Maybe The Third Time Will be The Charm

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Here’s local news affiliate coverage of a Buffalo, NY armed government worker named Corey Krug – on trial for use of excessive force for the third time. He has been accused and acquitted at least twice before already.

This third time is a new time.

Corey smashed a man’s face onto the hood of his car, then used a baton to whack at the man’s legs. The man was not charged with any crime, so it’s unclear what the legal justification was for the badged beatdown, but probably was triggered by an affront to the authority of the AGW.

Here’s the news clip:

The AGW’s lawyer says, “police have to be aggressive.” No, they don’t. This “aggression” is precisely why we have an AGW problem.

We used to have police, who were expected to exercise judgment. Aggression was considered a last resort, to be used when there was no other choice and the situation demanded it for the sake of public safety – not “officer safety.”

Today, we have hair-trigger AGWs encouraged to be aggressive at the first sign of the slightest failure of a “citizen” to submit and obey. This includes questioning an AGW’s orders, even if done entirely without violence or even raised voice.

It’s worth observing in this context that anyone not wearing a government-issued badge is prohibited by law from being “aggressive” – that is, physically violent – unless in clear self-defense against violence. A citizen cannot get away with a physical assault because he felt affronted.

Why are AGWs allowed to curb-stomp people for the same “offense”?

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet (pictured below) in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a sticker – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  


Share Button


  1. Hi Rick,

    Yes, abuse has always occurred, however it has become much worse and much more widespread. Search for Radley Balko and “The Rise of the Warrior Cop” for the grisly details. While qualified immunity (near total in practice) has always been a big problem, other awful policies have contributed greatly. The escalation of the drug war, the encouragement of open theft, errr.. asset forfeiture programs, super cheap military hardware made available to police departments, which encourages the insane escalation of SWAT raids (adult children need something to do with their new toys), preferential hiring policies for returning soldiers, upper IQ limits to weed out independent thinkers, etc…

    Modern police are trained to demand immediate submission and to treat officer safety as paramount. This encourages rapid escalation and the subsequent murder of people who pose no immediate threat. The manufacturing of the fake “War on Cops” reinforces this mindset. It is uncommon for cops who murder people to be held accountable, while those few who attempt to deescalate the situation are often punished for putting their fellow officers in danger. The list of cops who commit murder and are not punished keeps growing everyday. Some are even handsomely rewarded for their crimes. This sniveling sociopath

    will receive $2500.00 a month in disability pay for the “trauma” he suffered after executing a helpless man pleading for his life. I can’t imagine such happening 30 years ago.

    Finally, when I was a teenager, a group of us were walking across a parking lot at night when a cop pulled in. On a lark, we decided to run (stupid, I know). Anyway the cop chased us and we stopped, I told him we thought it would be fun. The cop shook his head, told us we were stupid and went on his way. Today there is a good chance that a similar group of kids would be shot.

    Kind Regards,

  2. I appreciate your reporting of police abuse of citizens and the government’s legal immunity in punishing these crimes. However, I’m confounded by your assertions that this is a recent phenomenon. Police have been abusing citizens for as long as I’ve been alive and I’m sure long before that. When have they ever been expected to exercise judgement or use aggression as a last resort? In what world? Not mine.

    As long as unconstitutional sovereign immunity doctrines are enforced, there will be abuse. That’s true for the unnecessary use of force by police as well as the arbitrary power of regulators.

    • Hi Rick,

      You’re right, of course – but it has gotten much worse. The “officer safety” thing is a fairly recent (past 20-ish years) development; also the reflexive resort to force over perceived recalcitrance.

      Even the appearance of the AGWs has changed. The body armored/Batman belt with military weapons (high capacity pistols instead of revolvers) multiple mags, etc. SWAT teams in every podunk jurisdiction.

      The contrast today vs.say 1980 – for those who can recall – is striking.

      • eric, we bought a smart tv not long ago since wireless is our only connection to the word. I rarely watch it and very rarely finish something. She has this tendency to watch old westerns that could be condensed into a single movie.

        They always have bad guys and mostly the bag guys(sometimes with a badge)threaten people and maybe hit them or knock them down in extreme cases but rarely do they use their guns unless it’s the Good Guy they’re retaliating against. Mostly, the good guy gets winged at worst. If there’s two and one is old, he’s sometimes toast but no matter the level of violence, it takes the entire movie for the most part to get to the point we see these AGP’s in the first few seconds initiating violent and lethal force.

        Guns do make a polite society even though these movies for the 99th percentile are written by jew boys who have no nothing of the west or frontier back then.

        She had on this pro-Lincoln movie yesterday. I couldn’t stomach it so went off to see if I could steal most of her bandwidth with the computer. I don’t know if she finished but it took me about 2 minutes before I’d had more than I could stand.

        • Hi Eight!

          In re Lincoln hagiographies: I really admire the actor Daniel Day Lewis; the guy is brilliant. So I decided to try to watch his portrayal of Lincoln. I literally couldn’t get more than 5 minutes into the movie. It begins by showing “colored” federal troops bayoneting CSA troops. Then pan to Abe/Lewis… who engages in homey chit-chat with the federal troops, post slaughter. I almost shot the TV – as The King used to do whenever Robert Goulet came on.

          Instead, I just turned it off.

          • DDL is really a great actor. I didn’t even make the attempt to watch that. I just saw the previews and passed.

            I’m so proud of you “boys”. Say Curly, did you kill your brother And your dad? That’s great. Oh, your sister and mother too……awesome…..and black mammy too? You are getting a medal and promotion. Just the kind of patriot we like.

            • Morning, Eight!

              Lewis is a Brit – and an actor. He may have no clue about the real Lincoln, like most people. One has to make the effort to read the non-hagiographies and – above all – to have considered the meaning (rather than merely the mellifluous sound) of such phrases as “consent of the governed” and “we, the people.” Most people haven’t because they are conditioned not to. They eruct phrases they don’t understand and have been trained not to examine too closely. “Freedom” being another one. This enables the use of the rhetoric – which sounds good – to promote the opposite of what the words actually mean, when examine closely.

              Lincoln was an adept at this.

              The Gettysburg Address is satanic in its effrontery – and its rhetorical legerdemain. That he was able to read it aloud with a straight face is bad enough. Far worse, that generations of Americans have lapped it up like a cur dog licking spilled radiator fluid off the garage floor.

              • eric, the best oration from Lincoln I ever heard was at Disneyland. Lit up like an old, grungy, junkpile memorial, words and flapping mouth weren’t synced but it was the holocaust of locust flying in and out the mouth that had me busting a gut. It may be the most accurate portrayal yet. You couldn’t get too close. The bugs would go for anything reflected in the lights.

                There was one thing that always riled me and that was the war dirge Battle Hymn Republic which was written to denigrate those of the Confederacy and demagogue the illustrious Union hooligans as if they were God’s chosen people.

          • Re blacks fighting for the union they were generally useless. Purely for propaganda purposes. Great to push out in front of the white troops I suppose. just like that useless fighter squadron in WW2 that Eleanor Roosevelt adored. Fwiw – Confederates didnt take black prisoners and the blacks knew it. search Battle of the Crater

        • Lincoln was one of the most repulsive creatures that ever lived and one of the few who got exactly what he deserved. Up there with Mao and stalin. I wouldnt even allow that crap hollywood jew propaganda in my house. I would have shot the tv ha.

          • M3, yes, hardly anyone realizes Lincoln didn’t write a word of the Gettysburg address. He was just another Ronald Reagan reading a script while probably thinking about the dick up his ass from his gay lover later.

            No wonder Reconstruction was so dirty and evil. It was every carpetbagger from the poorest to the richest with absolutely NO morals. Who else would make sure the Scorched Earth policy was fulfilled to the maximum. It didn’t matter color nor anything else, if it was in the Confederacy, it was to be destroyed after you’d taken every tiny bit of wealth from it.

            • I just cant imagine the motivation of a union soldier. they got nothing from the war. they didnt realize they were fighting for pure evil? hopefully their female descendants got raped by blacks.

                • Don’t throw your empties at me. Most probably know this but Irish immigrants esp., had the option of going back to Ireland and sure starvation or joining the Union Army.

                  It was an eat or be starved choice, not really that much of a choice.

                  it’s also the reason of so many German and Irish enclaves in Mexico. Often when one or the other or both got close to the border they hauled ass and hid in Mexico and that wasn’t a hard choice either. They had no stake in the war and probably a lot of them had kin already in the US they certainly didn’t want to fight and kill.

                  Had it not been for the potato famine and the general drought in Europe, the Union would have found itself hard strapped for cannon fodder and taking free men who were making their way already would have been a hard sale at best. it would probably have resulted in a war within a war.

            • General Lee was a competent general I guess but if Nathan Bedford Forrest had been in charge it would have likely been a very different outcome. One of the pioneers of guerrilla tactics and one hell of a man. Oh lord did he kick ass. Lee’s problem is he was fighting a conventional war against an enemy with superior manpower and materials and couldnt learn to adapt. If i ever become 1/10th the man Forrest was I’ll die happy.

              • Hi Mark,

                I agree with you in re Lee vs. Forrest (and some others, including Jackson, of course). Lee was a kind of Washington figure in that everyone liked or respected him; as such, he was the perfect overall leader. But he failed to emulate Washington’s sound tactics of generally avoiding head-on battles with numerically superior opponents. The CSA coulda-shoulda practiced a war of attrition; kept to its side of the line – and thus forced the North/Federal Army to fight an aggressive war of conquest in country not their own. This would not have sold well to the Northern people – many of whom at first favored leaving the South be. And it would have been much harder to sustain.

                All the CSA really needed to do to win independence was to make it too costly for the North to prevent it.

              • the war could have been over after the first battle of bull run. All the confederates had to do was march in and take washington. the union retreat was pure chaos. Man what could have been.