[center][yt]2P6tVHWHiNg[/yt][/center]
Disclaimer: this video is not about cop bashing, it's about the facts. I am well aware that there are good people who happen to be police officers and judges, and one of those people is my own dad. But that doesn't somehow invalidate my criticism. Does the fact that good business owners exist make for a good rebuttal against people who oppose and criticize corporatism? No.
What do you think should happen?
Though obviously unethical, was what happened illegal or by the book? If legal, how can "the book" be revised?
How can this be prevented, in your opinion? What's the incentive for ethical behavior in institutions that rely on a steady stream of tax revenue that's guaranteed, as opposed to custom which isn't?
Man forcibly raped for failing to come to a full stop
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Man forcibly raped for failing to come to a full stop
Post #2This sort of incompetency and abuse of power occurs because there is no accountability. What typically results from this sort of thing is that there is an internal investigation, and all those who overstepped their legal authority or abused their power will be let off easy; paid leave or something else. Cops regularly do things that would land citizens in jail. In this case the victim will probably win suit; but unfortunately, since he's suing the authorities, the tax payers will have to reimburse him for their incompetence.
What I don't understand is why this sort of thing doesn't reach the same national attention that corporate negligence does. When Chic-fil-A made comments about gay marriage, everyone had their panties in a bind. But when the state goes to extremes, no one bats an eye -- it's like people have accepted it as normal.
In the wake of government failure in Detroit, a city that has failed because it employed progressive policies such as high taxation, etc., there have been security companies opening up because the police take days to respond, but the taxes are still high.
[center][yt][/yt][/center]
Yet, there is this strange contempt for private security agencies who must be accountable to their clients by protecting them and their property in a dangerous place (Police are not constitutionally duty bound to protect anyone).
If a private security firm, not contracted by the state, had done this same sort of thing. You can bet you'd hear about it on the national news. The liberals and progressives would be using it as an example to demonize the market and glorify the state.
They certainly would not be satisfied with an internal company investigation or a change in management; they would want the state to shut the rogue company down and sue everyone responsible for their criminal behavior.
But when it comes to state and local police agencies, the left can only call for people to vote for more responsible leaders. At best they can pressure police chiefs with media attention, but apart from that... they simply don't care enough to support the idea of alternative, competitive security. You will hear some bs like "well, it'll be like gang warfare." Meanwhile, they settle for crappy compulsory services that endanger the public (like that of the LAPD or the above department in question). Organizations with legal authority, but who act just like gangs... they're okay with the progressives if the alternative must come from the market. Because government solutions are always "better" in their opinion. This stems from the irrational belief that government is accountable or can be held accountable by the people. If this were the case, the LAPD would have a different reputation.
What accounts for this trust people have in government to protect them, despite the fact that police are not legally bound to do so?
Why do people have a knee-jerk skepticism towards market solutions (which isn't a bad thing), but that same skepticism is not applied towards government... even if there's widespread abuse and corruption?
I think public "education" has something to do with this bias, (not that there's some conspiracy or anything) It's just that it's in the best interests of the rulers and the leaders to support pro-government education in schools, as it instills a love affair for the country in the young and vulnerable. If children were taught to be critical of the government as they are of corporations, well... politicians would have a much harder time having careers. Again, there's no master plan with some evil politician cackling over it -- it's just incentives.
[center][yt]VucczIg98Gw[/yt][/center]
What I don't understand is why this sort of thing doesn't reach the same national attention that corporate negligence does. When Chic-fil-A made comments about gay marriage, everyone had their panties in a bind. But when the state goes to extremes, no one bats an eye -- it's like people have accepted it as normal.
In the wake of government failure in Detroit, a city that has failed because it employed progressive policies such as high taxation, etc., there have been security companies opening up because the police take days to respond, but the taxes are still high.
[center][yt][/yt][/center]
Yet, there is this strange contempt for private security agencies who must be accountable to their clients by protecting them and their property in a dangerous place (Police are not constitutionally duty bound to protect anyone).
If a private security firm, not contracted by the state, had done this same sort of thing. You can bet you'd hear about it on the national news. The liberals and progressives would be using it as an example to demonize the market and glorify the state.
They certainly would not be satisfied with an internal company investigation or a change in management; they would want the state to shut the rogue company down and sue everyone responsible for their criminal behavior.
But when it comes to state and local police agencies, the left can only call for people to vote for more responsible leaders. At best they can pressure police chiefs with media attention, but apart from that... they simply don't care enough to support the idea of alternative, competitive security. You will hear some bs like "well, it'll be like gang warfare." Meanwhile, they settle for crappy compulsory services that endanger the public (like that of the LAPD or the above department in question). Organizations with legal authority, but who act just like gangs... they're okay with the progressives if the alternative must come from the market. Because government solutions are always "better" in their opinion. This stems from the irrational belief that government is accountable or can be held accountable by the people. If this were the case, the LAPD would have a different reputation.
What accounts for this trust people have in government to protect them, despite the fact that police are not legally bound to do so?
Why do people have a knee-jerk skepticism towards market solutions (which isn't a bad thing), but that same skepticism is not applied towards government... even if there's widespread abuse and corruption?
I think public "education" has something to do with this bias, (not that there's some conspiracy or anything) It's just that it's in the best interests of the rulers and the leaders to support pro-government education in schools, as it instills a love affair for the country in the young and vulnerable. If children were taught to be critical of the government as they are of corporations, well... politicians would have a much harder time having careers. Again, there's no master plan with some evil politician cackling over it -- it's just incentives.
[center][yt]VucczIg98Gw[/yt][/center]
Post #3
Just when I thought it couldn't get worse. This is not the first time a man was forced to endure an anal cavity search for a minor traffic violation. It happened before.
Besides, I'm sure the free market is to blame for what happened. Never mind that the doctors who did the tests were forced to by law enforcement and a court order; never mind that the state did not reimburse the hospital for the costs of the procedures taken place there.
We best leave it up to government. It sure feels good to go to bed at night knowing that the residents of Deming can vote there way to a better compulsory service with new management. Oh...
But the important thing is that the citizens of Deming have police. Because they'd be worse off without state law enforcement -- even if it means some people have to get raped... greater good and all. Private security cannot be an option, because of god knows what they'd do; it would definitely be worse than what the government is capable of. I know this, not because of precedent, but because I feel really strongly that government is more trustworthy, no matter how bad its mistakes are.KOB4 Eyewitness News wrote:Police reports state deputies stopped Timothy Young because he turned without putting his blinker on.
Again, Leo the K-9 alerts on Young's seat.
Young is taken to the Gila Regional Medical Center in Silver City, and just like Eckert, he's subjected to medical procedures including x-rays of his stomach and an anal exam.
Again, police found nothing, and again the procedures were done without consent, and in a county not covered by the search warrant.
We've learned more about that drug dog, Leo, that seems to get it wrong pretty often. He might be getting it wrong because he's not even certified in New Mexico.
If you take a look at the dog's certification, the dog did get trained. But his certification to be a drug dog expired in April 2011. K-9s need yearly re-certification courses, and Leo is falling behind.
Besides, I'm sure the free market is to blame for what happened. Never mind that the doctors who did the tests were forced to by law enforcement and a court order; never mind that the state did not reimburse the hospital for the costs of the procedures taken place there.
We best leave it up to government. It sure feels good to go to bed at night knowing that the residents of Deming can vote there way to a better compulsory service with new management. Oh...
Post #4
Jesus... as if twice wasn't enough.
3rd time's a charm.
Another New Mexican victim.
Does anyone care about this or are they just put off by my anti-state arguments or what? Seriously. Hello? Anyone?
3rd time's a charm.
Another New Mexican victim.
KOB4 News wrote:A dog alerted to the woman, and Schaur Ives said federal agents stripped searched her at the facility, asked her to undress, to spread her genitalia and to cough. Female agents also allegedly pressed their fingers into her vagina looking for drugs.
The woman claims they didn’t discover anything during the on-site strip search, so they took her to University Medical Center of El Paso.
“First, medical staff observed her making a bowl movement and no drugs were found at that point,� Schaur Ives said. “They then took an X-ray, but it did not reveal any contraband. They then did a cavity search and they probed her vagina and her anus, they described in the medical records as bi-manual–two handed. Finally, they did a cat scan. Again, they found nothing.�
Does anyone care about this or are they just put off by my anti-state arguments or what? Seriously. Hello? Anyone?
-
Nickman
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5443
- Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Idaho
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Man forcibly raped for failing to come to a full stop
Post #5I saw this on TYT and I am mad. This is a complete violation. When the government can get in your butt 8 times, without consent, government is too big. Why couldn't he get an attorney prior? Why did the Judge sign off on warrant? That is another problem on its own, besides the police overreacting to his "clinched buttocks." This goes way beyond probable cause, which the police officers never had. Since we gave away our rights with the Patriot Act, police now do whatever they want without punishment.Darias wrote: [center][yt]2P6tVHWHiNg[/yt][/center]
Disclaimer: this video is not about cop bashing, it's about the facts. I am well aware that there are good people who happen to be police officers and judges, and one of those people is my own dad. But that doesn't somehow invalidate my criticism. Does the fact that good business owners exist make for a good rebuttal against people who oppose and criticize corporatism? No.
What do you think should happen?
Though obviously unethical, was what happened illegal or by the book? If legal, how can "the book" be revised?
How can this be prevented, in your opinion? What's the incentive for ethical behavior in institutions that rely on a steady stream of tax revenue that's guaranteed, as opposed to custom which isn't?
What should happen? These men should be fired and banned from law enforcement. The man should receive compensation for such an inhumane violation. Normally they are supposed to wait until the person deficates. This is already pretty bad, but not as bad as what they did to this man.
Post #6
[Replying to post 4 by Darias]
As an anarchist, I'm not at all put off by anti-state arguments.
I care about civil liberties and human rights, but as a Canadian expat living in Japan, the horrors of the American "law enforcement" organizations and "justice system" fortunately don't have a direct effect on me. I can only shake my head and think, "what a truly repugnant situation; how lucky I am not to live there!"
It seems to me that the U.S.A. is one of the most authoritarian, undemocratic, and criminal nation states on the planet, but the power structure has managed to convince the population that they-the people enjoy the freest, most democratic, and most just of societies. The people are complacent because they believe this flattering fairy tale.
The solution, I suppose, if there is one, is education. This type of abuse of authority needs to be exposed again and again, and the public probably needs to be shaken up a lot more. The grip of the corporate-financed plutocratic oligarchs is strong, and the will of the people is weak. After watching a report like the type you've shown, the average citizen would probably just shake her head in momentary disgust then switch the channel to the latest prepackaged distraction. I'm not very optimistic about the future of America. The prospect of a people power revolution seems remote. Sorry to say, but I just hope the U.S.A. destroys itself from within before it destroys the rest of the world.
As an anarchist, I'm not at all put off by anti-state arguments.
I care about civil liberties and human rights, but as a Canadian expat living in Japan, the horrors of the American "law enforcement" organizations and "justice system" fortunately don't have a direct effect on me. I can only shake my head and think, "what a truly repugnant situation; how lucky I am not to live there!"
It seems to me that the U.S.A. is one of the most authoritarian, undemocratic, and criminal nation states on the planet, but the power structure has managed to convince the population that they-the people enjoy the freest, most democratic, and most just of societies. The people are complacent because they believe this flattering fairy tale.
The solution, I suppose, if there is one, is education. This type of abuse of authority needs to be exposed again and again, and the public probably needs to be shaken up a lot more. The grip of the corporate-financed plutocratic oligarchs is strong, and the will of the people is weak. After watching a report like the type you've shown, the average citizen would probably just shake her head in momentary disgust then switch the channel to the latest prepackaged distraction. I'm not very optimistic about the future of America. The prospect of a people power revolution seems remote. Sorry to say, but I just hope the U.S.A. destroys itself from within before it destroys the rest of the world.
