Resistance is Futile: The Violent Cost of Challenging the American Police State

Guest Post by John W. Whitehead

“Police are specialists in violence. They are armed, trained, and authorized to use force. With varying degrees of subtlety, this colors their every action. Like the possibility of arrest, the threat of violence is implicit in every police encounter. Violence, as well as the law, is what they represent.”—Kristian Williams, activist and author

If you don’t want to get probed, poked, pinched, tasered, tackled, searched, seized, stripped, manhandled, arrested, shot, or killed, don’t say, do or even suggest anything that even hints of noncompliance. This is the new “thin blue line” over which you must not cross in interactions with police if you want to walk away with your life and freedoms intact.

The following incidents and many more like them serve as chilling reminders that in the American police state, “we the people” are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to “serve and protect.”

For example, police arrested Chaumtoli Huq because she failed to promptly comply when ordered to “move along” while waiting outside a Ruby Tuesday’s restaurant for her children, who were inside with their father, using the bathroom. NYPD officers grabbed Huq, a lawyer with the New York City Public Advocate’s office, flipped her around, pressed her against a wall, handcuffed her, searched her purse, arrested her, and told her to “shut up” when she cried out for help, before detaining her for nine hours. Huq was charged with obstructing governmental administration, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

Oregon resident Fred Marlow was jailed and charged with interfering and resisting arrest after he filmed a SWAT team raid that took place across the street from his apartment and uploaded the footage to the internet. The footage shows police officers threatening Marlow, who was awoken by the sounds of “multiple bombs blasting and glass breaking” and ran outside to investigate only to be threatened with arrest if he didn’t follow orders and return inside.

Eric Garner, 43 years old, asthmatic and unarmed, died after being put in a chokehold by NYPD police, allegedly for resisting arrest over his selling untaxed, loose cigarettes, although video footage of the incident shows little resistance on Garner’s part. Indeed, the man was screaming, begging and insisting he couldn’t breathe. And what was New York Mayor Bill De Blasio’s advice to citizens in order to avoid a similar fate? Don’t resist arrest. (Mind you, the NYPD arrests more than 13,000 people every year on charges of resisting arrest, although only a small fraction of those charged ever get prosecuted.)

Then there was Marine Brandon Raub, who was questioned at his home by a swarm of DHS, FBI, Secret Service agents and local police, tackled to the ground, handcuffed, and forcibly transported to a police station. Raub was then detained against his will in a psychiatric ward, without being provided any explanation, having any charges levied against him or being read his rights—all allegedly because of controversial song lyrics and political views posted on his Facebook page.

Incredibly, police insisted that Raub was not in fact under arrest. Of course, Raub was under arrest. When your hands are handcuffed behind you, when armed policemen are tackling you to the ground and transporting you across town in the back of a police car, and then forcibly detaining you against your will, you’re not free to walk away.

If you do attempt to walk away, be warned that the consequences will likely be even worse, as Tremaine McMillian learned the hard way. Miami-Dade police slammed the 14-year-old boy to the ground, putting him in a chokehold and handcuffing him after he allegedly gave them “dehumanizing stares” and walked away from them, which the officers found unacceptable. According to Miami-Dade Police Detective Alvaro Zabaleta, “His body language was that he was stiffening up and pulling away… When you have somebody resistant to them and pulling away and somebody clenching their fists and flailing their arms, that’s a threat. Of course we have to neutralize the threat.”

As I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, this mindset that any challenge to police authority is a threat that needs to be “neutralized” is a dangerous one that is part of a greater nationwide trend that sets the police beyond the reach of the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, when police officers are allowed to operate under the assumption that their word is law and that there is no room for any form of disagreement or even question, that serves to chill the First Amendment’s assurances of free speech, free assembly and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Frankly, it doesn’t matter whether it’s a casual “show your ID” request on a boardwalk, a stop-and-frisk search on a city street, or a traffic stop for speeding or just to check your insurance: if you feel like you can’t walk away from a police encounter of your own volition—and more often than not you can’t, especially when you’re being confronted by someone armed to the hilt with all manner of militarized weaponry and gear—then for all intents and purposes, you’re under arrest from the moment a cop stops you.

That raises the question, what exactly constitutes resisting an arrest? What about those other trumped up “contempt of cop” charges such as interference, disorderly conduct, obstruction, and failure to obey a police order that get trotted out anytime a citizen engages in behavior the police perceive as disrespectful or “insufficiently deferential to their authority”? Do Americans really have any recourse at all when it comes to obeying an order from a police officer, even if it’s just to ask a question or assert one’s rights, or should we just “surrender quietly”?

The short answer is that anything short of compliance will get you arrested and jailed. The long answer is a little more complicated, convoluted and full of legal jargon and dissonance among the courts, but the conclusion is still the same: anything short of compliance is being perceived as “threatening” behavior or resistance to be met by police with extreme force resulting in injury, arrest or death for the resistor.

The key word, of course, is comply meaning to obey, submit or conform. This is what author Kristian Williams describes as the dual myths of heroism and danger: “The overblown image of police heroism, and the ‘obsession’ with officer safety, do not only serve to justify police violence after the fact; by providing such justification, they legitimize violence, and thus make it more likely.”

How else can we explain why police shot a schizophrenic 30-year-old man holding a pellet gun over 80 times before his corpse was handcuffed? Mind you, witnesses reportedly informed the police that it was not a real gun, but the officers nonetheless opened fire about five minutes after arriving on the scene.

John Crawford was shot by police in an Ohio Wal-Mart for holding an air rifle sold in the store that he may have intended to buy. Oscar Grant, age 23, unarmed and lying face-down on the ground, was shot in the back by a transit officer in Oakland, Calif., who mistakenly used a gun instead of a taser to further restrain him. Ordered to show his hands after “anti-crime” police officers noticed him adjusting “his waistband in a manner the officers deemed suspicious,” 16-year old Kimani Grey was fired at 11 times, and shot seven times, including three times in the back. Reportedly, the teenager was unarmed and unthreatening.

Even dogs aren’t spared if they are perceived as “threatening.” Family dogs are routinely shot and killed during SWAT team raids, even if the SWAT team is at the wrong address or the dog is in the next yard over. One six-year-old girl witnessed her dog Apollo shot dead by an Illinois police officer.

Clearly, when police officers cease to look and act like civil servants or peace officers but instead look and act like soldiers occupying a hostile territory, it alters their perception of “we the people.” Those who founded this country believed that we were the masters and that those whose salaries we pay with our hard-earned tax dollars are our servants.

If daring to question, challenge or even hesitate when a cop issues an order can get you charged with resisting arrest or disorderly conduct, you’re not the master in a master-servant relationship. In fact, you’re not even the servant—you’re the slave.

This is not freedom. This is not even a life.

This is a battlefield, a war zone—if you will—governed by martial law and disguised as a democracy. No matter how many ways you fancy it up with shopping malls, populist elections, and Monday night football, the fact remains that “we the people” are little more than prisoners in the American police state, and the police are our jailers and wardens.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
3 Comments
Stucky
Stucky
September 11, 2014 8:53 am

It turns out Al Jezeera is just as big a piece of shit as the other networks. They are showing the 9-11 ceremonies and then the cunt bimbo said (paraphrasing);

“One positive thing we can say today is that the 9-11 terrorists tried to destroy America by changing it’s way of life and freedoms. In that regard they failed totally.”

Stupid cunt.

TE
TE
September 11, 2014 1:46 pm

“One positive thing we can say today is that the 9-11 terrorists tried to destroy America by changing it’s way of life and freedoms. In that regard they failed totally.”

Wow. People really think this way?

It’s been obvious to me since October of 2001 that they won.

The MINUTE we agreed to shredding the constitution without demanding ONE head on a pike, the terrorists won.

It is obvious to most thinking beings that the real terrorists occupy WDC, our state capitals, our city town halls and police departments.

Today we are a mere minimum security prison. I get the feeling the “minimum” is on its way out, sooner, rather than later.

“Show your papers: won’t just be a NY or international border thing much longer.

Econman
Econman
September 11, 2014 8:38 pm

Walmart shopper ‘swatted’ while talking on phone, holding merchandise
1.3K Police State USA / by Site Staff / 1 day ago

John Crawford III (right)

BEAVERCREEK, OH — A man was killed by police while browsing the aisles of a Walmart shopping center, talking on a cell phone, and carrying a product sold in the store: a plastic air rifle. His final gasps for breath were heard via a phone conversation he was having with another person at the time of the shooting.

* * * * *

Twenty-two year old John Crawford III, of Fairfield, was shopping at the Beavercreek Walmart with his girlfriend on the morning of August 5th, 2014. After entering the store together, the couple walked in different directions to gather items that they needed to purchase.

“He went around the corner he wasn’t gone for maybe five minutes on the telephone,” said Tasha Thomas, Crawford’s girlfriend. “The next thing I know, we were all being shoved out the store saying someone was just shot.”

While meandering around the store, with his phone pressed to his ear, Mr. Crawford picked up a Crosman MK-177 Air Rifle from the Walmart shelves. The rifle is made primarily of plastic and shoots 0.177 inch balls using air pressure. It is regarded as a tool for competitive gaming (Airsoft) and varmint control.

The packaging of a Crosman MK-177. (Read more…)

As Mr. Crawford walked through the aisles while completing his shopping, another customer perceived him as a threat and called the government to deal with him. The 9-1-1 caller went on to provide a sensationalized description of the harmless shopper.

“There is a gentleman walking around with a gun in the store,” a man named Ronald Ritchie reported during his panicked 9-1-1 call. “He’s like pointing it at people… He’s like loading it right now.”

Beavercreek police officers arrived on the scene, and a deadly confrontation followed. Sgt. David Darkow and Officer Sean Williams each fired upon Crawford, who died from gunshot wounds at 9:25 a.m. that morning.

The police claimed that they issued several verbal warnings to Mr. Crawford before opening fire. That version of events has been contested by several people, including the woman on the other end of the phone conversation, and those who have viewed the surveillance video; namely Craford’s father and attorney Michael Wright.

“The footage we saw, he didn’t know the officers were in the store. There was no reaction (from him) at all by the time the trigger was pulled,” said the decedent’s father, John Crawford, Jr. “We were waiting to see him menacing, waving this thing in a threatening position with women or children. None of that happened from the footage we saw. He wasn’t doing anything. He was just standing there.”

“All this nonsense of (officers saying) ‘Put the weapon down’ two or three times; There was no reaction from him. There couldn’t have been a cadence given,” the victim’s father added.

LeeCee Johnson, who heard his last gasps over the phone, agreed that the order of the shooting took place before police issued commands.

“The next thing I know, he said, ‘Its not real,’ and the police start shooting,” recalled Ms. Johnson. “And they said, ‘get on the ground,’ but he was already on the ground because they had shot him.”

Police have defended the shooting, claiming that officers were acting out of fear for their lives.

“It was an execution, no doubt about it,” alleged Crawford’s father. “It was flat-out murder. And when you see the footage, it will illustrate that.”

The elder Crawford argues that his son did not threaten anyone, and carried the rifle against his shoulder because “the rifle maybe got heavy to him.”

“You can clearly see people walk past him, and they didn’t think anything about it. Everybody was just kind of minding their own business,” his father added. “He wasn’t acting in any type of way that he would have been considered menacing, if you will.”

The public will have to apply pressure to get the surveillance video released, which may help clarify the truth of the incident that led to John Crawford III’s death.

{ Support Police State USA }

Accountability Check

Beavercreek Police Department (Ohio)
Phone: (937) 426-1225
Facebook: Link

Read this story and others at Police State USA.