“Even if you are fully exonerated, some will see you as ‘that trigger-happy nut’ or some other unflattering designation . . . Your self-defense act may impact negatively on your job advancement if your superiors don’t like, or are afraid of, guns. You may get threatening notes at work, or crank calls at home from people who cannot accept what you’ve done. People may stare at you in stores, and you may find yourself unexpectedly challenged by those who identify with, or were friends with, your assailant . . . Your spouse may find himself or herself socially ostracized, and you children may have to endure cruel taunts from their classmates at school . . . you will have the difficult task of explaining to them why you were taken away in handcuffs by the police.” – NRA Guide to the Basics of Home Protection
Hmmmm – sticks and stones . . .
Job – self-employed
Threatening notes and letters – those will be answered in the order they are received . . . have more than one gun, so you can strap something else on when yours is in the police evidence locker never to return.
It is not polite to stare.
Social Ostracization – what is that? I thought it would get me my 15 minutes of fame.
Kids will just have to cope or be put in therapy.
You mind explaining why that stupid John Deere ad keeps popping up every single time my mouse pointer goes over it. It is getting really really annoying. I can see the flippen ad. Ok. Don’t need it to pop up and take up half my computer screen.
Job – I’ve been fired from all of my previous jobs, so I don’t think it’ll get any harder.
Threatening Letters – I love to troll people so no problem there
Social Ostracization – Im a guy with long hair, dress in all black, often with knee high boots, i’m pretty sure i’m all ready ostracized, and I know they stare.
No wife or kids.
You have no idea how many emails i’ve sent to RF about those fukcing John Deer screen hijack ads. Send him a email so he might change them, [email protected]
I hate that damn ad too.
you will have the difficult task of explaining to them why you were taken away in handcuffs by the police
Not if you teach your kids from an early age that the police are mean people who’s job is to hurt decent people and protect their criminal friends. Seriously, if you end up in that situation you tell them the truth – that a bad man wanted to hurt you and the police were upset that you stood up to the bad guy, so the police wanted to hurt you too.
I agree that some police departments have overstepped their bounds and the United State is on the wrong side of the police state fence at this point, but this is a horrible idea overall. Sure at some point when your children are old enough and mature enough to understand the dichotomy of Law Enforcement vs Rights of the People; it would be prudent to teach them to respect the laws and those that enforce them, but be mindful that they are not necessarily on your team.
Whatever the truth is, a parent should never teach their kids to shy away from police or that they are inherently bad people. There are times and places where kids may need a Police Officer to protect them and they must trust that these people can help them. I cannot fathom telling my son that “Hey, even though that pedophile/kidnapper is chasing you, don’t run to the nearest officer because he is just as bad if not worse than the guy chasing you.” regardless of how I feel about our LEOs.
Agree that that’s a terrible idea, not only because your kids might not utilize the police when they need to, but for the same reason that it’s a bad idea to indoctrinate your kids in any other ideology – eventually they’ll rebel. So telling your kids the government is mean and bad is just as likely to make them into socialist government-lovers (or characters from American History X) later in life.
They’ll figure out on their own that the government sucks. In the meantime, treat them like intelligent humans by explaining forthrightly what happened. A bad man wanted to hurt you/them, and you protected them/yourself. Now you need to tell the police and the judge what happened, so they know whose fault it was. Any kid will understand that.
I cannot fathom telling my son that “Hey, even though that pedophile/kidnapper is chasing you, don’t run to the nearest officer because he is just as bad if not worse than the guy chasing you.”
Then you’re setting your kid up for a very bad situation at some point. Hell, most rapists and murderers are decent enough to not go after kids – the same can’t be said about cops. To a cop, if you don’t have a badge, you’re fair game. Besides, the odds of a kid coming across of a pedophile / kidnapper are much smaller than the odds of coming across Officer Tough Guy who’s looking to break some bones to make up for his small penis and low IQ.
It’s apparent that you hate cops and I understand that.
I am not a huge fan the way Law Enforcement is headed either in most large cities; however up to certain age, I think its irresponsible to teach kids that LEOs are bad people. If you (the parent) arent there who should they go to?
What ever your opinion, it’s your kids, your mess. I will teach my kid to rely on the police when he is in danger and I am not around, as that is the lesser of two evils more often than not. I guess we will have to agree to disagree about teaching kids to fear and hate police.
I’ll agree with most of that. I’ve seen a lot of bad cops, but I’d rather not have my kids not run to a police officer if someone was chasing them.
I could go on all day about how the United States is getting ever closer to becoming a police state, or how our civil liberties are being constantly assaulted. Truth be told I still don’t think it’s wise to teach that ALL police officers are villains. I know it’s probably too complex for a child to understand, but there’s got to be a better way than that.
I don’t have kids right now, probably won’t for a while; so pardon my ignorance about this.
I understand the frustration on this site, I’ve been on the wrong side of awful LE on more than one occasion, but this seems to have turned into a complete “Us against them.” conversation. As much as I think the majority of police officers don’t know how to respect Constitutional rights, let’s not turn an otherwise intelligent discussion into a complete hate-fest towards law enforcement.
The police aren’t “upset that you stood up for yourself”, they need to take you to the courthouse so you can help the judge to know whose fault it was. Any kid will understand that narrative, especially if they’re school age.
If youre going away in handcuffs then they certainly are upset that you stood up for yourself.
You’re missing my point. There’s a way to explain it that will make perfect sense to a kid, so they can go to sleep feeling like they understand what happened.
On the other hand, kids cannot properly understand the subtleties of the politics of gun control and self defense, and it’s 100% reckless and immature to tell them the police are mean and bad, or that the BG had it coming, etc. You’d next be dealing with your kid punching the resource officer at school because they’re trying to fight back on your behalf. Then both your lives are screwed up.
“100% reckless and immature to tell them the police are mean and bad, or that the BG had it coming”
I would think it was reckless and immature to lie to the child. What does this site preach? Shoot bad guys, and STFU because the police will twist your words in order to put you behind bars. Remember the part of the Miranda warning that says “everything you say can and will be used against you”, they aren’t kidding, it will be taken out of context, twisted and manipulated to be used against you. If everyone was taught as a child to STFU, there would be far less people in jail than there are today, because they thought the truth would prove their innocence.
@matt: Spoken like someone who doesn’t have small children, or know how to speak to them. (For the record, I don’t have children either.) You’re not lying if you do like Stacy says. You’re simplifying the statement for someone who is too immature to understand the complexities of the adult world. Teach them when they’re older, and can understand it. I don’t know what that breakpoint age is, but I suspect, if it’s your children, you’ll know it when you see it.
Telling them at a very young age that “the police are bad” is no different than institutionalized racism. It’s no different that a 6 year old saying, “Dem black people are bad,” simply because they heard their daddy say it. They grow up disliking/mistrusting an entire race or class of people without knowing why, and mistrust that is ingrained at that young of an age is almost impossible to overcome.
Go to youtube and show them videoes of botched SWAT raids, police brutality, take them on a tour of a prison, etc. They’ll understand. I think you’re saying you would prefer to shelter your children from the ills of the real world.
When I was in elementary school I remember being told time and time again to watch out for Stranger Danger, doing the same for the police is no different.
“Telling them at a very young age that “the police are bad” is no different than institutionalized racism. It’s no different that a 6 year old saying, “Dem black people are bad,” simply because they heard their daddy say it. They grow up disliking/mistrusting an entire race or class of people without knowing why, and mistrust that is ingrained at that young of an age is almost impossible to overcome.”
I think that’s a terrible comparison. Race is something that people can’t choose or change and it’s pretty much irrelevant. We’re all human beings. We’re not all police officers, however. That is a profession someone chooses to be part of. I don’t agree with categorically telling children that the police are bad, because I don’t agree with telling children what to think. I think we should teach them to think for themselves and to always ask questions.
If they do those things, then there’s a good chance they’ll formulate their own opinions on the police fairly early on.
“Go to youtube and show them videoes of botched SWAT raids, police brutality, take them on a tour of a prison, etc. They’ll understand. I think you’re saying you would prefer to shelter your children from the ills of the real world.”
In the immortal words of the internet, “lolwut?”
You realize we’re talking about small children here, right? That’s the original target of this conversation? You’re going to show your small child YouTube vids of police brutality and SWAT raids just to demonstrate to them that “police are bad?” Take them on a tour of a prison? We’re talking about small children, and helping them understand the world. Scared Straight is a great program, but they have to be old enough to be scared and know why. You say that I would “prefer to shelter my children from the ills of the world” like that’s a bad thing. Of course I, as a parent, would like to shelter them. That’s my friggin’ job as a parent, at least until they’re old enough to understand it. We’re referring to children that have not yet reached that age. We’re not talking about teenagers here. If you can’t understand the distinction between that and, as Stacy said, a “school age” child, then I don’t know what else to say to you.
Michael B.: I think it’s a great comparison, and you kinda proved my point. Race is from birth, profession is by choice. But for my point, they’re both irrelevant. As you said, teach the kids to think for themselves and make their own judgements in both cases. Don’t just tell your small children, too young to understand, that “the police are horrible bad men who hate freedom and are mean and want to take your candy,” as some people here are advocating. As I see it, doing that is no different than teaching them to mistrust black people because they’re black.
Teach them to think, don’t teach them to hate.
Matt in FL,
The state has been indoctrinating young children for generations that police are good and that the state is benevolent. In order to counter-act that brainwashing, children must be taught the truth. A person who chooses to be a cop has picked a job where he gets to control people. A person like that is most likely a bully. While a bully may sometimes refrain from beating you, most of the time they are not out to help you. I teach my children that they should be wary of police and to avoid interaction with them if at all possible. As far as your notion of “pedophiles and kidnappers”, I’ll protect my own children from those criminals without having to subject them to state-sanctioned criminals.
Matt in FL, racism is irrational and without merit. Saying the “police are bad” may have some merit even if it is a generalization and not universally true. Certainly, not all police are good. Your comparison is not a good one even though I understand what you’re trying to say.
Michael B.: I understand and acknowledge the distinction you’re making. At least my point made it through my wharrgarbl.
Henry Bowman:
“A person who chooses to be a cop has picked a job where he gets to control people. A person like that is most likely a bully.”
Gee, generalize much?
The comment about “pedophiles and kidnappers” was not mine, it belongs to Nate, although I’m inclined to agree with the way he stated it. Good luck protecting your children if you don’t happen to be nearby.
You’ve made it abundantly clear that as far as your concerned, all cops, without exception, are bullying state-sanctioned criminals, and anyone who disagrees with you is a “bootlicker,” a term you’ve used on multiple occasions on this board. You’re entitled to your opinion. I disagree with your generalizations, but I do think that teaching your children to “be wary of police and to avoid interaction with them if at all possible” is good advice.
Matt if FL,
Apologies, I meant to write “the concept of pedophiles…” not “your concept.” You’re right that fathers can’t always be physically present to protect their children from criminals. I think the whole point of this discussion is how to educate children about recognition of and avoidance of potential danger. For my kids, that education includes state-sanctioned criminals as well as free-lance ones.
Yes, I realize it’s a generalization to say that people who seek out a job where they hold power over others are most likely bullies. It’s also a generalization to say that people who seek a job in professional sports are most likely good atheletes. Generalizations are, generally, true. But, you’re right, not all cops are bullies.
I’ve said before that I judge people by their actions. In the absense of personally knowing every individual LEO, when I first meet one, the only action I have on which to base my assessment of their character is their decision to join a profession where it’s expected that they enforce illegal and immoral “laws”, imprison non-criminals, and steal from people who’ve hurt no one. Most of the time, my initial assessment of their character is cemented by their further demonstrated actions. Sometimes it’s not and I re-evaluate my first impression with the new information.
My comments on this board, with regard to the state and it’s enforcers, are intended to open people’s eyes to their enslavement. I don’t think I’ve ever called someone a “bootlicker” although I have, in sarcasm, said that I couldn’t wait to “lick the boots of the next enforcer I see.” I guess it has the same effect though, and I apologize if it offended you or whoever it was directed at. I try to avoid insulting the AI by “calling names” ever since someone took offense to my use of “slave.” Like I said, I want to open people’s eyes and that probably isn’t effectively accomplished by ostracising others.
Obviously, you’re free to disagree with my opinion regarding most police and I don’t think you’re a “bootlicker” because you do. What I do think is that you, like most people, have bought into the propoganda that we’ve been taught our whole lives… that police are good and Officer Friendly and McGruff the Crimefighting Dog are here to help. I think that the reality is that most police, at best, do a very poor job of protecting people and, at worst, are a full blown criminal gang themselves. As a husband and father, as well as a lover of liberty, I have chosen to take steps to protect my own family, from all criminal elements, and I won’t be relying on anyone else to relieve me of that responsibility. Thanks for listening.
Henry Bowman:It’s not very often that someone can turn around my entire opinion of them for the better with one post, but you pulled it off. I now understand much better where you stand than I did after any of your posts in the past. The internet is funny that way.
As far as buying into “the police are good” ideal… I guess it stems from the assumption that I live under that people are generally good, and since cops are people too… Don’t misunderstand, I don’t think that people (or cops) are beacons of morality and paragons of virtue, I just think that the ratio of people “just trying to get by” to people “out to get you” is pretty high. I think that most cops, just like most any of the rest of us, are just people trying to do a job and go home. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but that’s where I live at the moment, and it’s based on my experiences. My interactions with law enforcement, and I’ve had more than I’d care to admit in my 36 years, have never been less than, at the least, civil. Even the ones that involved bracelets.
To counter that, it does bother me that on my “list of concerns” is that if the cops execute a wrong address raid on the drug dealer upstairs and get my apartment by mistake, I’m nearly certain my dog would be a casualty of war, due to her demeanor around strangers. It bothers me that I have to think about that at all, but all I can do is advocate for anything that will help ensure that mistakes like that don’t happen. Training, oversight, demilitarization, whatever. (OK, I know that last one won’t happen.) In the meantime, I’m just trying to get by.
Matt in FL,
Cool, it’s always great to achieve a meeting of the minds, even if just partially. I totally agree with you that most cops are just trying to get by. The problem I have though is that their “just trying to get by” has a major impact on my “just trying to get by,” not to mention all the other people they interact with.
At some point, we have to add the modifier that most police are “just trying to get by… by ruining other people’s lives.” (even if it was by mistake when they raided the wrong apartment)
So the police wanted to hurt you too? Generalize much? Exaggerate much?
Seeing how I currently have a family member who’s in the midst of being prosecuted for a non-existent crime (that’s right – not just a crime they didn’t commit, but a crime that never happened in the first place) just because an asshole cop wanted to screw with someone for kicks, I don’t feel the least bit sympathetic to your submissive views.
Inquiring minds are now very intrigued.
I simply plan on telling my children that the police are state inquisitors. Because that’s essentially what they are. Don’t volunteer information to them in non-emergency situations.
In any situation unless mommie or daddy says its ok.
That would probably lead to me being screwed if they couldn’t ask me. Say, if I were incapacitated or something.
Teach them to differentiate between police and EMS? Its up to you I guess, they’re your kids.
You totally have that right.
Lots of tough talk on this site daily from people who open carry and are ready to get into it (matt seems ready to go toe to toe with the cops) yet how many have been on the wrong side of the law for more than a speeding ticket. It ain’t fun.
About the only thing you an feel good about after a DGU is you are still alive and your family is OK. Then the aftermath begins.
The old life you had before? Gone. Think about your next steps and what you will do. No matter what you may think, when the evening news on all channels runs a story on you the boss will tell you to stay home, you self employed types will lose customers, and you will find out who really is your friend.
The funny thing is criminals don’t really have these problems, they don’t have much to lose. You do.
So I guess based on your premise, we should all give up our guns because the risk of being killed in our homes is more acceptable than losing customers or putting up with the “hassle” of surviving an attack? Ok.
Don’t be a goddamned fool. Of course not. But talk on an internet forum is cheap — know and understand the likely consequences when you’re pulling that gun out in anger.
Even if you did “only” 30 days in jail and came out no worse for the wear before you were released and a Grand Jury no bills you…would you still have a job at the end of that 30 days? Would you be able to pay mortgage and/or taxes on your house or rent for your apartment without the income from your job? Or car payments? Etc.
+1 Well put.
Mr. MasterBlaster
Thanks for completely missing my point. Someday an attorney will be explaining things to you while he shakes his head.
+1
I spent a month in jail as the only white guy there when I was 15. It wasnt fun, but it was better than being dead. My boss has never told me to stay home before, I have however walked in to work just to learn that my key card had been deactivated.
I own my car so no worries about payments, I don’t have a mortgage, there is unemployment insurance for rent, or at the very worst I couch surf until my paperwork for a Section 8 voucher goes thru.
And in Cook County Jail, there is at least the Northsiders (white) gang, so i’m guessing it wouldnt be as bad as Audy.
Even if your not in the gang, according to this blog, they seem to look out for their own kind
http://paulmodrowski.blogspot.com/
For one thing, the premise above assumes cops are the good guys. I haven’t thought since I was a child. Police are a waste of time and money. They have NEVER been of any benefit to me but certainly have Ben annoying. In the case that I would ever be in a situation that most people would expect the police to help them, they won’t be there there to do it. I take responsibility for protecting myself – and cops don’t like that, now do they? After all, if we all did that, we wouldn’t need cops, would we?
Well there’s shooting the wrong person and then there’s shooting the wrong person.
What if you shot a gang member (or three) who had invaded your home? Someone who legitimately needed killing. The last thing you’d have to worry about is being ostracized by society.
Maybe, but people will look at you differently regardless. I have a friend and former coworker that’s a combat vet. The CEO brought it up in a meeting once since he was former military and thought it would be nice to recognize his recent service to the nation. No one at work saw him the same way after that. They may be nice and cordial but you’re still the guy who’s killed someone.
Once people know you did something they can’t understand it fills a box in about you. Expect them to behave different.
Being a soldier is very different than a DGU. Soldiers voluntarily take a line of work which will involve wanton acts of aggression. Dont even try to call what they do is self defense even if they are fired upon first.
They kill because they are ordered to, not because fate leaves them with no other choice.
I agree with you and I didn’t. The point is that if you’ve killed someone, it doesn’t matter if it was justified or not, some people will look at you differently once they know.
It’s an element of a concept Ayoob has called the “Mark of Cain” syndrome.
Here’s a thread about it on another gun forum:
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=243224
What if you shot a gang member (or three) who had invaded your home? Someone who legitimately needed killing. The last thing you’d have to worry about is being ostracized by society.
Unless they’re black. Just look at George Zimmerman.
Trayvon Martin was not a member of the Crips or Bloods. If he was, the most dangerous place for Zimmerman would be anywhere out in the free world without his guns (or with them, for that matter). Gangs don’t let their members go unavenged. No matter what they did to get dead.
The reality in many places-fortunately not all-in America is that self defense is a de-facto crime. It may not be specifically illegal, but the powers that be who think it should be won’t hesitate to ruin a citizen’s life for their own political advancement. Just last week a story came out of a Chicago citizen who shot a burglar. Once CPD responded , the shot burglar was arrested as was the citizen-the burglar for the obvious, the citizen for IL’s Aggrivated Unlawful use of a Weapon. The burglar received a sentence of probation -as in zero days in prison-and had the media not got involved(prompting a last minute withdrawal of the charges) the same court would be eligible to hit the defender with decades in prison on a felony conviction.
With that story in mind,as a citizen who takes responsibility for my personal defense I fully expect to be locked up as a result of protecting myself. Indeed some COPS have wound up in jail because they shot a perp trying to kill them and wound up on the wrong side of a politically motivated witch hunt.If police officers and private citizens have done time for legally defending themselves, I cant say it won’t happen to me. All that considered, id rather see my family behind visitation glass than not at all ever again.
I’m in Chicago so I certainly expect the same treatment.
There are good cops and bad cops, just as in any other group of people. They have rules they are supposed to follow, and in many jurisdictions that means that, if someone is shot, the shooter must be brought in for questioning.
It sucks in a DGU situation to be cuffed and questioned, but if cops are not supposed to make DGU decisions in the field, then I’d suck it up and go in for questioning. Of course, if I were the shooter it would be difficult for them to make an informed decision in the field anyway, given that my answer to everything would be “I want a lawyer.”
Thank you. Wisdom from another “normal” person. The time to plan your after-action is now.
You forgot, “I was afraid for my life, I want a lawyer!”
I know girls is in CA I think like I am. Here we don’t really have concealed carry. Yeah ok you can get one but it is a challenge, and costly.
The only defensive situation I could see myself in is the following:
1. Person or Persons enter my home which I defend, myself and my family.
This is usually pretty cut and dry, but you never know.
2. I shoot someone outside the home in defense of myself or my family following the bankruptcy of the state and the collapse of civil services.
In this case the cops, what’s left of them are probably dealing with the looters in town so no worries.
3. I shoot tons of people outside my home. Ok they are walking slowly and smell funny. You guessed it the zombie apocalypse.
Do dead people have rights??
Yeah, stuck in CA for a few more years. Or until the collapse of society and/or the zombie apocalypse.
And yes, the full sentence would be, “I shot him/her/them, I was afraid for my life, I want a lawyer.”
I wouldnt even acknowledge that I shot them. Let them spend the resources to prove that the bullet came from my gun.
Geez, where are all the “normals?” (I’m smiling as I type that, so everyone sit back down and reholster.) I have a corporate job in marketing, so yes, I do care about my reputation and my ability to provide for my family. I do dress to “fit in” where I am and I don’t regard the police as “useless” or “evil.” Those self-proclaimed independents among you can scoff at my life choices. Whatever. I don’t flip everyone the bird for the same reason I carry concealed. It’s polite.
Now. Everything above may be true (and I don’t see anyone disputing it), but it’s irrelevant. The moment someone attacks my home, person or family in a life-threatening manner, the gun’s coming out. I seriously doubt anyone — frothing libertarian or hand-wringing liberal — will be thinking “better not draw; don’t want to be another Zimmerman” at that moment.
Whatever. I don’t flip everyone the bird for the same reason I carry concealed. It’s polite.
Based off what you wrote before that sentence, I’d say it sounds more like because you’re scared of the consequences of not doing what most people deem “normal” and “appropriate”.
Why does “fitting in” equate to “fear?” Example: some days I wear jeans to work. Today I’m interviewing a bunch of seniors in a retirement home for a brochure. So I dress up a little more because I know they do; it puts them at ease and will allow me to get better interviews from them. Sure, I could dress like I did in my wayward youth, but why? To show my independence and say “screw you” to everyone else? Or am I “scared” that I won’t be accepted into their bridge club?
I applaud independent-mindedness, but I also applaud consideration of others. It’s a lost virtue. Consideration does not mean buckling under to popular opinion — that’s fear, and that leads to denouncing your neighbors. It takes a certain conviction to be considerate — conviction that one is doing what’s right and that you don’t have to make a show of your rights.
I don’t see fear in doing “what most people deem normal and appropiate”. Especially if the person doing it is normal and appropiate in his/her behavour. I don’t go flipping the bird at everyone that cuts me off on the road. I don’t use profanity much anymore because much of my day is spent in an office setting with professional people, customers, and vendors’ sales staff. And when on my own time, I am around family including small children that don’t need to learn those “colorfull” words and phrases from me. They will no doubt eventually learn them, but my 4 year old great-neice hasn’t as of today.
As to the topic of shooting the wrong person? Are we talking about wrong as in a gang banger that was threatening to harm me and mine, and I now have to worry about his “peeps” getting even with me? Or are we talking about me shooting innocent Mary Smith because I missed hitting perpetrator John Jones? The first one, I hopefully could live with, the second one would devastate me horribly. Frankly I hope I never EVER have to shoot someone. Much of my training is just to access the area I am in and if it’s sketchy and then to avoid or exit the area ASAP. I really try to not be in places where bad people like to do bad things, like the 24 hr Walmart’s parking lot in our area after dark, no hanging out in bars and pool halls, no dough-nut runs to 7-11 in the wee hours of the morning, etc. Now in my 56 years, I have never had to shoot anyone, shoot at anyone, or even threaten to shoot at anyone. But my local news reports on someone attempting a murder or committing an actual murder in a 50 mile radius of my house just about every other day if not more, say 200 a year. So I’ll continue to hope, pray and prepare should I ever find myself in this situation.
Internet cowboying and mittyism aside, pray to all that you hold sacred that you will never have to make such a choice.
The outcome will not be what you think.
When the nra is advising *against* gun use, it is time to give your head a shake. Leave the internet tough guy routine behind and carry with humility and superhuman restraint.
This. Carrying doesn’t mean you don’t take shit from people, it means you take more because you have the final word on your person.
If it is any condolence we are not allowed to carry out here in IL.
I don’t see this as a “don’t defend yourself” message so much as “brace yourself”.
We’re already prepared for an event that is unlikely (individually) to occur, but with high costs if it does. This is another part of those costs and while you’re at it consider preparing for this as part of your comprehensive plan.
Beats being dead, which beats my family being hurt if I could otherwise stop it.
Oh, and as a lawyer, whatever the quality of the cop: The Police Are Not Your Friends. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
The NRA is right, of course. Which is why anyone who carries must have a plan to deal with the after-effects of a DGU. One pointer, made many times before on TTAG: don’t make a detailed statement to the cops. You can and should give a broad statement such as “he was going to kill me! I had to defend myself!” After that, STFU and call your nearest of kin, who should then call your lawyer.
Cops get two to three days to think about it before they’re questioned after a police shooting, and they’re entitled to have their union rep (lawyer) at their side. You do the same, even if you’re locked up. You won’t get out faster if you spill your guts. If there was a physical tussle between you and the BG, demand that you be taken to a hospital. It’s harder for the police and prosecutor to pin phoney charges on you if they deny you medical treatment, so usually you’ll get it. You may need treatment more than you know, and you may need a Valium, too.
And if you end up sharing a holding cell with a real nice, non-threatening little guy who’s fascinated by what really happened, STFU twice. That little guy may be exactly what he appears to be, but maybe he isn’t. Your lawyer, however, is your true friend.
I wouldn’t care less what others think, especially if it was based on their own mental illness of victimhood syndrome and hoplophobia. I’d wear my new social standing as a badge of honor for having done the right and courageous thing, something that the sheep have been brainwashed to think is unacceptable. To be despised by the despicable is akin to being honored by the honorable.
I have been in prison half my life due to a lying cop. After a 33 hour interrogation, I was charged (and later convicted) under the Illinois Accountability statute. Yes, this cop and another kicked me, punched and slapped me, and even covered the 2-way mirror to make sure there’d be no witnesses. One of the cops testified that I confessed to lending my car to a man who committed a murder. That man was acquitted, but I was convicted by a separate jury for lending him my car.
If you have doubts or questions, check out my blog. Friends post my writings and handle my mail because prisoners have no access to the real world, including computers and the internet (in case you’re wondering).
Trust police? Never! Even if you say nothing, they will say you did–and make sure a buddy backs up their story. Perhaps they get brownie points, or perhaps the states attorney doesn’t understand how overcrowded our prisons are.
Once convicted, you can spend the rest of your life with lawyers and courts trying to get justice. No DNA evidence? You may never get out.
I’ve already checked out “your” blog, from a comment further up in this post, and it was interesting reading, and will continue to be, I’m sure.
However, to the person who is posting on Paul’s behalf, I have to say that it strains your credibility somewhat when you’re posting as Paul on the same day as the original post, within 8 hours of it hitting the internet. Even if you’re using the words he would use, even if you’re responding as he would, you’re not him. If I’m wrong, and you’ve somehow relayed all the contents on this post to Paul in prison, gotten his reply and posted it here, I will gladly retract my observations.
he isnt really saying anything that isnt on the blog
There wern’t any comments directed at Paul, although if you want to direct one at him here, i’m assuming they would probably be forwarded, and certainly would be if you posted it on his blog.
I am rather surprised how quickly his proxy managed to find my reference to his blog and post here.
And after re-reading Paul’s blog I was mistaken with the Northsiders comment, apparently they are present in prison but not at Cook County Jail.
And as the proxy said “Friends post my writings and handle my mail because prisoners have no access to the real world, including computers and the internet”
Thanks, Matt. I, one of the editors of Paul’s blog, happened to receive a collect phone call from Paul immediately after finding this site. Yes, the comments were more or less from Paul. Perhaps I should have just made up a name for purposes of getting attention to his blog and his experiences with cops and our judicial system.
I thought this was an appropriate site due to the topic of conversation. More folks need to know what’s going on and how you can become a prisoner of the state without actually committing a crime.
I also thought readers here would like to read Paul’s blog post on the Zimmerman case. He does keep up with the news, and often writes his opinions on stories regarding our diminishing rights.
It is rare that Paul gets to use the telephone, so it is unlikely Paul will post anything here again.
Comments are closed.