< Back to the Main Site
« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Two Supreme Court Decisions  (Read 1280 times)

Offline DanClrk51

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Location: Bellevue
  • Posts: 1128
Two Supreme Court Decisions
« on: January 20, 2013, 12:03:09 PM »
Any truth to this or is this over exaggerated?

http://www.appleroguetimes.com/two_supreme_court_decisions_the_.htm
Logged

Offline Dan W

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2007
  • Location: Lincoln NE
  • Posts: 8143
Re: Two Supreme Court Decisions
« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2013, 12:13:47 PM »
I am familiar with the Miller decision and I agree that it has relevance. But the second cite is new to me, so some research is called for.
Logged
Dan W    NFOA Co Founder
Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.   J. F. K.

Offline CitizenClark

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
  • Posts: 702
  • Live free or die!
    • Silencer News
Re: Two Supreme Court Decisions
« Reply #2 on: January 20, 2013, 12:44:54 PM »
Quote from: Dan W on January 20, 2013, 12:13:47 PM
I am familiar with the Miller decision and I agree that it has relevance. But the second cite is new to me, so some research is called for.

I mentioned the Bad Elk decision in the third part of my short book (available for free here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55429420/Fighting-Back). That whole section of the book is relevant to this issue, since it is about the ethics and legality of using violent force against state agents, but the Bad Elk material, including a nice long quote from the case, starts on page 90.
Logged

Offline CitizenClark

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
  • Posts: 702
  • Live free or die!
    • Silencer News
Re: Two Supreme Court Decisions
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2013, 12:59:45 PM »
The tl;dr version: the common law right to use deadly force in response to an unlawful arrest has been vitiated in this country. Unless you fear for your safety (like, the cop is beating the snot out of you and you think you are going to die or be grievously injured), you are supposed to just submit to the unlawful arrest and then use its illegality as a basis for suppression motions in court.

The problem is that only the guilty really have recourse to this remedy. For the guy who wasn't breaking the law when he got arrested, there isn't anything to suppress, so his remedy under this doctrine amounts to nothing, unless he can make out a case that the state agent conducting the unlawful arrest was intentionally setting out to deprive him of his constitutional rights (in which case the victim could initiate a "1983 action" to recover damages; see 42 USC ยง 1983).
« Last Edit: January 20, 2013, 01:27:46 PM by CitizenClark »
Logged

Offline Gunscribe

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Location: Horsethief, NM
  • Posts: 359
Re: Two Supreme Court Decisions
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2013, 12:11:24 PM »
The guy is way off base on Miller.
Logged
Sidearms Training Academy
La Luz, NM

Offline sidearm1

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 144
Re: Two Supreme Court Decisions
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2013, 12:41:16 PM »
Under the law in Nebraska, you cannot use force to resist an arrest, even if  the arrest is unlawful.

28-1409

(2) The use of such force is not justifiable under this section to resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, although the arrest is unlawful.

Again, not a lawyer, just someone who has worked with laws for some time. I know there are a couple of Neb Supreme Court decisions on this, I just don't have the time right now to find them.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »