New York Governor Candidate Arrested, Jailed for Recording the Aggressive Arrest of a Bronx Man

Only days after the NYPD sent out a city-wide memo to officers reminding them that the recording of their activity is allowed, Randy Credico, an upcoming candidate for New York Governor, was arrested, handcuffed and put in jail for recording the aggressive arresting of a man by two officers in street clothes.

Credico, who has been very vocal against NYC’s ‘stop-and-frisk’ policy, first started recording the situation after he noticed two men – not clothed in NYPD attire and not wearing badges, mind you – aggressively stopping an elderly black male in the Bronx.

As for how it went down after that, Photography Is Not a Crime shared a snippet of conversation from a call Credico had with Fred Dicker, a NYC radio host, while still in a Bronx holding cell

(Continue Reading)

Watch on www.uhohmonkey.com

Here is the main reason why we stopped making videos for a while… This case is not over… We still need help finding a civil rights attorney. Please email us if you can help us in any way. contact@uhohmonkey.com

JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED!!!

Drones Banned Over Appalachian Trail

The National Park Service has banned drones from flying over the Appalachian Trail. The Park Service said the interim rule prohibits launching, landing or operating unmanned aircraft from or on Appalachian National Scenic Trail lands.

The ban takes effect immediately and lasts until the Park Service can develop an appropriate policy. The Park Service says drones could affect resources and visitors in ways it has yet to analyze so more study is needed.

Read more: http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2014/08/drones-banned-over-appalachian-trail

NEW BILL IN CONGRESS WOULD BAN PRIVATE CITIZENS FROM OWNING BODY ARMOR

Private citizens all over the entire nation would be permanently banned from owning body armor

A new law that has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives “would prohibit the sale, transfer or possession of military-level body armor by civilians”.  In other words, private citizens all over the entire nation would be permanently banned from owning body armor if this bill gets passed and signed into law. The bill that I am talking about is H.R. 5344 (The Responsible Body Armor Possession Act), and you can view the proposed legislation for yourself right here.  The driving force behind this new law is Democrat Mike Honda from California.  To Honda, it doesn’t matter that large numbers of very responsible Americans have purchased body armor to protect themselves and their families in a society that is rapidly decaying.  Instead, it makes perfect sense to Honda to ban body armor because “access to military-grade body armor emboldens criminals and mass shooters to act.”  And Honda wants to make possession of body armor a criminal offense with a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.  This is absolutely crazy, and it is yet another example of the “police state mentality” that is so prevalent among our politicians these days.

When I first learned about this new law, I could hardly believe it.  But it is actually true.  The following is an excerpt from a news story about the introduction of this new bill

Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, has announced legislation that would block civilians from accessing military-grade body armor to prevent criminals from using them in gun battles with law enforcement.

Honda, speaking at a news conference in San Jose Wednesday morning with police chiefs and the district attorneys and sheriffs from Santa Clara and Alameda counties, said his proposal would discourage criminals from wearing enhanced body armor to commit mass shootings.

“This bill will keep military body armor out of the wrong hands,” Honda said. “It would ensure that only law enforcement, firefighters and other first responders would be able to access enhanced body armor.”

Fortunately, it is incredibly tough to get just about anything accomplished in Congress these days, so the odds of this bill ever becoming law are probably pretty low.

But without a doubt those that are attempting to systematically disarm the American people will just keep on trying.

And we need to be vigilant, because history has shown what happens when entire populations are disarmed.  All we have to do is look back at the millions that were killed under Nazi Germany or the tens of millions that were killed under the communist Chinese.

Of course one of the greatest examples of this phenomenon was what happened under Joseph Stalin as Simon Black recently explained…

By the late 1920s, Joseph Stalin became the unchallenged leader of the Soviet Union after having eliminated his opposition.

He topped it off in 1929 by serving a decisive blow to anyone that would dare to oppose him by outlawing private gun ownership in the country.

From that year on until 1953 when Stalin died, it’s estimated that more than 20 million Soviet citizens that were seen as a threat to the country’s leadership.

Many Americans are tempted to believe that it is impossible for that kind of tyranny to happen in our day and age, but the truth of the matter is that America is becoming more like Nazi Germany with each passing day.

For example, the “Department of Homeland Security” recently raided dozens of families all over the nation because they “imported unsafe vehicles“…

Jennifer Brinkley of North Carolina says when saw a line of law enforcement vehicles coming up her driveway earlier this month she didn’t know what to think. “I haven’t done anything wrong.”

According to WBTV, the Homeland Security agents were not there to take her away, they were looking for illegally imported Land Rover Defenders.

It was a task government officials were performing in several states in early July. Forums on defendersource.com contain posts from Defender owners claiming their vehicles were seized by the government.

Why?

All vehicles coming into the United States must meet U.S. safety and emissions standards. Many British manufactured Land Rover Defenders do not.

Why in the world are armed Homeland Security agents roaming the countryside hunting down vehicles that don’t conform to federal regulations?

That is absolutely absurd.

But this is the kind of society that we now live in.

In a recent article, John W. Whitehead shared some more examples of how our control freak bureaucrats are ruining our society…

Debra Harrell, a 46-year-old South Carolina working mother, was arrested, charged with abandonment and had her child placed in state custody after allowing the 9-year-old to spend unsupervised time at a neighborhood playground while the mom worked a shift at McDonald’s. Mind you, the child asked to play outside, was given a cell phone in case she needed to reach someone, and the park—a stone’s throw from the mom’s place of work—was overrun with kids enjoying its swings, splash pad, and shade.

Connecticut mother was charged with leaving her 11-year-old daughter in the car unsupervised while she ran inside a store—despite the fact that the child asked to stay in the car and was not overheated or in distress. A few states away, a New Jersey man was arrested and charged with endangering the welfare of his children after leaving them in a car parked in a police station parking lot, windows rolled down, while he ran inside to pay a ticket.

A Virginia teenager was charged with violating the state’s sexting law after exchanging sexually provocative videos with his girlfriend. Instead of insisting that the matter be dealt with as a matter of parental concern, police charged the boy with manufacturing and distributing child pornography and issued a search warrant to “medically induce an erection” in the 17-year-old boy in order to photograph his erect penis and compare it to the images sent in the sexting exchange.  The police had already taken an initial photograph of the boy’s penis against his will, upon his arrest.

In Georgia, a toddler had his face severely burned when a flash bang grenade, launched by a SWAT team during the course of a no-knock warrant, landed in his portable crib, detonating on his pillow. Also in Georgia, a police officer shot and killed a 17-year-old boy who answered the door, reportedly with a Nintendo Wii controller in his hands. The cop claimed the teenager pointed a gun at her, thereby justifying the use of deadly force. Then there was the incident wherein a police officer, responding to a complaint that some children were “chopping off tree limbs” creating “tripping hazards,” pulled a gun on a group of 11-year-old boys who were playing in a wooded area, attempting to build a tree fort.

For many more examples like this, please see my previous article entitled “30 Signs That America Is Being Transformed Into A ‘Big Brother’ Police State“.

The United States was supposed to be a beacon of liberty and freedom for the entire globe.

Instead, we are going to end up looking just like North Korea eventually if we are not careful.

Our freedoms and liberties are being eroded a little bit more with each passing day.  And if the American people don’t start standing up and objecting to all of this craziness, the control freaks are going to feel empowered to keep on pushing the envelope even further.

primadarrien said:

So ive always been really into law shows and law classes, and im thinking about going to law school incase my musical theatre dreams dont work out. Do you think its a good idea?

Hi primadarrien,

My answer would be no.

I actually also was a big musical theater/theater geek. It was a passion for me for many years. But I’ve also wanted to become a lawyer since I was in fifth grade, which is why I went to law school. Law school is too expensive and too hard to just do “in case” something else doesn’t pan out, especially if that something else is something you love. Sure, you can go to law school, no one would stop you, but what a lot of people forget is that it’s a professional school. That means you’re going to have a profession, not a job. You’re locked in. Of course you could leave it later, but that would mean that the three years of law school tuition and sweat (and your youth!) that you poured in have gone to waste.

Don’t go to law school unless you want to become a lawyer. Don’t go to law school as a back-up, as last resort. Too many lawyers (especially litigators) are already frustrated actors.

Good luck!

The US Animal Welfare Act is a pile of shit that does nothing to actually stop the cruelest of treatment towards animals in laboratories, circuses, zoos, and in transport. It outright states that some of the most common animals used in testing are not under consideration for protection, avidly lists the number of ways in which it is acceptable to “dispose” of animals, imposes minimal fees for maximum crimes against their lives, and really only exists to protect business interests, to make sure the industry’s “goods” don’t get too damaged. Any business or institution that actively violates these laws does so to maximize profit (SeaWorld, Ringling Bros., Harvard Medical, etc.), meaning that when they’re faced with fines, it’s nothing but a little slap on the wrist. Pay chump change and you get to slaughter and torture animals with new levels of agonizing cruelty.

You can argue that we need laws like this to protect against the worst of the worst, but you can also damn well argue that these laws to protect against those scenarios should actually be at least a little bit efficient instead of a farce to animal rights and the legal system all at once.

Roman sumptuary legislation of the Republican Era C. 200-100 B.C.

Molly Ann Rosser Dauster

Texas Tech University: Master of Arts, May 1 (1996)

Abstract

Between the end of the Second Punic War and the beginning of the Social War the Roman Senate proposed and the voters passed a number of laws and regulations concemed with private life and public display, among them at least four restricting the cost of provisioning and the number of guests allowed at private banquets…

Under and behind all outward appearances or manifestations, there must always be a Substantial Reality. This is the Law. Man considering the Universe, of which he is a unit, sees nothing but change in matter, forces, and mental states. He sees that nothing really IS, but that everything is BECOMING and CHANGING. Nothing stands still–everything is being born, growing, dying–the very instant a thing reaches its height, it begins to decline–the law of rhythm is in constant operation–there is no reality, enduring quality, fixity, or substantiality in anything–nothing is permanent but Change. He sees all things evolving from other things, and resolving into other things–a constant action and reaction; inflow and outflow; building up and tearing down; creation and destruction; birth, growth and death. Nothing endures but Change. And if he be a thinking man, he realizes that all of these changing things must be but outward appearances or manifestations of some Underlying Power–some substantial Reality.
—  The Kybalion

It bears saying one more time: It’s a disgrace that the Justice Department has failed to bring a single criminal charge against any Wall Street or mortgage executive of consequence for their roles in wrecking the economy, despite having managed to make arrests in the comparatively piddling schemes of Enron and the Savings & Loan flimflam. (The latter resulted in more than 800 convictions, including those of many top executives.) These settlements are wan consolation. The sums being surrendered, for starters, are large only until compared with the $13 trillion or so the public lost in the financial crash—or, for that matter, with the banks’ own coffers. (Citi’s pure profit in the two years before the wipeout was more than triple its penalty.) Not to mention that the money won’t be paid by any parties actually responsible, but by the banks’ current shareholders, who pretty much had nothing to do with the misdeeds in question. And the bulk of the settlements will be tax deductible. For destroying trillions in wealth and thousands of jobs, banks will get a write-off.

Modern policing has really gone down hill. Imagine reading ANY of these to a cop today. He would laugh in your face.

From 1829… Sir Robert Peel’s, ‘Nine Principles of Policing.’

1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.”

Text
Photo
Quote
Link
Chat
Audio
Video