Innocent Persons Resisting Arrest

[stevil]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305497477' post='2241984']
So if he comes to arrest you and says , you are being arrested for the murder of such and such, please put your hands up agianst the wall, and then procedes to begin to cuff you, you are obiged to go quitly, even if you did not murder such and such?


This is true even though once you surrender you are completly in the states power and unable tofurther defend yourself, as well as no longer at liberty?

Agian no arguement being made here, just trying to clarify peoples position.
[/quote]

I think they would be more likely to say "you are being arrested for suspicion of murder..."
It is not the police officer's job to debate with you whether you are innocent or guilty, that is for the lawyers, judge and potentially jury to decide.

The police officer would be best to be as respectful as possible, but they also need to do their job which can mean violating your human right to freedom.
If the system didn't work this way then we would struggle to function properly.

Think of it from a Forum perspective. If the moderator does not restrict or ban trolls then the forum would be in disarray.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1305499010' post='2241991']
I think they would be more likely to say "you are being arrested for suspicion of murder..."
It is not the police officer's job to debate with you whether you are innocent or guilty, that is for the lawyers, judge and potentially jury to decide.

The police officer would be best to be as respectful as possible, but they also need to do their job which can mean violating your human right to freedom.
If the system didn't work this way then we would struggle to function properly.

Think of it from a Forum perspective. If the moderator does not restrict or ban trolls then the forum would be in disarray.
[/quote]

I'm not debating your position, I am just trying to determine it.

Your not arrested for suspicion, you can be detained for suspicion but to be arrested you have to be being charged with something. Edit: not that that is functionally different

You position is that, in order for society to function, one must personally be prepared to sacrifice ones reputation, freedom, and right to self defence, becuase, if one was not obliged to do that the society would collapse.


IS that a fair assessment of your position?

Edited May 15, 2011 by Don John of Austria

[Winchester]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1305497727' post='2241985']
my position is it is wrong to resist arrest and get into a fight with an officer and injure him when he is only doing his job. you are obliged to submit to arrest if the officer is acting in good faith. its no different than anything else in america. you are obliged to go thru medal detectors and possible pat downs at government buildings if the security says so. just you are are obliged to pay taxes to the government.

its as simple as this, with any job there are mistakes made. i think you would agree. just like there are mistakes at trial and an innocent man is put into prison. although just because the man is innocent does not give him the right to attack and injure guards in an escape attempt.

that is the way a state, any state is run. without law enforcement having any authority, then a society would crumble. murders, rapists, child molesters and such could commit crimes and get away with it. for any, i repeat any state to properly function the law enforcement needs to have some form of authority over the citizens. if not, then let anarchy rule and let it be last man standing.
[/quote]
Authority ends at injustice. It is unjust for an innocent man to be arrested and he may choose thus to resist. He is also free to subject himself to the law and thereby face possible execution. The government obviously must respond to enforce the law, but the just man may also resist. It is proven in this nation that innocent men are imprisoned and also executed, so it follows that innocent men are morally permitted to defend themselves.

[stevil]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305499292' post='2241993']
I'm not debating your position, I am just trying to determine it.

Your not arrested for suspicion, you can be detained for suspicion but to be arrested you have to be being charged with something. Edit: not that that is functionally different
[/quote]

I don't see the difference. You are only guilty once the courts make the decision. Submission to be arrested or detained is not an admission of guilt, it is simply submission to the rules and laws that govern the society in which you participate.

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305499292' post='2241993']
You position is that, in order for society to function, one must personally be prepared to sacrifice ones reputation, freedom, and right to self defence, becuase, if one was not obliged to do that the society would collapse.

IS that a fair assessment of your position?
[/quote]
Society needs to implement rules in order to function. If you do not oblige you will likely face the consequences of your societies rules. If you don't like it, you can:
[list][*]move into a different society with a different set of rules[*]start a petition[*]influence your local government representative[*]take a dispute through the courts in an attempt to change common law[*]become government and change the law[*]break the law and face the consequences[*]grudgingly comply[/list]Many choice, no right or wrong answer. Although if you choose to break the law, hopefully no-one else gets harmed in the process.

Edited May 16, 2011 by stevil

[havok579257]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1305500383' post='2242002']
Authority ends at injustice. It is unjust for an innocent man to be arrested and he may choose thus to resist. He is also free to subject himself to the law and thereby face possible execution. The government obviously must respond to enforce the law, but the just man may also resist. It is proven in this nation that innocent men are imprisoned and also executed, so it follows that innocent men are morally permitted to defend themselves.
[/quote]


you are right, you are morally permitted to defend yourself. although if your attacking the officer in the hopes of resisting arrest he is morally permitted to use force to secure you as a prisoner and defend himself. but yeah, if your innocent and being arrested, be my guest to attack the officer to try and resist arrest. see how far that gets you.

Edited May 16, 2011 by havok579257

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1305505449' post='2242044']
I don't see the difference. You are only guilty once the courts make the decision. Submission to be arrested or detained is not an admission of guilt, it is simply submission to the rules and laws that govern the society in which you participate.


Society needs to implement rules in order to function. If you do not oblige you will likely face the consequences of your societies rules. If you don't like it, you can:
[list][*]move into a different society with a different set of rules[*]start a petition[*]influence your local government representative[*]take a dispute through the courts in an attempt to change common law[*]become government and change the law[*]break the law and face the consequences[*]grudgingly comply[/list]Many choice, no right or wrong answer. Although if you choose to break the law, hopefully no-one else gets harmed in the process.
[/quote]



So your guilt is determined by the courts, not legally but actually? I like you stevil, your reasonably philosophically consistant, I respect that.

What I am asking here though is moral question, certianly the State is going to come for you if you resist, but do you have the right to resist?

Are you as a human person entitled to the right of self defence against the state, regardless of the states obvious position of power over you?

[Winchester]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1305505884' post='2242049']
you are right, you are morally permitted to defend yourself. although if your attacking the officer in the hopes of resisting arrest he is morally permitted to use force to secure you as a prisoner and defend himself. but yeah, if your innocent and being arrested, be my guest to attack the officer to try and resist arrest. see how far that gets you.
[/quote]
In the case of not resisting, it has gotten some men executed.

You really hope a just man resisting unjust arrest is harmed, don't you?

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1305505884' post='2242049']
you are right, you are morally permitted to defend yourself. although if your attacking the officer in the hopes of resisting arrest he is morally permitted to use force to secure you as a prisoner and defend himself. but yeah, if your innocent and being arrested, be my guest to attack the officer to try and resist arrest. see how far that gets you.
[/quote]


Wait so now you can resist arrest? Which is your position havok? Can an innocent man resist arrest or not?

[Amppax]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305497477' post='2241984']
This is true even though once you surrender you are completly in the states power and unable tofurther defend yourself, as well as no longer at liberty?
[/quote]

Well the premise of this is flawed, once you are arrested you are not completely defenseless, you still have the right to defend yourself in court, and still have the right to legal representation. So no, you are not completely defenseless.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1305509397' post='2242078']
Well the premise of this is flawed, once you are arrested you are not completely defenseless, you still have the right to defend yourself in court, and still have the right to legal representation. So no, you are not completely defenseless.
[/quote]
I have yet to see a law step in and stop someone from breaking it. You might as well use the existence of law to prove us protected from being murdered.

Or an infallible court.

Once you are locked in a jail cell, you are completely at the mercy of your captors. Once you are in handcuffs, good luck resisting.

[stevil]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305506039' post='2242051']
So your guilt is determined by the courts, not legally but actually? I like you stevil, your reasonably philosophically consistant, I respect that.
[/quote]
As observers but part of society there is no magic ability to look at someone and determine their guilt, we have to trust the system rather than be vigilantes. Unfortunately the system gets it wrong at times.

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305506039' post='2242051']
What I am asking here though is moral question, certianly the State is going to come for you if you resist, but do you have the right to resist?

Are you as a human person entitled to the right of self defence against the state, regardless of the states obvious position of power over you?
[/quote]
As an Atheist my opinion is going to vary greatly from the Catholics on this forum. This neither makes me wrong or right, this is simply my current opinion.
I feel the concept of morals is difficult to define. I don't tend to use the term in my self explainations. I have a set of personal values, which help me make my own decisions quicker than if I didn't have these values. However I don't even accept my own values to be set in concrete. They are open for debate and even though the older and "wiser/set in my ways" that I get these become more difficult to change, but change is possible.

I don't subscribe to a position of absolute morals, although you would have to have something seriously wrong with you if you were to think child rape was OK.

Anyway, getting back onto topic, I feel people can have a personal set of values or can hold to a group's set of morals (e.g. Catholic Church).
With this Point of View in mind only you can answer the question "Morally do I have the right to resist?"
For me the governing laws have a huge priority (however they tend to align with my personal values, so generally no problem). For a Catholic or Christian or any other Theist for that matter, I could see how this person might prioritise on their god's stance over and above that of government.

I don't have enough theological knowledge with regards to the dilema that Catholics may face with regards to the Original Post here.

[Winchester]

We have a "right" to keep and bear arms. There's another one the government regularly violates and imprisons people over.

[havok579257]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305507973' post='2242067']
Wait so now you can resist arrest? Which is your position havok? Can an innocent man resist arrest or not?
[/quote]


i said morally you can resist arrest. moral according to God's law. although the officer can morally use force to arrest you.

[havok579257]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1305506861' post='2242060']
In the case of not resisting, it has gotten some men executed.

You really hope a just man resisting unjust arrest is harmed, don't you?
[/quote]


please restat your point. i don't understand what your trying to say.

[Winchester]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1305510766' post='2242091']
i said morally you can resist arrest. moral according to God's law. although the officer can morally use force to arrest you.
[/quote]
Actually, I said it.

And you agreed with me. If you agreed with me more often, you could enjoy being right.