To love... or hate... the Police... That is NOT the question.

Well ATS its time to start acting like grownups again...

To love... or to hate... the Police... That is NOT the question!

Over the course of the last few months ATS has been flooded with threads about how our police have been blatantly abusing their authoritative powers.

I might take flak for the following comment but here goes... Police are only doing the jobs we have enabled them to. The argument here on ATS as well as other online forums and even IRL (In Real Life) political events should not be whether police are criminals and abusers. (They are without a doubt.)

The questions should be:

How have we confused the meaning of the law?
Do police even know the difference?
What important lessons need to be learned before we can change the standards?
How can we enable change?

In the following thread I will present to ATS and the online community in general in the plainest possible terms why I believe what I believe. I will try my hardest to leave my background in professional law out of it as to not confuse people.

How have we confused the meaning of the law?
The answer is simple, deception. While that statement in and of itself does little to explain the confusion it helps form a basis of understanding of why we are confused as to the meanings of law.

It takes little critical thinking skills to figure out why it would be in the best interests of powerful men to deceive the average man and woman into confusing the law with that of a legal system. Obviously control of man and the resources of the planet come to mind.

Pretty much everyone knows 3 things about the law.

1. Ignorance is no excuse.
2. It costs lots of money to be a lawyer.
3. Lawyers get paid lots of money.

In court your opinion counts for nothing, on the other hand if you are a judge or an attorney your opinion can mean the world. We accept this as apparently these people are the professionals. They have after all been trained in the law. When we look back and consider the path a person is required to walk to become a lawyer it is easy to see how abuse could run rampant.

To attend law school:

You must be in the upper 10-15% of your university class in terms of grading. You must pay obscene amounts of money to a law school to join. Your education will take the better part of 4 years.

To interpret (practice) law:

You must have attended an accredited law school, swear an oath to your local law society (?!), and pay fees to said society.

This power structure is not hard to understand, only the smartest, most wealthy are able to join the club then they are taught how to think by the top members of the society, so to speak. An elite few by definition.

In court a judge will have no problem looking you in the eye and saying. "IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE!" As a matter of fact he is right. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for anyone. Frédéric Bastiat said it better than I.
The Law -- Frédéric Bastiat

What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?

If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.

Can you see the difference now between the law and a legal system? This is the source of confusion for many people. They have been lead to believe that the legal system is in fact the law.

The Law contemplates the spirit of the law and is embodied in the moral and ethical consideration of rendering unto each man his due. Legal is the 'form of the law' and merely means that it is written down someplace. It is quite possible for something to be "legal" and still be totally unlawful.

Do police even know the difference?
Obviously not. As we see on ATS police will quote a statute then defend their actions on that statute until their dying breath. Is this so hard for all of us non police officers to understand? Not really. I mean when we put ourselves in their shoes we can understand that they are only doing what they have been taught and justifying their jobs. Almost everyone I know will justify their job. Police are no different. Many are as fed up as the average person, some even more so.

If we use the current case of Emily Good as an example here. If the video she was filming made itself public without her arrest the officer more likely than not would be facing disciplinary actions at work. The reason being he has a job to do. That job is to enforce the legal system. Not provide lawful justice. The public as a whole is as confused as police in this regard. The public honestly believe the police are meant to enforce law.

Law does not need to be enforced. Only justice need be administered. Not the job of police, they tell us this on ATS everyday.

What important lessons need to be learned before we can change the standards?

The first would be that the job of police is to not enforce law. The job of police is to enforce the acts and statutes of a legal system.

The law and the legal system are no longer one and the same. Sure it started out that way but not any longer.

We must shed the confusion of the terms law, legal, society and government.

Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

How can we enable change?

By doing what we are doing now. By shining a spot light on every single abuse of the law we can find. Unfortunately police are the front line force used by the powerful elite to protect the existing power structures. So we are going to find that police are going to be the front line abusers of law as well. But the idea is to not blame them for the abuse of the system itself, only hold them accountable for their own actions so they can set an example for their fellow officers.

We can clearly see on ATS the winds of change are blowing. If the attitudes of this website are any indication people just want to be left alone unless they specifically ask for help. As long as they are not hurting anyone (breaking the law) I don't see any problems with this.

-Lightrule

Its funny how police officers these days think they ARE the law.

Do you even have to graduate from high-school to become an officer?

To attend law school:
You must be in the upper 10-15% of your university class in terms of grading.

Solid post. I like it- a lot.

Some things in there I wasn't aware of and some more reading material on my list.

I would add though that there has been a consistent pressure on the American people as a whole to abrogate their responsibility for their own safety and well being to the government- essentially FORCING people to rely on the police. Once that reliance was established then TPTB corrupted what should be a noble profession into "law enforcement".

There is a definite need for investigative bodies with arrest powers however. If someone were to rape my wife or steal my car I do not have the resources, as an individual, to track down whoever did the crime or the ability to process evidence.

Other than that- spot on

reply to post by balon0


When I worked in the states many of the smaller police departments only required a high school diploma. Most of the bigger ones were asking for at least a 4 year college degree.

In Canada most only require a high school level education but more and more we are seeing they want a 4 year degree as well.

Of course it helps if the degree is in a related field but if its not that's OK too.

In my opinion police should be required to go to law school, they enforce "laws" and carry a gun while doing it, lawyers don't get to carry guns...

-Lightrule

There is a great deal of truth to what you say. Police are indeed doing the job we have enabled them to do through our laziness in not knowing and understanding basic rights and laws. When we as a whole have become more interested in playing online games and having more toys then the Jones instead of being a community then we leave gaps that must be filled. It used to be that we knew our neighbors and watched out for them and they in turn did the same; when and why did that stop?

It's past time we stepped up to the plate and took responsibility for our actions, our communities, our neighborhoods and our families. If we wish a safe polite society we need to take it upon ourselves to work at it and not expect the police to magically do it for us. Respect is a two way street but before we respect others we must respect ourselves and live up to our responsibilities. People wonder why violence is up and our kids are running wild; we've taught them to expect to have everything handed to them without having to work for it. We've taught them that it's okay to be mediocre. It's appalling to see that school sports often do not keep score lest the losing team have hurt feelings; when our children screw up as they all will we do our level best to keep them from facing the consequences. It's a fact of life there are always winners and losers; when you screw up in real life there are consequences; keeping kids from learning that is doing them no favors.

When we decided to ignore our responsibilities we began to lose our freedoms. The police departments are doing exactly the job we gave them.

reply to post by SFA437


Exactly, by slowly forcing the public as a whole to rely less on themselves and more on government (police) we rather effectively allowed the chains of oppression to be slipped on.

The idea of police when discussing the law makes a lot of sense, have a group of people lawfully band together to defend the rights of others. Police today do not fit this description.

-Lightrule

If you were in the military you have a better chance among other non-military candidates to land a job as a police officer. It would make sense since they've already been trained on handling guns, their in top shape, they've been trained on how to raid homes, follow orders, and they know how to defend themselves.

I think the problem some of these police officers run into, is adjusting from apprehending enemy combatants to apprehending civilians. They're used to following orders without hesitation and using brutal force in a time of war. Now when they're faced with apprehending citizens, they don't realize they're in the public eye and they revert back to their military training.

There's no doubt being a police officer has to be a stressful job. They're only human, but some of the videos I've watched here on ATS show blatant misuse of their authority and over stepping our American civil rights.

Just my opinion.

"The public honestly believe the police are meant to enforce law."

Yes, when the police call themselves law enforcement and go about 'just doing there jobs' in that manner it can get very confusing for some people.

People have been lazy, not simply in not being willing to take care of themselves but in not telling the government that we don't want the police to take care of us...for us.

Your right things at the top of the pyramid need to be changed, thank you for your OP, I'll try and remember the difference between the definition of law and legal, I believe that I have had it right in my thinking, just not the terms.

reply to post by gallopinghordes


I couldn't have said it any better myself, had to give you a star for this one my friend!

You are exactly right, everyone big or small, young or old needs to take an active interest in making our society a safe place. The police were never meant to be a magic bullet to stop tyranny, they were meant to be a tool to help us defend our rights. Tools must be used correctly (with the proper protective gear) or else they can hurt or kill you.

Many police officers feel that because some people like myself call them out on these issues that I am against the idea of police as a whole... So the part above about socialists. Haha. The existing power structures love to point a finger and cry Anarchist.

-Lightrule