I was doing some “algorithm surfing” (i.e. VPN+private tab+click enough youtube videos on a topic=temporarily immersed in someone else’s rabbit hole). In a patriotism rabbit hole, I found this video about a fearless teenager defending himself and his father against police misconduct with knowledge of Utah law.

Question: how can a layperson possibly know that much about the law to rival a cop’s situational power like that?

I’m already familiar with shutting up (I vaguely remember there being a way funnier video but I can’t find it)

but I think not shutting up, and instead sheer CYA, was instrumental to that kid and his dad winning the counterlawsuit. And being friendly has turned a speeding ticket into a warning for me (anecdotal evidence)… once…

Apologies if this question is too American. Also please don’t hit me with another All Cops Are Benzene or something – I could use a usable answer ^ .^

  • chloroken@lemmy.mlEnglish
    15·
    2 days ago

    I can speak from direct experience here.

    You do not argue law with police in the United States. Period. Any example of it working out is overshadowed by hundreds of deaths. Even giving off the impression you’re some kind of sovereign citizen is a good way to get killed.

    You quite literally — and this is triple true if you’re a POC — must submit to them and pay a lawyer to interact with the Corrections Department and the courts. Doing anything other than this, e.g., resisting arrest, arguing law, is a surefire way to get hurt or killed.

    The police in the United States are not there to help, you should never talk to them. This includes arguing law.

    • refalo@programming.dev
      4·
      2 days ago

      And never open your front door for any reason. If the cops or anyone else really needed you that bad, they’d be busting the door down anyway and you’re already fucked six ways to Sunday.

      Also cameras. Lots of them. Different brands. Offline recording. INSIDE AND OUT. Ask me how I know.

    • eldavi@lemmy.mlEnglish
      3·
      2 days ago

      that fact that youtube requires you to sign in just to see the videos shows how effective they are. lol

    • fool@programming.devOP
      7·
      2 days ago

      Pot Brothers! That’s the video I was thinking of.

      Stfu is widely best (better to do nothing than go negative), but there’s the caveats of self-identification being necessary in some places, and drawing police hostility, isn’t there? (e.g. oh, we’re all nice and joyful? oh… no? nvm… hmm, I sense a traffic violation)

      I’m primarily asking about that part.

      Haven’t seen the Regent one, I’ll give that a watch.

      • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
        4·
        2 days ago

        anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law

        There is no situation outside of basic ID verification where any statement you make will benefit you in any way. If a cop has decided he’s going to arrest you then you’re getting arrested. The proper time to fight against that is in court, not at the time of arrest.

  • NeoToasty@kbin.melroy.org
    4·
    2 days ago

    Don’t be a sovereign citizen. The worst mistakes I’ve seen people pull is argue the law with cops. Cops are like robots, they’re going to be spamming commands after commands. There is no room to debate, so shut up and comply, debate the rest of the shit in court later.

    And when you get to court, the worst mistake here is running your mouth about things you only have an idea of, but not the complete story. This is why it’s advisable to get a lawyer.

    I’ve watched a court case where my sister tried to defend herself, least partially even with a lawyer. She lost a custody case because she tried driving her narrative to sway court judgment. Don’t be an idiot, like her.

    • fool@programming.devOP
      1·
      1 day ago

      Does the adage “know your rights” simply denote “self-identify then stfu then get a lawyer” – and nothing else? If not, where can a layperson find the useful-to-knows? (Yes, look up local law, but it’s basically all scholarly articles or superficial news reports)

      This part is the crux of my question