13 votes

Turning The Tables - Citizens Arrest - This Thread Is Open For Debate

For too long, we have succumbed and forfeited our natural/God-given rights. We have willfully allowed the criminals AND ourselves to repugnantly ignore the law, in many situations the Law of the Land which is the Constitution. We have willfully asked, pleaded even, for law breakers and offenders to grant us the opportunity to place the onus, civilly and financially, on us, while offering those who disgustingly break the law comfort and power. It is NOT THEIR fault, it is OURS.

Consider the 1st Amendment, where somebody calls or complains about you exorcising your right and threatens to call the police. Or when the police threaten you to 'shut up' and become 'obedient'.

I propose that before YOU are placed into cuffs and having the onus placed on you to pay for your defense, you would instead at the first sign of trouble threaten citizens arrest while citing 18 U.S.C. § 242 : US Code - Section 242: Deprivation of rights under color of law.

Immediately declaring 'citizens arrest' and placing the burden onto the law breaker will shift the onus onto them. It will be the law breaker who will be held and accountable on THEIR own dime.

For those who will claim that it will 'cause trouble', or that police will not care, that is a cop-out. It is We the People who must exorcise our rights, and hopefully if enough people over time continue to do this, we will someday prevail.

18 U.S.C. § 242 : US Code - Section 242:

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/13/242#sthash.A6pabJ...

Citizens Arrest:

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/citizen-s-arr...

THIS THREAD IS HEREBY OPEN FOR DEBATE.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

surely you mean exercise...

The Federal government wishes to exOrcise your rights. A responsible American would wish to exErcise one's rights.

I believe we're on the same page beyond that. This is exactly what the founding fathers did. No one issues rights... you either claim your rights or you don't. You either assert your authority or you accept the authority of others.

At their inceptions, the #Liberty, #OccupyWallStreet and #TeaParty movements all had the same basic goal... What happened?

One would need to have some potential backup

to attempt such a feat, especially if the statist was belligerent. More good reasons to network with your fellow patriots.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

^This

Unfortunately, I think it will take a mob to stop a mob, if you are making an arrest as a citizen, not only will you need backup(even other citizens) but you may need to be armed as well.

We should also become private detectives, as telling the news reporters "private detectives" arrested police, would make more sense to sheeple than private citizens. As more and more arrests happen, and people understand we have all the authority the police do, we can show them how we are just the average citizen and we can do this.

Justice!

If we assumed our responsibility of self-defense when the situation demanded it, as well as refuse to associate and exchange values with known value destroyers they would be ostracized out of existence or have to change the way they deal with fellow humans (grow).

The creation, production and fair exchange of values is the business of evolving consciousness, love and life.--Craig Johnson

Bump for debate.

We need to take a stand. I intend to be prepared.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

How is that supposed to work?

Your second link says that for a citizen's arrest, "the felony must have actually occurred before an individual can make a citizens arrest." So the time to apply it under your scenario is after you've been actually stopped from exercising your right to freedom of speech or whatever, not "at the first sign of trouble."

On the other hand if you've actually been stopped from exercising your rights, and all the conditions of 18 U.S.C. § 242 clearly apply, then you've got a case with or without citizen's arrest.

But let's say you do this with a citizen's arrest. If it's a law enforcement office who is stopping you from exercising your rights, they're unlikely to go along with your citizen's arrest peacefully. Simply saying "I'm placing you under citizen's arrest ..." doesn't do anything, and it certainly doesn't put any burden of proof on the officer. Some lawyer type can correct me if I'm wrong but the "arrest" part is about stopping the person, not about filing charges. You haven't made an arrest if you haven't stopped them. Charges, if any, would be filed after you turn them over to law enforcement.

So, in order to arrest them, are you going to use force? It's not hard to predict how that would play out in practice, but let's look at it anyway. The point of a citizen's arrest is to prevent someone from getting away. If you use more force than necessary, you open yourself up to civil and criminal liability (according to your second link). But if you can identify the law enforcement officer then what's the justification for the use of force? You can't use citizen's arrest before the felony is committed, only after the fact. And if you can identify the person, and have the evidence such as video that proves what they did, and they're not a flight risk, how do you convince a jury that the use of force was necessary to prevent them from getting away?

If you could manage to put them under arrest, i.e., physically restrain them, the next step in any citizen's arrest would be to turn them over to law enforcement. Again, it's not hard to predict how that would play out in practice. But even if you were able to convince the law enforcement officers you're turning the arrested law enforcement officer over to that you shouldn't be arrested yourself and charged with kidnapping, the next step is the one that matters: you need to convince someone in the legal system to take your case seriously, and prosecute.

But if you can identify the law enforcement officer who prevented you from exercising your rights, and prove that they did so, and you've got someone in the legal system willing to prosecute under 18 U.S.C. § 242, then what did the citizen's arrest add? Even without the citizen's arrest you've got everything you need for a successful prosecution, and without the risk of civil and criminal consequences that a citizen's arrest can bring you.

Successful prosecutions are the only things that are going to get any meaningful attention. How about finding a case where the evidence is very, very clear, in Virginia, and starting a publicity campaign to get Ken Cuccinelli to prosecute?

what if...

you are looking at it backwards because they do it backwards to us.
What if you witnessed a crime being committed, then brought the information to a grand jury who authorized the arrest. then you brought the offender to trial...all separate but parallel to the system that occupies our land now.
you would afford him all his rights before depriving him of liberty.

What do you mean by a parallel system?

What do you mean by a "parallel" system? Are you suggesting that the grand jury, the people performing the arrest, the judge and jury in the trial, etc., would all be outside the legal system? A vigilante kind of thing?

If it were discovered it would be defined as kidnapping by the official legal system, and everyone involved would very likely end up in prison. Like the people in Las Vegas a few months ago who planned the arrest, trial and (apparently confident of the outcome of that trial) execution of law enforcement officers.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Do you think this would have helped Adam Kokesh

And prevented him from being arrested, when they battered down his front door with a ram, then threw a flash grenade into his apartment like it was back to Iraq for Adam?

Do you think if at that point, he had yelled 'citizens arrest!' would it have left him in anywhere of a different place than he is now?

Just curious about your opinion on that?

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

Bob-45 hit on a few

good points.

So, do you think that by not exorcising our rights, but instead give permission to the thugs, setting new precedent and re-writing laws to suit them in their favor will regain what we seek?

As you know, everything is not black and white, Michael. We will certainly lose some, but as the checkpoint videos show and prove, when we take a stand, we not only provide a service to ourselves, but to our fellow man as well.

Would this have worked in Adam's favor? I do not know, but would tend to doubt it. I do know that he was locked up anyway without declaring such. If he did yell out citizens arrest and cite the code, it may have been on record and could have encouraged more activism.

My goal is to raise awareness and to exorcise what I [we] preach. I do not lay down so easily.

For those below who have not read the codes, please do so :-)

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

Michael Nystrom's picture

Word

Peace

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

Had Adam not cancelled the Washington "Open Carry" March...

and decided to go it alone, yes, I think it would have helped. Because if that march had taken place with no arrests (as did the "Occupy Phoenix March led by Arizona Border Militia armed with "locked and loaded" AK47s trained on the Phoenix Police), Adam could probably have slept easy, knowing there was someone on a nearby rooftop waiting "just in case" the feds decided to bash Adam's door down.

Do you actually believe NOT doing your duty to arrest these criminals will "change their hearts" and they will desist in their evil acts?

Keep this in mind; a higher percentage of those American soldiers who joined the Philippine resistance and fought the Japanese occupiers until MacArthur returned, survived than those who surrendered their weapons and either died during the Bataan "Death March" or in Japanese POW camps. Given the relatively small numbers who did not lay down their arms, that is pretty remarkable, since the death of one of them would be statistically the same percentage as the deaths of dozens, if not hundreds who died during the Japanese occupation.

Just because we have accomplished a few small victories over the last few days, do not fool yourself into believing the NWO has been stopped. Nothing short than the arrest of at least a few high level members will accomplish that. Otherwise, without a shadow of a doubt, we face economic ruin, incarceration in FEMA Camps, execution or death from a thermonuclear war. Any or all of these horrible consequences is likely to play out before the end of 2013.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Got it.

Thank you.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

That same sort of question dominated our group

When we were deciding how to arrest the first senator or congressman.

Pandacentricism will be our downfall.

if Gomer Pyle

can do it , than anybody can

I'll Bite

Where and who do you propose to arrest under citizens arrest law.

There are many we can choose from. The big ones have armed security guards.

The only time I have heard of a citizens arrest holding up is someone following a drunk driver home and calling the cops. The cop walks up with the citizen and the citizen conducts the arrest under the cops supervision. So if the cop is not there I would only imagine the lone citizen would have the door slammed in his or her face.

It is a good idea, but going to need lots of Law enforcement to buy into it. No one is going to let the average citizen arrest them independently.

I didn't read your law links, but just like anything it requires a large following. It can happen, just need to continue to change the hearts and minds of the sheep.

I am with you, if we could make examples of some prominent criminals it would send a very strong message.