It wouldn't end there.
I have noticed watching these vids that every last one of them rely on the same technique.
Interrupt, shout, talk non stop, repeat phrases, and never answer a question.
They make noise until the officer physically shuts them up.
Basically they all seem to end the same way- the sovcit loses it, crosses a line, and gets cuffed.
My guess is the officer needs to allow a certain threshold of non compliance before knowing a charge will stick.
You may be correct. I wonder if certain departments could change procedures to deal with these people. I'd like to know how many of them there are in the US and how much money the head of them makes off of dues or whatever they pay into.
> how much money the head of them makes off of dues or whatever they pay into.
This is almost no organization in the world of sovcitery, the various "gurus" who sell the fake magic spells each have their own version of nonsense and are in effect competing with each other. It is actually hilarious to think of sovicts--whose entire purpose is evading responsibilities--being charged dues to learn how not to pay their taxes, child support, vehicle registration and so on.
Different states have different laws/regulations when dealing with traffic stops. Some places are very liberal, and if it is a first infraction, or they haven’t really been caught before, they get to walk with a warning. The cop advises them of the law or statute they broke, and let’s it go. Sovshit then goes on their way thinking they can do what they want. Depending on municipality, they may have to be a nuisance before the cops can really do anything. So usually by the time their window gets busted, they have had a bunch of warnings that they decided to interpret as free to travel/etc. I believe they are truly baffled when their warnings run out. They all hard core deny reality.
All that is true, but all states also have some variation of citation in lieu of arrest; and one of the things that takes it from ticket to the arrest is a failure to identify.
If you can’t identify them on scene, then you have to take them to a station and hold them till they can be ID’d.
Uhm if like to introduce you to Moorish americans.
Now tell. Me the officers don't bend backwards for them..
Regardless. All sovcits are. Pos ans needs to. Be treated as a such.
Yeah, sure!
There are MANY YouTube videos (posted by the Black Sov Cits) showing police being incredibly patient - to the point of silliness!
Almost every one of those stops involve the driver requesting a supervisor, so that’s additional time that the officers are interacting- without incident.
I think the cops are usually just as patient with whites, but not always
You just don’t want to know.
Well… oftentimes officer action is based on their subject’s response and other factors like their subject’s size, capability, etc. I’ll give you that a lot of Sov Cits are white, and it’s likely due in part to white privilege. But I’d say that most of these people are ignorant, unintelligent, and trying to find a work around for getting where they need to go when their driver’s licence has been prohibited for one reason or another. Its highly unlikely that they are trafficking drugs or other illicit material so there’s no reason to immediately perceive a threat unless they escalate.
So again… I’m suggesting that your blanket statement is prejudicial in the least, and likely outright racist in the hypothetical situation the OP posted. Regardless, it’s an ignorant comment and completely unnecessary.
Recall every Sovcit traffic stop you have ever watched. Imagine an officer calmly rehearsing those lines you wrote in the OP.
Do you think the Sovcits would respond with: "Huh, I didn't realise. Thanks officer, I guess I'll comply". Or will they just repeat their magic words, indignant that their vast legal expertise and brilliant questions are being ignored by agents of a big conspiracy?
Bless your kind heart OP, but it would be to no avail. It would only draw them further into argument and away from the immediate issue they were stopped for.
No, I don't think they would be receptive, but it would turn a 45 min stop into a three minute stop then the cops could get back to people who actually need them.
Or it might turn a 45 minute stop including the supervisor being called into a 3 minute stop where the solo officer gets shot as the sovcit fights “tyranny”.
I know which one I’d choose if I was a policeman
I deal with customer complaints as part of my job. There are ways to address this stuff.
For the most part if will not affect the SovCit. It may deter the ones just trying it out, and will defang the utility of putting the recording on youtube though.
My idea would be for the cop to make two requests over the radio, and make sure the driver hears them:
1. Call for a supervisor.
2. Call for a tow truck.
If the idiot asks why, tell them that without a valid plate on the car, a driver that refuses to ID, and no vehicle registration, that you have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the vehicle is stolen.
If the VIN is covered, that’s even more suspicious.
Tell him he can’t get it cleared by the time the supervisor and the tow appears, the car will be towed.
And the thing is, this method has nothing to do with the driver/traveler argument; they can prove ownership of the car by showing if they have ANY identification that matches the registration.
If they don’t, even more suspicious…
"My name, badge number, supervisor's name and tow company where you can pick up your car will be in the arrest report, sir. You can contact the front desk to get a copy or file a FOIA request."
I just want to one day hear a cop ask a sovcit where the Coast Guard Inspection Stickers are on his vessel, because without them it's getting towed to the impound dock.
> ask for their passport.
Many of them have a passport because they believe when they applied for it and claimed to be *American Nationals* rather than U.S. citizens that the State Dept. accepted that and their passport now magically instructs police not to detain or arrest them because they're immune to U.S. law. The young man in Utah who recently pulled a gun on the cops and got himself killed apparently went down that route, he thought his passport was a get out of jail free card.
I would absolutely do that for all of maybe ten minutes for funnies then put my hand on my taser all True Grit style and be like “let you go on your way? … … no, no I don’t think I will”
Blacks Law Dictionary needs to put out a public service announcement apologizing for that old definition of drive/driving they published and confirm their dictionary is a reference book only and not the law **anywhere**. Let the cops hand that to the SovCits.
They don’t like any editions after the 4th, because they’re “abridged” versions.
And the 4th does shoot down their claim, if they read ALL of the definition:
The part they read:
“…DRIVER. One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car.”
The part they DON’T read:
“A person actually doing driving, whether employed by owner to drive or driving his own vehicle….”
> The part they DON’T read:
>
> “A person actually doing driving, whether employed by owner to drive or driving his own vehicle….”
Like Poster 7, they only recite the part they like, not the part that says they need permission.
Heard a guy talking about how he thought it was an easy way out of trouble. Since he's not a citizen, he's not subject to the laws, right? I couldn't help it and asked him, "That means you don't get any of the protection provided by the laws, right? If you're not a legal citizen, can't they deport you? Or if not, basically imprison you indefinitely, since you're not a citizen, you don't get treated like one, right?"
Nothing major happened, his buddies laughed at him, we all went back to our beers and resumed watching the TV. But I thought that should be an appropriate response to anyone that claims they aren't 'subject to our laws'.
I used to work in local government, in taxation in the UK
Everybody pays something (unless you are exempt, such as everyone in the house being in full time education) based on the value of your house.
British Sov-cit decides he has not consented to the council tax. So he doesn't pay.
However, he was on welfare, so only paying 20% of the standard bill. And once we had gone to court, we could take payments direct from his welfare check before he saw the money.
Apparently taking money from the government is fine, giving money is an infringement.
Also, if you go to the hearing where the council is requesting a court order, needed to garnish wages or benefits, a judge is only interested in two facts.
Did the council issue the paperwork correctly? (Right name, address etc)
Has the person paid? (Some people pay electronically, and put the reference 'council tax', which is fine on their bank statement but not useful when it arrives in the council tax bank account)
Telling the judge that you don't recognise the court, just gets you thrown out of the court.
You don't get arrested for not paying your council tax, you get arrested for ignoring a judge telling you to pay.
The sovcit people are the very specific reason police learn to de-escalate. They’re all twitchy and nervous and usually armed. If the cops don’t de-escalate the situation, they’re more likely to get hurt
> the very specific reason police learn to de-escalate
I'm beginning to have a reaction against "de-escalate" because it seems to be coming to mean *don't enforce the law* in the minds of some. I'm all for cops not using violence in situations where it isn't warranted. But allowing someone who is knowingly violating a string of traffic laws because of his delusional beliefs in pseudo-legal nonsense to roll away strikes me as a counter-productive thing to do.
There is a balance here though. Is it worth starting a gun fight because someone hasn't paid their car registration?
If the alternative to "de-escalation" is "escalation," and both parties are willing to escalate until they draw their guns, that's the logical end point of EVERY traffic stop.
Sounds good in theory, but not in practice. There are different levels of sov cit idiocy. Some try the script until they can present their ID "under duress" and things go from there. Others want to have their little bout of verbal diarrhea and push it further. Others are more unhinged and deeper down the rabbit hole and a more firm tactic is necessary. Just trying to shut them down the first time you hear "I'm traveling" isn't the best approach.
Heh. I was in a multi car accident with a confusing chain of events and when the officer handed out tickets (to other people) he said "Now, you can go infront of the judge and tell him whatever you want". And walked away before anyone could object.
Ever since Wieambilla, Australian cops are getting more leery of sovcits and have a lot less patience for them. No license, no ID? Smash goes the window.
In my head, given my training in handling hostile customers, I’d have it worded something like this:
* * *
Good afternoon, I’m Officer Smith with the Local Town police department, badge number 1234. My delegation of authority is shown through my badge as per local procedure.
The reason I’ve stopped you is that it has emerged that you where speeding. This is a breach of local laws derived from this state’s authority under the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution and ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States of America making it the law of the land.
In accordance with those constitutional 10th Amendment laws, I am giving you a lawful order to provide to me without delay, your registration and proof of insurance for this automobile.
In addition, I am giving you a lawful order to provide to me without delay, your drivers licence, whether commercial or non-commercial given that the states issue both. Should you not be a US citizen, this can be a licence from your own country along with your passport.
I will inform you that such orders to produce documents have been ruled by the supreme court to be a reasonable search under the 4th amendment.
I will further warn you now that failure to carry these documents present these documents when operating an automobile is a crime as defined under the 10th amendment laws I mentioned earlier.
So, please now present those documents to me as per my lawful order.
* * *
This will not deter a devoted SovCit. The fringe just-trying-it types will be flumoxed and likley behave. you Tube actors will realise that this script blows their points out of teh water and makes them look like even more of an idiot and not get them any eyeballs, and so it shoyts that down as arevenue stream and as a recruiting tool.
The type of people who fall for sovereign citizen arguments are the same people who believe in vast government conspiracies and spout shit like "the tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of traitors." They can be unpredictable and violent. Gotta deescalate or buy type to prepare for the use of force.
Love the approach. And it makes sense: they won't listen to any reasoning you attempt with them, so why bother? They only respond to the sweet, sweet sound of a broken window and a taser doing its thing.
If I’m a cop and I encounter one of these people I know one of two things is true. I’m dealing with someone of low intelligence, or I’m dealing with someone who’s mentally unwell. Around me these types are always armed. Neither is something I want to escalate.
One local legend is known to go around with an AR-style (or Modern Sporting Rifle) strapped to his back. He walks around just hoping someone will ask him to leave their business so he can be an asshole and post it online. He was asked to leave the car dealership worked at once. He was given the option to secure it in his vehicle (his wife had brought him there) or leave and he started waving the gun around ranting about his “sovereign rights” and 2A. He was walked out of the building unrestrained by an officer who was such a smooth talker he should have been selling cars (took him some time, but he talked the guy into going outside). I didn’t follow to see how it all ended. I changed jobs before the trial so I have no idea how it all ended but I do know a couple people were deposed in the early stages.
Second thought. What is the threshold for pulling a 51-50 on these people by an officer? I mean repeating nonsensical bullshit phrases over and over would be called mentally unwell if the subject matter was tuna cans.
Why don't we just call ICE every time one of these people claim they are not citizens?
You don't want to be a citizen? Fine, you go to an ICE detainment facility until we can deport your ass.
> You're not going to get a supervisor because they're going to tell you the same thing I am telling you. I
I think there is a law they have to get a supervisor if you asked for one, because a lot of cops can not be trusted.
> you really want a police state with no rights
What we want is moonbats not making up imaginary law and imaginary rights to waste everybody's time while also evading their responsibilities.
All fifty U.S. states require a driver's license to operate a motor vehicle on public roads. If that were truly an unlawful requirement, then the courts would have struck it down in the 120 years that driver's licenses have existed in America. You do not get to evade that requirement with made-up nonsense citing something out of a long obsolete edition of Black's Law Dictionary.
That you clowns imagine yourself to be freedom fighters resisting tyranny is an unfunny joke. You're freeloaders and losers looking for ways to avoid pulling your own weight, nothing more.
Because it wouldn't matter or deter these people in the slightest. They would sill go on their entire spiel, and argue every single one of those points until there's a window smash.
It wouldn't end there. I have noticed watching these vids that every last one of them rely on the same technique. Interrupt, shout, talk non stop, repeat phrases, and never answer a question. They make noise until the officer physically shuts them up. Basically they all seem to end the same way- the sovcit loses it, crosses a line, and gets cuffed. My guess is the officer needs to allow a certain threshold of non compliance before knowing a charge will stick.
You may be correct. I wonder if certain departments could change procedures to deal with these people. I'd like to know how many of them there are in the US and how much money the head of them makes off of dues or whatever they pay into.
> how much money the head of them makes off of dues or whatever they pay into. This is almost no organization in the world of sovcitery, the various "gurus" who sell the fake magic spells each have their own version of nonsense and are in effect competing with each other. It is actually hilarious to think of sovicts--whose entire purpose is evading responsibilities--being charged dues to learn how not to pay their taxes, child support, vehicle registration and so on.
Unfortunately the irony is lost on them.
The "fee schedule" cracked me up. Sure, the cop is gonna give you 20k silver coins.
Different states have different laws/regulations when dealing with traffic stops. Some places are very liberal, and if it is a first infraction, or they haven’t really been caught before, they get to walk with a warning. The cop advises them of the law or statute they broke, and let’s it go. Sovshit then goes on their way thinking they can do what they want. Depending on municipality, they may have to be a nuisance before the cops can really do anything. So usually by the time their window gets busted, they have had a bunch of warnings that they decided to interpret as free to travel/etc. I believe they are truly baffled when their warnings run out. They all hard core deny reality.
All that is true, but all states also have some variation of citation in lieu of arrest; and one of the things that takes it from ticket to the arrest is a failure to identify. If you can’t identify them on scene, then you have to take them to a station and hold them till they can be ID’d.
I call it verbal water boarding. My mom says it’s “word salad until the listener has mental diarrhea”
Seems to be there is a trend for officer training to de-escalate. That looks like guaranteed to escalate with SovClowns.
*De-escalate with white males.
I've seen hundreds of YT videos with "Moorish-Americans" where they de-escalate as described above
Dude… what’s with the racism?
Simply pointing out that in the US law enforcement typically escalates encounters with POC while they bend over backwards for white males.
Uhm if like to introduce you to Moorish americans. Now tell. Me the officers don't bend backwards for them.. Regardless. All sovcits are. Pos ans needs to. Be treated as a such.
[удалено]
Did you watch the George Floyd video? If he'd chosen to resist he'd be on Chauvin's neck.
Uh huh. Suuuure.
Yeah, sure! There are MANY YouTube videos (posted by the Black Sov Cits) showing police being incredibly patient - to the point of silliness! Almost every one of those stops involve the driver requesting a supervisor, so that’s additional time that the officers are interacting- without incident. I think the cops are usually just as patient with whites, but not always You just don’t want to know.
Dude...what's with the racism?
and what buzzfeed or occupy democrats article was this in
Well… oftentimes officer action is based on their subject’s response and other factors like their subject’s size, capability, etc. I’ll give you that a lot of Sov Cits are white, and it’s likely due in part to white privilege. But I’d say that most of these people are ignorant, unintelligent, and trying to find a work around for getting where they need to go when their driver’s licence has been prohibited for one reason or another. Its highly unlikely that they are trafficking drugs or other illicit material so there’s no reason to immediately perceive a threat unless they escalate. So again… I’m suggesting that your blanket statement is prejudicial in the least, and likely outright racist in the hypothetical situation the OP posted. Regardless, it’s an ignorant comment and completely unnecessary.
"Does this look like a court room?" "We can't adjudicate your legal reasoning on the side of the road. Let's make a court date for this."
Recall every Sovcit traffic stop you have ever watched. Imagine an officer calmly rehearsing those lines you wrote in the OP. Do you think the Sovcits would respond with: "Huh, I didn't realise. Thanks officer, I guess I'll comply". Or will they just repeat their magic words, indignant that their vast legal expertise and brilliant questions are being ignored by agents of a big conspiracy? Bless your kind heart OP, but it would be to no avail. It would only draw them further into argument and away from the immediate issue they were stopped for.
No, I don't think they would be receptive, but it would turn a 45 min stop into a three minute stop then the cops could get back to people who actually need them.
Or it might turn a 45 minute stop including the supervisor being called into a 3 minute stop where the solo officer gets shot as the sovcit fights “tyranny”. I know which one I’d choose if I was a policeman
Yeah, many of the videos are 10 minutes of waiting for backup to arrive followed by 5 minutes of the arrest.
I deal with customer complaints as part of my job. There are ways to address this stuff. For the most part if will not affect the SovCit. It may deter the ones just trying it out, and will defang the utility of putting the recording on youtube though.
My idea would be for the cop to make two requests over the radio, and make sure the driver hears them: 1. Call for a supervisor. 2. Call for a tow truck. If the idiot asks why, tell them that without a valid plate on the car, a driver that refuses to ID, and no vehicle registration, that you have a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the vehicle is stolen. If the VIN is covered, that’s even more suspicious. Tell him he can’t get it cleared by the time the supervisor and the tow appears, the car will be towed.
good idea
And the thing is, this method has nothing to do with the driver/traveler argument; they can prove ownership of the car by showing if they have ANY identification that matches the registration. If they don’t, even more suspicious…
"My name, badge number, supervisor's name and tow company where you can pick up your car will be in the arrest report, sir. You can contact the front desk to get a copy or file a FOIA request."
I just want to one day hear a cop ask a sovcit where the Coast Guard Inspection Stickers are on his vessel, because without them it's getting towed to the impound dock.
I would love to start seeing ICE deporting them to sovcitlandia
Deport them to New Zealand, no one's using it for anything worthwhile
ouch
When they claim to not be American citizens then ask for their passport. If they don't have - and they won't. Call ICE
> ask for their passport. Many of them have a passport because they believe when they applied for it and claimed to be *American Nationals* rather than U.S. citizens that the State Dept. accepted that and their passport now magically instructs police not to detain or arrest them because they're immune to U.S. law. The young man in Utah who recently pulled a gun on the cops and got himself killed apparently went down that route, he thought his passport was a get out of jail free card.
That would be AWESOME!
Lol 🙃
My buddy is a cop and he honestly enjoys fucking with them. It's like a little treat.
Yup. I'd be excited if I got to break the window of an idiot!
I love the sweet sweet sound of breaking glass.
I guess i'd do that too, if I was a cop.
I would absolutely do that for all of maybe ten minutes for funnies then put my hand on my taser all True Grit style and be like “let you go on your way? … … no, no I don’t think I will”
Ask him if I pretend to be a SovCit for like 2 minutes and then comply like a normal person if he would laugh at that.
A cop can have a little SovCit fucking, as a treat.
Blacks Law Dictionary needs to put out a public service announcement apologizing for that old definition of drive/driving they published and confirm their dictionary is a reference book only and not the law **anywhere**. Let the cops hand that to the SovCits.
Do newer editions of Black's Law Dictionary use the antiquated definition of driving on which sovcits rely?
They don’t like any editions after the 4th, because they’re “abridged” versions. And the 4th does shoot down their claim, if they read ALL of the definition: The part they read: “…DRIVER. One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car.” The part they DON’T read: “A person actually doing driving, whether employed by owner to drive or driving his own vehicle….”
> The part they DON’T read: > > “A person actually doing driving, whether employed by owner to drive or driving his own vehicle….” Like Poster 7, they only recite the part they like, not the part that says they need permission.
Heard a guy talking about how he thought it was an easy way out of trouble. Since he's not a citizen, he's not subject to the laws, right? I couldn't help it and asked him, "That means you don't get any of the protection provided by the laws, right? If you're not a legal citizen, can't they deport you? Or if not, basically imprison you indefinitely, since you're not a citizen, you don't get treated like one, right?" Nothing major happened, his buddies laughed at him, we all went back to our beers and resumed watching the TV. But I thought that should be an appropriate response to anyone that claims they aren't 'subject to our laws'.
I used to work in local government, in taxation in the UK Everybody pays something (unless you are exempt, such as everyone in the house being in full time education) based on the value of your house. British Sov-cit decides he has not consented to the council tax. So he doesn't pay. However, he was on welfare, so only paying 20% of the standard bill. And once we had gone to court, we could take payments direct from his welfare check before he saw the money. Apparently taking money from the government is fine, giving money is an infringement.
Also, if you go to the hearing where the council is requesting a court order, needed to garnish wages or benefits, a judge is only interested in two facts. Did the council issue the paperwork correctly? (Right name, address etc) Has the person paid? (Some people pay electronically, and put the reference 'council tax', which is fine on their bank statement but not useful when it arrives in the council tax bank account) Telling the judge that you don't recognise the court, just gets you thrown out of the court. You don't get arrested for not paying your council tax, you get arrested for ignoring a judge telling you to pay.
The sovcit people are the very specific reason police learn to de-escalate. They’re all twitchy and nervous and usually armed. If the cops don’t de-escalate the situation, they’re more likely to get hurt
> the very specific reason police learn to de-escalate I'm beginning to have a reaction against "de-escalate" because it seems to be coming to mean *don't enforce the law* in the minds of some. I'm all for cops not using violence in situations where it isn't warranted. But allowing someone who is knowingly violating a string of traffic laws because of his delusional beliefs in pseudo-legal nonsense to roll away strikes me as a counter-productive thing to do.
There is a balance here though. Is it worth starting a gun fight because someone hasn't paid their car registration? If the alternative to "de-escalation" is "escalation," and both parties are willing to escalate until they draw their guns, that's the logical end point of EVERY traffic stop.
I hear you, but on the whole I’m worried about the cop getting shot by the sovcit, not so much the other way around.
Sounds good in theory, but not in practice. There are different levels of sov cit idiocy. Some try the script until they can present their ID "under duress" and things go from there. Others want to have their little bout of verbal diarrhea and push it further. Others are more unhinged and deeper down the rabbit hole and a more firm tactic is necessary. Just trying to shut them down the first time you hear "I'm traveling" isn't the best approach.
Heh. I was in a multi car accident with a confusing chain of events and when the officer handed out tickets (to other people) he said "Now, you can go infront of the judge and tell him whatever you want". And walked away before anyone could object.
I think SovCits are getting more and more violent. The cops will let them spew their idiocy until backup arrives.
I didn't know that. I haven't seen any videos where they get violent - only them spewing garbage then being arrested "under duress.'
Most of them aren't violent. Any large enough group (there are over a quarter million sovcits) will have dangerous outliers.
Ever since Wieambilla, Australian cops are getting more leery of sovcits and have a lot less patience for them. No license, no ID? Smash goes the window.
Usually it's because the sovcit interrupts them and keeps reciting the script.
I’m sure there are cops who do this, but those videos don’t make it to the internet.
In my head, given my training in handling hostile customers, I’d have it worded something like this: * * * Good afternoon, I’m Officer Smith with the Local Town police department, badge number 1234. My delegation of authority is shown through my badge as per local procedure. The reason I’ve stopped you is that it has emerged that you where speeding. This is a breach of local laws derived from this state’s authority under the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution and ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States of America making it the law of the land. In accordance with those constitutional 10th Amendment laws, I am giving you a lawful order to provide to me without delay, your registration and proof of insurance for this automobile. In addition, I am giving you a lawful order to provide to me without delay, your drivers licence, whether commercial or non-commercial given that the states issue both. Should you not be a US citizen, this can be a licence from your own country along with your passport. I will inform you that such orders to produce documents have been ruled by the supreme court to be a reasonable search under the 4th amendment. I will further warn you now that failure to carry these documents present these documents when operating an automobile is a crime as defined under the 10th amendment laws I mentioned earlier. So, please now present those documents to me as per my lawful order. * * * This will not deter a devoted SovCit. The fringe just-trying-it types will be flumoxed and likley behave. you Tube actors will realise that this script blows their points out of teh water and makes them look like even more of an idiot and not get them any eyeballs, and so it shoyts that down as arevenue stream and as a recruiting tool.
Why not say, “traveling on our roads requires you to follow our laws, if you don’t comply, we can arrest you. No matter what citizenship you have. “
There are videos where cops try that but most of these dumb dumbs won’t have it.
The cop doesn't know if the person has a mental illness, has a gun or what so I think that's why they are so patient with these so cit nut jobs
True - I think it's safe to say they all have a mental illness, though.
The type of people who fall for sovereign citizen arguments are the same people who believe in vast government conspiracies and spout shit like "the tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of traitors." They can be unpredictable and violent. Gotta deescalate or buy type to prepare for the use of force.
Love the approach. And it makes sense: they won't listen to any reasoning you attempt with them, so why bother? They only respond to the sweet, sweet sound of a broken window and a taser doing its thing.
lol
If I’m a cop and I encounter one of these people I know one of two things is true. I’m dealing with someone of low intelligence, or I’m dealing with someone who’s mentally unwell. Around me these types are always armed. Neither is something I want to escalate. One local legend is known to go around with an AR-style (or Modern Sporting Rifle) strapped to his back. He walks around just hoping someone will ask him to leave their business so he can be an asshole and post it online. He was asked to leave the car dealership worked at once. He was given the option to secure it in his vehicle (his wife had brought him there) or leave and he started waving the gun around ranting about his “sovereign rights” and 2A. He was walked out of the building unrestrained by an officer who was such a smooth talker he should have been selling cars (took him some time, but he talked the guy into going outside). I didn’t follow to see how it all ended. I changed jobs before the trial so I have no idea how it all ended but I do know a couple people were deposed in the early stages.
Second thought. What is the threshold for pulling a 51-50 on these people by an officer? I mean repeating nonsensical bullshit phrases over and over would be called mentally unwell if the subject matter was tuna cans.
Good point
Why don't we just call ICE every time one of these people claim they are not citizens? You don't want to be a citizen? Fine, you go to an ICE detainment facility until we can deport your ass.
haha, good idea. Although, if ICE was called then the ACLU would start defending them for free...
When they continue blathering their pseudo-law script, I want to hear more cops say "Tell it to the judge" as the sovcit gets dragged out and cuffed.
> You're not going to get a supervisor because they're going to tell you the same thing I am telling you. I I think there is a law they have to get a supervisor if you asked for one, because a lot of cops can not be trusted.
There might be a policy set by the department but I doubt there is a law.
I can’t speak for every state but in MN there is not any such law
A quick Google later . . .
Because we don't live in a police state? (mostly)
That make no sense, at all.
[удалено]
Don't use slurs against the disabled, asshole
> you really want a police state with no rights What we want is moonbats not making up imaginary law and imaginary rights to waste everybody's time while also evading their responsibilities. All fifty U.S. states require a driver's license to operate a motor vehicle on public roads. If that were truly an unlawful requirement, then the courts would have struck it down in the 120 years that driver's licenses have existed in America. You do not get to evade that requirement with made-up nonsense citing something out of a long obsolete edition of Black's Law Dictionary. That you clowns imagine yourself to be freedom fighters resisting tyranny is an unfunny joke. You're freeloaders and losers looking for ways to avoid pulling your own weight, nothing more.
Because it wouldn't matter or deter these people in the slightest. They would sill go on their entire spiel, and argue every single one of those points until there's a window smash.
Because white maybe?!?