He was a passenger in a car where the driver was pulled over. He did nothing wrong and stood up for himself. He was arrested and later released with no charges.
At 2:35 he says, “The Lord rebuke you.” All cops and all government officials from top to bottom need to hear that!
On one hand, I might scoff at anyone who raises the specter of Americans having their guns confiscated or being moved into a FEMA concentration camp. On the other hand, gun confiscation has already taken place on a limited scale as you can see in the video below. And Japanese Americans were put into concentration camps during WWII.
A couple of points I’d like to make about the video. I know people who claim that an overwhelming majority of cops are great, freedom-loving Americans who would never in a million years confiscate anyone’s guns. On the other hand, when it comes down to it, there is no shortage of cops willing to confiscate guns. It’s not bikers who will confiscate guns, or crackheads or Mexican drug cartels or inner-city gangs.
If there is ever a gun confiscation or mass internment into concentration camps, it will be Mr. local sheriff’s deputy or police officer. George Soros, Obama, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, or Harry Reid won’t be confiscating anyone’s guns.
I would hope many cops will refuse to obey such orders or enforce unjust laws, but there is ZERO evidence that any of them are willing to disobey orders. And, they certainly aren’t building up any spine in refusing to enforce unjust laws and orders now. They seem to be doing exactly what they’re told. It seems to be a human tendency to talk big about the bold, decisive actions we’ll take on the hill worth dying on until we get there. Cops are no exception.
My second point is that when the cops ask if you have a gun, it is not in your best interest to answer the question. You have no obligation to answer any question from the police. Whether you refuse to answer, or lie is something I will leave between you and the Lord, but I can think of two examples of people who have lied to government in Scripture and ended up in the Faith Hall of Fame of Hebrews 11.
I admit that it might cause problems to refuse to answer questions from police, but how much worse could it be than telling the truth like the people in this video did? We need to all get in the habit and get the gumption up to tell cops that we don’t answer their questions.
When your religion is statism and cops are the priests, apparently it can make you see things that aren’t there. Here’s a conversation I had on Twitter.
“Morality is Freedom” says that Tamir Rice approached the police. I have no idea how he came to that conclusion. As far as I can tell it is just a complete perversion of the facts. The cops raced up to him, driving on the grass, and killed the kid in under 3 seconds. I don’t see how anyone can reasonably perceive that a pedestrian has done any significant approaching in 3 seconds to a car that has just raced up to him.
Jesus said, “Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Wouldn’t love dictate that the cop, even at the risk of his own life, at least try to diffuse the situation? Is officer safety really the chief concern? Wasn’t Jesus saying that my own well-being isn’t my chief concern?
Apparently officer safety is the chief concern, to the point that we no longer care what the Bible says about murder. The Bible teaches that humans are created in God’s image and there are very specific limits to when killing isn’t murder.
But Americans don’t care about all that. We’d rather a child be murdered, than an officer have to risk his life. Since that’s the case, wouldn’t police be even safer if they didn’t have to expose themselves at all? Shouldn’t they have just run the kid over? Maybe someone will invent special bumpers that will more effectively kill people on the first attempt at running over, so as not to give them a chance to fire on police even after having been run over by a less-lethal bumper.
In case you missed it all, here’s the video of the incident. The murder takes place beginning at the 8:26 mark.
Without this video, these cops would never have faced any serious questions about the murder they committed. But this commenter, Sheva Meucci may be on to something. He thinks they may have been trying to plant a gun on the guy. Here’s the video, and his commentary below.
1:11 When officer 1 was shot, the victims right arm was visible holding the fence at an angle that suggests a nearly impossible angle for him to left-hand-shoot the officer behind and to his left. (seriously, try it out)
Just after shooting his partner, officer 2 seems to mumble something. Perhaps it was “I didn’t mean to get you”
1:30 is the KEY
At exactly 1:30 officer 1 has just said “Where’s the gun” (fearing there never was one) pulls a secondary weapon out of his belt in the front after touching and deciding not to plant his primary weapon, then wipes it across the victim’s back and puts it on the ground (for those watching). He then picks it back up resting his weight on it barrel pointing toward the ground. The camera loses track but picks back up as the cop, with planted weapon in hand goes for his primary weapon and has to drop the planted gun to free his hand. He loosens his primary wepon but does not take it. (because the guy is obviously no threat) Then the other offficer (2) shoots the guy once.
Officer 1 then pulls out his primary weapon and shoots the victim in the back three times. He then pleads to the crowd over his murder saying “I got shot” and adjusts the position of the planted gun for the onlookers. At 2:51 he decides to call attention to the gun again by picking it up and tossing it 1 additional foot away from the dying man.
At 3:15 someone in the crowd says “He’s got another gun or what?” trying to determine why they are suffocating the dying man. At 3:16-17 officer 2 says to officer 1 “I dunno if he has a gun”
Immediately thereafter at 3:20 Officer 1 grabs his secondary weapon/plant off the ground and sticks it back in his belt as, apparently, there is some confusion about whether or not he needs a plant.
At 3:37-41 the obviously weird motions of officer 1’s body are a puposeful attempt to secretly shake loose the gun he has in his belt. (Sort of an impromptu magic trick) And it then lands on officer 2’s leg.
At 3:52 officer 1 lifts the victims left arm for cuffs and brushes his hand against the planted gun to attempt to get prints on it, even using the hand to “throw the weapon” to the side.
3:59 officer 1 has now grabbed the planted gun and moved it into a position where people on the other side of he street can see it and then asks “Does he have another one?” (desperately hoping they don’t need the plant)
4:07 Officer 2 reveals he’s not aware of the plant at this point by replying “Doesn’t really matter” intimating that they are covered for all misconduct now that they’ve found a gun and the guy is no threat even if he had another.
After displaying the second plant to everyone, officer 2 sends officer 1 away and at 4:20 yells, “That’s his fucking gun”
At 1:30 it is obvious where that weapon comes from unless it was a hover-gun.
The murderer says “Where’s the gun” reaches right for it and then pulls it out without telling his partner?
Crystal… Freaking… Clear…
Officer 2 was a violent monster using deadly force without any real danger to his life who shot his own partner, then quitely shoots the victim again with no reason to do so other than to subdue and hide his first mistake but eventually he felt he could get away with it because a gun was found.
Officer 1 may have thought the victim actually shot him, but was filled with rage at what he percieved was his attempted murder, and in his pained and blind rage became the true murderer. Then in his fear, he tried to hide his rage/fear-filled actions through planting a gun.
Officer 2 caused the whole thing and the pain and rage of officer 1 almost excuses (what he thought was) his retaliatory murder. Officer 2’s actions were just cold and evil.
I love how these abolitionists speak to the cops and call them to repentance.
I don’t think preaching is a violation of a disorderly conduct law unless the law specifies a decibel level, and the cops test the sound level with a decibel meter at a certain distance. None of that took place in this instance. Also, how can this interfere with students leaving school and getting on buses? It’s not like the kids were in class.
It boils down to the fact that these cops sinned. I bet a good percentage of them claim to be Christians and attend church. They should be placed under church discipline for this.
Abortionists rest easy at night knowing there are no good cops.
It’s easy to compromise the truth just a little to get along with people. Difficult truths are easier to forget than others. I find myself having forgotten what Bojidar Marinov is talking about here and I’m grateful for the reminder.
He’ll probably get away with it. Most of the time they do. After all, cops are the collection agency for the government. Very few courts will risk going against those who are expected to collect the money for their salaries. The purpose of police is not to be moral but to be brutal. Fear is a lever for easier taking the money of the populace. Thus, from a government perspective, there is no reason to convict the cop; he was doing his REAL job.
It’s about time for us to understand that police is not a legitimate authority but an occupation army. And act accordingly.
I believe the courts won’t challenge the police because they are afraid to challenge them, for the reasons I mentioned above. The events in NYC in the last one year proved me right: When the mayor made only a mention of the need of reform in the NYPD (that after the Grand Jury exonerated an obvious murderer for a murder caught on video), the cops boycotted the city by refusing to to “do their job,” that is, extort money from the population for the purposes of the city. The result? The city surrendered to the cops, and there’s no reform, not even a talk of reform anymore, and the murders and brutality continue, and the courts do nothing about it.
Which again proves my statement that the cops are an occupation army. And everyone, including the courts, is their captive, obviously, for no one is willing to stand up to them. Ever since the creation of the first professional police force in NYC in the 1840s, by the corrupt Democrat Tammany Hall government, the purpose of police has been to create a standing army for the subjugation of the population – just as the creation of the government schools was meant for the subjugation of the minds of the children. In our day we see the fruition of the final purpose of these two ungodly tyrannical institutions.
The system that the Founding Fathers originally set up DID NOT HAVE PROFESSIONAL POLICE. They never envisioned professional police, nor can you find anything in any state constitution about professional police. Nor can you find it in the US Constitution. Alexis de Tocqueville specifically mentioned this fact of the American system in the 1830s: No professional police, and yet, hardly a crime remained unsolved and unpunished. The very concept of professional police was very explicitly pagan, a product of the Enlightenment. The first professional police in Europe – as an executive agency – was set up by the French revolutionaries. It did not appear in the US until the Democrat den of thieves called Tammany Hall took control of NYC. For a very long time – until the 1970s, actually – most of the court warrants were served by private individuals, not by the cops. Catching criminals and convicts was also left to private agencies. There was no executive agency charged with the task of security and maintaining order – that would have been entirely opposite to what the Founding Fathers envisioned.
If the judicial system was reliable, it would shut down police entirely, not pick out “criminal cops” to prosecute. It’s the very system of professional police that is criminal to the core, anti-Constitutional, and anti-Christian.
The very existence of a group that declares that it has the right to initiate aggression without court warrants is already criminal. Every cop who ever initiated aggression not at the scene of a crime and not on a court warrant is already a criminal. Every cop who has ever put handcuffs on an innocent person for whatever reason is already a criminal. Every cop who has used his authority to destroy or unlawfully use a civilian’s time, property, or liberty, is already a criminal. The justice system won’t prosecute those. The justice system is a hostage to that occupation army, like the rest of us.
Notice that the news report is all about bad language. Of course it’s unprofessional to use bad language, but I’m much more worried about the abuse of people’s rights.
Also, the guy just did everything the officer told him. The cop gave him all these unlawful orders, and the guy apparently just tucked his tail and did it all. This is why cops just expect everyone to do what they’re told, because most people do.
We all must know the law! How can you play Monopoly without knowing the rules? Yet people think you can go through life without knowing the law. We must teach our children the law. We must teach them how to interact with police and know what is a lawful order and what isn’t, and THEIR RIGHTS! My children will not kow tow to a power-tripping loser like this.
I said, “This seems contradictory to the one you posted about police being special for risking so much for people who care so little. Who is arresting the people for fishing with no license? Don’t you think cops should do the right thing regardless of what the law says?”
——————————————–
He said, “It has been my experience working with police officers for over 25 years in emergency services, that they do try to do right by the citizens they serve. And for the most part are vilified by that same citizenry for doing their job (because of a few – rare – bad apples). That is the testimony of my own eyes running calls with them and as a police chaplain. This post has more to do with the unjust laws being written by “moral entrepreneurs” who want to take your rights away.”
——————————————–
I said, “I certainly agree that politicians passing unjust laws is part of the problem. But I’ve never heard of a politician out checking people’s fishing licences. Politicians pass laws that take away our rights, but all they’re really doing is shuffling papers. Men with guns are what’s really required to take away our rights.”
——————————————–
He said, “Actually, it also a populace that allows them to do so. But again – most police officers are not part of the problem. Ex: Sheriff Justin Smith – refuses to enforce Colorado gun magazine laws. Or Oath Keepers.”
——————————————–
I said, “There is plenty of blame to go around. I would place a lot of blame on the pulpits for having taught a terrible twisting of Romans 13. I’m not saying only cops are to blame for the tyranny we face, but they’ve played a large role in it, and it doesn’t work to blame politicians and give cops a pass.”
“My sheriff isn’t enforcing the magazine law either. That just goes to show that it is within their power to refuse to enforce unjust laws, but that is a rare example. What evil gun control laws do they enforce?”
“Have you considered the possibility that politicians instituting a police force in the first place was just another one of their unjust, unconstitutional and unbiblical acts?”