Im_J-hnG-lt: Well done. Well thought out and insightful response to this topic.
Thank you.
JC

I do believe DHS said ALL vets, not just the ones returning from the current deployments.

It sure sounded like they were talking about vets like me at any rate.

Six Sigma always fails if you don't implement from the bottom up. That is where the work is done, the top is excess weight.

No offense, but that sounds pretty strawman to me. Why should my rights be violated if there are thugs elevated to sainthood?

I started a neighborhood watch for my hood. One of few rules - no guns, ever. I started it long before the Trevon incident too, about 7 years ago. Just observe and report. It cut the crime way down.

I've experienced similar. There's a real alpha male thing that goes on with these guys. I'm 6'1", about 230, and I box (even into my middle years). I've had to talk down cops a few times, calming them down so I could get home. Sometimes they get really wound up. I understand that many of them are on roids and I'd believe it. Actually, I think it's probably an epidemic.

Hello DrZarkov99,
Always providing an interesting angle/analysis and food for thought.
I am torn on this issue. I see some bad police, but also some good.

There is no darkness without the light.
Regards,
O.A.

Well, I guess I'm in the minority here. I believe that the problem is with the criminals, and the system that allows them more rights than the officers. Again, I say - Don't like the police? Then don't break the law.

Yes Zen, it has changed over the past 20 years. I agree.

There is a very different mentality in the force that I didn't see back when I was a kid.

They're immune to any of those threats now, and the result is the arrogance and bullying they display on a daily basis. It's about time they WERE constantly in fear of being sued, jailed, or worse. It's the only thing that just might slow them down.

If even that doesn't work, then we'll have to think about sending them all home and learning to defend our own families.

Zenphamy: While I think many of your points are accurate and they represent a partial reality- that of the underbelly of the police, the "dark side" if you will- I am however, bewildered by what appears to be your total condemnation of ALL policemen.

I must say though, that if your statement on, "...even the honest, well meaning policemen are guilty, and probably more so, for joining the police force...", this is so far reaching so general that it encompasses everyone and every field and condemns all. There are terrible teachers poisoning the minds of our children with dangerous liberal, leftist extremisms- are all teachers to be condemned? There are judges entrusted to impart justice without malice and vengeance and yet many are more guilty than those who stand before them- are all judges to be condemned? The same for doctors, lawyers, politicians...
We are all guilty of imperfection, of oversight, of overreaction, of lack of courage, of empathy....

As I stated, I respect many of your points, but for the sake of application, to avoid hypocrisy, to be congruent- your statements, your beliefs cannot remain relegated and applicable only to the police. One can be so angry, so blinded by emotions, as to suffocate the light and destroy the seed of truth.

"One can strike a match and give light to the room or burn down the building".

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cops-ki...
Sounds like your local Walmart is a possible war zone.

When you refuse to respect and accept authority from those elected to govern us or enforce the law, you have anarchy. They do not work to eliminate the individual rights of those they serve. Their jobs is to maintain law and order The unfortunate deaths of lawbreakers who are too stupid to behave in a civil manner when confronted by a police officer, or member of a neighborhood watch, does not justify rioting, burning of autos and building and looting. Those engaging in these actions are criminals and should be dealt with as such. Peaceful protest is okay as long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others.

So it sounds to me that you believe in anarchy. Let everyone do whatever they want to do. I have the right to do 180 mph on any road I feel like. If I don't kill anyone then it's no problem. What's a stop sign, what's a traffic light???

Maybe you live in an area such as Germantown near Memphis or the Dominion north of San Antonio but there are many war zones throughout the US. I don't live in a war zone but there are many that do. You make it sound like there should not be a police force and just let everyone do what they want to each other!!!

You make it sound as if you are ready for war but you also stated that we are not at war??????

And again john, I really don't care if you drive 90 or 115 until you damage another or their property and then I,ll expect the government to enforce the tort punishment. Otherwise, have a good day and continue to be responsible for your actions.

H6163741; I think I've located the comment you're referring to and I apologize if I wrote it in such a way that you could gain that interpretation from it. That was certainly not my intent nor my belief.

My intent was that I would like to see honorable, ethical, and virtuous men become policemen and go into their forces and return the entire force to what we expect of them, with pride. A system that protects it's own over the rights of the citizens that have granted them the limited power to apply force in the protection of the citizenry as a whole and retributive force against those that have violated the rights of those citizens, yet teaches them that they are at war with those citizens, demands that they enforce the outright thievery (civil forfeiture, traffic citation quotas, etc), and rewards their 'mistakes' that we see as abuse and wrongful death with immunity from prosecution is corrupt.

The honorable, ethical, and virtuous man that finds himself within such a system, supporting and defending those that do wrong as well as laws that he knows to be wrong--that then does nothing to correct the system while waiting out his retirement and pension time--that's Hitler's SS troops and police. Individually with his family and maybe neighbors he might appear to be such an honorable, ethical, and virtuous man probably even loved and respected--but he's not worthy. He is as corrupt as the system he works within, supports, and defends, or he's a puppet fool. Just following orders and doing my job are no longer justifications or excuses.

ok, then, it doesn't hurt me much to drive at 55 on
the road when I'd really love to go 90. . I have done
115 for hours on a harley, and, well, no ticket. . but
no traffic, either. . got a ticket for 50 in a 45. . paid
the dues, gladly, because it's like Mom enforcing
my saying "Yes, ma'am" to a neighbor -- social
courtesy. . society imposes courtesy rules, and
I do not fault the enforcers for the nature of their jobs. -- j

mckenzie; I'm not trying to say the entire police force is corrupt. I'm trying to say that the police forces we have today that are the force arm of our legal/criminal system have been corrupted to such a point that those with less than worthy ethics and virtue that manage to get into the police, then operate with relative immunity compared to the rest of the citizenry. And somehow those less than honorable, ethical, and virtuous people have managed somehow to rise to the level of convincing others in their profession that they are at war with us and to train their new recruits to think and act that same way (non-hesitation range targets). While violent crime has been going down, in some areas dramatically, police force applications and abuse, have increased with a concurrent decrease in the strength of individual rights.

Yes john, but I on the other hand won't shoot him unless he's already shot at me or is attempting to shoot me. That's not freedom, that's self protection and is an individual right by nature.

Too true j, but I'm just not sure how that applies to our 'caring' policeman. Bureaucratic administrations dictated by government regulations trying to apply something like 6 Sigma is like asking a 1st grader to paint a sistine chapel. God how they love their new words.

plusaf; Provide us with your inestimable insights rather than asking inane questions.

Herb; I as well have had tragic causes to deal with policemen and have had some good experience. I hesitate to call in positive. But I've also been the victim and the reporter of a problem, resulting with having guns pointed at me and being threatened. Policing has changed in the last twenty years. These aren't the cops of our younger years anymore.

plusaf; the police are an arm of the government we currently live under, the arm that is licensed to respond with force, even to initiate it on occasion. And make no mistake, every encounter (even traffic tickets and selling a cigarette) with a policeman carries with it the threat of force up to and including death.

I fully understand 'Who is DOING the rewarding and the WHY and HOW'. The root cause is quite simply the collectivist and statist mongering and pandering that we've all accepted in our society for far too long.

If you have a better answer than that, please discuss.

The consequences of breaking a traffic common sense is you're going to have a wreck harming another or his property or yourself and your property. You've then established a tort that you're responsible for. As to police with WAR WEAPONRY AND TACTICS whose job it is to protect us from the force of others, they're not allowed to make mistakes, {Military and war are not unions, corporations, or businesses--they are death and blood) Unless they're willing to accept the consequences of establishing a tort and the resulting punishment that the rest of us have to live under.

Hostile areas sounds like WARZONE to me. If we live in a war zone, let me know so I can uparmor and prepare. I'm not unfamiliar with such places and the necessary conduct, but if you try to Mi Lai on me, don't expect it to go as easy as it did in Nam, or Ruby Ridge, or Waco. You want to call yourself an 'operator', join up and go through the same qualifications, testing, training, and years that some of the rest of us did. And we didn't even call ourselves operators, (I suspect we'd have done a skivey check on anyone stupid enough to call himself that) and if we'd killed as many as these simpletons do, rather than successfully kidnap them out of their beds and bring them back for questioning and POWing, we wouldn't have had our jobs, even lives, for long.

And yes, I paint our police with as broad a brush as they seem willing to paint us with and their's appears to be dipped in blood. WE'RE NOT AT WAR. I care not who you are or what authority you claim to have, do not point a gun at me or try to break in my door. I will not accept that from anyone or any group. Treat me with the respect you seem to think I should treat police and we'll all get along. I'm an old man, but the cost you'll have to pay to make a 'MISTAKE' with me is much more than you seem to expect and I guarantee, more than you're willing to pay. I've already got the coffee cup, belt buckle, and ball cap, and yes, I'm still paying for those' heroic' experiences.

Dunno what to tell you. I have been known to swat flies with a sledgehammer from time to time. Depending upon who you ask, this is either one of my better qualities or my worst. It's a big part of the reason I don't post here much. I've never been a fan of glib one liners in an echo chamber, and I have better, more productive ways to spend my time than editorializing on every topic that drives me crazy in the world. This particular topic, though, just happens to be one of those hot button issues for me that is guaranteed to suck me in pretty much every time.

To all contributors:

Good discussion.

Seems that the core issue is one of individual character; principles, values, motive & intent.
These are severely tested when individuals find themselves in corrupt environments and especially where personal health & safety are challenged.

The underlying principle of 'Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.' seems appropriate. This can be demonstrated by what I refer to as the 'Crossing Guard Mentality'; Notice how when a child is given arbitrary authority or 'power' to 'control' others that privilege of 'office, rank or title', generally speaking of course, tends to be over emphasized if not abused for the amusement of the individual who holds that position based on the immaturity of that person. True as this principle may be, it does not apply equally to all.

The individuals character is essential in the employment of their authority. The character of the individual is revealed in the manner in which he speaks and acts in his relationship(s) with others. An individual who has experienced the influence of 'flawed' or 'healthy' character in parents, peers, teachers, mentors and other 'heroes' is likely to develop a similar character in himself. If he at some point is able to develop a significant degree of 'objectivity' in regards to his own character, there is the possibility to make a more conscious decision on the content of his character; principles, values, motive & intent.

If you are a sovereign individual aka John Galt, you not only understand, but have assumed full 'authority' and responsibility for your person. Most of us have some need or desire to interact with others, so the idea of being totally independent and self-reliant is impractical. Even John Galt needs and wants other (like-minded) individuals to join him in his 'shrug' to Galt's Gulch. But the principle of responsibility for ones character and actions are the key issue.

Prejudice, over-generalization, stereotyping, bias & bigotry are products of intellectual laziness or where expediency does not allow thorough investigation prior to response. It seems that a reasonable level of prejudgment based on prior observation and/or experience is appropriate where expediency is necessary.
The mistake in judgment and reasoning occurs when one becomes lazy or unwilling to judge a situation on its own merits, a new investigation rather than simply applying ones prejudgment.

In my humble opinion, it is always appropriate to question ones legitimacy of authority based on their character. Character means more than any title, certificate or demeanor. A legitimate authority is one based on sound character with unselfish motives and without intent to harm in any manner.

When legitimate rules & regulations (laws) which have been adopted are applied and enforced with other than the intent with which they were established, they are being abused in some manner which is not for the general health & safety of the individual or the community, but most likely for the profit & amusement of the individual who by doing so is a fraudulent and treacherous person who must be appropriately dealt with by his associates if we are to preserve a civil society.

I welcome your comments.

Best regards,
John Galt