Comments on Pro Libertate: Your "Duty" to Protect and Serve the Police

To Mario Kenny, Yeah, the entire concept of "...

2015-09-10T07:43:59.684-06:00

To Mario Kenny,

Yeah, the entire concept of "rhetorical violence" and "verbal violence" is ridiculous. When did we become such victims that someone saying they think you're wrong constitutes violence? To make it worse, these claims to victimization are coming from the most violent caste of Americans.

This means shielding police not only from violence...

2015-09-08T18:19:55.840-06:00

This means shielding police not only from violence directed against them, and the legal consequences of violence used by them, but also from the “rhetorical violence” supposedly committed by people who scrutinize their conduct and condemn their abuses.

So this means no one can be critical of police

Mr. Grigg, If you haven't already, check out t...

2015-09-05T21:41:05.029-06:00

Mr. Grigg,
If you haven't already, check out the comments http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/9485292-Arbys-workers-disciplined-after-refusing-to-serve-Fla-officer

Cops complaining about sole being suspended with pay. They truly live in a bubble to not see the irony.

Will, have you seen this: http://countercurrentne...

2015-09-04T14:01:39.746-06:00

Will, have you seen this:

http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/09/texas-sheriff-says-you-have-to-obey-the-police-because-their-authority-comes-from-god/

I am speechless, I knew they all have over - inflated egos, but this is truly over the top.

So if a citizen, ordered to help by a government e...

2015-09-04T10:27:37.762-06:00

So if a citizen, ordered to help by a government employee, "accidentally" plants a steel toed boot to the government employee's temple, that will be excused the same way a government employee who "accidentally" commits battery on a citizen would be, correct? We can't expect all blows to land correctly in the "heat of battle", right? We can't be "Monday morning quarterbacking" when a citizen fears for his life when ordered to help a government employee.

Or if the citizen under those same orders picks up the government employee's weapon and fires all 15 rounds randomly in the general direction of the altercation, he will be able to say "I was in fear for my life." correct? That seems to be SOP for most police agencies.

Or maybe the citizen dowses both combatants with a debilitating chemical agent, that would be approved, right? After all, cops routinely spray large crowds with tear gas, coating the innocent along with the "guilty".

Under the Alabama statute, who will bear responsib...

2015-09-03T20:56:09.173-06:00

Under the Alabama statute, who will bear responsibility if a citizen attempts to offer aid, and an officer misinterprets the move, thinks he's being engaged by an additional perp, and the officer inflicts grave to fatal injury on the good Samaritan?

donna from North Dakota: Still have NOT heard fro...

2015-09-03T16:11:26.262-06:00

donna from North Dakota:

Still have NOT heard from my state representatives regarding arming drones with 'nonlethal' weapons. According to the bill's author, Representative Rick Becker, House Bill 1328 was amended with the weapons provision to insure his 'primary intent requiring law enforcement to obtain a search warrant prior to being able to conduct surveillance on private citizens' was legally established.

Well...I'm not sure why we have had 24/7 drone surveillance over our farm...at least since I first noticed them in 2002. We aren't on any USDA Programs requiring compliance. In fact, we don't do much of anything but graze a few sheep & goats, horses, & run a tiny flock of chickens. These are the LARGE drones, too! They have running lights, seemingly perpetual operating systems, and are extremely nimble in their abilities to move in for a closer 'look' when someone goes out to check animals after dark or 'take a leak'.

Well, anyway, maybe ordinary folk need to carry around their own armed-drone emergency packs to be deployed ONLY when officers finding themselves in overwhelming difficulties are in need of assistance.

"A person commits the crime of refusing to ai...

2015-09-03T12:06:54.256-06:00

"A person commits the crime of refusing to aid a peace officer if, upon command by a peace officer identified to him as such, he fails or refuses to aid."

ARE there any peace officers working for the police any more?

Will, I was going to add that even if Dan Grayson...

2015-09-03T08:09:53.135-06:00

Will,

I was going to add that even if Dan Grayson's view was correct, most of your readers understand that any prosecutor will present the case to any jury as though the standers-by should have rendered aid. And, unfortunately, most juries these days will buy the prosecutors view of the law and convict the individual in question.

With reference to Mr. Grayson's point, this is...

2015-09-03T06:39:17.020-06:00

With reference to Mr. Grayson's point, this is the specific portion of the statute under discussion:

"A person is not liable under this section if the failure or refusal to aid the officer was reasonable under the circumstances. The burden of injecting this issue is on the defendant but this does not shift the burden of proof." (Emphasis added.)

This formula doesn't require that a defendant prove his innocence, but it does assume that a "refusal to aid" an officer is unreasonable, and places on the accused the "burden" of overcoming that presumption.

Re: "Under Alabama's statute, onlookers a...

2015-09-03T05:57:23.638-06:00

Re: "Under Alabama's statute, onlookers are not liable to prosecution if the failure to render aid “was reasonable under the circumstances,” but the burden of demonstrating that this is the case is placed upon the accused. "

You misread the statute, which says that burden of proof is not altered.

I've got to know, Will. How do you do it? Ho...

2015-09-03T05:46:20.168-06:00

I've got to know, Will. How do you do it? How do you not just give up in impotent frustration? You do far more than I do, yet we fall farther and farther behind the State every day. How do you keep from slipping into apathy over it all? I'm serious when I ask this, because I find myself getting more and more apathetic by the day. People will nod along and agree with me wholeheartedly, then turn around and continue to support the status quo. To quote Joss Whedon's "Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog" (which I highly recommend you spend the 45 minutes to watch, because it's extremely entertaining) "Well, the status is NOT...quo."

Anyway, to the point of this particular blog. If I found myself in court trying to justify why I didn't help a cop, I'm sure I'd go to jail. I can easily see myself in court stating, "If a cop was on fire, I wouldn't piss on him to put him out." He's paid to be a "public servant" that supposedly "protects and serves" yet we know he isn't a servant of the public and he doesn't protect or serve anything but those in power. If they want me to put myself in danger to assist a cop, I demand they pay me, and clothe me in qualified immunity, as well.

Anonymous @ 9:50 PM, Pray all you want for the ba...

2015-09-03T01:07:49.687-06:00

Anonymous @ 9:50 PM,

Pray all you want for the badged thugs. You still have that bit of freedom. But you better understand that those with badges and guns, are ONLY there to protect your fellow elite citizens you love so much. You know them as "government".

There is no reason why we need government agents with badges and guns. They protect no common citizen. There are no good cops.

No one is being forced to pray for the safety of f...

2015-09-02T21:50:06.783-06:00

No one is being forced to pray for the safety of fellow human beings.
If the thought of doing so is distasteful to the author then, I would suggest, they need someone to pray for them as well and there are PPL out there willing to do so

If government security provisioners do not want t...

2015-09-02T17:10:03.491-06:00

If government security provisioners do not want to listen to criticism then they need only allow competition. Let people express their concerns with security providers not in words but in subscriptions. Restore to Americans the fundamental right of consumer choice. Restore to Americans the freedom to choose the security providers they feel are the best in a free market in competing free enterprise security service providers.