The Thin Blue Line

We are beginning to see what I fear is the start of something that will evolve into something really, really ugly. The erosion of the “Thin Blue Line”.  There are some people that support the law enforcement community no matter what.  I am not one of those.  I think people like the officer (Kevin Dupre) from Cleburne Texas that called these dogs over to him by making kissing noises and then killed them need to rot in hell. I truly hope there is a special place in hell for people like him. Just so I’m clear on how I feel about this piece of scum. I’ll be honest, I can’t watch the whole video.

Just in case you are livid as well, there is a petition to have him terminated since the police chief decided he did nothing wrong. They want 150,000 signatures by 14 February 2015, they already have 148,985.

By the same token, I think the officers that used an illegal choke hold on Eric Garner needed to face legal consequences.   There are some nasty Law Enforcement types out there that crave power and abuse it.

That being said, the majority of the Law Enforcement Officers I’ve dealt with have been good people. Trying their best to carry out their calling. They have a genuine desire to protect the helpless, to stop crime, make their towns safer for good people. They are truly “Sheepdogs”.

The Thin Blue line refers to the line that police form between good people and predator thugs. It’s the same kind of mindset as the military, and to a lesser degree concealed carry holders. Speaking for myself, I did not get my concealed carry endorsement to protect society in general, but myself, and my family when I’m with them. The members of the Thin Blue Line willingly, on a daily basis, put themselves at risk in harms way to protect law abiding citizens, people they’ve never even met.

I know it well.  A few hundred years ago I was a member of the “Thin White Line” meaning Emergency Medical Services, airborne variety. We did search and rescue, emergency transport and “scene flights”. Those are usually “high drama” as you are landing at the scene of whatever, car crash, shooting, stabbing, heart attack, sudden infant death, ________ tragedy. If it’s a scene flight, it wasn’t good. Often at these scenes you would have very upset people, they could be family members, friends or just bystanders. Before we would land, the LZ (landing zone) would be secured usually by the Fire Department and law enforcement.  But for law enforcement the fun didn’t end there. Once we were on the ground, they also kept the crew and the helicopter safe. I’ve had upset family decide I was going to talk to them, RIGHT THEN, and unfortunately I was trying to stick a tube in an airway to ventilate the patient.  Law enforcement peeled the guy off me and I finished my job, upset family member was very determined though and previous law enforcement hero repeated heroic act and got him off me as we were loading the patient in the helicopter. This was also during a time when one of the local gang initiations was to “pop” someone in a jacket. Which meant us,  or the ambulance crews, fire or police. Securing a scene is not always easy I don’t suppose.

So through the years, most of my contact with law enforcement has been on the same team, apart from an odd ticket every 20 years or so. And I’m very supportive of our local law enforcement where I live, well, the Sheriff’s department anyway.

And this is where I differ from the “peaceful protesters” we’re seeing such a plethora of lately. For them, it doesn’t matter if the innocent child (read 300+ lb charging water buffalo) was committing a crime as Michael Brown was, on top of a “white hispanic” like Trayvon Martin pummeling the snot out of George Zimmerman or walking away as Eric Garner was, if the person that died was black, and the narrative can be exploited, get ready cause it’s going to be. Not far from Ferguson another young black man named Antionio Martin had made the choice more than once to commit armed robbery, assault and armed criminal action. Quite the list of accomplishments since he was 17. It ended badly as it often will when police who had been called about the theft have a gun pointed at them. They shot him. So far the Chief of that officer is standing behind him pointing out the choices Mr. Martin made had everything to do with the outcome of the situation.

I haven’t heard when the race pimps will arrive in town to foment it being burned to the ground yet.

The execution of Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos I think is the beginning of a response to the attacks by politicians such as Warren Wilhelm (aka Bill diBlasio) Barry Sotero (aka Barak Obama), non-Govorner Jay Nixon, Eric Holder and flotsam and jetsam Sharpton and Jackson. Also getting into the act are the schools of higher “education” (chuckle, guffaw) colleges. Like the charming editorial in the CUNY by the editor in chief calling for armed war against the police. I think there is already plenty of hostility toward the LEO community. While I didn’t hear it in the American press, in an Israeli newspaper ran an article that the gun man that killed Liu and Ramos had invited bystanders to come, follow him and watch what he was going to do. Yet in that community it apparently didn’t even prompt a phone call from any of the people in the hood to the police to say something might be afoot.

Also in an Israeli paper is the opinion that US cops are probably feeling pretty Jewish about now.  The campus rabble are having to make decisions now.

For campus firebrands it must be quite a chore deciding who to hate more on any particular day.

If it’s Monday it must be the Jews and if it’s Tuesday it must be the cops. Is that how it works?

This we know about the darlings who have turned our universities into gulags against free thought and free speech. They want to boycott Israel and they want to divest from law and order and they want to sanction anyone who makes them feel “uncomfortable.”

Quite a good column that, worth the read. You can find out the direction the future of our country is being steered by the hallowed halls of higher education.

So what’s the endgame? I don’t know, I can’t find my crystal ball at the moment, but a conversation with a couple of co-workers one day was pretty interesting. One of them opined that the police would soon become afraid to intervene in anything involving one of the protected by politician class of people. I could well see how that could be possible. And since this protected class largely appears to be the criminal element this won’t go well for law abiding citizens. And since our law-breaker in chief doesn’t seem to think local police forces are up to the job of “fairly” applying the law, perhaps it is time for him to begin to implement the plan he first put forth in July 2008, of a “Civilian National Security Force” that would be “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded as the US Military.” You can read about how helpful this type of security force has been in history, and how he has gone about starting to create it. Don’t remember him saying it?

And the idiots applaud on, never questioning “What the heck does THAT mean?” nor did the media jump on it.

But as Ronn Torossian points out, Hitler hired PR firms, the terrorists of today hire PR firms (which by the way ofter refuse Israeli business) but Obama and his left wing ideologues? They don’t need to hire PR firms, the media does it for free for him.

The current regime has done everything it can to divide this country, by race, economic class, religion and now law-abiding and LEO community vs. gangs that are becoming ever more violent in response to the encouragement.

Where does it all end, I don’t know. But I’d fasten my seatbelt, cause it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Additional thoughts, what will happen to a town when firefighters can’t fight the fires because they are taking incoming fire, from the “peaceful protesters for social justice?” As they did in Ferguson and had to pull back. When EMS, Emergency Medical Services can’t get in to help the injured for the same reason?


Another aspect that is coming into play. I found out today a large area mall was shut down the day after Christmas during the large shopping day due to fights breaking out in the mall. It was one of several malls across the country so attacked. Not spontaneous, planned. In the story one Mother says she TOOK her teenage daughters to the mall at a certain time due to a message the girls received on social media telling them what time to be there. WHO does that? I mean, really, did the Mother not know what was going to happen? Did she not ask her kids? Yesh! The economic impact of things like this is going to be awful. Whole shopping centers shut down because the police can’t protect them, even when calling in mutual aid.

Bumpy ride? Societal norms under attack? In the past, what has followed attacks on a culture? Yeah, buckle up.


22 thoughts on “The Thin Blue Line”

  1. No, Sheila, I’m not buying it. To me, the problem is not the bad cops, but the good ones. The ones that keep a rotten system going.

    It takes some imagination to really see what would happen without cops. It’s not simply the current setup, minus the cops. People respond to incentives, so behaviors everywhere would change, to fit in to the new reality.

    Also, the job of policing is fundamentally objectionable. In a sense there can be no such thing as a good cop.

    We don’t need cops. What we need is liberty. The rest will be sorted out on its own.

    1. We have the right to self defense. By the very nature of a right, we can authorize others to protect said right and exercise it on our behalf. We pay these guys to put themselves in the line of fire FOR US. That is the nature of our society. If you don’t like it, it sounds like anarchy is more your style, which is fine, but that’s not what our society is. The job of policing is doing what many in this society are unable or unwilling to do on their own. There are literally MILLIONS of law enforcement officers out there, who are getting slime dumped on them because of the actions of a relative minority. You don’t like cops? Fine. You don’t want to live in a society that pays them to protect and serve? Fine. Move. But to claim there is no such thing as a good cop is silly histrionics.

      1. Well, this is collectivist-speak. *I* did not authorize anybody to protect my right to self defense; in fact if anything, cops get in the way of my self defense by making me beg permission to do it, and by creating so many criminals (via mala prohibita). Not only that; money was stolen from me to fund these cops that I don’t want “protecting” and “defending” me. Last time I checked, theft and extortion are themselves mala in se crimes.

        I do not mind if you prefer a fascist or a socialist society, and I don’t expect everybody to prefer a society without a ruling class as I do. Fortunately there is an alternative that can serve both desires at the same time; it’s called panarchy.

          1. Well, since you didn’t authorize anybody to protect you, feel free not to use their service.

            That’s no solution at all. I’m forced, ultimately at the point of a gun, to fund this gang of criminals that you so fawn over. I’m much more likely to be savaged or killed by this murderous blue gang than I am by any private criminal, and I ALSO have to pay for them to do it. Such a deal!

            Luckily for America, people are starting to wake up to what worthless thugs cops are. Apparently you view this awakening with alarm, but it’s going forward anyway.

          2. I’m not alarmed by anything. I’m well-armed, and I’m ready to defend myself and my family. I just don’t view police officers as the enemy, because the majority of them will be on our side when SHTF. I also don’t “fawn” over anyone. I find it amusing that when someone doesn’t conform exactly to someone else’s views, they’re immediately branded as a statist, collectivist, or just stupid. The stunning arrogance is truly appalling.

          3. … the majority of [police] will be on our side when SHTF.

            On what, other than pure fantasy, do you base this belief? I’m glad to hear, at least, that you’re well armed. That way when cops prove to be statist thugs well after SHTF, you’ll have a fighting chance.

            And by the way, forcing every citizen to pay for a service that many don’t want IS “collectivist”, no matter how much you’d like to pretend otherwise. Why not wear the label with pride, if it fits?

          4. On what, other than pure fantasy, do you base this belief?

            On the hundreds and hundreds of police officers I have personally encountered and know well.

            And by the way, forcing every citizen to pay for a service that many don’t want IS “collectivist”, no matter how much you’d like to pretend otherwise. Why not wear the label with pride, if it fits?

            You have a nice day, now.

      2. You don’t want to live in a society that pays them to protect and serve? Fine. Move.

        Ahhh, the old “America: love it or leave it” attempt to end a discussion. I’m curious: had you lived in the eighteenth century, how do you imagine you would have reacted to those radicals who claimed that if the British didn’t stop trying to run people’s lives, they should be shot? By many measures, things weren’t nearly as bad then as they are now. Taxes, for example, did not approach 50% of earnings, as they do today. There was no NSA spying on every communication. People could travel without passports. As far as I know, repugnant as the general warrants of the day were, British agents didn’t tend to burst into homes and start shooting people and pets, as criminal cops are so fond of doing now.

        Perhaps you would respond, we have a democracy today; that makes all the difference. But what the government gets up to bears little or no resemblance to what politicians promise before being elected. And even if they were faithfully executing the will of the voters, to what extent do 51% of the populace morally dictate to the other 49%?

        I find the entire notion “If you don’t like it here, move” to be more suited to a backward third-world mentality. America is, or was, supposed to be about letting everyone run their own lives, as long as doing so stops short of aggressing on others. Shoving anything down others’ throats is completely un-American, IMHO.

        1. OK, sorry. Pardon me for exaggerating. HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS. And how many more retired?

          I remember I was driving along I-66 in crappy weather, and an Escalade plowed into my little Saturn at probably 50 mph, which in that snowstorm was crazy. The State Trooper arrived at the scene, helped me move my decimated car, and invited me into his car to take the report, as it was coming down, sleeting, snowing hard. After we were done with the report, and were waiting on the tow truck, we started to chat. We looked at one another’s pistols. He lamented that he only carried a 9mm and liked my G23 I was carrying at the time. He then told me that the majority of folks with whom he worked were ardent 2A supporters, and they weren’t happy with leadership, who were generally politicians in uniform interested in advancing their own careers and agendas. I got this same message from the scores of police officers I know as well.

          Oathkeepers. How many of the officers/military in that fine organization? Are they all the enemy too?

          I would submit it’s unwise to make enemies out of probably some of the most passionate, effective allies you could ever have.

          Your mileage may vary.

          But that’s what it’s all about.

          1. “I would submit it’s unwise to make enemies out of probably some of the most passionate, effective allies you could ever have.”

            There is actually some truth to this. Gene Sharp, the doyenne of nonviolent resistance, advocates making as many allies within police state organizations as possible.

            However, that is not the same thing as giving them a complete pass on what is happening. Anyone likely to become one of our allies (e.g. a Serpico) KNOWS what is wrong with the institutions they work for. That is why they become allies. They are not likely to be driven to the bosom of our enemies because we think policing is an evil institution.

  2. There are a lot of good cops out there protecting all of us against true evil, murder, robbery, assault, rape, arson; these crimes are called mala in se. These are crimes with victims.

    But the major problem is that they also have a dual mandate to enforce laws made up by clergy or politicians (mala prohibita) that subject the people to immediate obedience, under threat of force, for a supposed, made up crime that harmed no one, a victimless crime.

    Until we remove this dual and conflicting mandate, they will/must by oath, continue breaking the Rule of Law against assault, kidnapping and such, in order to enforce their arbitrary law of rules.

    They must return from being law enforcement officers, (LEO’s), enforcing the whims of a powerful elite. They must become Peace Officers again, standing for all that is good, strong, proud and American.

  3. While I do choose to be prepared to defend myself, there are people like my Mother and Sisters who are not capable. My Mom’s physical limitations prevent her. My Sisters both lack the mindset. So they don’t deserve someone to act on their behalf?

    I’ve got a fire extinguisher too, but do I care to fight a structure fire on my own? Not only NO, but NO WAY!

    Police do not usually get in our way of protecting ourselves. Laws enacted by politicians do, and how did those politicians get put in a position where they could do such things? Mainstream media=low info voters. People uninterested in politics cause it’s “dirty”. Lots of reasons, figure out the ones you can change and work on them. Police are charged with enforcing the laws on the books, they didn’t put them there.

    As I look at potential “coming attractions” I see from an article in The Hill:
    Police militarization

    In the wake of the police killings of two unarmed black men, Obama this month acted unilaterally to reform law enforcement practices around the country. He signed an executive order last week creating a task force to review police practices. The task force will deliver its recommendations by March.

    Obama also called for $263 million in funding for state and local police departments to purchase body-worn cameras and improve training for officers using military-style weapons.
    If barry is reforming our community police departments, I’m worried.

    Then there is this report of the “peaceful protesters for social change” in Portland. The writer points out that a world with these people and no police is not one you want to face without AR-15s handy.

    And lastly, with the latest UN resolution from Christmas eve, if the UN decides it needs to send troops to help the U.S. implement the gun control measures contained in it’s vile pages then it will be our local law enforcement (the ones with the kind of ethics and principles talked about in Lt.Col. Grossman’s essay) that will be standing with the citizens. And we will need them, and they us.

    No, my complaint isn’t with the police in general (well, except for the one mentioned at the start) but with tyrants that give them those laws. In general, I think we need to be standing with the members of the “The Thin Blue Line”.

    1. “Mom’s physical limitations prevent her. My Sisters both lack the mindset. So they don’t deserve someone to act on their behalf? ”

      “Deserve” is a loaded term. Let’s just say that it is in their self-interest to have someone else protect them. Nothing at all wrong with that, and none of us are arguing there is .

      What is wrong is creating a class of (what have become) thugs with no accountability, funded by theft (not just taxes, but also “civil forfeiture”). Look for the coercion in the picture, that is what is wrong. The same applies to fire departments, by the way. And government propagandists – er, I mean, teachers.

      Were people uneducated before Horace Mann imported state education from socialist Prussia in the 1840’s? No, Americans were considered the best educated people in the world (yeah, I know, hard to imagine these days). Likewise, are fires not fought without police departments? On the contrary, people would use MUCH more effective technology (residential sprinkler systems) absent fire departments, and pay cheaper fire insurance in the bargain (I installed one such system in a home I built). Would there be no protection without cops? On the contrary, without state and municipal cops there would be many more protection alternatives than there are now. Anyway cops do not protect: “When seconds count, a cop is only minutes away.”

      Government policing is a bad institution. We need to eliminate it and bring back the truly American system we had before Peel created government policing, later adopted here.

      1. By the way, all the good cops you guys keep talking about could easily find employment doing the same sort of work in a coercion-free system. They just wouldn’t be getting a free pass for murder any more.

  4. You know, I think it’s always dangerous to make generalizations based on media reports. Not that I’m going to defend statist politicians who use LEOs for their own gains. But there are people, as Sheila mentioned, that aren’t capable of defending themselves, or helping or protecting themselves. And what we don’t hear about is the crimes that are actually prevented or lives that are actually saved by police actions. Most of the time we don’t hear about it, because as they say in the media, “If it bleeds, it leads.” If there’s no blood and no crime, we won’t hear about it.

    1. “But there are people, as Sheila mentioned, that aren’t capable of defending themselves”

      There are people who are not capable of welding, or of painting a house. They do not solve their problem by creating a class of thugs funded by theft and whose actions, no matter how egregious, are accepted without question.

      The objections are not a question of needs, and you cannot defend the institution of policing that way. They are a question of coercion. Any solution that depends on coercion is illegitimate, and is fundamentally opposed to liberty.

  5. Eric Garner was not choked. A “choke hold” can have two effects.
    1. If pressure is placed against their carotid arteries, they just pass out. Their breathing is not constricted. This hold is used in Ju Jitsu.
    2. Their airway including the larynx is constricted, in which case the person cannot speak clearly. Try putting some pressure on your own throat and speaking.
    Eric Garner could speak clearly, and so was NOT being choked. Please stop saying that he was. His inability to breathe had another cause.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *