Another Isolated Incident

Thursday, October 18th, 2012

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

73 Responses to “Another Isolated Incident”

  1. #1 |  Cyto | 

    Right Nancy,

    A one man violent insurrection is a nutjob, signifying nothing. 10 guys in a violent insurrection is a cult, also signifying nothing.

    50 million on your side? They call that a civil war.

    150 million? Now you don’t need violent insurrection anymore, because you just vote the bastards out. What’s needed is a way to skip from the 1-15% range we are in now all the way to the 60% range. Maybe our charismatic and well-spoken President can take up the cause as soon as he’s finished with all the important work of saving Big Bird and Planned Parenthood.

  2. #2 |  demize! | 

    #19 while you may be correct, the inevitable calculus is that only unmitigated force has ever changed anything of this nature. When a privileged class, in this case police, operate free of negative consequences for their actions as well as exist within a culture of license and impunity their actions will only become more extreme unless met with continued, sustained opposition. I think The Zimbardo experiment sheds a bit of light on the psychology, however in this case you have a subset of the population drawn to police work because they are authoritarian to begin with. The only other alternative is to bombard the culture with the true nature of policing, constant villification of the chronic misdeeds on the media, day in day out then there might be some policy changes with meat on the bone. But this will not happen because the police are there to serve the same interests and protect the same class that own and control the media. So insurgency may be the only real remedy. Im not advocating for that simply pointing out what I view as a truism.

  3. #3 |  Mike Williams | 

    This reporter will be encouraged to leave town soon, and the most unapologetic cop in the group will receive a commendation.

  4. #4 |  JLS | 

    Helmut “WHILE THEY ARE IN PROGRESS, their actions would certainly be justifiable. See how I emphasized IN PROGRESS. I think this is the difference between me and a few of the other commenters here. I advocate self-defense, not blood lust and vengance.”

    Yea I definitely agree abou the in progress being justified but I don’t think that going after the guilty is just vengence or blood lust. It’s like bringing those Nazi war criminals to justice after decades. Tp a lot of their victims it wasn’t just revenge but a matter of justice. I think it’s the same way for our current police. Hopefully there will be a way to bring them to justice someday but when people are denied justice I don’t think that violent revolution as a last resort to change an intolerable situation is necessarily morally wrong.

  5. #5 |  celticdragon | 


    I appreciate and agree with much of what you say. I caution however that many of the RedState folks who are growling loudest about the need for Civil War 2.0 are also likely to be the same folks who have abusive cop shoe polish on their tongues. You cannot assume for one minute that (and I sure as hell hope it doesn’t come to this) if another mass insurrection starts that the people on the rebel side will be even remotely be on your or my side.

    Again…they love the idea of coercive governement power as long as it is used to enforce their favorite cultural mores and keep undesirable (meaning people with brown skins) people in their place.

  6. #6 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    When Obama was a senator from Illinois, his big achievement was pushing through legislation requiring that interrogations and confessions be videotaped in capital cases.

    This gave me a lot of hope that he’d work to promote civil liberties, which he hasn’t. On the other hand, I still think that if the public had cared about the subject, he would have.

  7. #7 |  demize! | 

    @ Celtic point well taken. This is one of the places were I think a coalition can possibly be built #55 Seems Obama is mainly concerned with removing the civil liberties of peasants via robot death machines.

  8. #8 |  Bill | 

    #14 Croaker – I realise I’m not the only one to say this, but let’s say your scenario happened and an Upstanding Pillar of the Community type gunned down a cop or two. Would that lead to people rethinking current policy? No way, it would lead to demonization of the guy and cops who were even more heavily armed. Fast forward a few more times, the only thing that would change is a way more aggressive policy – they’d claim that announcing themselves was giving people time to arm themselves (the same rationale they use for No-Knock raids now). The only thing going to change this is a change in liability that results in several really big payouts for victims. Big payouts b/c of screw ups hurts the promotion ladder. Once it’s tied to their own self-interest, the brass will start demanding they show some restraint b/c they don’t want to risk suits.

    But keep in mind we had Rodney King and countless others and even with all the exposure and money piad out, things have gotten not better but worse. The worst thing that could happen is more dead cops.

    We’ve already heard a bunch of hand wringing about a fake war on cops. Let there be a bunch of crying wives and kids (and when it’s the cops’ families, there’d be no shortage of media sympathy) and that would be used to ramp up the violence. All that would do is result in a lot more dead dogs and dead or hurt civilians. In fact comments like yours (and no, I’m not saying you can’t say such things) are frequently cited by cops in such situations as ‘proof’ of the hostility they have to deal with. And it takes one such comment to be the focus of a story on the news to get all the PoliceOne types salivating and finger pointing (although I make no pretense that they wouldn’t do so otherwise – they’ll grab anything they can hang on to to justify their hostility toward the people they supposedly represent.

  9. #9 |  Bill | 

    #55 Nancy Lebowitz – here in SC, the Bar Lobbied really hard to have Cameras installed in all cop cars and demand all DUI arrests be fully taped. THis made a huge difference b/c Defense attorneys have strong grounds to show that there wasn’t really an illegal lane change or other traffic indiscretion. It’s made a huge difference here and law and order types bitch about it to no end, claiming ‘were not serious about protecting our kids from drunk drivers” but they always sign that tune. Cameras aren’t a perfect solution, cops can do quite a bit off camera as we’ve seen here at the Agitator many times, but it does cut the surface area for abuse and help provide a out for people wrongly treated. Currently, there’s still a lot of disappearing video tape in cases where abuse is alleged, but in many cases missing tape means the case goes in the crapper (and since every time cops beat people up they arrest them for resisting arrest, its better than nothing). Honest cops like the cameras as they feel the cameras protect them from dishonest claims and bad cops hate them – currently, I think the more monitoring of cops that happens, the better.

  10. #10 |  Bill | 

    #47 Arensen- Very well said. I remember reading that Ghandi criticized German Jews saying they should have just completely rolled over – in his case when his people weren’t heading to the gas chamber and faced no chance of it – it’s very easy to be an absolutist. But I can say for certain that with a Thuggish government that’s not afraid to hurt and kill people, NonViolence will get them nowhere (not saying violence will either – the mixture depends on the situation largely). You wouldn’t do the Ghandi/MLK route in say Syria or Saudi Arabia. Wouldn’t get you very far in Cuba or many other places. Might work here but you’d need a lot of people and a sympathetic media – and the media is very selective about their outrage over Police Abuse – the last thhing they’d want to do is empower those who aren’t totally in love with a Leviathan.

  11. #11 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    ” currently, I think the more monitoring of cops that happens, the better.”

    C’mon, get real. You think these sworn, decorated officers are going
    to abuse their power or violate the law?

  12. #12 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    I’m sure that if Gandhi had been a Jew under the third Reich, he would have put more thought into the question.

  13. #13 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    But I can say for certain that with a Thuggish government that’s not afraid to hurt and kill people, NonViolence will get them nowhere

    There are many forms of non-violence as every term gets usurped today. But, the idea here is for the people to move…which is one of the most important reasons that states should allow free movement of people.

    Yes, the state can keep people from moving. This is more commonly known as “imprisonment” and “immigration restrictions”. Also, “professional courtesy” among authoritarians.

    tried non-violence against Hitler, got nowhere and died in the hands of the Gestapo.

    This might be the hardest philosophy for western minds to understand…but easiest for them to condemn without actually defining what “success” means. Did 1 person being murdered by the Gestapo have any result? Did 6 million? At what point is a difference made?

    Not a proponent of non-violence (I’m more NAP), but I don’t condemn it. Principles are tested during hard times, not the best of times. And, the US failed miserably to adhere to the principles it champions during just about every test.

    Nancy, Gandhi put a lifetime (several) of thought into non-violence. Need a reminder of the brutality of British colonial rule?

  14. #14 |  Jim | 

    As long as the vast majority of Americans think LEOs are their friends and ‘heroes’ as gets pounded into their heads daily on the local TV and print news, and unquestioningly worship the global interventionist/occupation US military, the abuses by domestic LEOs will only increase, and any real individual resistance will be met with fury by state power and approval by the boobs. With few exceptions, We’re all ‘Good Germans’ now.

  15. #15 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    It seems more and more that comments are leaning toward support of violent responses to police brutality. Some thoughts:

    1. The state has the most and the biggest guns. Whatever you have, they have a bigger gun. They can bring more violence to the fight than anyone or anything. You lose this fight.

    2. The problem with assassinations is that it seems the wrong people always end up getting assassinated. It won’t work.

    3. The state welcomes civil unrest. The state greets it with calls for bigger budgets, more security, reduction in privacy (also freedoms/rights), and even more rabid patriotism which fuels the state with such hubris as to act even crueler. Unintended consequences.

    4. Violence against police is at historic lows…and the cops are still justifying the murders they commit by saying they felt threatened (and that line is being bought by the courts no matter how absurd). Ramp up the actual violence and I have no idea how you would even get a day in court, let alone a chance to win.

    5. Peace through violence doesn’t work.

    Hollywood has been making huge profits off “revenge” movies (like “Taken/Taken II”) for decades. These movies appeal to the 15 year old in people and play on the exact emotion that getting “revenge against the cops” does. Don’t seriously consider adopting a philosophy that is against all your other philosophies to satisfy a 15-year old’s idea of settling the score. That doesn’t seem like it would work.

  16. #16 |  Dave Krueger | 

    And in other news…

    Spain Looks to Ban Photos, Videos of Police

    FTA: The new Citizen Safety Law will prohibit “the capture, reproduction and editing of images, sounds or information of members of the security or armed forces in the line of duty,” said the director general of the police, Ignacio Cosido.

    Citizen Safety Law, my ass. Luckily for us, this kind of thing can never happen in the land of the free…

  17. #17 |  el coronado | 

    @Boyd, #64 –

    Let’s just focus on your point #4, “Violence against cops is at historic lows…and the cops are still justifying the murders they commit by [spouting the bullshit they learn to spout in the academy]….”

    Then you tell us, “#5: Peace through violence doesn’t work.”

    This _immediately_ after you just told us, in #4, that ‘peace through appeasement and submission doesn’t work’! Dude. Your whole post was a fine list of the problems of the instant, (“Because gravity will always suck”), but not so much as a hint of what you might think *would* work or ought to be tried, at least. WTF?

  18. #18 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    A more truthful title is probably this:

    Spanish Police Look to Ban Photos, Videos of Police

  19. #19 |  Jim | 

    @boyd 68 – ‘The state has the most and the biggest guns. Whatever you have, they have a bigger gun. They can bring more violence to the fight than anyone or anything. You lose this fight.’

    Tell that to the Afghanis.

    Barring that, it would seem our fate is to just keep taking it, no matter what. The ‘justice’ system protects the State and its agents first and always, so no relief there, and responding with like violence will just piss ’em off more and then they’ll REALLY REALLY come down on us, as opposed to just coming down on us like they do now.

    OK, stop this train, I want off.

  20. #20 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    #63 | Boyd Durkin |

    I agree that Gandhi’s achievement was amazing. I don’t think there’s been any significant improvement in techniques of wrangling governments since his time. (Social media are just a way of making Gandhi’s methods more efficient.)

    However, he was an expert on Indians and the British government in India. There’s no way he could have had that sort of intimate knowledge of the Third Reich.

    As bad as the British were, they weren’t in love with killing the way the Nazis were.

    Getting back to the current situation, we’re up against a problem which is easier in some ways and much harder in others. The way that it’s easier is that police violence is sporadic and local. I’m not worried about Radley being assassinated.

    The way that it’s harder is that what’s needed is as much a change of attitude as a change of laws.

  21. #21 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    #66 Dave Krueger:
    Yeah I saw that earlier today. Is it Franco’s ghost or have they been chatting w/ some buddies from the American FOP?

  22. #22 |  demize! | 

    “As bad as the British were, they weren’t in love with killing the way the Nazis were.” No just Burma, Hong Kong, The Opium Wars The Mau Mau rebellion,The Boer War,The Zulu Wars, The Lucknow rebellion, Rhodesia,29,000,000 Indians dead due to deliberate policy of famine,The Tasmanian Genocide,The eradication of the Maori, but NAZI’S were the very worstest genociders they threw babies into ovens while we merely turned entire cities into ovens. #yawn. This kind of absurd reductionism is nothing but narcissism. It has no place in a serious debate.

  23. #23 |  JSL | 

    Re Boyd at #65

    1. You’re assuming they can be everywhere with those big guns, those big guns cannot be made inoperable, or stolen and used against them. You are ignoring overall numbers and you don’t take them head on.

    2. Yes, because forcing them into their green zones won’t control them or cause some to rethink their motives for sticking with the gov team.

    3. As long as they can hold it all together through propaganda and actually being able to protect people. The more they tighten their grip, the more star systems will slip through their fingers.

    4. & 5.

    See post #67 by el coronado.