National Review Article : "It's Time for Conservatives to Stop Defending the Police"

[SeanTX]

Attitudes must be changing when the National Review publishes something like this. I haven't read the comments yet though, I'm sure the badge lickers are out in force there.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...lice-j-delgado

July 21, 2014 6:10 PM
It’s Time for Conservatives to Stop Defending Police
There is nothing conservative about government violating the rights of citizens.
By A. J. Delgado

Imagine if I were to tell you there is a large group of government employees, with generous salaries and ridiculously cushy retirement pensions covered by the taxpayer, who enjoy incredible job security and are rarely held accountable even for activities that would almost certainly earn the rest of us prison time. When there is proven misconduct, these government employees are merely reassigned and are rarely dismissed. The bill for any legal settlements concerning their errors? It, too, is covered by the taxpayers. Their unions are among the strongest in the country.

No, I’m not talking about public-school teachers.

I’m talking about the police.

We conservatives recoil at the former; yet routinely defend the latter — even though, unlike teachers, police officers enjoy an utter monopoly on force and can ruin — or end — one’s life in a millisecond.

For decades, conservatives have served as stalwart defenders of police forces. There have been many good reasons for this, including long memories of the post-countercultural crime wave that devastated, and in some cases destroyed, many American cities; conservatives’ penchant for law and order; and Americans’ widely shared disdain for the cops’ usual opponents. (“Dirty hippies being arrested? Good!” is not an uncommon sentiment.) Although tough-on-crime appeals have never been limited to conservative politicians or voters, conservatives instinctively (and, it turned out, correctly) understood that the way to reduce crime is to have more cops making more arrests, not more sociologists identifying more root causes. Conservatives are rightly proud to have supported police officers doing their jobs at times when progressives were on the other side.

But it’s time for conservatives’ unconditional love affair with the police to end.

big snip

[SeanTX]

The comments are interesting -- most are anti-police. Most of the ones that are pro-fascist seem to be from cops and friend/family of cops. A couple of years back an article on police shooting dogs was posted there (maybe an article by Radley Balko), and back then nearly all the comments were pro-police.

[Philhelm]

The comments are interesting -- most are anti-police. Most of the ones that are pro-fascist seem to be from cops and friend/family of cops. A couple of years back an article on police shooting dogs was posted there (maybe an article by Radley Balko), and back then nearly all the comments were pro-police.

*Gazes into crystal ball.*

"If someone breaks into your home, the police will be the first people you call."

Did I win?

[aGameOfThrones]

*Gazes into crystal ball.*

"If someone breaks into your home, the police will be the first people you call."

Did I win?

Unless cops are the ones breaking in your house.

[fisharmor]

Let's see how long my comment lasts....

"Your disclaimer is most certainly not obligatory, and thankfully more and more of us are waking up to that fact daily.

If there was any such thing as a good cop, then there would be no bad cops. This is so self-evident that it stupefies to ponder that people capable of putting together enough English words to write regular coherent columns are apparently incapable of working it out.


Those murdering officers, just like every other murderer in uniform, will get the functional equivalent of a paid vacation while a review board figures out the bare minimum effort which must go into a cover-up. If there were good cops, then they would hold these men accountable. There is no accountability - ergo, there are no good cops. There are only bad cops, and cops who are indifferent to the bad cops... and I fail to note a difference there.

Frankly Mr. Delgado, you come across as a plant. There are hundreds of other high-profile cases just in the last year - let alone the low-profile cases - from which you could choose. That you opt to take a stand for one instance where the victim had assailable integrity marks you with suspicion, sir. Such is not always the case, and a bare minimum of research readily shows this.


To Mr. Delgado as well as everyone else: Do your homework. Read some Will Grigg for starters. There's a saying going around, that in the information age all ignorance is willful. So do everyone in the US a favor and get fully up to speed here."

[Philhelm]

Let's see how long my comment lasts....

Blarg, blarg, blarg.

+187 five-oh.

[thoughtomator]

When the cops lose the law-and-order crowd, interesting times lay ahead.

[Christian Liberty]

@fisharmor- I liked the article. I understand that it wasn't perfect, but its a good step in the right direction.

Some thoughts.

First of all, the writer is coming from a conservative perspective, not a libertarian one. So I'll hold the article to what conservatives actually claim to believe in, the US Constitution, rather than to the NAP. No, its not the ideal, and conservatism isn't, but the country will still be a better place if more conservatives actually start being conservatives rather than fascist warmongering police statists.

I agree with you on the disclaimer, to a point. My disclaimers usually look a little bit different. Frankly, I would prefer the cop who's indifferent to crimes that other officers do over the one who's actually committing the crime. No, I don't want either one ,but there is a difference in how bad each cop is, as well as differences in intentions. I'm willing to give the ones with good intentions a little patience (though not too much.)

All in all, this could be a great article for somebody who is still brainwashed into heroizing the police. No, its not everything I would want, but its a start, and it could do something for somebody who's still too far gone to even take guys like Will Grigg or Laurence Vance seriously. Gateway drugs and all that

[Anti Federalist]

When the cops lose the law-and-order crowd, interesting times lay ahead.

Was thinking the same thing myself...

[Christian Liberty]

Was thinking the same thing myself...

WRT: "Rule of law".

There are moderates who support the "rule of law" in that they support the US Constitution (I call them moderate as opposed to those of us who are more radical and would like to do away with the State entirely.)

Then there are fascists who support the "rule of law" in that they make politicians into gods and believe in rule by politicians and cops.

They aren't the same types of people at all. But they could both be "law and order" in a limited sense.

[pcosmar]

WRT: "Rule of law".

There are moderates who support the "rule of law" in that they support the US Constitution (I call them moderate as opposed to those of us who are more radical and would like to do away with the State entirely.)

Then there are fascists who support the "rule of law" in that they make politicians into gods and believe in rule by politicians and cops.

They aren't the same types of people at all. But they could both be "law and order" in a limited sense.

NO,, it is simpler than that even.

There are authoritarians
and there are libertarians.

Conservatives were at one time libertarian. and then authoritarians co-opted the word.

[phill4paul]

When the cops lose the law-and-order crowd, interesting times lay ahead.

Anxiously awaiting it. In another thread a city decriminalized marijuana and the cops couldn't give a $#@!. So what then if we criminalize cops? Theye are stocking up on guns, ammo and armored vehicles. I know which way their minds bend. Theye will not go quietly into the good night. Theye will ramp up and do as Theye have always done. Subjugate.

[Christian Liberty]

NO,, it is simpler than that even.

There are authoritarians
and there are libertarians.

Conservatives were at one time libertarian. and then authoritarians co-opted the word.

I wish it was that simple, but it really isn't. There are a bunch of shades of gray. Now, you could say that anything that's not white (libertarian) is black (authoritarian), but really, I don't think a scale that puts Rand Paul, John Doe who blindly cheers on the Republican Party without really understanding much, and Adolf Hitler in the same category is really justified. And yet, Rand Paul and John Doe aren't strictly libertarians either. Heck, Ron Paul is authoritarian 1% of the time or so.

Anxiously awaiting it. In another thread a city decriminalized marijuana and the cops couldn't give a $#@!. So what then if we criminalize cops? Theye are stocking up on guns, ammo and armored vehicles. I know which way their minds bend. Theye will not go quietly into the good night. Theye will ramp up and do as Theye have always done. Subjugate.

[TaftFan]

National Revview is very fair to libertarians in getting articles published.

[pcosmar]

I wish it was that simple, but it really isn't. There are a bunch of shades of gray.

NO.. there is no shade of grey,, other than folks blurring the line.

Either you believe in and defend individual rights,, or you believe that some collective has a right to control.

There is no gray area. It is either/or.
Either Liberty or Authority.
The two are polar opposites,,

[GunnyFreedom]

Anxiously awaiting it. In another thread a city decriminalized marijuana and the cops couldn't give a $#@!. So what then if we criminalize cops? Theye are stocking up on guns, ammo and armored vehicles. I know which way their minds bend. Theye will not go quietly into the good night. Theye will ramp up and do as Theye have always done. Subjugate.

'but...but...but... we voted!'

They don't care how you vote, they do what they want to. They will justify it later if they have to. If they have to find it in the law or make it up. They are sharks in a fish tank and they like that. Do not expect them to give that up without a fight. MRAP's and APC's and BEARCAT's, oh my.

[KurtBoyer25L]

Let's see how long my comment lasts....

"Your disclaimer is most certainly not obligatory, and thankfully more and more of us are waking up to that fact daily.

If there was any such thing as a good cop, then there would be no bad cops. This is so self-evident that it stupefies to ponder that people capable of putting together enough English words to write regular coherent columns are apparently incapable of working it out.

I don't understand what you mean by that. No matter what state/voluntary security force we're talking about, no group of people is comprised of 100% perfect individuals.

[Christian Liberty]

NO.. there is no shade of grey,, other than folks blurring the line.

Either you believe in and defend individual rights,, or you believe that some collective has a right to control.

There is no gray area. It is either/or.
Either Liberty or Authority.
The two are polar opposites,,

Well, I don't believe any collective has any right to control. I wish more people agreed with us on that.