“Gangsters” is timeless and accurate. “Bandits” works too. “Imperial Porktroopers” is a bit more fun.

Exaggerate much, Boyd? Since you are so familiar with my “past posts,” you should understand that I am not a knee jerk defender of law enforcement. Just because I don’t engage in “smash the state” rhetoric doesn’t mean I am an apologist for the field.

“I know from your past posts that you have some connection with law enforcement (real or imagined)”

Was that last part supposed to be an insult? Gee, why not just call me a “badge licker” like some of the other nice folks on this blog might do. I do have a “real” conncetion with law enforcement. My dad was a police officer, so I learned the good, bad and ugly about policing from an early age. I also studied Criminal Justice and interned with a few police agencies. I know what I am talking about when it comes to policing, period. Now I work in healthcare security. I am not a sworn officer. I’m the guy that helps you when your car is stranded in a hospital parking deck or subdues you when you come in intoxicated and try to throttle a nurse. Frankly, I feel pretty good about what I do now. And for the record, I think I am held to a higher standard than public police. Hope that bit of background helped, Boyd.

“Ditto #26, too, Helmut”

Yeah, well sorry about that. It wasn’t my best exchange on this blog, but I felt like Laura Victoria had it coming. We all have off days.

And yet, most cops, most of the time, aren’t brutal. It’s plain that individually, most cops could get away with a lot worse than they do, and as a group, local police forces could often get away with literal murder, working together. They overwhelmingly don’t. This, far more than the low-quality MSM reporting on police and prosecutor abuse, is why most middle-class whites, at least, don’t hate and fear the police. There’s a working culture in most police departments that keeps that kind of misbehavior on a leash.

One thing that worries the hell out of me is the combination of the increasing militarization of police work, and the incoming crop of future policemen from our glorious adventures in pointless bloodshed and misery in the Middle East. It’s not hard to imagine how the culture of existing policemen might be changed, over time, until that leash disappears. And then, we will have few working legal or procedural mechanisms for controlling abuse by police and prosecutors.

When people are absolved from accountability, they never do what they are supposed to do and then they end up either breaking the law or ignoring their responsibilities to others. This is what happens when we can’t police the police or any other government agency.

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes.

I really don’t know what is off-topic about my points. I strongly believe this bi-partisan support for these union thugs is the root of the continuing and growing problem of police abuse.

In spite of Helmut’s White Knight post: good cops cover-up for bad cops, which makes them bad cops. When the chips are down, seldom has a group demonstrated such dedication to each other as their primary duty. Seldom has a group had no one to blame but themselves for being lumped together and “hated” by so many. I mean all Nazi prison guards were bad…um…four fried chickens and a Coke.

Real libertarians should understand that individuals can rise above less than ideal circumstances to make a difference and move their field or society forward.

Good luck with that when the “field” in question is a violent, law-skirting agent of an authoritarian state. It doesn’t seem like a “field” worth elevating. And, it is nice to have you here explaining what “real libertarians” should understand.

I know from your past posts that you have some connection with law enforcement (real or imagined), but c’mon, man.

Ditto #26, too, Helmut.

Very well said, Omar. Your depiction of Rand’s philosophy is, I believe, quite accurate. That’s why I never cared for her (Well that and she was basically a cult leader).

Individuals that try to help fellow citizens, should be applauded, not incessantly analyzed for insidious motives (or for being “altruistic,” virutally a criminal activity for Objectivists). This is true even for those who, gasp, work for public agencies. Individuals who hurt others or try to get away with doing dirt by becoming one with the mob, should be criticized, shunned or held accountable (while having their due process rights respected).

I believe in empowering individuals so that they rely less and less on government, their employers and other influential institutions. I don’t have a blueprint, and this project will always be a work in progress. I don’t know what you call that ideology, but it’s what I believe.

Real libertarians should understand that individuals can rise above less than ideal circumstances to make a difference and move their field or society forward.

To believe in the viability of liberty, you have to believe in nearly all individuals, their ability, and willingness to make good decisions in their own interest.

IMHO, playing the Ayn Rand card of separating the world into the doers and parasites doesn’t give the vast majority of people enough credit. It seems especially counter-productive to spreading the message of individual liberty to pigeonhole people into doers and parasites based on some real or imagined group affiliation.

I learned this after 9/11 when my libertarian hero, Niel Boortz, started advocating racial profiling at the airports. I was really put off by the idea that his projection of my group affiliation should be cause to treat me differently under the law.

Libertarianism works and spreads best as a positive message; if you are drawn to libertarianism out of angst and attempt to spread the label with anger and frustration, well “I’ve got mine, fuck you” becomes a persuasive if invalid criticism of the philosophy.

I like this website because discussions are usually heady and focused. We disagree sharply with each other from a moral, logical, and emotional perspective, but hackery is never tolerated. Calling groups of people names over and over in unfocused rants give our philosophical opponents something to win an argument over and lowers the level of discussion for the grownups.

@ #22 | Gideon Darrow

Illinois Nazis remind me of the “God Hates Fags” people I pretend don’t exist.

“I hate Illinois Nazis . . . ”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EoOZKjAjlk&feature=related

Sweet! If I still had the option I would give you +1 for that, Omar. But hey, Laura isn’t so bad. She’s got Mexican friends, you know.

You may call corrupt, brutal or incompetent police officials whatever you prefer. That is not my problem. I would simply avoid using the broad brush as the New Left did, and as you are doing now. I do not buy the “few bad apples argument,” but when you label a large group of people–whether those people are police, teachers, lawyers, politicians or rabid right-wing union hatin’ libertarians–as something that is not human, simply because of their occupation or station in life, then I will object to that everytime.

Real libertarians should understand that individuals can rise above less than ideal circumstances to make a difference and move their field or society forward. Failure to realize this seems to negate the alleged appreciation that said libertarians have for individuals, which calls into question the sacred “principles” that libertarians are supposed to hold dear. Without this belief that individuals can be good, productive citizens even if they work for troubled agencies, these so-called libertarians reveal themselves to be nothing more than run of the mill cop-haters (or politician-haters or lawyer-haters teacher-haters), and their opinons should be treated accordingly by those of us who wish to improve society instead of giving up and running off to the wilderness to be “sovereign individuals.”

Ok Laura, my speech is over. Now you may go back to slurping Mochas with your Hispanic friends in San Jose del Cabo. After that, don’t forget to get back in touch with your “black friends” in Compton. They miss you.

Conservatives [who can go to hell] need to start realizing that cops and not just teachers [teachers are not the subject of this post] are union [unions are not the subject of this post] scum who typically endorse dems [who can go to hell] and whose numbers Obama [Obama is not the subject of this post] padded in his misdirected stimulus efforts [stimulus is not the subject of this post].

Sentence 2 and you are all over the place. It’s hard to know which angry platitude to respond to. I’m not going to qualify your libertarian bona fides, but you sound like an angry drunk.

I believe that is called “Godwin’s Law” and it seems to be accuarate most of the time, including this time.