Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
District Attorney or Defense
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 2742563" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>Last I heard, resisting arrest involved using force against the officer. Clearly, that would be a legitimate crime.</p><p></p><p>Of course, that presupposes that the arrest is legal in the first place. If it's not, then "resisting" is actually self-defense against an illegitimate aggressor. The use of force in legitimate self-defense is not wrong; in fact, there's substantial court precedent to suggest that resisting an unlawful arrest is perfectly legal. Indiana even made headlines a few years ago for explicitly codifying a citizen's right to resist an unlawful arrest with force, up to and including deadly force.</p><p></p><p>henschman's position appears to be that victimless crimes shouldn't be crimes, and therefore he supports resisting arrest for such crimes (he is, of course, free to correct my understanding). I agree with him that victimless crimes ought be no crimes at all, and that arrest for same is illegitimate; however, I'd note that in the eyes of the law, those crimes are on the books, so while they're morally treasonous, they'll still land you in jail, or on a slab for resisting. Still, I like Indiana's solution...and I hope to see a repeal of a lot of laws that criminalize behavior that doesn't actually hurt anybody (save, possibly, for the actor...but it's his life to live, now isn't it?).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 2742563, member: 13624"] Last I heard, resisting arrest involved using force against the officer. Clearly, that would be a legitimate crime. Of course, that presupposes that the arrest is legal in the first place. If it's not, then "resisting" is actually self-defense against an illegitimate aggressor. The use of force in legitimate self-defense is not wrong; in fact, there's substantial court precedent to suggest that resisting an unlawful arrest is perfectly legal. Indiana even made headlines a few years ago for explicitly codifying a citizen's right to resist an unlawful arrest with force, up to and including deadly force. henschman's position appears to be that victimless crimes shouldn't be crimes, and therefore he supports resisting arrest for such crimes (he is, of course, free to correct my understanding). I agree with him that victimless crimes ought be no crimes at all, and that arrest for same is illegitimate; however, I'd note that in the eyes of the law, those crimes are on the books, so while they're morally treasonous, they'll still land you in jail, or on a slab for resisting. Still, I like Indiana's solution...and I hope to see a repeal of a lot of laws that criminalize behavior that doesn't actually hurt anybody (save, possibly, for the actor...but it's his life to live, now isn't it?). [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
District Attorney or Defense
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom