"We don't make the laws, we only enforce them"

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: Erongaricuaro

Oh, please...

It an exception, rather than a rule only if you/we allow it to be. As with any govt. entity you get what you/we deserve if you aren't willing to work at it.

Nothing changes on its own.

Especially in things like this. If we aren't willing to watch the watchers, why are we surprised when things go pear shaped?

Keeping a society running smoothly takes work. Work that we're all, apparently, unwilling to do.

I get so tired, as you may surmise, of hearing/reading that "we can't change it". We can if we're willing to do it, willing to do the hard work necessary to change it. Whatever "it" is. Bad laws. Bad politicians. Combinations of both of those.

Sure, that's the way to get things done. Respond with righteous indignation rather than address the question I asked regarding what steps you took in remedying your own encounter with "bad cops." I admired the results you claim to have gotten, I had just hoped you would shed more light on what procedures you followed. Did you merely make a complaint or was there more to it than that?

a reply to: Erongaricuaro

Started to and got distracted, which happens easily to me sometimes...Sorry.

I've told the tale elsewhere here on ATS.

I'll try to find it and link to it...

But that'll have to wait 'til tomorrow unfortunately...since I go to work in a few hours. Sleep beckons.

a reply to: seagull

I am sorry. By whose authority do the police have to do any of that Henry listed? Why ignore article 6?

Article 6 US Constitution > policy, your opinion, chartered police forces, elected officers, all other laws. THAT is the law, as it is written.

Stop protecting the abusers. They do not deserve any of your trust. None. We need thousands of independent investigations, crowd funded.

They are actively participating in treason, under color of law each time they defend or deflect constitutional abuses. The law applies to them too. How many charges would you face if you knowingly participated in paperwork perjury to block justice?

a reply to: seagull

They may not like the various laws they're asked to enforce, but that's in the job description. It's our responsibility to change the bad laws, not to complain about the enforceres, or not just complain.

So coming to ATS to discuss our ideas and examine the
thoughts of like minded fellow members. And also members
with opposing views suddenly are merely coimplaining?
That seems like a twist. Maybe we should all just STFU?

originally posted by: Danbones
a reply to: intrptr

it no longer says to serve and protect on police cars

You're right. It says "to patrol and protect". I went looking for that to show you and drew a blank.

"But I know it is there".

Ah forget it.

a reply to: Not Authorized

Thank you for that concise reply. I would only add that if the "internal" review process were to be come an external and objective court of inquiry, say a committee with judicial powers staffed by citizens form the community or precinct, then maybe we could begin to take back some of the ground lost for citizens rights.

Police "policing" the police is ridiculous.

a reply to: intrptr

I agree that citizen oversight should be utilized at all departments.

a reply to: randyvs

When Martial Law is declared Law no longer exists is the cool part.
GAME ON

a reply to: randyvs

Maybe we should all just STFU?

and not get put on more watch lists...hell no. I like being watched.

originally posted by: buster2010
Supporting a law and making a law are two different things. Only congress and the president make the laws.

You might want to do a search: "Lobbyists writing laws for congress"
You will find that MOST ridiculous laws that benefit industries are WRITTEN BY THAT INDUSTRY.

Here are a few to help you along the way:
1. Banks doing it.
2. Google CEO discussing it. I really don't see how he might know something about this.
3. Koch & Exxon Mobile writing state laws

And while you are at it, how about this American Political Science Review article entitled,Lobbying as a Legislative Subsidy. Which basically suggests that lobbyists are helping legislators as the authors describe it, "The proximate political objective of this strategy is not to change legislators' minds but to assist natural allies in achieving their own, coincident objectives."

Seriously, to assume that the lobbyist has NO input whatsoever is a very naive view in this issue, especially when there are plenty of examples that exist that demonstrate otherwise.

a reply to: intrptr

Citizen‘s Grand Juries are the solution. Ever look up the purpose of a notary public before?

Lol, numerous times to say the least on MSM it's been shown the police don't know what the law is. They are not lawyers.

If they knew the law, they'd be making the big bucks.

a reply to: Not Authorized

Citizen‘s Grand Juries are the solution. Ever look up the purpose of a notary public before?

Thanks, if thats what I meant. I'm not a lawyer.

a reply to: thisguyrighthere

Just doing their jobs....

JUST LIKE THE NAZIS.


Blind loyalty and obedience is despicable, immoral and pathetic.


Tyranny is tyranny is tyranny.
No matter its color.

Tribalism needs to go.
The only way humanity can even SURVIVE', let alone thrive, is by evolving anthropologically.

How many more years, centuries, millennia, ERAS...filled with immeasurable death and destruction...how long before we come together and abolish Government? How bad does it have to get before we say ENOUGH.

You don't need rulers to have rules.
You don't need Governors to have governance.

a reply to: ltinycdancerg

And we don't need leaders to find our way to hell.

a reply to: intrptr

Grand juries under common law, are the highest court of the land. That is the whole purpose of them. Federal courts are lesser courts when compared to juries.

The FBI unlawfully tookover the purpose and place of grand juries. How did the system work before the FBI? Go searching yourself. :-)

Learn the basics of how the law is supposed to be working. It will only take a few days.

Citizen‘s Grand Juries are the solution. Ever look up the purpose of a notary public before?

I have been on three. Twice as Foreman. All we do is examine the prosecutions evidence to conclude that it is sufficient ie True Bill to continue the court process.

The Grand Jury has broad subpoena power to investigate each and every case however it is quite rare that the prosecution will present a case they don't have sufficient evidence to convict. In a typical 6 hour session more than a hundred cases will be heard.

Federal Grand juries are different as Federal prosecutors have a higher burden of continuation and they don't prosecute cases they can't prove. If you are indicted by a Federal Grand Jury your only option is to negotiate.

Both citizen panels have investigation powers however the Judge-of the criminal court they are representing-can approve or disapprove tax payer funds being used to investigate certain malfeasance.

The FBI has nothing whatsoever to do with Grand Juries. They can be ordered to appear-to testify under oath and jailed if they don't cooperate. That applies to everyone.

If you are going to accuse the Bureau of witness intimidation and jury tampering you better have so proof to back that up-lets hear it!

a reply to: Not Authorized

Learn the basics of how the law is supposed to be working. It will only take a few days.

Thank you, after you explained Grand Juries I did indeed remember that is how the law is supposed to work.

Do they still use them (nowadays) to indict police officers that overstep their bounds?