TheAgitator.com
Got That, Punks?
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009A police officer in the Chesapeake area addresses the Ryan Frederick case on his blog:
Ryan Frederick will forever be known as a cop killer. He shot and killed Detective Jerrod Shivers in January 2008 while the Chesapeake Police Department was serving a search warrant at his house. He is a cold blooded killer…
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury? You have FAILED MISERABLY. You have failed the family of Detective Shivers, police officers, the City of Chesapeake, Commonwealth of Virginia and this nation. Failed. Failures each and every one of you.
The next time you need police, please be sure to tell them you were on the Frederick jury. While that is an emotional statement, I do know that no matter what, the officers will still be professional. But I bet it made you stop and think didn’t it?
Just like all the people who have voted in the polls on PilotOnline. Voting for acquittal. The next time YOU need police, be sure to tell them you think that Frederick should have been let off for killing a cop.
Classy.
The word “unprofessional” comes to mind.
Sounds like the other detectives did not put a very good case forward to the County Attorney for prosecution but the CA took it and ran into trouble. Then it’s a matter of poor police work from the start to the finish.
Maybe the police can access the names of the jurors and put them on a blacklist. If any of them ever calls the cops or 911 they just don’t show up. How’s that for democracy huh you little shits?
From the article:
“If the tables were turned, and it was a cop who shot blindly through a door, killing a civilian, I wonder how that would have turned out at a trial?”
Someone should post a link to the story about that drug raid in Ohio where the SWAT guy shot and killed an unarmed woman and wounded her baby because he heard a gunshot (which actually came from one of the other SWAT guys) and started firing through walls without identifying what he was shooting at. I seem to remember he didn’t do any jail time. He “feared for his life” or some such bullshit. These guys are supposed to be trained for those kinds of situations yet the courts hold them to a lower standard than a common citizen. It boggles the mind.
I wonder if he would say the same about the three Georgia cops sentenced this week for lying, cheating, and leaving an old lady to bleed to death?
BTW, his punctuation is the suck!
Ryan Frederick is charged with first-degree murder in the death of a police officer. The officer was part of a SWAT team that kicked in Frederick’s front door while he was sleeping. Frederick allegedly fired at the dark figure thinking it was someone attempting to burglarize his home again. Someone had burglarized his property in the recent days before this raid. The warrant was for a marijuana grow operation. A .380 caliber handgun, two .380 spent shell casings, one .223 spent shell casing and small amount of marijuana for personal use were taken into police custody.
Oh stop it the entire situation was one of total piss poor police work–having a snitch burgle a house and then attempt to use that tainted apple to do a search. Sorry bout the cop that got it but I’/m thinkling he was part of the taint. So brothers of blue get back to proper proceedure and learn from your errors
@3, it’s the fourth comment down on the entry. Three cheers for Sailorcurt.
Does this guy really think that Ryan Frederick is sort of guy who was planning to kill a police officer? Or even knew that he was shooting a officer at the moment he pulled the trigger? He was convicted of what the jury felt he did wrong, firing without identifying the target. If it would only be manslaughter had it been the milkman, then the same charge should apply. The officer here is essentially whining about the lack of special consideration given to the victim.
Jerrod Shivers is dead, Ryan Frederick shot him and that is a tragedy for their loved ones, but the cognitive dissonance needed to completely discount the role that kicking in someone’s door in middle of the night played in Shivers’ death is staggering.
As I find it tiresome to constantly hear police whine about “when you need a cop…” as a justification for all the bad policies, abuses, and law-breaking that the police shouldn’t be doing. In case this gentleman hasn’t clearly thought out his words, what he’s implying is “protection racket 101″.
Putting the “lice” back in “Police” I see…
Justice Scalia, are you reading any of this?
Well, he doesn’t have to worry about me….even though I don’t live in Chesapeake, one of my general life guidelines is to avoid calling the police.
‘I do know that no matter what, the officers will still be professional.’
I love irony. Especially when it’s not intentional.
Until it happens at my ivory tower it’s all lies!!!
hahahaha.
cop killed by inept loner jackass.
FAIL.
I’m wondering if this is retroactive jury intimidation, or preemptive jury intimidation. The cop may have well said “let this be a warning to all citizens who fail to give cops the benefit of the doubt and the license to tyrannize.”
A perfect example of “What the police do best is whine.”
Typical response from cops all over message boards. Criticize them and they generally resort to “If you don’t allow us to act like raging lunatics with no consequences, don’t even think about calling us.”
Which I won’t anyway. I don’t want those psychos with guns anywhere near my dogs and kids.
“I’m wondering if this is retroactive jury intimidation, or preemptive jury intimidation. The cop may have well said “let this be a warning to all citizens who fail to give cops the benefit of the doubt and the license to tyrannize.””
Remember what happened to the jury that acquitted William Penn. They were sent to jail. This is one reason that the Quakers, Puritans and others left the Old World to find freedom in the New.
Add +1 in the column for people a little too used to having the power of life & death over other human beings and who feel perfectly entitled to threaten and intimidate anybody who doesn’t properly worship them and their station in life above the rest of us.
Nothing new.
Don Taborrequested a citizen review of this case last night.
“cold blooded”
you keep using that word. i don’t think it means what you think it means.
And excellent example of what’s wrong with police (and government in general). They believe themselves to be right under any and every circumstance.
Awww The Thin Blue Line…at it’s finest.
Did you expect anything else?
They need to look in the mirror to find the real killer of Det. Shivers. Yes, they are unprofessional; just look at the entire investigation. Keystone Kops would have done a better job. I suggest a mandatory 48hr viewing of episodes of Law & Order, so at least they might emmulate a fictional police organization. Its much better than the reality that is Chesapeake PD.
Reading that thread really shows how much contempt the police have for civilians.
I find it amazing that none of the cops can put themselves in Frederick’s shoes and say they would do the same thing…….of course if they did the same thing it’d be a “tragedy” and no significant charges
Personally, I think Ryan Frederick should have been awarded damages for shooting a cop (nothing personal against Det. Shivers or his family) and given no jail time…after all, they did bust into his house at night without announcing their presence on a bogus warrant obtained through questionable means. Sounds like the police department did everything they could to force Mr. Frederick into that situation where he had to take someone’s life, short of loading his gun for him.
As for the officer who wrote the letter, he sounds like one of those guys who became a cop because he was a loser and a victim of life who couldn’t succeed at anything else and he sees the uniform as something that will fill in all the holes in his personality because people are forced to respect him, so he takes any perceived slight against police officers to the extreme. I don’t think that’s a description that fits all police officers, or even most of them, but it is a description that fits far too many of them. Those guys never really get that the job isn’t about them…at all.
Who cares about this clown?
Don’t call the cops.
EVER.
Fuck ‘em all.
I’ll tell you guys a little secret: A few years ago, I seriously considered being a police officer. It’s just about as seriously as I’ve considered any specific profession since I’ve been out of school. I went so far as to visit the local training academy and talk to some police officers. Ultimately, I decided against it.
If this is an example of what I might have become, I’m awfully glad I did.
i have never had a conversation with a police officer, so i can’t claim to know their mindset. but i have spoken with many Army veterans. i know many of them that are vocally upset with thier chain of command. they are angry that their friends lives were wasted in Viet Nam, or Iraq, or Somali … many of them are upset that we went looking for WMD that didn’t exist.
where is the parallel in the police world? how come no officers have come forward to criticize the Frederick operation? Frederick was not arrested because he was a suspected cop killer, he was arrested for drugs. it turns out there weren’t any drugs; it was not a slam-dunk. where are the officers calling for the head of the narcotics unit or the head of the swat unit? how come the police never hold other police officers accountable?
Dsmallwood, there’s an organization called LEAP, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. Check them out, it’s a decent start.
I don’t think that ‘Scott’ knows what the phrase “cold blooded” means.
Ironically, this ad was just displayed on your site, next to this story
.: http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/imgad?id=CIGuivfYmITaFxCgARjCBDIIKQSnxkECzcI
“The next time you need police, please be sure to tell them you were on the Frederick jury. While that is an emotional statement, I do know that no matter what, the officers will still be professional. But I bet it made you stop and think didn’t it?”
Think about this Scott, next time you need a hand from a citizen, might wanna hope he/she has not read your blog. But they will still dial 911 for your imminent rescue.
LEO certainly knows how to evoke that warm, fuzzy feeling of security and community!
A cop trying to discuss deep thoughts is like a monkey with a chainsaw: dangerous, with a chance of really funny.
”how come no officers have come forward to criticize the Frederick operation? Frederick was not arrested because he was a suspected cop killer, he was arrested for drugs. it turns out there weren’t any drugs; it was not a slam-dunk. where are the officers calling for the head of the narcotics unit or the head of the swat unit? how come the police never hold other police officers accountable?” #30
Exactly. The reality of this case is a reality that the cops cannot face. The people who are REALLY responsible for this whole debacle are the police themselves, all the way from the top of the command chain on down to the officers who broke into Ryan Frederick’s home that night. If it had been a criminal shot dead while busting through Frederick’s door, Ryan Frederick would be a free man today. It obviously would have been self defense and he most certainly would have been considered justified in shooting because he was “in fear for his life.” But because it was a police officer (doing just what a criminal home invader does) that makes Frederick’s actions unjustified. Chesapeake Police Department, when you do a job as carelessly and as negligently as this job was done then you have to look to yourselves as the real guilty parties. Was the three joints you found really worth the cost? Why don’t you focus your attention on REAL crime, you know, like rape, robbery, assault, murder etc.? Why don’t you work on making the streets of our cities and towns safer to be on? Or is Chesapeake VA so free of any REAL crime that the PD has to think up stupid things to do? Stupid things like attacking some citizen in their own home over an uninvestigated and unconfirmed “tip” about marijuana plants.
It appears that the Chesapeake Police picked what they thought was an easy target for their late night, No-Knock drug raid.
The confidential informant, who the police knew had broken into the house a few days before, told mistakenly told the police that there was a major marijuana grow on the premises.
There wasn’t. There was apparently only a major Japanese Miniature Maple grow operation by the time the police raid occurred.
I think Mr. Frederick would be walking the streets a free man save for one major error on his part:
He freely and willingly spoke with the police in the aftermath of the shooting.
The police interviewers were not conducting the interview to just “get the facts” or to clear Mr. Frederick.
They were looking for incriminating statements with which to prosecute him of murder.
And, it is upon the police EVIDENCE, gathered through the interview, that he was subsequently charged with FIRST DEGREE MURDER.
The lesson for everyone:
If you are involved, even peripherally, with a major potential Felony event, say NOTHING to the police, except.
“When my attorney is present, I’m sure we can clear up this matter”…….
What would the government do if a gangbanger wrote a treatise threatening–and rousing those in his gang to threaten-people who served on a jury who have convicted one of his home boys?
This officer has, essentially, threatened those jurors, and encouraged his home boys to withdraw protection in the event of the commission of a crime against said jurors. Here is the Virginia statute which addresses gang intimidation against jurors–but it seems to only apply to jurors while they are active. Surely, there is something out there regarding inciting retaliation against jurors who have reached a verdict:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-460
FYI, you can contact the police force for which Officer White works using this online form:
http://www.hampton.va.us/police/community/contact_us.html
While I’m sure that some of his superiors agree with his opinions about the case, perhaps bringing their attention that the public does not endorse juror intimidation will make a difference.
Well that would be futile. Police departments regularly don’t do shit about officers that cause bodily injury up to and including death to innocents, unless the incident manages to get picked up by the media and starts resulting in riots.
His superiors would probably thank him for his loyalty to the gang and give him a medal, if anything.
Lord Robert Peel’s wisdom becomes clearer and clearer the more it isi ignored and forgotten: “[The police must] maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen, in the interests of community welfare and existence.
[Peel was founder of of Scotland Yard, and is often credited with inventing the modern police force.]
In the spirit of Peel, then, I say this to Officer Scott:
“The next time I need police”? Why would I call you guys anyway? Truly, it is written, “There’s never a cop around when you need one.” And as the courts have repeatedly ruled, in turning down suits alleging negligence, there can’t be, even shouldn’t be.
Only rarely can the cops stop a crime in progress. Best will in the world, almost always they show up after it’s all over to fill out the paperwork and take away the bodies.
It is up to the citizens, all of us, in uniform and not, to protect ourselves from thugs of all stripes, crack-headed and jack-booted.
Officer Scott, looking around your website you seem to be an advocate of the Second Amendment. What we have here is the result of combining the Second Amendment with police who have forgotten Peel’s Seventh Principle, and become so arrogant they forget they may be attacking armed citizens in their own homes. Or alternatively, police cowards — cowards, sir! — who know damn well they may be facing armed citizens, and increasingly choose no-knock raids in the grossly mistaken belief that invading citizens’ homes at three in the morning, when they will be sleepy, disoriented, and terrified, is somehow “safer”.
Two paths, Scott: armed citizens acting as their own police, with occasional uniformed backup; or police tyranny under color of law.
Pick one. Whose side are you on?
I think Shivers has some comparative negligence in this case – going along with an insanely stupid plan, motivated by catching a nobody who might have had some pot plants. And cold-blooded – no way.
“The next time you need police. . .”, “The next time YOU need police. . .”
How funny. I would shoot myself in the face with a shotgun before I called the police for any reason, and this is more and more the attitude of people who have had any dealings with them in the past several years. (White people, that is. Black and brown people have known for decades.)
Do they really have a “Do Not Respond” list? If so, can we voluntarily add our names?
BTW, they are “civilians” too, just like the rest of us mutts and scum (their endearing names for us) who are not in the military.
“[The police must] maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen, in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
Peel really gave the game away there.
“Duties which are incumbent on every citizen.”
A very clear defense of anarchy. And a very clear case against Statism.
DJMoore (#42): Well said, sir (I didn’t feel that + karma-ing the post was enough).
If I ever need help, the Cops are the last people I would call anyway. I don’t really care to have my dogs or family shot.
Z; If you are representative of all cops, then I think I would rather defend myself, and have the coroner come out in the morning to pick up the perp’s body.
I think Lord Acton said it best: “A few murders in Whitechapel is a small price to pay for not giving the government this much power.”
It looks like Mr. Peel’s experiment in professional government crime fighters is an abject failure. We should abolish these jobs, and let people like you seek private employ in shopping malls.
Do we have positive ID on this clown? If so, his department needs to be informed and he needs to be put on the rubber gun squad before he kills someone and costs his department millions.
Jerri Lynn Ward:
“This officer has, essentially, threatened those jurors, and encouraged his home boys to withdraw protection in the event of the commission of a crime against said jurors.”
Very good point. The comparison to a street gang member, unfortunately, is apt in this case.
If the family, friend, colleagues and supporters of Det. Shivers want to blame anyone at this point, I would start with his employer, the State of Virginia and the United States government, which sent the “drug war” into overdrive with the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Det. Shivers was not killed by drugs. He, like so many others, fell vicitim to terrible prohibition policies and the overly aggressive (and often sloppy) policing that accompanies vice enforcement.
#42 DJ Moore:
“[The police must] maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen, in the interests of community welfare and existence.”
Thanks for bringing up Peel’s ideas, DJ. As a former Criminal Justice major, I get a warm, fuzzy feeling people use this quote. This is what it is supposed to be like! And when you added, “…armed citizens acting as their own police, with occasional uniformed backup; or police tyranny under color of law,” I was even more impressed. Do away with enforcement of consensual crimes, and we may be able to get there.
Cynical: I’m not sure if Peel is endorsing anarchism, per se, but if you take his ideas seriously, you would advocate the more libertarian version of policing that DJ Moore discussed. Also, thanks so much for mentioning LEAP. I’m an associate member, and I try to promote them whenever possible.
A cop is someone who knocks on your door and announces himself…
A jackbooted thug is someone who bust the door down to kick ass and take names with his buddies dressed up like GI Joe with super cool toys….
Said thug is probably rolling in his grave knowing it was some sissy 380 cal. that took him down when he and his buds were so well armed and armored…
a lot of the officers on these swat teams might one of the following two problems:
-a mental one which can be remedied by medication and removal from the force
-a training one which is easy to fix.
i have even seen on the mentioned blog one of the posters (hopefully not a police officer) advocating laying supressive fire in the Frederick case. talk about having a mental problem.
i guess these kind of actions are gonna continue happening and lives are gonna be lost on both sides. too bad noone does anything about them.
I read the post and the comments. I COMPLETELY disagree with the blogger/police officer. (IMO Frederick should have been acquitted and a full criminal investigation launched on anyone in charge of the raid – all the way up the chain). BUT…I have to give the guy credit in that he seems to treat his commenters with some respect even when they are completely in opposition to him. That’s rare these days.
Unlike what they show in the old movies on TV, it was not the Geheim Statspolitzei (GeStaPo) that dragged Jews and others off in the middle of the night. It was almost always the police who “followed orders”. I got this from someone who witnessed this sort of thing first-hand and had the tattooed number on his forearm to prove it.
The police are not your friend. They will smile at you and say hello, and may even patronize your business. The next week, when you are declared some sort of criminal over something that just became illegal, they will be the ones to drag you into a patrol car and haul you off.
Believe me: when the time comes for any sort of round-up, whether it be for improper political thought, the wrong religion, or anything else, there is not a cop in the world whose conscience will get in the way. Would YOU let a few lives ruined or taken get in the way of YOUR pension?
To any police or other law enforcement people reading this: did I offend you? Good. Did I make you think about what you do for a living? I didn’t think so.
Which is why police are simply state sanctioned thugs, murderers, and historians — they show up to take notes, kidnap, and cage people. Protect yourself and your community, screw calling 911.
http://www.vaag.com/ContactUsForm/ContactForm.aspx is the form for contacting the Virginia Attorney General about this clown.
“Cynical: I’m not sure if Peel is endorsing anarchism, per se …”
I’m dead certain he wasn’t, Helmut. Not intentionally, at least. But if those are in fact his words, then he captured the essence of anarchism perfectly — the responsibility of each individual to defend himself.
Cynical: “But if those are in fact his words, then he captured the essence of anarchism perfectly — the responsibility of each individual to defend himself.”
Fair enough. But not everyone is up to this responsibility. In fact, a fair number of the people I’ve dealt with while working in private protective services barely seem up to dressing themselves in the morning. This is where police–”the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen”–fire-fighters and paramedics come into the equation.
People are largely oblivious to security and safety risks. I don’t entirely fault them; people are busy, after all. But that is why I advocate radical reform and transparency instead of the elimination of agencies.
Even if I acknowledge that it may be within the realm of possibility to replace public police (and fire-rescue) with private protective services, I continue to have problems with the idea that private agencies could assume total responsibility for major investigations. Private detectives have their place, but will the profit motive become more important than community safety if a killer is on the loose (especially if the killer is targeting “street people” who don’t have much disposable income).
But even if you can convince me that PI’s will be sufficient for the investigative function, what about the courts. I am all for people defending themselves, but should they be judge, jury and executioner when they are wronged? Justice is subjective, after all. Of course, an impartial arbiter must exist. I am somewhat familiar with the idea of private arbitration services, and they also have their place. But will people get only as much justice as they can afford? If you shop around enough, will you find an arbitration agency that will let you get away with murder? Who sets the minimal standards of behavior? I continue to believe that we must have a reasonably impartial, multi-tiered system of courts. And with courts, come court orders, so sheriff’s/marshals will likely be needed. Feel free to critiqu my argument at your leisure.
We can go round and round all day, with the statists saying but what about X? And what about Y? And what about Z? If you demand that we know how everything will be produced, from justice to roads, to security, we don’t. Anarchists are simply people who have judged the initiation of force immoral, and who recognize that everything the state does is backed by the threat of violence.
Trying to consider what a stateless society might look like is an interesting diversion, but not a necessary question to mentally get from statism to anarchy.
This happens because we in law enforcement are used to having our butts kissed by everyone. It is absolutely vital to “SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER” Keep up the good work Radley!
The police are necessary, but they go too far. Many police in America have a distorted sense of reality in which they are in a continuous state of siege. Only be holding fast to thin blue line and never admitting wrongdoing can they hold off the hordes of crazies hoping to destroy them.
I just have a hard time understanding why the cops think that the death of a cop is so much more important than the death of a citizen. In this nation NO ONE is more important than any other; well, at least that is how it was intended to be. Now we have special protections for politicians (they are not only not any more important or better than the rest of us, they are actually worse) some of them for life (former presidents, who really should be just citizens after their term of office is up, they do not need nor do they deserve 24/7 Secret Service protection for life). Cops are just people, no one honors anyone else killed on the job as “heros” — the flagger who gets hit by a car or backed over by a dumptruck, the roofer who falls due to faulty materials used by or workmanship of the framers, etc.. I thought all people are supposed to be treated equally before the law, which means that anyone who deliberately kills (cop or not) should be tried for 1st degree MURDER, and anyone who shoots an univited and unknown intruder into their home should be let off with the self-defense defense.
Wendy.
As has often been noted in this and other blogs, cops are regarded as superior people whose death is a special tragedy.
While the cops have always held this idea – realistically, who doesn’t treat the loss of “one of their own” as being a special loss? – the notion has been bought into by politicians, the media and the public. In short, this view has been indulged rather than discouraged. To borrow a phrase, the fault lies in ourselves.
“… a fair number of the people I’ve dealt with while working in private protective services barely seem up to dressing themselves in the morning.”
I am all in favor of PRIVATE protective services. Let the burden be paid by those who need it, or those who love them. As you are no doubt well aware, my gripe is with State socialism.
“… I advocate radical reform and transparency instead of the elimination of agencies.”
Sorry to burst your bubble, but reform and transparency have been tried and have failed repeatedly, strong evidence of the truth of Einstein’s dictum about insanity. It is abolition that is the only possible solution.
“… will the profit motive become more important than community safety if a killer is on the loose …”
Community safety will be valued by the members of that community, such that the price of apprehending a killer will known and a decision can be made as to the economic benefit of such action. Private security companies (DROs, etc.) will compete and cooperate as business dictates, driving the cost of the provision of public safety down to affordable levels with a dramatic increase in efficiency.
“I am all for people defending themselves, but should they be judge, jury and executioner when they are wronged?”
Of course they should. Who else should? Why? How is it working out presently?
You presume one organization providing security services (the present situation). In anarchy, there would be as many organizations providing security services as the market would bear (profit motive). These organizations would be true agents of the principal citizen, not the farcical bizarro situation we have now. The competition between agencies and the need to turn a profit would ensure peaceful solutions in all but the most extreme and deranged situations, which would be naturally selected out of the system over time by market pressure.
“Who sets the minimal standards of behavior?”
The community in which one lives. My ideal community would be like-minded individuals who subscribe to “First, harm no one, then do as you please.” Others may feel differently — they can find their own communities.
I enjoy the mental exercise of retreading all this old ground about anarchy, but the volume of literature on the subject is exhaustive and much better expressed than I can muster, Helmut. A Statist can sit back and refute every anarchist proposal as ridiculously idealistic and unprovable, but the anarchist can sit back and spend 24/7 ridiculing the present system as a criminal farce.
In the end, all reasonable want essentially the same thing. I believe every individual is by necessity an anarchist, as each of us seeks to control his/her environment according to individual subjective preferences and judgment — the essence of humanity.
Some of us jump off the train out of fear that there’s a cliff around the bend and seek “security” in the State. We all know how that ends. The tragic irony is that there is no cliff around the bend and no reason to jump off the train. Stay onboard and depend on yourself and those you choose to associate with peacefully.
While the cops have always held this idea – realistically, who doesn’t treat the loss of “one of their own” as being a special loss?
They tend to take the concept of “one of their own” much further than most people. I’d attend a funeral for someone in my office, but I wouldn’t drive to another state to attend the funeral of a stranger with similar job description to my own who happened to be killed on the job.
Cynical:
Have you talked with anyone who lives in a society in which private agencies provide a lot of the police services? I believe they’re pretty commonly used by middle-class-and-up people in South Africa, and while it’s better than the alternative of no police protection, I’m not sure you end up with less brutality than exists in other places. (On the other hand, the South African police were never noted for their gentleness, so maybe this is cultural.)
I suppose you hit the nail on the head, albatross. Those who can afford private police hire them. Must be because it makes sense, else why do it.
The poor? Well, in a Statist world, they’re stuck with what they get (i.e., brutality).
The point is not that there will be no violence. The point is that the present system is founded on violence. How any system founded on violence could be peaceful simply makes no sense to me.
Thanks for the discussion, Cynical. Interesting as usual. The goal of each individual being “by necessity an anarchist” is actually quite laudable, in my opinion. We may disagree on the details, but I continue to think we are more on the same page than it might appear. And if people can debate like this, without name-calling and/or violence, then that’s good news.
Law and order are essential for anything above a subsistence-level economy. Unfortunately, governments frequently undermine law and order (and often use the failure of law and order to justify policies which will further undermine it).
IMHO, those who would focus on a jury’s right to ignore laws they don’t like would distract juries from their real duty: to protect society from lawlessness. Sometimes society needs protection from a lawless person on the witness stand, but sometimes it needs protection from lawless government. Properly-instructed juries in the Ryan Frederick case should have acquitted Mr. Frederick not because of any personal sympathies, but because his home was being broken into by people whose actions were grossly inconsistent with any sort of reasonable effort to minimize risk and harm to persons and property. Deliberate destruction of private property without due process would be illegitimate, and recklessness would be unreasonable (ergo illegitimate as well).
government justice = “just us”
Maybe I will say all those things to the next cop I see — while I’m kicking in his front door, throwing his wife to the floor, and tearing up his house because someone told me he had drugs.
“[T]here is not a cop in the world whose conscience will get in the way. Would YOU let a few lives ruined or taken get in the way of YOUR pension?” – #54
For years, in thinking about the Holocaust, I have often wondered if the great mass of police, teachers, and other civil servants simply didn’t go along with things because of the risk to their pensions. I mean, what would stop you from simply keeping your mouth shut but quitting?
Is it any coincidence that Bismark created the first welfare state?
[...] cop shows his true colors. You might have to backtrack a bit to get the context for the story, but really, it’s just [...]