I was under the impression that US rules about trespassing left the owner with a lot of rights, even to use weapons to protect their property. Doesn’t this apply when ICE raids homes without warnings or warrants?
Apparently not, either die trying or live in servitude as all hopes of resistance gets further stripped away. A lot of people in here seem to choose the latter, it’s how the bad guys win every time.
Yes but no, you have the right to defend your home but not against an officer of the law carrying out a warrant. So if a plain clothes officer, with a drawn fire arm, carrys out a no knock warrent, and the homeowner tries to shoot them. That’s attempting to kill an officer of the law. It doesn’t matter if the appearance of a plain clothes no knock warrent is identical to a home invasion, and the homeowner defends themselves, the ICE agents are just going to kill the homeowner and the ICE agents will have protection of the law.
This isn’t really true. People have gotten off on shooting at officers because they didn’t know they were officers. It’s a huge risk, because they’ll also likely just shoot you, but the law doesn’t actually require people to have telepathic knowledge of the association of a presumed home invader.
It’s still very much a matter of privilege to afford a good enough attorney to get you off. Black people tend to get shot while sleeping and convicted postmortem.
You are forgetting they are not using warrants. A court would find you not guilty if they have no warrant and you defend yourself according to your laws.
I certainly wouldn’t find anybody shooting an ICE “agent” as guilty if I was on the Jury, regardless of what a judge might say. Jury Nullification is an important right that every U.S. Citizen should know about, but never talk about inside a court house.
I refuse to put away people defending their community from a gestapo like force, regardless of the events surrounding said gestapo’s death.
Sadly, no. I mean, MAYBE, with the right administration you could get away with killing an officer if they are breaking the law and endangering your life. But it’s really up to the courts, and courts are usually not okay with killing their officers. Even when it is justified or self defense. The state will not go down without a fight.
I don’t think there is any realistic resistance without an organized army of civilian soldiers. The 2nd amendment and ‘militias’ and all that.
Actually an organized militia isn’t needed. As the bill of rights is just a small enumeration of our natural rights, and does not include all of them. They are solely there to remind the populace what our rights are even in the face of a tyrannical government. Funny enough your arguments now are why James Madison didn’t want a bill of rights included as he felt that Natural Rights were too numerous to list, and people would think themselves limited to only the enumerated powers or confuse them into thinking the government granted them those rights. When, in fact, those rights are inherent to our very being.
Some Relevant reading:
" When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. "
-The Declaration of Independence.
So important they wrote it down, and signed it.
(Broke it up for readability)
Yes, I’m aware of this and in fact I agree with Madison’s position. I just wasn’t trying to get into the nitty gritty behind having a top-down system of authority dictating what is or isn’t “rights” and its flaws.
I still stand behind my position that having well-organized, volunteer community militias is a necessity that every community should have and be engaged with to some extent. So long as the state exists, people need to be ready to defend themselves against it.
Also, personally, I oppose the existence of the state as a concept and believe it should be abolished, with its roles being replaced by bottom-up structures of authority from within communities, but that’s also getting into much deeper politics.
Americans love to preach about their rules. Especially about how uniquely exceptional the rules are. Turns out it’s all bullshit. They’re just another tinpot dictatorship ruling over a barbaric shithole.
I was under the impression that US rules about trespassing left the owner with a lot of rights, even to use weapons to protect their property. Doesn’t this apply when ICE raids homes without warnings or warrants?
Apparently not, either die trying or live in servitude as all hopes of resistance gets further stripped away. A lot of people in here seem to choose the latter, it’s how the bad guys win every time.
Yes but no, you have the right to defend your home but not against an officer of the law carrying out a warrant. So if a plain clothes officer, with a drawn fire arm, carrys out a no knock warrent, and the homeowner tries to shoot them. That’s attempting to kill an officer of the law. It doesn’t matter if the appearance of a plain clothes no knock warrent is identical to a home invasion, and the homeowner defends themselves, the ICE agents are just going to kill the homeowner and the ICE agents will have protection of the law.
This isn’t really true. People have gotten off on shooting at officers because they didn’t know they were officers. It’s a huge risk, because they’ll also likely just shoot you, but the law doesn’t actually require people to have telepathic knowledge of the association of a presumed home invader.
It’s still very much a matter of privilege to afford a good enough attorney to get you off. Black people tend to get shot while sleeping and convicted postmortem.
You are forgetting they are not using warrants. A court would find you not guilty if they have no warrant and you defend yourself according to your laws.
I certainly wouldn’t find anybody shooting an ICE “agent” as guilty if I was on the Jury, regardless of what a judge might say. Jury Nullification is an important right that every U.S. Citizen should know about, but never talk about inside a court house.
I refuse to put away people defending their community from a gestapo like force, regardless of the events surrounding said gestapo’s death.
Honest question: what warrant are they operating under? These guys won’t even produce ID when asked so I doubt they’ve got paperwork
If you’re asking about ICE officers, they’ve been given the authority to sign their own warrants.
Sadly, no. I mean, MAYBE, with the right administration you could get away with killing an officer if they are breaking the law and endangering your life. But it’s really up to the courts, and courts are usually not okay with killing their officers. Even when it is justified or self defense. The state will not go down without a fight.
I don’t think there is any realistic resistance without an organized army of civilian soldiers. The 2nd amendment and ‘militias’ and all that.
Yea. The key part of the 2nd amendment is the “organized militia” part that has conveniently been left out of main stream discussions.
Civilians need to start organizing or we are all royally fucked.
Actually an organized militia isn’t needed. As the bill of rights is just a small enumeration of our natural rights, and does not include all of them. They are solely there to remind the populace what our rights are even in the face of a tyrannical government. Funny enough your arguments now are why James Madison didn’t want a bill of rights included as he felt that Natural Rights were too numerous to list, and people would think themselves limited to only the enumerated powers or confuse them into thinking the government granted them those rights. When, in fact, those rights are inherent to our very being.
Some Relevant reading:
-The Declaration of Independence.
So important they wrote it down, and signed it. (Broke it up for readability)
Yes, I’m aware of this and in fact I agree with Madison’s position. I just wasn’t trying to get into the nitty gritty behind having a top-down system of authority dictating what is or isn’t “rights” and its flaws.
I still stand behind my position that having well-organized, volunteer community militias is a necessity that every community should have and be engaged with to some extent. So long as the state exists, people need to be ready to defend themselves against it.
Also, personally, I oppose the existence of the state as a concept and believe it should be abolished, with its roles being replaced by bottom-up structures of authority from within communities, but that’s also getting into much deeper politics.
Americans love to preach about their rules. Especially about how uniquely exceptional the rules are. Turns out it’s all bullshit. They’re just another tinpot dictatorship ruling over a barbaric shithole.