Armed Protestors STAND UP To Corrupt Cops!

46 thoughts on “Armed Protestors STAND UP To Corrupt Cops!”

1. Thanks for being here! We're working on a part two for the update series that should be debuting soon so keep an eye out for that. If you'd like to support the channel beyond a like or a sub then just watching this video to the end would really help us out. Hope you have an easy Monday and a pleasureable week!

2. Im all about the 2A but commies or fascists who only see the world thru a racist lense ought not be armed

3. Overalls dude gives off strong Uncle Ruckus vibes.

4. These people now how to peacefully assemble, protect themselves with a balance of firepower, and also have the highest power to protect their constitutional and divinely lawfully protected rights and freedoms, their highest power here is that they know their rights and freedoms…

5. The Truth About Law Enforcement, Military, and Accountability Under U.S. Law, common law,, international humans rights laws, and divine laws.

   Many people are once again realizing that law enforcement agencies, military branches, and even courts are legally recognized as corporate entities. They are registered businesses, often with DUNS numbers, operating under commercial law — meaning they’re engaged in commerce, not just public service.

   Yes, They Can Be Sued — and Even Criminally Charged
   
   Despite the public perception that cops or soldiers are untouchable when acting “on duty,” U.S. law makes it clear: no one is above the law — especially when they violate someone’s constitutional rights under the guise of authority.

   Relevant Laws & Codes:
   
   18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law
   
   This federal statute makes it a crime for anyone acting under "color of law" (including cops, judges, or military police) to willfully deprive someone of rights protected by the Constitution.

   Penalties range from fines, imprisonment, or even death if someone dies due to the abuse.

   This law applies to ALL government employees — even military members operating domestically.

   18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights
   
   Two or more officials conspiring to oppress someone’s rights? That’s a federal crime too.

   42 U.S. Code § 1983 – Civil action for deprivation of rights
   
   Victims of unlawful police or government abuse can sue individuals in their personal capacity — not just the agency.

   This applies when public officials act outside their jurisdiction or use excessive force.

   Are They Private Corporations?
   
   Yes — legally speaking, many public agencies (police departments, city governments, court systems) are registered as corporations or municipal entities.

   Search them on sites like Dun & Bradstreet.

   Being a corporate entity means they are liable, just like any business.

   Their employees (cops, sheriffs, judges, etc.) are acting as agents — and can be held personally accountable.

   What Does This Mean for You?
   
   Don’t assume “they’re the law” means they are lawful. They are not the law, They are commerce. All of the economies and communities, are a form of commerce. Constructs created by humans. Many are well balanced and self sustaining and live in harmony with each other, nature, the animals as well.

   Bullies/hurt people tend to get into these positions thinking they have some qualified immunity when usually what they do is play victim for their wrongdoings, and sway or cry to their higherups to manipulate opinions and views. This is seen in some regular workers as well from different stores and businesses.

   Know your rights under the Constitution.

   Record interactions and stay calm, but never waive your rights.

   File formal complaints, lawsuits, and even criminal referrals if you’re unlawfully targeted.

   This isn't conspiracy — it's commercial and constitutional law. Agencies that overstep can be sued, fined, fired, or even prosecuted.

   The Right to Defend Yourself Against Unlawful Arrest or Harm
   
   The U.S. legal tradition — especially in its common law roots and early jurisprudence — affirms that individuals have a right to resist unlawful arrest. While many modern courts try to limit this right procedurally, the principle remains embedded in law:

   Common Law Right to Resist Unlawful Arrest
   
   John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529 (1900)

   “Where the officer is resisted, not with the intent of taking his life, or inflicting great bodily harm, but solely for the purpose of asserting the right to personal liberty, the law regards it as justifiable or excusable depending on circumstances.”

   Modern Considerations
   
   Many states have tried to repeal this doctrine, but constitutional protections (4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments) still prohibit warrantless, unjustified use of force. When an officer initiates unlawful deadly force, you may legally defend your life — just as you would against any armed attacker.

   You Have the Right to Defend Others from Unlawful Harm
   
   U.S. law also allows third-party defense when another person is being subjected to unlawful use of force. This is not negated by the aggressor’s badge.

   Model Penal Code § 3.05 – Use of force for protection of others

   Castle Doctrine / Stand Your Ground (varies by state): In many states, if someone — including a law enforcement officer — uses unlawful deadly force, a bystander may intervene to stop it.

   Terrorism Laws
   
   If police or public officials use intimidation, coercion, or violence systematically against civilians, it can fall under the federal definition of domestic terrorism:

   18 U.S. Code § 2331(5) – Definition of Domestic Terrorism
   
   “…acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; appear intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; or influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion…”

   This means:

   If officers or departments engage in abuse of power to intimidate, retaliate against whistleblowers, or suppress lawful dissent…

   And they do so with violence, threats, or coercive authority, their actions by divine and constitutional law constitute as acts of domestic terrorism, and should be reported to the FBI Domestic Terrorism Unit or DOJ Civil Rights Division, or dealt with immediately thru balanced and power backed de escalation.

   Final Word
   
   No badge, uniform, or title gives anyone the right to violate natural or constitutional law.

   When officers:

   Violate your rights knowingly (18 U.S. § 242)

   Conspire to do so (18 U.S. § 241)

   Attempt to cloak their violence behind a false claim of lawful authority.

   They are not “law enforcement” — they are domestic criminals, and possibly domestic terrorists, under federal law, common law, international human rights laws, and divine law.

   Asserting your rights is not rebellion — it is duty under a free republic/nation/community etc.

6. I wonder how Black Panthers felt about a black sheriff being a tyrant and a white Trooper trying to be understanding, just curious

7. So let me get this straight. The stop started as him being too close to the car in front of him. Which in the broad scheme of driving seems like an arbitrary thing to pull someone over for. Then the stop was about speeding. Then it was about prior tickets then window tint. Really odd set of things. Feels like you pulled someone over to find things.

8. Sorry but blocking a road is not the definition of a protest. But still.

9. I notice that you didn't name your video "Armed Black Protestors stand up to corrupt cops". Yet any time there is a female cop in your videos you always name the video "Armed protestors stand up to corrupt female cop". I love your videos, but be better.

10. I always find it sad when there’s law on the books like parade permits that make it virtually illegal to exercise your first amendment right to protest

11. Lol, the definition of "parade" seems a lot like a circular definition

12. They have the right to freedom of speech and assembly, not the right to essentially detain other citizens and prevent them from driving to their destination. These dumbasses get an F for violating other citizens rights.

13. Good job on your part. Typical on theirs.

14. I'm sure there was a right of way on the main road.

15. No justice, no law.

16. requiring a permit to assemble is a violation of the first amendment because they can just deny you a permit thus removing your rights.

17. Everyone in this video sounds ignorant. They should all get an F for failure to speak intelligently.

18. Bout goddamn time

19. Appreciate that Indian cop helping them out

20. Those tactics are just disgusting

21. I remember this one

22. Chief hims a good ol'boy

23. Why is the chief wearing overalls? 😂that looks so weird

24. I swear this country wants a license for everything this shit is annoying always a loop hole to mess up our rights

25. They had the evidence of tailgating. If not, Mr Turner would've provided his dash cam video to show they were wrong.

26. Let's encourage peaceful dialogue and understanding between all sides. Respectful discussions can lead to real change.

27. To be honest, that second cop was more tame than most officers on this channel. Most cops get to escalating things when people don't answer questions. But he respected that no one was going to answer his questions, and he left things as they were without escalating things unnecessarily and he stayed within his authority. That's the first officer I saw receive a grade higher than an F in a long time.

28. A cop in overalls… That's actually not bad.

29. Black Panthers are a black nationalist group that hate white people.

30. 😂 they got serious fire power…

31. Aleays thr dame grouo..good guys

32. Very calm huh, lol

33. The 2nd video, regarding Mr. Turner with the traffic stop was very educational, I applaud Mr. Turner in his voice to exercise his rights! And I also applaud the law enforcement in honoring his rights even though the police could have been profiling him, the fact that the officer stopped him and asked "have you had any tickets before?" Was met with the 5th, he honored his right in the matter when he didn't pursue the questioning any further

34. He’s lucky when he cracked his window they officer didn’t hit him with “ I smell weed in the car is that why you don’t want to roll the window down?”

35. An excellent segment. Remember, you have the right to remain silent. Use it!!

36. 14:53 cop hitting a vape mid confrontation is pure American 😭

37. Pretextual stops should be illegal

38. It's wild how calm the police are when they aren't the only one carrying guns.

39. Don’t need a permit to protest it’s a right

40. They just traded their white hoods for badges.

41. Chief Collin’s gets an A and the protesters get an F-

42. “We were never in the road” as they blocked the road for the duration of the video.

43. On the first video: they were breaking the law by being in the street, and when they started shouting “coon”, they lost all credibility.

44. Its those bad Batches of apples that make it hard for the few good ones!
    I think thats what they mean by thin blue line?

45. Battousai doesn't mess around, and his "dont answer questions, cops are just looking to hang you with your own words"… Bro definitely ain't wrong.

46. 16:30 BIG disagree here, he should get a D. How does he get the same grade as others who straight up grab innocent people and throw them to the ground? He was following ordinance. Yes it was unconstitutional, and that's why he gets a bad grade. But it is MUCH more forgivable and understandable for a cop to have a sub-lawyer level understanding of the law, knowing that time place and manner restrictions are constitutional, but not understanding the more rare and specific nuances of this law, especially when his own ordinance is essentially misinforming him of the true law.

Comments are closed.