POLICE OATHS

[jimmi2guns]

OATH OF OFFICE - Police Officer



Every Police Officer must take the Oath of Office when they start their career at the Goulburn Police College. There are two types of swearing in procedures that can be taken. One is for the person who has a Religion belief, and the Oath of Office is sworn while holding a Bible, the other is referred to as the Affirmation and is for those who are not of a Religion faith where the use of a Bible is not used.
OATH OF OFFICE - POLICE OFFICER

I........................DO SWEAR - THAT - I WILL WELL AND TRULY SERVE - OUR SOVEREIGN LADY THE QUEEN - AS A POLICE OFFICER WITHOUT FAVOUR OR AFFECTION - MALICE OR ILL-WILL - UNTIL I AM LEGALLY DISCHARGED - THAT I WILL SEE AND CAUSE - HER MAJESTY'S PEACE TO BE KEPT AND PRESERVED - AND THAT - I WILL PREVENT TO THE BEST OF MY POWER - ALL OFFENCES AGAINST THAT PEACE - AND THAT - WHILE I CONTINUE TO BE A POLICE OFFICER - I WILL - TO THE BEST OF MY SKILL AND KNOWLEDGE - DISCHARGE ALL THE DUTIES THEREOF - FAITHFULLY - ACCORDING TO LAW.
SO HELP ME GOD.

For those who do not believe in any Faith or such, they can take the Affirmation where the use of a Bible is not required.


AFFIRMATION - POLICE OFFICER

I........................DO SOLEMNLY - SINCERELY AND TRULY DECLARE AND
AFFIRM - THAT - I WILL WELL AND TRULY SERVE - OUR SOVEREIGN LADY
THE QUEEN - AS A POLICE OFFICER WITHOUT FAVOUR OR AFFECTION - MALICE OR ILL-WILL - UNTIL I AM LEGALLY DISCHARGED - THAT I WILL SEE AND CAUSE - HER MAJESTY'S PEACE TO BE KEPT AND PRESERVED - AND THAT - I WILL PREVENT TO THE BEST OF MY POWER - ALL OFFENCES AGAINST THAT PEACE - AND THAT - WHILE I CONTINUE TO BE A POLICE OFFICER - I WILL - TO THE BEST OF MY SKILL AND KNOWLEDGE - DISCHARGE ALL THE DUTIES THEREOF - FAITHFULLY - ACCORDING TO LAW.
So the discharge of all duties will include statute and legislative acts of parliament???
Does this mean that because the Queen gave royal ascent and approval to all the Governments ACTS of parliament that they are deemed to be law to any constable????
This may explain why the police do not realise that when we tell them to stand on OATH they carry on wth any statute they are spouting at the time.
So I ponder the question HOW THE HELL DO WE GET PAST THIS?????

[Geronimo]

good question

[skipper1]

At no point does it mention statue, so we are still fine

[DaveScotFree]

Google Police Officer + IQ
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&so ... officer+IQ

[Taff]

The new Police oath of 2010 differs from what I affirmed in 2002 but still does not go far enough and is impossible to abide by when discharging any duties. The oath is nonsense as carrying out the demands of the Home Office a Parliamentary body takes away all independence for conducting any duties impartially. To be honest I don't believe there should be any oath just a job description, as many officers make it up as they go along due to lack of knowledge and act as agents for the Government not the Queen.

[vanilla]

Every Police Officer must take the Oath of Office when they start their career at the Goulburn Police College.

Are you in Australia?

Does this mean that because the Queen gave royal ascent and approval to all the Governments ACTS of parliament that they are deemed to be law to any constable????

And judge and anyone else.

due to lack of knowledge and act as agents for the Government not the Queen.

The Government exercise the power of the Queen. HM Government... HMRC... HMCTS... etc.

[ljtherock]

Every Police Officer must take the Oath of Office when they start their career at the Goulburn Police College.

Are you in Australia?

Does this mean that because the Queen gave royal ascent and approval to all the Governments ACTS of parliament that they are deemed to be law to any constable????

And judge and anyone else.

due to lack of knowledge and act as agents for the Government not the Queen.

The Government exercise the power of the Queen. HM Government... HMRC... HMCTS... etc.

What power is this you claim for her?

Where is it taken from?

How is it lawful?

[ELIJAH MC]

right at the end of the oath it states 'according to law' not according to acts and statutes. i would imagine that acts and statues are subject to common law.

[vanilla]

What power is this you claim for her?

Where is it taken from?

How is it lawful?

She has power because people and the organisations of the state treat her as having power. There's nothing mysterious about it.

The question of whether someone's power is 'lawful' or not doesn't make a great deal of sense because laws are a product of power, not the other way round.

Presumably (well, I know) that you're a fan of the whole God's law scenario. You seem to think that having a higher source for 'law' would make our rulers more valid, but all you're doing is pushing the problem one step further up the chain. Can you give me a genuine answer for those questions you asked if we replace the Queen with God?

[ljtherock]

What power is this you claim for her?

Where is it taken from?

How is it lawful?

She has power because people and the organisations of the state treat her as having power. There's nothing mysterious about it. I agree that she is treated as having the power/authority by the state but not totally by the people. Although, she claims her authority by God and this does not hold true.

The question of whether someone's power is 'lawful' or not doesn't make a great deal of sense because laws are a product of power, not the other way round. Agreed their laws are a product of power and their power being gained firstly by deciept and ultimately by coercion followed by force as final arbiter.

Presumably (well, I know) that you're a fan of the whole God's law scenario. Not a fan but a man of God and most certainly Gods servant. You seem to think that having a higher source for 'law' would make our rulers more valid, Not think but KNOW. but all you're doing is pushing the problem one step further up the chain. No, not problem one step further up chain but actually breaking the chain. Can you give me a genuine answer for those questions you asked if we replace the Queen with God? You enquire this of me because you know not of God, so how is it that I could open your eyes, ears and mind. perhaps you could teach me first how to raise the dead and then I would be able to prove what you ask.

Put aside your atheism for a brief moment...

Let us assume God does not exist... Then how is it the Queen and other authorities swear an oath to God and claim their power and authority is of God?
Truly, such a question proves their deciept and fraud...

If I were to be forced to enter their courts, for I would not go of free will. I would not plead to them of equal standing as if they were exalted above me. I would not defend myself using their legislation, be it statute or common law. Both statute and common law are their rules and are made for them and not the people, many lost cases of truth have proven this to be so.
Ergo, I would use the only true law that would beat them every time, the law for which they have no defence and again has proven to seal their mouths and dismiss their judgements.

I shall end now, for I have stated too much as you will not understand any of the last 9 lines I typed...