Just a few thoughts about resistance

[undergroundpanther]

When I think of the OWS protests and the cops abusing them,they were tolerating unlawful arrest.

Some of these cases would have been useful I think.

“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.

“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).


http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm

[pocoloco]

1. You trying to get someone severly fucked up??

Or more likely killed??

[newfie11]

5. AGREED!!! n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. And it will NOT go anywhere like that

COP, they were resisting arrest and posed a threat to MY LIFE... why we used deadly force.

Trust me, been there at a few of these. Hell, the only reason somebody was not arrested at Council the other day was we were ready for the floor show as media.

[SlimJimmy]

3. If an eviction order has been issued, then any refusal to disperse would be subject to a lawful

arrest. The mere fact that we *believe* the arrest to be unlawful is not enough to resist. I would never advise anyone to actively resist an arrest under those circumstances. Let it get sorted out in court.

“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

The law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right.

http://constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm

[Saving Hawaii]

4. Go chew on some valium please.

When I think of the OWS protests and the cops abusing them,they were tolerating unlawful arrest. Some of these cases would have been useful I think.

“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.”

Look... I'm all for protesting unlawful arrests. That's absolute bullshit. I was a little disappointed when OWS transformed from inequality to fuck the pigs, we've got much bigger fish to fry than that, but... Well, you know the first thing I heard when I got involved with OWS. And it got repeated again and again. Violent protest is doomed to failure. If you want to win, take your knocks and wear them as a badge of honor. Fighting the police accomplishes absolutely nothing. Please tell me if you think you're going to win an argument by murdering the father of two children or whatever.

[leveymg]

6. That S. Ct. case is from 1900 and involved an Indian policeman who resisted arrest by 2 others

without a warrant for an alleged misdemeanor that occurred earlier, out of their presence. Good luck trying to apply those fact circumstances. Cheez-itz.

One of the reasons OWS has been successful, politically, is that it generally hasn't violently resisted the police - even, when to those involved that might have seemed justified.

You're misguided, and your armchair lawyering is worse.

[2pooped2pop]

7. I understand

Especially some of us older folks who have been protesting the bullshit for years have a tendency to just want to kick someone's ass. And while it would be well deserved, it is not a tactic that will work.
We would be clobbered. It is not now the time for that kind of action. These young occupiers are pretty clever. Trust them. It must remain peaceful.
It is sometimes hard when you see such bullshit abounding in this country. Don't try to change the peaceful goals of this occupation. It will just turn it all into shit.

Remain calm. I know it is sometimes hard for me too. Just do it. Don't give them a legal excuse to squash us.

I'm pretty sure the newest ruling says that you do NOT have the right to resist even if the officer is wrong. You must accept arrest, then fight it out legally. Resistance is futile.