Home / South Florida Cop Posts Video of his Arrest for Protesting Obamacare

South Florida Cop Posts Video of his Arrest for Protesting Obamacare

Ericson Harrell, the South Florida cop arrested for protesting Obamacare beside a busy highway while wearing a Guy Fawkes mask and waving an upside down American flag, posted the video of his arrest for the first time since the November incident, showing the cops accusing him of disrupting traffic when they were the ones blocking an entire lane of traffic, forcing cars to bottleneck into an even slower traffic jam.

What’s not in the video is the part where Plantation Sergeant Alfred Stanco walks up to him and rips the camera out of his hands, claiming it could be a weapon – never mind the 8-foot flag pole he was hoisting.

This, of course, was before they discovered he was a North Miami Beach police officer who was fully armed.  The story made national news,

Harrell said his camera batteries died on him moments before Stanco walked up to him (which is why the video gets stuck for the last four minutes). He told them he was a cop as they were patting him down and they asked him why didn’t he inform him  from the get-go.

He was charged for refusing to remove his mask, a rarely invoked law written decades ago to target KKK members. The statute, posted below, is poorly written because it makes a very broad statement about not being allowed to wear a mask in public, before clarifying the law is only applicable if the wearer of the mask is about to engage in criminal activity.

And we know most cops will never bother reading beyond the first line.

The charge was dropped and now he is suing.

But he is still being investigated by internal affairs, even though the incident took place seven months ago, did not take place while he was on duty and did not result in a conviction.

“They’re investigating me for conduct unbecoming,” he said in a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime Monday night.

But it’s obvious they’re investigating him for refusing to march to the beat of the blue lie, daring to invoke his First Amendment rights while off the clock rather than strip citizens of their First Amendment rights while on the clock.

The latter, as we know, is usually given a free pass by internal affairs departments throughout the country.

Harrell, who’s been a cop for almost 16 years, said he experienced a political awakening after voting for Obama in 2008, drifting to the doomsday side of the spectrum, believing 9/11 was an inside job and later believing the Sandy Hook shooting was staged by the government to strip citizens of their guns.

He is a self-admitted conspiracy theorist, which one can imagine, creates friction with fellow officers.

“Just because you call yourself a conspiracy theorist doesn’t mean it’s not true,” he said. “When we arrest somebody, we’re presenting evidence and basing it on a conspiracy theory.”

He believes the government took an evil turn the day John F. Kennedy was assassinated, which he also believes was an inside job and why he chose to protest on November 22 when he was arrested last year, the 50-year anniversary of the assassination that did change the course of history no matter where you stand on the political spectrum.

“JFK was talking about ending the military industrial complex, talking about ending the federal reserve, ending the secret societies,” he said.

“I talk to people and they think the New World Order is fiction,” he said. “JFK was trying to expose it.”

His fellow cops call him anti-government. He tells them he is anti-corruption.

“It offends my conscious that the federal government is committing crime and getting away unscathed and I’m expected to arrest people just trying to survive,” he said.

As a result, he keeps his arrests to a bare minimum, saying there is no quota in his department.

He is also looking for a career change, but understands it’s not going to be easy.

“I understand I’ll be giving up my pension, but I don’t believe my pension will be around anyway,” he said.

“The more I hear the economists speaking, the more I think another bubble is going to burst.”

So he and his family are preparing for the inevitable by stocking up on water and learning to grow their own food, actions have been known to raise suspicion with Homeland Security (along with taking pictures and reading alternative media).

“If the economy collapses, they are going to have me on the front lines beating people back because people are going to be starving,” he said. “I would rather be home.”

And like many of us, he expects them to come busting down his door at any given moment over his online rants and postings, which he does regularly on Facebook.

“There’s always that possibility,” he said.

Ericson Harrell and Luke Rudkowski

Ericson Harrell and independent journalist Luke Rudkowski a couple of months ago. Photo by Carlos Miller

876.12 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on public way.—No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, enter upon, or be or appear upon any lane, walk, alley, street, road, highway, or other public way in this state.
History.—s. 2, ch. 26542, 1951.
876.13 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on public property.—No person or persons shall in this state, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, enter upon, or be, or appear upon or within the public property of any municipality or county of the state.
History.—s. 3, ch. 26542, 1951.
876.14 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on property of another.—No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing a mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, demand entrance or admission or enter or come upon or into the premises, enclosure, or house of any other person in any municipality or county of this state.
History.—s. 4, ch. 26542, 1951.
876.15 Wearing mask, hood, or other device at demonstration or meeting.—No person or persons over 16 years of age, shall, while wearing a mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, hold any manner of meeting, make any demonstration upon the private property of another unless such person or persons shall have first obtained from the owner or occupier of the property his or her written permission to so do.
History.—s. 5, ch. 26542, 1951.
876.155 Applicability; ss. 876.12-876.15.—The provisions of ss. 876.12-876.15 apply only if the person was wearing the mask, hood, or other device:
(1) With the intent to deprive any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws or for the purpose of preventing the constituted authorities of this state or any subdivision thereof from, or hindering them in, giving or securing to all persons within this state the equal protection of the laws;
(2) With the intent, by force or threat of force, to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person because of the person’s exercise of any right secured by federal, state, or local law or to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from exercising any right secured by federal, state, or local law;
(3) With the intent to intimidate, threaten, abuse, or harass any other person; or
(4) While she or he was engaged in conduct that could reasonably lead to the institution of a civil or criminal proceeding against her or him, with the intent of avoiding identification in such a proceeding.
History.—s. 1, ch. 81-249; s. 1416, ch. 97-102.
876.16 Sections 876.11-876.15; exemptions.—The following persons are exempted from the provisions of ss. 876.11-876.15:
(1) Any person or persons wearing traditional holiday costumes;
(2) Any person or persons engaged in trades and employment where a mask is worn for the purpose of ensuring the physical safety of the wearer, or because of the nature of the occupation, trade, or profession;
(3) Any person or persons using masks in theatrical productions, including use in Gasparilla celebrations and masquerade balls;
(4) Persons wearing gas masks prescribed in emergency management drills and exercises.

About Carlos Miller

Carlos Miller is founder and publisher of Photography is Not a Crime, which began as a one-man blog in 2007 to document his trial after he was arrested for photographing police during a journalistic assignment. He is also the author of The Citizen Journalist's Photography Handbook, which can be purchased through Amazon.
  • http://www.mattstorms.com Matt Storms

    If this guy ran for Sheriff I would vote for him.

  • ibanix

    He might be a little crazy to my way of thinking, but he’s got every right to be out there protesting. I am amused/disheartened by the ‘Conduct Unbecoming’. Why do we have cops using the same rules as military officers?

    • inquisitor

      Because they have received their training in cooperation with the Israeli military in regard to tactics transferred to DHS and domestic law enforcement.

      Just google…”law enforcement israeli training”…and keep reading to see just how pervasive it really is.

      Most people actually regard that fact as a conspiracy theory or being anti-semitic.
      If they were training from instructions from Peru, then I would say it was Peru…makes no difference to me. But once you state it is Israeli training, peopled get all bowed up and offended.

      You state…
      “He “might” be a “little” “crazy” to “my” “way” of “thinking”.”

      When you are stating this type of a critical and potentially invalidating or damning comment about this guy, his philosophy and his beliefs as being a “little crazy”, would it not be more concise to be specific as to how exactly that is and how it may be in discordance with your own views? Otherwise you risk using dismissive blanket declarations and statements that are the exact opposite of what one would need to use to constructively debate an actual conspiracy theory because of the very nature of what a conspiracy actually is and entails.

    • ICBM904

      Because these guys carry guns and are tasked with shooting someone who is a serious threat. You don’t need nutjobs with guns dreaming up ways to enforce the law.

  • Pragmatic Liberaltarian

    It’s interesting in the video that he talks about his hands shaking. Just goes to show that people naturally get anxious when being questioned by and dealing with the police, EVEN A REAL COP, and that’s it’s not evidence of any wrongdoing.

    • Carlos_Miller

      It’s the flight or fight syndrome that is ingrained in all mammals. Your adrenalin starts pumping to prepare you to either run away from the threat or stop it dead in its tracks.

      But you can’t do that with cops because you’ll be killed either way.

      So you have to remain very calm, but it’s very hard to do considering the circumstances.

      You know that a single misinterpreted move on your part, no matter how minute, can get you killed in a heartbeat.

      Cops know this. They are trained to act on this. Many are instinctively prone to prey on this.

      This is why you hear them growl their orders.

      • Charlie

        A few days ago I made a complaint at my local PD about a dangerously parked police car. The cop who I made the complaint to was rude and arrogant, called my complaint a joke and said I was being silly. I immediately asked for his supervisor, told him to show me respect and gave him an earful. He left the room and came back without his badge on (he’d removed it while out). I smashed him (verbally!) asking why he took his badge off and told him he was trying to cover up his conduct. After I spoke with the supervisor, the first cop apologised to me and volunteered to write down the station boss’s contact details so I could make a formal complaint. Amazing. If it wasn’t for what I’ve learnt on PINAC, I would never have known my rights and I would just have been walked all over. Still, though, even though I had the upper hand during and after the exchange it was nerve racking. Afterwards I thought ‘I shouldnt have gone so hard at him, he could have shot me claiming I was a threat (there was no glass screen between me and him).’ Still, I think it was worth it.

        • inquisitor

          PINAC is quite the educational tool in this regard.

        • http://www.policemisconduct.net Film The Police Always

          Follow through on that complaint. FOIA the video from that lobby (with voice) and go from there. I’d even give it to the news so they could run it.

      • inquisitor

        And I am sure this cop has observed the inside view of the candid remarks and actions of police officers for years and that he fears how they actually think and what they are truly capable of doing.
        He has more to fear of that than the average citizen who is ignorant of such institutionalized psychopathy.

  • StreyDawg

    A well-written article, Carlos. Thank you.

  • Rob

    I like this guy.

  • Tamerlane Real-Life Super-Vill

    I have researched the statues myself. Yes of course you can wear a mask… Just don’t commit crimes while wearing them. The two Blue Drones that showed up are speaking their typical legal-ese bullshit interpretations of laws that they clearly do not know.

    • A Default

      It goes beyond committing a crime while wearing the mask, the intent of the mask has to be to keep from being identified. That would apply to someone putting a mask on to rob a bank, it wouldn’t apply to someone standing on the sidewalk making no attempt to evade the police or evade identification if detained.

      • A Default

        This is the clause that applies, since he made no attempt to avoid letting the police identify him after being arrested it is crystal clear he had no intent to avoid identification in a criminal proceeding against him. Not that his conduct could reasonably lead to the institution of criminal proceedings against him, he was doing nothing but exercising his right to free expression. Any distracted motorists have themselves to blame, no differently than if they saw a very attractive woman walking along the side of the road and failed in their duty to control their vehicle instead of siteseeing.

        (4) While she or he was engaged in conduct that could reasonably lead to the institution of a civil or criminal proceeding against her or him, with the intent of avoiding identification in such a proceeding.

  • That guy

    Shoulda printed the statute and applicability clause. Of course, probably wouldn’t have thought he would need to print the legal definition of “harass” as well. Or even the dictionary definition of “intent.”

    • Charlie

      Well you know he has to prove himself innocent, right? Crazy

  • Charlie

    I don’t agree with all of Ericson’s views but who the hell am I to tell him he’s wrong and shouldn’t speak up for what he believes in. I do think he’s speaking truth about the coming economic collapse, whenever it might occur. (btw excellent article here about this http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html?ml=m_b2_2#.U7EUAfmSxc8 )
    I can understand why he wants to get out of the police culture but it will be a loss for the People. Great article, Carlos

  • Guest

    Plantation Police. The town name is apropos.

    • inquisitor

      My mother lives in Plantation.
      The department there is pretty much the same as other departments and filled with idiot sociopath enforcers of their whim, but perhaps not as corrupt as the neighboring Hollywood police department.

  • Difdi

    Did anyone else notice that those mask statutes criminalize SWAT personnel who violate anyone’s rights?

    • inquisitor

      Good point, but that is like saying the commandments and dictates of the bible apply to god himself.

      • Difdi

        Untrue. It’s like saying that the ten commandments and dictates of the bible apply to priests as well as the common folk.

  • inquisitor

    So if he was wearing a police riot gear mask and claimed he was wearing this to protect himself from psychopathic cops’ bullets from hitting him in the head for the acts of photography and peaceful demonstration, would that have fallen under an exemption?

  • sfmc98

    A guy protesting on the side of the road is like a police academy test question–which they must have gotten wrong. How much more First Amendment-y does it get? Jeez.

    • Guest

      They’re not making any mistakes. They are taught to do this. They are taught to bully, harass, batter, assault. They are taught to be traitors.

  • A Default

    Just another example like the one where the photographer was accused of disturbing the peace because someone ELSE was disturbed unreasonably. In this case he was clearly harassing nobody, he hasn’t targeting anyone and he was effectively arrested because someone didn’t like his freedom of expression.

    Just another shameful example of the inability to think logically by the police. Sorry we didn’t see the usual display of aggression by the officer who insisted a camera could be a weapon. It is a weapon, a weapon of truth. A weapon that stops cops from their usual game of trumping up charges with false statements on a police report. It stops cops from being able to give false testimony at a trial and have the jury believe them. It keeps cops honest.

  • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

    FS 876.12XYZ – clear evidence of what a crock of shit the entire legal system is.

    I hope Harrell continues to hold a mirror up to every nazi jackwad prowling the streets. Vampires hate mirrors (and cameras).

    Those giving the orders to arrest Harrell clearly need to hang – chief, DA, and everyone at the brownshirt academy that passed these orcs. Do the orcs arresting Harrell need to hang? Hard to say. After all, they were “just following orders.” If that’s too harsh, okay, take away their badges, guns, and assign 30 days of community service with a roofer, then put them on a raft to cuba.

    Meanwhile every klansman (and sympathizer) from rosewood to kirven is pissing themselves with laughter over the fact that this feel-good superfluous bullshit legislation intended to hurt the klan has now been used to arrest a darkie. Way to go busybodys. What a great country.

  • ICBM904

    A nutjob cop who believes Sandy Hook was a government operation? Really? And this guy is a police officer who should know how impossible that would be to pull off. The rational ones are scary enough. This guy really scares me.

    • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

      he might well be a nutjob, but that doesn’t mean he is always wrong. Given the choice between conspiracy and bureaucratic bumbling/ineptitute, I’ll choose ineptitude every time.

      I don’t think Sandy Hook was a govt operation, and am generally skeptical of 9/11 conspiracy theories. HOWEVER, that approach misses the point entirely. It is much more telling to examine the aftermath of these incidents. Fearmongers love to exploit these tragedies and declare war on anything and everything at every opportunity. Coming soon: the war on kittens,

      Case in point: Sandy Hook. Am I worried about young psychos killing kids (and teachers) at school? Yes. Am I also worried about bungling govt agents running around with guns chasing ghosts and teenagers smoking dope in the parking lot? Yes. Which is the bigger problem? I don’t know.

      Perhaps we can compare the number of people shot at schools this past year with the number of people shot by police. You decide.

      Basically I agree with your main point – it might be better if Harrell doesn’t have a gun. That said, he sounds less dangerous to the public than pretty much every other gun-toting gestapo slug. Unless of course we’re worried about Harrell becoming the next Chris Dorner. Hmmm. . . but would that be such a bad thing?

      • inquisitor

        I certainly have some questions concerning Sandy Hook and 911 that their official stories just have not or cannot answer, but should have.

        • DickVanstone

          I find James Corbett well versed on the subject. He’s on Youtube and has his own site, corbettreport.com.

          I hope it’s helpful.

          edit: well versed in regards to 9/11. I don’t recall him covering Sandy Hook to any great length or at all for that matter.

      • ICBM904

        If you’re referring to every cop on the street as a “gun-toting gestapo slug,” then your credibility in any discussion is pretty much completely undermined by your reasoning ability.

        • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

          You’re right, Gustav. There is no reasoning ability here.

          Thanks for reading.

    • Mike TheVet

      How “impossible” is it to “pull off”?

      Give me the numbers and show me your research. Prove that Sandy Hook was committed by Adam Lanza.

      I’m all ears and willing to listen to YOUR SIDE.

      • inquisitor

        Ah…let’s make it easy.

        Show me one picture or any media coverage that shows one obviously wounded and bleeding kid, dead kid, or dead kid lying under a tarp at the triage area or in a body bag being carried from the scene.
        Or one official autopsy report or death certificate of any child killed that day.
        Just one.

        • Mike TheVet

          Amen.

          • inquisitor

            Or show me a picture of one Sandy Hook child that was wounded recovering in the hospital from their wounds.

            Some picture akin to this victim of the Hunan, China stabbings…

            http://www.globalpost.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/gp3_full_article/china-henan-stabbing-newtown-sandy-hook-attack-2012-12-17.jpg

            And one thing is for damn sure…
            There were crisis actors on the scene Sandy Hook at that had been clearly identified from photographs from their false portrayals in other media news stories. But that is another debate.

            And then there is…”HIM”…
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhZEBB3mgFQ

          • Mike TheVet

            They don’t have any proof, Inquisitor.

            Did you ever find out about why the OnStar helicopters were never called?

          • inquisitor

            I have heard the point as to why helicopters were not called.
            It is something to consider, but I am skeptical of Halbig.

            But I prefer to address other points that require less speculation over something that did not occur.

            Like how could emergency vehicles hope to transport any wounded to the hospital by ambulance when the entrance-exit road was completely blocked and bottlenecked by civilian vehicles as evident on aerial video footage?

          • Mike TheVet

            Why are you skeptical of Halbig? Because he’s an outside source or do you believe he’s asking irrelevant questions to distract?

            Excellent comparison video, btw. One thing I can’t seem to get passed, though:

            How could a father conjure up any smiles just after his (Robbie Parker) daughter was gunned down?

          • DickVanstone

            Thanks and Semper Fidelis to Mike TheVet and you Inquisitor. I may have heard some skeptics about the Sandy Hook shooting, unfortunately I dismissed them out of hand. An obvious fail on my part.

            Also in that video I was forced to find out who that 2nd song was from. I had not heard of Blood for Blood, thanks.

  • http://www.policemisconduct.net Film The Police Always

    It’s been 7 months with IA because they know they can’t go after him for anything. Trust me, the legal department has been digging through every law and nothing is available to them to fire this guy. I’ll also guarantee that the police higher ups have been working back door deals with the union higher ups about trying to get help from them to get rid of him. Unions are so full of shit, don’t EVER think they will not support a member for the overall benefit of the union when closed door deals are being promised. They know if he’s fired that he will sue (AND HE WILL WIN) so they are looking for anything. If I were him, I’d stay low and would collect my pension. If I saw a dirty cop I’d report them, if I saw anything dirty I’d report it. I’d take names, times and places everyday till I retired.

    Is he working now, or is he on paid suspension?

    Be smart Ericson. Do not play into their game as they would love to fire you. Get your pension and enjoy it.

  • hang3xc

    Apparently Muslim women are not allowed anywhere in their county.

    No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing any… device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer

    • Guest

      Sure Muslim women are allowed. Just not the nutty ones that have been brainwashed into hiding themselves from the men so as not to bring rape upon themselves.

      • Paul Kisling

        Do we have to include the ugly ones??? I want them to wear burkas…

  • anan

    I would have more sympathy for this guy if he wasn’t a bat shit crazy pig.

    • Mike TheVet

      Try harder next time.

  • dickgosinya48

    Just like the NAZI’s . You disagree and they trash you, just like they did to Erwin Rommel.They’ll do it to this guy too.

  • dung heeve

    The guy is a total whack job. I can see why he became a cop.

    • Mike TheVet

      What does an upside-down flag mean to you, Dung? Forget the story and forget the officer’s intentions.

      What does the flag displayed in an upside-down matter mean to you?

      • anan

        It means nothing unless you are the one holding it. Then it means you’ve lost your mind. Get a grip on reality. If you don’t like the system, elect different leaders. That’s the beauty of a democracy.

        • Mike TheVet

          If you would have served in the military, you would know there is a specific meaning.

          It does not mean one has “lost their mind.”
          You are wrong, anan. But I don’t think you really care.

          “It means nothing unless you are the one holding it.” Wrong.

          • anan

            On the side of the freeway, it means you’ve lost your mind, possibly your day job.

          • Mike TheVet

            You believe anyone disagreeing with you is losing their mind.

            Good luck to you and yours, anan. You need it more than I.

          • anan

            It’s not about disagreeing with me. It is about thinking your government has purposely killed a classroom full of 5 year old students in the name of gun control, or pretended to kill them, and then to improperly display a symbol that has serious historic connotations that you are completely ignorant to try to draw attention to your crazy conspiracy theories. That is what this is about. In fact, flying the flag upside down outside of a situation where your life or property is in extreme danger is considered desecration of the flag.

            United States Code –

            Title 36 – PATRIOTIC SOCIETIES AND OBSERVANCES

            CHAPTER 10 – PATRIOTIC CUSTOMS

            Sec. 176 – Respect for flag

            …The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property…

          • Mike TheVet

            LoL!:

            “…The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property..

            “Crazy conspiracy theories.”

            Thank you very much for this exchange. I enjoyed it thoroughly and will be making an example of your post on a website called “The Daily Paul.”

            You should check it out sometime, keyboard warrior. You might learn a thing or two about yourself, among other things.

            Again: good luck to you and yours, anan.

          • anan

            The Constitution is outdated. It should be scrapped and rewritten with modern concerns in mind.

            Those of you that accuse the government of crazy conspiracies without any evidence do the real criminals a service. You create a cloud of nonsense where their real misdeeds can be hidden. You can post all you want on your insane websites dedicated to hate a misinformation, but the only way you’ll change anything for the better is in the voting booth.

          • Mike TheVet

            “The Constitution is outdated.”

            All do respect, I stopped reading after that and my name should cover the “why.”

            “you can create a cloud of nonsense” Evidence has been presented on numerous occasions, but people don’t believe it to be consequential.

            The truth is in the eye of the beholder.

            Good luck to you, Anan.

          • anan

            LOL, “evidence”…. “The truth is in the eye of the beholder.”

            No. The truth is the truth no matter your limited/incorrect perception of it. If your evidence was true, it would stand up to scrutiny. If your evidence was true, you would be able to convince others of its validity.

            I do not care if you are a vet. Any dimwit that is stationed in South Korea for over 2 years is considered a veteran of the Korean war. That doesn’t make your incorrect opinions any more correct. I have nothing against vets, but stating you are vet as if that should clarify something about your attitude towards the Constitution is just silly. The Constitution is a random collection of ideas that produced a pretty good government, but the document is not perfect nor is it the best constitution that can been written in terms of preserving the granted rights of the people and ensuring a fair democracy. The rights granted to you by our current Constitution are mostly random. Hearing this might shake the foundation of all your beliefs, but it’s true.

          • Paul Kisling

            This is the country that cannot decide which reality tv show it likes and somehow you think those same people could rewrite the Constitution more perfectly??? What a fucking joke!

          • anan

            We are the smartest and hardest working generation of humans to ever exist. Even our lowest examples are smarter than the average person at the time when the constitution was written.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            I’m a libertarian, dimwit. I don’t constrain my beliefs to a single document written by slave owners over 200 years ago. It’s a nice historic document, but it is a terrible blueprint for preserving our rights in the 21st century. If you weren’t busy jacking off to the Constitution, you’d realize this. It was written before modern medicine even existed. You know what is a great way to preserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? By keeping people alive. It also has nothing to contribute in terms of your right to access the internet. There is nothing unconstitutional about the US government installing content filters on the internet like China. Seriously, educate yourself.

          • rust

            I reiterate: go suck on your master’s dick, asswipe. Open the door to the commies and you’ll be picking lice out of your bunghole for the next century. THERE’S A REASON TO FOLLOW YOUR CONSTITUTION.

            “There is nothing unconstitutional about the US government installing content filters on the internet like China” — are you fucking serious? Apart from the fact that it violates about 3 amendments, tell me WHERE in the constitution where it says that the GUVMINT is allowed into the PRIVATE COMMUNICATIONS of INDIVIDUALS or GROUPS.

            Let’s see, there is the CONSTITUTIONALLY prohibited “safe in papers and persons” provision. Just because there was no word for something they did not conceive of in the 18th century, doesn’t mean the language didn’t provide for a good approximation.

            And there is that nasty First Amendment that governments have hated from the beginning, including your personal hero, Abe “I DON’T LIKE WHAT YOU WRITE” Lincoln.

            Stupid, stupid, stupid, moron.

          • anan

            Please list the amendments that would be violated by an internet filter installed by the government that blocked certain websites. You are foolish if you think the Constitution protects all the rights you value.

          • rust

            First and Fourth, dickwad.

          • anan

            How would it violate your first or fourth amendment rights? Imagine the government blocked all kiddie porn sites. How does that prevent your freedom of speech or your right to privacy and unreasonable search???

          • rust

            Figure it out for yourself. Here’s a picture I snapped of you when you weren’t looking:

          • anan

            You have a very poor grasp on what free speech is if you think the government blocking kiddie porn sites infringes on your free speech rights. Also, they don’t need to search or examine anything of yours to block traffic to a particular site. Either way you are too stupid to understand that the Constitution does not protect your unburdened access to the internet just in the same way the government could legally block you from calling certain numbers or entering certain buildings, flying on certain flights…etc.

            You don’t have the rights you think you do, dimwit. That’s a great picture of you btw.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            Hate to break this to you, but the government already does this. They have every right to block whatever content they want. You don’t have a right to access any content you want on the internet.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            There is only one government, and it is run by the people. You get to elect who runs it. Educate yourself.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            You make no sense.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            You are the type of person that uses the N word at the dinner table, huh? I pity you and your endangered kind. History will remember you harshly.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            You are a racist. If Obama were white, you would treat him differently. You should be ashamed of yourself.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            If Obama were white, he would have ran against Bush and beaten him.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            What’s funny is that you completely forget that I told you that I’m a Libertarian. I don’t support or vote for Obama. You are the reason people do vote for Obama. You make the opposition look bad.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            You are gay.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            Once again, I have no parents.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            Can you say that again?

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            You’re a troll.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious.

          • anan

            Why don’t you love me?

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is a cocksuckingly obvious

          • anan

            Have a good 4th. How many flags are you going to burn tonight?

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            You are the type of person that uses the N word at the dinner table.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            Unless you have a feeding tube, you must swallow as well.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • anan

            I don’t have parents.

          • rust

            Obvious Troll is obvious

          • Paul Kisling

            Modern concerns like what? Human nature has not changed. We have the oppressed and oppressors. Rich and poor. Crazy and sane. We have good people and bad people.

            Just like the founding father had.. Just because technology advances does not mean people or what people do changes.

            I notice that the founding fathers were far smarter than the people today. Think about it. How would it be possible to completely rewrite the Constitution without the entire country degenerating into a warzone??? Do you seriously think the founding fathers did not think of this outcome especially since they were students of history???

          • anan

            Human nature has changed. Our culture has evolved. We no longer enslave people. We no longer allow lynchings or for gays to be murdered. People now have a right to medical care (medical did not even exist at the writing of the constitution). The founding fathers didn’t think of everything because they couldn’t. They were not magicians. They were intelligent for their time, but they were far from perfect. We have much more qualified people now that can produce a much better constitution. We must learn from our past, not strive to live in the past.

        • Paul Kisling

          Actually the definition of a democracy is 51 percent oppressing the 49.

          • anan

            Only if that is the nature of the culture of the society. There are many democracies where no one side has 51 percent of the vote. They function just fine without oppressing 49 percent.

  • Bill Larson

    From a legal dictionary

    Harassment (either harris-meant or huh-rass-meant) n.

    the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demands. The purposes may vary, including racial prejudice, personal malice, an attempt to force someone to quit a job or grant sexual favors, apply illegal pressure to collect a bill or merely gain sadistic pleasure from making someone anxious or fearful. Such activities may be the basis for a lawsuit if due to discrimination based on race or sex, a violation on the statutory limitations on collection agencies, involve revenge by an ex-spouse, or be shown to be a form of blackmail (“I’ll stop bothering you if you’ll go to bed with me”). The victim may file a petition for a “stay away” (restraining) order, intended to prevent contact by the offensive party. A systematic pattern of harassment by an employee against another worker may subject the employer to a lawsuit for failure to protect the worker.

    I don’t think that they can say exercising your first amendment rights qualifies. He wasn’t making threats or demands.

  • rust

    Interesting turn of events

  • AintMizBahavin

    at least he knows and understands what going on and its exactly the reason they killed christopher dorner in front of the world. if you havent read the manifesto you need to.. there are many places its still online the cia wasnt able to snatch it off completely

  • Eric

    What if someone was running public errands while wearing a full face respirator (or gas mask) with the intent to avoid inhaling fragrances,
    chemicals, and pollens due to severe allergies, not because a doctor told them to, but because they are aware of the dangers of public air? Would this individual be at risk of being arrested for carrying out his/her daily activities wearing the personal protective equipment he deemed fit for his/herself?

  • bob smith

    Kudos! i don’t believe in any of the conspiracy theory stuff but i love seeing someone standing up exercising their rights. I am a retired Florida police officer and would support Officer Harrell anytime he steps out to protest. Keep fighting the good fight! Oh and i hope you win your law suit!

  • American

    This law also needs work because literally it exempts whole categories of persons from the entire law when it means to exempt them only *when* they are using the specified masks.

  • Paul Kisling

    This guy might be a little off kilter on some of his theories, but if it makes the cops not be total assholes than they can be as crazy as hell for all I care.