Hut! Hut! Hutting! Didn’t Just Happen

10
1532
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Here’s the latest reader question, along with my reply!

Anonymous writes: Heard you on Infowars the other day (here) with Harrison Smith and have some feedback on your conversation that you may find of interest. I would very much look forward to communicating with you if you like. There is much people do not comprehend about why police are in the position they are in concerning the enforcement. Also I have an idea that may interest you I would like to share with you. Hope all is well for you and yours.

My reply: I don’t think it’s any great mystery. First, the police have been militarized – in appearance, equipment and training. They have become – their own language – law enforcers. This is a brutal and nihilistic thing. It contains not a whiff of concern about reason or common sense, much less right and wrong or lines that must not be crossed for the sake of our common humanity. Only that “the law” – whatever it is – be enforced. 

The Gestapo and NKVD also enforced laws. It is not random or coincidental that American AGWs now look and behave very much the way Gestapo and NKVD thugs did.

But American AGWs are much worse because none of them face the either-or choice of brutalizing people or being brutalized themselves. No one places a gun to someone’s head and tells him you will man a checkpoint or Hut! Hut! Hut! someone’s home. . . or else.

They do so freely and willingly and for money – and expect to be hero-worshipped in the bargain.

AGWs are also now a separate caste, held to a much more lenient standard as regards violations of the law – which (obviously) encourages lawless behavior.

They are much less likely to be criminally prosecuted for acts that would be criminally prosecuted if committed by anyone else. They enjoy de facto (and in some cases, de jure) exemptions from traffic laws to laws relating to the handling and possession of weapons and are protected from the consequences of their own wrongdoing in almost every case by the system in very much the same way that the Catholic Church protected pedophile priests.

This, in turn, attracts the worst sort of people – just as were attracted to the priesthood. It is not, as they say, rocket science.

There is an easy way to understand how far down a dark road we have gone. It is simply to reflect that it was once true – as recently as 30 and certainly 40 years ago – that Americans who had not committed an overt criminal act could go decades without even speaking to what were then cops and when they did speak with them, the cops were almost always courteous rather then peremptory and “trained” to dominate the interaction. Police shootings were extremely rare; so rare that they made big news when they did occur.

Now think about the word of today, in which almost all of us have to deal with an AGW at least once and usually several times a year – as for example at a probable cause-free “checkpoint” where we are required to submit to an examination of our “papers” (Americans have become used to this but 40 years ago, it would have been – and was – perceived by most people as evidence of totalitarianism) and required to prove we haven’t committed any of several offenses, absent the slightest pretext to justify any suspicion that we’ve done anything wrong at all.

AGWs have been empowered to literally steal our money – to “seize” it, in their language – using a despicable doctrine (civil forfeiture) which empowers them to do so as they like, without any trouble about due process. It is literally no different than being mugged except it is being done under official pretenses and anointed as “legal.”

What sort of person involves himself willingly in such activities?

These AGWs are heavily armed and encased in body armor  – ostensibly for “their safety” but it is far more likely ours is at risk because of the way these AGWs have been kitted out (If you dress the part, it’s likely you’ll act the part) and because of the way they have been “trained” to regard the slightest lack of servile deference as a “threat” that must be met with immediate escalation.

Meanwhile, “civilians” who are still allowed to carry guns – but not guns as powerful as those wielded by AGWs – are legally obliged (in most states) to adduce facts establishing they were in physical/mortal danger – not that they “feared for their safety” –  before they may legally so much as “brandish” a firearm.

Another method for coming to grips with the state of things is to realize that people like me – responsible/employed/educated middle-aged white guys – have had it with AGWs. The wheel has turned. It’s no longer “radicals” or smelly hippies and people who don’t like cops because they want to get away with things like vandalism, theft and so on. It is good, solid people who despise destruction, violence, theft and so on.

Which is now the primary job of what is styled by its own practitioners as  . . . law enforcement.

. . .

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

10 COMMENTS

  1. Start with the mafia having cops on the take in prohibition. Move forward to Frank Serpico. Then the training changes necessary for women to be cops, the military equipment, the hero nonsense and we get what we got.

    I also wonder how much TV and movies had to do with it. The need for action and drama even in “reality” tv.

  2. Only about 3%, or maybe 5%, of all cases go to trial. Most defendants are represented by public “pretenders” who work at the court house with the judge and the “persecutor” and go out drinking with the AGWs every weekend. They typically push defendants to accept a plea deal. Finally, the number of jurors who would defy a judges orders to only find defendants innocent or guilty based on the presented facts is so small it’s not worth mentioning. I’m in favor of laws requiring judges to inform jurors of their right to judge the law but that’s not anymore likely than any of the other positive reforms we need.

    • JG, The special club extends to the lawyers you hire and pay for. When it comes to traffic court you aren’t paying them for their knowledge of the law you’re paying them for their relationship with the prosecutor and the judge. I assume it is little different in the other courts.

      On jury duty once I did get called into the courtroom but not the jury box. The judge wanted people to out themselves if they would judge the law. He specifically asked them if they would apply the law as he told them to.

  3. It is obvious that cop training doctrines have changed drastically.
    Are police departments looking to a very different source for officer training?
    And if so, what might that source be???

  4. Jury nullification.
    Why trust anything a state that steals, blocks information, writes gun laws, red flag laws and harasses Christian bakers.

    • Amen, Ozzy –

      But – as others have pointed out – the problem with jury nullification is that judges can (and do) threaten uncooperative jurors. Still, a time comes when we have an obligation to take risks to preserve not only our own rights but also those of others, as an affront to anyone’s rights is a threat to all of our rights.

      • Currently, if you wish to actually engage in jury nullification, you should do it on your own. Keep your mouth shut about what you are doing.

        The jury room is not the place to advocate for nullification, as your fellow jurors won’t have a clue what you are talking about and will narc you out to the judge.

        Being the only “not guilty” vote among 11 other “guilty” may not result in a full “not guilty” verdict, but you will have prevented a “guilty” verdict.

      • eric, in the tiny town in my county where there was a new Law Enforcement Center built that nobody wanted. The landowers are having to pay for it. It was bad enough it was $8M but it went over $200k. And one county precinct had to build roads around it.

        Right across the corner is the old jail and sheriff’s office where the sign still says Sheriff’s Office and the new structure, ugly as hell, has a big stone sign out front proclaiming it to be the Law Enforcement Center. What’s really bad is there is no crime. Remove drug and DWI laws(I repeat myself), and there’s be nobody in it. AS it is, the 12 inmates in it represent other counties other than 2 from this county. I constantly see an official vehicle occupied by a married couple going somewhere to do their own thing on county gas.

LEAVE A REPLY