Normally I'd put this in the Videos area, but I think it belongs here because it's something that needs to be discussed.



I'll post here the same thing I posted on my Facebook: Don't know if any of you remember me posting this video a while back. Now it's complete with the dashcam video. My own opinion is that the officer, who drew his weapon, was in the wrong when he first made contact.

I'm thinking things would have went a bit different if he wouldn't have put his hands on the weapon at the start. When the officer tried to unhook it and the guy was like, wait, what're you doing - and he put his hands down to prevent the unlawful disarming, it was quick draw McGraw time for the officer. Officer was in the wrong, that's my take.

This has been out for awhile.

I dont know much about Texas' laws but lets compare the right to bear arms to the first amendment, the right to free speech. As we all know, our right to free speech as expressly dictated in the first amendment, is NOT absolute. You can't go into a movie theatre and shout FIRE (assuming there is not actually a fire) because the panic it would incite could potentially cause injury and harm to others. Same as when you say bomb in an airport, or allude to having a gun in a school. When what you're saying infringes on other peoples rights to safety and well being, you lose some rights. The same should apply to gun control. When you're actions, however benign they may seem to you, harms others distinctly in body or mind you're not just exercising you're rights, you're infringing on others.

Now you may think im just some liberal gun hating Bloomberg offspring new yorker, but I completely support peoples right's to own and carry firearms. The officers actions in this case were entirely absurd. No officer in their right mind would walk up to a man armed to the teeth and just start pulling on their weapons. Any reasonable person wouldn't have acted like this. He clearly had a false understanding of the law in Texas and as a result used a superiority complex to handle that situation. And once he had made that decision his arrogance led him to continue on something that should've been dropped. In order for you to be charged with resisting arrest, or interfering with an officers investigation (as this man has been formally charged with) the officers actions have to be lawful. They were not. This charge is ENTIRELY the result of the arresting officers actions, not Sgt. CJ.

I live in Canada and the guy with the rifle would have been doing jail time he would be so wrong. I have watched the video and don't know about the laws in his state but I believe the officer could have handled the situation much better. The guy with the rifle could of also handled the situation better, his actions also escalated the situation.

He's a sergeant in the US Army, he's been in battles and one of the things that is ingrained in him is weapon retention. Keep control of your firearms at all times and don't let anyone take them. The reaction when that cop tried to unclip the rifle was reflex.

I'm having some browser issues and the video won't load for me. Is there a physical response from the officer, or is the guy just being charged with a bunch of stuff after the fact? Either way, from the descriptions it sounds pretty shitty.

whats with the lame music?

From the cops radio lol.

This ain't Canada dude. And thank God for that.

Someone said something about no right being absolute, i.e. no yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and claim 1st Amendment rights, however the 2nd Amendment is the only one with the specific phrase, "...shall not be infringed."

This cop is scum. He should be fired immediately.

The man made no threatening movements WHATSOEVER! In fact, if you watch the video, he made an obvious effort to keep his hands in plain view and to be as nonthreatening as possible. Then the cop just tries to disarm him without asking first? What bullshit. The cop is totally in the wrong. If it were up to me, he'd be executed by firing squad for abusing his power and violating the public trust.

it also states you (depending on how you want to interpret it) must keep a well regulated militia and to own arms in the interest of maintaining state security. Not simply because you can own them. And it's already infringed on by the restrictions of certain types of magazines, guns, and gun accessories you can buy, so that section obviously does not hold much weight.

Wrong.



Wrong again.


The 2nd Amendment reads, as follows:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It's giving the right for TWO things. Forming a militia. And securing the individual right to keep and bear arms.

It specifically says, "the RIGHT of the PEOPLE" to keep and bear arms. NOT the right of a "well regulated militia."

See, without the individual right to bear arms. There wouldn't be anyone for there to form a militia from. Most people don't know this, because they don't have any idea what a militia actually is. You need to bring your own gun. You are not provided a weapon in a militia. You must provide it for yourself. You DO NOT need to already be a member of a militia to exercise your individual right to keep and bear arms.

I mean think about it. Where do you think this militia comes from? Have you ever heard of any militias to join? No. Because militias form spontaneously in the moment. And how does a person know when to spontaneously form a militia you may ask? Well, when it happens you'll know, because the F*CKING shit will be hitting the fan. All males of fighting age will be considered combatants, as the USA does with the drone strike program, and if you fall into this category, it would be wise to be armed, otherwise you'll probably be shot on sight, or at best be captured and sent to some camp to live in squalor and die.



That part is true.

There's been a few supreme court rulings which are of a concern for this topic.

One is District of Columbia v. Heller. This ruling explicitly states that the 2nd Amendment does indeed guarantee the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

The other, which you admit is indeed an infringement, limits types of firearm, etc. It is unconstitutional. The supreme court is supposed to error on the side of liberty, but instead, they succumbed to the fear and paranoia which came from gangsters using automatic weapons during the Prohibition Era and people with sawed-off shotguns. Well guess what? Gangsters still use automatic weapons to this day, regardless. And anyone at any time can still saw the barrel off of their shotgun.

Anyway, it is still legal to own fully automatic firearms with the right paperwork and enough money, so it's really difficult. This is bullshit. The people need to be able to own, for if forming a militia becomes necessary, whatever the current modern standard is or whatever they would be facing. The standard for today's modern army is a select-fire rifle with semi-automatic and fully automatic capability. Shit, even poor 3rd world countries use AK-47s which are full and semi-auto. To compete with even the most basic and poorest army, we should have select-fire weapons. Instead, we are mostly restricted to semi-automatic AND some states have the nerve to limit magazine capacity, which is even more utter bullshit, which would make the militias in some states even weaker.

You believe some things which are just plain untrue. Your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the subject is disappointing and is a reflection of just how misinformed the vast majority of people are. I really hope that such ignorance and the attitude that goes along with it, doesn't lead to further restrictions of our liberty.

Because as the old expression goes, "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."

i know im super afraid of this being that I live in afghanistan and all and not some sweet country like america.

I just don't think what a bunch of shmucks a few hundred years ago bears much weight now in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOCIETY with COMPLETELY DIFFERENT NEEDS/VALUES/GOALS. Who gives a F*CK if they needed to include an absolute right to bear arms when you had to bring a firearm when you went fishing so a wolf or a bear wouldnt F*CK your shit up. The only thing guns being legal serves today is the gun manufacturing industry. And if government does decide to take over and we don't have guns cause liberals are gay devil babies then well shit but I don't see that being as likely as fearmongers like to speculate just so they can keep on mass producing guns and making oodles of moneys.

I'm glad you realize what a sweet country America is. And just who made it such a great country? The very people you want to bash and say are outdated and have completely different values.

You know, for a guy who can't use any capital letters or punctuation, your IQ might not be high enough to know what is a concern and what isn't. You clearly know nothing about history. And people like you, who know nothing about history, and even worse, don't seem to care, will be doomed to repeat it.




Ha! Speak for yourself there, buddy. It is not a "complete different society" or have "completely different needs/values/goals. I most definitely share the same needs, values, and goals.

You completely contradict yourself. Out of one side of your mouth, you say how America is such a sweet country, but then out of the other side of your mouth, the very people who made it such a sweet country, you call them "schmucks." Are you shitting me? You don't see the hypocrisy and obvious contradiction of that?

You think America is a few hundred years old? Thanks for displaying your total ignorance of history. How about math? Can you do simple math? What's 2013 - 1776 = ? It's sure and shit not a few hundred years. You don't even know how old America is! Tell me, did you even have civics class when you were in school? Or did you just sleep through it?

America was founded on LIBERTY and that value has never changed and never will. This is America where we have freedom. Not some shit hole where people like you get to impose on me and dictate to me what freedom you're comfortable letting me have. So, do you have the balls to come and try and take my guns away yourself? I'm guessing no.




I give a F*CK. Many people give a F*CK. Just because you don't; don't think that's how everyone else thinks. I have to shoot varmints in my yard all the time. In case you didn't know, wolves and bears still exist. So, the possibility of needing to defend yourself from one, also still exists.



ROFL! THIS IS HILARIOUS! You are very obviously totally brainwashed by the liberal media. Watch some more MSNBC why don't you.



Well, I'm glad that you at least recognize what liberals are.

I have no problem with a business selling their products and making money. No one is forcing anyone to buy a gun. People have free-will and have the right and the freedom to buy what they want.

You think I buy guns because of fear? Wrong. Fending off an invasion or a tyrannical government is secondary. I buy guns because I enjoy the sport of shooting. I also think it is wise to be prepared. Hunting and self-defense are also legitimate reasons.

If you want to be a helpless pu$$y and put your safety in the hands of someone else, that's fine.

But, don't you dare, EVER, try and keep me from making my own decisions and keep me from being able to be self-reliant, instead of relying on someone else for my safety, like some pu$$y schmuck like you.

It seems like everything you do is out of fear; i feel sorry for you: maybe you should calm your nerd rage before-you try to discuss things cause you just come off like a frothing neckbeard/douchebreath when you argue about stuff

ps. my bad on the punctuation bro I forgot to take that class on being a grammar nazi narcissist back in highschool.

<Stoner

LOL! So, am I a Narcissist or controlled by fear? Which is it?

You of course, have nothing to say, no counter argument of any kind. No facts. No nothing. So, what's the classic liberal tactic you have to use because you have no argument and can't win a debate on merit? Insult your opposition. And not even for the things that they actually do, like have bad grammar, but made up assumptions like, "seems like everything you do is out of fear" and of course, the ever comically sophomoric "nerd rage."

What about you being so anti-gun? You must be pretty fearful yourself. I'm advocating for freedom and letting people make their own life decisions, NOT prohibiting people from owning an inanimate object. If you feel the need to deny people freedom to own what they want, then you must be pretty scared of what they might do. It doesn't seem like you've thought this through. This is simple logic here.

The guy who can barely form a sentence is complaining about "how I come off?" ROFL!

Are you aware of how hilarious it is to hear you complain about "how I come off," when you clearly have not given any thought, of any kind, to how you are "coming off?"

Have you taken into consideration whatsoever how YOU "come off" with your lack of writing ability, lack of being able to come up with coherent arguments, and your need to use terms like "nerd rage" and "neckbeard/douchebreath?"

Do you know where the shift key is on the keyboard? Do you know what a period is? That "class on being a grammar nazi narcissist back in highschool" you missed out on, they called it "English." You should have shown up. Thanks for shitting on any kind of intellectualism and further contributing to the Dumbing Down of America.

If your perception is that I'm "nerd raging" just because I actually know what I'm talking about, know how to be assertive, am adamant about my position, and know how to form a sentence; then you're pretty F*CKING sensitive and you should probably start thinking about growing a pair. Because if typed words on the internet can so easily bother you, I can hardly imagine how sensitive you are during an actual interpersonal interaction in real life. It is I, who feels sorry for you.

Nice work on being a classic example of the Pussification of America and a perpetrator of the Dumbing Down of America all at the same time. Now, if only you had any idea what I was talking about.

Here, let me help:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Pussification+of+America&l=1

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Dumbing+Down+of+America&l=1

I just don't have the time to devote an intelligent thought or rebuttal to neckbeards.

Too old for that shit.

Yeah, I hear you. The 5 minutes I spend typing my posts is just too much time to spare.

i bet you only like guns cause it makes up for ur small penis.

If you really want to know, you can always ask your mom.