• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Video Shows Man Getting Punched by Cop After Resisting Arrest in Harlem

Ahlevah said:
No, I believe this kind of thing happens. Whether it did in this case or not I can't say because I don't have all of the facts. But from what I can see the citizen became uncooperative and combative when the cop appeared to request a pat-down search. Big mistake.
Click to expand...

Well, I made that very point, which perhaps you missed?

Captain Adverse said:
My problem with this is that the arrest was not really justified, at least by the evidence in this video...


HOWEVER, the act of resisting arrest was wrong...


...The officer's use of force here was in keeping with the law.
Click to expand...
 
Henrin said:
If you want to throw me in that hell I will attempt to kill you. Your only choices are to either subdue me or kill me because I sure as hell am not going freely.
Click to expand...

Are you still living here in this country? If yes then you are giving an implied consent to follow the laws. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not. Have you even attempted to move out of this country? If no then you are most definitely giving implied consent to follow the laws. You have a choice to follow our laws or not. But only two. Either stay in this country and follow them or get out so you don't have to follow them.

No society has to have your permission to enact laws and enforce those laws on you. You're not that important to be above the law.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Are you still living here in this country? If yes then you are giving an implied consent to follow the laws. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not. Have you even attempted to move out of this country? If no then you are most definitely giving implied consent to follow the laws. You have a choice to follow our laws or not. But only two. Either stay in this country and follow them or get out so you don't have to follow them.

No society has to have your permission to enact laws and enforce those laws on you. You're not that important to be above the law.
Click to expand...

Well, he can always consult with CanadaJohn about emigrating to Canada, if he ever feels the need to escape laws he doesn't think apply to him,,, eh? ;)
 
Captain Adverse said:
Well, he can always consult with CanadaJohn about emigrating to Canada, if he ever feels the need to escape laws he doesn't think apply to him,,, eh? ;)
Click to expand...

Sure. Of course by moving there he is implying that he'll be following their laws. ;) Wonder where one can move without laws.....Hmm...IS there such a place?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Sure. Of course by moving there he is implying that he'll be following their laws. ;) Wonder where one can move without laws.....Hmm...IS there such a place?
Click to expand...

A deserted island?

Oh...wait...he'll still have to follow the laws of nature. That might pose a problem if he doesn't give his consent to those laws.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Are you still living here in this country? If yes then you are giving an implied consent to follow the laws. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not. Have you even attempted to move out of this country? If no then you are most definitely giving implied consent to follow the laws. You have a choice to follow our laws or not. But only two. Either stay in this country and follow them or get out so you don't have to follow them.

No society has to have your permission to enact laws and enforce those laws on you. You're not that important to be above the law.
Click to expand...

I lived in France for a while and hated the ****ing place. lol.

And I don't buy into the social contract theory.
 
Henrin said:
I lived in France for a while and hated the ****ing place. lol.

And I don't buy into the social contract theory.
Click to expand...

That's ok. It doesn't have to have you buy into it. It will still be in effect anyways. ;)
 
Captain Adverse said:
Out of curiosity then, what IS your theory in this regard?
Click to expand...

I think it's dishonest to call something a contract without agreement, and I find the notion that people consent to government because of where they live just tyrannical nonsense. What if I apply this logic to other things? What if I give everyone that lives in the city a car and charge them lets say $40,000 for it, and if they don't want the car, well, all they do is move out of the city. If however they decide to stay in the city then they must pay the $40,000 dollars for the car and If they decide to not pay then I will send my goans out to their house and throw them in my cage. After all, when they decided to stay in the city they agreed to pay the $40,000 for the car that I can't prove they wanted in the first place.

I think if you can't prove that someone agreed to your governance then you're just a tyrant.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Are you still living here in this country? If yes then you are giving an implied consent to follow the laws. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not. Have you even attempted to move out of this country? If no then you are most definitely giving implied consent to follow the laws. You have a choice to follow our laws or not. But only two. Either stay in this country and follow them or get out so you don't have to follow them.

No society has to have your permission to enact laws and enforce those laws on you. You're not that important to be above the law.
Click to expand...

It's great you have a club you enjoy, but I would rather not be member of it and I don't think it's valid to tell me to move.
 
Henrin said:
I think it's dishonest to call something a contract without agreement, and I find the notion that people consent to government because of where they live just tyrannical nonsense. What if I apply this logic to other things? What if I give everyone that lives in the city a car and charge them lets say $40,000 for it, and if they don't want the car, well, all they do is move out of the city. If however they decide to stay in the city then they must pay the $40,000 dollars for the car and If they decide to not pay then I will send my goans out to their house and throw them in my cage. After all, when they decided to stay in the city they agreed to pay the $40,000 for the car that I can't prove they wanted in the first place.

I think if you can't prove that someone agreed to your governance then you're just a tyrant.
Click to expand...

Hmm,

Before I respond I'd like to ask a couple of questions.

1. Do you reside in the United States? If not, I have no further questions because I am not familiar enough with foreign laws to address the issue with you.

2. If so, is it because you were born in the U.S.A. or are you just a foreign visitor or permanent resident?

3.If you were born here, do you consider yourself a citizen or not?

3. If you do consider yourself a citizen with all the privileges and immunities, why would you think you must agree personally with the laws, rules, and regulations enacted by elected representatives before they can apply to you?
 
Captain Adverse said:
Hmm,

Before I respond I'd like to ask a couple of questions.

1. Do you reside in the United States? If not, I have no further questions because I am not familiar enough with foreign laws to address the issue with you.

2. If so, is it because you were born in the U.S.A. or are you just a foreign visitor or permanent resident?

3.If you were born here, do you consider yourself a citizen or not?

3. If you do consider yourself a citizen with all the privileges and immunities, why would you think you must agree personally with the laws, rules, and regulations enacted by elected representatives before they can apply to you?
Click to expand...

1. Yes.

2. Born

3. I would rather not be a citizen of the US, but technically I am.

4. I'm not sure how to answer that question. It's really just a matter of fact that I'm a citizen of the US. I didn't ask for it, I didn't want it, and I have to pay to get rid of it. I never asked for any protections, privileges, immunities or anything else from the government. They gave me what they wanted and they restricted me in whatever way they wanted to. Do I want their protection, privileges or immunities? Absolutely not. Maybe if they were more responsive towards me I would consent, but as it stands I consider them corrupt and completely out of control.
 
Henrin said:
1. Yes.

2. Born

3. I would rather not be a citizen of the US, but technically I am.

4. I'm not sure how to answer that question. It's really just a matter of fact that I'm a citizen of the US. I didn't ask for it, I didn't want it, and I have to pay to get rid of it. I never asked for any protections, privileges, immunities or anything else from the government. They gave me what they wanted and they restricted me in whatever way they wanted to. Do I want their protection, privileges or immunities? Absolutely not. Maybe if they were more responsive towards me I would consent, but as it stands I consider them corrupt and completely out of control.
Click to expand...

Well, I am not sure what you mean about the costs, but all that is required is: Renunciation of U.S. Nationality

"ELEMENTS OF RENUNCIATION

A person wishing to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship must voluntarily and with intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship:

1. appear in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer,

2. in a foreign country (normally at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate); and

3. sign an oath of renunciation

Renunciations that do not meet the conditions described above have no legal effect. Because of the provisions of Section 349(a)(5), U.S. citizens cannot effectively renounce their citizenship by mail, through an agent, or while in the United States. In fact, U.S. courts have held certain attempts to renounce U.S. citizenship to be ineffective on a variety of grounds, as discussed below.

REQUIREMENT - RENOUNCE ALL RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES

a person seeking to renounce U.S. citizenship must renounce all the rights and privileges associated with such citizenships. In the case of Colon v. U.S. Department of State , 2 F.Supp.2d 43 (1998),the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia rejected Colon’s petition for a writ of mandamus directing the Secretary of State to approve a Certificate of Loss of Nationality in the case because he wanted to retain the right to live in the United States while claiming he was not a U.S. citizen."

All you have to do is cross the border into either Canada or Mexico, locate the closest U.S. Consulate, and follow steps 1 thru 3 above. NOTE: when you do that you are no longer permitted to return to or reside in the U.S.A. unless you file for permission under the Immigration codes. If you do, you are then bound by all the laws while you reside in the U.S.A.

I suggest you liquidate all of your assets, rent a deposit box in your chosen country, and ferry cash in the authorized amount of no more than $10,000 at a time into it before you renounce.

What happens to you as a citizen of no nation after that? I guess that depends on the country you find yourself in.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
It's great you have a club you enjoy, but I would rather not be member of it and I don't think it's valid to tell me to move.
Click to expand...

Well, unless you do move then you are a member of it. That's just life.
 
Ahlevah said:
Okay, well, I'm guessing if he'd invoked his Second Amendment rights the end result still would have involved him ending up in an ambulance with multiple criminal charges pending.
Click to expand...

Why should we, as citizens, put up with that?
 
rocket88 said:
Why should we, as citizens, put up with that?
Click to expand...

Seems to me people are not without choices. Where it's the law to forbid the carrying of knives they can take their chances and defy it. If they're caught and think they can make a good constitutional case, they can try to get someone like Robert Levy at the Cato Institute to help them take it to the Supreme Court, if necessary. Or they can advocate to change the statutes, thus making a court case unnecessary. Or they can move to a jurisdiction where they can carry knives openly or concealed and not have to worry about getting arrested.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Well, unless you do move then you are a member of it. That's just life.
Click to expand...

So are you moving out of the city or paying for that car I sent you? Remember, if you stay you consented to pay, and if you don't pay I'm coming to throw you in my cage.
 
Ahlevah said:
Here's another idiot who doesn't know when to shut up:

Video Shows Man Getting Punched by Cop After Resisting Arrest in Harlem | NBC New York

People have been shot for less.
Click to expand...

Finally a case in which a taser or a club would have been the perfect choice to use, but the police officer thinks that starting a boxing match with a guy twice as big as him, is the best option. What a fool.

He did resist arrest but maybe the officer should have just walked with him and waited for support before starting a physical confrontation with the guy.
 
Peter King said:
He did resist arrest but maybe the officer should have just walked with him and waited for support before starting a physical confrontation with the guy.
Click to expand...

That's kind of what I thought. Since his partner was next to useless and he didn't have sufficient non-lethal force to subdue the guy he could have just followed him. He had is ID. It's not like he didn't know where he lived. The backup (in the form of the MALE officers) arrived pretty promptly.
 
Henrin said:
So are you moving out of the city or paying for that car I sent you? Remember, if you stay you consented to pay, and if you don't pay I'm coming to throw you in my cage.
Click to expand...

Problem with your scenario here is that YOU are not society. But you are a part of society. In order for your scenario to work you would have to get society to approve of such a law. Good luck on that. ;)
 
Kal'Stang said:
Problem with your scenario here is that YOU are not society. But you are a part of society. In order for your scenario to work you would have to get society to approve of such a law. Good luck on that. ;)
Click to expand...

No, I don't. I just need to win an election or conquer the lands and assume control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom