Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Teaching Kids to Trust the Police is Child Abuse


Somebody who would do this to a child should be horsewhipped, at the very least.


Integral to the American concept of liberty is the right to hold the state at bay, which is why children are never too young to be taught to regard government employees with suspicion and defensive hostility. Some conscientious parents in Northampton, Massachusetts acted on that principle by demanding an end to a program intended to habituate public school inmates to the presence of police officers. 

The local police department, acting on an initiative that originated with the International Association of Chiefs of Police, had dispatched officers to the local elementary school each week for an event called “High-Five Friday,” in which officers would exchange friendly greetings with cops who in practically any other context would treat such physical contact as a felonious assault on an officer. Police Chief Jody Kasper explains that she thought “it was a great way to start building relationships with young kids.”

That program was “paused” following complaints from a handful of parents who believe that it is the better part of wisdom to teach their children to avoid contact with the police, rather than seeking it out. In announcing the decision on his Facebook page, the department mentioned that “children of color, undocumented immigrant children or other children who may have had negative encounters with law enforcement” had expressed concerns about the program, which cued up the predictable reactions from the punitive populist faction. 

“Why don’t you toughen up out there in Northampton, all right?” eructated Bill O’Reilly, offering the jocular suggestion – at least, I think he was kidding – that the principal and the school board should be arrested. Minor-league talk radio personality Charlie Brennan insisted that “this is why Donald Trump’s gonna get re-elected – stories like this.” 

A contributor to The New American magazine who serves as that publication’s liaison to the white nationalist subculture snarked that “there’s no more `safe space’ for law-abiding citizens than when the police occupy part of it,” and insisted that no true American could possibly object to having an armed, costumed stranger clothed in “qualified immunity” breathing down his neck. 


“It’s entirely understandable, for instance, that a child hailing from a Third World nation with corrupt police may feel apprehension at the sight of the men in blue,” he patriot-splained. “But not that long ago people would have understood the proper response: You take the student aside and gently explain that the police visiting his school are there as friends.”

“Some might also wonder about the parenting evident here,” he continued in the style of a Soviet commissar tutoring parents about their duty to raise children in the fear and admonition of the state and its human emissaries. “If your child has some irrational cop phobia, do you try and educate and change his mind? Or should you moan and groan and change all of society to accommodate irrationality?” 

The “Caucasian leftists” and “minority” parents who complained about the police outreach program embody the “snowflake spirit of the age,” concludes the TNA contributor, whose otherwise barren rhetorical pantry is well-stocked with clichés. To be fair, this story does expose a rather shocking failure on the part of parents in the community – that is, those who accepted the program with bovine docility, rather than expressing skepticism about it.
If it is “irrational” for parents to teach their children to be leery of police officers, why do police officers and prosecutors cultivate that attitude within their own children? 

Every parent whose children have been sentenced to attend the Regime’s mind-laundry should review the advice offered by Professor James Duane of Regent University Law School in his slender and indispensable book, You Have the Right to Remain Innocent

Over the past several years, Professor Duane has made hundreds of presentations, each of which begins with an invitation to any audience members whose parents were police officers or prosecutors to ask what advice they had been given by their parents. 

“Every time this happens, without exception, [I’ve been told] the same thing: `Years ago, my parents explained to me that if I were ever approached by a law enforcement officer, I was to call them immediately, and they made sure that I would never agree to talk to the police.’ Not once have I ever met the child of a member of law enforcement who had been told anything different.” 

Several news accounts mention the fact that among those who objected to the Northampton police outreach program included “children who may have had negative encounters with law enforcement.”

“Wow, only in grammar school, and they already have a sour relationship with police,” sneers the above-quoted commentator. “Their futures are bright.” 

It is surpassingly easy for children to find themselves detained, shackled, or otherwise abused by police as a result of entirely trivial misconduct. Witness the case of Michael Davis, a five-year-old from California who was arrested, cuffed, and hauled away to jail for “battery on an officer” after he pushed away the hand of an officer who had touched him without consent and kicked the assailant in his knee in an act of righteous self-defense. 

This was a case involving a delicate snowflake who filed a complaint after his feelings were hurt– none other than Lt. Frank Gordo, who lodged a complaint against the mother of his victim, accusing her of “discriminating” against him by taking the story to the media. 

Incidents of this kind are becoming commonplace. Two years ago a misbehaving third-grader in Covington, Kentucky had his arms shackled behind his back at the elbows for fifteen minutes by a sheriff’s deputy. The eight-year-old supposedly attempted to elbow the deputy after going to the bathroom. 

“You don’t get to swing at me like that,” the heroic tax-feeder lectured his captive. “You can do what we’ve asked you to do, or you can suffer the consequences.” 

In 2014, deputies in Greene County, Virginia handcuffed a four-year-old who had been disruptive in class and briefly detained him at the sheriff’s office. The sheriff insists that the deputy “did what he had to do” and claims that the mother was “appreciative of the way he handled the situation,” which if true would be utterly horrifying.  

Until recently, school resource officers in Texas would routinely treat student misbehavior as misdemeanor criminal offenses, issuing citations that could lead to fines and jail time. School officials in Syracuse, Utah have warned that students who are found at the high school during release-time religious instruction would be issued trespassing citations that, once again, can lead to fines and even jail time. The amalgamation of public education and law enforcement has created countless variations on the theme of criminalizing what had once been treated as minor disciplinary matters.

While police can cause problems for students who misbehave, their presence in schools can be even more dangerous to youngsters who are obedient and conscientious. Professor Duane urges parents to teach their school-age children that “you cannot listen to your conscience when faced by a police officer and think I have nothing to hide.” 

Police are trained to lie as an investigative tactic, and rewarded when their lies prove to be instrumental in obtaining convictions. Innocent and well-intentioned children who somehow find themselves on the receiving end of police attention are “sometimes the most likely to be unfairly influenced by deceptive police interrogation tactics, because they tragically assume that, somehow, `truth and justice will prevail’ later even if they falsely admit their guilt,” Duane emphasizes. “You cannot safely trust a single thing police officers say when they are trying to get you to answer their questions…. Even if you are innocent, the police will do whatever it takes to get you to talk if they think you might be guilty.” 

No better illustration of that reality can be found than the case of Idaho Falls resident Chris Tapp, who has spent twenty years in prison for a murder he did not commit. The only evidence against Tapp was a patently false confession extracted from him through the efforts of IFPD Sergeant (and future Idaho Falls mayor) Jared Fuhriman. 

Fuhriman had been a DARE instructor and resource officer at Tapp’s junior high school. Desperate to clear the case, and left without any good leads after DNA evidence had cleared the three young men considered suspects – including Tapp – Fuhriman used his supposed friendship with his victim to lure him into lengthy interrogation sessions that mutated into something akin to psychological torture. Eventually Fuhriman convinced Tapp that unless he confessed to some role in the murder, he would inevitably be sent to the electric chair. 


“Christopher would just keep saying, `Fuhriman is my friend, mom – he wouldn’t put my life in jeopardy, he wouldn’t lead me astray,” his mother, Vera Tapp, told me in a telephone interview. “He was just such a `good old boy’ with Christopher…. You can see it in the videos – `Oh, Christopher, we’re friends, we’re buddies,’ you know, laughing and joking around. And that’s just what he did when [Tapp] was in junior high. He [was] learning people’s trust and how to manipulate people. And that’s what he did – he manipulated Christopher.”

It is a screaming pity that Christopher Tapp wasn’t given the advice that police and prosecutors offer to their own children: Do not, under any circumstances, talk to a law enforcement officer, beyond demanding access to your parents and, if possible, an attorney. 

Given that police and prosecutors tell their own children not to trust law enforcement officers, why shouldn’t parents employed in the productive sector do likewise?

The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, acting on an invitation from the late Justice Scalia, insists that the Second Amendment doesn't protect the right of Mundanes to possess "weapons of war." If it didn't, that amendment would be worse than useless, as I explain in this week's Freedom Zealot Podcast:



Be sure to check out the Libertarian Institute -- and share it with your liberty-minded friends.







Dum spiro, pugno!

9 comments:

  1. Will,

    I haven't read the whole post, but I did look at the link to the New American article, and I wanted to comment

    The JBS sure has become a bunch of boot-lickers, haven't they? They seem to be just fine with the police state, so long as it's THEIR kind of police state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I especially like Wills expression, "American soyuz". Because in a nutshell, one in which most Amerikanski are entirely blind and oblivious to, it describes how our populace has accepted today what in the past would have been at least nominally rejected. It's quite pathetic. And as I say to people... "You don't mind being a slave so long as it's your particular slave master who holds the whip".

      Delete
  2. Tragically, the JBS is no longer even maintaining the pretense of caring about individual liberty. That's true regarding much of the Trumpified American Right, but the JBS was actually ahead of the curve: They've been authoritarian suck-ups since the Bush 43's second term.

    ReplyDelete
  3. the cases mentioned and others, as well, wherein children are isolated, immobilized and then taken to the station are absolutely egregious, but not surprising in a police state where everyone, regardless of age, is viewed with suspicion.

    i find it difficult to understand why there are not MORE children acting out in the mandatory educational gulags children are REQUIRED to attend and who are then treated as described, or see others treated in similar fashion. is this indication that the 'programs' in schools have worked since so much is accepted without a whimper?

    it is my belief actions as those described are to instill FEAR, one of the factors allowing the formation and maintenance of a police state and constitutes ABUSE, mental and physical.

    this land has descended into an abyss of darkness.



    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, the presence of police in schools and the abuse they inflict, is to instill fear and terror in the minds of children at a young age so they learn to never question police authority.

    The thought police are already here. Obedience is not enough, you must not even contemplate disobedience.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's all about "conditioning" the poles into accepting as normal and every day the presence of costumed actors.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anyone that still believes the magic-blue-costumed ones are the good guys is: 1) willfully ignorant or 2) too stupid to be left to their own devices.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't care if you have a police chief in your family, like I had. You simply don't trust them at all! My late great Uncle who was a police chief would cover up very serious crimes committed by my father and stepmother against me. I was a child and I can thank God in Heaven for sending angels to protect me on my visitations. Every single time my father had me for the weekend. I was in a fight for my life! My father would abuse, and so would my stepmother. They would drown me in various lakes in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and the police reports would always disappear from the public records. Because, that police chief in my family was my father's uncle! My mother ended up having to kidnap me and my sister from Wisconsin to save my life! She already lost our brother to CPS because my brother snapped under the abuse and thought that the only way he could protect his baby sisters was to kill my father! That resulted in him being removed from the home by the state.

    Don't ever even as much as roll down your window at a traffic stop, and make sure your doors are locked! Don't even open your door to your house if police should show up! They're dangerous and evil. Even the Bible warns you about not having anything to do with them in 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 KJV, "I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
    Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
    But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
    For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
    But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person."

    But I also pray that you continue on reading 1 Corinthians 6:1-12 KJV, "Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
    Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
    Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
    If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.
    I speak to your shame.. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
    But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
    Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?
    Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.
    Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither: fornicators, nor, idolaters, nor, adulterers, nor, effeminate, nor, abusers of themselves with mankind,,
    Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
    And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
    All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any."

    Not one of these extortioners has a place in Heaven, but God says put that wicked person away from you! And any school trying to endorse a police extortioners are your friends program should lose all of their funding! Because, they're going against what God always has instructed of his children.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's disgusting how you would defile God's word in this manner. It's good that our children trust our police. How else can we bring up a well behaved non rebellious generation? The Bible speaks to us stating that God gives power to authorities. Romans 13:1-7
      Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; read more.
      for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. I don't know what your on, but to disrespect authority would be nothing short of ungodly. Check your stats and don't drink the koolaid.

      Delete