Police Deputy smashes into home, attacks family for flying flag upside down.

Sigh. The SCOTUS ruled on a similar law from another state. It did not state that NC code umpty-squat was unConstitutional. Until the NC state legislature or the NC courts pull it, it’s still there.

Neither the cop, nor Average Joe, are allowed to determine for themselves if the statute in question is similar enough to be covered by the SCOTUS ruling. (That is what the legislative and executive brahces are for, for pete’s sake.)

The door was not an obstruction to the cop obtaining info required on the citation? No exaggeration, the fact that they closed the door when he asked for ID is not in dispute, right? (I didnt say they hit him with the door…)

You mention that you have received warnings about your music or TV being on too loud, and the neighbors complained. The cops came out, and you turned it down.

What if… you told them to “Fuck Off”? You claim that the noise level is not high enough to qualify as a “disturbance to the peace”, and that they have no justification for harassing you.

What do you think they will do?

I predict that they would have written you a citation. They would have asked you your name, for the ticket.

You ignore them, and close your door.

Are they supposed to just stand there and pout?

I would not. The only citations received without a signature are ones written when the defendent is not available (like parking tickets). The ones were the defendant is present (like a speeding or jaywalking ticket), a signature is required.

They may believe that, and it might even be true.

You don’t argue about that on your front porch, though, and you don’t get to “resist arrest” (either through fisticuffs, or even walking away/shutting the door) if you think it’s bogus, either.

Which might support a harassment defense or something along those lines. But it is done in court, not on your front porch.

See, the defendent may think it’s harassment, but the cop may feel it’s justified. Therefore, a Judge and Jury decides if it is an abuse of authority by the cop, or not.

Not the defendent, on his front porch, at the time the citation is being written.

The fault, then, lies with the legislature for leaving this law on the books (or the state court for not getting it suspended). The cop is not authorised to decide which laws on the books are worthy of ignoring, nor is he authorised to do the work the state legislature and courts should be doing by ignoring laws currently in force.

He has some discretionary powers, true. In this case, he dicded to write the ticket.

No, they were resisting arrest. If the cop wanted them dead, he would have shot them dead.

One last time, I am not going to defend the cop fully here. He probably lost his temper. At the least, suspension, retraining, that sort of thing may be called for. But the defendents aren’t excused from thier actions, either. (Latitude comes in the sentencing phase, if any.)

As I stated, a sincere fear for your life is a legitimate defence, IMO. To protest a bogus law, not so much.

(We are talking an active, physical resistance here. Not a passive civil disobedience action, like chaining yourself to a bulldozer to prevent the forest from being uprooted…)

I know, but I like to be taken seriously by such august company (DtC included). :slight_smile:

Thanks for allowing me to participate.

You mean assault? Actually, I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing. How do you feel about the civil disobedience movement in the '60s to combat racial discrimation? Do you think it was wrong?

No. Not wrong.

Does the scenerio in the OP seem to fall under “civil disobedience” for you?

I don’t feel like I have enough information to make that assessment. I certainly never meant to say or imply that it was. Honestly, I can’t see what it accomplished here. I would have just accepted the citation and fought it in court if I felt so inclined.

I’d say no. If they were performing an act of civil disobedience, they wouldn’t have taken down the flag voluntarily. Also, one of the purposes of civil disobedience is to get arrested, which they seem to have tried to avoid. It doesn’t appear that they set out to challenge the flag desecration law, but maybe that’s the way this will end up. If so, that’s a good thing. I’m very confident that even the NC SCOTUS would rule that law unconstitutional.

They didn’t try to avoid getting arrested, they tried to avoid providing ID. It’s only technically “resisting arrest.” It wasn’t like he ever said “you’re under arrest,” before they closed the door. After he broke into the house, he never gave them a chance to submit to an arrest. He just pulled out his truncheon and started swinging.

If he was writing them a citation, and they refused to provide the information he needed to write the citation, especially by going inside and locking the door on him, how is that not resisting arrest? That’s more than just technically resisting arrest…refusing to comply with a police order’s instructions when he’s arresting/citing you is the definition of resisting arrest.

Look, I’m not going to continue this stupid argument, as you keep ignoring the facts.

The point I was addressing is whether they were performing an act of civil disobedience. I think not, because usually when you do that you try to get arrested. It does not look like they were trying to get arrested.

In fact, if I recall correctly, when a cop cites you for speeding and asks you to sign the citation, if you refuse, he can/will arrest you.

Not unless you’re trying for an appearance on Cops.

My point is that they were not necessarily avoiding arrest. Hypothetically, they could have been trying to provoke an arrest by closing the door (without realizing that they had already been technically under arrest and we’re already technically resisting it).

In this case, I was only arguing against Mace’s suggestion that they were intentionally avoiding arrest (and thereby were not being classically civilly disobedient).

Let me point out once again that their own defense attorney says they were resisting arrest, since they didn’t think they had committed any crime.

Sigh. We were talkiing about degree of discretion, and whether a person calling in a complaint reduced it. And I don’t know, and I don’t think you know, that once the complaint was called in that the cop still had that discretion to not write the ticket. Or if he still had that discretion but he was going to have to do a lot of explaining, etc. It’s certainly far from “obvious”. And why might that be? Because the rules that he operates under might not be the same as the rules as the cops where you live operate.

But I think I’ve had enough, Dio. Good luck with the fever.

Great leaping Buddha on a toadstool Diogenes you’re still at it? I’ll say this much, you’re as determined as you are wrong. Give em hell buddy…sheesh. :rolleyes:

But if, n their minds, they were only resisting showing ID, they didn’t KNOW they were resisting arrest. It is very plausible that they thought they were PROVOKING an arrest. I am no longer arguing whether they were technically resisting arrest, I am saying that refusing to show ID does not mean they weren’t trying to get hauled off in cuffs. Hypothetically, it could be a tactic to PROVOKE law enforcement to haul you away in cuffs.

Look change the word “arrest,” to “hauled away in cuffs.” People who are being civily disobedient want to get hauled away in cuffs. Refusing to show ID is a way to get the cops to haul you away in cuffs. Refusing to show ID does not mean you are trying to avoid getting hauled away in cuffs. Hypothetically it could mean that you’re TRYING to get hauled away in cuffs. Do you get what I’m saying?

No, I’m not sure what you are trying to say. Are you saying you think they were doing an act of civil disobedience? If so, I wouldn’t have expected them to take down the flag. Remember, they originally just flew the flag upside down, and only attached the notes later to explain to people why. Had they wanted to civilly disobeyed the flag desecration law, they would have “desecrated” it from the get go. Hanging the flag upside down does not constitute “desecration”, per the police in your original article.

The door. They closed the door.

Aaargghhhh. Must. Stay. Away. From. Thread. Must. Stay. Away.

Seriously, Diogenes, this is making no sense. If they were trying to be civily disobedient and get arrested, they first of all would not have complied with the request to take the flag down. Secondly, they would not have tried to close the door to avoid the officer, they would have stood their ground. I would think that refusing the officer’s request to take the flag down and then refusing to identify themselves would probably have been sufficient to get them arrested, if that’s what they were looking for…what else could the officer have done at that point but arrest them or walk away?

All charges dropped.

I am vindicated.
I hope they put that flag right back up with a great big picture of a cock on it.