HAVING PROBLEMS VIEWING THE SITE? GET FIREFOX! | A NOTE ON ADVERTISING

   

Are all police officers criminals?

This is by Roy Halliday:

Are all police officers criminals?
"Modern policemen not only commit crimes by enforcing laws against voluntary exchanges, they aggravate the conditions that lead citizens to commit real crimes. The war on those who use illegal drugs is the prime example of this.

The dramatic increase in the number of laws that violate basic rights has made it virtually impossible for a police officer to perform his job without being a criminal. More important than this is the fact that, regardless of the particular laws being enforced, the way police officers enforce the laws is basically unjust.


What do police officers do when they suspect someone has committed a crime?

They arrest him, which means they take him by brute force to the police station or the local jail, which means they kidnap him.

Then a judge decides how much ransom to charge. If the prisoner cannot come up with the ransom (called bail), a police officer locks the prisoner in a cell until his trial. In preparation for the trial, the police commit other crimes on behalf of the court and sometimes on behalf of the defendant. The police serve subpoenas on witnesses for the prosecution and on witnesses for the defense.
This is a crime, because it entails threatening to kidnap and imprison peaceful people if they refuse to participate in the trial.


Another crime backed up by the police force is jury selection.
When a prospective juror is told to appear at the courthouse, he receives a threat of arrest. The threat usually comes in the mail, but if the individual is bold enough to disobey the order to appear at the courthouse, police officers might kidnap him and put him in jail. Threatening to commit serious crimes such as kidnapping and imprisonment is an integral part of being a police officer today. Consequently, we should avoid this criminal profession.”

output

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

police criminals?

Yes. Every last one of them. They all steal natural rights given to us by our creator. For example:

If you have to change the Constitution by Amendment in order to enact alcohol prohibition, what do you have to do to enact drug prohibition?

That's easy. You just get stupid unprincipled Pigs to kick doors down and take children away, set up Gestapo roadblocks and take hard earned property and beat confessions out of people. On their day off they just intimidate people into giving better prices and services.

I'm glad you asked that question. Let me make it perfectly clear:
The Pigs are the exact same people that comitted the massacre at My Lai. They are the same people that killed 1/3 of Cambodian males. They are the same people that loaded the Jews onto trains and sent them to Daschau. These are the same animals that have been ruining the lives of hundreds of millions of good people for tens of thousands of years.

Pigs are so casual about committing perjury in court I believe that about half of what they say is slanted, omitted or just outright lies.
They do what they're told.

Police are the

Enemy of every person who wants true freedom. They enforce the draconian laws, handed down by the jack-booted elite who control this country. These cops are sick with the power disease. They have the need to control and enforce. They get a kick out of it. They also have a very deep ingrained sense of us against you mentality. They are orgainized criminals whom are unchecked themselves. There is no limit to thier corruption. Never met one who could handle a real job. Maybe someday we can lure them into a trap at the nearest Duncan Doughnuts.

Have only known a couple personally

and they were CREEPS. One used his patrol car to pick up teenage girls out past curfew, who he would then threaten into oral sex. One was a wife-beating, power-tripping jerk.
LAW is to defend individual's rights. POLICE are now in the business of detaining people whether or not there has been a crime, or a victim or anything. When is the last time a policeman DEFENDED you?

actually their first duty is to generate revenue...

in the form of traffic citations (another gross violation of peoples 4th ammendment rights)... and I would have to say yes on the above question, but it's a complex issue, the real problem is that the law in this country has been transformed (gradually over a long period of time) from common law to civil law. under common law there are no crimes against the state (no victimless crimes) you are generally free to go about your business so long as you do not harm anyone or interfere with anyone elses rights. under civil law there are so many laws everyone's a criminal on some level, and that's the intent, crime is a revenue generating enterprise in this country for state and federal governments and a massive prison-industrial complex. police officers are not hired to keep the peace, they are not hired to protect anyone or serve anyone but the state, and they serve the state by enforcing the laws (no matter how evil or idiotic they are and without regard to whether it serves the public and the peace or damages them or whether the law is constitutional or not), their job is to bust as many people as possible and generate as much revenue as possible. that's how they're evaluated too so I don't see how anyone can claim to be a peace officer in this country with the way things are now, but I see a couple people who posted below and claim to be... perhaps one of them could enlighten us as to how someone could work in this institutionalized criminal racket without violating their constitutional oath and peoples constitutional rights?

Just received this email from Restore the Republic..

the following is an excerpt:
.
"In an act of defiance to international law and its allies to
the south, Canadian authorities in conjunction with their US
counterparts worked to silence the 4 year incarceration and
torture of an American citizen.

One of our own, in Canada, was placed in solitary confinement,
entombed in a steel coffin, and sprayed with steam until his skin
blistered as retaliation for exposing a drug ring run by rogue
members of a Canadian police department. "
.
I think you know how I feel about our SS.
.
.
Where's the happy little tire swing?

The "all" word is much too general

But, I use to work in an Institute, for disabled folks lets say, some born that way, some by accidents, some from traumatic events.

Did you know that just being around these people for certain lengths of time your I.Q. was reduced by certain percentages, don't remember what it was, 3% or so I guess a year.

So knowing this, I would say that their, the Police, percentage points are lowered as well being around criminals, the actual guilty ones I guess a person would have to say, but not ignoring the extreme differences of personalities that they come in contact with as well.

Now-a-days who the guilty ones are questionable, knowing what we know.

The reduction would be oh so so subtle that a person may very well not recognize it happening and probably wouldn't.

So be aware!

OK, "virtually all" then

And most of the people the people they harass are not actually "criminals" according to natural law.
I think they become stupid by being the sheeple that they are--blindly follow their superiors' orders...

delete/ignore this please

~

Short answer, NO.

That's not to say some aren't. That's like asking if all politicians are crooked and criminals or liars. Ron Paul is a politician, so there you go. There are good and bad elements in EVERY field. Police, teachers, etc., etc. Many police officers support Ron Paul as well. Many first responders support him too. Do you want to be judged by others because of your line of work, your political affiliation, your religious beliefs, upon the actions of others who share the same? NO. That is collectivist thinking. So why single out a specific profession? Are all Ron Paul supporters "truthers"? White Supremists? Anti Semites? Of course not!!! But perhaps some are. It is best to judge people as individuals.
***********************************************
"Truth is treason in the Empire of Lies."

Balderdash

Okay their might certain officers who are not criminals. But would be a very tiny % -- and it would be hard for them to remain that way.

It means they would have to be barely enforcing any of the State's so called "laws"...Just imagine the peer pressure they'd get from their fellows pigs.

Poppycock!

First off, I enjoy using archaic terms to voice my displeasure, so thank you for that :)

My problem lies with the fact that despite my vehement and perpetual resistance to any form of government control over those in the private sector (and my INTENSE opposition to the War on Drugs in all its forms), I nonetheless have both family and very good friends of mine who are policemen and women, SWAT members, and one DEA agent, among others. I suppose then, it's a question of reconciling my knee-jerk "Fuck you!" reaction to calling those I love criminals to what's being discussed in a larger context, which is a larger crime that inevitably sweeps up good people into doing something they'd rather not, or don't fully understand, or any similar reason wherein the label of "criminal" is misdirected toward a group of people who do not fit the definition but nonetheless feel powerless to stop it. An extreme example, but I am reminded of ordinary working-class Germans who lived under Hitler's regime. Yes, you can cite the massive rallies of public support for the man, but what was that? Propoganda and careful politicking to enact policies and laws that supported the structure of the power elite (sound familiar?). Not everyone was innocent, sure, but not everyone was guilty, either.

When I was hit with a possesion charge, it was a cousin of mine, a police officer who detested drugs, who explained to me as much about the court system and the likely ramifications of the outcome as possible, and what to say to the judge and prosecutor to get the most lenient possible sentence (in addition to my own research). Yes, he did it because we were family, but I also know that many officers don't like drug laws and consider them a waste of resources and an invitation to trouble. Every time, they would rather respond to a call from someone smoking pot than being drunk off alcohol. There is awareness, but many are only starting to understand what kind of a cancer this is.

A good philosophical question, sure, but one prone to over-generalizations and ignorance once it starts becoming a way to label people. All of this is coming from someone who had 3 semi-automatic weapons pointed at his head from city police who assumed I was a major drug-dealer. I don't like cops in general, because too many of them are on power trips or are just pricks, but blanket statements like we've been discussing just seem to distort a very complicated issue.

For liberty!! *gong*

.

.

Did you read the post?

It sounds like you rust read the question (title) of the thread, rather than the whole opening post, and just answered the question it asks in the title after interpreting it literally.

The opening post clarifies what exactly it is asking about, and explains why it would apply to all police.


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

Yes I read the post

The entire post and I stand by what I said. Maybe you should read this post. http://www.newswithviews.... I highly doubt Ron Paul himself would agree with the context of this post.
****************************************************
"Truth is treason in the Empire of Lies."

If he agrees with natural law he would.

My hunch is that he does. However, this is so politically incorrect that he could never admit it publicly.

And here's another that

And here's another that people should see. http://www.youtube.com/wa...
*******************************************
"Truth is treason in the Empire of Lies."

.

.

Unfortunately, it is a

us against them attitude. The police have this it's my job mindset, they look at protesters as trouble makers rather than concerned citizens. Some say it is worse in other countries but we are fast approaching the same level as those other countries. It is not just the police that are compromised in this mindset non of us are off the hook. How about all these companies that are corrupt, corrupt politicians, doctors, insurance industries etc., etc. If we start pointing fingers everyone will have to admit what have I done because it was my job. What have I done for money that put others in jeopardy.
The crime is when good men and woman fail to speak up when they are being lead down the road to tyranny or corruption. Peace

You won't believe this video

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

Dozens of police caught on tape laughing about shooting innocent woman

Or this one

Michigan Police Caught on Tape Slamming Boy's Head
http://www.youtube.com/wa...

How Cops Really Want to Police

Cruel...

Pig: We like to play gladiator. You know what I mean? Let two gangs beat each other up without weapons, and the winner gets to deal on the corner. Or, we grab a bunch of muggers, or maybe two crews who steal cars, and tell them, “Okay, you all fight each other — the one still standing gets to avoid jail.” I know: it sounds awful, but believe me, this really works.

YES

every single one of them. they all enforce unconstitutional laws. none of them were forced to take that job. therefor they are criminals

No.

___________

Lisa C.

“Elections are short term efforts; revolutions are long term projects.”

--Ron Paul

Join the rEVOLution here: http://www.campaignforlib...

It looked like maybe..

The cop was hurting the kid's arm and the kid tried to pull away and then the cop overreacted. Stupid. Don't they have any psychological litmus tests for cops. They can't all be this bad, but it seems like events like this are more and more commonplace, especially with their new taser toys.

This was

arrogantly stupid! Cops are on a power trip. I watch the show "cops" and see it all the time!

When they tell you to do something, they don't even give you time to comprehend what they said and then obey/respond!

Arrogantly stupid = know cameras are everywhere - duh...

I do not agree with your

I do not agree with your analysis of probable cause, arrest, trial, etc and how it relates to police being criminal. In my opinion it is their duty as empowered by the people to do so.

In regards to your question "Are all police officers criminals?" I will say absolutely not. Although I will say that some police officers are definitely criminals. That fact is indisputable as evidenced by the convictions throughout our country over the years.

Years ago I used to believe police could never be criminal and that they were always right. I was young then. I also have family members and very clost family friends who were police officers. My opinion regarding all of this probably began to change when I saw first hand officers acting as though the law did not apply to them.

I suppose nobody is perfect, but we should expect and demand more from those who are empowered to enforce the law against others.

Natural law vs. Democratic Law (law by the majority)

I don't give a pig's whistle if police officers are "empowered" to do certain things by a majority of sheeple.

Natural law>Demos-cracy

I do agree that our rights

I do agree that our rights are not given to us by other people but rather they come from our Creator OR our humanity.

But where does that leave us?

Is your point that those who are believed to have committed a crime should remain free until such time that they are proven guilty? That is an interesting issue and does deserve more thought. How can someone be both "innocent until proven guilty" and imprisoned before their guilt has been proven?

In regards to empowering officers to do a certain job, supposedly our government is a government "of, for and by the people." So if not "of and by the people" - then who makes these decisions?

"Innocent until proven guilty" + imprisoment?

Haha, I hadn't realized that...What a huge contradiction!
Yes, of course they should be free.

Going further, I argue that imprisoning someone by force is a violation of their rights.
Imprisonment is only OK if the individual in question consents.

This might sound extreme, but it just shows how far the dominant ideologies on punishment are from libertarian principles...

Roy Halliday wrote a really good book that touches on this. It's called Enforceable Rights:
A Libertarian Theory of Justice

maybe because police are told

"i don't care if it's illegal or not in your job description, you'll do it or be out of a job." Could that be some major incentive?

Like all groups it takes

all kinds. Dr. Paul has a large following of officers. I remember he had a bill that would let officers deduct the cost of vests or something. Dr. Paul was the only one backing officers. I think it is going to be very difficult to be an officer or in the military soon because they will have to decide if they want to be a part of the destruction of the Constitution and become a enforcer for the new world order. I don't envy them and would not want to be in their shoes. Peace

So true

I think I read somewhere that in China it is illegal for cops to go "undercover" and deal drugs to arrest drug dealers. It really doesn't make sense for us to do that. People in positions of authority should not be legally granted to commit acts that those who are not in positions of power can be arrested for.

----------
"We will never give up. We will never give in." - Dr. Ron Paul

Yes, that's ridiculous

BTW, your sentence should read: "...China is is *legal*..."

Actually... I think his

Actually... I think his sentence is correct. In China it is illegal, and it should be illegal here as well.

Government Terrorists Terrorize Iowa Homeowners

http://www.infowars.com/?...

June 18, 2008

Rogue Government
Government Terrorists Terrorize Iowa Homeowners
Lee Rogers

Government terrorists are continuing their agenda of terrorizing the American people and destroying individual liberty. Using the guise of keeping people safe from the floods in Iowa, uniformed terrorists are setting up Nazi like checkpoints forbidding people from going back to their homes. These checkpoints are not only unnecessary but also illegal as people should not be forbidden from going back to their own private property because some Nazi in a uniform is claiming that they are blocking the road for the purposes of public safety. People have the right to travel freely regardless of what these uniformed terrorists say. Like Hurricane Katrina, the government is taking advantage of this disaster to setup a system of control that Hitler and Stalin would have approved of. These government terrorists need to be held accountable for unlawfully violating the Constitutional rights of American citizens. It doesn’t matter if there’s a flood, earthquake, tornado or an invasion by space aliens, the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land. The government does not have the right to block law abiding citizens from their own private property regardless of the situation.

http://www.youtube.com/wa...

A perfect example of these government terrorists in action was an incident reported by this Associated Press report on these unconstitutional checkpoints.

Police twice caught a man in his flood-damaged home before the property had been cleared by city inspectors. But Rick Blazek vowed to return — even if he had to sneak behind bushes.

“Once I’m in there, I’m not coming out unless they have handcuffs and leg shackles,” he pledged Sunday at a checkpoint where authorities were limiting access.

That’s what happened Monday when officers pulled Blazek out of his pickup after he tried to run a checkpoint. When he allegedly bumped an Iowa state trooper with the truck, police drew their guns, broke a window on his vehicle and wrestled Blazek out. He was charged with assaulting an officer.

Blazek was among thousands of flood victims frustrated by authorities’ decision Monday to cut off access to flood-damaged homes because of safety concerns. About 25,000 people have had to leave their homes since the Cedar River began flooding.

This is entirely ridiculous. The so called police officers are the real criminals by infringing on this man’s right to freely travel. At the very least, these individuals should be charged with destruction of property for breaking Mr. Blazek’s truck window and be required to compensate him accordingly. Here is a man who was simply trying to access his private property. These government goon squads had no right to block this man from his private property in the name of public safety. This man was not infringing on anyone else’s liberty and should have been left alone. The fact that he bumped one of these goons with his automobile would not have happened if these uniformed terrorists weren’t unlawfully blocking the road and preventing people from accessing their private property. The fact that he is being charged with assaulting an officer is absurd. He’s not the one terrorizing homeowners by not letting them access their private property.

What is really insane about this whole deal is that while people are not allowed to access their homes, these inspectors from the government are allowed to wander around to people’s property for safety purposes. This is a recipe for corruption. How can people be assured that their homes are not being looted by these so called government officials? Governments have time and time again proven to be one of the most corrupt and criminal institutions in the history of mankind. If you don’t believe this to be true, take a look at the looting and pillaging that is currently taking place by the crooks in the federal government.

In Iowa City, the Mayor actually ordered hundreds of people to evacuate their homes. This government bureaucrat has no right to order people to leave their private property regardless of the situation. If people believe the conditions are unsafe, they’ll leave, if not, they’ll stay. It is up to the individual to make that decision, not the government.

These government bureaucrats should be removed from office for allowing these checkpoints to be setup and not allowing people to go back to their homes. In addition, it is disgraceful that these uniformed terrorists are enforcing these unconstitutional orders. With insanity like this going on, this country is gone. We can certainly expect more of this as this nation descends further into the depths of the New World Order.

http://groups.yahoo.com/g...

Here is the thing. The

Here is the thing. The people in Iowa should be justifiably outraged. It is an individuals OWN business if they want to put themselves in danger or not, once they have been advised of it. If the city wants to "condemn" their house, then they need to go through the proper channels. Iowans should for SURE get rid of their city officials who think they need to be "protected" from going into their own homes. Adults do not need nannies. Even in Florida if they evacuated a dangerous area if a hurricane was coming and you chose not to go, no one would eject you at gunpoint from your home (do they do that now? I have been gone 8 years). MANY people would not return to their homes if they were advised not to. The ones that still wanted to return should have been left alone. This is something to fight for, and the Mayor and maybe the Police Chief should be ousted. ASAP and by a majority

I happen to be a peace

I happen to be a peace officer. And I know a few of them that support Ron Paul....Piss off bro!

"peace officer" what a joke...

hey where are you a "peace officer" the land of oz? ain't no peace officers left in this country...

You have to

understand that while we grew up with the idea that the police are our friends and people we can trust, we all know that is not necessarily the case anymore.

While I try not to paint all cops with the same brush, just because I see a police uniform now, I don't assume he/she is a friend. So many people have had so many experiences to show contrary. You know that too. The profession is inundated with people that are on a power trip and can't wait to use and abuse their authority.

I have friends that are ex-cops that don't have much good to say about cops in general. One that is proud to be hated by all of his former co-workers. So when someone makes a comment about cops in general, it's not something you should take personally. You need to recognize that the comment is aimed at the masses of officers that are not friends of liberty.

...And there are many, many

...And there are many, many police officers who support the Second Amendment.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

I plan on becoming a peace

I plan on becoming a peace officer as well.

The problem isn't the police; it's the laws. Police are doing their jobs. The politicians who write the illegal laws are the criminals.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

Please DO

Please DO become a cop. We need cops who respect liberty.

That's poor logic

Two types of crime:
a) What the State decrees
b) a violation of someone's natural rights

Yes, police officer's are not violating a), but they are definitely committing true crimes which are found in b).

For that reason, I advise you not to enter that profession.

That's like blaming our

That's like blaming our troops for Iraq.

The politicians are the criminals. Police officers are their employees. If cannabis is illegal, it isn't the fault of peace officers.

I do think the Founders would have worried about the concept of Police departments, had they been prevalent in their times.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

I do blame troops in Iraq for the specific crimes they have

committed!

Yes, cannabis being illegal isn't their fault. But if they kidnap (ie. put in jail) someone because of it (or steal their property), that is a crime.

Kevin Tuma

"I do think the Founders would have worried about the concept of Police departments, had they been prevalent in their times."

Why do you say that? You do not think they supported local law enforcement?

I think it is a stretch to

I think it is a stretch to compare one's right to smoke crack to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

I am all for the end of the Federal War on Drugs. And I think it is wise public policy to not criminalize them. I do not think it is a God-given, inalienable right.

Disagree on two counts

1) The Founders were mistaken on there existing a right to life.
For ex: If I am dying and need a kidney transplant, do I have the right to forcibly take your kidney in order to preserve my right to life?

2) Rights are not God-given. They are derived, by definition, from the ownership of property.