On Trump

[Dude#1279435]

Wow that's f--ked up. Another analysis shows agents backing up 8-10 feet from Perreti lying there motionless and another 4 shots fired. I feel the most bad for the women nearby who had the endure that.

 

[Mikado463]

Sadly but another example of Trumps poorly trained 'Gestapo' doing a miserable job ..............

 

[Mr._Clark]

What law was the protester breaking before he was shot? From the video I've seen, there was no justification. Am I missing some context from your statement?

I guess it depends on what was meant by "I state again that the constitutional right to bare arms is a f?ckin sad joke because they are not being used against a tyrannical government, the very reason it was put into the constiution."

I interpreted this as referrinmg to an armed insurrection.

As a practical matter, it is almost never legal to use force

>>>When Is It Legal To Use Force Against A Police Officer?
The short answer is… practically never.<<<

When Is It Legal To Use Force Against A Police Officer? – The Law Office of Chris Van Vechten

soundlawyering.com

>>>Right to Resist an Illegal Arrest? Nope!

. . . Libertarian-bent people repeatedly ask me the following leading question, expecting me to confirm their conclusion: We have a Constitutional right to resist an illegal arrest, right?

No, you don’t. . . . We have a Constitutional right to resist arrest, right? Nope. <<<

Right to Resist an Illegal Arrest? Nope!

hccla.org

!

I'm not aware of any court cases involving a successful "tyrannical government" defense.

Regardless of reason the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, it does not alter the law regarding self defense or resisting arrest.

 

[Mikado463]

I guess it depends on what was meant by "I state again that the constitutional right to bare arms is a f?ckin sad joke because they are not being used against a tyrannical government, the very reason it was put into the constiution."

I interpreted this as referrinmg to an armed insurrection.

As a practical matter, it is almost never legal to use force

>>>When Is It Legal To Use Force Against A Police Officer?
The short answer is… practically never.<<<

When Is It Legal To Use Force Against A Police Officer? – The Law Office of Chris Van Vechten

soundlawyering.com

>>>Right to Resist an Illegal Arrest? Nope!

. . . Libertarian-bent people repeatedly ask me the following leading question, expecting me to confirm their conclusion: We have a Constitutional right to resist an illegal arrest, right?

No, you don’t. . . . We have a Constitutional right to resist arrest, right? Nope. <<<

Right to Resist an Illegal Arrest? Nope!

hccla.org

!

I'm not aware of any court cases involving a successful "tyrannical government" defense.

Regardless of reason the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, it does not alter the law regarding self defense or resisting arrest.

perhaps I missed something in the various videos that I've watched, but nowhere did I see try to 'use force'. I saw what I believe to be a bunch of poorly trained ICE agents wrangle and wrestled him to the ground and in the scuffle his weapon (concealed) became displayed. To me it appeared the one ICE agent reacted to that, stepped back and open up, followed by the others

 

[Mr._Clark]

Wow that's f--ked up. Another analysis shows agents backing up 8-10 feet from Perreti lying there motionless and another 4 shots fired. I feel the most bad for the women nearby who had the endure that.

From the ICE website:

>>>ICE officials use reasonable and necessary force when someone resists arrest. ICE officers and agents prioritize safety — including the safety of the people they arrest — and are highly trained in de-escalation.<<<(emphasis added)

Immigration Enforcement Frequently Asked Questions

www.ice.gov

 

[Mr._Clark]

perhaps I missed something in the various videos that I've watched, but nowhere did I see try to 'use force'. I saw what I believe to be a bunch of poorly trained ICE agents wrangle and wrestled him to the ground and in the scuffle his weapon (concealed) became displayed. To me it appeared the one ICE agent reacted to that, stepped back and open up, followed by the others

As I understand the statement "I state again that the constitutional right to bare arms is a f?ckin sad joke because they are not being used against a tyrannical government, the very reason it was put into the constiution." the person posting was asserting that firearms have not been used against ICE (I believe this is true), but firearms should be used against ICE.

We might be talking past each other.

 

[Dude#1279435]

From the ICE website:

>>>ICE officials use reasonable and necessary force when someone resists arrest. ICE officers and agents prioritize safety — including the safety of the people they arrest — and are highly trained in de-escalation.<<<(emphasis added)

Immigration Enforcement Frequently Asked Questions

www.ice.gov

I find that odd given a) the initial ICE agent went at the woman who he was having a confrontation with and pushed her on the ground, b) Perreti had his back faced to the agents when he was separating them from her and they grabbed him and c) after six shots and several feet of distance from a motionless Peretti ICE agents took another four shots. It's almost as if key members of Trump's admin are telling me not to believe what I've seen. (It should be noted the initial agent actually followed the woman across the street and then pushed her down which then Peretti intervened.)

I mean the only way I can see this favoring ICE in any way is she would have had to have thrown something at the agent to warrant him following her across the street and push her down. Saying "I f--ked your dad!" doesn't strike me as having enough cause to go after her due to restraint and de-escalation LOL. Even then do you believe an admin saying they were "domestic terrorists?"

 

[GO-NAD!]

perhaps I missed something in the various videos that I've watched, but nowhere did I see try to 'use force'. I saw what I believe to be a bunch of poorly trained ICE agents wrangle and wrestled him to the ground and in the scuffle his weapon (concealed) became displayed. To me it appeared the one ICE agent reacted to that, stepped back and open up, followed by the others

He was actually shot after he was disarmed.

 

[jps]

Why would they come knocking on my door? Or anybody’s door. It’s not random, they have documents and orders to address and remove people. Do you really think they’re just grabbing random people? It’s not federal overreach. It’s citizen overreach by getting in the way of them doing the job. Why wasn’t anybody crying when Obama was beating the deportation drum? He was very vocal about border security.

Yes, ICE is grabbing "random" people -- including Minnesota police officers -- and demanding proof of citizenship. WIthout warrants. It IS federal overreach, and a violation of civil rights.

Statement from the Police Chief of Brooklyn Park, next to Minneapolis, confirms this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesota/comments/1qib372
ICE is primarily in MN to intimidate Trump's political enemies, and leverage sound bites for political gain. They are not there for immigration enforcement.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I guess it depends on what was meant by "I state again that the constitutional right to bare arms is a f?ckin sad joke because they are not being used against a tyrannical government, the very reason it was put into the constiution."

I interpreted this as referrinmg to an armed insurrection.

As a practical matter, it is almost never legal to use force

>>>When Is It Legal To Use Force Against A Police Officer?
The short answer is… practically never.<<<

When Is It Legal To Use Force Against A Police Officer? – The Law Office of Chris Van Vechten

soundlawyering.com

>>>Right to Resist an Illegal Arrest? Nope!

. . . Libertarian-bent people repeatedly ask me the following leading question, expecting me to confirm their conclusion: We have a Constitutional right to resist an illegal arrest, right?

No, you don’t. . . . We have a Constitutional right to resist arrest, right? Nope. <<<

Right to Resist an Illegal Arrest? Nope!

hccla.org

!

I'm not aware of any court cases involving a successful "tyrannical government" defense.

Regardless of reason the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, it does not alter the law regarding self defense or resisting arrest.

I guess the key words are the ones underlined:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

So, security of the State, not the public, per se.

 

[Mr._Clark]

I guess the key words are the ones underlined:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

So, security of the State, not the public, per se.

I’m not sure I understand your point.

The Supreme Court has never said that all firearms are protected by the Second Amendment. It has also never said that actions taken using a firearm that is protected by the Second Amendment are in some way exempt from criminal laws.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Welp about all I can say is hopefully they don't do something dumb like build a Trump monument in his honor.(Naturally they will.)

I always feel like the look at all he's done for this country has the esthetic of looking over your shoulder and hoping nobody notices the a$$hole in him lol.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I’m not sure I understand your point.

The Supreme Court has never said that all firearms are protected by the Second Amendment.

Of course. I wasn't trying to suggest otherwise.

It has also never said that actions taken using a firearm that is protected by the Second Amendment are in some way exempt from criminal laws.

Again, not suggesting that.

I guess my point is that so many guns rights advocates yammer on about 2A protecting their right to bear arms in order to overthrow the government, should it turn tyrannical when , as far as I can tell, it does no such thing.

I really don't think we have any disagreement, just a misunderstanding of what we have both stated.

 

[mtrycrafts]

The country is in a very bad place right now.

 

[3db]

Sorry but I have to disagree about the right to bear arms. It is not a license to break the law

I agree. My point is that the right to bare arms is a false premise and that the original reason for it no longer exists even though Trump and their enforcing ICE army is tyranical by any standard or measure.