Rest in Power: Johnny Hurley

Johnny Hurley was 40-years-old when he was gunned-down by a stranger who had taken an oath to protect others. Johnny’s death cannot be undone. But it can be learned from.

We can learn from and be inspired by Johnny.

Johnny chose to take action. His love of others meant that he sought to protect them.

According to Matt Agorist at The Free Thought Project, “Johnny Hurley was an outspoken activist for freedom and peace and he spent the last decade or more of his life seeking those goals for the world.” Involved with We Are Change Colorado and other endeavors, Johnny’s Facebook profile includes pictures of him enjoying nature, smiling with The Creature From Jekyll Island author G. Edward Griffin, and a humorous take on the don’t-tread-on-me meme:

 

Though his life was tragically cut short, Johnny’s impact was positive and pronounced.

We can learn from and not repeat the failure of Johnny’s killer to critically think.

Johnny’s killer arrived on the scene and acted thoughtlessly. And right now, that person is very likely feeling deep remorse. Certainly it must have been a tense time, but that doesn’t negate the permanence and injustice of his actions.

Might having an open conversation help to deter this type of thing from happening again? Certainly training methods that encourage a shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later mentality, being inculcated in a culture of fear and suspicion, and legalese that purports to remove personal responsibility, do nothing to bring-about thoughtful action. Would a moment of mindfulness have prevailed, Johnny’s life would not have been extinguished. Hopefully others so-employed see through their programming and take this to heart.

We can learn from the incident the importance of asking questions.

Though the killer is well-known to the local police — because he is their colleague — his name has yet to be released. Why?

The “authorities” know the importance of being “authors” — of controlling the narrative. Any authority they have is given, and can be withdrawn. Shielding wrongdoers because they too don a badge may work in the short term but a legacy of it has caused a gulf between police and those they claim to serve. It’s time to engage, not circle the wagons. It’s time to see each other as individuals, not through some collectivist veil.

Legacy media outlets have largely whitewashed the cause of Hurley’s death. Consider the obituary written by someone employed The Denver Post, which notes:

On June 21st, when a gunman entered the Olde Town Square in Arvada, CO and shot a policeman in the back, many witnesses say Johnny “didn’t hesitate” but ran toward the shooter who had returned to the square ostensibly to kill others. With clear presence of mind, Johnny downed the shooter, and in the ensuing moments also died.

Why so cryptic? Why not give a complete recount? Why deflect attention from the responsible party? Fortunately, some non-legacy media may weigh-in. Word on the street is thatย Ford Fischer, who lists “Cinematographer, Filmmaker, Storyteller” among his skills, is creating a piece about Hurley. Keep an eye out. update: the aforementioned documentary was released on July 23, 2021, here it is:

 

We can learn to lessen our own fear.

Certainly, when Hurley decided to involve himself in the fray, fear was present. But he acted according to a higher ideal — love of others, of the human organism. So can we. This interconnectedness is visible in the GoFundMe that a friend started for Johnny’s family. Its goal was 8,000 Federal Reserve Notes, and as of this writing, has been met ten times over.

Rest In Power John “Johnny” Michael Hurley 08/09/1980 – 06/21/2021

Henry David Thoreau wrote of his motivation to “Act deliberately.” That is as critical today for each of us as it was for Throeau when penned.

 

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


30 Comments

  1. Condolences to those who lost an empathetic and compassionate friend and family member. There are too few people who genuinely care to improve this world we are brought into. His message and mission will continue on with the rest of us who care to see less violence as a means to solve conflict. Rest peacefully John and a sincere thank you for reaching other people’s minds while you were with us.

  2. Glad to have you home old friend. Thank you for your tenacity.

  3. It’s unfortunate this happened. If he was and believed in peace, Why was he carrying a weapon around in the first place. He picked up the gun man’s rifle and obviously the police mistook him as the shooter. I suppose in the commotion he didn’t hear the officers or see them and he was mistook as the shooter. Unfortunate tragedy with a police officer murdered and a good Samaritan accidently shot. RIP

  4. This is tragic. I hope the city does the right thing and pays his family and funeral costs. We’ll have to see how the investigation turns out.

    As an aside, is it common in Colorado for obituaries to be written by journalists? Around here they are written by the family and proofread by the editor. Even still, I can’t imagine wanting to include specific details in the piece. It’s really not the place for it.

  5. Ghost of Karl Marx, you’re right it is tragic.

    Although “the city” wouldn’t be doing the right thing by forcing disinterested or neutral people to pay his family and funeral costs. Nobody should be prevented from voluntarily contributing, but using a government gun to force people to pay for something isn’t charity and given the circumstances of his death would be quite ironic.

  6. I wouldn’t call it charity, I would call it restitution. The police officer hired by the city caused this innocent guy to lose his life. The city should be responsible for making this man’s family as whole as possible. The people of the city presumably elected a mayor, who then hired a police chief, that hired this officer that made the mistake. It’s on the people to fix it.

    Oh, and they consented to taxation when they decided to live in the city, so don’t come at me with the taxation is theft nonsense.

  7. Hi Karl. Say, have you forgotten who you’re talking to? We’re smarter than you, remember? Consent has never played any role in taxation. Taxation, by definition, is always reaped from its victims under duress.

  8. “Oh, and they consented to taxation when they decided to live in the city,”

    Now does this apply to all laws, or just taxation? Not asking for myself… Let’s just say its for other ghosts… That and I’m still learning how to be an obedient little communist peon.

  9. Don’t like taxes? Go somewhere else. Maybe Mark Edge’s private scam cities will take you. Guess what though, you’ll have to pay there too. Otherwise, if you are going to reap the benefits of living in a city with public infrastructure like roads and clean water you are going to contribute. Pay your taxes, or you’re stealing from everybody in society.

    I pay my taxes. Nobody threatens me. Its the price I pay to live in a great area.

    Intrigare, are you an alien from outer space, unaccustomed to how society runs? Or are you just dumb? When you live in a city you need to follow its laws. You should have been taught that by your parents when you were a small child. I’m sorry you missed that lesson.

  10. That I give consent just by being somewhere? Yeah I must have missed that in my upbringing somewhere…

    That sounds like a pretty good deal though… for exploiter types anyway. Oh, and for police who accidentally shoot people.

  11. Ironic that this brave anarchist was shot and killed by the colleague of someone on whose behalf he risked his life by intervening.

    Why indeed was the police officer who killed him carrying a weapon around in the first place? Havenโ€™t we seen enough people murdered by uniformed government employees yet?

  12. Starchild,

    Ironic indeed.

    An anarchist maintaining peace and order, saving the lives of even those he is diametrically opposed.

    The police acting as agents of chaos and propaganda, taking life and then hiding their own identities in the interest of self-preservation.

    Who would have thought?

  13. That’s how it works, Intrigare.You are really starting to learn!

    The government of a city has jurisdiction over the city, so when you visit or live there you have to follow their laws. If you decide to stay and break those rules, there can be consequences.

    It’s kind of like if you visit a friend’s house, they have the ability to set house rules that you have to follow. If you don’t want to follow those rules, you can leave. If you continue to stay and break rules, there can be consequences. Do you understand?

    Also, believe it or not, the city’s laws can overrule a house’s rules! Where is the consent there? Well, when you bought the house, it was very likely incorporated in the city, which means that you knew that the property was under their governance when you bought it!

    Fun fact, this land was granted in the U.S. by the federal or state governments to the person that bought it under the condition that it could be taxed, regulated, and governed! You agreed to this at the time that you bought the property. The government actually holds the sovereign title over the land. Interesting, huh?

    Now, what your system is proposing is that instead of having the public control land ownership, you are instead going to have private parties own the land. Now, we all know that those with wealth can easily accrue more, so eventually we end up in a situation where a handful of people own the entire country. And guess what? In your system, what they say goes! If a normal person wants to live, they would have to do it on the landowner’s terms! We used to call those people lords and the system feudalism, but I guess it’s hip now to call it anarcho-capitalism.

    Any more basic questions about how society functions, buttercup?

  14. I think I’m pretty clear that if I go into certain places I can get forced to do stuff…

    Still having trouble with the idea that I consented to any of this… But hey you seem quite certain of knowing what I consented to, better than even I know, so I’ll yield on the topic for now.

    Anyway, do me a favor? Since you’re a ghost and all, ask the ghost of MLK if he feels he consented to Jim Crow laws and get back to us? You can do that right? I’m very interested to know whether he knows that he consented to those too.

  15. Hey Karl. Say, I really liked your last few posts. Especially the part where you redefined the word “consent” so that it can be used to justify acts which are normally indefensible into ones that’re necessary and even desirable. Absolutely brilliant.

    Anyway, I have another fun fact for ya. Didja know that Americans who’ve given up their citizenship are required to continue paying income taxes to Uncle Sam for an additional 10 years? Wow. What a shitty deal, huh? I mean especially when you consider that such people are “consenting” to move to another place that’s promising to steal less from them, am I right?

    Oh. Wait. I forgot. We’re not supposed to be asking questions or examining what our eyes and ears tell us, are we? We’re just supposed to listen to all you really swell guys – who’re definitely not threatening us or anything – that everything will be hunky-dory as long as we do everything you tell us.

  16. Aw come now, Silvia… No one is trying to threaten or force you to do anything– that’s conspiracy theory. But you better just do what you’re told, or else. Make sense?

  17. Oh, and the difference of course is you consented to the latter. You consented by existing. Got it?

  18. Fuck, Intrigare. I’m not sure I read that right. Your comments are all blurry and shit. It’s probably from all those Bohemian Mules I drank at breakfast. ๐Ÿ™‚

  19. Bohemian Mules? That doesn’t have anything to do with Bohemian Grove does it? You conspiracy theorist thought criminal.

  20. The real crime is the fact that there’re almost no raisins in these bagels I bought yesterday. Fuckin’ pollocks. That’s the last time I cheap out with the store brand crap. ๐Ÿ™‚

  21. The real crime is the fact that there’re almost no raisins in these bagels I bought yesterday. Frickin’ polllocks. That’s the last time I cheap out with the store brand crap. ๐Ÿ™‚

  22. Blueberries ftw

  23. Yeah. Blueberry bagels really are yummy. Hey. Didja know that the blueberries in some bagel brands are actually made from apples colored with blue food coloring? True story. Anyway, I don’t have any approved sources from CNN, so I guess Karl’s going to have to categorize this as being nothing but bullshit, huh?

  24. Ah, the debunked blueberrygate conspiracy.

    Hey, did you know raisins are rotten grapes with insects and fly eggs in them? This is confirmed by the FDA… but I don’t think you’ll find that on CNN either. Raisengate.

    We better stop before the thought police come ๐Ÿ˜‰

  25. Speaking of the thought police, have ya noticed how mad Karl gets when anyone brings up the notion that people with wealth should have the prerogative to amass more of it? I mean really, libtard weirdos act as if every business owner in America is Jeff Bezos. Truth is, most small business owners barely sit on any profits and, unlike the feds paying people not to work, a small business owner can’t run up the national debt to cover their payroll.

    Anyway, wish me luck, Intrigare. I’m going down to the horse track this weekend to bet on the ponies and get hella wasted.

  26. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

  27. @ Ghost of Karl Marx, “the people of the city elected a mayor” . What about the people who didn’t elect a mayor and want no part of that silliness?

    You’re not the kind of guy who’d force a person to engage in something if they haven’t consented to it, even when they’re otherwise peaceful are you?

    I’m skeptical you’re using the word consent accurately in the rest of your reply to me too. It sounds like you think a group of people can manufacture your consent for you, even when you, as an individual may specifically not consent. Are you a graduate of the Ted Bundy School of wordsmithing?

  28. If I were to be in that situation, it would be prudent to have prepared for it like Dave Champion does by having a shirt in your possession that you can don in a hurry that clearly says “POLICE” on it. Then, after the engagement, the cops will have to think twice before gunning me down. Just that hesitation will give you the time you need to defuse the situation and they will listen to you.

  29. @ Bob Those people can move away from the city. By living within a city, you are subject to its jurisdiction. Pretty easy to understand.

  30. @Ghost of Karl Marx, that’s not a good explanation and actually dodges the real question.

    If you or I don’t have a right to force otherwise peaceful people to accept and pay for our ideas if they prefer not to, how could we possibly delegate that nonexistent right to a body of people that call themselves “the city” ? It’s pretty easy to understand that a nonexistent right cannot be delegated to anyone. It’s also pretty obvious that a bevy of nonexistent rights cannot be aggregated into a positive sum. A sum of zeroes is still zero.

Care to comment?