Does calling a cop a NAZI equal lawful arrest?

We have not had ANY so called "RIGHTS" in this country for some time now. Some would say we lost our "rights" in 1871 through the Act of 1871 which changed the Title of the Constitution. Others would say we lost our rights in 1783 due to the Peace Treaty of Versai. (spelling is off) But personally I say the proof is in the pudding...ie

In 1942 (After Pearl Harbor) another false flag event. 110,000 Japanese American's were thrown into internment camps. Just because their parents happen to be from the "wrong" country...JAPAN.

If you don't believe me just ask GEORGE CARLIN...R.I.P.

CHECK OUT THIS CLIP, and let him explain it...PEACE OUT (FOR NOW...)

HAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

reply to post by SNAKE13X


Thank you for sharing that! Star for you

reply to post by morder1


Look...A police officer has the authority to arrest you for what ever. This does not mean an arrest in a conviction. I was stopped one time for having a tail light burned out and the police officer arrested for that and because he said I cursed at him (which to this day I deny ever saying anything to hime other than yes sir and no sir). we went to court and the Judge explained to the officer that we have free speech in this country and I could call him evry name bad or other wise in the dictionary and as a law enforcement officer he was bound by his duty to take it without retailiation.

The Judge did state that if someone in the public..ie another citizen complained of my use of bad language that they could press charges and I could at that point be found guilty of disorderly coonduct or a similar law but that again free Speech rights would and could provide me protection even in that case but that it could come down to the particulars in the xpecific case.

Oh and just for a conclusion I did pay a small fine for the taillight being out and the Judge did tell the officer that if he pulled him over and arrested him for a tail light out that he could expect to him (the Judge) using his free speech to curse him even if I did not. In other words he deserved to be cursed for dragging somebody into court and posting a bail bond for a tail light offense.

Unlawful arrest is something that could be pursued but its expensive and there are no absolutes when it comes to court rulings...but remember that police can and will arrest you for anything but it does not mean you are guilty of a crime...only a judge or jury can rule on guilt

Wow, ok look when an officer makes a judgement regarding arrest, he relies upon probable cause.

The standard for conviction is beyond a doubt, standard for arrest is probable cause. Get it?

OK, what is PC? link here because I cannot type this much crap.....

probable cause n. sufficient reason based upon known facts to believe a crime has been committed or that certain property is connected with a crime.

Probable cause must exist for a law enforcement officer to make an arrest without a warrant, search without a warrant, or seize property in the belief the items were evidence of a crime. While some cases are easy (pistols and illicit drugs in plain sight, gunshots, a suspect running from a liquor store with a clerk screaming "help"), actions typical of drug dealers, burglars, prostitutes, thieves, or people with guilt "written across their faces," are more difficult to categorize. "Probable cause" is often subjective, but if the police officer's belief or even hunch was correct, finding stolen goods, the hidden weapon, or drugs may be claimed as self-fulfilling proof of probable cause. Technically, probable cause has to exist prior to arrest, search or seizure.

Point is? People arrested are not always guilty. Yay USA!!

I really get tired pointing out the obvious.

reply to post by SNAKE13X


Cool video, thanks!

If you live in small town, and there is a skunk walking past your back door, the best choice is to let it continue on its path.

If you live in a remote mountain wilderness, and there is bear walking through your yard, it is not a wise decision to step outside and start poking at it with small sticks.

If you live in a city, and there are cops walking in front of your house, don't taunt them by calling them Nazi's.


[color=E0FFFF]It's called common sense. In the past, it was a common attribute.
Sadly, it isn't anymore.

reply to post by BrokenCircles


You're right. But while what he did wasn't wise it wasn't unlawful. You mentioned skunks, bears and Police in the same breath, indicating that what links them is they can all be expected to act like unreasoning animals. That's the problem. We shouldn't have to be wary of our Public servants like wild animals. But we are.

We dont know what motivated this guy to say that or what history he has with the Police. Perhaps his sentiments were justified. But whatever the case, he didnt break the law so the Police should just suck it up and act professionally by ignoring someone exercising their right free speech.

The Police are there to enforce the law. That's all.

They had better get used to more and more people calling them NAZIS, if they are going to continue to act that way.

reply to post by Malcram

Originally posted by Malcram

You mentioned skunks, bears and Police in the same breath, indicating that what links them is they can all be expected to act like unreasoning animals.

Keyboard + Breath = huh?


Anyways....No. Not even close. That is your misinterpreted assumption.

It is not unreasonable for a skunk to spray you, if you approach it in a threatening way. It is not unreasonable for a bear to attack you, if you are poking at it with sticks. It is not unreasonable, for a man to get pissed off, if a stranger is intentionally taunting him, with the singular purpose of pissing him off.

What I was indicating, is that it is ignorant to unnecessarily taunt something that is in a higher position of power than you are.

Originally posted by Malcram

We dont know what motivated this guy to say that or what history he has with the Police. Perhaps his sentiments were justified.

It is common for some people to only make assumptions, when the assumption is in agreement with their own opinion. This is why I am not surprised that you are having troubles seeing the obvious. It is obvious what motivated this idiot. His goal was to piss off the cops while recording it on video. This is what he wanted, and this is what he got. Mission accomplished.

reply to post by butcherguy


Actually there's "hate speech" laws on the books in several states so calling someone a ni**er or other ethnic slur is a criminal act- usually a lower class misdemeanor.

The only ethnic group not covered by these laws BTW are white folk so even in states where these laws exist using the Nazi epithet is legal

reply to post by BrokenCircles


You suggested that skunks, bears and Police were analogous, not me.

I said unreasoning, not unreasonable. A skunk doesn't use reason to determine if it should spray. A bear doesn't reason on an attack. Police are expected to follow and uphold law and apply reason. They are not supposed to act unreasoningly, like animals, or in retaliation for something they personally may not like, twisting and overstepping the law in an attempt to serve their immature egos.

But you suggested we rightfully be wary of Police as we would be of wild animals. Just because they may be likely to act that way doesnt make it right.

Perhaps if you dont like the inherent implications of your analogy, you shouldnt have used it.

reply to post by Malcram
Wrong again....

Doesn't matter though, because there is no point in continuing this conversation with you.

You can use whatever reasoning that you choose, in order to allow yourself to be continue being outraged. The simple fact is~> He was asking for it, and he got what he wanted.

reply to post by CodexSinaiticus


Not to rain on the police hating parade and all but...

This video is a spoof- it was staged and the "cop" is just a guy in costume with a foam baton.

ETA- in the OP the cops were d-bags. I was one and I'm sayin they were d-bags