This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
What are some unforeseen outcomes of conditioning our children to live in a police state?
What are some unforeseen outcomes of conditioning our children to live in a police state?
Are we really protecting them? My own observations in concert with one law enforcement officer's view in the wake of Oslo.
POLICE STATE: a political unit characterized by repressive governmental control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police, and especially secret police, in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/police%20state
I recently attended a high-school age swimming meet here in Texas. When we entered the front doors, at 7:30 am, there sat two volunteer parents at a table selling programs and tickets. Standing less than three feet behind them were two law enforcement officers with hands on hips and eyeing everyone that entered. It would be 100 degrees outside that day, but they were wearing combat boots, black BDUs, tactical armor in external carriers, pistols, and radios. The uniform patches and logos on their two brand new black Challengers, illegally parked just outside, identified them as XXXXXX Independent School District Police.
The kids all filed right by these police officers without even a second glance. Why would they think twice? After all, these kids are all hard working (swimming twice a day, six days per week, for 2+ hours) and drug free (high school athletes in Texas must agree to random drug tests to participate). They have nothing to fear from the police, which are there to serve and protect them.
When I asked my child about my observation, he explained how the police at his school are, "always around." He has become accustomed to their presence.
I explained that back in the 80's, when I was in high school, we had a Cancer Hill on campus where the kids went to smoke, and I don't think I ever saw a police officer set foot on our campus in three years. "Really?" he asked me. "Really," I said.
"Why do you think the police are always present now in school and at swim meets?" I asked. His reply was that he sees them pulling kids out of class almost every day, obtaining consent (LEOs receive extensive training on this), then walking out to the parking lot to search the child's vehicle, or down the hall to search the child's locker and backpack. I asked him if students always gave consent? He said they do, as far as he knows.
I asked my son what he thought would happen if everyone in his school refused to give consent, and requested that the police get a search warrant, signed by a judge, to search their car or backpack. He surmised that the number of searches would probably decrease, but the police would surely make trouble for anyone that tried this.
Just a day after this conversation with my son, in the wake of the tragedy in Norway, I read the following from Brian Hoffner.
What will happen to your kid when attacked by an active shooter?
We law enforcement have and will continue to train for the active shooter. When it happens I can only hope that I am close and that I get there first. Cops like me can’t stand not to be there and to not be there fast. Regardless, we can only get there so fast and people will die while waiting for us.
I don’t find it surprising, just disappointing, that the Norwegian teenagers did not team up and stop this lone shooter from massacring over 80 people. I’m not so sure it wouldn’t happen the same with American teenagers today. We saw what happened at Virginia Tech when grown college kids simple waited for their turn to die.
I was the keynote speaker a few weeks ago at a state organized school district law enforcement conference. I discovered that even after Columbine and all the active shooter incidents since that the schools may be having some lock down drills the students are still not being taught that they may have to defend themselves.
ADD is the acronym that we recommend the schools use and teach their student body. A) AVOID- get away, escape the situation to safety. D) DENY- if you cannot escape, deny the threat access to your location. Lock and barricade doors, cover windows. D) DEFEND- If avoid is impossible, and deny has failed and you are about to die…DON’T DIE! You must defend. Two or more full size students and/or teachers can overpower one individual with a firearm. One must attack the firearm while the other or others attack the shooter. Take him down and stop him from killing.
Apparently, it’s not pleasant to discuss such things with students. It could scare them. Let’s just do fire drills instead and tell the kids how smart they are, no kids left behind, just dead on the floor.
If you have children in school find out from the administration what the active shooter policy and plan is and what they are telling your children to do. Remember that YOU are the primary teacher of your children. It is your responsibility to see them succeed, achieve good grades, get into college, know how to stay safe and if necessary, defend themselves.
It’s a great big beautiful world out there, but it just takes one nut to kill eighty people in short order and there are plenty of them out there too. Do not leave home without your equipment and your head on a spindle. If you feel like you haven’t been training enough lately, then you haven’t been, take care of it.
Let others be sheep.
-Hoff
I share Hoffner's concern that, "...students are still not being taught that they may have to defend themselves." In fact, I believe it is clear that our students are being taught every single day that the government has control of political, economic, and social life through the arbitrary exercises of power by police, in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government such as teachers and principals.
»
- advertisements -
One problem has definitely been the militarization of our police force and a consequent move from acting as a Peace Officer to Law Enforcement. The Law has become nothing more than a (corrupt) mechanism for revenue generation.
Bastiat would call it legalized plunder.
I have noticed that there are two distinct avenues that LEO is taking. For the little ones in school there is still the nice smiling cop that comes to the school and instructs them on different obedience techniques.
The other one is the one you will see if you get pulled over at night. Overwhelming force and intimidation.
The days of the donut eating cops is over.
If you ever end up talking with LEO, remember the 4 most important words:
I want a lawyer.
These are the backup to the 5 first words:
I have nothing to say.
pods
The police will be the 2nd issue; the 1st will be the home invaders. I keep a loaded pump mounted (out of my grandkids reach) near my front door. Am I paranoid? No, just prepared. Ask your friendly police officer about the true crime statistics in your area and you might be very surprised.
It started with base metal thefts; now numerous reports of gold chain robberies (yanked from neck), purse and purchase snatchings at malls. Police have been alerted in my area about men (or women) in groups of 4 or more. Don't let your loved ones go out alone at night.
The police will be the 2nd issue; the 1st will be the home invaders. I keep a loaded pump mounted (out of my grandkids reach) near my front door. Am I paranoid? No, just prepared. Ask your friendly police officer about the true crime statistics in your area and you might be very surprised.
It started with base metal thefts; now numerous reports of gold chain robberies (yanked from neck), purse and purchase snatchings at malls. Police have been alerted in my area about men (or women) in groups of 4 or more. Don't let your loved ones go out alone at night.
The police will be the 2nd issue; the 1st will be the home invaders. I keep a loaded pump mounted (out of my grandkids reach) near my front door. Am I paranoid? No, just prepared. Ask your friendly police officer about the true crime statistics in your area and you might be very surprised.
It started with base metal thefts; now numerous reports of gold chain robberies (yanked from neck), purse and purchase snatchings at malls. Police have been alerted in my area about men (or women) in groups of 4 or more. Don't let your loved ones go out alone at night.
hedgeless_horseman....YOU ARE THE PROBLEM...YOU SHOULD TEACH (OR DONT TEACH) YOUR CHILDREN. who gives a rats ass what the school systems says....it is your responsibility to teach your kids YOUR VALUE SYSTEM. if you leave it to the school then i promise your kids will 'fail' at the worst possible time (like norway).
Did you even read the article? Thought not.
practice the head shot
Not sure if this is in jest or not, but practicing for a head shot will surely lead to failure, and in a gunfight, your death. If you are engaged with an armed opponent, you will not be able to rely on stopping the threat by a head shot. Better off running the opposite way as the shooter if that is your plan.
Center mass, shoot until the threat is neutralized or you have removed yourself from the threat. Preferebly both.
pods
...and then, after the cops have arrived, tell them you're "still too upset to talk about it" - it all happened so fast! you were so scared! - and anyway, while you *sincerely* want to help the guys who are actively trying to build a cse aginst YOU, the guy who was forced to shoot in self-defense, you think you "ought to have a lawyer here to help you explain things."
This will make the cops get pissy. Tough shit for them. Point out to them that you got the idea when you kept reading articles in whcih cops involved in shootings refuse to answer investigators questions "on advice of the police union attorney". Kill the intruder, by all means. but DO NOT SPEAK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER PRESENT. DO NOT ANSWER *ANY* QUESTION EXCEPT 'NAME & ADDRESS'. YOU are the victim, and what the cops will be trying to do is to help prosecute YOU. As the articles & comments above show, they ain't your friends.
Great YouTube video by a law school professor on why you should never talk to the police without first invoking your right to councel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
I disagree with AnAnonymous. A society with ubiquitous gun ownership is a responsible society where people will actively aid each other and not passively wait to be executed.
You disagree with facts then. No surprising since US citizens consider that facts have to be believed.
Facts, contrary to lies, exist without consent. That is why they are unfavoured by US citizens who strongly prefer lies as lies requires them to exist. Lies give US citizens a matter of meaning.
yeah sure most are composed in response. it's just that a growing number of police goons is increasingly abusing their power position? and find themselves receiving support from higher up?
consider tasering and beating some poor halfwit to death measured?
http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/first-video-of-the-fpd-beating-emer...
or shoot a resident after breaking and entering their house, without so much as a word.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV6Bq8xeQrU
or blanket the street in a hail of bullets because of a (drunk) perpetrator smashed into a bunch of cars, and then threaten witnesses at gunpoint.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXpMzT5yGp8
or generally behaving like a bunch of paramilitairy commandos?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9hS0ZhpFPA
you want more? there's HUNDREDS OF THESE VIDEOS
if you don't believe me.... just do a seach yourself... use "taser" "police" and "violence". self defence my ass. NOTHING like this happens here, where I live.
then there are these clowns with a "University" "Homeland Security" "Masters" plan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3Wm8JQpx8w
Seems to me you have a huge problem...
http://www.infowars.com/busting-posse-comitatus-military-cops-arrest-civilians-in-florida-city/
http://www.infowars.com/obama-to-approve-al-qaeda-embassy-in-washington/
The Police (in fact the entire governement) has no duty to protect anyone. They can not be sued if they completely ignore a crime and refuse to stop it. That's all you have to tell your kids.
On top of that if the police kill you while trying to legitmately stop a crime they still can't be sued.
Not really... While there is no good Samaritan law, those who swear public oath to protect and defend have different obligations... if you are in a position of trust or authority, then your obligations are different.
The problem, in some part, is that both qualified immunity and sovereign immunity gut the prospects of remedial lawsuits... For example, in my state, sovereign immunity protects the arms of the state to the extent they are not covered by insurance... so, how much are city officials covered by insurance? $25,000 (why the hell would they pay for more insurance?)... so, if a cop is in a high speed chase for someone with outstanding traffic tickets and plows into your car, killing your kid... want to know how much you're gonna get? $25,000... sued the city too many times and gotten to bite the weenie. They throw the policy limits out there and go on... nothing left to do... obviously every case stands on its own facts, but this is generally what happens.
The other issue is that even if you can nail an individual officer with a giant judgment, you'll probably just get a turnip and he'll file for bk...
In short, you can sue them, but they're ultimately judgment proof... generally.
Green arrow here.
Maybe votes on ZH are YouTube-ized: voting down based on subject matter over relevancy?
MM, I don't always agree with what you post - but it's always intensely relevant. Merci.
Police state? Count on it.
More importantly, prepare for it.
I once retained the counsel of a former court magistrate who later(right before sentencing) told me there was nothing he could do for me, it wasn't his fault I had chosen to live in a police state (Ohio)
How did this article pass the protocol board?
I bribed contributed to Tyler's campaign: http://www.zerohedge.com/content/donate-zero-hedge
the best thing about an overlord is that you get to engage in their 'practices' all the time
.
unlike the brutes that suffer disobedience
spell check mash a bunch of buttons ok
It is rather funny yet unsurprising that US citizens, who are gun addicts, use the story in Norway to advocate for more guns.
Because this is this attitude that leads exactly to what the situation is.
What was this Norvegian guy best's advantage? Certainly not his guns but the tactical control over terrain he set up for himself. He laid up a proper ambush.
The flaw in selling that guns would have been a change dealer is that the guy was well prepared and would have included measures to deal with guns bearers as he would have known this piece of information beforehand. And it is silly to claim that people should take to carry all kind of counter measures in case of.
So what? Ambushes are negated in one way in this case: securization of a perimeter. What are these policer officers doing? They are securizing a perimeter.
So, in a typical US citizen way, US citizens are pushing for a solution that will lead to even more of the situations they say they want to eliminate.
The US citizens nature is eternal and US citizens are duplicitous.
you say we advocate for "more guns" but thats just intellectual laziness. we advocate for less gun laws. how many mass shootings at gun shows do you see? how many at places filled with children who arent allowed to have guns and cant defend themselves? your an idiot. imagine if airplane pilots could have guns. a gun is really no different then a knife or a brick you need to stop being so scared it corrupts your mind. all more gun laws do are take guns away from good people who follow the law. how about going after the major illegal arms dealers like atf, cia.
The 2nd amendment was created to give citizens the means to defend themselves from a potentially tyrannical government that might emerge.
It's very easy to completely destroy your argument.
Switzerland has the most lax gun laws in the world. Citizens are generally required BY LAW to own firearms AND maintain sufficient ammunition. The end result? The lowest crime rate in the world.
Studies have repeatedly shown that crime rate drops dramatically in areas where gun laws are less restrictive and where citizens not only own, but actively carry firearms.
As others have already posted, criminals think twice about engaging in crime when grandma can potentially cap them.
Have you ever tried to shoot accurately while being shot at? Keep in mind that our military veterans (like myself) can suppress gun fire easily from any ambush situation if within a reasonable proximity to the target. Further, veterans can safely work their way up to a target or flank a target leaving the shooter vulnerable. Even in a sniper scenario where the shooter is in deep cover, he is vulnerable to flanking maneuvers. Unexposed sniper nest are generally directional. Exposed sniper positions are just as vulnerable to be flanked if they are a lone shooter.
I do not advocate more guns, I advocate less restricted gun laws. There is no reason why a adult cannot only open carry, but conceal carry as well. It makes criminal think twice if they are not suicidal or a nut case. I also do not believe in gun registration. There is no reason the government should know who has a gun. I do believe in back ground checks and I would not have a issue with a waiting period as this allows time for someone caught up in the heat of the moment to cool down before they buy.
I think its a problem slightly similar to drunk driving. If the drunk drives safely and we all knew those people growing up, then whats the problem, the same with gun carry, if everyone was a upstanding citzen, but a few people who cant handle it blow it for everyone.
So basically, you are invoking military training, military efficiency, military knowledge when the most used solution to the problem caused by the man by the military is securization of a perimeter...
That is great. That is very US citizen. The scenario you push for is what happens when a military forces set perimeter is broken, not before. Military people prefer to establish securized perimeters to deal with these situations.
And again, check what gear this guy used. And it should be kept in mind as this guy had the advantage of the ambush, he could have brought with him measures to deal with gun bearers.
So once again, you have again a feature that is typical to US citizens, be they elite or base: create a problem and offer themselves as the solution.
The US is not the solution. The US is the problem.
.
"I just feel better about trying to convince 12 men on a jury than 6 pall bearers at my funeral." --- proud gun owner.
In his book, "More Guns, Less Crime", John Lott, economist & lawyer, University of Chicago, showed conclusively in an exhaustive treatment of the subject that open carry and concealed carry jurisdictions consistenly had far less crime that those that tried to ban guns. Crime went down in jurisdictions that had previously banned guns.
To wit, Vermont has the most lax guns laws in the USA and has the least amount of crime in the nation. Whereas Chicago has famously had a long standing ban on all guns, they came within a whisker of actually calling in the National Guard in 2010 to combat out of control street crime because their gun ban has been such a failure.
And it's not just a USA thing -- after the UK banned handguns for home defense, the rate of home invasion burglaries shot up 50%, making dangerous physical confrontations more likely. The criminals knew in advance and changed tactics.
Mexico has had a long standing effective ban on guns, and the innocents are getting mowed down. They can't defend themselves against the cartel members who know that the law-abiding populous is virtually unarmed. (And only 17% of those cartel guns come from the USA, at least until Obama started selling them AK-47s).
What's more, every year in the USA, Lott reports there are at least over 100, 000 violent crimes known to be prevented by a personal gunowner intervening to stop a crime. You'll never hear about those on TV, but it happens all the time. And we will never know how many crimes are merely prevented because a criminal moved on to easier pickings because of the likelihood of confronting a possible gunowner, but the number is at least many multiples of the known interventions, and we know all of this from interviews with prison inmates.
Called Peacemaker for a reason:
A Scared little white-haired old lady slowly edges up to a man on the street corner who has an obvious pistol holstered at his side. She's afraid, but asks if the gun is really loaded.
The man says, "Well, yes it is loaded, maam. I guess I figure it wouldn't do me much good to leave home unloaded, now, would it?"
Relieved, little old lady sighs: "Oh..... thank God! Some dodgy punks with their pants hanging down have been following me for blocks, giving my purse the real stink-eye. Could you please walk me home?
Man: "Why I'd be happy to, maam, and you're the 3rd lady this week who's asked me that. I was beginning to think I was just handsome!"
.
So what you are advocating is that no citizen should have guns, eh? So lone shooter aquires a rifle from black market channels which will ALWAYS exist, then what? Your answer, the police will save the day. Ok, in order to have police being able to quickly respond to any such incident and prevent 87 people dying, you'd need police there all the time 24/7. So police everywhere all the time keeping watch on all the citizens. This is a POLICE STATE my friend. Not to mention that all these additional police would cost millions of dollars in salaries, benefits, etc. You don't seem to get it. Citizens carrying a gun to protect themselves isn't a pretty solution, but it is the cheapest, most effective way to stop events like these from taking heavy tolls and to deter everyday crimes. You say well there would be more gun violence, I beg to differ, for if the lone shooter knows when he draws his weapon EVERY single person around him is going to draw theirs on him he will know it is a futile effort and will think twice about trying such a stunt. Besides maybe he'd get a few shots off and take down a few, but by that point a prepared citizen would also be firing shots at him. THINK about it.
US citizens and their eternal nature... Unable to accept themselves as they are so always side tracking.
I advocated nothing about guns. The sad (for US citizens) fact is that I did advocated nothing about guns because it was unnecessary to the point I made.
My comment was to point a peculiar feature of US citizens, how they advocate for something on the ground of diminishing a behaviour while actually their advocated solution has the opposite effect, it strengthens and expands the behaviour they say they want to moderate.
Calling up the Norvegian event in relation of securization of a perimeter is US citizen branded.
Even the norwegian head was aware that it would be too cheap propaganda to sell at the expectations on propaganda at his level are higher and he dismisses this as a solution.
The point is that US citizens are used to call for solutions as a remedy for a situation when actually they look at reaching the opposite effect. US citizens are duplicitous.
You can’t disinvent the gun. You can outlaw them and restrict them, but as we’ve seen over and over, laws and regs aren’t very effective in controlling black markets and psychos in the Ole USA. The world is simply a violent place. Either defend yourself or increase your likelihood of being a victim.
Much stuff has been invented so far. Does not mean that the whole of it is being produced.
The genocide in Rowanda went along just fine with mostly clubs and machetes. Firearms are an equalizer - not the motivation. If folks want to hurt someone, that's the issue and they will find a way. Defending against an unwarranted attack is a basic human right.
Guns equalize nothing. The US (classical) liberal story of equilibrium achieved by multiple forces counterbalancing each other is moot at present times. It is outlived propaganda that has shown nothing credible in reality.
And for the Rwanda story, they might be Negroes but they have known of clubs and machetes in this area for millenia now.
And rainbows have no color. By "classical" do you mean "myth narrative"? Last time I checked you get fucked up if you steal from someone. Is that not humane?
Never watched a SWAT team fuck up a family on YouTube? Platitudes only go so far. Western society isn't primal anymore. It has little concept of self-defense anymore. Self-defense is a universal right. The law of the jungle.
Tyler Durden: "Don't fuck with us."
Self defense? But guns are not meant to support self defense. Guns are meant to support an active exercize of violence, not to prevent the use of violence.
Guns equalize nothing. It is always about the biggest gun.
"Guns are meant to support an active exercize of violence"
Easy fail. Stating something as "fact" that is in reality completely false.
But, it does show a sickie mindset on your part. You fully believe in gun violence.
If you were handed a gun, you could *only* use it in a violent way. Nice of you to come "out of the closet" so to speak!
Where in Europe are you from again? Seriously...I'd like an answer.
These anti-gun troll types on message boards are usually European. They have sick attitudes towards guns in general due to their complete unfamiliarity with them as an object. Probably some Freudian deal where they feel shame towards their own penis or something.
Now if you are just a basic pure troll...feel free to carry on. You have my permission.
Yes. Self-defense is often intensely violent. I send thee a virtual daisy.
And more cheap offuscation.
People using guns for self defense are not using guns to their full capacity as it is to support an active exercize of violence.
People using guns as they are meant to usually gain an advantage to acquire more guns over not using guns for what they are meant for and reserving them to propaganda usage like self defense.
Maybe you have been drinking heavily, like me. I tend to fuck up posts and write offensive shit all the time. I always hope that the collective ZH will forgive.
Back to the topic at hand: self-defense is naturally passive, not active. DO NOT FUCK WITH US.
Otherwise, you describe the natural tendency of consolidated psychopaths very well.
No. I've just admitted and report the purpose of guns.
Guns are not equalizors. With guns, it is always about the biggest guns. And the active use of guns when successful is more efficient way to acquire bigger guns than not using guns successfully.
It has nothing to do with human nature. All about guns.
Hey man, I shall have another shot of tequila in your honor. It's foquin great to be here on ZH with you! My glass if "half-full" tonite!
Wow, it's early.
And guns are being produced...All over the world and in high quantities. So what's your point?
What is the point?
That the disiventing stuff is just sidetracking, cheap attempt at offuscation?
...
Sorry. But you are an idiot.
Don't complain about "Fast & Furious" but do please paint all US gun owners as typical. Y'all who think like this jackass can fuck off. Where I live - if and when hell breaks loose - there are too few cops covering wicked terrain. And jackasses like this expect me to NOT protect limb, life & property.
Like I said. Fuck off.
Sure, sure, keep selling US propaganda. Guns in the US wont be used most of the times for personal security as you tell but to keep doing what the US does the best: extorting the weak, farming the poor.
Other gun owners wont be a threat to you, and you wont be a threat to other gun owners.
US citizens with guns will use their guns to extort weak US citizens and farm poor US citizens, rationalizing their actions as being the fruits of their preparation. The sheeple should have known better, they pay their mistakes etc...
That is the way it will be if the US falls in such a societal collapse.