AGWs Perform “Drive-By Tazing”

14
1421
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A pair of Texas armed government workers were caught on camera – their own body cameras – committing multiple crimes, including the “drive-by” Tazering of a man they later arrested and charged with attempting to flee, which he hadn’t as a matter of law because he hadn’t been given the chance to not-flee. He wasn’t told to stop or that he was under arrest.

The AGWs simply hit him with their Tazer – and then some other things.

“I don’t need to chase him,” one of the AGWs says. “My car will chase him.”

And it does. The man is duly Hut! Hut! Hutted! and taken off to jail.

But when prosecutors viewed the camera footage and saw the serial criminality performed by the AGWs, they dropped the charges against the victim and charged the AGWs. Who were actually convicted and sentenced to a year in jail.

This happens so infrequently that when it finally does happen it’s almost not believable. But for once, it did happen.

Now it just needs to happen more often.

. . .

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:

EPautos
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

14 COMMENTS

  1. Compared to all the unnecessary shootings … these officers are in jail for a whole year because [I assume] the officers identified the perp as having committed a crime, so they chased the perp then tazed him in order to stop him because he was fleeing. Isn’t that what the cops are supposed to do??? I must be missing something here.

    • Hi Larry,

      They are in jail because they’re criminals; they shot him with a Tazer without so much as having said “stop” or “you’re under arrest” first. Then lied about the guy “fleeing” before they shot him with the Tazer, in order to justify their illegal act. And for falsely charging their victim with that “crime” (i.e, “fleeing”).

      They’re not “officers.” They’re badged thugs, serial liars.

      Every single person convicted on the basis of “evidence” adduced by these sons of bitches ought to be freed immediately and their convictions expunged from the record since “evidence” adduced by established liars is not to be trusted in a court of law.

      How many other people do you suppose have been convicted of something on the basis of similar lies purveyed by these cretins? Would you like to be “pulled over” by one of them? Have them “testify” about what you didn’t do?

    • Amen, Jim…

      I never understood the veneration of armed government workers by conservatives – of all people. The say they distrust government yet invariably excuse/defend the actions of AGWs… it makes my teeth ache.

      • I could never quite consider myself a true libertarian – “conservative with strong libertarian leanings” is as far as I’ve ever gotten. So I believe I can offer some insight here.

        First, most mainstream conservatives are very into “law and order”. My mother, for example, considers the abolition of high school dress codes to be a major milestone of societal degradation. Conservatives support the war on drugs because in their mind, anyone who wants drugs is by definition a degenerate whose addiction needs to be broken, not accomodated. (Though that’s beginning to change for marijuana specifically as people become aware of its medicinal potential and realize that much of what they were told about it was either wrong or a self-fulfilling prophecy.) In general, conservatives believe that government should uphold righteousness wherever possible, even if the result is something less than 100% freedom.

        Second, among conservatives there is a longstanding tradition of respect for the police and armed forces, stretching back decades upon decades to the days when these were actually worthy of respect. So while there are a lot of police doing unrighteous things, conservatives believe (as did I, until recently) that those were just a few “bad apples” and that the vast majority of cops are still upstanding, community-minded people who truly desire to serve and protect. They genuinely do not understand how toxic police culture has become.

        Third, many conservatives still believe in the narrative of constant foreign (i.e. terroist) threat, plus they believe due to a lethal cocktail of paid troublemakers and the 24/7 news cycle that criminals are hiding in the shadows everywhere waiting to take over and cause chaos at the first opportunity. It doesn’t help that in some urban areas gang members WILL actually attack police, either to evade arrest or because their honor code involves hating the police. It also doesn’t help that starting from the 1970s-1980s the justice system started trying to play nice with genuine violent/property criminals, with predictable results. So even if the police operate more roughly than they used to, conservatives don’t see them as mercenaries or costumed thugs, they see them as beleaguered guardians trying desperately to maintain order in a world constantly on the brink of insanity. You saw the same thing when conservatives tried to make excuses for the security state – “Do you want another 9/11? What if they use a dirty bomb this time?”

        Fourth, many conservatives don’t see “the government” as a single, monolithic entity. Their ire is directed mainly towards the federal government and occasionally towards lower levels if they’re especially bad. Since the police are mostly local in nature and theoretically apolitical, conservatives see them as being more closely aligned with “us” than with “them” even if the laws they enforce aren’t always perfect.

        • Hi Chuck,

          As you say, conservatives seem to value “order” above all else. The problem is that they falsely believe that the State is an agent of order. So, they cling to the parts of the State that they believe maintain it, the police and military. Conservatives are Statists who believe that the power of government should be leveled against disruptive change and that which they find morally objectionable and socially destructive. They do not disagree with liberals about the need for, or legitimacy of, coercive institutions, they simply disagree about particular ends.

          Leftists seek to change the world, conservatives seek to maintain it. Both see the State as the best means for achieving their ends. Both believe in good and bad government but differ on what constitutes each. The State is interested in itself, and creating conflict contributes to the it’s power.

          Jeremy

            • Hi Chuck,

              That’s a conundrum. Leftists have a competitive advantage over conservatives because their desire for a more powerful State coincides with the desires of nearly all politicians, whether the call themselves liberals or conservatives. In short, the interests of leftist constituents coincide with the interests of “liberal” politicians whereas those of most conservative constituents conflict with the actual interests of “conservative” politicians.

              I don’t know the answer but history shows that the pursuit of State power, in the hope of conserving what conservative constituents value, doesn’t work. At best, conservatives slightly delay the onset of some new big government program. At first they complain, ineffectively, then they acquiesce, then they become champions of said programs. Look at Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, “sensible” gun laws, even welfare.

              Conservatism effectively died when it abandoned it’s former anti war, non-interventionist tradition. Leftists and Trotskyites infiltrated the movement and helped create the perpetual warfare/welfare State that exists today. Once the average conservative citizen adopted the pro war equals patriotism mantra, the game was over. Do you remember Buckley’s famous quote?

              “The thus-far invincible aggressiveness of the Soviet Union does or does not constitute a threat to the security of the United States, and we have got to decide which. If it does, we shall have to arrange, sensibly, our battle plans; and this means that we have got to accept Big Government for the duration — for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged, given our present government skills, except though the instrument of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores”.

              Well, the Soviet Union is gone, mostly due to the impossibility of a centrally planned communist economy, but “big government and a totalitarian bureaucracy” remain. Funny how no conservative politicians, save Ron Paul, put in any real effort to dismantle this wretched Leviathan. The two parties pretend to disagree to maintain the illusion of choice.

              Cheers,
              Jeremy

      • There has been a perception for years that liberal judges have let criminals off with a slap on the wrist. We have been fed a steady stream of stories of criminals having all the rights due to the ACLU and the like while the victim has no rights. The police feel if they do not part out justice, the criminal will just be let go. I know this is misguided and illegal, but it is the mindset of many in law enforcement. I also think that some people become police officers for the wrong reason. People who get a kick out of controlling others, compensating for loss of power in other areas of their lives, having a chip on their shoulders, frustrated with there own personal short comings. This leads to abuses as seen in this article.

        • Hi Oskar,

          Lots of factors have coalesced to create this ugly mess – among them the militarization of police and the state-sponsored deification of anyone wearing a uniform. This latter is overtly fascistic – and it began in earnest under Ronald RRRRRRRRRRReagan… which is ironic given that he is considered an icon of small-government conservatism.

          But in my view, the bedrock problem is one of law enforcement vs. peacekeeping. Few – including me – object to some mechanism for preventing or at least dealing with the consequences of things like theft, physical assault and things of that nature. The keeping, in other words, of the peace.

          Unfortunately, perfectly peaceful people are routinely subjected to assault by law enforcement.

          Law enforcement is antithetical to keeping the peace for this precise reason. The Nazis, the NKVD and the Red Guards all practiced law enforcement. The principle is the same.

          What defines a free country is that you are free – to live your life, as you like and free from any threat of government/legal violence (i.e., law enforcement) so long as you remain peaceful. So long, that is to say, as your actions cause no harm to other people.

          But we’ve completely strayed from that crucial principle – and that is the source of our woes.

          • I agree with the comments here but I think the basic change has not been addressed: law enforcement is an industry run by unions as a government monopoly. All citizens and members of the public are seen as potential subjects to be monetized. The primary functions of law enforcement are two: T0 protect union interests and institutions and 2) generate revenue and bodies to be inducted into the legal/ prison industry. All other functions of law enforcement are tertiary.

            As we see time and again the courts state no law enforcer anywhere has any duty to protect anyone or anyone’s property: the cowards of Parkland High School.

  2. Willis…that’s not too far up the road from here. Nice Mexican restaurant there. Nice town. At least the judge put an end to the serial AGW abuse of the public at large for a spell, until they get out of the pokey.

  3. The victim should be given ten tasers and allowed to use five on each one after the other until all sets of barbs are embedded then hit the triggers at random… Only seems somewhat fair to me.

LEAVE A REPLY