Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 02:59:37 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: when should you shoot a cop  (Read 4888 times)
elggawf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
November 12, 2011, 04:04:10 PM
 #41

Really? Do you have no imagination?

Cop and his partner break in your door. Cop kills your family then his partner. Explains how you are going to prison for the murders because the gun he used is unregistered and he's going to put your prints on it, not to mention testify that you did it.

But he's lowered his weapon and didn't expect you'd have one inside your jacket.

... and 5 minutes later you woke up with a handful of melted ice cream.

You don't need to go completely over the top in your scenario to prove "never" is wrong, you simply need to point out that when a cop acts outside the law, he ceases to be a cop, so the standard self defense rules apply. In the very unlikely event that this scenario coincides with said "cop" threatening to cause you immediate harm, again, depending on numerous factors such as where you live, you should have the right to defend yourself. Just make damn sure that you're right about what the cop's doing, because if it turns out he's giving you a lawful order and you blow him away... well let's just say cop killers don't get the greatest of treatment by the criminal justice system.

^_^
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481381977
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481381977

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481381977
Reply with quote  #2

1481381977
Report to moderator
1481381977
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481381977

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481381977
Reply with quote  #2

1481381977
Report to moderator
ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 12, 2011, 04:58:36 PM
 #42

The police system is horribly corrupt. Don't assume cops will be held accountable for their wrong-doings.
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
November 12, 2011, 06:56:30 PM
 #43

 
You don't need to go completely over the top in your scenario to prove "never" is wrong

Yeah, I agree. 'Never' is self evidently wrong.

 

You don't need to go completely over the top in your scenario to prove "never" is wrong, you simply need to point out that when a cop acts outside the law, he ceases to be a cop, 

That's really convenient, no?

Why magic rules here? If we said "When should you shoot a plumber?" would you say, "Never, if he starts killing you with his plunger he's not a plumber anymore."?

'Profession' doesn't matter. Either you protect your self from dangerous humans or you don't.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
elggawf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
November 12, 2011, 09:16:55 PM
 #44

What? Cops, by definition of their jobs, have responsibilities above plumbers and other citizens. A cop pointing a gun at you is, depending on the jurisdiction, not necessarily a deadly threat. If you have illegal tint on your windows of your car and you get pulled over at night, there's a pretty good chance you'll be extracted at gunpoint just for the safety of the officer, and as long as they follow protocol it's usually not unlawful. I can't think of any comparable scenario where a plumber can point a gun at you and it's lawful.

But as I said, if the cop isn't acting in a lawful manner, then he's just some asshole with a gun - same as the plumber. That's the distinction.

^_^
ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 12, 2011, 09:29:11 PM
 #45

What? Cops, by definition of their jobs, have responsibilities above plumbers and other citizens. A cop pointing a gun at you is, depending on the jurisdiction, not necessarily a deadly threat. If you have illegal tint on your windows of your car and you get pulled over at night, there's a pretty good chance you'll be extracted at gunpoint just for the safety of the officer, and as long as they follow protocol it's usually not unlawful. I can't think of any comparable scenario where a plumber can point a gun at you and it's lawful.

But as I said, if the cop isn't acting in a lawful manner, then he's just some asshole with a gun - same as the plumber. That's the distinction.

I can't think of any time it's lawful for a person to harass me for using my common law right to travel while having darker windshields. The officer's safety should never come into question when I'm using my property and not aggressing against another person. A gun in my face is emotionally distressing and harm against my person. My preference in my property does not entail that.
elggawf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
November 12, 2011, 10:03:24 PM
 #46

Holy shit there's so much wrong with this paragraph, it's comical:

I can't think of any time it's lawful for a person to harass me for using my common law right to travel while having darker windshields. The officer's safety should never come into question when I'm using my property and not aggressing against another person. A gun in my face is emotionally distressing and harm against my person. My preference in my property does not entail that.

You don't have a "common law right" to travel with darker windshields. You don't even have a common law right to operate a motor vehicle, it's a privilege (though the same could be said about firearms ownership in most states, the lines are pretty blurred).

The gun won't usually be in your face (again, let's try keep emotions and action-movie masturbation to a minimum if we're going to have a serious discussion about defensive firearms use) - if they're going to extract you from a vehicle with tinted windows they'll usually tell you over the PA to stay put while they wait for another officer. Then they point the guns at you from a fair distance, and ask you to slowly exit the vehicle with your hands up. Then it's either hands on the roof, the hood, or get on your belly so they can approach for a pat-down. Most of which is utterly negated if you know the procedure cops take, and you turn your dome light on, roll down your window and put 8 fingers out over the edge of the door so they can see you're not going to shoot 'em.

My point was that there are (albeit questionable ethics, I'll concede that) lawful scenarios where a cop might point a gun at you - it's part and parcel of having a strong right to bear arms. In the unlikely event it ceases to be a lawful action, regular self-defense rules apply.

^_^
ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 12, 2011, 10:11:54 PM
 #47

I don't drive a motor vehicle. Those are for commercial entities. I travel in an automobile for personal pleasure. That is a right.

Anyways, read Common Law some time. It probably doesn't apply to you since you revoked your right to travel when you signed your license.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cci5MSvsSmc
elggawf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
November 12, 2011, 11:07:14 PM
 #48

I'll concede that if you consider "travelling" to not be "operating a motor vehicle", then even so...This is what I'm talking about earlier. If you consider being extracted from your vehicle at gunpoint because you're engaging in behavior that's considered threatening to the safety of officers, to be an unlawful act - then the standard self-defense rules apply. Get into a shootout with the cops, but then the other part of what I said applies (and doubly so):

Be sure you're right, and that what the officer's doing is actually unlawful. I'm not sure the courts would agree with you that it is, and bearing in mind that in that exact situation (it wasn't what I really had in mind when I talked about cops acting unlawful, but to each their own) if you're wrong, you're on the hook for shooting a cop. In some states (yours at minimum, I'm guessing) you're risking the injection if you're wrong and you kill the poor bastard anyway.

^_^
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
November 13, 2011, 12:36:18 AM
 #49

I completely disagree that an officer is justified in pulling a gun on you for having dark windshields.

That said I certainly would not shoot in that spot or encourage anyone else to.

All I'm saying ITT is that anyone saying "never" isn't thinking.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
elggawf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
November 13, 2011, 03:00:54 PM
 #50

I completely disagree that an officer is justified in pulling a gun on you for having dark windshields.

I don't think they're justified either. But our criminal justice system doesn't see anything wrong with it, and therefore is likely to see something wrong with someone responding with guns to guns, because "cops are supposed to point them".

The first goal of self defense is to wake up again tomorrow. The second goal, in my humble opinion almost equal to the first, is to do that in your own bed and not behind bars.

Again, my point was that you're right, "never" is not the correct answer. But of the tiny percentage of people who will have to actually defend themselves, a tinier still percentage of those people will have to do it from a guy with a badge (and you don't need some swarznegger/stallone plot to come up with scenarios why) - but they're skating on thin ice legally.

^_^
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
November 14, 2011, 04:23:14 PM
 #51

I completely disagree that an officer is justified in pulling a gun on you for having dark windshields.

That said I certainly would not shoot in that spot or encourage anyone else to.

All I'm saying ITT is that anyone saying "never" isn't thinking.
It makes sense to me.  If the officer can't see that the person in the vehicle isn't pulling a gun on them, they've got to take steps to protect themselves.
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
November 15, 2011, 12:39:54 AM
 #52

I completely disagree that an officer is justified in pulling a gun on you for having dark windshields.

That said I certainly would not shoot in that spot or encourage anyone else to.

All I'm saying ITT is that anyone saying "never" isn't thinking.
It makes sense to me.  If the officer can't see that the person in the vehicle isn't pulling a gun on them, they've got to take steps to protect themselves.

If someone is doing nothing but traveling with dark windows and a cop feels he'd be putting life in danger (his) then he needs to let it go. Pulling a gun for having dark windows is major escalation. I don't think a cop has a right to take money from someone with dark windows any more than I have that right. But if they are really set on that style extortion then send a letter in the mail. You've got their plate number, name, address. This doesn't need to be done with a gun on the side of the road.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
Bind
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252

DO NOT ACCEPT PAYPAL FOR BTC YOU WILL GET BURNED


View Profile
November 15, 2011, 09:34:33 AM
 #53

It makes sense to me.  If the officer can't see that the person in the vehicle isn't pulling a gun on them, they've got to take steps to protect themselves.

It makes sense to you, because you are conditioned to think that way.

It makes sense to you, because you are conditioned to think that cops are authority figures.

It makes sense to you, because you are conditioned to believe you do not have equal rights under the law.

Its about fear ... its about control.

Even in the slavery of the blacks there were blacks who were given weapons, special privilages, better food, better clothing, special "rights", more freedom of movement, less work, authority over other blacks, even some education, and a badge, hat, or symbol so they could be recognized as ENFORCERS, so the other blacks would fear them in order to control them, and the slave masters could tell them apart.

They were still slaves, but they facilliated, participated, and most importantly, ENFORCED their own enslavement and the enslavement of their people by this conditioning.

Quite often, a slave got uppity and needed to be disciplined. After obeying for a time, they got special privilages, like being LICENSED to drive the horse and wagon (the vehicle of the time) to town to pick up deliveries or to chauffer a friend or family membr of the slavemaster. However, the slave master wanted INSURANCE in case the slave damaged someone elses property in the course of their duties using the conveyance, so that the slave master was not personally liable for any damages. The slave had to adhere to a strict set of RULES AND REGULATIONS (the vehicle code of that time) handed down by the slavemaster and insurer.

Not only blacks but slavery throughout history where an elite ruled over the people.

Major plantation owners (slavemasters) and their descendents became our financial, corporate, and political elite families we recognize today. This is not by accident.

You have been indoctrinated, manipulated, and propagandized. We all have. We are slaves unless we are a member of their families and friends power structure.

All we have to do is stand up and say NO and claim our rights, but we dont do that. We fight amongst ourselves enabling them to divide and conquer us. Control us. When its us who should be controlling them.

When a few actually figure this all out they go into depression. When they come out of their depression, the reality hits different people differently. Some educated others. Others strike out at their oppressors. Others rebel and revolt when infringed upon. Some, like those are Waco and Ruby Ridge, do all of the above and are crushed when they try to live free, then the powers in "authority" propagandize them and mow them down to teach the rest of us what happens when Toby The Slave gets uppity, while trying to use it to manipulate us into thinking militia, constitution, and sovereignty are bad. Ancient relics of a long expired past that should be burried and forgotten.

History constantly repeats itself. Throughout history, oppressive and tyrannical leaders have fallen to the will and power of the people. Throughout history, ALL civillizations have fallen.

You can not regulate a right. That turns a right into a privilage and/or a benefit metered out by authority.

Why do you think there is such a war against personal sovereignty, militias, and the constitution?

Why do they have us fighting each other, so we do not concentrate on the real issues plaguing us and fighting them.

They would rather us fight each other in civil war than to fight them, so they will always hold the power, influence, and control, and guide us on the path they wish us to go down. This is why they created and gave us political parties and stupid meaningless "kitchen table issues" to fight each other over, all the while those political parties are completely identical and synchronized at the top and on the major issues plaguing and affecting us daily.

"... None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free ..."
-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe



"... He is no fool who parts with that which he cannot keep, when he is sure to be recompensed with that which he cannot lose ..."

"... history disseminated to the masses is written by those who win battles and wars and murder their heroes ..."


1Dr3ig3EoBnPWq8JZrRTi8Hfp53Kj
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 10:58:25 AM
 #54

So Bind, you falsely believe you are free.

What exactly are we meant to do about it?  If you are happy with your life, whats the problem?

deuxmill
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 121



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 12:26:44 PM
 #55

So Bind, you falsely believe you are free.

What exactly are we meant to do about it?  If you are happy with your life, whats the problem?

I actually understood that he knows he ain't free yet but he knows why. Because other slaves enforce slavery.

I would continue and say that whenever we create society (state , religion , law , country , nation, morality ,etc. etc.) we also create slavery . As long as we will view this Fictions as more valuable than individual life and free will we won't be free.

And the sad truth is that most are afraid to take decisions , so they love it when someone else , or the community takes the decision for them.
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 02:29:33 PM
 #56

So Bind, you falsely believe you are free.

What exactly are we meant to do about it?  If you are happy with your life, whats the problem?

I actually understood that he knows he ain't free yet but he knows why. Because other slaves enforce slavery.

I would continue and say that whenever we create society (state , religion , law , country , nation, morality ,etc. etc.) we also create slavery . As long as we will view this Fictions as more valuable than individual life and free will we won't be free.

And the sad truth is that most are afraid to take decisions , so they love it when someone else , or the community takes the decision for them.

So you feel qualified to tell other people that they are not really free - its just all in their minds.

Interesting.

deuxmill
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 121



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 08:12:14 PM
 #57

Not in theirs in our.
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 08:13:53 PM
 #58

Not in theirs in our.

Try that as a sentence with a subject and a verb please.

deuxmill
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 121



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 08:33:11 PM
 #59

Not in theirs in our.

Try that as a sentence with a subject and a verb please.

No .
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 09:07:50 PM
 #60

Not in theirs in our.

Try that as a sentence with a subject and a verb please.

No .

So you can't put a sentence together and feel qualified to tell people who believe they are free that they are deluded.

Nice.

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!