Gangsters in Blue

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” The image below of MLK and his famous quote have been circulating the internet for some time now. Perhaps MLK did not mean to make such a broad, unqualified statement, but I find this statement to be patently incorrect. Taking this sentiment literally and to its logical conclusion would necessarily mean that regardless of my wishes, I have a moral obligation to jaywalk every chance I get, use every illegal drug possible, drink on the beach, buy alcohol for people under 21, gamble, carry a gun without a permit, among other such absurdities. Since resisting illegal arrest is prohibited by law in almost all 50 states, if I were ever wrongly arrested, according to Martin Luther King, I would be morally bound to resist my unlawful arrest, and likely get shot and killed in the process.

“Moral obligation” presumably means that if one does not engage in some action, he or she is behaving immorally. To say that a person is immoral because he or she doesn’t want to shoot heroin, jaywalk every opportunity possible, and get shot for resisting police, doesn’t seem to make much sense. This is not to say that civil disobedience is not a highly effective and commendable form of protest. I have nothing but respect and admiration when Ademo and Pete take to the streets with cameras, and actively risk their freedom to keep police accountable. However, this is an entirely different matter from claiming someone has a moral obligation to do so. It’s the difference between saying it’s wonderful if someone donates to charity, versus claiming someone has a moral obligation to donate to charity.

I bring this up only to clarify what I am about to say shortly – I am not by any means trying to say that people have a duty to do something to advance the cause of liberty, or that they have an obligation to contribute their efforts or time to promote a freer society. After all, what do I do? I’m just sitting here drinking a beer and ruminating from behind a laptop screen.

But Dear American Public, I do ask that you at the very least, stop thinking like a pack of slaves with a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome. You are so smitten, deferent, even servile, to your captors and abusers that it is pathetic, and difficult to watch. The manner in which Americans excuse abuse, violence, and even murder by police and government is so ingrained that I am fairly certain it would be most accurately characterized as a form of mental illness. I share just a few notable examples of late -

Last week, CNN columnist LZ Granderson wrote a piece called “Why black people don’t trust the police.” While he hit some lucid and valid points, Granderson prefaced the article in this manner -

 I don’t trust cops and I don’t know many black people who do. I respect them. I sympathize with them. I am appreciative of the work they do. [Emphasis added]. But when you’ve been pulled over for no good reason as many times as I have; when you’ve been in handcuffs for no good reason as many times as I have; when you run out to buy some allergy medication and upon returning home, find yourself surrounded by four squad cars with flashing lights and all you can think about is how not to get shot, you learn not to trust cops.

Let’s think about this for a moment. A group of people has on multiple occasions used force to detain Mr. Granderson for no reason, forcibly restrained him for no reason, and arbitrarily caused him to fear for his life – even so, he holds these people in high esteem. Forget the badge and uniform for a moment, and assume that police are ordinary human beings like everyone else (at least grant me this one, will you?). Surely, with any group, people will argue that not every single member is bound to be evil. Yet, I guarantee you that if any other group of people (e.g. a gang, a mob, or a corporation) had terrorized Mr. Granderson in the manner police have, Mr. Granderson would not be qualifying his article with sentiments of respect, sympathy, and appreciation for the gang/mob/corporation.

Mr. Granderson’s propensity for groveling is almost too much to bear. He has internalized his own inferiority as a human being so severely that he feels compelled to dilute his criticisms of some very heinous aggressors, and in effect, he practically issues an apology for his very valid complaints. This would be akin to being forcibly restrained by a stranger, or threatened with deadly force by a stranger, and reacting in this manner – “Well, I understand life is hard for my attacker, I appreciate him, and I admire him, but really now, that wasn’t very nice, I’m so sorry I have to say this, but please, if you would just allow me to explain, you might understand where I am coming from.” This absurdity would almost be comical, if it weren’t downright sad.

Another example of this creepy type of self-effacement comes out of Illinois, where a well-meaning man offered 2 girls a ride in the middle of a snowstorm. The two girls not only turned down the ride offered by Rodney Peterson, they called the police because they were “alarmed” and “disturbed” by Mr. Peterson’s act of kindness (more here). As someone who has taken rides from strangers in a variety of situations all over the world, I cannot emphasize how astoundingly stupid and evil these two girls are. At any rate, although Mr. Peterson had done nothing wrong, the police acted on the complaint by the 2 girls, and charged Mr. Peterson with “disorderly conduct.”

The fact a well-intentioned family man was charged with a vague crime for the mere act of offering a ride is preposterous enough – but not so preposterous as Mr. Peterson’s own reaction to the investigation by police. CBS local reports that “the Petersons don’t blame the girls, their families, or even the police for following up.” This self-loathing and willingness to subjugate the self to the unreasonable and corrupt demands of police authority can only be explained by the total acceptance of one’s place as a slave or underling to the system.

This sort of self-denigration and self-loathing, in which an individual suffers arbitrary, undeserved violence, yet repeatedly excuses the violent aggressor, and even continues to worship the abuser is no less serious and perverse than any other type of self-destructive behavior.

On the other hand, if you have any semblance of dignity, and are educated on the matter, you know that police do not protect you. Chances are, if you are ever a victim of a crime, it will be because the laws and restrictions enforced by police against knives and guns will prevent you from being able to defend yourself when the need arises. Chances are, after you have been attacked, robbed, beaten, and/or raped, the police will only show up in time to take a report (well, they are only human after all; they can’t fly, for fuck’s sake).

If you are logical, you will observe that since you are forced to pay police and cannot fire them for their incompetence and preference for arresting weed smokers over solving real crimes, chances are, they will never find the perpetrator. If you are anything but a naive dolt, you know that police generate a great deal of revenue for the state with tickets, fines, and other arrests involving no victim, but generate very little revenue for the state by solving thefts, rapes, or murders.

Thus, if you are informed on the matter, you will never apologize or make excuses for police, as if you are some abused woman stuck in a vicious cycle of a violent relationship, taking beating after beating, while reassuring yourself and those around you that the beatings/abuse/violence were justified, necessary, well-meaning, or even accidental. If you are anything but a subservient, mindless drone, you will not qualify your stance on police brutality and your criticisms of police violence with, “but they work so hard,” and “but I still appreciate them” and “but of course I know they are necessary.”

If you are logical, educated, and aware, you will simply say, “Fuck the police.”

Dear American public, you are mentally ill is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Tuesday night Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed the Right to Resist bill into law and the policemen of the United States went completely apeshit. There’s really nowhere better to go to write this article than the hangout site for cops called PoliceOne.com. Alot of people I know have changed their opinions of police after reading what the officers say on that page.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels said Wednesday that he shares police groups’ concerns that some people might misinterpret a new law that lays out when residents could be legally justified in using force against police officers.

Daniels said he thought carefully before signing the bill Tuesday night. The legislation was passed by strong majorities in the House and Senate in response to public uproar after the state Supreme Court ruled last year that residents couldn”t resist officers even during an illegal entry.

Obviously Mitch wants to please both sides in this debate, but let’s just take a look at what the police are saying.

I think you see the point, police really think people are that evil, that they will now just play real life Grand Theft Auto and start killing at will. Which begs the question, if people are really that inherently evil, why give so many of them the power of the badge over everyone else? It always appears to me that the worst of the worst are in gangs, whether it be Blood, Crypts, or Thin Blue Line.

But will people really just start killing at will? I can give you one fact, the law and/or a guy in a funny costume with a badge doesn’t stop me from killing someone. I don’t kill or use violence because I believe it is wrong morally. Even if murder were legal I wouldn’t kill anyone and most people wouldn’t either.

This whole clamor that people will just start killing cops for sport because this law was signed is complete bullshit. People are good, not evil, and it’s not just because of cops and laws. Just look at this study done by the Institute for Science of Complex Systems.

Fundamentally people behave in a social and rather compassionate and “good” way rather than aggressively, even without specified rules. That is the result of a study from the Institute for Science of Complex Systems at the MedUni Vienna under the leadership of Stefan Thurner and Michael Szell. They analysed the behaviour of more than 400,000 participants of the “Virtual Life” game “Pardus” on the Internet. The findings are that only two percent of all actions are aggressive, even though the game would make it easy for war-like attacks with spaceships, for example.

It takes alot of horrible circumstances to turn a person bad. Charles Manson was tormented growing up, the Unabomber was abused at a young age, John Wayne Gacy was beaten constantly by his alcoholic father and suffered serious head trauma. People are not born evil, they learn it or adopt it after a horrible circumstance warped their mind.

The report goes on to say

Millions of human interactions were assessed during the study which included actions such as communication, founding and ending friendships, trading goods, sleeping, moving, however also starting hostilities, attacks and punishment. The game does not suggest any rules and everyone can live with their avatar (i.e. with their “game character” in the virtual world) as they choose. “And the result of this is not anarchy”, says Thurner. “The participants organise themselves as a social group with good intents. Almost all the actions are positive.”

The interactions were fed into an “alphabet” by the researchers, “similar to how the genetic code of DNA was decoded 15 years ago”, says Thurner. “From this we get a pattern which reflects how people tick”. However, there is quite a high potential for aggression: so, for example, if a negative action is inflicted, the probability that the player will subsequently also act aggressively shoots up more than tenfold, even to about 30 percent.

Thurner and his team were also able to present by means of the pattern that the whole game is a reflection of reality. “For example, we could adopt measured values one for one for communication networks. A further measurement is that almost no one has more than 150 friends, the so-called Dunbar’s number, regardless of whether in the real or the virtual world.” The study has now been published in the specialist journal PLoS One.

The long-term aim is to detect “phase transitions in societies” early on using these measurements and the behavioural patterns researched in the virtual world in order to be able to forecast group dynamic social processes and to be able to react in the event of these cases in good time. “It is possible, for example, that through certain conditions the aggression level, that has increased tenfold, remains extensively in place and therefore systemically for a longer time, which bears comparison with a drastic radicalisation in societies. Consequently, we could react to it in good time.” A current example for such a phase transition in society has been the relatively surprising “Arab Spring” with its many protests, uprisings and revolutions, which, as is well known, were targeted against the ruling totalitarian regimes in many countries.

All the claims that this new law, which took effect immediately, will lead to a bloodbath, is completely unfounded. Maybe the police are the ones pushing it, with all their drug war home invsasions in the middle of the night or early morning when people are sleeping. Alot of times people think they are being robbed when these raids happen and reach for their gun and point it at the officers and sometimes start shooting. And the response is always justified by the fact “They drew a weapon”

Human psychology and history shows no indication that violence against police will escalate because alot of people will always be afraid. But police and government history shows every indication that violence against citizens will always escalate.

Just remain vigilante, peaceful, and always stick up for your rights. Violence always begets violence, just remember that. Time to see now which side will be proven right, and I hope it’s our side, not the police.

Right to Resist now law in Indiana, cops show how evil they think we are is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

March 15 is International Day Against Police Brutality. Cop Block is growing in size, and our support is ever increasing. Even so, there remains a great deal of ignorance with regard to the institution of police and its systemically brutal effects. Over and over again, those who are aware insist the militarization of police is absurd and dangerous. The use of tanks, grenade launchers, tasers, and constant surveillance has undoubtedly ensured the United States’ reputation as a police state.

Those who have been paying attention have noticed the militarization of police for years, but most people and news outlets in the mainstream have not been, and are not paying attention.

While the government has provided no statistics that crime has suddenly run rampant, or is imminently on the rise, police are increasingly armed with state-of-the-art weapons to use upon the populace. Indeed, even if “crime” were running rampant, it would likely be because everything has become a crime in this country – from throwing frisbees, to studying whales with inappropriate techniques, to selling raw milk. The laws are countless; 40,000 were passed in 2011 alone.

Having the wrong books on your bookshelf can get your business raided. Believing in what is perceived as bizarre ideology puts you on law enforcement watchlists. Americans are guilty until proven innocent; in almost all 50 states, it is a crime to resist unlawful arrest, and innocent victims must submit to illegal arrest under the penalty of law (more here).

The year has hardly begun, and already police in the Bronx have murdered a young boy for the heinous crime of marijuana possession (and in a city in which marijuana is allegedly decriminalized, no less).

An Orange County sheriff’s deputy shot and killed Sgt. Manuel Loggins Jr., who was sitting in his parked car with his two daughters, also for inexplicable reasons. Police in Culpepper, VA murdered a woman who rolled up her car window in response to an officer’s commands.

Of course, in each case, it does not appear charges have been filed against the murderers. Yet, Cop Block continues to receive naive and downright stupid comments such as the following -

 If you really believe that the present laws protect the police and you the citizen are having your rights violated, then you truely are nuts!  Police officers have a code of conduct and their job is to uphold the law. When they break this code/law, then they should be judged in a court if law!   — Sharon

Well, unfortunately for Sharon, wishful thinking does not reality make. The reality is that the laws do protect police. They have qualified immunity in civil suits. Resisting arrest charges literally allow police to make illegal arrests because innocent victims are not legally permitted to fight off unlawful restraint by a police officer. Assault on an officer and homicide of an officer are treated differently than normal assaults and homicides, meaning the law assumes the person and life of an officer is of more importance and value than that of everyone else. These are just a few examples of how the law most definitely protects police.

Certainly, one can hope police officers “have a code of conduct” and that they report on themselves, keep themselves accountable, charge their friends when they commit murder, and use their fancy tanks, tasers, and dangerous weapons only as needed (i.e. hope that they possess super-human abilities to behave like saints) – just like I can hope that I get a pet unicorn for Christmas this year. However, this is obviously unrealistic, and it is frightening that a grown woman can believe in such impractical and naive fairytales.

To everyone else – thank you for your support of Cop Block. Please think of the many victims of police brutality in America and around the world today. Your awareness is rational, compassionate, and important.

Join the forum discussion on this post

Today is International Day Against Police Brutality is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Do some critical thinking

The Chesterton Tribune reports that the Indiana House approved the “Right to Resist” bill by a vote of 74-24. The bill would protect residents of Indiana under the states self-defense law if they believe force is necessary to protect them from unlawful actions by a police officer.

However the bill does not give this privilege to someone who is committing a crime. That  change was made after police and prosecutor groups told lawmakers they worried the proposal as previously written would spark more violence toward officers. But stop and apply some critical thinking to that part of the bill and remember how many crimes there are on the books and how often people are accused of bullshit crimes during police encounters.

This kinda leaves it wide open to still let officers get away with illegal acts. All they have to do is charge with with the favorite “disorderly conduct” or “resisting arrest.” If this bill passes, would Pete Eyre then be allowed to have used force against the officers who drug him from the court for wearing a hat? He was never charged with any crimes, but with a law like this in place, I have reasonable suspicion to believe he would have been in order to say he was not justified in using force, even though I know Pete never would as he is an incredibly peaceful person as you can see in the video.

What about the bullshit crime of contempt of court, the crime Ademo was charged with when speaking his mind at the video arraignment of Pete after his arrest? Can’t resist if you’re committing a crime? Well you’re always committing a crime, whether you know it or not, the average person commits 3 felonies a day. I’ve probably committed 10 crimes just writing this article.

This is why I’m not too excited about this bill like most people are. It’s mostly posturing when you really break it down. I was excited at first, thinking freedom had scored a win in Indiana, then I saw the comments by State Rep. Ed Delaney

Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis, said the Supreme Court had drawn a “bright line” protecting police and that the public can contest illegal police actions in court or seek to have rogue officers disciplined.

“I believe this goes much too far and is capable of being misunderstood,” DeLaney said.

It’s all about protecting police, the State of Indiana doesn’t care about your rights against police. Just do a quick Google search on court cases where officers are accused of committing crimes and you will see how much advantage they have, mostly getting paid vacations or temp desk jobs. Ed is just regurgitating the same bullshit about suing cops in court, which never works.

Just check out this story from St. Louis, where out of 117 related police shootings in the last 5 years, all but 4 times the officers were cleared of any wrongdoing.  I could write forever on those types of instances, but instead just search “paid vacation” on our site and you will see what I am talking about.

One State Rep. who is also a former cop, is against this bill.

Democratic Rep. Linda Lawson of Hammond, a former police officer, told House members they shouldn’t back a measure that could lead to an “open season” by criminals against officers who are willing to sacrifice their lives to protect the public.

Open season? Fuck Linda Lawson, does she ever look at it from the opposite side? She’s worried about citizens being able to use force against cops if they think their actions are illegal? What about the motherfucking police having the right to use force on citizens they think are doing something illegal? Does that not declare “open season” on the people you claim to represent?

Does Linda really think people are that bad? That if given the right to use force against an officer illegally aggressing against them we would just start beating the shit out of police and murdering them at will? This is what cops do all the time.

This cop has the right to use force, up to lethal force, if he thinks someone is doing something illegal. Is this “open season” on citizens? The answer is yes. And since this is a change to the status quo, the cops predictibly are speaking out, using the only thing they have in their arsenal, fear.

“We believe people have the right to be secure in their homes,” said Hendricks County Sheriff Dave Galloway. “But the people who hear about this law are going to think it’s okay to kill a law enforcement officer. What you and I think is ‘reasonable’ isn’t the same as somebody high on meth. They’re going to shoot first, and ask questions later.”

AAAAAHHHHHH! DRUG USERS! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Maybe if you left peaceful people alone, like a lot of drug users are, you wouldn’t have to worry about them shooting you.

It’s that phrase, “if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary” that alarms bill opponents.

“That makes everybody a lawyer,” said Terre Haute Police Chief John Plasse.

And what is wrong with everyone being able to interpret the law? Why should only people with proper government permission be able to interpret this? Alot of cops are freaking out, what they forget, whether it be purposely or not, is that the courts routinely side with the badge. It’s the reason I am subdued in my excitement over this. How often do you even see a police do something clearly illegal, and the courts or their superiors  agree with the populace? How often does a court come out and actually say a policeman’s actions are illegal? Sure it happens, but not very often.

So why the outrage from police? Alot of them are crying out “You do not resist a police officer. Just do what we say and everything will be fine” Which asks the question, who is really the master and who is really the servant? If we can get in serious trouble for resisting demands from servants, are they really servants, are they really working for us?

They want you to believe that people are inherently evil, which is completely false. Just look at the background of mass murderers and you will see all the terrible things that happened to them in their childhood. If people are inherently evil, it would not take so many terrible things happening to them to turn them into horrible people?

We all know that if someone breaks into your home and brandishes a weapon you will not be tried for murder if you shoot back. But if it is a cop entering your home, whether they are doing it legally or not, why are they worried about resistance?

The Indiana Supreme Court said you have no right to resist, a ruling brought forth because a Evansville man told a cop he could not enter his house when he responded to a domestic dispute call and pushed the officer away from his door.

Even though I only believe this bill is nothing more than posturing and will not cause a huge upswing in murders of police officers, like the cops are claiming will happen, take a look at past judges ruling on the right to resist unlawful arrest and remember police officers have sworn to uphold the law (although we know it’s a joke)

“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer’s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.

“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded, ‘If there be any remedy at all … it is a remedy never provided for by human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.

As for grounds for arrest: “The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable, and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of the peace. Nor does such an act of itself, lead to a breach of the peace.” (Wharton’s Criminal and Civil Procedure, 12th Ed., Vol.2: Judy v. Lashley, 5 W. Va. 628, 41 S.E. 197)

The bill will now go back before the Indiana Senate in an attempt to have both chambers agree on the same bill. While we wait, remember to keep your head up, remain peaceful, and for gods sake…..

STOP RESISTING!!!!

Right to resist police passes Indiana house, but before you get excited….. is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

A video allegedly depicting a very kind and wonderful cop has been circulating around the internet for a while now. I ignored it at first, but it keeps popping up – along with peoples’ maudlin and obsequious commentary about how touching and heart-warming this officer’s last act of kindness is, and how this surely is a stellar example of how police officers ought to be.

You may ask, what was this last act of kindness? Did the officer lay down his life for another? Did he save a child from drowning? Or perhaps he protected an individual from some kind of vile crime against the person, such as murder or rape?

No, no – none of that. Something far more glorious and admirable – he bought a kid $1 worth of cookies at McDonald’s. Daveon Tinsley purportedly asked Officer Jeremy Henwood for 10 cents to buy a cookie, and Officer Henwood in response bought the him 3 cookies. Subsequently, Henwood was gunned down and killed, allegedly in an unprovoked attack (more here).

The media frequently demonstrates their extreme bias when it comes to police; this is nothing new. When innocent people are murdered or beaten  by police for no reason, the media is quick to point out the victim was a criminal, was drinking, or was engaged in some other mild offense, as if to justify police actions. Funny how it works though – when police die in unfortunate circumstances, the media has no interest in digging up dirt on the dead officer, but instead rushes to point out any inane, worthless factoid that will “humanize” the officer. Yet, one cannot blame the media, when people demonstrate that this kind of nonsense is exactly what they prefer.

While it is lamentable when anyone dies in an unprovoked attack, a logical assessment of this situation leads one to the inevitable conclusion that many people in America are idiots. The first clause of the previous sentence is bolded because no matter how clear I make it, any time I show anything less than uncontrollable anguish at the news of an officer’s death, I am accused of the utmost depravity, and of cheering on their deaths. Nevertheless – buying someone a cookie would not be news in any other context for other people who die in tragic circumstances, but somehow, when a police officer dies, a non-negligible number of Americans start incoherently babbling about how fucking great it was that some man bought a kid some cookies. Americans get so excited about this that it actually is reported as news.

This is to say nothing of the fact that people like Henwood are basically gang members in nice uniforms. They spend their lives prowling the streets, extorting people of their hard-earned money based on stupid crimes like jaywalking, speeding, rolling stop signs, drinking on the beach, or smoking marijuana. This is a fact, because most people in jail/prison are not there for violent crimes or property crimes. They are there for drugs or other offenses which involved no victim. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude police spend most of their time on drug and victimless offenses, rather than on offenses involving personal or property crime.

Accordingly, police officers dedicate their lives to essentially terrorizing people. At the worst, they kill children in drug raids, chase down and beat innocent people,  kill harmless pets or abuse wildlife. At the very least, they drive around and make everyone they pass feel anxious. They have a dress code, and adhere to the Blue Code of Silence, which is a loyalty oath they make to each other. Really, the gang member analogy could not be more apt.

No one posts videos such as, “Crip member’s last act of kindness,” or “M13 leader shows last act of kindness by buying boy a sammich,” but for some reason, people wet themselves over Henwood’s last act of kindness – completely ignoring the fact he spent most of his days being an asshole to people.

This is surely reminiscent of the hysterical behavior exhibited by the mourning citizens of North Korea when Kim Jong Il passed, although on a milder level. Here, we have the same kind of bizarre hero-worship of a man who in all likelihood had the moral integrity of a local thug. Inexplicably, people’s reactions are of greatly exaggerated sorrow, followed by diarrhea-like outpours of lament. Are you one of the Americans who thought North Koreans were insane for putting on such histrionic displays of sadness when Kim Jong Il died? Better check the mirror; you might be an only-slightly-less-insane, only-slightly-less-ignorant version of them.

Heroism bar set remarkably low for police officers is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

On Friday I am commissioning my first ever official “overview” of government misconduct. The presentation will detail my case as to precisely how Keene Circuit Court-District Division Presiding Judge Edward Burke violated state law, the state Constitution, and judicial canons by telling a lie to have someone arrested. A lie that constituted False Reports to Law Enforcement, a crime under state law. A crime that if the exact facts and circumstances were brought before him in a criminal case where you did the same thing, he would find you guilty.

I am quite familiar with the crime as I have arrested people and prepared prosecution cases for it before. Judge Burke should have been arrested by now for what he did… but lucky for him, it appears that his friends in government are protecting him.

The presentation I will be burning to DVD and distributing to Governor John Lynch, the Executive Council, and every member of the New Hampshire General Court. Every mainstream media outlet in New Hampshire will also be receiving a copy.

Judicial Canon #2, the code of conduct for judges, reads as follows:

A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL OF THE JUDGE’S ACTIVITIES

I presume that includes impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge’s interactions with members of the free press who are asking constitutionally protected questions.  Especially when our own Constitution says:

FREE SPEECH AND LIBERTY OF THE PRESS ARE ESSENTIAL TO THE SECURITY OF FREEDOM IN A STATE: THEY OUGHT, THEREFORE, TO BE INVIOLABLY PRESERVED.

(not taken away in a creative attempt to cover up a criminal offense against CopBlock.org founder Ademo Freeman which clearly resulted in his constitutional rights being violated)

Join the forum discussion on this post

Judge Edward Burke Misconduct Overview To Be Released On Friday is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Though this article is about Florida, there is no doubt in my mind that this occurs nationwide. I suppose it should be expected.

Considering that the first rule of any officer is to protect his fellow officer; Does it really make sense to have members of the same agency investigate the crimes of their colleagues?

It’s time to hold police accountable! (below is an editor’s addition to the Sun-Sentinel’s Story)

We’ve all seen it, and now there’s proof: Police officers sworn to uphold our traffic laws are among the worst speeders on South Florida roads.

A three-month Sun Sentinel investigation found almost 800 cops from a dozen agencies driving 90 to 130 mph on our highways.

Many weren’t even on duty — they were commuting to and from work in their take-home patrol cars.

The extent of the problem uncovered by the newspaper shocked South Florida’s police brass. All the agencies started internal investigations.

“Excessive speed,” Margate Police Chief Jerry Blough warned his officers, is a “blatant violation of public trust.”

The evidence came from police SunPass toll records. The Sun Sentinel obtained a year’s worth, hit the highways with a GPS device and figured out how fast the cops were driving based on the distance and time it took to go from one toll plaza to the next.

Speeding cops can kill. Since 2004, Florida officers exceeding the speed limit have caused at least 320 crashes and 19 deaths. Only one officer went to jail — for 60 days.

- LiberT

Read more about the Sun-Sentinel’s four part series (including videos) about Speeding Cops and see the double standard for yourself.

Cops Among the Worst Speeders is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

By Ian Freeman, blogger at FreeKeene.com:

Back in 2010, on a visit to the NH Attorney Genital’s office, we met “investigator” Dick Tracy. More recently, Copblock’s Ademo and I were in the area so we dropped in again with some more questions, this time meeting “investigator” James Brown. Neither man was interested in speaking on the record and Brown attempted to intimidate us into not recording. We did not stop. Here’s what happened:

Remember, it is supposed to be your right to record government bureaucrats in public places. Though, we know they don’t care about what your rights are, so there’s always a chance you could be aggressed against and caged. Sometimes it can be scary when they threaten you, but if you have backup also willing to not back down, your odds of walking away without being caged increase.

Just say NO – to demands you quit recording them.

Don’t Stop Recording: Meet James Brown is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

There are countless laws. Literally.

Maybe not in the mathematical sense – it is technically possible to count the laws in existence, but based on a colloquial and general use of the term “countless” it is not really feasible for someone to count every law. Just this year, 40,000 laws were passed and are set to go into effect. On the other hand, we rarely hear news about laws being repealed.

At this rate, if it is a monumental task to even count the laws, certainly, one can never know all the laws. And then – even if one knows generally of many laws, it is further impossible to understand the laws with requisite detail so as to ensure compliance.

Yet, people are told over and over by police, prosecutors, and the justice system that “ignorance of the law is no excuse.”

To all the police, prosecutors, asshole judges, and other groveling subjects who insist on the “rule of law” –  actually, yes, ignorance is an excuse. Perhaps one would be viewed as disingenuous when claiming he or she did not know murder, theft, or rape was against the law. However, when 40,000 laws are passed each year, each with possibly hundreds of pages of details, it is a perfectly legitimate excuse to claim one is ignorant of said laws.

This is especially the case because most laws do not prevent murder, theft, or rape, which of course are the most obvious and justified prohibitions. Personal violations and property violations – that’s 2 laws. Total. It’s reasonable to throw in a few more for different degrees of personal violations (e.g. 2nd degree murder, voluntary and/or involuntary manslaughter, assault and battery), and different types of theft or property violations (e.g. fraud, embezzlement, petty theft, larceny, robbery, trespassing). That might get us to 15, and for the most part, that’s the bulk of the law that is reasonable or necessary. So where did the other 40,000 per year come from?

They are almost all useless or repetitive. They come from lobbyists, power-hungry politicians who want to appear to be “doing something” and from idiots who do not understand the meaning of statistical significance. One freak tragedy happens, and suddenly the relatives of the victim are lobbying, protesting, and demanding their local sleazeball politician to “do something” about any act, behavior, or substance remotely related to the tragedy, despite the fact that those acts, behaviors or substances are completely safe and hurt no one 99.99 percent of the time. I can almost guarantee you that if someone happened to run out of their house, slip on a banana peel, smash their face into a fence and die, that a committee of concerned citizens and responsive politicians will form to demand the death penalty upon people who litter banana peels, or to throw people in jail for running out of their houses.

If you visit this fun website by a couple of lawbreakers blogging their criminal activity, you will learn that it is illegal to peel an orange in a hotel in Los Angeles. It is illegal to fish while wearing pajamas in Chicago, IL. Playing an instrument with the intention of luring someone into a store is illegal in Indian Wells, CA. It is illegal in Globe, AZ to play cards with an Indian. Drinking a beer from a bucket is illegal in St. Louis, MO. Sleeping on a refrigerator is illegal in Pittsburgh.

I haven not personally verified the existence of these laws, but I can tell you with fair certainty about a multitude of other absurd laws that do exist. For instance, Alabama only legalized interracial marriage in 2000. Altruistic war veteran Antonio Buehler learned recently that spitting on a police officer is a third degree felony in Texas. When he observed an officer abusing a woman, he stopped to take pictures, and was attacked by police and arrested. Videos taken do not show him spitting police, but nevertheless, police accused him of doing so and charged him with harassment of a public official, a third degree felony (as a side note, spitting on a regular person would not nearly rise to a felony, because regular people aren’t gods, like the police are).

In yet another display of legal absurdity, a marine biologist faces 20 years in prison for violating an obscure federal environmental law. Nancy Black was in her research boat when killer whales attacked and killed a gray whale calf. Blubber floated to the surface, and the killer whales were getting ready to feed. Ms. Black threaded ropes through some blubber and lowered a camera under water. She has been indicted by a federal grand jury for violating the 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act (more here).

In many cities, it is de facto illegal to feed the homeless. And of course, in most states in America, due to the rise of the “Resisting Arrest” charge, people literally can be arrested for doing absolutely nothing.

Above all, the most important element to note is that “ignorance of the law is no excuse” only applies to the peons of America. It does not apply to prosecutors, judges, police, or other powerful people.  Police have qualified immunity for various actions they take on the job. Prosecutors have even greater immunity. The Supreme Court held in Imbler v. Pachtman that absolute immunity of public prosecutors is “based on the policy of protecting the judicial process.” Thus, prosecutors face no recourse for even the most malicious of actions – knowingly using falsified evidence.

The Supreme Court is currently considering the issue of whether there is a Constitutional right to “not be framed.” (Yes, the system is that evil – they actually have to debate whether there is a “right not to be framed”). Judges also have absolute civil immunity, so if the Supreme Court decides there is no Constitutional right “not to be framed” they will not be held accountable, and all anyone can do about it is cry. (Read more about all these immunities here).

Next time you hear anyone talk about “the rule of law” or “ignorance of the law is no excuse” it’s worth pondering what exactly that means. In the context of America, it inevitably means oppression and arbitrary results from a system that operates off an extensive, random mire of nonsensical dictates decreed by tyrants.

Actually yes, ignorance of the law is an excuse is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Recently I was found guilty in my Chalking 8 trial, while highlighting those bogus charges we (Pete and I) met Frank and Mike, who took this video of Manchester Police Officer Murphy. The video went viral and received attention from several news outlets. Instead of taking a serious look at the actions caught on tape the city went into defense mode.

The Police, school and local government officials sought to criminalize Frank, Mike and myself. They expelled Frank from school, charged Mike as an adult (over a teenage fight) and charged me with three counts of wiretapping. Crimes the state says justifies caging me, at your expense, for 21 years.

I’ve been through this before in Greenfield, MA and am confident I can present my case, logically. The problem I face in Manchester that I didn’t have in Greenfield is the personal vendetta those in Manchester seem to have for me. After all, I was given the max sentence (with 10 months of it stayed for 2 years good behavior) for ‘resisting’ my arrest.

With that in mind I’ve thought long and hard about how I’d like to tackle this case. I’ve done all the homework, reading up on New Hampshire’s wiretapping law, talking with lawyers, brainstorming ideas with fellow activist and more and it’s come down to one thing, funding. Which is why I made this video asking for your help.

As stated in the video, I think a lawyer would be beneficial to ensure I have fair pre-trial hearings and ‘proper’ (in their eyes) procedure during trial. Considering this will be an expectation of privacy trial – and that public officials have none – it will be more difficult that my Greenfield trial. Yet, a win here could do wonders for activists in the “Shire” attempting to change coercive government actions.

That being said, I also know, and appreciate, the offensive tactic as well and when done properly, is mightier than the current justice system. In terms of risk, I end up taking more with this tactic, as these actions will be done outside the court room. The best part of this strategy is that the actions the government is trying to distract you from – excessive force, deletion of evidence and criminalization of those who question government – will be front and center. As this issue goes further back than just one phone call, the Manchester police have gotten away with murder (literally) for a while now.

Regardless of how this fund raiser goes, I’ll be in court, speaking the truth and defending my position on filming, recording and monitoring public officials. I would greatly appreciate you donating to either cause as it would help me (and other activists) further the message of police accountability. You can also buy CopBlock.org swag, which help funds our CopBlock activities, or contact me for video intro/outro’s and power post. For those unable to donate, sharing CopBlock.org content and social networks is just as good as FRN’s and I need/appreciate your support as well.

Thanks in advance.

—–

Ademo’s First Hearing (video) – CopBlock.org
CopBlock Founder faces 20 years – Photography Is NOT a Crime
Ademo Responds to Charges by CopBlock
Manchester’s Chalking 8 by Cop Block
High School Student Catches Excessive Force on Video by Cop Block
Video shows West High student’s arrest by Mark Hayward in the Union Leader
West High student arrest video goes viral by Kathryn Marchocki in the Union Leader
Teen on school arrest: ‘I was goofing around’ by Mark Hayward in the Union Leader
Manchester students say videotape of arrest was not planned by Shawne Wickham in the Union

Defensive or Offensive? That is the Question… is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights