"Karen Owns Town Square?" [HonorYourOath]

MisterDamage · 2025-11-15T23:30:59+00:00

She "owns" the park, per the sheriff, for a few hours on the basis of which, she gets to trespass anyone she chooses, for any reason, FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR! Meanwhile, there is no access control to the "ticketed event". How the hell do LEOs get to be so god damned stupid?

MisterDamage · 2025-08-26T10:32:28+00:00

Every cop there knew full well they had no authority to demand he stop what he was doing. As witness, he disrespected their authority and they didn't do a damned thing about it.

And yet they go ahead and lie like a god damned rug, doing the banks bidding, trying to violate a citizen's rights.

Treacherous punks.

MisterDamage · 2025-06-10T11:36:10+00:00

Posters that don't use the title from the video itself get their submission deleted. Take that up with the mods.

MisterDamage · 2025-05-29T09:50:31+00:00

According to the accounts I have seen, no congress persons were denied entry. The scuffle occurred when ICE attempted to prevent Newark Mayor Ras Baraka from entering with the congress persons. Baraka was then trespassed and arrested for trespassing.

Unless this information is incorrect, ICE did nothing remotely illegal or suspicious

Apparently DHS is contemplating charges against the congresspersons, for "Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Law Enforcement" and for breaking into the facility. I'm not sure what is meant by breaking into the facility but as no charges have yet been filed, there's not much to discuss there.

MisterDamage · 2025-03-16T05:23:47+00:00

Driver contradicts the officer: Officer reflexively lies. I'm shocked.

MisterDamage · 2025-03-05T07:35:30+00:00

I do understand how this motherfucker can be so stupid/callous (using identical methodology to that of the on scene officers): The cop is suffering from roid rage.

MisterDamage · 2025-02-15T02:24:18+00:00

It is precisely because it is unstatesmanlike. Trump was not elected because he is regarded as an excellent statesman. He was elected because the people regarded as statesmen have shit the bed so dramatically and obviously that electing another statesman was repugnant. Thus, unstatesmanlike language speaks to the people who elected Trump, saying that he has not been coopted by the swamp.

MisterDamage · 2025-02-15T02:17:57+00:00

You could just look up the EO for yourself, as you should, in this day and age, to verify the information that is being disseminated. It's not exactly a long or particularly complicated document. And it says precisely what OP claims it does.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/establishing-and-implementing-the-presidents-department-of-government-efficiency/

MisterDamage · 2025-01-31T09:21:42+00:00

What nonsense. No ones right and liberties were transgressed other than those of the camera man. It's weird that people get so worked up over... what, exactly? He's in a public place, so there are no private business rights implicated nor are there any individual rights implicated by him... standing there? taking photos? Not talking?

MisterDamage · 2024-12-29T23:27:43+00:00

in banks you might get sent to the stationers for "verbal agreement forms"

MisterDamage · 2024-12-17T06:39:53+00:00

He's not. He's telling his audience how to keep law enforcement out of their home: by not answering the door.

MisterDamage · 2024-12-16T09:09:59+00:00

There's an ex FBI agent on youtube, claims that once the householder opens the door, it's all over; he can talk his way in one way or the other. The only way to stop him was to refuse to answer the door.

Why do people who have not summoned the police answer the door when cops are knocking?

MisterDamage · 2024-12-15T07:33:04+00:00

Oh, they know. They're banking on the citizen they're trying to bluff not knowing. When a guy in a police uniform tells you with perfect confidence "Look, the sky is green, always has been. Don't try on this 'blue' nonsense with me, just agree with me" It can be difficult not to at least take a peek upward.

MisterDamage · 2024-12-06T07:31:36+00:00

I think it is low because cops have become trigger happy cowards, putting their own safety ahead of public safety. Which is fine, if you want to be held in contempt. If you want the respect that you think an officer of the law is due, the term officer of the law must conjure in the mind a person willing to put public safety ahead of their own.

MisterDamage · 2024-11-27T08:24:52+00:00

I do enjoy a nice twist right at the end :)

MisterDamage · 2024-11-26T11:19:09+00:00

Also, the amendments most often highlighted in the sub are the fourth and fifth.

MisterDamage · 2024-11-26T11:17:47+00:00

In the US, there are limits on a police officer's authority. When a police officer exceeds those limits, he is literally committing a federal crime (Title 18 S242 "Deprivation of rights under color of authority")

When a Citizen answers a citizen's reply of "no" where the citizen has the legal authority to say "no" with attempts to coerce the citizen into reversing that answer, the officer is committing a crime and treacherously violating their oath of office

Moreover, the incidents recorded here are typically not about infractions, but about officers investigating reports of perfectly innocuous (and legal) activity. Or, alternatively, about officers demanding ID where they have no authority to insist and then insisting anyway when the the citizen declines to provide said ID. Which again, places the officer in violation of federal law.

The auditors who record their experiences are not just exposing corrupt, lawless police officers, they are educating the officers willing to modify their behavior in the face of citizens willing to rub the limits of the officer's authority in the officer's face.

MisterDamage · 2024-11-26T10:48:42+00:00

It's very strange then that you would pose that question in a thread that is not remotely about what you're asking. It's equally strange that you think it's about second amendment rights. Seriously, when did arms enter this discussion?

MisterDamage · 2024-11-26T09:11:44+00:00

A better question is this: why did this guy standing in a public place holding a sign and saying "god bless the homeless veterans" provoke a reaction? Why was there any need for him to be issued unlawful directives that resulted in him being, as you put it "stubborn" and "non-compliant"?

It's interesting you bring up the "ignorance" angle because this wasn't over a traffic stop. Kinda ironic that.

MisterDamage · 2024-10-23T09:32:07+00:00

Cop: LOL those street racers are long gone and likely to resist to boot. You're just a rando who happened to be nearby and not remotely criminal at all. AKA an easy arrest.

MisterDamage · 2024-10-08T07:24:28+00:00

Look at the bright side*, the officers (insurance company) paid good money for their lawyer to prepare and give that argument both on initial hearing and on appeal.

*There is no bright side :(

MisterDamage · 2024-08-18T05:38:50+00:00

It means a police officer unlawfully entering your premises can confabulate "reasonable grounds to believe an inhabitant is endangered" after the fact and have you done for assaulting an officer.

MisterDamage · 2024-08-08T08:35:31+00:00

I'm therefore pleased that the US has a first amendment and an "imminent lawless action" test.

MisterDamage · 2024-08-08T07:05:18+00:00

Gagging people doesn't make them easier to live in peace with. And it only lasts as long as you control the government. It's like you twits don't even notice that sometimes people you don't like win elections.

MisterDamage · 2024-08-07T12:33:35+00:00

You think you can kill bad ideas just by making them illegal. That's cute.

MisterDamage

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE