I didn’t suggest that I was the “center of the activist universe.” You implied that white people and libertarians have no interest in injustices done to poor people and minorities. I was merely pointing out the irony of you making that comment on a website run by a white libertarian who writes about injustice, in most cases injustice done to poor people and minorities.

You are erroneous when you assume all “tea party” members are, all, racists! In th end, your opinion makes you no different than the racists you and I both hate! There is no mention of race, in my Bible. Christians should know better. But, a lot of them know nothing about true Christianity. They forget about it the second they exit the building on Sunday! They ain’t perfect, either!

Historically, older and financially established white people in this country have consistently failed to protest or make demands for justice where it has been denied to minorities. Remember how the Freedom Riders where young college kids who were rebelling against “the system”? Remember how NC Senator Jesse Helms called the University of North Carolina the “university of negroes and communists” and who said, in response to vigils on college campuses by students in the wake of Martin Luther King’s death, “They should ask their parents if it would be all right for their son or daughter to marry a Negro.”
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/07/goodbye_jesse_helms.php

He could get away with that because the default suspicion in this country is that any advancement or improvement to minorities will come at a price to white people. Hence, the infamous “White hands” ad Helms used successfully to get re-elected. This suspicion and resentment has been exploited by powerful white power brokers in the South since the Civil War. The joke, of course, is that the power brokers are just as contemptuous of “white crackers” as they are of African Americans. The infamous “intelligence tests” for voting were used to keep out poor white farmers as well as black farmers.

Sorry, but there it is. Tea Party protesters are concerned about a perceived threat to their own status, and they are not going to be particularly concerned about helping a black woman harassed by the police. The Tea Party is not protesting police power grabs. They are protesting about illegal, uppity minorities and a guy that most of them think was born in Kenya. They are being cynically pushed along by Dick Armey for now, and the funding and attention from Freedom Works and Fox news will magically vanish if a Republican is elected next term. Not one of the Tea party concerns will actually be addressed, of course. They are the white cracker farmers of today, and they are useful to the power brokers only as long as the black guy in the white house is around.

You are erroneous when you assume all “tea party” members are, all, racists! In th end, your opinion makes you no different than the racists you and I both hate! There is no mention of race, in my Bible. Christians should know better. But, a lot of them know nothing about true Christianity. They forget about it the second they exit the building on Sunday! They ain’t perfect, either!

Black or white, the police state is out to screw us all over. Being poor is bad enough. Being black and poor is a guarantee that the racists , everywhere in the justice system, will screw blacks over! And why wouldn’t they be there, in the justice system. I have seen them in all walks of life, including the medical profession!

Liberals are not lacking when it comes to racist members.

There are plenty of red neck Democrats I know that would also qualify, as racists, here in the styx!

Indeed. BTW, I am Annemarie Dickey on the Facebook page. I absolutely intend to go to protests in her hometown if at all possible. The woman is a disgrace to the bench and our state.

An excellent point. We’ll see if Dixon responds to it at all on her re-election page.

It’s cut down *massively* on police abuses in the UK. Of course, it’s being reversed by the Coalition because they can’t have that…

I think his point still stands that that aging, well to do white tea party protesters will not likely bother to protest anything having to do with police power abuses against African Americans.

Unfortunately.

And the right to appeal won’t mean much given the deference an appellate court gives to factual findings. As Her Honor stated, the case is very fact specific. Further, appeals are expensive and you don’t get your money back if you win. Trial court judges and DAs in misdemeanor cases especially bank on the fact that rarely will the apppellate option be exercised.

More slavery by intimidation to counter-balance the other slavery by intimidation. Yup, that’ll work.

Cops would love it if everything that spewed from their piehole was a “lawdul order”, but it isn’t! I think these KIDS need remedial training on what is/isn’t the law! Then they can work on the BoR and Constitution!

Bob, would you not call this the height of hypocrisy? A person who gets off on prosecuting people who harmed noone? Yet his extra-curricular activity suggests that he enjoys watching the victims of his own crime!

I submit that downloading, viewing and sharing this stuff is further victimizing this child. Look around a bit and figure who your major CP distributors are! Why would the cops want to hang themselves? Where do you think they get this from when they run their so-called busts?

While I do agree that the producer and distributors of such filth are the larger criminal, the victims have no control of any of it.

I guess she isn’t allowed to uphold the law either since she puts it that way! Letting the imps judiciate from the badge is bad precedence no matter which direction you view it from!

Resisting Arrest: Not A Crime

http://www.apbweb.com/cops-speak-out/1405-resisting-arrest-not-a-crime.html

Written by Dennis Slocumb

The Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office in the Portland, Oregon area recently sent out a memo regarding a resisting case (State v. Oliphant) and its decision’s effect on Oregon law enforcement. In essence, the ruling says: an arrestee may defend himself against a police officer’s use or imminent use of force if the arrestee believes, as much as a reasonable person in his position would believe, that the officer’s use or imminent use of force exceeds the force reasonably necessary to make the arrest.

Oregon effectively is now the only state that gives a suspect charged with Resisting Arrest (ORS 162.315) an affirmative defense that they were defending themselves against what they reasonably believed was an actual or imminent unlawful use of force by a police officer.

Accompanying charges including Assault on a Public Safety Officer will likely be dismissed if the argument stands.

The full case can be viewed at: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S056404.htm

Dennis Slocumb is the vice president of legislative affairs for the International Union of Police Associations.