A Patriot sent this to me in email. My ISP must have pissed off ATT, because ATT will not permit anyone from my ISP to send mail, so I don’t have permission to identify the Patriot by name.
It seems LEO found some flyers that upset them. It would appear that some of the Occupy folks are laying the moral premise for violence against LEO. I read the PDF version of the flyer, it is here.
Is it a plant? Is it legit? I’m not sure. I do think there are elements of the Occupy folks who want violence for political means, which would explain why LEO across the country is moving to shut them down. Interesting, we never had a single such incident at any Tea Party, did we…
But having read the Occupy essay, there are points with which many Patriots would find common ground. For instance, the Occupy essay declares that if LEO is enforcing an unjust law then the defender may use any force necessary to resist and defeat the unlawful enforcement. I have no problem with that, and Mister Jefferson would concur.
As a rule of thumb I think most of us would agree that Self Defense is the proper line in the sand for engaging violence…under typical circumstances.
I think we are all familiar with Mark Matis – I don’t think I am speaking out of turn when I say he is not a fan of LEO and I find it hard to fault his logic when he discusses that LEO will be the point of engagement when the fight for Liberty gets real. In the history of Man it has always been so.
As the Patriot who sent me the piece rightly observed, John Parker and his men were engaging unlawful LEO at Lexington and Concord. The Brits were trying to enforce “legal” yet “unlawful” laws…and Captain Parker met them with enough force to make them stop their unlawful acts.
Obviously, our Founding Generation had no problem with that…well, I should say, our Founders who chose not to side with the King. 😉
I have a very hardcore philosophy regarding this topic that is simply not properly evolved or appropriate for this venue. I intend to explore it in the most blunt terms in a published book. I may be kidding myself, but I think I run a lesser chance of being prosecuted for potential incitement when my ideas are offered in a printed, legitimate book as opposed to a blog.
But I will not shy away from this entirely: In any matter of self defense, as you define self defense at the moment of engagement, you are morally justified to meet any unlawful violence against you (violence includes the laying of hands, the verbal threat to lay hands, and any attempt to arrest or restrain) with sufficient violence as to remain at Freedom and Liberty. That’s the Kerodin Doctrine.
And one more point to consider: Once you choose to step off the porch (whether you choose to announce it or not) the rules change. When you step off the porch you are at war on behalf of Liberty. If you know you are heading into a fight, win.
And remember: Never tell a man that you are planning to sneak up on him…
Stay safe, my friends…by any means necessary.