OK guys you talk about the police been brutal, now the most important and a bit aggressive question. Will you take responsibility for the safety of those who resist arrest? It is much more prudent not to resist the officer and then have your day in court. That advice is much more reasonable when explaining to folks that have never encountered a police situation. I explained to people that sometimes they may encounter a situation where a police officer has been called to investigate a complaint and the start of it is to respond, observe and interview people to see if there is a need for police action. Sometimes it is obvious and sometimes it isn't and may not involve the person being questioned. For the police officer to do the job they need an assessment. I would explain that the best course is to stay calm and answer the inquiries. If you were not a problem you most likely will not have a problem.
Morality and practicality are not the same thing. There are a LOT of occasions--millions, in fact--when Americans would have the absolute moral right to resist aggression by "law enforcers," up to and including deadly force, but which I would highly suggest they not attempt, because it would just get them killed. So if you're just giving practical advice, I agree. But if you're saying it is morally wrong to not cooperate with badge-wearing aggressors who wish to detain, interrogate, search, etc., without probable cause to suspect any crime, then you are sorely mistaken.
This is why I study kung fu and brazilian jiu-jitsu.
Sure, they have some training... but it is rare to find an enforcer that has anything close to black belt level skills in physical self defense.
Definitely agree about not attempting to defend yourself... simply because it will end up being the entire police force of City X against you. That being said, it is always morally right to resist... but prepare for bad results. The deck is stacked against anyone that defends themselves from false imprisonment because 99% of the population (maybe 96% these days...) believes the lies they are taught.
People should have the means available to take responsibility for their own safety. If you 'were not a problem' then where is the 'problem' coming from?
Never answer police questions verbally. Ever.
Make them give their questions in writing.
Review which should (and should not) be answered with counsel (even your own).
Then answer any you want to answer very carefully.
Your answers can and will be used against you.
Never answer to people that have no authority to ask you questions, but do question them until they leave you alone.
That is the fundamental master and servant power struggle. The master asks questions, the servant answers them.
Learn to not answer questions (see I don't answer questions on youtube) and assume the role of the master... ask your questions and they will soon find some reason to leave you be.
Larken would have benefited immensely in his trial by asking some vary basic questions, such as what your role is, what their role is, where the authority comes from, how far it extends, yadayadayada. I walked away/drove away without license or insurance after asking them repeatedly: am I free to go after being stopped for "speeding" in a school zone, and the utmost skill in such scenarios is to master the art of answering questions with questions.
So true. So many people don't see what is going on or what role they are being regulated into by failure to assume the role they rightly occupy.
Of course, our schools teach people to be obedient. You will never be rewarded for questioning your teachers or demanding that they answer your questions.
Rozsencrantz and Guildenstern are dead has an amazing questions game. Get good at this and you can beat the authoritarians every time... especially once you start realizing that they have no authority until you "consent".
Ok, statist.