Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles
Title: Support Your Local Police? (25 Reasons to Say "No")
Source:
Lew Rockwell
URL Source: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/10 ... -m-vance/support-local-police/
Published: Oct 27, 2015
Author: Laurence M. Vance
Post Date: 2015-10-27 07:52:16 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 2966
Comments: 28
“Law and order” conservatives: When they are right, they are so right; but when they are wrong, they are so wrong. They are right when they decry the militarization of local police. They are right to point out that the DOD 1033 program has transferred over $5 billion worth of military equipment from the Defense Department to local police forces. They are right to oppose more federal laws and mandates relating to local police. They are right to oppose a federal police “czar” like the Congressional Black Caucus has called for. They are right to oppose nationalizing the local police. They are right to point out that the Constitution only provides for the federal government to punish the crimes of treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. They are right to decry all the federal police in the alphabet soup of federal agencies. They are right to oppose making the police like a branch of the U.S. armed forces. They are right to oppose federal funding of local law enforcement. They are right to oppose federal control over local law enforcement. But does this mean that Americans should always support their local police? To the contrary, most of the problems with local police have nothing to do with the federal government. Here are twenty-five questions to consider before making a blanket statement like “Support your local police.” Do all local police in American cities and counties do all of these things? Of course not. Do most local police in American cities and counties do most of these things? Perhaps not. Do many local police in American cities and counties do many of these things? Probably so. Do some local police American cities and counties do some of these things? Certainly so. And way too many. The first reply is that the local police are just doing their jobs. Sure they are—just like guards at concentration camps were just doing their jobs. How quickly will those who say that the local police are just doing their jobs change their tune when one of their disgruntled neighbors gives the local police they support an anonymous tip that they might have illegal drugs in their house and the local police they support break down their front door in the middle of the night, shoot their dogs, and tase them and their family for the non-crime of asking what all this is about? The second reply is that the local police are just following the law. How quickly will those who say that the local police are just following the law change their tune when their local police enforce a law that requires roadside anal exams of everyone pulled over for traffic stops to make sure they have no hidden drugs or weapons? I haven’t said that all cops are bad. I haven’t said that there shouldn’t be any police. I haven’t said that libertarians shouldn’t be cops. I haven’t said that a libertarian society wouldn’t have any police. I haven’t said that Christians shouldn’t be cops. I haven’t said that police detectives don’t solve crimes. I haven’t said that a police presence doesn’t deter crime. I haven’t said that the police don’t perform a valuable service. I am merely pointing out that the main problem with local police is not that they have been centralized, federalized, militarized, or nationalized. I am merely pointing out that conservatives should not be making blanket statements like “Support your local police.” After all, you can’t have a police state without police—local police.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
What's the alternative -- allowing the police to decide which laws they will enforce and which laws they won't? Is that what we want? How about this? If people don't want the police to issue tickets to motorists for not wearing seatbelts the people could vote TO CHANGE THE LAW!?
It's obvious. Police should ignore the law and enforce libertarian philosophy at gunpoint. Because freedom.
You dumb cop worshiper - the "people" HAVE NO CHOICE. This was rammed down our throats. The Fraud of Seat-Belt Laws Seat-Belt Laws Infringe a Person's Constitutional Rights While the hundreds of millions of dollars spent in support of seat-belt laws has been a horrendous financial burden to society, the greatest cost is really not money. It’s the loss of freedom. Seat-belt laws infringe a person’s rights as guaranteed in the Fourth, Fifth, and the Ninth Amendments, and the civil rights section of the Fourteenth Amendment. Such laws are an unwarranted intrusion by government into the personal lives of citizens; they deny through prior restraint the right to determine one’s own individual personal health-care standard. While seat-belt use might save some people in certain kinds of traffic accidents, there is ample evidence that in other kinds, people have been more seriously injured and even killed only because they used seat belts. Some people have been saved from death in certain kinds of accidents only because a seat belt was not used. In those cases, the malicious nature of seat-belt laws is further revealed: such persons are subject to fines for not dying in the accident while using a so-called safety device arbitrarily chosen by politicians. The state has no authority to subject people to death and injury in certain kinds of traffic accidents just because it hopes others will be saved in other kinds of accidents merely by chance. The state has no authority to take chances with a person’s body, the ultimate private property. As for the promise that seat-belt laws would reduce auto insurance rates, there is no record of any insurance company ever reducing its rates because a seat-belt law was passed. A study released in August 1988 by the Highway Loss Data Institute compared auto-accident injury claims before and after the enactment of seat-belt laws in eight states and could find no clear-cut evidence that belt-use laws reduced the number of injuries. “These results are disappointing,” the report added.7 In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much I think you are wasting your time trying to provide evidence to two badge lickers.
Yeah, probably. This Roscoe character was the same cop-worshiping shit-stain over at Freakerville from way back, even when I was there 10 or so years ago. Welcome back, BTW. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Should we support our local police when they go online and pretend to be crack whores trying to pimp out their teenage daughters? Should we support our local police when they equip themselves with weapons powerful enough to conquer a small country? Should we support our local police when they drive around in vans equipped with X-ray scanners to secretly search vehicles? Should we support our local police when they tase people who are offering no resistance? Should we support our local police when the enrich themselves by seizing property and cash from people who have not even been charged with a crime? Should we support our local police when they plant evidence like weapons and drugs? Should we support our local police when they strip-search people who have been arrested even if there is no reason to suspect that the individual is carrying “contraband”? Should we support our local police when they hide at the bottom of a hill, off the side of the road, or just after a speed limit change in order to collect revenue under the guise of enforcing traffic laws? Should we support our local police when they dismiss charges of police abuse as alleged and charges of police brutality as greatly exaggerated, and most of the time never investigate any of these charges? Should we support our local police when they enter homes without search warrants? In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Yes you pedophile supporter.
That is a load of crap. No police departments are armed enough to conquer a small army. If i'm wrong tell me the police department and the army they would fight.
We should support the police when they do the right thing. Which is most of the time. I say this as someone who was beaten by the police in Kentucky. Unjustly. But most police aren't doing stuff like that.
You most likely deserved it. /misterwhite meme
You mean the cops when they go online and pretend to be crack whores trying to pimp out their teenage daughters? Yes I agree. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Yes I agree. Sounds like you support pedophiles not getting caught by the police. When the pedophiles are trolling online. They are looking for under age girls. You don't want the government to do anything about it. So you're ok with letting a guy go who is trying to pick up 12 year olds. That makes you a pedophile supporter. It makes the police honorable trying to protect kids from monsters who would prey on them. Some of your list might have some legitimacy. Not the couple of things I pointd out. I mean I reduced you fighting for a pedophiles rights to be left alone.
Who protects the kids from the "honorable" cops? Isolated Incidents? 40 Cops in 30 Days Racked Up Dozens of Charges of Child Rape and Sexual Abuse Not to mention the fact that they bend rules to boost sex sting arrest totals and inadvertently snare INNOCENT people. I mean I reduced you fighting for a pedophiles rights to be left alone. Uh - no. The only thing you did was point out that you always resort to name calling like this whenever someone disagrees with you. Way to stay classy, Pebbles. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Isolated Incidents? 40 Cops in 30 Days Racked Up Dozens of Charges of Child Rape and Sexual Abuse Not to mention the fact that they bend rules to boost sex sting arrest totals and inadvertently snare INNOCENT people. Ignoratio Elenchi, according to Aristotle, is a fallacy which arises from "ignorance of the nature of refutation". In order to refute an assertion, Aristotle says we must prove its contradictory; the proof, consequently, of a proposition which stood in any other relation than that to the original, would be an ignoratio elenchi… Since Aristotle, the scope of the fallacy has been extended to include all cases of proving the wrong point… "I am required to prove a certain conclusion; I prove, not that, but one which is likely to be mistaken for it; in that lies the fallacy… For instance, instead of proving that ‘this person has committed an atrocious fraud’, you prove that ‘this fraud he is accused of is atrocious;’" … The nature of the fallacy, then, consists in substituting for a certain issue another which is more or less closely related to it, and arguing the substituted issue. The fallacy does not take into account whether the arguments do or do not really support the substituted issue, it only calls attention to the fact that they do not constitute a proof of the original one… It is a particularly prevalent and subtle fallacy and it assumes a great variety of forms. But whenever it occurs and whatever form it takes, it is brought about by an assumption that leads the person guilty of it to substitute for a definite subject of inquiry another which is in close relation with it.[5] — Arthur Ernest Davies, "Fallacies" in A Text-Book of Logic
Of course they do. You're just upset because not enough of them choose what YOU want. So you demand that the cops not enforce the law.
Of course they do. Good grief man - you think they are suddenly going to stop with seatbelt checkpoints? It's a major cash cow for them - always has been. It's not about "safety" as I have already pointed out. You live in a dream world where politicians serve the people. Here's a news flash - they DON'T. Politicians exist to serve themselves and the corrupt moneyed interests that tell them how to vote. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Seatbelt checkpoints? I thought we were discussing the seatbelt law. Which the people want. Case closed.
Yep. In Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, and Wyoming, the police do NOT ticket you for just failing to wear a seat-belt. Centralized government fanatics want a single standard everywhere. And it has to be whatever they want it to be.
That kind of thinking led to the incorporation of the Bill of Rights. And the Bill of Rights is what whatever 5 justices say it is. Five unelected justices decide how 320 million people will live. The Founders must be spinning in their graves.
The all too predictable lie: The actual Associated Press quote:
Oh - you mean fed.gov worshipers like you who want more SWAT teams to raid pot users and medical marijuana clinics in states where voters opted for legalization? In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Meaning if we got rid of the seatbelt laws, more people would die and more people would be seriously injured. BUT, the Libertarians could argue that the total number of injuries would remain the same. I'm not comforted by that statistic.
That's the next legal frontier of the libertines.
Not only that, they could argue that injuries that are only minor will increase as the serious injuries become less harmful. SEAT BELTS CAUSE MORE MINOR INJURIES!!!!!!
Nope, but apparently you are in favor of cops bending the law and arresting innocents along the way. ...you fighting for a pedophiles rights.. Uh - no again. Is that the only retort you have : "you must be a pedophile enabler" if you don't support cops breaking the law to pad their number of arrests. That shit gets real old real fast. Good grief - you didn't even bother to look at the facts in the two links I posted. A yearlong investigation by 10 Investigates reveals many of the men whose mugshots have been paraded out by local sheriffs in made-for-TV press conferences were not seeking to meet children online. Instead, they were minding their own business, looking for other adults, when detectives started to groom and convince them to break the law. While detectives used to post ads suggesting an underage teen or child was available for sex, they now routinely post more innocuous personal ads of adults on traditional dating sites. When men – many of them under 25 with no criminal history - respond, officers switch the bait and typically indicate their age is really 14 or 15 years old. However, sometimes the storyline isn't switched until the men, who were looking for legal love, already start falling for the undercover agent. According to arrest affidavits inspected by 10 Investigates, law enforcement is also now routinely making first contact with men who have done nothing wrong, responding to their ads on dating sites like PlentyOfFish.com. After men start conversing with what they think are adults, officers change the age they claim to be, but try to convince the men to continue the conversation anyway. Other examples include undercover officers showing interest in a man, then later introducing the idea of having sex with the undercover's "child." If the men indicate they weren't interested, they were still often arrested for just talking to the adult. Critics of the stings, including a number of prominent Tampa Bay law enforcement leaders, tell 10 News the operations make for better press conferences than they do crime fighting. Many of the men who are arrested for sexual predator crimes see little jail time. But Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd, when asked about over-aggressive detectives, instead went on the offensive: "The concern (I have) is that you inflate your investigative reporting to make it glitzy." Judges have also been very critical of some of the tactics used in the stings, which violate Internet Crimes Against Children guidelines. Among the comments from judges in recent entrapment decisions (case numbers withheld to protect the defendants): The judge in one dismissed case criticized the undercover officer for failing to follow procedures and "the officer controlled the tone, pace and subject matter of online conversation, pushing toward a discussion of sexual activity." In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much I've explained that "slippery slope" concept to him 5 trillion times, he's to fuckin stupid to understand how that concept fails. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
How about cops using common fucking sense and not be soulless, programmed robots? In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much True. The other day when I put mine on, I pinched my thumb. That counts, right?
1.Should we support our local police when they issue tickets to motorists for not wearing seatbelts?
#2. To: misterwhite (#1)
#3. To: misterwhite, Roscoe (#1)
If people don't want the police to issue tickets to motorists for not wearing seatbelts the people could vote TO CHANGE THE LAW!?
Loss of Freedom
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#4. To: Deckard (#3)
#5. To: Fred Mertz (#4)
I think you are wasting your time trying to provide evidence to two badge lickers.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#6. To: Roscoe (#2)
It's obvious. Police should ignore the law and enforce libertarian philosophy at gunpoint. Because freedom.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#7. To: Deckard (#6)
Should we support our local police when they go online and pretend to be crack whores trying to pimp out their teenage daughters?
#8. To: Deckard (#6)
Should we support our local police when they equip themselves with weapons powerful enough to conquer a small country?
#9. To: Deckard (#6)
#10. To: A K A Stone (#9)
I say this as someone who was beaten by the police in Kentucky. Unjustly.
#11. To: A K A Stone (#7)
you pedophile supporter.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#12. To: Deckard (#11)
You mean the cops when they go online and pretend to be crack whores trying to pimp out their teenage daughters?
#13. To: A K A Stone (#12)
It makes the police honorable trying to protect kids from monsters who would prey on them.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#14. To: Deckard (#13)
It makes the police honorable trying to protect kids from monsters who would prey on them. Who protects the kids from the "honorable" cops?
#15. To: Deckard (#3)
(Edited)
"the "people" HAVE NO CHOICE."
#16. To: misterwhite (#15)
"the "people" HAVE NO CHOICE."
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#17. To: Deckard (#16)
"Good grief man - you think they are suddenly going to stop with seatbelt checkpoints?"
#18. To: misterwhite (#15)
Of course they do.
#19. To: Roscoe (#18)
"Centralized government fanatics want a single standard everywhere. And it has to be whatever they want it to be."
#20. To: misterwhite (#19)
A study released in August 1988 by the Highway Loss Data Institute compared auto-accident injury claims before and after the enactment of seat-belt laws in eight states and could find no clear- cut evidence that belt-use laws reduced the number of injuries.
The report by the Highway Loss Data Institute acknowledges that use of safety belts by motorists has reduced serious injuries and deaths in automobile accidents. But the report made public this week said the new study "found no clear-cut evidence of comparable reductions" in overall injuries as reflected by accident claims.
#21. To: Roscoe (#18)
Centralized government fanatics want a single standard everywhere.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#22. To: Roscoe (#20)
The report by the Highway Loss Data Institute acknowledges that use of safety belts by motorists has reduced serious injuries and deaths in automobile accidents. But the report made public this week said the new study "found no clear-cut evidence of comparable reductions" in overall injuries as reflected by accident claims.
#23. To: A K A Stone (#12)
So you're ok with letting a guy go who is trying to pick up 12 year olds. That makes you a pedophile supporter.
#24. To: misterwhite (#22)
BUT, the Libertarians could argue that the total number of injuries would remain the same.
#25. To: A K A Stone (#12)
(Edited)
So you're ok with letting a guy go who is trying to pick up 12 year olds.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#26. To: misterwhite (#1)
What's the alternative -- allowing the police to decide which laws they will enforce and which laws they won't? Is that what we want?
#27. To: GrandIsland (#26)
allowing the police to decide which laws they will enforce and which laws they won't?
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#28. To: Roscoe (#24)
"SEAT BELTS CAUSE MORE MINOR INJURIES!!!!!!"
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]