Archive for the 'Police' Category

This is a remarkable video.  It comes from reader Joe.  I don’t know when this incident occurred, but the video was recently released.  Watch it all.

The officer repeatedly states that he is entitled to know the person’s identity for a lawful activity because he is “investigating” something or other, while also not making clear that the person has been detained or arrested.

He then goes inside and reads the statute aloud, while also reading the words detained or arrested on suspicion of a crime.

He’s conflicted.  The statute cited by the photographer, Texas Penal Code 38.02, says this.

(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally refuses to give his name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information.
(b) A person commits an offense if he intentionally gives a false or fictitious name, residence address, or date of birth to a peace officer who has:
(1) lawfully arrested the person;
(2) lawfully detained the person; or
(3) requested the information from a person that the peace officer has good cause to believe is a witness to a criminal offense.

The photographer was not under arrest.  He was also not being detained according to the officer, but the officer wouldn’t let him leave.  So the officer lied about it, and clearly doesn’t understand what it means to detain someone.  The officer merely repeated the point that he was conducting an investigation.

We’ve seen this before with the Prince William County PD, where they repeatedly claimed that the mere act of conducting an investigation was adequate cause for demanding identification.

Here’s the fact.  It’s not.  That couldn’t be clearer.  This wasn’t a so-called “Terry Stop.”  There was no suspicion of a crime (photography isn’t illegal), and the conduct of an investigation isn’t justification for violation of rights.

The police academy is lying to their students, or else, the officer is ignorant and unteachable.  There is another possibility – he just doesn’t care.  Their contact information can be found here.

Beware, dear readers.  The 2A sanctuary movement, bringing Sheriffs and local PDs on board with your 2A rights, may not be be all it’s cracked up to be.  For your AO, you need to ensure that it means what it means and your local LEOs are truly on board, not just saying things for the purpose of reelection.

If they’ll violate your first amendment rights with careless impunity, they’ll do it with the second amendment too.

Recall that one crud, vulgar, obscene Putnam County Sheriff’s Deputy violated a man’s rights guaranteed under the second and fourth amendments by an illegal and unconstitutional detention?

Well, a recent video shows obvious violation of someone’s fourth amendment rights, and attempts to cover it up before the fact.

Sheriff Steve Deweese, sdeweese@putnamwv.org, has a real problem on his hands.  It looks like most if not all of his deputies are crass, lawless thugs and criminals.  Then again, you know what they say.  This typically all comes from the top.  Sheriff Deweese needs to be replaced and then prosecuted along with his deputies.  He looks like he is corrupt to the bone.

News from New York.

“We’re a rural county, and a lot of people are gun owners and support the Second Amendment and were not happy with the SAFE Act, and I support all of that,” Smith said. “But I couldn’t take the lead and advise people to break the law.”

“I couldn’t lead it because I took an oath and am here to support people who are for and against the Second Amendment,” Smith said.

Have you ever heard such a cowardly and confused statement?  Try to dissect that.  ” … I took an oath and am here to support people who are for and against the Second Amendment.”

Where is something like that in any oath he took?  When did he take an oath to “support” people who are against the thing to which he was supposed to swear an oath?

Via WiscoDave.  News from Florida.  Video at the link.

As he attempts to back up and drive around the golf car blocking the parking lot exist, the school resource officer issues a foul-mouthed warning: ‘You’re gonna get shot, you come another f***ing foot closer to me. You run into me, you’ll get f***ing shot. This is my campus, brother.’

The lesson here isn’t really that many cops are thugs and gang members with badges and court authority who will use any chance to berate, belittle, and lord it over other people like the sociopaths they are.  We knew that already.

The real lesson here is that when you send your children to centers of communist indoctrination, the state owns them.  The only solution is home schooling.

News from California.

FRESNO, Calif. (KFSN) — A frightening situation for a Tulare County family started when they heard banging on their front door at around ten Tuesday night.

“They can hear them yelling ‘Sheriff’s Office, Sheriff’s Office,’ says Tulare County Sheriff’s Lt. Joe Torres. “The victims thought it was odd that it was late hours, so the suspects then forced their way into the living room area, they busted the front door.”

At this point, Torres says the homeowner knew for sure that the people at the door were not sheriff’s deputies, as they weren’t wearing law enforcement uniforms.

That’s when Torres says the homeowner and suspects started shooting at each other.

One suspect was hit in the upper body and died at the scene. The other suspects got away.

The homeowner’s wife, child, and another man were inside the house at the time. Thankfully, nobody was hurt.

I’ve documented two other times this has happened, once in Norfolk, Virginia, and the other time in Houston, Texas.  There are doubtless many more examples I haven’t documented.  I have observed that “You see, we can’t just lay down and let people screaming “police, police, get on the floor, police, police” … come into our homes without countering those efforts with close quarters battle.  Because they may not be police.”

So two sides are now set up to conduct war on one another, the first side being the police who conduct SWAT raids with impunity from prosecution by the government, the second side being the innocent homeowner, victim of a false claim or mistaken identity, and the setup was built by the government itself who refuses to stand down their stupid “war on drugs” and simply follow the constitution.

It’s happened before to innocent home owners, and it’ll happen again.

This is a remarkable video for a number of reasons.

First of all, the cop who conducted the detention is a vile, foul-mouth, nasty, mean individual, who clearly hasn’t the temperament, education or intelligence to be a cop.  In my estimation he has the temperament to be a ditch digger, and probably nothing more until he grows up.

Second, this detention was illegal.  The video commenter keeps referencing U.S. versus Black, and that’s a good one to use since the Fourth Circuit determined that the simple act of carrying a gun openly in an open-carry state isn’t reason enough to stop and detain a man on suspicion of anything (Nathaniel Black and the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department).

But it shouldn’t even have to get that far.  West Virginia is not a stop-and-identify state based on every resource I could find on the subject (not that I believe stop-and-identify is constitutional, but it seems to be recognized by the courts in the case of a “Terry Stop” where there is legitimate suspicion of a crime).  So the cop broke West Virginia state law.  He no more has the right to stop someone and force them to answer questions or provide identification for no reason than I do.

Third, based on what this cop says, he does this all the time.  Seriously.  Watch the video.  Based on what I heard, I think he confessed over video to multiple violations of constitutional rights of citizens of West Virginia.

Your contact information for this is the following.

sdeweese@putnamwv.org (Steve Deweese, Sheriff of Putnam County)

prosecutingattorney@putnamwv.org (Mark A. Sorsaia, Office of the Prosecuting Attorney
Putnam County Judicial Building)

Oh, and by the way, Putnam County is a so-called “Second Amendment Sanctuary” county.  It looks to me like Sheriff Deweese isn’t on board with that and needs to be replaced.

News from traitor Michael Bloomberg.

“I have my own army in the NYPD, which is the seventh biggest army in the world. I have my own State Department, much to Foggy Bottom’s annoyance. We have the United Nations in New York, and so we have an entree into the diplomatic world that Washington does not have,” Mayor Bloomberg said.

I’m glad you see it that way Michael.  I do too.

Hey, here’s a little note for you.  Your army sucks.  And the founders disagreed with the notion of standing armies in America.

His weapon was concealed and the only reason the deputy knew he had a weapon was that he informed as such.  He was stopped, detained, and a gun pointed at him for wearing a ballistic vest. In other words, he did nothing illegal.

In our discussions about fisking your local Sheriff and his deputies for their views of your rights, especially in the context of working towards constitutional Sheriffs who will prevent agents of the state and federal government from infringing on gun rights, it’s been easy to overlook a very important aspect of your local AO.

In a lot of urban and suburban areas, it’s commonplace to have separated law enforcement duties and authority between the Sheriff and a city or county/city police department.  The Sheriff, under this framework, is responsible for serving warrants, security of the court, juries and the jail system.  The police department is responsible for law enforcement in all other areas.

The pretext for this separation, which likely happened either from a state referendum or a change to state laws, is that the Sheriff, who is an elected officer, can then use his status to show favoritism to those who donated to his campaign, who are his friends, and family.  Conversely, he can punish his enemies.

True enough, this has happened on too many occasions in American history, and where this has been done, the Sheriffs have themselves to blame for it, at least in part.  But this also removes the highest elected law enforcement official from public review and voter approval.  The other side of the sword cuts deep.

I assumed that this is the way Prince William County law enforcement works, since these are police officers, not deputies.

This is a remarkable video, made even more so by the fact that they knew they were being videoed and were still as abusive as they are.  To begin with, photography isn’t a crime, and these officers know it.

They repeatedly make the claim that “we need you … ” normally ending in something like identify yourself.  But the fact of the matter is that no one talks the law or rights.  They don’t really need anything of the sort, they just want to fill out the right paperwork and put another name on a watch list.

They also repeatedly ask his “intent and purpose” with said videography.  Again, that’s not important and isn’t any of their business.  They have no constitutional right to know this information.  They place this in the category of “suspicious activity,” but suspicious activity isn’t a crime.  His detention wasn’t a legal “Terry Stop,” and the police officers greatly add to their problem later in the video.

When he was asked to remove his face cover, the videographer smartly asked them what they would do if he was a Muslim wearing head/face cover and it was his religious beliefs.  They clearly state that they wouldn’t be able to force him to obey the order, and this is highly problematic because this means they won’t apply the law equally to everyone.  The law is either constitutional or it’s not – regardless of religious views.

They further demand his DOB, which again isn’t based on any real need to know that information outside of putting him on a watch list.  Then they ridiculously claim that he’s “disturbing the peace” since everyone is now watching him, that fact being based solely on the fact that the police stopped him.  The police were the ones disturbing the peace, not him.

The legal problems this police department presents for itself are overwhelming, and if this individual has the money to pursue it, they are in for a legal fight.  Finally, when the individual demands their identification, they claim they are under no obligation to supply that because “we’re law enforcement.”

The arrogance and haughtiness would be staggering if it weren’t for the fact that it is ubiquitous.  I almost know what to expect these days when I view these videos.

The contact information for the department is: policedept@pwcgov.org.

The contact information for the chief of police is: bbarnard@pwcgov.org.

This video is long but interesting.  Before watching, I have a few points to make to the chief of police in Speedway, Indiana.  Yes, I sent you this link, Mr. Campbell.

First, your officers violated the constitution of the United States by detaining him without a crime having been committed.  The original phone call didn’t report a crime, and you had no reason to suspect a crime.  This wasn’t a “Terry Stop,” and you know it.  Check with your DA.  He’ll back me up on this.

Second, the officer on the right in the video is much too emotional for my tastes.  I don’t think he has the temperament for the job.  Additionally, he keeps talking about logic, and I don’t think he understands what he’s talking about.  He should take a college course in logic before doing that again.  They will explain the rules of classical logic, and how presuppositions and axioms are used to produce conclusions, or in other words, how to properly build syllogisms.  The gun carrier you stopped didn’t violate any rules of logic in the video.  He didn’t stumble into any formal logical fallacies.

Third, as to the officer on the left who kept talking about what the gun carrier was trying to “prove,” that’s an irrelevant line of questioning and makes no difference.  It has nothing to do with anything, certainly not why he was being detained.

Fourth, the sergeant in the video asking the gun carrier to hand over his weapon for examination is the most nonsensical thing I’ve heard today.  Any man who touches another man’s gun is an idiot.  Any man who asks another man to handle his weapon is risking an ND, and is therefore an idiot.  Any man who handles another man’s weapon (in a case like this) is risking an ND, and is therefore an idiot.  I couldn’t care less if he is an “armorer” or not.  The request was stupid.

Furthermore, the stated excuse for turning over the weapon, “To see if any modifications had been made to it,” was an invasion of his privacy and unrelated to his being detained.  Your officers had absolutely no need to see his weapon.  And finally, if he had converted his weapon into a fully automatic rifle loaded with AP rounds, less than a 16″ barrel on it, and an illegal can attached, it wouldn’t have stood up in court.  I’m not going to waste our time explaining this since it’s all available if you review the Fourth Circuit case of U.S. versus Nathaniel Black (Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department).  Ask your DA.  He’ll back me up on this.