What is the end goal of neutering this countries police forces?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Dean C.

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Aug 25, 2013
    4,557
    113
    Westfield
    The organization and funding for the original Vietnam war protests certainly did come from the communists, regardless of your view of the merits of such protests. Most of us who were military personnel during the war - whether we served in Vietnam or not - were well aware that the war was being mishandled, but that was "political" rather than tactical. And, in case you don't remember, Cambodia and Laos also fell to communist insurgents and literally millions died as a result (remember Pol Pot?). The Thais are still fighting a communist-inspired insurgency. "Domino Effect." The same sorts of issues drove the Iraq and Afghan conflicts; when casualties started to mount in Iraq, the Democrats sought to sabotage the war effort and certainly encouraged anti-Bush opposition to the war. Notice that once Barak Obama took office, the daily casualty counts disappeared, and when he decided to commit more troops to Afghanistan ala the "Bush Surge" in Iraq, nary a murmur seeped out of the national news media. Doesn't matter if a conflict is "justified" or "unjustified" (usually depends upon whether you win or not) no country is going to win a war unless the government and the people stand behind the military. And when the military forces are hamstrung by Rules Of Engagement which restrict their ability to defeat the enemy and which compromise their safety for no tactical and strategic purpose, there will be no possibility of victory. George Bush warned us that we were in a "generational war" and it seems that we aren't capable of visualizing or conducting such a war.

    I give credit to the good Senator Charlie Wilson from Texas for breaking the Soviets backs personally. Yes I know exactly who and what Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge did. Fighting proxy wars to stop communism was absurd at best. Honestly the only two proxy wars we conducted successfully were the war in Korea, and the funding of the Mujahideen. As long as the principle of MAD (mutually assured destruction) was in place the cold war would have stayed cold. The way the Soviet Union went about conducting itself economically was unsustainable at best and disastrous at worst. The US used the Soviet Union as the bogey man for decades it was sad. I know exactly what the domino effect was as well and to put it frankly why would it matter to the US economically or politically if a bunch of backwater third world Asian countries "fell" into Communism.

    Look at every "communist" country left in the world they are only communist in make (with the exception of North Korea those people are crazy). Communism is not nor will it ever be a sustainable form of government and I bet my last dollar the US government has known that all along. The old cold war maxim of giving thirld world countries democracy and freedom was insane, the people of those countries have to want it for themselves, not have it forced upon them. If you need an example look at Iraq, or better yet and more relevant South Vietnam.
     

    AA&E

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 4, 2014
    1,701
    48
    Southern Indiana
    It's a misguided liberal idea based in the belief that human beings are wholesome and good by nature. They would be the first screaming for help if it were to happen and the predators in our society had free reign to do what they want unabated.

    I'm not liberal and have no illusions about the goodness of mankind, but I do believe there is a reasonable expectation that when the police are performing their jobs even criminals be dealt with in a manner that doesn't result in an unjustified death. We've seen a couple pretty horrific examples that go far beyond what should be acceptable. These are still citizens that have the benefit of the doubt, innocent until proven guilty.. they are not enemy combatants on a battle field and therefore fair game.
     

    AA&E

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 4, 2014
    1,701
    48
    Southern Indiana
    Honestly, I have ZERO problem with a less aggressive police force, even if that decrease in aggression means a decrease in their ability to "protect" us. Thats what my gun and my (soon to arrive) ccw permit are for. I would LOVE to see American citizens take a more active role IN THEIR OWN PROTECTION and to have police take a step back.

    The problem occurs when an American citizen lives in a place like Baltimore, NYC, or Washington DC. The gun rights are so restricted that the citizenry does not have the ability to protect themselves. What good is a "right" to self defense without the ability to do so? In these situations people are basically held hostage.

    Even reading this thread, it is obvious that some people are under a mistaken notion that the police have some duty to protect you. THEY DO NOT! The police may have a duty to protect a community at large, but the supreme court has ruled that they have NO SPECIFIC DUTY to protect individual citizens (see Warren v DC). The result of this can be seen in places like Detroit, where average police response time for all calls is 58 MINUTES, but if you live near Wayne State University that response time drops to 90 SECONDS. Here are citizens in the exact same city getting starkly different public services, based on where they live.

    Americans need to start taking more responsibility to protect themselves. It is this abdication of their responsibility of self protection that leads to this mindset of wanting the police "do whatever it takes" to keep them safe. Of course, this "do whatever it takes" mentality really means "do whatever it takes, as long as you don't do it to me or my kids". I used to (along with most Americans) LOVE the movies about the brutal cop who gets "tough" on criminals, even if it means breaking the rules and violating their rights. Now, those movies disgust me.

    When the police assist the public in providing for a safe community, they are public servants. When the police are expected to be the ONLY means a citizen has of protection, they are no longer public servants. Now they are your Daddy. And like good little toddlers, when need to leave the grownup stuff (like personal protection) to them and trust that they will keep us safe from the big bad men outside.

    I'm not sure how successful I'm going to be at making my point, but here goes:

    Since the time I grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, our society has undergone a sea change. In that time, "Officer Friendly" has somehow disappeared and become "Officer JBT." At least some of this change seems to be cultural; a somewhat "fashionable" view promulgated by anti-war protesters (instigated by - surprise! - communists and their sympathizers) transformed "police officers" into "pigs." Additionally, political and cultural pressures forced changes on police agencies which have exacerbated standard human corruption issues, while the 24 hour news cycle and a generally "liberal" news-gathering culture has emphasized police misconduct, while minimizing the effects of an increasingly aggressive criminal class which has grown up with less and less respect for life or law.

    While I have no particular evidence for the theory, it seems to me that the course our culture has pursued in the past forty years and our current situation is eerily like the efforts of communist insurgents to undermine a society by breaking down its institutions, including undermining the society's faith in its laws and the ability of the government to protect the citizenry. My personal opinion is that we have too damned many laws involving too damned many things about which government should not concern itself. Too many laws mean everyone becomes a law breaker at some point (just look at traffic laws and how they are obeyed - or not - every day) and that reduces the public trust in "law" as a means of fairly arbitrating disputes. Increasing disdain for the law translates into increasing disdain for those who create and enforce laws. Putting police into a situation where every interaction with citizens is potentially life-threatening creates a "combat" mind-set and encourages more aggressive responses - and an "us vs them" culture. All of these factors mitigate against a healthy society.

    I agree with both of you. Good posts gentlemen.
     

    BigBoxaJunk

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 9, 2013
    7,404
    113
    East-ish
    The craftiest communists were the ones who made Americans think it is patriotic to enslave themselves with debt, for lost causes in the Third World.

    I suspect that, in an honest moment, those crafty commies would admit that Americans aren't really THAT hard to fool.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,262
    113
    Gtown-ish
    The craftiest communists were the ones who made Americans think it is patriotic to enslave themselves with debt, for lost causes in the Third World.
    What might help the situation is if individual Americans realized the debt is theirs. I really wish we had a tax system that only compelled tax payment for core government functions: national defense, justice system, necessary infrastructure. But because we have people who want government to do more:wealth redistribution, science allocations, education, etcetera, we should let them vote for that stuff with their own money.

    So we we should have a compulsary tax for core goverment, and a voluntary tax for everything else. let the people who are convinced to support lost causes in the third world, let them pay according to their convictions.
     

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    19,613
    113
    Arcadia
    I'm not liberal and have no illusions about the goodness of mankind, but I do believe there is a reasonable expectation that when the police are performing their jobs even criminals be dealt with in a manner that doesn't result in an unjustified death. We've seen a couple pretty horrific examples that go far beyond what should be acceptable. These are still citizens that have the benefit of the doubt, innocent until proven guilty.. they are not enemy combatants on a battle field and therefore fair game.

    I didn't say anything about criminals being combatants in a war zone nor did I attempt to justify any unreasonable uses of force. What I am attempting to get across is that many believe the police are the problem, not the violent citizens in this country which is ridiculous. We are told by the progressives that we aren't supposed to judge any certain group based on the actions of a few (rioters being a good example) yet those same progressives are demanding that the police be stripped of their arms and ability to perform their duties based on an extremely limited number of examples.

    It is either as I stated originally, that liberals believe everything will be ok if we just deal with all of the evil police or it is an attempt to neuter a large portion of the what would be resistance when those pulling the strings decide its time to take over.
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    What might help the situation is if individual Americans realized the debt is theirs. I really wish we had a tax system that only compelled tax payment for core government functions: national defense, justice system, necessary infrastructure. But because we have people who want government to do more:wealth redistribution, science allocations, education, etcetera, we should let them vote for that stuff with their own money.

    So we we should have a compulsary tax for core goverment, and a voluntary tax for everything else. let the people who are convinced to support lost causes in the third world, let them pay according to their convictions.

    I would whole-heartedly support this. We often hear "follow the money." So much of our current government's onerous power is derived from its ability through a complicated, even arbitrary, tax code to buy allegiance from certain groups, or pit one group against another. If the tax code fails, then government expenditure on special interests finishes the job. An equitable and simple tax code, coupled with your above proposal, would not only severely limit government power, but would also get our books in the black for the first time in a few generations.
     

    Fargo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Mar 11, 2009
    7,575
    63
    In a state of acute Pork-i-docis
    I think so. Not all crimes are immoral, and not all enforcement is just.

    Exactly.

    Walking on the railroad tracks is a criminal offense. Walking home at a .08 was a criminal offense until a couple years ago. Picking up a box turtle is a criminal offense. Picking up an eagle feather is a criminal offense. Stepping on a farm field is a criminal offense. Technically, owning a propane cylinder is a criminal offense.

    3 years ago, it was a criminal offense to use reasonable force to resist unlawful forced entry of your home by LE.

    One of the dead guys above was being arrested for selling single cigarettes; his property which he had bought.

    We have overlegislated to the point where pretty much everyone is a criminal, yet we wonder why there is so little respect for the law...
     
    Last edited:
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Aug 23, 2009
    1,855
    113
    Brainardland
    Exactly.

    Walking on the railroad tracks is a criminal offense. Walking home at a .08 was a criminal offense until a couple years ago. Picking up a box turtle is a criminal offense. Picking up an eagle feather is a criminal offense. Stepping on a farm field is a criminal offense. Technically, owning a propane cylinder is a criminal offense.

    3 years ago, it was a criminal offense to use reasonable force to resist unlawful forced entry of your home by LE.

    One of the dead guys above was being arrested for selling single cigarettes; his property which he had bought.

    We have overlegislated to the point where pretty much everyone is a criminal, yet we wonder why there is so little respect for the law...

    Ayn Rand anticipated this long ago:

    [h=1]“There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”[/h]
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,262
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Ayn Rand anticipated this long ago:

    “There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”

    That's one of the passages I highlighted. There are some gems among the boring stones.
     

    rambone

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Mar 3, 2009
    18,745
    83
    'Merica
    I think so. Not all crimes are immoral, and not all enforcement is just.

    Why is that a police problem and not a legislative/regulatory problem?

    Because it's easier to blame the police silly

    When injustice takes hold, ALL the branches of government are culpable. They ALL have failed to protect freedom. That includes the lawmakers, the cops, the judges, the chief executive, the prosecutors, the jury, and lastly, the voting public.

    I do NOT agree when the Executive Branch throws up their collective hands and says "Its all the Legislative Branch's fault!" THAT is what blaming others looks like.

    The reality is that if ANY BRANCH would have properly stood up for justice, then innocent people wouldn't be terrorized by unjust laws.
     

    D-Ric902

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 9, 2008
    2,778
    48
    Exactly.

    Walking on the railroad tracks is a criminal offense. Walking home at a .08 was a criminal offense until a couple years ago. Picking up a box turtle is a criminal offense. Picking up an eagle feather is a criminal offense. Stepping on a farm field is a criminal offense. Technically, owning a propane cylinder is a criminal offense.

    3 years ago, it was a criminal offense to use reasonable force to resist unlawful forced entry of your home by LE.

    One of the dead guys above was being arrested for selling single cigarettes; his property which he had bought.

    We have overlegislated to the point where pretty much everyone is a criminal, yet we wonder why there is so little respect for the law...

    Without stealing your thunder,
    railroad tracks are private property for 36 feet, it is not criminal but civil trespassing. Stepping on a farm field is the same. Three years ago it was illegal to resist forced entry, now it is not, showing progress on that front.

    but I do agree with your basic principle. Too many petty and vague laws on the books.
     

    Fargo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Mar 11, 2009
    7,575
    63
    In a state of acute Pork-i-docis
    Without stealing your thunder,
    railroad tracks are private property for 36 feet, it is not criminal but civil trespassing. Stepping on a farm field is the same. Three years ago it was illegal to resist forced entry, now it is not, showing progress on that front.

    but I do agree with your basic principle. Too many petty and vague laws on the books.

    No fear on the thunder because you are incorrect on both.

    There is a specific statute on train tracks but I don't have time to find it right now.* Farm fields are under 35-43-2-2(b)(5)(A). It is new in the code this year which doesn't give me a ton of hope for progress.

    *edit: the railroad law is 8-3-15-3. It is a crime to even cross the tracks except at designated crossings.

    No posting or trespass order is needed for either offense.
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom