PDA

View Full Version : Ferguson




Anti Federalist
11-30-2014, 12:39 AM
I was going to post this in another thread, where a heated discussion was ongoing about the nature of cops.

But, this is one of Eric Peter's best, I think.


Ferguson

by eric • November 29, 2014 • 10 Comments

http://ericpetersautos.com/2014/11/29/ferguson-2/

Darren Wilson may be a decent man, out of uniform. I do not know him, so I cannot say.

He is, however, a cop. A law enforcer.

That is known.

And that is why he is reviled. Not as a man per se, but as an archetype.

For what he represents.

For similar reasons, Michael Brown is mourned by many. Not because of who he was (a thug) but because of what he represents.

The legions of victims of law enforcers. The nameless millions who’ve had their rights stomped on by America’s run-amok praetorians, who run amok because they know they’ll almost never be held accountable in any meaningful way (the way any of us would be held accountable for doing far less).

It begins to chafe.

People – white and black, from all economic and social backgrounds – are awakening to the fact that officers are not friendly. That any one of us could be tomorrow’s victim of “officer safety” and “stop resisting.” Too many lurid videos of soccer moms being Tazered, of kids being body slammed to the ground, of old people being treated brutally, gratuitously – by law enforcers. What was once exceptional and outrageous – beyond the pale of civilized conduct – has become frighteningly routine.

Cops wonder why so many people really dislike them.

It is because we fear them.

With good reason.

They have acquired almost limitless authority to do as they please – up to and including summary execution. Our lives are quite literally in their hands. At their whim.

Meanwhile, we are held to a different set of rules.

I have a concealed carry handgun permit. It imposes on me legal consequences of extreme severity in the event I handle my firearm recklessly, let alone criminally. As is right and proper. I have assumed responsibility for carrying a deadly weapon on my person. Merely to “brandish” my gun – that is, to menace someone by letting them know I am armed – invites severe legal repercussions. And if I actually point the thing at someone – let alone fire it at someone – I’d better be able to produce clear and convincing evidence that my life was in actual (as opposed to imagined) peril. There will be a lengthy criminal investigation in such an event, regardless. And the odds are high that unless it was a clearcut case of self defense against a violent and plausibly murderous attack, I will be convicted of a felony and will become an inmate in a prison for many years to come. In addition, my victim (assuming it wasn’t self defense) will be able to pursue personal liability through the civil courts. Even if I am not criminally charged, I face possibly ruinous financial repercussions.

This knowledge – along with my own lack of interest in harming anyone – very effectively encourages me to be extremely cautious and responsible with guns.

Unlike these guys.

But the state’s enforcers are incentivized in the opposite direction.

To not exercise caution.

To (literally) shoot first – and ask questions later.

Sociopaths seem to be actively recruited.

As here:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8qUT2uPVlvg

Not infrequently, it all begins over some penny ante petty infraction of some kind, which escalates to the ultra-violent when the person waylaid “resists.”

“Resistance” having become cop-talk for any show of recalcitrance whatsoever – such as arguing a point or having a less than obsequious attitude toward cops.

And there’s the small stuff, too – which nonetheless begins to grate.

Such as cop tailgating us or driving considerably faster than the posted limit – often, not buckled up for “safety.”

Or parked in front of a fire hydrant so as to avoid having to drive around to find a legal spot as the little people must.

Then there are the Stasi-style checkpoints, where probable cause and the entire Fourth Amendment have been thrown in the woods.

The barked orders.

Their got-damned insolence.

Granted, these low-brows (literally; were you aware that having an above-average IQ disqualifies one to become an enforcer?) are merely “doing their job” and did not write the law.

That bitch whine did not fly for Eichmann. Why should it fly for them?

Back to Michael Brown and Darren Wilson.

They have transcended their individuality.

Wilson, the avatar of all that’s wrong with law enforcement.

Brown, unappetizing as he may have been personally, has come to represent something much more profound.

Twenty or so years ago, it was easy enough for white middle class America to dismiss someone like Brown as "another ****** who got what he deserved."

But guess what?

We’re all ******s now.

Your whiteness will not save you from a thug scrum in the middle of the night, nor excuse you from the degradations of a probable-cause-free stop and search.

If they pull you over for some petty nonsense and discover, in the course of their rooting around, that you are carrying $10,000 in cash (because you were on your way to buy a car or for any of a dozen other innocent reasons) they can – and frequently, will – simply take your money.

If you are an attractive young woman (or just a woman, period) and are out driving by yourself alone at night, do you feel “safe” when all of a sudden and out of nowhere a cop is tailgating you with his high beams on?

And yet, we are not allowed to fear for our “safety.”

So it goes – and will continue to go (and churn and bubble) until finally, it explodes.

Which I think has become inevitable.

More and more people seem to sense it – even if the cops don’t understand it.

Anti Federalist
11-30-2014, 11:44 AM
one bump

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-01-2014, 04:13 AM
Darren Wilson may be a decent man, out of uniform. I do not know him, so I cannot say.

He is, however, a cop. A law enforcer.

That is known.

And that is why he is reviled. Not as a man per se, but as an archetype.



He is reviled in my book as a blatant liar and a blatant coward. Man or cop. His most cowardly lie was saying Brown never, ever had his hands up when multiple, and more credible witnesses, testified just the opposite in the grand jury testimony. Wilson actually had the nerve to say that Brown regrouped for a second bull rush when Brown was actually staggering forward from the group of 6 shots. It was the staggering and not a second bull rush that led to Wilson firing the next group of 4 shots.

I don't even think Wilson would have been convicted in a jury trial, even if he had told the truth. He accomplished two things by embellishing the story and lying:

1. He saved himself the trouble of a jury trial.

2. He saved himself being called a coward by a few more people.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-01-2014, 05:02 AM
The double standard alluded to in the article (e.g., concealed carry) was reflected in the grand jury questioning. There was more than one instance of the two assistant DAs saying to witnesses I don't want to say you're lying, but... One DA even chastised the older Dorian Johnson for not being a mentor to Brown. Their questioning even sometimes read like a defense of Wilson.

No such scrutiny for Wilson in his testimony. He got the benefit of the doubt. His squealing tires almost hitting Brown and Johnson was never questioned. His improbable scenarios were rewarded with more softball questions.

No, skin color or nothing else matters. It's simply blue privilege versus other-colors-of-the-rainbow.

tod evans
12-01-2014, 06:34 AM
Good-n!