while engaged in the performance of his duties with regard thereto or on account of the performance of such duties

And this is the way out – stealing people’s money and watches isn’t part of the DEA’s duties. This, again, is why we have to start calling it what it is instead of using terms like “confiscation”, “use of force”, etc.

No worries, JJ. I was just adapting your premise to a larger issue. Nothing personal — anyone who posted about the IRS might have had their words parsed by me.

In a contact or detention, you may refuse to answer
(which does not in itself create probable cause to arrest).

Here is the correct mantra:

“I don’t have to answer that. I’d like to be on my way now,
so am I free to go?”

If you don’t know your rights, then you effectively have none!
A must-buy book on the subject:

http://javelinpress.com/you_and_the_police.html

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888766093/theagitator-20/

Assault or resistance
(a) Whoever forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, prevents, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person authorized to serve or execute search warrants or to make searches and seizures while engaged in the performance of his duties with regard thereto or on account of the performance of such duties, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both[.]

The current fine for individuals is up to $250,000.
Like it or not, the courts have upheld the rights of officers to seize property under circumstances like these, so I would be very surprised if they did not view resistance to such a seizure as a violation of this criminal law.
If you don’t like it, the only fix at this point is a legislative one.

Maybe he fell victim to their bluff?

Stolen money is stolen money irregardless of the motive.

I get it; you’re Cynical. But collecting taxes is not “armed robbery” and “irregardless” is not a word.

Yes it is.

Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: \?ir-i-?gärd-l?s\
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : regardless
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance.

“There is certainly a big difference between a legislature out in the open passing a tax law that effects everyone…”

When was the last time a legislature passed a tax law that affected everyone?

Equally, I mean.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ca2_1233195018

See also the news story in the upper right.

Freeman (the rogue officer) got 4 weeks off unpaid, plus he must take more training for use of force, anger management, and verbal judo.

My take:

Here we go again with weasel language. Knocking a person off their feet is assault, not “use of force”.

Good news, the TBI is involved, and apparently they’re talking to the DA about possible charges.

Many sheeple have a conditioned blindness that obscures any faults in their heroes. Their heroes think they’re better than ordinary people, and the sheeple, believing that the heroes must indeed be better, see nothing wrong with that. The sheeple’s eyes aren’t going to be opened by accusations that their heroes are psychopaths.

I use the term “totalitarian anarchist” in the hopes that the sheeple will concentrate their mental defenses on those aspects of their leaders which are least defensible. If the Great Leader is accused of being a totalitarian anarchist, people will say that of course he’s not above the law, and he isn’t acting like he is (because that’s what they believe), but their eyes might be a little bit open when the impossible happens and their leader in fact fails to abide by the law.

I really don’t know the best way to penetrate Liberal Mind Fog. I do know that I used to be a leftist before I came to realize how the Left manipulates people’s blindness, but unfortunately I haven’t figured out any receipe to remove LMF in others.

http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/groves/groves1.html

Which is significantly different from the totalitarian anarchists involved in many seizure cases: Legal, no. Moral, no. Able-to-be-gotten-away-with, yes.