Posted on

Barbarians and law enforcement :So what cops only deal with criminals

Based on some of the examples I have shown through this series of ordinary people that that either did very little wrong or nothing, and still had their lives at best turned upside down, by law enforcement if not out right destroyed. You shouldn’t even be making this argument at this point. However lets forget even that those cases for a moment.

What if tomorrow you are a criminal?

According to lawyer Harvey A. Silverglate, author of Three Felonies a Day. There is so many laws just at the federal level that you, as an average American citizen commit three felonies a day. But lets say you are not average and you some how know the federal, state and municipal laws and regulations so well that you never make a mistake.

What if your city state or the federal government tomorrow decides that you are a criminal. Thats how passing new laws works. One day something is legal and the next its not. Something you do everyday that is legal could now not be.

They could instill a curfew, outlaw 100% of abortions, ban homeschooling, enforce federal marijuana laws, how about ownership of non electric vehicles, California already has done it with small engines. Maybe they ban alcohol again, Who knows it really could be anything and it doesn’t matter how trivial.

Don’t think its possible the government can label who ever they want a criminal with a stroke of the pen? Then why is that the favorite argument that both sides likes to use when the other tries to pass a law that they don’t agree with.

Now even worse, what if they are innocent and treated this way?

How many people in the news lately have you seen where the victims are ones getting arrested. Homeowners calling the police on squatters who then get arrested themselves. Store owners defending them selves or trying to stop shop lifters. People defending them selves against home invasions. They more and more wind up sitting in the cells next to the criminals who attacked them, if the criminals who attack them even have to stay in jail.

Then everyone always blames the legislator or the Government as a whole and they always jump right over the cops even though by definition are part of the government.

So ask your self would the legislators or government be able to do any of this with out their merry band of enforcers? Why do they not have any responsibility if they enforce things that unlawful, or unconstitutional? Why do they never have to answer to the citizens that they supposedly serve?

Now what about crimes where there are no victims?

Like Seat belt laws, If you break it who does it hurt? No one, other than yourself IF you get in an accident. (Personal responsibility) The only possible worthwhile justification I can see would be for passengers under 16/18/21 years old. What ever your jurisdiction considers an adult/legal driver such as children.

Helmet laws……Read seat belt laws

Tint Laws (Or really any vehicle modification law) What person dies because you darken your cars windows, are people dropping dead on the side walk as you pass by with tinted windows? How about lifts? Bigger tires? Body kits? How about fuel system chips? Air intakes? All are illegal in one jurisdiction or another and none them effect anyone. Not even the driver of the car so they cant even justify the for your own good argument.

The justification for any victimless crime is that it prevents something else from happening. Speed limits stop accidents, prostitution laws stop drug use and other crimes and so forth. but if that were the case then, cops would be unnecessary at this point no?

Prostitution is illegal in most jurisdictions so there must be no prostitution right? No one speeds or modifies their car? Surly everyone must drive with a seat belt right? Or is it possible that they knew a large portion of a population would continue the behaviors even though they are illegal and figured they could make money off it? punishment by fine = legal for fee as most victimless crimes are, but don’t think you might not get killed over it none the less.

Most victimless crimes stem from either misguided thoughts that they will stop the behavior or some other allegedly connected behavior, from one group trying to impose their world views on the rest of the population, or from the simple goal of fund generation (extortion).

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

The first of our merch is live on the shop now with more to come go to the link below and pick up yours now

https://modern-barbarian.com/shop/

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

TWITTER/X

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK

Posted on

A barbarian’s issues with law enforcement : No longer innocent until proven guilty

People still believe that you are innocent until proven guilty. As it its written that might be the case, but with the court of public opinion and never changing data bases, that is no longer the case. Just the act of getting arrested and in many jurisdictions you are guilty for ever.

While not specifically a problem with cops they do not take this into account when they take any action towards a citizen such as an arrest. If you have a legitimate defense you may make it out of your initial appearance with a dismissal but the damage may have already been done. Just another example of the lack of responsibility and caring for the citizens that they supposedly serve.

Simply getting arrested even if not charged can and will ruin your life. At the time of your arrest police PR teams and media will blanket the airwaves with everything the first day and nothing you can release after that will ever take it back in order to undo for what they did.

Even if your case is dismissed early on and there is no charge or sentence on your record the arrest will always stay there. Even if you take it all the way to court and get an acquittal with record expunging the arrest will often stay on your record which will still cause many problems.

The Eddie Gallagher case is a great example of what damage can be done to your reputation simply by an arrest and a less than clean justice system. Though it did take place in the military justice system, the damage to his reputation and his families as well was far from contained to military life.

They enforce the law no mater what is is and follow orders even if it is not the law

They enforce the law no matter what it is, the will shrug off any question to the constitutionality of the law they are enforcing because their is no responsibility on their part, and will fallow the orders given to them because their paycheck depends on it. “Take it up with your legislator” will often be their response.

For instance much of what you are seeing at the southern border is being allowed by federal law enforcement just following orders. Much of the “bad cops” you saw during covid, tazing mothers in parks for not wearing masks and the like was all being done following orders. Even though there was no law on the books and only a decision by the mayor of the cities. This takes them out of even the role of law enforcement where at least some process was taken to passing the rules they enforce and into the realm of a tyrants gun thug.

“I have a family i got bills” is an often used justification as if no one else has bills or family. I wonder how their family would feel if they knew what they were doing in their name? When they enforce a law that infringes on rights, or follows an order to arrest people for going to church, or watching their kids soccer game with out a mask on, or surfing in the ocean alone?

Cops have long been just another gang, some even joke about it. Their uniform is their colors, the only difference is they are sanctioned by the government.  They might swear an oath to the constitution but when it comes down to it they enforce what ever law is on the books and pass the buck with a bullshit justification, ” my job is to enforce the law not interpret it, if you don’t like take up with your representatives.” But if the legislature passes laws that are unjust and or unconstitutional, and the cops aren’t deciding if enforcing those laws is breaking their oath then who is?

The men of Reserve Police Battalion 101, were just following orders In Germany during WW2. They were the first ones to execute jewish people under hitlers regime.

See where just following orders can get you?

Check out this article for more information. https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/reserve-police-battalion-101

You cannot resist or you will be injured or killed

Both the citizens and cops alike love to throw out “just comply and you wont get hurt”. How many times have you seen that in the comments section of social media where the cops kill someone. Even in ones where the crime would never warrant the death penalty. Even when the person follows the commands the cop gives them and they still get Killed. How about when the cops go to the wrong house and kick the door in in the middle of the night. Should homeowner’s just comply with all home invasions on the off chance that its the cops kicking in your door?

Now does “do what we say and you wont get hurt” really sound like something that someone who supposed to be helping your community should be saying? No, that is something that hostage takers say when they are holding you at gun point. Are citizens hostages now?

Unfortunately many would argue yes, and have made some good points.

Cops target people unrelated to a suspects actions

Asset forfeiture is used in a variety of ways based on your jurisdiction, ranging from anti drug operations and seizing vehicles and properties used in the commission of those crimes or as a punishment for DUI where they seize and auction off the drivers vehicle if they are found to be driving under the influence. In some jurisdictions this is done without any hearings or representation to fight it.

Where this gets worse is when the cops target people unrelated to the crime, but connected to their suspect in an attempt to stick it to the suspect. Should cops target and confiscate the home of the mother of a drug dealer because a bill was paid for by said drug dealer? Does this stick it to the drug dealer? Does this improve the image of law enforcement in the public’s eyes? Or just ruin peoples life who are just trying to survive.

Asset forfeiture, while it may have been designed for a good purpose, (debatable) its puts the incentive on police departments to confiscate first and ask questions later,. Often selling off or transferring the property before the person can make any sort of legal defense.

For example this Utah veteran not only had his life savings taken, even after the cop said that nothing the veteran was doing was illegal and never being charged with a crime, They took his money, gave it to the DEA in return for a percentage of the cash, and left him and his kids in the desert With no money. https://reason.com/2021/12/01/watch-nevada-highway-patrol-officers-seize-a-veterans-life-savings-through-asset-forfeiture/

Cops have the “authority” to and will kill you to enforce any law

Or order they are given, no matter how small. If you don’t think so let me ask you this, what happens if you refuse to submit to them? At what point do the cops walk away and say “what they did is not that bad.” They don’t. Even if the crime is victimless.

They are allowed to raise their force to match and exceed yours until you submit or cant resist any more. This is called the use of force continuum, and it is how all the kinds of use of force are categorized and ranked in legal arguments and for use by law enforcement.

Any of these issues alone is bad but put al together is a catastrophe that makes cops look more like enforcers for a criminal organization than they do public servants. They can arrest you, with only questionable evidence to do so. They can ignore any alibi or defense that you may have even if those defenses are written into the laws as Justifiable defenses. This alone leaves a permanent record. Depending on the alleged crime, they can then possibly seize your assets and property, with no court proceedings, even if you are released with no charges, or you are found innocent later, you assets may be gone or you have to fight an additional court battle to have your property returned.

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

The first of our merch is live on the shop now with more to come go to the link below and pick up yours now

https://modern-barbarian.com/shop/

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

TWITTER/X

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK

Posted on

A Barbarian’s Issues with Law Enforcement: No duty to protect or serve the citizens

When a cop fails or decides not to stop an incident, or protect a citizen he is often held as a bad cop, how ever he has no such obligation legally, or in his job description so he is simply doing his job.

The courts have ruled on multiple occasions that government personnel including cops have no legal duty or requirement to protect or rescue citizens. Warren v. District of Columbia, was a case heard in 1981 in the D.C. Court of Appeals that held that police have a general “public duty,” but that “no specific legal duty exists” except when there is a special relationship between an officer and an individual, such as a person in custody.

The U.S. Supreme Court also ruled that police have no specific obligation to protect. In the DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services case in 1989. SCOTUS ruled that a social services department had no duty to protect a young boy from his abusive father.

In the 2005 Castle Rock v. Gonzales case, a woman sued the police for failing to protect her from her husband after he violated a restraining order and abducted and killed their three children. Justices ruled the police had duty to do so.

And in a case that most probably remember from recent times. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld a lower court ruling that police could not be held liable for failing to protect students in the 2018 shooting that claimed 17 lives when deputies decided not to make entry into the school during an active shooter Incident at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

Even more recently was the incident in Uvaldi Texas where not only did no cop make entry after receiving orders to stand down, they arrested parents who attempted to do so, and the one cop who did try to make entry, though its questionable if he would have even tried if his wife was not inside. The incident was ultimately ended we are told by a federal agent who disobeyed orders and went in.

This lack of duty, legal requirement, or incentives to protect the citizenry could be multiplied by not policing the areas they live in as they may have reduced or no loyalty to the community they work in. Going hand in hand with this lack of duty,

They have no obligation to check your alibi before arresting you

“use it as your defense” is the common excuse. Even and especially when the cops are so absurdly in the wrong that you cannot believe it. Such as a blind man getting arrested for carrying a concealed weapon…..His cane. > https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/nov/10/florida-police-arrest-legally-blind-man-cane-gun Not only did they not listen to his alibi even though they had his cane in possession, they doubled down on their wrong doing once the sergeant showed up and went thorough with his arrest.

Cops are trained to lie

Law enforcement can legally lie to you about the evidence they have against you. They can say they have witnesses when they don’t, they can say they have physical evidence when they don’t, They can tell you a search warrant is coming soon when it isn’t and they don’t have enough evidence to get a search warrant in the first place, all in an attempt to get you to confess or give up your rights to allow them to do whatever they want.

This is why innocent people confess to things that they didn’t do because they are scared of what could happen to them.

Nothing is off the record, but they might tell you that it is. Or that they are looking for someone else and just need you to tell them what happened so they can get on with looking for the other person.

Have you ever seen a police interview where the cop says, “we have no evidence you did the crime but we know you did it so confess”? No? Me either, they will always act as if they have mountains of evidence and that the trial is all but won and you better confess to get leniency. Now to a normal person that would be considered a lie.

A gray area, according to some people. is in report writing. There are keywords and phrases that are taught and used in report writing to justify situations, responses, and outcomes. Whether they are actually true or not. The most famous of which is “through my training and experience.” That little phrase can let you stop just about anyone you want In most jurisdictions. And even if it can’t then you can just wait until they do something minor like a traffic violation and use it as an excuse to stop them, or what they call a pretext stop.

Another famous one is “I feared for my life.” and while typically used in situations where it is true, by both civilians and cops, it is also been used to justify lethal force in situations that do not warrant it. One main one that has become a running joke online is the killing of dogs.

I second guess loading my dogs up in my vehicle every time I do it because of because of how chicken shit cops tend to be when it comes to dogs. I fear having my dog in the car and getting pulled over for even something minor. I don’t want them tazed and running out into traffic or getting killed trying to protect me because a power hungry officer tries to rough me up, because as we will cover in part 6 you are no longer innocent until proven guilty.

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

The first of our merch is live on the shop now with more to come go to the link below and pick up yours now

https://modern-barbarian.com/shop/

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

TWITTER/X

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK

Posted on

A barbarian’s issues with law enforcement : SYSTEM DESIGN

This is the bread and butter, where the rubber meats the road. These are the issues with law enforcement that most people don’t see until they are pointed out to them, if they are not brainwashed enough to ignore them. The issues that cause real problems for the citizens as a whole. So lets get started.

Everyone on the states side is on the same side

Cops, prosecutors, judge, and public defenders all work for the same organization. This means the cop arresting you the prosecutor charging you and the judge that over sees the trial all answer to the same organization. In addition if you cannot afford a private attorney, your defender will also be a person who works for the same organization. As well your private attorney is governed by the bar association who ultimately is also under government regulation.

So how can you trust them to do anything but cover their own people when something wrong happens. If for no other reason than they need to maintain working relationships with the different sections of the organization, so they don’t want to prosecute cops or cops don’t want to arrest prosecutors, or judges throw out cases for them etc. When everyone works for the same organization there is not only a monopoly, but there is an unavoidable bias that the citizens have to take on faith wont be acted on.

Cops get special treatment

Laws are often written with exceptions for law enforcement. Special laws are also passed specifically for cops. If a law bans certain items such as knives or certain firearms, cops are always exempt. If they kill someones dog its not a crime and only civil issue. If someone kills a police dog its killing a police officer. If a cop roughs up someone even if they are not arrested its not an assault but if you shove or fight fight back against a cop its not only assault its assaulting a police officer, and if they kill someone “accidentally” its only an accident and again only a civil issue.

Cops always say they they are people too and want to remind everyone that they are individuals, but then have all these benefits and protections built up for them and given authority that citizens don’t have.

Cops getting hanged for doing the right thing

Now in defense of cops for a moment, The very few that are good, and do the right thing by the citizens, will usually get hung out to dry. Especially if it goes against an order even if the order was illegal or immoral. Greg Anderson is a prime example of this from recent history.

All the while the cops that allow them selves to get used to harass the citizens, are rewarded. This is because cops job is no longer to keep the peace but to enforce the law and follow orders. So when a kid has a lemonade stand, thats an unlicensed business That needs to be shut down. See link > https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/asa-baker-lemonade-stand-shut-down-police-permit-b2145610.html People will typically call this a bad cop.

And when you see the opposite in the same situation > https://abcnews.go.com/US/police-called-kids-lemonade-stand-sweetest-reaction/story?id=65265878 you get the “these are good cops.” When in reality they most likely went against the law in their jurisdiction by doing nothing even though this the right thing to do. Depending on their command staff or city council they could have been fired for that.

Incentives and operational priorities are skewed

Setting aside the constitutionality question of DUI check points and check points in general which is questionable according to some lawyers. Many states, local jurisdictions, and the feds have programs for law enforcement where they get bonuses for DUI arrests. More arrests = more money, so there is an incentive for them to potentially fabricate DUI arrests, especially when “Under the influence” in many states is not a set blood alcohol level but the officers opinion on your driving ability.

Which in terms of arresting impaired drivers is necessary, due to other substances that impair driving. This is why you can be given DUI for things other than alcohol. Here is one example of a cop allegedly intentionally arresting someone who is not DUI at a DUI checkpoint. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CA1NitQ5QNA

In a jurisdiction without dash cam or body cameras this is all the easier to pull off, but as many will attests body cameras have an uncanny ability to turn off when the cops do something questionable.

Outside of the cops realm, improper incentives also apply to the prosecutors whose entire performance is dependent on their successful prosecution count regardless of whether they are innocent or not. They have no incentive to drop charges if evidence comes out that the defendant is innocent as long as they still think they can win or get them to plead guilty.

No responsibility personally or departmentally

Starting at the department level there is very little if any responsibility for any of their actions whether necessary, intentional, accidental or otherwise. For instance, This incident in Colorado that started from a shoplifting call And ended with an uninvolved family without a home and no one to pay for the damages. https://www.denverpost.com/2019/10/30/swat-team-destroyed-greenwood-village-familys-home-police-dont-have-to-pay-for-damages/

The Homeowners insurer, did eventually pay the family a partial payment of $345,000 for the damage to the house was not close to enough to cover all the costs associated with the demolition, property losses or even the appraised cost of the $580,000 home.

The police also caused roughly $70k in damages to the neighbors house as well and offered $2,000 dollars in compensation when the homeowners insurer refused to pay anything. Sure seems like serving the public right? Over a shoplifting charge the police will do almost 3/4s of a million dollars in damages to unrelated peoples homes, to bring the person to “justice” and then leave the homeowners on the hook for the damages they caused. Of course the pendulum seems to have swung the other way on this one in most places and now they don’t arrest anyone for shoplifting period.

Now should the criminal be liable for damages too? Sure, but fiscally that will never payout in most cases. Unfortunately if a civil case is ever won in any situation involving cops its always the taxpayers ultimately footing the bill. So the cops never feel anything repercussions.

Personally

Now on the individual level, for the most cops are given the benefit of the doubt from the courts and a good amount of the public, when it comes to bad or flat out wrong decisions and I do get it. They do make split second decisions and that cannot be judged with 20/20 hindsight all the time, but there is plenty of examples just listed already where decisions they have made were not hard to see that they were wrong.

However even if they do, rarely will they be charged sentenced or fired even if they did commit wrong doing or criminal activity, often allowing them to resign and go to a different departments. This stops any questions from being raised about that individuals cases and whether they need to be reopened or questioned allowing the other records to stay in tact, when depending on the situation those cases should be reopened and looked at again if the officer is doing something wrong.

Look everybody makes mistakes I get hat but when cops make mistakes or commit wrong doing it usually results in tragedy rarely with any repercussions, no restitution, not even a demotion, or docked pay.

Take a look at just a hand full of incidents where SWAT teams raided the wrong house.

https://reason.com/2021/06/14/michigan-police-no-knock-raid-wrong-address-dunigan-colston-held-at-gunpoint/

https://www.foxnews.com/story/minneapolis-swat-team-raids-wrong-house

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-mayor-orders-probe-woman-alleges-police-raided-wrong-house-injure-rcna134062

This one the person was killed.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-dotson-familys-furious-police-assassination-wrong-house-1796281

Check out

https://thefreethoughtproject.com/cop-watch/who-pays-the-price-for-botched-swat-team-raids-we-do

For further reading on this subject specifically.

Whether they were acting on bad info from a detective or they unknowingly went to the wrong house, Either way they are either lazy and not doing their own recon or confirmation, or they are flat out don’t care and are negligent. But if your going to do a no knock or any warrant service and shoot anyone who shoots at you or fights back you better be damn sure you are at the right house, and that you are not being intentionally or negligently mislead by who ever is requesting you do the warrant service.

Restitution

So they are doing something wrong? Take it up with the judge is always their response.

So what do you do? You take them to court.

You sue them, and if you win? guess what you paid for it.

The individual cops who make the mistake rarely ever feel any judgement laid down because the department or city/county/state foots the bill thanks to qualified immunity for the officer themselves. So lets say they destroy someones life and even their courts cant justify it and you win a settlement. Where do the departments get their money? Taxes. So they just took the money that was forcibly taken from you and gave it back in a settlement. Their budget doesn’t change, The officers are not personally responsible, and the machine keeps on rolling.

While there is reason for qualified immunity, though I do not fully agree with them as the judge could ultimately throw out cases that were frivolous or hand no standing but they give a blanket immunity instead. So is there any incentive for them to dO right by the citizens? Not really and Part 5 will cover wHat makes this even worse.

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

The first of our merch is live on the shop now with more to come go to the link below and pick up yours now

https://modern-barbarian.com/shop/

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

TWITTER/X

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK

 

 

Posted on

A Barbarians Issues with Law Enforcement: MISCONDUCT VS DESIGN

The problems with cops and law enforcement fall into two categories, misconduct and system design. Many people will see these problems and think they are bugs in the system when in realty a lot of them are actually features of the system’s design. They are just how the system is built to work.

Many people do not see these issues because they have never actually interacted with law enforcement, never actually given any of it much thought or worse refuse to look at these problems, I hope to change that part below.

Most people when they think of problems in/with law enforcement they think of misconduct. Excessive force, wrongful death or corruption to name a few, and while some incidents can be debated, by the letter of the law these incidents are actually fairly rare.

Now it can be argued that it’s because the government writes itself and cops legal exceptions and special privileges to prevent the legal infraction from happening in the firstplace and some make the argument its because most cops are good.

Problems of misconduct (SOMETIMES)

Excessive force/wrongful death

While this does happen, and more often than we want to think, true incidents of it are rarely covered by the media. The incidents covered by the media typically are cases that are justified force or that leave out extenuating circumstances that contributed to the death and are used to sow discontent when the cops are eventually acquitted in quart. The ones that are actually bad are swept under the rug in order to protect the department when ever possible.

This incident for example while the officer was fired did not receive weeks long coverage like others have in the past and in my opinion is is far worse than many use of force cases that have received non stop coverage. As well this incident raises the question of working extra duty in uniform but then acting as a cop which we cover later. https://nypost.com/2021/12/01/video-shows-arizona-cop-fatally-shooting-man-in-wheelchair/ Many will argue the “just follow orders and you wont get hurt” argument but we will touch on that later as well, but in short, what if you can’t?

Such as in Minneapolis during the riots, The police department special units were conducting bean bag round driveways on any one that was out after a certain hour. While they were supposed to be only targeting rioters, they targeted anyone on the street. What if you work nights, or need to protect your home or business when they are not? https://www.huffpost.com/entry/minneapolis-police-hunting-activists-body-cam-footage_n_615f4c56e4b02bd79fbccaf8

Side jobs, extra duty and moon lighting

In most jurisdictions and most departments they allow extra duty. Jobs that cops can take when they are not on shift for extra pay such as, security at sporting events, and personal protection details. Now for quick clarification, moon lighting I unauthorized side jobs and most departments have policies against this.

Now extra duty is typically put on as shifts by the police department and paid for by them such as major sporting events and conventions which makes sense because while they are private events by law, they are large public gatherings which makes them targets for attacks as well as other crime, though you do not want to pull people off normal shifts to cover them.

However in some instances the department is taking money from a company or organization to cover paying the officers to do that shift. They often have no requirement to NOT wear their uniform and often times request that they do and they often are acting as cops. Essentially the police department is selling enhanced police service to certain organizations or companies that can afford it. This is where these extra duty shifts become a problem. Like the Arizona case above,

Should departments be able to sell policing services to paying companies, or should the cops have to be in Walmart uniform and not act as police if they are working a security shift? Or should the whole practice of Extra duty for out side companies be discontinued?

Corruption

I list this here because corruption like you see in the movies is exceedingly rare. However cops just following orders that contribute to other peoples corruption is another story. I cannot find it now but there was a case of a mayor using the police department to clear out neighborhoods so that his real-estate buddies could buy up the houses. While the cops did not benefit from this they were at best party to it by their “i am just following orders” attitude and at worst willing participants. When I find the case Ill edit it here.

Genuine problems of misconduct

Lack of knowledge of the law

Watch enough incidents with cops and you will see many that don’t know the laws they are enforcing, and some that even just make things up as they go because they can say “its the law” and most people will fall in line. This particular cases started that way, but ends horribly.

This Disabled Veteran accused of panhandling, a victimless crime, and resulted in his service dog getting killed. https://taskandpurpose.com/news/vet-service-dog-tasered-died-arrest-police/

The disabled homeless veteran had his service dog killed by a car after it was unnecessarily tazed by a cop. The arrest went forceful when a cop would not accept the veterans government issued veterans ID. The dog then gets concerned and agitated (not aggressive) because his handler is freaking out as the dog is trained to do and then attempts to calm his handler down.

Now every state that I have trained and worked in says government issued ID, which VA would count as accepted identification, as well, cops can take a Name and Date of birth or social security number and check ID thoguh their PC or dispatch, as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FO_LN-mJHI

SIDE NOTE: 30 minutes in you will see the dogs behavior. If that behavior is threatening to you you should not be a cop. 5 minutes into your first day as a cop you are issued at least three fire arms, body armor, and a host of less lethal weapons because you are supposed to be going up against the worst criminals in your jurisdiction, if a dog scares you to the point that you cannot tell the difference between an aggressive dog and a scared or concerned dog, don’t be a cop.

This incident resulted in no firings to my knowledge and in fact accusations of harassment and coverup by the department against the Veteran. Also no nationwide coverage.

Criminal behavior/history or bad hiring

Law enforcement departments often have a reputation of bad hiring practices, and ignoring criminal behavior of its employees. This is also made worse when cops are allowed to resign instead of charges being filed because they can then go to a different department and get hired again because they have no criminal record, lazy background investigators at the new department or some departments only hire these people, because they no one with other options wants to work at their departments.

In this case a Colorado officer tazes an old man for complying with the order that he gave him. According to the old man he was tazed upwards of 60 times. https://abcnews.go.com/US/colorado-man-shocked-taser-files-federal-lawsuit-las/story?id=99022329 The officer had a record of not only previous incidents but criminal behavior.

According to court documents, the officer who was in a command position at the department, was subject to a domestic abuse case in June 2006. A case was filed against the officer that resulted in a temporary restraining order. In the state of Colorado restraining orders take away your right to own a firearm. Which means that he was no longer eligible to work as police officer. In addition

The officer also was subject to at least three misdemeanor cases, according to court documents, that range from harassment-obscene language/gesture and disorderly conduct-offensive gesture charges to disorderly conduct-fighting in public and menacing charges. All of these charges were dismissed.

According to court documents, the officer was also subject to a criminal case filed in 1997 where he was charged with the Class 5 felony of menacing use of a deadly weapon. Although that charge was dropped, the same 1997 case charged the offcier with disorderly conduct displaying a weapon, where the defendant entered a guilty plea.

In 1998, the officer was subject to another misdemeanor case for harassment in public, according to court documents, where he was found guilty after a court trial after pleading not guilty. He was sentenced to unsupervised probation

Should this person have been a cop to start with let alone continuing to be?

Part 4 of this series we begin down the road of the “problems” that are actually built into the system. This is where the disconnect happens in most peoples brains and where many of the good cop vs bad cop arguments come out of.

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

The first of our merch is live on the shop now with more to come go to the link below and pick up yours now

https://modern-barbarian.com/shop/

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

TWITTER/X

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK

 

Posted on

A Barbarian’s Issues with Law Enforcement: Some Understanding

The general public has many misconceptions about law enforcement that are not problems in them selves though they could lead to or exacerbate other problems.

Lack of training

I went through a year long 40hour a week academy. I can tell you that its not a problem of minimum hours of training its the content of the training. I would say that 50% or more of the time i spent in academy was spent on things that don’t matter, and they were stretched out much longer than necessary. While things that do matter and would make cops better were left to the way side. A topic that could be covered in an hour, required 8. This left us sitting on our hands or stuck in lectures that are unnecessarily long taking away time from training that should have had more time dedicated. Or training that is typically reserved for the department inservice trainings is left out of academy completely.

In the age of woke and pronouns this will only get worse. More time will be spent on DEI than on differentiating from medical incidents and driving under the influence. Trainings involving autism and other disabilities. More training time will be taken away from learning the law, and rights more so than it already is, though this might be by design……

I will say that my academy did cover law very well for the state i was in at the time, but I also know that it is not the case in all academies and that time is often taken away from learning the law for other topics. Law class ran almost the entire time of the academy and covered statue law and constitutional law and case law. Though case law only covered those that benefited the cops or threatened them not that benefited the public.

My academy spent a good amount of time on report writing but what that means is that were were trained the formatting and the “buzzwords” to use to cover our asses and the departments ass regardless if the report was 100% accurate to what happens by using those buzzwords. “Through my training and experience” Is a popular one. Time was however taken away from things such as negotiation/crisis intervention (talking down suicidal people).

Dark Humor

People need to understand this because it is not just law enforcement. Anyone that spends the majority of their time in stressful or tragic circumstances will develop a dark sense of humor in order to process it or they will not make it out alive. This applies to cops, soldiers, firefighters, social workers, and Drs. They may be there for the worst day of your life, but this is only the 3rd worst day of a life they have been in today. They may still have 12 more hours of worst days before starting it again tomorrow. You get to process and deal with this day, they have to shake it off move on and go back to work.

Misconceptions that could be problems

Racism

This is not systemic as most would have you believe. Not at the country level or most organizations. They think this because there is info going around that law enforcement started with slave catchers when in reality law enforcement traditions goes back to Europe before the US was even a thing. Racism however can be a problem on an individual level just like in any other profession or industry. The problem is when departments or other officers will cover for bad officers in order to try and avoid looking like Its a department problem, inadvertently creating the department problem they were trying to avoid.

Cops not policing their own areas – This is another popular one that people like to complain about. Cops living in one city and policing another. I get why this happens, and it happens in fire departments too. People don’t want to deal with seeing people they know, shot, killed, robbed, committing suicide, and so on.

There is however an argument to be made that by doing so they do not have any ties to the community and therefore have no incentive to do right by the community.

Thinking everyone is armed

This comes up constantly, and when said out loud it sounds fine. “Cops shouldn’t act like everyone is armed” but you have to when your in a job where you might have to go up against an armed felon even if that likely hood is low.

This is the real world people hurt other people, and in reality its not just cops that should think about other people being armed. Especially when people are getting assaulted for no reason on the streets. Everyone needs to think about it and prepare themselves because one day it might be you in that confrontation.

I would argue that the over reaction comes from people being afraid of weapons and not people holding them. These are the cops you see drawing down on someone who says they have a concealed weapons permit, or a hunter who has a rifle slung. They equate weapon and death instead of looking at the entire situation. This fear is also where you see cops so amped up that they give an order and then shoot the person for complying with the order. This is proven time and time again every time a citizen goes into a police training trying to prove this wrong and ends up “shooting” an unarmed person.

We have now come to the end of limits for my benefit of the doubt and understanding when it comes to law enforcement. Part 3 will start to cover actual misconduct in law enforcement as well as the misunderstanding by the public in the design of the system.

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

The first of our merch is live on the shop now with more to come go to the link below and pick up yours now

https://modern-barbarian.com/shop/

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

TWITTER/X

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK

Posted on

Barbarian’s issues with law enforcement: An Introduction

My issues with law enforcement are not your typical defund the police activists problems with police, though some might overlap. If nothing else I hope this serves as a realty check for those looking at getting into the profession so that they know what they are signing up for.

Most commentators on law enforcement have had no interaction with or knowledge of police work. Whether they are on the “cops are good and there are only a few bad apples side.” – The people who believe the system works and trust it blindly because they have never had an interaction with it, or work inside it – or they are the people who are running training companies of one kind or another, K9, firearms, etc and they only deal with the “good cops” who by their definition are those that seek out training on their own time.

The same goes for those that blindly talk shit about cops as well. They either have had to many encounters with law enforcement or they sit on the side lines thinking that all violence is wrong and live in the world they think should be and not the one that is. They talk just as much shit about citizens defending themselves as they do about cops.

This is not what I am doing.

Some Background

I grew up in a law enforcement family. I wanted to be part of law enforcement through my entire childhood and young adult life. That was a dream that I in fact accomplished, and then regretted almost immediately. Though a regret that I did not really understand until a few years later as well as the blessing that was me having to leave that dream behind.

Shortly after I made it on to a department I had to resign due to some health issues. A resignation of a dream that I had for the better part of two decades. That resignation became a blessing over the next couple of years, because of events at both that specific department, which I learned was just some in a long list of prior events as well as events on the national level. The years following completely changed my point of view on law enforcement as a whole. Where they used to get the benefit of the doubt now was a complete lack of trust. I used to defend them in debates and now I only defend the individuals I know personally if they deserve it.

Intentions VS Results

I do not want this to be a complete bashing of law enforcement personnel as I do believe that at least some of them do get into the profession with good intentions of protecting their community and helping people. However they could do the same thing by getting a concealed carry permit and going about their every day lives. Looking back I got into it for those reasons, as well looking for some action fighting the bad guys.

I was also looking for a brotherhood. A brotherhood that i was depending on to rebuild my social and support network after moving thousands of miles for the job and ultimately a brotherhood that I did not find and that after talking to many in the profession I now know no longer exists.

Now as we know intentions don’t matter, results do and the road to hell is paved with good intentions. What you think your going to be doing and what you actually will be doing are not always the same thing especially in law enforcement and I like most people learned this the hard way. Only a small percentage actually get to chase the bad guys and handle the true threats to the community, the majority don’t. the majority do more of what looks like harassment than serving the community. This is not entirely their fault but the fault of the justice system as a whole but they are by definition the enforcers for that system.

Strong moral men and families make safe communities, regardless of law enforcement’s existence, and like the founding fathers understood, you also need to protect your community from the state, you cannot do that if you are the enforcer for it.

I don’t know if the profession was always this way or only recently but I know that what people have been saying about law enforcement for decades if it was not true the whole time is becoming true now. That being said I do understand why certain things happen in law enforcement that the general public does not understand, which I will cover in more depth.

I am going to harp on one last point here before we get started. It applies here but is not limited to this topic alone.

Follow Nothing and No One Blindly

If you don’t know them or the incident personally, don’t die on that hill. Doesn’t matter if its cops, celebrities, brands, influencers, or religious institutions. If you don’t have personal experience with it or them never jump in with them 100%

There is only five current or former law enforcement officers that I truly respect, and trust were good when they did the job. I know all but one of them personally and thats the point. One is my father who worked for two different departments and ran an academy. His career culminated in retirement from a gaming regulation agency in the western united states.

One is my step father who retired from two different departments, in two different states. over the course of his life and career he worked special investigations full time swat and air support devision as a pilot.

one is a fellow academy graduate from my class who at the time of this writing had taken over as deputy chief in a sheriffs department in the western united states.

One is my field training officer from the department i was at who i assume is still there or possibly retiring soon I would hope if he hasn’t already. This officer worked as a k9 officer while i was there and was the only officer i have ever seen argue with a person on the call over not infringing on someones rights.

Now the last one is the only one that I don’t know personally, but would not hesitate to meet him. Greg Anderson who chucked his career over doing the right thing during the Pandemic when he released a video calling on his fellow officers at his department and others across the country to make sure that they were doing the right thing, not infringing on the rights of the citizens when following orders. As you can imagine this was not welcomed by the politicians and his superiors and resulted in him loosing his job when he refused to take the video down.

What is Law Enforcement?

Its right there in the name, Law Enforcement. How ever their is a disconnect between what the public thinks that means and their job definition and what they actually do. People have one of two images of law enforcement in their heads, on the side that defends them, they see them as police officers or peace officers. There to protect them and solve their problems, but there is a reason their official title was changed to law enforcement officer.

Then there is the side that has either had run ins with them or that can be objective enough to see them clearly, that they are their to enforce the laws, what ever that law may be, or how right or wrong the law is. This disconnect is why you have the good cop and bad cop arguments, more so then because of dirty cops because that is actually exceedingly rare, at least in the prospective of corruption.

Law enforcement is historically a tool of tyrants, they respond to violence but only that which is unsanctioned by the state. They mainly bring violence upon those who do not comply or obey the regime in charge. They do some things that are good and some of their actions could be seen as good deeds, but a good does not undo a wrong.

I started this article with the intent for it to be one article but consisted of so much that it grew into a multipart series so stay tuned for more to come.

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

The first of our merch is live on the shop now with more to come go to the link below and pick up yours now

https://modern-barbarian.com/shop/

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

TWITTER/X

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK

 

Posted on

Choose Your Master – Voting

Lets talk voting, as a rule I hate politics, At best its nothing but corruption and self serving elitists pandering to a populous they know nothing about, hoping they can convince enough of them to keep them in power so they can continue to enrich themselves. However these days not only is it everywhere, both sides supporters are so devoted to it that if you don’t pay attention it might just wind up killing you. It’s like any other threat that you encounter, you cannot just put your head in the sand and hope it goes away you have to pay attention to it.

Typically I avoid talking politics in much depth most of the time mainly because the they have extended the political season to damn near 24/7 365, but also I feel in most cases it’s a waste of time. Both sides are part of the problem and yet only blame the other side. Mindlessly following their political parties talking points and parroting catch phrases leaving them oblivious to the fact that both sides are part of the same organization playing everyone toward the middle.

Few people on either side are open to hearing anything that does not 100% fit their parties platform with the majority wanting their life style forced upon the other side with little to no actual desire for freedom for anyone. However the situation will never change if left unexamined so here we are.

This is not an all encompassing discussion but I wanted to cover a few topics briefly that gets you thinking about the whole situation.

People think it matters who occupies that house, (The White House) It doesn’t, multi national corporations and criminals run the world.

~Raymond Reddington

The system is broken…..or is it.

Even of those that believe in the state, many still say it’s broken and needs to be fixed, but they fail to realize that it is working exactly how it has been built to work. Maybe not how it was intended to be built by the founding fathers but how it has been built none the less.

At best and what it is from the point of view of the citizen is 3 people locked in a room fighting over a gun so the winner can control the other 2. Different groups within the public want control of the government in order to force their way of life on the other groups. At worst and how it is from the point of view of the state, is one organization putting on a facade of division in order to keep the public divided and fighting amongst each other in order to allow them to enrich themselves and their friends and maintain and expand their control of the populace to the highest degree possible.

This is made obvious by a simple little fact that most people don’t realize unless its pointed out to them directly. You don’t get to vote for who you want to, you get to vote for who they let you vote for. The parties put on their primary “elections” in order to pick who will run in the actual elections, but as was learned from the DNC scandal during the Clinton Sanders primary election they are less than straight elections. The parties then use their powers to keep anyone else from running in the main election that is remotely on their side, using any number of means from payoffs to intimidation. This limits your vote to who they put forward, provided you stick to voting one of the two parties.

Its true you could do a write in candidate and vote for anyone you wanted but they are not going to get elected. Though it is an option for those who can’t bring themselves to not vote at all. Or you can vote third party. This is a statement towards refusing to vote for the uni-party of Democrat/Republican but you are still consenting to be ruled, simply by participating. Remember just because you vote for your new master doesn’t make you free. Your vote is saying I believe in the state but that someone else should be running it, but I will accept being ruled by who ever wins because that’s the rules.

Identity politics

A part of this system is identity politics which makes you choose an identity and have to vote exactly how that identity votes or you can’t be part of the identity anymore. Many peoples identity is wrapped up in a political party, and how they vote. To them any deviation from that straight Democrat or Republican ticket is no better than treason. This doesn’t leave much room for independent thought.

For others their identity it wrapped up in a religion, or their race and then those religions or races are supposed to vote for a certain party regardless of their personal beliefs toward the issues or how that party view those beliefs or issues. Pair this with most peoples cognitive bias/desire to not be on the loosing team and many people will pick one of these two options and disregard their own code or beliefs because they don’t want to be on the loosing team.

So where does that leave the free thinkers? Well they have some third parties and independent candidates, but they have less than no chance of winning typically and are constantly berated by the other two parties followers for being traitors, or giving their vote to the other side because they are not voting for their side.

No political system works on a large scale

Human beings have lived in small groups/tribes/warbands etc throughout our entire existence up until only comparatively recently groups with a population of around 150 people. This is called Dunbars number. Dunbar’s number is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships—relationships in which an individual knows who each person is and how each person relates to every other person.

Anything larger than this number and you loose connection and the larger the population the less an less connection until there is no connection at all and you have strangers. With no connection there is no trust, and no relationship which is the basis for all community and there by the systems they use to govern.

In a group where you know everyone, you can have a single leader, (king, chief) and there is a likelihood that all will be fine. You can also have democracy and there is little chance that the group will vote to enslave half the population because you know everyone. You can have communism where the tribe owns the property and everyone can share it without issues.

This is all possible because at that level of population, your more likely to all be mostly if not totally aligned on the major issues of your population, and there will typically be swift repercussions if someone try’s to over step their power and authority. Which in most cases they will not do in the first case cause most people won’t cross a group that they feel they belong to, with the obvious exceptions of certain personalities such as narcissists.

Now all those rules go out the window as the population size grows. Once those connections and relationships go out the window so does trust and the unified(ish) thinking of the tribe and then you get split populations and ideologies which is where the political turmoil starts. In these situations where the pitfalls of any political theory comes out.

When you have a large population and half or more have differing beliefs, they will invariably come to a clash at some point. As well those certain personalities we talked about will look for ways to get themselves the most power and benefit for themselves. In this situation with communism you get the soviet union, if you have democracy you get mob rule, with kings or single leaders, you get dictatorships and despots, at least according to half the population or less that don’t agree with his policies.

Now the US for example is too wildly different in almost every aspect from one geographic location to the other to be governed by one central government. Weather, people culture resources etc. the needs, wants, beliefs and ideologies are just to wildly different from area to area for one group or set of rules to understand or be able to account for all of them. Your can’t make everyone happy and the founding fathers knew this which is why the first governing system for the United States was the articles of confederation and not the constitution. It was later changed to the constitution which is what has let the problems grow to what they have today.

Democracy is mob rule

The voting system makes no sense if your in a minority position because none of you positions get put forward. It’s a matter of choosing between the worst kinds of choices that they put in front of you. There is nothing consensual about that as it’s a system of forced consent. By participating you concede to be ruled by whomever comes out on top in the election no matter if you vote for them or not because you are participating in the process, which means you agree with the process.

The smallest minority in any group will always be the individual, we are all unique and despite how much the empire and its systems try to force us into whatever little box or group they want us in, we will remain that way. This means the individual and their rights will always suffer at the hands of the mob, and this is the problem with the popular vote method. This is because any decision that needs to be voted on is decided by majority vote not a unanimous vote. They tell you that it could come down to a single vote, but where did anyone agree to be ruled by a group that wins by one vote. That means that potentially half the country does not agree with the other but has to bow down because for no other reason than they are the minority. This type of justification would not be allowed to be used any where else. How would that play in a rape trial? 2 guys want to have sex with a woman and she doesn’t. But now she has to let it happen because they are the majority vote?

The only way that would be somewhat ethical would be to require an unanimous vote. This means that the whole population agreed. Many would say that this would make it so that nothing would get done. Thats true and in a sense that is part of the point. Unless 100 percent of the population agreed on the vote it wouldn’t pass. Weed? Wouldn’t have to legalize it because it would not have been made illegal in the first place. Abortion? Guns? Freedom of speech? Individual rights would not be in near as much danger, as everyone would have to agree to take them away. Now what about murder? Rape? Kidnapping? Do you think that you could not get a unanimous vote that those should be illegal?

Now with all that being said, those in the US and many other countries are not even true democracies. They are one kind or another of republic. The people vote on representatives that are sent to parliament or congress or whatever the term is in the country in question. They are sent there to represent the people of their jurisdiction and their interests, or so you are lead to believe. Really they take money from corporations, special interest groups, and their wealthy friends, to push their interests when they win so that they can pay to bombard you with propaganda to convince you to vote for them. Then they completely ignore your needs because they are no longer beholden to you, but the corporations and groups they took money from. At least until the next election season.

This is easier than you might think, people have short attention spans and even shorter memories. They fall for the lies and promises made during election season and then forget completely that they promised the same thing last election and did the opposite during their term.

Most people don’t want true freedom, at least not for everyone.

People want to live their lives, but they don’t want other people to live lives that they don’t agree with. Both sides are guilty of this. They cannot comprehend or refuse to comprehend the concept of live and let live. If they don’t like weed, they think no one should use it. If they don’t believe in abortion no one should be able to get them. If they don’t like guns no one should own them, except the state so that they can enforce any of these rules they want to force on other people. They cannot understand or live in a world where people live or want to live different lives than they do and believe that other ways of life should be outlawed and their way of life forced on the other side.

You can pretty much boil down all lobbying of laws to one group wanting to force their way life on someone else. With the exception of corporate lobbying that typically is wanting laws passed forcing people in one way or the other to buy their products. Politicians then use these desires to control and force one groups ways onto the other to drum up votes.

Representation or lack there of.

I want to give credit to legal man from the quash podcast. It was an episode of his show that brought this information to my attention and its eye opening. In 1780 the first year of the United States the total population was around 2.7 million people. As of 2022 that number is estimated at around 333.28 million. The first congress had 65 members and grew to 435 by 1912 where it remained by law from 1941 on with only a short exception prior, when Alaska and Hawaii were ratified as states. The population of the United States in 1910 was roughly 93 million people. So the in the original congress each member represented roughly 41,538 people, In 1941 each member represented 213,793 people and today, each representative represents 766,160 people and each senator 3332800 people. So how much representation does each person actually have in congress? Especially if they are in a minority group for that representatives region? To receive the same level of representation that was given in the early congress, there would need to be over 8000 representatives in the house. Can the representative really listen to his constituents to a degree that will matter?

What does your vote actually do?

The next level of the problem is that the people who you are voting for are not the ones actually in charge anymore. People who are in the government for their entire lives are not voted in they are appointed. And often stay no matter who is in the White House or congress. Did you get a say in the matter of whether or not they stayed or were hired in the first place? Many of these positions for what ever reason never have to be held accountable to congress or anyone else.  The President is only there for a max of 8 years. Congressmen can be there longer but could still be gone next election. The people who really hold the power are occasionally appointed and stay for the majority of their life.

A recent example of this is Dr. Fauci. Who was in office for multiple presidents and most of his adult life. Directors of federal agencies and all their underlings, and federal judges and the Supreme court judges are just a few other examples.

Let’s look at some numbers.

According to 2020 stats the Federal, State, and Local governments had a total number of 23.43 million people. 2.87 mil. at the federal level with 1.33 mil. In the military and 19.23 million in the countries different state and local governments. How many did the people vote for?

The President – But not the Vice president as they are a chosen by the President. A 100 senators and 435 house members federally. 50 governors, in some states LT governors are voted on and others they are chosen by the governor so we will just call it 50. (its not gonna skew the numbers) In State Senates in total there is 1943 members with 5415 state house representatives and with roughly 19,495 incorporated cities in the United States you have the mayors.

Now in the majority of the Government and the country Law enforcement leaders are appointed and their staff is then hired with on 46 states electing sherifs by vote for the county level law enforcement and only 39 states elect judges. Only in those states do you have a direct say in law enforcement leadership and there by maybe a say in their policies other wise they are appointed and they are going to do whatever their boss tells them to do.

In total there is 27,438 total elected officials or .00117106% of the government. So the people have only a say in .0012% of the government (rounded) up to ten thousandths of a percent.

Then at the federal level the President appoints or could if he changed up the whole bench 4000 positions with only 1200-1400 of them needing senate approval as a check in balance, and that is just the federal level. Those 4000 positions are then responsible for the policies, hiring of staff and regulation of the agencies and organization they are in charge of that ends up playing a part in your life in one way or another through the regulation and rules that they can and often pass without even your so called representatives input.

So what can you do?

The easy answer for many is don’t vote, and I get it, dissolve the conditioned belief that other men and women who call themselves “government” have the right to rule you, adopt voluntarist principles, and stop engaging with the political system altogether. Build and live your life so that whomever is in office doesn’t matter. Withdraw your vote from the system as a vote of no confidence.

How is “get out and vote harder” the solution for those who think the 2020 election was stolen (never mind the integrity of every election before that)? Do they believe their vote matters? How about those who voted for Hillary in the previous election who think Russia stole the election for Trump?

Even if one side completely controls every single elected position in all levels of government, and replaces every single one of the appointed positions, which will never happen at either circumstance. Do you think they would be able to remove all the entrenched corruption that is there now from all the levels below them? How much cleaning up will the system allow And why would a politician do that for you when he could keep the status quo and reap the benefits.

This could and probably will result in naked power grabs by so called elected officials. These actions will only decrease confidence even further. That’s only the short term. I’m talking about the long game. If American men stop thinking of the government as “us” and start thinking of it as “them” if we stop thinking of ourselves as Americans and start acting for our own our tribes or families interests things could really get interesting.

~Jack Donovan

Your vote isn’t going to fix the system. No one that gets in is going to be able to fix it all even if they could. There is too many organizations that will stone wall until they are back out of office. For those that don’t vote the best thing you can do for your country, for your tribe, and for the future, is to let the system tear itself apart. And be ready to play a role in the rebuilding afterward.

Your cast vote is a consent to being ruled, a statement that you think the system is fixable. When you argue in favor of a candidate you’re telling people that you think that candidates view should be forced on everyone and that they should be the one ruling everyone. That the change of who is in control of the system will fix it and not that the system itself is broken or built that way in the first place.

Local-ist Voting

If you can’t bring yourself to not vote at all, I get it the conditioning is deep. I haven’t been able to bring myself not to vote completely either. So what are your options when nothing you do is going to change the federal level in a substantial way? Vote third party or write in candidates at the federal level to make sure your vote doesn’t go to someone you don’t want it to. And make sure you focus on your local elections and voting.

Just like charity the closer to home your actions the more impact you will be able to see and contribute to. The local elections will have more impact on your local life than a lot of federal elections and you do still have the ability to fight off certain policies locally that can at least in the short term improve your way life in one way or another.

There is the possibility that in the future, certain federal policies can effectively be nullified as well if you have a local government that is on the same page, look at the sanctuary city principle for immigration or gun laws, as well as the states legalizing and decriminalizing different “drugs”. Nullification has already effectively happened on some of these fronts so it is technically possible in others. In addition if the federal level does tear it self apart, having an already established system that you at best don’t have to fight everything on, could hopefully ease the transition pains and stave off any control grabs from other groups.

Conclusion

If you made it this far, congratulations, there is hope for us all yet. Half the battle of making change, is understanding all the dynamics that play a part in the situation at hand. Once understood, you can then play a more active role in helping bring about change for the betterment of everyone. My hope is that I’ve given you enough food for thought to cause you to do your own homework, your own research and work towards making valuable changes and to see the value in small communities (tribes if you will) and the impact they can play in your life.

Help us grow and share our content to your timelines and feeds.

Follow us at

TELEGRAM

INSTAGRAM

MEWE

SUBSTACK