Tuesday, June 5, 2018

June 5, 2018 -- A Quick Run Around the Web

"Can You Resist an Unlawful Arrest?"--Mike the Cop (9 min.). Disclaimer: I'm not your lawyer and this is not legal advice. The answer to the question posed in the video is complicated, mostly because different jurisdictions answer the question differently, and because "unlawful arrest" can mean different things. This is really a topic where you should ask for legal advice from a lawyer in your jurisdiction that specializes in criminal law.  However, if you consider the term "unlawful arrest" to be an arrest for which there are no legal grounds, I would note that the U.S. Supreme Court has said "no" you can't resist--your recourse is with the courts (e.g., a motion to suppress in the criminal proceeding or a sec. 1983 civil rights lawsuit). I don't know, but I suspect that the majority of states follow the same rule. Some states, such as Idaho, allow self-defense against an unlawful act by an officer, but you have to understand that the right to stop and detain is very broad. It isn't a question of whether you (the person being detained) is innocent, but whether the officer lacks the probable cause to detain you. The video above mostly addresses a sub-set of the "unlawful arrest," which is the officer using unlawful or excessive force. "Mike the Cop" explains that you can generally defend yourself against unlawful force; but (BUT!) officers are allowed to escalate force in order to overcome unlawful resistance to arrest. So, the officer would first have to use the unlawful force before you could respond--and, keep in mind, it might appear very different to a third person. Witness testimony is known to be unreliable for a reason--most people don't correctly remember or even fully and correctly perceive events.


  • We have double-billing for today:
The Rose City Antifa scheduled a counter-protest for 4 p.m. "to show Patriot Prayer, just as we showed them last year, that their violence and hatred has no place in Portland."
  • "The Effectiveness of Short Barrel Rifles in 5.56/.223"--For The Love Of The Gun. Velocity and terminal ballistics from the short barreled AR. The author notes that most 5.56 ammo relies on muzzle velocity to cause the bullet to violently yaw and fragment (which is what causes the wounding effect from FMJ ammo). The "magical" velocity is 2,500 FPS. He writes:
Below this 2500 ft/sec, full metal jacket rounds will not reliably fragment.  Basically, any AR with a barrel under approximately 9.5″ will never be able to expel a projectile over fragmentation velocity. A 10.5″ barrel will launch a projectile over this barrier, but air resistance/drag will quickly slow it down to under frag velocity in around 25-50 yards.  Even going with an 11 or 12 inch barrel will still only get you to around 75 yards max. By the time you get a little longer, you effectively lose the advantage an SBR altogether.
However, the author continues by noting that you can mitigate this somewhat by selecting bullets designed to expand. He does advise to stay away from open tip match (OTM) bullets, but I would point out that the ballistic gel tests I've seen generally seem to indicate that the heavy (75-77 grain) OTM projectiles perform the best when it comes to reliable penetration and expansion/fragmentation. In any event, the author of this article links to some other resources to help you decide on ammunition should you go with a very short barrel in 5.56.
  • "Natural Night Vision"--The Firearms Blog. A good discussion of how the eye works, and some tips and suggestions to help improve our night vision, or preserve our night vision after we have adjusted for dim light. The author concludes: "We often don’t think of getting enough vitamin A, not smoking, or wearing sunglasses outdoors as a tactical decision. However, each of these factors help improve eye health and together will increase our night vision and give us an advantage."
  • "The need to SEE"--Active Response Training. Greg Ellifritz notes that when faced with a physical threat, the mind and body naturally tend to focus on the sense that provides the most useful information, generally sight. And with this comes the unconscious tendency to want to reposition the body to allow a better view of the threat, even if you can already see all you need to know. This can be a problem, however, if its causes you to give up a position of cover or concealment.
  • "The Age of the Empozzment"--Social Pathologist. The author begins:
             One of the reasons why I tend to focus on the religious aspect of the Dissident Right is because I believe that the collapse of religion in the West is THE primary cause of the Western decline.  The transformation in values that came about with the ditching of Christianity lead to the Age of the Empozzment with its current societal consequences.
                For better or worse, until about the First World War Christianity was the underlying cultural foundation of the West. Since then its secular replacements have attempted to build a new and better world--with the body count as predicted by Neitzsche-- and while we are, admittedly, materially and technologically richer, it's pretty clear to any objective observer that Western civilisation is on a downhill spiral. It's the last round of drinks before the party ends.
                  I think that there are many even in Neoreactionary circles who would deny this view of Christianity and feel that a Western restoration can come about through some kind of secular program.  I wish that this was so since the task would be easier but I think it is impossible.  Even the best versions of secularism still run on the "fumes" of Christianity.  Equality, one of the foundation beliefs of the modern secular state is a credal belief  and not one that is supported by a rational appraisal of the evidence. Rationality in the absence of a creed will therefore, in the long run, push against the notion and once the Christian memory of the West is extinguished so will the notion that all men are equal. I know that there are those who will argue that humanistic notions can be derived from rational deliberations but they're on a fools errand. The Neocons, have a similar view, and quite openly advocate the notion that the modern world is purely a secular product. However, as Havers and Gottfried have shown there was nothing in the rationality of "Athens" which supports our current liberal beliefs.  As any good lawyer knows, with enough skill you can make a good argument for anything.
                    Nietzsche wasn't so stupid and he realised that a post Christian world was going to be was going to be different and not necessarily a world of hugs and kisses. If you want to know why your art is shit, the streets unsafe and degeneracy is advancing in society it has come about from the ditching of Christianity and the embrace of secular values. The "transvaluation of values" comes with consequences.
            Read the whole thing.
            • Political power flows from the muzzle of a gun: "It’s been 29 years since the ‘June 4’ Massacre. Still, these 5 truths aren’t widely known"--Inspired.  The first truth: "At least 10,454 people were mass-murdered by the Chinese regime on Tiananmen Square, according to an unnamed source from the Chinese State Council. A figure far greater than the 'official' fatality count of 200."
            • "David Hogg Family Home SWATted"--PJ Media. The author points out, correctly, that "[w]hat happened this morning is, as others on the Right have pointed out today, attempted murder ...." But that begs the question of why calling what are supposedly highly trained police is tantamount to attempted murder. Implicit is that it is attempted murder because police cannot be trusted to properly evaluate and respond. After all, "SWATting" didn't arise until police had adopted violent entry as a fairly standard tactic which made it likely that someone could be seriously injured or killed.
            • Related: "Toddler Burned During SWAT Team Raid In Lakeland, Florida"--The Captain's Journal. From the article, it appears that the SWAT team had already cleared a bedroom, but nevertheless decided to throw a flash grenade into the room anyway. Just as they did, a toddler slipped out of a hiding place under a mattress. The child suffered third-degree burns.
            We have entered a new battlespace between left and right.  No longer do we have gentle disagreements about public policy.  Instead, the Left has sought to criminalize many disagreements, has weaponized the law to attack their foes – both personally and substantively – and is pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into a multi-front war to transform the remaining institutions that they have not already transformed.  They seek to silence their opposition.

            No comments:

            Post a Comment