I did an 8 hour police ride-along today... it was fascinating

[Matt Collins]

It was absolutely fascinating...

My day started at 3pm when the shift came on duty. Nashville has multiple divisions, but most of the guys who answer the calls are known as the Patrol division. The reality is that the vast majority of what they do involved scuffles, domestic disputes, traffic accidents, and paperwork.

In fact, they really seemed like taking a report was their primary job. Think of them as armed and trained bureaucrats.

When they have down time they will go and serve warrants, or do traffic stops.

Many of the issues that us liberty-lovers would raise are way above and beyond what these guys deal with on a daily basis. The other divisions of the Nashville PD, such as Traffic, SWAT, Drug, Crime Suppression, etc are the guys who deal with the more controversial issues that we all love to debate.

The officer I was assigned to for the 8 hour shift was a very calm, cool, and level-headed guy. Most of the guys that work the patrol job are.

I asked him about recording LEOs and he told me that he has come to the realization that there is now a more than normal chance that he is being filmed and so he acts accordingly every time.

Furthermore he pulled several people over in our downtime for having a headlight that was out. He let every one of them go. He was mainly looking for drunk/intoxicated drivers or those with expired tags. Since everyone with a headlight out tonight was none of the above, he simply let them go without any problems.

He then told me that if he catches someone over 10MPH he'll pull them over and give them a warning. If they are 15MPH over he'll give them a ticket. He also said that he doesn't just hand out tickets unless someone needs one. For instance, if someone has an attitude or is jut flat out belligerent, then he may decide to ticket them if he can. But if the person pulled over is nice and polite, then most of the time he won't issue a ticket.

Again, most of what we did today was following up after-the-fact and writing a report about what had happened.

There is a lot more I can tell you, but my brain is kind of mush at the moment.


If your jurisdiction offers this sort of thing, I HIGHLY recommend it!

[kcchiefs6465]

He should be given a medal.

[TheGrinch]

But I have anecdotal experience that most of the cops I've encountered were complete assholes, corrupt or both. Therefore my theory is just as valid as yours.

I'm not completely anti-cop, but I'm sure not for your campaign of driving a wedge with those who have less marketable beliefs.

[Tod]

glitchy forum for some reason.

[fr33]

Those scarey expired tags. :eek:

[Tod]

It was absolutely fascinating...

My day started at 3pm when the shift came on duty. Nashville has multiple divisions, but most of the guys who answer the calls are known as the Patrol division. The reality is that the vast majority of what they do involved scuffles, domestic disputes, traffic accidents, and paperwork.

In fact, they really seemed like taking a report was their primary job. Think of them as armed and trained bureaucrats. (No thanks, I'll stick with armed thugs.)

When they have down time they will go and serve warrants, or do traffic stops (commit armed robbery for the state!).

Many of the issues that us liberty-lovers would raise are way above and beyond what these guys deal with on a daily basis. The other divisions of the Nashville PD, such as Traffic, SWAT, Drug, Crime Suppression, etc are the guys who deal with the more controversial issues that we all love to debate.

The officer I was assigned to for the 8 hour shift was a very calm, cool, and level-headed guy. Most of the guys that work the patrol job are.

I asked him about recording LEOs and he told me that he has come to the realization that there is now a more than normal chance that he is being filmed and so he acts accordingly every time. (That is the first good thing in this post! I think. It probably just means that he is careful to yell stuff like, "Stop Resisting!" as he beats people who are being reasonably compliant)

Furthermore he pulled several people over in our downtime for having a headlight that was out. He let every one of them go. He was mainly looking for drunk/intoxicated drivers or those with expired tags. Since everyone with a headlight out tonight was none of the above, he simply let them go without any problems.

He then told me that if he catches someone over 10MPH he'll pull them over and give them a warning. If they are 15MPH over he'll give them a ticket. He also said that he doesn't just hand out tickets unless someone needs one. For instance, if someone has an attitude (since when is THAT a justifiable reason for robbing someone at gunpoint???) or is jut flat out belligerent, then he may decide to ticket them if he can. But if the person pulled over is nice and polite, then most of the time he won't issue a ticket. (sounds like a typical pig who is likely to kill someone for "contempt of cop")

Again, most of what we did today was following up after-the-fact and writing a report about what had happened.

There is a lot more I can tell you, but my brain is kind of mush at the moment.


If your jurisdiction offers this sort of thing, I HIGHLY recommend it!

Sounds like it! ;)

[acptulsa]

If your jurisdiction offers this sort of thing, I HIGHLY recommend it![/FONT][/COLOR]

Me too--if the weather is nice. If it isn't, don't risk your life and limb to do it.

For, you see, they may be tasked with telling you how to drive, but that certainly doesn't mean they're any good at it.

[Mani]

So did he saddle up beside you and say, "Matty. You ever been in a police car before?"

"No sir!"

Cop: "Have you ever been in prison?"

Cop: "Do you like movies about Gladiators?"

Cop: "Have you ever seen a grown man naked?"


Did it go something like that? :rolleyes:

[Matt Collins]

So did he saddle up beside you and say, "Matty. You ever been in a police car before?"

"No sir!"

Cop: "Have you ever been in prison?"

Cop: "Do you like movies about Gladiators?"

Cop: "Have you ever seen a grown man naked?"


Did it go something like that? :rolleyes:
That made me LOLZ :D

[heavenlyboy34]

So did he saddle up beside you and say, "Matty. You ever been in a police car before?"

"No sir!"

Cop: "Have you ever been in prison?"

Cop: "Do you like movies about Gladiators?"

Cop: "Have you ever seen a grown man naked?"


Did it go something like that? :rolleyes:
LOLZ :D Comedic gold, there.

[kcchiefs6465]

So did he saddle up beside you and say, "Matty. You ever been in a police car before?"

"No sir!"

Cop: "Have you ever been in prison?"

Cop: "Do you like movies about Gladiators?"

Cop: "Have you ever seen a grown man naked?"


Did it go something like that? :rolleyes:
"What can you tell me about international law?"

[jclay2]

Sounds like it! ;)

Exactly right Tod. I wonder what people would say to me if I told them my daily routine was to steal 100's of dollars from average joe's who were doing nothing wrong or endangering those around them. Armed Thugs committing robbery for the state is the only way to describe them.

[Tod]

So did he saddle up beside you and say, "Matty. You ever been in a police car before?"

"No sir!"

Cop: "Have you ever been in prison?"

Cop: "Do you like movies about Gladiators?"

Cop: "Have you ever seen a grown man naked?"


Did it go something like that? :rolleyes:


Bwahahahaha......must spread reputation before giving to Mani again.

[Spikender]

Buck, he from Cashville Ten-a-key, brotha...

But for real, sounds interesting and what not. I personally would not tag along with any of my local Police Departments, especially not the Henrico PD.

Collins, did you ever think that they showed you the good side of the job since you were a ride-along? Sounds like a PR trip to me to instill love of the PD in your heart more than anything.

[Natural Citizen]

If you put one of those under video surveillance (or something along those lines) stickers on yer bumper then you'll never get pulled over. Ever. :)

[oyarde]

Collins has gone to the Dark Side , sorry , I tried to save your soul .

[CPUd]

Where did you go, Hillsboro Rd?

Go to Trinity Ln to see some real shit.

[asurfaholic]

Buck, he from Cashville Ten-a-key, brotha...

But for real, sounds interesting and what not. I personally would not tag along with any of my local Police Departments, especially not the Henrico PD.

Collins, did you ever think that they showed you the good side of the job since you were a ride-along? Sounds like a PR trip to me to instill love of the PD in your heart more than anything.

This is the case at least in my town.

Ride alongs are given only the most basic of calls to respond to. I know this because I have very close ties to the sergeant in charge of training as well as others.

But I am not a a total anti-cop guy.. I am more of a anti-stupid law guy..

Fortunately my town's PD is very forgiving on minor traffic violations and there are never any stories of gross misconduct. Most of the PD guys are just normal people.

I got pulled recently for running a red light. Didnt check my license, or reg, and just said something like "I had to stop you, you pulled out right in front of me and my light was green." Let me go..

Nc state troopers, otoh, they are a bunch of pricks.

[Philhelm]

He also said that he doesn't just hand out tickets unless someone needs one. For instance, if someone has an attitude or is jut flat out belligerent, then he may decide to ticket them if he can. But if the person pulled over is nice and polite, then most of the time he won't issue a ticket.

In other words, those that kneel and doff their caps before the Praetorian may receive mercy, at the Praetorian's supreme discretion.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Sounds like a PR trip to me to instill love of the PD in your heart more than anything.

That's what I'm thinking. Sort of like when the pig visited your school. I'm sure larger cities are very shrewd about this sort of thing. Very choreographed

Television's COPS is really a "ride along" for the entire country. This highly choreographed show shrewdly selects and edits, and has probably evolved to be very calculating and sophisticated.

The good thing about media like the internet and things like Youtube is that there are now more unedited and real portrayals of what order enforcement--I mean law enforcement--is all about.

[Spikender]

This is the case at least in my town.

Ride alongs are given only the most basic of calls to respond to. I know this because I have very close ties to the sergeant in charge of training as well as others.

But I am not a a total anti-cop guy.. I am more of a anti-stupid law guy..

Fortunately my town's PD is very forgiving on minor traffic violations and there are never any stories of gross misconduct. Most of the PD guys are just normal people.

I got pulled recently for running a red light. Didnt check my license, or reg, and just said something like "I had to stop you, you pulled out right in front of me and my light was green." Let me go..

Nc state troopers, otoh, they are a bunch of pricks.

VA State Troopers are iffy, but like I said, Henrico County PD is just bad. They have a good reputation on the West End since it's the rich neighborhood, but I was born and raised in the East End... and they were just terrible over there.

And yeah, that's what I figured. They tried to enamor us to cops at the schools, especially with the school resource officer, but it was all a load of crap. I've had too many friends and family members who have been burned by law enforcers.


That's what I'm thinking. Sort of like when the pig visited your school. I'm sure larger cities are very shrewd about this sort of thing. Very choreographed

Television's COPS is really a "ride along" for the entire country. This highly choreographed show shrewdly selects and edits, and has probably evolved to be very calculating and sophisticated.

The good thing about media like the internet and things like Youtube is that there are now more unedited and real portrayals of what order enforcement--I mean law enforcement--is all about.

Exactly. I was always shocked that people on the West End didn't know anything about police abuse that I had saw on the East End and abroad. Thank God for the Internet to show them the truth... though even then, the reaction is always mixed.

[WM_in_MO]

Title made me think of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCDXwOzG7fE

Glad to hear you didn't get shot.

[Origanalist]

http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111228182732/fairytail/images/0/06/Sugarboy_riding.JPG

[phill4paul]

Teh Collinz did a PSA for them after experiencing first hand situations experienced during a ride along....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNMGHN0jnmI

[FindLiberty]

It was absolutely fascinating......I HIGHLY recommend it!

Exactly.

And if everyone did this 2 or 3 times per year, there would always be some citizen there, riding along with every cop on the force.

It's an "always be polite" PR move, but it might also save many innocent doges from getting unnecessarily gunned down in their own canine blood...

[Danke]

Have you finally made up your mind on what you want to be when you grow up, Matt?

[belian78]

Collins finally made his alienation complete.

[Origanalist]

There is a lot more I can tell you, but my brain is kind of mush at the moment.




:rolleyes:

[PaulConventionWV]

Buck, he from Cashville Ten-a-key, brotha...

But for real, sounds interesting and what not. I personally would not tag along with any of my local Police Departments, especially not the Henrico PD.

Collins, did you ever think that they showed you the good side of the job since you were a ride-along? Sounds like a PR trip to me to instill love of the PD in your heart more than anything.

Henrico County, Virginia? I used to go to school in Richmond, and the jurisdiction on campus was split between Henrico County and Richmond City. I've heard stories of people running from the cops just to get to the Richmond side so they wouldn't have to deal with the Henrico jail system.

[PaulConventionWV]

The positive I took away from this story was that the cop apparently "came to the realization" that he was probably being filmed every time. That means more citizens are starting to do their civic duty and filming the police.

[Spikender]

Henrico County, Virginia? I used to go to school in Richmond, and the jurisdiction on campus was split between Henrico County and Richmond City. I've heard stories of people running from the cops just to get to the Richmond side so they wouldn't have to deal with the Henrico jail system.

Yep, Henrico County, Virginia, right on the money. Still living here too, though I moved to Glen Allen, which is on the West End, to be closer to my job, so luckily I can avoid the worst bits of the Police Department.

Glad to have someone who can back me up on this. It was funny having Henrico cops come in when I was in public school and talk to us and then see the same group out on the street being douches to students who went down to the Hardees up the street from school for lunch or stopping vehicles and searching them for drugs.

Like I said, crazy to come and live on this side of town and see how everyone pretty much loves the police over here. Mind-boggling for me. Well, mostly. Luckily I work with people from New York and Highland Springs (My Hometown) who know how the police roll and can at least sympathize with me on the need to address police violence.

[fisharmor]

They tried to enamor us to cops at the schools, especially with the school resource officer, but it was all a load of crap. I've had too many friends and family members who have been burned by law enforcers.

I'll always remember being a senior in Fairfax County, when they brought a cop in to teach us all to be copsuckers.
The guy was really level-headed and reasonable. A model cop, as it were.
During Q&A I raised my hand and asked,
"A couple weeks ago I was at a stop light late at night. I was paying attention, luckily, because a good five seconds after my light turned green a cop car blasted through his red light at about 80 in a 40 zone. Another cop car happened to be nearby and immediately lit up and chased the other one, until he found out it was a cop car, and then he turned his lights off and turned around. What's your comment on that?"

He very calmly replied "Well I wasn't there so I can't comment on that."

Not "If that really happened then I'm surprised at it".
Not "Did you happen to notice any numbers on the cars involved".
Not "We have a training session every quarter to make sure our officers set a good example on the roads".

He didn't do a very good job teaching us to like cops that day. But he did do a pretty good job teaching us they're privileged caste.

[pcosmar]

Teh Collinz did a PSA for them after experiencing first hand situations experienced during a ride along....


On a related note,,
Dragnet Badge.
http://www.pimall.com/nais/BADGES/friday.jpg

Police entertainment PR.
http://lygsbtd.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/quaalude.jpg

notice any similarity?

[Schifference]

Maybe it would be worthwhile to go to the less desirable part of town with your camera and watch some of the men in action.

[pcosmar]

Maybe it would be worthwhile to go to the less desirable part of town with your camera and watch some of the men in action.

Less desirable?

to Who?

I find towns/cities to be undesirable. and limit my time there to necessity.

[JK/SEA]

not sure what a ride-a-along proves. Matt was an innocent citizen riding with cops for 8 hours, but then there is ALWAYS innocent citizens riding along , usually in handcuffs, and sometimes beat to death or shot to death, for no other reason than being in their way...

Waste of time Matt. Hope you can put your brain back together after your fun trip with the fuck heads.

[satchelmcqueen]

did the officer molest you with his baton?

[JK/SEA]

did the officer molest you with his baton?

why would he need a baton?...

[angelatc]

Those scarey expired tags. :eek:

They must get a bonus for those.

[KCIndy]

Have you finally made up your mind on what you want to be when you grow up, Matt?

And will it look something like this?


http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/cartman-respect-my-authority-570x404.jpg

[Matt Collins]

Exactly right Tod. I wonder what people would say to me if I told them my daily routine was to steal 100's of dollars from average joe's who were doing nothing wrong or endangering those around them. Armed Thugs committing robbery for the state is the only way to describe them.The patrol division doesn't really steal anything from anyone. These guys handle disputes and wrecks mostly. They stamp out legitimate problems. The traffic division is a different story though.

[Matt Collins]

Collins, did you ever think that they showed you the good side of the job since you were a ride-along? Sounds like a PR trip to me to instill love of the PD in your heart more than anything.Of course it's a PR thing. But that doesn't mean what I saw was fake. They however are not going to put civilians in the more abrasive/aggressive division for ridealongs of course. I know what goes on there. But this particular division, patrol, really doesn't do anything that offensive as far as I can tell. Pulling people over for a headlight that is out is the worst I have seen, and no one got a ticket.



Where did you go, Hillsboro Rd?

Go to Trinity Ln to see some real shit.
No, Charlotte and Church, midtown area.


My roomate is going on another ride next week in a different part of town, so we'll see what that is like. He'll be on East Pct which actually does include Trinity.

[Matt Collins]

If you put one of those under video surveillance (or something along those lines) stickers on yer bumper then you'll never get pulled over. Ever. :)
Pic? :confused:

[Henry Rogue]

Copsucker

[Anti Federalist]

Bet my last fiat dollar a "ride along" with the Stasi would have revealed the same thing.

[Mini-Me]

Bet my last fiat dollar a "ride along" with the Stasi would have revealed the same thing.

It depends on what kind of "ride along" we're talking about. For instance, your "ride along" is likely to go a little different if things keep going the way they are. You'll be at the train station with your wife, when all of a sudden an extraordinarily pleasant young man will arrive saying, "Don't you remember me, Anti Federalist?" You'll have difficulty remembering, "Well, not exactly, you see, although..." The young man, however, will be overflowing with friendly concern: "Come now, how can that be? I'll have to remind you..." He'll bow to your wife and say, "You must forgive us. I'll keep him only one minute." She'll agree, and then you'll be led away by the arm - forever or for ten years! (Half-quoted, half-paraphrased by a book I'm sure you've heard of. ;))

[PaulConventionWV]

Of course it's a PR thing. But that doesn't mean what I saw was fake. They however are not going to put civilians in the more abrasive/aggressive division for ridealongs of course. I know what goes on there. But this particular division, patrol, really doesn't do anything that offensive as far as I can tell. Pulling people over for a headlight that is out is the worst I have seen, and no one got a ticket.



No, Charlotte and Church, midtown area.


My roomate is going on another ride next week in a different part of town, so we'll see what that is like. He'll be on East Pct which actually does include Trinity.

Maybe it's just me, but I avoid any and all association with the armed state thugs. I view it as a foreign occupation, literally. They are the militarized police force that control us and subdue us as a nation. If there were foreign troops occupying our towns and cities, I doubt most people would want to ride along with them as they did their jobs because most people would be wholeheartedly opposed to what they're doing as a matter of principle. That's how I view cops. If I were to be in a foreign troop's car as he arrested or ticketed one of my friends for something totally stupid, I would feel like a traitor. Their jobs are an inherent injustice to society, and I would never participate just so I could learn more about it. I'm aware of what they do, and I don't harass them when they're taking care of a wreck scene or something like that. If they don't mess with me, I don't mess with them and in fact, try to avoid them at all costs.

[Anti Federalist]

Matt has, for a while now, been preaching the line that the system isn't so bad, that if you wear enough finery and cajole more politely, things will go your way.


Maybe it's just me, but I avoid any and all association with the armed state thugs. I view it as a foreign occupation, literally. They are the militarized police force that control us and subdue us as a nation. If there were foreign troops occupying our towns and cities, I doubt most people would want to ride along with them as they did their jobs because most people would be wholeheartedly opposed to what they're doing as a matter of principle. That's how I view cops. If I were to be in a foreign troop's car as he arrested or ticketed one of my friends for something totally stupid, I would feel like a traitor. Their jobs are an inherent injustice to society, and I would never participate just so I could learn more about it. I'm aware of what they do, and I don't harass them when they're taking care of a wreck scene or something like that. If they don't mess with me, I don't mess with them and in fact, try to avoid them at all costs.

[Anti Federalist]

And this goes right here...


If Cops Want to Be Viewed as Heroes . . .

by eric • March 14, 2014

http://ericpetersautos.com/2014/03/14/cops-want-viewed-heroes/

Cops seem to have an almost frantic need to be regarded as “heroic” – yet they all-too-often act in ways that are downright cowardly.

A good example of this is a recent incident in Clover, SC (news story here). A wobbly old man was pulled over for a very minor traffic infraction (expired tags). He pulled over compliantly, without giving any reason to assume belligerence, much less a “threat.” Keep in mind that cops routinely run the plates of a vehicle prior to the actual stop – precisely in order to ascertain whether there is anything about the vehicle or its driver to warrant heightened alertness. In all probability, the cop in this case was well aware that the driver was 70-year-old Bobby Canipe.

Elderly white men are rarely a “threat” to an officer’s “safety.”

Well, Mr. Canipe made the nearly lethal error of getting out of his vehicle – something that used to be normal/routine (I myself recall doing this many times back in the ’80s) and which Canipe no doubt didn’t realize constitutes an actionable “threat” to “officer safety” these days. The old man then reached for his cane, which he needs in order to steady himself – and that was sufficient provocation for the cop to not merely unholster his gun but to fire it repeatedly and attempt a summary roadside execution of the elderly Mere Mundane.

Is this “heroic” conduct?

Shouldn’t a “hero” cop extend the benefit of the doubt to a frail old man? To just about anyone who isn’t obviously an immediate and genuinely dangerous threat to the cop’s physical safety?

Therein lies the proverbial rub.

It is now sufficient for a threat to be conceivable – rather than actual – to incite an over-the-top violent response from a cop. Merely to argue with a cop (or turn one’s back and walk away) is often enough.

This parallels the “war on terror” – with its doctrines of pre-emption, overwhelming (read, disproportionate) response – and better safe than sorry. Actual dangers have been supplanted by imagined – and often enough, contrived – dangers. The particularly curious thing is the inverse relationship. Crime is down, but police aggressiveness is higher than it has ever been. Just as “our” government (speak for yourself!) sees a terrorist under every bed when in fact “terror” is practically a non-issue – at least insofar as the danger of being attacked by bearded Bedouins with AK-47s and C4 strapped to their bodies. You are far more likely to die as a result of accidentally falling down the stairs (or for that matter, being consumed by a Great White shark) than you are as a result of “terrorism.” (Or being shot by a cop - AF)

But the government terrorizes us on a daily and ever-increasing basis – all in the name of “fighting” this hirsute and ululating bogeyman.

Police work was plausibly heroic when cops put their lives at risk for the sake of others. To defend rather than aggress. But they do the opposite now. Their lives – their “safety” – is of inestimable value (to them, of course) whereas our lives are worth . . . well, nothing. Quite literally, the slightest perceived “threat” to a cop’s “safety” (not even his life) is – per the Bobby Canipe incident, which is important precisely because it is not aberrant – sufficient (in the minds of cops) to kill one of us. The new attitude is captured best by the old saying: Shoot first, ask questions later.

Movie audiences used to chuckle – but they’re not laughing anymore.

If police want our respect – rather than our contempt – they ought to behave more like the heroes they purport to be. That means talking first – and shooting later. Ideally, never – unless shot at first. Burly young men – and burly young women – ought to resort to persuasion first, the strength of their bodies second, if need be . . . and their guns as a very last resort, when faced with a mortal danger. Not a “might be” – but an actual one. A manifested threat – someone actually shooting at a cop. Not a 13-year-old-kid walking down the street holding a plastic gun. Not a wobbly old man exiting his vehicle with a walking can that “looked like” it might have been a gun.Heroes t shirt

Would this entail greater risk for cops? Certainly (although minimally; incidents of Mere Mundanes shooting at cops are a statistical and actual pittance compared with the routine shooting of Mere Mundanes by cops).

But isn’t that what being a “hero” is supposed to be all about? The putting of other people’s safety first? To risk life and limb, to willingly put oneself in harm’s way?

When that becomes characteristic of cop conduct, cops will once again deserve the honorific – as well as the honor – of being referred to as heroes.

Throw it in the woods.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

But this particular division, patrol, really doesn't do anything that offensive as far as I can tell.

Sounds like they're the good cop in a skewed variant of good cop/bad cop.

[DFF]

Furthermore he pulled several people over in our downtime for having a headlight that was out. He let every one of them go. He was mainly looking for drunk/intoxicated drivers

Ah, the $10,000 ride home that nobody in broke ass America can afford anymore. Such a wonderful thing, laws that exploit and capitalize on normal human behavior.

[PaulConventionWV]

Matt has, for a while now, been preaching the line that the system isn't so bad, that if you wear enough finery and cajole more politely, things will go your way.

I am aware. There are, unfortunately, quite a few busybodies here that seem obsessed with "blending in" and not offending anyone. In Revolutionary times, they were called loyalists.

[Matt Collins]

They are the militarized police force Again, maybe the SWAT team or drug interdiction unit, etc, but not the standard urban patrol units that I rode with.



That's how I view cops... Their jobs are an inherent injustice to society, and I would never participate just so I could learn more about it. That is highly ignorant, not to mention untrue. When someone commits violence or coercion against another, there must be a 3rd party with the authority and power to be able to stop it.


I'm aware of what they do,Obviously not :rolleyes:

[Matt Collins]

Matt has, for a while now, been preaching the line that the system isn't so bad, that if you wear enough finery and cajole more politely, things will go your way.Not hardly, nice try though.

[Matt Collins]

Ah, the $10,000 ride home that nobody in broke ass America can afford anymore. Such a wonderful thing, laws that exploit and capitalize on normal human behavior.You think it's ok for people to drive drunk? :confused: :rolleyes: :mad:

[kcchiefs6465]

That is highly ignorant, not to mention untrue. When someone commits violence or coercion against another, there must be a 3rd party with the authority and power to be able to stop it.

Everyone is 'able' to stop it. What are you talking about with regards to "3rd party"?

Are you referring to establishing a class with more rights than another?

[Anti Federalist]

That is highly ignorant, not to mention untrue. When someone commits violence or coercion against another, there must be a 3rd party with the authority and power to be able to stop it.

Cops are the modern incarnation of the slave patrollers.

Their job is to enforce the law.

It does not matter if the law is unjust, or an ass, they will enforce it.

And they will enforce it in increasingly violent and brutal ways.

[fr33]

When I was in school the local cops came and gave us stickers and candy. If I were Matt Collins, I would have fell for it.

[Spikender]

Of course it's a PR thing. But that doesn't mean what I saw was fake. They however are not going to put civilians in the more abrasive/aggressive division for ridealongs of course. I know what goes on there. But this particular division, patrol, really doesn't do anything that offensive as far as I can tell. Pulling people over for a headlight that is out is the worst I have seen, and no one got a ticket.

You are aware this was a PR thing yet you are still praising them because all you saw was them pulling people over for headlights and not giving tickets?

Okay. Right then.

I don't have much interaction with you, and I don't want to be rude, but that seems really naive to believe that this division does no wrong based off of a single ride along on a single day where they likely avoided letting you see them do anything wrong or offensive.

Sorry, not buying it, not one bit. Not after all the crap I've seen and dealt with personally and seen on here and on the Internet. And I'm not talking about accusations, I'm talking about video evidence of cops being a criminal gang sanctioned by the Government. Until cops are at the very least punished the same as any mundane for the crimes they commit, right down to speeding, they are scum in my book.

[kcchiefs6465]

When I was in school the local cops came and gave us stickers and candy. If I were Matt Collins, I would have fell for it.
We got trading cards.

And vague pushes to turn in one's parents.

[Anti Federalist]

Some required reading:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?444608-The-start-of-modern-quot-policing-quot-Support-Your-Local-Slave-Patrol

[Matt Collins]

Everyone is 'able' to stop it. What are you talking about with regards to "3rd party"?

Are you referring to establishing a class with more rights than another?
Government is instituted to secure individual rights, provide justice, and to enforce contracts. When someone infringes on someone else's rights, or violates a contract, it is government's job to step in.

[Matt Collins]

Their job is to enforce the law.

It does not matter if the law is unjust, or an ass, they will enforce it.And therein lies the rub. This particular division doesn't really do much of anything that we would consider controversial. However, yes, if a law was unjust and the situation was before them, most LEOs would enforce it I believe. That is unfortunate.




And they will enforce it in increasingly violent and brutal ways.Most of what the local LEOs do is not violent and brutal. Some of it is, but again, at least where I am at, it isn't commonplace.

[Matt Collins]

but that seems really naive to believe that this division does no wrong based off of a single ride along on a single day where they likely avoided letting you see them do anything wrong or offensive.Uh no. They didn't hide anything from me, I saw all the calls coming in on the screen, I followed the officer everywhere, and I even assisted him on one of the calls. I was involved in every discussion, never once was I left out, left behind, or told "we need you to close your eyes".

Again, this is just patrol. If it were SWAT or traffic division, or drug interdiction, or vice, or crime suppression, then yes, it might have been a different story.





Sorry, not buying it, not one bit.Well, see if your local LEOs offer a ride along, and take it. Then come back to us and let us know what you see.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I think that technology has made part of the reason for the ride along somewhat obsolete. There was a time when most people learned about the police through the local news. Local media was (and still is) the public relations arm of law enforcement. If competing stations wanted the inside track and even some juicy stories, then they had to cozy up to law enforcement. Their ratings depended on good relationships between reporters and supervisors. The softball, human interest stories had the tone of order. Rarely was the "bad" cop exposed, unless the offense was particularly egregious. Systemic abuse and offenses were rarely addressed in the same way, lest the local media outlet risk its relationships. A lot of this still persists today.

The media now has competition through technology. People everywhere film the police and upload to Youtube. Dashcam footage is available. The truly global nature of the internet means that a person is not stuck wondering if the piece of filth who shot his dog is some small town or remote anomaly.

It's probably more imperative than ever that police departments promote themselves to counter the mounting reality. There was the story of the 92 man getting shot for getting the cane from his truck. I saw the sheriff being interviewed. He availed himself of the local news because, he said, of all the negative internet comments.

[GunnyFreedom]

When someone commits violence or coercion against another, there must be a 3rd party with the authority and power to be able to stop it.

Um.

We live in this little unknown country called "America" that has what is called "a republican form of government,' which makes it a blatant violation of the US Constitution for any group to have public authority and power over others.

[GunnyFreedom]

Government is instituted to secure individual rights, provide justice, and to enforce contracts. When someone infringes on someone else's rights, or violates a contract, it is government's job to step in.

Is that in the Cuban declaration of independence, or the Russian Constitution? Because it's pretty clear here that you are not familiar with America.

[GunnyFreedom]

Uh no. They didn't hide anything from me, I saw all the calls coming in on the screen, I followed the officer everywhere, and I even assisted him on one of the calls. I was involved in every discussion, never once was I left out, left behind, or told "we need you to close your eyes".

Again, this is just patrol. If it were SWAT or traffic division, or drug interdiction, or vice, or crime suppression, then yes, it might have been a different story.




Well, see if your local LEOs offer a ride along, and take it. Then come back to us and let us know what you see.

"Hey! I went on a visit with Joseph Goebbels and he never said anything nasty at all! I think those Nazi guys are probably alright. You should go visit uncle Joe too you will see!"

[compromise]

http://www.festivalcrashers.com/wp-content/uploads/supersuper.jpg

[phill4paul]

On a related note,,
Dragnet Badge.
http://www.pimall.com/nais/BADGES/friday.jpg

Police entertainment PR.
http://lygsbtd.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/quaalude.jpg

notice any similarity?

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTKceWNLaRc0IOtK9Qmdk1nPzriKdlX8 5HPDJDXUhk4yVFSRT7D

[PaulConventionWV]

Again, maybe the SWAT team or drug interdiction unit, etc, but not the standard urban patrol units that I rode with.

Urban patrol may not be militarized as we see in things like SWAT, but they are still responsible for some egregious acts, many of which they are mandated to commit in the name of Just-us. The laws are unjust and they enforce them anyway. I don't just excuse that as an unfortunate circumstance like you do. If I knew my job would require me to inflict harm on others unjustly, I would not do that job. I don't know about you, but I choose to make my living the honest way rather than pick up a fat paycheck from the taxpayers to enforce unjust laws.


That is highly ignorant, not to mention untrue. When someone commits violence or coercion against another, there must be a 3rd party with the authority and power to be able to stop it.

Their jobs are to commit violence and coercion. Rarely do they ever stop it. We have a second amendment to prevent crime; since when is a third party necessary? Does the Constitution mention this third party you speak of? Crime prevention is a losing game. It's essentially pre-crime, and everyone who has watched sci-fi movies knows it doesn't work.


Obviously not :rolleyes:

Right, because obviously you're the only one who sees them in their true light and I must be deluded because I just don't know them like you do. Just how intimate do I have to get with a cop to be as aware as you are? Tell me, sensei Collins, how can I reach your level of knowledge and awareness? Once I do, will it make me like them more, or will it just make me be able to accept my own slavery as palatable and "look on the bright side" so that I don't gaze on the ugly truth?

I roll around the city streets every day and I see them doing their business. I see them doing some good things and I admit there are times when they are helpful, but how does that justify getting a taxpayer-funded salary? It is rare, but some of them are capable of behaving like normal, decent people at times. That doesn't mean they should get all that they get and it certainly doesn't justify enforcing bad laws.

[phill4paul]

They stamp out legitimate problems.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-luOs4xKFaZ8/TbrREIwCXtI/AAAAAAAAAeE/HhJErMhG-EU/s400/G20-Toronto-Police-Kicking-Unarmed-and-Tied-Up-Civilians.jpg

[PaulConventionWV]

You think it's ok for people to drive drunk? :confused: :rolleyes: :mad:

If it doesn't hurt anyone, then it's none of my business. I may not approve, but it's not my place to place my edicts upon them.

[PaulConventionWV]

Uh no. They didn't hide anything from me, I saw all the calls coming in on the screen, I followed the officer everywhere, and I even assisted him on one of the calls. I was involved in every discussion, never once was I left out, left behind, or told "we need you to close your eyes".

Again, this is just patrol. If it were SWAT or traffic division, or drug interdiction, or vice, or crime suppression, then yes, it might have been a different story.




Well, see if your local LEOs offer a ride along, and take it. Then come back to us and let us know what you see.

But they knew you were there, so how do you know that all the calls that came in weren't directed to you with that in mind?

[pcosmar]

You think it's ok for people to drive drunk? :confused: :rolleyes: :mad:

Drunk? or after a drink?

And if they drive without harming anyone (as most do) then I have no issue with it.

The simple fact (often overlooked) is that drunk driving as a cause of accidents (Fatal and non fatal) is a small % of all accidents..

It is an insignificant issue in regards to traffic accidents However the damage done by Law enforcement s highly significant.

[phill4paul]

You think it's ok for people to drive drunk? :confused: :rolleyes: :mad:

I consider the laws governing drunk driving and the abuse of said laws to be far more damaging.


You think Occifer Mullock was a bad egg? You Ain't seen nothing yet. Interesting series of articles I just hit on....

http://peterlance.com/wordpress/?p=1214

Part One of Peter Lance’s 2011 DUI series Santa Barbara News-Press

SBPD officer may have manipulated DUI evidence : Investigation uncovers inconsistencies, possible forgeries involving Kasi Marie Beutel

By PETER LANCE, SPECIAL TO THE NEWS-PRESS

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/printthread.php?t=390933&pp=10&page=23

[MRK]

This thread turned out even better than I had imagined. :)

[Origanalist]

But they knew you were there, so how do you know that all the calls that came in weren't directed to you with that in mind?

You beat me to that. I have a very hard time believing the "ride along" wasn't screened from certain police activity.

[Matt Collins]

We live in this little unknown country called "America" that has what is called "a republican form of government,' which makes it a blatant violation of the US Constitution for any group to have public authority and power over others.That's what the government is.... it's a 3rd party that in some limited situations (such as when someone's rights are being infringed upon) has power and authority over others.

[Matt Collins]

Is that in the Cuban declaration of independence, or the Russian Constitution? Because it's pretty clear here that you are not familiar with America.
No, US DOI. It clearly says government is instituted to secure individual rights... the corollary of that means providing justice and upholding contracts. Because when someone breaks a contract they are infringing on another person's individual rights and that needs to be remedied.

[Matt Collins]

"Hey! I went on a visit with Joseph Goebbels and he never said anything nasty at all! I think those Nazi guys are probably alright. You should go visit uncle Joe too you will see!"


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
:p

[Matt Collins]

Drunk? or after a drink?

And if they drive without harming anyone (as most do) then I have no issue with it.



If it doesn't hurt anyone, then it's none of my business. I may not approve, but it's not my place to place my edicts upon them.Driving drunk in and of itself IS dangerous and negligent of others' safety and should not be permitted. However, that doesn't mean that we should turn the entire country into a police state in order to keep such things from happening.

[Matt Collins]

But they knew you were there, so how do you know that all the calls that came in weren't directed to you with that in mind?Because I got to see the screen where all the calls for the entire precinct came in. I also heard all of the calls over the radio.

[moostraks]

Collins finally made his alienation complete.:D


Not hardly, nice try though. Golly you must have a p.r. problem then because I was under a similar impression.:confused:

[moostraks]

Government is instituted to secure individual rights, provide justice, and to enforce contracts. When someone infringes on someone else's rights, or violates a contract, it is government's job to step in.

And when the infringing party is, as quite often has been the case, the king's foot soldiers such as you are peddling the praise for, to whom shall we turn? The government is the greatest abuser of the rights of the individual and operates with impunity.

[GunnyFreedom]

You beat me to that. I have a very hard time believing the "ride along" wasn't screened from certain police activity.

Ride alongs were openly and intentionally created for the sole purpose of presenting a bright face to the public.

[GunnyFreedom]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
:p

Uh no, a strawman would require that I was speaking about something irrelevant known-false that was easy to strike down. What I did was to offer a comparable situation, albeit reductio ad absurdum so that you could see the point, since you appear to be wearing blinders. The ride-along program is not confidentially, it is openly intended and maintained for the sole purpose of presenting a face to the public. You pointed to the whitewash and inferred that it's character applies to the dead bones that lay inside the tomb.

[GunnyFreedom]

No, US DOI. It clearly says government is instituted to secure individual rights... the corollary of that means providing justice and upholding contracts. Because when someone breaks a contract they are infringing on another person's individual rights and that needs to be remedied.

LOL we actually have copies of the text of the DOI. You don't get to just make stuff up about what's in it. Good Lord man, what has gotten into you?

[GunnyFreedom]

That's what the government is.... it's a 3rd party that in some limited situations (such as when someone's rights are being infringed upon) has power and authority over others.

That may be the kind of government you want, but it is not the kind of government described in the US Constitution.

[pcosmar]

Driving drunk in and of itself IS dangerous and negligent of others' safety and should not be permitted.


Driving drunk is subjective..and deceptive.

Define drunk.

and what do you mean by "Not permitted" (verboten)?

I am not arguing that it is a good idea, but I am arguing that laws are useless and detrimental.

And having Authoritarian Control Enforcers is contrary to a free society.

[erowe1]

He also said that he doesn't just hand out tickets unless someone needs one. For instance, if someone has an attitude or is jut flat out belligerent, then he may decide to ticket them if he can. But if the person pulled over is nice and polite, then most of the time he won't issue a ticket.

Let this sink in and think about who this guy thinks he is.

[pcosmar]

That's what the government is... , power and authority over others.

Authoritarianism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Authoritarianism is a form of government. It is characterized by absolute or blind obedience to authority, as against individual freedom and related to the expectation of unquestioning obedience

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authoritarian
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/authoritarian


This is the Liberty Movement Matt.

[Danke]

This thread won't be complete until Matt posts a photo him standing next to the officer awarding Matt with a Jr. Police Officer Badge.

http://www.healthpromotionsnow.com/images/Products/1067_med.jpg

[Matt Collins]

And when the infringing party is, as quite often has been the case, the king's foot soldiers such as you are peddling the praise for, to whom shall we turn? The government is the greatest abuser of the rights of the individual and operates with impunity.That's why it's critical that people are involved in the political process so that they can shape the direction of the government.

[Matt Collins]

That may be the kind of government you want, but it is not the kind of government described in the US Constitution.

LOL we actually have copies of the text of the DOI. You don't get to just make stuff up about what's in it. Good Lord man, what has gotten into you?


"to secure these (individual natural) rights, Governments are instituted among Men"

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

[Anti Federalist]

Driving drunk in and of itself IS dangerous and negligent of others' safety and should not be permitted. However, that doesn't mean that we should turn the entire country into a police state in order to keep such things from happening.

Too late.

You already have, and guess what, it still happens.

So now we get to live in the worst of both worlds.

[tod evans]

Driving drunk in and of itself IS dangerous and negligent of others' safety and should not be permitted.

The programming once again proves itself effective...

[Matt Collins]

Urban patrol may not be militarized as we see in things like SWAT, but they are still responsible for some egregious acts, many of which they are mandated to commit in the name of Just-us. Not most of them, and not most of the time.


The laws are unjust and they enforce them anyway. I don't just excuse that as an unfortunate circumstance like you do. If I knew my job would require me to inflict harm on others unjustly, I would not do that job. I don't know about you, but I choose to make my living the honest way rather than pick up a fat paycheck from the taxpayers to enforce unjust laws.I agree, but the vast majority of what most LEO's do, especially if they are not SWAT or drug interdiction or traffic, does not involve unjust laws.




We have a second amendment to prevent crime; since when is a third party necessary? Does the Constitution mention this third party you speak of? Crime prevention is a losing game. It's essentially pre-crime, and everyone who has watched sci-fi movies knows it doesn't work.Yes, the government cannot really prevent crime. However, the government's job is to uphold contracts and provide justice.

[Matt Collins]

Most of the people in this thread have this problem:



https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division





.

[pcosmar]

"to secure these (individual natural) rights, Governments are instituted among Men"


Police should not exist in a free society. And their very existence is contrary to the line you just posted.

http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm

This article marshals extensive historical and legal evidence to show that modern policing is in many ways inconsistent with the original intent of America's founding documents. The author argues that the growth of modern policing has substantially empowered the state in a way the Framers would regard as abhorrent to their foremost principles


The Constitution contains no explicit provisions for criminal law enforcement. Nor did the constitutions of any of the several states contain such provisions at the time of the Founding. Early constitutions enunciated the intention that law enforcement was a universal duty that each person owed to the community, rather than a power of the government. Founding-era constitutions addressed law enforcement from the standpoint of individual liberties and placed explicit barriers upon the state.

This is the Constitutional position. This is the Liberty position.
It is neither Anarchy, nor Authoritarian.

[tod evans]

Most of the people in this thread have this problem



Most of the people are wrong and you're right.....................Got it:rolleyes:

[pcosmar]

][SIZE=]Most of the people in this thread have this problem:




Quit spamming that crap (your only response when challenged), it is generally meaningless. and address the arguments against Authoritarianism.

which you seem to advocate.

[Anti Federalist]

Uh no, a strawman would require that I was speaking about something irrelevant known-false that was easy to strike down. What I did was to offer a comparable situation, albeit reductio ad absurdum so that you could see the point, since you appear to be wearing blinders. The ride-along program is not confidentially, it is openly intended and maintained for the sole purpose of presenting a face to the public. You pointed to the whitewash and inferred that it's character applies to the dead bones that lay inside the tomb.

Straw man gets thrown around a lot, like neo-con, without knowing what it really is.

[Anti Federalist]

I agree, but the vast majority of what most LEO's do, especially if they are not SWAT or drug interdiction or traffic, does not involve unjust laws.

How do you know?

Do you know every law you are breaking every day?

You've studied the millions and millions of global, federal, state, county and local rules, laws, edicts, ordinances, statutes, mandates and regulations, how they apply, and, based on that study, determined that they are not unjust?

[tod evans]

Maybe ol' Matt would be well served to do a "ride along" with one of those targeted by the LEO community...

It's difficult to have a valid opinion about anything without being able to clearly see both sides...

[Anti Federalist]

Most of the people in this thread have this problem:

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division


Often when something is true for the part it does also apply to the whole, or vice versa, but the crucial difference is whether there exists good evidence to show that this is the case. Because we observe consistencies in things, our thinking can become biased so that we presume consistency to exist where it does not.

I don't know why this is so hard for some people to understand...

Look, Matt, the cop you rode along with probably was a swell guy, never "abused" anybody in the line of his duties, was professional and courteous and probably a great guy to hang around and have a few beers with after work.

That is not the point.

The point is that he, for a living, wears a uniform and enforces the law of a system that has gone corrupt and bad.

By virtue of that fact, he has become a "bad guy".

[Origanalist]

Most of the people in this thread have this problem:



https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division





.

Did you stamp your foot while writing that? Try clicking your heels three times.

[erowe1]

Most of the people in this thread have this problem:



https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division





.

I guess that you also think most people in this thread have the problem of poor eyesight.

[amonasro]

Maybe ol' Matt would be well served to do a "ride along" with one of those targeted by the LEO community...

It's difficult to have a valid opinion about anything without being able to clearly see both sides...

This applies equally well to both sides. Those here who criticize police are a select few, and I have no idea if they are isolated, making judgments from internet articles, or if they have active, real-life connections to police to support their arguments or at least get the other side of the story. I have a feeling it's the former, not the latter.

Thanks for the story, Matt. Cops are individuals working within a system that is designed to exploit their less-than-savory sides.

[Anti Federalist]

Matt, you also need to consider the fact that of course this is a PR stunt, and of course the calls routed to your unit would be the most mild mannered of call outs.

You really think the city or or the cop management is going to send an uninsured, untrained civilian into an active hostage shooting or bank robbery?

Let alone a good old beat down or evidence plant?

You think they are doing a "good job"?

Tell that to the 30 percent of innocent people in prison.

Tell that to the innocent people on death row.

[Anti Federalist]

This applies equally well to both sides. Those here who criticize police are a select few, and I have no idea if they are isolated, making judgments from internet articles, or if they have active, real-life connections to police to support their arguments or at least get the other side of the story. I have a feeling it's the former, not the latter.

Thanks for the story, Matt. Cops are individuals working within a system that is designed to exploit their less-than-savory sides.

Precisely.

Working within a system that has gone bad.

Oh and for me, it is all of the above, in addition to first hand experience with police abuse.

[Danke]

Those here who criticize police are a select few, and I have no idea if they are isolated, making judgments from internet articles, or if they have active, real-life connections to police to support their arguments or at least get the other side of the story. I have a feeling it's the former, not the latter.



Ya, my senses can't be trusted, as I only see (usually with audio too) examples daily from the "internet." :rolleyes:

[Matt Collins]

Police should not exist in a free society.That's absurd... in order to have a free society there MUST be some form of police. Otherwise there is no disincentive to not trample the rights of others. This is why anarchy is non-functional.

[Matt Collins]

The point is that he, for a living, wears a uniform and enforces the law of a system that has gone corrupt and bad. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division

Not all of the law is corrupt and "bad". The vast majority of what this specific unit deals with is not corrupt or bad laws.

[Anti Federalist]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division

Not all of the law is corrupt and "bad". The vast majority of what this specific unit deals with is not corrupt or bad laws.

You know this, how?

You've studied the millions and millions of global, federal, state, county and local rules, laws, edicts, ordinances, statutes, mandates and regulations, how they apply, and, based on that study, determined that they are not unjust?

[Matt Collins]

of course the calls routed to your unit would be the most mild mannered of call outs.Not true. Apparently you didn't read what I wrote above... I saw the screen, I saw every call in the precinct. We didn't get ignored or have bad calls routed somewhere else. I was also able to hear the radio the entire time. They really didn't hide anything from me.

Now, if there was a shootout, they probably would've dropped me off somewhere and told me to wait... I'm guessing... maybe not. I dunno. Maybe they would've taken me everywhere.

But there really wasn't anything they were hiding.





You really think the city or or the cop management is going to send an uninsured, untrained civilian into an active hostage shooting or bank robbery?

Let alone a good old beat down or evidence plant?

You think they are doing a "good job"?

Tell that to the 30 percent of innocent people in prison.

Tell that to the innocent people on death row.
As I said, that is not what this division does. Go back and read what I wrote..... if this were traffic, or drug interdiction, or street rovers, or SWAT then I would probably have a different story to tell.


The problem with people in this thread is that many people here are assuming that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it; or that the whole must apply to its parts. That is a logical fallacy.

[Anti Federalist]

Let me ask you this:

Did you discuss the CFC with him at all?

[Anti Federalist]

The problem with people in this thread is that many people here are assuming that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it; or that the whole must apply to its parts. That is a logical fallacy.

When a person dies of cancer that started in one small area and then spread through the whole body, is their corpse a "logical fallacy"?

[pcosmar]

That's absurd... in order to have a free society there MUST be some form of police. Otherwise there is no disincentive to not trample the rights of others. This is why anarchy is non-functional.

No,, and you are apparently illiterate as well as rude.
I had already addressed that. It is not anarchy.

It just is not Authoritarianism,, which you seem to favor over liberty.

Police are an Authoritarian construct. And the country functioned well without them,, prior to their creation.

The Word "police" means to control. It is an authoritarian control mechanism.


Police should not exist in a free society. And their very existence is contrary to the line you just posted.

http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm




This is the Constitutional position. This is the Liberty position.
It is neither Anarchy, nor Authoritarian.

re-posted in Large Letters so you can read what you failed to read before.

[erowe1]

That's absurd... in order to have a free society there MUST be some form of police.

Did any of the signers of the Declaration of Independence believe that?

Can you think of any serious and reputable proponents of free society who do?

[Origanalist]

This whole story is bullshit. Cops don't let the majority of people go with a warning. They are revenue collectors. Maybe this particular division doesn't deal in violence as much as the others but they get the same training and I wouldn't trust them with my safety any more than a swat team. Matt Collin goes along for a PR seminar and comes back with his eyes glazed over and I quote; " my brain is kind of mush at the moment." Well, it still is. That very same cop is out writing everybody he encounters up for every infraction he sets his greedy little piggy eyes upon.

Good luck peddling your fairy tale Matt. I hope you don't watch too much Home Shopping Network.

[pcosmar]

The problem with people in this thread is that many people here are assuming that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it; or that the whole must apply to its parts. That is a logical fallacy.

No it is not. The problem is with Authoritarianism.

It is wholly incompatible with Liberty.

It is all or nothing,, authoritarianism is the exact polar opposite of Liberty.

you can't just have a little and be OK with it. It grows and corrupts.

[Anti Federalist]

The problem with people in this thread is that many people here are assuming that one part of something has to be applied to all, or other, parts of it; or that the whole must apply to its parts. That is a logical fallacy.

Also, as I've said many times before, most encounters people have with cops will go smoothly and professionally, if not gratingly, from a freedom perspective.

The problem is the increasing likelihood that any particular encounter will NOT.

That it will end instead, in prison, or the hospital or the morgue.

[Anti Federalist]

Matt has, for a while now, been preaching the line that the system isn't so bad, that if you wear enough finery and cajole more politely, things will go your way.

After these further exchanges, I stand by this comment even more.

[erowe1]

The last time I was pulled over by a cop, he did let me go with a warning. He also repeatedly called me stupid. He obviously thought he was pretty special. I could tell the story. But it's not that interesting compared with Will Grigg stuff.

[pcosmar]

The last time I was pulled over by a cop, he did let me go with a warning. He also repeatedly called me stupid. He obviously thought he was pretty special. I could tell the story. But it's not that interesting compared with Will Grigg stuff.

The last time I got pulled over was for a loud exhaust,, And the car just had the entire exhaust system replaced and I had the receipt sitting next to me.

The brand new muffler and tail pipe were clearly visible when he walked up to the car.

He was an ass,, intent on harassment.

[moostraks]

This applies equally well to both sides. Those here who criticize police are a select few, and I have no idea if they are isolated, making judgments from internet articles, or if they have active, real-life connections to police to support their arguments or at least get the other side of the story. I have a feeling it's the former, not the latter.

Thanks for the story, Matt. Cops are individuals working within a system that is designed to exploit their less-than-savory sides.

Numerous real life stories on my part. Want the one about the officer who arrested me and then decided what he would charge me with while I was in a holding cell because he was pissed at his wife and thought I was cheating on my husband so he figured he get his pound of flesh from me, or you want the one about the officer who made me stroke his ego so I could get an incident report for my abusive ex-husband and threatened me with potential repercussions he could cause my family if I wasn't nice enough. Sorry no videos so you'll just have to take my word for it on these. It is my real life experience that gives me the ability to be grateful for those who are now showing the rest of the community that spouts the line about hero police that it isn't always the accused who is the problem.

[Anti Federalist]

Numerous real life stories on my part. Want the one about the officer who arrested me and then decided what he would charge me with while I was in a holding cell because he was pissed at his wife and thought I was cheating on my husband so he figured he get his pound of flesh from me, or you want the one about the officer who made me stroke his ego so I could get an incident report for my abusive ex-husband and threatened me with potential repercussions he could cause my family if I wasn't nice enough. Sorry no videos so you'll just have to take my word for it on these. It is my real life experience that gives me the ability to be grateful for those who are now showing the rest of the community that spouts the line about hero police that it isn't always the accused who is the problem.

Cop hater.

[moostraks]

That's why it's critical that people are involved in the political process so that they can shape the direction of the government.

What type of people do you think they hire for this position that operates without repercussions for their behavior?

[moostraks]

Cop hater.:D

[Origanalist]

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/8103752960/h144683E1/

[Matt Collins]

Let me ask you this:

Did you discuss the CFC with him at all?
What is CFC?

[Matt Collins]

Also, as I've said many times before, most encounters people have with cops will go smoothly and professionally, if not gratingly, from a freedom perspective.

The problem is the increasing likelihood that any particular encounter will NOT.

That it will end instead, in prison, or the hospital or the morgue.Valid point, but it greatly depends on who, what, where, and when.

[Matt Collins]

It is all or nothing,, authoritarianism is the exact polar opposite of Liberty.

you can't just have a little and be OK with it. It grows and corrupts.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white


You are confusing "liberty" with "anarchy" which are NOT one in the same.

Anarchy is just as bad as democracy; it's mob rule.


Anarchy and authoritarianism are incompatible. But in order to have a free society where one's rights are protected, then it is imperative to have some government (although as minimal as possible).

[Matt Collins]

Police are an Authoritarian construct. And the country functioned well without them,, prior to their creation.
There were no sheriffs or law enforcement at all in Colonial US? :rolleyes:

[Matt Collins]

When a person dies of cancer that started in one small area and then spread through the whole body, is their corpse a "logical fallacy"?


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

[GunnyFreedom]

"to secure these (individual natural) rights, Governments are instituted among Men"

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

Yes, Matt. The US DOI states that governments are instituted among men to secure the blessings of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not to "individual rights, provide justice, and to enforce contracts." You don't get to just "make up" what you think our founding documents should have said.

[GunnyFreedom]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division

Not all of the law is corrupt and "bad". The vast majority of what this specific unit deals with is not corrupt or bad laws.

The fallacy of composition means that you presume the characteristics of the parts will be the same as the whole, while the fallacy of division means that you presume that the characteristics of the whole will be the same as the parts. AF made a statement that he was a part of an overall system that has gone corrupt. He made no inference therefore that the individual in question was corrupt, only that his presence contributed to the overall corruption of the system.

You can't just scream 'fallacy' whenever you don't like what someone is saying, Matt. It would appear that you are trying to invoke an "Argument From Fallacy" which itself is a logical fallacy, but you are failing even that since your accusations of fallacious arguments are quite apparently inaccurate.

Is appears that your process is to match the form of a person's syntax with the syntax of a selected fallacy and then accuse them of it in the hopes of bullying them into argumentative submission. It's actually kind of obscene.

[GunnyFreedom]

Straw man gets thrown around a lot, like neo-con, without knowing what it really is.

I think he is picking fallacies from a menu and slinging them at people in the feverish hope that some of them will stick.

[pcosmar]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white


You are confusing "liberty" with "anarchy" which are NOT one in the same.


No I am not..

What is the Logical Fallacy in being deliberately disingenuous?

I do not and never have advocated Anarchy. I do not even believe it can exist beyond momentary.

Why is it that anyone that challenges Authoritarianism is labeled as an anarchist?

Law can be enforced without police. It was enforced without police before they existed,, and in places where they do not exist.

People do not need to be controlled. That is an Authoritarian belief. People/Society can control itself. People will enforce the laws that the people themselves will enforce.

In the absence of police,, people will not tolerate thieves and murders. They will remove these threats from their communities. (if allowed to do so)

[pcosmar]

There were no sheriffs or law enforcement at all in Colonial US? :rolleyes:

Elected Sheriffs are NOT police. nor should they be allowed to assume that role.

And of course there was Law Enforcement. The people enforced Laws. The people went to Judges with evidence,, acquired warrants and served them,, sometimes with the Local Sheriff's assistance.

Law Enforcement was in the hands of the common man. as it should be.

of course if you had read the link provided,, you might have known that.

[GunnyFreedom]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

No, actually it is demonstrable that people die from cancer and that nations die from corruption. Once again you are incorrectly applying a logical fallacy in an attempt to discredit his argument, which in and of itself is a "fallacy fallacy" or an "Argument From Fallacy." In order to have been a slippery slope fallacy, it would have had to postulate that some small proposed measure will necessarily lead to a harmful expansion of that or those kinds of measures. AF's argument was nothing of the sort. He argued that the nature of corruption was poisonous to the body politic, and is often expressed in the form of official (police) cruelty. Those arguments bear no resemblance except in the most superficial of means.

There can now be no doubt that you are just picking any fallacy that looks like it might fit out of a menu and hoping that your audience will be cowed into submission or fooled into adulation at your wit. The problem is your attempt is clumsy and obvious, and most rational beings will instantly observe that your accusations of fallacious reasoning are contrived.

[PaulConventionWV]

Driving drunk in and of itself IS dangerous and negligent of others' safety and should not be permitted. However, that doesn't mean that we should turn the entire country into a police state in order to keep such things from happening.

Meaning....?

So driving drunk should be against the law, but we should not turn the entire country into a police state over it? I see those two statements as contradictory.

[pcosmar]

I think he is picking fallacies from a menu and slinging them at people in the feverish hope that some of them will stick.

Seen t in several threads.. he spams that site when he is unable to argue a point logically.

[PaulConventionWV]

Let this sink in and think about who this guy thinks he is.

Gotta be nice to the king's men, lest ye earn their scorn and suffer the consequences. What if I demanded someone pay me for looking at me wrong under threat of violence? Is that something the forefathers envisioned to you cop apologists?

[GunnyFreedom]

Seen t in several threads.. he spams that site when he is unable to argue a point logically.

The funniest thing is he appears blind to the fact that he makes many if not most of the fallacious arguments he accuses everyone else of, and then he sits back and chills like he thinks he's a genius and the rest of us are Neandertals. LOL One would be hard-pressed to find a quicker means of discrediting themselves amongst people of high intelligence. I don't think Matt realizes that he is actively repulsing the intelligentsia of the liberty movement with this kind of 'holier than thou' schtick of his.

[PaulConventionWV]

Not most of them, and not most of the time.

I agree, but the vast majority of what most LEO's do, especially if they are not SWAT or drug interdiction or traffic, does not involve unjust laws.

You're kidding, right? You don't see any unjust laws about how you can behave in public? What if I were to walk down the street with a gun in plain view? What if I were to stand too long in one place or cross the street without the permission of the little green man? There are many unjust laws out there that are enforced every day.


Yes, the government cannot really prevent crime. However, the government's job is to uphold contracts and provide justice.

So, then, how do you defend laws against drunk driving?

[CCTelander]

After these further exchanges, I stand by this comment even more.


I used to have a certain degree of respectfor Matt Collins. This thread has finally eliminated the last vestages of that respect.

[PaulConventionWV]

Most of the people in this thread have this problem:



https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division





.

What you're saying is, basically, don't hate the player, hate the game.

I am not judging the police based on the injustice of the whole system. They directly perpetuate the system and uphold it when they have a choice. That is why the police themselves are an unjust manifestation of this system. I am arguing against the very existence of the police, not just the unjust laws that they enforce. Even if that were the case, the police can and should make the decision as individuals not to participate in the subjugation of the public when they know that the system is corrupt. It is not enough simply to say, "I need money and the government is offering it to me if I do this." They are individuals, not just the parts of a whole.

[PaulConventionWV]

That's absurd... in order to have a free society there MUST be some form of police. Otherwise there is no disincentive to not trample the rights of others. This is why anarchy is non-functional.

There is the disincentive of not wanting to get killed by the would-be victim. Also, you're making a straw man by arguing against "anarchy." Nobody here has defended anarchy. Maybe you should refer yourself to one of those links so you can understand that better.

Not to mention that the threat of retaliation doesn't deter crime. The existence of a police force, especially, doesn't disincentivize anyone not to commit crimes any more than individual retaliation would.

[PaulConventionWV]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/composition-division

Not all of the law is corrupt and "bad". The vast majority of what this specific unit deals with is not corrupt or bad laws.

No loitering, public intoxication, disorderly conduct, etc? Urban patrol doesn't help with drug crimes? I find that very hard to believe.

[RJB]

"I need money and the government is offering it to me if I do this."

Sad thing is, most officers LOVE their job and would gladly commit legal thuggery for free. A paycheck and hero status is just a bonus.

[PaulConventionWV]

The last time I was pulled over by a cop, he did let me go with a warning. He also repeatedly called me stupid. He obviously thought he was pretty special. I could tell the story. But it's not that interesting compared with Will Grigg stuff.

Oh, yeah. I got let go for going 20 over the speed limit once, but all the while, he yelled and screamed at me about "arguing with" him about whether or not I was responsible for my company vehicle's expired registration.

[PaulConventionWV]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white


You are confusing "liberty" with "anarchy" which are NOT one in the same.

Anarchy is just as bad as democracy; it's mob rule.


Anarchy and authoritarianism are incompatible. But in order to have a free society where one's rights are protected, then it is imperative to have some government (although as minimal as possible).

Once again, you need to link yourself to an article about straw man logical fallacies.

[PaulConventionWV]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

There is one logical fallacy that the people who like to quote internet pages about logical fallacies always forget.

It's called the fallacy fallacy. Just because a statement is a logical fallacy, it does not mean it's untrue. It is not enough to merely quote logical fallacies all day. You actually have to argue the facts.

As Gunny pointed out, this is also known as the Argument from Fallacy. Slinging fallacies at people doesn't immediately negate all of what they're saying. People need to focus less on catching a logical fallacy (they are very common, even in reasoned arguments that stand on completely logical footing) and instead demonstrating with a counter-argument.

[PaulConventionWV]

No I am not..

What is the Logical Fallacy in being deliberately disingenuous?

I do not and never have advocated Anarchy. I do not even believe it can exist beyond momentary.

Why is it that anyone that challenges Authoritarianism is labeled as an anarchist?

Law can be enforced without police. It was enforced without police before they existed,, and in places where they do not exist.

People do not need to be controlled. That is an Authoritarian belief. People/Society can control itself. People will enforce the laws that the people themselves will enforce.

In the absence of police,, people will not tolerate thieves and murders. They will remove these threats from their communities. (if allowed to do so)

Depending on the context, it is either a straw man or a false dichotomy. Almost every argument is littered with logical fallacies, so pointing them out does not negate the argument as Matt is implying.

[PaulConventionWV]

Sad thing is, most officers LOVE their job and would gladly commit legal thuggery for free. A paycheck and hero status is just a bonus.

I don't doubt it. If not police, they would be hit men for the mafia or something similar. Like you said, the paycheck and the hero status is a bonus.

[devil21]

You mean to tell me that Officer Friendly was on his best behavior when he had a non-arrestee citizen in the car watching his every move? Surely you jest Collins.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

The many examples in this thread show that law enforcement is actually order enforcement. Jaywalking, loitering, drugs, prostitution, seatbelts, roadblocks, lemonade stands. The list goes on.

The new police recruit can no longer hide in today's world behind the sentiment of "I just enforce the laws. Blame the politicians." You know that in today's world that you're going to be enforcing the order of a lemonade stand rogue rather than legitimate laws. You have chosen to become part of the problem. There are no more excuses.

My theory is that order enforcement will continue to eclipse law enforcement as the U.S. continues its economic decline. Order enforcement is largely what built our empire. It ranged from the larger order of Indian removal, slavery, and oil wars, to the smaller order of prohibition and roadblocks.

Most people will become desperate to maintain the crumbling material empire, so they will employ the means with which they are familiar. That means will simply be more order enforcement.

[Anti Federalist]

Saved me some typing...

What Gunny said.


No, actually it is demonstrable that people die from cancer and that nations die from corruption. Once again you are incorrectly applying a logical fallacy in an attempt to discredit his argument, which in and of itself is a "fallacy fallacy" or an "Argument From Fallacy." In order to have been a slippery slope fallacy, it would have had to postulate that some small proposed measure will necessarily lead to a harmful expansion of that or those kinds of measures. AF's argument was nothing of the sort. He argued that the nature of corruption was poisonous to the body politic, and is often expressed in the form of official (police) cruelty. Those arguments bear no resemblance except in the most superficial of means.

There can now be no doubt that you are just picking any fallacy that looks like it might fit out of a menu and hoping that your audience will be cowed into submission or fooled into adulation at your wit. The problem is your attempt is clumsy and obvious, and most rational beings will instantly observe that your accusations of fallacious reasoning are contrived.

[Anti Federalist]

What is CFC?

Circular Force Continuum.

[Anti Federalist]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

See, I can cut and paste goofy internet shit too.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/47262383.jpg

[heavenlyboy34]

See, I can cut and paste goofy internet shit too.

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/47262383.jpg

Without a doubt, this is one of the most appropriate uses of that meme on RPFs. :) I am approve.

[Occam's Banana]

When someone commits violence or coercion against another, there must be a 3rd party with the authority and power to be able to stop it.

And what happens when that 3rd party commits violence or coercion against another?
Must there be a 4th party with the authority and power to be able to stop it? Why not?

And what happens when that 4th party commits violence or coercion against another?
Must there be a 5th party with the authority and power to be able to stop it? Why not?

And what happens when that 5th party ... (and so on ad infinitum).


Government is instituted to secure individual rights, provide justice, and to enforce contracts. When someone infringes on someone else's rights, or violates a contract, it is government's job to step in.

But who "steps in" when the "government" (i.e., the State) "infringes on someone else's rights or violates a contract?"
And if your answer is "the people," then why did they need the State to begin with? You don't get to have it both ways ...

You do NOT get to say that a 3rd party (i.e., the State) is necessary because "the people" do NOT have the ability to deal with certain problems - and then turn right around and say that "the people" DO have the ability to deal with those very same problems when the 3rd party (the State) is the source of them.

Either "the people" DO have this ability, or they do NOT. If they DO, then you have to drop the notion that the State is necessary. If they do NOT, then you have to drop the notion that the State can be adequately constrained by the "the people." In either case, you do NOT get to have it both ways ...

[tod evans]

No fair Nanner!

Making sense isn't permitted..;)

[Anti Federalist]

Thus endeth the thread.


And what happens when that 3rd party commits violence or coercion against another?
Must there be a 4th party with the authority and power to be able to stop it? Why not?

And what happens when that 4th party commits violence or coercion against another?
Must there be a 5th party with the authority and power to be able to stop it? Why not?

And what happens when that 5th party ... (and so on ad infinitum).



But who "steps in" when the "government" (i.e., the State) "infringes on someone else's rights or violates a contract?"
And if your answer is "the people," then why did they need the State to begin with? You don't get to have it both ways ...

You do NOT get to say that a 3rd party (i.e., the State) is necessary because "the people" do NOT have the ability to deal with certain problems - and then turn right around and say that "the people" DO have the ability to deal with those very same problems when the 3rd party (the State) is the source of them.

Either "the people" DO have this ability, or they do NOT. If they DO, then you have to drop the notion that the State is necessary. If they do NOT, then you have to drop the notion that the State can be adequately constrained by the "the people." In either case, you do NOT get to have it both ways ...

[presence]

It was absolutely fascinating...

He also said that he doesn't just hand out tickets unless someone needs one.
For instance, if someone has an attitude or is just flat out belligerent, then he may decide to ticket them if he can.
But if the person pulled over is nice and polite, then most of the time he won't issue a ticket.


http://webspace.webring.com/people/ib/bootchap/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/bootpol.jpg


So.... In other words, traffic tickets have very little to do with crime prevention,
justice, serving the public, or punishing wrongdoing


and much more to do with creating opportunities for cowering, conformity,
submission, obedience, subservience, groveling, toadyism,
and good old fashioned bootlicking of our overlords.


...if I understand correctly, you're right...

Absolutely Fascinating!

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Ride alongs. Youtube videos. Dash cam footage. Whatever.

No matter how you slice it or how you see it--it all comes back to "respect mah authori-tee."

[KingNothing]

Ride alongs. Youtube videos. Dash cam footage. Whatever.

No matter how you slice it or how you see it--it all comes back to "respect mah authori-tee."

Unless enough people decide that it doesn't have to be this way, and I think arming every cop and citizen with a camera is really, really, going to push us in the right direction.

No one wants the bad guys to win - be they murderers, thugs, rapists, or crooked cops. If enough of the good guys - be they cops sincerely trying to do the right thing, or people like us- can record and instantly upload any abuse we see, we're really going to be able to come down hard on the crooks.

Now, that is to say nothing about the subset of the population who can watch something like the Kelly Thomas beating and STILL find the police not guilty of any wrongdoing. We have our work cutout for us on winning those people over.

[KingNothing]

He also said that he doesn't just hand out tickets unless someone needs one. For instance, if someone has an attitude or is jut flat out belligerent, then he may decide to ticket them if he can. But if the person pulled over is nice and polite, then most of the time he won't issue a ticket.

Petty tyrants do love to reward deference.

[KCIndy]

Petty tyrants do love to reward deference.


Absolutely! Without proper deference (instilled via intimidation and outright violence) the tyrant quickly loses his job.... and often, his head.

[KingNothing]

Absolutely! Without proper deference (instilled via intimidation and outright violence) the tyrant quickly loses his job.... and often, his head.


I should note that I treat police officers with dignity and respect, because they're humans. It has nothing to do with the costume that they wear.

[Matt Collins]

Yes, Matt. The US DOI states that governments are instituted among men to secure the blessings of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not to "individual rights, provide justice, and to enforce contracts." You don't get to just "make up" what you think our founding documents should have said.No, it clearly says "to secure these rights".... rights only belong to individuals

[Matt Collins]

Law can be enforced without police. It was enforced without police before they existed,, and in places where they do not exist.Ok, please elaborate on this.




People will enforce the laws that the people themselves will enforce.

In the absence of police,, people will not tolerate thieves and murders. They will remove these threats from their communities. (if allowed to do so)Really, you want lynch mobs? Because that is what you're advocating here. Democracy rule? No thanks...

[Matt Collins]

So driving drunk should be against the law, but we should not turn the entire country into a police state over it? I see those two statements as contradictory.They are not contradictory at all. If someone causes an accident or harms another while intoxicated, then their penalties should be stiffer.

If someone gets pulled over for a legitimate reason, and they are found to be intoxicated, then they should be dealt with for endangering others. Although they shouldn't get jail time, just a fine maybe, and a ride home by the officer.

[Matt Collins]

You're kidding, right? You don't see any unjust laws about how you can behave in public? What if I were to walk down the street with a gun in plain view? What if I were to stand too long in one place or cross the street without the permission of the little green man? There are many unjust laws out there that are enforced every day.Yes, and where I was at, that is not what these particular LEOs do.

[Matt Collins]

No loitering, public intoxication, disorderly conduct, etc? Urban patrol doesn't help with drug crimes? I find that very hard to believe.Nope, not in this area. They are mostly a reactive response unit. When there is a problem they get called out. There are other divisions that do focus on the things that we would find offensive, but not the division I was with.

[Matt Collins]

But who "steps in" when the "government" (i.e., the State) "infringes on someone else's rights or violates a contract?"This is where involvement in the political system comes in to play. The only way to hold the government accountable is to control the politicians. That means being organized and effective at mobilizing others against/for certain laws and candidates.

If people who love liberty do not have power over the politicians, than people who do not love liberty will.

[Matt Collins]

It amazes me how many libertarians are closed and narrow minded, as evidenced in this thread.

[Anti Federalist]

It amazes me how many libertarians are closed and narrow minded, as evidenced in this thread.

Because we don't agree with you, we are narrow minded bigots...

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

[liberty2897]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

Sally sounds like my kind of woman.

[moostraks]

It amazes me how many libertarians are closed and narrow minded, as evidenced in this thread.

Officer Friendly doesn't treat you like crap while you go on your propaganda tour and we are closed and narrow minded??? that's rich...Yeah, wait while I toss away the numerous times I have been treated like a second class citizen by a police officer because you can't acknowledge some of us have more experience with the seedier underbelly of this group. I mean I wouldn't anyone to think I was narrow minded, you know, because of these actual experiences with jerks in uniform who abuse their position for personal gain.

[presence]

http://i.imgur.com/GhqHHP1.png

[GunnyFreedom]

No, it clearly says "to secure these rights".... rights only belong to individuals

Yes, the rights belong to individuals, (nice red-herring by the way) but you do not get to just invent the substance of those rights out of your imagination.

[CCTelander]

It amazes me how many libertarians are closed and narrow minded, as evidenced in this thread.


What amazes me is how many collaborators in thier own subjugation one finds among the so-called "liberty movement."

Actually, it doesn't durprise me at all. Some of one's worst enemies are often to be found among presumed allies.

[Occam's Banana]

But who "steps in" when the "government" (i.e., the State) "infringes on someone else's rights or violates a contract?"
This is where involvement in the political system comes in to play. The only way to hold the government accountable is to control the politicians. That means being organized and effective at mobilizing others against/for certain laws and candidates.

If people who love liberty do not have power over the politicians, than people who do not love liberty will.

IOW: you are saying that "the people can step in and hold the State accountable when it infringes on someone's rights or violates a contract."

That was exactly the kind of response I expected from you - because it seems to be the ONLY one you EVER have on this subject - and I anticipated it by explicitly addressing it in my post.

Oh, but look! Whaddaya know? THAT part of what I said seems to have magically disappeared when you quoted my reply. How about that?! Strange, huh?

Here is what I actually said - with the parts you conveniently snipped out & ignored in bold.

But who "steps in" when the "government" (i.e., the State) "infringes on someone else's rights or violates a contract?"
And if your answer is "the people," then why did they need the State to begin with? You don't get to have it both ways ...

You do NOT get to say that a 3rd party (i.e., the State) is necessary because "the people" do NOT have the ability to deal with certain problems - and then turn right around and say that "the people" DO have the ability to deal with those very same problems when the 3rd party (the State) is the source of them.

Either "the people" DO have this ability, or they do NOT. If they DO, then you have to drop the notion that the State is necessary. If they do NOT, then you have to drop the notion that the State can be adequately constrained by the "the people."


It amazes me how many libertarians are closed and narrow minded, as evidenced in this thread.

So let me get this straight ...

You reply to other peoples' rebuttals to your claims by snipping out & ignoring the most important and substantive parts of those rebuttals. Then you repeat the very same assertions you have already made without addressing any of the objections that have been raised against them (apparently in hopes that those objections will be magically invalidated if you simply pretend that they were never made).

And then you have the gall to bitch about how "closed and narrow minded" other people are? (And to top it all off, you make this "it amazes me" post immediately after the one in which you self-servingly hacked up and ignored my counter-argument.)

SMGDH ... I would very much like to say that all this amazes me about you. Unfortunately, it does not. It is your shop-worn modus operandi - you consistently and reliably ignore any and all substantive objections to your assertions while merely repeating those assertions like a stuck record. (You also seem to have an inordinate fondness for employing the Fallacy Fallacy by responding to many posts with little or nothing more than a link to a catalog of logical fallacies - yet more evidence for your unwillingness or inability to engage in substantive argumentation.)

[Origanalist]

So let me get this straight ...

You reply to other peoples' rebuttals to your claims by snipping out & ignoring the most important and substantive parts of those rebuttals. Then you repeat the very same assertions you have already made without addressing any of the objections that have been raised against them (apparently in hopes that those objections will be magically invalidated if you simply pretend that they were never made).

I think you got it.