Law-enforcers (the term is both apt and despicable) often wonder why they’re hated by people who aren’t criminals – at least not in any morally meaningful sense.
I’m a law-breaker in that I regularly ignore laws that I feel no moral obligation to obey – because disobeying them does not cause harm to anyone else. Why not “run” a stop sign, for instance, when you can clearly see there is no sound reason to come to a complete stop before proceeding – other than mindless obedience to signage? I also “speed” – which is against the law. So? Law enforcers “speed” all the time, too – so they know as well as I do that “speeding” is just another one of those “violations” that they make up to serve as the justification for causing harm to people who haven’t caused any. To give them them an excuse to flex their Authority. Or – rather – the authority of the state, which is who they work for by the way. Not you – even though you “pay their salary,” as the sad sheep bleat has it.
Similarly, I never “buckle up” – because I don’t like to and more fundamentally, my “safety” is not only no one else’s business, it also imposes no harm on anyone else if I do not “buckle up.”
I commit such “crimes” on a daily basis – as do millions of others who are not criminals in any morally meaningful sense but who are nonetheless subject to being treated as if they were because they’re law-breakers. It’s a distinction that ought to matter. That it doesn’t – insofar as whether a person who hasn’t caused any harm to anyone is subject criminal treatment – is precisely why so many people who never commit any morally meaningful crimes despise law enforcers, the tip of the state’s spear.
Here’s another reason for that justifiable contempt:
A Florida man in his 60s was assaulted in his own home because law enforcers thought they had a warrant for his arrest. Turns out they had a warrant for the arrest of his much younger son, who is in his 30s. The man in his 60s told the enforcers he was not the wanted man; he repeatedly asked the law enforcers whether he looked to be in his 30s, which anyone could see he didn’t. Apparently, the law enforcers could not tell the difference between a man in his 60s and a man in his 30s, which seems to be a common problem given that men (and women) in their 60s are routinely expected to produce ID to prove they are old enough to buy beer.
More likely, the enforcers were so target-fixated on the object of their Hut! Hut! Hutting! that they couldn’t dial it back for a moment to check whether they had the right man. Instead, they roughly handcuffed the man in his 60s, not because he constituted any kind of meaningful threat to the “safety” of the two enforcers but to show him who’s boss. 
After awhile, a more senior enforcer appears and this one recognizes that the man in his 60s is not the man in his 30s that is described in the warrant (which description presumably has the wanted man’s date of birth, among other important facts). The older man is unshackled and let go. Cursory apologies are tendered.
But no consequences.
So: A couple of goons with badges and guns – and “the law” backing them up – show up at the door of a man who not only isn’t a criminal in any meaningful sense but isn’t even a law-breaker in any sense – and proceed to violently shove and manacle him, on the basis of not just false information but extreme stupidity. How else to describe anyone who cannot tell at a glance that a man in his 60s with salt and pepper hair and wrinkles is unlikely to be a man in his 30s?
And they got away with it.
More precisely stated, they got away with committing an unjustifiable physical assault against a man who had committed no crime – no offense, even – who could easily have been badly injured as a result of the attack he was subjected to. Yet no arrests were made – of the enforcers, I mean. They can commit a physical assault with effective impunity, just as they can “speed” with impunity, too, since they are – per Judge Dredd – the law. Which means they get to decide whether it gets enforced. It will be enforced if you or I “speed” or assault an enforcer, of course. And to the nth degree, too.
The old saying about who watches the watchmen? comes to mind.
Now, consider what could easily have happened if the man in his 60s – rightly affronted by having his home invaded and understandably fearing for his safety – had defended himself against the law enforcers. He might be dead rather than sore from the beatdown he got – and the law enforcers probably wouldn’t have been “punished” with as much as a few weeks’ paid leave while an “internal investigation” was performed that led to absolutely nothing meaningful in the way of consequences.
And they wonder why they’re hated.
More so because the scene depicted in the body cam video is not an aberrant incident but a routine one. This sort of thing happens all the time. Every day in in this country, thousands of non-criminals are harassed/mulcted/arrested for having “violated” some law or other who haven’t caused any harm to anyone and in many instances, could not even with a straight face be argued might have caused harm, as in the case of failing to “buckle up.”
It ought to be telling when people who aren’t criminals in any meaningful sense fear and loath law enforcers. But the latter do not comprehend. Some are affronted. They – many of them – actually believe the psychotic nonsense that began during the Bush years that law enforcers are are “heroes” who are “keeping us safe.”
Which makes them even more dangerous than they already are.
. . .
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 $25 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 a Baaaaa hat or other EPautos gear, see here!
 often wonder why they're hated by people who aren't criminals.){kind=link}
I like the little dialogue at the end of the article between the cop and Shaniqua but the chances it comes out like that in the form of a Thomasina Sowell pithy comment is so unlikely it is laughable.
Well, sometimes they f up bad enough to make the news AND get hauled in, one of our County Mounties ‘finest’ :
https://www.applevalleynewsnow.com/news/kittitas-county-deputy-fired-after-being-arrested-on-felony-charges-tied-to-bar-dispute/article_367f4a1f-a0ce-422a-be88-44bdb961ddc5.html
The Brick was a great biker hangout ‘till ‘Northern Exposure’ TV show got the Biff and Muffy crowd interested in Roslyn WA. Now just another mainstream tourist stop. Food still decent.
The police are merely the stooges of the ruler-ship and are paid to enforce the rules/laws of those in charge like our representatives. The 51% will rule the 49%. America is changing demographically and soon we will be ruled by the newly transplanted people from third world shit holes. Is there anything that can be done? itz probably too late. We can’t run to the suburbs, rural areas and hills as they will follow us. Obama even found out where all the White people live and started sending them to us. What to be done? I don’t know as there are no new continents to discover. Yes there are traitors in our ranks. I think you know who “”they”” are.
Don’t get your beanie in a bunch helot.
Though I understand why some might not want to wear seatbelts, why cut your nose to spite your face? I started wearing them long before it was legally required, and I still do. Why? Because they’ve saved my bacon a time or two; that’s worth more than making any statement by not wearing them.
Hi Mark,
How am I cutting my nose? I’m fine. Seatbelts have never “saved” me from anything. I suppose I could also wear Depends, since it’s possible I might crap my pants. But I elect not to.
Someone once said “There are lots of very smart people who cannot think. ”
Eric,
One, just because you’ve never been in a wreck doesn’t mean you’ll never be in one; even if it’s not your fault, you could still be one. Someone could run a red light and hit you; someone could be in your lane passing someone; an animal could jump out in front of you, leaving you little or no room to stop; there are a number of ways things could go wrong for you, and it’s best to be ready for that. Failing to wear seatbelts could get you hurt, and hurt you in a way that you’re never the same again. There are things that can happen on the road that are beyond your control. Why not be ready for that?
Two, the Depends analogy is questionable; I don’t think it’s the same thing as wearing a seatbelt at all. You’re in good health, so you don’t need one. Could your health change? Perhaps, but you’ll have plenty of notice or warning that’s coming, and that you might have to wear one. If that happens, then wearing one would be a good idea. To wear one now when you don’t need one is foolish. Wearing one isn’t the same as wearing a seatbelt because you’re not having to account for what other idiots may do out there.
Three, one of my Navy buddies, Magic, was a NYC paramedic before he joined the Navy. One time, when we were piling into my old Chevy to go somewhere, I did what I always did; I buckled up. He immediately told me it was a good habit and to keep it up. He said that, as a paramedic, he’d seen bad things happen to those who weren’t buckled up in an accident. Who’d deal with the consequences of car wrecks more than a big city paramedic would? Who’d know more about the consequences of being buckled up vs. not buckled up?
I feel the same when you say you go riding without a helmet on; I fear for you. It’s not because you lack riding skill; you don’t. It’s not because your bikes aren’t safe; they are. I can see that you maintain them very well; they’re in like new condition, so you won’t have a blowout or brake failure or something else go wrong to cause you to crash. HOWEVER! However, just because you and your bikes are 100% doesn’t mean that the other a’hole cagers are; it doesn’t mean a deer won’t pop out of the woods; there are things beyond your control that could cause you to crash while riding. Why not at least protect your head if it does?
I’ll never forget the story about Gary Bussey, the actor. Years ago, he was riding without a helmet. He crashed, and he was messed up; he suffered a brain injury or something. Had he even been wearing a cheap helmet, his life and career wouldn’t have been damaged in a life changing way.
For me, when it comes to managing risk, there are two things to consider: 1) the likelihood of that happening; and 2) the consequences if they do. It’s one thing if there’s a low likelihood of something happening, and the risk is low. However, even if the likelihood of something bad happening is low, but the consequences are high (as in life changing), that changes the calculus completely. Even if there’s a low likelihood of being in a car wreck, the consequences of not wearing my seatbelt are high enough that I choose to wear it anyway; there’s a greater chance I’ll be in one piece if I do. Even if I’m hurt wearing a belt, I’ll be far less severely injured in the aftermath of a wreck. Like it or not, physics is physics, and physics doesn’t care what we think.
Hi Mark,
Sigh. Well, just because I haven’t crapped my pants in a while doesn’t mean I might not crap them tomorrow – so maybe I ought to wear Depends!
I’m just being snarky – but also serious.
I managed ot survive childhood, young adulthood and adulthood up to now even though I never “bucked up.” I understand that it is possible I might get into an accident and that a seatbelt might help. But I judge the risk of not “buckling up” to be slight and – the main point – it is one I am willing take because I do not like to wear seat belts. Just as I loathe wearing a helmet when I ride my motorcycles.
Life is about risk; obsessing about risk ruins life, in my opinion. We are all going to die. If it came down to it, I’d far rather die on my bike – in an instant – than spend the last year or two of my life shitting the bed and staring at the ceiling in an old folk’s home.
“ I’d far rather die on my bike – in an instant – than spend the last year or two of my life shitting the bed and staring at the ceiling in an old folk’s home.”
Or just maybe you’ll get that opportunity sooner if you’re not so lucky as to die.
Believe it or not, I support your right to be disabled and bedridden.
Well, thank you, Bigsby… I think!
I’m a GenX guy who grew up before this (to me) effeminate obsession with saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafety became a thing. As kids, we rode bikes without helmets and as teens drove cars unbuckled while drinking beer. It imparts a very different worldview than that which predominates today.
Well, I was born in 1957, so I guess I grew up mostly in the Sixties and Seventies. I started driving in 1973. Iwas encouraged to wear at least a lap belt, but only did so sporadically until early 1981. when I witnessed an accident where a car crashed into a parked car, at no more than 25 miles per hour.
Both of the occupants — a brother and sister — of the moving car suffered fairly significant (and gruesome looking) head trauma, particularly the sister on the passenger side. The windshield on her side was bulged outward as well as “spider-webbed” where he forehead struck it.
It mad such an impression on me that from that day I started forcing myself to wear a lap and shoulder belt every time I drove anywhere, even for short trips in town.
After a year or so of doing it (during which time I was ridiculed and ostracized for the practice), it became second nature, almost reflexive, to me.
The only time it bothered me or felt restricting to me was when I was backing up and needed to lift up my pelvis somewhat in order to be able to swivel around enough to look backwards. I mean to see better than I could with mirrors alone.
When around 1982 or ’83 they passed a law mandating seat belt use, I resented it bitterly just as a matter of principal. I think mandatory car (at least liability) insurance became law here around the same period, and I resented that bitterly too, again just on principle.
So I am very far from advocating mandatory seat belt use OR mandatory insurance.
I just started wearing seat belts because I didn’t feel like getting busted up for no better reason than driving to the grocery or the bank.
If I was going to risk life and limb I needed something more like a real good reason. If I wanted extra thrills in my life I’d seek them elsewhere than on the road. I used to do some rock climbing, for instance. I mean outdoors on real cliffs (or real buildings), not in a gym.
But I admit that in general I am not much of a daredevil or thrill seeker.
There are all sorts of things that I think are good ideas but I don’t think they should be compulsory. Likewise there are all kinds of things I think are bad or stupid but i don’t think they should be illegal.
Did you really read my response? The Depends analogy isn’t really relevant here.
Secondly, I was under the impression you blow off wearing seatbelts as a political protest; I was under the impression that it was your personal FU to gov’t. Maybe it still is. I felt the same way when wearing belts became mandatory. However, since I’d been wearing belts long before the laws were passed, I still continued to wear them, and I still do; even though I don’t think the gov’t should be telling me to wear them, I still do because the benefits they offer outweighs making any political statement.
Now, if you genuinely don’t like them, then don’t wear them. As someone who’s used seatbelts for decades, I don’t see where the discomfort is, but that’s me.
Finally, yes, risk is part of life; you can’t get away from it. That said, all we can do is manage risk. For example, even if the likelihood of a wreck might be low, the consequences (of being unbelted in my car) are high enough that I choose to wear them anyway; even if there’s a 1/1000 chance of being in a wreck, I’ll still wear them because I don’t want to risk the life changing results if I don’t; I don’t want to be a vegetable just to make a political statement. The same applies to wearing a helmet when I ride.
Good post! I agree with just about everything except your statement about Gary Bussey and his lack of wearing a helmet.
Had Bussey been wearing a helmet, he might just have been paralyzed from the neck down. While protecting the “brain bucket” the weight of a helmet can play havoc with the neck and spinal vertebrae, resulting in more serious injuries, which not entirely life-threatening can decrease the true “quality of life” to a great degree.
Who wants to be confined to a hospital bed or wheelchair, depending on others to take care of them because they chose to “play it safe” and wear a helmet?
As to seat belts, I use them but have seen cases in which their use would have meant almost instant death for the non-user. A friend of mine who refused to wear seat belts used to fall asleep at the wheel (I know, not good) got into an accident where the driver’s side of his truck was crushed down to the seat level. He was able to slide over to the passenger side which saved his life. Had he been wearing a seat belt, he would not be alive today. I realize that the above situation was out of the ordinary, but still–there are instances where wearing seat belts causes more problems that they save…
While protecting the “brain bucket” the weight of a helmet can play havoc with the neck and spinal vertebrae, resulting in more serious injuries, which not entirely life-threatening can decrease the true “quality of life” to a great degree.
Who wants to be confined to a hospital bed or wheelchair, depending on others to take care of them because they chose to “play it safe” and wear a helmet?
Spoken as someone that has never raced motorcycles or actually experienced a crash hearing that helmet smack the pavement and grind along it as they tumble.
Just so much stupidity here sometimes. Just because you’re free to do something doesn’t mean you should.
SMH.
Hi Kent,
The issue is, fundamentally, freedom to choose and – secondarily – risk-reward. If I am on a track (racing) cars or bikes I would wear the harness/helmet even if the rules did not require it. But that’s on a track, where you are by definition engaging in a high risk activity. Me just driving into town or riding my bike on the parkway is not a high risk activity. Of course, there is the possibility of an accident. There is always the possibility. But it’s not a likely one and so I prefer to not wear a seat belt when driving or a helmet when riding because I find both uncomfortable and that’s reason enough for me.
That’s all there ought to be to it, too.
There are “trade-offs” in every decision every human being makes.
Racing is one thing where it makes perfect sense to wear a helmet, but in ordinary everyday life, the freedom to choose one’s own risks is a fundamental human right.
I stand by my statement regarding helmet use.
As to you claiming that my statement borders on stupidity, you need to grow up. There is nothing stupid about adults making their own choices.
If you had a choice, would you choose permanent, irreversible paraplegia over possible death?
Way to double down on stupid.
Go take a look at motorcycle racing and actual crash data and testing. Your BS about “ the weight of a helmet can play havoc with the neck and spinal vertebrae, resulting in more serious injuries” is demonstrably false.
But you’ve always struck me as sort of brain dead already so not at all surprised by your doubling down on stupidity.
I support your right to be stupid and not wear a helmet. Hell, in your case I’d be delighted to see you riding without a helmet.
You are swallowing the shibboleths from the safety crowd, hook line, and sinker. Too bad for you.
The safety crowd purposely hides figures of motorcyclists who are unhelmeted that don’t suffer the same degree of spinal injuries that helmeted riders endure.. If word got out that helmeted riders suffer much more severe spinal injuries leading to partial or total paralysis, helmet use would go down. That is something the safety nazis cannot abide. This is the same thing MADD does, pushing for laws that criminalize drunk drivers not only for driving but for sleeping in the back seat of their cars to avoid driving while drunk.
Your name-calling is unwarranted and exposes you as a small-minded person who always has to have the last word.
I’ll bet that you are a jew…
Morning, Anarchyst –
I have never understood the logic of the gotta-wear-a-helmet people. OK, so what about the rest of your body? It is illegal for me to ride a motorcycle without wearing a helmet. But I can legally wear shorts and a T shirt and (yes, really) flip-flops, if I want to. So if I wreck, my head will be spared. My face will still look nice when I am lying in my casket or sitting (forever) in my wheelchair. In my estimation, it is preferable to be killed than to be crippled. And it ought to be my choice to decide.
Hi Gus,
I do not understand the (apparent) “delight” in contemplating someone else being hurt or killed while riding a bike without a helmet. Do you also feel “delight” when a rider goes down and breaks his ankle and gets severe road rash because we wasn’t riding wearing full armored leathers and boots? Do you ever ride without wearing armored leathers and boots? Is it not all a matter of degree – and of choice? Who are you (or I) to decree to others the degree of “safety” they ought to buy into? And why would I be “delighted” to hear that someone else got hurt just because they weren’t wearing a helmet or armored leathers, boots, etc?
My 1976 Trans-Am does not have air bags. Would it “delight” you if I got into an accident and was injured or killed because this old car didn’t have air bags? Do you think every vehicle that isn’t “safe” – in terms of it having everything a brand-new car has – ought to be outlawed?
I see this meanness toward others who do differently than we might as a symptom of the pathology of our times.
That is why Communism has gained a foot hold in the U.S., Eric. The “have nots” are greedy and envious of anyone who is doing better than them. Therefore, they must be punished and/or destroyed so that the “withouts” can have what does not belogn to them, and so that their “feeeelings” are not hurt anymore. Helmet or no helmet, seat belt or not, at the end of the day, it should be ones right to choose for themselves. Not be forced by those who disagree with you. I do not have to agree with you. It is your life, not theirs.
Morning, Shadow –
Yup. The good old attitude of live (and let live) and MYOB are becoming relics of another time. The general busybodyness is just that and it will end with everyone (just about) minding everyone else’s business. Heck, we’re already there.
The photo/caption of the motorcycle cop giving a ticket to a person in a car not wearing a seatbelt is priceless.
Thanks, Helot!
I agree. It neatly shows the evil absurdity of the whole thing. A cop can ride a motorcycle – without a seatbelt, obviously – and hand out tickets to people driving inside a car, or not wearing a seatbelt. It makes my teeth ache.
Well paid enforcers in this jew plantation system. So are teachers, but they fuck up your mind, instead of your body. Jew puppet preachers and politicians fuck up your soul, so all bases are covered.
Jew this, jew that. Are you a robot? Imho, you’re divisive. A negative, no matter the small truths you post, such as, “So are teachers, but they fuck up your mind”.
‘Pink Floyd · Another Brick In The Wall (Parts I-II-III)’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVg108SO14Q
Why are you so divisive (working with our overlords & their objectives) not ALL Jewish people are evil. Captured, maybe? As we all are?
Or, are you just stoopid?
Stop doing the bidding of our overlords.
It doesn’t matter if you accept that the jews are behind it or not. Most intelligent people by this point have long since figured it out.
@ C.B.
A little vulgar but very succinct & reality based. I’d say you hit it out of the park with that one.
Oh, and pay no attention to helot, he got up too early & forgot to take his Meds again.
Every time I hear “thank you for your service” I want to puke.
I pay taxes, Ugg, the tax eaters never thank me for my forced “service”.
It’s a, ‘ Mind Fuck’, isn’t it?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mindfuck
[First time I had to Prove I’m Not A Robot to view a definition in Websters, odd that.]
Morning, Ugg!
Yeah, me also. That began sometime around the era of The Chimp – when flag-humping became a mainstream fetish. The fact is that the people in the military are mercenaries. They work for the federal government. They take orders from the federal government. The idea that they are “serving” is risible. People who freely give of their time to help at a women’s shelter are performing a service in the sense implied.
Ditto. Bill Meyer has it right. Should be thanking us Helots.
The elephant in the room which too few of us recognize is the influence and control from a certain sh!tty little foreign country (israel) that has permeated all of USA law enforcement tactics and procedures and soon the USA military with “information sharing” (one-way espionage benefiting that certain shItty little foreign country (israel) in the middle east–not the USA), as well as the command structure of the USA military that will have IDF-approved or selected “plants” (commanders) at the top of the USA military rank structures, both commissioned officer and enlisted which will make decisions that benefit that certain sh!tty little foreign country (israel) in the middle east, NOT the USA..
Keep in mind that both police departments and military organizations are provided with “free” trips to that certain shItty little foreign country (israel) in the middle east to “see how it’s done” and to integrate abusive IDF tactics and operations within the USA military and civilian law enforcement structures.
Torture and dehumanization of gentile captives (prisoners) are integral parts of the jewish and israeli thought processes and are already in use against American citizens. Abu Ghraib and Gitmo abuses ring a bell?
Both sites were and still are run by IDF-trained operatives who have totally swallowed the israeli methods of torture and dehumanization.
Keep in mind that what the “chosen” are doing in the middle east, they have the same thing planned for “the rest of us”.
We are all Palestinians now.
This “mission creep” is not only inevitable and progressing but is rapidly accelerating as we speak and has been further enshrined into USA law with the recent capitulations by Congress, giving that certain sh!tty little foreign country (israel) not only access but full control of our civilian law enforcement and our military defense systems.
As much as I hate always bringing up jewish and israeli misbehavior, I feel that it is necessary to do so, even if my voice is only “one in the wilderness”.
As always, best regards,
You shouldn’t hate bringing up jewish misbehavior. It should be the focal point of every conversation in America.
They are vile, wicked people. The only ones that should feel bad for pointing that out is them.
It’s not just on the roads, and not just in the USA.
There was a case a year or so ago, IIRC from Victoria, Australia, where a 90-year old, frail female resident of an aged care home managed to somehow get hold of a kitchen knife.
The staff called the cops, one of whom proceed to taser the ‘offender’ to death.
His excuse?
“She looked dangerous.”
His superiors admitted that ‘mistakes were made’, and the cop ultimately ‘voluntarily’ resigned, with a nice payout.
Even among libertarians, many, if not most, believe that law enforcement (and defense) need to be handled by the state.
Yet there is no reason for this to be the case.
As ‘The Principles of Economics’ by Saifedeen Ammous says:
“Tax-funded security providers have no economic incentive to minimize human and monetary cost, as customer satisfaction is tangential to their job.
“Rather than peaceful cooperation under the rule of law applicable to all, society under government eventually degenerates into competitive conflict and aggression between people seeking to gain control of the power to dominate others.
“In a free market for security, private providers have no tax revenue to subsidize them, and so must economize to survive and succeed. They would aim to minimize violent conflict and, to the greatest extent possible, seek peaceful solutions because doing so is good business. Private security guards in private establishments have nowhere near the same nasty reputation as police, precisely because they operate in a free market with accountability to the customer, and they have rational market calculation motivating their decisions, training, and operation.
“Tax-funded security providers have no economic incentive to minimize human and monetary cost, as customer satisfaction is tangential to their job. They are able to take the least economic choices available, as their operation is not constrained by an operations budget or a budget for recruitment and training of manpower. Monopoly army and police can treat their members as dispensable cannon fodder since they are not being allocated by entrepreneurs who succeed or fail in their enterprise by their prowess in allocation. The startling trigger-happy nature of modern police, notorious for wasting life and endangering police and citizens alike, cannot be understood without reference to the lack of market discipline imposed on police services.”
This is a very Big Untruth/a.k.a. a Big Fat Lie: “Even among libertarians, many, if not most, believe that law enforcement (and defense) need to be handled by the state.”
Why would you write such a lie?
‘One bastard goes in, another comes out!’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09-GbpOd9T4
It’s far from a lie.
Libertarians are not ‘monolithic’. Many, if not most, do not fall into the ‘anarcho-capitalist’ camp.
Believe me, I’ve read plenty on that topic to know there have been, and still are, lots and lots of discussions among the wider ‘libertarian community’ on that very topic.
Personally, I believe the State is an evil institution by its very nature. It cannot be otherwise, especially in a ‘democracy’.
So I don’t support the ‘need’, to have the State to run defense and law & order.
But if we are being honest, that’s an academic debate, anyway, because there’s no way the population at large would support such an order in ‘modern’ society.
Liberty, after all, implies and requires personal responsibility, and few these days are prepared to take that on.
Even the Swiss voted in a referendum to retain their fiat currency, rather than go back to the gold standard. Because having hard money again would mean the government could not ‘look after them’ as well as it does now. /s
See also, “the real solution is to privatize the law.”
https://mises.org/mises-wire/law-enforcement-not-same-thing-security
Totally agree, but see my response above.
All police take a test called the “MMPI”, or “Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Index”. It’s a psyche test, and the reason we’re told they give it is to “keep crazy cops with guns off the streets”.
We’ve all seen enough “crazy cops” to know this explanation is utter hogwash. So, either they’re wildly incompetent (highly unlikely), of the test isn’t REALLY looking for what we’re told it’s looking for.
Spoiler alert: The MMPI does NOT look for what we’re TOLD it looks for.
The MMPI specifically screens out intelligence and empathy, and specifically seeks out obedient people who are loyal to organizations (the blue line, the govt), and people with no other real skill sets (dependency on the org they’re loyal to anyway).
So, what you end up with, BY DESIGN, is people who are just smart enough to drive the cars and fill out the paperwork, but who are too stupid to have any other skills or trades. And you also end up with people who completely lack any empathy whatsoever (the real reason cops have high rates of domestic violence), so they won’t care at all when they slam you to the pavement, or ruin your life for smoking a joint. They won’t lose a minute of sleep over it, because they’re patently unable to.
And when you consider the fact that police departments were NEVER created to serve the people, but rather to protect the interests of big (mostly jewish) business, if you have even a modicum of independent thought, you can plainly see that eliminating the corporate police departments isn’t the “left vs right” issue they want us to think it is. The police are, by definition and design, the enemy of the people because they monopolize violence in the hands of the state, which is the one place you really don’t want it monopolized. The police should be eliminated in totality.
I have never taken the MMPI, but I have heard it has strange questions that make no sense, that the test taker didn’t even understand.
Yes. That. I *have* taken it, under compulsion and duress. It is is absolutely Kafka-esque in its insanity and inanity.
Yes. That.
Cops aren’t an erudite profession. They’re blue collar people with a penchant for authority, and they get paid really well. They do what they’re told by their bosses, don’t question, and when some kind of resistance happens from their prey, they double down.
I grew up poor, and being a cop was aspirational to lots of people. One good friend from high school became a cop, and he was honest. I’ll never forget what he said; that the difference between a cop and a crook is the badge, and you need that criminal mindset in a cop to spot the crooks. He walked a beat in Queens, though, before cops became commandos, so it was a different time.
Whenever I have a run-in with cops, I remember that I’m probably dealing with a simpleton, who has the right to shoot me for any number of reasons, even if I am 100% in the right, and he is 100% in the wrong. All the advantages are on his side. He can even lie in court when I face him, and the word of an officer doesn’t need any proof, unlike my statements, which need to be proven somehow. It’s a two class society, and I’m in the wrong one, I guess.
I can kind of see how being a detective investigating actual crimes, with actual victims, might call for a higher type of man. Writing speeding tickets or busting people for jaywalking, no.
Cops understand that like Machevelli, it is better to be feared than loved….but I don’t remember growing up in the 70’s & 80’s with such apprehensions.
But when even the joe six-pack “everyman” fears cops, then the hate and distrust multiply exponentially….
Almost like there’s an (((agenda))) for this to happen or something….and I wonder who would JEW that????
Everyberg.
Singlestein
Timeowitz….
100 percent, Saxons –
I also grew up in the ’70s and ’80s and – like you – don’t recall fearing or loathing cops. What I do remember was being pulled over many times for “speeding’ during the ’80s and it used to be totally normal to get out of your car and walk over to the cop to haggle over the situation. They never screamed at you to stay in the car! Even if you got arrested, they just cuffed you. No get on the ground, now!
Back then, of course, they didn’t dress like SEALS or carry multiple mags for their semi-auto pistols. I think the fact that they do now is part of the reason why they behave the way they do.
One thing, is Not like the other:
“One good friend from high school became a cop, and he was honest.”
“I’ll never forget what he said; that the difference between a cop and a crook is the badge,…”
See also: “The fundamental reason government bureaucrats will never get it right: because they are employed by the state, and not those whom they are supposed to serve, they lack the incentives of private security guards, and, moreover, they lack accountability because face no legal or economic liability for their actions.”
https://mises.org/mises-daily/crime-and-government
“Police business … is a hell of a problem. It’s a good deal like politics. It asks for the highest type of men, and there’s nothing in it to attract the highest type of men. So we have to work with what we get—and we get things like this.”
― Raymond Chandler, _The Lady in the Lake_ (1943)
That was likely true in 1943. What’s changed since then, what’s different now, is they don’t even *want* the highest type of man anymore. Having an IQ that’s too high disqualifies police applicants. They have other tests designed to weed out anyone with empathy, and anyone who’s not basically a robotic order follower.
And the analogy to politics is still apt in a similar way: electoral politics as currently practiced weeds out almost everyone with a thimbleful of decency or honesty or integrity. Look what happened to Thomas Massie, for one example among many.
A lot of Trump’s early supporters liked him (and some still do) precisely *because* he was coarse and crude and uncultured and obnoxious and callous, not in spite of it. They *liked* that he doesn’t read books. That proves to them he’s not some ivory tower egghead.
Who gives a shit about collateral damage? The only good cop is a dead cop. Fuck these revenuers.
You are wrong, Jim. The only good cop, is one who sees the errors our overlords have blindsided him with, and then, repents.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/repent
Afterall, at one point or another, who of us hasn’t been blindsided by our overlords?
Now, the one who pushes on, in spite of it all. That’s another matter.
There’s also the recent video of the AGW pulling over a woman supposedly texting while driving, but even after showing him she has no hand to text with instead of apologizing and maybe showing her some sympathy that she lost her right hand the dipsh*t STILL writes her ticket. That AGW should be shamed out of his job but these bozos have no shame.
Wow. I saw the headline but didn’t read it.
Thanks for filling me in on our Idiocracy.
I wonder: is it about lack of shame? (Yes) But, moreso, lack of culture/tradition/family… all the sheet our overlords & their minions attack and destroy?
Sad sheet.
It’s just a fact that virtually all cops and ex-cops cannot comprehend why they’re not universally revered. If you have any cops or former cops as friends (even on Facebook) count on losing them if you ever bring any of this kind of thing up.
One *very* prominent retired cop and world-renowned use of force trainer and expert witness (you’d recognize the name) actually wrote a 6,000 -word column defending and justifying the Daniel Shaver murder, because “furtive movement” (Shaver trying to pull his pants up).
He made a big deal about how that could have been Shaver reaching for a hidden weapon in his waistband. He called it “awful, but lawful.” His exact words.
I asked him what would he say if Shaver had just stood there and looked at them with no attempt to play their lethal game of Simon Says.
Or suppose he went to light a cigarette. I imagine this world famous expert would claim that, well, Shaver *could* have had a tiny single-shot derringer concealed in the pack of cigarettes in his t-shirt pocket. Or he might even have some James Bond-style disguised cigarette gun.
Elsewhere he seemed to be saying the cop(s) would have been justified in shooting Shaver in the back if he ignored them and tried to walk away from them or go back to his hotel room. Because that could be seen as “going to retrieve a weapon.”
He also seemed to believe that any time people try to walk away from them cops are always justified in Tasing them in the back and violently tackling them and “proning them out” and shackling them. Regardless of what if any underlying “crime” was ever suspected.
He blocked me from commenting on his blog after I brought up the Shaver case sometime last year.
In my last comment (before he blocked me) I said that he and I were clearly looking at this thing through different ends of the binoculars or spyglass (I didn’t want to say “telescope” as that might be misconstrued), and that at least one of us had a serious blind spot.
“He blocked me from commenting on his blog”
That kind of tells you everything you need to know.
The title, says it all:
https://mises.org/mises-daily/serve-and-protect-state
Let’s not forget Uvalde where the cops sat on their hands, waiting out the shooter who inflicted maximum damage. They are all still employed. None of them have been fired or disciplined.
Contrast that with the recent school shooting where an armed citizen went in on his own and “solved the problem” saving innocent lives as a result. If police were on-scene, there would have been a lot more dead students.
It would not surprise me if the prosecutor attempted to bring charges against the real hero for bring a firearm into the “weapons-free school zone”.
Police training in the USA is right out of the IOF (israeli occupation forces) playbook.
Every police training academy in the USA teaches their recruits to yell “stop resisting” to their detainee loud enough for the bodycam to capture it, even if the detainee is not resisting.
This gives the dirty cops and prosecutor another charge to “pile on” assuring that the defendant will take a plea bargain rather than go to trial. Trials are expensive, time-consuming, and often reveal the dirty truth inherent in the “system”. This is why trials are to be avoided at all costs.
If I’m ever on a jury and I hear “stop resisting” on a body cam, that’s an automatic acquittal from me.
Yes. That.
Ever wonder why many cops are so stupid? The steroids they take inhibit rational thinking as well as making one more aggressive, to the point of irrational thinking and stupidity.
Of course the “laws” are set up to absolve them of responsibility for their actions.
Police departments do not test for steroids.
Observe SWAT teams who are all tatted up and on steroids who cannot read the address on a warrant properly and end up hitting the wrong house, often with disastrous results. This happens more often than most people think. They claim that “dynamic entry” tactics, smashing and destroying everything in sight is from an “adrenaline rush” and not steroid use (yeah right).
“Qualified immunity” and other police-only “carve-outs” such as cell phone and computer use by police while driving are but two of many “laws” that absolve cops of actions resulting from their inherent stupidity and steroid use.
Graduated escalation of force tactics are no longer used, being replaced by israel-style command and control tactics where immediate compliance with police officers’ commands is not only expected but demanded. Failure to immediately comply can and will result in a death sentence. Qualified immunity absolves police of accountability for their actions.
We are all Palestinians, now…
If I had a daughter, I would definitely name her Adrena Lynn.
Or, possibly, Adrena Lynn Rush
That’s hilarious, Adi!
I’m saving that for a future short story/novel!
Do it. 🙂
“Municipal police departments” are a relatively new phenomenon in the grand scheme of human civilization. This concept of “law enforcement” is beholden to the power structure and not to the citizenry.
In “the good old days”, the “sheriff” was the chief “law enforcement” individual in the county and had broad reign in his respective jurisdiction. When the need arose, ordinary citizens were “deputized” and were given limited “police authority” at the discretion of the “sheriff”. This was used during emergencies when there was a need for “manpower”.
Today, this has morphed into the need for permanently appointed sheriff’s deputies.
In order for a sheriff to be elected (and re-elected) he has to have a good reputation among the citizenry. Accountability to the citizenry is a major part of the equation.
Fast forward to today, where the “chief of police” in major urban areas is quite often a political “hack” whose allegiance is to the mayor and power structure, not the citizenry. This is a large part of the problem as it fosters an “us vs. them” attitude, where the citizenry (us) is considered to be the “enemy”. It gets worse, as city officials “pull back” their police when they should be doing just the opposite.
The concept of “qualified immunity” for public officials has been expanded to the point that police departments operate with impunity and have no problem abusing their power as the prosecutors, courts, and in general the “system” is heavily stacked against the victim of police abuses. It is almost impossible to sue police departments for abuses committed by their personnel.
Individual police officers cannot be sued as they are “protected” from lawsuits by their official “immunity”. Even with incontrovertible video and audio evidence, police are rarely convicted of crimes. Juror intimidation is a large factor in the inability to reign in the “bad apples”. Police unions play a large part in whitewashing criminal behavior by police.
Immunity negates responsibility and must be abolished across the board.
Let’s not forget the “israelization” of today’s police departments where “escalation of force” has been replaced with israeli-style “command and control” tactics in which immediate compliance with police commands is demanded.
American police departments routinely send their personnel to israel for (free) training in how to handle Palestinians (oops, I mean American citizens) to “see how it’s done”. We are all Palestinians, now…
Problems arise when multiple police officers bark out conflicting commands as in the case of Daniel Shaver being murdered by Mesa Arizona police officer Philip Brailsford for being unable to crawl on his stomach with his hands behind his back–impossible for any human being to do. Google it… In fact, Brailsford was rehired by his police department so that he could apply for and receive a disability pension. The “thin blue line” definitely protects it’s “bad apples”.
What we are experiencing today is “blowback”, something that I feared would occur, with the increasing number of publicized police abuse cases. Those who are attacking police see only the uniform and not the person wearing it.
Not a good situation for either police or the citizenry…
Just maybe it is time to abolish municipal police departments and go back to the sheriff model of “law enforcement”.
Hell, I’m an old, rich, white guy and I am fearful of the cops! Just the idea of fighting something thru litigation would bankrupt me. Too much $$ to lose.
Damned lawyers have gamed the system.Heads they win, tails we lose. Society has gone to shit and soon we’ll be seeing commercials advertising lawsuits for misgendering and hurt feelings.
The end of commercial would be call the law offices of Crook, Swindel & Steale ; 1-800-sue- them.
Or their competitors, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawyer_joke#/media/File:Car_Talk_Dewey,_Cheetham_&_Howe.jpg
Beat me to it Adi! 😆
Pretty sure they’ve been doing that for a while up in Canuckistan.
Hi Tom,
I’m not rich (or old, yet) but – like you – I get edgy when I see a cop near me. Because I am well-aware that they can find a pretext to screw with me, if they decide to. There are so many “laws” that one can easily be found in “violation” of something or other. On top of this, many cops today are tatted-up/low-IQ/steroid-addled thugs. They are like ill-trained/inbred Dobermans and best avoided.
Sadly, Eric, I have never “felt safe” any time there was a State Trooper/ local police (no Sheriffs in these parts) nearby. Whether they were in front of me, driving next to me, tail gaiting me, or even walking in a grocery store in uniform. The quote “Show me the man, I’ll find you the crime” comes to mind seeing them. Never mind the rich (or bitter?) irony, in that such a quote was associated with Lavrenty Beria (Stalin’s chief of secret police). As “Porter” (Mel Gibson, “Payback”) stated: “Crooked cops. Do they come any other way”?
Exactly, Shadow –
I reiterate that this is telling. I’m not a criminal; neither are you. Neither are most people. We’re just people trying to go about our business and we don’t do anything to cause harm, at least not intentionally. If we do cause harm unintentionally, we own up to it and make amends as necessary. The point is, we’re no “threat” to anyone but the state regards us affronters of its authority when we do not follow to the letter every last pedantic law, including laws the enforcers routinely ignore themselves.
Naturally, we regard them as predators. Worse, we’re not legally allowed to defend ourselves against these predators.
“Worse, we’re not legally allowed to defend ourselves against these predators.”
Lol.
Watch me. 😉
Can the victim sue the police for their illegal actions?
I seriously doubt it. The government sends out the armed pickpockets, the courts gather the collections and the extra “revenue” goes into the “public” coffers. A citizen’s lawsuit would disrupt the racket.
They can, there is apparent negligence and violation of rights as a result. A civil attorney may take the case on review of the body cam footage, should the old man want to pursue.
‘People who aren’t criminals in any meaningful sense fear and loathe law enforcers.’ — eric
Most countries tolerate prostitution as a public nuisance, often restricting it to a designated zona rosa … and at most, treating it as a minor misdemeanor. Not Bible-thumpin’ America:
‘Arizona enacted a new law that makes soliciting prostitution a felony offense and imposes jail time. The law requires that a person convicted of soliciting prostitution pay a $200 fine, funds that will go toward services for sex trafficking survivors.
‘Offenders will have to serve 15 days in jail for a first violation of soliciting prostitution. A person convicted of four or more violations will need to serve 180 days in jail and is guilty of a Class 4 felony.’
‘Courts are now also required to seal all records for victims of sex trafficking whose convictions have been overturned. GOP state Rep. Selina Bliss, the bill’s sponsor, called it “a victory for families, neighborhoods, and victims who deserve a path out.”’
https://www.azfamily.com/2026/06/08/new-arizona-law-cracks-down-soliciting-prostitution/
No punter is going to dissuaded by (or probably even aware of) this law. It’s all about keeping the police/prosecution/judicial cartel in business with new defendants to ‘process’ and mulct.
Moreover, there’s an ugly sexist slant, in which formerly prosecuted hookers are now regarded as ‘victims’ of sex trafficking, while men get blamed for accepting what’s on offer.
No wonder the birth rate has fallen below the replacement level, as men shun entrapment by censorious harridans who fault them for everything.
The whole “sex trafficking” thing has been blown out of all proportion as if everything escort or street hooker is the victim of some Epstein-style operation. Yes, it exists, and in some cases desperate women from other countries forced into some kind of prostitution in order to pay for their passage but that is far from the majority. Many in escort services (both female and male) are in it for the money as they can make more than as a barista or bartender. “Street” prostitutes are often doing it to support a drug habit, which goes to the whole question of how keeping drugs “illegal” contribute to the problem.
It is in reality a nuanced topic, but in the USSA Idiocracy led by a sociopathic Orange Clown ringleader nuance is not allowed.
All of the defendants will be men, guaranteed. Soliciting a whore, asking her for some, is a crime, but offering some is not. Just another example of how dominant women are, mutilating the law to serve their own interests.
God forbid a man gets laid without paying through the nose. Ditto for family courts. The cost of pussy is at an all-time high.
The issue with prostitution is more nuanced to be sure but seriously, you need therapy to deal with your hostility towards women as a whole. Yes there are bad women out there but it takes two to tango and you just seem to lash out blindly at females.
Get help now.
I don’t hate any women (well, maybe one). The psychology industry offering the therapy you recommend is controlled by feminist ideology and has never ‘cured’ anyone of anything. No thanks. Not to mention it’s a racket.
Like most men, I love women generally. But I’m not blind to the negative female influence which is dominating more and more of the zeitgeist and which leads directly to the obviously totalitarian trends Eric constantly directs our attention to, including the example above, where women who sell sex are victims but men who buy it are evil criminals.
Did men invent the safety/nanny state, which, for example, leads to vicious punishment for sleeping off a few beers in the back seat of your car? Are men pushing for sexual mutilation of minors who feel trans-gendered?
I don’t think so. And there are literally thousands of similar examples in law, in culture, in education, in journalism and many more fields.
It’s not about ‘blindly’ hating women, it’s about objecting to the many, many outcomes of what I’ll choose to call the dominant female ‘egregore,’ or thought-form, of our modern neo-liberal era. (https://www.theosophy.wiki/en/Egregore).
The fact that you’d recommend therapy indicates that you too are under its influence.
And so sorry, men and women are not equal. That’s the first lie of the egregore.
Also, discussions like this always omits the topic of MALE prostitution like it doesn’t exist or is just dismissed as “they’re just a bunch of fags”. How many times do prominent men get caught in “rentboy” stings? As long as both parties are consenting adults should not this not be broadcast to the world, no different that with female prostitutes if you’re being intellectually honest.
I think prostitution should be legalized.
Hi Mark,
My view on this is that consensual relations between adults are no one else’s business; certainly not any legitimate business of the state (which is illegitimate in and of itself). Do I like the idea of a woman selling herself? No, I don’t. But what I like – or don’t – is immaterial. It is none of my rightful business. I don’t like a lot of things, but I expect that there are plenty of people who do not like a lot of things I do – such as not wearing a seatbelt and “speeding.” Well, that’s my business, isn’t it?
My main point is that unless it can be demonstrated that a tangible harm has been caused (a real one, not the kind of “harm” some will say comes in the form of agreed-to debasement or freely made choices but the kind of harm visited upon a victim who would never, on their own, have been a party to the situation in question) then it’s no one else’s business insofar as taking action to redress it.
I agree. Besides, as a practical matter, trying to stop “the world’s oldest profession” is like trying to stop drugs-not happening.
Oh, you could stop drugs.
But the only way to do so, is to fix our society so the lie we’re given in grade school – “You can be anything you want to be when you grow up!” (I wanted to be an astronaut…full disclosure, I’m not an astronaut) – becomes the truth.
The point-blank reason people turn to drugs of any kind is disillusionment with life. Prove me wrong.
Apparently they are having quite a problem in residential neighborhoods.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3kDKX_oXqc
1.10.25 Fox Prostitution crackdown targets Phoenix’s ‘The Blade’ The backstory: Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell said the area known as “The Blade” along 27th Avenue between Indian School Road and Northern is gaining national recognition for prostitution, and the people living and working in that area said it has to stop.
What they’re saying: Dozens were arrested in the prostitution crackdown, but officials said it’s far from over.
“This is just one step in that process,” said Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell.
Mitchell said the multi-agency effort was long overdue.
“27th Avenue is not just the main area in Phoenix, but it is actually gaining national recognition as one of the major tracks in the United States. And that needs to stop,” Mitchell said.
“Local perspective: She said the months-long operation comes after years of complaints from neighbors and business owners, which include students on the nearby GCU campus.
“With that comes drugs, with that comes violence. And so you have people whose neighborhood is being destroyed, and they have been very vocal about it,” Mitchell noted.
Alfredo Gonzalez lives nearby and sees that kind of activity daily.
“Drugs, prostitution, robberies. I can see prostitution on that street. And that street. See the prostitutes with their butts hanging out,” Gonzalez said
______________________
4.16.26 I12 News “Over the past several years, MCAO said, it has seen a dramatic rise in sex trafficking cases. In 2023, their office received 107 submittals from law enforcement related to sex trafficking. Last year, that number climbed to 172 cases, a 60% increase.
“In the area known as “The Blade,” a section of 27th Avenue near Indian School Road, MCAO has partnered with Phoenix Police, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, Grand Canyon University Police, and other agencies to disrupt human trafficking and restore safety to these neighborhoods. “Break the Chain” campaign is also part of this effort and will feature social media, digital, and TV ads to spread the word.
RELATED: Phoenix man indicted on child sex trafficking charges tied to area known as ‘The Blade’
“County Attorney Rachel Mitchell said, “Unlike many other crimes, human trafficking is not easy to notice.” Mitchell continued to say that “Traffickers are master manipulators and will entice victims with false job offers, romantic relationships, or promises of money. Many times, victims don’t realize they are in a trafficking situation.”
The worst part of this whole situation is, it seems that Armed Government Workers just about never arrest anyone who is actually causing harm to themselves, others, or society at large.
From traffic cops who bust people for driving slightly too fast while ignoring Clovers who create real safety hazards on the road, to the 2020 “Summer Of Love” where cops stood down while Anti-Farts destroyed people’s property and livelihoods to the streets of cities like San Francisco strewn with used drug needles and human waste.
Rather, Armed Government Workers would go after so-called victimless crimes and do SWAT raids on innocent people.
It doesn’t help matters that we saw a need to militarize law enforcement in the wake of 9/11 under the guise of “keeping us safe from terrorists.”
Much like politicians, it’s healthy to be suspicious of those who are in or desire to be in law enforcement. The common thread is power and the desire to lord it over those of us who want to be left alone.
As one local talker said last week, “You don’t touch a cop” or else you’ll be subjected to a beat down and possibly killed. This was in reaction to the cops in Shelby, NC that beat up a woman.
https://www.wbtv.com/2026/05/30/watch-viral-video-appears-show-police-officer-hitting-woman-repeatedly-during-arrest-shelby/
Note the description by the local CBS affiliate that the video “appears to show” a beating. “Appears”? One cop is whoopin’ on her (punched her ten times in the face and head) while the other cop grabs her by the arm while some of the blows are delivered.
And the media defends these thugs as though they are gods. Well, maybe they are. Have you seen the funerals they have when they die while on the clock? They’d make a third world dictator blush.
Did you read of the story of the student (Henry Nowak, UK), that got stabbed by a “migrant”? While he lay bleeding to death, begging for an ambulance, the LEO’s promptly arrested HIM, rather than the perp who stabbed him. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crlpyw05l75o
It is disgusting Mark, the North Korea style funerals for the “first responders” class.
Firefighter died on the job here a couple weeks ago, I have empathy for that guy and his family but the media circus was unbelievable. Lead story on every local tv station ever day, sea of blue uniforms, flags everywhere, and the actual funeral was televised, again on all the local stations. Give me a break, I’m sure he was a nice guy, family man, whatever but people die on their jobs on a regular basis and nobody throws North Korean funerals for them. I worked for the electric utility here; last year I guy I knew got badly burned in an underground vault explosion, he was on fire when they pulled him out, alive, but he died a couple days later. Thirty seconds on the tv news, couple paragraphs in the back of the newspaper, and that was it. He was a good guy and had a family too, but as we’ve all seen, some are more equal than others.
Per GovCo’s labor stats the most dangerous jobs 9deaths per 100k workers) are:
1. Commercial Fishing 100
2. Loggers 87.3
3. Pilots & Flight Engineers 51.3
4. Roofers 45.2
5. Sanitation Workers 43.9
6. Iron & Steel Workers 33.3
7. Truckers & Sales Reps 26.9
8. Farming 58.9 (includes vehicle crashes)
9. Landscaping 21.0
10. Electrical Workers
“Law Enforcement” is 11.3 and doesn’t usually rank in the top 15 most dangerous professions annually. Obviously, everyone is equal but, some are more equal than others.
that should be a parenthesis not a 9 before deaths
DOH!
I wonder why “Sanitation workers” is so high. I can understand the dangers of most of those occupations, but being the trash guy doesn’t seem particularly dangerous to me.