This another predictable case of the Police investigating the Police and finding the Police did no wrong... according to the Police. The Idaho Attorney General has decided the Deputies, who killed Jack Yantis, did no wrong and therefor will not face charges.
Jack Yantis was murdered. But since the killers, Cody Roland and Brian Wood, were members of Law Imposement, and of the Vast Majority, they get away with killing an innocent rancher who was trying to do the right thing.
However, Mr. Yantis committed a cardinal sin. He bore arms in the presence of the Gang. He wasn't groveling. He wasn't showing deference. He didn't render obeisance. Immediately after killing Jack Yantis, one of the killers turned his weapon on Donna Yantis and threatened her life, forced her to the ground, and put her in handcuffs. She soon thereafter suffered a heart attack.
Go to this link and listen to the audio of Deputy Cody Roland being coached as to how the events transpired.
As to whether Jack Yantis fired his weapon, and neither deputy is sure about it, someone HAD TO clear that rifle BEFORE it was entered into evidence. Someone KNOWS if the rifle was fired or not. Someone picked up that rifle, worked the bolt, and emptied the chamber. Either a loaded round came out, or a spent piece of brass came out. The State Police, conducting the interviews, already KNOW.
Members of the Vast Majority, are you so daft, obtuse, contemptuous of the people you "serve" as to think you'll get away with this in perpetuity? Do you realize that when you cover for murderers in your own ranks, you are saying, "I am he and he is me." ?
Do you have any idea what you're doing? Do you realize your veil of credibility, stretched thin as onion paper over the last thirty years, has a ten thousand holes in it?
In short, a middle aged woman takes a day trip to Mexico, Ciudad Juarez, opposite from EL Paso. She crosses back and when her passport is swiped, she is selected to additional screening. When a drug dog jumps up on her, a series of invasive procedures begins.
She is digitally (and with a speculum) raped in front of several people, all Government Employees. She is taken to University Medical Center Hospital and forced to evacuate her bowels in front of witnesses. She was subjected to a gynecological examination and x-rays. She was again digitally raped, in both her anus and vagina.
The Government Thugs then demanded she sign a retroactive "content to search" form or be billed, $5000.00, for her own rape and humiliation.
She refused to sign. She filed suit. She settled for just under half a million dollars.
Here is another example. In this incident a young woman, nineteen years old, was treated the same way.
Oh, one more thing. I'm sure the "Vast Majority" in Law Imposement are super duper good guys who would never do such a thing... right?
Right now, somewhere, a Law Imposement agent is saying, "Well, that didn't happen in MY agency/ department/unit/section..." At some point along that line, it sure as fuck did! And YOU didn't do a damned thing to stop it, did you?
Remember, folks, they are proud of themselves. They believe they did the right thing. They believe they cannot be wrong.
Government employed THUGS, I pray God will have mercy on you. If this kind of thing ever happens to my wife, daughter, sister or mother, I will not be able to conceive of the concept of "mercy". There will be justice, swift and sure. The "Legal System" will have nothing to do with it.
"The ubiquity of cellphone, dashcam and surveillance video has transformed the way the public understands police violence. But as scene after scene unfolds on shaky screens and in grainy contours, another element of the violence is beginning to come into focus: the pattern of officers showing no concern for the person they have shot, often fatally.
The nonchalance around the injured and the dying is stunning in its own way."
It does raise the question, why is this the case. The answer is utterly simple.
Modernity, Wilson thought, demanded efficient government by independent, nonpartisan, benevolent, hyper-educated experts, applying the latest scientific, economic, and sociological knowledge to industrial capitalism’s unprecedented problems, too complex for self-governing free citizens to solve. Accordingly, he got Congress to create executive-branch administrative agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, to do the job. During the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt proliferated such agencies, from the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Housing Administration to the Federal Communications Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, to put the New Deal into effect. Before they could do so, though, FDR had to scare the Supreme Court into stretching the Constitution’s Commerce Clause beyond recognition, putting the federal government in charge of all economic activity, not just interstate transactions. He also had to pressure the justices to allow Congress to delegate legislative power—which is, in effect, what the lawmakers did by setting up agencies with the power to make binding rules. The Constitution, of course, vests all legislative power in Congress, empowering it to make laws, not to make legislators.
Here comes some new information. It seems Officer Aledda, who shot the unarmed man who had his hands in the air, while aiming for the other subject, is/was a member of the double select and double anointed SWAT unit in his department. Watch the video on the linked page.
Money quote from the piece: "North Miami Police Officer Jonathon Aledda was identified today as the officer involved in the shooting of an unarmed man earlier this week.
Jeff Cazeau, North Miami City Attorney, said the release of the officer's name was delayed due to safety concerns, but added that he is safe now."
Whew! That is a relief! I'm so happy that the department has secured the SAFETY from the public, of the policeman who shot an unarmed and submissive/supine citizen. Hell, a trigger happy cop's life could be in danger from righteous retribution. We can't have that! No, it is much more important to safeguard the lives of Law Imposement personnel first. I mean, everyone knows, the lives of cops are infinitely more valuable than the lives of mere mortals. The Vast Majority agrees!
"Another officer who was at the scene, but did not shoot, was Commander Emile Holland. Holland was put on administrative leave without pay, officials said, noting there was evidence that Holland tried to fabricate the police report."
"Police Chief Ken Moore fully stands by his officer. He claimed Opie
attacked Franklin as he was coming around the corner of the house.
However, this contradicts what Franklin originally stated, which was
that the dog attacked him through the fence and he had to kick him off.
Opie was shot and died near the gate."
“We have a right to defend ourselves so I stand by my officer in the decision that he made.”
Citizens have a right to defend themselves also, Chief. Even against Tools of the State.
Chief Wiggum says, "If you carry a toy truck, I will assume it is a weapon and if you do not grovel before me, I'll have no choice but to shoot you! These civilians gotta learn their place. Mmmyeah."
Here is another story about the incident where the cops in North Miami shot a man who was lying on the ground with his hands in the air.
The North Miami police officers' union says the officer who fired the shot was aiming for the patient, who they thought was armed, and not Kinsey, NBC News reportedThursday. The patient, however, had a toy truck. So, the cop who shot the innocent man was aiming for the OTHER innocent man. Well, now it all makes perfect sense! But, he missed the innocent man he was aiming for and hit the man who had assumed a surrender position. The man shot had begun to grovel just police advise their subjects to do. The man he was aiming for, however, was not assuming a surrender position. He was not groveling. He didn't render obeisance. Hence, he was worthy of being shot. What caused the policemen in the area to perceive him as a threat? He was armed with a toy truck. He was autistic.
That man din't have no bid-niss carrying a toy truck around any how.
What did they do after they shot him? They cuffed him of course and laid him prone. It's standard procedure. Why didn't they roll an ambulance right away? Well, they got around to that, in the mean time if the "perp" bleeds out and dies, too bad. That leaves only one side of the story to be told, doesn't it?
But, not to worry. The police will perform an investigation of themselves and find they did no wrong. Justice, you see?
Elite police SWAT sniper, deadly to 100 yards. Sometimes even further!
"But the SWAT member’s shot, he argued, is exactly why militarized tactics are needed. The rifleman took out gunman Gavin Long while more than 100 yards away..."
Really? Wow! Over ONE HUNDRED YARDS! It would seem policemen have powers and abilities above and beyond those of mortal men.
"...without a clear line of sight, Dabadie told CNN."mm,
hmm... 'nuff said.
Now, I have no problem with police having a trained designated marksman. I have no problem with a department in a large urban area having a group of men trained to handle, in extremis, hostage type situations.
Was putting down a madman making mayhem on the community the right thing to do? YES!
What I find curious, is that Chiefs of police like the one in Cleveland go about saying that mere mortals, you know, "civilians", shouldn't be "permitted" to carry weapons. By the way, I haven't heard a peep out of the rank and file policemen who work the street. That Vast Majority we often hear of who support the people's right to be armed, have not said a word to the contrary of their Chief. They declare a task this simple to be something amazing. Only a specially trained and anointed SWAT cop could have shot a man sized target at such an extreme range. Why, mere mortals couldn't dream of executing such a feat. It is a damned good thing we sheep have sheepdogs to herd and control protect us.
Savannah policemen find out they have the wrong man and then charge the man they assaulted with "Obstruction".
This incident is the product of the mindset which says, "I am a uniformed Tool of the State! I cannot be wrong! All mortals must bow before me and submit!"
Remember, these policemen believe they did nothing wrong. They believe they did the right thing. They are proud of themselves. All of their co-workers will back them up. They will never be corrected from within their own chain of command.
I can hear the refrain now, "Why didn't he just submit...?"
Is that how Free Men behave? Our ancestors would be ashamed of us.
Semi-automatic truck responsible for the deaths of dozens on France
These senseless acts of violence happen because it is easier for a terrorist to get his hands on guns, grenades and trucks in France, than a book. We must have extensive background checks before terrorists are able to buy or rent semi-automatic trucks with large capacity cargo compartments and high powered engines. If only we could close the car-show loophole, we could keep trucks out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them.
A similar Associated Press piece was run In Yahoo News today.
A letter from the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office confirms Castile, 32, got his permit last year. The letter, dated June 4, 2015, says Castile's permit is enclosed. It also says that he must have his permit card and photo identification when carrying a pistol, and must display those items "upon lawful demand by a peace officer."
Officer Yanez was trained to view the armed citizen as a threat to himself and members of his Gang. Failure to grovel before a Tool Of The State resulted in Castile being killed. Is there a lesson here? Sure there is. The State is Supreme. The State is Awesome. The State rules its subjects. All subjects must render obeisance before the State or the State has the option to kill them. Tools Of The State are immune from consequence for their actions in subjugating the population. The Fourth Amendment? That quaint old anachronistic thing? Ha! What was originally intended as a bulwark, has been reduced to a thin piece of onion paper through which have been poked ten thousand holes. Policemen universally treat it with the seriousness of a barricade of saw horses on the street. They simply pick them up and move them out of the way when it suits them to do so. The Second Amendment? Don't you dare!
OK. Here is video from the policeman's perspective.
I didn't see Dylan do anything making him worthy of being executed. Of course the police will say they saw every reason to shoot their suspect. He did something other than grovel in fear. THAT made his worthy of being shot.
I did see the policeman had his gun out ready to shoot someone before his vehicle was even stopped. This indicates to me the mindset of the policeman, which leads to the inevitable shooting.
I saw Dylan had both his hands up and visible, as ordered at gunpoint. The fact that both hands were not showing out the door of the truck will be argued as "He refused to show his hands!". The two other policemen on the scene would clearly be able to see BOTH of Dylan's hands, one from the side door, and the other through the rear window.
I did hear Dylan say something like "I hate my life..." about a half second before he was shot twice. Has there been a toxicology done on Dylan's body? If he was intoxicated in some way it could explain his failure to grovel.
I saw Dylan drop something from his hand when he was shot. It looked like a cell phone.
The policemen continued to shoot Dylan as he lay dying, reaching for his wounds.
Policemen are trained that any movement, gesture or posture other than, "Worship at my feet!" is an aggressive act, a threat to his life, and worthy of the use of lethal force.
The only thing, it appears which will save your life in a situation such as this is abject submission, prostration, obeisance, groveling.
One of the reasons the 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta was stood up at Ft. Bragg in 1977, was to prepare for an eventual rescue of American prisoners still being held in Vietnam. There were verified locations of prisons and prisoners. The likelihood of success for a rescue mission was high. The ultimate decision NOT to make the attempt was a political one. It was not a question of feasibility, or likelihood, or even truth. It was politics. Powerful members of the press in the U.S. knew the truth just as well as the politicians. They colluded in hiding the truth from the American People. We were betrayed and our men in Vietnam and Laos were betrayed. The story is a sad and amazing one. Read it all here. Let it turn your stomach for a little while. Think of this when you go into the voting booth this fall, and remember: they all knew. One of the many money quotes from the piece: "I doubt if one American in twenty is aware that over forty years ago, his government deliberately abandoned hundreds of POWs in Vietnam, and then spent four decades desperately covering up that enormous crime, with the media being a willing co-conspirator. But even if our citizens remain ignorant of that particular dark deed, over the years they have strongly come to suspect their elites are guilty of a vast number of equally heinous offenses, some of which are plausible and others ridiculous; and who can reasonably blame them? If our entire media would willfully ignore “the story of the century” as massively documented by one of its most distinguished members, who can say what other matters might remain hidden from public view?"
Also see these related links from the same website:
It seems the DEA and other Law Imposement agencies have used a technology known generically as Stingray. Read about it here.
So, in this case a Federal Judge has ruled that using this technology and technique is injurious to the right protected by the Fourth Amendment.
For the first time, a federal judge has suppressed evidence obtained without a warrant by U.S. law enforcement using a stingray, a surveillance device that can trick suspects' cell phones into revealing their locations.
U.S. District Judge William Pauley in Manhattan on Tuesday ruled that defendant Raymond Lambis' rights were violated when the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration used such a device without a warrant to find his Washington Heights apartment.
Now, whatcha wanna bet the Supreme Court of the United States will overturn this ruling? I mean, we need to stretch the Fourth Amendment as thin as possible don't we? You know, so that Law Imposement will have all the tools needed toentrap and persecute track and prosecute criminals, the criminally minded, and those who have yet to commit their crimes but might think about it sometime.
The way of the future for Law Imposement is to cast a wide net. Cast a wide and net and you're sure to ensnare something. Anything you "catch" you can call "criminal". That is the way public control peace and prosperity is assured.
Just a couple of days ago, I wrote this about the recent Dallas shootings,
"The public has been cowed by similar indoctrination. "The police don't know if you're a good guy or a bad guy. The police MUST get control of the situation. Citizens should just let the police handle it. If you are carrying your weapon and encounter a policeman, behave submissively, and everything should be fine." Etc, etc, etc..." http://pluckingtheyew.blogspot.com/2016/07/what-should-have-happened-in-dallas.html
Today, I read from PressTV that Dallas Police Chief has said, publicly, the following,
“It is increasingly challenging when people have AR-15's slung over, and shootings occur in a crowd. And they begin running, and we don’t know if they are a shooter or not,” Brown said at a news conference Monday.
“We don’t know who the 'good guy' versus who the 'bad guy' is, if everybody starts shooting,” he added.
Now, the Chief of police, who speaks for the entire department, says that nobody should be armed except the police. Why? because the police don't know good guys from bad guys. Why? Because if you are armed. The policeman assumes you are a bad guy. Why? Because you are armed and you are not a policeman. That is why.
A couple of days ago, I said this,
"No matter how trained, prepared, and willing a person, or percentage of persons might be, the police, in a tense situation such as Dallas, will see an armed citizen as a threat. THIS is what MUST change."
Police do NOT see the average armed citizen as an advantage. He cannot envision a situation where an armed citizen may come to his aid. He will give lip service to the "right to bear arms, but doesn't REALLY want Joe Citizen to "bear arms", particularly not in his presence. Why? Because you are not him. You are not a member of his organization. He firmly believes that only himself and members of his Gang should be armed. He believes that YOU are an incompetent boob who will shoot him because you are a mere "civilian" and not a select and anointed 'only one".
Let us not forget the Godfather of the "Only Ones", Lee Paige.
OK. What is the answer? Carry openly EVERYWHERE it is legal to do so! Carry concealed where you must. Get the public, and especially the Policemen, in your community conditioned to seeing honest law abiding citizens carrying their weapons with them.
Policemen, get this point:
An armed citizen is NOT a threat to you until and unless he presents a threat to you! A free man, any free man, has a natural right, secured by the highest law in the land, to "carry his weapons(s) with him as he goes about his own business! I say again, A citizen's right to CARRY his firearm(s) with him on a daily basis is the HIGHEST LAW IN THE LAND! He does NOT deserve to be eyeballed up and down and questioned by a uniformed agent of the State as to why he is exercising a natural right. He does NOT deserve to be stopped, harassed, threatened, bullied, or derided. If he has broken no law, threatened no person, and damaged no property, leave him the hell alone!
You policemen are trained/conditioned/indoctrinated to believe that every person you stop for a traffic infraction is going to try to kill you. This is false. You are shown videos like this one,
and told this happens every day. It does NOT happen to YOU every day. It doesn't happen to someone in your department every day. It doesn't even happen in your State every day. Does it happen sometimes? Yes. Almost universally these are felons with nothing to lose by shooting it out. Should you be careful and be aware? By all means yes! Should you work to preserve your life? Yes, you should. Is every citizen in your state a violent maniac looking for a reason to kill you? No!
Given the above examples of citizens shot without reason, should every citizen, who sees a policeman approaching, assume, "This cop intends to kill me!"?
Should he take up a defensive posture, place his hand on his sidearm, and order you to prove your intentions? Would he be prudent to force you to produce a State issued Photo ID, proving you are really a policeman? Should you be made to answer questions about where you've been, where you're going, why you're out so late? What if a citizen approaches you, demands to see your ID, declares he smells marijuana on you and says you must now prove you don't have methamphetamine stuck up your ass? Would you like that?
This is the way citizens are treated by policemen in our country every day. This is not about Black lives Matter. This is not about profiling. It is not about any of the other catch phrases we hear each day on the news. This is about liberty and rights.
An armed citizen could be an asset to you. A man who has been finger printed, gone through required training, had his mugshot taken, paid money, and received a permission slip from the State, to do what should be done of right, is NOT a knucklehead who will fuck up at the first opportunity. (With that in mind, you should neither assume that any armed citizen who chooses to carry openly is therefor a knucklehead, etc. A free man should never be made to beg permission in the first place. Natural rights, remember?)
On the contrary, he has proven himself legally. He practices situational awareness as you do. He avoids confrontations and trouble like the plague.
But there is one other thing about him you must remember. He is probably more proficient with his weapon(s) that 90% of the men on your police force. He practices his skill at arms regularly, unlike 90% of the men on your police force.
If you are in a potential life and death situation, you had better be praying there is at least one, of not half a dozen armed citizens within a stone's throw. There should be! They would help you if you asked for it.
But that is not how you think. It never occurs to you to simply ask help of your fellow citizens. You will rely ONLY on the other members of your Gang, who are minutes away. This puts your life at greater risk. Your fellow citizens could be an asset to you at any time, but you refuse to recognize it.
Your police Chief speaks for you and tells the public that only select and anointed "Only Ones" like Lee Paige should bear arms.
In Dallas last week, there should have been a hundred armed citizens helping the police in that shoot out with the terrorist.
Study the last ride of the Dalton Gang in 1892. The Dalton Gang attempted to rob two banks simultaneously. Citizens recognized what was going down and armed themselves. As the robbers exited the banks, citizens engaged them in a gun fight. The Dalton Gang ended there and then.
But, you say, "Yeah, but Coffeyville, didn't have a professional police force..."
You are correct. The citizens of Coffeyville weren't cowed into passivity and submission either.
This piece fromNewsmax.com Illustrates an important point. It seems that many in the Black lives Matter movement and most in the Black Panther Party aren't happy living in these United States. They are not happy and cannot be made happy to live among white people. According to Black Panther Babu Omowale, "We just need to start migrating back to those states and taking control of the economics in those states. If black people move in, most definitely white people will move out. So it's not a hard process for us to have our own country within a country … "
I say we give it to them. Oh, wait! We already did!
The country of Liberia exists to facilitate people like Mr. Omowale who are not happy and cannot be made happy living with white people in North America. Mr. Omowale, and anyone who is as unhappy as he is in the African-American community, can immigrate there and be happy and free among his own people. There won't be a white man around for hundreds of miles to tell them what to do. Go there and build your paradise! What is stopping you? I'll bet, if you lobby enough you might even get Congress to appropriate the funds to facilitate your movement to your new home. Hey! Start a Gofundme page. I'll be the money will roll in.
Do it! Do it now!
Oh, wait... Is it racist of me to want to facilitate Babu's dream? Well, I'm white, so of course it is. Oh well.
Consider what would have happened to you, if you and your combat veteran buddy had grabbed your weapons and walked up to the Dallas Police pictured here, and said, "Hi! we're good guys. We're here to help!"
There is a problem with being one of the one's who'll "Mount up and ride to the sound of the guns!"
In 1967 at the University of Texas tower shooting. Charles Whitman met resistance from citizens who grabbed their rifles from their trucks and returned fire. That allowed one policeman and one citizen the opportunity to go up the tower and end the shooter's rampage.
Such a thing shall not happen today, even though more citizens are bearing arms than ever before. More citizens now own appropriate rifles and a substantial amount of ammunition and magazines that their great grandparents would have dreamt of.
Let us say a group of citizens, say two to four, would have grabbed their rifles, located the shooter and returned fire. What do you believe the outcome of that would have been? What if that group of citizens, actually maneuvered on the shooter, using suppressive fire and maneuver tactics just as they had done in the infantry? What do you think Officer Friendly's reaction would have been?
I'll tell you what I believe, firmly, would have happened.
They would have been cut down by the police as soon as they coalesced into an effective fire team. The mere sight of a man with a gun who is NOT a policeman, would be enough to engage them. The police have been trained and indoctrinated to believe that anyone, who is not them, who is armed, is a threat to them. In an ongoing shooting situation, these "good guys with guns" would not be seen as good guys.
It doesn't matter that the good citizens would say to the policemen, "Hey, we're good guys, we're here to help!" If not shot immediately, they would be forced to the ground at gun point and disarmed and probably charged with some "crime" after the fact.
Lets say Joe the veteran sees the location of the bad guy / shooter. He analyzes the situation, recognizes that with some fire and movement he would be able to get to the shooter and put him down. He grabs his rifle and a couple of mags from the trunk of his car and begins to move. He whistles to the nearest policeman, and shouts, "I see the shooter! Follow me and lets put this guy down!' Do you think the policemen in the vicinity will be inspired by his actions, as infantrymen in combat would? I don't. I think the policemen would see him as "...one of the shooters!" and act out of fear and indoctrination.
The public has been cowed by similar indoctrination. "The police don't know if you're a good guy or a bad guy. The police MUST get control of the situation. Citizens should just let the police handle it. If you are carrying your weapon and encounter a policeman, behave submissively, and everything should be fine." Etc, etc, etc...
Peele's Principles: “The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.”
“Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
How often do policemen refer to their fellow citizens as "civilians".
“The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.”
Think about the use of SWAT to serve simple warrants these days. Think about the public display of military hardware and equipage, etc.
No matter how trained, prepared, and willing a person, or percentage of persons might be, the police, in a tense situation such as Dallas, will see an armed citizen as a threat. THIS is what MUST change.
Think of the infamous North Hollywood Shootout for a moment. What if (God forbid) one citizen had grabbed with fine Wetherby .300 Magnum hunting rifle and simply taken a couple shots on the bank robbers? One wouldn't have needed to be a military trained sniper to do the work. A simple huntsman possessing proficiency with his rifle at hunting distances would sufficed. Not one citizen armed himself and took action. Why? Indoctrination, or one might call it, counter-indoctrination. Citizens now doubt their own natural right to defend themselves and their neighbors and their property. One even must consider the possibility of being charged with a crime after the fact if he does take action.
In October of 1892, at Coffeyville, Kansas, the Dalton Gang made their last bank robbery attempt. Citizens, seeing what was happening, grabbed their privately owned weapons and engaged the Daltons as they emerged fro the banks just robbed.
The citizens of Coffeyville DIDN'T cower in fear. They didn't shelter in place and hope for the best. They screech like a bunch of helpless women, "Police! Police! Help!" They took action and protected their property and their fellow citizens. The citizens of Coffeyville ended the Dalton Gang.
This is what must happen today in situations such as we just had in Dallas.
They get some of the Special Forces terminology wrong, but over all it is a good presentation. McVeigh was never "in" Special Forces. He went to the Selection course (SFAS) and bombed out (pun intended).
When an entire occupational field - law enforcement - has reached, exactly like Islam, the point that only either being killed wholesale, or learning to call out and deliver the heads on platters of your own murderous offenders from within your midst will suffice to expunge your guilt in the public's eyes, as it has with American law enforcement for decades, you've fucked the pooch so hard the ASPCA should have had you arrested long ago. And we've now reached the threshold that people are going to start treating them, wholesale, randomly, exactly like jihadis, when they get the chance.
If that doesn't institute a sea change in Team Blue, leading to a deep and profound reversal of course, and a return to Peel's Principles rather than Machiavellian politics as usual, the body count from here on out is entirely justifiable, and I'll be rooting more for the shooters than the law enforcers, despite the near-term consequences to civilization, and so will millions of ordinary Americans.
If you wear a badge, LEARN. THAT. LESSON. Think it over long and hard, and make some serious changes, right damn snappy. Well Said.
These videos speak volumes. Typically police plant disinformation in the public discourse after a use of force such as this to deflect the perception that they could be culpable. The "investigation' goes on long enough that it gets stale. The initial statements about the circumstances turn out to be inflated or untrue. The "totality of the circumstances" is used to exonerate the policemen involved.
The police were looking for a man in camouflage pants after a "man with a gun" call.
Dylan was supposedly traveling at a 'high rate of speed". Note here the police didn't say he was driving in excess of the posted speed limit. He may have been, but they haven't said so. Dylan failed to stop for half a mile after the policeman turn on his emergency lights. He may not have looked in his rear view mirror and may have had his music playing loud in his truck. I did this many times in my youth. Luckily didn't get shot for it. We will never know.
After he stopped the policemen began shouting commands at him. They say he had his hands in an odd position, i.e., one in his waist band and one in the small of his back. Maybe he was pulling his pants up. Maybe, we'll never know. He was shot dead.
This video shows Dylan on the ground AFTER he has already been shot. He has been shot! He is on the ground in shock, as anyone would be after being shot. He is on his back with his head toward the policemen. The policemen continue to shout commands at a young man who is laying mortally wounded on his back. Dylan's failure to obey these commands, in a state of shock after he has been shot and mortally wounded, is used a justification for the policemen shooting him again. The audio starts at about twenty-five seconds.
Note how they still command him to roll over on his belly after he has been shot at least twice. Failure to grovel on your belly before the bully squad, is justification for being murdered.
In this next video, we have the chief of police continuing to disseminate the policemen's' version of events to further reinforce the idea that if it was the cops what dunnit, it was the right thing to do, because it was the cops what dunnit. He tells us we shall not see the policemen's bodycams until the case gets stale.
Another video, The Chief tells us Dylan was shot walking quickly toward the officers (perhaps as he "ordered" to do) and for showing his hands too quickly (probably as he was "ordered to do") . Could he have been reaching for his wallet? We'll never know. He was shot dead. Remember Eric Scott in Las Vegas?
In this next video, a grieving mother wants the truth (yeah, good luck with that one) and demands justice. Justice is something the FBI recently showed us does not exit in the country any more.
Remember folks, here in the Land Of The Free, failure to grovel will get you killed. The policemen in our country, the "vast majority" of them, fully believe this is truly right and just. Subjects in our society are required to grovel, prostrate themselves and worship at the feet of their uniformed masters, or risk being killed.
We don’t see color when looking at any shooting incident where there is a possibility of police wrongdoing, just as in this attack on the police, we have no idea what color the dead or wounded officers are, and we don’t care. We just see people.
And as I have said many times, I think we ALL have a very real, and very serious problem in every community with the militarization of the police, and the increased use of what amount to military rules of engagement where officers are very quick to fire on anyone they suspect of being armed, as if that is itself a justification for shooting people (odd, in a nation of armed free people). See our protest against the SWAT killing of Marine veteran Jose Guerena. I still have a hard time watching this gut wrenching video we put together on that and every time I hear that song, I think if him and his poor wife and child and tears roll down my face. I didn’t insist on protesting that shooting to give “equal time” to Hispanic victims of police abuse, even though I come from a family of Mexican immigrants on my mother’s side). I insisted on it because he was AN AMERICAN, and a Marine who served his nation in combat, and he did not deserve to die like that. And it made us angry to see a SWAT team used like that, to serve a mere search warrant, on a man who did exactly what any of us would do if strange men came crashing down our doors with our wife and kid home – grab a rifle and defend them. We don’t see color, we see people, and we realized that there but for the grace of God, go I. We all would have ended up like him, dying with his safety still on, while he tried to sort out what was going on, while the SWAT team saw man with gun, and shot man with gun, who was merely defending his family. It was an outrage, and it was an outrage not because he was a “man of color” (whatever the hell that means) but because he was a man. Period. A man we can relate to as men, and as warriors. And it pissed us off.
Before you start demanding that we provide “equal time” according to race, you really should read what I wrote back in November, 2014 here:
The perception of the people as “the enemy” in a “war on terrorism” and a “war on drugs” is not just in cities, nor is it just applied to “communities of color.” That perception is applied in small town America as well as in cities, and to ALL Americans, of every race, creed, and color. It is not a “black” problem. It is not a “brown” problem. It is an American problem. Any American, anywhere, at any time, can be subjected to the same military tactics and mindset, whether during a raid on their home, during a traffic stop, or any other encounter with police. Sniper rifles were pointed in at protesting Americans at Bundy Ranch in Nevada just as much as in Ferguson, Missouri. And likewise for the response to the Boston bombing in the search of Watertown, MA, where weapons were pointed in at entire families as they were ordered from their homes. And any American can suffer the fate of Jose Guerena (Marine Iraq veteran killed in SWAT raid), Bounkham Phonesavah (a one year old baby burned with a flash-bang), or any of the many other Americans caught up in the overuse and abuses of SWAT teams seen here: http://www.cato.org/raidmap
And any American can end up like John T. Williams (deaf woodcarver shot by Seattle cop while whittling a stick), or David Eckert (repeatedly cavity searched and subjected to forced enemas and colonoscopy), or like these two women cavity searched on the side of the road. What does race have to do with it? Not much.
This, this, this, or this, can happen to any American, of any race, in any community, at any time.
As retired Pennsylvania police officer Larry Hohol put it, when referring to that last link (the Robert Leone beating): “But for the grace of God, this could have been your child or family member that these horrific acts happened to.” Watch his video analysis of that incident here. That had nothing to do with race, but everything to do with abuse of power.
American police have a problem, and this problem is now endemic, and reaches into every community. As former NYPD Detective Frank Serpico recently said:
Today the combination of an excess of deadly force and near-total lack of accountability is more dangerous than ever: Most cops today can pull out their weapons and fire without fear that anything will happen to them, even if they shoot someone wrongfully. All a police officer has to say is that he believes his life was in danger, and he’s typically absolved. What do you think that does to their psychology as they patrol the streets—this sense of invulnerability? The famous old saying still applies: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
And it is a problem that the good police have a DUTY to stop. You officers who are the “good cops” out there must police your own and put a stop to the abuse by the bad cops, and that includes all the overuse and abuse of SWAT teams, all of the violations of rights perpetrated in the name of the “war on drugs” and all of the excessive force and violations of rights that occur all over this nation, every day.
Unless and until the police give up their military-style affectations, "us vs them" mentality, and most of all, their legal unaccountability, they're going to find themselves fighting a war against the American people. And it is a war they simply cannot win.
What happened in Dallas may be shocking, but it isn't even remotely surprising. Many people have seen it coming; what will likely prove the most surprising aspect of this incident is how many people will remain utterly unsympathetic to the Dallas police and their bereaved families. The police may consider themselves above the law, but they are not beyond the reach of an increasingly outraged public.
Police around the country will take the wrong lesson from the Dallas shooting event. They, in their ongoing training, will reinforce their belief that they are a military occupational force and that they must, and of right ought to, dominate and subjugate the people who employ them.
Policemen will behave more thuggishly. They will be even more hyper-vigilant with every encounter with "civilians" (mind-set, remember). They will see EVERY citizen who is legally armed, whether in possession of a Government permission slip or not, as an enemy to be stomped on. Understand this. Police around this country have been conditioned for nearly one hundred years to the idea that No one should posses arms but themselves.
Think about this very concept. If a citizen is in possession of a sidearm, which he has a natural right to, and encounters a policeman, the policeman's automatic response is usually, "Prove to me you have permission to do that!" If no permission from the State is required in that locality, the policeman's response is, "Prove to me you NEED to!"
This mind-set leads to, "Get on the ground, Civilian! I shall stand on your neck until I feel better!"
I have said before, we are in the anti-terrorist era. Police tactics have evolved to handle "terrorist situations". What are those? Every situation is a potential "terrorist situation". A citizen otherwise minding his own business and stopped for a minor infraction, or even stopped at an unlawful "check point", becomes a "threat to officer safety" the moment the citizen does anything but submit. God help the citizen if he is exercising his natural right to be armed. The policeman goes instantly into panic mode. The citizen, becomes "Man with a gun!". "Man with a gun..." equals "threat/terrorist/he is going to try to kill me." At that point, there is very little chance the citizen can do anything right. He MUST grovel and beg and placate and render obeisance or the policeman believes he is justified in using deadly force. Killing the "subject" is a valid option because of the policeman's emotional state. The citizen doesn't need to BE a threat to the policeman. The policeman just needs to FEEL that way. That is enough.
What SHOULD policemen learn? Very simply, a man carrying a sidearm in holster is NOT a threat to you or anyone else until he threatens you or someone else! A man with a firearm (or a dozen firearms) in his car as he travels down the road is NOT a criminal until and unless he commits a crime! You have no business interfering with a person going about his business just because he decided to carry his sidearm that day and didn't beg your permission first! Sobriety checkpoints are unlawful, it doesn't matter that Supreme Court says you can get away with doing them. Too often these are used as interrogation checkpoints. Citizens of the community see this as an interruption of their right to their lives. When "What ya headed tonight?" elicits the response, "None of your fucking business! Leave me alone!", you should NOT be surprised! This is a natural and normal response to a person having his life interrupted by a bully intent on his own designs.
I do not condone the murder of ANYONE. I do however know that it is a universal law that bullies and thugs eventually get what is coming to them. Those thugs could be career criminals, politicians (same thing?), sociopaths and psychopaths in business, or even control-freak policemen.
If you have the attitude, "These civilians are gonna have learn to submit...", then look at Dallas and see what you have wrought.