Show me the ethics of how government employees (including cops) get paid.
As a side note, I love parodies ;D :
http://www.funnyjunk.com/movies/5170/Go+Cops+Kesha+Tik+Tok+parody/
-Libertango
[quote author=Libertango link=topic=4846.msg50595#msg50595 date=1299264817]
Show me the ethics of how government employees (including cops) get paid.
[/quote]
Yep. On cashing his first paycheck, a government employee becomes a felon: receipt of stolen property.
I wonder if the police in New Haven have been arresting each other for the numerous crimes they've been committing through blocking traffic and such, all because the city laid off less than 4% of the officers?
I mean, the law's the law, right? So they obviously won't turn a blind eye to the criminals in their midst, right?
And they'll be locking up Melendez for the numerous criminal acts that their own investigation turned up, right? Or will they be allowing him to retire, with a annual pension of $124,500? Throw the crook in prison, or tell him he can sit at home and make six figures? If it was anyone else, we know exactly what would happen, but because he's a cop, he gets to sit at home and make three and a half times what the median family (not individual) makes in that city. That one thug, to sit at home, requires that every man, woman, and child in New Haven cough up a dollar each year. Just for him. Think he's worth it?
Joe
Without having to quote everything that was said, I will sums things up.
@Joseph- You fail to directly answer the important part of my line of questioning- What do YOU do to enforce your rules, and who exactly gives you the 'right' to enforce your rules? What happens when the rule YOU think is legitimate is considered illegitimate by someone else, and now YOU happen to be the party in the wrong?
What gives you the right to enforce your rules on people that are not part of your society? I used the example of rape done by a guy from Rapeville where rape is acceptable and normal. Your strawman was "There's nowhere that it's okay to commit rape." That is not true and along with your physics lesson, you need an anthropology lesson. You should probably look at some indigenous communities in Africa and South America. It is only unacceptable to YOU because you have been brought up in a 'civilized' society. So that point aside, what gives YOU the right to enforce YOUR law on another person that is not part of your community? Now you are making a moral judgment on this rapist and applying your arbitrary law on him with no regard HIS beliefs.
Therefore Joseph, I have proven again that you view yourself as the moral man in the robe, based upon your laws that you think are right, and are willing to enforce them at the point of a gun. Please tell me again what makes you better than me? Sounds to me like you are a fascist dictator like Hitler, who believes he can impose his will upon whomever he sees fit. Not very liberty oriented are you?
And before you again try to steer things off course and not answer the question, or strawman argue back- also answer this- what gives YOU the right to enforce YOUR arbitrary rules without a 'contract' and HOW can you non-violently enforce such rules? So far everything that you've proposed ends at the pointing of a gun.
Carry on, liberty minded Joseph.
@Dallineation: I like Rothbard's message to some extent, and I think the Mises Institute has some good characters like Lew Rockwell. But a society will never succeed without rules and people to enforce those rules. The idea of a 'free' society where no one ever has their 'rights' infringed upon will not ever happen. We are just monkeys after all.
@whoever asked about enforcing rules that 'don't hurt anyone': We've gone through some of this, and my example was a seatbelt violation. Joseph doesn't think it's possible to get ejected from a car and become a hazard to other people (he believes you are vaporized) yet the YT vid I posted shows someone getting thrown out of a car and nearly landing on the hood of another car. So the idea that seat belts only affect 'me' doesn't work.
If we chose to pick not paying your taxes as a 'hurts nobody' crime, then I can make the following argument: Road repair is done through taxation. Because no one paid their taxes this year, the roads are is disrepair. You drive along one day and blast through a pothole, damaging your car. Because you didn't pay your taxes, the pothole never got fixed, and your property was damaged as a result. Therefore, not paying your taxes creates a public hazard in which you are entirely responsible.
I expect Joseph to counter this with the old- I HAVE INSURANCE!!! argument, which does nothing but pass the monetary buck onto someone else. Yet it never addresses the
meat and potatoes of the discussion- personal responsibility and the absolute necessity of rules and laws, and some kind of way to enforce those rules and laws.
Just so we have it straight on my personal beliefs- I hate INCOME taxes and think it's theft. I hate property taxes because they are high. But I can tolerate the property taxes because it keeps my roads drivable, my kids get to be indoctrinated by the public school system, and I know that if my house is on fire or someone gets hurt, that I can depend on someone helping 24/7. It allows me to continue working if my house gets broken into so I don't have to take time off work to investigate this case myself. (Hell, I wouldn't even be able to investigate it since WHO would have the fingerprint files of everyone without some kind of law in place to take fingerprints to begin with.)
Please tell me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression from some of you that you aren't liberty-minded, but instead selfish brats without forethought as to how exactly you could handle a crisis if there weren't public servants there to help you. There seems to be a lot of the John Rambo talk, where you can 'take your law into your own hands.' Even John Rambo needs to sleep, and a one man army won't usually last more than 4 movies.
So I'll ask you a FOURTH time, Oh Crap it's the cops…
Are you okay with arresting a peaceful person that hasn't harmed anybody over a plant?
What is your justifiction for this ?
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]@Joseph- You fail to directly answer the important part of my line of questioning- What do YOU do to enforce your rules, and who exactly gives you the 'right' to enforce your rules?[/quote]
Already addressed. Either you lack reading comprehension skills, or you're just flat-out lying. Given that you're a cop, it really could be either, couldn't it?
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]What happens when the rule YOU think is legitimate is considered illegitimate by someone else, and now YOU happen to be the party in the wrong?[/quote]
There is only one rule. And it's very cut-and-dry. Did you use force? If so, did you initiate it, or were you responding to someone else's use of force? Answer those two questions, and you know who's in the wrong.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]What gives you the right to enforce your rules on people that are not part of your society? I used the example of rape done by a guy from Rapeville where rape is acceptable and normal. Your strawman was "There's nowhere that it's okay to commit rape." That is not true and along with your physics lesson, you need an anthropology lesson. You should probably look at some indigenous communities in Africa and South America. It is only unacceptable to YOU because you have been brought up in a 'civilized' society. So that point aside, what gives YOU the right to enforce YOUR law on another person that is not part of your community? Now you are making a moral judgment on this rapist and applying your arbitrary law on him with no regard HIS beliefs.[/quote]
Here you go with your silly mythology of "society." There are only individuals, each possessing self-ownership. There are no magical entities that can make it okay to violate someone's self-ownership. "His society said he can do it" makes no more sense to a rational person than "his unicorn said he can do it."
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]Therefore Joseph, I have proven again that you view yourself as the moral man in the robe, based upon your laws that you think are right, and are willing to enforce them at the point of a gun. Please tell me again what makes you better than me? Sounds to me like you are a fascist dictator like Hitler, who believes he can impose his will upon whomever he sees fit. Not very liberty oriented are you?[/quote]
Self-ownership is a natural law, not something I came up with.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]And before you again try to steer things off course and not answer the question, or strawman argue back- also answer this- what gives YOU the right to enforce YOUR arbitrary rules without a 'contract' and HOW can you non-violently enforce such rules? So far everything that you've proposed ends at the pointing of a gun.[/quote]
You know, there's a saying, that those who hate liberty must be stupid, insane, or evil.
I'm getting a feeling that you're a mixture of all three.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]@whoever asked about enforcing rules that 'don't hurt anyone': We've gone through some of this, and my example was a seatbelt violation. Joseph doesn't think it's possible to get ejected from a car and become a hazard to other people (he believes you are vaporized) yet the YT vid I posted shows someone getting thrown out of a car and nearly landing on the hood of another car. So the idea that seat belts only affect 'me' doesn't work.[/quote]
See, this is what I'm talking about. No intelligent, rational, honest person could keep repeating the same lie, over and over again, expecting it to work. I guess someone who spends all his time around others who lie to themselves constantly, might imagine that those around him are gullible enough, but no one here is going to fall for your nonsense.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]If we chose to pick not paying your taxes as a 'hurts nobody' crime, then I can make the following argument: Road repair is done through taxation. Because no one paid their taxes this year, the roads are is disrepair. You drive along one day and blast through a pothole, damaging your car. Because you didn't pay your taxes, the pothole never got fixed, and your property was damaged as a result. Therefore, not paying your taxes creates a public hazard in which you are entirely responsible.
I expect Joseph to counter this with the old- I HAVE INSURANCE!!! argument, which does nothing but pass the monetary buck onto someone else. Yet it never addresses the meat and potatoes of the discussion- personal responsibility and the absolute necessity of rules and laws, and some kind of way to enforce those rules and laws.[/quote]
Or road repair could be done by private owners of private roads. Stealing land upon which to build roads, then stealing money to do the construction, then claiming that others will be harmed if you can't steal money to maintain your stolen roads, is not a sane line of reasoning.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426](Hell, I wouldn't even be able to investigate it since WHO would have the fingerprint files of everyone without some kind of law in place to take fingerprints to begin with.)[/quote]
So, now you want to fingerprint everyone?
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]Please tell me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression from some of you that you aren't liberty-minded, but instead selfish brats without forethought as to how exactly you could handle a crisis if there weren't public servants there to help you. There seems to be a lot of the John Rambo talk, where you can 'take your law into your own hands.' Even John Rambo needs to sleep, and a one man army won't usually last more than 4 movies.[/quote]
LOL. "I work with and for rapists and murderers, but if you don't want to support our murderous rapine, you're just selfish!"
Do you think before you post this drivel?
Joe
Clapping with one hand…again. I just can't keep up with your strawmen, Joseph.
@free libertarian: I'll get back to this when I have time, but you might be surprised at my answer.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]
If we chose to pick not paying your taxes as a 'hurts nobody' crime, then I can make the following argument: Road repair is done through taxation. Because no one paid their taxes this year, the roads are is disrepair. You drive along one day and blast through a pothole, damaging your car. Because you didn't pay your taxes, the pothole never got fixed, and your property was damaged as a result. Therefore, not paying your taxes creates a public hazard in which you are entirely responsible… Just so we have it straight on my personal beliefs- I hate INCOME taxes and think it's theft. I hate property taxes because they are high. But I can tolerate the property taxes because it keeps my roads drivable, my kids get to be indoctrinated by the public school system, and I know that if my house is on fire or someone gets hurt, that I can depend on someone helping 24/7. It allows me to continue working if my house gets broken into so I don't have to take time off work to investigate this case myself. (Hell, I wouldn't even be able to investigate it since WHO would have the fingerprint files of everyone without some kind of law in place to take fingerprints to begin with.)
[/quote]
Well I can agree with you that it's a wonderful service to have someone ready to help if your house catches on fire, or grandma has a heart attack, and to have roads quickly repaired. I think in a free market, there would definitely be demand for these services. The difference, however, is that in a free market I have the option of sending my money to a competing service provider, thereby bringing all the benefits of competition. The current providers of court, police, and other emergency services don't leave you with an option to choose a competing one. Instead your salary, and those of all these other service providers is obtained through taxation (i.e. theft). Now I happen to believe that the ends do not justify the means, so although you provide some valuable services, which would likely thrive in a free market, you do so by first forcibly taking what is rightfully mine. It is because of this dynamic that I cannot condone the way you currently operate.
-Libertango
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50611#msg50611 date=1299336695]Clapping with one hand…again. I just can't keep up with your strawmen, Joseph.[/quote]
You really can't avoid the libel, can you?
Guess cops don't obey their own laws, do they?
Just for some more "fun"…
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/
http://www.copblock.org/cameramap/
And a few others, with our lovely "public servants"…
http://www.pixiq.com/article/nypd-cop-threatens-citizen-with-jail-and-rape-for-being-disrespectful-video
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/10/03/teen-raped-court-rapist-probation/
http://reason.com/archives/2010/10/18/americas-most-successful-stop
Joe
@ free libertarian- "Are you okay with arresting a peaceful person that hasn't harmed anybody over a plant?
What is your justifiction for this ?"
I am assuming we are talking about marijuana. Or are we talking about cocaine? Or are we talking about heroin? Or shrooms? Let's lump them together and discuss all of them, shall we?
The drug war is a farce, as is the war on terrorism. The government needs an enemy at all times in order to keep the MIC going. The MIC is where the money is- through weapons development and research, through back room deals, and through destroying and controlling the economies of third world nations. None of us should be naive enough to think the government doesn't have a hand in the importing and/or controlling of drugs worldwide. Drug money is a huge portion of our economy, not only because it keeps the prisons and correctional facilities in business, and the courts full of taxes, it also serves a legitimate purpose of keeping regular business going. What better way to launder drug money than to buy expensive items in cash and then sell them to someone else for clean money? I read an article somewhere recently that made the claim that drug money accounts for up to 10% (iirc) of our economy. Those are HUGE numbers.
The government also uses things like the 'drug war' to keep certain socioeconomic strata in their respective categories. What a great way to keep a population under control. You drug them, glorify a certain lifestyle, and have them kill each other over these plants. It keeps the welfare state alive and well, keeps our prisons stocked and court systems full, and keeps a certain group of 'undesirables' in check, never allowing them to prosper. Sounds like a crazy conspiracy, but it fits the MO of a corrupt state. And we can surely agree that a great portion of government is corrupt in one way or the other. Just check and see what some of our troops are protecting in Afghanistan, and see what their major crop is under US rule vs the Taliban's.
So let's talk about how many (NOT ALL) of the plants get here. Someone grows fields of the plants, pays peasants or makes slaves of the local population to cultivate and manufacture them, then ships them out on some midnight airplane ride or boat trip, where it may make its way into a neighboring town, state, or country. But before the shipment is sent, a neighboring 'farmer' decides that there's too much competition in this free market, and decides to take matters into his own hands. That farmer kills the peasants, slaves, hired guns, and other farmer, and takes his plants. These plants now have blood on them.
The plants make that midnight trip and are dropped off at a dealer. That dealer packages things up, and sends them off to his managers. But before they get to the managers, ONE manager decides that since this is a free, unregulated market, he's going to just take ALL of the drugs. A bloodbath ensues, and the dealer, his family, a visiting friend, and his hired thugs all get killed. Now there's even more blood on these plants.
The manager dishes out his plants to his lower level street bosses. One of the street bosses is pissed off because one of the other bosses has a better area than he does. Instead of settling things like gentlemen, and swapping positions once a week, the one boss and his crew gun down the other boss and his crew. These plants right now are a bloody mess.
You buy from the street level boss, go home, and smoke/snort/inject your bloody, bloody plant. Victimless crime because you weren't the one pulling the trigger, right? Maybe it was your $10 that bought the box of ammo that kills the next dealer.
Well, it's only marijuana, not the other hard stuff, and I grow my own. That's all well and good, but where did you get the seeds? And where did the guy that got your seeds get HIS seeds?
That is how I justify locking you up for having a plant- not because I think it's wrong or immoral to use those things if you're an adult, but because of the carnage associated with it.
Thank you for responding. I believe your justification is long winded, weak and illogical. Following your "logic" since somebody somewhere is irresponsible I'm to be incarcerated even though I bother nobody? Let's try that with another substance, bullets kill people, can we go after every responsible gun owner now? Tobacco kills people, shall we dress up in our swat team garb and bust down some Cigarette company execs doors?
Speaking of violence, is it okay for Police to initiate it ? I believe your justification is very reliant on rationalization.
Who do you think owns YOUR body ? I believe you do. I'm certain you don't own mine.
Crappy, you really are full of shit.
All the carnage associated with government. The admitted corrupt nature of the current government.
Yet, you're still on the front lines working for them.
You really aren't capable enough to figure this out, are you?
I had to explain the process because had I just said, "there is blood on the plants", it would have required the example anyway.
Unfortunately, you can not understand logic if you do not understand that the end does not justify the means. Your 'good time' might have cost a hundred people their lives. That is justification enough for me. Where does justification come for you- 200? 1000? How many lives need be lost before you realize your 'good time' is the cause?
Violence is an arbitrary term. Force does not necessarily mean violent. If I have to hold your arm in place for me to put a cuff on it, my action is not violent. If I need to hit you in the face to make you comply, that is violent. The ability to become violent is an absolutely essential part of my job, and at times it is imperative that it's initiated.
What does owning your body have to do with anything? I don't own you, don't want to , and don't care who does.
If a person owns their own body and hasn't harmed another person why are you there with your handcuffs?
You aren't protecting anybody then, YOU are initiating violence on a person that has done nothing to you.
There is "blood on the plants" is weak. There's blood on your cotton shirt. There's blood on your big Mac.
What if I got seeds from a peaceful person that got them from a plant that occurred naturally? Where is the blood then?
More then what FL had to say about the justification about 'blood on the plants', just because it does happen somewhere in the world, doesn't mean that all of it happens to every single plant. By that logic, one could say that because someone was killed somewhere in the world, everyone else is guilty for the crime of murder because they didn't do enough to stop it. Justifications that rely on ideological reasoning, rather then 'proof is in the pudding' reasoning are weak arguments and when brought to their extreme, as I just did, would seem to indicate that anything, anyone else does, everyone else is to blame for. That kind of reasoning lead to gassing the Jews, killing darked skinned people everywhere, killing Christians, killing Heathens, and out lawing prostitution, as well as making a rule that you can't have anything in a milk container except milk.
It would appear to me that, 'Cop', your rationalization for harming people is not consistent with your profession. Would you arrest someone based only on the allegation that he killed someone, without any evidence at all? I would believe, based on your previous testimony you wouldn't do that. Please confirm for me. You think it is perfectly okay to arrest someone, not because the rule exists, in absent of any evidence at all, that a plant which is a weed, which can be grown in almost every climate except the arctic, because they possess a plant that may have someone's 'blood' on it?
Did man invent cannabis? No, he did not. So it is possible, somewhere on this planet, that someone has grown cannabis without having 'blood on it'?
Regardless of your answers, the idea that you would harm someone based on an allegation and without real evidence is wrong.
Where'd I say I would hurt someone without reason?
And depending on the mitigating circumstances, yes you could potentially arrest someone based upon the allegation they did something. If someone came into hq and said, "I just killed Nancy", then even without physical evidence they would be detained.
Why are you trying to justify weed to me? I already said I don't have a moral connection to weed as a crime. I really couldn't care less if you want to use it. Point is, I don't have a problem enforcing the rule that makes it illegal. It's justified for me not because the gov't said it's bad, but because it has blood on it at some point in the chain of it getting from seed to pipe.
And yes, I'm aware that oil has millions of bodies under its belt, and is legal. Why is it still legal and a weed isn't? Because a bunch of guys that were 'elected' say so. So again, I will say- your fight is not with me, it's with the legislators. But it doesn't change the fact that I have the public's trust to uphold the law and do what I get paid to do.
I have discretion to enforce low level laws and offenses. I do not need to be a robot, nor do I act like one. If I locked up every kid that smoked a joint or had stems and seeds in his car, I'd never get out of court. There are battles I'll fight hard, and battles I don't care if I lose. Most of it depends on what way you push me.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50623#msg50623 date=1299369128]I had to explain the process because had I just said, "there is blood on the plants", it would have required the example anyway.
Unfortunately, you can not understand logic if you do not understand that the end does not justify the means. Your 'good time' might have cost a hundred people their lives. That is justification enough for me. Where does justification come for you- 200? 1000? How many lives need be lost before you realize your 'good time' is the cause?[/quote]
No, ends don't justify means.
Ergo, your "ends" of saving those "hundreds" of lives, don't justify your means, of attacking innocent people.
Or is it that ends don't justify means, unless you're a cop?
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50623#msg50623 date=1299369128]Violence is an arbitrary term. Force does not necessarily mean violent. If I have to hold your arm in place for me to put a cuff on it, my action is not violent. If I need to hit you in the face to make you comply, that is violent. The ability to become violent is an absolutely essential part of my job, and at times it is imperative that it's initiated.[/quote]
Actually, both of your examples are violent. Or are you going to tell me that groping a woman isn't sexual assault, just because it doesn't actually involve genital penetration?
Touching someone against his will is an act of violence. Chaining him up and putting him in a cage is so far over the line that no sane person could ever argue that it is not violent.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50623#msg50623 date=1299369128]What does owning your body have to do with anything? I don't own you, don't want to , and don't care who does.[/quote]
Simple. If you don't own him, you have no right to interfere with his life.
Joe
I think I gave you more credit than I should have a few pages back. You are still rationalizing your initiation of force, I'm thinking you might have given me the wrong impression that you somehow were close to "getting it" when you first showed up after listening to FTL. I know that sounds harsh so I'll apologize for the tone, but it is absolutely true and probably my error for misjudging your intent. I thought you were here to learn. You're not.
As long as you are not willing to accept that you have no legitimate authority to intervene in another peaceful persons life you will continue to nibble on the edges of getting it, but then ultimately resort to your bag of excuses. Good luck with that.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50608#msg50608 date=1299333426]
@whoever asked about enforcing rules that 'don't hurt anyone': We've gone through some of this, and my example was a seatbelt violation.
[/quote]
Yeah, but what about enforcing rules that actually don't hurt anyone?
How about a guy who is just minding his own business, growing a hemp plant in his backyard? He's fighting greenhouse gases, improving the soil quality, maybe generating some heating fuel or other industrial material. But you're just fine with breaking into his house and shooting him in the head in front of his family if he tries to act like the king of his castle, aren't you? That would be "appropriate force" in your book, right? And even if he submits to your threats and violence, you're still okay with knowingly participating in an active enterprise to deprive him of his ownership of his property, even though he hasn't hurt anyone, aren't you?
It's nice that you can have your abstract thoughts about cops in fantasy land who go around reconciling loud neighbors, and pat yourself on the back because your utopia is achievable but your critics' advocate a utopia that is unachievable, but when it comes right down to it, you don't seem to be able to explain how in practice you are anything more than a glorified thug who gets paid to kidnap and steal shit from people who haven't hurt anyone.
[quote]So let's talk about how many (NOT ALL) of the plants get here. Someone grows fields of the plants, pays peasants or makes slaves of the local population to cultivate and manufacture them, then ships them out on some midnight airplane ride or boat trip, where it may make its way into a neighboring town, state, or country. But before the shipment is sent, a neighboring 'farmer' decides that there's too much competition in this free market, and decides to take matters into his own hands. That farmer kills the peasants, slaves, hired guns, and other farmer, and takes his plants. These plants now have blood on them.
The plants make that midnight trip and are dropped off at a dealer. That dealer packages things up, and sends them off to his managers. But before they get to the managers, ONE manager decides that since this is a free, unregulated market, he's going to just take ALL of the drugs. A bloodbath ensues, and the dealer, his family, a visiting friend, and his hired thugs all get killed. Now there's even more blood on these plants.
The manager dishes out his plants to his lower level street bosses. One of the street bosses is pissed off because one of the other bosses has a better area than he does. Instead of settling things like gentlemen, and swapping positions once a week, the one boss and his crew gun down the other boss and his crew. These plants right now are a bloody mess.
You buy from the street level boss, go home, and smoke/snort/inject your bloody, bloody plant. Victimless crime because you weren't the one pulling the trigger, right? Maybe it was your $10 that bought the box of ammo that kills the next dealer.
Well, it's only marijuana, not the other hard stuff, and I grow my own. That's all well and good, but where did you get the seeds? And where did the guy that got your seeds get HIS seeds?
That is how I justify locking you up for having a plant- not because I think it's wrong or immoral to use those things if you're an adult, but because of the carnage associated with it.[/quote]
Kind of sounds like prohibition now doesnt it. I'm sure everybody knows how wonderful that worked out . Another farce to control the people.