BACKGROUND: The driver had been ‘stalking’ the Trooper while in pursuit of a speeding car. This put the Trooper in a position of being threatened. When stopped,the driver antagonized the officer. Single Troopers are dependent upon our submission to investigation for their safety. The Trooper verbally escalated so that he did not have to Physically escalate to violence in order to force the driver into submitting to investigation, or to throw the driver ‘into the system’ for failing to submit to investigation. Other countries use groups of police at all times but they are smaller countries with more dense population with fewer drivers, because those countries were not organized for cars like the USA. So either triple the cost of officers or submit to investigation to keep costs down. WHAT”S THE PROBLEM 1) educate the public (a) the police’s role in identifying risky behavior (insurer), and enforcing violations, and intervening in crimes, and resolving disputes, (b) in the citizen’s responsibilities when ‘pulled over’ or ‘questioned’. 2) explain to the public how the officers need to react in each case: (a)instruct to investigate, (b) command if necessary, (c) verbally escalate if necessary, (d) physically escalate if necessary (e) escalate to deadly force of necessary. 3) train officers to ensure that they can only escalate in response not initiate escalation, and that their primary function is (a) obtain control of the environment, and (b) de-escalation (c) investigation in that order. And that escalation is only necessary if they can’t get control of the environment. 4) explain to the public how cops and citizens are human beings, who don’t know each other, thrown into conflict. Be forgiving of one another. Most of what I find when investigating is simply not getting the training I got as a child by the police in how to interact with police and what police were trying to do and why. Explaining incentives is all that’s necessary for ordinary human beings. Most ‘bad’ police behavior is due to initiating the accusatory method ithat causes the citizen to escalate his behavior. Rather than just asking for his or her side of the story. And it’s this ‘cheap’ way of agitating the citizen so that he can put the citizen into the system, rather than de-escalate the situation. In other words, police are habituating the strategy of ‘don’t make me come here or you’ll be in the system’ rather than “I’m here to de-escalate conflict in the citizenry, to reduce your risky behavior, or to intervene in criminal behavior”.
Theme: Coercion
-
How Did the Uk End up To Be a Multicultural Root-Less Anti White Mess
—“In your view, how did the UK end up to be a multicultural root-less anti white mess that it is now? How did the police become increasingly militarized?”— Joshua Shalet
1) The socialists were more effective postwar than here because the UK was destroyed by her ‘ahem’ civli war to prevent germany from taking over europe (as she traditionally had and western civlization needed her to. france has always been the enemy of europe.). 2) they failed to shrink the state in response to the loss of empire. 3) They were financially dependent on london in ways the USA is not. And they loved all the free money flowing in from europe by being ‘the other switzerland’. 4) They failed to control immigration into london and are now prisoners of it. We can shut down a NYC because any other major city can pick up the slack. But they can’t shut down london because they haven’t a backup. same for france. not the same for usa, canada, australia, germany or russia. 5) Brits don’t have ‘rights’ like Americans and the parliament can modify the constitution whereas the people have to modify the american constitution. 6) They don’t have sheriffs to compete with the police, they don’t have governors to compete with the federal government, the people don’t have rights to sue the government like we do in the states. And that’s just off the top of my head. ( The fact that the British working class is … a bunch of p—ies, addicted to milking the state… well, you know. )
-
How Did the Uk End up To Be a Multicultural Root-Less Anti White Mess
—“In your view, how did the UK end up to be a multicultural root-less anti white mess that it is now? How did the police become increasingly militarized?”— Joshua Shalet
1) The socialists were more effective postwar than here because the UK was destroyed by her ‘ahem’ civli war to prevent germany from taking over europe (as she traditionally had and western civlization needed her to. france has always been the enemy of europe.). 2) they failed to shrink the state in response to the loss of empire. 3) They were financially dependent on london in ways the USA is not. And they loved all the free money flowing in from europe by being ‘the other switzerland’. 4) They failed to control immigration into london and are now prisoners of it. We can shut down a NYC because any other major city can pick up the slack. But they can’t shut down london because they haven’t a backup. same for france. not the same for usa, canada, australia, germany or russia. 5) Brits don’t have ‘rights’ like Americans and the parliament can modify the constitution whereas the people have to modify the american constitution. 6) They don’t have sheriffs to compete with the police, they don’t have governors to compete with the federal government, the people don’t have rights to sue the government like we do in the states. And that’s just off the top of my head. ( The fact that the British working class is … a bunch of p—ies, addicted to milking the state… well, you know. )
-
Governments Do Have Currency if Not Money
Feb 1, 2020, 5:40 PM
—“Governments don’t have money, citizens do. Will the state fund [whatever] through mandatory force derived taxes or will state funding be purely voluntary on the part of interested citizens (non mandatory tithing).”—
Hmmm… that’s not entirely true. Just as a thought experiment, assume a government over a territory that is fully autarkic and has no need of foreign currency or trade. This government can issue a currency (each unit a tradable share in the economy), demand it as legal tender for all debts private and public, and it can equidistribute X amount of this currency to every citizen every day, week, month, quarter, year or whatever directly to a bank account. It can then collect some percentage of that in taxes and repeat the process. This is what governments already do. They just put the banks in the middle requiring us to borrow it and giving the banks interest, thereby having the banks inflate 9x times the amount. We are not fully autarkic so the process limits the state’s powers of monetary distribution. Modern monetary theory won’t work, but this will, it will just require collecting and measuring better information than we do now
-
Governments Do Have Currency if Not Money
Feb 1, 2020, 5:40 PM
—“Governments don’t have money, citizens do. Will the state fund [whatever] through mandatory force derived taxes or will state funding be purely voluntary on the part of interested citizens (non mandatory tithing).”—
Hmmm… that’s not entirely true. Just as a thought experiment, assume a government over a territory that is fully autarkic and has no need of foreign currency or trade. This government can issue a currency (each unit a tradable share in the economy), demand it as legal tender for all debts private and public, and it can equidistribute X amount of this currency to every citizen every day, week, month, quarter, year or whatever directly to a bank account. It can then collect some percentage of that in taxes and repeat the process. This is what governments already do. They just put the banks in the middle requiring us to borrow it and giving the banks interest, thereby having the banks inflate 9x times the amount. We are not fully autarkic so the process limits the state’s powers of monetary distribution. Modern monetary theory won’t work, but this will, it will just require collecting and measuring better information than we do now
-
To Violate Our Sovereignty Is to Invite Us to War
To Violate Our Sovereignty Is to Invite Us to War https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/24/to-violate-our-sovereignty-is-to-invite-us-to-war/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-24 23:04:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264693769871466496
-
No you aren’t going to take away our guns. 😉
No you aren’t going to take away our guns. 😉 https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/24/no-you-arent-going-to-take-away-our-guns/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-24 20:27:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264654307405824000
-
No you aren’t going to take away our guns. 😉
Feb 2, 2020, 7:00 PM
—“Time to TAKE AWAY your fucking guns”—(((Gamhard McCoy)))
It’s time to take away your citizenship, benefits, rights to property, free speech, and add 30% taxation above and beyond. Which one of those options do you think is more likely? 😉 Gonna happen this year. End Birthright Citizenship. End Migration Citizenship. Roll immigration back to pre 65 act. End all H1B, and all Non-European academic visitation. Require economic means of ongoing support Revoke citizenship to 65 Immigration Act Revoke citizenship for any and all individuals and their familes who have voted for, promoted, written raised money, written legislation for, violation of the constitution. Exit of miltiary, state, federal employment, and political positions of those people and their families. Monopolize military, state, federal employment, and political positions by pre-65. Forcible repatriation of all post 90′ immigrants. All will happen this year or next. Why? And it isn’t even hard.
-
No you aren’t going to take away our guns. 😉
Feb 2, 2020, 7:00 PM
—“Time to TAKE AWAY your fucking guns”—(((Gamhard McCoy)))
It’s time to take away your citizenship, benefits, rights to property, free speech, and add 30% taxation above and beyond. Which one of those options do you think is more likely? 😉 Gonna happen this year. End Birthright Citizenship. End Migration Citizenship. Roll immigration back to pre 65 act. End all H1B, and all Non-European academic visitation. Require economic means of ongoing support Revoke citizenship to 65 Immigration Act Revoke citizenship for any and all individuals and their familes who have voted for, promoted, written raised money, written legislation for, violation of the constitution. Exit of miltiary, state, federal employment, and political positions of those people and their families. Monopolize military, state, federal employment, and political positions by pre-65. Forcible repatriation of all post 90′ immigrants. All will happen this year or next. Why? And it isn’t even hard.
-
It’s Never Enough for Them.
—“So why do lefties default to socio-economics when debating “equality”? That’s not the definition.”—Quinn Patrick
They have escalated from equality of defense under the law, to equality of access, to equality of opportunity, to equality of outcomes. And we cannot yet internalize that the left is cognitively female and unconsciously hyper-consumptive with NO END OF WANTS. It’s never enough for them. They’re parasites.