Category Archives: Hell’s Saints

Police Interaction Book

Preface – The King’s Men

The following words are an attempt to catalog my experiences with police, and frame them in such a way that makes it as clear as possible what my perspective was. From the very first time that a police officer pointed his sidearm at me to the very last, I’ve continuously known that the actions of both myself and the police officers I met would be difficult for many people to understand. I have known that I’ve never appeared really normal or average when others view my actions, but I have always felt that this was due to a fundamental misunderstanding of my premise.

However, this book is not truly about me. While I myself must frame the stories, since I (and my corroborating cameras) were actually there, the stories herein are about the individual police officers; the specific humans that occupy the uniforms of law enforcement; the minds within the machine. Perhaps I have my own biases, partially due to my own ego and drive to succeed, but I will include no added lies or falsifications to tell the story better for my perspective; I will only include the full picture of truth that I can, because the boring old truth still ends up being a sum of unbelievable experiences with a plethora of colorful people. I have shocked myself in what I’ve seen with my own eyes, and I hope that you might be able to withdraw the same knowledge that I have from my experiences.

While this book will be universally declared by angry critics to be completely anti-police, let me make it clear that this is not the case. Police are a necessary part of a peaceful society. Absolutely necessary. Not everyone in a society, certainly not a majority, are likely to be professionals at conflict resolution, confrontation de-escalation, and defense of the peaceful population at large; I think that every reader, and myself, will agree that this is ideally the ultimate role of police in society.

This is not how police actually are.

Police are trained not to resolve conflicts, but to investigate and cage possible offenders of an arbitrary edict sent down from the metaphorical king in Washington, DC or Lansing, Michigan or your local city hall. The king (the government: the state, and their courts) has offices nationwide, and indeed across the world. Though the exact nature of how that king comes to power is no longer a method as arbitrary as family lines or marriage, the collective edicts returned from the king(s) carry the threat of violent, life-threatening, physical force from the king’s men (police) if you dare defy such edict. It does not matter if you didn’t hurt anyone or if there is no complaining victim: the king’s men will put you in a cage if the king says so, end of story.

Police are not trained to deescalate confrontations, but to escalate them until they gain physical control. If a police officer wants to talk to you, and you are walking away from him (since you have the fundamental right to ignore any stranger on the street, regardless of their costume or certification from the king), since he thinks the king will grant him permission to do so, he will grab your arm to stop you. If you resist, he will either knock you to the ground with his body or his Taser. If you defend yourself from this clear aggression, the officer will murder you. If you submit to the torture, you will be chained, caged, and be told to remit a portion of your wealth to the king to leave said cage.

I once got pulled over for having a muddy license plate (the purpose of such plate being that the king may better identify and steal from his subjects), just a few minutes after being on a muddy dirt road. The only issue here is that the police want to be able to see the plate; its not like anyone was harmed in the making of this $60 traffic ticket. If I hadn’t paid that $60, the police would eventually send a SWAT team to put me in a cage, just because the police officer couldn’t read a piece of metal that I don’t even need on any practical or moral level; I only have it because the king demands his subjects have plates.

Police are trained not to defend the peaceful population at large, but to protect themselves at all costs, even if those costs are grossly immoral on their face. Not only do police officers often cause unnecessary physical harm to peaceful people in their efforts to enforce the king’s edicts, but they lie to protect each other in a dangerous Police vs Public mentality, all to put the king’s wrath upon some peaceful subject rather than themselves. Whom will the king believe: a peasant, or one of his own men? Even then, in the United States at least, the king has declared that his men aren’t even required to protect any specific subject from imminent harm happening in front of them, but to protect the community at large so that the king’s interests are not affected by unrest (Warren v. District of Columbia is an edict from the king that addresses this point).

By this point, you may be thinking that I am broadly generalizing police in an unfair way. This is at least partially correct. Each individual police officer is their own person; they each own themselves and control their own actions. This means that individual police officers are fully capable of ignoring the common trends described previously and being better custodians of the peace of their community than their peers. Many officers proactively attempt to be better than others, but they are a minority. Thanks to the nature of relying on a metaphorical king to rule society, the king’s men typically follow the training handed down to them, regardless of its ethicality or morality. I have met police officers that literally tell me, “I hate cops,” knowing full well the coercive, thug-like nature of the common police officer; this is the exception rather than the rule.

Different law enforcement agencies across the world have their own standard of what exactly is proper conduct for their officers. In many nations, the police are literally worse than the criminals on the streets, because the police are assured of having the king’s blessing in whatever corruption they choose. Another plethora of nations have police that are far more effective at maintaining a helpful relationship with the king’s subjects, to the point that the people look up to the police to one degree or another. Police in the United States fall into both of these two loose categories, usually varying wildly by geography and local politics. A sheriff’s deputy in rural Montana will almost always be a true community peacekeeper compared to the thugs that occupy NYPD costumes in New York City. Bigger populations are almost always an indicator of worse police, for a wide variety of economic and political reasons.

However, it CAN truly be said that all police are required to be immoral; it IS objectively true that all cops are bad. This may seem like an extremely overbroad statement that couldn’t possibly be justified, but the explanation is rather simple. Police are policy enforcers: its right there in the name. Alternatively, they are law enforcement officers; their job is to enforce ALL of the king’s edicts (laws), not protect anyone needing protection. While police can and do, of course, on occasion actually protect someone in dire need of protection, this is not in their job description. The institution of police is designed to enforce ALL the laws, ideally with the intention of making a safer community.

However, sometimes government makes laws for reasons that aren’t based in a concern for the public, but perhaps a concern for itself or whom it favors. There are bad laws in existence in every single jurisdiction that police patrol. Every single police jurisdiction in the world has laws against what natural plants you can choose to put in your body, as an easy example. Because you own yourself, and because you own your body, it is a violation of your self-ownership for the king to declare that you cannot do so. Putting a plant in your body is not inherently a violation of someone’s safety or freedom, and yet your safety and freedom is directly threatened by the king and the king’s men if you do so.

The inherent contradiction that all police encounter is that they are required to enforce these bad laws and put you in a cage if you do not comply. It doesn’t matter if it is manifestly evil to throw a peaceful plant smoker into a cage; the king requires his men to do so. Therefore, every police officer is constantly required to choose between doing their jobs properly or not enforce these unjust edicts from the king. If the police officer does not enforce an unjust law, they are not doing their jobs properly, and are therefore a bad cop. If the police officer enforces an unjust law, they are acting in a manifestly evil manner under the king’s direction, and are therefore a bad cop. There are NO good cops, because every single one is required to be in this dilemma.

Police, as you might imagine, nearly exclusively choose to enforce these unjust laws in manifestly evil manners. They have their own needs to fund theirs and their families’ best interests with income from the king, and they have little motivation to give up that financial security. To make matters worse, the training that police receive convinces them that their actions are perfectly moral; they are conditioned to accept that the unjust means justify the ineffective ends. It is a sad truth that all police are in this position where they must choose between financial security and being a moral peacekeeper; it is exponentially sadder that police choose to put themselves in that position by virtue of their voluntary choice of career.

At this point, you may be wondering precisely how I can show that all police are required to be immoral, yet simultaneously claim that we need police. The key difference here is that I advocate not for the monopolized enforcers of the king’s arbitrary edicts that we currently live with, but with peacekeepers skilled in conflict de-escalation, conflict resolution, and protection of those who ask for protection. Being forced to have “protection” from a thug class with the force of the entire king’s resources at their disposal is not freedom; any peaceful person being forced to subjugate themselves to something they do not ask for is tyranny. You as a liberated, peaceful person who just wants to live your life hassle-free have every right to protect yourself if you choose; you have no moral requirement to accept another’s protection. Just like a mafia demanding protection money from members of the community, the end result is a net loss for the peaceful community members. In the end, you are not paying for protection from the mafia, even if they actually provide it: you are paying to not get your ass kicked by the mafia.

People want police, or else they wouldn’t exist. It really is that simple, but a huge portion of peaceful people in the world believe that our current type of police is good enough. We can find a better way as a society; we can do without the king’s men and even the king himself. We need not settle for a thug enforcer class that operates under intimidation and coercion; we can have police that are not bound by edicts from a king. The king’s men are only out for the king, by definition, and the safety and liberty of we the people is secondary at best. The king’s men theoretically serve the citizenry by serving the king; why can’t the king’s men simply serve the citizenry directly, and simply cease to be men of the king?

Until we reach a critical mass of people realizing the coercive nature of their police, there are many things to be done. The massive quantity of personal paradigm shifts required to improve the status quo is a daunting task. What we can easily do, in our efforts to move to a more peaceful society, is educate both the police and citizenry of the concepts in the preceding paragraphs. This is my premise for this book. This book is designed to show not only efforts of myself to improve individual police officers directly in their respect for the liberties of the citizenry, but to more importantly show you how you can create the same positive changes for yourself and your community. Call this an autobiographical how-to guide on preserving your liberty in the face of growing unrest and tyranny in our world, starting with the boots on the ground that the king’s men are. Ideally, upon completing this book, you will have all the knowledge you need to make yourself exponentially harder to be victimized by the police, as well as learn distinctly effective methods for improving the police for the safety and liberty of the rest of your community.

If it pleases the crown, I invite you to read on.

—————————————————————-

If you find the preface to be a riveting exposition into the dozens of police interaction stories told, then please consider donating some crypto to help this project.

BTC: 16NhvUZL5x116e5ziSii1hNkjzqqKKhxyw
ETH: 0x438C2f88108c9951c7c2655aA89137Ff2cD8A302 (ERC-20 ready)

News Versus Reality

My friend and associate from Hells Saints recently made the news like crazy for merely going on a walk. This is idiotic to say the least, but these sorts of things are not new to the open carry community. It is idiotic that people who make a lifestyle of exposing things the news won’t end up getting used by the news to make bullshit stories that not only have much to do about nothing, but entirely miss the point being made to begin with. This event was no exception.

Tens of thousands of people have run their mouths, thinking that because they have an NRA membership and/or watch CSI and/or play Call of Duty, they are entitled to speak. But they don’t know us. They don’t understand what we do and why, and the news damn sure won’t be telling them. They probably don’t even grasp the basics of gun safety – nevermind the appropriate uses of firearms or conflict de-escalation. So, let’s consider why he ACTUALLY chooses to open carry and engage police.

He is, in fact, sick of tyranny. He is sick of police taking money that is stolen from citizens under the threat of death and then using their stolen wages to treat us like their subjects. He is sick of people thinking they’re free, even while they get screwed over by governments and their corporate handlers in every possible way government officials and corporate executives can manage. He is sick of people thinking that cops are here to protect them and that when cops step out of line they can’t – or shouldn’t – be challenged, an especially important thing to him (and most of us, as well as huge portions of minority communities) after all the years he’s been harassed by cops for doing nothing illegal. Contrary to what legions of apathetic shit talkers online have to say, he does not do this for personal attention, he does it to support my freedom and yours.

He is a local resident, and he is very well known of by the police officers that appear in the above video. This is important to note for those who think he’s some sort of unknown stranger to this community, a stranger who is angling to stir up trouble in the midst of well-intentioned, concerned cops. This is simply not the case. Although you can see him in many other videos essentially setting the standard for how to bitch out harassing cops without giving those cops any justification to arrest him (A DIFFICULT THING TO BALANCE – AND NOT SOMETHING I SUGGEST TO ANYONE INCLUDING HIM), this time was different. He was furious, and he let them verbally have it in a way that went further than any other occasion I can recall from him or anyone else. I hope that his attitude will serve to teach those who might otherwise partake in fairly useless activism like occupy protests and “die ins”. You gotta start somewhere and make due with what skills and resources you have, but you SHOULD consider yourself above the police because you pay their wages, and your activism should reflect your inherent superiority. (“die ins” are in my opinion an acknowledgement of victimization rather than a statement that the police are not above the law and must be stopped from being cold blooded murderers. Merely protesting murder is a far cry from saying you’ll lose your rights over your dead body as Charlton Heston used to so frequently do. I suppose that I need to make another post about non aggression principle based protesting vs non violent protesting, but that’s another topic for another day.) However you want it to happen – whether extremely professional and business-like, or like the actions depicted in this video, or anywhere in between – you have to remember that you own yourself and they are not in charge of you. Remember too that no end of the spectrum is wrong. They are already abusing you, and your anger is extremely justified, but there is also nothing at all wrong with being very polite.

Which brings me to my next point. There is an epidemic of “us against them” hatred from cops toward the public. We as tax-paying citizens do have by default the moral high ground because we are the victims of their theft and their enforcement of laws against “crimes” with no victims. Even though their very profession is in contradiction with our rights, we nonetheless should remember to NOT stoop to that level. For me, this means that I prefer not to interact with cops unless in writing, other than occasionally using the wash rinse repeat method to gather evidence during an unlawful stop such as we did in Muskegon. For example, I will give copies of the same material we hand out to everyone else on our walks, or email with them later if they want (though it’s extremely rare that they do). They are people, after all, and thus, there is no reason to neglect to (carefully) share the message of liberty with them out of the hopes that they too can get the message and help better the world.

Mitch

Arrested Open Carry Activist Found NOT GUILTY

From Elijah Woody’s attorney, Jim Makowski of Dearborn, MI:

PEOPLE v. WOODY AAR

On September 13, 2014, Elijah Woody, Jr., a 24 y.o., African-American male, was hanging out chatting with 4-5 friends on the sidewalk of an inner city neighborhood in Detroit. WOODY was open carrying a Glock 23 in a Blackhawk Serpa OWB holster and wearing jeans, a t-shirt, and a light jacket buttoned all the way up.

At approximately 7:50p, a car containing three officers from the Detroit Police Department’s Tactical Response Unit, rounded the corner and approached the group. The TRU officers dress in BDUs and typically act in a paramilitary fashion.

As everyone in Detroit knows but most of us from the suburbs do not, it is common for DPD officers to stop, frisk, demand identification and conduct illegal, unconstitutional searches of any group of black males on public property. If they find anything illegal or questionable they will then lie as to how they learned of the offense.

True to form, the officers stopped the car, jumped out and demanded everyone produce ID. Officer James Taylor went straight to WOODY and asked him “you got some bullshit on you there,” referring to the Glock. WOODY is immediately disarmed, cuffed and placed in the back of the squad car. The officers did not inquire whether he had a CPL until after transporting him to the Detroit Detention Facility, and charging him with the five-year felony of Carrying a Concealed Weapon.

When the police wrote their report they had to come up with a story to justify their encounter with WOODY. The officers claimed they observed the group drinking from red Solo cups and, as they drove up they “smelled the strong odor of burning marijuana” from a moving car about 15’ away (must be some bloodhound genes there). Officer Taylor claimed that when WOODY noticed their approach he “bladed” his body to limit their ability to see his right hip and started “backpedaling.” Taylor claimed that WOODY then turned full face on, lifted the right side of his jacket and exposed the Glock hidden under his jacket, stating he was “open carrying.”

Shortly after the arrest I was contacted and advised about this gross abuse of WOODY’s rights. I reached out to my good friend Terry Johnson, a fellow 2A defense lawyer, to see if he was interested in jointly defending WOODY. He agreed so we took the case.

At the preliminary exam two of the three officers testified and many inconsistencies became evident in their testimony. Despite these obvious falsehoods the judge decided that there was Probable Cause that a crime had been committed and bound the matter over to Wayne County Circuit Court on the felony CCW charge. We flat out refused to engage in plea negotiations and demanded the matter be set for jury trial.

At 4:49p the afternoon before trial the Wayne County Prosecutor filed two Motions in Limine. A Motion in Limine is a pretrial motion generally filed several weeks before trial, used to exclude certain evidence or limit what the jury is allowed to know. The prosecutor sought to exclude part of the dashcam recordings that, to put it mildly, were uncomplimentary about the general public. He also sought an order from the judge PROHIBITING US FROM CLAIMING OPEN CARRY AS A DEFENSE. The judge granted both motions and we were forbidden to explain to the jury that Open Carry differed from Concealed Carry and what the differences were.

At trial the next day Officer Taylor claimed that he decided WOODY had a gun on him based upon his “extensive experience” and the fact he was “blading” his body away. When asked whether he yelled “GUN” or in any way alerted his partners of the presence of a firearm he said no and claimed that he was trying to “deescalate” the situation. Yet when the second officer took the stand, on cross examination he claimed that they had a “code word” to alert the other officers of a gun and that Taylor had given it. Further, the dashcam video showed WOODY being placed in the rear of the squad car with the empty holster clearly visible. The jacket the police claimed was hanging down covering the gun was clearly shown in the video to be buttoned all the way up. It became obvious that the officers had fabricated their story, with jurors shaking their heads in disgust at times. The day ended after the first two officers testified.

The next morning the last officer testified. He was the most truthful, stating that he hadn’t really interacted with WOODY as he was on security overwatch, making sure the other civilians present were not a threat. The prosecution rested and we made a Motion for a Directed Verdict, asking that the judge rule that, as a matter of law, the Defendant could not be found guilty. Since the judge is required to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party the motion was denied.

Our first witness testified how the group had been standing around, talking about the upcoming Floyd Meriwether fight that was going to take place that night when the cops drove up, ordered everyone to put their hands up, and directly approached WOODY. The witness firmly stated that WOODY’s gun was not concealed or in any way hidden by a coat.

The WOODY then elected to take the witness stand to testify in his own defense. The arresting officers had not realized that WOODY had pulled out his cell phone and started recording video. While the video only lasted 13 seconds it completely contradicted the police version of the facts, showing that WOODY had his hands up and was 2-3’ away from the nearest person and not moving away. The video cut off as Taylor slapped the phone out of his hand. It was perfectly clear that the cops saw the gun from the moving car and headed directly to WOODY hassle him.

After we rested we again asked the judge allow us to explain in the Jury Instructions that Open Carry is legally recognized and that the jury should be advised of same but we were again denied. The case was sent to the jury at noon. Shortly thereafter the jury asked to see the videos. It took a while to get the videos set up for the jury to review but, five minutes or so after the jury reviewed the videos they came back with a NOT GUILTY verdict.

LESSONS TO BE LEARNED

1. Always get a CPL.
2. Always record when Open Carrying, especially without a CPL.
3. Detroit Police cannot be trusted to recognize your right to Open Carry.
4. Expect dirty tricks from the prosecutor’s office.
5. Make sure you have competent legal counsel.

http://youtu.be/sbskx8XmE04

ELIJAH WOODY UPDATE

Elijah Woody
Elijah Woody

Elijah Woody, the persecuted open carry activist of Detroit, MI has had his days in court today and yesterday for the malicious and bogus charge of carrying a concealed weapon, when it was in fact carried openly.

The three officers who testified could not agree on the same story. The jury knew they were lying the entire time. After less than an hour of deliberation, he was found NOT GUILTY.

Special thanks to everyone who helped make his freedom possible, including his excellent attorneys Terry Johnson and Jim Makowski.

-EC