ryandb

Well based on this incident you wouldn't be dead, the cop was subdued with minimal effort.

They are all possibilities, considering a round went off, there's more to the official story than we have been told and again these are reasons why you can and SHOULD defend yourselves, you lot don't want to wait to find out, you want them jailed immediately without knowing for sure. I'm not saying they weren't just Richards, but I'm happy to wait to find out before the lynching. Hilarious, you mentioned "unfounded" too Also, it proves you live in a fantasy land, just to help you in future.

Again you are guessing what happened, hey you could be right they may have just attacked the cop, but you might be pretty wrong and the cop went on an ego trip and threatened to shoot or even, as we know one shot was fired, fired a shot and they took him down

never worn a pair but somehow I suspect Thailand doesn't own the IP/trademark on these and lets not pretend like they care about knock off goods anyways, this was only about the tax evasion

- Cop attacks first - Cop is unlawfully detaining - Cop is sexually assaulting you - Cop is acting on behalf of a tyrannical government implementing oppressive laws - Cop is threatening to kill you - Cop is drunk/high and handling his weapon All these would justify restraining or even assaulting and stopping the threat to you, just because you wouldn't have the balls to stand up to a cop doesn't mean that there are zero circumstances where a non cuck wouldn't

Doubt they'd lie about a record to national news when that would be found in about 5 minutes by any NZ news outlet, yes they'll protect and lie about the character but if they had an assault charge they'd more likely not mention anything about the past than say they've never been in trouble in the past

I've said it many times on this thread, there are plenty of times it appropriate

You'd be wrong then, they have no record from their parents statement

Have you met them? You have zero clue

you mentioned the traffic stop so I assumed you were referring to a video of the initial interaction and stop, only the restraining and disarming part is on page 1

I've been here 4 years, enough, I've never had a problem with the police here, but that's not the case for everyone.

True but the key part we are missing is the interaction between them until the video, they may be guilty of that but justified in defending themselves

Yes, from a traffic stop, you might not find Thai examples (never looked doubt there are as many Thai drivers recording the interactions with dash cams as in the west considering it's mostly bikes here) but there are thousands of videos of cops overstepping and getting aggressive when the person stands firm to their rights. There have been many deaths.

has the video been released then?

No, I'm not. I'm a believer in people's individual rights, and being a cop does not mean you can infringe on them. I've never said it was wise to fight the cop but between 6ft under and fighting the cop, I'm going out swinging. Hopefully, you'll never find yourself cornered with one of the really bad ones.

follow the thread for this conversation, someone stated resisting an arrest is a crime everywhere, this was just a rebuttal but we already know you don't like to wait to see all the evidence before you make a judgement

it's on the constitution site.... here's another then “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).

The traffic offenses are not proven, and again you are just assuming that they just took the cop down and took his gun (which he had in his hand) without the cop doing anything to elicit the reaction.

Again for about the 50th time it depends what they were doing, was it their "duty' or were they infringing on rights, were they threatening to shoot the NZers, did they overstep the mark? Again just being in a police uniform doesn't automatically give you the right to do anything to anyone

yes but he said anywhere in the world.....

“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. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

Why exactly? Because I believe in evidence before public lynching. It seems you guys all believe the police would never overstep the boundaries despite thousands of videos to the contrary in existence.

What's your obsession with Tiger Muay Thai, did you lose money betting against Petr Yan last weekend?

You nor I have no clue what happened before the video, but you seem so convinced they were not cornered into this situation. It's really mindboggling how some from a snippet of a video and the police statement think that they know the entire story.

I don't know whether it was, as neither of us know the real story of what led to the altercation, they do not look aggressive to me, there were zero strikes shown, his friend was not kicking the cop when he was down, they restrained and disarmed him. Again if the video included a man being disarmed without a uniform on, would you jump to these same conclusions?