Saturday, May 19, 2012

Are "peace officers" a good idea?

No. And I'm not even talking about the reavers. I'm saying it is a bad idea to have anyone set apart, with a badge and "authority".

Yes, I know that the original idea was that a "peace officer" had no authority that wasn't held by any individual in the general population, but was supposed to be someone paid in order to free his time to devote to "keeping the peace". How has that worked out?

Even the notion of "policing" is a bad thing. It's my job to "police" my own sphere. No one can do that for me better than I can- all anyone else could do is interfere. There is no need for a "special" class to do it, and when established that "special class" will inevitably evolve into the abomination we suffer under now.

Because, if I am "policing" my own life, and I go beyond the limits of protecting myself and my property (or the self and property of someone else), I am responsible for my actions and will be held accountable. Reavers are almost invariably found (by their own gang) to be acting "within department guidelines"- even when guilty of the most obvious acts of evil.



  1. I agree.

  2. "I am responsible for my actions and will be held accountable."

    By the... by the... by the... oh, yeah, no one!

  3. I have been held accountable many times. Sometimes when I was right, sometimes when I was wrong.

  4. There is the rub,who makes bad people behave?life takers i am talking about.Who goes after them?Why are we so helpless in the face of barberism?

  5. "We" are only helpless in the face of barbarism if we think defending ourselves from the bad guys can be delegated to someone else. It can't be.

    Their potential victims are the ones who can make them behave. The cost of being a thug has to be raised back to its real cost, rather than being cheapened by The State.

    Remove all counterfeit "laws" against self defense, and the effective tools for self defense, and few bad guys would survive long.

  6. and in the meantime?

  7. In the meantime "'We' are only helpless in the face of barbarism if we think defending ourselves from the bad guys can be delegated to someone else. It can't be." You don't need to wait for a free society to take responsibility today. Take responsibility first, and the free society will follow.

  8. do that and u die in the joint.

  9. Not necessarily. I have done it several times. It doesn't mean you have to shoot every bad guy who comes along. And even in that case, you may escape severe punishment. There are some places in the country, though, where you had better just "shoot, shovel, and shut up"- literally or metaphorically. Remember that in most instances of a bad guy confronting you, there is nothing connecting the two of you. He didn't leave a note at home saying he would be at your house, just in case anyone needs to get in touch with him while he is "working".

    The first step of self defense is remembering that it is your full-time job, whether you accept it or not.

    The second step is to stay aware of your surroundings and APPEAR aware. That alone will frighten most thugs away. Don't shuffle along staring at your feet. You'll miss too much that way- both good and bad.

    Then, if you find yourself confronted by a bad guy anyway, defend yourself with everything you've got. If you refuse to do so because you are afraid you might go to jail, the bad guys have won anyway and you might as well curl up and die the first time life gets difficult. As one of my friends used to say a lot "Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6". Who knows, maybe you'll have someone like me sneak onto the jury and refuse to convict a hero of anything.

  10. If we were all moral people there would be no need for laws.Sadly this is not true.We have to figure a faster way to hang the sons of bxxxxes.and daughters of said same.
    We have made self-defense illegal in California.We have what they call a" duty to retreat "law here.If there is a way to escape ,you ,not the bad guy ,has 2 take it.About 10 years ago I fired a gang banger want2b,he came with a friend to pick up his check ,they got mouthy, i did 2 ,i showed them a holstered pistol and said beat it.The Sheriffs Deputy's who came were nice and polite about the LAW.I was holding a FFL at the time so it would have been a big deal.Shoot,shovel and shut up IS the right answer.

  11. "If we were all moral people there would be no need for laws." And since "we" aren't, "laws" are useless.

    But I'd substitute "ethical" for "moral".

    I know of a guy who was shot at while driving, minding his own business, in a desert area of southern California. Probably just some gang members out looking for some random "fun". He shot back- they fled- and apparently (according to the news) he hit his mark. Since there was nothing to connect him to the shooting incident, and the bad guys weren't talking, that was the end of it. It was put down to a "gang-related shooting". Now, had he called the cops to report being shot at, he would have been the one in trouble. You're safer to just let it go.