Pulled over by PCSO.

[Metalhead47]

Well this thread is totally derailed past comprehension.

This is no where NEAR derailed by WA ocdo standards. Slight bump on the track is all. Dime, maybe a nickel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Citizen]

Agreed. I would have done the same.

Try some of cop Mas Ayoob's videos or books sometime. After a few, it starts to dawn on you that he is a statist and pro-police, and very good at not telling you the real reason he wants you to do all the things he's telling you.

The conclusion is inescapable. He knows the problems in policing and how dangerous some cops really are. And, he's trying to protect you, without telling you from what. I don't know if he's conflicted between freedom and police, or its a problem that he doesn't want to injure his reputation in the police world. But, you kinda gotta admire the guy. He dances around it very well.

 

[gogodawgs]

Try some of cop Mas Ayoob's videos or books sometime. After a few, it starts to dawn on you that he is a statist and pro-police, and very good at not telling you the real reason he wants you to do all the things he's telling you.

The conclusion is inescapable. He knows the problems in policing and how dangerous some cops really are. And, he's trying to protect you, without telling you from what. I don't know if he's conflicted between freedom and police, or its a problem that he doesn't want to injure his reputation in the police world. But, you kinda gotta admire the guy. He dances around it very well.

Because the truth would be bad for his business.

 

[papa bear]

He must REALLY like his village people



I'm surprised no one has hit on the most obvious (and correct) answer here:

"...because I was violating one or more traffic laws and endangering all those around me."

please never, ever, never, never, admit to breaking the law!!!!!!!:shocker: that is really what the LEO is trying to do is get you to talk. even if you did break a law, shut the F up

 

[Citizen]

This is no where NEAR derailed by WA ocdo standards. Slight bump on the track is all. Dime, maybe a nickel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess some folks just want conversations to follow one track. They're always siding with orderliness, where the ties between the posts and OP are obvious. And, they always wanta spike side discussions. They probably want to station someone nearby to watch that we don't divergefrom the line of discussion. Unless the thread is a conductor of directly-related ideas, they seem to rail against it.

 

[Metalhead47]

I guess some folks just want conversations to follow one track. They're always siding with orderliness, where the ties between the posts and OP are obvious. And, they always wanta spike side discussions. They probably want to station someone nearby to watch that we don't divergefrom the line of discussion. Unless the thread is a conductor of directly-related ideas, they seem to rail against it.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Try some of cop Mas Ayoob's videos or books sometime. After a few, it starts to dawn on you that he is a statist and pro-police, and very good at not telling you the real reason he wants you to do all the things he's telling you.

The conclusion is inescapable. He knows the problems in policing and how dangerous some cops really are. And, he's trying to protect you, without telling you from what. I don't know if he's conflicted between freedom and police, or its a problem that he doesn't want to injure his reputation in the police world. But, you kinda gotta admire the guy. He dances around it very well.

Because the truth would be bad for his business.

Truth in both statement.

Arrest proof yourself is a book written by a former LEO although you can tell he is still pro cop although now being a criminal defense attorney, he freely admits cops are dangerous to you.

 

[bmg50cal]

This is no where NEAR derailed by WA ocdo standards. Slight bump on the track is all. Dime, maybe a nickel.

This was the thread from the start... Was it really going to get anywhere anyway?

 

[amlevin]

Try some of cop Mas Ayoob's videos or books sometime. After a few, it starts to dawn on you that he is a statist and pro-police, and very good at not telling you the real reason he wants you to do all the things he's telling you.

The conclusion is inescapable. He knows the problems in policing and how dangerous some cops really are. And, he's trying to protect you, without telling you from what. I don't know if he's conflicted between freedom and police, or its a problem that he doesn't want to injure his reputation in the police world. But, you kinda gotta admire the guy. He dances around it very well.

What would you expect from a former Cop cum Magazine Writer. Entrepreneur, "Liar for Hire" (that's "professional expert witness" to the uninformed)?

 

[amlevin]

Truth in both statement.

Arrest proof yourself is a book written by a former LEO although you can tell he is still pro cop although now being a criminal defense attorney, he freely admits cops are dangerous to you.

Don't overlook the fact that some people are dangerous to themselves.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Don't overlook the fact that some people are dangerous to themselves.

That's just a given. And a misdirection.

Cops do not have your best interest in mind, the author of Arrest Proof Yourself a former cop freely admits this while still being pro cop.

 

[sirpuma]

[video=youtube;6wXkI4t7nuc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc[/video]

 

[amzbrady]

 

[DocWalker]

It was totally expected that you would get thrashed for doing both #1 and #2 above.

Consider the alternatives. The officer sees your firearm and you haven't advised him you're carrying. Next you're ordered out of the vehicle at gunpoint and then in handcuffs. In #2, what do you suppose the officer would have done if you refused to allow him to disarm you. Chances are you would be disarmed anyway, but now at gunpoint and again, handcuffs. If you really piss off the officer, the handcuffs are applied while face down on the pavement.

It's easy for those who are not involved in a situation to "egg someone on" and tell them how "they would have done it".

Sometimes it's a lot easier to just not be an @-hole, get the stop over with, and if you feel the officer was out of line, file a complaint. Nothing good is going to happen if you protest along the highway with the officer that stopped you.

I agree but then why even have a US Constitution if we are not going to use it. Let us just do away with it and live in a police state as we are heading there by our own apathy.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

[video=youtube;6wXkI4t7nuc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc[/video]

Don't talk yourself into prison, let this guy do it for you.....

 

[Citizen]

Don't talk yourself into prison, let this guy do it for you.....

Excuse me? Are you saying OCers violate the law, and defense lawyers are going to actively argue an OCer defendant into a conviction?

 

[PistolPackingMomma]

Don't talk yourself into prison, let this guy do it for you.....

I guess you either missed or ignored the part where OFFICER Bruch got up and said "Everything he said is true." (27:39) But hey, why should we listen to practicing professionals? We've got YOU to advise us.

 

[bmg50cal]

I don't think Echo Mike November watched the video...

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I don't think Echo Mike November watched the video...

I in fact have watched the video many times, I was making a jab at how annoying he sounds with the fast talking. And I really don't feel sorry for his examples who went to prison either, like the laywer he talked about how put his hand on a female lawyer "as a joke" yeah right...

His advice however is extremely over broad to a fault, as has been brought up before, if you shoot someone in self defense and the assailants weapon slides into a gutter, are you going to wait for your lawyer before police are informed that evidence exists? wait until your attackers buddy comes and gets the gun back. There are in fact situations in which some level of cooperation with the police is in fact warranted, nearly all the examples Duane gives are of GUILTY people, he provides no examples of an innocent person hinging on an affirmative defense

The main example he uses throughout the lecture is a hypothetical in which Detective Bruch is investigating you for the slaying of someone one night in Virginia, problem is if you fire in self defense, you have slain someone and your defense involves admitting you intended to slay him, possessed the weapon used to do so, and you did slay him.

So if you tell the police "this man attacked me" you've violated professor Duane's advice! and if you say nothing, you allow the cops to make up what they feel happened. and if you are the one who calls 911, you contacted the police and talked to them, again another violation of Prof. Duane's philosophy.

 

[BigDave]

EMNofSeattle you are trying to change the minds that are stuck on victims of the government and if the videos were taken literally then there is a good chance a crime against you would never be reported nor support your position after you are done talking with your attorney as the evidence and witnesses have magically disappeared, poof!

On this topic, you are on the right path.