The Case For Disarming The Police

You may also like...

27 Responses

  1. Nmo says:

    Our overlords are obviously and intentionally destroying, weakening, and dividing the economy and the USA by punishing hard work with regulations and taxes and rewarding laziness with welfare while promoting illegal immigration, free trade, feminism, homosexuality, moral decay, drugs, wars, the minimum wage, political correctness, debt, gun control, and the nanny police state.

    Once the country is destroyed and the poor become too much of a burden on the rich, the elites will soon say Capitalism failed to justify turning the US into a hardcore Communist state. Americans will then be sent to concentration camps and starved and killed so the 1% can divide the wealth and land among themselves.

    Wake up. How else can you explain why the government is doing the opposite of every logical action to help the economy? Economics isn’t rocket science. If you want to boost the economy and nation, don’t allow millions of cheap illegal immigrants to flood the country, offshore jobs to 3rd world countries, punish hard work with taxes and regulations, and reward laziness with welfare.

    Sadly Americans won’t realize what is happening until it is too late.

    Never underestimate the inhumanity of man towards man. Greed has no bounds.

  2. Francesco says:

    American way
    How did it start?
    Thousands of creeps
    Killed in the park
    American way
    Try and explain
    Scab of a nation
    Driven insane
    Don’t cry
    Gotta go bye bye
    Suddenly: die die
    Cop kill a creep!
    Pow pow pow

    American way
    Threatened by us
    Drag a few creeps
    Away in a bus
    American way
    Prisoner: lock
    Smash every creep
    In the face with a rock

  3. Molecule-X says:

    When the police are the only people who have guns, that is when we will find out that only criminals have guns.

    “Drugs” is a 150 Billion $$ operation in the US. B-billion. The top federal and state cops claim this is why they need more bigger pensions, and more rights. (Actually different agencies claim slightly different amounts.)

    There is only ONE institution in the US with the infrastructure, with the “boots on the ground” that has the discipline and the ability, that has the physical trunk space in their cars, to run illicit drugs in the US at this level. When they throw punk kids, with loose shoes and lost souls and strange tattoos, into the prison complex, they are merely protecting their monopoly. They also have an immediate power of confiscation of any nice looking car, or any piece of real estate. All they need is their “dime bag.” They put a dime in the bag, peppered with dust of some unknown powder, so that when they throw it, it will travel the few feet or so they need, to claim “… voila … my brother in law will be buying this nice new car or house at a ‘public’ policeman’s auction, that no one else ever attends, tomorrow at 3AM.”

  4. Rush says:

    We need to go back to a time when police actually protected and served the public. Sadly today the police force is a recruitment ground for the worst dregs of society. Socio and pychopaths, personality disorders and dysfunctionals -cowards that hide behind a gun and a badge and serve only the ruling elites and their tyranny. The US is no longer the bastion of freedom and liberty it purports to be. Rather it is a shameful sprawling out of control vassal of British Colonialism ruled by secrecy, secret societies and services that are hellbent on destroying the constitution and perpetuating wars. It is a nation that has turned its back on God and become an abomination unto Him. Like Jefferson said the greatest reason for a citizen to bear arms is to protect ourselves from tyranny in power. That day has come. Lord knows we need a peoples revolution.

  5. James Scott says:

    The behavior of the police was predicted long ago. All of the people who told the truth about multiculturalism have been vilified and flushed down the memory hole. every multicult society in the history of man has evolved into a police state. The USA has gone from a 90% white nation of people who had shared values to a vile brew of dissent with a hostile elite fomenting hatred against the white founding stock of the nation. By constantly importing violent low IQ non whites and instilling a resentment against whites into them the hostile elite has brought about the necessity for a police state.

    If you are for legal immigration or think it is ok if whites become a minority in the USA you should shut up about police brutality because multicult is the only reason we are seeing the police behaving so aggressive.

    If you are for non white immigration

    • Harbinger says:

      The problem with the USA is that it was founded to become the country that it is. As Russia was the guinea-pig for Communism, the USA was for multiculturalism. Sadly, the USA is a fledgling nation, with the most crime and an authoritarian police state. Things aren’t so bad here in the UK, but they’re getting there as the immigrants flood in, courtesy of politicians’ decision to invade the middle east, driving the locals over here to be safe. And who can really blame them?

      Understand that this is not just happen chance. The destruction of the European peoples is the only way that a New World Order will be achieved. Once they’ve destroyed all world peoples and cultures, they can bring in world government and a banking system and designate land masses as areas, no longer being called what they are now as nations will no longer exist.

      This won’t be stopped simply because the people are too ignorant to realize what’s going on. Rome burned while people watched games at the Colosseum. Nothing’s changed as you can see.

  6. Tim says:

    “…why citizens don’t have the legal right to defend themselves against police violence?”

    They do. See John Bad Elk v US. There are also at least 9 other similar cases. Also mentioned in some state Constitutions.

  7. Ohio River says:

    We need to review the psychology of individuals who want to be police officers. Were they the social rejects in high school who now wants to dominate those that taunted them? Are they individuals who want to truly protect decent citizens?

    Maybe, the wrong criteria is being used during recruitment. Walk Daddy Walk

    • Anonymous says:

      Totally agree, every “cop” I know, is dumbed down beer drinking Super Bowl watching flag waving low iq retards who think Osama USA-ma Biden Bin Laden was killed in a midnight raid by a bunch of Navy Seal Team Six members who were then themselves killed off in various “accidents”. These dumb motherfuckers called “cops” actually think that because they wear their bullet proof vests, combat clothing and carry a semi auto Glock and 8 mags holding15 or so rounds each that they are somehow protecting us is a laugh.

  8. Rajah says:

    Only a coward would wear a uniform, the people need to rise up, arm themselve, and let it be an eye for an eye. When a white police. Kill a black ,they need to find his address and kill someone he loves
    You only hear a heart warm response when something happens to one of them. I would rather live under terrorist rule, than to deal with white superiority, under jewis rule In America. They are the real devils. The Jewish people control all whites,with money jobs cars and houses
    And there’s nothing they can do about it. But surrender this country to them ,and be mad about it..

    • Anonymous says:

      Now now, relax my friend, killing an innocent because their relative killed someone is not only an invalid killing…..its F$&@ING INSANITY!!!! Enough of revenge, revenge is not for us to decide, that task is Gods and Gods alone, it’s in the bible look it up, in the meantime, save the anger, it clouds the mind and darkens the soul

  9. SNNNN says:

    What has changed in this last century is the immunities given to the policeman. In the 1800’s shooting
    a sheriff or policeman in self defense was perfectly acceptable if they were acting outside the law. The
    officer was expected to follow the law like everyone else. Today the “boys in blue” can assault and murder
    with impunity….and folks are then surprised as the body county climbs. The question now only becomes
    when the the shooting back starts and more citizens now exercise their Constitutional Rights with
    open carry and training with firearms for self protection.

  10. Pat O'Connor says:

    As you pointed out in one of your previous articles, there is an angle to these highly publicized police acts of violence – there is always a camera handy to record the police shootings and other heinous acts.

    All this eruption of police violence may be an act in preparation of creating a civil war scenario – Black and Hispanics joining together in attacking the whites in response to a perceived white-on-black violence.

    Many of these “killings” may just be “staged” acts. – no victims – just actors. Think about it.

    • Anonymous says:

      Agreed, MANY of these recent mass shootings have been total PSYOPs against the population to create fear, division, chaos, confusion, and to incite riots in order to usher in martial law (Obama wet dream). Most cops that are not low life scumbag killers, are still too stupid to realize that their very JOBS are repugnant to the constitution, which therefore makes them a standing army and and enemy of humanity.

  11. hp says:

    How long before tens of millions of armed citizens (black and white), when seeing the cops coming just start shooting and consider it self defense?

    • Anonymous says:

      The very fact that “Police” exist is completely repugnant to the constitution for the United States of America, and every single intelligent person knows this fact. The “Police” are a standing army, and will be dealt with as such very shortly I would imagine.

  12. Edwin Vieira says:

    Of course there is another way: Read the first thirteen words of the Second Amendment, and then imagine whether the present-day problem would exist if all “police” forces were made subject to direct control by the Local population by incorporating them directly into the Local Militia.

  13. R Freedman says:

    Fully agree with your thesis. Your readers may like to read more on this topic at: “Disarm the police . com”

    Here is what they have to say:

    More and more we hear reports of U.S. citizens being shot and killed by law enforcement officers. Repeatedly, the deadly force action is justified with a statement from law enforcement that the officer followed procedure. Inevitably, the victim made some sort of movement or lunged or disobeyed orders that resulted in the officer feeling threatened. Removing the firearm from the officer’s belt will reduce the confrontational behavior of officers and allow additional time to access situations, resulting in fewer deaths and increased officer protection due to a more collaborative police effort .

    We are advocating that police forces curtail their initial use of deadly force when dealing with the public. Deadly force should be available to police when the need arises, but only after non-lethal remedies have been exhausted.

    At first glance, your reaction to Disarm The Police.Com may be that the police will be left defenseless and at risk of attack by criminals. But, we believe, the opposite is true. An unarmed police officer is less of a threat to the public than an armed officer, which in itself reduces threats to the officer and encourages participation by the public through increased communication.

    According to the FBI, in 50% of murders of American police officers, the officers did not have time to even draw their gun. This is because the initiative always lies with the attacker; they can strike first before the officer can react. Simply arming officers doesn’t protect them. If anything, arming front-line officers increases their risk.

    All major police forces in Europe, as well as the US, Canada and Australia routinely carry firearms, says Prof Peter Waddington in the United Kingdom. The exceptions are Britain, the Irish Republic, Norway and New Zealand. In Norway officers carry arms in their cars but not on their person.

    The Garda Siochana (Guardian of the Peace) is the national police force in Ireland.

    The first Garda Commissioner stated that: “The Garda Siochana will succeed not by force of arms or numbers, but on their moral authority as servants of the people.”

    Irish scholar Robert Nielson puts this into perspective, “Ireland’s police are reliant on the consent of the people to be effective. This cannot come from intimidation and coercion but only from genuine support. An unarmed force removes the barriers between them and the community and creates greater trust among both sides. People should not view those who protect them with fear. This respect is part of the reason why Ireland is relatively peaceful and our police are greatly respected”.

    When Englishman Robert Peel started the ‘New Police’ in England, the idea of disarming front line officers faced profound and widespread hostility. Peel and his colleagues realized that the police could not defeat the mass of the population by force. Policing by consent was the only option, consent was grudgingly offered by the lower social classes. That was why he consciously decided that the ‘bobbies’ should be unarmed. Even the truncheon ( billy club) should be hidden away, to appear less offensive.

    New Zealand has adopted an armed response model similar to Britain, says the International Law Enforcement Forum. There was considerable debate there in 2010 when two officers were shot, and commissioner Peter Marshall stated: “International experience shows that making firearms more accessible to police raises certain risks that are very difficult to control.”

    These considerations include:

    Risk of police having weapons taken from them
    Risk of greater use of weapons against the public and/or offenders
    Ambush can never be controlled, whether or not officers are armed

    All U.S. police forces have directives and procedures that dictate the appropriate use of deadly force. The basic current precursors to the use of deadly force are given in the following example:

    An officer may use deadly force:

    1. When it appears to be necessary to defend himself or another person from what the officer believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly force; or

    2. To affect an arrest or prevent the escape of a person in custody who, theofficer believes, is attempting to escape by means of a deadly force; or

    3. To affect an arrest or prevent the escape of a person in custody who indicates that he presents an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to others unless apprehended.

    As you can see, the decision to use deadly force in the U.S. is largely left up to whether the officer feels threatened. We are continually learning more and more about the human brain and we know that the rational brain and the emotional brain work together. The decision to act is much more than a rational process of sorting out incoming information, as we tend to believe when analyzing behavior in a given incident. Scientists are discovering that expectations, past experiences, prior outcomes, genetic makeup, and previous injury all play an important role in determining our decision making and ultimate action.

    In other words, many things come into play that lead to an officer feeling threatened in a given situation. The officer’s interpretation of the situation may also be influenced by the brain’s need to satisfy certain chemical responses previously established from past experiences like military combat or shooting range practice.

  14. Michael Burton says:

    You haven’t even touch the surface of police violence.

    o At least 1148 people were killed by police in 2014. 304 (26%) were black.

    o Black people were nearly 3x more likely than whites to be killed by police in 2014.

    o At least 101 unarmed black people were killed by police in 2014, more than any other race.

    o Police killed at least 16 more black people in 2014 than in 2012, an increase of 5%. Police killings increased despite a drop in crime.

    o Where you live matters. A black person in St. Louis is 5x more likely to be killed by police than a black person in New York City. A black person in Florida is more than 2.5x more likely to be killed by police than a black person in Georgia.

    o It’s not about crime rates. Despite the fact that Newark and St. Louis have similar crime rates and demographics, police killed 4 black people in St. Louis and zero in Newark in 2014.

    o It doesn’t have to be this way. One black person was killed nationwide in Canada in 2014. There are more black people in Canada than Missouri.

    Yes, takeaway the arms from police. That is the only way.

  15. Bill Krawitz says:

    Disarm the police? It is the craziest idea I ever heard. Are you promoting Anarchy?

    Disarm the police today, tomorrow the gangsters will loot, rape, and kill us all.

    Look carefully at those police is accused of killing, they are all criminals. We have to obey the law and respect our police. They are doing a great job of protecting us.

    • hp says:

      Here in Pa. on December 1 there were 800,000 men, women and youths all ‘out and about’ armed with high powered rifles, pistols and shotguns. Pretty sure they weren’t worried much about gangsters. The other way around though, yeah..

    • Anonymous says:

      Bill, your delusional and it looks like you have reading comprehension issues. If the COPS are disarmed, and the citizens ARE armed, then the so called “gangsters” will either fall in line and behave like normal folks, or they will surely die. Now, cowards like yourself obviously can’t grasp this basic concept because you have an irrational fear of boogeymen gangsters coming to rape and pillage you. Real men and real women know better and it’s cowardly faggots like yourself, that are a burden as well as a strain on society

    • Dick Vanstone says:

      1. I’m fairly certain you don’t know what anarchy means.

      2. No gangster is going to “loot, rape, and kill” me. You see I have weapons in my home. More than one in every room. I also have weapons of opportunity(lamps, chairs, glass bottles, etc.) throughout my home. I also am a weapon.

      3. Fuck your law. Fuck the police. Fuck you.

      Semper fidelis vox Populi. Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.
      Sgt Dick Vanstone USMC

    • Harbinger says:

      It is clear Bill that you do not understand anarchy.
      What’s really ironic about your comment is your ignorance. “Tomorrow the gangsters will loot, rape and kill us all.” The police protect the elites, whom they were set up to do. The elites are spraying us, poisoning our food and water supplies, creating cancers and various other diseases, starting wars all over the world, creating umpteen false flags, taxing our labour for themselves…..the list goes on and on. I’d rather be looted, raped and killed by ‘gangsters’ whom I presume you mean the thugs on the street, because I have a high chance of winning against and stopping them. The elites, on the other hand, are untouchable and turning the world into a hell hole.

  16. Mark Burton says:

    But, the million dollar question is, Who is going to disarm the police? It is a band of outlaw bandits with enormous resources. Further, the police, the super wealthy and the government are the same thing. No one is going to touch the police.

    Police will keep on its Duck Hunting spree – sad!

  17. Johan W says:

    I cannot agree more with your assessment. Police brutality is the direct consequence of their fire power.

    As you said, disarm them. The police function of police is to serve the community – with the guns in their possession, public doesn’t need police to “protect” it.

    I have the first hand knowledge of what you said, in a fully armed community crimes disappear. My uncle lives in Nelson, Georgia where every one MUST own, and be trained in the use of it, a gun. There are absolutely no crimes. Prior to passing the law, the town used to have its usual (rather more than that) share of crimes.

    Yes, take the gun away from the Police.

Leave a Reply to James Scott Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>