<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: i am on the plane</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/</link>
	<description>Who is McAfee - The Official Blog of John McAfee</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 21:41:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: another old timer</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7231</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[another old timer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2012 05:02:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7231</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[John, keep low. And I am not sure you can trust our American government. Back to the problem solving steps: go somewhere that no one would look for you. Such as Kansas? You get the idea.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, keep low. And I am not sure you can trust our American government. Back to the problem solving steps: go somewhere that no one would look for you. Such as Kansas? You get the idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jay</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7230</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jay]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 20:04:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BTW I am NOT suggetign any one go and try to test out the leagel waters on this at all.   that would lol be a BAD IDEA.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW I am NOT suggetign any one go and try to test out the leagel waters on this at all.   that would lol be a BAD IDEA.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jay</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7229</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jay]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 20:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7229</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest

“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer&#039;s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.

“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).

“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).

“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded, ‘If there be any remedy at all ... it is a remedy never provided for by human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.

As for grounds for arrest: “The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable, and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of the peace. Nor does such an act of itself, lead to a breach of the peace.” (Wharton’s Criminal and Civil Procedure, 12th Ed., Vol.2: Judy v. Lashley, 5 W. Va. 628, 41 S.E. 197)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest</p>
<p>“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer&#8217;s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”</p>
<p>“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.</p>
<p>“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.</p>
<p>“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.</p>
<p>“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).</p>
<p>“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).</p>
<p>“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).</p>
<p>“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded, ‘If there be any remedy at all &#8230; it is a remedy never provided for by human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.</p>
<p>As for grounds for arrest: “The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable, and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of the peace. Nor does such an act of itself, lead to a breach of the peace.” (Wharton’s Criminal and Civil Procedure, 12th Ed., Vol.2: Judy v. Lashley, 5 W. Va. 628, 41 S.E. 197)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: here</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7228</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[here]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:54:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7228</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm   Your Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest

“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer&#039;s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm</a>   Your Right of Defense Against Unlawful Arrest</p>
<p>“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer&#8217;s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chad Essley</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7227</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chad Essley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 18:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No he is not. The tattoos are just coincidental.. and the photo was the only photo I got of John and myself together on the trip.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No he is not. The tattoos are just coincidental.. and the photo was the only photo I got of John and myself together on the trip.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blackberrypie</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7226</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Blackberrypie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 16:29:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have  2 questions-- Is John  using the name Peter Norton . Why do the 4 women in the pic have tattoos with Chad &amp; John on their arms . Just curious.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have  2 questions&#8211; Is John  using the name Peter Norton . Why do the 4 women in the pic have tattoos with Chad &amp; John on their arms . Just curious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NunyaBiz</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7225</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[NunyaBiz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:47:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7225</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[lol... what?  I&#039;m sure this is doable since Britain is on the way to Miami from Guatemala.  :-]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>lol&#8230; what?  I&#8217;m sure this is doable since Britain is on the way to Miami from Guatemala.  :-</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GOStickIT dot Biz</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7224</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[GOStickIT dot Biz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Lubricant, that is a great idea AND a great way to clear the air for John. Once John can level off and get some clarity it should be a priority if for no other reason than to help them understand any and all other options. It would also go so very far in providing John with more support from those who may be on the fence!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Lubricant, that is a great idea AND a great way to clear the air for John. Once John can level off and get some clarity it should be a priority if for no other reason than to help them understand any and all other options. It would also go so very far in providing John with more support from those who may be on the fence!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: silenteuphoria</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7223</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[silenteuphoria]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:22:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7223</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[jj - I have never read anything more contrite than your comment above. It is so full of over the top, erroneous facts that it is laughable. I am not on here to troll, but I have to point out that you sound like nutcase. &quot;ITS YOUR DUTY TO RESIST&quot; - ha ha ha! Seriously? Go ahead and resist being arrested for being innocent -- see what happens. Sure, go ahead and even try to use deadly force... oh, because you&#039;re innocent. You will be shot, killed, and forgotten. If you want to stay stupid stuff like &quot;the supreme court ha [sic] even ruled&quot; back it up with some facts and a case example. Otherwise, you&#039;re just a weirdo spouting babble. Wow, I still can&#039;t get over reading your junk. You seriously sounded like the creepy weird guy that  hangs out of the busy streets wearing the sign that says, &quot;The end is coming&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jj &#8211; I have never read anything more contrite than your comment above. It is so full of over the top, erroneous facts that it is laughable. I am not on here to troll, but I have to point out that you sound like nutcase. &#8220;ITS YOUR DUTY TO RESIST&#8221; &#8211; ha ha ha! Seriously? Go ahead and resist being arrested for being innocent &#8212; see what happens. Sure, go ahead and even try to use deadly force&#8230; oh, because you&#8217;re innocent. You will be shot, killed, and forgotten. If you want to stay stupid stuff like &#8220;the supreme court ha [sic] even ruled&#8221; back it up with some facts and a case example. Otherwise, you&#8217;re just a weirdo spouting babble. Wow, I still can&#8217;t get over reading your junk. You seriously sounded like the creepy weird guy that  hangs out of the busy streets wearing the sign that says, &#8220;The end is coming&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jj</title>
		<link>http://www.whoismcafee.com/i-am-on-the-plane/#comment-7222</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jj]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:54:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whoismcafee.com/?p=1304#comment-7222</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lubricant thats pretty low to make light of faull&#039;s death and the grief his family might be going threw.   Just so you can try and make a snarcky pot shot at john Mcafeee or trying to make it out like you know some thing no ones else seems to be privy to,]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lubricant thats pretty low to make light of faull&#8217;s death and the grief his family might be going threw.   Just so you can try and make a snarcky pot shot at john Mcafeee or trying to make it out like you know some thing no ones else seems to be privy to,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
