A Hero Worshipper Retorts

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

I received the following in reply to my article the other day about “law enforcement” and publish it here, in its entirety, with my replies interspersed:

“I have to tell you your article entitled “Law Enforcement” is probably one of the worst articles I’ve ever read in my life. It couldn’t be less informed if you actually put effort into it.”

How could it be less informed if I “actually put effort into it”? 

“I won’t address everything in it because it would take all day, but I will address a few things:
1) A lot of the reason that there are laws about seatbelts and motorcycle helmets is because when you aren’t wearing either of those, and you crack your melon and go into a coma, you become an expense for the rest of us while you lay there and waste away for years.
Now, if we had a society where police came up on your bike accident on the highway, and you were already in a coma, and they just shoveled you to the side of the road to die for your own stupidity, then that would be different. We wouldn’t have any need for helmet laws. But I suspect if you were in a motorcycle crash without a helmet and somebody in the medical field didn’t do everything just right, you would be the first one to sue them.”
You make an interesting package deal. Let’s unpack it. First, you argue that seatbelt and helmet laws are necessary because otherwise I might “become an expense for the rest of us while you lay there and waste away for years.”
Well, I haven’t, first of all – and that vitiates any claim you make that I am obliged to wear a seatbelt (or eat my veggies or wear a Face Diaper) because it’s just an assertion about what might happen as opposed to what hasn’t. You might beat your wife – or abuse your kids. Do you think that possibility entitles the government to force you to attend counseling sessions or submit to regular screening interviews/inspections of yourself and your home, etc. . . . just to be “safe”? 
If not, why not?  
In the second place, I would not be “the first one to sue.” Because I don’t expect anyone else to pay my bills. 
Like many in “law enforcement,” you seem to believe it’s right to pre-punish people for harms they have not caused  . . . because they might. And then impute to them actions which they haven’t performed, such as “suing” others for harms they caused themselves.
Rather, I believe people are responsible for what they do – and that no one should be held responsible for anything done by others.
“And regarding the seatbelt, people are often carrying passengers and the driver needs to be in a seatbelt because it offers more control of the vehicle, especially going around turns that they took way too fast. That’s just a fact. And seatbelts DO save lives, and there are plenty of families out there that are appreciative of them because of it for somebody who otherwise would not have gotten a second chance.”
This is another generalized assertion that does not necessarily apply. In the first place, because most people don’t have accidents when they drive – and in the second, because few people are skilled enough to retain control during an accident. Thirdly, modern cars all have bucket seats and these prevent the driver from sliding over into the passenger seat.
Finally, you say (IN ALL CAPS) that seat belts DO “save lives.” So? They have also taken them – a fact as much as the one you’ve stated. What gives you or any other person the right to decide cost-benefit for others?  
“2) since you were so opposed to laws, imagine if we had no DUI laws and people just ran head-on into families and killed them with no recourse. Having zero laws is about the dumbest idea I’ve ever heard in my life.”
And yet, notwithstanding all the laws prohibiting “drunk” driving, there is a lot of drunk driving. And does it matter whether a “drunk” ran the light and ran into you – or a senile old lady or a teenager on his phone? 
I did not argue that there should be no laws. I argued that there should be no enforcement of tyrannical laws – i.e., those that punish people who’ve caused no harm to anyone but merely affronted “the law” – and that this “it’s the law” business empowers tyranny.    
“3) I’m not really sure what you’re intense hatred is for police.”
I resent “law enforcement” – because I hate tyranny.
“Perhaps you got a speeding ticket that you didn’t feel that you deserved . . .”
Almost no one deserves these things you style “tickets.” Who deserves to be forced to hand over money because they drove faster than some arbitrary number on a sign? Or “violated” some other arbitrary/pedantic edict? I hold that people should be held accountable for the harms they cause. Period. And absent any harm caused, they have a right to be left in peace.
” . . . so now you hate people who run into a burning building to save somebody, or extract somebody out of a burning car at their own peril, or run towards a firefight while people like you are running away? I’d say that qualifies for hero status. The fact that you’re citing one case out of countless incident police handle on a daily basis around the nation is just ignorant.”
You mean like the “heroes” in Texas, recently? And the “heroes” who enforced the lockdowns and business closures and Face Diaper “mandates”? You attempt to malign me, saying “people like you are running away.” You don’t know me and have no idea what I have done – or not done. It’s a weak, petulant little jibe emanating from someone who seems to expect hero worship.   
“4) police are not militarized just because they wear the latest defensive clothing and equipment.”
Such “defensive” equipment – body armor, multiple mags/web gear, etc. – was all available 50 years ago. Cops rarely wore such equipment 50 years ago. Or even 30 years ago. Because in those days, cops didn’t think they were the military. They didn’t look it, either. Today, they do – and it fosters the delusion (in their minds) that they are. 
“On the one hand you’re going to scream for the Second Amendment, and everybody should be able to own everything they want including bazookas, but then you’re going to whine about cops trying to protect their bodies with equipment that works like Kevlar, knee pads, ballistic helmets, etc.  Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. “
Really? Do you  not understand that there is a distinction between the rights of free citizens in a constitutional republic and armed government workers? AGWs deny free citizens the right to posses the same equipment they force those very citizens to pay for.  
“In case you forgot the pulse nightclub shooting in Florida, there was a cop who took a bullet to the helmet and the Kevlar helmet saved his life. And it was a military style helmet. Should he not be afforded that piece of life-saving equipment just because it looks like something the military would wear? Police are being shot at in the streets just like soldiers are being shot at out in the field. There really is little difference. So crying about their equipment is no less ignorant than the last point I addressed.”
I am not among those asking anyone else to protect me – much less fleece me. If someone else wishes to have/wear body armor and so on, they have every right. But they have no right to make me pay for it. And if you cannot see the danger inherent in “suiting up” AGWs for war and the absurdity of equating what they do to “soldiers in the field” then it is no wonder why you cannot understand my leeriness of what is styled “law enforcement.”  
“The simple fact remains that people like you, and these anti-police activists that are currently driving policy, are driving police away from the profession, and those that stay are opting to do absolutely nothing for fear of being sued. Thus violent crime is going through the roof. I wonder what you’re gonna do about that once there are no more police to protect society. Are you going to do it? I highly doubt that. In fact, it’s those that scream the loudest that are always the first to call the police when they need somebody. Good day.”
I am fully supportive of peace keeping – a thing qualitatively different than law enforcing. Good people are shunning the “profession,” as you style it, because good people want nothing to do with bullying and mulcting their fellow men on behalf of the state. 
Violent crime is going through the roof because the culture is breeding violent people. It is not through the roof in areas still emotionally/psychologically sound; rural areas, for example. There is practically no violent crime where I live – where there are very few law enforcers but lots of heavily armed private citizens. A correlation, perhaps? 
I would never bother to call – much less “scream” for a law enforcer in the event I have to deal with a violent criminal, in part because I am quite prepared to deal with such things and, secondarily, because law enforcement is only minutes (actually, more like 15-30 minutes) away when seconds count.  
I need a law enforcer like a fish needs a bicycle. 
Good day!


  1. While seat belts may save lives they also can kill. When I was a senior in high school I was sitting in the passenger seat of my buddy’s ’82 Grand Marquis, a giant boat of a car. We were going through an intersection as we had the green light when a tool bag who was driving a ’97 Camaro at about 90 miles an hour sped through the red light and smashed into us. Thank god we were in that Grand Marquis as it saved our lives, had i been wearing a seat belt I would have been skewered by the metal from the door, jutted out like knives into where I had been sitting. As I wasn’t wearing a seatbelt I flew forward and then towards the driver’s side. Both my buddy and I walked away from this accident, he got a nasty scar across his cheek from rearview mirror slicing it and I got a small scar above my left eye from hitting the windshield. Highly doubt I’m the only one who’s been saved by not wearing a seatbelt.

  2. “Violent crime is going through the roof because the culture is breeding violent people”

    Ahh, the old nature vs nurture discussion or is it culture vs nature. In my opinion nature creates culture and nurture has an positive (and in some cases negative) effect on nature.
    The biggest crock is shit that has been foisted on the public is that “We are all created equal”. Itz amazing how many people believe this BS.
    I am going to rephrase your statement to this: “Violent crime is going through the roof because nature is breeding violent people”. We inherit all our our unique nature from our parents. That includes bodies and brain. Yes , culture (nurture) can mitigate and influence our natures in some respect but cannot change our nature.
    I’m glad you live in a low crime area but this is not the case in major urban areas.

    • Hi Euro,

      I have no doubt that I might have grown up a violent cretin were it not for the civilized environment I was raised in. My parents civilized me – as is the role of all proper parents. Taught boundaries, respect for other people and their property. Showed by example how to behave – and how not to behave. Take those things away and you have Lord of the Flies. And that’s just what we have – in many areas of the country, expanding outward.

  3. I was in hospital for a busted leg and I made some acquaintance with a Hardly rider that eschewed head protection. His head looked like Barry O’bama with all of the stitches. A helmet might have saved him from his pitiable mess. Many thousands of taxcow dough did not save him, but that is an afterthought.

    • Hi Erle,

      Certainly… and every day that I am out and about I see morbidly obese people – some in their teens and 20s – who probably already have the chronic illnesses of late middle and old age.

  4. I have always used a helmet and leathers.I always used Spanish eye goggles too. I always used seat belts and a couple of times they protected me. The grind marks on my old Bell saved me from grinding off an ear. Nah, I will continue with prudent safety precautions. I laid down a Guzzi sport with no damage to speak of. My helmet was scarred rather badly.
    I laugh at hardly riders in flip-flops. A friend of mine lost a daughter in a wreck that could have been far less severe with a shitbox helmet and proper riding gear.

    • Hi Erle,

      Sure! I always hit the gym every other day – and run a few miles on the days I’m not working out with weights. It’s protective of my health and I think the effort is worth the benefit. Maybe seatbelts and helmets are also. But no one ought to be required to work out – or wear a seatbelt – or eat their veggies, for that matter.

      The notion that such things are any (rightful) business of policing is obnoxious in the extreme.

      • Agreed, but one is stupid for not wearing protective gear. I do not agree with your idyllic notion of having a pillion gal. They always lean the wrong way and are shocked that criticism flows their way. I am favorable to bikes that have no provision for passengers even though having a set of tits on the back is stimulating.

  5. Another problem with this LE’s position is that he seems to fancy himself as an elite. Special. Enlightened. Superior. From above us.

    I recall when policing was community based. The local boys who became cops were still just “Bob from Flat Rock Road”. We knew one another by first names. Our families knew one another. When I got pulled over I got questions like “What’s your Dad doing with that old truck he just bought?” Or “I saw your Mom and Jill at the movies last night.” A cop car in your driveway usually meant Officer Bob came by to say Hi to Grandpa or the like.

    My point is that cops were part of our town. Our families. Our lives. There was also “frontier justice”. When a hoodlum was riding around in his hooptie the local boys in blue ( all 2 of them) would “curb” him and if they felt it warranted it jack him up. Viola! No more bikes stolen!

    I lived in a suburb of Detroit as a kid in the early 60s. The above was my experience there- not in Hooterville.

    • Hi Eric,

      Yup. I’ve had several online bouts with guys like the one who wrote the rant I replied to. They all seem to think they are entitled to deference – even to worship. They will say that because they “pulled a guy out of a burning car” or some such good thing, it obviates all the bad things they do as part of their “jobs.”

      Like you, I have no quarrel, as such, with peace-keeping because I myself am peaceful and so would not have to worry about being hassled by peace keepers. But law enforcers? That’s another thing!

  6. Eric, talking of body armour, is it true that they are trying to ban body armour as well for normal people out in the US (because ofcourse 2 crazy people on certain pills wore it when they lost their minds).

    I did notice that police in the US, even in Britain has become more and more militarised over the past 20 years. I do recall back in the 90s, many times we would know the local police chief Once my brother dialled 911 and hung up – he turned up at our house peaking in the window to see whats up. Dad went out to see WTF and he told him what we did but they have to investigate all calls. Had him in for tea, he told us why we shouldn’t do that (we got our asses whipped Asian style after he left) We were friend with him as long as we lived in Shelburne . When we had a restaurant, I remember again dad knew all the local cops. He knew they were pretty incompetent, but his view was they’re fairly harmless and better to keep them on side…It did come in handy when there was once a burglary at the place (no they didnt catch a criminal) but at least they promptly did the paperwork for an insurance claim!

    I just dont know if today I would see them like that…. also I’ve never really met a cop here just like that, they always seem to turn up from somewhere at the opportunity to feed off a host with all their kit (say at the side of the road with their speed camera), and then disappear to wherever they came after the opportunity goes…

    • Am wondering – do you think this is potentially due to America and the west itself being in a constant state of war for the past 2 decades, that this mindset has crept into society itself, particularly in “law enforcement”

      • Hi Nasir,

        I think it’s related, certainly. Or certainly amped up. Worship of the state’s enforcers got a big boost when Ronald Reagan became president. But it was under The Chimp that it went ballistic. That was the era of “proud to be an American” – and “with us or against us.” The “enemies of freedom,” if you’re not “with us.” The conflation of love of the state with patriotism. The insistence that cops and soldiers are “heroes” – rather than cops and soldiers. That brief era of relative peace from 1989-2001 could not be allowed to stand. But it was nice while it lasted.

        • Eric, also wondering the impact of when many thousands of soldiers from battle zones returning home to the west, and then joining the ranks of AGWs has changed their mindset (and their enthisasim to use their skills and that attitude from the battleground in their new day jobs)….

        • Hi Eric.

          Once you strip away all of the illusions/delusions, both cops and soldiers are just enforcers for the gangs. That the two very different roles are blurring is a demonstration of how far into decline the system is. Both are considered expendable by the political class, and especially by those who own the politicians. The reality is, its just a job to most of them. The dangerous ones are the ones who have drank the kool aid. That actually believe in the illusions/delusions that make such huge populations governable. As those illusions/delusions break down, things are going to get down right ugly. Especially as we move into the mid term Selections.

      • Nasir, the US military has been actively engaged in killing people for all but about 20 years of the existence of the nation It’s not new, just “bigger and better”.

        • Hi John.

          As has been stated “War is a racket”. Couple the book by the same title (War is a racket) with a more recent one called the New confessions of an economic hit man, and you get a much better picture of the formation and expansion of the US Empire. That Empire has killed millions of foreign civilians, and sacrificed hundreds of thousands of our own people to advance the petty interests of the Empire and those behind it. Now that, is something that’s worth remembering,

    • It’s been tried and will be tried again. And the very fear that some had of enumerating rights is being used to justify Federal or State (CA) body armor bans for the general public: “The Second Amendment doesn’t mention body armor.”

      Well, it shouldn’t HAVE to. What’s often forgotten are the NINTH and TENTH Amendments, which do specify that the citation of rights that the Government is SUPPOSED to be restrained from “infringing” does not “disparage” OTHER rights, and that ALL powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government are RESERVED for the states, or the PEOPLE.

      To those that want to forbid LAW-ABIDING citizens to own body armor, ask them WHY? And those those Congress critters that advocate such a ban: YOU FIRST. If it’s good for Eric and/or I, it should be just “Jim Dandy” for THEM! Of course, such a ban would NOT be applied to the Congress critters AND their body guards, or to AGWs! Now, WHY? Hmm…

      • The same thing goes for magazine and weapons restrictions. Actually ALL firearms “laws” are unconstitutional, as even the “1934 National Firearms Act” will not pass Constitutional muster.
        The “1934 National Firearms Act” does not ban certain weapons but TAXES them. Add to that, the “1986 Hughes Amendment” to the FOPA act is blatantly unconstitutional as it is a restraint of legal trade in machine guns by artificially restricting the number of machine guns available to ordinary citizens. The “Hughes Amendment” banned the manufacture and registration of new machine guns for ordinary citizens. As such, the prices for the remaining machine guns out there skyrocketed. A $600 M-16 in 1986 will cost $30,000 today.
        Where is the NRA and other pro-2A organizations in all of this?

  7. What a bonehead. Like police carea bout folks like us besides seeing us as potential domestic terrorrists with a squinty eye. If they’re quitting the profession it’s because even those fat government slobs see they the backstabbing they’re getting from the political establishment and all the pro-crime equity BS. The ones who aren’t in it for the gravy train and have a soul have no place there.

  8. Well, we know of one brain that won’t be donated. lol

    The writer points with pride and views with alarm, smarmy reaches a new height.

    Tough to reason with someone whose mind is set on what they believe to be the zeitgeist, they know the answers. So shut up, sit down, and listen. They’ll get all mad and angry and stuff if you don’t. They can get as mad as they want, I don’t care.

    I’d call the cops and have the ignoramus arrested for disturbing the peace, placed in cuffs and hauled away.

    I’ve seen it happen, somebody opens their big mouth, starts arguing with a peace officer and ends up in cuffs, taken to the cop shop, gone from the scene.

    We’ll let you go, but you’re going to behave, you’ll stop making a fool of yourself, maybe, but you’re gonna be a decent person and you’re gonna stop acting like a jerk.

    Some friendly advice to the writer, not gonna see it your way, so it’s the highway.

  9. His reply that “if you were in a coma we’d all pay” argument is classic. All it does is show the failure of Socialism. In this case in the medical field. And, as is typical, collectivism is used as an excuse for tyranny.

    Then, when objecting to tyrannical laws the response is, “So, you want NO laws, eh?”. It shows the inability to extrapolate by twisting a statement into something it isn’t. If you object to one law you object to all laws. But, maybe in this case he has a point.

    I would contend that “government” is an institution created by civilized men (Jefferson, et al) in the hopes of advancing civilization. If the founding of this Republic was to be the crown jewel of Enlightenment thought, I think it can be said that the experiment is an abject failure. The United States, supposedly founded on “limited” government and individual freedom is Exhibit “A” to that failure. It has become monstrous at all levels. As a civilized people we need to find other ways to arrange our affairs that do not involve the coercive, tyrannical entity known as “government”.

    It boils down to this, if government was intended to protect us from sociopathic tyrants it has turned that idea on its head. Government is merely a way to give sociopathic tyrants full time employment.

    • Another thing about “all paying” for injuries from accidents – goes hand in hand with the successful indoctrination that “emergency care” will be SKY HIGH! I am also shocked that the author of this diatribe to Eric even found their way to a libertarian type blog.

      • A Michigan State police officer was killed in a traffic accident. My response to the article that was published was a simple question: “Was he wearing a seatbelt?”
        The vitriolic responses I got for merely posing the question were legendary–one of my favorites: “How DARE you question whether the (anointed) police officer was wearing a seatbelt. He’s DEAD”.
        So much of the public is brainwashed, thinking that police officers are “special”.
        Other questions I posed involved the police use of computers and cell phones while driving. The responses were as such: “Police officers are specially trained in the use of these devices while driving.” Yeah, right…
        There are far too many copsuckers out there with no way to snap them out of their delusions about “law enforcement.”

        • Hey, Anarch, a few years back, my neighbor was stopped at a light when he was rear-ended by a swine in a pig-mobile who was futzing with his computer. Hit my neighbor while he was doing about 50. Poor neighbor who had recently had back surgery ended up under the front seat of the car…..

          My late evil sister used to adulterate with a married NYPD sergeant who’d drive the 60 miles home from Manhattan to Long Island on the Long Island Expressway blasted out of his mind most nights (Including a detour to my sister’s). [Her ex-husband was also a copper- another serial adulterer/alcoholic, who used to regale people with stories of how he’d humiliate/scare random people for doing nothing].

      • What I LOVE ( 😉 ) about the “It’ll cost the public $$xxx if you end up in a coma” spiel, is that I happen to be a member of the public and I am forced to pay $$$xxxxxxxxxxxxx for every little Tyrone that gets a tummy ache and whose mammy (whose upkeep I am also forced to pay for) takes the ‘amberlamps’ to the hospi’l (and then the Medicaid cab home) for little Tyrone’s MRI to diagnose the grape Kool-aid induced condition- and that is somehow just fine, because some guys somewhere got together and decreed it. So, I do not have the autonomy over my own life to choose how I will sit in my own vehicle, or where and how my money will be spent….but if I were to start slinging-out copies of myself like a Zerox machine, it it is somehow perfectly fine if I impose the cost of care, feeding, education, housing, healthcare, etc. of those sprogs on the public….because someone somwhere has decreed that that is ‘legal’, but to choose to not wear a seat belt is not, therefore I’d be a ‘criminal’ if I didn’t wear one….but perfectly within the graces of ‘the law’ if I cranked out 10 sprogs with various stray women.

        But pigs can’t think- they are trained and indoctrinated- so such absurdities never occur to them, and if somehow such a thought ever were to occur in the vacuum-between-the-silk-ears, they wouldn’t care, because if they cared about justice, equity, liberty, and mankind, they would have quit after the first day at academy.

        Funny thing is, the mentality of the typical modern copper is that of someone who craves respect and admiration (and usually, power) -to make-up for what they can not acquire by their own merits yet feel that they are owed- and yet they do not realize that by wearing the blueblack costume they have in-fact assumed the role of a servant– the lowest servant class, who betray their own kind to enforce the dictates of those who are destroying traditional Western civilization; the rabble of the slave class who keep their fellow slaves submissive.

  10. This AGW didn’t leave a good impression at all. He strikes me as someone caught up in his inflated sense of self-importance and drunk on his purported “authoritai”.

  11. “… the driver needs to be in a seatbelt because it offers more control of the vehicle, especially going around turns that they took way too fast. That’s just a fact.”

    It’s obvious that the writer has never driven a real racecar, where the harness really does hold you securely. It’s a great feeling being cinched in there so firmly – it’s like you’re part of the car. In fact, in an open-cockpit formula car, without a harness it would be impossible to use the brakes to their full potential because you wouldn’t be able to hold yourself in there.

    Passenger car seatbelts by comparison are a joke. There are good reasons to use them, but holding the driver in place to enhance control is not one of them.

  12. My 1966 Dodge Power Wagon W200 truck did not come with seatbelts. I had to put some in when I got it to make it legal.

    I found the original invoice stuffed behind the bench seat, it sold from the dealer for $2200. I’ve noticed truck prices have gone up significantly since seat belts became mandatory – and so have the number of road deaths.


    By mandating safety features and such the cost of a vehicle keeps going up, making you work more hours to buy one, and thus you spend more time on the road increasing your chances of death.

    Back in 1935 a house cost $2000, on a 5 year balloon payment. Now a car costs 10-20 times that and the mortgage on the car is longer out to 7 years.

    We’ve been completely screwed.

  13. One doesn’t know what type of crash they may be in at any given time. In a roll over, the set belt will likely be beneficial. In a side swipe or side impact(T-bone)type accident, the seat belt is likely to be detrimental.

    If you pour over seat belt statistics, the state implicitly admits that in some accidents that seat belts are detrimental. NHTSHA removes “side swipe” and “intersection”(the most common wrecks)accidents from their data, while adding motor cycle, pedestrian and bicycles struck by cars to the non-seat belt wearing statistics to feed you the deception that seat belts are always safer. The reason they do so is because, statistically, it would be safer not to wear a seat belt and that doesn’t fit the agenda.

    They must have “reasons” to pull people over and any excuse goes to serve tyrants.

    Fuck tyrants and especially fuck this guy and others like him for serving tyrants willingly. Without willing slaves suiting up to enforce tyranny, tyrants could do nothing.

    • That is true, Ancap!

      While I tend to like seat belts, and choose to play the odds that I’d be more likely to be in an accident in which not being ejected would be advantageous, I have to say that I have personally known several people over the years who survived/walked away because they weren’t belted (And I don’t know a lot of people).

      But regardless of how one feels on the subject, the thing is: It should be everyone’s choice as to the level of risk they choose to take, or what risk they take under any given circumstance. Who gave any other man the power to determine such a thing for another, including those whom he procreated?!

      Spurious arguments, such as the one that the piggie above makes, about it ‘causing the public a great expense if you are injured’ are ridiculous; just abolish the socialistic laws which force hospi’ls to treat people without regard to ability to pay, and that argument goes away.

      And it’s absurd to think that I could choose to ride a motorcicle- on which my odds of being killed are 27 times higher than in a car….but I can not choose to not wear my seat belt when driving my 7500 lb. vehicles, or it somehow gives armed goons the right to impede my travel and relieve me of money. The absolute height of insanity and logical contradiction…..but of course, the conscienceless cretins who are paid to inflict tyranny are schooled in the verbiage to justify what they do to some degree- but usually not enouigh to keep them out of the bottle.

    • In frontal crashes, seat belts are helpful.
      A friend of mine was in an accident in which the driver’s side of his truck was crushed down to the seat. He is an old-timer that never wore a seat belt. He was thrown to the passenger side of the vehicle and survived without a scratch.

      • Hi Anarchyst,

        I never have disputed that seatbelts can be helpful; I have simply argued that their wearing is properly a matter of individual choice. If we are to be denied that choice – because seatbelts can be helpful – then on the same basis, everyone who is overweight should be fined as being within the normal BMI range is also “helpful.” The same as regards the food we eat. It would be “helpful” if everyone ate a clean and balanced diet. Why not have the government require we do so?

  14. Definition of hero
    1a: a mythological or legendary figure often of divine descent endowed with great strength or ability
    b: an illustrious warrior
    c: a person admired for achievements and noble qualities
    d: one who shows great courage

    We live in Orwell’s 1984 where modern societies have weaponized language to manipulate and control citizens. In 1984, “Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought”. Today we have “safe and effective vaccines” that damage immune systems and do not provide protection from disease. We have BLM riots causing hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage that are “mostly peaceful” and peaceful protests of a stolen election that are labeled an “insurrection”. The fact that we now have “heroes” that are cowards and bullies enforcing state tyranny should surprise no one, it’s been a long time coming.

  15. I am alive today as seatbelts save my life twice in violent rollover accidents.

    The same maligned helmets have also likely prevented serious injury on 3-4 occasions where various types of sporting helmets were destroyed but my noggin still ‘somewhat’ intact.

    I would never make the argument that such safety devices should be enforced by men with guns(i.e. new laws). When I see the 22 year old ripping through traffic at 120mph on the 900rr with flip flops and wrap around sunglasses + bandana I merely acknowledge a little boy or girl might get that badly needed organ transplant today.

    As we’ve all here so very painfully learned from the past two years of Corona madness, most people are just incredibly fucking stupid. It’s this stupidity that created the genuflecting for police and soldiers in the past. Their own stupidity and resultant inadequacies results in this abrogation of true personal responsibility and foists it upon the collective.

    Keep at ’em Eric!

  16. The writer betrays himself. He applies the concept of communism of the body – your injuries are socialized among all – to support dictating your behavior. I would guess the writer is a self labeled “conservative” would also eschew communism at the same time.

    Then the writer repeats the fallacy taught in LE training – society will fall apart without them. They are the heroes & protectors, the fence between the wolves & sheep (another common one they like to tell themselves).

    Modern police are very much the victims of brainwashing. They don’t understand what role they play or why they are anti freedom, not protectors of it.

    • Hi Dan,

      The guy who sent me the original rant replied as follows:

      “Libertardians. You’re still not getting it. There’s no reasoning with you guys. SMH

      • Eric,
        Spoken like one whose peak reasoning is deciding which professional liar they’re going to vote for. Doesn’t have an argument, so calls people names. They’re a dime a dozen. Apparently unaware what a master class eff up the government has delivered to our door.

      • He’s frustrated b/c he knows he doesn’t have a cogent refutation.

        Many of these AGWs were enlisted personnel in the US military, typically the Army or the USMC. If they go into law enforcement, they’re not usually doing their “twenty” in the military first. And WHY, pray tell, is that? Either they don’t have the patience to do what is more or less a Government job with a uniform and issued weaponry, or, worse, temperamentally, they’re MISFITS. Usually those with an “anger management” problem or they simply let a little bit of authority go to their heads (i.e. “Power Tripping”), or BOTH. Assholes like those not only demand your OBEDIENCE to what they THINK is the “Law”, they demand your OBEISANCE as well.

        And they wonder why so many ostensibly law-abiding folk don’t care for the cops.

        • I tend to agree with you with one exception. These are EXACTLY the people I would put in schools as they WILL run toward the sound of gunfire, unlike the pussy cops and “school resource officers” who cower in fear.
          Hire them as janitors and other maintenance personnel (most veterans do have skills other than just infantry), deputize them, and give them the run of the school campus.
          I would bet that you would see school shootings go down to zero or at least student and teacher casualties being minimized.

          • Hi Anarchyst,

            I appreciate the idea of having veterans in schools as maintenance personnel, etc. – but I also think it doesn’t address the fundamental problem, of government schools as such. These places breed the very violence we’re appalled by and have become quite literally prisons for children, who are forced to go there, forced to stay within and treated as if they were prisoners while in there.

            Government schools foster collectivism. They undermine the family and assault core rights – and responsibilities. Parents have the right – and the responsibility – to educate their kids. Other people should not be obliged – forced – to pay for the education of other people’s kids. This latter is outrageous – and dangerous. Education is not a “right.” It is a benefit that must be provided by someone else. No one has the right to force another person to provide them a benefit. If a benefit such as education is a “right” then so is “health care.” So is “housing.” So is a “living wage.”

            If parents tool responsibility for their kids’ education, they would be invested in that education. Government schools take away that “due diligence.” They also centralize and consolidate everything – and what is desperately wanted (if liberty is wanted) is decentralization and a return to local/individual control of as many things as possible, as soon as possible.

            • Eric, the late great Walter Williams once put forth a succinct definition of what a right entails. Paraphrased because I won’t bother looking it up, “Expression of real rights do not require action by anyone else”.

              • Hi John,

                Yup. Walter was a gem – a mensch. I got to meet him a couple of times. He was similar in temperament to Joe Sobran (another late great) who I also had the great honor to talk with a few times, a million years ago…

            • Yes Eric, in the early 2000s my worst memories of schooling were when I was in ‘middle school’, a peach of a building that really did remind one of a prison. Barely any windows at all. Just an absolute hell for a 6th-7th grader.

              I have suppressed many memories of all my schooling and I couldn’t tell you too many of my teachers names (other than the hot ones). But I remember only the classes where there were no windows or only one 1′ wide and 10′ high window you couldn’t see out of.

              In fact, this applies to me even as an adult with a job. The worst jobs are ones which, duhhhh, feel like prisons. I need to feel fresh air when I want to feel it… those older brick buildings I see that used to offer jobs to men offered natural lighting and fresh air. These newer factories are factories of sadness. Cleaner, maybe. But dark and depressing.

              I believe Theodore Dalrymple and many others make this argument with modern architecture and landscaping. Love him or hate him, Paul Joseph Watson made a video about it on YT titled “Latest Atrocities in Modern Architecture”.

              It is by design.

        • Hi Douglas,

          Indeed. I’ve written before that, if we had police – as opposed to law enforcers – I’d be much less annoyed and resentful of the whole enterprise. Police, properly speaking, ought to be people that peaceful/honest people never have to interact with, beyond the possible exchange of pleasantries. Yet peaceful/honest people must be ever-vigilant when a law enforcer is around – and fret that one may come around, as to hassle them at their place of business or elsewhere.

          • We need a constabulary. Like firemen[“sexist” designation intended] they would be on-call for disturbances or criminal activity. They would not be roaming the streets “looking for trouble”.

            As my Mom said years ago, “If you go looking for trouble, you’ll find it.”

      • Hi Eric.

        This fellow obviously knows little or nothing about our principles. But that could also be said about most of the Libertarian party… 🙂

        • Hi BJ,

          Yup! He’s interesting – the person who wrote me the critique – because he’s not technically stupid, in the low IQ sense. And yet, he cannot follow logic, grasp principles, apprehend contradictions. As you noted before, this person is likely a “conservative” and so likely opposes Obamacare. While favoring seatbelt laws. In other words, he thinks it’s legitimate for the state to force people to “buckle up” because if not they might get hurt – or hurt more seriously – if they are in an accident… but is opposed to forcing people to buy health insurance which they may not need because they are not sick and have no interest in paying for that which they neither want nor need….

      • Yes Eric,
        I expect no other kind of retort from that crowd.

        They are like the left in this regard. They view their position as moral and just, therefore you are just wrong, probably because you are evil – or “libertarded”

        I will gladly be name called in the cause of freedom all day.

    • Plus his arrogant assumption that only government minions are able to help people in trouble. Most house fires are spotted by neighbors and the residents inside are alerted and evacuated by them long before the fire department arrives on scene. Same with car crashes, I’ve seen many stories of bystanders helping to remove the occupants from cars that have gone into the water or are on fire and administered first aid while waiting for the ambulance. Most of us are more than willing to help their fellow man, despite the preponderance of psychopaths in positions of “authority”.

      • Here are two stories of firefighter arrogance, and is a good reason why “qualified immunity”should be abolished for ALL public workers and officials:
        A firefighter from a certain southeastern Michigan community claimed to have a “arson dog”–one that could detect accellerants. This “firefighter” and his dog were instrumental in ruining many peoples’ lives by his testimony alone. Insurance companies LOVED this guy as he was able to get them out of paying (valid) claims. People were denied valid insurance claims and prosecuted for arson on the testimony of this “arson dog’s” handler.
        Those who were “burned” (no pun intended) by this supposed arson dog’s “handler” had no recourse, because of “qualified immunity”. The firefighter (and fire department) could not be sued.
        Finally one citizen who had been accused of arson fought back by suing to prove the “arson dog’s” ability. The dog was found to have NO special ability. The “arson dog” and his human master’s career was finally over. How many innocent people were convicted of arson and lost everything they owned??
        Another case was that of a plating plant that caught fire. The owners had a fire department “approved” fire plan in place which involved shutting off utilities and shutting down processes in an orderly fashion. The firefighters that responded to the fire pushed the owner out of the way, and told him that they were going to do things “their way”. The building burned to the ground.
        A firefighter’s job (for at least 98% of the time) is not inherently dangerous. This does not take away from the seriousness of their job, which is to be commended. but, firefighter arrogance can be just as dangerous as police arrogance. THIS is why firefighters should be included in the abolition of immunity for public officials.

      • Here’s another instance of an attempted police cover-up and attempt to shift blame for an accident on to another party.
        A Michigan State Police “stakeout team” (all in plainclothes) ran a stop sign and t-boned a driver who was already in the intersection. It was clearly the cops fault.
        As soon as they got out of their car, they handcuffed the driver of the other car showing no concern for his injuries.
        Luckily, there was a residential security camera that captured the whole incident on video. After a short non-committal story by the local media, the incident “disappeared”.
        I hope the aggrieved driver gets a nice settlement from the city or state for the police criminal misbehavior as it is against the law to misreport an accident. Yes, this includes cops as well.

        • Hi Anarchyst,

          The late Will Grigg (I miss that guy) made the point that there is no situation so bad it can’t be made worse by calling the police. I agree with this sentiment. Of what use is a crime historian? I made this point to the original writer, advising him that – in my case – by the time a “hero” arrived at my place, whatever was happening would already have happened. It’s up to me to deal with it. So of what benefit is it to pay him to not deal with it?

          Even so, I’d still not object so fiercely – and might even freely pay to support it – if we had police rather than law enforcers. If, that is, their brief were restricted to responding to and attempting to prevent violent and property crimes exclusively and otherwise left honest, peaceful people alone. No “tickets” for pedantic rules violating. No Hut! Hut! Hutting of people whose only “crime” is doing something the government has declared “illegal” but which entails no victim. No manning of “checkpoints,” no enforcing of “mandates” hurled without even the pretense of legality.

          That they don’t so restrict themselves is what chafes. And that they expect us to regard them as “heroes” for what they do to us.

    • He seems like he wants “Landru” to tell him what to do. Or, maybe, secretly, he wants to bang Reger’s daughter and “Festival” is the only legitimate way he can rape her.

      • Reply to Self, Douglas Lloyd:

        I’d just tell him to have sex and travel. This applies to most of the “Freedom Police” and their “Safety Truncheons” also.

  17. If “ifs and buts” were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.

    People are paid to sit around and anticipate possible bad outcomes. It takes a psychopath to stop a psychopath, or at least someone who can think like one. That’s the theory anyway. All levels of law enforcement are full of these types, usually hired as consultants in think tanks. They come up with all the scenarios, backed up with real (but extremely isoloated) examples of what might happen. So new legislation is passed, usually after an incident. Legislation that was sitting on the shelf, just waiting for the political need. Doesn’t matter if it does anything to fix the fundamental problem, as long as there’s money avilable. And the consultants come up with new scenarios to take up that now empty shelf space.

    School safety is a great example. Instead of spreading out children in many different, small local buildings, the introduction of scale means extremely large school districts, big buildings and big classes. The bad seed loner kid is ignored by everyone, lost in the noise. In a small school he would stick out like a sore thumb (and been steered away from insanity). Instead of addressing the fundamental problem (large monolithic schools), consultants recommend fortification (pretending to spend more money, but usually miniscule actual amounts channeled to well-connected businesses). Which in the case of the Texas shooting, caused the opposite of the intended outcome. Since, if you take the cops at their word, they couldn’t find keys to open up the doors to the building. Maybe they could have contacted the fire department, because I’ll bet there was a fire keybox somewhere on the building…

    Small, distributed schools aren’t efficient. They don’t “scale.” But that’s why public education exists to begin with, at least that’s what we’re told. It’s too expensive, the payoff too far out, and way too inefficient for the free market to provide. You and I know differently, but let’s assume they’re right. The US pays a shit-ton of money per student for education but somehow the money is gobbled up in everything but teaching kids. A select few make a lot of money though, thanks to big budgets and very big schools.

    • ReadyK,

      Precisely! Small, decentralized schools address a number of issues. Their funding should also be voluntary, as done correctly, even working-poor parents should be able to find away to pay for their childrens’ school expenses when their money isn’t “gobbled up”, as you put it. Also, having multiple generations of kids in the same class so that the older kids become teachers and mentors for the younger, would be indispensable.

      Also, the Border Patrol had the key to that classroom?! WTF? Also, also, I saw that the DEA was there as well? Why didn’t they send in USPS, or the Coast Guard?

    • There is a reason (this is but one) why things were better for the nation as a whole when we had one-room schoolhouses and a parent-paid teacher. Another is that teenagers got to learn how to teach and lead in assiting the one and only teacher with instructing the younger kids. The institutional school has begotten many societal ills. Thomas Dewey and other “progressives” (communists) have much to answer for.

  18. Wow!…just wow…. This copper is a walking (or more likely ‘rolling’ -viz-a-viz donuts) illustration of someone who has fully absorbed the indoctrination which issues from the public school system in all of it’s mind-numbingly contradictory illogical tyrant-glorifying lowest-common-denominator stupidity.

    And they want us to give up our guns and entrust our lives and safety to these “trained[like a seal or hamster] professionals”….to whom they give military-grade weapons?! THAT should scare anybody far more than anything some random [non-state-supported] bad-guy might do.

  19. Here is a guest article that deserves the light of day:

    No One Cares If You Go Home Safe At The End Of Your Shift
    Jan 02, 201812:50AM
    Category: Politics
    Posted by: Michael Z. Williamson

    Here at the house, I have a couple of decades plus of military experience. I have tools to dig in or out of natural disasters. I have extinguishers and hoses. I have a field trauma kit and bandages. I have weapons both melee and firearm. I know how to use them. I know how to trench, support and revet. I understand the fire triangle and appropriate approaches. I understand breathing, bleeding and shock. I know how to detain, restrain and control. I have done all of these at least occasionally, professionally. I’ve stood on top of a collapsing levee in a flood. I’ve fought a structure fire from inside so we could get everyone out before the fire department showed up, which only took two minutes, but people can die that fast. I’ve had structures collapse while I was working on them. I’ve been in an aircraft that had a “mechanical” on approach and had to be repaired in-flight before landing. I’ve helped control a brush fire. I’ve hauled disabled vehicles out of ditches in sub-zero weather.

    My ex wife has over a decade of service and some of the same training.

    We have trained our young adult children.

    My wife is a rancher who knows her way around a shotgun, livestock, sutures and tools, hurricanes and floods, and works in investigations professionally.

    Our current house guest is another veteran.

    This means if anything happens at the house, and last year we had a lightning strike, a tornado and a flood within 10 days’ we’re pretty well prepared.

    Now, we’re probably better off than 95% of the households out there. The level of disaster that necessitates backup varies.

    If we find it necessary to call 911, it means the party is in progress and it’s bad.

    You will probably not be going home safe at the end of your shift.

    And you know what? If it gets to that point, I really don’t give a shit. I don’t give a shit if you get smoked. I don’t give a shit if you fall under a tree. I don’t give a shit if you get shot at.

    Because at that point, I’ve done everything I can with that same circumstance, and run out of resources.

    If my concern was “you going home safe,” then I’d just fucking hunker down and die. Because I wouldn’t want that poor responder to endanger himself.

    Except, that’s what I pay taxes for, and that’s what you signed up for. Just like I signed up to walk into a potential nuke war in Germany and hold off the Soviets, and did walk into the Middle East and prepare to take fire while keeping expensive equipment functioning so our shooters could keep shooting.

    There’s not a single set of orders I got that said my primary job was to “Come home safe.” They said it was to “support the mission” or “complete the objective.” Coming home safe was the ideal outcome, but entirely secondary to “supporting” or “completing.” Nor, once that started, did I get a choice to quit. Once in, all in.

    When that 80 year old lady smells smoke or hears a noise outside her first floor bedroom in the ghetto, she doesn’t care if you go home safe, either. She’s afraid she or the kids next door won’t wake up in the morning.

    If I call, I expect your ass to show up, sober, trained, professional. I expect you to wade in with me or in place of me, and drag a child out of a hole, or out from a burning room, or actually stand up and block bullets from hitting said child, because by the time you get there, I’ll have already done all that. And there will be field dressings, chainsawed trees, buckets and empty brass scattered about.

    I don’t want to hear some drunk and confused guy squirming on the ground playing “Simon Says” terrified you so much you had to blow him away. I don’t want to hear that some random guy 35 yards away who you had no actual information on , may have reached toward his waist band. Or that “the tree might fall any moment” or that “the smoke makes it hard to see.”

    Near as I can tell, I don’t hear the smokejumpers, or the firefighters, or the disaster rescue people say such things.

    But it’s all I ever hear from the cops. If you and your five girlfriends in body armor, with rifles, are that terrified of actually risking your life for the theoretically dangerous job you volunteered for and can quit any time, then please do quit.

    You can get a job doing pest control and go home safe every night.

    Until a bunch of fucking pussies with big tattoos, small dicks, body armor and guns blow you away for minding your own business.

    Because what you’re telling me with that statement is, your only concern is cashing a check. That’s fine. But if that’s your concern, don’t pretend you’re serving the public. If you wanted to help people at risk of life, you would be a firefighter, running into buildings, dragging people out, getting scorched regularly.

    If you’re cool with writing tickets, then there’s jobs where you can do just that.

    If you want to tangle with bad guys and blow them away, fair enough. But understand: That means they get to shoot first to prove their intent, just as happens with the military these days. Our ROE these days are usually “only if fired upon and no civilians are at risk.”

    If your plan is “shoot first, shoot later, shoot some more, then if anyone is still alive try to ask questions,” and bleat, “But I was afeard fer mah lahf!” you’re absolutely no better than the thugs you claim to oppose. All you are is another combatant in a turf war I don’t care about.

    Since I know your primary concern is “being safe,” then I’ll do you the favor of not calling. Cash your welfare check, and try not to shoot me at a “courtesy” sobriety checkpoint for “twitching my eye “in a way that suggested range estimation.

    If you’re one of the vanishingly few cops who isn’t like that, then what the hell are you doing about it? If there’s going to be a lawsuit costing the city millions, isn’t it better that it be a labor suit from the union over the clown you fired, than a wrongful death suit over the poor bastard the clown shot? Both are expensive, but one has a dead victim you enabled. So how much do you actually care about that life?

    How is the training so bad that it’s not clear who is the scene commander who gives the orders?

    How is it that trigger happy bozos who, out of costume, look no different from the gangbangers you claim to oppose, get sent up front to fulfill their wish of hosing someone down because “I was afraid for my life!”?

    Why does the rot exist in your department?

    If you can’t do anything about it, why are you still in that department?

    At some point, collective guilt is a thing.

    You’ve probably not been a good cop for a long time.

    And I still don’t care if you go home safe. I care that everyone you purport to “serve and protect” goes home safe.

    • If they don’t go home safe, it’s likely because of their alcoholism. Gotta drown-out any remaining pangs of conscience any time they rear their ugly heads. Real heroes don’t need to do that- neither do those of us who earn our own respect by being decent human beings, rather than by being a member of a uniformed gang of badge-toting heavily-armed state-sanctioned mercenaries who can not make it through an hour on the job without lying, defrauding innocent people of their rights, or extracting money from those who are not criminals and who have harmed no one.

      What remains of the remnants of the consciences of these badged bastards is their biggest enemy- second only to good men who love justice. How many people have they assaulted, battered, caged, lied to, defrauded and cheated or destroyed this week, in the name of the king of the state, while convincing themselves it is all O-K because it is in the name of ‘safety’? And since most locales now administer tests prior to hiring swine, in order to guarantee that their IQ is not too high (Wouldn’t want anyone who is actually capable of thinking for himself, and who might do what is right in a given situation as opposed to ‘just following orders”) these nitwits actually believe the BS they peddle, and think that they can somehow convince US of it! Of course, if the PDs would hire those with IQ’s higher than the 103 limit, they would realize that such arguments are futile, because they advocating a position which is a fiction, and thus would see through it themselves and realize that it is pointless to try and convince those of equal or higher intelligence that their idiotic mantras which they use to justoify their evils are somehow valid.

      tl;dr: Cops are stupid assholes.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here