Child Protection Stasi in action

This abuse of government authority has got to stop, and stop immediately.

Police seized 10 kids from their rural Kentucky home after receiving an anonymous tip to investigate the family’s “off the grid” lifestyle.

Joe Naugler happened to be away with eight of his children when the authorities arrived on the scene. Nicole Naugler, who happens to be five months pregnant, took their oldest children with her to drive away, but the authorities stopped her and took took them. She was arrested for “disorderly conduct and resisting arrest,” but she claims she was arrested after not allowing the officers to take her children without a “fight.” Officers told her husband he needed to hand over the other children or face felony charges, and he complied.

Pace Ellsworth, a family friend, said he believes the Nauglers were targeted because the government disagrees with their “free” lifestyle of “unschooling,” which focuses on learning through life experience and each child’s individual strengths.

The children have been placed in four different homes in four different counties that CPS chose. On Friday morning, officials inspected the Naugler’s home and concluded that they did, in fact, have good living conditions.

The Nauglers are hopeful to get their kids back. The family will find out the specific reason their kids were taken at an upcoming court hearing, but it’s hard to believe how EASY it was for the authorities to take their kids. This was all based on a baseless, anonymous tip.

There is absolutely no excuse or justification for this sort of thing.
Every policeman and CPS agent involved should be arrested and tried for
kidnapping. Whatever happened to Blackstone’s Formulation and the principle “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”?

The Child Protection Stasi aren’t protecting children. They are abusing them.


Police accountability

It appears there has been at least one positive consequence of the Baltimore riots:

Six city police officers were charged Friday in the death of Freddie Gray, a 25-year-old man who suffered fatal spinal injuries last month while in custody, a swift development in a case that has heightened the national focus on policing in black communities.

The announcement by State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby, the city’s chief prosecutor, surprised many in a city where officials had cautioned for days that the investigation might not come to a quick resolution. Spontaneous celebrations broke out in some neighborhoods that were roiled by looting and violence after Mr. Gray’s funeral on Monday, while police union officials said they were disappointed in what they called a rush to judgment.

The most serious charges were brought against Officer Caesar Goodson, who was driving a police transport van that brought Mr. Gray to a police station after his April 12 arrest. Mr. Goodson, 45 years old, was charged with second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter and other charges.

Officers William Porter, 25, Lt. Brian Rice, 41, and Sgt. Alicia White, 30, were each charged with involuntary manslaughter, second-degree assault and misconduct in office. Officers Edward Nero, 29, and Garrett Miller,
26, were charged with second-degree assault and misconduct in office.
Lt. Rice and Messrs. Nero and Miller were also charged with false
imprisonment for making what Ms. Mosby termed an illegal arrest of Mr.
Gray.

The officers surrendered to police and bail was set in
amounts ranging from $250,000 to $350,000, according to court records
and state officials. By Friday night, all six officers had posted bail
and been released, according to public records. Like Mr. Gray, three of
the officers, including Mr. Goodson, are African-American.

I have no doubt that the six officers will get off without a penalty, but at least the case will draw further attention to the problem of US police believing they are able to freely murder US citizens without being held accountable. Even though they will probably be “exonerated” by the legal system, the arrest and trial itself serves as a moderate deterrent for future officers tempted to impose rough justice on the public.


Meta-SWATTing

Patterico has the details:

This is one of the creepiest articles I have ever read. It reminds me of my experience being SWATted — having armed police rush into my home in what looked like retaliation for my speech. Yet in the case described in the article, the SWATting is actually being carried out . . . by the government.
In Wisconsin, citizens had cops bust into their homes with battering rams. Property was taken from their homes, in full view of the neighbors — and in some cases officers mocked them. Then the citizens were told that they could tell nobody about what had happened. If they did, they could go to jail.
All for exercising their First Amendment rights. Essentially, for being conservatives.

This should be kept in mind by anyone who still thinks going along to get along is still an option. The Statists are as insistent in their demand for submission as those who named their religion after the concept.


To pretend and to shoot

It’s time to take away the police excuse of “feeling threatened” for shooting someone or cutting them any slack when they kill someone. It should take a genius to know that basing law upon feelings is not the best idea, and it is becoming increasingly clear that the so-called “good cops” are perfectly willing to cover for the supposedly few “bad apples”:

Patrolman Michael Slager, 33, opened fire on father-of-four Walter Scott, 50, in North Charleston, South Carolina, on Saturday morning after reportedly stopping him over a broken tail light.

Slager was arrested, jailed and charged with murder yesterday afternoon after the incendiary footage emerged. An outraged representative of Scott’s family said: ‘This was a cop who felt like he could get away with just shooting anybody that many times in the back.’

The killing comes at a time of mounting unrest over police use of force – particularly against black men – after violent protests erupted over the killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson last summer.  Slager had previously defended his actions as being in line with procedure, saying he ‘felt threatened’ by the Coast Guard veteran.

The officer claimed Scott ran away after being pulled over at which point he tried to Taser him. But he claimed Scott managed to wrest the stun gun away, prompting him to draw his pistol. At no point in the video, which does not show the initial contact between the men, does Scott appear to be armed.

In the footage, Scott gets a few yards away before Slager opens fire – seven shots in quick succession followed by an eighth, with three of them missing. Scott collapses face-down on a patch of grass. Slager then walks over, shouts at him to put his hands behind his back, then handcuffs him.

Footage then appears to show Slager jogging back to the point where the Taser fell to the ground, bringing it over to Scott’s body around 30 feet away and dropping it next to him.

According to police reports, officers performed CPR on the victim. But video shows that Scott remained face down on the floor for several minutes without being given any medical attention. It is only after two-and-a-half minutes that Slager is seen placing his hand on Scott’s neck in an apparent attempt to check his pulse.

The police are not, contra their all-too-common assumptions, above the law. And if they are not held accountable by the justice system, it is entirely predictable that they will be brought to rough justice by vigilantes and family members seeking revenge. It is stupid and short-sighted for police officers to think they can continue to get away with dirty business as usual; the ever-present eyes of the Panopticon are watching them just like everyone else.

Remember the idea that with great power comes great responsibility? That means that those given badges and guns by the state or local government must be held MORE accountable than the average untrained citizen. Not less.


No heroes in New York City

The police are under no legal obligation to protect and serve you. And apparently, if they do not feel sufficiently lionized by the public, they will not even do their jobs.

Arrests plummet 66% with NYPD in virtual work stoppage. It’s not a slowdown — it’s a virtual work stoppage. NYPD traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses have dropped off by a staggering 94 percent following the execution of two cops — as officers feel betrayed by the mayor and fear for their safety, The Post has learned.

The dramatic drop comes as Police Commissioner Bill Bratton and Mayor Bill de Blasio plan to hold an emergency summit on Tuesday with the heads of the five police unions to try to close the widening rift between cops and the administration.

It has helped contribute to a nose dive in low-level policing, with
overall arrests down 66 percent for the week starting Dec. 22 compared
with the same period in 2013, stats show. Citations for traffic violations fell by 94 percent, from 10,069 to 587, during that time frame. Summonses for low-level offenses like public drinking and urination also plunged 94 percent — from 4,831 to 300.

Even parking violations are way down, dropping by 92 percent, from 14,699 to 1,241. Drug arrests by cops assigned to the NYPD’s Organized Crime Control
Bureau — which are part of the overall number — dropped by 84 percent,
from 382 to 63.

If you still weren’t convinced that the corrupt and militarized modern police of America are little more than a badge gang, I should think this obnoxious, irresponsible reaction by the police should suffice to convince you, at least concerning the feckless nature of the NYPD.

Recall that police work is not even among the ten most dangerous jobs in America; if it were, women would not pursue it. Remember that most officers never draw their gun nor fire it in the course of their career. And keep in mind that police departments intentionally screen to keep out the excessively intelligent and the insufficiently aggressive.

The petulance of the NYPD made me recall the Tom Simon essay in Sci Phi Journal #2, which concerned, among other things, Tolkien’s definition of heroism.

In his essay “Ofermod,” Tolkien writes:

For this ‘northern heroic spirit’ is never quite pure; it is of gold and an alloy. Unalloyed it would direct a man to endure even death unflinching, when necessary: that is when death may help the achievement of some object of will, or when life can only be purchased by denial of what one stands for. But since such conduct is held admirable, the alloy of personal good name was never wholly absent.

These words describe Boromir exactly. To him, as to his father, the idea of the Good is limited to “the good of Gondor”; ultimately, to the good reputation of the Stewards and their house. Because Gondor, too, has much in it that is intrinsically good – there, too, folk spend much of their time growing food and eating it, and doing various kinds of service to one another – this remains a noble pursuit; but it is fatally flawed, for it mistakes the secondary good (the reputation of the guardians) for the primary.

Tolkien’s most direct criticism of this defective idea of virtue is put in the mouth of Faramir. He does not denigrate Boromir’s character directly, but he implicitly recognizes his flaws by making the distinction that Boromir missed, preferring the primary to the secondary good:

‘I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.’

The NYPD have made it clear that they love only themselves. They do not love that which they claim to protect and serve. Their idea of virtue is defective. They want to be regarded as heroes, but it is their very hunger for heroic status that renders genuine heroism forever beyond their reach.


The dissolution of order

The cracks in US society are widening:

Police officers showed their contempt for New York’s mayor on Saturday, turning their backs as he addressed a funeral for a fallen colleague.

Rafael Ramos was shot dead alongside his partner Wenjian Liu last weekend amid nationwide protests accusing police of racism and using excessive force against black people. Mr Liu’s funeral will be held in the coming days.

Officers have accused Bill de Blasio, the city mayor, of having blood on his hands for failing to give his full backing to officers while demonstrators raged at the death of Eric Garner, a black man who died in a police choke hold.

While he received polite applause inside the church, hundreds of officers outside turned their backs to screens showing the service.

Notice the names. Ramos. Liu. De Blasio. Ironically, only Garner, the black man, had an traditional American name. They are names that would cause a progressive’s heart to leap for joy, were it not for the context of the story in which the names appear. And I would be remiss to fail to mention Ismaaiyl Brinsley.

This is what multiculturalism in a multi-ethnic society looks like. Violence, lack of respect for authority, rival power centers, and ongoing societal fragmentation. Expect more of it.


Sometimes there are no good guys

ESR points out that it’s not always possible to take a side:

After Brinsley’s mini-murder-spree, the temptation for any reasonable person to weigh in on the side of conservatives and the cops is great. And yet…and yet…important distinctions are in danger of being lost. On the evidence we have, Michael Brown was a violent thug who deserved the death he got, but the live-on-video strangulation of Eric Garner was a genuine atrocity. The New York medical examiner deemed it a homicide.

But because humans are excessively tribal, it’s difficult now to call for justice against Eric Garner’s murderers without being lumped in with the “wrong side”. Nor will Garner’s partisans, on the whole, have any truck with people who aren’t interested in poisonously racializing the circumstances of his death.

I don’t have a fix for this problem. But someone needs to be pointing out that both of the pseudo-tribes that have sorted themselves around this dispute are behaving badly. “Death to cops” is totally out of line, but the New York police had innocent blood on their hands before Ismaayil Brinsley did on his. There should be an accounting for that, not by assassin’s bullets but by a trial in which justice can be seen to be done.

I’m not on the side of the Africans or the Badge Gang. One is a barbarian force, the other has devolved into a destabilizing one. Both are dyscivic. I’m on the side of civilization, but watching what is taking place in the USA is somewhat akin to watching Tutsis butcher Hutus and vice-versa. It doesn’t make any sense to cheer for either side, nor will it accomplish anything positive.

The Badge Gang must be held considerably more accountable than it presently is, for its own sake, if nothing else. Once it loses its perceived moral authority, as is increasingly the case today, it doesn’t actually have much else to fall back upon.

The temptation to choose sides is understandable, but in cases such as these it should be resisted. We live in a fallen world, a sinful world, an evil world, where often there are no good guys on either side. That’s the central point of the holiday we are celebrating tonight and tomorrow.


4GW in Brooklyn

As William S. Lind predicted it would in his book ON WAR, 4GW has arrived in America and is targeting the police. Because the police have militarized and lost their moral authority, they are now deemed legitimate enemy targets by a growing number of armed individuals.

In an apparent targeted killing, two police officers were shot in their patrol car in Brooklyn on Saturday afternoon by a man who later fatally shot himself in head, police officials said. The shootings come at a moment when the city is roiled by demonstrations after a grand jury decided not to indict an officer in the chokehold death of a Staten Island man. The shootings on Saturday took place near Myrtle and Tompkins Avenues in Bedford-Stuyvesant.

“It looks like they were shot in the upper body,” Deputy Chief Kim Royster said.

She said that a man fled into a subway station after shooting the officers from the patrol car’s passenger side, and that the police had recovered a gun from the scene. Chief Royster said the man opened fire on the police officers, ran up Myrtle and went into a subway station. The man died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head, Chief Royster said.

Fire Department officials said that a 911 call came in around 2:50 p.m. reporting that two people had been shot. Charlie Hu, the manager of a liquor store at the same corner, said he saw two police officers slouched over in the front seat of their patrol car. At least one of the officers, Mr. Hu said, appeared to have been shot in the head.

A high ranking police official called the shooting an assassination.

The problem faced by the police is that their instincts are now in direct contradiction to their best long-term interests. They are increasingly corrupt, increasingly frightened, increasingly gunned-up, increasingly feeling at war with the general population, and increasingly of a different ethnicity than the people with whom they are interacting on a regular basis.

What they should do is disarm completely, stop playing soldier, abandon the concept of “law enforcement”, and stop their confrontational tactics. This is highly unlikely, however, because most police officers recruited after the Drug War began are psychologically well-suited for confrontation and quasi-militarization. They’re neither trained nor psychologically equipped to lower the temperature these days.

The police problem is the same one faced by occupation forces everywhere. While they have the ability to project overwhelming Mass at specific targets at will, the complete lack of Shape means that their opponents can deliver superior Mass at any time, in almost any place. The police have forgotten that their very survival depends upon the good will of the people; the people could re-enact the Sicilian Vespers and wipe out every single police officer in the country in a single night if they were so inclined. One hopes that they will come to their senses and remember this before things get any uglier.

And this isn’t uglier. We’ll be fortunate if the 4GW forces developing in the USA remain content with only targeting armed officers.

A reader asks: “In 2007 or so Bill Lind wrote that cops understood that you can’t fight
an insurgency by cracking down.Think they still know that?” 

I don’t know. I am concerned that they do not, as the manhunt in Los Angeles that very nearly killed some innocent women indicated a propensity to panic and overreact once they discover that they are the prey and no longer the untouchable predators.


The banality of US evil

ESR rightly identifies a problem much worse than racism:

Eric Garner was black. The policeman who choked him to death was white.

Some people want to make this horror about race. I find myself wishing they were right – that just once, the racial grievance peddlers weren’t basically making up inflammatory crap that canonizes thug trash like Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown. Because as bad as violent racism is, I’m afraid that what actually killed Eric Garner was something far worse.

The truly terrifying thing about Eric Garner’s death is that I don’t think the cops in that video hated anybody. They were just doing their job. And their job included strangling a man to death for having sold “loosies” – untaxed cigarettes. Something he wasn’t doing when he was killed; he had just broken up a fight that the police came to investigate.

Garner had just broken up a fight. The police hassled him, based on his record as a (gasp!) vendor of untaxed cigarettes, and when he protested the force of law came down on him and snuffed him.

In 1835 Alexis de Tocqueville wrote a book called Democracy In America that has been justly celebrated for its perception about the young American republic ever since. In it, he warned of the dangers of what he called “soft despotism” – that “covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules”, all justified in soothing ways to achieve worthy objectives. Such as discouraging people from smoking by heavily taxing cigarettes.

Eric Garner died in a New York minute because “soft despotism” turned hard enough to kill him in cold blood. There was no anger there, no hate; the police simply failed to grasp the moral disproportion between the “crimes” he wasn’t even committing at the time and their use of force. And an investigating grand jury did no better.

Violent racists, as evil as they are, generally understand on some level that they’re doing wrong. That understanding is written all over the excuses they make. These cops didn’t need an excuse. They were doing their job. They were enforcing the law. The casual, dispassionate, machinelike brutality with which Garner was strangled reveals a moral vacuum more frightening than mere racism could ever be.

Americans find themselves living in a country where people can be freely killed, without hesitation or consequences, by the police for the “crime” of simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. To call it “the Land of the Free” is darkly morbid sarcasm indeed.

The anger expressed in the Ferguson riots was misplaced, but not entirely illegitimate. There is a serious cancer in the United States and it has fully metastasized in the police forces across the country. It is yet another sign that all is not right on Main Street USA these days.


A thief is a thief

Whether he wears a badge or not:

What Lanier portrays as crippling criminal enterprises appears to be equally targeted towards separating users from their next fix — or simply separating random “suspects” from whatever they happen to have in their wallets.

Since 2009, D.C. officers have made more than 12,000 seizures under city and federal laws, according to records and data obtained from the city by The Washington Post through the District’s open records law. Half of the more than $5.5 million in cash seizures were for $141 or less, with more than a thousand for less than $20.

Because the system is primed for abuse, legislation has been introduced that would overhaul the city’s asset forfeiture program, raising the threshold of proof needed to justify a seizure as well as forcing a majority of funds to be routed into the city’s general fund. Unsurprisingly, cops aren’t fans of the proposed legislation.

[T]he bill has been opposed by law enforcement officials, partly for the same reason other reform efforts across the country have been stymied: money. The officials also said it would create an administrative burden. In addition to tightening oversight and the rules for civil seizures, the District proposal would cut back on revenue.

No policeman who has ever participated in a civil asset forfeiture can be declared innocent of thievery. Nor is it correct to point the finger and blame politicians when the police themselves are actively lobbying against legislation that would place the burden of proof concerning the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the ownership of the individual’s property on the accuser rather than on the owner.

In their commendable respect for authority, conservatives often tend to forget that authority can be legitimate or illegitimate, as well as honest or corrupt. They also tend to ignore the fact that every single totalitarian and authoritarian state in history has had a police force which the people quickly learned to fear and hate. After all, one can hardly have a police state without police.

Like it or not, “law enforcement officials” are actively attempting to undermine the remnants of the Constitutional limits on policing the public in their own pecuniary interest. An extrapolation from the DC data indicates that around 2.9 million Americans who are accused of committing no crime other than carrying $150 dollars or less have been robbed by these police thieves; will the defenders of asset forfeiture attempt to evade the point by demanding to know why these individuals are in possession of such outrageous sums of money?

The decent, law-abiding police of yesteryear are simply not germane to the subject. They are retired or dead. The police of today do not wear the same uniforms, carry the same weapons, or operate under the same rules of engagement. One can no more exonerate the police of today by appealing to the behavior of the police of yesteryear than one can argue for the scientific precision of biology by appealing to the accuracy of physics.

It is not police critics like me who are traducing the reputations of the good policemen of the past. It is their corrupt and lawless successors who are doing so through their actions.