Blood in the homes – not just the streets

By Nathan Barton

Once more, we see “American” police gunning down innocent people for no more reason than a mistaken address given by someone – or misunderstood by cops and dispatchers.

The latest is in Southaven, Mississippi, as reported by The Free Thought Project, where a man responded to cop cars and pounding on his door by opening the door only to be killed in a hail of bullets from cops.  The cops claim he pointed a gun at them: no gun was recovered at the scene and the man’s wife said he did not have a gun with him when he went to the door.

I don’t know the total death toll due to cops killing people – especially not innocent people with no record of anything, no warrant, and no reason to be killed, like Mr. Lopez, for this year.  Previously, I’ve found information that it amounts to about three killings a day – and who knows how many wounded, beaten, tortured, or terrorized by men in dark blue, black, brown, and khaki, wearing badges that are – more and more – licenses to kill issued by their masters in federal, state, and especially local-level government agencies.

Today, for probably the fifth time this week, I’ve received a robo-call from some company or another (some identify themselves as “paid callers”) using fake telephone numbers and trying to get me to donate money in support of police officers and law enforcement, to protect the “thin blue line” that supposedly keeps civilization alive.  Or in other words, adding yet another lie to the first four or five they say in just making the call.  When I am able to get an actual organization name, more often than not a search on line turned out to come up with nothing: the organization does not seem to exist.  When it does, it is often on lists of con-artists and fake charities that spend 90% of the money that they get and give 10% to the “benevolent” organizations of police officers or to actual police organizations.

Believe me, that 10% is 10% too much. Even one percent is too much.  In fact, the way things are going right now, I would feel better if I were stupid enough to give money to the con artists, making sure that not a red penny went to a law enforcement agency – or even to the children or widow (or widower) of a law enforcement thug. Yes, I realize that I am painting with a very broad brush, but even if there are ten good cops for every bent or bad one, enough is enough. And I think it is much worse than just one in eleven bad’uns.  Let me give an example.

I frequently drive through San Juan County, Utah, the Four Corners county in the extreme southeast of the state.  San Juan is the Old West, filled with good people: Navajo (Dineh), Ute (Numu), LDS, and other Anglo-Europeans. A fair number of tourists – even from East Asia and Europe and the Commonwealth.  An LDS temple.  A lot of hard-working farmers and ranchers and, yes, government employees, and oil and gas people and folks who run and work in tourist establishments in this red rock desert country.

Today, there are three trials going on in Monticello, as reported by the Salt Lake Tribune  and the San Juan Record.  The trials are of the Sheriff, and two Deputy Sheriffs.  The victim of the crimes of which they are charged is another member of the Sheriff’s Office in the County.  (In addition, of course, to the taxpayers and citizens of the County.)  The sheriff has been in office for 7 years – the deputies for even longer.  They are accused of threatening the other employee with a rifle, and then of covering up the incident and lying about it.  Just like the cops in Mississippi appear to be lying about the gun that Mr. Lopez did not have.  At least (as far as we know) the victim in San Juan County was not killed or wounded.

That is three out of eleven officers in the Sheriff’s Office in this large but sparsely populated area.  I’ve seen several of these, together with some of the Monticello city police, frequently as I travel through their county (usually about 70 miles of US highway) – and I’ve seen them stop and help people who were broken down, as well as stops for other reasons (I assume: speeding, etc.).  They have usually been friendly: I suppose my South Dakota plates let them treat me as a tourist or a temporary worker in the area, and not a local.  Unlike some counties and towns in the Fifty States, I’ve not heard much bad about them.  Unlike some of the neighboring counties, where sheriff’s deputies and police officers are regularly on front page stories for various crimes (at least once or twice a year), I’ve not seen that in Monticello and the county.  They haven’t recently killed anyone – at least not going back for several decades.  The community respects them (or used to, at least).  But there is a very good chance that more than a quarter of this sheriff’s office are lawbreakers, criminals, felons.

Multiply that by hundreds of thousands, especially in places like the Deep South and the Rust Belt where the history of corruption and bad cops, abusive killers is known.  Statistics and studies say that the presence of sociopaths and psychopaths on police forces is 15 to 20 times as high as that in the population as a whole.  I have seen good men and women become police officers – and turn bad.  I have seen bad men and women become police officers – and become worse.  I have seen a few good men and women become police officers, realize what was happening, and quit to go do something else. And I will admit that I have seen a few good people become cops and NOT turn bad – a very few, but a few.  But for most, it is inevitable.

Once I would  say (and did) that service as a peace officer – and even as a law enforcement officer under some conditions – was compatible with being a libertarian.  At least with being a minarchist.  Today?  Theoretically, I suppose it is still the case: practically, even in a very small county or town, I do not think it is.  Compromises here and there, allowing yourself to believe the propaganda spewed out by the law enforcement academy, and practice and just plain cynicism corrupts – and not only in the way we normally define corrupt cops.  But in how we deal with people – especially our own families and neighbors – will change as the mental attitude and the constant wear on our souls proceeds.

What can we do?  What can be done? A lot of us have given thought to this.

Privatization of police functions (as normally defined) is apparently NOT the solution: privatization simply means that the police are not direct government employees, but instead employees of a company which contacts to provide the police services for the government, but in essence follows the same rules and objectives and procedures as if they were government employees directly of a government agency.

Commercialization is also probably not the answer: again, a private company uses its employees to provide services under contract to a government; the major difference is that the contractor does not necessarily have to abide by all procedures and rules: they are given specific objectives to accomplish but not told (within limits) HOW to accomplish them.  Still, they are working for government.

Libertarian “privatization” is still probably not the answer: in this case, private companies and their employees are hired by private persons (usually landowners or groups thereof) to provide “police services” (law enforcement) in accordance with laws of the various levels of government.  In some states (the Carolinas, apparently) such independent police and their organizations must follow established procedures and rules also followed by the “official” city, county, state etc. police. While there are some very important advantages for this, such as taxation and many advantages of the free market, they are not much different than the usual government-run, tax-funded type.

In addition, as with standard governmental police (which really have only existed in the English speaking world since 1735 or so) and sheriff’s offices, these all have the potential for tyranny – probably on a local level, but still, tyranny and therefore abuse of the very people that they “serve” as well as those others in the community.

However, this is certainly better than the system we have here in bloody-streets America.  Jarret Wollstein provides a great deal of information about such a concept of anarchocapitalist police in, among other places Mises.org.

It may be that we are looking at this the wrong way.  It is not so much that we need law enforcement by police of whatever kind, but that society needs people who keep the peace – and do so by preventing crime and helping deal with the results of crime.  Key to this is defining what IS a crime – and here we enter the realm of politics and philosophy.  And the pragmatic circumstances that resources are limited.

This concept is far from new – indeed, some places (like San Francisco, which came as a surprise to me) have such a concept that operates somewhat in parallel with the city’s police. In the case of San Francisco, this has existed since 1847.  L Neil Smith explains a similar concept in many of his Probability Broach series of novels and stories.

The main emphasis in this is NOT “law enforcement” but rather, maintaining and reestablishing the peace and civil behavior: responding as necessary to actual crimes (in which there is a real victim and in which there has been serious physical harm or damage done) and providing support to first responders and to people in the community.  It is a very big difference from our current system, and not just because it is free-market. And most especially, it requires the accepting of responsibility by individuals (and their organizations and companies) for their own defense and protection against crime AND against those tempted by their position and power to take over.

But it cannot really exist and function properly, in my opinion, in parallel with government police forces, whether or not they are considered to have a monopoly of force.

And that is the key.  Reform has been attempted many times both of modern police forces and of their equivalent in various societies and cultures going back thousands of years. The reforms have, at best, lasted a few years.  But always (unless the society is destroyed and submerged into another), the same abuses and dangers of tyranny arise again.  In 2017 and beyond, we can no longer afford this danger of servants becoming masters.  The one major key to solving this problem is the abolition of government-owned, government-operated, and tax-funded law enforcement organizations.

REFERENCES:

From 2015 (Natural News – often a suspect website): Private policing and SCOP (Special Conservators of the Peace).

From Mises Institute, an article by Murray Rothbard (from his book A New Liberty) discusses the entire subject of privatizing police functions.

Also from Mises Institute a 2010 republication of a 1969 article by Jarret Wollstein on Police Forces.

Mama’s Note: There will be little or no progress toward removing the monopoly of force, and the sociopaths who use it, until people in general stop believing in government “authority.” It is that belief which keeps the liars, thieves and sociopaths in power, allowing  them to do what they do.

No reform or alternate form of “police” will be possible until people in general take back their sovereign authority and responsibility for their own lives and safety.

About tpolnathan

Follower of Christ Jesus (christian), Pahasapan, Westerner, Lover of Liberty, Free-Market Anarchist, Engineer, Army Officer, Husband, Father, Historian, Writer.
This entry was posted in Nathan's Rants and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Blood in the homes – not just the streets

  1. JdL says:

    “Today, for probably the fifth time this week, I’ve received a robo-call…”

    Yecccch! My wife and I never answer the phone unless we recognize the caller. Robo-callers almost never leave messages. And if they do, message deleted and problem solved.

    As for avoiding trouble by keeping a low profile, yes, it helps not to do something blatant like flipping a cop off or cutting him off in traffic, but presumably the guy in Mississippi was “keeping a low profile” when the cops banged on his door, and he got killed anyway. I hate to say it, but I don’t think anything will change substantively until genuine justice, so obviously missing from the official government “Justice system”, is administered by others outside that system. When and if cops realize that if they panic and murder an innocent, there WILL be meaningful retribution, they might take the time and energy to change their ways. As things stand, I can’t see that they have any motivation whatever to clean up their acts. Many of them get promotions and medals after particularly nasty rampages. The system is completely rotten.

    Like

    • MamaLiberty says:

      “I don’t think anything will change substantively until genuine justice, so obviously missing from the official government “Justice system”, is administered by others outside that system. ”

      Yes, the system is completely rotten… and will remain so as long as most people continue to believe that there is legitimate authority for it at the base, however much they deplore what is going on. It is the authority, the belief most people have in it… that’s what has to change. And I have no idea how to go about it. Twenty or thirty years ago I actually believed that the growing dissonance, the growing evil of the “system” would be evident to more and more people – that they would lose that state worship. Oh, that’s happened some, in a few places, but nowhere near enough for people to begin to administer real justice as a general thing – or even understand what individual liberty means. Think of the many people who believe passionately in their right to carry a gun, but are just as passionate about putting everyone else in jail -or worse- who uses some substance or does something else harmless just because THEY don’t approve.

      Like

    • Nathan Barton says:

      Dear JdL:
      You are right. We’d love to be able to not answer the phone if we don’t recognize the number. Unfortunately, we own and run a small business, and can’t afford not to answer – it may be our next client (or an existing one using a phone number we don’t recognize). Or a vendor of ours, or someone we coordinate with. So we have to put up with it. But it is getting worse year by year.
      In the same way, you are right on the mark regarding a low profile. In certain professions and businesses, there is no way to do that – and we don’t have the resources to go Galt (yet). As you point out, a low profile does not ensure that they won’t get you. But we CAN sometimes reduce our risk by choosing where we live and work, what roads we take, and other things. Mama LIberty really pushes situational awareness, and advance planning and training/practice. She is certainly right to do so. And it is the reason she lives where she does, and we live and work in the places that we do.
      I don’t know if legitimate, genuine justice is possible even outside the governmental injustice system, because of that governmental system. At least as long as the fake system run by government exists.
      Too many people do not understand this. But we need to keep trying to explain. Libertarian Christian Institute [http://libertarianchristians.com/2017/07/27/how-government-works-visual-model/] just published two drawings by Dr. Hubner that show the perception and reality of the FedGov – the same thing exists in the law enforcement and “justice” system at every level.

      Like

      • MamaLiberty says:

        Have to chuckle when people talk about “recognizing” phone numbers in the ID screen of their telephones… I remember the first telephone my family had… and we were required to “recognize” our specific ring sequence so we didn’t “answer” other people’s calls on the six party line! LOL Not that children were usually even allowed to answer (or use) the telephone at all. Now it seems that even toddlers have their own portable telephone – with internet access, I suppose. No, there probably are not very many people now who have any idea what keeping a low profile might be, or the advantages of doing so. And if they ever get a clue, they usually expect someone else to restore/maintain their privacy. And that “someone else” is usually the government, one way or another. No, I suspect it’s not going to change for the better any time soon.

        Like

  2. Darkwing says:

    If law enforcement people were held accountable for their actions a lot of this would stop. But courts and DA are the friends of the Gestapo and they want them to protect them if it all goes down. I tried to keep a low profile but every one in the area knows me and they respect me and my opinions. That is my plus.

    Like

  3. Jerry the geek says:

    You paint a bleak picture
    As near as I can tell, the only solution is to keep a low profile and pay the two dollars.

    If that’s Dane Geld, so be it.

    Like

    • MamaLiberty says:

      The “money” doesn’t really bother me much, since it is all actually worthless now, but keeping a low profile is definitely a good idea. As I’ve said so often, however, when folks stop believing that the “official” ones have some sort of legitimate authority, and refuse to accept the abuse, it will tend to stop.

      Like

      • Nathan says:

        Jerry, I understand what you are saying, and like Mama, agree that the low profile is essential – IF we can do it.
        But the money DOES bother me, because supposedly we learned the lesson more than a thousand years ago. To quote Rudyard Kipling:

        And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
        But we’ve proved it again and again,
        That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
        You never get rid of the Dane.

        We can never completely refuse to recognize and submit to their immoral “authority” and refuse to accept their abuse if we keep paying them off. And that bogus money is NOT worthless: it represents what I am paid for my labor, which is NOT worthless – and it is necessary for me and my family to be able to live. It may be bogus, it may be fiat, but for now I can at least convert it to tangible, essential things we need to live: food and water and a roof over our heads and fuel and repairs to go where we need to.

        Like

      • MamaLiberty says:

        Didn’t make myself clear, obviously. The $2. Jerry mentioned is not worth the battle – and a battle over it would definitely blow the low profile idea.

        But the Dane thing is only going to work if all or most refuse to pay it. The presumption is that you WILL pay it, one way or another, and the powers that be have plenty of guns and goons to take it – and so much more – away from you if you so much as twitch. I don’t think Kipling had any idea where that was all going…

        The problem remains that most people pay it because they believe the “government” has some legitimate authority to take it, whether they like it or not. That’s what has to change. They won’t quit paying it until they understand who actually has legitimate authority over their lives and property.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s