Do No Harm... Even against Police.

I have been seeing stories lately dealing with persons or groups of people targeting police officers for physical altercations. I am against this as a trend and I wanted to take a moment to explain why. No I do not have a soft spot for the police. No I do not secretly work for a Law Enforcment agency. It is on principle of the axiom of Do No Harm. In essence the Non-Aggression Principle in action. If it is not in self defense or the defense of another it is violence, unjust, uncalled for and equally wrong in comparison to the actions in which police officers often use.

For those stories I have seen or heard lately some have been in response to prior events not dealing with the person or group that is making the attack on the officer(s).
One such case is a story of a woman who was tased by an officer while handcuffed. Other officers looked on and allowed this person to be tased repeatedly by a fellow officer. Weeks after the story was made public a small group of men took it upon themselves to find and physically harm the officer, causing minor injuries. This is against all logical retorts to self preservation or self-defense. This group went out of their way, after the primary event had subsided, to find this officer. To track him down, follow and stalk him until they could attack. This is a lowdown and dirty tactic by thugs and one usually associated with the police themselves. It is not an act that should be taken by those who wish to turn a course on the treatment of individuals by police officers.

The use of force on a person not in the preservation or defense of oneself or another in proximity is unexcusably unjustified and shameful. It leads to no other response from law enforcement officers but to retaliate on another helpless victim, continuing a cycle of violence and breeding a war of sorts between the public and the police.

It has been broadcast on social media sites, websites, personal blogs and Youtube videos, those that endorse this type of behavior, those that willingly admit to beliving this to be a admirable result and glorifying the culprits of the attacks. Some will say that even not in the protection of life or limb while in the presence of an officer one should have the right tot use this force based on the prior experiences and history of police brutality. Wholeheartedly I disagree, this is an unprovoked violation of a principled stance to not cause physical harm to others.

In a world gone mad we have police beating people and people beating police, continuing a cycle that will lead to a head and can usher in a higher police state presence and the ultimate loss of freedoms for even those not involved. Fight the State, not through their Modis Operandi, but through peaceful means. Spread ideas, not violence. Live as an example to a better world, live as an example what what it means to value liberty even in the darkest holes of state control and operation. This is not a plea for passification, it is not a plea to not defend yourself or other from abuse by state thugs. It is the spreading of the idea that even force can be met with non-violence and still win. If your only recourse is to cause violence than your ideas are narrow and your mind is closed.

Live by a standard. Live for something.

Do No Harm
Live the Non-Agression Principle

A tale of concealed carry and abuse of power by police.

This is an experience of Eric Faden of Miami, Florida. What follows is his recent  experience with Miami Dade Police Department. This is just a small example of the abuse of power Police Officers and their Departments all across the country perpetrate.

Friday night on the way to a show the red and blues that nobody wants to see flash behind them lit up my rear view mirror like the 4th of July. I veer off the road into a shopping center and abruptly pull over. My friend hands me my registration from the glove compartment so I couple that with my driver’s license and concealed weapons permit to hold all three out of the window.

A man in an ugly brown uniform walks up to my car to grab the bundle of documents and seconds later he draws his gun from his holster and the barrel of a Glock is pointed at my forehead, a flashlight attached to it shining in my eyes making it hard to see.

Cop: WHERE IS IT?! WHERE IS YOUR WEAPON?!
Me: (My hands as high as they can be inside of a Honda) Whoa Whoa relax, it’s on me.
Cop: WHERE
Me: On my body
Cop: KEEP YOUR RIGHT HAND UP, REACH FOR IT WITH YOUR LEFT AND GIVE IT TO ME.
(I do).

He takes the gun and walks back to his car behind me with all my stuff. Shortly after, three more police cars arrive. Two of them park behind me and one parks in front of me. Now he’s coming back and terror doesn't begin to describe the feeling myself and the four others in the car are experiencing. Having a gun pointed at us by someone we can’t legally do anything to in response makes your stomach react all sorts of ways. Helplessness has saturated the air in the car.

Cop: Why did you take a stop sign and why were you speeding back there? (In an obvious attempt to unlock a self-incrimination from me)
Me: ..Silence..
Cop (Louder this time): WHY DID YOU TAKE A STOP SIGN AND SPEED BACK THERE?
Me: ..Silence..
Cop: IS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOU? ARE YOU MUTE? IM ASKING YOU A QUESTION!
Me: ..Silence..
Cop: OKAY YOU WANNA PLAY THIS GAME? WHY AREN'T YOU ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS?
Me: Officer, I’m not playing any games but I know my rights and I don’t have to answer those questions.
Cop: OKAY STEP OUT OF THE CAR
-Reaches into my window and unlocks the door and pulls it open- (Illegal)
I step out.

He puts me up against my car and pats me down, allowing him to reach far up enough to feel my nuts (probably his favorite part of the job) “Anything on you I should know about”? No, I respond while thinking to myself that there isn't a damn thing on me or near me or anywhere I have ever been that he needs to know about.

Then all of a sudden he’s yanking my wrists behind my back and putting them in handcuffs.

Me: WHY AM I BEING ARRESTED?
Cop: FOR RECKLESS DRIVING

I should have known better and not expected anything other than this by now but still, I didn't believe what was happening and it was totally surreal to me.

Me: Are you serious, you’re really arresting me for taking a stop sign?
Cop: Yes (While shoving me into the back of the patty wagon).
Me: Why are you giving me a hard time, I’m not a bad guy, we’re just going to a concert and we’re late.
Cop: Oh yeah? Who the fuck goes to concert with a loaded gun? Gimme a fucking break
Me: I’m not at a concert, I’m in my car.
Cop: Where is the concert?
Me: Little Haiti.
Cop: OH so you’re gonna go to a high robbery area and risk someone seeing you take your gun out and putting it in your glove compartment and then breaking into your car to get it?

By this point I had already had enough time to realize from here to the moon why this guy chose to be a police officer as his profession….because he was too stupid and or emotionally unstable to work as anything other than a knuckle-dragging arrest machine and revenue generator for the state. In short, he was a barbarian. An animal.

Arrested again. This time equally if not more ridiculous than the last. Let’s re-examine, shall we? I was driving my vehicle at a rate of miles per hour that which was deemed to be too high by the “authorities” so I was signaled by bright red and blue lights to drive off the road where a gun was pointed at my face, mind you with his finger on the trigger and only a sneeze away from killing me; Then, since I chose not to talk to this person who thought it was fine to point a gun at my face even though I had no legal obligation to do so, he found it in his will to kidnap me using restrictive circular metal devices around my wrists that left welts for days and drive me to a place where I was placed in a cage.

This cage is where crimes such as assault, attempted murder, murder, and rape happen more frequently than anywhere else in the Western Hemisphere.

It must have really hurt his feelings that someone didn't feel like talking to him. Now I owe him and the cage facility money. Apparently, it is for the services they provided me. Thank you sir, may I have another?

If you believe this is justice, hang your head.

20 modest hours was not bad. It was less than last time but that’s because I was bailed out. $500 and a 6 hour wait time punishment for the person who just wanted to see their loved one out of barbarian custody. 20 hours without food or temperatures that felt above 60 degrees but plenty of screaming, banging against walls, smells of sewers, being pushed around and barked at by more pathetic souls in dumb uniforms who take pleasure in the anguish of others, sleeplessness, and the company of people you don’t want the company of. Do you doubt that there were better ways I could have spent those 20 hours?

…for taking a stop sign.

Of course the fabricated official affidavit report goes way further than that. Speeding or taking a stop sign aren't close to enough. I also took an additional stop sign, was swerving in and out of lanes, was going 25 mph over the speed limit, and was cutting off not one but two other drivers with clear criminal intent and a blatant disregard for their safety. Right. Glad I remembered that part during the writing of this section, needed the comic relief.

Is it not clear by now that the police are a gang? The police are the biggest gang. The structure is the same, albeit more organized. They engage in: theft, human trafficking, murder, kidnapping, extortion, drug as well as firearms sales, battery, stalking…etc. etc. Like other gangs, they are more prominent in larger cities. Their jurisdiction or turf is limited to a certain geographical area and it runs out when the next gang’s starts. The structure of a police department is completely parallel to that of a gang. There are leaders and lower members.

The latter are forced to pursue the least desirable initiatives, like policing the most dangerous neighborhoods. There are standards that must be held up and examples to be made of people. You will also be laid off or kicked out of the gang if your numbers don’t show up in the form of arrests or tickets handed out (how else can they monitor efficiency if not by the amount of people you make your victim over a certain period of time?) It is in their interest for there to be more crime, more criminals, and more new laws making new criminals. It is job security. We couldn’t let some areas become too docile now could we? Then they wouldn’t be needed and would actually have to find more productive jobs, like dropping potatoes in oil at McDonald’s.

The first myth I want to dispel completely out of the minds of everyone is that they work for us. They don’t. They DO NOT. The Police do not exist to serve and protect anyone, except the state itself and its interests. It’s extremely rare to see someone beat up the person they work for, but in the land of the tooth fairy where cops “work for us” it is the protocol. We are NOT their constituents, customers, the people they look out for, the people who pay them, none of that. We are their subjects.

In fact, the following non-exhaustive list of court cases decided they have no obligation whatsoever to protect you or even respond to your calls for help even in the event of a life-threatening situation: Hartzler v. City of San Jose, Riss v. New York, Warren v. District of Columbia, Deshaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, Balisteri v. Pacifica Police Department. Some of the above cases even guarantee that the police are supposed to provide a higher protection to suspected criminals in custody than to would-be victims of the public.

You are a walking case of naiveté if you believe you have the right to any protection from the police. So if their job is not to protect us then why are we forced to pay them? Why do they even exist?

The cops are law enforcement. They protect the laws, not the people. Do the laws protect the people? Definitely not all of them, probably not the vast majority of them either. One only needs to know what it takes for a bill to become a law to demonstrate how distant the process is from the interests of the mass citizenry and how little their opinions matter. Many laws are bad >> Cops enforce the laws =? You do the math.

Next, I want to address the notion of “but they’re just doing their job”!
So fucking what? So were the gestapo but that defense didn't work out too well in Nuremberg, nor should it have. Most of the people who use this justification would nod their heads in agreement if you asked them whether or not beating people, kicking their doors in, spraying mace on students, asking strangers personal questions, caging people for growing vegetation or downloading songs were wrong or immoral.

Oh but voila! On comes the magic suit with matching hat, tacky boots, cyborg utility belt full of little gadgets to punish people and plastic badge and now all of a sudden all of these actions are somehow okay. They’re more than okay, they are the law! They are a "public service." We obviously owe them for our safety after all.

If someone would commit these acts without the magic suit on they would be considered a psychopath. The blind authority follows next like a cat after a laser pen. People quiver in their presence. They speak differently, drive differently, they do everything differently. This is understandable of course. They don’t want to end up like me and who does?

Kiss the boot that rests upon your neck or pay up, that’s the way to get by. Make sure to kiss it enough so that your saliva makes it shiny, shiny enough to see the person in the reflection responsible for letting that happen to you.

Yes they are just doing their job. I am not contesting that. The question we must ask ourselves though is what kind of person would sign up for a job like this, with these job requirements? And why are we so accepting of the blatant psychopathy present in the list of qualifications needed? Are there not any other fucking jobs they can apply for?

I’m convinced it was those who were picked on growing up, or doing the picking on. The ones who salivate at the opportunity to be the one the teacher appoints to write the names of the students who were talking on the board, the snitches, the tattle-tales, the ones who were always in trouble for putting their hands on other kids, the busy bodies, bullies, the violent ones.

Retract what little respect is left for this horrid profession and this gang of criminals. If your friend wants to become a cop try to talk them out of it. If they don't listen, cease to be their friend. Socially ostracize them. Ridicule them. Make those who think its okay to become one or even support them think twice. If you get stopped by one, film them. Put it on Youtube. Don't be scared. They deserve it. Make them know if they act out that thousands will be able to see their ugly faces spouting lies about the laws they are supposed to uphold.

If you thought my story from the first couple of paragraphs was a nightmare, then take notice. If you thought the Hialeah Harlem shakedown was an outrageous debacle, then take notice. These were nothing in comparison to the other horror stories being reported everyday. I am not a martyr, not even close. But please listen to me when I say they're out of control. Take away all their legitimacy. Speak out, and don't stop. They will hear.

A C A B.

Addressing Moral Character

I was reading Lawrence Reeds Are We Good Enough For Liberty and something hit me as a profound thought I have been neglecting for some time. He says, “What those Founders were getting at is the notion that liberty is built upon the ability of a society to govern itself, without government intervention. This ability to self-govern is itself built upon – you guessed it- Individual Character.”

I do think this is an important part of self-governance and self-rule, to hold character that would be not harmful to any other man around you, so that no outside governance would be needed. But that is not how our society is, is it? Most would say no, and most would give plenty of reason why they would believe that, but many would also neglect to mention their own fear of what they would do without some sort of governing body telling them what is right and wrong and punishing them for their own transgressions.

Along these line Jeffrey Tuckers recent article in FEE’s (Foundation for Economic Education) publication The Freeman titled “Against Libertarian Brutalism” has caused a giant storm of backlash on what I see as a quite ironic misunderstanding. Mr. Tucker’s words reflected what I think is seen as a negative to the furtherance of the message of liberty. There are those that would use the idea of freedom to pursue name calling, derogatory messages or bullying in their words. When approached as being mean, insensitive or slightly ignorant in their choice they throw out, “I am free to do it” and right they would be in that aspect, but being right and having moral character enough not to do it are two entirely different things.  There are also those that use their freedom to help others, to further a recognition of what freedom can bring, to educate others that the ugliness we see doesn't have to remain, if only those with virtue and character step forward to the light and to do what needs to be done whether someone I watching or not.

I myself have had this run in on local Facebook forums and pages. Recently a “Leader” of a Young Republicans group began insulting those he disagreed with by calling them “retards” and Paultards”. When I pointed it out to him, and the rest of the silent group, I was attacked as if I was trying to silence him, to restrict his speech, but this was not the case. My point was to get him to understand that the words he has effects and to call anyone by those names is absolutely unacceptable in my eyes. He continued to assault me with constant derogatory names and continued to threaten me. I sent the National Group of the Young Republicans a screenshot of the conversation between him and I and simply stated that it may be of some interest to them that their local representation acts like this. No call for removal, no call to silence, no muting him, just that they should be aware. Apparently they contacted him quite quickly and he increased his assault on the online thread we had begun.  To make this shorter I can say I was removed from this group and it is for the best. It was a good lesson for me that even I had used those exact same words in a derogatory manner before, but I have progressed since then.

I think what counts in the end is to be able to look back and say that you have learned from your behavior, both bad and good, and have made amends to those who hurt, helped those you can and to live a life worth mention in some way to someone.

I think that individual character has a lot to do with individual liberty, and I think that the more people that embrace this idea the better the world can become. Mr. Reed sums it up quite well on the back cover of his book, “Without character, a free society is not just unlikely…. It is impossible.”

And the young will take the mantle of liberty...

This is a letter to the editor of "The Citizen" a newspaper in Peachtree Georgia. It is written by a 15 year old in response to her high schools practice of infringing on inherent rights of individuals. Her understanding of private property rights and the no victim no crime principle is encouraging to me. 

[Editor’s note: The following email is from a 15-year-old freshman girl at McIntosh High School. Although she provided her name and address, we are not printing that information.]

Many students might have and should have signed the “Student Code of Conduct” in the beginning of the year. This “contract” had to be signed for students to attend classes.

Most students, me included, did not read the Code of Conduct. It was just another silly form students had to sign to please the administrators.

As it turns out we should have read the 30-page “rule book.” When I signed my name at the bottom of the green slip of paper, I did not realize I was signing away my basic human and constitutional rights.

I have been told by multiple teachers and upperclassmen, “You’re a freshman, you’ll learn that in high school you have no rights.” I nodded in agreement and thought it was just another made-up stereotype of high school.

Recently I experienced this absolute lack of rights. Only the other day I was out in the hall before school started, showing my friend a picture on my phone. A staff member I didn’t recognize, later identified as [name omitted], approached me and asked for both our phones.

How was I to know she was a teacher? I had never seen her before and she was not wearing a badge, only a name tag.

While my friend handed hers over, I politely declined, stating that it is my private property, which it was. Not only had school not started yet, but she had no valid reason to ask for the phone.

It’s not as if I was showing something explicit (it was my dog) or that my phone was an explosive device. She then asked for my name which I also refused to give. In defense of this, I did not know who she was. When a random stranger approaches you and asks for both your phone and your name, do you just hand it over?

I later find myself with three days of ISS (in-school suspension) for “Insubordination: failure to comply with the directions of a staff member.”

There was no insubordination, only a student acting on the rights she believed she had as not a citizen of the United States but as a human.

In the agenda on the first page it states, “Positive relationships and mutual respect among students and staff enhance student learning.” While I showed respect, I received none from [name omitted]. She behaved as if I had committed a crime when I refused to hand her my phone, when in actuality it was the other way around.

According to [a school official], students are not permitted to have devices out unless supervised by a teacher.

We all know that at least half of the students are always on their phones, yet not all of them are punished. According to administrators this is because there is not a large enough staff to enforce it on every single student.

If you can’t enforce it on all students equally, you should not be picking out certain students. This is a form of bullying, and as I remember McIntosh has an “anti-bullying” policy.

We are also not allowed to have the devices unsupervised since the moment we step foot on campus. I’ll admit, I didn’t know this, but what troubled me most was that McIntosh is the only high school in the county with that rule.

My argument was that I have basic human rights to my own property, and as I was not violating anybody else’s right, there is no room for any type of punishment. [The official] then informs me that as soon as students step foot on campus theoretically they do not have rights.

Again on the first page of the agenda right under the bolded word “Belief Statements,” it states, “Public education is the foundation of a free society.” How is this true if we are treated with no rights whatsoever?

Students are not only bullied by teachers, but also have their rights taken away. Learn from my mistake; logic and human rights will not defend your case against the administration acting like children.

Name withheld at editor’s discretion
Peachtree City, Ga.

Originally published at http://www.thecitizen.com/articles/03-18-2014/freshman-decries-loss-rights