One Photo Tells the Story

104
2926
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

People tend to behave the way they dress. Put on a track suit and sneakers – you’re ready for a run.

Put on a tuxedo and you’re not.

It is probable that one of the reasons armed government workers behave like the soldaten of an occupying military force is because they dress the part. You’re more than just what you eat.

Campaign hats, jackboots, straps across the shoulder. Insignia of rank – all the way up to five star general of a one-horse town.

When you wear the same insignia that MacArthur had on his collar, it tends to make the wearer believe he is MacArthur. And to expect the same deference due his “rank.”

It’s a recipe for Not Good.

Whether this happened by accident, via a kind of slow-motion morphing of the soldaten and what was once the civilian cop to the point that the visual distinction is now almost indistinguishable, isn’t relevant.

The end result is that the two are almost functionally indistinguishable.

AGWs dress for war, wearing the same body armor that soldaten in Afghanistan wear – only we’re the indigs here. They routinely carry heavy arms and enough ammo on their body to wage war. They drive around in the machines of war.

Is it any wonder it feels like we’re at war? But who, pray, is the enemy?

These sort-of-soldaten do more than dress the part. They set themselves apart by shaving their heads high and tight – as if they’d just been inducted into boot camp – and use the same term, even. They march in serried ranks, run in synchronized groups carrying a regimental standard while bellowing martial songs, twirl combat rifles at “dress parade.”

And they refer to us as “civilians.”

But they are not soldaten – even sort-of. No matter how much spaghetti they’ve got on their kepis; irrespective of the “rank” they award themselves.

Armed government workers do not enlist – nor do they “serve.” They go to work. They can quit at any time, just like any other civilian, which is just what they are.

Armed government workers aren’t commissioned. The Cracker Jack “rank” on their lapels is at best an imposture and at worst a form of what real soldaten style stolen valor. Ask a Marine officer what he thinks of an officer of the court walking around with “colonel’s” eagles on his collar.

These ersatz obersts hold no rank above that of any “civilian.” A five-star sheriff is as much a civilian as those he thinks he commands.

But the visual distinction between actual soldaten and civilian AGW has been blurred such  that the latter believes he is the former – and so behaves as if he were. It’s a form of conditioning – of them as well as us.

They see us as the enemy – and fear us as a dangerous threat which must be subdued.

When we see them, we feel fear – because we know they see us as a dangerous threat which must be subdued. We are aware – as an indig in Afghanistan is aware –  that they can do anything they like to us.

And often, do.

They are aware we increasingly despise them for this. Which makes them fear and loathe us even more. The pustule suppurates.

The ersatz soldaten are trained in the tactics used by actual soldaten. The difference being that we are not supposed to be the enemy.

We are treated as such, though.

It was once usual to simply handcuff a non-violent suspect and advise him that he was under arrest. He was not ordered to Get on the ground, now!

One can see this relic of a vanished culture in movies and TV shows from the ’80s and prior. It was just the way things were done, once upon a time.

It is now not unusual for an AGW to scream Get on the ground, now! . . . at jaywalkers. To tackle ID refusniks. To make “civilians” pulled over for minor traffic offenses sit on the curb, like misbehaving children, while the ersatz soldaten rifle their possessions.

The purpose of these tactics – note the soldaten lingo – is only secondarily and superficially  to assure the “safety” of the AGW. It is primarily a tool to humiliate and degrade the “civilian.”

That is to say – to show the “civilian” who’s boss.

There have been calls to defund AGWs but perhaps a better course of action would be to re-dress them. No more campaign hats and jackboots; no more badges of rank. Less Neidermeyer – more Roscoe P. Coltrane.

Maybe if they stopped dressing up for war – and acting the part – we could avoid one.

. . .

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 or sticker or coaster 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 magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

If you’d like an ear tag – custom made! – just ask and it will be delivered.  

My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!

 

 

Share Button

104 COMMENTS

    • Anon, in the last couple days one of the stories going round is the Floyd family contacted the UN(sure, doesn’t everyone, hell, I call them once a month just to shoot the shit)and the UN is going to enact what they want, the elimination of all small arms and that includes the police. Little Billy C signed the pact to do just that thing.

      I’m of the mind we need to shed the UN and NATO and most of the military. It will be a tall task to shed our own military(and poleez)but it’s our only hope of being free.

  1. There is only one situation where a SWAT team and/or a no knock warrant could be morally engaged. A hostage situation. “They might flush their drugs” is not an excuse to destroy their front door and put them in mortal danger. Nor is “they might have weapons”. Never the less, they are implemented thousands of times every day. I wonder why we have a negative attitude toward police.

  2. In no particular order:

    1 – Complete teardown of the multibillion traffic ticket industry – no blood draws or cavity searches by any cop at any time for any reason

    2 – Traffic enforcement cameras (redlight and speed) – gone

    3 – Checkpoints (DUI – “safety” – license check – inland border) – gone

    4 – Clothing – calm it down – no military-like clothing – no “campaign” hats – no military ranking – use Dockers and polo shirts – only conventional ball caps – no flat-bill hats

    5 – No horses or “biter” dogs – no “dope” dogs

    6 – Wrongful convictions – minimum $2m per year restitution – if official misconduct is involved, minimum 10 years incarceration

    7 – Clear up PRECISELY the definitions of reasonable suspicion and probable cause – a felony if these are made up on the fly

    8 – Organised labor – gone

    9 – Eliminate school “resource officers”

    10 – ALL forms of immunity – for cops, prosecutors, judges, legislators – gone

    11 – Implied consent – gone

    12 – Jury nullification – fully implemented

    13 – During investigations, cops can no longer lie – any lie results in all charges dropped

    14 – Asset forfeiture – gone

    15 – Brady violators (cops, prosecutors, judges) kept in a national, public database – felony to not list/hide violators – violators kept on list for life

    16 – No military in civilian peace keeping – military is for killing people and breaking things – copping and military are two very different disciplines and we mix them at our peril

    17 – No transfer of military equipment of any kind

    18 – Huge boot placed on the neck of SWAT

    19 – Meaningful, detailed k-12 education on your rights with cops – refuse to talk – refuse searches – when to say NO – how to fend off intimidation

    • A scene in the ” Departed” film had a comment by a plainclothes cop with a uniformed cop who was jealous of the plainclothes guy’s rise in rank. The plainclothes guy said something like:

      “You can make rank if you go it alone sometimes, unless you enjoy coming to work dressed like you’re about to invade Poland”.

      That kind of sums up the theme pf the article, eh?

      • Anon, that was a great scene. It’s replete in the east. The NE has shed it’s shit all the way down the coast since the Union invasion. There’s a damned good reason why almost every white person and many blacks families got the hell out of the conquered south into Texas. They were fleeing the invading hordes and even though Texas was on the losing side, nobody could make anyone but a politician admit it. And it’s the reason I belong to the Texas Nationalist Movement. It’s certainly not perfection but compared to being part of the US, it comes as close as anything I’ve seen.

      • I clipped that scene, somewhere in here…Boston were an original bastion, & Concord’s sour grapes were juiced for the shots o’ Koolaid drunk round the world…& all those original carpetbaggers begat the the ones what supplanted their southern counterparts. (This ain’t nihilism, but the denialism that would Hamilton my Burr might be.)

        Hell on Wheels: The same carpetbaggers, in the usual rolled hierarchies, bilking the transcontinental rr. At the end, Cullen Bohannon, achieving some kind of enlightenment, if not salvation, ditches the place, gets on a sailing ship bound for China, to find May, the woman instrumental to his arrival.

        *wimmenfolk’ll need to work the nuke buttons like cocaine rats work their pleasure bars to ever stand a chance of catching up with the stalwart menfolks’ carnage & destruction.

    • Either that, or start wearing the sig runes, black unis and the totenkopf.
      Once we “civilians” know where we stand, we will figure out how to deal with the situation.
      I.e., the army of occupation.
      Adapt and survive.

    • No faster way to get booted from a jury pool that say “jury nullification.” Which means it should be explicitly told to all empaneled juries as their right. Juries get their instructions from the state, who is trying to convict the accused, so it sure sounds like a conflict of interest to not explain jury nullification. Perhaps a national campaign on social media everywhere, tshirts, etc.. discussing jury nullification to ensure all citizens are aware of this power they have. Of course, responsibility is key too, just because you like someone, or like their politics, if they are guilty of crimes with real victims, they need to be found guilty. Grand juries especially need to understand their power within the justice system, it is awesome, even if the district attorney doesn’t want you to realize it.

  3. Hi Eric – thanks for the article. As the husband of a 34-year retired AGW, I sometimes cringe at your anti-law enforcement rants. However, I consider them the price of admission for reading your always excellent political and automotive prose. In addition to being married to an AGW, I was involved with many AGW’s during my 30-year career as a public fleet manager. I found most if not all to be dedicated, caring professionals.

    There are problems in law enforcement for sure, but not every cop comes to work with hassling the average citizen on their minds. They don’t make the laws, but they are tasked with enforcing them, and unfortunately, they aren’t always able to exercise the discretion that you might wish they could. There is a lot of pressure from the political class.

    There is a need for law enforcement. Not everyone is a law-abiding sort just going a about their business. In every society, the dirtbag element constitutes 5-10% of the population – they need to be dealt with somehow. From what I’ve read here, you seem to be someone who believes in “law and order” in the generic sense – how else do we deal with those who violate our rights? I would be interested in knowing your thoughts on possible solutions.

    With that said, this article is spot-on, and is somewhat of a solution in its own right. As a fleet guy, I was involved in the purchase and acquisition of all types of law enforcement equipment. Post-9/11, Homeland Security dollars were flowing, and the arms race was on. Some of the equipment was legit – primarily for larger agencies, but the obvious trend towards militarization in small-town PD’s has been just ridiculous. It’s more than just uniforms and equipment – it becomes an attitude. Is it really necessary?

    • Hi Keith,

      I agree that the laws are the fundamental problem – those who enforce them being the secondary problem. But the two terms together are very problematic.

      Consider what it means – or rather, what it doesn’t mean – to be a law enforcement officer. One’s job is to enforce the law. All laws. Any laws. Because they are the law. Not because the law is right – and even if the law is demonstrable wrong as a moral matter (obvious examples abound, but the arbitrary criminalization of the mere possession/consumption of some but not other “drugs” comes to mind; also the random stopping of people who’ve done nothing to suggest an illegal act, who must then produce “papers” or prove that they are not “drunk,” etc.)

      This is nihilistic. It is expressed by law enforcers – who say, “I’m just doing my job” and “the law is the law.” Perhaps you see the danger. The law was also the law – and they were just doing their jobs – in the old Soviet Union and other nasty places. We’re not quite there yet – but we are much closer than we were. The reason for that is the divorcing of law from morality.

      More precisely, the redefinition of morality. Where once it was based on the rights of the individual it is now based on the “rights” of the collective (expressed by “the law,” supposedly made legitimate via “the vote” and so on). Where once it was necessary to establish guilt, it is now presumed – and innocence of guilt must be proved. Even more profoundly, it was once legally necessary – in the West – to establish that harm had been caused before anyone could be held responsible for having caused it. A victim had to be produced. Not “society” – not “the people” or “the United States,” even. Instead of these abstractions without substance, a specific person or persons had to be produced and it was necessary to establish that your actions resulted in provable harm to these actual people.

      That seems entirely just to me.

      I am very much in favor of holding people accountable for the harms they cause. I am very much opposed to harming people who’ve caused no harm – but who’ve not obeyed some arbitrary decree (i.e., a law).

      I am not opposed to paying for any service I have need of. And I do not dispute anyone else’s right to pay for the services they have need of.

      Is there a need for “dirtbag element” services?

      Put more finely, should there be a body of men paid by taxes whose job is to protect lives and property? Is such a thing necessary? Note that both questions are not objectively answerable. Each one of us will have a different opinion. Should the man who does not feel the need for such services be compelled to pay for them anyhow?

      Libertarians have wrestled with these questions for a long time.

      My view is is that it wouldn’t be necessary to impose taxes to pay for a community peacekeeping force. Such could be financed by a subscription pool in the manner of volunteer fire services. And my belief is that a sufficiency of the community’s members would voluntary contribute to “watchmen” whose role was limited to the protection of lives and property.

      My general point is that probably two-thirds of the problems we’re dealing with – in particular, the increasing dislike of people like me and you for “law enforcement” – would be ameliorated by getting rid of the two-thirds of the laws currently in force that create “offenders” out of people who’ve done nothing to cause the slightest harm to anyone else and who ought to be able to go about their business without even thinking about “law enforcement.”

      This was once largely the case in this country. I can remember it. If you weren’t stealing things or beating people up or defacing property – and so on – you didn’t worry about cops (as distinct from law enforcement) because they weren’t worried about you.

      • Not to mention that the plethora of new “laws” have been increasing exponentially, especially since 9/11/01. By the simple statistic that each of us commits about 3 felonies a day, such is brightly illuminated. Those who choose enforcement of such male bovine fecal matter as an occupation are NOT innocent, they are a party to it. There is only one valid secular law. Thou shalt not steal, weather the theft be of property, well being, or life. All other laws are nothing less than tyranny. The choice to enforce them makes one a tool of tyranny. Such choice may be made with benevolent intent, but it quite quickly must become obvious to any sane person who makes such choice that there is nothing benevolent about it. “Just doing my job” is the refrain of every jackbooted thug who ever held that position. Brian Young of HighImpactFlix.com makes the choice obvious, “The moralist does what is right regardless of what they are told. The conformist does what they are told regardless of what is right.”

        • JWK, right on the spot and thank you. It’s the very thing that makes the covid bs so dangerous and it’s dangerous to kill every freedom loving person in the country. Only the psychopaths in waiting are enjoying it, sans the mayor of Seattle and the Guvnah. I have begun to cringe every time I see a female in charge of anything. They, for a huge majority of psychopaths, have the greatest need to quash people’s rights I’ve seen. Even the wife agrees with me and how could you not seeing one in action. The police forces with the largest problems overwhelmingly have a woman chief.

          The Mayor of Seattle was obviously jumping for joy when she showed she had the authoritah to do whatever she wanted when she gave the fascist thugs part of the city.

          I could cure that entire shitty quickly. Starve them out. That fence they have built works both ways. Let no one in and only the ones who are unarmed out. They won’t get back in….carrying anything. Or the easy way of dropping nerve gas and hauling them out in dry vans and unload them into the ocean. That should fix it. If anyone pops up saying how it’s not right, just ask them if they need a ride.

          • Eight, the optics of that, aren’t really what we need right now… Face Palm. ^^

            Just surround the place, cut off their power and natural gas. Then announce that anyone who comes out, unarmed in the first twenty four hours, will be ID’ed and released.

            After that, they will be arrested, and charged with various property crimes. Then just wait them out. How long do you think those soy boys, and land whales are going to last without their fodder?

      • Another thing too, is that the AGW’s are the “tip of the spear” for tyranny. This parlays into the “I’m just doing my job” excuse. Well Nazi’s who ran the ovens at Auschwitz were just doing their job too. I also posit, that should you run afoul of the most insignificant of laws, that, given enough time, armed men will break thru your door and haul you away. Hell, I say incur a library fine, and see how long before AGW’s manhandle you just like George Floyd!

        • Sorry – no ovens at auschwitz; this has been proven a thousand times. Stop parroting the propaganda (((they))) foist on you. Wake up and smell the facts.

          • Careful there (((They))) might hear you, if you leave out any ((()))’s ^^

            Propaganda has two edges, much like a sword. It divides the sharp from the dull, and promotes agendas.

          • These aryan historical evisionist types really are a hoot! Gotta love that they are such yellow-bellied cowards that they cannot even name their enemy, instead using stupid codes. Do you guys have secret decoder rings?

            Of course the “proofs” they have offered a thousand times fall into the same category as the “proofs” offered by the flat-earthers.

            • Hi Jason,

              I know. It is tiring, isn’t it? Hitler – the great leader of the cause – was a national socialist. This is supposed to be preferable somehow to international socialism but it just means being enslaved more locally.

              Thanks, no.

              If “the Jews” are behind all of what’s going on then it speaks very highly of them – and very poorly of Aryans (I suppose I am one if the definition is 100 percent Germanic goy ancestry). I would wager that 90 percent of the Face Diaper set aren’t Jewish. Yet they put on their diapers, just as they are told. What mighty Jews!

              What feeble Aryans.

              Who cheered The Chimp (also a goy)? Was it Jews who enabled the warnntrrr? Put scanners and blue suited goons in the airports? Who willingly passed through those gates, even though almost none of them had to?

              If Aryans are this easy to control and manipulate, then I’d like to surrender my membership in the master race.

              • eric, and if speaking of Jews and Goy and lies they all tell to suit their end this article by Caitlin Johnstone says a lot about the current fastline the US govt. is taking to stop any version other than it’s own that certainly isn’t in the interest of “we the people” but of the oligarchs message via big govt.

                https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/06/13/narrative-control-operations-escalate-as-america-burns/

                And they’ll throw any person or any group under the bus to try and stop any ‘we the people’ message. As this related to the upcoming election, once again, cue the Fugs.

              • Hi Eric,

                Jason and I have long pointed out that if the “joooos” really control everything, dictate policy to the power elite in the US, against their own interests, bamboozle well meaning “whiiiiites” into doing their bidding, etc…. then they really are the “master race”. So far, none of the “Jewish Supremacists” on the site have attempted to explain the cognitive dissonance.

                Cheers,
                Jeremy

                • Well… It could be, that they are just one faction, in the endless shadow war between the Hidden Masters™ ^^

                  As Rothbard was fond of saying. I’m not interested in conspiracy theory. I’m interested in conspiracy fact.

                  That is why, the idea of directed history, is so derided by the Court Intellectuals.

              • If there is some sort of religion at the core of the self proclaimed “elite” I imagine it would be something very very ancient. Why? It’s not because of some Alex Jones film with the Owl in the grove sort of thing but because the scams being used to control the human population and exploit it are very very ancient.

                So any thing like a religion tying them together would IMO then need to be similarly ancient. Much older than the Jewish religion.

                A more likely explanation is that it is just a club of people who think alike and share knowledge.

                • Hi Brent,

                  I may have some insight regarding this – in that, for a time, I worked and swam in the same circles, at least a little bit. When you are a big city journalist and have access to the “right” people and attend the “right” events you catch glimpses of things; you hear conversations. You begin to see and to understand.

                  There is an Inner and and Outer Party. Very much as Orwell described. I was an Outer Party member who might have become an Inner Party member. Most of the Outer Party people are a kind of unconscious elite – relative to the “proles,” the broad masses. But they constitute an elite nonetheless and work hard to protect their status, without (generally) understanding what It Is All About. Most want very much to move up – and become members of the Inner Party. They will do – and sell out – anything to get there. In my field, that meant writing the right stuff – without being told to do so. If you were very good at it and very lucky and maybe outmaneuvered your grasping greedhead colleagues, you might become a paid stooge at The Washington Post or maybe even NPR. But there is still another level up the elevator – and it’s one most of us will never reach no matter how much we grasp because we were not born into it. This is the apex of the pyramidal structure. The hidden hands which pull the strings.

                  The whole thing is incredibly creepy – and made me want to get as far away from it as I could.

                  • yeah. I think at times I failed a few ‘tests’ when I was young. Either because the conditioning I got didn’t fully work or because it damaged me.

                    The system does seem to pick people in a way. Then it presents opportunities and if a person chooses “correctly” then they get to move forward.

                    Even recently I was contacted about working for a major “defense” contractor. Although the 3rd party recruiter probably had no clue that my politics would get me blackballed or maybe it was another ‘test’. Who knows?

                    However I decided a long time ago I am not designing, improving or otherwise going to be involved with weapons for the government or the giant corporations that will apply things to weapon systems. I would have no issue with firearm companies that sold only into the private use market, I just won’t do the military-industrial complex.

                    Sometimes I become concerned that work I did in my early 20s might have found a weapons use. Although it was for fuel economy and I doubt it could do anything more than that.

                    I can do “better” than where I work but my end customers are primarily small businesses and with little exception the products are used responsibly and productively.

                    • Amen that, Brent –

                      I am grateful and honored that this site is supported by the readers; the whole thing a voluntary exchange by people of goodwill. And I am grateful I do not have anyone pressuring me to write about this – but not that. To slant my articles in a certain direction. Etc.

                      No money is worth one’s soul.

      • Eric – thanks for the thoughtful reply – lots to digest there, and I’m not sure how to reconcile all of it, but I agree with much of what you said. I will still defend – at least generally – the rank and file LEO. There are many reasons people join the police force, and I think most are genuinely interested in helping their communities. Yes, there are a few assholes who join the force to bust heads, but I really think they’re in the minority. You’ve made a good case for changes – or at least a return to the fundamentals of law and morality, but the changes you suggest really don’t have as much to do with “enforcement” as they do with the law itself. Those are high-level changes that need to be made by our federal and state legislatures. That’s where the pressure needs to be exerted.

        One example of something that is difficult to reconcile is your mention of the arbitrary criminalization of drugs . . .on the one hand, I personally don’t care what people inhale or ingest as long as they aren’t infringing on my life, liberty or property. On the other hand, I see the damage that is wrought in our community by drug abuse – crime, derelicts and bums in the streets, bottomless pits of taxpayer dollars spent on “treatment” and other programs. Is that a law enforcement issue or something else?

        You make a great point for security as a “pay as you go” service. However, I maintain that you will still have the same issues with training, standards and accountability that you do with the AGW’s. I’m not sure how you would be able to establish a private security service without intense government oversight and manipulation. That model might work in smaller jurisdictions, but how do you apply it to a large city?

        • Keith, you apply private security the same way in a big city as a small city. They must go by the law and not be loyal to a union that is loyal to no one but the union leaders and to the rank and file to a high degree also.

          Not sure why you thing private security, who can be fired toot sweet if they offend the community would be less able. “Government oversight” would be the Constitution and not a bunch of people being paid off by various entities such as city councils, manufacturers of the things they want them to use and no handouts of machines of war from the military.

          Nothing would strengthen the money market, the wages of the people in this country and a bad Just Us dept more than cutting the military budget and having a defensive military instead of needless wars on people who, 20 years ago, had no one thing in common when thinking of the US, Thousand Needles, the very phrase I heard time and time again when I spent some time in Mexico in 04.

      • Exactly. Law Enforcers enforce laws, regardless of the morality of the laws. Some laws are clearly unconstitutional, yet that oath isn’t honored is some local potentate decided they want a law the contravenes the constitution- they know the law enforcers will enforce that immoral law, because… pension. And because there is no penalty for not protecting citizens rights.

        • Agreed, Todd –

          And also: I submit it takes a dick to want to be a law enforcer – to be willing to enforce laws. Any law. Just because “it’s the law.” Such a person is either a nihilist indifferent to right and wrong or bully and neither is a person I’d consider “good.”

    • Hi Keith,

      I’m sorry if this is offensive but, they’re are no “good” cops. Certainly there are many good people who happen to be cops, but it is impossible, in the moral sense, to be a “good” cop. The reason for this is that the job of a police officer requires violating people’s rights, and causes harm to those who have not harmed another. This is immoral, no matter what the “law” says. Enforcing the will of the political class is not an excuse.

      There are many ways to improve the justice system as it currently exists. Eliminating qualified immunity for cops and absolute immunity for prosecutors being the most important. Immunity for cops and prosecutors incentivizes bad behavior and attracts bad people to the job. Another obvious step would be to require that cops carry individual liability insurance, as is required of almost everyone else who can cause harm to others in the performance of their job. I wrote about this in a previous post.

      “If you can kill or seriously injure someone by doing your job, it is absurd that the risk you pose, and compensation for harm caused, can be passed onto society as a whole. As for the cost, total tax dollar expenditure would be lower if cops were required to carry liability insurance. It would be simple enough for the insurance companies to assess financial risk correlated to behavior and determine the price to cover a “good” cop. Their salaries could simply be adjusted to compensate for the out of pocket expenses. “Bad” cops would be financially punished and maybe priced out of the job. All cops would have an incentive to lower the actual cost of the policy because they could keep the difference between the standard policy and their own. As for insurance companies dictating policy, that would be much better than what we have now. Driven by profit, their primary goal would be cost reduction, which necessarily means harm reduction.

      Of course, the unions, politicians and police departments will cry foul, claim it will be too expensive, discourage cops from joining the force, create barriers to good policing, etc… All of this is bullshit. The cost savings of eliminating taxpayer funded settlements would dwarf the cost of the extra salary required to make such a plan palatable to existing and potential police officers. Such a policy would discourage “bad” cops from seeking a job, but that’s a good thing. There is no reason why it would discourage interest in police “work” per se, it may even encourage more of a “peace officer” mindset. Finally, “barriers” to the type of policing practiced today NEED to be erected”.

      “how else do we deal with those who violate our rights?”

      There is a lot of literature on this topic if you are interested. Here’s a sampling.

      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/998023.The_Enterprise_of_Law

      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/614357.Anarchy_and_the_Law

      https://mises.org/library/private-production-defense

      The second book, “Anarchy and the Law”, is a collection of essays from many authors.

      Kind Regards,
      Jeremy

      • Eric – thanks for the thoughtful reply – lots to digest there, and I’m not sure how to reconcile all of it, but I agree with much of what you said. I will still defend – at least generally – the rank and file LEO. There are many reasons people join the police force, and I think most are genuinely interested in helping their communities. Yes, there are a few assholes who join the force to bust heads, but I really think they’re in the minority. You’ve made a good case for changes – or at least a return to the fundamentals of law and morality, but the changes you suggest really don’t have as much to do with “enforcement” as they do with the law itself. Those are high-level changes that need to be made by our federal and state legislatures. That’s where the pressure needs to be exerted.

        One example of something that is difficult to reconcile is your mention of the arbitrary criminalization of drugs . . .on the one hand, I personally don’t care what people inhale or ingest as long as they aren’t infringing on my life, liberty or property. On the other hand, I see the damage that is wrought in our community by drug abuse – crime, derelicts and bums in the streets, bottomless pits of taxpayer dollars spent on “treatment” and other programs. Is that a law enforcement issue or something else?

        You make a great point for security as a “pay as you go” service. However, I maintain that you will still have the same issues with training, standards and accountability that you do with the AGW’s. I’m not sure how you would be able to establish a private security service without intense government oversight and manipulation. That model might work in smaller jurisdictions, but how do you apply it to a large city?

        • Hi Keith,

          Thanks for the thoughtful reply; I’ll try to respond similarly!

          On drugs: First, let’s define what we are talking about. Some drugs – the one ones decreed to be arbitrarily illegal. I say arbitrarily because I see no objective reason to justify my arrest for possessing a bag of pot while I am allowed (despicable language, really – if we assume this was meant to be a free country) to walk into an ABC store and buy a quart of whiskey. The whiskey is objectively worse for me in that alcohol is physically addictive and harder on the body than pot – and alcohol tends to decrease inhibitions while pot generally just makes you happy and has definite, medically legitimate palliative attributes.

          But none of that is relevant in terms of rights. You and I – as owners of ourselves – have the absolute right to do as we like with our bodies. If we want to consume alcohol or pot or meth, that – as such – is as much our right to consume as it is our right to eat as much bacon as we like. Even if it is bad for us. Because that is our business.

          Whether someone else goes on a violent bender – or “imposes costs on society” – doesn’t justify punishing you or me or anyone else who didn’t. This collective guilt thing is precisely why we have so many tyrannical laws – and such a problem with AGWs.

          The way to not have it is to hold specific individuals individually responsible for what they do. Whether a guy is high or drunk when he crashes his car into yours or robs a store is incidental. What isn’t is that he lost control of his car – or robbed a store. Hold him criminally and civilly responsible. Make him pay the damages. Don’t take away my rights – or yours.

          But what if he has no money? There are other – entirely legitimate – methods of holding people accountable for their actions. I see no moral dilemma in requiring an indigent offender to make his victim whole through compensatory labor. In fact, I see this as infinitely more moral than stealing the fruits of the labor of other people, who did nothing to cause the harm.

          There will also be cases, of course, where an innocent person is left holding the bag – as when the person who caused the harm just gets away or can’t be held accountable because of physical infirmity or some such. This is not good, of course. But far worse is making everyone responsible by proxy for the damage caused by a few louts.

          Freedom requires the acceptance of some risk. Tyranny doesn’t eliminate risk. It uses the promise of doing so to eliminate freedom.

          • eric, 110,000 people in the US alone die every year of those “approved” drugs taken as directed. Add a zero and that’s per decade although the damage is going up exponentially from…..what else? Vaccinations. Mandatory vaccinations for children which doctors are realizing and not using on Their children.

            • Good point Eight. Also keep in mind that more than 250,000 a YEAR die from |medical “mis adventure” (mistakes…). Some say its much higher. Does that mean that we have to lock everyone up, to “protect” them from doctors?… But if we don’t people will DIE!! ^^

      • Hi Jeremy – I can’t disagree with your thoughts regarding a requirement for liability insurance, but I would disagree that qualified immunity “attracts bad people to the job.” It certainly can protect bad people – unions protect bad people as welsl. It’s something that should be explored I suppose. The good people in law need to be supported, and the bad need to be weeded out. Given the current attitudes towards police, I’m very concerned about our future ability to recruit good people. Who in their right mind is going to want to put up with the abuse, knowing that no one has their back?

        • Hi Keith,

          What “good person” would wish to be an AGW? Would want to hassle people for not wearing seatbelts? Man probable cause-free “checkpoint where innocent people are presumed guilty of things and forced to prove they’re not? Mulct people for made-up “violations” that involve no harm done to anyone – and which they themselves do with impunity (e.g., drive faster than the speed limit, have darkly tinted windows, carry firearms)? Just a few of many examples of the things AGWs are empowered to do to us as part of their job that have nothing to do with protecting or serving us.

          AGW’ing is about enforcing laws. Whatever the law. Because it is the law. Period. That attracts bullies who like to lord it over others. Not good men who are appalled by it.

          That, in my view, is the real problem – not qualified immunity.

          • These days? Well… Mainly those who like to dress, as if they are about to invade Poland… ^^

            Once upon a time, that was different. Perhaps some day, that will return. But until then, its just not a profession for people who have well considered principles.

            Especially, considering the dark future we are approaching. No matter who wins in November, the other side isn’t likely to accept it.

            If you think the Progs have been hysterical, for the last three and a half years, you’ve not seen anything yet.

            • BJ, if you’re smart, you’ll be dressing as if you’re about to invade Poland and more. They’ve already tried to stop level 3 body armor. They’ll outlaw all of it if we’re not opposing it. Yes, I realize body armor won’t stop arty but we’ve got to do what we have to. If anyone thinks this is going to stop without more people dying, you and me and lots of others, just stay with it and remember as you’re dying all those young ones who will grow up in a world of slavery.

              • Eight, some of us have seen this coming, decades ago. Others saw it coming generations ago.
                Be a gray man. Thats all I have to say on that subject.

                • BJ, I figured it out in the 60’s when I was a teen. But don’t say it back then. It was dangerous. Oh say can you see? Damned right and that’s the reason I didn’t sing along or take my hat off.

        • Hi Keith,

          Qualified immunity, which amounts to near absolute immunity because prosecutors need police to make convictions, and thus have a strong incentive to be on their side, doesn’t guarantee that only bad people are attracted to the job, but it does make the job more appealing to bad people. Some, not all, cops are bullies, they like lording it over others and are attracted by a job that allows them to do so. Some cops mask their desire to bully under a cloak of self righteous furor, which may be acknowledged by the cop or not. It may be a form of cognitive dissonance, a self created narrative that justifies bad behavior in pursuit of a “greater” good. Qualified immunity signals to such people that they will be allowed great leeway in the pursuit of what they deem to be “good”. Thus, a sort of compartmentalization may occur, actions that would be seen as intolerable if done by a “mere mundane” are justified, even celebrated, if done by a “legal” crusader for the “greater good”. This helps to explain why some cops are perfectly decent people when not on duty, but transform into violent thugs when they are on duty.

          “On the other hand, I see the damage that is wrought in our community by drug abuse – crime, derelicts and bums in the streets, bottomless pits of taxpayer dollars spent on “treatment” and other programs. Is that a law enforcement issue or something else?”

          This argument would have practical, but not moral, merit if the enforcement of drug laws significantly ameliorated the harms associated with drug use. But, it does not, it exacerbates every problem. It does not reduce consumption, it guarantees that drugs become stronger and more dangerous (see this https://mises.org/library/economics-prohibition-0 for an explanation of the “iron law of prohibition”), it prevents the peaceful production and sale of substances some people desire and guarantees that such is surrounded by violence and crime. It also prevents many people from seeking help because, by doing so, they are admitting to a crime. None of this should be a law enforcement issue, making it one perverts the role of a “peace keeper” and guarantees escalating violence.

          Eric points out that what cops are tasked to do is the fundamental problem, and he is correct. As long as the job of a cop is to enforce the will of the political class, there can be no “good” cops. Qualified immunity, and the myriad other legal privileges granted to police, are a subset of a much greater problem.

          “The good people in law need to be supported, and the bad need to be weeded out”.

          As long as cops are tasked with law enforcement, that is any law, no matter how immoral or unjust, there can be no good people in law. But, I take your point. Fact is that most of the supposed “good” cops support the “bad” ones, either by silence or complicity. If the the vast majority of cops are “good”, why do they tolerate, even support, the “assholes who like to bust heads”? Perhaps these “good” cops could take the lead here and condemn the “few” bad apples. The fact that they don’t, at least officially, shows that their loyalties lie with their tribe rather than “us”. Far from being abused, every “bad” cop knows that almost the entirety of the justice system “has their back”.

          Finally, a system of peace keeping and dispute resolution, preferably provided by competing private firms lacking any special legal immunity, would likely provide better protection at far less cost, both in harm caused and money. Dale Brown of Detroit’s “Threat Management Center”, is pioneering such an approach and could serve as a guide for peace keeping where the institutional incentives are aligned with “our” interests; in the current system, those incentives align against “us”.

          https://tomwoods.com/ep-597-can-the-private-sector-protect-against-crime-this-case-study-will-blow-your-mind/

          Cheers,
          Jeremy

    • A big problem for police is over time for a lot of people the police are just a group that hassles them and lifts money from their wallets. When the police are needed for a real issue they do nothing or make themselves scarce. When you’re on your own anyway and police are only there to find ways to fine you over nonsense you don’t see much reason for them.

      • Morning, Brent!

        Exactly. You and I are members of the demographic – not criminals – who ought to not have to worry about AGWs . . . or at least, worry about them less than non-official criminals. But who is the greatest actual threat to us? I have never been mugged – possibly because I avoid bad neighborhoods and also possibly because I carry – nor had my house invaded. But I have been legally mugged by AGWs so many times I can’t recall the exact number. But it runs to scores of times and many thousands of dollars.

        All of that in “fines” for bullshit “violations” such as driving faster than a number on a sign, not completely stopping at a stop sign, notwithstanding any reason to do so (other than it being “the law”), not having two other people in my car with me (HOV “violation”), not wearing a seatbelt . .. and so on. I have never been forced to show my “papers” to anyone but an AGW. Etc.

        I’ve never harmed anyone. I pay my own way. I leave other people in peace. But AGWs will not leave me be.

        I dislike AGWs for this reason and more so because of another reason: I am not permitted to defend myself against these costumed and badged thugs. At least I have that option – and the law generally defends it – when I defend myself against an ordinary thug.

        I think the above constitutes one of the main reasons AGWs have not only lost support among ordinary decent citizens – not just the BLM/Antifa people – but also earned contempt.

        They ought to think about it.

        • eric, nothing like being on the side of the road making a repair and have a cop stop just for shits and giggles I suppose. And no, I do mind having to clean my hands with the last of the hand cleaner I have with me to get a damned insurance card out to show you. Get back to me when I’m through. They don’t really know what to do at that point and if you see them on the road later, they just go on knowing you ain’t the guy who’s in a good mood right now.

  4. They say, when someone is breaking into your house in the middle of the night, who ya gonna call?

    Well, NO ONE until the situation is neutralized!

    Then … I am supposed to call someone who will meander out here from town, and second guess and question ME, and maybe drag me out of my broken house and lock me up and impoverish me to prove I didn’t do the wrong thing? (at best!)

    I hate these fawking rioters and BLM and commies with all my heart, but tell me what good the cops are doing for me again …?

    • Hi Anon,

      Yup. Maybe an AGW will respond in time to a 911 call placed from a suburban subdivision. But out here in The Woods, the sheriff’s office is 30 minutes away and the handful of deputies who patrol could be farther away. They are functionally useless to me, even with the best intentions. If someone breaks into my house, it’s up to me to deal with it. So I resent being forced to pay for the “services” of someone who can’t deal with it.

      • And who is just as likely to arrest YOU for defending yourself in an “illegal” manner. The very notion that defending one’s property with lethal force is illegal is preposterous. The vast majority of us acquire property by our investment of time and energy, also known as our life. The theft or destruction of said property is the theft or destruction of a part of our life. Can I not preserve part of my life by depriving the offender of part of theirs? While one who is civilized will show some restraint in depriving another of part of their life, the offender most often does not.

        • Yall might not watch as many scenarios that play out of someone calling for help and being murdered. It’s the hammer and nail syndrome.

          A few years ago we had an $8.2M LEO center foisted off on our pore county. We couldn’t/can’t afford it and had no need for it. But the final insult was looking across the street to the sheriff’s office and courthouse and seeing the sign there that still said “Sheriff’s Office” and back to the “Monument” that said Law Enforcement Center and that was the real need of it, just the goddamn sign so everyone would know they’d “made the change”.

      • eric, my neighbor had a mad cow ram the gate on the pens(his own fault), run it over his legs and broke them. While he was on the ground, wanting a bottle of booze, the medics had been called, all of 7or 8 miles of clear sailing away. They arrived 45 minutes later. 911 is a farce and just because you call it, doesn’t mean HELP is coming when it finally gets there.

      • We had an incident here in our neighborhood some years ago. In the end it all turned out that some druggies got too high and started hallucinating that they were being attacked in the middle of the night. But nobody knew THAT at the time and the LE “response” was quite educational. We heard it all on a VFD radio. They staged several miles away and waited until they had various officers from several jurisdictions all together before even beginning to approach the residence. So that “30 minutes” response from town is more like an hour plus if they think it will really be a violent situation. In the meantime the local taxpaying resident can just keep dealing with whatever is happening on their own.

      • I saw a video earlier of that mess in Seattle. There was a homeless guy freaking out in there and the harder they tried to “fix” him, the more dire the situation became. All of a sudden in the thundering herd you hear a female voice scream “Call the cops”. Hilarious.

  5. “Whether this happened by accident, via a kind of slow-motion morphing of the soldaten and what was once the civilian cop to the point that the visual distinction is now almost indistinguishable, isn’t relevant.”

    It “ISN’T RELEVANT??” How can you say that?

    If you refuse to identify the cause of the problem, you’re never going to fix it.

    • True as that logics out to, even if you do the id deed, you still ain’t gonna’ fix it.

      Cuz, hard to swallow as may be, it ain’t broken. Pang full o’ gloss as may be, this here’s the best o’ times / worst o’ times all possible whirlds.

      • One can’t fix, what isn’t broken… Oligarchs play their shadow games, while the tax farms burn, and the herds stampede. Same as it ever was.

        • And you may find yourself living in a shotgun shack
          And you may find yourself in another part of the world
          And you may find yourself behind the wheel of a large automobile
          And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife
          And you may ask yourself, “Well… how did I get here?”

          Letting the days go by, let the water hold me down
          Letting the days go by, water flowing underground
          Into the blue again, into the silent water
          Under the rocks and stones, there is water underground
          Letting the days go by, let the water hold me down
          Letting the days go by, water flowing underground
          Into the blue again after the money’s gone
          Once in a lifetime, water flowing underground

          Same as it ever was, same as it ever was
          Same as it ever was, same as it ever was
          Same as it ever was, same as it ever was
          Same as it ever was, same as it ever was
          ~ Talking Heads, Once In A Lifetime

          “Like many fly fishermen in western Montana where the summer days are almost Arctic in length, I often do not start fishing until the cool of the evening. Then in the Arctic half-light of the canyon, all existence fades to a being with my soul and memories and the sounds of the Big Blackfoot River and a four-count rhythm and the hope that a fish will rise.

          Eventually, all things merge into one, and a river runs through it. The river was cut by the world’s great flood and runs over rocks from the basement of time. On some of those rocks are timeless raindrops. Under the rocks are the words, and some of the words are theirs.

          I am haunted by waters.”

          ― Norman Maclean, A River Runs Through It

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=NJF70sHMFN8

    • I agree, asking “why” is the most relevant question. What happened to the United States after WW2 that ended the era of “civilian police”? Prior to 1980, there was crime, but mostly the type committed by the usual suspects with the usual level of violence. Then two things happened. First, mass immigration from third world countries (enabled by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 – sponsored by Ted Kennedy and signed by Lyndon Johnson) had transformed the United States into a multicultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, non-Christian third world culture in most of the major cities. Second, the “war on drugs” created an incredibly profitable drug trade exploited by international criminal gangs and at the same time sent thousands of young men to prison for drug possession, trapping them in the criminal justice system and a life of crime. In this environment the militarization of the police was an attempt to protect life and property from the chaos and violence of the criminal gangs. This transformation of the police into an occupying army was supported by most citizens who were threatened by the rising crime and violence in their neighborhoods.

      Divide and conquer has been the strategy the Communists and Globalist elite to bring down the United States from the beginning. If the police are disbanded, crime is not going to go away, it will get much, much worse. The endgame is to make the situation so bad that people will rise up in their local communities to fight the chaos. Regardless of their racial composition (white, black, Asian, Hispanic), these “militias” will immediately be branded as “white supremacists” using the “useful idiots” in the main stream and social media. With Biden as President, the real military will be deployed, martial law proclaimed and used to disarm and punish these “oppressors”.

      I do not think violence is the answer. It gives them what they want. Peaceful, political separation by honest, moral, hard working people is the only approach that can be successful.

      • Hi Griff,

        This is well-said. I absolutely agree with you that a parting of the ways – peacefully, I hope – is the probably the only way this situation can be resolved peacefully. We are at the “irreconcilable differences” juncture. The differences are no longer minor quibbles about whether to slightly raise or slightly lower taxes but wholesale differences over the rights of individuals vs. the supposed “rights” of collectives. But it is also deeper than that, even. We are divided by reason – vs. emotion. And most of all, by a refusal on one side (the left especially) to be willing to leave those who don’t agree with the left’s views of everything alone – as opposed to the willingness of the rest of us to let the left live as they wish, provided they extend the same courtesy to us.

        It’s going to get hot.

  6. Hey Eric, guys, how’s this defund the AGWs thing going around a bad thing? At least it will hopefully keep some of this military grade kit out of their hands? Maybe even save the taxpayer a couple bob…. i suspect im missing something… because it sounds too good to be true….

    • Be careful what you wish for. As the wheels come off, the cities and states are going to have less and less tax base to farm from. That leaves Mordor on the Potomac, as the main funding source. We could well end up, with all police, being part of Home Land Security (or some such), as they will be the only ones who can pay them.

    • Hi Nasir,

      I don’t think defunding AGWs is a bad thing, as such. My worry is that it will be used as another pretext for yet another uptick in tyranny. What I foresee happening is violent crime – actual crime – permitted to increase. This will increase the public clamor for saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafety. And the adoption of even more brutal measures imposed – not on violent criminals.

      On us.

      See Corona Fever for the “case” study.

      • And now, back by “popular” demand, we are being fed another edition of lies to remind us we are still in extreme danger from corona flu. The latest statistics used to convince us this is the case are statistically insignificant.

    • I’m all for it, but then taxpayers better get a refund check. We’re going to need to hire private security forces in addition to our property taxes.

  7. Years ago I told my wife that the way cops were treating citizens would eventually blow back. I’m not sure eliminating the police is the right thing to do. Mobs would rule possibly bringing martial law. We sure don’t want that. Bringing back the Andy Griffith peace officer and putting them in some Chicago neighborhoods would be murder. Even as militarized as police are they can’t control these neighborhoods.

    As for Floyd,,, when I mention the autopsy report states he died of a heart attack probably due to the high level of fentanyl and meth in his blood. Mentioning that or his extensive rap sheet I get some very harsh replies at some sites.
    It’s going to be interesting to see how the courts are going to handle it. Will they ignore the autopsy and send them to prison or worse for Political Correctness or will they turn them loose / find them guilty on lesser charges chancing more riots. looting and killings. Either way this is a defining moment for the country.

    • Those particular details scaled to weigh the particular case are disabled, since the source is the handicap slots nearest the doors. What did Epstein’s autopsy “report”?

      (Dealing with known & proven liars, there’s no point nor logic to pretending to be able to pick & choose if/when that ilk speaks truth.)

      And the rigging is interconnected. Gulliver’s crocheted in place. Those Chicago hoods didn’t arise from a pristine vacuum. Those places are just patterns in & of the larger piece. Same as in the days of Capone. And whoever it was before Capone. And whoever it was before that.

      The larger part about authoritarianism shortcuts, double-standards, is the needles, & yarn/s too, that knit humanimals’ nets.

        • I like me-me’s for how outrageously it denies its Weus!-ness.

          Epstein did kill himself – just not that last little bit, there at the end, as made official, by the coroner-notary.

          And what the sneering backhand public demonstration shows, if your eyes, & ears, are good, is the powerlessness of conductors & their orchestras of instruments to play a decent tune.

          “I’m hip, man, that cat didn’t know any tunes…”

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSH9ryRzHQ4

    • Fred Reed advocates an Apartheid system of policing. Let black cops patrol black neighborhoods, in the manner that that community chooses, and let white cops do the same in white neighborhoods. Ideally, that would mean Sheriff Andy and Officer Fife for the white burbs and rural areas, and anything from the Waffen SS to basically no policing at all for black neighborhoods, depending on what the residents demand or would be willing to tolerate. The important point would be that anybody entering a white or black police zone is subject to whatever police treatment is accepted and authorized for that area.

      Not ideal, but better than what we’re now encumbered with.

      • I like ol’ Fred.

        But “policing” is largely make-work that metastasize-works into ever more make-work.

        “Symptoms” are purposely created in various acts of policing for “profit” – “war on drugs,” “gun control,” “fed reserve policy,” etc–yadda—ad infitada — & latter day taints punch a clock to move dirt – or bodies — from Boss Kean’s ditch to Boss Paul’s yard then back again over & over again.

        Keeps a lot of people busy breaking rules & following orders.

        Meantime, po-po’s of all “varieties” have robbed-stolen-raped-assault & battered-murdered more in any given year than all the petty unaffiliated criminals in all of history have done.

        Real crazy, like that, can’t be made up & method acted; that’s born-in madness.

  8. Lately I’ve noticed that AGWs avoid things that are unsafe for them- like protecting private property. To “serve and protect” means serve the State and protect themselves.

  9. New Mexico state police dress so much like Nazi officers that I did a double-take when a group of them walked through the county fair last year. I actually thought for a moment that they were cosplayers. Only the lack of swastika armbands gave them away. I would have felt better seeing the armbands because then I would have known it was probably just a joke. As it was, they were serious.
    Maybe that’s only their “dress uniforms”… I don’t know since I try to stay away from such parasites.
    But I think if you don’t want to be treated like Nazis, don’t dress as Nazis.

  10. Perhaps the real reason I think that The Dukes of Hazzard would not fly today is not only the Confederate flag on the General Lee, but because Sheriff Rosco P. Coltrane and his deputies Enos and Cletus would be buzz cut Tactical Tommies who wouldn’t chase the Dukes in their patrol cars, but drive up to the Duke farm at night in tactical armored vehicles with a SWAT team with a no-knock warrant, break down the door to the farmhouse with a battering ram, fire tear gas canisters through the windows, and drag out Uncle Jesse, Daisy, Bo, and Luke hog tied in zip cuffs, and that would be the end of the story. (Or maybe they’d kill Uncle Jesse by kneeling on his neck.) The Dukes would go to jail. Then, thanks to asset forfeiture, Boss Hogg would own the Duke farm and the General Lee. The General Lee would be sent to the scrap yard for being environmentally hazardous, and the Duke farm would be sold for a development with condos and shopping centers called Brook Manor Dale Farm.

    Incidentally, Sheriff Ed Little, who was African American, was, unlike Rosco and his deputies, a rarity: an honest and competent peace officer. Even Boss Hogg didn’t mess with him.

    • Bryce,

      You forgot dropping a flashbang! The SWAT raid would no doubt include one of those. They need their “shock and awe”, you know…

    • Hello Bryce,

      I remember watching the Dukes of Hazzard as a middle schooler; it was a laughable parody back then. My mother told me that there might be crooked sheriffs around, but none would ever get away with being as obviously crooked as Rosco and Boss Hogg.

      Besides, even if they managed to catch the Duke boys, the worst they’d do is arrest them for charges that’d never stick, and they’d be let go again. Nowadays, Rosco would seem like a positively kind and considerate guy compared to police “tactics” we routinely see.

      • Hi Chris,

        The Dukes weren’t that far off… that kind of America did once exist. Young guys having fun in cars (never meanin’ no harm) weren’t treated like MS-13 thugs by tacticooled thugs. I personally experienced shuckin’ and jivin’ with local cops over burnouts and such. You might get a ticket, you might get a finger-wagging lecture and don’t-do-it-again, boy. But you’d never get a gun drawn on you or even be shrieked at to get on the ground, now!

    • Ron White says you can’t fix stupid.

      I believe it, my ineluctable conclusion, anyhow.

      harumph

      When you burn your own neighborhood, you’re stupid.

      When you use deadly force to maintain control, you lose control.

      The maelstrom of the madness can foment plenty of discord.

      Seems to happen a lot.

      Plenty of youtube videos show how some rogue police can be rather mean and nasty.

      Leave me alone, it’s beer time, always. har

      Where I live, I hear birds singing every day.

      The dog chases the cats, the gophers run scared, the sun shines.

      No sirens, no police and nobody screaming bloody murder.

      No crickets yet, not until late July.

      Peace and harmony reign supreme.

  11. For sure. I think we need to take away their toys too. The armored cars, the machine guns, the black suits. All of it. They are entirely useless to anyone. Look at what’s going on in Seattle. A group of left wing thugs is taking territory within a city and setting their own borders, extorting and threatening regular people. Where are the cops? No where to be found, drinking coffee and handing out speeding tickets like normal. They are not fighting a war except with the country’s right wing. Normal people. I say defund and defang them now. And let right wing militias take over.

      • I’m ready and willing to “flip the switch” when needed. I try to treat people kindly until they give me reason not to. For a lot of good people like us in this group, flipping that switch does not come naturally. I think it is a mental challenge for us to be ready at all times to go into defensive violence mode if needed, only because in our world of peaceful anarchy we’ve created for ourselves, it is rarely needed.

        But the enemy is out there, and they are getting bolder by the day. Always a good idea to be mentally (as well as physically) ready to spring into action when necessary.

    • “Defang then”

      As far as everyday interaction with them, I’ve always maintained that you should be following the same rules for vampires.

    • Yep…and the first thing the left wing thugs in Seattle did is move the police barricades in a circle around the “zone”, which formed A WALL ! Thought they hated walls ?? Now they have a heavily armed black “rapper” enforcer. You know, kinda like a COP ? !

    • In all fairness, it’s the lefty mayor and his police chief lackey holding back the cops. If they were given the order, they’d take back the “Capitol Hill Free Zone”…

LEAVE A REPLY