Below is a journal entry I wrote for my World Politics class in college. I decided to repost it here. I welcome any comments, especially from any police officers that may be reading, if any…
First of all, I’d like to point out that the NY Times is a liberal organization. If anyone would be defending the government, I’d expect it to be them. As such, considering the story puts the government in a bad light, I trust the source.
I can’t possibly comment on all of them, but I feel like I read things like this every day. Police abuse of some kind or another. In this case, there was an emotionally disturbed man disrupting traffic, and apparently was carrying drugs (I just want to point out, again, that drug use or even abuse is a victimless crime, and punishing it is a form of immoral pre-crime that punishes people because of what they MIGHT do in the future). Now, I am not defending disruption of traffic. I’m not defending drugs either, despite the fact that I support their legalization. But for the police to respond by shooting at the man is absolutely disproportionate to the crime. The police who did this should be executed for attempting murder. Instead, the police charged the man with assault.
Why? Because the cops missed (apparently, among other things, “our protectors” can’t use a firearm. It might be funny if it wasn’t so sad) and hit two women who were bystanders. Apparently, this man’s disruption was responsible for the cops shooting (and being horrible marksman) so he’s being charged with assault because of the cop’s crime.
This is yet another reason why a monopoly on force will never work. It cannot work for anyone but the ruling class. The state never holds itself accountable because it is a contradiction in self-interest to do so. The market, for all its flaws (And there are flaws, I do not deny that) does have a market incentive to provide good services. Pay for those services by compulsory taxation (Theft) and there is no incentive to provide good service. Why would you? Does an armed robber care whether his victims are satisfied? Or course not. And here we see a blatant example of the government being no better.
This system cannot be “fixed”, it must be destroyed.
My grandfather said this morning that he thinks there is eventually going to be a revolution in this country. As much as I don’t like to condone violence, I hope he’s right. In the long run, that would lead to less violence, because the US government commits far, far more violence than it prevents. As for those who are tied to the idea of “obeying the authorities” or “obeying laws”, I’d like to remind those readers that the highest law in the United States, other than God, of course, is the United States Constitution. Prosecuting someone for a crime they did not commit, or trying to kill them without trial when they are not a threat to your life in any way, is a blatant violation of due process. Will we obey the armed thugs, or the actual laws?
To any “good cops” I ask the same question. If you think you are a “good cop” when are you going to hold your “bad” comrades accountable? Are you even able to do so?
This message will be offensive to some. I don’t care anymore. Until someone says what needs to be said, nothing is going to change. If anyone who is reading is or knows a police officer, I am not attacking you personally. If you believe what you do is honorable, I’m actually curious what your thoughts are on this.