Why do the ritors ask for Justice?

[Huggy Bear]

If you could be bother to read what i wrote you will see i did indeed take alot of time answering each and every question you brought up.

You seem to be ignoring facts that critically wound your argument.

Perhaps since i spend so much time breaking down your argument and going point by point showing just how and why you are wrong, you could do the same. rather than making sweeping generalizations like the lazy atheists do.

Maybe you should spend more time formatting the quotes you're responding to correctly, because otherwise it's just a confusing mess...

let's try something different since you seem to be going blind to facts on me..

1) show proof that these were even legit arrests.

The whole point is that the arrests weren't legit, hence why the charges were dropped.

2) Show that charges were dismissed.

Once you show me some paper work, I can then show you why it was deem ok that these two were let go. (If that did indeed happen)

http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-ne...0531-story

"It was roughly three years ago that FOX 2 was standing in this same place reporting on charges against two teens for fighting with two Detroit police officers.

A lot has happened in those three years. Initially police said the officers did not use excessive force and felony charges were levied against both Moore and Mitchell.

"Assaulting a police officer. Resisting arrest, both were college students," Sanders said.

But just two weeks after FOX 2 first aired the story in 2013, the charges were dropped.

"Once the prosecutor read the transcript and saw the video tape the cases were dismissed and that's when we pursued a civil cause of action," Sanders said"

Or you can google "due process of the Law" for yourself.

Again, you seem to be blocking out all knowledge of this term. But that is why it is never ok to resist and yet people do get set free.

They weren't set free because the resisted I can assure you. they were set free because Due process probably showed the arrest to be bad. Which again is not for you to determine, like it was not up to those guy to determine this either. DUE PROCESS determined this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process

Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law.

Due process went out the window the moment the cop accosted and struck the two men without cause, the men fought back in self defense WHICH IS ALLOWED. Why do you think the 2nd amendment exists?

And I am saying everything you say here is simple minded speculation. How do I know you did not just yank to random you tube videos and create a narritive you change to support your arguement no matter what I say?

Again proof, proof, proof so me some proof.

Also why did the city of Detroit pay out $120,000 to these men after they clearly resisted arrest?

Again proof, proof, proof so me some proof.

same link as above
http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-ne...0531-story

"DETROIT (WJBK) - They went from being arrested and facing felonies to being cleared of all charges.

Now they are figuring out what to do with all their money after winning a big settlement from the city of Detroit over a restaurant brawl caught on video.

It wasn't a prize fight, just a costly one, upwards of six figures, paid to Tywonn Mitchell and Navian Moore. The two men were out for a bite to eat when police followed them into the Grandy Coney Island.

"(An officer) poked one of the young men in the chest, I believe it was Mr. Moore who slapped the officer's hand away and a scuffle ensued," said Herbert Sanders, and attorney for the men.

The settlement was just paid by the city of Detroit - or more accurately the tax payers.

"It is an unfortunate circumstance that taxpayers continue to pay for stupid mistakes," Sanders said."


http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index...._fist.html



"DETROIT, MI -- The city paid out $120,000 -- $60,000 apiece -- to two men involved in a fist fight with police in 2013, according to Michael M. Muller with the Detroit Law Department.

It was a "full and fair" settlement, Muller said.

Naibon Miller, 28, and Tywonn Mitchell, 23, spent three days in jail following the videotaped altercation with two Detroit police officers inside a Coney Island restaurant in May 2013.

They were each charged with felony resisting or assaulting a police officer.

Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy dismissed those charges in September 2013 after reviewing the case."

It would seem the "governing authorities" found that they did nothing wrong by resisting an unlawful arrest, correct?

According to your narrative..

So Again proof, proof, proof so me some proof.

And I can tell you exactly why they were released.

According to MY narrative?

http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm

• “Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529.
  
  
  
• “An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.
  
  
  
• “When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.
  
  
  
• “These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.
  
  
  
• “An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
  
  
  
• “Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
  
  
  
• “One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910)
  
  

Now do you see where an unlawful arrest violates due process and may be resisted according to the governing authorities (in this case the supreme court)?

*emphasis mine*

Oh so what you're saying is that James Holmes and Dylan Roof were given an opportunity to surrender, correct?

Are you saying ALL the black men shot by cop were not given the chance to surrender? I looked at the last 5 videos and every single one the black guy is running or fighting with the cops... Again the two white boys did everything they were told when they were told that is the only reason the lived. You put either one of these two murders infront of a cop pulling a gun from their belt or pointing one at a cop they are dead.

Show me in this video where Tamir pulled out his gun and screamed at the cops, or had any opportunity to surrender for that matter.

1:15 to 1:25 point the gun at a passer by
4:32 4:50 point gun at something/someone off camera seems to have some words/gustures.
8:32 tamir jacket goes up where he has the gun tucked in the waist ban.

You didn't answer the question, we know that Tamir had a fake gun, I asked where did he get the opportunity to surrender it? The cops damn near performed a drive by shooting.

My point about James Holmes and Dylan Roof is that they weren't shot on sight like Tamir was.