I’m sure the British were also not happy when a lot of the colonists stopped backing the redcoats. The police are traitors to America and freedom, just like the redcoats.
There are countless examples of this kind of thing. If you’re not suspected of breaking a law, the cops can’t arrest you for not providing ID. This cop says otherwise. So is he lying or is he ignorant? Who knows, but either way he should be fired for harassing people.
Whether the cop is lying or ignorant, he’s attempting to take away your rights. The job of police is to take away your rights. The government PR is that they’re here to protect us, but that is obviously false. If you believe that, you’ve fallen for their propaganda.
Here’s a little background on this story. A bill was submitted to the Texas state legislature earlier this year, HB948. Its purpose was to abolish abortion, and instructed the state to ignore any judges at any level that attempted to strike down the law. The bill was blocked from being voted on by Byron Cook who is a legislator. He is Republican and pro-life. He is also a deacon at a Baptist church in Corsicana, Texas.
Since he used his power to block this clearly righteous bill, he should be under church discipline. But his pietistic 501c3 social club isn’t into that sort of thing, so abolitionists protested his church from the public sidewalk.
This shameful quote appeared in the article:
“This was disrespectful, inconsiderate and inexcusable to be in front of a church on Sunday morning where these little ones were walking in to learn about Jesus and the Bible,” Elmer Tanner, Navarro County Sheriff stated in a social media post. “It was uncalled-for and was as classless an act as I have ever witnessed.”
“Be angry with a law, a situation or a person, but direct your protest at the right place and the right time,” Tanner stated. “Not at a place of worship where children are needing to feel safe, welcomed, eager and excited to be … Nothing beneficial came out of this display today. Nothing.”
Sixty million babies have been murdered in this country. This dirtbag sheriff has done absolutely nothing in his official capacity to stop it. He would almost certainly say stopping abortion isn’t his job, and that his job is just to enforce the law. That is the same excuse the Nazi guards used during their trials at Nuremberg.
Abortionists rest easy at night knowing there are no good cops. Tanner is the proof of that statement.
The funny thing is that HB948 would have required sheriffs like Tanner to stand up to tyrants and baby murderers. Tanner is clearly too big of a sissy to do that. He would fold in front of a fed like a little girl.
I told someone that the cops should arrest abortionists for murder, and they said that would be anarchy. Here is my response. Please check out the link, and take the time to read that important article.
If the Nazi guards at the concentration camps had disobeyed orders to kill Jews, would that have been anarchy? Six million murdered Jews is anarchy. Sixty million dead American babies dwarfs Hitler’s anarchy. The Bible only ever refers to man’s laws as lawlessness, i.e. anarchy. Check out this article.
All unlawful orders must be disobeyed. Abortionists rest easy at night knowing there are no good cops.
Civil asset forfeiture is plain old wicked. It is blatant, out-and-out stealing. Some Colorado lawmakers aren’t trying to end it, but to just rein it in a little bit. (That in itself is not the best approach. Theft should be illegal and any concession that theft should be legal under certain circumstances is evil. But this episode reveals a lot of truth in spite of that little fact.)
Prominent cops are bold in saying that they want their thievery to remain unchecked. They have revealed their covetous hearts and their names are named unashamedly in the newspaper.
Pete Carey, Colorado Springs Police Chief
Chip Taylor, executive director of Colorado Counties Inc.
Justin Smith, Larimer County Sheriff
They’re the ones who are named in the article, but I’m sure there are many, many more. Those guys don’t stop theft in their jurisdiction. They and their blue gangs are the biggest thieves.
Cops blindly enforce any and all unjust laws and then use the lame excuse that they don’t make the laws, they just enforce them. Obviously, that’s a lie and a cop out. They have the ear of the governor and lobbyist groups and they can’t claim to be impartial parties. They are a powerful constituency and they make their voices heard.
UPDATE: A similar story appeared in the Pueblo Chieftain. We can add these names to the list of thieves boldly coming out of the thief closet.
Kirk Taylor, Sheriff, Pueblo County
Eric Gonzales, Sergeant, Pueblo Police Department
In case you were wondering, it’s not just me saying all of this stuff about how terrible the police are. There are bona fide Christian leaders who are saying this stuff.
I don’t know if you watched any of the video Jeff Shirton, but the people involved did nothing but film – some for people they didn’t even know. No concern for their mistreatment? No concern that police routinely lie – and lie to cover for each other’s unjust behavior? No concern that legislators in various states are making laws to further help them cover their unjust and wicked deeds? I have had the police lie about me or others many times when arrested for our efforts on behalf of the preborn. They have erased our videotape to cover their wicked deeds. One time I was looking at 20 years in prison for the charges the police made up against me – all lies. The only thing that saved me from their lies was someone videotaping from about 75 yards away that they did not know was filming. Their video showed their lies – and the prosecutor released me with all charges dropped.
Concerning the situation that I speak of on this post, I was looking at 4 years in prison – all based on lies by the police. I simply filmed another pastor who asked me to because of the unruly officer. I stood about 15 feet away; never said one word; never raised one finger; the officer never said anything to me but approached me and beat me to the ground. Other officers arrived. They took me to the squad car and several beat me there before putting me inside it. The officers then made up a lie. The first one said I approached him and he warned me to stop and that I had an unidentifiable object in my hand (the old ‘I thought he had a gun routine’). The others covered for him and said I was so unruly it took four of them to take me to the squad car and that I fought with them there. I never did. I was handcuffed. I simply had to take their beating. They spent an hour at the police station with me cuffed saying filthy things about Jesus to me and mocking my Christian faith. Once processed to the sheriff, they then tried to confiscate my video footage, but I had already released it to friends. Why did they want it? To erase it. It showed I was telling the truth.
What they didn’t know was that my daughter had taken about 20 still shots of them walking me from where the first cop beat me to the squad car – showing there were not four officers restraining me in my unruliness but I was just walking with one officer gingerly holding my wrist while the other 3 followed about 5 feet behind. The also did not know that someone was filming them about 100 yards away showing them kicking and beating me at the squad car – and me doing nothing but taking the beating. There is SO much more I could say about this story – but in the end, after a 3 day trial, I was found “not guilty” of my charges. During my ordeal, I was contacted by three people who had been brutalized by that police department. My lawyer also found numerous reportings against their behavior including a death. This IS a problem – and attempts to stop the lawful recording of police in public can only be meant to further evil. A big part of the problem is the type of training law enforcement receive in this country.
You don’t care about this man who is facing 42 years in prison for simply filming the unjust/wicked actions of the police Jeff? And this is the problem, the “good” officers cover for the bad. There were 15 officers on the scene when I was beaten and charged – yet not one came forward to say it was a lie. In fact, several stood on the stand in court and lied to help their fellow officer. And not only that, but the police chief, the city attorney, and the district attorney all became involved and joined in the cover-up; to get me convicted and the officer exonerated. The only thing that kept me from prison was a just judge. I was fortunate – most are not.
I have some bad news. I was found guilty at my speeding ticket trial today. The cop did a really good job of presenting his case, and didn’t screw up the things I thought he might.
I also screwed up a little bit on the jurisdiction line of reasoning. Rather than say, “Why do you believe the law applies to everyone in the state of Colorado?” I said, “How do you know the law applies to everyone in Colorado?” He said because he has peace officer certification. So that tripped me up a little, I got side tracked by that and asked a few questions about that rather than going back and rephrasing the question. Obviously, the law applies to everyone in Colorado because he’s a peace officer is a misunderstanding of the question, and I blew it.
I eventually got him to admit that the peace officer certification is based on the law, and the right to pull me over is based on the law, but the judge stopped that and said something like, “I wanted to give you some leeway on that line of questioning, but the court determines what law applies.”
So to the judge, I said, “Can I ask you a question, then?”
She said, “You can ask, but I may not answer.”
I said, “What is the legal reason for why that law applies to everyone in the state of Colorado?”
She said, “I’m not going to answer that question.”
So I asked several questions about the tuning forks, and I cited a case that said the tuning forks have to be proven to be reliable for radar evidence to be valid.
Ultimately the judge said that the cop’s testimony about eyeballing my speed would be enough to convict me, regardless of what the radar gun said.
There is some good news. The trial took 30-45 minutes, and there were three cops sitting around waiting for the trial, so they were off the streets for that long. There were also two clerks sitting there the whole time. So, it cost them much more than the $190 they got out of me.
But the question of why the law applies to everyone in the state of Colorado goes unanswered. There is no answer, and the system is based on a blind faith religion, albeit an antichrist religion.
We will go on pretending that the laws given us by half-wits in Denver is sacrosanct.
I hope I never get another ticket, but I would like to do better next time.
I have court for a speeding ticket tomorrow. I’m going to make them earn their money at least. Everyone ought to take their tickets to trial. If they did, the courts would get clogged up, and they wouldn’t be able to handle the cases. Even if they could, they would no longer be profitable.
My wife just told me that she thinks I should just pay the ticket. However we have to keep in mind that it is important to our system that we are innocent until proven guilty. We have a right to a fair trial, and men have shed their blood for these rights. These rights are based on the Christian worldview, and it is important that we exercise our rights, which don’t come from men, but from God. I didn’t start this…a man with the power to blow my brains out, pulled me over. He started it.
Here’s a few things I’ve learned from this ticket, in addition to what I’ve learned previously. I’m also going to provide the questions and notes I’ve compiled in hopes that it might save you time.
- They tell you that if you pay the ticket within a couple weeks (or whatever), you get a deal. The deal they offer as a plea bargain to everyone if you show up to plead guilty or not guilty is better than their initial offer.
- When you show up to plead guilty or not guilty, I’d guess that is their break even point. They have to get you to pay the ticket or take the deal there to break even. If you plead not guilty, they will lose money.
- Read the state laws on traffic tickets. I went to that first hearing, and asked the clerk if she’s a referee. She said she wasn’t, so I filed a motion to dismiss. The judge said that she agreed and rescheduled my first hearing to be in front of her. They called me and left a message, and they mailed me a notice. I showed up, but I think if I hadn’t shown up, they would have either had to drop the case or properly serve me. So I think I screwed up by showing up to that hearing voluntarily without proper service.
- So my November 30th ticket is scheduled for trial on May 24. I think that postponing as long as possible also increases the chance that the cop retires/dies/moves, which would mean you are not guilty.
Here are my notes I’m taking tomorrow. I’m hoping to rake this guy over the coals as much as possible. The first portion is taken from a trial I saw where a lawyer did this to a state patrolman, and the judge dismissed the case. The second portion is based on Marc Stevens thoughts. The third part is taken from this article.
- Has the state rested its case?
- He never identified me as the driver. I ask that the case be dismissed.
- This law that I’m charged under, is it your belief that it applies to everyone in the state of Colorado?
- What is your logical, legal reason for that belief?
- So the law says that the law applies? Do you see that that is circular reasoning, and isn’t a valid answer?
- Can you describe your training in using this radar/lidar?
- How is the device calibrated?
- If radar:
When did you use the tuning forks?
How did you use the tuning forks?
Was this done with the operator’s manual for the device?
How are the tuning forks calibrated? State of Florida v. Allweiss
(1980) says that using the radar manufacturer’s tuning forks is tantamount to having the device test itself.
Did you have the heat on? Was the car running?
- If lidar:
Did the operator have adequate training and experience?
Is the training documented?
Has the lidar been tested according to the procedures recommended by the manufacturer?
Was the unit tested against a known speed?
Does the unit include a technician certification?
What is the date of that certification (must be within 3 years according to State of Hawaii v Abiye Assay and NHTSA standards)?
Do you have the operator’s manual with you?
Was the heat on? Was the car running?
- Have you had any disciplinary actions taken against you?
State of Connecticut v. Tomanelli (1966)
In the case, which is the same year as the Honeycutt case, the Supreme Court of Connecticut ruled that “outside influences may affect the accuracy of the recording by a police radar set sufficient to raise a doubt as to the reliability of the speed recorded.”
The court also stated that tuning forks must be proved to be accurate to be accepted as valid tests of a radar unit. In order to establish the accuracy of the radar unit the operator must testify to the following:
- That he made tuning fork tests before and after the defendant’s speed was recorded.
- That the tests were made by activating 40, 60 and 80 mph tuning forks and by observing that the unit responded correctly in each case.
State of Minnesota v. Gerdes (1971)
The Supreme Court of Minnesota ruled that where the only means of testing the accuracy of a radar unit is an internal mechanism within the unit, and there is no other evidence of the motorist’s speed other than the radar reading, the conviction cannot be sustained.
The court also established the following conditions for proving the accuracy of the radar unit:
- The officer must have adequate training and experience in the operation of the radar unit.
- The officer must testify as to how the unit was set up and the conditions the unit was operated under.
- it must be proven that the unit was operated with a minimum possibility of distortion from external interference.
- The unit has to be tested with an external source, such as a tuning fork or an actual test run with another vehicle with an accurately calibrated speedometer.
People of New York v. Perlman (1977)
The Suffolk County District Court ruled that the radar device was not proved to be accurate since no external test had been performed before or after the arrest. This case is significant since it established the criteria of testing before and after a citation is issued.
It’s clear to me that my simple question of jurisdiction won’t be answered, because it can’t be answered. It’s clear to me that your only basis for jurisdiction is the fact that I’m within range of your gun, and you and your comrades having proven your willingness to use it. We have a system devoid of any rational or logical basis for proving jurisdiction. It is based on the blind faith antichrist religion of statism and threats of violence. It is a system of might makes right. I consider this process to be unjust. I will write a check today if I’m found guilty, not because I feel it is the right thing to do, but under protest and due to the continued threats against me if I don’t. I wasn’t hurting anyone that day. No victim of my alleged crime has come forward. I’m innocent of the charges against me and I have an excellent driving record. There is no reason why we should have men with a gun on their hip harassing non-criminal Americans for supposedly violating arbitrary speed guidelines. The only valid basis for morality and justice is found in the fact that Jesus Christ is Lord, but that has long since been found to be unconstitutional, and what we’re left with is the arbitrary definition of justice provided by legislators gathering in Denver, a good percentage of which I wouldn’t trust to babysit my kids. I think you should be ashamed of yourself and you should repent of operating under this antichrist religious system.
Civil asset forfeiture is blatant theft performed by cops. The cops are bigger thieves than the thieves. Of course, government in general way outpaces the cops by themselves via unjust taxation and currency manipulation.
Here is a graph from yesterday’s post that bears reposting again and again.
I’ve noticed many instances of people of all walks discussing some political issue have said something like, “Obviously we don’t want anarchy; that doesn’t work; it’s crazy.” I’ve yet to hear any of those people actually defend that position. It’s something everyone seems to just accept as true. But, I’m not so sure.
First of all, the Bible says there is a purpose for government, and I’m not an anarchist. Romans 13:4 says that the purpose of government is to carry out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. And Romans 13:6 says that for that purpose, we can be required to pay taxes, because the government is a minister of God. Notice they are to carry out God’s wrath–not their own wrath. Criminal justice being the only purpose of government places biblical government much closer to anarchy than to the U.S. form of government, which meddles in every aspect of life.
The problem in America is that government in any way acknowledging Christ is unconstitutional. Therefore, they are doing a terrible job, and they’re not carrying out their God-given purpose in any way, except maybe accidentally in some rare cases. My list of grievances would be ten times longer than the list of grievances given to King George III on July 4, 1776. Only a fraction of what we pay in taxes is used for the only biblical purpose given in Scripture.
The bottom line is that our government, at every level, is unbiblical if not antichrist. So, for people to say that our government is preferrable to anarchy is to claim that unbiblical system A is better than unbiblical system B. Maybe they’re right, and maybe they’re wrong, but I don’t think it’s a foregone conclusion.
The problem is that man is inherently sinful, with a wicked heart (which includes those currently operating our government). But, thankfully, God does limit the amount of evil that takes place. All humans have God’s law written on our hearts, but I think most Americans, even those that are unsaved, still have at least a partially Christian worldview. I think anarchy would be much different if we were predominantly Hindu, Muslim or atheist, so I’m only going to consider what anarchy might be like in America.
Americans seem to generally obey whatever the government tells them to do, even if it creates injustice. Most people seem to do what they’re told. Less than 50 law enforcement officers in this fairly large county keep more than 40,000 people under control. Of course, bad things happen, and bad people are around, but it is generally peaceful and law-abiding. Is that because our government is so great, or because it’s in our nature, or because we’re predominantly Christian or because we’re all brainwashed to respect government in the schools they operate? I don’t really know, but I don’t think the vast majority of people would go around murdering people or driving recklessly if there were no more government tomorrow. There are some who would, just as there are some who do now.
There are some great things that would happen if government ceased to exist tomorrow. Public school would be gone. Taxation, welfare, Social Security, government interference in business would all be gone. Individual theft might go up without government, but the government is by far the biggest thief. Government theft via unjust taxation and currency manipulation dwarf private theft. Even civil asset forfeiture, which is blatant, legalized theft is greater than private theft. So I’d guess that government being gone would cause a huge reduction in overall theft.
I suppose the worst fear of anarchy is that roving gangs of thugs would crop up causing all kinds of mayhem. I suppose it’s possible, but Americans are a gun-owning people. We’re not exactly defenseless, and who wouldn’t team up with their neighbors to help protect each other? And isn’t that exactly what we have now? Don’t we have roving gangs of thugs making sure everyone has the correct stickers on their license plate at gunpoint? If you’re scared of roving gangs of thugs under anarchy, just do what they tell you to do, and they might even treat you better than the roving gangs of thugs you mindlessly obey now. Maybe you could offer to buy stickers from them annually at exorbitant rates.
And, just because there wouldn’t be anymore forced payouts for substandard, government-provided security services, doesn’t mean there aren’t free market solutions for security. Why couldn’t my neighbors and I voluntarily pay a security guard to drive around the neighborhood at night? And I’m sure security businesses would pop up to compete for people’s business–providing better service at better prices.
Of course, public school being gone might be the greatest benefit of anarchy. Millions of kids are steeped in antichrist religion seven hours per day. Public school has done so much damage to this country. And the whole thing is paid for by property tax, which is collected via threat of confiscation (robbers stealing from you at gunpoint). The whole system is based on socialism, and has done an excellent job of training most of us to be good, little socialists.
Welfare, food stamps, Social Security, etc. being gone would also be a benefit. Christians are commanded to take care of orphans and widows, but government has usurped that job. We would all be better off if charity and churches took care of people on a case-by-case basis. How much greater would the influence of Christianity be if churches had greater involvement in taking care of people’s day-to-day needs rather than people getting a government check?
On the issue of abortion, anarchy would be bad for the preborn, but obviously, our government isn’t helping so it’s a wash. This is definitely one area that government should be involved in as God’s servants to carry out His wrath on murderers.
There are many other issues to be discussed, but I think anarchy would be preferrable to the government we have. How much worse can that unbiblical option be over the unbiblical option of government we have now?
This is an interesting quote from Alexis de Tocqueville, whose observations come from his time in early America, taken from this worthwhile article.
“At the time of Tocqueville’s observations (in the 1830s), “the means available to the authorities for the discovery of crimes and arrest of criminals [were] few,” yet Tocqueville doubted “whether in any other country crime so seldom escapes punishment.” Citizens handled most crimes informally, forming committees to catch criminals and hand them over to the courts. Private mobs in early America dealt with larger threats to public safety and welfare, such as houses of ill fame. Nothing struck a European traveler in America, wrote Tocqueville, more than the absence of government in the streets.”
Of course, mobs are good if they are righteous mobs. Unrighteous mobs are bad. I think the bottom line is that there is no good form of government for wicked people.