In Viral Video White Houston Cop Releases the Black Man He Unlawfully Detained in His Own Yard b/c He Wanted to, Not b/c of the Black Man’s Demands- but We are “Free" to Believe Otherwise

houston deputy detention.jpg

From [HERE] A white Houston deputy tried to arrest a black man playing with his kids outside his own home — because he apparently mistook him for a fugitive wanted in Louisiana, viral video shows.

A 5-minute video [see below] on Facebook posted on May 8 by Clarence Evans — which has racked up more than 1.1 million views as of Thursday — shows Evans pressed up against a car in the driveway of his home after a white Harris County Precinct 4 Constable’s Office deputy misidentified him as a suspect named Quentin who was sought by authorities in Louisiana.

“You don’t know my name, so how can you tell me I have an open warrant in Louisiana?” Evans asked the deputy, identified by KHOU as Garrett Lindley. “You don’t even know my name. Why would I trust you?” [MORE]

FREE-RANGE PRISON. Although the heated interaction may appear to be an arms length discussion between a public servant and a citizen, it is actually far from it, your mind is playing tricks on you again. Cops are representatives of authority who have been given super-human status with regard to morality and immunity from laws. When we do the same things they do we will be held accountable to written laws and also judged according to normal standards of morality. Public rulers do not serve their subjects, unless they want to. Toward this end the executive branch of every government has granted cops official, discretionary authority to stop, detain and arrest citizens and commit other unprovoked acts of violence when they deem it necessary to do so.

All laws and police commands are actually threats backed by force. Michael Huemer explains ‘at the end of a chain of commands or orders must come a threat that the violator literally cannot defy. The system as a whole must be anchored by a non-voluntary intervention, a harm that the state can impose regardless of the individual’s choices. That anchor is provided by physical force.’ [MORE] Here, the white cop used his discretion and chose not to en-force his orders on a disobedient Black citizen who questioned his authority.

After the video check out the obedient happy slaves on the Roland Martin show. Mr. Bolden has probably not ever set foot in a criminal court. If so, no one paid him to be there. Here he is harming people with his ignorance and love for his own slavery. He has gone too far to stand up for his masters [FUNKTIONARY explains, "a willing slave gets upset if you refuse to to acknowledge his or her master. Usually when people say 'act responsibly' what they mean is cow-tow to the conforming lies we call truths" [quoting George Battailes]. Bolden is offended by a disobedient Black man’s words & conduct. If you have belief in such things in The Spectacle at least know what you're talking about.

  • In order for the cops to stop you the Supreme Court has explained that cops must have reasonable articulable suspicion that there is criminal activity afoot and that you are involved in the activity. Cops may not act on on the basis of an unclear and unparticularized suspicion or a hunch - there must be some specific articulable facts along with reasonable inferences from those facts to justify the intrusion.

  • If cops reasonably suspect that you are committing, have committed or are about to commit a crime, they may briefly detain you for questioning. Under these circumstances, the officers may request your identification and an explanation for your actions.

  • In order to frisk you the Supreme Court has ruled that the police must have independent reasonable articulable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous before they may touch you or put their hands on you (a cursory patdown for weapons). Police may not act on on the basis of an inchoate or unclear and unparticularized suspicion or a hunch - there must be some specific, actual & articulable facts along with reasonable inferences from those facts to justify the intrusion. That is, cops must have some reason that they can articulate by pointing to specific facts that led them to believe the detainee was armed; like they saw a bulge, nervous movement or attempt to conceal etc.

All the above is lacking in the video above. Here, the white cop apparently had only a vague description of a black male w/dreads. The cop had no other corroborating details, such the suspect's height, weight, build, complexion, hair length, facial hair, age or what color jacket, shirt, pants or whether the suspect had a hat on, a hoodie etc. He was black man w/dreads and that was good enough to this costumed authoritarian.

maidera student art 23.jpg

Doc Blynd explains in a legal system based on intentional, harmful physical coercion, so-calledrights” are myths—obedience to servitude or jail is the reality. If “rights” are intended to be protections from Government intrusions then rights only exist in courtrooms or if an officer shares in the belief that they exist. Brazen white cops so frequently abuse their power that no Black or Brown motorist, juvenile, adult, professional of any kind—could make a compelling argument that constitutional rights afford any real protection from the state on the street. The real problems here are racism/white supremacy and the belief in authority.

According to statist belief “the people” have delegated or transferred to police the moral right to commit acts of unprovoked violence on people. Cops have been authorized by Government to initiate the use of force on “citizens” to make arrests and so forth. [MORE] Question here: can you delegate a right to someone that you don’t have? Where does their “authority,” the right to rule others, come from? Asked differently, if you don’t have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of force against other people then how can you delegate or authorize another person to do such things? How did police acquire such super-human powers? 

The answer is logically unsupportable as “the belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self-contradictory. Yet all modern statism is based entirely on the assumption that people can delegate rights they don’t have.” [MORE]


Larken Rose explains, “the belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self-contradictory; it is contrary to civilization and morality, and constitutes the most dangerous, destructive superstition that has ever existed. Rather than being a force for order and justice, the belief in “authority” is the arch-enemy of humanity.”

Allegedly governmental power comes from the people. But people cannot delegate rights they do not have to other people. You don’t have the right to arrest someone or initiate unprovoked acts of force against other people - so how can you delegate or authorize anyone else to do such things? This makes it impossible for anyone to acquire the right to rule (”authority”). If everybody on your block voted to make you responsible for picking up their trash would it be binding? If you refuse could they issue you a fine you and subsequently use force to arrest if you fail to pay or comply? What makes it right when politicians require you to do things through “laws?” When did you explicitly consent to this “voluntary” governmental arrangement?

Dr. Blynd explains that there is no freedom in the presence of authority. Authority is not a force but a farce! FUNKTIONARY states: 

"authority" - (so-called)—a cartoon, an alleged image of the Law. 2) a cartoon clothed in flesh and blood. 3) the notion of an implied right and application of that "right" of individuals or groups of same to control or exercise external power over others, which has no meaning in reality. 4) power over...which is thoroughly institutionalized. 5) ruling through coercion. So-called "authority" is the justification for remaining impotent. The real threat to "authority" is the masses overcoming info-gaps and verigaps through self-knowledge and the proliferation of symbols of opposition, not crime or destruction of property.

authority - (from the root word author)—which means to originate. Only you have authority over your Self...anything else. i.e.. to accept any authority external to one's Self once of discriminating age, is the very definition of irresponsibility. There is no freedom in the presence of so-called authority, i.e. outside of one's Self and Self-Nature.) 2) the handmaiden of autonomy. 3) internal power. 4) Nommo. All authority, like the kingdom of heaven, is within. Be an authority unto yourself as all authority should come from your own authentic experience—that is the only source or wellspring of authority. Authority is the means by which society uses to control its population. Ignoring or belittling authority does not mean people are either good or bad, whether or not they are punished for their insubordination. Healthy people do not need authority figures to tell them what to do, but only the knowledge of themselves. You can teach a parrot to quote from either scripture or statute, but a parrot is not an authority. Only by you becoming truth do you have authority to speak—and then only on your behalf (i.e., your inner truth), your innerstanding. An authority is an eyewitness or an I-witness. and to picture the dynamic truth no proofs or negatives are needed nor possible—as reality isn't certain or static. When you are dead to sin and Alive to the God-Self-Divine, you become the Buddha, the Christ, the true authority within. (See: Obedience, Predictive Programming. Autonomy, Anarchy, Nommo, Sin, Alive. Authentic, Responsitivity, Dharma, Follower, Spontaneity, Conditioning, Conditions, Freedom & Responsibility). [MORE

Corporate Police State - the enforcer of the commodification of life within the Spectacle Surveillance Society. Anyone who thinks that he or she is immune to the baseless destruction of his or her life (including immediate family members) by a "government" or corporation does live in a happy menagerie—enjoy your illusions. (See: GUPI & Judicial Victimization)