Cops Don’t Make Me Feel Safe

Print Friendly

It has been said – and I agree – that the typical person (i.e., the person just trying to get through the day, do their thing) has more to fear from a cop than a (non-official, non-uniformed) criminal.

Harsh? No, a reality check.

I’m in my mid-40s and – so far – have not been robbed at gunpoint by an ordinary criminal. But I have been robbed at gunpoint literally dozens of times by cops, who have a license to rob me. Cumulatively, the total I’ve had to “stand and deliver” – in the felicitous phrase of the appropriately named highway robber of yore – comes to thousands of dollars, over the past twenty-something years. It’s dressed up, of course – in order to make the cop feel better about himself and what he’s doing (he’s just keeping us safe, etc.) and also to douse the rage of his victim by getting him to accept what’s done to him as something other than it is.

That being, a robbery at gunpoint.

After all, I have committed no crime, properly speaking. I have caused no harm to anyone. Yet I am molested by a guy in a uniform – with a gun on his hip – because he has noticed I am not wearing a seat belt, or because  my vehicle does not have the requisite tax stamps upon it, or because my velocity is greater than the velocity posted on a sign. It may not be any of these things. It may be simply that I happen to be on a given road at a given time. I – and all the others who happen to be on that road at that time – are forcibly compelled to interrupt our journey, roll down our windows and submit to a roadside inspection-interrogation, with the implicit threat of lethal violence if we fail in the slightest way to Submit and Obey.

It does not make me feel safe. Does it make you feel safe?

I do not especially fear louty-looking thugs approaching me on the street. I’m not a tough guy, but I am a bigger than average guy – and I usually carry a big gun. If the thugs come at me, I am reassured by my physical capacity to resist and defend myself – and also by the fact that the law is still (for the moment) on my side, should I be forced to defend myself. I know I have a shot, at least. It may not be a fair fight (what fight is?) but at least I can fight.

I cannot fight Officer 82nd Airborne. Which is why he scares me a lot more than a crew of street toughs. Not because he’s bigger or tougher than me. But because it does not matter how big and tough he is – or how big and tough I am. He has the entire weight of the state behind him. Legions of toughs – and the full apparat of the system – are on his team. The toughest, roughest Navy SEAL or Hell’s Angel stands as much chance against this juggernaut as Pee Wee Herman does of becoming the next UFC heavyweight champ.

Which is why I am just as fearful of a bloated, out-of-shape lout in uniform as I am of Officer 82nd Airborne. Or even a female a third my size… if she’s in uniform. Ordinarily, I’d just walk away from such people. And if they jumped me, I’d stand more than a fair chance of getting them off me. But because I am legally powerless to defend myself against them, no matter what I’ve done (or not done) and no matter what they do to me, no matter how outrageous, I feel anything but safe in their vicinity. To do so much as raise one’s hand to ward off a blow – to try to retreat and get away from an assault by cop – is the equivalent of the opening bell at a boxing match. Only you’re not allowed to box back – and there’s no retreating to your corner. Or ref standing ready to end the fight.

This does not make me feel very safe. To know that I am potentially at the mercy of another person – a random stranger -  merely because that person is wearing a uniform and has been anointed a “law enforcement” officer. To know that such a person has the legal authority to screw with me, for any or no reason at all – at any moment. It is just a matter of our paths crossing – and the stranger in uniform deciding it’s my turn.

This is the reality. “Law” no longer binds “enforcement.” Or rather, the law is no longer a restraint on the enforcers. It is their carte blanche – their  pretext for doing anything to anyone – and maybe later, there might be some partial accountability if all the Ts were not appropriately crossed.

In court, the cop’s statements will be taken as gospel truth simply by dint of the cop’s having said them. Your statements, on the other hand, will be treated as “hearsay” – if the judge allows them to be heard at all – and dismissed out of hand absent your $lawyer$ managing to get incontrovertible video evidence into play. If there’s video evidence. If the evidence is admitted. If you had the money to hire a $lawyer$ to operate the levers of the system – levers you and I and other Mundanes are not allowed to touch.

I have come to understand – a little bit, at least, what it must have felt like to be a “citizen” of the Soviet Union. And I can remember when much of what the government did was based on the idea that we didn’t want to end up like citizens of the Soviet Union: “compelling state interest” or “security” (and “safety” – that is, the safety of the enforcers and the system ) trumping all; nonexistent personal liberties; having to Submit and Obey at every turn to petty (and not-so-petty) authority figures in funny costumes.

It is important to be safe and secure. But when the state may do almost anything to anyone, at anytime, for any reason or no reason at all, then no one is safe.

I hope enough of us figure this out in time.

Throw it in the Woods?

Share Button

eric

Author of "Automotive Atrocities" and "Road Hogs" (MBI). Currently living amongst the Edentulites in rural SW Virginia. 

  227 comments for “Cops Don’t Make Me Feel Safe

  1. GW
    May 21, 2012 at 11:33 am

    “Submit and Obey” or “Stand ones ground” – when that happens the second American Revolution will have truly started and it won’t be pretty.
    It seems that this may already be in process within some commuties as the number of “gestapo” killed nationwide is currently on record pace this year.
    No wonder so many folks are building bunkers as we are being squeezed from both ends by thugs and criminals, or should I say “Gangs and Government”?

    • May 21, 2012 at 4:52 pm

      I’ve come to regard them as fundamentally the same thing.

      In living memory, the government was not entirely tyrannical. Though I oppose much of what it did, nonetheless, it left peaceful people alone to an extent that is almost inconceivable today. There was – generally – the rule of law and accountability. The system was far from perfect – but it was not an outright thugocracy as it has become today.

      If people – enough people – don’t say Enough! – soon – I expect we’re in for a very rough ride.

      • Mike in Spotsy
        May 22, 2012 at 1:24 am

        “I’ve come to regard them as fundamentally the same thing.” Yes Eric, remember Murray Rothbard’s description of government as “a gang of thieves writ large”.

        • graham
          May 22, 2012 at 4:15 pm

          Murray was paraphrasing half of Augustine’s famous statement: “Without justice what are kingdoms but great bands of robbers, and what are bands of robbers but petty kingdoms?” The only difference is that of scale.

          And I must point out that gov’t are by far responsible for the greatest number of deaths throughout history by a factor of 100-1 (at a minimum) over private murders.

          And in many recent interviews Lew Rockwell has quoted Augustine’s term “libido dominande” (lust to dominate) as the operative psychological characteristic (disorder) behind the notion of the State.

          Things haven’t changed in thousands of years and they aren’t likely to any time soon. The best we can do is “become men” in our minds and de-legitimize them. Open mockery and public disdain should be their lot. Only then can we advance to eradicating the vermin with requisite measures.

          I dare do all that may become a man who dares do more is none.-Shakespere

          • JdL
            May 23, 2012 at 8:41 pm

            I dare do all that may become a man who dares do more is none.-Shakespere

            Could you translate that into English? ;-j

          • jason
            May 26, 2012 at 10:01 pm

            I think legitimacy is the problem. It would not be so bad if people saw the taxation, the wars and counterfeit money and law for what it is. Then the state would have to beg for taxes, probably giving it a religious veneer so people would feel it is right. Democracy would be impossible since the state would not enjoy mass support. People would be much more free, not because the state chose to do so, but because the state couldn’t. If statists could, they would enslave us all.

      • May 22, 2012 at 4:45 am

        In the Chinese-speaking world, there’s a popular saying:

        “白道比黑道還可怕!”

        “bai dao be hei dao hai ke pa!”

        It means:

        “The white gang (government) is even more frightening that the black gang (criminal triads).”

        It’s a universal truth, the same everywhere.

        • May 22, 2012 at 10:13 am

          Errata: Got the Romanization wrong. Should have been

          “bai dao bi hei dao hai ke pa!”

          I’m assuming nobody noticed.

          • Doug
            May 22, 2012 at 1:36 pm

            We’ll let it go this time. ;-)

          • methylamine
            May 23, 2012 at 6:34 am

            Unforgivable mistake, you’re banned from posting!

            But seriously–thanks for the great cross-cultural reference, I’m thrilled to hear the Chinese still retain disdain for the State.

          • methylamine
            May 23, 2012 at 1:23 pm

            @Eric re: Pricks in Action

            I’d take a night in jail for contempt of court, simply for the pleasure of telling the judge to go fuck himself–I’m never paying those tickets.

          • May 23, 2012 at 1:28 pm

            I like the idea – but then, in all likelihood, the judge would throw additional charges your way (possibly including felony charges). And if you didn’t pay the fines, then they’d suspend your “driving privileges” – and if you get caught driving sans “privileges,” then it’s another bust… and so on.

            They have rigged the system such that even a very minor “offense” (such as a seatbelt ticket) can lead to severe repercussions as the additional charges pile on.

            You could conceivably end up facing prison time – all of it starting with something like a minor ticket that you ignored….

          • May 24, 2012 at 12:11 am

            Dear Doug, Methylamine,

            I’ll try to do better next time. LOL!

            Don’t worry about the Chinese people not hating Clovers controlling their lives.

            After all, as the Father of Modern Libertarianism Murray Rothbard noted, the Daoist philosophers of China were the world’s first laissez-faire capitalists and free market anarchists.

  2. drtypirat
    May 21, 2012 at 11:55 am

    I couldn’t agree more, I have the right to defend myself against a non-state sponsored aggressor but because the state has a monopoly on the use of force we are supposed to cower adn trust them to sort things out. Whenever I see the red and blue in my rearview or a cop car parked along the street my initial thought is never one of thankfulness or a sense of safety. I see a tax sponsored enforcer of the thugocracy. I can honestly say 100% of the time the sight of them makes me sick to my stomach as well as very angry. Why don’t cops work like fire-fighters and respond when called, fire trucks don’t drive around perpetually “patrolling.” I read an article a few weeks back and it made incredible amoutn of sense.

    Whether it is mail delivery, licensing (driving or professional), banking, education or peace officers, when has a monopoly ever yielded good results?

    • Don
      May 21, 2012 at 1:51 pm

      Correct! A cop is never there to “protect” you if a crime occurs. They’re only there after the fact to clean up the mess. No need for them on the street at all.

      Plus if we pay for the cops to be on the street and “protect” us then why do we also pay for: home security systems, motion sensors and flood lights, neighborhood watches, car alarms, our own guns and everything else that we do to protect ourselves? We’ve already got the situation under control. It makes no sense.

    • May 21, 2012 at 4:49 pm

      That’s my attitude, also.

      I’ve got little, if any use for cops. We live in a very rural area. If someone breaks into our home, it’s going to be between me and him. When the cops show up 20-30 minutes later, they can write a report.

      So, let’s see. They don’t protect my property or my physical person. They harass me over BS “infractions” that are tyrannical on their face (e.g., seatbelt laws). I am forced at gunpoint to help provide money to pay for their costumes, cars and guns. And then these costumed goons roam around waiting for opportunities to threaten me (and other harming-no-one people) in order to cow us and make us pay yet again.

      I support peace officering. But that’s not what we have in the USSA.

      • MoT
        May 22, 2012 at 7:39 am

        Cops are the equivalent of armed janitors. They’re there to clean up after the fact. And I’m sorry to disparage any janitors out there because at least they do an honorable job.

        • liberranter
          May 22, 2012 at 2:11 pm

          And if all they (cops)are responsible for is cleaning up the mess after the fact, why the hell do they need to be armed at all?

    • Tor Munkov
      May 21, 2012 at 4:51 pm

      It’s like playing a game of Russian Roulette Monopoly with a bunch of Deliverance Leering Buzzcuts with itchy trigger fingers and fragile violence-prone egos.

      Good afternoon, citizen. The reason I stopped you, is I need you to play a little game with me, just to keep me safe.

      We’re all good guys, and if you can roll your dice for a few rounds and make it all the way around the board, you’ll advance to Go and collect $200 worth of services you don’t want and then be on your way.

      We all play with the bankers money, but you’ll have to play with your own.

      If you land on one of our properties, and you can’t pay the rent, the law says we have to put you in jail for as long as it takes you to raise the money and then roll doubles.

      It’s all being conducted on behalf of Mr. Monopoly, who is a famous dignitary and public servant of the highest caliber.

    • Jason Calley
      May 22, 2012 at 2:32 pm

      Yes, modern US government claims a monopoly on the use of violence. Anarchist theory claims that government by definition is that institution which claims such a monopoly. Note though that the US government did not originally fit that definition. Early US government was marked by a division of access to violence. We did not have police as a governmental force, but the populace in general was the most common force for law enforcement. We did not have a standing army, but rather “We the People” had a clear right to every weapon available to a common soldier. we people had just as much claim to violence as the government, and in fact, the government could only enforce a call for violence when a large part of the people supported the call by showing up with their weapons. Only the Swiss still retain something similar.

      • chris
        May 22, 2012 at 9:42 pm

        Tell that to the Whiskey Rebellion “rebels.” I get what you’re saying though . . . .

        • May 23, 2012 at 10:12 am

          Much as what happened to the Whiskey Rebels heralded what was to come later, the state’s actually exerted authority over the individual from circa 1787-1861 was infinitesimal compared with today. Much as I hold to the absolute Libertarian ideal, I’d be ecstatic to enjoy the liberties that Americans enjoyed when America was still a constitutional republic. Just imagine:

          Being able to own land – your home – free and clear (once paid off). No taxes on real estate.

          Being free to keep and bear arms without a permission slip – and to defend both your person and property, with the full support of the law.

          Being free to engage in business dealings – or not – with whomever, for whatever reason. The relationship to be based entirely on free association. With the full support of the law.

          Not having to get a license to operate your vehicle, or run your business.

          Not having to possess an ID – let alone present the ID to an authority figure on demand.

          To be essentially immune from harassment by costumed authority figures unless you personally had actually committed a crime. With the full support of the law.

          Your privacy inviolate. No one knows your business except those whom you wish to know about your business dealings.

          Having in your pocket real money – specie – not paper money, whose value depended entirely on the whim of the shyster bankers who printed it.

          Just a smattering of what we had – and have pissed away.

          • jason
            May 26, 2012 at 10:10 pm

            Uh…. Don’t mean to be a stickler, but 200 years ago, NO ONE needed a passport to travel the world, markets were pretty free, all over the world. This whole fascist state control and licensing of everything is NEW! Even in would be fascist States, the power they wielded was small, most the time they would banish unwanted, or hell you could run. No where to run anymore baby!

          • methylamine
            May 27, 2012 at 2:24 am

            @jason & eric–

            The counter-”argument” clovers and statists (or is that redundant?) present today is “Things could never go back to the way they were, the world’s so much bigger and more complicated now, we NEED government or it would be chaos!”

            How do you guys counter that?

            I have difficulty with arguments that stupid; it throws me for a loop, because the answers are so incredibly obvious I pause a while to dredge up from subconsciousness an answer.

            My first take is: no, it isn’t different. The technologies are different, but balanced; there is no net advantage to the hypothetical criminal/victim pairing.

            My second counter is that people are no different; we haven’t magically evolved in 200 years. What has changed is that government has debilitated them so much they’re largely incapable of taking the same personal responsibilities as they did then.

            The only real difference is population density; it’s much easier to remain anonymous to other people in a large city. But even that argument fails because of the counterbalancing increase in communication technology.

            So really, we COULD return to that minimalist set of laws today, and have relative nirvana. It would just take an adjustment period–probably a generation–for people to re-learn how to be adults instead of petulant, mewling children who can’t take care of themselves without saaaaafety regulations…and the other roughly one million laws wiping their every messy bowel movement.

  3. Nick
    May 21, 2012 at 1:20 pm

    You HAVE to hire lawyer for anything short of the run of the mill(less than 20 mph over) speeding ticket. Lawyers make their liviing by dealing with the corrupt system.

    I’ve personally taken a few tickets to court myself. The cops will lie to “win”(I’ve heard outright lies in two cases), they are buddies with the judge and prosecutor(if there is one-which calls into question legality as it is) who are more than willing to bang the gavel in their favor regardless of the circumstances/evidence.

    I once had photos of an unmarked “one way” street that was made that way over a weekend for construction purposes…and the “one way” had been made on the right hand side of the street…lol
    I was cited when I turned onto it unknowingly on a Sunday morning even though I turned off immediately when I realized what was going on.

    It wasn’t enough even then. The judge looked at the photo’s and said “you could have turned off earlier”…I tried to tell her I turned off at the first drive and she said “no more!” and banged the gavel. LMAO! This was 22 years ago and I will still naive about what traffic court was about and my odds of getting a “fair” trial. It was a good lesson for me @ 19 years old about kangaroo courts.

    Cops are trained to lie to make their case and even frame any potential victim by deliberating lieing into their mics.

    The biggest lie you hear is when some unfortunate mundane is on the end of a beating…you almost always hear “stop resisting, stop resisting” over ALL the officers mics.

    I can guarantee you that many times there is no resistance…it’s simply “cover” for them and audio “proof” of the victim’s resistance.

    The biggest warning that things could get nasty is if you find yourself in a position in which you have to
    argue a point with an officer and you hear “calm down”. That means he’s starting to frame you for something bad. He’s doing it 90% of the time for framing purposes in case he decides you’re too uppity.

    If you hear that, don’t even bother with saying anything else. Really, Lew Rockwell has it right…best not to say ANYTHING as 90% of them are crooked, and the 10% left that aren’t will be drummed out after time for not playing ball.

    Cops are “super citizens” with scarey power….stay away from them.

    • Don
      May 21, 2012 at 1:48 pm

      When I got the statutory reckless driving citation in Va. lawyers immediately started calling me wanting $800 to get it reduced to a speeding ticket. LMAO.

      Nice little system they got there: cops, lawyers, judges all working together to keep us safe. :)

      • Edward King
        May 21, 2012 at 2:54 pm

        Same here. The only time I have ever had a gun pulled on me was by a cop. The thing was, I was in my own home when it happened. My next door neighbors had been robbed at gunpoint, so the cops were called. I heard a noise coming from my living room, and lo and behold, there was a cop with his gun raised standing at the door.

        Now that I think about it, I am glad I wasn’t shot. Being a black man in the vicinity of a robbery doesn’t inspire much confidence in the system.

        • May 21, 2012 at 4:39 pm

          Ed,

          Same here. Had it happen to me once over a traffic stop. Not pleasant. The more so because I dared not make a move in my own defense.

          That so many of our fellow “freedom loving” Americans accept this state of affairs is testimony to the degree to which they’ve been mentally enslaved.

      • May 21, 2012 at 4:41 pm

        I try not to think about it too much – because it tends to send my BP off the charts…

    • embree smith
      May 22, 2012 at 7:32 pm

    • John Illinois
      May 23, 2012 at 2:41 am

      I can lie, too. I have 2 cars that are identical, except for color. I have pictures of both, with the other license plate on them. When I go to court, I take the picture of the other car with me. The ticket clearly states color, the registration does not. I have never had a judge fail to throw out a ticket because of “errors on the ticket”. Most of the time, just showing up in court takes care of the problem, because the cop isn’t there. My son beat a ticket where the judge was running through tickets without cop testimony, and I told him to ask where the cop who wrote the complaint was. The judge had to admit that the cop had not shown up. The she had the gaul to ask how he pleaded–he was smart enough to plead not guilty, and she said she wanted to continue the case, but he said, wait a second here, it has a specific date ant time to appear–I am here, where is my accuser? She decided to simply drop the case. Then when we went to get his license back, the cashier wanted $125. I hit the ceiling. I told the cashier to get off her fat ass, and find out what the judge had actually rules, not the pre-planned outcome. If everyone would show up and contest their tickets, the system would break down. I have never lost a ticket I have contested.

      • May 23, 2012 at 9:53 am

        In Virginia, the bastards are on to that one. They now require you to state the color of your vehicle on the registration paperwork and it’s listed on the actual document.

        Still, I like the way you fold your shirts!

      • methylamine
        May 23, 2012 at 1:39 pm

        Here in Houston, at the dungeon-like plunder-processing facility called a “court” on 1400 Lubbock I showed up to contest three tickets.

        The cop wasn’t there; so the prosecutor filed a continuance and the judge informed me I’d have to come back another day.

        I hit the roof; like you, I said “where’s my accuser?”

        I kept calm but insistent. The fat, petty little tyrant–a Mexican woman, incompetent to sit in judgement of a mud-pie contest–threatened me with contempt and motioned the (equally fat) bailiff over.

        It took real self control not to put the bailiff on the floor; I’m competent in Okinawan karate and he looked like he was competent in stuffing his face with tax-purchased Ho-Hos. He’s lucky his shoulder is still in its socket.

        I brought a lawyer the next week and beat all three; Kubosh only charged fifty bucks.

        I’m at the point of total disgust and contempt. I was pulled over the other day for appearing to drive too quickly through an intersection at which the cop was sitting cross-ways to my travel. I knew he had nothing; the trusty Valentine was silent.

        He tried the usual “hail fellow well met” fake bonhomie; “Lessee here, son, why you drivin’ like it’s the Daytona 500?”

        Stone silence. “Why are you detaining me?”

        “Well for one thing you didn’t use your turn signal”

        “Yes I did.”

        “I saw you cross lanes with no turn signal.”

        “Then you weren’t watching closely enough. Am I free to go?”

        Surprisingly, he sent me off. I wonder if the total contempt in my expression, or the fact that all I could think about was how I would relish stomping him in court, was the deciding factor.

        I think the predator-prey dynamic is in play here, and if you fail to act like prey it confuses them.

      • BrentP
        May 23, 2012 at 1:59 pm

        I believe the registration on my cars have the color on them. (also Illinois). Have been that way since I started driving… now there are other issues like how the SoS insists I am in another county despite numerous attempts to correct it. If your registration doesn’t have color on it, it is simply a continued error.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 23, 2012 at 2:57 pm

      Google: TESTILYING

  4. Don
    May 21, 2012 at 1:46 pm

    I wrote a column about this same thing last year for LRC.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/cooper/cooper37.1.html

    I too have only ever had a gun pulled on me by a cop, never a citizen.

    • Tor Munkov
      May 21, 2012 at 4:26 pm

      I remember reading that one. It’ one of my ATFs, kudos.
      I understand why the elite d*bags indoctrinate us as children about the violent myths of the states’ benevolence. But it escapes me that with the availability of the internet and alternate media, why so many choose to remain eager children of their abusive deadbeat fatherland.

      If a good thing gets made better by backing it with military and police power, then why not do this with the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus as well.

      The myth that there really is such a thing as the United States, or that the Policeman & Mailman are our helper is philosophically on equal footing with the myths about the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 21, 2012 at 6:11 pm

        “But it escapes me that with the availability of the internet and alternate media, why so many choose to remain eager children of their abusive deadbeat fatherland.”

        It escapes me too. Twenty years ago I expressed great hope that the Internet would play the major role in causing government to respect the promise of the Unanimous Declaration.

        It has not happened nor do I see evidence that it is going to.

        Sad.

      • Don
        May 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm

        I think it’s because the truth is scary as hell; much scarier than delusion.

        How many people can function on a daily basis knowing that the cops are a criminal gang which violate your rights. That the local, state and federal gov’t are also criminal gangs that use extortion to take your money and control your life.

        And the truth is like a snowball: once you “get it” you start thinking back on your life and realizing it’s all been one big fat lie from the beginning. Starting in grade school with “Officer Friendly”, the pledge of allegiance and revisionist history.

        Then you realize that your bank and your employer are just unpaid informants to the gangs. Informing them of how much you make and extracting your tribute.

        I have some die hard Ron Paul friends who, even though they get it, they still kowtow to the man and any thought of actually fighting them brings on a panic attack.

        • liberranter
          May 22, 2012 at 2:21 pm

          Spot on, Don. As I and others have mentioned here before, fear completely owns a huge segment of the Amoricon population. I think it’s especially controlling of the older generation, but it cuts across demographics. The idea of confronting reality, acknowledging that they’ve been snookered, and leading a life in which they’re responsible for their own destiny is just too much for the average Joe and Jane to bear thinking about.

    • May 22, 2012 at 12:57 pm

      Technically, that’s what happened to me as a child, though strictly speaking they weren’t pointing a gun at me personally but just generally shooting to kill the local white community that had holed up in a block of flats when the Force Publique mutinied after Congolese independence. Luckily we were armed and could hold them off for three days until a Belgian colonel disobeyed official orders not to intervene and organised a relief paratroop drop.

  5. dom
    May 21, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    Cops manufacture events much like a corrupt dentist or automotive repair shop does cavities, or unneeded vehicle repairs.

  6. May 21, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Perhaps this analogy will help you deal with the fact that cops exist.
    The best way to perceive a cop is like a RATTLESNAKE.
    Rattlers provide an ecological benefit by helping to keep the vermin population under control.
    But they are nasty creatures, hard wired to strike out at anything that comes near them.
    So the smartest thing to do is simply keep your distance.
    You know where their nests are likely to be found, and the rocks they are likely to slither from under.
    And usually, you can hear them rattle before they strike.
    If you find yourself living in an environment that is just rotten with rattlesnakes, move to some other location.
    There are many places where you are much less likely to encounter these reptiles.

    • Tor Munkov
      May 21, 2012 at 5:04 pm

      Perfect analogy. The worst vermin on the face of the earth right now are the savers and the guardians of the value of greenback federal reserve notes.
      These vermin are a pestilence to the Special Drawing Rights currency and the UN Bill of Rights signed in 1947.
      Luckily, these vermin are isolated to a small area between Canada & Mexico and are rapidly being eradicated.
      If you are a rattlesnake, snakewrangler, or snakecharmer please apply immediately to http://www.un.org to learn more about the many exciting opportunities available during these exiting times.

      • liberranter
        May 22, 2012 at 2:26 pm

        A not quite perfect analogy in that rattlesnakes, unlike cops, do not actively and aggressively pursue humans as prey (I live in Southeastern Arizona, so believe me, I’m something of an expert on crotali). Rattlers prefer to avoid confrontation with humans and focus on small rodents and other creatures that can actually serve as a food source. Cops, on the other hand, have no other “food source” than us mere mundanes, so they seek us out when they’re starving – for money or violence.

        • JT
          May 22, 2012 at 5:04 pm

          Well said.

          I think the analogy maligns the crotalis. In 2007-2008 I caught 27 of these magnificent reptiles from peoples’ yards, as a ‘hotline’ guy with the Arizona Herpetological Association.

          A rattlesnake will not harm you unless you molest him or her. The rattlers I caught were all lovely, and most were docile, unless someone calling for ‘help’ had hosed or rocked them.

          Rattlesnakes are worthy of great respect. The police, not so much…..

          • May 22, 2012 at 5:10 pm

            I have always respected reptiles.

            As you say, rattlesnakes want no part of you; they are good Libertarians in that they generally just want to be left alone and won’t bother you unless you bother them.

            Rattlesnakes are also useful. They keep the rat/vermin population in check. I’m not so sure about the usefulness of cops. The more I ponder it, the less use I can find for them. In my life, they have been nothing more than a source of annoyance.

    • Libertymike
      May 21, 2012 at 5:04 pm

      Although the rattlesnake may provide an ecological benefit, what “benefits” do cops provide?

      • May 21, 2012 at 5:22 pm

        And: Rattlesnakes will generally leave you alone unless you pester them. Exactly the opposite of a cop.

        • May 21, 2012 at 6:18 pm

          Perhaps where we perceptually differ is that you seem to feel that “avoidance” is futile, while I believe that it is still, usually, possible. Cops will leave you alone if they don’t know you’re around.

          Granted, I spend considerable energy practicing avoidance. And there are some jurisdictions (viper’s dens,) where I simply will not go. I think that is the most cost efficient way to deal with this scourge, and get on with life.

          If you chose to live in Virginia, drive sans seatbelt, then spend energy bemoaning the fact that the vipers there are extra venomous and abundant, that’s your prerogative. ;-)

          • May 21, 2012 at 6:50 pm

            I agree it’s a good policy – however, avoidance is immaterial when it comes to such things as random checkpoints.

            And the seatbelt shit is almost everywhere. Besides, is it even remotely viable to just pack up and live someplace else? It’s no better anywhere else! Maybe one state is better here (such as gun laws, for example) but worse there (taxes – or seatbelt laws).

            What I am trying to do is get more people pissed off – so that there are enough pissed-off people to make a difference.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 21, 2012 at 7:56 pm

            AVOIDANCE

            Avoid when possible, but never forget that avoidance does nothing at all to disabuse Americans of unlawful power.

            If partisans never attack the forces occupying their country, their country will continue being occupied.

        • liberranter
          May 22, 2012 at 2:27 pm

          Exactly!

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 21, 2012 at 5:25 pm

        With a growing number of unlawful laws in their arsenal, almost none.

        Once a Precedent is on the law books, any bill that is equally or less obnoxious than the Precedent itself will almost surely become law.

        tgsam

        tgsam

        • May 21, 2012 at 7:51 pm

          Where people should get pissed off is at the city/county/state governments that enact the inappropriate laws, and allow local law enforcement to hire people of low moral character. Bad cops are the very last link in the corrupt chain of causation.

          Now when we get to federal level, we’re talking about a problem of a different magnitude (and nature.) But at least up till now, the majority of badged misconduct we encounter is local in origin.

  7. Rob
    May 21, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    I’ve been pulled over a dozen times in the past 20 years, never once was given a ticket. Why? Cause my brother was a local cop (retired now) and we have an unusual last name. The cop would ask if I was related and then let me off. So it is a buddy/who you know type of system.

    Even my retired cop-brother is sick of the police.

    Oh and I only felt a slight twinge of guilt for getting out of all those tickets ;)

    • May 21, 2012 at 7:12 pm

      And implicit in his letting you “off” is that he knows the “offense” was bullshit. Because otherwise, he consciously allowed a person who deserved punishment to avoid it. Which also means he knew he was just hassling all those other non-connected victims.

      What a shitty way to make a living!

      • Rob
        May 21, 2012 at 7:29 pm

        Yup, it was always petty bullshit violations (no seat-belt (oh the horror), not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign, 10 miles over the posted speed limit). All it was was an excuse to harass someone, make a few bucks for the State and to see if they could nail you for something else. Never once was it for something remotely dangerous to someone else.

      • liberranter
        May 22, 2012 at 2:35 pm

        What a shitty way to make a living!

        As I never tire of reminding people, if the brainless assclowns “working” in “law enforcement” today had any brains, any useful talents, any ambition, and any social skills they would be employed in the gainful, productive private sector instead of burdening the tax slaves with their existence.

        These idiots are nothing but glorified welfare cases – and not really “glorified” either.

        • AnarchoCapitalist
          May 22, 2012 at 2:56 pm

          I had a conversation with a very drunk cop at a local bar once. She said to me “being a cop is what we call on the force “white mans welfare”", I smiled politely as I threw up in my mouth a bit…

          • May 22, 2012 at 3:52 pm

            Women cops are among the worst – because they now have the power to lord it over people that they’d otherwise be powerless against. This goes for men, too – but to a lesser extent in most cases.

        • May 22, 2012 at 3:54 pm

          The welfare cases are less of a threat to decent people, too!

    • May 22, 2012 at 12:54 pm

      I agree. About a year ago I was pulled over by a cop for speeding in the taxi. turns out the cop worked security on the weekends at a bar where I would often hang out on the cab stand. He let me off with a very light warning.

  8. Libertymike
    May 21, 2012 at 7:47 pm

    Cops are, like almost every person “employed” by the state, parasites. They do not make or produce anything nor do they provide a “service” upon a voluntary, consensual basis. They do, however, take.

    More and more, I have come to the point of view that the parents of those who become cops and / or soldiers should, presumably, share some of the blame. What type of values did those parents instill in their tax feeding offspring?

    • dom
      May 21, 2012 at 8:15 pm

      Cops are weak-minded pussies looking for respect and authority. 99% of all cops I’ve ever encountered I’d classify as a piece of shit.

      • May 21, 2012 at 8:36 pm

        Yup – it goes with the turf.

        I can see how a well-intentioned person might get bamboozled into joining “the force” – hoping he’ll spend his days going after criminals. Then comes the reality. The well-intentioned person spending most of his time manning a radar gun or otherwise enforcing bullshit laws on people he knows (if he’s honest with himself) haven’t done anything wrong. Imagine spending a good part of each day demanding that people show you their ID – people who haven’t caused any harm to anyone. And giving them tickets. Or manning “checkpoints.” Ladling out shit to people who would smash you in the face – or at least, tell you to fuck off – if it weren’t for that badge and gun.

        Just like you said: “weak-minded pussies looking for respect and authority.”

        • drtypirat
          May 22, 2012 at 11:24 am

          that description, good people thinking they are going to “help” and go after criminals. Sounds like how every enforcement agency starts out but then devolves into gestapo.

          • May 22, 2012 at 11:51 am

            I give some of them the benefit of the doubt – up to a point. Meaning, I don’t disbelieve that some people decide they want to become cops for the right reason – that is, to maintain the civil order, protect people’s rights and remove criminals from circulation. But once they become cops, the reality of the work becomes clear. While they still do some of the “right” work, much of what a cop spends his days doing is enforcing vicious, tyrannical edicts – everything from nannyish “buckle up” laws and low-level intimidation/degradation of the populace at “safety” checkpoints to outright thuggery such as arresting harming-no-one people who happen to be found in possession of an arbitrarily illegal substance. And much worse besides.

            At that point, it’s the obligation of the “good cop” to either quit – or refuse to enforce the clearly tyrannical edicts (which will end his career in short order).

            Thus, most cops who remain cops are not people you want to have to deal with. You cannot have a moral sense and participate in this “work.”

            I could not participate in this work. The idea of galloping up behind some poor bastard in my Pursuit Special, pulling him over and demanding his “papers” and then issuing him a fine for not wearing a seat belt sickens me. What sort of person wants to spend his days doing that? How about degrading your fellow man by forcing him to stop his car for absolutely no reason (none that involves any legitimate suspicion of criminal activity) and submit to an interrogation. Despicable. I’d feel like a cretin doing such work.

            But the cops who do it must enjoy it – or at least, justify it to themselves. The latter tells us much about their mindset, too. That is: We’re the higher-order beings; the Mundanes are foolish/stupid/childlike (and probably guilty of something) creatures that require disciplining and herding. It’s the Master-Slave mentality.

            And the evidence of it is all too clear.

        • Strider55
          May 22, 2012 at 7:32 pm

          Don’t forget the latest wild card in this whole mess. Quite a few cops are also in the military part-time (reserves or Guard) and have deployed to Iraqistan multiple times. They spend a year or more in an environment where everyone is a potential threat. They see people on both sides killed & mutilated. They develop PTSD. Their default attitude becomes “shoot first and to hell with questions.” Then they rotate back home and bring their hair-trigger “everyone is the enemy” mindset back with them.

          Cops are supposed to be like Jedi Knights — “keepers of the peace, not soldiers,” as Mace Windu famously said. Toward that end, persons with past or present military experience (at least in combat or combat support jobs) should automatically be disqualified from civilian police duty.

      • DD
        May 22, 2012 at 3:45 am

        Worse than “Looking”…Demanding!
        They also get off by tasing people…Seriously…Sexually excited by another human being flopping on the ground at their hand…And done with total immunity from retaliation. Cops are psychotic and infantile parasites (public schoolers/TV watchers)..errr…Maybe psychotic parasites are cops.

        • Jason Calley
          May 22, 2012 at 2:43 pm

          Frighteningly enough, most police look like choir boys when compared with most Judges.

      • May 22, 2012 at 12:57 pm

        the thing is, they do not view themselves that way. The cops view themselves as paladins on motorcycles, keeping the roads safe from blah blah blah…..
        I didn’t say they WERE paladins; merely that they see themselves as such.
        And this is a major problem.

        • liberranter
          May 22, 2012 at 2:49 pm

          Most sociopaths manifest such delusions of grandeur. They aren’t the problem – oh, no, no, no. It’s everybody else who is the problem.

    • Tor Munkov
      May 21, 2012 at 8:18 pm

      Stefan Molyneux and others have written on Libertarian Parenting. A parent has the ability to raise a child in a cocoon of justice and freedom from arbitrary rules and force based behaviors.
      They may also demand that children perform age appropriate “work” 8 hours a day 5 days a week in an effort to “pay” their own way. Productive small adults can then live the lives they choose within a spectrum of miniature choices and options a parent finds permissible.

      A child’s ability to focus fantasy and play for productive pursuits instead of for meaningless lounging about like that a housepet might engage in is the beginning of a path with more chance for success and less chances for failure.

      Children Are People Too
      http://youtu.be/uoWZjeFVvfk

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 21, 2012 at 8:52 pm

      I’m more interested in repeal than blame.

    • Dissent
      May 28, 2012 at 7:57 pm

      I had a teacher in 8th grade or so, who had a son in the same grade as me. Her son is now a State Police officer. She was, what you would call, a “clover”. Not that bright in terms of reality, but always trying to impose her whim and the universal “laws” upon others. She was nice and friendly, but rather dumb and shallow.

      I once got into a discussion/debate with her. She pulled me aside, to talk privately regarding the importance of following the rules. I think it had something to do with chewing gum in school (which was banned). She became frustrated when I refuted her points.

      Thinking back, the topic got onto the subject of when “I was older” and how it’s important for me, when I’m adult, to “obey the rules of society”. As an example, and during the course of the discussion, somehow the topic got on the subject of the DMV and car registrations, which I told her about some scheme to avoid it. She became infuriated and offended and asked me “why I was trying to come up with ways to beat the system”.

      I think I responded, by telling her something along the lines of how the system is evil and needs to be beaten.

      Thinking back, its scary to think how school was just as system to brainwash kids into be obedient slaves to the State.

      It’s no surprise her son became a cop. He was a good kid, but a clover like her. He recently unfriended me on Facebook, probably due to my anti-police posts. He is clueless, endured a lifetime of brainwashing, and actually thinks a majority of the “laws” are for the “common good”; and seems to refuse to acknowledge the cognitive dissonance regarding the interest of the State and that of the people.

      Perhaps I was a Libertarian/Anarchist since I childhood — as freedom is something very natural. Teachers never liked me because I refused to conform and be molded by their State institutions. It wasn’t until I got older, that I could read, articulate, and learn fully about the subjects thanks to people like Murray N. Rothbard, Mises, etc.

  9. Tor Munkov
    May 21, 2012 at 8:00 pm

    There are few options when you under the red sun kryptonian glare of the Totalit-Aryan-Nation which is about to go supernova.

    Hate the state. Ostratize the statists and their appeasers.
    Raise your children in a state free environment with strict non-initiation of force principles, granting them full personhood and self-responsibility before the age of 2.

    Luke Skywalker & Darth Vader were both equivalently evil statists. Star Wars presented only a tautology of Jedi superiority. Gallavanting about killing strangers with light sabers is universally evil.

    Obi Ron Paul Kenobi: Do something productive and value creating with your life, Luke. Use force only as a last resort for your own protection. All initiations of force both Jedi & Sith are the dark side. Don’t be the droids they are looking for.

    A successful libertarian needs to be like the Amish, well mannered, yet resolute. Uncompromising and unassimilatable.

    To hell with Death Stars, Death Sabers, Death squads, & Death Philosophies.

    • Douglas
      May 22, 2012 at 6:19 am

      Luke Skywalker laid aside the business of trying to run the galaxy once he was boinking Mara Jade. Maybe we need to get the cops laid so they’ll get off our backs.
      Seriously, cops do NOT exist to ensure safety of individuals, they exist for purposes of PUBLIC safety, meaning they serve the interests of the State and whosoever is benefiting from it.
      Were the Second Amendment respected (here in CA it is all but nullified), adults who are by default members of the unorganized militia would be more than capable of packing whatever heat they deemed necessary. The criminal underclass would be less inclined to prey realizing, like Treyvon Martin, that they’d quickly get an up-close encounter with some hot lead. That WHY I advocate that if there is ANYTHING that the state-run schools ought to do (they really shouldn’t exist at all, but one issue at a time…) it is to train young people in basic military concepts, discipline, physical fitness, and proficiency in firearms, along with their rights and duties as members of the great state militia. The young need to be taught from the get-go that the ultimate power is with them individually and as a group of citizens, and NOT with the various organs of the State. In such a state the number and powers of so-called “law enforcement” will be considerably less, as miscreant members of the militia can be readily deal with via a courts-martial of their peers.
      Read SM Stirling books about the fictional Draka Empire in his series of novels, “The Domination”. It’s not that I think that America should be like the fictional Domination. It’s about how the power rests with the citizens and the organs of the State exist to serve them, NOT the other way around. However, committable with that is the responsibility to be ready, willing, and able to kick ass as needed!

      • MoT
        May 22, 2012 at 7:55 am

        I have to laugh when you say the “schools” should teach kids to be martial. They already do! It’s called State/Military worship and they do a damn good job of it, too.

      • May 22, 2012 at 10:12 am

        Hi Doug,

        I agree with most of what you’ve written. The fact is there was no organized police force in this country for generations – and somehow, amazingly, the country did not descend into a Mad Max-style free for all.

        So, how come?

        In part, it was because virtually all adults were armed – and the law recognized their right to defend both their persons and their property. No one had any obligation to accommodate a thug. Thugs were dealt with quickly and effectively – if not by the individuals they accosted, then by the courts. Even as recently as the 1940s, convicted murderers were put down within weeks or at most months of sentencing.

        Want to solve the (alleged) problem of “gun crime”? Easy. Impose a mandatory minimum 20 year prison sentence, without the possibility of parole, for any criminal use of a firearm. Flash a gun during the course of a robbery? Twenty tears – plus whatever the sentence is for the actual robbery. Break into a home while in possession of a firearm? Twenty years – plus whatever the sentence is for burglary. Etc.

        “Gun problem” solved. Without in any way impinging on lawful possession/use of firearms by the citizenry.

        • May 22, 2012 at 1:14 pm

          Actually, if you read Fanny Trollope on the U.S.A., you will see that in the early 19th century it did indeed get close to a free for all in places and that murderers and the like routinely got away with it when they had political pull.

          • May 22, 2012 at 4:01 pm

            As they do today – only now the murderers are in uniform.

    • MoT
      May 22, 2012 at 7:58 am

      When you simply boil it all down the entire Jedi/Sith turf battle is the equivalent of Repub/Demo fighting. Here you have two halves of the same corrupt coin. One does not exist without the other and you, citizen/slave, are to foot the bill or shed your blood so they can get their galactic rocks off.

      • May 22, 2012 at 10:04 am

        Indeed!

        I happened to be watching one of the Star Wars movies the other night. There was a scene in which young, not-yet-Darth is arguing with his girlfriend about politics. She says something like: “The politicians get together and decide what’s best for the people.” That’s her rebuttal to the call for a dictatorship by proto-Vader!

        • drtypirat
          May 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm

          haha, I saw the same scene, they ran a prequel marathon recently.
          It is funny how people think they are better off with 500+ dictators than 1 dictator.
          In some ways you are better off with just 1, easier to predict and less costly of burden on the populace to shower one “leader” with riches for “serving” the people.

        • Douglas
          May 22, 2012 at 2:08 pm

          Palpatine (aka Darth Sidious)…”The Queen (Padme Naberrie Amidala) is YOUNG and NAIVE”…two terms as elected Queen (oh, how ENLIGHTENED of the Naboo) and her service as a Senator didn’t wisen her up as to the TRUE nature of politics, never mind the Force. This version would’ve been more believable…

          On a take from a Simpsons parody, what the hell was so bad about the Emperor versus the gaggle of douchebag corrupt politicians that were running the erstwhile republic anyway? And if one reads the “history” of the SW Galaxy AFTER supposedly “tyranny” is overthrown, nothing had changed. At least Lucasfilm could more accurately project current politics onto their fictional universe. This is why, after nearly ten years since we went into Iraq and toppled the bastard Sadaam Hussein, thousands of Americans killed, many more mained, billions upon billions spent, what DID we really accomplish for all that trouble? Or do the PTB have any concern about results?

          From Ghostbusters, quoted Ray Stanz: “You haven’t been in the private sector like I have. They expect results!”

        • Strider55
          May 22, 2012 at 7:38 pm

          My favorite line from Episode III, also spoken by Padmé:

          “What if the democracy we thought we were serving no longer exists, and the Republic has become the very evil we’ve been fighting to destroy?”

          Something to ask those deluded fools who still think the US is salvageable in its present form.

          Liberty will return to these shores when the US joins the USSR on the dustbin of history.

  10. Rob
    May 21, 2012 at 10:07 pm

    By the way, last week was “National Police Week”. Did you remember to hug a cop?
    I’m pretty National Police Week just gives the cops extra immunity to administer beat-downs.

  11. Rob
    May 21, 2012 at 10:28 pm

    make that last line in my comment: I’m pretty SURE National Police Week just gives the cops extra immunity to administer beat-downs.

  12. Tinsley Grey Sammons
    May 22, 2012 at 12:10 am

    This ain’t about cars but it does involve Liberty and Justice, something that every car owner and driver should cherish. Law Predators abound on Americas streets, roads and highways while Law Parasites infest America’s legal system.

    UNCONSTITUTIONAL DRUG WAR

    Madam Speaker, I rise in reluctant support for S. 1789, the Fair Sentencing Act. My support is reluctant because S. 1789 is an uncomfortable mix of some provisions that reduce the harms of the federal war on drugs and other provisions that increase the harms of that disastrous and unconstitutional war. I am supporting this legislation because I am optimistic the legislation’s overall effect will be positive.
    –Congressman Ron Paul (July 30, 2010)

    Each successive ramping up of the federal war on drugs has made it more evident that this war is incompatible with constitutional government, individual liberty, and prosperity. It is time for Congress to reverse course. I am optimistic that S. 1789 – even with its faults – may signal that Congress is ready to begin reversing course. It is imperative that the House of Representatives pursue a dialogue on how we can end the federal war on drugs – a war that has increasingly become a war on the American people and our Constitution. –Congressman Ron Paul (July 30, 2010)

    May 21, 2012

    Nearly two years have passed and Congress has made no effort to repeal Drug Prohibition.

    Why?

    Nearly two years have passed and the Media remains silent.

    Why?

    Nearly two years have passed and the Alternative Media has nothing to say.

    Why?

    Shouldn’t the repeal of unconstitutional power be top priority? Harmless Individuals are being injured every day by the UNCONSTITUTIONAL Drug War. Shouldn’t it be obvious to every adult American that Congress’ doing nothing to correct such a monstrously criminal error is itself criminal? Don’t the many lawyers infesting Congress know that? What about the judges? Can’t they even give a lawmaker a hint over martinis?

    • MoT
      May 22, 2012 at 8:05 am

      Yes indeed. Why? Why all the focus on petty side issues when the core is deliberately ignored? Because that’s the plan. And unless you held their corrupt feet to the fire it will never change.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 22, 2012 at 3:20 pm

        Thank you for commenting.

    • Boothe
      May 22, 2012 at 6:37 pm

      Tinsley – Let me provide some rhetorical answers to your rhetorical questions. The repeal of the fictitious “War on Drugs” won’t occur because it is one justification for the all too real war on Essential Liberty (the wars on poverty, illiteracy and terrorism also playing back up in the same band). It has allowed the federal, state and local kleptocracies carte blanche authority to audit our bank accounts, rifle through our pockets, grope our genitals and seize our cars, homes and any portable valuables that we can’t “prove” are ours. The idea that possession is 9/10’s of the law be damned. If you have more than a few bucks in your pocket you could, maybe, possibly, potentially buy drugs with that money. So the constabulary in true non-judicial pre-crime fashion (in order to protect you and “the public” from your hypothetical moral incontinence, of course) will relieve you of that filthy lucre, put it in safe keeping and may eventually let you have it back. That is if you and your court-approved mercenary shyster can prove to the black robed bandit behind the bench that the money was actually yours to begin with. If not, Officer 82nd Airborne’s department, the court and (either way it turns out) “your” attorney all hit payday at your expense. It’s a great system…for government sanctioned thieves.

      But this silly-ass “War on Drugs” also denies us the one recreational drug that is far safer than alcohol (for numerous reasons); but primarily because any moron can grow Cannabis (and lots of it), thereby denying the regime much if not most of “their” liquor, beer and wine “revenue.” And that’s ignoring the billions in pot money the CIA and God knows who else in the regime rakes in due to prohibition. It’s the same way that early Amerikan tariffs forced the agrarian South to pay exorbitant taxes on imported manufactured goods or artificially elevated prices to Northern industrialists. This grievously skewed the free market economy in favor of the government and their chosen few; which led to smuggling, tax evasion and any end runs possible around the government pirates that took booty at the docks as opposed to the more honorable pirates working the high seas (who would probably only hit you once). Anyone that’s capable of tying their own shoes can see that this so-called “War on Drugs” is merely an excuse for taking our wealth and usurping legitimate power under the threat of force. If Joe Sixpack can see this (and most can), then we can be assured that the oligarchy knows damned well they can’t stop recreational drug use (and more importantly self medication and alternative / natural medicine) any more than they can stop gambling or prostitution. Simple logic and historical evidence clearly puts the lie to all the well worn official “reasons” for drug prohibition.

      I don’t doubt for one moment that the CIA / military industrial complex is up to their eyeballs in the drug trade and its obscene profits. It’s the one source of funding that is virtually impossible to trace and congress doesn’t have to approve. You can bet the “money changers” (i.e. banksters, loan sharks, money-launderers) are taking their cut too. The worse things get economically, governmentally and socially the better the market share and profitability of recreational drugs due to the natural human desire to escape from a dismal reality. As long as prohibition creates high risk then recreational drug prices and profit margin will remain artificially elevated. Those who are able to will invariably seize that opportunity.

      Those that have the force of law on their side (e.g. the CIA, DEA, narcotics cops, “confidential informants”, etc.) can and do take advantage of the drug prohibition windfall with impunity. This is why Hillary had a moment of candor and stated that there’s too much money involved to ever allow a free or even decriminalized market in drugs. Whether it was the high priests of Egypt, the Sorcerers of the Old Testament, the British Empire in China or the Cartels of Mexico those who would rule others have always sought control over any and all mind altering substances that enjoy a measure of popularity. Our fashion, modes of transportation and communication, along with energy production and consumption may have changed over the millennia; but human nature has never changed. Consequently the narcissists and sociopaths that would herd us like cattle can always count on the same old lies and tricks to work on us one generation after another. This is why Liberty, whether it relates to arms, public discourse, ingesting mind altering substances or any other individual right, is not a destination where one arrives, sets up camp and relaxes by the fire. No; achieving and maintaining a state of Liberty is a perpetual and potentially lethal struggle between free men and those who seek to oppress us.

  13. Scott
    May 22, 2012 at 1:29 am

    Here you go Eric, a crossover comment on the subject of police, feeling safe & rat bikes. Possibly a “one size fits all” solution.

    http://www.cycletrader.com/listing/2005-KAWASAKI-Kz-1000-Police-103895383

    2005 Kawasaki Kz 1000 Police

    I couldn’t help myself. Your Rat Bike article made me remember my old KZ 440 and brought back memories of always wanting a 1000 so I wandered off to Cycle Trader to check prices on the ZX10R Ninjas and this popped up. Naturally I thought of you :)

    • May 22, 2012 at 11:02 am

      I almost bought one of these – an ex-cop Kz1000 – before I found my ’83 Silverwing!

      I own a Kz900 – same basic bike as the cop Kz1000 – and know them to be reliable (and powerful) bikes. So when I was in the market for a low-cost touring bike, it occurred to me: Why not shop for an ex-cop Kz? It would have the same solid mechanicals as my Kz900 – but also a fairing and hard bags. You can pick these up for not much money.

      The only reason I don’t own one is because the ’83 Honda just kind of fell into my lap and I’d have been an idiot to shove it off!

  14. DD
    May 22, 2012 at 3:37 am

    People are too stupid to be free.
    This is why Dumbocrazy will always fail.
    State Terrorism will get even worse after the election.

  15. L C
    May 22, 2012 at 6:08 am

    Holy Shit! Where do you people live? There are about 8 cops in my entire county. They are nothing like the ones you people seem to run into. The local cops work for the Mayor or Sheriff, both are elected into office. How many of you have made a formal complaint to either, for the horrid abuse you’ve been victim of?

    Keep acting like little sheep or start standing up for yourselves. If your local cops are acting like assholes then you are letting them by not talking to your elected representatives, ie. Mayor or Sheriff. Or you are guilty of the infractions that YOUR local government has put in place. How many of you have attended your county commissioners meeting or city council meeting to complain about the regulations THEY have put in place for your police officers to enforce?

    It’s easy to sit around and complain about the end result of your not doing anything. Have another bag of chips, American Idol is coming on.

    • May 22, 2012 at 10:16 am

      Hi LC,

      I am guessing you live in a very rural area or very small town – as I do. Yes, the situation is better in areas where there’s an elected sheriff vs. a police force. Nonetheless, even in the small town scenario, we still have “safety” checks – and the cops enforce all the idiotic/tyrannical laws passed by the state and federal government.

      Th essential problem here is the laws. The cops are just a mechanism. If laws are legitimate – and cops are not legally empowered to abuse people – then cops will be less abusive. If laws are illegitimate, and cops empowered to abuse people’s rights, well, the result will be abusive cops.

    • drtypirat
      May 22, 2012 at 1:27 pm

      L C you are lucky buddy, I have friends who when went to the station to file a complaint against an officer have then been asked “why”, “are you sure you want to do that/” and then frisked and searched. It is all about intimidation.
      the solution is getting rid of the laws, then there is no reason for them to do anything. and if they aren’t imposing hteir will on others then the type of people who gravitate to those positions won’t end up there.

      here is one of the more appauling instance of “law enforcement”
      http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=39610

    • BrentP
      May 22, 2012 at 5:42 pm

      My commute to work consists of seven towns spread across two counties. My commute is nine miles. That’s nine different police forces excluding the state cops which makes ten.

      Theoretically I can have an electoral effect on three. (one town, one county, and state) Practically speaking I can have an effect on one, the town I live in. Even though I’ve had problems with them I believe it’s the only town that doesn’t have red light cameras of the seven. There is absolutely nothing I can do with regards to the others electorally. Only withhold my commerce from them.

    • Tor Munkov
      May 24, 2012 at 6:06 am

      Your local cops, sheriff, and mayor do not work for you. They are mandated and enfranchised from a top down pyramidal cabal with top capitanos installed in D.C., U.N., and NATO. They are wholly unlike salty snack manufacturers, talent show producers, and couch assemblers, who must earn your dollar in some fashion.

      They are a type of feudal Duke or Earl, permitted a certain station and latitude for violence within their assigned enclosure sector.

      All actions defined as criminal in a free society are actions involving force—and only such actions are answered by force.
      Being that prisons are filled twice to capacity with only 8% violent offenders, one must conclude that we are not a free society in regards to the rule of law. You should concede that the voting gimmick is rendered moot and meaningless, and only a dog and pony petting zoo diversion.

      Most are easily misled by sloppy expressions such as “A murderer commits a crime against society.” This is completely wrong. It is not society that a murderer murders, but an individual man. It is not a social right that he breaks, but an individual right. He is not punished for hurting a collective—he has not hurt a whole collective—he has hurt one man.

      Even if a criminal robs ten men—it is still not “society” that he has robbed, but ten individuals. There are no “crimes against society”—all crimes are committed against specific men, against individuals. And it is precisely the duty of a proper social system and of a proper government to protect an individual against criminal attack—against force.

      When all manner of extravagances of devices and offices are placed on the back of the working man, what else is this but tyranny?

      To say anything other than these unwanted sheriffs and mayors are paid in funds forcibly extracted from unwilling victims is to be a liar and a bleating Orwellian farm animal of the worst sort.

      Free people don’t need to answer to you. They are free to eat chips, watch musical talent shows, sit on couches, and complain liberally about the sorry state of their servitude.

      Free people have grown weary and enraged by the subservient uncle tom turkeys like you strutting around telling them how their coops & pens are for their own protection, instead of for the purpose of making them a cash cow and source of guaranteed income for a network of human taxslave plantation owners.

  16. Rob
    May 22, 2012 at 11:50 am

    Cop pulls a woman over.

    Cop: Ma’am do you know why I’m here?

    Woman: Cause you got all C’s in high school?

  17. Dan M.
    May 22, 2012 at 1:27 pm

    Several years ago, just a few months after I got married, my wife’s uncle gave us a beautiful old red 1947 GMC panel truck as kind of a wedding gift. It was non functional at the time, with no engine and a seriously beat up three on the tree tranny. Hell, it didn’t even have any seats. Rebulding and refurbishing that beast was a two year labor of love for me, and is a separate story in itself.

    But I digress. About halfway through the rebuild process, we had to move. A huge part of my strategy to get that chore accomplished was to hitch a tow bar onto the still non running Jimmy, pile as much stuff into it as I could, and use it to ferry our belongings to the new place. During one trip, I saw the flashing red christmas tree lights in my mirror, and sighed heavily with the realization that the license plates currently on the old van had expired in 1961.

    I was expecting a serious confrontation with a bored cop and an even more serious ticket, but he had actually pulled me over because a full length mirror inside the rear window was reflecting the sun into his face. He asked me to move it, which I did. He then proceeded to spend several minutes asking me about the Jimmy, how the rebuild was coming, and so on. I answered all his questions, making sure to stand directly in front of the rear license plate as we chatted. For a cop, he turned out to be “okay.” At least he went on his way after a while and allowed me to do the same.

    I’m in my fifties now, and this happened when I was in my early 20′s, maybe in about 1980 or so. I shudder to think what my fate might be today if I had the collosal gall to safely tow an unregistered vehicle down a public highway loaded with my personal belongings. I can see the van (and everything inside) being “impounded” for “safety” reasons and winding up becoming the personal property of the cop. I can also see myself arrested or, at the very least, ticketed on some trumped up charge, and the beginning of a long, miserable, expensive ordeal with the government.

    • May 22, 2012 at 4:00 pm

      Absolutely.

      These days, you’d probably be cited for “reckless driving” and a whole roster of other things. The vehicle impounded – etc. Hundreds, if not thousands of dollars later, you might get your GMC back.

  18. May 22, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    Unfortunately, it’s worse: too many of those who agree with you, shirk jury duty. Jury duty is where we stand up for each other, and one person’s vote can completely change the outcome.

  19. Tor Munkov
    May 22, 2012 at 3:16 pm

    NYPD Sgt. Lesly Charles Doesn’t Make Me Feel Safe

  20. RICK
    May 22, 2012 at 3:32 pm

    I see by reading that the idea of Cops stopping people and giving
    DWI test should not be done unless there is an accident. Also I read that drugs should be legalized.

    I am a commerical pilot. The FAA ties DWI directly to my pilot licence.Also drug use.

    Please read FAA FAR 91.17 and 61.15 and give me your thoughts.

    • May 22, 2012 at 3:50 pm

      Hi Rick,

      DWI testing should only be done if a specific individual gives reason to suspect he may be drunk. That I (and I’m sure most of the others here) have no problem with. What I – and others here – do have a problem with is stopping people at random without even the pretext that they appear to be intoxicated.

      That’s the difference – and it’s a very important one.

      • RICK
        May 22, 2012 at 3:59 pm

        Hi Eric
        What about FAR 91.17 FAR 61.15 and the .04 for drunk flying?
        THe rules all tie together through DOT and the DEA.

        • May 22, 2012 at 4:11 pm

          The issue here, Rick, is the Fourth Amendment. Ostensibly, the law of the land. It very clearly states there shall be no unreasonable searches or seizures, absent probable cause or a warrant. Stopping people at random who have given no reason whatsoever to suspect them of having done anything illegal is the very definition of unreasonable – if the word has any meaning.

          You are a commercial pilot. If your employer demands that you submit to drug screening or a booze check that is their right. But you have the right to not work under those conditions. And you should have the right to fly your own plane without being subjected to any sort of drug/booze test. If you fly impaired (whether as a result of booze or pot or just being tired) then you should be held accountable for your actions. Not other people.

          Let’s take it a little further. Would you support cops randomly entering homes to check for domestic abuse? If not, why?

          Americans once had the right to be left alone unless they’d done something to give a cop probable cause to suspect a crime had been committed by them or was about to be committed by them. Cops could not just detain people and force them to submit to an interrogation. This is what used to differentiate the US from the Soviet Union or East Germany.

          It doesn’t anymore.

  21. graham
    May 22, 2012 at 3:42 pm

    Part of the myth I grew up with was Nathan Hale’s quote “I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.”

    Pretty soon it will be “I regret that I took but one cop’s life for my countrymen” if the cops don’t back off and chill out. (similar to Patton’s logic “make the bastard die for his country”)

    And the dope who earlier advocated 20yrs for any gun crime… well that is only going to make it worse as they will be much more likely to shoot since the price of having surviving witness is so high.

  22. graham
    May 22, 2012 at 3:48 pm

    We are a nation that dehumanizes and trains our young men to bomb and invade innocent countries killing indiscriminately. We heap honor and worship upon them for this. Then they return to our shores, become cops, and do exactly what we trained and rewarded them to do. And WE have the gall to be puzzled by this???

  23. RICK
    May 22, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    Eric
    I would not support cops randomly comming into my house.
    Because of Fourth admendment.

    I do have the right to quit my job. I can fly my airplane without a drug test.

    The FAA says that if I want to play the game, flying, I have to play by their rules. Do you think their rules are fair?

    Like having my pilots liceses lost for DWI’s?

    • May 22, 2012 at 5:05 pm

      I oppose any infringement of any individual’s rights for any reason other than that specific individual having committed some specific, objectively real harm – or given reason to suspect he may be about to.

      Period.

      This whole business of treating responsible adults like irresponsible children because some adults (always a small minority) behave like irresponsible children is one of the the fundamental tyrannies of our time.

      And once you’ve accepted the premise – that some “greater good” justifies trampling on the rights of people who have harmed no one because someone might (might!) harm someone (in the abstract, not even a real person) – then you have opened the door to absolute despotism.

      And we’re already there, almost.

      You know – you’re a pilot. Thanks to the TSA, I have not flown and will not fly again until I can board an airplane without being treated like an incoming felony convict by a gloved goon.

      • Don
        May 22, 2012 at 5:57 pm

        Many, many people in this country do not believe that someone has to actually do something wrong (or make a credible threat of doing something wrong) before they should be punished for doing something wrong.

        That concept is foreign to them. They believe that if the possibility exists that at some point in the future there’s a chance he or she might do something wrong, then better to punish them now. It’s mind boggling.

        • May 22, 2012 at 7:12 pm

          I know – and I agree.

          It scares me more than almost anything else. These “little Hitlers” – or rather, “Hitler’s little helpers” – will cheer as people who don’t “obey the law” are rounded up and thrown away (or worse).

          Out of this nation of some 310 million, I would be surprised if even 10 million desire to live in freedom – the real deal, wherein you are free to do anything you like, so long as what you are doing doesn’t cause a provable harm to others (and in that case, the individual offender – and only the individual offender – is held accountable). Wherein no one has any claim enforceable by violence on anyone else – excepting when a person has been aggressed against. And then only against the aggressor.

          Most Americans are socialists or fascists – united by their authoritarianism and collectivism.

          Land of the free … please.

          • Don
            May 22, 2012 at 7:27 pm

            Correct. It only takes one “crisis” and everybody is punished from that day forward. It’s nothing short of penalizing life. The stupid logic of the gov’t that they can pass laws, and rules, and regulations that will keep people “safe” in every possible life threatening situation.

            And of course, these “life threatening” situations are only identified after they actually happen. The gov’t isn’t smart enough to foresee it or prevent it the first time but they promise they’ll stave off every possible subsequent occurance of it with more laws and more regulations and more usurping of our liberties – only they don’t, they fail. And the sheeple baaaa for more gov’t to keep them safe.

            Sure true freedom is harder, but you get what you pay for.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 22, 2012 at 9:59 pm

          R: Bad Law

          Don, the Judicial Industry reaps enormous profits from bad law.

          America is ruled by JDs and career office holders many of who ARE JDs. They’re all in bed together. The People have the potential power to deal with them, but they won’t.

          tgsam

  24. Ned Weatherby
    May 22, 2012 at 5:00 pm

    Folks are now becoming more concerned about a “race war” – due in part to the Trayvon Martin matter and resulting fallout. However, the only black man I currently fear is the one donning the police uniform.

    • Rob
      May 22, 2012 at 5:02 pm

      I also fear the one at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 22, 2012 at 5:47 pm

        Blood is thicker than water. I realized that except in certain transient circumstances race is more important than nationality. Black Americans might be my fellow citizens but North Europeans are Family. If that makes me a racist then I am a racist and damned proud of it.

        Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 22, 2012 at 5:55 pm

          While in Germany in 1948 I realized that in spite of all that transpired a few years previously, I felt a kinship with Germans that I did not feel for the Black American Soldiers stationed there in growing numbers.

          tgsam

          • George
            May 22, 2012 at 10:39 pm

            Likewise, I never felt any particular attachment to Black soldiers when I was in the Army in the ’80s. Theirs was an alien culture (my first exposure to rap music, for example) and the ever-present resentment against “Whitey.”

          • Scott
            May 23, 2012 at 1:27 am

            Personally, as a Black American Soldier, I just loved the *shit* out of Whitey. Seriously!

            Do you guys ever step back and listen to yourselves :)

          • Scott
            May 23, 2012 at 2:00 am

            Can I just assume from the above that you don’t much care for rap music George?

            I don’t mean this as criticism because I hate rap music, fact is I’d go so far as to not call it music since it doesn’t seem to have a melody. It has cadence,which is cool, but having a beat doesn’t mean ya got music if ya know what I mean.

          • May 23, 2012 at 10:01 am

            Mumbling/shouting repetitive doggerel to the accompaniment of an electronically generated (and also repetitive) beat box is something that involves neither singing ability nor musicianship.

            Whatever it is, cRap isn’t music.

            I consider rap to be the soundtrack of the Golden Horde – and its promotion deliberately intended to further that object.

            Some will accuse me of (sigh) racism. Well, if loathing the “culture” of the black underclass makes me a racist, so be it. I hold white trash (and other trash) in equal contempt.

            Speaking of which: George Lincoln Rockwell sought out the white underclass 40 years ago. He deliberately eschewed intellectual conversion to his cause. Someone took the hint – and picked up his brilliant idea. Lenin would approve – and understand. Sharpton, et al. instinctively “get” the concept, too.

          • George
            May 23, 2012 at 10:34 pm

            Scott, no I do not care for rap music. Even after almost thirty years, I still find it alien. That having been said, I have never had any desire to force Blacks not to listen to it. On the other hand, I have had Blacks attempt to intimidate me over my listening to classical music. Blacks think that Whitey listening to classical music is an easy target. Some of them are sitting in jail for making that mistake with me.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 23, 2012 at 1:06 am

          Whites don’t owe Blacks a damned thing other than “EQUAL protection of the laws.

        • Brad Smith
          May 23, 2012 at 3:36 am

          I would say it does make you a racist. But that doesn’t make you a bad person. Have you done actual harm to a person just because they were black? If not, don’t worry about it.

          I am also not talking about denying them your services. I believe we all have the right to choose who we give our services to.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 23, 2012 at 11:08 am

            I go out of my way to avoid hurting a Black Persons feelings. I am extremely careful about what I say because it is so easy to be misunderstood. However, there are some things that need to be said. Thus my concern over the possible extinction of the White race in America.

            White folks simply must stop running for cover every time someone uses the R* word. The White Race has as much of a right to exist and improve as any race.

            The consequences of race mixing are irreversible.

            tgsam

            *racist

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 23, 2012 at 12:01 pm

          Eric, Rockwell spent a night in my home when he visited Jacksonville Florida.

          In a conversation over dinner Rockwell explained his reasoning to me. Realizing that a moneyless White would have to do something “shocking” to gain media attention, he founded the ANP which of course was as far away from race mixing politically as one can go.

          I found Rockwell to be a keenly intelligent and cultured individual. I detected no meanness in the man.

          Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)

          • May 23, 2012 at 12:20 pm

            No question Rockwell was bright. I’ve listened to recorded interviews and the gist as I received it amounted more to a defense of free association than advocacy of abusing anyone merely on account of race/religion.

            I’m a staunch defender of free association myself. I regard it as being among the essential liberties – without which liberty is in fact not possible. If you are not free to associate (or not associate) with whomever, for whatever reason – then you are manifestly not free.

            All people have a right to equal treatment under the law in civil and criminal proceedings, etc. – and to have their legitimate rights (such as property rights, the right to possess arms, the right to free speech and so on) equally protected by the law.

            But no one has a right to attempt to impose equality of condition, or means, or anything else, at gunpoint. Or to compel people to associate/do business with anyone – for whatever reason. A free man has the right to transact business with whomever he wishes, under whatever conditions he lays down. If someone doesn’t like those conditions, they are free to not transact business with him – and to transact it with someone else. But that person has no right to use force to compel others to transact business with him, or to interact with him.

            Until such basic principles are re-learned, we cannot expect a rebirth of liberty.

          • Scott
            May 23, 2012 at 4:42 pm

            Well said Eric.

  25. Brad Smith
    May 22, 2012 at 5:15 pm

    Believe it or not when I was first in the military the MP’s were not bad at all. They generaly just broke up fights or gave out warnings. Move along, dump out that beer, put out that joint etc. We could even give them shit and they would laugh. Heck sometimes they would jump in the fight and have fun along with the rest of us. Never once did I even get a ticket so much as locked up by them.

    You know when it changed? It was when women started becoming MP’s. They must have had to change everything for them. Or at least they made that an excuse. Get pulled over by a female MP and you got a ticket. I saw one down in Panama pulling people over for drunk driving and shooting their guns in the air. This was just after we got Pineapple head and they were celebrating! There was no law against this. They were just having fun, hanging out car windows with bottles in their hands, waving flags, shooting pistols, etc. It was as if the women just couldn’t stand to see people have fun. The male MP’s pretty much just parked and watched in amazement that these people were allowed to do this.

    In a way it was a shock. How could these people be so free?

    • Don
      May 22, 2012 at 5:54 pm

      Hey Brad, I was in the Navy in Panama – Galeta Island – from 85-87.

      I remember what you’re talking about too. I’d go running late at night before a midnight shift and the MP’s would come give me shit about running so late. I remember that feeling of: just leave me the fuck alone! Just always sticking their nose in other people’s business because they could.

      • drtypirat
        May 22, 2012 at 6:03 pm

        haha, my pops used to refer to MP’s as “flies,” because all they do is eat sh!t and bother people.

      • Brad Smith
        May 22, 2012 at 8:13 pm

        Cool, you must have gone to Colon once in a while. On my second trip to Panama I had to go to AA there. It was too funny. I would walk patrol then have to sit in a class. Hi, my name is Brad and I got caught smoking pot. They would laugh and ask me what the heck I was doing in their class. It was part of my “rehab”.

        De donde le roho ganjah. (where are the big red buds)

        Probably not proper Spanish. But it was close enough.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 23, 2012 at 12:52 am

          In a week I’ll be alcohol-free for 22 years. I’m living proof that an atheist can use AA to his advantage. In my opinion,the so-called Higher Power is actually the group.

          • Brad Smith
            May 23, 2012 at 3:26 am

            Kick ass and good for you! It’s nice to hear success stories. My point about AA was that it really was not the right place for a pot head who had no intention of quiting. I stopped years ago, but just because I outgrew it. I won’t say I will never smoke again. Booze is way worse trying to give up for most people.

            I used my GI bill to get my Masters in Addictions Counseling. Never did make a penny from it. I do volunteer for a crisis line for Vets. Far too many of us are addicts. Plus I think it helps that they know I also saw a lot of stuff.

            Groups do help and so does having someone to talk to. It’s also really good if you can find friends who are not addicts or should I say no longer using.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 23, 2012 at 10:54 am

            Brad, I cringe whenever someone writes, “Alcohol OR drugs…”

            Hell, delirium tremens is much worse than opiate withdrawal.

            Interestingly, both alcohol withdrawal and heroin withdrawal symptoms peak in 72 hours. Until about a century ago, in a more sensible era, American doctors often treated alcohol withdrawal with morphine. That sure makes sense to me.

            Lawmakers and drug manufacturers have collaborated to deprive Americans of effective unimpeded relief from suffering. Sadly, only a pitiful few Americans recognize what they have done as criminal.

            Forcibly denying an Individual the right to effectively treat his own suffering is morally equivalent to inflicting the suffering. It is intrinsically criminal to do so.

            How much longer will Americans tolerate, and even support, the insane Drug War?

          • May 23, 2012 at 11:37 am

            Oh, I’d take it a lot farther than that!

            Screw the utilitarian argument. A free person has the right to ingest alcohol or pot or any other substance – for any reason whatsoever. The “why” is no one else’s business. Or at least, it’s not the business of the “the law.”

            To disagree is to base your argument on slavery: That a person’s very person (his corpus) is not his – to use and do with as he wishes – even if what he does may not be “good for him.”

            There is only one moral justification for “the law” interfering with an individual’s freedom of action: Has his action caused a specific injury to some other person? If not, then “the law” should be powerless to interfere.

            If I wish to eat bacon every day, that’s my affair. If the cop down the road prefers not to exercise (and be overweight and out of shape) that is his affair. It is not his affair – or mine – if the guy across the street is growing a plant for his own consumption on his land.

            Unfortunately, most Americans are Elmer Gantry authoritarians – they believe they have the right to point guns at people (or have guns pointed at people by duly deputized proxies) in order to impose their values, or because they believe in transferred accountability. Viz: Joe the peaceful pot smoker is contributing to violence because the guy he bought the dope from beats his wife. Of course, the same illogic is never applied to the arbitrarily legal dope, such as booze.

          • methylamine
            May 23, 2012 at 2:02 pm

            @Eric:

            YES, we must continue hammering away at the utilitarian arguments and expose the real principle–the moral argument.

            vis: Who owns my body?

            The correct answer, “I do”, militates absolutely against ANY infringement of free choice on how to comport that body.

            That said–I’m glad to see the inroads the cannabis-legalization lobby is making using the utilitarian argument. Too often, we make the mistake of ignoring a useful tool in favor of pure principle; our opponents, not hampered by intellectual honesty or morality, don’t suffer that handicap.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 22, 2012 at 9:46 pm

      Here’s a keeper.

      “Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
      ― H.L. Mencken

      I’ve had bad times in my life when I envied happy people but I never wanted to spoil their happiness.

      • methylamine
        May 23, 2012 at 2:04 pm

        TGS isn’t it ironic that the very people who call themselves “liberal” harken back to the hated Puritans in their politics?

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 23, 2012 at 5:41 pm

          I eschew labels because I’m convinced that a label can actually mean different things to different Individuals.

          Would a liberal support an across the board repeal of de facto Drug Prohibition? Or would a liberal only call for the legalization of marijuana and continue to prohibit some other drugs?

          Wasn’t that smug asshole William Buckley considered a liberal?

          • May 23, 2012 at 5:58 pm

            Buckley was considered a “conservative” – meaning, a reactionary statist as opposed to the progressive liberal sort of statist. He loved the warfare state as much as the liberal statist loves the welfare state!

          • methylamine
            May 23, 2012 at 11:38 pm

            Buckley was a change agent for the CIA–verified.

            He was largely responsible for leading the conservative movement further along its warmongering course; the National Review is a CIA front.

            And yes–he was a smug piece of shit.

  26. May 22, 2012 at 5:55 pm

    i was beaten by a cop and i went to the emergency to show my damages and document it and in court the cop said he didnt hit me but my lawyer wasnt afraid of him and yelled at the cop after showing evidence i had being assaulted , then the cop admitted he might have hit me a couple of times and then the judge says i dont believe the cop hit this young man after the cop just admitted it, portsmouth,va officer les nahue not sure of spelling and was an am a cripple ,he said he was gonna finish breaking my back ,, i hope that cop and judge and prosecuting attorney go straight to hell , early 1970,s

    • Brad Smith
      May 22, 2012 at 8:45 pm

      Damn. I hope he comes back as a three legged dog in Bangledesh. Let him get beat and kicked and have to eat out of garbage cans.

  27. May 22, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    now you know the rest of the story,what this country is up against

  28. May 22, 2012 at 6:26 pm

    police officers are supposed to be peace officers ,not law enforcement officers , cops ,judges and prosecuting attorneys are like little kids that need discipline from their parents but who are their parents gonna be when they are like runnaway kids ,and the only parents they have is the puppetmaster bankers who say keep doing what you are doing and we will pay and reward you well,now you know the rest of the story

  29. George
    May 22, 2012 at 10:24 pm

    “Oh, you citizens who love to travel! Do not forget that in every station there are a GPU branch and several prison cells.”
    - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago, Volume 1.

  30. Alex
    May 23, 2012 at 2:06 am

    Agree completely with this article, but I will say that geographical location and population density are a factor when dealing with LEOs.

    Out West, with obvious exceptions for California, Western WA & Western OR, cops & state troopers are not too obnoxious – have a more libertarian bent, tolerate reasonable victimless infractions more so than other regions, don’t get freaked out when they see a gun in your car(most of the West is gun friendly, probably because of the long distances if you’re attacked by a criminal)and so on. In much of the South and the East Coast it’s been my experience that they are more petty, write more tickets on the slightest pretext and are overall just more abusive of their powers and I think it’s due to the higher population density.

    If you want to see the future, if people don’t wise up, just look at what’s going on in Tennessee, a beautiful state ruined by VIPER checkpoints, unreasonable searches and seizures.

    I suspect when they go too far you’ll see more violence between cops and civilians, regardless of the odds of resistance, starting from those with nothing to lose.

    • May 23, 2012 at 9:57 am

      Density is a factor in my experience, too. In part because in a low density areas, you stand less chance of having to deal with them at all. And if you do, as you say, they tend to be less obnoxious. I think it’s because low density areas tend to have elected sheriffs rather than appointed police chiefs. It imposes at least some accountability.

      Nonetheless, I agree with you that we’re rapidly approaching the shit or get off the pot moment. Either enough of us will decide – that’s it, I’m not talking it anymore – or all of us will live in a continental gulag.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 23, 2012 at 10:27 am

        Armed with bad laws, police have become revenue collectors. It is insufferable but what exactly should the People do about it?

        tgsam

    • Scott
      May 23, 2012 at 10:43 pm

      “starting from those with nothing to lose”

      I think this is an accurate prediction of how its going to go down. It will start with those who have nothing to lose. As social analysts looking for the “tipping point”, we’d be well advised to consider this observation well; it has immense predictive capacity.

  31. May 23, 2012 at 4:09 am

    Didn’t the great philosopher, social observer and commentator Mick Jagger warn us over 40 years ago that “every cop is a criminal?”

    Frank Chodorov was more specific: “Since every privilege amounts to getting something for nothing, no privilege can be self-enforcing. Taking property always requires force, and legalized force is the most expedient. The sovereignty of the state, backed by general acquiescence, is the source of privilege. It is the gangster’s gun made shiny by the law.”

    • May 23, 2012 at 9:50 am

      Frank Chodorov (and Leonard Read) saw what was coming 75 years ago. We’re almost there now.

      • Mike in Spotsy
        May 24, 2012 at 3:22 am

        John T. Flynn, in “As We Go Marching” (published in 1944) saw that we had already become a fascist nation. And Garet Garrett wrote an essay in 1938 stating that anyone worrying about revolution coming to America was looking in the wrong direction, because it had already happened. What used to be America no longer existed by that time.

        The concept of America died many decades ago, but the brainwashing of the schools and the media have kept the great majority of the sheeple from realizing it.

        • May 24, 2012 at 9:50 am

          It did die a long time ago – in principle. But it took another few decades to slough away the residue of liberty that still existed just by custom and habit. As you say, by the 1980s, legally speaking, we were already a police state. But cops and other authorities were somewhat restrained by the general Gestalt about the rule of law and that cops and so on were public servants, etc.

          Now we’ve lost even that. The populace, at large, is incredibly servile – and more and more people have been imported who have no cultural affection for liberty even as a vague inclination. People such as the cretinous John Woo, for example. This is not “racist,” either. It’s just a statement of fact that the American core has been diluted extensively by people who come from countries and cultures that have a tradition of both collectivism and authoritarianism. To not expect that these traditions – and mindset – come with them is just silly.

          Meanwhile, as you say, the already-here Americans are conditioned by government schools to be just as authoritarian-minded.

          In 20 years, this country will be the Soviet Union. Not a rhetorical device. The actuality. The population will have been completely habituated to servitude. A generation will have reached adulthood with no memory of a time when one did not have to raise one’s arms in the I surrender! pose and submit to a physical search just to get onto an airplane. What outrage (by our standards) will such people not supinely tolerate?

          For more than ten years already, the presidency has become an overt dictatorship. In the past, its power was at least somewhat restrained by the lingering fumes of republican (small “r’) forms and process. But since 2001 we have had a Decidership – not a presidency. Each new Decider just decides. And that’s it. Der Fuhrer befehl – under wir folgen.

          Obamacare will be affirmed. There will then be no legal limit whatsoever to the authority of the federal government to intrude into and micromanage our lives. Nothing – not the smallest corner – will be left to us. “Safety” and “security” have already vitiated almost every meaningful former legal bulwark we once had against the state’s authority. But there were still a few scraps of personal discretion. We could, for example, choose to eat the foods we liked – in whatever quantity we liked. We could still choose to go for a hike in the woods without asking permission or registering with some authority. Most of us could still possess guns.

          When Obamcare blooms, all of that will be over. Our “health” will be the new “safety” and “security.” The new pretext for the final, total lockdown of America. Nothing we do will be outside the scope of the government’s authority. Some will say I am being hysterical, that I am exaggerating. And it’s true that at first, we will probably not see much in the way of new encroachments. No, the government will not impose a national cheeseburger moratorium or take away your motorcycle because of the danger it poses to your “health.”

          At first – for awhile.

          But if you believe it will not get there in time, piece by piece, then apparently you haven’t been paying attention.
          The fact is the legal precedent will have been established. And – just as random “sobriety checks” set the precedent for warrantless, probable cause-free stops and searches – and led to I surrender! and feel ups at airports and much worse than that – so also will “health” become the basis for telling you, in torturous detail, what you may and may not do in your personal life.

          What’s left of it.

          Meanwhile, the Fourth of July approaches. The American Idol-addled populace will watch displays of fireworks they are not allowed to possess as they cheer freedoms they no longer have.

    • Scott
      May 24, 2012 at 2:24 am

      Chris, it’s comments like yours that keep me coming back to this site (no offense Eric, I like your stuff too). I’d never heard of Frank (Fishel) Chodorov or the “Old Right” until today. Thanks.

      • May 24, 2012 at 9:57 am

        Check out the Foundation for Economic Education – if it still exists. When I was a college kid I stumbled on their publications, which turned me on to Chodorov and Leonard Read, among others. Names mostly forgotten today – voices in the wind from 70 years ago.

        • Mike in Spotsy
          May 24, 2012 at 12:15 pm

          It’s still around…website is fee.org. It has great stuff, including full text of Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson” and Read’s “I, Pencil”.

  32. david
    May 23, 2012 at 4:32 am

    “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
    ― Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

    I hope it doesn’t come to this in the USA, but everyone should be aware that we’re headed there.

    • Tinsley Grey Sammons
      May 23, 2012 at 10:19 am

      Je mehr desto besser! (The sooner the better).

  33. May 23, 2012 at 4:42 am

    Did you just get a ticket, E?

  34. methylamine
    May 23, 2012 at 2:27 pm

    They have rigged the system such that even a very minor “offense” (such as a seatbelt ticket) can lead to severe repercussions as the additional charges pile on.

    I hear you Eric. It’s a nice fantasy; but the fact is, we live in a prison.

    I’m entertaining expatriation again.

    The latest news has been extremely disturbing, especially taken as a gestalt of the country’s demeanor. Mix in the complaisance of the average Amoricon…nay, the active support…and we’re in for a very deeply unpleasant ride:

    NDAA–indefinite detention, no habeas corpus
    NDRP–nationalizing all resources, transportation, energy, food; because the president thinks it’s a good idea when the time comes
    DHS buying >600m rounds of ammo, and mobile bulletproof pillboxes
    2010 Army document detailing “re-education” camps, complete with prescriptions for dealing with political dissidents and organizing work gangs among the inmates; references to processing prisoners by Socialist Security number. Afghans don’t have SSN’s.
    ex-patriot act–you can’t leave, slave, and if you do we’ll steal your shit
    FATCA–how cute, sounds like “fat cat”; makes it almost impossible for Amerikans to open a foreign bank account. Keep your money here slaves, we’re going to need it ALL soon!
    Money-sniffing dogs and DHS (or do I repeat myself?) at the airplane gates; questions about precious metals on departing international flights
    Looming false flag attack; I’m almost convinced it will be Chicago, we’ll find out next month.

    The hairs on my neck are standing up; “by the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes.” I’ve vacillated on this point so much over the last four years–but it’s getting very, very heavy, very quickly.

    The chief reason I’m leaning to the GTFOOD (GTFO of Dodge) camp again is simple; my kids. I can stand it. I’ll be that guy, along with close friends, that Solzhenitsyn wished for, lurking in ambush in the hallway when the NKVD comes. But who will protect the kids? My sister and brother-in-law don’t understand what’s happening. My parents are too old.

    And how long is this going to take? Will there be a mighty fight for a few years, where 30% of the populace (same percentage as during the Revolutionary War) has to rapidly go through the next stages (they’re in Denial now), transitioning through Anger with a total breakdown, grid-down scenario before they cast off the foreign bankster occupation?

    Or will it grind on, a bleak Soviet system to make Orwell weep?

    And how far will the foreign occupying bankster elite scumbags go to hold their prize? As far as I can tell, they’re bat-shit crazy at this point. All Elites degenerate to insanity over several generations, and this group is no different; will they make good on their eugenics/depopulation agenda, and unleash the really nasty weapons?

    I’m not sure it’s worth staying to find out. I’ll miss my parents and sister terribly; but I’m sure Germans who made it out in the 30′s made peace with their separation.

    • May 23, 2012 at 6:04 pm

      I may end up coughing forth a rant on this subject!

      • methylamine
        May 24, 2012 at 2:50 am

        I’d enjoy your take on it, and I’m sure we’ll all profit from the comments.

        Please do!

    • Scott
      May 24, 2012 at 6:17 am

      I’m unfortunate enough to be with you Mr. Amine. For years I thought about it, for a few more years I talked about it. Now I’m taking my wife and mother on a trip we may never come back from.

      May you live in interesting times.

      • methylamine
        May 24, 2012 at 5:26 pm

        Please keep in touch. I don’t know how fast I’m going to move on this; I *might* be able to swing buying a property w/out leaving immediately, and bugging out at the last moment. Not sure I have enough money to do it though.

        Expats should definitely stay in contact!

  35. Brad Smith
    May 23, 2012 at 3:38 pm

    In Michigan it has become a huge revenue scam as well. We now have the “driver responsibility law”. What a fine piece of garbage that one is. Aparently it means that it’s now your “responsibility” to pay the state it’s cut when the tax feeders pull you over.

    Yep, you not only have to pay your regular fines to the local jurisdiction, but now it’s your “responsibility” to pay a boatload of fines directly the the State Treasury Department. Everything from driving without a seatbelt or license to DUI get’s you exta fines that you pay directly to the state. I think my favorite is no proof of insurance. Even if you have insurance it doesn’t matter. You must have proof of insurance on you. The “responsibiity” is a $200 fine for two years, so the state gets $400 on top of what you have to pay locally for simply forgetting to put a piece of paper in your car.

    Reckless driving is $500 X 2.

    My wife recently was told to be responsible to the tune of $300 for not renewing her license on time, Not that we plan to pay it. What are they going to do, take our lisence or the taxes we don’t pay either?. It had been over ten years, just a little bit of our personal protest. Between the two of us it was around 22 years of driving without one.

    Ps. Don’t forget to thank them and smile!

    • Tor Munkov
      May 23, 2012 at 4:22 pm

      It’s just a tax. I made for decades with no insurance, but now they have plate readers and software that flags fictitious registration, whatever means.
      I know a guy that has “runners” who can smog vehicles, get tabs and many other official things without my involvement, but I knuckled under after about the third time explaining I was from out of state and all that cal to the grinning monkeys waiting to rip my face off, once they get the radio response from the Organ Grinders at HQ.
      Even Ted Nugent wouldn’t qualify for self-insurance in Michigan. It’s only like 20/40/10 meaning 20k a person and 40k max for people and 10k max for property. Nugent’s worth over 10 million but he better have the 50k in special Mr. Monopoly’s money or he’ll find himself in a hell of a shitstorm.
      I’d like to see data on premiums collected versus payouts, I’m sure it’s 100 to 1 or worse.

      • Brad Smith
        May 23, 2012 at 5:25 pm

        Right on! It’s a big scam. It’s also one of the reasons why I never take a loan out for anything. Pay cash and they can’t force you to buy worthless insurance. That includes my house, cars and property. F them. But I live out in the middle of BFE. I do keep insurance on one car but that is mainly in case I hit a deer.

        Ps. Ted is an odd duck but actually a nice guy. He showed up at my buddies hunting camp asking for milk one morning. Their properties are next to each other. I think he said he was making pancakes. My band puts on a benefit for our after school program and he donated a signed rack that we raffled off. Then he stopped in and played a set with us. (It’s a ladies night off party)

        One more thing on insurance I think it’s fine if people choose to buy it. But if you do a lot of business it’s cheaper to take the money you would pay and put it in escrow. UPS insurance sucks they never want to pay claims.

        I mostly make my living playing guitar, But I also fix up guitars and sell them. I’m also one of the guys you see selling guitars stamped “2nd’s” or “used”. I have sold literally thousands. I buy from MIRC. (Ask for Ken if you look them up) He is a bow hunter and generally very cool guy. I also have an e-cig business, I build and sell “mods” and make up e-juice. Not so much to make a profit but to help people quit smoking. Insurance on them is also a waste.

        • May 23, 2012 at 6:00 pm

          Brad,

          Is “Ted” the Ted? The Ted of tooth, fang and claw?

          • Brad Smith
            May 23, 2012 at 6:17 pm

            Yah it’s him and he is a big government douchebag. But in person he is a nice guy. I try and accept anyone’s point of veiw. My wife on the other hand woulnd’t take the time to spit in his face.

          • May 23, 2012 at 6:46 pm

            I like his music!

            And I have a friend (well, had) who I bet is a lot like him: Gung-ho macho; rabidly pro-Republican/pro kick-the ragheads’ ass, etc. It got so the stuff we had in common became less than the stuff we don’t – so I don’t see much of him anymore.

          • Scott
            May 24, 2012 at 6:32 am

            http://www.vulture.com/2008/10/ted_nugent_explains_his_person.html

            Pretty much says it all about Ted.

            Chevy Chase (aka Dr. Rosenpenis) : “Ted. Ted Nugent”

            – Fletch

          • May 24, 2012 at 9:11 am

            Chevy Chase has lost his sense of humor – but back in the day, he was brilliant. Fletch was – is – hilarious!

    • Douglas
      May 24, 2012 at 4:43 am

      On a slightly different vein, but which still amounts to the State of “Californicate” inventing new ways to plunder the pocketbooks of its residents and others unlucky enough to be snared: I have a diesel-sipping “vee-hikkel” (1995 Mercedes E300 with the 3.0 inline six) which is three model years too older to require biannual smog inspections. On the “nooer” ones, I guess that diesel cars and light trucks are causing the skies of the great state of “Californicate” (thank you, RedHotChiliPeppers, for causing me to dream of “Californication”) to fill up with soot not unlike the rooftops of jolly ol’ London in Mary Poppins, eh? Can’t we just send Bert to “chim-chim-men-nee” sweep the skies of the Golden State clean? Anyway, the solution for CA DMV is to impose a “smog abatement” fee, explaining that it’s a surcharge levied on vehicles that are by their nature EXEMPTED from the biannual smog inspections. Their justification for this petty larceny ($94) is that the monies raised go for the buying up of “gross polluters” because they be “po folks” that “cain’ts ‘fford to pay to fix they vehikkels that be pollutin’”, (no, gotta prioritize, as the fictional Senator Jay Billington Bullworth said in ‘Bullworth’, the malt liquor and chicken wings). So my fees are doubled since I’m otherwise exempt from this smog crap. Never mind that there’s no agreement from climatologists, industrial hygienists, physicians, and related disciplines as to the actual public health danger of diesel exhaust! The soot that we often see when a diesel plant is laboring (or it’s just tired) is little more than very finely powdered charcoal (soot!). Since they operate under conditions of excess air (go back to your basic thermo classes and stoichiometry), by definition under normal operating conditions diesel exhaust is very clean. The worst that needs to be dealt with is some NOx and diesels don’t lose as much power as a comparable gasoline plant from an EGR system.
      My guess is that some bean-counter figured out that there’s a sizeable enough community of diesel die-hards like myself that getting this fee through the state legislature, then programming the DMV computers to sort out the applicable vehicles and levy the fee(s) was well worth it.
      If they figure out how to tax a sunny day, we’re even more fucked.

      • Scott
        May 24, 2012 at 6:46 am

        Doug, you should be happy the people of the Great State of Californicate just don’t shoot you and be done with it.

        Whining. All I hear these days is whining.

        :)

      • May 24, 2012 at 9:17 am

        I hadn’t heard about this one yet, Doug – thanks for bringing it to my attention. Is it $94 per year? Or just a one time hit?

        • Douglas
          May 25, 2012 at 5:50 am

          Supposedly it’s a present from the previous Guv, “Ahh-nold…”. Again, it’s not like $94/yr is going to break a guy pulling down in the low six figures, but, it’s another example of invention of a reason to tax for mere existence. Supposedly it “offsets” the fact that vehicles like my crowfoot oil-burner have been exempted from the biannual smog process and therefore haven’t been “contributing”. Forget the explanation of the combustion processes of gasoline (or Otto cycle) versus diesel engines and how their respective emissions are quite different. We that rely on compression-ignition didn’t have to visit the friendly smog station, licensed by the all-benevolent state, and pony up money to stick a probe up the car’s exhaust and see if it offends. On newer diesels, there are standards for smog inspections, but the trucking industry managed to keep CARB away from imposing these requirements on older vehicles (the potential minuscule benefit would be greatly outweight by effectively scrapping hordes of useful engines/vehicles since retrofitting wouldn’t be practical). The point is, besides the other benefits of a diesel (much better fuel economy and usually a far more durable engine), it was nice to hot have to “get pass the Dragon” (e.g, pass “Smaug”, LoL). So now I pay a surcharge for the “privelege”.
          Scott, you’re an asshole. You reach in your fucking pocket and pony up your hard-earned dough for bullshit reasons, then, when the pricks in your state/municipality invent even more creative ideas for plundering you. There are times I’d wish they’d just shoot me, but there’s no profit for the PTB in that. No, they need all of us morons to slave away and keep ponying up…
          At some point, ya gotta jump aboard the ship of His Majesty’s trading company, seize the tea, smash open the crates, dump the contents into the harbor, then piss in it. The “man” has to get the message loud and clear, as our forefathers that each had a pair down there, that we’re not gonna take it, anymore (thank you, Dee Snider).

          • May 25, 2012 at 9:05 am

            Even if you can “afford” it, it’s outrageous. It’s another assault on property – specifically targeted at property owners who prefer not become property debtors by keeping an older (paid for) car rather than sign up for a monthly payment plan on a new one.

            It’s an example of the “nudge” (how I despise that term) technique peddled by people like Cass Susstein. These coercive utopians are incapable of leaving their fellow men alone. And the worst part about them is that individually, they’re cowards who would never dream of raising a hand against the people they lust to control – for the eminently good reason that they’d get their smug little faces pushed in. So what do they do? They become shyster lawyers, “community activists,” bureaucrats and politicians. Then they can remain safely in their offices, signing papers that send armed goons out to do their deeds for them.

  36. Brad Smith
    May 23, 2012 at 6:05 pm
    • Scott
      May 24, 2012 at 6:51 am

      What if pigs could fly?

  37. That One Guy
    May 24, 2012 at 2:49 am

    So the city has added walking dogs on the beach to the litany of things we are no longer allowed to do. Actually it has been for awhile but enforcement has been ramped up tremendously because someone determined it harms the seal population. It seems they won’t haul out on the beaches if they smell dog poop. No word yet on the effects of the 25 reporters, photographers and game wardens that swarm on every harbor seal pup that crawls up on the beach, but I digress…

    They’re now posting police officers on the beaches to enforce this law. Ran into one today. Mind you, this guy was old enough to be one of the high-timers making around 100K/year. He was sitting in the car yelling at people over the PA to get their dogs off the beach. My cousin and I walked up to him and made sure we were “in compliance” if we stayed on the trail above the beach. Nice enough guy, he wasn’t of the Officer 82nd Airborne generation of cops. Oh yeah yeah, he says. Then he leans toward us and in a lower voice says “I think it’s a stupid law anyway. I have dogs and I do it all the time. There’s no better area for them to run off-leash in open space.”

    My God…

    • methylamine
      May 24, 2012 at 2:53 am

      And yet.

      There he sits; just “doing his job”.

      And with every little action like that, the hell-hole gets deeper. What a god-damned hypocrite he is.

      TOG don’t let yourself think “eh, he’s a nice enough guy.” No. He’s an evil little troll bereft of principle.

      • That One Guy
        May 24, 2012 at 3:16 am

        Yeah I hear you. I suppose it’s a matter of degrees; when you meet one not wearing the mirror aviators, sticking his chest out at you practically begging you for an excuse to administer the wood shampoo, it’s deceptively disarming.

        I catch an unbelievable amount of hell every time I point out to friends and family that these guys and the sainted military are going to turn on us violently, and although a number will make the moral decision, it won’t be near enough to make a difference. This is, after all, probably the most sacred canon of the American religion. There are even a few here who refuse to accept this.

        There’s always the story of the nice family man flipping burgers with one hand and pushing his kids on the swing with the other. But it’s what they do with the uniform on that we need to pay attention to. That’s what we must stress.

        And the fact is, I cannot think of one single instance in the history of the martial forces of this country disobeying extra-Constitutional orders, and this history has been an interest of mine for some time. Not one instance. If someone else can, please enlighten me. All I find in the dusty scrolls is time and again, from the Whiskey Rebellion to OWS, they turn their weapons on we the people when asked, rather than bite the hand that feeds.

        History proves that you should expect nothing less from a professional soldiery.

        • dom
          May 24, 2012 at 3:35 am

          I don’t know about ya’ll, but I am totally looking forward to the eye in the sky!

          Groups Concerned Over Arming Of Domestic Drones

          http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/05/23/groups-concerned-over-arming-of-domestic-drones/

          • That One Guy
            May 24, 2012 at 3:50 am

            A good sign, but I won’t hold my breath for the ACLU to get this one right. How nice of the cop to promise he’ll only turn his tear gas and rubber bullet-armed spy drones on us if we’re “suspected of criminal activity.” That makes me feel so much better, like Obama not planning on using NDAA.

            Some months ago Eric posted a column about the increasing use of these R/C snoop planes domestically, and I remember commenting that I was worried about how these aircraft would maintain separation from other aircraft with the limited field of view. There’s no substitute for a head on a swivel, just like the problem with backup cameras, only at a few hundred knots rather than two.

            Well guess what happened last week:

            http://www.infowars.com/spy-drone-almost-causes-mid-air-collision-with-jet-over-denver/

          • May 24, 2012 at 9:23 am

            Trusting that “wise” and “good” overlords will “only use their powers for good” – was The Chimp’s argument for the Patriot act and bought by the Republican rabble that supported him. The Chimp is a good kreeschun may-un, they crooned.

            And here we are.

          • BrentP
            May 24, 2012 at 3:18 pm

            I probably sound like a broken record but I’ll say it again. Americans like their laws to be control freakish and selectively enforced. Not on them, but that other guy, over there, who’s ‘bad’.

            Americans by and large want everything to be illogical emotional social system where two people can do exactly the same thing and one is an evil baby killer and the other is horrible individual that deserves to rot in hell.

            It’s always about who a person is and who he knows and how well liked he is.

            This police and nanny state will collapse the moment it applies all the laws to just about everyone. Where ten over clover in a new Taurus isn’t ‘good people’ any longer and he gets treated the same as some teenager driving an old far-canned winged Civic in primer or worse yet some flashy yellow paint job with a body kit.

          • BrentP
            May 24, 2012 at 3:20 pm

            opps messed that up… where one is an evil baby killer that deserves to rot in hell and the other is just misguided or just made a mistake or didn’t do anything unusual.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 24, 2012 at 6:40 am

          Professional Soldiery

          At least the Draft maintained a large Civilian-minded element in the Military. Perhaps the Military Draft was after all a lesser evil that should be reinstated

          • Scott
            May 24, 2012 at 6:57 am

            I think you’re on to something here Tinsley. The Swiss have managed with a civilian militia for going on 300 years or more. Hasn’t hurt them a bit and you’ll notice they don’t frequently get themselves involved in wars of aggression.

            I’d also suggest that all civilian police be unpaid volunteers. It just makes sense.

          • May 24, 2012 at 9:09 am

            Another thing about Switzerland that’s probably relevant: It’s a very small, extremely homogeneous country. This provides both cohesion and political accountability that’s impossible here.

          • Scott
            May 24, 2012 at 7:43 am

            BTW, in tribute to your idea I have just resigned from a volunteer police force that recently started charging for service.

            For bringing this moral argument to my attention, I thank you. It’s my hope I have done justice.

          • Scott
            May 24, 2012 at 8:00 am

            Here’s the bottom line Tinsley: who are the good guys?

            You create a draft and all you get is a random sample of the population. I’ll admit that’s a lot better than the self selected sample we have without a draft, but it still doesn’t get you people who actually understand and care about the law.

            I think a volunteer army is a good idea. I think a volunteer civil militia (police) is a good idea.

            What I don’t think is that either of those principals work in practice. Why? Because most folks are sitting on the couch eating butterscotch cool-whip brownies and watching American Idol on TV. Nobody is taking their dog out for a five mile hike in the woods looking for lost campers. It JUST isn’t happening.

            And therein lies the rub.

          • Tinsley Grey Sammons
            May 24, 2012 at 12:54 pm

            Scott, Although it is far from perfect, I’m afraid the random sample is the best we could ever do.

          • Scott
            May 24, 2012 at 8:36 pm

            Of course you’re right Tinsley and I think the Swiss have proven that. I’m just grumpy.

    • Brad Smith
      May 24, 2012 at 2:13 pm

      I used to have fun warning tourists that the beach in Monterey wasn’t clothing optional. It was a thousand dollar fine just for going topless. So I saved the ladies a thousand bucks and got to check out their ta ta’s.

      I actually only bothered to warn them when I would see the police coming around.

      Another good one was in Santa Cruz, they made it illegal to feed the parking meters for anyone but yourself. Someone, I think it was a woman was putting money in the meters when people had run out of time. Of course this was costing the tax feeders money, so they were having none of that.

      • Don
        May 24, 2012 at 2:22 pm

        Nice! ;)

        The city of Orlando, Fl has passed ordinances making it illegal to feed the homeless.

        That’s why when anybody starts spewing nonsense about America being a free country I just go home and watch porn. At least porn is a fantasy I can get onboard with.

        http://abcnews.go.com/ad/introAd3.html?goback=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com%2FUS%2Farrested-feeding-homeless-orlando%2Fstory%3Fid%3D13802769

        • BrentP
          May 24, 2012 at 3:32 pm

          Interesting. Those in government recognize there is more undesirable behavior when a private group subsidizes it but when they have government do it suddenly there’s this huge blind spot.

        • Tinsley Grey Sammons
          May 24, 2012 at 4:45 pm

          Methinks that this merits Critical Thinking before drawing any conclusions.

        • Brad Smith
          May 24, 2012 at 4:53 pm

          They actually arrested them. That is messed up.

          In Santa Cruz they really started cracking down on the homeless too. They used to hang out and panhandle At the outdoor mall (Pacific Garden). The city took out all the benches and passed a bunch of other BS too. The panhadlers were half the fun, there would be all kinds of entertainers. Everything from an old guy who played his violin to folk singers. They chased them all out and now it’s just meth heads begging on the sly. The cops leave them alone because they are usually begging for bus fair.

          They are also having problems with the homeless peeing in public. Well possibly if the tax feeders got off their ass and cleaned the public toilets instead of walking around posturing up they would use the bathrooms instead of the alleys. By far the nastiest bathroom I have ever seen is the bus terminal in Santa Cruz.

      • Tinsley Grey Sammons
        May 24, 2012 at 4:55 pm

        By July 4, 1976 I had begun to avoid places where crowds gather. Somehow it just stopped being fun.

        The last great gathering that I actually enjoyed was Mardi Gras 1972. In my experience that was the last great Mardi Gras. But ’72 was the beginning of the end of the Vietnam Era.

        • Brad Smith
          May 24, 2012 at 5:31 pm

          We have a good festival called the Posen Potato Festival. (well it used to be fun) 30,000 people packed into a town that normaly holds under 500.

          But even it has gotten to be a pain so I don’t go as much anymore. For starters the parade annoys me because of the pro-state BS. They start it off by singing the national anthem with a bunch of cop cars lined up and their new drug vehicle (looks like a tank on wheels) Everyone stands there with their hands over their hearts except me. So I get some really dirty looks. Then the vets parade through which is fine, except I know most of them are not even combat vets, but they walk around all day like they are.

          The tax feeders of course are always out in force, pulling everyone over. This is a tiny town that normally has zero police. They come to town to make money of course.

          They even arrested some WWII vets for standing on the sidewalk protesting.

          I only go now to put some change in my pocket playing at the beer tents or parking lot, then I get out of town.

          When the vets got arrested for protesting, I had my band set up in the parking lot right behind the stand waiting to play after the parade. So we blasted the cops out with this song and we all ended up locked up with them, for disturbing the peace.

          Probably not your kind of music but the words were perfect for the occasion.

          • methylamine
            May 25, 2012 at 3:04 am

            Not usually my type of music…but in the context I love it!

            Music’s been a great form of protest and resistance. I visited Estonia once, and a local was telling me about how they taunted the Russians with traditional ethnic Estonian songs. The Soviets forced them all to learn Russian…but they kept their culture and language alive during the occupation with their music.

            When the broken Soviets left, the Estonians picked up right where they’d left off.

        • Scott
          May 24, 2012 at 8:51 pm

          So I’m hearing you’re a guitarist Brad? I play myself, mostly folk rock stuff; Crosby, Stills, Nash (not much Crosby really) and a lot of Young. Some Paul Simon, Dan Fogelberg, maybe a little Stealy Dan when I’m feeling weird. Just started covering a guy from Wyoming named Dave Stamey.

          You solo or do you have a group?

          • Brad Smith
            May 24, 2012 at 11:04 pm

            If I can get paid I play it. For my own fun I do actaully prefer playing acoustic and singing solo maybe just another acoutic player adding in leads.

      • Scott
        May 24, 2012 at 8:41 pm

        Brad, you’re showing your age. Santa Cruz is clothing optional now, I don’t even know how long its been that way. You can drop trow on the Pacific Garden mall and nobody can do anything about it. You can also light up a fatty and you won’t even get a ticket.

        Santa Cruz has a lot going for it, but its a weird sort of totalitarian libertarian state. They just passsed a whole bunch of laws about how many times a month you can rent your house. The Planning and Zoning department is completely out of control, but in most other respects its a pretty good county.

        • Brad Smith
          May 24, 2012 at 11:26 pm

          I didn’t know that. I remember the nude beach by Natural Bridges though. What is up with the rent thing? Are they mad about people renting to party people?

          It was a strange place back in the day as well. But like you said far from the worst. As a kid I loved the boardwalk. As a teenager and later I loved the mall. You could buy anything you wanted, but it was mostly weed and lsd. I surfed Santa Cruz once in a while by the lighthouse, the Mavericks was fun to watch but beyond my skill level.

          Is the Catalyst still up and going? I saw some great bands there.

          • Scott
            May 25, 2012 at 12:24 am

            Yep, the Catalyst is still going. I saw Stephen Stills there last year. And the mall is almost the same as it used to be, most of it’s been rebuilt now after the big earthquake in 89. The old Cooper House is gone though.

          • Scott
            May 25, 2012 at 8:58 pm

            I forgot to cover the rent thing. They’ve decided that people who rent their houses to people for less than a month should pay a special tax because their a vacation rental. They’re doing the same thing to people who do short term rentals of rooms in their homes (boarding houses), they have a “transient occupancy tax” that’s a little over 10% of whatever the owner charges for shelter.

            It really sucks in my opinion. Doesn’t make any sense at all. Transient occupants put less load on city and county services than permanent long term renters because the property isn’t occupied 100% of the time. I have no idea how they justify this nonsense.

  38. Brad Smith
    May 25, 2012 at 1:43 am

    I remember when the Cooper House went down. Loma Prieta. I was in the barracks on Fort Ord just getting off duty. It also messed up my favorite record/book shop. Logos. I remember when they had it set up in the tent type of thing waiting to find a new place.

    I was still living in East Salinas at the time and my wife was home with our kids when the earthquake hit. That was something else. It started out like any other one then it got violent.

    Half of my family still lives in Salinas and Watsonville. My Grandfather moved from Mexico to Watsonville he built houses and worked on the Big Sur bridge. He lived just down from the Giant Artichoke on Merrit street.

    Planet Ord is strange now that it’s closed.

  39. Walker
    May 25, 2012 at 12:28 pm

    I was a cop back in the early 90s, so I have seen this issue from both sides. And this article is SPOT ON. The cops are no longer protectors of the citizens, they are oppressors of the citizens. I absolutely dread dealing with cops, even though I have the experience to know what to say and do in a legal encounter. But that can’t protect me from the cop that isn’t interested in legalities, and only wants to flaunt his authority to me.

    The law cannot protect us from illegal police activities; at best it can only come around later and clean up the blood stains.

    • May 25, 2012 at 12:47 pm

      Hi Walker,

      Thanks for your input!

      I find myself in a very strange position: I hate scumbag criminals (an oxymoron, I know) and so my natural instinct is to support peace officers. The problem, as you say, is that we don’t have peace officers anymore.

      Non-criminals are now a major target of “law enforcement.” That is, people who in better times would have no (or few) dealings with the police … because they weren’t criminals. Mostly, the only people who had to sweat the cops were criminals – i.e., thieves, crooks, people who attacked other people – and so on.

      That’s all changed – and it sucks all around.

    • Brad Smith
      May 25, 2012 at 5:35 pm

      We actually have some decent cops left where I live. But they seem to be increasingly rare. Do you think it’s the new training or just corruption?

      Do they become corrupted and then only hire others that are the same as them? I kind of get that, why would they want to be surrouded by peace keepers when they are thugs?

      When I was a kid it was so different. Cops were actually kind of cool. My wife who is actually more anti-government than me, if that is possible, says that when she was a little girl the local cop that walked the beat was always a nice guy.

      What the hell happened? Was it the war on some drugs? Is it fear? Honestly what the hell happened?

      This is an ongoing story and really a strange one. It’s one thing to fight back, but it’s another thing to beat up a cop steal his gun and car. I think this guy is toast. Actually he better not come knocking on my door. An 870 pump isn’t something you can just walk through. And what the hell are they going to do? If you were still a cop, what would you do? I think it would have to be center mass.

      http://www.9and10news.com/story/18572621/developing-news

      • May 25, 2012 at 6:58 pm

        I think the why is obvious: Could you spend your days telling grown men (and women) to “buckle up for safety” – and threatening them with cuffs and guns if they do not? Could you spend your days manning “safety” checkpoints – forcing people who clearly hadn’t done anything to submit to an interrogation and “your papers, please”? Could you send a kid to jail (or prison) because he had a bag of weed on him? Etc.

        It’s an asshole’s job. It attracts assholes.

        • Brad Smith
          May 25, 2012 at 10:55 pm

          Yah I’m sure that is a big part of why most government jobs attract assholes.

  40. July 1, 2012 at 3:28 pm

    Why are my boys locked up with a $500,000.00 bail a piece making it One Million dollars for crimes they have not committed ? The charges are:

    PC243(D)
    BATT W/SERIOUS BODILY INJ
    PC182(A)(1)
    CONSPIRACY:COMMIT CRIME
    PC212.5
    ROBBERY

    No Appearance Scheduled

    FSB1202778

    PC664/212.5(A)
    ATTEMPTED ROBBERY:1ST DEGREE
    PC243(D)
    BATT W/SERIOUS BODILY INJ
    PC182(A)(1)
    CONSPIRACY:COMMIT CRIME

    There has been no window to allow anyone reasonable time to post bail before the bail was raised to an unreasonable amount, with no criminal back ground history at all. This bail in the beginning was, NO BAIL, and then without any legal representation, went to $100,000.00. again without any legal representation at all to help them acknowledge their rights the charges were changed, as to appear, as an admission of guilt. As of this mornings arrangement the bail was raised to 500,000.00 a piece, and the boys were not notified of this and had to appear in front of a judge without any legal representation of any kind, even terrorist get legal representation.
    It is my understanding that these rights below is the law that ALL parties are to obey, as you can see in this Miranda warning you have the right to speak to an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning, (now or in the future.) Do you understand?

    I understand my boys did not get representation at all this morning in court. I would also like to know, why the responsible party of this incident was not taken into custody as well…And is still out on the streets to date..

    I am respectfully requesting the DA, Mike Ramos, review this case.

    Case #s are as follows:

    FSB1202778 (THE SAME CASE NUMBER FOR BOTH.)

    I BELEIVE THERE IS A GRAVE INJUSTICE HERE.
    That will certainly destroy both of my young boys lives before it even gets started..

    Again,

    I am respectfully request District ATT. Mike Ramos to review this case..
    As a tax payer and a mother I feel I have a right to the truth and the full protection of my boys under the law..

    Signed,

    Suzanne Barber
    Can be contacted at: (760-987-3649
    )

    Miranda Warning: long version:

    You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. Do you understand?
    Anything you do say may be used against you in a court of law. Do you understand?
    You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during questioning now or in the future. Do you understand?
    If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish. Do you understand?
    If you decide to answer questions now without an attorney present you will still have the right to stop answering at any time until you talk to an attorney. Do you understand?
    Knowing and understanding your rights as I have explained them to you, are you willing to answer my questions without an attorney present?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *