Big Plans for Our Police

Leaving names and parties and positions out of the conversation, I can still say that anytime the federal government gets involved in a matter, chances are excellent that bad results will follow.

How's that for being bi-partisan? LOL

Pop and Manny,

Obama and his ilk have managed to politicize the FBI, IRS ect, etal. Now they want to make local law enforcement another claw on their talon of evil. The concept of federalizing local law is folly since local law enforcement enforces State law and local ordinances, not federal law. Another "progressive" step towards tyranny.

Good Morning Pop and Manny,

I agree with Billy, government involvement by either party has yet to solve a problem. In fact government involvement tends to make problems worse than they were before they got involved.

But keep in mind that at this point in time many in government are very concerned about their own welfare and increasing the size and need for big government is in their best interest.

Much has come to light regarding the extreme level of corruption that has evolved within our government. Many of them now fear for their jobs as more and more facts of this corruption are discovered.

I am of the opinion that if the government were given their way, all Police departments in the country would be under government control, and all law enforcement officers would be Federal Employees.

And that could happen in this country if some of our elected representatives get what they want. As it is now any Police department who refuses Government intervention may lose whatever Federal funding they may have had.

I would gladly pay additional taxes to support our local law enforcement agencies rather than see them a part of the Federal Government.

Disaster, that is the only word I could come up with if our local departments become part of the federal government. What federal government agency's work well right now? It would simply be a disaster.

See you at the Inn

Obama and his partners in crime would have the federal government control our thinking as well as our external affairs. Unfortunately many passive Laurel resters have drank the koolaid thinking it was the refreshing cocktail of positive change, and have welcomed Obama and friends to take control of their gray matter. On the other hand, many have come to their senses (too late) and realized Obama is a bad guy. What a shame it took so long. Now America as we know it is in jeopardy of imploding,or being invaded and destroyed by Obama's terrorist friends.

Great......another of Obama's plans........(yawn) I wonder how much chaos & disaster this one will cause? He's done such marvelous things during his really Looooooooong 2 terms. Is he gone yet?

Yippee!! Now our local law enforcement officers will be limited to standing down 90% of the time and slapping wrists the other 10 % The immediate result of a soft-core Police force will be outrage from the law-abiding public with those same people realizing they must take the law into their own hands IF THEY REALLY WANT ANY JUSTICE AT ALL. Oh my, What ARE you doing Barack? Nah, it;s OK, go ahead, do your thing, dude......Why would we deny you the opportunity to add one more piss poor idea to your long list of utter failures? Go for it! It's obvious you don't feel you've caused enough harm, division, chaos, unrest & unemployment....

So if your former-opponent-now-left-wing-"buddy" is elected, she can keep the steady flow of destruction going........or will she? Do you trust her to carry on your reign of Dummy-Down-America? I mean, pssst....have you heard that every time her lips move, she's lying about something? Pssst, don't want to shock you but haven't you heard? Hillary lies when her lips move.

BTW, we hear you and Michele hate the Clintons. At least you & I have that in common...........OK, I'll let you get back to screwing America now........

Patti - The really scary part is that if this Administration decides they want to nationalize the Police there is little we can do to stop it.

Many of our elected representatives don't even try to do their jobs anymore, and some never did.

Perhaps Obama believes the TSA employees could replace our local law enforcement agencies at any time. We all know how well that would work.

Fortunately, there is probably not enough time left for Obama to accomplish this destructive move against our country.

Hello, Breakfastpop,

Remember me?

I am still alive. And still around "Hubville."

I enjoyed this hub beyond enjoyment. It was very poignant; helpful and very well-written.

Sorry for not corresponding as much as in the old days, but honestly, I've had a near brush with death in November, opened my own birdhouse shop and still, with God's hand, still on HP doing hubs.

I am glad that I came by to read this.

I miss you.

Kenneth

The police need to be treated as "public servants", instead of omnipotent thugs who patrol the plantation. Since they are here to serve the citizen, then citizen review boards should have been implemented from the very beginning. If these morons cannot be brought to heel, then they should be put out to pasture.

The public would be better served if they were digging ditches, or making donuts, instead of murdering, raping, and bullying the citizens who are paying their bills. The reaction to Obama and Black Lives Matter is a racist reaction, and quite predictable. More whites are being killed by miscreant cops than blacks, yet white racists have little concern for their own kind who are being murdered with impunity. Their only concern is keeping black people "in their place". But those days are over, and even Donald Trump can't bring back the glory days of Bull Connor.

breakfastpop,

Unlike many Americans, and so-called Christians, I don't live in fear. In many cases, it is best "not" to call the police. Their primary function is to simply collect revenue for the city and state by providing the "muscle" to extort money from the citizen. Crime only exists at the current level because of the evils of capitalism, which are compounded by racism, and a general lack of education. If the American people truly wanted to end crime, homelessness, and poverty, then they would get serious about a new form of government, as well as a new paradigm for a world economy. But instead, the greedy capitalists, and the pathetic wannabe's who will never have enough capital to sustain a hot dog stand, continue beating a dead horse.

Furthermore, the police are involved in much of the drug trafficking that goes on throughout the nation, especially in the inner cities. They facillitate the trafficking of narcotics by looking the other way and getting a generous kick back. At the same time they arrest a percentage of people using the drugs and enslave them to a "prison for profit " system. And so, they make a profit for themselves, and the state, on both sides of the street. And for those miscreant cops who happen to be racist, this helps them to destroy the black community. A 2006 report by the FBI warned that the Ku Klux Klan had infiltrated police departments across the nation. It's really not that hard to connect the dots.

It appears that many Americans who support this kind of domestic terrorism are suffering from a form of Stockholm Syndrome. Unless the citizens disarm the police and greatly diminish their power, and "legal" authority to harass and murder with impunity, things will only get worse. Soon we will reach a tipping point, and beyond that is Martial Law, and Civil War.

Hi, breakfastpop,

Where is your response to my comment?

LOL! Just had to kid you a bit.

Making the police accountable to the public they serve through citizen review boards would not prevent them from arresting serial killers, rapists, and bank robbers. It would simply mean that the Fox would no longer be guarding the chickens. It means that when an innocent civilian is harassed, injured, or killed by a cop, there is no longer a "thin blue line" to circle the wagons and allow the miscreants to continue operating with impunity.

Furthermore, Fireman risk their lives everyday. Perhaps it has happened, but I cannot recall any Fireman refusing to enter a burning building because he "feared for his life". Anytime you enter a building on fire you are putting your life at risk, yet Fireman continue to risk their lives and save citizens who might otherwise perish in the flames. But "I feared for my life" has become a mantra for any coward with a badge who decides it's easier to shoot first and ask questions later. If they are so afraid, they should just get a job at the donut shop, and kill two birds with one stone.

@ breakfastpop,

So I've still got it even under adverse conditions, eh?

Seriously. The fact remains that I still miss you. And please, I ask you nicely to stay in touch.

wrenchBiscuit - I have no idea where you live but most cities offer a ride-along program where civilians can ride with a police officer for a shift.

If this is available where you live, I suggest you give it a try. I also suggest you ask them if you can ride-along on the night shift when all the really bad guys and creepy people crawl out of their holes. You might be surprised at what is going on at night in the city you live in while you are home safe in your bed. I suggest you also tell them you would like to ride-along in some of the rougher parts of the city and not in the gated communities with guards on patrol.

If this is program is not available in your area get a cheap scanner that will monitor police dispatchers directing calls to the officers on duty. Some cities even make their police and fire dispatch systems available on the internet.

I believe if you could see what these officers face on almost every shift you would change your opinion of police officers. Both of my sons were police officers, and many of my friends are in Law Enforcement. These are some of the finest people in the country.

I have no idea where you get your information from, but the real story is out on the streets. Go see for yourself before you judge too harshly.

My interpretation of the news is tempered with my own experience. I have seen police brutality up close and personal. For example: I saw a white woman thrown off a bar stool in front of her husband by a miscreant cop, while three other cops stood and watched. Both the woman and her husband were over the age of 65, and the husband was a Vietnam veteran. Apparently there was a warrant out on the woman because another woman claimed that this woman had threatened her at another bar several weeks earlier.

I was standing on stage between songs when I watched it all go down. The cops came in the bar, one cop approached the woman from behind and told the woman she was under arrest. The woman simply rotated on her bar stool and asked in a normal tone of voice why she was being arrested. At that point she was violently thrown to the floor and handcuffed! Apparently it is against the law to ask a question. You see, it's not so much about race, as it is about power and control. This was a retired white woman who was with her white husband, but in this case, race didn't really matter.There was no reason to manhandle this woman in such a way.

And because of the nature of my work, I have been exposed to many such incidents across the United States. But these types of men, and women, are bullies and sadists, which is why they become police officers in the first place. There is no other job where they could have such absolute authority and control. If it is your daughter, or wife, who is abused and raped by a cop, or if it is your son who is beat up and shot, it really doesn't matter how many so-called "good cops" are out there. The only thing that matters is the fact that a corrupt system let a pervert, a sadist, or a sociopath have absolute power and control over someone you love.

When I joined the military I understood that I might have to die. But I am the one who made that choice. It is the same with the police. If a cop is not up for the challenge, and is too cowardly to exhaust all other means before using deadly force, then they need to find another occupation. And if they are a pervert, sadist, or sociopath, they need to be locked up, not protected. No, I am not concerned at all about the so-called "good cops". They are getting paid very well for what they do. And if there are so many good cops, as you and many others have suggested, then why didn't the "good cops" weed out all the bad ones before this problem got out of hand? As I believe I stated earlier, although the Indigenous and the Blacks are being murdered by cops in disproportionate numbers, more Whites are being murdered than any other race. And this begs the question: Why weren't white people marching in the streets and protesting the killing of white people long before "Black Lives Matter" came on the scene? The phrases "All Lives Matter" and "White Lives Matter" only came as a reaction to "Black Lives Matter". But why not before? And why not now?

A good place to start would be the murder of Samantha Ramsey, a 19 year old white teenager from Kentucky who was shot and killed for allegedly running over a State Troopers foot with her car! But even if she did, most people have sense enough to get out of the way of a moving vehicle. At any rate, when you study the details, it didn't warrant a death sentence. Samantha was a substitute teacher, and had a bright future ahead of her. Please, call up her family and ask them what they think about all of the "good cops" in Kentucky.

My interpretation of the news is tempered with my own experience. I have seen police brutality up close and personal. For example: I saw a white woman thrown off a bar stool in front of her husband by a miscreant cop, while three other cops stood and watched. Both the woman and her husband were over the age of 65, and the husband was a Vietnam veteran. Apparently there was a warrant out on the woman because another woman claimed that this woman had threatened her at another bar several weeks earlier.

I was standing on stage between songs when I watched it all go down. The cops came in the bar, one cop approached the woman from behind and told the woman she was under arrest. The woman simply rotated on her bar stool and asked in a normal tone of voice why she was being arrested. At that point she was violently thrown to the floor and handcuffed! Apparently it is against the law to ask a question. You see, it's not so much about race, as it is about power and control. This was a retired white woman who was with her white husband, but in this case, race didn't really matter.There was no reason to manhandle this woman in such a way.

And because of the nature of my work, I have been exposed to many such incidents across the United States. But these types of men, and women, are bullies and sadists, which is why they become police officers in the first place. There is no other job where they could have such absolute authority and control. If it is your daughter, or wife, who is abused and raped by a cop, or if it is your son who is beat up and shot, it really doesn't matter how many so-called "good cops" are out there. The only thing that matters is the fact that a corrupt system let a pervert, a sadist, or a sociopath have absolute power and control over someone you love.

When I joined the military I understood that I might have to die. But I am the one who made that choice. It is the same with the police. If a cop is not up for the challenge, and is too cowardly to exhaust all other means before using deadly force, then they need to find another occupation. And if they are a pervert, sadist, or sociopath, they need to be locked up, not protected. No, I am not concerned at all about the so-called "good cops". They are getting paid very well for what they do. And if there are so many good cops, as you and many others have suggested, then why didn't the "good cops" weed out all the bad ones before this problem got out of hand? As I believe I stated earlier, although the Indigenous and the Blacks are being murdered by cops in disproportionate numbers, more Whites are being murdered than any other race. And this begs the question: Why weren't white people marching in the streets and protesting the killing of white people long before "Black Lives Matter" came on the scene? The phrases "All Lives Matter" and "White Lives Matter" only came as a reaction to "Black Lives Matter". But why not before? And why not now?

A good place to start would be the murder of Samantha Ramsey, a 19 year old white teenager from Kentucky who was shot and killed for allegedly running over a State Troopers foot with her car! But even if she did, most people have sense enough to get out of the way of a moving vehicle. At any rate, when you study the details, it didn't warrant a death sentence. Samantha was a substitute teacher, and had a bright future ahead of her. Please, call up her family and ask them what they think about all of the "good cops" in Kentucky.

wrenchBiscuit - You said, "My interpretation of the news is tempered with my own experience."

There are good and bad people in most every profession. For instance, many now believe that most VA Hospital employees are really bad people based on what we have read in the news. The truth is the VA Hospitals have some really outstanding people working for them with a few bad apples in the mix.

You cite some observations of really bad behavior by cops that you observed first hand. Yet on the same day you saw those bad things happen I would bet there were hundreds of stories of cops helping people that never get reported in the news.

I again suggest you try a ride-along program with your local Law Enforcement agency to get a feel for walking in a cops shoes for just one shift. You might be very surprised at what you see.

Pop

Excellent hub and good points.

You nailed it when you say that the federal government is using our tax dollars to influence, or extort, or coerce, OK financially force the police as they do with the schools to do it the fed way.

Now, you can skip over my story about how this came about.

Once upon a time, in the 1940s, the SC started its first misinterpretation of the Interstate Commerce Clause.

=-----------

The Commerce Clause, Article I Section 8 Clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States, grants Congress the power “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”. The commerce power is an enumerated power of Congress and the Supreme Court has interpreted it as an express grant of authority to Congress and an affirmative limitation on the rights of the states to regulate commerce within their own borders.

The scope of the commerce power depends on the interpretation of “commerce”. If construed sufficiently broadly, the commerce power can give Congress the power to legislate in many areas that otherwise would fall within the scope of the states’ police power. The Constitution does not define the term and the Supreme Court therefore has great flexibility in deciding cases involving the Commerce Clause and enormous power to influence the balance of state versus federal power.

--------------

The SC did construe the clause broadly and liberally. To the extent that there isn't anything that the court will not deem a federal matter, and use the ICC to justify their decision.

This is then backed up by the Supremacy Clause which then trumps the 10th Amend which is only residue of state powers that the feds haven't usurped.

The Supremacy Clause and the 10th Am create a zero sum of government powers in the country. The more that the Supremacy Clause takes the less that is available to the state powers under the 10th.

So decade after decade the SC has found in favor of the feds. This also included the liberal scope they gave to the implementation of the 16th am, Fed Income Tax.

The Interstate Commerce Clause existed for the feds to protect goods going across the states from being over taxed by one or more states. The concept of Apportionment was key to this control. So one state could only tax the goods for the slice of control within their state, but if the goods were merely passing through the state then their portion to be taxed was minimal.

Now the whole concept of the 16th amend was to remove the bonds of apportionment. Once removed the feds had a blank check to tax anyone or anything without being restricted by apportionment. They already had the power to tax from the constitution, but getting ride of apportionment gave them Carte Blanche.

My point is that the Income Tax was the mechanism to fund any increase in the size and scope of the federal gov. This also took away revenue from the states so that they would be dependent on federal funds, which as you mentioned they totally are especially in the area of schools and now law enforcement.

The value of the states are being diminished one SC decision after another.

While an amendment can be hardly found to be unconstitutional, the implementation of that amendment can run afoul with the constitution.

The IRS and the Internal Revenue Code are certainly candidates for rulings of unconstitutionality. The problem is that the SC has found for the feds against any constitutional challenge to the Income Tax. Even though for simply getting revenue for the country, it is akin to the Inquisition. Constitutional rights like the 4th and 5th amend are summarily waived for you. Due process and equal protection are ignored.

In conclusion, the SC and the Income Tax feed the cancer running through the federal government, and it continues to spread.

If the states are to exist as envisioned by the founders, then they must get back the Powers that the fed gov and the SC have usurped from them.

Otherwise, there are no states, united or otherwise. The US becomes a Kingdom, and the president becomes the King or Queen of it.

What areas are left for the states that are of value to the citizens of those states?

Hi Breakfastpop...

Didn't we recently have a civil war over states rights...???

Symbolically, I like Obama. The fact that he is the first so-called "black" president continues to rattle white racists, and so, I get a big kick out of that. I only wish my parents, who were both Civil Rights activists, had lived to see it. But other than that, he is no different than any of the pale faces that preceded him. He is a company man, and he follows the direction of the home office,just like his predecessors. And it is quite clear that the "home office" consists of the bankers controlling the Federal Reserve. This control is maintained on behalf of England, the Zionist Jews, and other entities that constitute a ruling elite.

And so, it appears that you, Old Poolman, and others who support the Police are facing a great dilemma. breahfastpop, you have admitted that you agree the government is out of control. And I agree with your agreement! So let's all have a drink together, put a dollar in the jukebox, and play my favorite Hank Williams Jr. song "Old Habits". But once the song is over, we must face the music. The government is out of control, and the government controls the military and the police. The police do not make up the rules, as they simply follow orders from their superiors. I suggest that you review Executive Order 13603 that was signed by Obama in 2012.

This EO essentially legalizes slavery in the United States! I suggest that you also review the Patriot Act, which among other things suspends Habeas Corpus. When you combine all of this with the unlimited power of the police , you have a recipe for tyranny. The police, as a collective, have no will of their own, and they will use their unlimited power against the citizens of the United States if they are directed to do so.

It is imperative that the powers of the police, local and state governments, and the federal government be significantly reduced and contained before it is too late. And once we reach the point of no return, it won't matter if you are a white racist, the man sitting on the fence, or a member of Black Lives Matter, because at that point we will all be standing together on a sinking ship. Of course, I understand your sentiment, and your appreciation of those officers who are trying to do the right thing. But contrary to the U.S. Constitution, the people no longer control the government, thus the people no longer control the police.

wrenchBiscuit I like that comment. You were able to put into words many of my exact thoughts and concerns.

WrenchBisquit

Don't confuse civil rights with constitutional rights.

The constitution has been watered down by the SCOTUS for about 100 years. We have lost constitutional rights from the application of the 16th Amendment. It is hard to imagine that an amendment could be patently unconstitutional, but the implementation of an amendment can be done in an unconstitutional manner.

That is what the SCOTUS did with the IRS, The Tax Court, and all the regulations that came with them.

The Patriot should have been declared unconstitutional because we haven't had a declared by Congress war since WWII. The Patriot Act is not more successful that 100% TSA handling of airplane passengers.

Executive Order 13603 is not slavery per se, but Involuntary Servitude, and a taking without just compensation.

Obama extended the Patriot Act for 4 years. No one even blinked.

Snowden likes the new Freedom Act.

People vote for the personality and their party to which they are loyal, and other than that they don't have a clue as to what they are voting for in the election. How intelligent is it to vote Row A or B?

The SCOTUS instead of being a check and a balance branch just seems to be too political. And it acts more like congress than a judicial branch. The president also thinks that he is congress. So we now have 3 branches of congress, and NO SCOTUS and NO real president.

The constitution has so many holes in it that it could be used as a colander to strain the spaghetti laws of the 3 congresses.

This election is no different than the last several presidential elections in that the main course is red herring. While fish is supposed to be brain food, it doesn't appear that digesting red herring makes people smarter.

Trump is the only one bringing up at least some of the critical issues of the country. The other side just does personal attacks against Trump. They need to attack his policies and ideas rather than him personally.

Barack Obama is the 2 term black version of ex president Jimmy Carter.

Both for example made Iran stronger.

Back to the point.

Nationalization whether true federal powers, or federal money has not been successful in public education or police. Maybe that is why we have so many loyal party voters.

Brad, yet another awesome comment.

Old Poolman

Thanks

There is much interesting information on your post and comments. All I have to say is that if the government is advocating some thing it is most likely profitable for their agenda.

Aug. 8, 5:20 p.m., cst

Dear breakfastpop,

Just passing by and I thought I would take another look at this impressive hub. And I loved it all over again.

If I may, you just keep on plugging hubs like this and before you know it, you will be signing books at Walden Books.

That is what I pray happen to you.

Your Friend for Life, Kenneth