Keep your papers ready to be produced immediately or it's a tazering

In article >,
Harry K > wrote:
>
>While it would have been better, the repeated order to 'turn
>around" (I think that was the term) would be sufficient for even the
>brain impaired to understand it was time to comply. Time for protest
>had already passed, any further resistance would result in just what
>did happen.
>
>To repeat _again_ which people in these threads keep ignoring. "once
>a cop has decided you _will_ do what he says, it doesn't matter a
>tinkers damn at that moment whether the order is legal or not, you
>will comply or get hurt and still wind up complying albeit
>unwillignly."

I was once given the same order, and did not comply. Now, while a lot
of things occurred as a result which I did not enjoy, including my
arrest, my turning around was not in fact one of them.

Of course, if you're right, I would have been arrested in any case.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article > , Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> In article >,
> Harry K > wrote:
>>
>>While it would have been better, the repeated order to 'turn
>>around" (I think that was the term) would be sufficient for even the
>>brain impaired to understand it was time to comply. Time for protest
>>had already passed, any further resistance would result in just what
>>did happen.
>>
>>To repeat _again_ which people in these threads keep ignoring. "once
>>a cop has decided you _will_ do what he says, it doesn't matter a
>>tinkers damn at that moment whether the order is legal or not, you
>>will comply or get hurt and still wind up complying albeit
>>unwillignly."
>
> I was once given the same order, and did not comply. Now, while a lot
> of things occurred as a result which I did not enjoy, including my
> arrest, my turning around was not in fact one of them.
>
> Of course, if you're right, I would have been arrested in any case.

And once your back is turned beaten or cuffed and then beaten. Beating
people who are cuffed seems a favored tactic of police. Slam their head
into the door of the cruiser or something on the subtle end all the way
to just beating them up. Bullies are ultimately cowards.

In article >,
Brent P > wrote:
>In article >, Harry K wrote:
>
>> While it would have been better, the repeated order to 'turn
>> around" (I think that was the term) would be sufficient for even the
>> brain impaired to understand it was time to comply. Time for protest
>> had already passed, any further resistance would result in just what
>> did happen.
>
>Could you have a stronger slave programing?

Yeah. First he says "protest later". Then he says "the time for
protest has already passed". It appears the window for protest is of
negative length.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Dec 8, 4:58 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
wrote:
> In article >,
>
> Brent P > wrote:
> >In article >, Harry K wrote:
>
> >> While it would have been better, the repeated order to 'turn
> >> around" (I think that was the term) would be sufficient for even the
> >> brain impaired to understand it was time to comply. Time for protest
> >> had already passed, any further resistance would result in just what
> >> did happen.
>
> >Could you have a stronger slave programing?
>
> Yeah. First he says "protest later". Then he says "the time for
> protest has already passed". It appears the window for protest is of
> negative length.
> --
> There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
> result in a fully-depreciated one.

Nice strecht there. Where do you get that I have dropped the "protest
later" bit? It shouldn't be necessary to have to keep repeating
myself but it appears that I do. I guess I will have to archive
everything I post and repeat it all each time, whether it applies to
the thread or not.

Will that satisfy you?
..

Harry K

In article >, Harry K wrote:

> Will that satisfy you?

What will satisfy me is that you learn that you were born with rights and
that you shouldn't allow yourself to be stepped on and treated like
property of the state.

In article >,
Harry K > wrote:
>On Dec 8, 4:58 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
>wrote:
>> In article >,
>>
>> Brent P > wrote:
>> >In article >, Harry K wrote:
>>
>> >> While it would have been better, the repeated order to 'turn
>> >> around" (I think that was the term) would be sufficient for even the
>> >> brain impaired to understand it was time to comply. Time for protest
>> >> had already passed, any further resistance would result in just what
>> >> did happen.
>>
>> >Could you have a stronger slave programing?
>>
>> Yeah. First he says "protest later". Then he says "the time for
>> protest has already passed". It appears the window for protest is of
>> negative length.
>
>Nice strecht there. Where do you get that I have dropped the "protest
>later" bit?

"Time for protest has already passed".
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article >,
Brent P > wrote:
>In article >, Harry K wrote:
>
>> Will that satisfy you?
>
>What will satisfy me is that you learn that you were born with rights and
>that you shouldn't allow yourself to be stepped on and treated like
>property of the state.

Remember, if the cops want to cut off your balls and feed them to you,
you should let them, then sue later.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Dec 8, 9:15 pm, Ashton Crusher > wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 08:38:35 -0800 (PST), Harry K
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Dec 7, 8:14 pm, Alan Baker > wrote:
> >> In article
> >> >,
> >> Harry K > wrote:
>
> >> > On Dec 7, 8:10 am, Ashton Crusher > wrote:
> >> > > On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 06:48:51 -0800, Scott in SoCal
>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 07:46:48 -0600,
> >> > > >(Brent P) wrote:
>
> >> > > >>In article >, Daniel W.
> >> > > >>Rouse Jr. wrote:
>
> >> > > >>> It really is not that hard to understand: suddenly reaching into a
> >> > > >>> glove box
> >> > > >>> or center console compartment without telling the officer what is being
> >> > > >>> retrieved could very well cause the officer to think one is reaching
> >> > > >>> for a
> >> > > >>> weapon. If the officer thinks one is reaching for a weapon, the officer
> >> > > >>> will
> >> > > >>> justifiably think their life is in danger. More than likely, an officer
> >> > > >>> who
> >> > > >>> feels their life is in danger will not wait to actually see if there is
> >> > > >>> actually weapon before they decide on the level of force necessary to
> >> > > >>> defend
> >> > > >>> themselves.
>
> >> > > >>Roadside robbery is a dangerous profession, maybe they should consider a
> >> > > >>different line of work?
>
> >> > > >So why don't you just keep a gun under the seat and shoot the next
> >> > > >robber that pulls you over? It would save you from a tazing and all
> >> > > >the other hassles of a traffic stop.
>
> >> > > >Same thing for Matt - you seem to think it's better to go out
> >> > > >fighting, so why don't the two of you just take out as many of these
> >> > > >robbing pigs as you can before they finally get you?
>
> >> > > Why do you call maintaining ones self respect and rights "fighting"? I
> >> > > haven't seen anyone suggest shooting the cops if they start to ignore
> >> > > your rights. If the cop asks to look in your trunk you have the right
> >> > > to refuse. If he has no probable cause he can't do it. What will you
> >> > > do if a cop asks you to look in your trunk? Are you going to just let
> >> > > him so you don't get him upset? What if he decides to strip search
> >> > > you and your wife on the side of the road? You just going to go along
> >> > > with it instead asking him what the hell is going on"? Tell me how
> >> > > you will just take it to court later.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> >> > You did read the thread right? This is about refusing to comply with
> >> > an order where the order deals with beign arrested. Has nothing to do
> >> > with saying "No" to a question.
>
> >> > Harry K
>
> >> No.
>
> >> No order dealing with "being arrested" had been issued.
>
> >> --
> >> Alan Baker
> >> Vancouver, British Columbia
> >> "If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
> >> to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
> >> sit in the bottom of that cupboard."- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >While it would have been better, the repeated order to 'turn
> >around" (I think that was the term) would be sufficient for even the
> >brain impaired to understand it was time to comply. Time for protest
> >had already passed, any further resistance would result in just what
> >did happen.
>
> >To repeat _again_ which people in these threads keep ignoring. "once
> >a cop has decided you _will_ do what he says, it doesn't matter a
> >tinkers damn at that moment whether the order is legal or not, you
> >will comply or get hurt and still wind up complying albeit
> >unwillignly."
>
> Please answer my question, which you ignored before. If the cop
> decides to strip search you and your wife on the side of the road are
> you going to accept the notion that "once a cop has decided you _will_
> do what he says, it doesn't matter a tinkers damn at that moment
> whether the order is legal or not, you will comply or get hurt and
> still wind up complying albeit unwillingly."
>
>
>
> >Some one ?Necromancer? did make the point that continuing to the
> >point of physical action can make a point to the public.
>
> >Those, I think 3 now, who claim to have successfully won an argument
> >did not do so _after_ the cop decided that they would do as he said.
>
> >Harry K- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Errmmm...hmmm....jeez hard to answer such an asinine projection. Of
course I would resist but that will happen just about the time the sun
goes nova. Seems we are talkign about usual police procedure not some
drug induced scenario.

Harry K

On Dec 8, 8:51 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
wrote:
> In article >,
> Harry K > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Dec 8, 4:58 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
> >wrote:
> >> In article >,
>
> >> Brent P > wrote:
> >> >In article >, Harry K wrote:
>
> >> >> While it would have been better, the repeated order to 'turn
> >> >> around" (I think that was the term) would be sufficient for even the
> >> >> brain impaired to understand it was time to comply. Time for protest
> >> >> had already passed, any further resistance would result in just what
> >> >> did happen.
>
> >> >Could you have a stronger slave programing?
>
> >> Yeah. First he says "protest later". Then he says "the time for
> >> protest has already passed". It appears the window for protest is of
> >> negative length.
>
> >Nice strecht there. Where do you get that I have dropped the "protest
> >later" bit?
>
> "Time for protest has already passed".
> --
> There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
> result in a fully-depreciated one.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Have a reading comprehension problem do you?

Harry K

In article >,
Scott in SoCal > wrote:
>
>Let's say Harry refuses to allow ths strip-search. What is the cop
>going to do? Just say "OK, sir, have a nice evening, and drive safe!"
>and walk back to his patrol car? Or is he more likely to become
>enraged, use his taser and/or nightstick on Harry and his wife, and
>THEN strip-search them by the side of the road? How is this a better
>outcome for Harry and his wife?

Because if he's beaten senseless first, then afterward, she'll likely
not hate him for letting the cop fondle her.

(What, you never saw _Crash_?)
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.