Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/audittheaudit
Facebook: https://bit.ly/3fKIZF8
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuditTheAudit
Audit the Audit 2: http://bit.ly/2CD2b6j
Submit your videos here: auditheaudit@gmail.com
Sponsorship inquiries: audit@ellifyagency.com
Welcome to Audit the Audit, where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions. Help us grow and educate more citizens and officers on the proper officer interaction conduct by liking this video and/or subscribing.
This video is for educational purposes and is in no way intended to provoke, incite, or shock the viewer. This video was created to educate citizens on constitutionally protected activities and emphasize the importance that legal action plays in constitutional activism.
Bear in mind that the facts presented in my videos are not indicative of my personal opinion, and I do not always agree with the outcome, people, or judgements of any interaction. My videos should not be construed as legal advice, they are merely a presentation of facts as I understand them.
FAIR USE
This video falls under fair use protection as it has been manipulated for educational purposes with the addition of commentary. This video is complementary to illustrate the educational value of the information being delivered through the commentary and has inherently changed the value, audience and intention of the original video.
Original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD9RZnLsTu8&
DontComply.com’s channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCT5wI5eCSBgjw8aNV-kOiJQ
Sources:
Code 42.01: https://bit.ly/32asxJ9
King v. Brown: https://bit.ly/3iXw6JD
Jones v. State: https://bit.ly/2YSnmwS
Sparkman v. Peoples National Bank: https://bit.ly/3gbgOz9
Grieve v. State: https://bit.ly/2E8pf1d
Constitutional Convention poll: https://bit.ly/31h2tx7
DontComply blog: https://bit.ly/31dq1Ta
Thanks for joining us! Be sure to hit that subscribe button for more police interaction content!
This video still makes me sick every time I see it…. The audacity of that cop to think it’s up to him to decide what rights anyone should be able to exercise…
He would have gotten an A+++ if he simply didn’t answer the door – in my judgment.
I wouldn’t even have opened the door.
Texas cop coming to a civilians house to argue “I wouldn’t do that so you shouldn’t do that” is corruption at its highest levels and I expected more from a Texas. And his “interpretation” of laws doesn’t override the constitution. Doesn’t matter if it’s New York or Minnesota the Constitution is the Constitution. But I guess this is why Uvalde happened.
Disturbing the peace is the easiest wae for an officer to threat arrest on some one for no reason. Its completely speculative. If they need a reason to threaten or arrest anyone they want the go to easiest way for the cop to make up anreason is disorderly conduct. They are tyrants plan ans simple
I get the rights and all that but the lack of common sense in this video and comments is ridiculous
Police have no problem telling citizens that ignorance of the law is no excuse while being willfully ignorant of laws that they were hired to uphold not interpret.
A constitutionally protected activity cannot be criminalized.
If he is allowed to open, carry a long gun….. Then doing so can't be criminalized because it causes an alarm.
That is why a law is made. To EXEMPT an action.
Meaning you can do it UNLESS there is a lot that says you can't. And if the law is made that says you CAN do something…. It is made to EXEMPT that action from the consequences of an already existing law.
What is up with the creepy no legs dude with shades in the group picture ?
Idk. I have my firearms and what not. I'm all for conceal carry but open carry, wether it's legal or not, its a joke. Its literally asking for police attention. Idk. Id rather conceal carry and go about my day than waste hours at a time explaining "my rights" to cops every time I step put the door. Gun nuts will never understand and die by what's "right" or not. Like the officer said. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
It's all deliberate.
We didn't get this safe by letting you have rights! I've been robbed. lol I thought Texas was the cool state?
This sounds like a scene straight out of Reno 911!
sgt needs to be fired he is a bully with a gun and badge
I'm from Texas and my family owns multiple firearms. It's that dude's legal right to walk around with that stupid thing strapped to his back but it's still going to make me think he's a nutty compensating doorstop for feeling the need to walk around a peaceful neighborhood like that for no other purpose than "LoOk aT mE!"
It makes me wonder if those same people would be perfectly cool with a bunch of poc doing the same thing. 🙄
Gun nerds are so weird
I’ve always found it weird how there are laws set in place to allow people to do certain things but then there’s regulations on the action regardless of how “non-threatening” the action is. For example, why give people the constitutionally protected right to open carry a long rifle, in this example, even if the rifle was in the most “non-threatening” manner that that weapon could ever possibly be in, would still be considered unlawful. I mean if I saw a guy walking around with a rifle on their back I would be alarmed no doubt. But why give them the right if it can’t ever be utilized in the way that the law has constituted? i.e the 2nd amendment
I mean the whole 2nd amendment, concerning the ability to open carry a long rifle is a means to calculate alarm. Why have it under the 2nd amendment?
Genuine question if anyone could respectfully answer it please 🙏🏼
Dont mess with texas.
Can we just appreciate what a wordsmith the narrator is ?
::shrug::
“I’m not asking for permission, im providing a courtesy notice.”
They should up to threaten him, they know he’s within his legal right.
Don't care
2nd amendment rite are not gonna be trampled cuz you don't want to do your job to bad its my rite
Can you shut it hear the conversation
Don't care if it causes alarm
The hypocrisy of lie enforcement is astonishing. It's not just an opinionated talk when you're threatening to jail a citizen for exercising his rights while simultaneously doing the same.
Sounds like the cop already has the paperwork ready. Just put in the date and time and the innocent civilian is off to jail
There's no such thing as a consensual conversation with a police officer. When talking with men in uniform with guns, there's an automatic intimidation factor: "cooperate, or we will threaten you with arrest." If it is indeed consensual, then a person should have the ability to withdraw from the conversation and refuse to participate further. You should be able to tell them the conversation is over, and they should leave.
In real life, that won't happen. Cops will say it's a consensual conversation because they want to keep you talking. Try to end the conversation, and they will suddenly declare it's an "investigation", and insist you HAVE to talk to them, or be arrested for impeding their investigation.
Fuck the back the blue sentiment. The boys in blue in New Mexico will enforce the unconstitutional decree from the governor banning guns. They will break into your house, throw you down to the ground, throw you in jail, lie about it with a smile on their face.
very interesting and this cop is full of it. they always want you to see it their way or else
Great video And Assessments!
Knowing that Some people will be alarmed by you exercising your constitutional rights does not equate to calculated intent to cause alarm.
We do not derprive ourselves of our rights simply because some people are alarmed that we have the rights.
This is a case of freedom of speech versus the public's Right to feel safe.
Some public carrying is okay because it's not going to make the majority of people scared as hell. But carrying an AR-15 down the street while holding a sign that says, "Sandy Hook was a good start! " clearly falls outside of the first amendments guarantee of freedom of speech.
Actually, you can include necessity in there too. It doesn't matter if you're scaring the hell out of the public just so long as what you're doing is necessary.
I would have refused to have had a consensual conversation with this opinionated Sargent.if he chooses to violate this citizens rights then the community that this cop says he represents will need to pay for his misdeeds. This cops behavior was coercive and unacceptable. He is full of perceived authority and should focus on his actual authority.
You should have also graded the action of the police chief. His willingness to meet and discuss the issues should be commended. Additional his willingness to help educate the public should be acknowledged.
well, fuck these second amendment folk.
Walking around with a gun and that not being calculated to cause alarm is further proof of how undeveloped America is
This is wild. If the government has the power to simply say him exercising his right will cause an alarm then arrest him on that fact for doing just so. That’s too much power. With any rights. Next you won’t be allowed to protest our government cuz they can say “it’ll cause alarm”. See how that works? Your rights. At all times. Simple as that
I don’t think that cop deserves a lower grade for using a threat of arrest for Mr Horton wanting to exercise a constitutional right.
Then, if the police believe that, then all police officers take away all their weapons, they were not allowed to use a weapon anymore display weapon of any kind they will only use tasers and their hands to stop criminals for now on that’s the new law
sad to live in this much fear, walking the streets with guns. really sad there in America.
If I saw a man walking around my neighborhood with a huge gun, I'd call the Police.