subscribe or follow us:                    

A case against government Part 1: Police State

6 comments

policeWe have to have government. Who would protect us if we didn’t have police? Right? I keep hearing these questions and claims.  The Supreme Court blew holes in those arguments when they decided it was not the job of the police to protect people.  If you have a hard time with believing that then just check it out yourself Click here.  So we know the police are not there to protect us, but they are there to enforce laws.  What laws do they enforce and why?  Well we know they enforce the laws that enable them to demand money from law abiding citizens. This is what happened to Fire Chief Don Payne, who spoke out against the extortion racket his town was running.  When the federal government and state budgets run short police stations find ways to get the funding they need from citizens.  We hear about it on the news and around town and in Jericho.

WASHINGTON, June 27 – The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.

If a citizen or company were to choose to supplement income by forcing it out of people by threat of a gun they would be called a criminal and sent to jail.  This is no different than organized crime.  If you still doubt the thug violent nature of police I would ask you to visit GoodieMonster‘s Blog Governed By Wolves, and watch this video (Click here) he posted.

police often do not want to go after violent criminals, they would rather go after the law abiding citizens, they put up less of a fight and they pay instead of cost.

police-brutality

The police look after their employer not the citizen. Their employer is the government, they are the strong arm of large corporations and the state.  This is seen in the fact that their purpose is to enforce the state’s law.  Often this law is to give money to corporations or government.  Punishment is often not jail time, but payment to the state.  Most every state forces citizens to pay insurance companies before they drive, and this is enforced by threat of felonies, and paying more money to the state.

Police fight to change laws for citizens to abide by in their own self interest not in the interest of the citizen or their liberty.  Many of the laws of the system are oppressive to weaker individuals.

Currently in Kansas City there is an effort to pass SOAP/SODA “stay out of areas of prostitution,” “stay out of drug areas.”  This effectively takes individuals who have drug problems as well as women who are abused and stuck in the sex industry and bans them from areas where they can get help.  Learn what it is Click here, and see why it is just more damaging legislation Click here.  So those that need the most help are taken and abused by cops, and forced out of where they can get help?  This is needed?

If anything does exist like police officers it needs to be much more regulated.  I support excessive legislation and regulation when it is to bind the hands of government, and keep them far away from our liberty, property, and freedoms.  We are giving barbers about equal training as police officers, and the worst that happens when a barber slips is that your hair looks stupid, you don’t end up shot and dead.  If judges & social workers are required high education we could at least ask the same or more from the so-called civil servants who point guns at us.

In reality if we eliminated police most of what they do would not be in high demand by the citizens.  I doubt you would be pissed going 70 in a 65 wishing someone fully armed would pull you over and demand you pay his salary.  What we do want from them we can just take our money back from the government and put it in the free market so that they would work for us and keep our safety in mind and not the tyrant’s law.

I will not say one way is better than another, but the point is that as long as they benefit from you being against them they will only grow worse.  Until government stops profiting at your expense it will continue to victimize you.

We are seeing reports almost daily of police demanding respect from citizens and arresting or going after them if they do not show this respect.  What has this person done to deserve respect at that point? That is basic machismo behavior I expect from rival gangs stepping on each others toes not from my “public servants.”

We still have to touch on profiling, racism, class-ism, and the speak English or die bullshit, but that will be for another post.  Until then, watch out the Police are out to get you.

Comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

  • Ms. Maria

    Props on this post!

    The police force where I reside once left me, an infant, a toddler and a small child in a vehicle that I could not operate (I did not know how to drive a manual at the time) after arresting the driver of the car for a suspended license–of which of course they had no legal obligation to inform him about until he was arrested for the violation. When I told one of the officers, who was driving a large SUV, that we needed a ride to the station, he made it clear that he had no obligation to give me, or the children, a ride. He then "graciously" offered to push the car with his SUV up the road a bit where it was less likely we would be hit by an oncoming car… and drove away. Had a relative not have come and got us, we would have been stranded there for hours.

    Serve & protect? My ASS.

  • Aaron

    Great article.

    "I doubt you would be pissed going 70 in a 65 wishing someone fully armed would pull you over and demand you pay his salary. "

    That line is priceless.

    Sure, there are a few bad apples, but most of them are just good people doing their jobs…HA! Start a conversation with the average person, and notice how they're actually unable to think beyond this canned response.

  • Ninja R

    Your entire story starts on a false premise: 'So we know the police are not there to protect us"

    No. We know the SCOTUS has ruled that the feds cannot control STATE police. That's as it should be according to the Constitution.

    ….you…*do*…believe in the Constitution, don't you?

    Correct this and I'll think about reading the rest.

  • http://www.gonzotimes.com PunkJohnnyCash

    @Ninja R according to the article linked to at the beginning SCOTUS ruled in June of 05 that There is no constitutional duty to protect, so the constitution you believe in has laid out no provision for such a thing. This states that the police do not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm.

    I believe the Constitution exists. I agree with many supporters of the Constitution, but in the end I am not really sold on it being the greatest constitution that we could have. I like the idea of a Constitutional Republic, but only if we can use it to restrain government much more than we have done so far.

  • Djsandra1

    yes!!! an excellent point

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GFRJI7G3RXK3LCT3EVDEUYDJTA Ariel

    The only good pig is a dead pig.