Do we really need the Police?

reply to post by jjkenobi


I have never had the Fire Department hassle me.Never had them come start a fire on my lawn or exstingiush a fire that did not exist.

If you are too ignorant to see the point of the thread dont blame me.

The law has caused the trouble in Mexico. Simple solution....legalize drugs. Problem solved.



# And someone that listens to Coast2CoastAM calling me ignorant is funny.

Not only are you ignorant but you are also quite rude.

Coast2CoastAM?

i have not read all the replies but the first few "yey"s were well put i say we still need them but i say increase their pay no double it and call them "peace officers" hire men with real brass and a strong tie to citizens they serve
then to pay for it all cut entire nations force in half
that just might work

Originally posted by Tindalos2013
I have mixed feelings about the police (in the U.K.) becase on the one had they are needed to deal with crime incidents as seen on Crime Watch UK and other similar shows but at the same time I have been stopped and asked questions about who I am, where I live, where I have been/going, what I am doing etc. for no particular reason. Sure I like to take early morning walks (2-4am) into town and back just for the exercise and I find it amusing to answer their questions only to have them get all snarky with me.

Example 1

Me. (Sitting on a park bench, police car pulls up a two Police Officers get out)
1st PO. What are you doing?

Me. I am looking at the stars and enjoying the quiet of the night.
1st PO. What your name?

Me. Scully Tindalos
1st PO. Is that your real name? Sounds made up. (Tells me to stand up and empty my pockets)
2nd PO. Why have you got two mobile phones?

Me. I always like to have a spare just in case (note I had a 3rd phone that I didnt reveal)
1st PO. Calls in on radio to check if I am 'known' to the police.

2nd PO looks inside my tobbaco case (for evidence of illegal drugs probably) Why have you got a small torch?
Me. It comes in handy for illuminating the dark when I walk through parks and fields at night.
(I tell them where I live etc)

2nd PO. Why are you smiling? I dont like it, makes me think you are getting one over on me.
Me. I sit back down on the bench.

1st PO tells me to stand back up.
Me. Who are you? Can I see both of your ID's please. (they have to comply with this request)

2nd PO. You shouldnt be wandering around at this time of the morning, you might be looking for cars to steal or breaking into houses.
Me. I can walk around at any time I feel like regardless of what you might think. Can I go now?

Fair enough, though I think most people would consider you somewhat cheeky.

If I worked in a shop and someone stood next to the till, not buying anything, simply stating they 'liked that bit of carpet to stand on', then I would feel like someone was trying to take the mickey.

Yes, perhaps at the end of their shift (e.g. 3am) they may be somewhat cranky with someone who provides (presumably) false details for no apparent reason - your being in the park is of course completely legitimate but very unusual and a large number of individuals out and about at 3am in the morning, giving false details and carrying a torch would certainly meet several characteristics of a burglar (not saying you are of course, star watching in parks can indeed be joyous!)

You should be very pleased that they showed you ID - as there is no legal requirement to do so - only to provide a collar number and station name (unless they were in plain clothes) www.northants.police.uk...

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by theovermensch

 

I believe there is.

There is certainly a mentality among law enforcement that needs to be discouraged and we need to re-train police to understand their rights and limitations as well as our own.

A lot of the time unfortunetly police are put in situations where thinking will get you killed. There are things we the people need to work on, and things that our police services must work on.

~Keeper

Law enforcement is just that. To enforce the law. Its not the public who dictates the law. It is the government, the democracy.

The law enforcement is in place to make sure the public submit to the law. Therefore the law enforcement is in reality a instrument for the governments to govern the law on to the people. Its not a instrument to protect us but to protect the law "The government".

In most all cased the police enters the seen after a crime is committed. There for there is no real protection. Only justice. Justis is a form for settlement between a person and the governed laws. The governed law needs law enforcers (force of power) to be able to conduct its business.

We have to change a lot to be able to have the police on our side.

reply to post by spy66

Text A democratic mob comes in many shapes and size. It can be the EU, The US, China and so on.

Awesome pic by the way. I love Spy vs Spy

reply to post by theovermensch


Unfortunately yes we do. Because we cannot take care of ourselves and when the SHTF we will need someone to come and steal all our stuff so they can have it and we can all suffer and die.


Why

Because that is just the way it is.

reply to post by Rocky Black


I like your location

That is a good motto.

Sums the thread up nicely.

Live free or die.

reply to post by spy66


Actually you don't need to change a thing if you know what laws are legal, and which ones are lawfull.

There is a very big difference between the two.

I'll link Ebook here, take it as you will, it's for informational purposes only, I do not suggest you follow what is said, but it gives you a damn good understanding of how your rights have been trampled on and how you've been lied to about what your rights are and how you can get them back.

Read at your own risk.

Freedom Is More Than a 7 Letter Word

Enjoy.

~Keeper

When you expand the question out, it becomes: do we need government; can we self-govern.

Our species is simply not ready for anarchy.

Well, actually, I think it's more that the circumstances in which we live necessitates governance, and authority.

I think our currently aggressive nature is not just how we are period, rather how we have come to be because of instinctual drives interacting with the environment.

Basically what I mean is that there are far too many people, and to little resources to effectively work in a peaceful state of anarchy.

Just note the differences between a big city and the country to get an example of this.

If I travel out to rural areas, everyone is more hospitable, drive slower, are more calm, have a better sense of community, etc..

So in some areas that have low population density, and plentiful resources? Sure. You could go without having police. The community could handle their affairs effectively. As for urban, industrialized zones? Not a chance in hell.

reply to post by spy66


Err what about the crimes that the Police prevent simply by being in existence? Hard to measure but most definately a factor - those things you 'wish' you could do but - wait - arrest and jail mean its not worth it.

Furthermore, even taking the point and example you make - i.e. police attending the scene of a crime after its been committed - very often, attendance at that crime ensures they can catch the criminal/s - thus preventing further crimes.

It seems like the police cant win - if they can only react, then you seem to think them worthless - if they try and pre-empt a crime, then they are accused of acting out of hand or 'victimising' people.

Text Cops arguing against their having/owning/carrying guns: "If you lawfully have a gun in your home, that doesn't mean it can't ultimately become a threat," Hartman said. "If your home is burglarized and the gun is stolen, then that gun floats from one criminal activity to another throughout the community. That's why it's important that we accept these guns from anyone, no questions asked." link Stats indicating police are many times more prone to violence, self-medication, and emotional instability than non-cops: Domestic violence is 2 to 4 times more common in police families than in the general population. In two separate studies, 40% of police officers self-report that they have used violence against their domestic partners within the last year. In the general population, it's estimated that domestic violence occurs in about 10% of families. www.purpleberets.org... Research has revealed a strong connection between occupational stress and alcohol and drug abuse, but also a strong sub-cultural more among police officers that encourages drinking both for social and stress-reduction purposes. Alcohol consumption among police officers is also correlated with officer suicides and domestic violence, and many departments are beginning to recognize the liability in allowing this problem to go untreated. milestonegroupnj.com... Police mortality studies have demonstrated that officers are afflicted with stress-related disease at a higher rate than the general population. www.jimstonjournal.com... The joke is that we elevate them above everyone else while the punchline is that they're ticking time-bombs comparatively far more broken and sick than everyone else.

I just read this reply to a different thread titled Cops Shouldnt Carry Guns. I think 'thisguyrighthere' sums things up better than I have. Not only are the Police somewhat unnecassary and overkill,there is also no reason they should be held so highly.I think the fact that we elevate them above the rest of us creates an environment that is conducive to Police Brutality being accepted. Its almost as if the Police have immunity when it comes to assault, manslaughter and even murder at times. Police should be held to the same standards as the rest of us.

Thats if we must have them. I still dont think they are needed.

reply to post by theovermensch


With respect, exactly the same arguments regarding elevated rates of self-abuse / domestic violence / mental health issues can be made against many sub-sections of the populace (here in the UK, at least). Specifically, the long term unemployed, armed forces personnel (serving and ex), working class etc. These are periodically supported and then disproven by studies and statistics...I think a more reasonable conclusion would be that those under stress are more likely to suffer some form of breakdown or mental disturbance. Im not in any way justifying the behaviour, but trying to rationalise and understand it (if, indeed, it occurs).

In any case, there are tens of thousands of police on duty in any country at any time. They would deal with anything from 1 - 100 members of the public in a shift. If they are so abusive / power hungry / depraved / sadistic / brutal as you claim, why is it that examples of such behaviour are so rare? Before you say it, i'm not just talking about something on the MSM - i'm talking word of mouth, anecdotal evidence from friends and family.

As a working class guy in an average area of the UK, I can safely say i've never heard of an incident of police heavy handed ness or brutality - other than perhaps a handful of occasions on MSM - though of course, i'm not supposed to believe that, am I?

reply to post by ComeFindMe

Text As a working class guy in an average area of the UK, I can safely say i've never heard of an incident of police heavy handed ness or brutality - other than perhaps a handful of occasions

A handful of occasions is a handful too many.

I do agree with some of what you are saying though but the guns/brutality issues are just part of the problem with the police. The 'Tip of the Iceburg' if you will.
If you feel relieved and safe when you see a cop car or uniform I am happy for you but when I see those things it makes me feel uneasy.And the scary thing is I am not doing anything wrong. I think alot of people feel that way,not just the crims.

reply to post by theovermensch


I agree - and in cases where power has been abused, or a position of power has been abused, the strongest possible punishment should be applied.

The trouble is overmensch, if the police forces of the world were dissolved overnight, people like me and you would wake up and strive to make the world a better place - make our communities stronger, make our families and loved ones happier, innovate and improve. However, there is an element - and it need only be 0.001% of our respective country's population - that would see it as an opportunity to selfishly take what they want, not what they deserve.

What if I lived in a remote farmhouse, living a simple life and an armed group came along one day, shot my family and kicked me out - who could I go to? Why would someone that way inclined NOT do it, if there was no police, no punishment?

It's an interesting and emotive topic!

reply to post by ComeFindMe


Yeah,the crazy thing is the Law in some cases punishes us for protesting ourselves. Its like they want us to feel helpless in a way.

this is an interesting post... and it kinda goes back to that woman who was murdered by her boyfriend (she had gotten a restraining order) yet the police couldn't help in this situation.. If California had looser laws on guns... you know concealed permits were easier to get would this have been avoided?

I think the real question is... Did the gov. take too much away from us to let us defend ourselves?

reply to post by theovermensch


But what I meant in that example was in a police-less society, what would happen when deviance or crime occurs? I'm trying - and failing - to find a reference to a sociological point I read about once - that is, in a Society of Angels, there will still be deviance in some form.

And back to your comment - the reality is that common-sense for many people doesn't prevail - and that the police act as a buffer in those cases. If we all went round avenging and retributing, society would be a pretty sorry state! A one-size-fits-all approach to law keeping will never be perfect - but in all honesty, I believe that when you look at the world we live in and the types of people that live in it, it may be the closest we're gonna get.

reply to post by ComeFindMe

Text What if I lived in a remote farmhouse, living a simple life and an armed group came along one day, shot my family and kicked me out - who could I go to? Why would someone that way inclined NOT do it, if there was no police, no punishment?

In my world you would go to the nearest Pub/Bar and tell the people. I think an armed group would be formed against these people that was alot scarier than the Police and the group would be dealt with. But again I agree,we dont want a Mad Max/Road Warrior set up. Maybe there is a happy medium. I really think the majority of Police simply raise revenue.

Originally posted by ComeFindMeWhy would someone that way inclined NOT do it, if there was no police, no punishment?

Punishment is not a deterrent. America's largest prison population in the world is testament to that.

Besides, what good is punishment? Say this group came in and kicked you off your land, took over your property, maybe even killed your family members. What punishment is going to make that right?

Punishment is pointless. Prevention is the only thing that matters. The only person who can prevent you from being made victim is yourself. This is the reality of criminal behavior and no judicial system of any government has ever proven this untrue.

At best police serve as a vehicle for petty vengeance. At worst police serve to justify their own existence by seeking out charges which leads to corruption and an over-abundance of redundant law which simply criminalizes every last one of us whether we know it or not.

Police came into existence to fill a void created by weak men.

Hell, they made it illegal to act in any way shape or form like one of them. That tells you right there theyre scared of being discovered as useless.

reply to post by ComeFindMe


check this out as a reference real fast... kinda goes to show what would happen I think

en.wikipedia.org...