Your home for discussing politics, the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the principles of liberty.
https://ldsfreedomforum.com/
Was Jesus wrong to have died proving a point.investigator wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 2:13 amEven if he was right, was it worth getting himself killed just to prove a point?25 Agree with thine adversary quickly while thou art in the way with him, lest at any time he shall get thee, and thou shalt be cast into prison.[or you get yourself dead]
ALL cops are humanitarians and beyond reproach. We should grovel at their boots and copiously thank them for their service and laud them as heroes. The same as the military ….
I can appreciate a good BUT….HVDC wrote: ↑March 8th, 2023, 7:22 pmAll true.Fred wrote: ↑March 8th, 2023, 7:08 pm There is NO legitimate reason to license any vehicle. Anyone saying otherwise is a lying bastard and evil prick.
I remember as a kid when the worthless POS government wanted farmers to register tractors. The farmers ask why? Give us one good reason. The liars in government said so if stolen it could be recovered. All farmers immediately wanted to puke at such a lie. The farmers said "Shove it up your arse. We would rather a tractor be stolen than registered." The farmers won. My cousin was one of the thousands that went to the white house to educate the democrat President Kennedy about private property.
But moron citizens have let government remove one right after another without a single whimper.
But...
Sir H
ButHVDC wrote: ↑March 8th, 2023, 8:04 pmUltimately.
Americans need to understand a few things.
You do not live in a free country.
You are not a free and sovereign person.
The Constitution is not the law of the land.
Everything you think you know is probably wrong.
And.
If you believe otherwise.
And act on that belief.
You might end up being.
Chased.
As long as you flow with the current.
You won't notice it.
But you will go where it goes.
Hope that's where you want to go.
Sir H
Some of them did that after lockdown, telling us about "freedom of worship" etc. I pointed out that we hadn't had freedom of worship at all for most of that period.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:04 am People always stand up in Fast and Testimony meeting and give testimony that we are so blessed to be free …
Free to flow downstream.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:04 amButHVDC wrote: ↑March 8th, 2023, 8:04 pmUltimately.
Americans need to understand a few things.
You do not live in a free country.
You are not a free and sovereign person.
The Constitution is not the law of the land.
Everything you think you know is probably wrong.
And.
If you believe otherwise.
And act on that belief.
You might end up being.
Chased.
As long as you flow with the current.
You won't notice it.
But you will go where it goes.
Hope that's where you want to go.
Sir H
People always stand up in Fast and Testimony meeting and give testimony that we are so blessed to be free …
Oooh the irony ….Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:06 amSome of them did that after lockdown, telling us about "freedom of worship" etc. I pointed out that we hadn't had freedom of worship at all for most of that period.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:04 am People always stand up in Fast and Testimony meeting and give testimony that we are so blessed to be free …
One of the Scottish judges, Lord Braid, ruled churches had been discriminated against. Of course he did so after the damage had been done. Even the supporters of lockdowns struggled to make a case why bars should be open and not churches when some restrictions had been lifted.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:09 amOooh the irony ….Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:06 amSome of them did that after lockdown, telling us about "freedom of worship" etc. I pointed out that we hadn't had freedom of worship at all for most of that period.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:04 am People always stand up in Fast and Testimony meeting and give testimony that we are so blessed to be free …
That is significant . Brave judge.Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:17 amOne of the Scottish judges, Lord Braid, ruled churches had been discriminated against. Of course he did so after the damage had been done. Even the supporters of lockdowns struggled to make a case why bars should be open and not churches when some restrictions had been lifted.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:09 amOooh the irony ….Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:06 amSome of them did that after lockdown, telling us about "freedom of worship" etc. I pointed out that we hadn't had freedom of worship at all for most of that period.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:04 am People always stand up in Fast and Testimony meeting and give testimony that we are so blessed to be free …
He made his judgement as the restrictions were lifting, and it was not really to do with the deep depths of lockdown. I wish he'd made it earlier. He said the Scottish Government had overreached. It got very little publicity.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:23 amThat is significant . Brave judge.Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:17 amOne of the Scottish judges, Lord Braid, ruled churches had been discriminated against. Of course he did so after the damage had been done. Even the supporters of lockdowns struggled to make a case why bars should be open and not churches when some restrictions had been lifted.
Ah yes .Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 7:28 amHe made his judgement as the restrictions were lifting, and it was not really to do with the deep depths of lockdown. I wish he'd made it earlier. He said the Scottish Government had overreached. It got very little publicity.Light Seeker wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:23 amThat is significant . Brave judge.Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:17 amOne of the Scottish judges, Lord Braid, ruled churches had been discriminated against. Of course he did so after the damage had been done. Even the supporters of lockdowns struggled to make a case why bars should be open and not churches when some restrictions had been lifted.
No. But if a single honest cop or reporter existed, there would be an investigation. No cop should EVER pull any car over unless an actual crime has been committed. I think the death penalty for such is appropriate. Such a flagrant violation of the constitution can not be stopped with a mere life sentence. Besides, why should taxpayers feed such an animal? The cop obviously hates God and freedom. He/she is a disgrace to humanity. No amount of education can ever change such a deep seated hatred for freedom. It is not even possible for anyone to come up with a good reason to pull over a car when no crime has been committed.investigator wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 2:13 amEven if he was right, was it worth getting himself killed just to prove a point?25 Agree with thine adversary quickly while thou art in the way with him, lest at any time he shall get thee, and thou shalt be cast into prison.[or you get yourself dead]
unfortunately, the only way to retain freedom is bloodshed. I haven't ever seen a peaceful protest ever accomplish anything. The founding father knew this when they realized that all other avenues to gain freedom had failed. Those same avenues are still here today, does anyone really think they have changed? No, there is only one way to gain our freedom back. Sad to say it, but it's the truth, and if that is what it takes, then I am all for it. I die, then I die, at least I know I died fighting for what was once ours, rather than rubbing the bellies of those who could care less about our sovereignty.Fred wrote: ↑March 8th, 2023, 8:32 pmI think the Founding Fathers did not want a war, either. But, we have lost leadership by and for the people. The only real edge we have is that we outnumber them, and are armed.h_p wrote: ↑March 8th, 2023, 8:05 pmWould you even believe that I agree with you?tmac wrote: ↑March 8th, 2023, 7:38 pm We have millions of totally useless laws. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again — Malum in Se versus Malum Prohibitum — but do you even know what that means?
What inherent evil is there in driving a car without a license plate — and/or a million other completely useless laws, all designed for the primary purpose of enslaving people and take their money?
Here in Texas, for about 100+ years, we were not allowed to legally carry a handgun unless we were "traveling" and "traveling" had no legal definition, so every jurisdiction was free to make up their own rules. It was ridiculous and tyrannical. But some good people back in the 90's got that law changed to where we could get a license to carry. And then a couple years ago, a bunch of us managed to restore the right lost to us 150 years ago, and now we can carry without a license. None of that effort involved pointing guns at people.
It boils my blood that there are civil forfeiture laws on the books, where cops can just assume someone's property was illegally obtained, and take it from them. There are tons of other laws that are oppressive that need to disappear off the books. I'd like to see a lot fewer laws in this country. I'd like to see a lot less government. But I'm still hoping there are peaceful avenues to get to that point. I'd much rather spend all night testifying to the legislature to repeal a law than start shooting people.
I’m not sure all of what you’re saying is true. I will agree that SCs may be trying to live in an alternate reality, but I’m not sure most SCs are trying to force everyone else to live in that same alternate reality. From what I’ve seen, unlike most LGBTQ activists, most of them just want to live and let live. They seek to “do no harm,” and would be content if others would take the same approach. If you don’t bother them, they probably won’t bother you. They are also inclined to fly the Gadston Flag — Don’t Tread on Me. Why should any of us want to just be walked all over?h_p wrote: ↑March 11th, 2023, 9:51 am Sovereign citizens have the same mentality as the pronoun folks. They think everybody else has to live in their alternate reality. I guess I'm old-fashioned, but I believe in one set of rules for everybody, so we all know what to expect from each other.
And there could have been 1000 cops there, but none of this changes the fact that Chase drew first. OK, fine: he asserted his sovereign citizenship. The cops had a different view. He chose to decide the matter with violence. He lost.
If you're going to argue this on the basis that we're all allowed to make up our own rules, then you can't blame the cops for making up their own.
You solve this easily by giving the death penalty to any cop that pulls any vehicle over without probable case that a CRIME has ALREADY been committed or a signed warrant. Then, if anyone does get in a wreck and there is property damage, insurance covers it and no cop has to get the death penalty. If anyone is killed, then a crime MAY have been committed and a cop can do his job. It is NEVER a cops job to get involved if a crime has not been committed.Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:04 am I agree that government registrations are a financial racket. But as for cars on the road, my main concern would be that they are maintained – that means no faulty brakes, decent tyres, headlights if it's dark/foggy, and lights at the back for the same reason... those are legit concerns since no one wants a tonne of metal careering in their direction without warning.
I think Americans would be horrified at the amount of vehicle-related regulations we have over here now. The green lobby is being used to introduce a lot of them. You might think yours are bad, but our fuel prices are horrific.
The death penalty is on the table for the judge that hurt my son and I and removed our constitutional rights under color of law. I would own the police department for KNOWINGLY serving that fraudulent no-knock emergency TRO and violating my son and I when there was NO CRIME, but the judge threatened the Chief of Police (who told me this) if they didn't serve it. But nobody in the system is willing to DO something about it. They are ALLL in the same club and they protect each other. So even if there are laws, they protect each other in the system - like the Chief who protected his department instead of following the law AND protecting my son and I. They FIND a way to make THEMSELVES in the "right", whether it's a traffic stop or anything else. If a cop joins the force thinking he's going to be helping citizens, he's naive. I don't imagine there are tons of naive cops today. There might still be one or two with souls. I'm ALLLLLLL FOR cops having HEAVY penalties for abusing their position. But then those laws would be made by judges like the one I'm talking about here ^^^^^^. So I'm not sure what we do at this point. Well armed militia?Fred wrote: ↑March 11th, 2023, 12:14 pmYou solve this easily by giving the death penalty to any cop that pulls any vehicle over without probable case that a CRIME has ALREADY been committed or a signed warrant. Then, if anyone does get in a wreck and there is property damage, insurance covers it and no cop has to get the death penalty. If anyone is killed, then a crime MAY have been committed and a cop can do his job. It is NEVER a cops job to get involved if a crime has not been committed.Niemand wrote: ↑March 9th, 2023, 6:04 am I agree that government registrations are a financial racket. But as for cars on the road, my main concern would be that they are maintained – that means no faulty brakes, decent tyres, headlights if it's dark/foggy, and lights at the back for the same reason... those are legit concerns since no one wants a tonne of metal careering in their direction without warning.
I think Americans would be horrified at the amount of vehicle-related regulations we have over here now. The green lobby is being used to introduce a lot of them. You might think yours are bad, but our fuel prices are horrific.
I say that because they expect everybody else to treat them as though they're immune from the laws the rest of us live by.tmac wrote: ↑March 11th, 2023, 11:04 am I’m not sure all of what you’re saying is true. I will agree that SCs may be trying to live in an alternate reality, but I’m not sure most SCs are trying to force everyone else to live in that same alternate reality. From what I’ve seen, unlike most LGBTQ activists, most of them just want to live and let live. They seek to “do no harm,” and would be content if others would take the same approach. If you don’t bother them, they probably won’t bother you. They are also inclined to fly the Gadston Flag — Don’t Tread on Me. Why should any of us want to just be walked all over?
One cop pulled him over, not five. He called for backup when it became clear Chase was going to be a problem. Turns out he wasn't wrong.But you’re saying that although five cops itching to take-out a SC pulled him over just because of his stupid license plate, the cops weren’t the aggressors — with a license to kill, and looking for an excuse.
I believe in law and order. I don't agree with a ton of the laws in this country, and I have a problem with a lot of police acting above the law. I'd like to see us living in a lot more equal, free society. But I'm not like Fred--I don't think the path to that utopia is to start killing everybody who disagrees with me.It’s true, the outcome was very predictable, but you seem to be very defensive of the whole bloody system that produced that predictable result.
I'm not seeing what you're seeing in the footage, then. I see a guy who has unilaterally declared himself immune from the law, and some cops who are trying to enforce that law. He could have fought the law in court, or in the legislature. But nope, he decided to argue using deadly force with people who are legally and morally justified in shooting back. He fought his one-man sovereign citizen revolution and lost. Get over it.But I hope nobody is pretending that the primary intention of the cops was not to escalate and provoke exactly what happened.
There is actually a growing body of case law saying that the cops are on pretty thin ice when they intentionally provoke like this.
There is NO law that says a vehicle has to be registered or carry a license plate. The Supreme Court has already ruled that rules, regulations, ordinances, and statutes are NOT laws. The cop should get the DEATH PENALTY for pulling the car over in the first place. CASE CLOSEDh_p wrote: ↑March 11th, 2023, 12:40 pmI say that because they expect everybody else to treat them as though they're immune from the laws the rest of us live by.tmac wrote: ↑March 11th, 2023, 11:04 am I’m not sure all of what you’re saying is true. I will agree that SCs may be trying to live in an alternate reality, but I’m not sure most SCs are trying to force everyone else to live in that same alternate reality. From what I’ve seen, unlike most LGBTQ activists, most of them just want to live and let live. They seek to “do no harm,” and would be content if others would take the same approach. If you don’t bother them, they probably won’t bother you. They are also inclined to fly the Gadston Flag — Don’t Tread on Me. Why should any of us want to just be walked all over?
One cop pulled him over, not five. He called for backup when it became clear Chase was going to be a problem. Turns out he wasn't wrong.But you’re saying that although five cops itching to take-out a SC pulled him over just because of his stupid license plate, the cops weren’t the aggressors — with a license to kill, and looking for an excuse.
I believe in law and order. I don't agree with a ton of the laws in this country, and I have a problem with a lot of police acting above the law. I'd like to see us living in a lot more equal, free society. But I'm not like Fred--I don't think the path to that utopia is to start killing everybody who disagrees with me.It’s true, the outcome was very predictable, but you seem to be very defensive of the whole bloody system that produced that predictable result.
I'm not seeing what you're seeing in the footage, then. I see a guy who has unilaterally declared himself immune from the law, and some cops who are trying to enforce that law. He could have fought the law in court, or in the legislature. But nope, he decided to argue using deadly force with people who are legally and morally justified in shooting back. He fought his one-man sovereign citizen revolution and lost. Get over it.But I hope nobody is pretending that the primary intention of the cops was not to escalate and provoke exactly what happened.
There is actually a growing body of case law saying that the cops are on pretty thin ice when they intentionally provoke like this.
Look, there are plenty of other examples out there of cops exceeding their authority where I'd be a lot more agreeable. Here's one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcO3fjp2Pec
Chase Allan is nobody's hero, find a better one.
Nobody is even attempting to say that Chase Allen is a hero — I’m certainly not. But since you’re a so-called “Law & Order” guy, you think the cops are heros for killing him for no good reason other than their own provocation?h_p wrote: ↑March 11th, 2023, 12:40 pmI say that because they expect everybody else to treat them as though they're immune from the laws the rest of us live by.tmac wrote: ↑March 11th, 2023, 11:04 am I’m not sure all of what you’re saying is true. I will agree that SCs may be trying to live in an alternate reality, but I’m not sure most SCs are trying to force everyone else to live in that same alternate reality. From what I’ve seen, unlike most LGBTQ activists, most of them just want to live and let live. They seek to “do no harm,” and would be content if others would take the same approach. If you don’t bother them, they probably won’t bother you. They are also inclined to fly the Gadston Flag — Don’t Tread on Me. Why should any of us want to just be walked all over?
One cop pulled him over, not five. He called for backup when it became clear Chase was going to be a problem. Turns out he wasn't wrong.But you’re saying that although five cops itching to take-out a SC pulled him over just because of his stupid license plate, the cops weren’t the aggressors — with a license to kill, and looking for an excuse.
I believe in law and order. I don't agree with a ton of the laws in this country, and I have a problem with a lot of police acting above the law. I'd like to see us living in a lot more equal, free society. But I'm not like Fred--I don't think the path to that utopia is to start killing everybody who disagrees with me.It’s true, the outcome was very predictable, but you seem to be very defensive of the whole bloody system that produced that predictable result.
I'm not seeing what you're seeing in the footage, then. I see a guy who has unilaterally declared himself immune from the law, and some cops who are trying to enforce that law. He could have fought the law in court, or in the legislature. But nope, he decided to argue using deadly force with people who are legally and morally justified in shooting back. He fought his one-man sovereign citizen revolution and lost. Get over it.But I hope nobody is pretending that the primary intention of the cops was not to escalate and provoke exactly what happened.
There is actually a growing body of case law saying that the cops are on pretty thin ice when they intentionally provoke like this.
Look, there are plenty of other examples out there of cops exceeding their authority where I'd be a lot more agreeable. Here's one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcO3fjp2Pec
Chase Allan is nobody's hero, find a better one.