(TWS1405_2) Cops do not answer to civilians like that. You need to first listen and don’t question. You don’t know the traffic laws, they do. Therefore, you won’t know if you did something wrong until you are told. Sometimes cops tell you after you give them your license and registration. Sometimes it’s the first thing they tell you. Either way, it is not to you to question their decisions and/or authority.
Sentences like the bolded are capable of raising fury in my exhausted heart. Before I explain further a pertinent question was asked:
(AleutianTexan) This is a general value question, but do you think citizens have a duty and/or right to stand up, violently or otherwise, against tyrannical or unjust governments?
It would be one thing to claim that at the time of detainment or arrest it is not appropriate to challenge the claims of the state (and anyone acting under color of law is acting as the state), but there is no later time either; none of any practical significance.
There is no justice for cops if the don't understand the law, if they arrest you wrongly. The most that is even legally possible is forcing the hiring government to pay out money, money they stole from the people.
There are three great sources of injustice in modern government:
1.) The laws themselves violate rights
2.) The laws are so complicated that they cannot be known or predicted, "ignorance is no excuse" is something that should be inscribed on a bullet of vengeance, to be delivered to the speaker's brain unless he can recite the full US code at will.
3.) When cops or prosecutors try to enforce non-existent laws or apply laws arbitrarily there is no penalty on them.
Government bureaucrats certainly do not know the law better than their victims. I have personally backed a county official into a corner where he admitted (on tape) that everyone breaks the law and he only cared about me breaking the law because he didn't like my schedule.
There are countless videos of 1st and 2nd amendment auditors to prove this. Cops don't know the law, lawyers don't know the law, judges don't know the law. All they know is the game they play with each other because "the law" is often an incoherent enormous pile of text which is physically beyond the capacity of any individual to know.
It seems obvious in hindsight, but when they were happily writing constitutions about two hundred years ago; they never stopped to ask themselves "If we create a body of authority whose only job is to pass laws, what will they do when there are no more problems that can be solved by a new law?"
The answer is that they will just keep passing new laws pretending they're solving problems and they will never get rid of old ones. Why would they? Every law is another weapon to be used against uppity citizens as needed.
The solution is simple. In the tradition of free market motivation of personal interest: Reward cops, prosecutors, judges who get it right, and penalize those who get it wrong.
For example give the jury an option to return "not guilty" OR "obviously not guilty", if it is obvious everyone who participated in the illegal arrest and indictment pays.
Pays how? Money. Almost every criminal code has associated fines. They pay those fines to the person whose life they were royally fucking up.
If you arrest someone and hold them for 48 hours and "decline to charge" you pay.
You issue a citation incorrectly? You pay.
Trial by jury is always a right, but if you're found guilty: You pay.
I guarantee you that the frivolous arrests will fall and cops will learn the law.