Previous Post
Next Post

Sgt. Patrick Hayes writes

RF recently sent me a link to an article entitled Is resistance futile? The Cost of Challenging the American Police State. The piece was written by attorney and author of (A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State) John W. Whitehead, posted in Huffington Post politics. Normally, I don’t trust anything Arianna Huffington’s inheritors publish; the writers never met a Big Government idea they didn’t like. This piece was different . . .

Mr Whitehead lists several startling, distrubing examples of police overreach. He paints a bleak picture of police contacts in this country. Like many observers in the post-Ferguson environment, where police “militarization” and race relations have come under fire, the author tries to say that the examples he cites represent the common, normal Police/citizen encounters. Nothing could be farther from the truth. There are tens of thousands of police/citizen encounters each day that are conducted properly and end well. Click here for [what I believe to be] a more common outcome, chronicled by TTAG reader Josh Grabow.

That said, anytime a police officer violates a citizen’s civil rights or acts outside his/her authority, we have a problem. Here’s another of Mr. Whitehead’s examples:

Police arrested Chaumtoli Huq because she failed to promptly comply when ordered to “move along” while waiting outside a Ruby Tuesday’s restaurant for her children, who were inside with their father, using the bathroom. NYPD officers grabbed Huq, a lawyer with the New York City Public Advocate’s office, flipped her around, pressed her against a wall, handcuffed her, searched her purse, arrested her, and told her to “shut up” when she cried out for help, before detaining her for nine hours. Huq was charged with obstructing governmental administration, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

This case resulted in a lawsuit. The NYPD had no reason to accost Ms. Huq in the first place. She was not violating any law. She was minding her own business when a NYPD officer decided he wanted her to move. Why? Only he knows. One thing is clear. The officer acted outside his authority.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This is the law. Law enforcement – from the cop on the beat to judge on the bench – must respect it. And if there is to be an error, and police are just as prone to errors as any other civilian, it needs to favor the rights of the citizen. And as this is a gun site, it must be said: those of us entrusted by society to enforce the law with firearms have a special obligation to live by the rule of law. To appreciate that the power to deploy deadly force was given to us by that law.

Simply put, the police are not, nor should be, a law unto ourselves.

Again, Whitehead’s examples are the exception, not the rule. Again, we, as law enforcement officers and leaders, have the responsibility to ensure that we do not violate our fellow citizens’ civil rights. We’ve taken an oath to uphold and defend the United State Constitution. Our actions must reflect our sworn commitment. It’s a simple concept.

The vast majority of American police officers do their jobs without violating anyone’s rights. It only takes a few bad apples to make the rest look bad. While I disagree with TTAG commentators who believe that all cops are thugs, I share their opinion that good cops have a responsibility to ensure that all police officers follow the laws they are sworn to uphold. Until that happens there can be no trust.

I also understand that internal and external police politics have eroded this trust in some places, and destroyed it in others. If we wait for a political solution, we may never restore public confidence in the police in those places where it’s been lost.

The good news: cell phone cameras, dashboard and body cameras are changing the “balance of power.” Now that we can see when police cross the line, we can name, shame and yes blame those officers who’ve betrayed their oath. My department is deploying body cams. I welcome them with open arms, as should anyone who respects the police’s proper role in society. Anyone who doesn’t is no friend of society, nor mine.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. It’s all about making those in power respect our rights. Mayors, city councils, chiefs of police are the ones that need to suffer when cops step over the line. End careers, cost them elections and you’ll see much more oversight of those rank and file cops that have been given the power and responsibility that goes with it.

    • As long as police are immune from liability for their thuggery, law enforcement crossing the line will continue. Police must be personally held accountable for their actions. Things done under the color or their badge or employment should not result in indemnifying them from wrong.
      Another problem is the credibility the police have in the courts. Since they are seen to be professionals and under the color of “only doing their job” hence it is not personal, they are accorded instant credibility in court regarding their testimony of the “facts” in the case.
      The bottom line is….we have the legislature passing laws which may, or may not be, good intentioned. Agents of that same state enforce these laws in a subjective manner sometimes committing perjury to accomplish their goal, then another state agent sits in judgement on all this. A recipe for disaster.
      If one touches a police officer in my state it is a felony. When police assault a citizen it is not. There are only one of three remedies available:
      1. Things continue.
      2. Legislation and the mindset changes.
      3. We fight back either at the scene or later after the noise cools.

      • Quickest way to fix it is to have a prosecutor to file assault charges on some of these officers that slam a citizen down for doing something legal. Best way to find someone that will do this is to ask some questions when the prosecutors are running for office.

        • The ONLY way things are going to change is when a cop is killed and the killer is acquitted because his actions were in self defense. Only then will police forces start to care for our rights.

        • More states need to follow Indiana’s example and update their Castle Doctrine laws.

          Non-LEOs and police should be on the same footing.

          If police can be cleared of killing innocent people due to an “error in judgment,” then the same should hold true for people who erroneously shoot or kill police because they believed their home was being invaded by bad guys.


          Myths and Misconceptions About Indiana’s New Self-Defense Law

          The Castle Doctrine law says that if someone has entered or is attempting to enter your home without your consent, you’re legally permitted to use a reasonable amount of force to expel the intruder from your residence. If you reasonably believe your life or members of your family are in danger, you can use lethal force. The revision to Indiana’s law simply states that public servants aren’t exempt from such treatment.

          In seven years of reporting on paramilitary-style drug raids, I’ve reviewed cases where police officers have shot and killed innocent people after mistaking a blue cup or a glinting wristwatch for a gun. In nearly all of these situations the officers were cleared because prosecutors determined that given all the circumstances, the officers had made a reasonable error in judgment. Now in Indiana, the citizens on the receiving end of these raids will be given the same consideration.

          “In the end, that’s all this amendment does,” Rutherford said. “It really just puts police officers on the same level as everyone else.”

  2. Thanks for another well written article. While I agree with it, I have only one bone to pick.

    This is the law. Law enforcement – from the cop on the beat to judge on the bench – must respect it.

    I would change that to

    This is the law. Law enforcement – from the cop on the beat to judge on the bench – must follow it.

    The difference, though subtle, is important. One can respect the law and still not follow it, yes?

    • I see what you mean and this is only my opinion, but I feel that if you choose not to follow the law, you are inherently demonstrating that you have no respect for it. In my mind, people who follow a law without respecting it are more likely to break it when they think nobody is looking.

    • No, one can follow a law but not respect it. So in the case of civil rights. yes I would rather they follow it and weather or not they respect it is not a concern. Now there are some stupid laws (NJ Shanneen Allen) that are followed but no one who is a true American would respect.

      • You can’t follow a law but not respect it…

        … Here’s this law lots of people follow but no true Scotsman, sorry I meant American, can respect it….

        Wait, what?

        • Really? You don’t understand what you just read? Have you heard of the Milgram experiment? People will be obedient even though they don’t like what they are being asked to do.

          And I use “American” as in anyone who believes in and follows the Constitution and American values. Even if I am the only man left in this country that feels this way then there will only be one American left. If you don’t agree with that then you can stick it.

  3. While we are not even close to a nation of laws (4th Amendment on life support, lack of border security, 2nd Amendment infringements, vagaries of tax code, Obamacare exemptions, variable enforcement, etc.), there is no excuse for police to abuse authority. Government desperately needs accountability, both from the outside and within. That includes not only police but lawyers and politicians as well. Those who are honest are copacetic with accountability measures. Liars and cheats are not.

    I appreciate having a body mic and dash cam recording to record enforcement contacts. It doesn’t work particularly well, but still offers a measure of liability protection. I’d be fine with body cams as well, provided they are reasonably well designed.

    I know that my enforcement contacts are subject to audit – doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

  4. Sgt. Hayes, it may not be that the vast majority of cops are bad, but it seems clear that where they exist there are systemic problems within the agencies. If a cop has no problem violating the rights of citizens, it’s because he or she knows–or has good reason to believe–he will not get in trouble for it.

    Take the case in Colorado where the cops made a warrantless raid on the home of an innocent family, throwing one teen through a window head-first. When they realized their mistake, they conspired to charge them with assault on a police officer which carries a mandatory two year prison sentence. They were willing to send innocent people to prison to cover up their mistake. Not one cop on the team told the truth or refused to go along with it because they knew they could get away with it. And they were right. No punishment whatsoever.

    If cops know they can get away with lying, falsifying reports, and abusing citizen rights, that shows you it’s not some rogue cop doing bad, it’s the agency.

    Unfortunately there seems to be a lot of agencies where things like this occur. We could bury TTAG with news stories like this.

    • This is the point that seems to bemissed so often by honest cops. It’s alluded to briefly in this post, but it needs emphasis.

      The thin blue line is bullshit in the face of corruption. When a bad cop is not immediately reported by good cops, those good cops have crossed that thin blue line into being bad cops.

      In my more generous moments, I wonder if even 10% of cops are good enough to want to fight corruption. Most of the time, I can’t imagine how any cop could not be aware of the corruption which they decline to report, unless he’s a rookie or willfully blind.

    • This. My main problem with cops isn’t those who are exposed as corrupt thugs who believe themselves to be above the law. Such abuses are inevitable. The real problem is that for every corrupt or brutalizing cop there seem to be a dozen “good cops” who knew but did nothing to stop their corrupt “brother in blue,” Genuine good cops will value the rights and well-being of their fellow citizens more than they do their corrupt and brutal fellow cops.

      • That’s exactly why I always chuckle a bit (painfully) when some self-righteous copper rattles on about “the majority of good cops”. Well yeah, you may not be doing anything wrong yourself, and I know lots of cops like that.

        But I got a stack of C-notes the author isn’t doing a god damned thing about the dirty cops in his unit, platoon, squad, or division. Everybody knows who the platoon Ricky Ranger or ‘The Shield’ wannabe is. Nobody ever arrests him, even though they all have direct evidence to do it with. He will be covered for until he does something soooo egregious that even the metro PD can’t BS it away. Then it will be sold as a heroic removal of a bad apple, see the system works. I’ve seen it happen a dozen times with platoons I have contacts in.

        I know lots of cops so I understand why. Cop is a cushy job, above almost all laws, nice benes, fat retirement, tons of OT. Who’d wanna rock that gravy boat? So please, STFU with the ‘I’m a good cop’ sanctimonious bull excrement. The author knows exactly who the POS are under his command, and he hasn’t done anything about it. Nice that he personally isn’t being a jagoff, but he lets others run wild, and that means he has nothing of any moral relevance to say.

        Everybody has to make a living, so keep your head down, mouth shut, and do your job the way it is supposed to be done. You wanna cookie? You get paid well, buy your own. But until you clean out the filth that you work with, I don’t want to hear you spouting any garbage about your being a ‘good cop’. Until you do something about your coworkers (let alone subordinates) you ain’t got a hobby horse to be riding high on.

        • AGREED!! Until they start weeding out these thugs let them all be painted with the same brush. Take special note of all those “PEACE” Officers who threw that flash bang into the playpen of that baby. Any of us who made a “MISTAKE” like that would not have skated with a “well they were only doing their job” crap.

        • Police departments need to establish honor codes.

          An officer will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.

      • This is an entirely fair point, and though inexcusable, happens every day. Some departments are worse than others. Some aren’t too bad. The city I work for has only been around for a few decades, and we are a relatively small department of between 120-130 depending on who’s retiring and how the budget looks.

        In the five years I’ve been here we have lost people to;
        sleeping on duty,
        lying about their education,
        sending sexual text messages to a citizen, then lying about it,

        and I say lost because they resigned before they could be fired. I am by no means saying that we are perfect, but in my experience, this particular department actually does investigate and remove the bad apples. There may be a few left, but if so they keep their heads down to where I don’t see it.

        We actually had a case years before I got hired where we arrested one of our own people for misconduct, the details of which I won’t get into. Again, we’re not perfect, and I’m also not speaking for any other department but my own. All I’m saying is that some places actually do, as an institution, try to do it right.

        • Fair enough, but that’s so much odd duck I have no idea where it could be.

          In the world of major metros/suburbs none of the instances you caption would merit any investigation, let alone a “resignation” to some other dept. Sex on duty in a PC is hardly odd, and your PZ is covered while it’s happening. I’m glad to hear your dept is functioning as a dept is supposed to, but it’s a major outlier…

        • And then there are cases such as the Florida Highway Patrol Officer who arrested a municipal officer in a squad at gunpoint because he was–and it is recorded on tape–charging through traffic at speeds over one hundred miles an hour because he was late for an appointment unrelated to his official duties. That officer was fired, but the arresting officer (a woman) came under intense pressure from fellow officers personally, by e-mail, by illegal surveillance of her home and illegal accessing of her driver’s license information so that she could be harassed at home. And of course there was Serpico.

        • he was late for an appointment unrelated to his official duties.

          Yep, I believe he was running late for work at his second job.

    • I agree and that’s the beef I have with most P.D.’s “OF TODAY” (Please note those two words) The problem citizens are having is whenever a cop does something very wrong they get put on ad.-leave w/pay while the “investigation” is going on and bam he/she is right back on the street and then you learn that officer has had two or three of the same type of violations on his/her record. That means the whole dept. needs flushed out because of corruptness.

  5. All this over reach/ infringement is solvable instantly. Remove police / state immunity. You would see a change overnite when the first cop has HIS bank acct or home seized to pay a judgement. Or the door slams on his jail cell. Imagine the HORROR ? Having no more rights than a normal citizen.

    • This is something that is LONG over due. Include all elected officials to be held accountable for the legislation that they vote on. If someone’s life, liberty, and/or property is effected by a piece of legislation they passed, they should be held accountable.

    • Exactly. Immunity, whether absolute or qualified, is an elitist measure and does not befit a democracy.

      When authority exceeds accountability, you get corruption. When accountability exceeds authority, you get scapegoats.

      Accountability MUST match authority in any same society.

    • Exactly. They (the few bad ones) know the worst that can happen is they get fired and go find another job. They break into a wrong house – blow a baby’s face off, or gun down a homeowner and they may get fired and the lawsuit is paid by ME. The cop should be held liable and everyone but the cop pays for it. Taxpayers drop the bill for lawsuits against police. Unbelievable. And if the budget starts running short they will just raise taxes. Then they can pay more lawsuits. The majority of issues raised against police normally result in an officer paid vacation. I seriously don’t get it. Are we promoting or discouraging these actions?

      • One idea I’ve heard recently is to require police to have liability insurance before they leave the academy. This would be similar to those in medical occupations. If an officer is “high risk,” his premiums may shoot through the roof or he may just get dropped by his insurer. So even if his or her department isn’t taking care of business, the insurance company may drop the officer, making him unemployable.

        • Man that is the best idea I have heard yet ! Make them responsible for their own actions instead of having a union and a city budget to cover them.

        • Great idea regarding liability insurance.

          All the talk about accountability is meaningless unless individual police officers have “skin in the game.”

    • “Having no more rights than a normal citizen.”

      I don’t want to make a post that just says “THIS” so I added all these other words.

    • +1
      My modest proposal:

      (1) All SWAT operations that are not required by exigent circumstances require a warrant. Failure to comply results in strict liability against all involved, with no immunity.

      (2) Even with a warrant, strict liability for all concerned (with no immunity) for any “mistakes” that occur during non-exigent SWAT operations and any no-knock raids.

      In short, if the po-po want to play soldier with all the fun toys when it’s not a real emergency, then they ought to pay for all screwups.

      • I don’t know what you mean by ‘swat operations’ but your #1 is pretty much already the case. Except for exigency the police writ large cannot force themselves into a person’s home without a warrant. I don’t really know of ‘swat’ operations that don’t involve a warrant (search/arrest) or exigency (defined however loosely by a court).

        • I think you misunderstand my proposal.

          I’m suggesting that the use of SWAT teams / tactics in non-exigent circumstances (i.e., excluding active shooter, hostage, etc., situations), require additional judicial sanction beyond a simple warrant, and the recognition that any screwups during the use of extraordinary force in nonemergency situations will result in liability.

          The routine use of SWAT teams to serve search or arrest warrants, to accompany EPA / Dept. Of Agriculture / OSHA inspections, etc., is beyond ridiculous. Whether it’s because the authorities have a mindset of “I’m going home at the end of my shift” or that they just want to play with all the cool new toys they have, it needs to be reined in, and civil liability has a way of motivating people in that regard.

        • Hannibal, You are kidding right? Do tell where there’s strict accountability and no immunity for a SWAT team, because I’ve never seen that case in the US courts. Ever.

          SWAT teams routinely do horrible things under preposterous circumstances where they shouldn’t even be. I’ve yet to hear of a case where they are held to any account more serious than a written in their jacket. I’m sure there is at least one, but I’ve never heard of it.

          How’s the accountability for the AZ SWAT that executed Guerena who never fired a shout at the unknown intruders breaking into his house going? Oh, that’s right, NONE. Paid out $3.4MM of taxpayer money as they knew they were guilty, but ‘natch all were cleared.

        • LKB, ah, I think I understand what you mean now… what a warrant would have to include an extra provision for a swat team just like it should for a no-knock entry, right? I would say there are two problems with the idea. First, I wouldn’t be surprised if judges will sign such things as easily as they sign no-knock warrants now. Second, I wonder what is the level that would trip such a requirement… instead of a ‘swat callout’ you might just end up with a team of officers who have patrol rifles, etc.

          I’m open to the idea though. Maybe it would work (although I tend to think that legal reform and taking some laws off the books would be a better long-term option). I was looking to see if police-caused deaths (shootings,etc) have increased or decreased with more Swat use and was downright surprised to see that there is apparently no reliable and complete metric for people killed by local, state and municipal police each year (justified or not)!

          16V I don’t see a need to respond to your points since you’re busy constructing a strawman out of arguments I never brought up. I was specifically talking about LKB’s first proposal, as I noted. Read twice before you post next time.

        • Hannibal, He made a proposal, you stated that item 1 was already in place. I offered that statement was not factual.

          How is that a strawman? As in my post, do tell of the one time that a SWAT team was held to account for, well, any of the obscenities that have been done in the last decade or so. Sure the taxpayers may have to pony up for the lawsuit, but when were the SWAT members even tried, let alone convicted for their malfeasance?

    • Although I agree with removing immunity, there is an issue. The reason they have immunity is to prevent hundreds if lawsuits from being used to tie a police officers hands. I think just requiring cities to have each officer insured individually for liability would go a long way to solving the problems. Also allow lawsuits against cops after they are no longer employed. That way if A cop gets fired he knows he can be held accountable for whatever got him fired.
      And no more police watching themselves. Why are there secret shoppers grading retail clerks but not. Regular “stings ” aimed at not just police committing crimes but also at unprofessional behavior. Fail to address a citizen as “sir or maam” written reprimand. Have a rude or aggressive attitude during a routine traffic stop , 1 week non pay and psych evaluation. See what kind of service we get then.
      Also why not have private police to compete with the ones we have now?

      • WRT the concern that stripping immunity would lead to lawsuits being used to hobble to police (or as a standard dodge as part of criminal defense), the answer is pretty simple: put in a “loser pays” attorneys fee rule in all cases against the cops.

  6. I grew up around enough leo’s to know I definitely didn’t want to be one. They deal with a lot of crap for not much reward. My way of thinking is like this: bad cops are like cancer cells, it doesn’t matter how many good ones you have, if left alone they will multiply until it’s too late. No cop hate, just saying the cure needs to come from within the system and from what I’ve seen there are still plenty good ones left to put up a fight.

  7. Police departments all over the country have a terrible cultural problem that they seem unwilling to address. Yes, there are more good cops than bad ones — lots more — but the culture is rotten and will ultimately infect the majority.

    The best weapon against the continued erosion of good police culture is the body cam. It’s good for the public and it’s good for the officers too. When cameras are mandated, use of force incidents and civilian complaints both decline. Police and civilians don’t always act nice when nobody’s watching, but turn on the cameras and things change.

    • I think body cams will eventually be as common as dash-cameras (which is to say not universal, but more the rule).

      But when does the footage from body cams become public? I happen to think it should all be obtainable for the public. You know, for transparency.

      • Just like all the dashcams, prison cams, holding cell cams, there will be a technical malfunction when it is convenient. Same as it has been for 20 years of dashcams.

        • And here we have one of the reasons I’m not sold on such devices… the moment something happens that isn’t captured as if it’s on the set of Law & Order or the camera glitches out for a half second there will be claims of coverup. I guess it could be considered a cousin to the CSI effect. Probably still a positive to have them, I guess.

        • the camera glitches out for a half second there will be claims of coverup.

          More like the camera was turned off for a longer period of time. Or like a recent raid gone bad where the cops were wearing body cams but none of them were “turned on” and they have no explanation. They just say, “oh well…”

          If it had been a good raid that went right, the videos would have been available. But since it was a bad raid that went wrong, it seems highly likely that the videos were either deleted or erased.

        • Two decades of “malfunctions” at exactly the right time have taught me how ‘valuable’ those cameras are. From dashcams to cell cams, they always just ‘happen’ to “malfunction” when the guards are sanctioning a fight, or offerng a sacrifice.

          Everybody knows how easy it is to wipe a body cam, just like wiping the tapes in that “secure” trunk video back in the old days. Body cams are so easy to wipe with a $5 Neodynium magnet you have to be a complete noob to think they mean anything to the world of sketchy LEOs.

  8. Well two thoughts went through my head.
    The police would be responsible for him if he got hurt by a stray bullet during the raid (like if some gang member blind fired at a doorway). Also, and this is a stretch, someone with a wireless video feed could effectively get the police shot by calling their location to whoever is inside.

    • Point taken. Now, why can’t the officer simply say that instead of acting like a jackass? Is this what they teach in the academy these days?

      The cops in the video had no problem until the videographer took a couple of steps forward. That had nothing to do with safety or broadcasting the location of the SWAT team. It was contempt of cop, and that’s what triggered the arrest. Ironically, the two cops who decided to react to having their authority questioned almost certainly had jobs to do during that warrant service, and allowing their egos to divert their attention away from their primary jobs probably increased the risk to public safety and the safety of their fellow officers far more than the presence of some smartass standing on the curb with an iPhone.

    • Fine points, but the fact of the matter is the 1st Amendment still stands. He had every right to be in his own drive way filming them in public.

  9. Sorry, one dog that gets out of line is one dog too many.

    In case this hasn’t been made clear: cops are motherfucking EMPLOYEES.

    Employees don’t talk back, don’t demand, don’t command.

    PERIOD. Get over yourselves. Your ‘services’ are on their way out.

    Problem isn’t “a few bad apples.” It’s the delusion that a bunch of supposed SERVANTS have become delusional imperious unionized “No Bills of Attainder” violating govt terrorists. If you honestly delude you can and will continue at this pace, you better see where the bulk of vox populi is going.

    No amount of “a few bad apples”-vocational-self-preservational rationale is gonna work. Imagine, if the po po were never covered by tax-payer funded insurance underwriting all the ills of a municipality, but like every other citizen, you yourself have to be fully liable and responsible for your actions.

    ALL ‘police’ force in America are UNconstitutional, PERIOD. As is, other than the very elected office of the county Sheriff, no such thing as police as we know it today existed prior to post Civil War, when the fascist model was directly imported from UK, the same very shithole America declared independence from, when the London Metropolitan policeforce model was adopted in NY & Boston.

    But, more so now, with the same EXACT command/rank hierarchy, BDU, equipment, often worse ROE than the military, with almost every PD in America receiving Federal money from the now infamous 1033 DoD wartoys ‘gifting’ program, to the moronic insande Drug War, “civil asset forfeiture” bullshit, the entire model fascist militarized occupying policeforce and privatized prison industrial complex are a literal economic drain on the lifeblood of this nation. You are not de facto, you are de jure Federal.

    And, Constitution does not authorize the formation of a standing army. There’s a reason why we’re in perpetual wars: the Const. only authorizes continuous maintenance of a Navy, but Army exists on two yr rotations, unless there are wars or “insurrections.”

    As such, ALL police force in America today are UnConstitutional, Posse Commitatus violators. PERIOD.

    Cops, are taxleeches of the worst kind. You literally produce nothing. You have ZERO productive capacity: everything you do is based on thievery/taxation. You literally are wasting the Americans’ ever losing inflationary dollar harnessed wealth, on meaningless nonsense. By numbers alone 95-98% of security matters in this nation is already fully secured by PRIVATE security solutions, be it citizenry or firms. We don’t “NEED” you. Never have. Investigative, CSI, security, capacity ALL exist, as is. Already, y’all farm out your ‘services’ to private entities, under corporatist contracts. The capacity to do the work, nor lack of expertise is not the problem. The problem has always been you: employees who are not held to account, for ANYTHING, while hiding behind city lawyers, the insurance underwriter’s coverage threshold, police unions (there is nothing more abominable than public worker unions: ALL govt worker union must be abolished, period), etc. Name one ‘class’ of people who can literally get away with murder, other than govt terrorists.

    Even in the post-9/11 policestate, police make up less than a million in a nation of now reaching 310-315 million in population. Your jobs don’t even rate within top 10 of ‘dangerous’ jobs. Everything you scream about is emotive hyperbole, and hypochondria, doubly ironic for a legion of armed thugs.

    The people have had enough. You are collectivists. You want to identified as a group, and want to be treated as a group. Yet, y’all emotively bitch, moan and whine the hardest, whenever ANYONE ‘dare’ say self-evident shit about you, like a bunch of motherfucking minders in fascist regimes like North Korea, Cuba, Soviets, and the Nazis.

    So don’t come crying when people see a ‘exception to the rule-minority’ of ‘a few bad apples’ and decide to paint the entirety of cops as the rule. At this rate, your entire profession is on its way out. Start looking for another profession or take heart the newly cropping up private security solutions model popping up in Detroit, a literally bankrupt city: because with all the way the Federal Reserve’s trajectory is going, and the state of economy, with currency reset a mathematical inevitability, a couple more police brutality lawsuits, every city in America can and will face the same fate as Maywood, CA where the town’s insurance underwriters pulled out, due to overabundant cost of police brutality lawsuits, and the entire town literally shut down, disbanded city council, PD, and FD.

    That, alone should tell you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, there is no such thing as a govt, but a legal construct solely bolstered and exist at the pleasure of a private insurance company willing to cover it. Govt is not often “hijacked” by corporations, nor is “municipal corporation” merely a legal formality in creating a legal entity to conduct civilian govt. It’s not de facto, but govt is DE JURE, corporation, period.

    And seeing as how once the currency reset commeth, be it in SDR, or whatever, the first model to be reexamined would be one of the costliest: public ‘workers’ and your pensions.

    Sad thing is, had you actually conducted yourselves like peace officers, the ever brainwashed public would’ve never turned against you.

    The only growing market would be those who continue to utter “fuck the police.” and the more you make excuses and bullshit rationale that no one is willing to bother entertaining, the quickly your entire profession would literally cease to be.

    Lest you think, you’ll always be considered part of ‘the Club,’ ask former Davis County Utah Sheriff William ‘Dub’ Lawrence, a USMC combat vet, whose firefighter son-in-law Brian Woods was murdered at 38ft by a .308 sniper rifle wielding dipshit murderous pussy motherfucker member of the very SWAT team that Dub himself founded, when he was the Sheriff.

    The policestate you helped ‘enforce’ ain’t gonna discriminate, once you retire, or move to another jurisdiction whose idea of the “Thin Blue Line” only extends to incumbent assholes.

    The sooner you exit your field and start looking for another job, the better you yourselves will adjust to the new economy. Seriously, I know of no other profession where the entity looking for a new roster of employees have to go to court to defend your position to hire those with IQ below 100, as to be able hire a bunch of mindless, acquiescent drones who at most can pull a metal or plastic bars on a projectile launching platforms. Seriously, what assholes are proud that they wasted citizenry’s taxdollars to make sure that they can keep hiring a bunch of dumb assholes??

    No other profession in the world rewards or make it a point to hire literal, mindless dumbasses. That, is your ‘profession’ in a nutshell. Get over yourselves. Exit the field, look for new jobs, or use what little expertise you have gained on behalf of tax-leechery of many years to good use. Post currency reset? A new day is coming. And that does not call for repeating the biggest mistake of humanity: hiring goons to enforce the dictates of even more useless politicians.

    shoo doggie, shoo.

    • Employees don’t talk back? Demand? Command? What fantasy land have you been living in, Nelson? You’ve obviously never been in the real world.

      • He’s in the sovereign citizen world where he believes he is the center of society and the universe. Best just to smile, nod, and try and stay away from them… unlike most crazies they’re not even fun at parties.

      • jwm says:
        October 11, 2014 at 21:54

        Employees don’t talk back? Demand? Command? What fantasy land have you been living in, Nelson? You’ve obviously never been in the real world.

        Hm.. that’d be because I’ve either long fired them. Those that I’ve chosen to hire, had better range of social temperament. And the voluntary condition for work and services rendered were such, they don’t demand, nor talk back, certainly NEVER command. Besides, the risk of them doing that to me, would never result in them shooting me to death, hide behind tax-thieved city lawyers and more tax-thieved police unions and invoke 100% legal fiction “qualified immunity.”

        Apparently, you’ve never had employees, let alone ran a tight ship enough where you first hired those with horrible social temperaments, or tolerated out of control behavior where you did not observe signs and LET the situation to a sour confrontational point.

        sounds to me like I’ve had better experience being an employer/biz owner. xD

        and no, Hannibal the tennis ball: you can assume, but you must imagine something you imagine others to be.

        Hannibal says:
        October 12, 2014 at 00:16

        He’s in the sovereign citizen world where he believes he is the center of society and the universe. Best just to smile, nod, and try and stay away from them… unlike most crazies they’re not even fun at parties.

        like you even know what a “sovereign” means. xD You do realize, in a republic, the citizen IS a sovereign. “Sovereign citizen” is a shorthand constitutionally clueless statist and policestate dildofuckers like throwing around, because you’re too dense to realize where the source of power is in a REPUBLIC, and no, that ain’t your worshipful state. think you miss your boat back to Cuba, bootlickin’ Quisling.


        And like employees, I choose whom I’d party with, with distinction. So, do go on she doth protesting too much; you must have a pathetic life, to need to wait on to be bemused by the said “crazies,” which is just an admission, you ARE crazy.

        cheerio, wishful sovereign crazy, Hannibal name deserving of a tennis ball, but not so much historically eponymous conqueror…perhaps of your keyboard, maybe.


        • Exactamundo. I’ve always been generally well-liked by those who worked for/with me, but in the end, I’m the boss. My responsibility, my accountability, my culpability, my liability. They come back and hang out with me years later, which is good enough validation for me.

          Out of many thousands of employees over the decades and the companies, I’ve only had to fire about 20 for gross malfeasance. The rest who just weren’t a ‘good fit’ I helped find something more appropo to get into, and made their transition a smooth one. Life’s too short to be a prick for no reason. All things are not for all people. I have former emps who run toy company design depts, do funky UN stuff, or are heart surgeons. I’m privileged to have known them all.

          I’ve always been open to the most ridiculous of ideas, asks, questions, demands, or whatever. (You never know, it might be brilliant.) But I am the final decision, and anyone who thinks they are will meet with an abrupt career change.

  10. I do not like the police nor do I trust them. However in the video above, the camera man should have been arrested. What kind of person stands around with the police announcing out load to the homeowner that they are doing a search warrant?

    • Frank, how do you know that the guy wasn’t on his own property? How do you know that he wasn’t the attorney of the people being raided?

      The fact is that he was engaged in a Constitutionally protected activity (filming police in public). This is not even a question.

      As for your last question, I don’t think the police have the authority to arrest someone for being any kind of person. I seem to recall a certain police state that engaged in mass arrests of citizens who had committed no crime other than being a Jewish kind of person.

    • Frank… I’m a little confused. The man in the video was filming the police – on a curb nearby (which he never went beyond). I didn’t see him interrupting the police activities in any way. What is wrong with filming a police raid? Do they have something to hide?

      It did seem like the police didn’t like their authority questioned and didn’t like him not doing whatever they (police) wanted regardless of the request’s boundaries within the law.

  11. I used to be a Deputy , first the guy filming the police was on his own property , the police trespassed and assaulted the guy , for filming them and not abiding by what the officer told him , which has been already settled by the Supreme Court as that civilians can film police , with no penalty , this guy was within his rights and the officers broke the law , cut and dried . Be prepared and ready . Keep your powder dry .

  12. Since when does HuffPo publish John Whitehead? I didn’t think The Rutherford Institute was down HuffPo’s alley, ideology-wise.

  13. I am not a Historian. However, I know that in the 1930’s (early) or 20’s…. USMC General Smedley D. Butler (Ret.) was sent to Philadelphia to stop corruption in that City’s civil service. Also there is a Policeman named Serpico (most of you know about that). So….What makes the LEO immune to being corrupt? And yes, there are many GREAT Policemen and Firemen. My Uncle and Dad are two of them! Both deceased. I must say though…….The ‘Lone Ranger’ is just, when in the Movie, he says “if this is the law….then I am an outlaw”

    If any man can not discern good from bad within himself morally, or correct it. That is despised by God. IMO

    • Grindstone says:
      October 11, 2014 at 19:20

      Good cops who do not stop bad cops, are bad cops.
      – – – – –
      Precisely. After the cop in Ferguson murdered a guy for walking, where were the other cops? He should have been arrested immediately.

      Until that starts happening, indeed until it’s a crime to engage in a crime while a cop, with an extra penalty allowing no good time or parole, there really are no good cops. Further, any time a cop is found guilty of so much as abusing his/her authority, that individual should be blacklisted across the entire country, barred from eve again serving in ay law enforcement capacity or even private security position.

      • I guess you missed the part where the officer had his face smashed in, huh? Or is beating up police officers a normal part of “walking” (down the middle of the street)?

  14. First, I have a lot of friends in the force. But these %#c%sticks are beyond the pale. How often do these occur? That is the question… My question is are guys like this the ones who were rewarded when Hitler and Stalin came to power? With a not so subtle nudge, these “rare” occurrences will become the norm… Heck, they’ll be SOP.

  15. Apologies if this was already an article , but if not it seems relevant:

    Seems the tide is slowly turning, in both the law, and in the awareness by best practices LEAs and honest cops, even to the point that the Progresive Left is listening and agreeing, at least on the issue of inappropriate use of force and over-militarization to solve all problems.

    Given the vast effort in the face of what seemed long odds, its important to remember what works for 2A rights, as we still have a long way to go: groups of committed citizens working in grass roots up, county by county, state by state, and contributing to groups that leverage individual contributions, to educate other voters, to persuade politicians that our rights matter, and hire the best, most strategic and effective legal help you can get, to change bad law back to what the Founders intended, to ensure individual rights and freedoms, vs a tyrranical State.

  16. THe title of the book comes from a quote by Edward R. Murrow, “a nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”

  17. “Nothing could be farther from the truth. There are tens of thousands of police/citizen encounters each day that are conducted properly and end well.”

    If, by “end well,” you mean that the citizen wasn’t murdered, and rather, only were held by armed ruffians long enough to be fleeced of their property.

    • Yeah, does “end well” include not being subject to interrogation during a “routine” traffic stop?

      * Where are you going?
      * Where are you coming from?
      * What brings you to this part of town?
      * Who are your friends?
      * What’s in the bag?
      * What have you got in the trunk?
      * Why do you seem so nervous?
      * Where do you live?
      * Why are you out so late (or so early)?
      * What’s that funny smell?
      * You don’t have anything illegal on you, do you?
      * You wouldn’t mind if I searched your car, would you?
      * Why don’t you want to let me search your car?
      * Have you got something to hide?
      * Why are you sweating so much?
      * Why won’t you answer my questions?
      * Why are your hands shaking?
      * Why are you so nervous?
      * You don’t mind waiting a few minutes until the dog gets here, do you?
      * Why don’t you want to wait for the dog?
      * Why are you refusing to let me search you car if you have nothing to hide?

      Ad nauseum.


      Your response to the above ought to be a polite reply:

      “Am I free to go or am I being detained?”

      Repeat as necessary.

      Otherwise, keep your mouth shut.


      Don’t Talk to the Police – Regent University

      Flex Your Rights

  18. The problem isn’t just the cops who are violating people’s rights, but the ones who stand and watch and not intervene as it is happening, as well. Most cops attempt to justify the egregious actions and defend their brothers in blue rather then condemn the bad ones, or simply don’t say anything at all. Many police cars have the phrase “serve and protect” emblazoned on the side, but the protect part doesn’t apply when one cop is standing by watching his buddy give some innocent guy a hickory shampoo for no reason…

  19. Quote of the month, needs to be painted on the wall of every department’s locker room:

    “…good cops have a responsibility to ensure that all police officers follow the laws they are sworn to uphold. Until that happens there can be no trust.”

    And that’s why there is no trust today. We see, time and time again, the so-called good cops further violating the rights of the victims to protect the ‘bad cops’ from justice. It’ll take years of near perfect behavior by the ‘good cops’ before we again trust them to chose truth and justice over the brotherhood of the badge.

    We see the videos on youtube where one cop ‘loses it’ and the other cops join in, and we see many more where only one cop ‘loses it’, the other cops present know they’re witnessing a violent crime in progress and don’t participate, but none of them lift a finger to stop him. They might privately say ‘hey Lieutenant, Officer Smith went totally over the line last night’, but they’ll still sign the official report placing all the blame on the guy who got beat, and watch him face trial on a felony charge of resisting/assaulting a cop.

  20. I was watching one of the news programs (cannot remember which one) and the guest on the show linked the rise of police authoritarian issues/lawsuits to lowering of police standards to allow for more minority police officers.

  21. In Pennsylvania, any mere mortal may file a private criminal complaint against the offending officer(s). The form itself is readily available on-line. Charge him/her/them with Simple Assault (18 Pa. C.S. § 2701) and Official Oppression (18 Pa. C.S. § 5301). The County D.A. may or may not take action, but is required to respond why if no action is taken – it can be appealed. Plus, while dropping off the complaint with the local magistrate, one should also drop off a copy at their local newspaper.

    • …A newspaper that coincidentally operates under the same 1st Amendment protections that the two cops in the video violated when they intimidated, assaulted and falsely arrested the videographer.

      With such flagrant Constitutional violations so commonplace (firing year and grenades at reporters in Ferguson and then arresting them?) I have to wonder how long before it suddenly becomes “necessary for officer safety” to put on the SWAT gear, climb on the sideboard of the MRAPs and storm the newsrooms or broadcast booths.

  22. If you want to see just how a police state develops, you should watch an old SciFi TV show from the mid 90’s called Babylon 5. Looking at the world today, all I can say is Joe Strazynski was a prophet.

  23. I took the time to read the REASON article about the warrantless raid in Colorado:
    Was reading the comments and liked what one commenter suggested after others kept mentioning that it was actually the taxpayers who have to pay the $1.8 million awarded to the family, not the cops who committed the crime: “Take it out of their pension fund. They might start to give a shit, then.” — JW on 10/09/14
    I agree 100%. If the individual officer cannot be held responsible, then this is second best. It would also change the attitude of the union, which is the main power protecting the “bad” officers.

  24. “I share their opinion that good cops have a responsibility to ensure that all police officers follow the laws they are sworn to uphold.”

    I personally think this cause just as many if not more people to dislike and distrust police officers than the few that overstep their authority. Until cops start holding other cops to the same standards as everyone else, nothing will change.

  25. Re: the video – why are law enforcement officers wearing camouflage for warrant service? I thought the point of warrant service was to be easily identified, so that the warrant can be served?

    I love the “you’re interfering” canard that comes up in these scenarios. How can someone standing on the other side of the street, pointing a video camera, be interfering with warrant service? Is he somehow more of a distraction than the armored vehicle, floodlights, bullhorn, breaking windows, and flash-bangs? (The latter two, I’m assuming from the videographer’s description aat the YouTube link.)

    The camo-wearing LEO claims that his order for the private citizen to go inside his house was a “lawful order”, the disregard of which constituted a violation of

    But ample precedent case law exists to refute the charge the passive exercise of a first-amendment right (namely, video-recording the police in the public conduct of their duties) interferes with carrying out those duties, and thus an order to cease video-recording (or telling someone who is clearly far enough away not to be physically interfering with those police duties, to go inside) is not lawful, because it is a violation of that person’s rights.

  26. sgt. patrick. perhaps you live in a kinder, gentler bubble. the reason so many of us are suspicious of police is the raging silence when egregious stalinist tactics do not result in an outcry from every non-involved police department in the country (oh yes, such a loud blast would NOT go unnoticed by the press). we read/see all these criminal actions by police agents and agencies, all hiding behind department protocol and government immunity (btw, when a duly appointed agent exceeds his/her authority under that appointment, the agent can be held personally liable. called the ‘law of agency’, wherein going beyond the limits of agency (commissioned police officers included) is not a part of legal execution of the agency, i.e.committing a crime while an appointed agent. suing a LEO individually is on us, the citizens. screaming condemnation at any police agent/agency that willfully bullies its way around citizen protections is the only thing (along with long-term proof the denouncing agency isn’t also guilty) that can possibly restore any trust in police. instead of informing us ignorant civilians about the overall ‘goodness’ of most departments (just 51% constitutes ‘most’), how about a copy of a letter of admonition to say, 100 other police departments decrying the lack of distance between themselves and the bad actor agencies? hhhmmm?

    your inaction screams so loud i cannot hear your words.

  27. Sir, either you have blinders on or rose colored glasses. The abuses are common and getting worse. Cleveland, LA, Detroit, New Orleans, Albuquerque, Seattle, Houston, have all been or are being investigated for “systematic” civil rights violations. Get you head out of the sand, take off the glasses and see the reality.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here