It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Police Commissioner Insanely suggest Upgrading Resisting Arrest To A Felony

page: 2
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ATF1886
So then what you are tellifng me is that it is too late to change or make a difference?? Im sure its been way too late im not worried bout me any more its my kiddos that i fear for...a reply to: FormOfTheLord





Never too late but dont expect too much that way you wont be dissapointed when the only changes are for the worst.

Lets not forget in case of emergency, and I mean any emergency there is this little continuity of government plan called FEMA where we all go to prison oops I meant to say into our government feel good FEMA camps.




posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   
The Facist are coming, just another excuse to jail people..I guess there aren't quite enough in U.S. prisons..next leap forward will be labeling anyone not instantley compliant a terrorist.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord

originally posted by: infinityorder
a reply to: Daedal



Great idea...it isn't like they just throw "resisting arrest" at the drop of a hat....oh wait.



Ironically enough they arrest people illegally all the time.



The supreme court has ruled many times on this, and one can resist arrest that is not lawful up to and including killing the offending officer if necessary to ensure ones freedom.



One case I remember was john badelk vs the state of Indiana.



They can't just arrest you because they want to.



There must be a set criteria ad per the constitution, the supreme court has also ruled on this and up held it.


For 48 hours yes you can be detained for nothing at all, then a judge needs to see a reason why and they will decide if any formal charges need to be applied to you. So for up to 2 days you can sit in jail while they think about if they will decide to charge you with anything at all. If they decide to not charge you with anything you are free to go, but if they can think of anything, and I mean anything, kiss your freedom goodbye. So if a cop doesnt like you he can just say you resisted arrest, and you go to jail anyway, reguardless of if this law happens in New York or not.


Wrong...arrest is the stripping of your freedom, by law.

They are not empowered to strip an american of their freedom without witnessing a crime and or a warrant, which can only be issued with witnessed law breaking.

If you are arrested for any other reason it is in fact unlawful.

They are not empowered specifically by the the constitution for this very reason to strip an American of their freedom at will.

They must have proof. Or it is unlawful, and one may kill the officer flat out and can face no charges.

The supremes have ruled on this many times....like 12 I believe.

Just because people go along with it doesn't make it legal.

One does not have to tolerate loss of freedom without evidence.

You are entitled to defend with physical force up to and including deadly force.

Read the supremes rulings on the subject, they were quite clear.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: crankyoldman
I think most people misunderstand the reason for elevating "resisting" arrest to a jailable offense. There is no way the court system can possible put everyone in jail who might be tagged with this - all arrestees, as It is impractical.

The reason can be found in the word "resist." It is our natural inclination to resist being jailed, handcuffed, assaulted, beaten, or restrained and has been for all of time. 100 years ago you had no obligation to consent to a pseudo authoritarians attempts to cage you but this was a problem. Consent is needed for all actions to take place on earth, all, so those in charge need to find creative ways to get you to consent. At first the idea was "arrest" was in the public's best interest. Then it was to protect all involved and so on.

By stating that "resisting" is no longer a "natural" response to aggression but an attack on the state they have stated you no longer have "choice" when it comes to the control mechanisms and must consent to anyone or anything that seeks to bind you.

This is a VERY desperate measure taken by those who seek to control. They will frame this in terms of safety for the arrestee, and then safety for the officer but the fact is this is a last ditch effort to bypass natural freewill, consent, in favor of creating a mental construct that simple obeys, despite the fact that the effort required to obey goes against the nature of the human.


I couldn't agree more.

They cannot just strip an American of liberty because they decide to.

This is absolutely illegal.

And the supremes have ruled in favor if it being absolutely illegal many times.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   
In the US we have way too many "because I said so" laws. In Ohio if a cop says you were speeding ,you were, period. I tried to fight a speeding ticket in court. The dashcam footage CLEARLY showed that I was driving the speed limit. Didn't matter, because the cop (without even using radar) visually determined that I was speeding. Guilty.

We just had a thread where a lawyer was arrested for resisting. WTF? How is that even possible? "because I said so".

We have increasingly out of control police forces that seem to be immune from justice, the last thing we need is to hand people we no longer trust the power to hand out felonies at will "because I say so".

All "because I say so" statutes need to be struck down.

Do we need a new Magna Carta in the US to tame our police forces?
edit on 8-2-2015 by abe froman because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-2-2015 by abe froman because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedal


LOL,

From recent events, a cop is trained to start yelling "stop resisting" as loud as they can repeatedly the second they start any physical interaction with another person.

Also, it appears to be their "catch all". You can be charged with resisting arrest for anything that pisses the cop off. Look at them funny, you are charged with resisting arrest.

Then they over charge a person with as much crap as they can get away with so they can bargain charges down so you do not sue them later.

This is a DUMB idea.

A felony on a persons record immediately makes them a 2nd class citizen in the employment sector. The second a background check comes in, you will not be getting that next job.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: Daedal


LOL,

From recent events, a cop is trained to start yelling "stop resisting" as loud as they can repeatedly the second they start any physical interaction with another person.

Also, it appears to be their "catch all". You can be charged with resisting arrest for anything that pisses the cop off. Look at them funny, you are charged with resisting arrest.

Then they over charge a person with as much crap as they can get away with so they can bargain charges down so you do not sue them later.

This is a DUMB idea.

A felony on a persons record immediately makes them a 2nd class citizen in the employment sector. The second a background check comes in, you will not be getting that next job.





Which raises a very good point.

WTF happened to serving your debt to society and having a chance at life?

WTF...everything is a felony these days.

Now you can't vote, can't own a gun, can't get a job.

Where in the second did it say " right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"....unless your a fellon?



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Guys....if you don't do it then you have nothing to worry about.

Not sure what you are all getting your panines in bunch about




/sarc just in case any one misses it.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: infinityorder

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord


originally posted by: infinityorder

a reply to: Daedal
Great idea...it isn't like they just throw "resisting arrest" at the drop of a hat....oh wait.
Ironically enough they arrest people illegally all the time.
The supreme court has ruled many times on this, and one can resist arrest that is not lawful up to and including killing the offending officer if necessary to ensure ones freedom.
One case I remember was john badelk vs the state of Indiana.
They can't just arrest you because they want to.
There must be a set criteria ad per the constitution, the supreme court has also ruled on this and up held it.

For 48 hours yes you can be detained for nothing at all, then a judge needs to see a reason why and they will decide if any formal charges need to be applied to you. So for up to 2 days you can sit in jail while they think about if they will decide to charge you with anything at all. If they decide to not charge you with anything you are free to go, but if they can think of anything, and I mean anything, kiss your freedom goodbye. So if a cop doesnt like you he can just say you resisted arrest, and you go to jail anyway, reguardless of if this law happens in New York or not.

Wrong...arrest is the stripping of your freedom, by law.
They are not empowered to strip an american of their freedom without witnessing a crime and or a warrant, which can only be issued with witnessed law breaking.
If you are arrested for any other reason it is in fact unlawful.
They are not empowered specifically by the the constitution for this very reason to strip an American of their freedom at will.
They must have proof. Or it is unlawful, and one may kill the officer flat out and can face no charges.
The supremes have ruled on this many times....like 12 I believe.
Just because people go along with it doesn't make it legal.
One does not have to tolerate loss of freedom without evidence.
You are entitled to defend with physical force up to and including deadly force.
Read the supremes rulings on the subject, they were quite clear.


Umm the supream court said go for it to arrest people for up to 48 hours back in the early 90s. What did our American people do about it. . . . ..
NOTHING AT ALL


www.nytimes.com...
WASHINGTON, May 13— The Supreme Court ruled today that people who are arrested without a warrant may be imprisoned for as long as 48 hours while awaiting a judicial determination of whether the arrest was proper.

The 5-to-4 decision set aside a Federal court order, issued in a lawsuit brought by prisoners against Riverside County, Calif., that had established a 36-hour deadline for a judicial determination of whether the police had probable cause to arrest someone without a warrant.

Under the California county's policy, the determination was supposed to be made within 48 hours, not counting weekends and holidays. But delays of three or four days were common if an arrest occurred on the eve of a weekend or holiday.

The ruling today may not have a sweeping effect nationwide, since many states already meet the standard set by the Court.

edit on 8-2-2015 by FormOfTheLord because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   
What about passive resistance to being arrested? Simply going dead weight and limp, and not struggling? (Especially if you're a bigger person.)



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Yet there are still many police officer who scoff when we point out that they are loosing the trust of the citizens. In some communities they lost that trust generations ago or there never was any trust.

As time passes, it seems like the police class keep getting more tools, both legal and physical that gives them an almost supreme power of the citizen.

Resisting Arrest is one of those charges the police can simply through out there without any evidence, make it a felony and then brutality is justified, especially when the jury is hand picked from a pool of people who have never been arrested.

A person who has never been arrested is much more likely to believe the police's side of the story.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: ArchAngel_X
I think you would have a good chance of being "damaged" wouldn't you think..not that it's right.
I think any kind of non compliance would suit their needs.


edit on 8-2-2015 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Yet there are still many police officer who scoff when we point out that they are loosing the trust of the citizens. In some communities they lost that trust generations ago or there never was any trust.

As time passes, it seems like the police class keep getting more tools, both legal and physical that gives them an almost supreme power of the citizen.

Resisting Arrest is one of those charges the police can simply through out there without any evidence, make it a felony and then brutality is justified, especially when the jury is hand picked from a pool of people who have never been arrested.

A person who has never been arrested is much more likely to believe the police's side of the story.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Frankly, my view is that every violent action taken against an NYPD officer can be just as much classified self defense as it can assault or murder.

They have made it blatantly clear that they are going to act aggressively, abusively, and use procedure and precedent to engage in violence against NYC's general public. The police serve the people, not the other way around, and when they overstep that boundary, they become a public enemy and should not be surprised when they are treated as such.

This is a sad, sad thing to see when a department full of what should be amongst the country's finest starts acting like they are the enforcers for a mob kingpin.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   
OK, but also upgrade a police officer shooting and killing an unarmed person to murder.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedal
That's insane man,leave Joe public alone..I think the Fed need to drug test the PIGS for Steroids..Over angry As*holes.



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: greydaze

Once upon a time on ATS I was told by someone that there is no proof that the Steroids cause aggression and there is no good reason to test cops for steroids, nor punish cops who get caught using steroids.

Can't even make that up, I have tried to search for it on here but just can't seem to find it.

Police aggression and brutality is something that seriously needs to be addressed in the US, especially NYC if we want to live in a country with freedom and liberty.



posted on Feb, 9 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
Yet there are still many police officer who scoff when we point out that they are loosing the trust of the citizens. In some communities they lost that trust generations ago or there never was any trust.

As time passes, it seems like the police class keep getting more tools, both legal and physical that gives them an almost supreme power of the citizen.


We should ALL be trying to de-fund police departments, instead of trying to prosecute their employees or change laws. Such measures have proven, overwhelming, to be ineffective. De-funding police departments is perfectly legal and solves the bad apple problem MUCH faster, than constitutional challenges in the court system.

Activists should be finding ways to, legally, cut the budget for NYPD and all the other PD's acting illegally. By forming their own opposing PAC's (Political Action Committee) focused on chipping away at this single Budget reduction issue, little by little, across the country. Cutting off the money supply will stop them dead, cold, in their tracks.

Defunding government is a sensible voter solution to reining in local government By Dave Duffy

This is the simplest answer that nearly everyone continues to ignore.

LEOs are in place to do the following and NOTHING MORE:

1. Protect themselves.
2. Maximize their total compensation.
3. Act as a source of revenue generation for the department currently employing them, the union they belong to and the local governments authorizing their activities.
4. Protecting the commercial interests of national corporations (with PAC's lobbying on the behalf of these big corps)
5. Protecting the private property of large, influential, land owners, residing within their jurisdiction, that are also contributing to and participate in local politics.
6. Controlling dissenting narratives that would interfere with 1-5.

They’ve been totally co-opted, insulated from consequences and the citizens are picking up the tab. Its that simple, but no one understands this, nor are many willing to accept these facts. Also most importantly, that’s how Fascism works and in turn uses domestic police forces.

edit on 9-2-2015 by boohoo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   
This is insane, the only thing I can come up with after thinking for a couple days is that it's unconstitutional. Labeling a person a felon for a minor undefined act has to violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause. Being labeled a felon is in many ways a harsher penalty than serving life in prison. And now the police get to charge people with crimes carrying that penalty for any reason they want? We saw a lawyer just the other day get hit with a resisting arrest charge for coming to the defense of her client. Should she be a felon? No guns, no voting, loses her right to practice law, up to a $100,000 fine, and all the rest.

Resisting arrest will come down against the defendant as a violent felony directed against a police officer. Essentially that puts the person on the same legal seating as someone who went out, robbed a 7-11, and killed the clerk.

This is absolutely insane. If the courts allow this for even one moment I will be in utter disbelief. I guess the NYPD did say recently that they're now at war with the public.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
And now the police get to charge people with crimes carrying that penalty for any reason they want? We saw a lawyer just the other day get hit with a resisting arrest charge for coming to the defense of her client. Should she be a felon? No guns, no voting, loses her right to practice law, up to a $100,000 fine, and all the rest.

Resisting arrest will come down against the defendant as a violent felony directed against a police officer. Essentially that puts the person on the same legal seating as someone who went out, robbed a 7-11, and killed the clerk.


And you have just uncovered the true endgame.

This is going to be used to threaten lawyers, with law enforcement wanting to be able to have even more influence over prosecutions. DA's are going to rule the day because police can simply charge the defendants lawyer with "resisting arrest".

Unconstitutional is absolutely correct, it smacks in the face of "Checks and Balances" concept. Someone with money is going to have to challenge this law all the way up to the supreme court, if the opportunity comes, due to a false arrest.

edit on 10-2-2015 by boohoo because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join