My life as a tyrant
I’m going to say something that will undoubtedly cause me to lose some police officer friends. But I feel it needs to be said anyway. I’m willing to take the heat for it.
Keep in mind, I became a police officer because I wanted to be a good guy. Even though we’ve all seen reports of police brutality and corruption, I still believe we cops are the good guys. I’ve seen cops perform brave, selfless acts for strangers on countless occasions. Even the worst cops I’ve ever known would risk their lives to defend the innocent. But I have to say this anyway. Before you start throwing shoes, hear me out. I have a good reason for saying it.
If you think our police are no threat to your freedom, you’re living in a fantasy world.
Now I’ll explain what I mean. I worked for the United Nations Police Mission in Kosovo for eighteen months. I wasn’t there as a soldier. I was a civilian cop, living in town, basically a Kosovo PD officer. For part of my tour I worked patrol with a group of international officers and local police. We had officers from America, the UK, Germany and Greece, plus local Kosovar Albanians. The Americans were regular street cops from police departments all over the United States.
One of the American officers in my station came from a very wealthy suburban police department. My cop stories were about murders, fights and chases; his were about citizens having garage sales without permits. For some reason, citizens selling things without permits aggravated him to no end.
In postwar Kosovo, many tens of thousands of war refugees lived in the capital. Not enough jobs existed to support them all. Many of them became vendors in a sprawling, dirty bazaar. They supported their families by selling cheap Turkish and Pakistani housewares and trinkets. Under old Yugoslav law, which was still the legal standard, those vendors had to have permits. Few bothered to stand in line at a dilapidated government building to pay for a permit.
This officer – I’ll call him Joe – became infuriated every time he patrolled the bazaar. He’d find vendors without permits, then ticket and berate them. He’d make note of other illegal vendors so he could ticket them later. He’d even drive through the bazaar off-duty to spot illegal vendors for future targeting. He’d vent his anger about illegal vendors at us, which always made me laugh. I didn’t care the least bit about vendors without permits, and thought Joe would eventually get over it. I was wrong.
Joe got so mad at illegal vendors that he researched Yugoslav law. We had been advised not to do anything that violated the Bill of Rights, but officially Yugoslav law was still in effect. And Joe discovered he could use Yugoslav law to do something about those damn illegal vendors.
Joe put a plan together. Officers from a couple of stations, along with some NATO troops, would go through the bazaar, identify which vendors had no permits, and confiscate all their merchandise. Local Albanian Kosovo Police Service (KPS) officers would assist. A large NATO truck would follow the officers so they could load all the confiscated items. All the seized property would immediately be donated to charity organizations.
When I heard the plan, I was amazed. Then I got angry. Why would anyone, in a country which had suffered through a horrible war less than two years earlier, think vendors without permits were such a big deal? We didn’t have a crime problem in the bazaar, the only reason we were going in there was because Officer Joe had a personal issue with the vendors. And wouldn’t an operation like that violate people’s rights?
I argued against the operation, and was overruled. Since Yugoslav law allowed it, we were doing it. I was ordered to take my team of KPS officers and participate.
The day of the operation, I forced myself to show up for work. My KPS officers were angry, frustrated and hesitant. They didn’t want to do to their people what we were about to make them do. But their jobs and livelihood, like mine, depended on following those orders. So we walked out of the station toward the bazaar.
An officer from a European country met me outside the bazaar, held out a stack of papers and sternly ordered, “Take these. You’ll need them to document what you confiscate.”
I kept my hands down. “I’m not taking them. I think this is wrong. We can’t just take people’s property.”
The officer held the papers out further. “It doesn’t matter. They’ve been warned. Take the forms.”
I didn’t move, or respond. The officer maintained his stern demeanor for a few seconds. Then, seeing that I wasn’t going along with it, he backed down.
“Okay, fine. Just take some forms, in case you change your mind.”
I took a few forms and stuck them in my pocket. The next time they came out, later that afternoon, I dumped them in the trash.
The operation began. Dozens of officers entered the bazaar, followed by NATO soldiers and their cargo truck. The vendors initially didn’t know what was happening. Then cops walked up to stalls and asked for permits. Nobody had them. The cops grabbed everything they had and threw it into the back of the truck.
Hundreds of vendors picked up their wares and ran. The slow ones were accosted and stripped of their possessions. KPS officers swarmed me, saying, “We can’t do this! This is what the Serbs used to do!” I stood back, watching the chaos in angry silence, and said something in Albanian. It was a phrase I never in my life expected to say.
“Ne jeme komunista sot.” We are communists today.
Our KPS officers were ordered, forced, to join in. They grudgingly helped take the property, although a few from another station were enthusiastic about it. Customers in the bazaar stood close by and yelled insults at the KPS officers, or screamed things like “Why are you doing this?” One KPS officer almost got into a fight he didn’t want to be in, over something he didn’t want to do, with one of the customers. Guilt was obvious on the KPS officer’s face. That was hard to watch.
I stayed back. Officer Joe, the illegal vendor hater, picked out an old man selling bananas. The old man, who looked about eighty but was probably younger, struggled to pick up boxes of bananas before the truck arrived. Officer Joe reached the old man’s stall, tore a box from the old man’s hands and threw it in the truck. The old man grabbed the next box. Joe fought it away.
I remember standing there in impotent frustration, thinking, So now we’re literally wrestling food away from old men. This is disgusting.
I finally managed to grab a handful of KPS officers and leave. I stayed at the station until the operation ended, angry at what we had done and at myself for being part of it. I had stood by and done nothing as a fellow cop turned us into petty tyrants. That still bothers me.
Joe beamed with pride when he came back to the station. As he promised, all the confiscated property was donated that day. No vendors had been ticketed. None received receipts for their property. None had recourse to recover what had been taken. If police did that here, they would be charged with a crime.
Later that day I argued my way up the chain of command that the operation had been wrong, we shouldn’t have done it and should never do it again. An Irish officer agreed with me. But a senior American officer listened to me with a disinterested expression and said, “Look man, it’s legal here. So I don’t have a problem with it.”
I learned a lot from that operation. Prior to it, I had been something of an idealist about cops. I thought American cops would go by what’s right and wrong instead of looking for what they can legally get away with. I know now that cops like Joe have no problem violating people’s rights, as long as they have some “official” way to do it.
Maybe you’re thinking, “But this was in another country, so it’s okay.” I don’t think so. I took an oath to defend the Constitution, not to enforce any law no matter what it is. If I go to Afghanistan as a cop, I’m not going to beat women for walking the street without a male relative, even if it’s legal there.
So why do I tell this story now? This might seem like an abrupt topic change, but it isn’t. It’s directly related.
I keep hearing we don’t need the 2nd Amendment. I keep hearing the 2nd Amendment is an anachronism. I keep hearing that it was written for a time long past, when we had to worry about foreign invasion and government tyranny. I keep hearing the 2nd Amendment should be repealed because there’s no threat of tyranny today.
I’ll agree that we don’t currently worry about foreign invasion. But we ALWAYS have a worry about government tyranny. Don’t tell me, “it can’t happen here.” I know better. I was there when Officer Joe stole people’s property, because he had a personal vendetta and knew he could get away with it. Don’t tell me police officers won’t engage in tyranny. I’ve seen it.
Joe was, in many ways, a good guy. He wasn’t a horrible, hateful man who just oozed evil from every pore. He and I had a lot of decent conversations about life (and a HELL of a lot of arguments about what limits our authority should have). No doubt he did good things for people in the past, and probably did good things after Kosovo. He likely never did anything like the bazaar operation in America. But he did it in Kosovo, because he COULD.
Our founding fathers were incredibly intelligent, insightful men. They knew an external threat of invasion could exist. And more importantly, they knew an internal threat of tyranny would always exist. They knew that even basically good guys like Joe can let their personal hatreds control their official actions. They knew that even Officer Chris Hernandez might maybe, once or twice, have a little nagging thought like, There should be an automatic death penalty for anyone who drives through a quiet neighborhood at 3 a.m. blaring gangster rap. They knew I better have threats over my head, to keep me from carrying out that death sentence.
The founding fathers knew guys like me and Joe need to be controlled. They wrote the 4th Amendment so we would have to follow rules when we took people’s property. And they wrote the 2nd Amendment so that if we ever decided not to care about citizens’ rights, the citizens could forcibly change our minds.
This nation was formed by armed rebellion. Our freedoms were maintained by armed resistance to foreign threats. Our police and military exist to protect the rights that many hundreds of thousands of brave, armed Americans died for. We serve the descendants, family and friends of those men and women. We call them “sir” or “ma’am”, even if they’re a laborer and we’re a police chief or 4-star General. We don’t bend them to our will, we don’t strip their rights “for their own good”. We don’t repeal the Bill of Rights in order to protect them from the sometimes horrible consequences of freedom.
As I’ve said before, I don’t speak for anyone but me. Many, many cops will vehemently disagree with me about this (which might sort of prove my point). But I WANT law-abiding citizens to have guns. I WANT them to have a means to defend themselves from ME. I DON’T want the people I’ve sworn to defend worrying about Officer Joe and his friends taking their property on a whim. I feel ZERO threat, absolutely none, from lawfully armed good citizens.
I’ve been a cop in Texas for almost 19 years. I’ve interacted countless times with armed homeowners, business owners, and concealed carry permit holders. I’m absolutely comfortable knowing that they’re not helpless lambs, totally dependent on me for their safety and freedom. I’m there to protect good citizens from criminals; citizens have weapons to protect themselves not just from criminals, but also from me and Officer Joe.
That’s how it should be. That’s why we have a 2nd Amendment. And officers like me and Joe are why it shouldn’t be repealed.
NOTE ADDED 3/3/13: I’ve received a lot of interesting replies to this post today. Many of them point out my failure to act that day in the bazaar. Fair enough; this post obviously isn’t a defense of what I did. I don’t think there’s any way to interpret this story as a boast about my inability to stop something I knew was wrong. I admit guilt and don’t flinch from the criticism.
However, some of the comments have gone way beyond simple analysis of my actions, or justifiable criticism of law enforcement. There have been calls for violence against police, accusations that the President is a Nazi, claims that the federal government is preparing for all-out war against the citizens, etc. I’ve deleted those comments.
On the “how I roll” page I describe the rules I follow writing this blog. The comments I receive don’t have to follow the same guidelines, but those like I just described won’t be posted. This blog isn’t anti-police, anti-government, or a place for people to vent all their anger and suspicions about any political party, federal government agency or elected representative.
I welcome rational, intelligently presented dissenting opinions. This is a site where I hope reasonable people can calmly discuss important issues. It’s not a place for internet tough-guyism, veiled threats made from the anonymous safety of a computer, or expressions of support for any revolution.
Because I love this country, the last thing I’ll ever advocate is warfare between citizens and any arm of the government. The vast majority of police officers, members of the military and American citizens are fantastic people. We as a nation are strong enough to correct problems, even those we’re facing today, with discussion instead of violence.
Filed under: Cops | 229 Comments
Tags: 2nd amendment, police, tyranny
Chris, you probably just struck a chord in the main reason as to why I didn’t finish applying for Houston Police Department, Austin Police Department or any other police department for that matter. I DID NOT and DO NOT want to become an Officer Joe or anyother Joe Schmoe Officer out there using laws to get away with intentionally hurting someone- in whatever form that may be. I couldn’t bear the thought that I could turn out that way or be seen that way; that is exactly how I see many officers. Yet, still, there are many officers of the law who really are the good guys-who want to serve and PROTECT this nation to their best abilities so that law abiding citizens can live freely, happily, and fulfill their purpose. I take my hat off to those good men and stand behind your stance and what you speak for. RIGHTFUL JUSTICE.
Kim,
I still want you to become a cop. You’d be a good one, and I don’t think you’d ever be a Joe. And trust me, you’d enjoy it. One thing about this job, if you’re willing to odo the work and take the risks, you can really be a good guy. There are plenty of great cops out there who have done amazing things to help others and protect all of us. That’s who you should be.
Chris
I don’t agree that this individual should be a police officer … at least, not yet. I am retired career military and a former cop. From the information provided, it seems that this individual may lack the maturity and strong sense of character required to operate independently under the color of law. This is not to imply that she lacks character. She says, “I couldn’t bear the thought that I could turn out that way …”. If you fear that you might be capable of going over to “the dark side”, then find another profession. Perhaps with some more life experience, she may be able to handle the pressures of being a good cop. Good luck and wishing her the best in future endeavors.
Chris, I know the point of your article is not about Kosovo BUT…..THANK YOU for feeling and acting the way you did at that market. I traveled to Kosovo on many occassions to participate in both humanitarian work as well as to work directly with an amazing group of young adults who wanted Rule of Law, etc. The young adults were a multi ethnic group and some of the most incredible people I’ve ever met.
What I found so interesting about my experiences in Kosovo is that no one wanted a hand out – they wanted tools, education, etc. to do their own work. I agree with you 100% that the last thing tose folks at the market needed was to be torn down AGAIN. At least they were trying to make some sort of a living.
Anyway, thank you for this article and for sharing what you did on all levels. Most of all, thank you for being such a great person.
Leta,
Thanks for reading and for your comments, but I’m really not a great person (seriously, just ask my wife). All I did was offer some resistance and speak out. I didn’t manage to put a stop to it, although it didn’t happen again while I was there. I also thought very highly of the people there, although I know there are also many problems with organized crime and ethnic hatred. And I agree, the last thing those people needed was to be jacked with over tiny details that made no difference at all.
Faliminderit for your service over there, for reading and for your comments. I truly appreciate them.
Chris
Chris,
Kosovo was an eye opener for me as well. I went in the initial peacekeeping (invasion) mission to supposedly end the ethnic cleansing. What I found was that we probably doubled the suffering, as we protected the Albanians while they persecuted the Serbs. My sister engineer company had the mission to guard the KLA headquarters in Pristina. During daylight hours they conducted normal guard security missions, but after dark, the guns were turned inwards as we knew that the KLA was an al-queda front organization.
Now the more I see, the more my misgivings are supported. You would be a great spokesman for Oathkeepers. Unlike politicians, when we take an oath, we truly mean it.
I’m right there with you Chris. With all the talk of gun control my mind has wandered. Imagine this scenario. The 2ND amendment is gone. Wiped from the constitution. The next step would be total confiscation of arms. I thought, no way! Who would they get to do that. No American would do it voluntarily. Some maybe. They would get the military, but that would take years. No, they would get the local police. Then I thought, no cop I know would do that. But, in order for my scenario to happen, the “shit has really hit the fan.” I’m talking rations on gas, food, water, no schools, no hospitals. The worst had happened. Now, imagine the officers and military are told, seize the weapons from the citizens, and in exchange you’ll receive food, water, gas, heath care and safety. Many would do it without hesitation. And there would be many. Some cops and military would resist, but not enough. Plus, how many “new” officers would jump at the chance for the offer of security and safety for their family. It’s a far fetched scenario, but is it really that unbelievable? I, for one, would be on the side of the citizen and the rights of freedom and the American way. My badge would be gone and my life would be in the hands of the American in the face of a new tyranny.
K,
Exactly. I’m afraid a lot of guys would find their principles folding real quick when they were faced with losing their jobs, or when THEIR families could wind up disarmed. Unfortunately, some guys might want to be cops just so they could still have weapons, even though nobody else could.
I don’t think the military would ever be forced to confiscate weapons though. That really would be a total SHTF, doomsday scenario.
Chris
The best thing anyone can do to prevent something like this from happening in the US, or to stand the line against Government Tyranny is to BECOME ONE OF US!
Find an academy nearby, pass your TCLEOSE exam, find a department, TAKE AN OATH, put on a badge, follow the laws while putting your sense of right or wrong ahead of your opinions.
CSPOA.com & Oathkeepers.org
Wow, a powerful testimony. For someone who has witnessed police “enforcements” growing up in the former Soviet Union, this story in the post-Soviet era Yugoslavia is all too familiar. Our country is heading that way, perhaps too slow for many to notice. But in historical measurements of time, we are heading in the same direction. Thanks for writing it Chris. Your story is informative as well as educational. And for those who live “in a bubble”, it should be an eye-opener. “Joe” is real and is a living proof what happens when people like him get empowered to do things because they think it is better for a society. Regardless of the suffering they will cause along the way. Lenin did the same thing in 1917. Again, thanks for sharing your story.
Igor,
Thank you for reading and commenting. Your perspective as a former resident of the Soviet Union is extremely valuable and I hope you share your experience. People here don’t realize how valuable and rare this kind of freedom is. If they knew, like you do, that freedom is precious, they wouldn’t be so eager to throw away freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
Thanks again, and I hope to hear your story.
Chris
joe cops think that they are bullet prof but they are not if you use flechettes.they for get that we know where they live.
I hesitated before approving this comment, because I don’t want anyone to think I advocate violence against any government organization. But Bruce’s sentiment’s (not the flechettes part) are very similar to what Paul Howe, a retired Delta Force operator, police officer and tactical trainer, recently wrote. For the record, I am VERY pro-police, and I believe most police (at least in Texas) would refuse to violate law-abiding citizens’ constitutional rights.
Chris
I think the concern from those of us in the anti-government crowd is the parsing of your phrase “law abiding citizens’ constitutional rights”. Currently, freedom of speech is a “constitutional right”. Yet a guy who has never committed an actual physical action against the county, Anwar Al-Awaki, is executed without due process or a trial by his peers with a drone strike in a country with which we are not at war carried out by the military. Obviously, violating a number of “constitutional rights”. At a more local level, in NY our government recently passed legistlation banning certain weapons, essentially retroactively. If you own what has been deemed an “assault weapon” (one characteristic test instead of two), in one year you will be considered a felon. So, now, we have ex post facto being enacted by our rulers that will have to be enforced by the police. I believe (although not positive) the constitution states there are no ex post facto laws. And, what is the war on drugs but a big huge raid on an unlicensed bizarre. I like to think most police or military are good people. But, at what point are those good people willing to “question authority”?
cops like joe think they are bullet prof but they are not especially if they think they can confiscate our fire arms.all they need to do is kill a few American and you can bet the rest of us will not wait for them to come for us because we know where they live.
I hesitated before approving this comment, because I don’t want anyone to think I advocate violence against any government organization. But Bruce’s sentiment’s are very similar to what Paul Howe, a retired Delta Force operator, police officer and tactical trainer, recently wrote. For the record, I am VERY pro-police, and I believe most police (at least in Texas) would refuse to violate law-abiding citizens’ constitutional rights.
Chris
I don’t know how I feel about this, to be honest. Part of me wants to believe that our military and police would never turn on us. But the realistic part of me feels that if they were ever ordered to, only a very small number would refuse. Even in your story, the ones that didn’t agree with it, didn’t stand against it. For what reason? Who knows. Fear of losing your job, fear or punishment, etc… whatever the reason. Heck there are existing laws in the U.S. right now that violate peoples rights and the police enforce them all the time. Petty minor things that only serve to harass and beat people down. I think your story made me even more afraid of this happening here.
Jeff,
I hear you, and the only thing I can tell you is that things look different when you’re in another country. I know that Joe would never have even tried to pull that in America, but he did it overseas because the law let him. But based on my experience, officers like Joe are the minority. If a law that was a blatant USC violation were passed, my gut reaction is that the vast majority of police would refuse to enforce it. There’s a reason so many sheriffs have publicly stated they won’t enforce confiscation, even though we’re nowhere near confiscation. Police are drawing their lines in the sand, to make sure nobody even tries to get near them.
Thanks for reading and commenting.
Chris
I sure hope you’re right, and it makes me feel better hearing things like that from you guys. Looking forward to reading your book, which I’ll be picking up next week.
Glad to hear that Jeff, and hope you enjoy the book. Please feel free to post a review, even if you think it sucks.
I have the same queasy feeling as Jeff. If a power grabbing government that can pass a bill without reading it first, as in the Obamacare, is certainly capable of passing quick fixes, either via Congress or executive orders to oppress its citizens; DHS already consider the 2nd amendment supporters, ex-military, religious rights, anti-abortion groups… as right wing extremists. It doesn’t take much to knock us off this slippery slope we are on right now. I think we are one or two new supreme court appointments away from having a new constitution or at least a differently interpreted one. Recent statements by Panetta regarding US arm deployment at the will of UN and NATO instead of our Congress is concerning.
Khanh,
I definitely understand your queasiness. The Nathan Haddad case, where a decorated Iraq vet is facing 35 years in prison for possession of 5 empty magazines, shows us that some cops and prosecutors will ignore common sense and fairness and will arrest for any law, no matter what. But we also have well over a hundred sheriffs nationwide publicly stating they’ll refuse to enforce unconstitutional gun control laws. So there’s hope.
Chris
Chris-
I agree with you…I’ve come across a few Joe’s in my 30+ years as a cop, but I feel that there are so many more of us who will not turn on those we have sworn to defend. It will be a cold day in hell before I even think about going against the 2nd, or 4th Amendment.
I think it must partly be what we’re used to. The entire war on drugs, for instance, is blatantly unconstitutional. No authority for it is listed, 9th and 10th make clear that without explicit authority none is implicit. The commerce clause isn’t much of a fig leaf, but they try.
And yet here we are, with cabinet level federal departments and divisions of nearly every police department devoted to it.
Well said. Never followed a blog before but enjoyed and agreed with your thoughts. Keep up the good work.
Glad you read and agreed, hope you keep coming back. Thank you for reading and commenting.
Chris
It’s bloody wonderful to hear someone acknowledge that human nature is universal and inevitable…and that an understanding of human nature is why the founders placed the restrictions on government power that they did. As the old saying goes, if men were governed by angels….
Excellent post, and a great blog overall.
Thanks Tim. I think we’ve felt so safe for so long in this country, we forget what human nature really is. Only in a country this safe and this far removed from reality can anyone seriously say such stupid crap as “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”. You have to ignore human nature as shown every second of every day for tens of thousands of years to believe something that stupid. Likewise, you have to ignore tens of millions of murders just over the last century in order to convince yourself that freedom doesn’t need safeguards.
Thanks for reading and commenting, and I hope you comment more in the future.
Chris
The other problem is, not that men are merely corruptible, but also that they’re often wrong. If Officer Joe was an angel and he truly believed that he could help those people by confiscating their property, he still would have done it. Most of the idealistic communists fit this bill, as do most left-wing socialist types. They don’t realize that their actions cause death and destruction. Ludwig Von Mises *proved* that there could be no calculation in a communist country without a free currency, since currency is what allows us to prioritize our needs. A government governed by “angels” that don’t understand basic economics would still starve millions of people because they believed the people wanted factories and heavy machinery when they really just needed some bread.
From a fellow LEO, THANK YOU! To that other cop what a douche lol, I think before any cop can be a cop in a rich area they should have to work the hood/shit areas. We have had people quit at my department after they get assigned to the “shit” zones. I requested the worst zone because I wanted to be a real cop.
I still can’t imagine why anyone wouldn’t want to police the rough neighborhoods. That’s where you learn the basics, and do all the stuff you see on “Cops”. After 17 years of being on the street or deployed I was finally ready to either work a nicer area or ride a desk. I wound up behind a desk, but still doing important work. I miss the street, but I’m older and worn out now. Time to relax a little.
Thanks for reading and commenting, and come back anytime.
Chris
Guys who did the dirty work tend to be the guys who understand what the job should be about…and they should understand which way to go when law and justice aren’t the same things. That can be pretty darn useful when they wear white shirts and start supervising others. A culture of leadership that “gets it” is the difference between a department that spends its time and energies keeping on top of gangs versus one that’s busy writing tickets and harassing yard sales for lack of a permit.
You can do a lot of good for a lot of people behind a desk. Maybe even moreso than when on the street.
Chris you are right on the money! I spent 3 years in the Army as a Military Police Officer and saw the same things happening that you describe. When that badge is pinned on, some peoples heads and egos swell, it happened to me a few times. Which is why I decided not to continue my law enforcement career after the Army. Great write up, thanks for sharing!
Hey John, all of us in LE have had to fight the swelled ego thing. I’ve been fortunate to have worked in areas where I had to learn to talk to people. I’m too small to let my mouth and ego get bigger than the rest of me.
Thanks for reading and commenting, come back anytime.
Chris
Preach it brother! I had 7 years as military and civilian policeman. So naturally pro-police. My motivation was a combination of being a boy scout who got to help the Innocent and being paid to play cops and robbers, the adrenalin rush. We know some cops that are carrying on a family tradition, some that see it as just another job. Some that enjoy the feeling of being part of the tight knit fraternity. And then there is that one of 20 – 30 that is just a bully with a badge.
That’s why we have all these (often unreasonable) layers of oversight and accountability, is to reign in those idiots who feed their low self esteem by dominating the very people they are entrusted with serving. Most cops take that “Protect and Serve” as their mandate. Others fall into that same attitude that seems to afflict our political class. That their position makes them somehow a superior being.
I hope and pray that it is only that 5-10% of the cops and military that would be willing to sacrifice our constitution to an executive order or unconstitutional laws demanding they disarm their fellow citizens. Otherwise, if the gun grabbers have their way, my beloved country is in for some ugly times..
I honestly don’t know how many cops would go along with the “it’s illegal now, so we’ll enforce the law no matter what” mentality. Situations like the Nathan Haddad case in NY scare the heck out of me.
Thanks for reading and for sharing your observations. You’re right on the money.
Chris
And thus we see how a nation was destroyed by the officious actions of a disgruntled paper-hanger, and the terrorism of an agency run by a former chicken farmer.
Because when it comes right down to it, everybody with a gun and a badge “just follows orders”. Even when they’re the “good guys”, going in to “help”. Happens far too quickly and easily, doesn’t it?
I’m glad y’all got back and all, but I wouldn’t have shed tears if this had been a reminisce about the day the citizens of Kosovo pulled out pick handles and gave the lot of you the thumping you so richly deserved. You had it coming, and even the local cops knew it before, during, and after.
And the worst part is, Officer Joe is not only back with his agency, he has thousands of cousins running loose with the same “Respect mah authortay!” attitude, and a mandate from the local authorities to fuel their petty egos, and unless the local Sherrif Andy makes them take the bullets out of their guns, and just carry one in their pocket, Officer Barney Fife is the mildest form of the disease.
But thanks at least for walking away and taking as many other people with you as you could, arguing the idea afterward, and telling the story now. I’m sure a decent regard to how little that means to the victims that day is part of the impetus to share the story now.
Pity the UN doesn’t have the same hard-on for “peace crimes” they have for “war crimes”, because hearing about Officer Joe sitting in the dock on trial at the Hague looking at the crappy end of twenty years in a Kosovo prison while his life savings was poured into lawyers fees would do wonders to salve some of the hate and resentment his little mornings’ exercise in tyranny probably engendered in countless citizens of Kosovo to this day, and will continue to do for years after he’s cold and dead. Not to mention the undoubted high regard the citizens of his local burg have for him, if this vignette is anything by which to judge his everyday behavior.
Officer Joe apparently never learned the value of the advice given by no less an authority than Guido The Killer Pimp (Joe Pantoliano) to Tom Cruise’s highschool kid character in the movie “Risky Business”:
“Don’t f*** with another man’s livelihood.”
Aesop,
thanks for the well-written response. I don’t agree with all of it, and I’d say you’re venturing into hyperbole (intentionally maybe?) with the references to a paper-hanger destroying the nation and the former chicken farmer’s terrorism. But in the main, you’re right. Officers did follow orders, even officers who knew better. People with serious moral qualms were convinced that “it’s okay because it’s legal here”. My personal feelings about the situation don’t help the vendors much (although I think I did more good for that country than bad).
I’d venture to say that any cop and most deployed soldiers who went outside the wire faced a situation that was, to say the least, not morally crystal-clear. Most of us do the right thing, I think. When I didn’t, I kept it inside, and finally wrote about it.
Maybe that makes up for it, to some degree? I don’t know. But I don’t have any other way to address it.
Chris
My point wasn’t that you guys were Nazis, but rather that when you see how easily decent people “just follow orders” it becomes a lot less surprising how a nation of civilized, educated , and generally decent people can quickly end up loading up boxcars with their neighbors. The urge to conform is much stronger than the urge to stand up in opposition.
The classic psych experiment with college students where half were made pretend “guards” and half pretend “prisoners” had to be called off early, because it was becoming a concentration camp for real within a day. Because people are people.
Our founders were right to distrust everyone, and make things difficult for any one person or entity to do anything unless the consensus was pretty generally in favor. Now if only we could weed out the ones who fail these little tests, before they start making out train schedules…
A most excellent read, thank you for taking the time to write it.
What I find interesting is that the behavior you describe in so many ways violates the “community policing” concepts that so many CONUS LE departments are supposed to be using.
The Joe you refer to is the type I like to call a “hall monitor”. These guys are petty little douche bags who trive on screwing with people over such petty little bullshit rules.
The flip slide is that if we don’t have some rules, like building codes and traffic laws, then we would have a clusterfuck for a country like much of the rest of the world.
The art for cops is knowing when to use and apply some of this stuff.
You can’t make a case on Al Capone for all of the stuff he is doing then you lock him up for tax evasion, as an example.
Good point. There are times to worry about the petty stuff, most of the time we can leave it alone. Just after a war when thousands of refugees are just trying to survive is a good time to leave it alone.
Some cops do thrive on the petty stuff. I couldn’t be that way, it’s just not me.
Thanks for the comments, and I need to link back to your writing. Sounds like you have a lot of good experience and important things to say.
Chris
I remember a movie in which only the Military and the Police had the guns. It was called Schlindler’s List.
I don’t know you but I’ve seen city cops and country cops. You take a random cop and a random citizen and the cop is only about getting a citation/arrest/conviction. They’ll write a ticket for a no-permit yard sale or a no-permit burn barrel. They’ll use little tricks to get the uneducated to give up their constitutional rights. It’s been this way for decades and it is getting worse. I avoid lawful interaction with police that would be beneficial to society. When it comes to gun confiscations, cops won’t resist and cops won’t resign, at best they will pull security while others confiscate, pretty much what you did, after all, it was the law, right? Can’t risk feeding your family or that precious pension.
David,
I’ve had constant interactions with cops my entire adult life, and I absolutely disagree that police in general wouldn’t resist confiscation. It’s hard to prove a “what if” on either side of the scenario, but based on almost 20 years of working with cops I don’t see it happening, or at least don’t see it happening across the board.
And as a minor correction, I didn’t pull security. I failed to resist adequately, and ultimately just stayed out of it and tried to keep others out of it. That definitely wasn’t the best thing to do, but it wasn’t pulling security.
“pull security” was meant as to what will happen during the confiscations, “pretty much” meant you watched theft happen.
Most cops have a mortgage, car payments, child support, need to put food on the table for someone, a wife & kids that don’t understand why you got fired or quit for what they will call a “stupid principle”. Do most cops have 3 months of food stored while looking for a new job as a mall guard (that pays how much?) because you won’t get hired at another department. What will they do when the confiscation orders are issued for Joe Schmo at 123 Oak St? Have they thought about what they will say right then or will they try to weasel out & ask to work other calls while other cops that are team players confiscate? What will they do when on a domestic dispute call and see an “illegal” AR-15 in plain view? Ignore it? I’ll bet you think civilian forfeiture is OK, after all, transporting $15K cash the guy must be a drug dealer, buying a car is just a story he made up. It’s legitimate that honest people should have to file suit to get their own money back? Have you read Three Felonies a Day or The Collapse of American Criminal Justice? A very high percentage of police have already made their choice what they will support and it isn’t the Constitution.
Author edit:
This article proves that there is no such thing as a good cop. When bad cops act up, the other bad cops just stand by, or close their eyes, or go back to the station. And offer excuses, just like Chris did. You disgust me…[continued rant against police in general including personal attacks on me, some valid examples of actions I could have taken, and a point I didn't understand about cops needing psychiatric help and sleeping pills].
Points taken. I edited your post because I welcome dissenting opinions, but I don’t have a a reason or responsiblity to post diatribes against law enforcement.
You’re right that I failed to stop this action, and that I didn’t intervene even when I felt it was blatantly wrong. My feelings about my lack of action are what prompted me to write this essay in the first place, as an effort to remind people of the dangers of unchecked power. If I still disgust you, no worries.
I will say that in the moment, when we were operating in another country under a different set of laws, it didn’t seem quite so clear-cut. In the theoretical world, human responses are acknowledged but not really factored into discussions about what should have happened. In the human world, theoretical concepts about moral absolutes don’t always present themselves as simple solutions. I don’t say this to excuse anything. I say it in order to give people an understanding of why humans, especially me, sometimes fail to live up to even their own moral standards.
Regarding your comment “there’s no such thing as a good cop”, I’m fairly certain that’s a conclusion you reached long before you read my essay. I know that statement is false, but I don’t see that even concrete examples would change your mind.
Chris
that guy is the same kind of cop who stops at a 7 year old girls impromptu lemonade stand and tickets her for not having a business license or a sign license or a health certificate costing her parents hundreds of dollars.
dont think for a second that guy couldnt have been convinced in increments to be apart of rounding people up and puting them in camps. killing any who resist.
he barely hid sadism. but thats what it was. he wanted to hurt those people. people who were the least amongst you, people who were the sheep with no defense, little in the way of wealth or power. got it, he would never have organized or orchestrated a raid on a determined dangerous criminal orginization with ak-47′s willing to kill.
he went from being a sheep dog to a predator. just a little taste of the lamb mind you, not enough to be considered a wolf by the rest of the sheepdogs but he got what he wanted, to inflict pain.
to hurt people. to hurt the sheep. he is a failure as a sheepdog and the rest of you sheep dogs failed in your main duty to keep the sheep from harm.
Rum,
going from “he barely hid sadism” to “dont think for a second that guy couldnt have been convinced in increments to be apart of rounding people up and puting them in camps, killing any who resist” is a HUGE leap. A personal flaw, even if it’s petty sadism, does not mean Joe would round up and murder innocent innocent people if only he could be convinced in increments.
I understand your concern. If you’ve read Ordinary Men by Christopher Browning, you know how far “normal” people can go. But humans aren’t rubber stamps of each other, we don’t always fall into the absolutes you described.
But regarding your last point, you’re right. We failed in our duty. That’s why I called BS on what was done, and on my own actions that day.
Chris
“going from “he barely hid sadism” to “dont think for a second that guy couldnt have been convinced in increments to be apart of rounding people up and puting them in camps, killing any who resist” is a HUGE leap”
No, it isn’t even a small leap, it’s a single step in the way such people as Joe roll. Sadists like Joe joined the force to exercise control over other people. If he was a little smarter or had better connections, he would have started out in politics and would be writing the laws that direct the police to load people onto boxcars.
The one quibble I would have with Rum’s statement is that there would be no need to convince Joe to do his thing in increments. Take off the leash, and Joe will round the people up and beat them while he does it.
I wonder if you considered the possibility that by forcing Joe to go by the book on confiscations (issuing receipts for every single item he took) that you would have brought the operation to halt before it got very far. He would have quickly tired of the paperwork involved, that you should have insisted he follow (since he was such a stickler for the law). Instead you saw it as a further absurdity in an already ridiculous situation.
Actually, I don’t think I considered that. You’re probably right that I would have just seen it as a further absurdity, even though it may have worked. Hindsight and all that…
Good observation, thanks for posting.
Great essay Chris. I had a similar experience in Iraq, but in some ways even more disturbing. In 2004 I was in charge of a 15 man US State Department contract PSD team, and sent 4 of my guys on a mission with a UK team’s operators. When they returned I asked how things went, and my guys said “fine.” Later, the leader of the UK team that had gone on the mission with my guys pulled me aside and said “I’ll never work with your guys again!” He told me that my guys had been seen abusing destitute Iraqi children by tossing them coins to fight each other, and throwing food into the street gutters so they could laugh at them eating it.
To say I was furious would be an understatement. I confronted my guys and they admitted they were “just fooling around” and it was no big deal since the children were “just Iraqis”. All of these guys were former cops and Marines.
I didn’t elect to renew my contract to work in Iraq. When I returned to the US I finished out my 22 years as a Deputy Sheriff and took the 3%@50. During my last year on patrol before retiring I began to realize that many of the cops I was working with were no better than those idiots on my PSD team. While I was focused on arresting violent fugitives, others in my department wanted to write traffic tickets to college kids or senior citizens for equipment violations. Now, as a retired cop, I look at situations like Chris Donner and the LAPD with a huge sense of embarrassment and loathing for my former profession.
I know there are a few good cops who understand and respect the Constitution, but I fear they are the shrinking minority.
Adam,
I think you’re right, that is a more disturbing story. That would have really bothered me as well, especially since I had a soft spot for the Iraqi kids. I couldn’t imagine my children having to live like that.
Having said that, I hope you get over your loathing of LE. I’m willing to bet you and many officers you worked with have a lot to be proud of.
Thanks for posting, and for your service. If you hung around in Iraq until 2005 we may have run across each other.
Chris
Chris, I enjoyed your article quite a bit. I understand how it must feel pretty conflicting to see good people perform tyrannical actions in the pursuit of justice, and disconcerting when those lines are blurred.
You seem like an intelligent person, so I hope you don’t take anything I might say related to your profession personally. I’m really just trying to share ideas, though some of those ideas may be fundamentally challenging to your worldview. If they seem to cause some inner conflict or seem controversial, I hope you still give them thought because I think you regardless of how you feel afterward, you may find them insightful.
Have you ever read The Law by Frederic Bastiat? He was the economist who developed the concept of “opportunity cost” and was pretty influential in the US. His short book is entirely about what you’re discussing here. The perversion of law.
The full short book can be read here:
http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
Secondarily, but I something I think may be more interesting…
I noticed your line: “Ne jeme komunista sot.” We are communists today.
and found it interesting considering that public police, state security organizations, are socialist institutions based on the principles of communism. They are institutions owned by “the public”, by funds extracted from the private property of the customers they purport to protect, and managed by politicians and bureaucrats. It’s a wasteful institution based on the organizational principles of authority and monopoly. No competition and the power to prevent bankruptcy from customer flight leads to severe power discrepancy between the customers and the service providers. It essentially amounts to a monopoly protection racket which includes services which may be more desirable to the organization providing the service than their customers. Of course, as you said, that doesn’t mean there aren’t people who join into it for good reasons. The problem is those reasons can easily be perverted into tyrannical action.
I’m not going to get too much further into it, but I really hope you check out this short booklet by Gustav de Molinari, it’s even shorter than The Law, but it’s highly relevant, and if you only checked out one I’d say go with this one, but the previous book will provide a better framework to understand where this one is coming from. It’s specifically about the production of security:
You can also get this booklet free here:
http://library.mises.org/books/Gustave%20de%20Molinari/The%20Production%20of%20Security.pdf
From Bastiat’s wikipedia: “He declared on his deathbed that his friend Gustave de Molinari (publisher of Bastiat’s 1850 book The Law) was his spiritual heir.”
Anyway, I’m sure this comment is has already taken up enough of your time and you probably don’t have as much on your hands as you’d like, and I’m not really expecting much out of this random internet comment request on a blog, but I really do hope you bookmark these and check them out at some point when the urge strikes. The Law is already pretty famous but The Production of Security is much lesser known. At the very least I can guarantee you will find them stimulating and thought provoking if nothing else.
Thanks for the article, truly. It was very, very interesting and insightful seeing things from your point of view.
I’m just going to leave with this great, and pertinent, excerpt from The Law:
“No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.
The nature of law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are “just” because law makes them so. Thus, in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it. Slavery, restrictions, and monopoly find defenders not only among those who profit from them but also among those who suffer from them.”
Also, if it weren’t evident, this reply was intended to be a response to the original article rather than any individual’s response. I may have clicked “Reply” in the wrong place, it’s a bit hard to tell with the way this comment system is interacting with my browser. If so, apologies for the confusion.
Joe’s lucky he didn’t get picked off by one of the vendors’ kids with a Dragunov or Mosin. S–t happens in unstable places.
Kenneth,
we’re ALL lucky nobody decided to fight. I don’t even want to imagine what a crappy day that would have turned into.
I have to agree with Mr. Hernandez, the vendor’s kid wouldn’t have known who started the get-up…
Sir,
read your article with interest after it was posted to a Maryland firearms forum. We have a lot of concerns in Maryland over proposed legislation which, while not as bad as New York’s, would significantly roll back our 2nd Amendment civil rights in the state. I’ve never visited your site before today but plan on coming back now; I found your posting to be very honest in terms of what went wrong that day in Kosovo and the broader implications for the current political climate.
I live in Prince George’s County, MD, in the jurisdiction of a department (PGCPD) that has a repeated history of abuse. Additionally, I used to work in a federal law enforcement agency; though I’m not an 1811 special agent, I worked with several who I expect would act in a similar fashion to your former colleague.
In Maryland, we’ve had some elected sheriffs and rank’n'file cops speak out against the state’s proposed legislation, which includes bans, mandatory registration/licensing/fingerprinting for the owners of some firearms, etc. Although I’d like to think most of our state and local police would resist further unconstitutional encroachments, as with New Orleans during Katrina I fear that many (at least in Maryland’s urban areas, where I live) would go along with confiscation or worse if they felt they had the authority.
Thanks again for the article!
Brian
Brian,
there’s definitely a lot to worry about, especially up there in yankee country (no offense). Down here in Texas we’re on a pretty even keel, no hysteria about new gun control so far. I’ve spent time up north and it just seems to have a different character in regards to personal freedom.
Thanks for reading and commenting, and good luck up there.
I solute you Chris. I wish all officers embodied your attitude, discernment and spirit. Here is the crux of the problem that we American Nationals, the people of the world really face today; it isn’t the individual cop per se, it’s the chiefs, commissioners, mayors, governors and so on who are turning the police into an occupation force. Police are being systematically trained and equipped to deal with the people they are supposed to protect as the enemy. Cops weren’t like this when I was a kid 30 years ago.
Everything is compartmentalized so no one at any level really knows the whole truth–sees the whole picture–except those who wake up and at least try. The evidence is everywhere if people would open their eyes, put down the beer or the video game controller and educate themselves.
Real law, simple principles established by humanity over eons, has been forgotten, written over by the corporate rules of a privately owned and controlled legal system.
Cops don’t understand that the entire system that they are supporting is corrupt by design. The courts are all commercial, established as part of the English admiralty legal system–having nothing to do with original law.
Did you ever hear of what the lawyer (liar) acronym B.A.R. stands for? British Accreditation Registry, a private association established in the late 1800′s that regulates our entire “legal” system. All lawyers and judges must be members to practice law in our country. Doesn’t that strike you as odd, unconstitutional, and insane? A private association that controls the entire “justice” system? They’re all about extracting money, and thus–life force–from the people. Justice is merely coincidental and only occurs when a “judge” decides it should. We’re all too familiar with myriad examples of when it doesn’t.
Private much like our Federal Reserve, which is owned by a private consortium of the largest banks in the world–controlling our monetary policy and our money supply in direct violation of the constitution AND loaning our own money to us at interest!
Of course all this is by design and all interrelated. There are powerful wizards behind the curtain that orchestrate it all for the benefit of a few, and your compatriots intimidate, railroad, abuse, and murder the people every day for their benefit, and most never know it or question it.
The evidence to back up what I’ve written is easily available, it’s not my opinion, but no one knows anything because they aren’t supposed to. They are taught to dismiss anything outside their small frame of reference with one of so many labels…conspiracy theory. They’re literally rendered INCAPABLE OF CRITICAL THINKING by a system that poisons their food and water, and indoctrinates them with the most insane TV broadcasts and an educational system that is designed to spit out compliant, stupid sheep.
There’s so much more….
all over America, certain states and local communities have enacted strict gun-control laws that would condemn a man for using a firearm in the defense of his home and family. There is more than one person sitting in jail today who was deemed a lawbreaker for doing just that. And now, there are legislators, senators, and a President and Vice President in Washington, D.C, who want to further deny everyone in America the right to self-defense by banning semi-automatic rifles.
Make no mistake about it: the semi-automatic rifle is the premier self-defense tool in the modern world. It is effective against the would-be felon, and even more effective against the would-be tyrant. To enact laws against the ownership and possession of semi-automatic rifles (yes, with large capacity magazines) is tantamount to condemning a man for ignoring the “No Swimming” ordinance in order to save the drowning boy. Plainly put: SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLES SAVE LIVES–INCLUDING SAVING THE LIFE OF THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC.
It is at this point that we must point out the jaded philosophy and understanding that so many Americans (especially Christians) have regarding law. So many people seem to be completely ignorant of the natural principle of the greater law, or The Law of Necessity.
When governments pass laws that infringe upon people’s natural right to self-defense, they have become tyrannical; and no one who understands the divine principle of The Law of Necessity is morally obligated to submit to such laws–no more than a man would submit to the “No Swimming” law that would let someone in trouble…. drown.
“I WANT law-abiding citizens to have guns.”
Actually, ALL citizens who are free men and women have the right to bear arms. That includes ex-convicts, people convicted of domestic violence, etc., etc. The laws that are in place today are already a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution. But let’s NOT go there…
Oh the good will that could have been engendered if Joe would have used his position of authority and influence to help those people obtain their permits instead of using it to make himself feel powerful. When I was umpiring we were taught that it was better to prevent someone from violating the rules than to stand by while they did and have to correct the violation with a penalty. Maybe they could teach that kind of compassion at the academy.
Another note here. If you want to see how easily people can become ugly read about the STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT. Chilling.
Well, have you ever arrested someone or confiscated their property on the basis of possession of marijuana?
Very well written. You’re obviously one of the majority: a good cop who is trying to make a positive difference. I’m a fellow Texan, and a competitive shooter — and I share your profound respect for our constution. Years ago I ran to the aid of a uniformed cop who was on the losing end of a fight to make an arrest (and I’m still proud of it). I’d do the same for you any day!
Tears of Joy! The police and military MUST stand up for the right of private citizens to be armed as well as or better than the military and/or police. In a tyrannical system no one is safe – not even the enforcers of the system of tyranny – Just ask Beria
I’m so glad you wrote this Chris. I live in N. CA where we just had a Sheriff retire that thought no law abiding citizen should be able to have a Conceal Carry Permit and was actually a big problem for years. He is “Joe” x 10, and that scares the shit out of me if we did have a societal failure. He would be the 1rst one to suit up and take away my right to defend my family. I have been a life long gun owner and have never have been on the wrong side of the law. What am I suppose to do against people like this? We have really given way to much authority to the Local, State, and Federal police. How do you take that back from them?
Thank you for writing this. My friend John applied to work for the LAPD a couple years ago. His application was denied solely because when asked why he wanted to be a cop, his response was, “I want to help people.” The answer they were looking for was, “I want to enforce the law.” Personally, I think John’s answer was far more reasonable than the expected answer. When anyone, whether they’re police, soldiers, or corporate workers, follow orders blindly because it’s “the law” or “the rules” without judging their actions carefully, you’re opening the door for possible ethical problems.
Steve,
I understand your point, but I disagree about why your friend wasn’t hired. Police hiring practices are something I know a lot about. I guarantee you police agencies are still looking for people who want to help others.
Chris, I do not have any faith that any of the sheriffs who are currently posturing their support for the 2nd will actually resist in any way when the order to confiscate comes down. **ALL** of them already participate in unconstitutional activity — for example, they all participate in enforcing Drug Prohibition.
In addition, all those volunteer cops who went down to “help” during Katrina — I haven’t heard of any that refused orders to confiscate weapons. They all knew damn well that was illegal, but they did it anyway.
The only thing that might help reform American policing is privatization. At least then if the neighborhood-hired cop starts beating up his customers, they will have some hope of recourse.
Private cops actually get prosecuted when they break down the wrong door (example: TWO BOUNTY HUNTERS CHARGED IN HENRICO THEY SMASHED WAY INTO WOMAN’S APARTMENT – Richmond Times – Dispatch – Richmond, Va. – Date: Jul 7, 1995 – Start Page: B.1). Government cops can break down the door, shoot the dog, shoot a sleeping innocent person, and ransack the house — and get away scot-free.
Thank you for a thoughtful – and thought-provoking – article. And thank you for at least trying to be the Good Guy.
I’m not sure I agree with “Mountainman”, where he said: “If you fear that you might be capable of going over to ‘the dark side’, then find another profession.”
Reason being, maybe *fearing* becoming a force for bad would keep Kimberly on the straight-and-narrow?
I’ve seen a lot of cops who were stoked up on their ability to “be good”. They are the most dangerous ones out there.
“The only thing that might help reform American policing is privatization.”
Since you mentioned Katrina, remember that FEMA simply brought in Blackwater mercs as police. The only privatizing that politicians will ever allow is that kind of privatizing, where they hire the mercs and still control them.
I agree that is a danger. Privatization done badly could be just as bad or worse than the statist quo.
However, there have been examples of communities that abolished their local police force. Some contracted out (“hired mercenaries” as you remind us), but some have adopted a decentralized model, where individual neighborhood associations hire their own security firm. I am calling for the decentralized model.
Private police have a contractual responsibility to protect their customers; and if they step over the line, they can be sued like any other private company.
In contrast, public police have no such responsibility; they cannot be sued if they fail to respond to calls for help, for instance (Warren v. District of Columbia).
In addition, government police have a long, brutal record of excessive force, and generally speaking it is notoriously difficult to get prosecutors to bother prosecuting even the most egregiously violent cops. Civil lawsuits are not much of an answer:
a) the individual cop still routinely gets off without even a slap on the wrist, whether the civil suit is won or lost;
b) the taxpayers, not the individual law-breaking cop(s), are forced to pay;
c) the victim often finds the odds very stacked against him — courts routinely assume the cop is telling the truth, even though cops are *trained* to lie and stretch the truth;
d) victims often find out the cost of complaining about abuse is being subject to harassment by the cop’s coworkers.
I am not anti-cop. I think the same individuals who right now misbehave as cops, **would** behave if they were subject to the same liability and criminal laws that is enforced upon us Mundanes. Power is a very corrupting force; and it will slip into the least little crack in one’s wall of morality, and it will grow. Like ice cracking a rock.
After reading your story Chris and the many replies, my heart is filled with a renewed hope for us all. It is just what I needed at this moment in time. God bless all of you.
“He likely never did anything like the bazaar operation in America. But he did it in Kosovo, because he COULD. ”
It’s far more likely that Joe did exactly the same thing at home as he did in Kosovo. That’s probably why he was so outraged about the market vendors in Kosovo “getting away with a crime” as he saw it. What you described at the bazaar there is just business as usual here and has been for at least 10 years that I know of.
Thanks for writing this blog post, and thanks for being a decent man in uniform. I’m not trying to beat a dead horse by making this 2nd comment, it just dawned on me that you hadn’t seen the things where you work that have been going on here in Virginia, and probably elsewhere. I just thought you might like to know that the same thing has been happening here and is typical, not an aberration at all.
I don’t know where Joe comes from but he sounds exactly like the kind of cops who raid flea markets here. He might be from Chesterfield county, Va. He certainly would be welcome on their force.
“None had recourse to recover what had been taken. If police did that here, they would be charged with a crime.”
No….. They wouldn’t.
Good article. Those, like ‘Joe’, who act more like kindergarten monitors rather than police officers make life for the rest of us difficult. Those critical of your ‘inaction’ I doubt have ever worked in the international environment, and are unaware of its unique characterisics which make ‘common sense’ at times a rarity.
Since policemen no longer need probable cause, or need to concern themselves with property rights, or privacy, are they more a threat than a benefit? Would the private sector be more accountable in providing security?
Dave,
Not sure what you mean by saying we don’t need PC. At my level, on the street, we absolutely need PC. I understand if you’re referring to specific laws (such as some federal laws), but as a blanket statement that definitely isn’t true.
I personally don’t believe the private sector would provide better security. Privately hired police would be responsible to those who pay them. If a rich guy hires his own cops, then those cops respond when rich guy is beating his wife and kids, are they going to arrest him? Police agencies are beholden to the public, not specific individuals. Abuses occur and officers fail in their duties, but I don’t see it getting better with private police. Private police would still be human and still have the same flaws the rest of us have.
Good for you for writing this, this is a dilemma I believe many officers will have to face in the next few years in America. Many already had to face it in LA after Katrina. Thank God for organizations like Oathkeepers. Their stickers may be how we tell the good guys from the bad in the future.
When a conservative and presumably moral person looks at the world and sees that things aren’t working well, one of the obvious first impressions that one gets is a realization that a whole lot of people are not behaving with personal responsibility. This realization can lead to an knee-jerk authoritarian mindset. I have seen many “conservative” people stuck in this mindset and I, too, admit that I was there at one time. When you take someone stuck in this trap and place them into a law enforcement role you suddenly have a potentially dangerous, confused individual on your hands. I believe that “Officer Joe” as described in the blog post may have been a victim of this type of mindset. The only escape from this mindset is to ask yourself: are the beliefs that I hold really a solution to an actual problem, or are they only a vent for my frustrations with the world?
“I believe that “Officer Joe” as described in the blog post may have been a victim of this type of mindset. T”
Well, I think that “Joe” was no victim. The victims of HIS mindset were the poor vendors he robbed.
Thanks for the heartfelt article. I feel that you will soon see the truth: that the police are not a force for good. I know you are pro-leo, but if have a conscience, and believe in morality, then there is no way you can maintain a belief in our countries current police state mentality. Every single police officer out there is already enforcing immoral, unconstitutional, and idiotic laws. If I just include only drug-enforcement in that statement, there is enough injustice to fill a thousand blogs. I realize I am further down the path of understanding than you, and many like you, are. Many people in America can not come to grips with what the police actually represent. Many do not want to know the truth and do not wish their illusions shattered. Looking at the data, at the factual evidence of what the police in America actually do, the only conclusion is that the police, in aggregate, represent the greatest threat to liberty, to the safety of citizens, and to the long-term ability of citizens to regain our freedom. Police follow orders. Maybe not all of them, but the vast majority do, as history shows. Without people willing to enforce their edicts(police), coercive government would fail. Ask yourself this question. How can the police do good, when their existence must be supported through theft, fear, and intimidation of the very people they are supposed to protect? How about another one. How can the police be essential when the supreme court has ruled that police are not obligated to help anyone, and yet we are forced to pay for the police regardless?
Thank you for telling the truth. We need more officers like you and we need more people to listen with understanding verses judgments. *shaking your hand internet style
)
Your story brings back the memory of why I was glad to leave a career as a peace officer behind. When left alone to do my job no problem, all too often being told to do things against my conscience made the job a problem. The stupidity and “I don’t care” attitude of supervisors was rampant. Having since worked as a contractor in most of the mid-east and northern Africa I know it is exponentially worse there. Thats the problem with being the enforcement arm of any system, we only have the human race to recruit from and you get all sorts of weird personalities to work with.
I hear the same reply from the so-called liberty patriot crowd, open calls to shoot anyone in uniform without any regard to the fact that often you would be shooting someone who has volunteered to put his/her life on the line for you. If people could stop being such asshat-douchebags and learn how to work together, there is no end to how much good we could do for everyone.
People being what they are will never allow that to happen. Mobs can get things done because they don’t care what the result is as long as it destroys everything around them. People with morals and values who want to create something can’t set aside their differences long enough to agree on whether the sun is shining or not.
Thanks Chris for trying to help people and open their eyes. I am of the opinion these days that no amount of education will help stupid people and in this country we now officially have 51% of the population too stupid to pour piss out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel.
Well done, we all need more people like you backing our only protection . . Our Constitution! The one and only garauntee on this planet we have to be enabled to legally defend ourselves and those with us. Again, well done…
Fact is, “IT” for the most part has already happened and hardly no one lifted a finger to even attempt to stop it. The America most grew up in is history. The 1st amendment is gone with the swipe of a pen via EO It is now illegal to protest or even assemble when or where ever the secrete service are present, the 4th has been gone since the patriot act and the supreme court buried it for good last week ruling electronic surveillance is perfectly legal with out warrant. Then we have ” constitutional free zones” ie anywhere with in 100 miles of our borders which by the way includes the entire state of Florida. The military and federalized police are training to confiscate weapons and have been for years. The government knows what happens when economies collapse and are preparing for it in mass. The sad truth is that most people could care less, believe the constitution is outdated and will line up to turn in their weapons for a loaf of bread. America is in for a very, very rude awakening folks, prepare accordingly.
That is only part of the sad truth. How can we the people stop and reverse the direction we are headed in?
You recognized a wrong being committed and had a choice to do right or wrong. You chose wrong, as most people do when they stand to suffer for choosing right in even a tiny way. History shows that people will not choose to do right until the cost to themselves of doing wrong is higher that the cost of doing right, i.e., they have been stripped of their dignity, humanity, or the means to support themselves and their families, and have nothing more to lose by doing right.
The right choice for you was to refuse to participate. If enough of you had chosen that peaceful route, then perhaps the whole operation would not have happened, or at least it would have drawn attention to the immorality of the action. If you had refused, you might have inspired others to follow you (we are all sheep at heart). I admire that you recognize your choice was wrong and are thinking about it and trying to inform others in hopes that this won’t happen again. The proper response to most evil is not to commit violence against it, but to refuse to participate. That is where 80% of the population fails. They falsely believe that if they have permission of law, that wrong is not really wrong.
The one thing I think I can add to your piece is that this path to destruction that we are on will not change until people understand that the only purpose of government is to enforce moral and legitimate laws. Right now, US citizens have been well-trained to respect and follow all laws, regardless of how crazy and immoral they are. They respect authority without regard to whether it is legitimate. If the military says to kill citizen X in country Y, we support that choice without a thought about morality. When the police enforce unconstitutional laws, we still support them. Why? Your premise that most police are ‘good’ is irrelevant. Most ‘good’ people still choose wrong over right, as you and your colleagues did. ‘Good’ people do not participate in harming others or stealing.
A proper definition of ‘good’ is ‘doing what is right.’ It is not following orders, following your feelings, or going along with the crowd. If there is no absolute morality, then there is no morality at all. What is absolute morality, as defined by our Creator, or nature, or whatever the source is that you believe created us? It is quite simple. We are not to hurt others and we are not to steal. These values are enshrined in our Constitution.
We will each be faced with a continuing series of choices between right and wrong. Every time one of us chooses to support wrong, we are responsible for the consequences that will ultimately cause people to suffer, and eventually that will include ourselves and our loved ones.
Please continue to use your experience to teach others. And let us all endeavor to choose right over wrong, and encourage others to do the same.
Always good to find cops who aren’t delusional about the true nature of government.
“Always good to find cops who aren’t delusional about the true nature of government.”
Yes, that would be good, let me know when you find one.
Having served in a metropolitan police force a decade ago and having served as private security in Iraq in 2004; I hear you. I hear you on the abuses in Kosovo (the tyranny) and on how citizens need to protect themselves. My thought is that personal firearms are for personal defense; “protecting yourself or another from grave bodily injury or death.”
Like you, I have little or no problem with legal carry and ownership, especially if the person carrying is qualified (most are not) to handle those firearms for self defense. Sadly, most are not qualified, most are not trained in bring their firearms to bear in a combat situation. I’ll touch on this later.
Now, what I write next may seem to disagree with you. It may be arguing for the banning of the possession of some weapons. In essence I’m not. I just has some concerns about the ramifications of saying the 2nd amendment protects us from the tyranny of ourselves (our government). As for protecting ourselves from the tyranny of our government? I don’t know how that is possible or practical in any real sense.
Why? That would mean weapons of war in the hands of civilians. We are talking about AR variants in their many forms which, with the exception of one function (select fire), are basically functionally the same as the weapons you and I carried overseas. You carried weapons of war. I carried weapons of war. I’ll say it again. Many of the AR variants sold today by the manufacturers and dealers are functionally the same as what you and I carried. The only thing missing is select fire.
Even with that function missing, you and I both know just how effective an AR variant is, even in single-shot mode.
Should the general population have access to weapons of war? I really don’t know. I don’t have an easy answer for that. We could try to ban them, as we have attempted to do in the past. It didn’t work very well. It especially won’t work very well when the technology exists *today* to use 3D modeling software and a 3D printer to “print” an AR lower receiver and large cap magazines. The latest version of that lower receiver shot over 600 rounds before failure. It cost almost nothing to produce. *Anyone* with the software, the plans file and a printer could have made one.
Add all the accessory components available over the internet and from local dealers and — Bingo! Instant weapon of war.
There are more weapons in currently in the hands of civilians in this country than we have in the hands of trained military. It’s not practical, nor even possible, to collect them all. I don’t think it will ever be. Would you participate in the door to door search and ollection of said firearms? When, not if, but when the inevitable confrontation breaks out, would you return effective and deadly fire? That is the situation every front line solider and police officer would face. The government knows this.
Can the government convince our front line soldiers and police to try to take them away? Can they convince our front line soldiers and police to get into firefights with civilians by deeming them domestic terrorists? It’s possible they can. Such confrontations always depend on the willingness of the front line enforcers to carry out the orders of their superiors.
Even in your situation, you could not stop Joe. No one would listen to you.
So we have an uneasy state of balance in this country. There are really more firearms out there already than we can every hope to take away. They are in the hands of a populace that, to a significant degree, will not turn them in. There is even another significant part of the populace that, dare I say, is actually hoping someone will try. Those are the deterrent to any real attempt to remove firearms from the populace.
But we also have a problem. Those same AR variants are falling into the hands of people who are “good guys” on paper. Those good guys are turning out to be not so good. They are mowing down innocent theater goers, children in schools, with those same weapons of war. Other “nice quiet men” (yes, they are mostly men), are using handguns to clean out coffee shops in Seattle to avenge supposed wrongs.
Now, the pat response to this from some “gun rights” advocates is to have more firearms out there, to arm more people, to arm our teachers, our firefighters, our first responders. Really?
There has to be another answer to gun violence in this country than “more guns”. There has to be an answer to the Gun Culture in this country, the fear they continue to feed, the violence they continue to dismiss with rhetorical hand waving, and the hand they have in the same violence. When I say Gun Culture, I’m taking about the people who don’t see weapons as a tool but as a hobby, a fetish, a multi-million dollar line of business, and a security blanket.
That same Gun Culture fights, at every front, at any reasonable (yes some are quite reasonable) attempts to regulate the ownership, sale and transfer of weapons. They see *any* regulation as infringement. I am of the opinion that they are wrong and, the thing is, it helps the mentally unstable, the criminal, the “bad guys” get access to what are basically weapons of war.
This United States of America has a real problem with gun violence. That problem is fed through a deadly combination of fear mongering, afraid people, opportunistic politicians and capitalists, and entertainment where violence and firearms are the stars, not the actors.
I believe that we have a legal right to have the ability to effectively protect ourselves and others from the imminent threat of grave bodily injury or death. I believe that firearms are effective and reasonable tools to that end.
I also believe that the firearm ownership in this country is an effective deterrent to outright government tyranny.
But I also believe we have a serious problem with gun violence in this country that cannot be solved with more guns and less regulations.
So, what are we going to do about it?
I’ve thought about this for a while. Here are some of my musings, if you are interested.
http://yes-anything-you-want.blogspot.com/2013/01/weapons-of-war.html
http://yes-anything-you-want.blogspot.com/2013/01/get-better-argument-because-this-one-is.html
http://yes-anything-you-want.blogspot.com/2012/12/death-togun-culture.html
http://yes-anything-you-want.blogspot.com/2012/07/if-you-want-peace.html
http://yes-anything-you-want.blogspot.com/2012/07/violence-in-movies-and-gun-nuts.html
http://yes-anything-you-want.blogspot.com/2012/05/if-only-someone-else-had-gun.html
By the way, thanks for trying to stand up for what was right in Kosovo. I ran into similar situations when I was in Iraq, and when I was a LEO. That balancing act isn’t always easy. Thanks for trying.
Like the author, I would like to believe there are at least a few “Officer Friendly” types left, but I’m not convinced of it. As to “it can’t happen here…”, I refer you to the firearms confiscation, participated in by many LEO agencies as well as the federal government, in New Orleans during hurricane Katrina. This, including the video showing the brutalizing of an older lady in order to take her deadly .38 special revolve. I also refer you to the southern state that tried to give its police the authority to confiscate all firearms during any emergency. Add to that the California confiscation of SKS rifles in 1999 and later, plus the recent introduction of confiscation bills in both the Washington state and Missouri legislatures. There will be plenty of police who want to “tac up” and go a confiscatin’, including those who are itching for a chance to be a real badass and shoot someone.