Radical idea. Arrest the feds?

[master shake]

Barry Cooper is doing something like this for a television show. Not the feds though just crooked cops local i think. He video tapes operations set up to catch the officers breaking the law.

that's the shit! What show is this?

 

[guest]

Now pay close attention to this:

Fed leo could choose to plead the fifth instead of providing evidence against themselves for the state court.

 

[guest]

I think it only fair for any federal judge to warn a witness that they are about to provide information against themselves before they testify.

Even more so, a federal officer. They should be given a fair chance.

 

[Cascadia]

So you are saying that a badge is a blank check to break the law?

No, as I explained, Federal agents operate under Federal law, under Federal law any Cultivation of Cannabis is illegal.

Medical Marijuana law enacted by the individual states protect the registered patients inside the boarders of said states from prosecution by the said state and lesser powers.

But growing Marijuana is still illeagal under federal law, and since Federal agents are not bound by State law, you have no defence against them.

Fairly easy to understand........

 

[accessndx]

So you are saying that a badge is a blank check to break the law?

Yes. It appears so.

 

[Cascadia]

Yeah, but federal agents are not bound by state law, so they are not breaking the law.........

Don't think I support their actions, I'm just trying to steer you guys into more realistic ways of dealing with the problem, the first step to doing that is truely understanding the situation.

 

[Verger OG]

I would most definitely attempt to perform a citizens arrest. Just for the principle and the entertainment of the idea.

All that is based on the assumption that you live in a democracy.

 

[cbf]

Thanks for the thread, I didn't even need to read it, just busted up laughing reading the title...

 

[rootfingers]

that's the shit! What show is this?

Doesn't look like its gotten very far yet but you get the idea. From Barry:

Regarding CopBusters

Candi and I have been working on a reality show called CopBusters. The idea is
to set up stings across America and catch crooked cops on camera. The interest
in Hollywood is apparent and we are trying to sign a deal. It seems others want
more control than they need and I won’t give it to them. I’m going to make
sure our NeverGetBusted vision does not get “lost in the Hollywood lights.” I’ll announce when we have the deal signed because we will need the public to
make us aware of any crooked cops in their area!

 

[libby]

So in short.......trying to preform a citizens arrest on a DEA agent will get you any combonation of the following:

1.Your ass arrested(likely)
2. Your ass shot
3. Your ass Tazed
4. Your ass in a federal pen for X number of years

Perfect example of britain, except no.2..... only allowed to kick ours.

 

[2broke2smoke]

according to 10th amendment state law should trump fed law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

2b2s

 

[Cascadia]

True that, but only if the Supreme court agrees, and right now they don't, so until they do, this is how it is.

Most recently, the Commerce Clause was cited in the 2005 decision Gonzales v. Raich. In this case, a California woman sued the Drug Enforcement Administration after her medical marijuana crop was seized and destroyed by Federal agents. Medical marijuana was explicitly made legal under California state law by Proposition 215; however, marijuana is prohibited at the federal level by the Controlled Substances Act. Even though the woman grew the marijuana strictly for her own consumption and never sold any, the Supreme Court stated that growing one's own marijuana affects the interstate market of marijuana, citing the Wickard v. Filburn decision. The theory was that the marijuana could enter the stream of interstate commerce, even if it clearly wasn't grown for that purpose and it was unlikely ever to happen. It therefore ruled that this practice may be regulated by the federal government under the authority of the Commerce Clause.

 

[Cascadia]

See, first you have to have a case make it to the Supreme court that wins, and proves that the Federal government can not interfere in medical grows.

Until that time, trying to arrest federal agents will just get you more trouble than you dreamed of.

 

[Flasht2]

True that, but only if the Supreme court agrees, and right now they don't, so until they do, this is how it is.

Originally Posted by wikipedia
Most recently, the Commerce Clause was cited in the 2005 decision Gonzales v. Raich. In this case, a California woman sued the Drug Enforcement Administration after her medical marijuana crop was seized and destroyed by Federal agents. Medical marijuana was explicitly made legal under California state law by Proposition 215; however, marijuana is prohibited at the federal level by the Controlled Substances Act. Even though the woman grew the marijuana strictly for her own consumption and never sold any, the Supreme Court stated that growing one's own marijuana affects the interstate market of marijuana, citing the Wickard v. Filburn decision. The theory was that the marijuana could enter the stream of interstate commerce, even if it clearly wasn't grown for that purpose and it was unlikely ever to happen. It therefore ruled that this practice may be regulated by the federal government under the authority of the Commerce Clause.

One would need to remove oneself from the law of sea jurisdiction (ie. maritime/admiralty law... U.C.C.) The supreme court would have no jurisdiction at that point. Obviously they're bastardizing the word commerce. Any legal dictionary defines it well. They've over-stepped their bounds. Even under their jurisdiction if they want to change the legal definition of the word they have to define it within the specific act/statute that they're citing from.

The actual act of engaging in commerce (in anything) is considerably more than just growing for one's own use. In common law even growing and selling wouldn't be commerce (at least when our country was formed it wasn't). You'd have to buy something, improve it, then sell/trade it to constitute "commerce". Simply growing anything then selling or bartering with it is not by definition commerce. If for example you bought a bunch of plastic forks, did nothing to them other than resell them or trade them for something of equal value... it was not "commerce". If you bought those same forks and improved them... added value of some sort... color... made them harder.. etc.. then sold at a profit.. that would be commerce.

I'm aware of the descrepency between the different definitions throughout the different law jurisdictions but what I am referring to is once again common law.

Common law is still here but folks aren't aware of it. Common law trumps all lower laws. Most laws we run into now are actually from the U.C.C.

There are 3 laws which the Constitution allows the Supreme Court to hold hearings over. The primary is Common Law(aka the law of the land and what all the others come from). The next 2 lower levels of law are the laws of Equity and Admiralty. The latter two were combined to form the U.C.C. back in the early 1930's.(the law of the sea)

This is also why you can't just go into a court in our country and claim that your constitutional rights are being ignored... you have none in these courts. They are courts of U.C.C. dealing with laws and statutes of commerce (once again, the law of the sea...not the law of the land.)

There's SO much out there to read now about the differences. Matter of fact we should start a thread about that. If everyone knew the differences and how to reserve your natural rights, we'd be in a much better country again. Might call it Law of the land vs Law of the sea or something. It would be a great thing to start here so that people can help others to rediscover their rights. It's all screwed up now. We think we are given our rights by our Constitution and Bill of Rights when in fact those documents themselves even acknowledge the prior existence of our rights.. and that they are just re-iterating some of them. We don't get our rights from our government. Quite the opposite, we've granted them "priveledges". It's gotten extremely twisted in the last 90 years. The natural order of law is God(wether one believes in God or not doesn't matter in this regard), humans, THEN what we create. One of the maxims of law is that the creator cannot be subjugated to the created. That actually dates back pre-Magna Carta. This is where we seem to have slipped to now with our government. Governed by consent... sound familiar? You can stop consenting but you have to go about it right or get your ass handed to you by the folks who DONT want to let you give up that consent =)

We are consenting from birth without even knowing it. Starting with your birth certificate. (started in the 20's) Anything you get from government costs you something. It might be cash, worse yet and more likely, it's costing you a right. They are LEGALLY doing this because we all volunteer.

Any "application","registration", or "submission" are all ways to volunteer and subjegate one's self.

Shit I'll stop here, I'll start an apporpriate thread and go into it further. There's lots of great info out there on how we can reclaim our natural rights. That's what I'm working on now myself.

 

[Flasht2]

See, first you have to have a case make it to the Supreme court that wins, and proves that the Federal government can not interfere in medical grows.

Until that time, trying to arrest federal agents will just get you more trouble than you dreamed of.

The problem with this is that we are no longer following our Constitution. This is just one example.

Try this exercise: Pick up the Communist Manifesto... read the 10 main planks within. Then reflect on our country. There's a scary realization to come to if you do this. We are dead on each one of them now. We keep looking down the road but it's here now. We're not even hiding it anymore and the population has no clue. Scary shit.

 

[cktRAVEl]

....

 

[Cascadia]

Flasht2- I am aware of what you speak, believe it or not, my father has been a member of the "patriot" community for a long time. The thing is, we know that what is going on(the rape of the constitution), but so far I have not known of anyone who has sucessfully argued any of it in court, I have heard of folks told they will be held in contempt of court if they mention the Consitution again however.

At any rate, I do not believe we will reclaim the freedoms that Congress and the Court system have taken, its a f**cked up mess. It doesn't help that so many of the population have no clue what happened in the first place, it will only change when they do, but considering that most of our population doesn't have the reading skills needed to read law, let alone understand it, how are we going to hope to fix this problem? I guess I'm saying I've been in your position already, years ago, and have grown cynical in the face of the harsh reality.

For now we have to fight in the courts as they are, and as they are right now, you have no defence against the feds.

 

[cktRAVEl]

...

 

[Flasht2]

Flasht2- I am aware of what you speak, believe it or not, my father has been a member of the "patriot" community for a long time. The thing is, we know that what is going on(the rape of the constitution),

I've no reason to not believe you =). It is funny though how it has to be labeled as the "patriot community". Not knocking you at all, it's just sad that it's just not the "norm" to be patriotic. I mean I'm aware of most folks walking around thinking that they are indeed patriotic but they have no clue. They're usually being loyalists to a government body and a symbolic flag.... nothing to do with the actual country or it's reasons for existence.

but so far I have not known of anyone who has sucessfully argued any of it in court, I have heard of folks told they will be held in contempt of court if they mention the Consitution again however.

Right. I've read about lots of failures. Usually from people either having no clue as to what they are doing and in which jurisdiction they're actually trying to do it in.... OR... someone more dangerous to themselves.. they have read a few things and have a vague idea but lack months of research still and try to stand up and say F U in court (in their own ways). They needed to spend the time to actually build a sound foundation (much like the economy is supposed to be) and then approach in a non aggressive manner. Using Claim of Rights, Notices of Understanding, and making full use of the assistance and power of Notorial laws. (another oft' forgotten gem from common law=) ).

At any rate, I do not believe we will reclaim the freedoms that Congress and the Court system have taken, its a f**cked up mess. It doesn't help that so many of the population have no clue what happened in the first place, it will only change when they do, but considering that most of our population doesn't have the reading skills needed to read law, let alone understand it, how are we going to hope to fix this problem? I guess I'm saying I've been in your position already, years ago, and have grown cynical in the face of the harsh reality.

You sound like where I was BEFORE researching, not after =) You're positions on our nation's ability to read sounds accurate enough and I think you're correct in stating that it directly affects people's hopes of redeeming. Since the Dept of Education was isntituted, we went from number 1 in world rankings (in various fields and with a DISTANT second place Russia) down to or near the bottom in reading, mathematics, etc. (23rd last time I looked.. and it's been about 4 years).

For now we have to fight in the courts as they are, and as they are right now, you have no defence against the feds.

Agreed, but only until you learn the lawful way to redeem yourself and take control over your fictitional legal entity. Once the two are seperated and everyone (every dept.) has been legally "Noticed".

This is my area of study now, as well as another subject... but that's for my career =) I'm spending more time researching this subject than my new career lol, prolly a bad career move)). BUT, I am in NO way saying that I have gotten it down yet nor fully grasp all the terminology necessary, but I know roughly what it is and where to look.

There's a great 7 hour Constitution Class available for free on a website.. I can provide the addy if someone would like to PM for it. I'll try to answer what I can. Keep in mind that I'm terribly busy and when I'm not I'm usually researching, so I might not get back right off... sorry about that.

Thanks for replying, keep the faith. Be cynical all you want)) I am too!

 

[Finklsteinshtkd]

I would love the address for the 7 hour online constitution class, however I cannot PM you because I am under 50 posts...please give us the addy...I am about to jump balls deep into supporting this new jersey medical bill as well as the decrim for med patients in texas...I have an invested interest in both states...I was born in one and live in the other...thanks for all your help and your unbelievably usefull and motivating informtion...