Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Theater of the Absurd (Updated)

It's difficult to believe that viewing the epic cinematic debacle Troy could be the high point of an evening, but such was the case for two Utah couples on the evening of May 23, 2004.

Harold Curtis and his wife Leslie settled into their seats at a Provo movie theater after paying the extortionate admission price and absorbing a second hit at the concession counter. When the lights went down, they were unsettled to hear a persistent stream of chatter, much of it in Spanish, coming from the row behind them.

This is, of course, the creature that haunts every movie-goer's imagination: The Thing That Won't Shut Up. Most movie patrons have had at least one outing ruined by the incessant, deafening wind blowing out of some nit-wit's gaping skull-cave. As the previews continued, Harold politely but insistently asked the couple sitting behind them – Vanessa Arnold and her boyfriend, Lorenzo Castillo – to quiet down.

Arnold later said that she was translating the previews into Spanish for Castillo, and that the two of them were quiet during the feature presentation. This much was confirmed by an eyewitness. Arnold also claims that Curtis glared at them several times, used a racial slur, and called her a “bitch.”

Following the movie, Curtis reportedly stood up and glared at the couple, and then followed them into the lobby, demanding that they reimburse him and his wife the price of a ticket.

This was a reasonable request made to the wrong party and at the wrong time. If Arnold and Castillo's conduct had robbed Curtis and his wife of their movie experience, Curtis should have complained to the theater management while the film was in progress. The management most likely would have refunded the ticket price or offered the couple a pass to another showing. And they would probably have evicted Arnold and Castillo from the theater, calling the police to do so if necessary.

(And, come to think of it, this was a perfect opportunity to score tickets to a better film -- and just about anything would have been an improvement over Troy.)

Ah, but therein lies the rub: Harold Curtis is a Utah County Deputy Sheriff, and to him this unfortunate episode represented a chance to assert his authoritah.

After Castillo refused to cough up the price of two movie tickets, Curtis flashed his badge and placed him under arrest. Curtis later claimed that this was necessary because Castillo had approached him with clenched fists. According to Arnold's account of the incident, it was Curtis who provoked the confrontation by approaching Castillo and sneering, “Do you want to play?” Betty Jo Searle, a witness who was 15 at the time of the incident, has also testified that Curtis acted as the aggressor.

Curtis insists that he arrested Castillo in order to “defuse” the situation – as if simply stepping off and taking his complaint to the theater management wasn't an option. After Searle and her date asked Curtis what was going on, he showed them his badge and “said we needed to walk away,” the young lady recalled.

Actually, this was a case in which butting in was eminently justifiable and desperately needed.

As Curtis moved to place Castillo under arrest, Arnold lost her composure, reportedly yelling “Don't do this! No, no no – stop it” and throwing herself on him. Arnold is 5'3 and 110 pounds. Curtis is approximately the size of one of the lesser Kuiper Belt Objects, although nowhere near as cool. (Like most members of the not-so-Thin Blue Line, Curtis is obviously not a slave to his conditioning program.) Yet both Curtis and his wife later professed to have been greatly alarmed by this “assault.”

Arnold, predictably, got the worst of it: She was shrugged off and ended up at the bottom of some stairs. She says Curtis threw her there; Searle says Curtis “just dropped her” down the stairs. Leslie Curtis later testified in court that Arnold jumped on her husband's back, wrapping her legs around his waist and putting her hands around his throat.

On cross-examination, it was pointed out that Mrs. Curtis's testimony different significantly from her account in the original police report, which stated only that Arnold had grabbed her husband at the waist. Apparently she had exercised a congressional privilege by “revising and extending” her testimony to make the supposed assault on her husband more dramatic, albeit thoroughly implausible. (For one thing, Curtis has no visible neck, which would make it difficult for a woman Arnold's size to strangle him.)

Leslie Curtis's version of events was largely supported by the testimony of Cheri Wolley, who told the court she had seen “a man and two Hispanics” arguing in the lobby, and that she had seen the Hispanic male “take a swing at the white man.” She didn't volunteer that she had served on the police force for several years, a fact she acknowledged only when it was pried out of her by Arnold's attorney. That fact, of course, doesn't impeach her testimony. The fact that she walked out of court holding hands with Mrs. Curtis, however, does – or at least it appeared to in the eyes of the jurors who noticed that detail.

It's curious as well that Curtis didn't remember Castillo taking a swing at him. The fact that Curtis released Castillo shortly after the arrest, rather than booking him on assault charges, also tends to undermine Wolley's version of events. Castillo later sued Curtis for false arrest, and settled out of court.

Arnold also sued Curtis for using excessive force and sundry violations of her constitutionally protected rights. She claimed significant and lasting injury as a result of her tumble down the stairs. That claim dissolved when the federal jury hearing the case was shown video, taken by a private investigator, of Arnold functioning quite normally despite supposedly debilitating injuries to her head and back.

Stymied by contending narratives that contradicted each other on several key points, the jury took about an hour to determine that the alleged injuries inflicted on Arnold by Curtis didn't “shock the conscience,” and found in favor of the deputy. This appears to be an appropriate end to an entirely contrived lawsuit. But that doesn't mean Curtis is entirely blameless.

Peter Stirba, Curtis's attorney, notes that “Your reputation and the way you serve is a big part of being a police officer.” Curtis went into the case with a troubled reputation, having been sued – unsuccessfully – for alleged abuses committed as a guard at the county jail. However boorish and inexcusable the behavior of Arnold and Castillo, Curtis is, by his own admission, the one who precipitated the altercation, doing so needlessly under the color of his supposed authority.

A ruling issued last August 1 by the US Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals notes that, according to Curtis's narrative, he told Castillo “he could not leave until the matter [of buying replacement tickets] was settled”; it was then, according to Curtis, that Castillo “clenched his fists, and Mr. Curtis understood him to threaten a fight.”

Well ... no, the last assumption doesn't necessarily follow from the first. Clenching one's fist is a reflexive expression of anger; cocking a fist constitutes a threat. More to the point: Curtis was trying to detain Castillo before identifying himself as a police officer.

Castillo's theater etiquette is badly in need of repair, but how was he supposed to react when a corpulent, officious guy who called his date a “bitch” and used a racial slur (a charge, notes the Tenth Circuit Court's ruling, Curtis effectively conceded) threatens to keep him in the theater to “settle” the dispute?

Clearly, on the basis of Curtis's own account, it was he who instigated whatever scuffle took place, as the eyewitness Betty Jo Searle confirmed. And it was after he had done so that Curtis whipped out the chintzy piece of costume jewelry that he apparently thinks elevates him above the rest of us.

That same poisonous assumption was the basis of the federal jury's ruling in Curtis's favor. As Austen Johnson, Arnold's attorney, points out, Curtis “enjoyed a higher legal burden of proof” because he was trying to arrest Castillo. A mere civilian wouldn't be entitled to such deference. And apparently this is the case despite the fact that Curtis was acting as a civilian when he provoked Castillo.

Of course, even if Curtis had identified himself as a police officer before threatening to detain Castillo in the lobby, the proper response would have been to say, “So what?” An officer who is a party to a dispute of this kind cannot in propriety be the officer who intervenes to settle that dispute.

This isn't the first time this kind of thing has happened in Utah. Back in August 2006, a Kosovar refugee in Salt Lake City was threatened with arrest after a pick-up basketball game at a Gold's Gym got a little rough. One of the players was an off-duty police officer who wanted to arrest the refugee, on the belief that his aggressive low-post game constituted “assault.”

Armed with a shotgun and supported by some of his buddies, the policeman chased the refugee to his car, prevented him from leaving the parking lot, and treated him to several choruses of profane verbal abuse as he dialed 9-11 and waited for other officers to arrive:

“You want to start something [Oedipal epithet deleted]? What you pulled in there is called an assault... You want to start sh*t right now?... Get out here [Oedipal epithet again deleted]. You're f*****g with the wrong people.... You know what I am?... I will put you under arrest! Get out of the car right now. If you don't get out of the car I will place you under arrest for resisting arrest. Get out of the car right now!”

The officer, Marcus Barrett, later pleaded no contest to a disorderly conduct charge, paid a $200 fine, and left the police force. Given that the entire incident began when he attacked the refugee with his fists, Barrett should have been prosecuted for assault and for false imprisonment. But the most serious charges were dropped, most likely because – once again – as an off-duty police officer Barrett was the beneficiary of “a higher legal burden of proof.”

Here's the real outrage:

Despite being described by one member of Utah's Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) board as “an officer completely out of control” who should not be on the streets, Barrett was not permanently cashiered; instead, he and the Utah POST board agreed on a three-year-suspension last June. That means he should be eligible for reinstatement as early as 2010.

Here's where the outrage deepens:

Utah state senator Chris Buttars (who is – need I even specify as much? -- a Republican) has proposed a measure, SB260, that would “classify a record of formal charges or disciplinary actions against a peace officer as a private record, unless the peace officer consents, in writing, to make the record public.”

If that measure is enacted it would mean that next time an off-duty cop in Utah provokes a melee in a theater lobby, or beats up another player in a pick-up b-ball game and chases the guy into the parking lot with a shotgun, the victims wouldn't be able to learn if the incident was part of a larger pattern of abusive behavior.

Oh, should I even bother to mention that Utah County Sheriff James Tracy said that an internal investigation of Curtis's conduct found that his actions “did not violate office policy”?

It's Footloose gone fascist: Bucket-heads from Utah County SWAT teams attack party-goers at an August 2005 dance party.

That's the same Utah County Sheriff Tracey, of course, who dispatched SWAT teams to break up a peaceful dance party a couple of years ago. And this is the same Utah County, of course, where elderly women can be thrown to the ground and arrested for not watering their lawns.

The next time I hear a sheriff or police chief admit that the bullying, corrupt, needlessly provocative, or abusive behavior of an officer does violate department policy ... will be the first.


"Just what the hell is the matter with the police in this country?"

I'm asked that question constantly, and can't adequately answer it despite the fact that I've studied this issue for literally decades -- including for a stretch waaaaaaaay back in my teen years when I seriously considered a career in law enforcement. I can diagnose the issue in political, demographic, and ideological terms; I describe the insidious influence of federal subsidies, regulations, and blackmail (in the form of litigation, consent decrees, and the like); I can sermonize about the unhappy results when unchecked power is combined with the results of Original Sin....

And even then, I still find myself unable even to begin to explain spectacles like this, or to witness them on video without wanting, at the very least, to track down this power-intoxicated punk-a$$ bully and beat the snot out of him:

Officer Rivieri presents an impressive recital of pseudo-tough-guy mannerisms -- from the affected "Command Voice," to the comically theatrical flaring of non-existent lats, to the swagger-waddle (call it a "swaddle") of supposed authority, to the criminal assault on a skinny, terrified kid. I'm forced to agree with him in one respect, though: He's not a man, nor any part thereof.

Nor should we neglect episodes like this one, in which a group of deputy sheriffs dump a quadriplegic on the floor like so much soiled laundry. This incident, by the way, resulted in one of the very few instances in which a police official -- in this case the Chief Deputy, not the Sheriff himself -- initially refused to defend the actions of the officers:

The emerging homeland security state is the subject of my new book, Liberty in Eclipse, which is on sale now.

Dum spiro, pugno!


Doc Ellis 124 said...

Is UT a concealed-carry state? If not, would this have happened in a concealed carry state the way it happened in UT?
I have noticed that where you can legally carry a concealed weapon neither private bad guys nor state employess know who is armed. Am I asking something that everybody else knows?

Anonymous said...

Doc ellis 124 -

Yep, they know. That Motorola tells them you are in the database that holds all those folks who have gone thru the concealed carry course. If you are going to conceal carry, better to do so the Constitutional way...without a by-your-leave.

Concealed carry only allows the government to look like it is giving you a privilege you already have free and clear thru the Constitution.

Personally, I don't want to be on ANOTHER database!

Anonymous said...

What did Claire Wolfe and Boston T. Party say about the police? Don't call them for ANYTHING! People must learn to equip themselves with the means of self defence and not rely upon the State's bellicose bullies in blue....or paramilitary black, which appears to be their preferred colour these days.
-Rorri W.

Al Newberry said...

“a man and two Hispanics”

That description right there tells me all I need to know about the witness. Didn't even have the decency to describe the victims as human beings, but by their perceived heritage.

That bully cop with the 14 year-old kid should be drawn and quartered.

Is it too much to ask to expect police officers to treat citizens as human beings (as they once did)? I think any officer who tries to act in an official capacity while off duty should be charged with Impersonating an Officer.

Anonymous said...

The abusive behaviors documented here and elsewhere were far less commonplace when America was a more homogeneous culture.

If that basic fact upsets the puerile liberty lover, then so be it. One simply cannot have both a legislated multi-cultural society and an organic peace, love, and understanding-based society at once. Again; if certain unpopular realities bother or "offend", then it's most likely time to wake up and smell the coffee for what it is rather than what one dreams it to be.

Zachary said...

I was listening to the Alex Jones show a few days ago. Andrew Napolitano was a guest and he said that in Texas, if you are being falsely arrested anywhere or anytime you can use lethal force to stop that arrest. Other states either require you to submit and let the courts sort it out or meet "force with force." That is, you can use whatever force the officer is using to falsely arrest you. I mention this because I know that question has been raised before.

prairiesurfer said...

Gee, Deputy Curtis must have gone to the same "cop school" as these Tampa cops, who didn't believe a quadriplegic was really quadriplegic, so they dumped him out of his wheel chair to find out...BTW, he was arrested for a "traffic offense".


Anonymous said...

Do you want to know why cops act the way they do? It's not complex.

Ever notice that the people working at the DMV can hardly speak English, are rude, unprofessional, and obviously don't care about the quality of their work? Care to guess why? They, and their supervisors, and indeed, the whole DMV, have something called a monopoly. You will get your car registered, you will get your traveling permission slip, and you will get your permission plates, or you will pay a fine or go to prison. DMV is the only place you can do those things. They're not going to lose their jobs for doing them poorly. Their pay is secure: their paycheck is transferred, by gunpoint, from people who actually work and offer voluntary goods and services, to these miscreants. It's called taxation.

A policeman is nothing more than a person whose job it is to protect the individual rights of individual men. Not the rights of God, not the will of the State. The rights of men. Life, liberty, and property. Period. There is no reason why these ends cannot be accomplished by private companies, operating on much the same principle as a car insurance company.

When you give monopoly power of violence to anyone, he is going to act like he has a monopoly: he will do anything he damn well pleases, because his paycheck is secure. So is that of his supervisor. They have no monetary incentive to offer high-quality service, or to treat anyone with respect.

In a real business, the workers must strive to treat their customers with respect. Otherwise, their customers will take their business and their money elsewhere. Again: this is not the case in a monopoly. These animated entities (in lieu of more aptly descriptive, yet less charitable terms)are coercively funded. You either pay the money they tell you that you owe, or your door is kicked down, and you are arrested or shot, or both.

As long as you have policemen funded with money taken by force or the threat thereof, you will have this bestial behavior. Privatize the police, and I guarantee these badgethugs will be weeded out in a heartbeat.

-Sans Authoritas

dixiedog said...

Will, I really think I would be in jail right now if I was the kid in that first video. In fact, it would've been nigh impossible for me to even remain cool. I'd have simply tried to remain silent throughout, but my blood pressure would've risen into the stratosphere! Only his gun (not his badge!), I'm afraid, would've kept me in check.

I'd have described that savage as just that, or a state-sanctioned barbarian with badge, to anyone who would've listened in the cell and among the other tax-consuming paladins in the premises. I'm glad someone had a camera to catch that nauseating cretin and slap it up on Youtube.

But I must ask, will that community become enraged and demand punitive action?? I can only hope so.

Just a note about the second video. The victim in the wheelchair appears to be a paraplegic rather than a quadriplegic, simply judging by observing the video here, although that certainly doesn't lessen in any way the injustice perpetrated upon the person in that wheelchair. Either way, he was obviously incapable of normal mobility.

And in the second video, if I had witnessed that entire episode and the attendant action by the police, my freedom would've (or my life possibly would've) just ended permanently that day!

Seriously, time for apathetic passivity is long past and it's now time to react when/if we witness these actions. I've not yet witnessed these kinds of antics myself.

Is UT a concealed-carry state? If not, would this have happened in a concealed carry state the way it happened in UT?

doc ellis 124, yes it could and most likely would happen in a CCW state as well because, if you've been issued a CCW license, the Leviathanette (and by extension Daddy Leviathan) will likely already know about it before they commence whatever action. In fact, you'll probably be treated more harshly (like that really would be a surprise?).

However, in many areas in VA you can open-carry in public locales with no problem. That defeats the purpose of a viable defense, obviously, since you'll be the first line target in any crime in progress, or otherwise having to endure the aftermaths of the inevitable 911 calls from terrified soccer mammas and effeminate men in the immediate area...sigh. I'm not jokin', it happens!

On another note, in Virginia, a first time charge of carrying an unlicensed concealed weapon is a misdemeanor ( I forget what class). Serious? Indeed, but survivable and, depending on the circumstances upon which you were charged, can be dismissed or the charge reduced.

At least I take comfort in the fact that Idaho is among the states that do honor VA CCWs. However, unfortunately, some southern states like SC, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia do not.


Al Newberry said...

Sans Authoritas,

Thanks for your comments. I couldn't agree more.

Bob said...

I believe that that Baltimore policeman who committed police brutality on that 14-year-old skateboarder has been suspended.

Doc Ellis 124 said...


would deputy Curtis have acted in the moveie theatre as he did if he knew that the other guy was or could be carrying?

Did he have a Motorola with him at the time?


Doc Ellis 124 said...


would deputy Curtis have acted in the moveie theatre as he did if he knew that the other guy was or could be carrying?

Did he have a Motorola with him at the time?


dixiedog said...

would deputy Curtis have acted in the moveie theatre as he did if he knew that the other guy was or could be carrying?

Did he have a Motorola with him at the time?

Well, obviously, I don't know if he had a radio with him at the time or not. Regardless, that is nonetheless extraneous concerning this particular event. I mean, assuming Curtis had no radio, and assuming that Utah allows CC, how would the copper know whether the man was carrying? He still acted like a punk regardless. So from that, I can't see how whether the victim was carrying or not would've deflated how Curtis chose to act upon this guy.

Of course, it must be pointed out that Curtis was not acting against this victim on behalf the department from the get go, only that he belatedly used the implied power of the department to back him up after the thug in him was at full bore. Certainly, if the deputy was acting on behalf of the department, he would certainly have had a radio handy ;), in any case, and used it to learn any pertinent info about this guy the Leviathanette had handy beforehand.

Ergo, that being the case:

"...will likely already know about it before they commence whatever action. In fact, you'll probably be treated more harshly (like that really would be a surprise?)."

For example, if you possess a CCP and you get stopped by the cops in Virginia, trust me, they'll almost certainly already be aware that you possess a CCP before they ever walk up to your vehicle.

Anonymous said...

Anyone else notice that at the very end of the first video, the cop threatens the cameraman? If he thought what he was doing was right and proper, why is he so concerned about finding himself on you-tube? My question, though, is how he managed not to notice he was being filmed until that point. I'm also curious why the cameraman didn't put down the camera and question the officer.

Walter said...

If they were only talking during the previews and were silent during the main feature -- as your write-up suggests -- then I don't think this couple was even being all that rude. Certainly whatever minor discourtesy they committed by talking during the previews was outweighed by the deputy glaring at them, using a racial slur, and calling the woman a bitch.

So, basically, the deputy sat there fuming through the entirety of the movie, and then decided to launch a testosterone contest over a minor discourtesy that had been committed nearly three hours earlier.

The legal term for that is "being an ass" -- and that's before his misuse of his (irrelevant in the situation) authority.

gerold said...

You want to know how the US are perceived in the rest of the world?
The copper vs boy clip is perfect.
Here you have it all in a nutshell.
Gimme your skateboard or we (US) will bomb you into oblivion. You better respect us (US) or we will kick your ass. We (US) are educated, you are dumb. We (US) have manners, you have none. Don't dude me, bro.
The poor idiot just incorporates his nation. He's american, why blame him?

Anonymous said...

Mormons fled to what is now Utah to escape tyrannical, brutal government tactics and persecution. They later suffered an army invasion. Did they learn anything at all from these actions?

Apparently not. Now they've become the despotic masters they once left behind. My relatives in Utah all back up as genuine the despotic law enforcement belligerence Mr. Grigg brings to our attention. How can such a record-keeping people have so short a memory?

Daryl said...

A few thoughts, from one on the inside:

Police are conditioned to think of themselves as an army of occupation. Private citizens are mere "civilians."

Too few police live in the same communities in which they work. "I don't s**t where I eat," was how one officer recently explained it, to a large, multi-agency training session. In California, an officer can have his driver's license and vehicle registration information reflect his agency's address, rather than his own. In some jurisdictions, it is illegal to divulge a police officer's address. In short, there's no community accountability and the occupation mentality is further reinforced.

Too many checks on law enforcement power have been eroded in the name of fighting some threat (drugs, Mafia, insider trading) that supposedly defies opposition by Constitutional means. Expect Dubya's normalization of torture and warrantless surveillance to filter down to general law enforcement sooner rather than later, given the accelerating pace of our decline.

averros said...

Of course, the real problem with the police is that they are just a band of officially-looking robbers.

Their job is to enforce collections for their political masters, to suppress competition from petty thieves, and to discourage population from acting against the said political masters (while pretending to protect that population from all kinds of puffed-up threats).

I find it very unsuprising that thugs in uniform act like thugs. Some of them are probably good people, although severly deluded regarding their role in this life; but the majority are quite conscious of the fact that they are enforcers for the regime.

Any sane person thus avoids contacts with the police just like they avoid contacts with the neigborhood gang. Kids should be taught to make themselves very scarce at the very first sight of a uniformed asshole - even if they don't do anything bad or proscribed at the time.

And, of course, no sane person would give a cop time of day, leave alone help him or socialize with him. They should be treated like lepers.

Cooper said...

As to what was said about the law in Texas...it is true that an unlawful force used by a peace officer may be countered with force as if a person was simply defending themselves against a regular attacker. However, this justification will be decided by a court so if you ever get into an altercation make sure the police force you call upon in the aftermath is no the same as the one the problem officer is from (i.e. call the Sheriff's office if you have a run in with a city police officer). All the Branch Davidians who survived, the ones who surrendered before the fire broke out, were all acquitted of any charges since it was proven that the ATF did not declare themselves as law enforcement officers serving a warrant; they simply opened fire on the compound and those inside returned fire thinking they were under attack and even called 911 to report they were being attacked.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said, "The abusive behaviors documented here and elsewhere were far less commonplace when America was a more homogeneous culture.

"If that basic fact upsets the puerile liberty lover, then so be it."

Sorry, this puerile lib lover can't agree. America a homogeneous culture? When was that?

What we are witnessing is the militarization of the police due to convergence of two trends: the establishment and extention of the "war on drugs" and the massive wave of ex-military into police forces due to our standing army. What else are the jar heads going to do for a living once they are out? I'd love stats on how many cops are ex-military. They are treating their fellow citizens as the enemy, as they are trained to do. I can think of only one way to stop it: end the "war on drugs" and disband the standing army. Without these sensible actions, boo-hooing by the citizenry will go absolutely nowhere.

Anonymous said...

Vermont is the only state in the union that allows Concealed weapons to be carried without a permit. Its great. It keep everyone honest and crime relatively low. Even the cops seem to be a little more friendly and less bellicose compared to other neighboring states. Better yet the legislature this session is even considering the elimination of jail time for small to medium amounts of marijuana. Hopefully this is the first step towards legalization and one more shackle on the rising police state.

Christopher Baker said...

Is brutality from the pigs increasing? Or is just more of it getting caught on tape?

www.Onebornfree.com said...

Police Strip Search Crime Victim:

armed_and_christian said...

I just ordered you book, William, and I'm really looking forward to reading it--then passing it along to others.

Anonymous said...

For an understanding of how Police abuses grow I, a former Texas Peace Officer, would recommend everyone look into the "Stanford Prison Experiment" covered in the book, "The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil."

Letting people get away with committing atrocities is the best way to encourage them to commit more and even worse in the future...

The Ol' Grey Ghost

Anonymous said...

I can assure you that Utah is INDEED a concealed carry state. I live in AZ and have one (CCW permit) for our state. Utah does not offer reciprocity to AZ CCW holders, so I have the option of also taking a Utah concealed carry for that state. It is considered "ideal" by many CCW people because having both tickets allows one to carry in many more states.

CCW holders are expected to behave much like martial artists: avoid fights and confrontations. Suck it up and walk away if possible. Draw your weapon only if your life--or someone else's is threatened. If you DO draw your weapon it means that you intend to shoot it--and shoot to kill. It is illegal in AZ to "shoot to wound" (so much for the Hollywood fantasies of shooting the gun out of the bad guy's hand).

IMO, most cops fall into the "Authoritarian Personality" type. I like to add "Disorder" as much what we see these days with the Tasering, bullying behaviors and bad shootings qualify many of these cops as armed sociopaths with a badge. Bad juju.

It's the old 90-10 Principle; 90% of the bad cops give the good 10% a bad image.

And just to add: I carry a gun because when seconds count--cops arrive in minutes. In other words cops are little more than armed janitors. They take names, wrap the yellow tape around the crime and call for the EMTs/coroner.

The cops you meet in the real world are either giving you a ticket or hassling you about something.

Anonymous said...

"America a homogeneous culture? When was that?"

Answer = < 1965. Population breakdown then: Whites = 90%, All others = 10%.

The huge influx of non-Western cultures/peoples, the Welfare State, perpetual war for perpetual "peace", and proliferative drug use - along with its own attendant "war" - are all cunningly wielded tools reshaping America into a new, servile nation bearing little resemblance to its founders nor the ideals and principles they sought to secure for themselves and their posterity.

Government (centralized power and coercion) is winning and winning big!

Anonymous said...

Let's start playing their game....back at them. State by state we need to send these videos to the Director of our Departments of Public Safety (or your state's equivalent). Then ask them about the failed examination process that is letting these goons through (I.e. the 1,000+or- question nut-job psych exam they all must take), review the standards and material used in the law enforcement academies in your state, ask for the right for citizen groups to monitor their training classes, etc., etc. The assumption is - "Something is obviously failing in your system, and it appears you need outside help in creating a better class of peace officers." Send courtesy copies of all letters to local media, state and federal elected officials.


Aaron Kinney said...

Anonymous said: "Answer = < 1965. Population breakdown then: Whites = 90%, All others = 10%."

NEWS FLASH: Having a bunch of people of all the same skin color does NOT a homogenous culture make.