Bisbee rancher beaten by SWAT after called in by a coyote… and Sir Robt Peel’s 9 Principles…

Bisbee rancher beaten by SWAT after called in by a coyote

Sounds like we need to make a stand at this old boys ranch, what do you think?  This may be the place for a final line in the sand stand.

A MUST READ, AND MUST SHARE

Remember to Flush OBAMA in 2012

---

Bisbee rancher beaten by SWAT after called in by a coyote

According to this source  his name is Dave Boggess, cousin to Roger Barnett

Message in the Oath Keeeprs facebook grouptoday 8/23/11:

Cassie McSasserson

I just got a message from a friend in Arizona "we have a 'situation' here outside Bisbee. A rancher who's house is within yards of a major immigrant pass has been beaten and nearly killed by the Bisbee Police. i am not sure they even have jurisdiction where he is. They confiscated all his weapons. I have asked him to write a statement, but after that, not sure where to go what to do. If you have any suggestions... It is my thinking that he has been targeted for the proximity of his land. He is elderly. During the beating one officer grabbed and tugged on his pacemaker. he was hospitalized overnight. They refuse to give him a receipt for the 7 weapons they took. They threw him to the ground when he was asked to come out of the house and he did so - in a t shirt and shorts, barefoot"

Cassie McSasserson OK this is the story "I will tell all I know. I am not yet sure how far he wants to go with this. He has been badly frightened. I would not want to go ahead without his permission.
What he told me last night (I was there fixing his computer) is that (obviously if you could see his property) he owns a major thourofare from Mexico to Naco and Bisbee. He said it is the best path because he owns a ravine that goes to the border. he has never hurt anyone, is elderly and ill.

Well, last week, a Coyote (human not animal) was bringing a bunch across and were giving his 30-yr-old daughter a very hard toime, driving by slow, looking in windows and all. So, he went out with his AK47 and popped a few into the air to get them to go away. The Coyote called the police and they sent a SWAT team. He said between 6 and 10 cop cars pulled in and speakered to him to come out of the house unarmed. He came out in a t-shirt, shorts and no shoes. They grabbed him, threw him on the ground, mashed his head into the gravel and started pounding on his pacemaker. Sorry I do not recall what he told me they were saying to him. They skinned his knees (he has photos) and cut up his head near where he has previously had a stroke - that scared him they were pounding on the part of his head where he had had a stroke, and were pounding on his pacemaker and grinding him into the dirt. They then went into his house - he says without permission or even ASKING and confiscated 6-7 weapons. They took him to Police dept. were he started to look really bad and so they took him to the hospital, where he was kept overnight. The next day, from the hospital he called and asked about a ride back (small town we have no public transport or taxi - he would have had to walk 10 miles home) they said no and that they didn't have to give him a receipt for his weapons. That is where I came in the picture - a few days later.

When I was at his place last night, I saw 5 illegals within 200 yards of his house. But also when I was there and he was telling me the story, he broke down and cried 3 times during the telling. Also as I was there, he would drop little bits of info so it is hard for me to put it all together. I told him I would help him if he wanted, that he has to write out a statement of every detail and I would get it to people. He at that point was ready to commit suicide, I thought. He is a recovering alcoholic and has started drinking over this so it was really hard for me to get the story. They have fucked this man up.
I asked him how many illegals has he turned in over the years, and he told me about 200 and that BP Border Patrol, always thank him. Then... as I was leaving, he tells me that if he calls BP from his house phone, they don't answer anymore. If you could see where his property lays, you would think as I do, they just want his property and will kill him to get it.

He kept telling me that the SWAT team acted as if it was a Drill or a training thing. He said it was surreal, and he feels as if he has been raped. he has not yet decided how far he wants to go, or if he should try to sell, or what but the property has been in his family for generations - his family is one of two or three in the area that originally settled here. I promised to talk to him tomorrow as I still have more computer works to do and so i will see where he is, then. But as I was leaving and I told him i would help him if he wants to fight, he sort of perked up and said yes, I want to fight. But tonight, at my neighbors for dinner he had a mini-stroke or something and we rushed him home. I think really, he is scared to death and thought he was alone until i showed up and said I would help, if he wants it. I think he needs to write out the statement and get it to me as he promised, and we go from there..."

It is starting to get ugly my fellow patriots!!
h/t to Yvonne

Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito
Bullets and Beans

http://bonfiresblog.wordpress.com

http://www.oathkeepers.org
http://www.st-ares.org/

Lest it should not be forgotten, you do not have to have taken an oath to be responsible for right from wrong, it is incumbent on every citizen to act:

The police are the public and the public are the police;

The police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen. Sir Robert Peel

The nine principles by Sir Robert Peel

1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.
3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
5. Police seek and preserve public favor not by catering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.
7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence
8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

These principles listed above may have been Sir Robert Peel’s principles. However, the Metropolitan Police’s founding principles and, de facto the founding principles of all other modern (post 1829) UK police forces, was summarized by Sir Richard Mayne (the first commissioner) in 1829 in the following terms:

The nine principles by Sir Richard Mayne

1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognize always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behavior and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3. To recognize always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognize always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5. To seek and preserve public favor, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humor; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. To recognize always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9. To recognize always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

In a broad sense these principles were continued to be taught until the time of Sir Robert Mark when he introduced his little “blue book” in the 1970’s:

The principles of Sir Robert Mark

“The primary object of an efficient police is the prevention of crime: the next that of detection and punishment of offenders if crime is committed. To these ends all the efforts of police must be directed. The protection of life and property, the preservation of public tranquility, and the absence of crime, will alone prove whether those efforts have been successful and whether the objects for which the police were appointed have been attained.”

Mark does go on though to make the point that the above is done with the consent of the public and is not done by way of imposing on the public.

Since Sir Robert Mark every commissioner has had his own set of “principles”, for instance Sir Peter Imbert had “The Plus Program” and so on.

Notwithstanding the generality of my last comment, poster versions of Sir Richard Mayne’s principles could still be seen within the Met Police Training school as late as the early 1990’s (for historical purposes).