Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Conn. Cop: I Will Kick Down Doors To Confiscate Guns
Story Leak ^ | 03/10/2014 | Mikael Thalen

Posted on 03/11/2014 8:08:23 AM PDT by Sopater

A Connecticut man revealed shocking comments made by a Branford police officer this week who has openly defended door-to-door gun confiscation.

After the tragic Sandy Hook shooting in 2012, Conn. lawmakers mandated that all “assault rifles” and “high capacity” magazines be banned, requiring all in circulation to be registered with the state. Fearing the obvious move towards confiscation, the vast majority of gun owners have refused to submit, with estimates finding less than 13 percent of rifles being registered.

Navy veteran and firefighter John Cinque, who made national news after telling state lawmakers he would not comply with gun registration, briefly commented on the officer’s statements in a discussion with gubernatorial candidate Joe Visconti last Friday.

“I’ve had contact with a police officer in my home town, I live in Branford, and his words straight out were, ‘I cannot wait to get the order to kick your door in,’” Cinque said.

In an exclusive interview with Storyleak, Cinque further detailed the disturbing comments made by Branford Police Officer Joseph Peterson, one of the state’s most highly decorated officers.

WarrantWarrantZZZ“It happened on facebook… he posted to a thread on my wall,” Cinque said. “I have known him personally for 20 years. He was interacting with other friends of mine and it was directly about the video.”

In multiple screenshots captured from the lengthy conversation, Peterson continually argued that law enforcement were not obligated to defy unconstitutional laws. Instead, Peterson stated that he would follow any order given, even if it meant confiscating firearms from close friends.

“But like I said I didn’t make the law,” Peterson told Cinque. “But if it comes down to that then I guess we see how you would respond…”

“I’m not going for any warrants… but if my dept gets them and we have to serve them I will see you then.”

As the conversation’s audience continued to grow, Peterson repeated his pledge, telling multiple people that he would never hesitate to carry out confiscation.

“So if they make a law confiscating guns… You will enforce it?” a Cameron Smith asks in a separate screenshot as Peterson reiterates his stance.

LeftNutPeterson0Angered by comments pointing out the state’s unconstitutional law, Peterson goes as far as to say that he would love to knock down Smith’s door personally.

“I give my left nut to bang down your door and come for your gun,” Peterson said. “Hey everyone Cameron is a criminal law breaking psycho.”

Receiving considerable backlash, Peterson quietly disabled his Facebook page following the conversation, although a screenshot was obtained beforehand.

Despite the inability of several officers to understand what a constitutional law entails, Cinque revealed that countless Conn. officers are opposed to the state’s ruling.

“As for the cops who will stand with the people… there are many,” Cinque said. “None have spoken publicly but in private i know many who do not like this one bit… they realize they are being used.”

“They are supporters of the Constitutional rights of the people, but they need to speak publicly soon.”

Officer Peterson’s mentality is eerily similar to that of Conn. State Police Spokesman Lt. Paul Vance, who recently told one woman that he was “the master” after being asked about gun confiscation.

Although police have begun sending out letters demanding residents comply with the law, Second Amendment activists are standing by their line in the sand. As the police leadership takes its time to analyze the situation, one gun group is now demanding the law be enforced or repealed.

“If the state does not have the stomach to enforce these laws, then the legislature has until May 7th, 2014 to completely repeal these immoral edicts and let the residents of Connecticut return to their rightfully owned property and former exercise of constitutional rights and practices without any threat of State violence,” a press release from Connecticut Carry reads.

Also last month, gun blogger Mike Vanderboegh was informed that multiple cops and politicians wanted him “dead” for sending a 16,000 word email to the Conn. State Police and the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. In the email, Vanderboegh warned that violence would surely unfold if officers attempted confiscation.

Despite denial by a few, the agenda of the country’s most powerful gun control groups has been thoroughly exposed. Only one month after the Sandy Hook shooting, rejected democrat proposals from New York’s SAFE Act gun bill were revealed to include outright gun confiscation. New York mayor Andrew Cuomo even publicly supported the idea, stating, ‘You could say confiscation is an option’ during an interview on station WGDJ.

Also last month, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. Mayor John C. Tkazyik announced his resignation from Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) group, pointing out the group’s hidden gun confiscation agenda.

“Under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens,” Tkazyik wrote. “Nearly 50 pro-Second Amendment mayors have left the organization. They left for the same reason I did.”

During a Moms Demand Action gun control rally last year, a group that recently merged with MAIG, Austin, Texas City Councilman Mike Martinez admitted that his group was pushing gun control in order to reach an outright ban as well.

Unfortunately for them, even with tens of millions of dollars, the popularity of such groups continues to plummet even faster than the country’s gun crime.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Connecticut
KEYWORDS: 2a; banglist; constitution; guns
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
Jackbooted thug... sounds like an unhealthy position to take in CT, and hopefully America for that matter.

UPDATE: Since the release of this article, Branford Police have confirmed that Officer Peterson has been placed on paid leave while an internal investigation is carried out.

1 posted on 03/11/2014 8:08:23 AM PDT by Sopater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sopater

He’s out on workers comp and was before this incident.


2 posted on 03/11/2014 8:09:03 AM PDT by Travis T. OJustice (I miss you, dad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

If ever you wanted a good reason to avoid having a Con Con, look at the Constitution of Conn before 1965 and the one they rewrote and is now in effect since 1965.

Pre 1965 this cop would be in jail or dead, post 65, this cop has done nothing amiss.

One of the many reasons we must secede on June 12 of 2018 is because there is movement by the democrat s to change Article One and Two of the Constitution of Maine to cause secession to be sedition.

The party of the democrat hates freedom.


3 posted on 03/11/2014 8:12:24 AM PDT by The_Republic_Of_Maine (Be kept informed on Maine's secession, sign up at freemaine@hushmail.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Yep, he’s an idiot.


4 posted on 03/11/2014 8:12:28 AM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

This Peterson guy sounds like a problem looking for a place to happen. He has issues. Tick tick tick sooner or later he’s gonna pop.


5 posted on 03/11/2014 8:12:40 AM PDT by Ray76 (How modern liberals think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
“I give my left nut to bang down your door and come for your gun,” Peterson said.

You just might give more than that.

6 posted on 03/11/2014 8:18:15 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Punk with a badge...

When this punk “does his job” or “just followed orders” he will be defended by some of his fellow officers and castigated by some who take their word or oath seriously. This officer clearly has not a clue about the law and his word is not worth a warm pitcher of goat piss.

Following orders blindly and using the “just doing my job...” or “just following orders...” lines were convenient excuses at Nuremberg but they didn’t work.

Some Connecticut officers can and will try the same lines and most people would cut them slack on minor secondary issues but when you start ripping up the Bill of Rights, throwing citizens in jail and making them felons for exercising a basic God given perfectly natural Right and then use the “I was just following orders” line and start killing citizens in the process, that crosses a line into the abyss.


7 posted on 03/11/2014 8:21:56 AM PDT by sarge83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

“I give my left nut to bang down your door and come for your gun,” Peterson said.”””””””

Best of luck with that. Might want to wear some ear protection because it might get loud for awhile until the clip is empty.


8 posted on 03/11/2014 8:24:30 AM PDT by shelterguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

“I’m not going for any warrants… but if my dept gets them and we have to serve them I will see you then.”

It won’t be pleasant for all parties involved.


9 posted on 03/11/2014 8:24:49 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Branford Police Launch Internal Investigation Into Officers Facebook Post on Gun Control

http://www.branfordseven.com/news/local/article_91c34912-a867-11e3-9152-001a4bcf6878.html?mode=image&photo=0


10 posted on 03/11/2014 8:26:58 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sarge83

11 posted on 03/11/2014 8:27:15 AM PDT by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne
“I give my left nut to bang down your door and come for your gun,” Peterson said.

You just might give more than that.


He might just give up all he has.
12 posted on 03/11/2014 8:27:17 AM PDT by Kartographer ("We mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All

It’s becoming more and more obvious that a significant chunk of today LEO’s have more interest in oppressing law-abiding residents than they actually do in protecting them.

I get the feeling that many of them act like Officer Peterson not because they are following the laws of their state,city, etc - but because it’s a control issue for them. They want to be the arbiters of what you can say, do etc.

I believe it was in Maryland recently where an officer told a citizen to stop filming him by saying that the person didn’t have any f***ing rights.

We are seeing the future of law enforcement, folks. It’s just not an East Coast thing either. It’s definitely spreading across the rest of this nation.


13 posted on 03/11/2014 8:31:32 AM PDT by MplsSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

There’s a reason why police forces don’t hire free thinkers or anyone with an IQ over 98.


14 posted on 03/11/2014 8:31:58 AM PDT by Tea Party Terrorist (Why work for a living when you can vote for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

Post his home address.


15 posted on 03/11/2014 8:32:39 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Rip it out by the roots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sarge83

It’s not an easy job. I think this guy has lost perspective.


16 posted on 03/11/2014 8:33:08 AM PDT by Ray76 (How modern liberals think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Izzy Dunne

Like 'ol what's-his-name said, "head shots, nothing but head shots"? hehhehheh

17 posted on 03/11/2014 8:33:16 AM PDT by BlueDragon (You can observe a lot just by watching. Yogi Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

If a cop breaks down a door to illegally confiscate guns, why not surrender them bullets first?


18 posted on 03/11/2014 8:34:26 AM PDT by logic101.net (How many more children must die on the altar of "gun free zones"?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
Officer Peterson’s mentality is eerily similar to that of Conn. State Police Spokesman Lt. Paul Vance, who recently told one woman that he was “the master” after being asked about gun confiscation.

None of these guys are "the master", they are the pawns and tools of their true masters, tyrannical statists who won't put their own lives at risk to enforce these ungodly laws, but will leave that to these useful idiots.
19 posted on 03/11/2014 8:42:19 AM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
Maybe “their true masters, tyrannical statists” should read Unintended Consequences”.
20 posted on 03/11/2014 8:49:02 AM PDT by Gadsden1st
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MplsSteve

I still hold to the “bad apple” theory, in that the vast majority of LEOs are reasonable, within their rules.

Many years ago, somebody got a rude but accurate cop quote, that “the typical cop is like a (homosexual), in that if you (have sex) with him, he’ll (have sex) with you right back, but harder.” So, ahem, reverse ‘golden rule’ with cops. It is their unwritten rules.

Importantly, there are two very critical provisions to this.

The first is that the FBI and DEA both admit that there is considerable abuse of anabolic steroids by police, and combined with high stress levels, this can make a cop an unpredictable time bomb. This is exacerbated by police not wanting to crack down on one of their own.

The second problem is all the other problems combined, to include bribery, gambling, prostitution, narcotics, and good old fashioned mental illness.

But a single cop, or a peer-pressure group of cops reflects on the rest of their department, no matter how many good cops there are.


21 posted on 03/11/2014 8:54:37 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (WoT News: Rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sarge83

“If someone is so fearful that they are going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have weapons at all.”

-Representative Henry A. Waxman

Yes, Henry, we should all go like sheep to the slaughter.


22 posted on 03/11/2014 8:55:20 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

If even a minor number of CT gun owners put a gallon glass jug of gasoline behind their front doors, who knows how many SWAT teams would be incinerated in their body armor in the course of “kicking down doors”?


23 posted on 03/11/2014 8:56:59 AM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
If the furher so ordered, I would put my own mother and father in the gas chamber."

So stated Adolf Eichmann. The banality of evil. The ultimate bureaucrat.

It is like the story a couple weeks ago of the junior high school girl forced outside in minus degree temps during a fire alarm at a school. She got frostbite on her feet. No one thinks to cover her up; put her in a car; wait for her to get dressed. No - the rules say we have to do it this way and everyone will comply. There is no room for free thinking, no questioning the orders, the rules.

This cop knows a person who for over 20 years had a certain type of firearm. For 20 years this firearm owner is a law abiding citizen. Then a law makes him a felon overnight. The cop does not question the law. Just enforces it. Never mind the fact the gun owner never caused any problems in his life. The state has now decreed he is a felon and will be treated as such.

Too many dangerous people running around in charge. Dangerous times indeed.

24 posted on 03/11/2014 8:58:58 AM PDT by 7thson (I've got a seat at the big conference table! I'm gonna paint my logo on it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76; All
‘It’s not an easy job. I think this guy has lost perspective.’

I don't know which party you refer to as having lost perspective. While being a LEO may be at times difficult , that is not an extenuating condition for the profound contempt for the Constitutional Rights of the citizens of Connecticut that Officer Peterson displays. I have had an experience early in my professional life with an officer who believed that I had no rights under the 2nd Amendment. This was more than 30 years ago and in another state. Many, perhaps most police officers in the US have so little moral(as opposed to physical ) courage and are so ignorant of the foundational basis of Constitutional Liberty that they would behave towards gun owners or whoever else is a designated ‘enemy of the state’ such as TEA party members in the same fashion that the French police at all levels behaved towards Jews who were French citizens in World War 2. Those people had a choice and overwhelmingly they chose not just to go through the motions in a slow, inefficient pro forma way to sabotage the Final Solution through through pretended compliance, instead they displayed energetic zeal and a sadistic pleasure in doing all and more than SD directed. After the Nazis were ejected from most of France the same police agencies and frequently the same men acted with the same sadistic zeal in rounding up and incarcerating ‘collaborators’ of various degrees of culpability. What does this say about the mentality of those who fill the ranks of police agencies. That many are craven, power worshiping statist thugs? Perhaps so. In any case, in this small city officer Peterson should be made to feel the sting of public contempt. There is nothing illegal about organizing a public ‘shunning’ campaign in which many of his fellow townsmen will refuse to speak to him, transact business with him or have any social contact with him at all. After a number of persons cross the street to avoid his presence, refuse to acknowledge his greeting or cut him dead in restaurants, churches, and businesses this will have an effect. At West Point it used to be called giving someone ‘The Silence’. The Silence should be employed today on the likes of Peterson and a good many others.

25 posted on 03/11/2014 9:00:32 AM PDT by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Would that not also endanger everyone inside the house? Would that not also potentially destroy the house?

I thought the goal was to turn back the Gestapo and live to fight another day, not go out in a ‘blaze of glory’.


26 posted on 03/11/2014 9:02:17 AM PDT by hoagy62 ("Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered..."-Thomas Paine. 1776)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Alaska Wolf; doc1019; TexasFreeper2009

JBT Ping!


27 posted on 03/11/2014 9:03:55 AM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Wow... that’s the flip side of the founders’
“The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.”

Waxman’s base assumption is upside down - that the government should have all the rights and people would be wrong to resist the taking of the people’s rights.


28 posted on 03/11/2014 9:04:32 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: hoagy62

It depends on the phase of the conflict.
In the first phases, the strategy should be to escape and get the word out.
Then organization gets underway,
then ambushes,
then “hunting”.


29 posted on 03/11/2014 9:06:30 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Conn. Cop: I Will Kick Down Doors To Confiscate Guns and you will have a bullet in your head.


30 posted on 03/11/2014 9:09:09 AM PDT by longfellow (Bill Maher, the 21st hijacker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

And his statement is right in line with the majority of the Rat Party.


31 posted on 03/11/2014 9:09:55 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: hoagy62
Yes. At that point everything you own, even your very life, is forfeit.
At no point in history has any government ever wanted its people to be defenseless for any good reason ~ nully's son
The fire and confusion *might* buy you enough time to escape.

As an alternate, there is nothing saying there will even be a fire, rather than just a gasoline spill.

For a fire one would need an ignition source, would a gasoline soaked cop risk becoming a fireball from his own muzzle flash, or even the sparks from his own Taser?

Run!

32 posted on 03/11/2014 9:13:08 AM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MrB

As you say.


33 posted on 03/11/2014 9:16:49 AM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: null and void

One thing is for sure - if any shots come from the house toward the cops, right house or wrong house,

EVERY PERSON IN THE HOUSE WILL DIE.

This is according to an observation of their current “rules of engagement”.


34 posted on 03/11/2014 9:18:41 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
This goes to the concept of unlawfully orders..going back to ww2 war crimes trials. .
the I just follow orders defense is not allowed. US military is trained or were to be aware that there can be unlawfully orders...seems our police need to have the same training. .for the cop in the article content its not his job to decide if an order is unlawfully. .he just states he will follow orders what ever they are..he better get his head out of his ass before he ends up packing jews in to cattle cars
35 posted on 03/11/2014 9:20:18 AM PDT by tophat9000 (Are we headed to a Cracker Slacker War?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
Officer Peterson’s mentality is eerily similar to that of Conn. State Police Spokesman Lt. Paul Vance, who recently told one woman that he was “the master” after being asked about gun confiscation.

The audio of that conversation was posted recently on FR, and I heard it. I'll bet Lt. Vance is still on the job after his boast. It was a phone conversation, at one point the lady (who's husband had gotten a letter that he was soon to be visited and his weapon confiscated) told him, "Hey, you're the servants! We citizens are the masters." He replied "We are the masters, we are the masters."

Remember this jackwagon next time somebody assures you the cops would never go through with it. Like Hell they wouldn't. They will, and they will totally enjoy doing it. And they'll break your wife's jaw just to teach you not to give them any sass.

36 posted on 03/11/2014 9:21:44 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty (H.L. Mencken: "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000

No, he doesn’t state he will just follow orders.

He state he would LOVE to kick down doors and violate constitutional rights.

He states he would even cheerfully give up body parts to crush a citizen.

Nothing so passive as “I vas yust followink odors”.

This Jack-Booted Thug is a wildly enthusiastic cheerleader for state sponsored terrorism against us mere citizens.


37 posted on 03/11/2014 9:25:41 AM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: robowombat
‘Killer cops aren’t welcome here!’ Officer Who Murdered Kelly Thomas, Driven Out Of Restaurant
38 posted on 03/11/2014 9:30:12 AM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

Unions!

You forgot to mention the unions.


39 posted on 03/11/2014 9:38:53 AM PDT by Carbonsteel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Acting under color of [state] law is misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law Thompson v. Zirkle, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77654 (N.D. Ind. Oct. 17, 2007)

“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed ... An unconstitutional law is void.”
(16 Am. Jur. 2d, Sec. 178)

“An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as it had never been passed.” Norton v. Shelby County.” 118 U.S. 425

“No State legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.”
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).

“The Constitution of these United States is the supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137

“No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.” Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105

“If the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.” Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 373 US 262

“Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a Constitutional right, from liability. For they are deemed to know the law.” Owen v. Independence, 100 S.C.T. 1398, 445 US 622

“The court is to protect against any encroachment of Constitutionally secured liberties.” Boyd v. U.S., 116 U.S. 616

“State courts, like federal courts, have a “constitutional obligation” to safeguard personal liberties and to uphold federal law.” Stone v. Powell 428 US 465, 96 S. Ct. 3037, 49 L. Ed. 2d 1067.


40 posted on 03/11/2014 9:39:05 AM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”


41 posted on 03/11/2014 9:39:41 AM PDT by Count of Monte Fisto (The foundation of modern society is the denial of reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Man’s a fool and a big-mouth! What a stupid thing to say!


42 posted on 03/11/2014 9:56:22 AM PDT by maxwellsmart_agent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Count of Monte Fisto

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family?”

In the decades following WWII, a number of Jews said the very same thing.


43 posted on 03/11/2014 9:59:09 AM PDT by MplsSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: maxwellsmart_agent
Man’s a fool and a big-mouth! What a stupid thing to say!

Far smarter to just do it...

44 posted on 03/11/2014 10:10:31 AM PDT by null and void ( Obama is Law-Less because Republican "leaders" are BALL-LESS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

I agree it is not an easy job. I have retired and current relatives that are law enforcement and the stories they tell sometimes are heart breaking and it is mentally and emotionally challenging for them.

However, this person is clearly a danger to the citizenry and as I posted will use the “I was following orders...” excuse. If he will gleefully kick someones door down and assault them in their home for gun confiscation what else will he use it for? Shoot to kill? No arrests? Fire into a crowd?


45 posted on 03/11/2014 10:11:50 AM PDT by sarge83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

I bet this cop listens to a lot of Wagner


46 posted on 03/11/2014 10:17:56 AM PDT by PATRIOT1876
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

I’m surprised that their police Dept. allowed someone with an IQ below 50 to get the job.


47 posted on 03/11/2014 10:20:01 AM PDT by PATRIOT1876
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sopater
I bet his it was one of his Tory relatives in the 1700’s that said, “Burn the church”
48 posted on 03/11/2014 10:21:18 AM PDT by PATRIOT1876
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty
And they'll break your wife's jaw just to teach you not to give them any sass.

I'm quick to defend my wife, and slow to learn from idiots.
49 posted on 03/11/2014 10:34:40 AM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

If someone is so fearful of those who would need to use their weapons to protect their rights, it makes me very nervous that these people have any power at all.

- Sopater


50 posted on 03/11/2014 10:46:27 AM PDT by Sopater (Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? - Matthew 20:15a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson