A Police State Really Isn't A Police State

 It's been a very long time since I've set out to write a blog. On one hand I felt that I wasn't reaching as big an audience that I would hope to, on the other hand I felt as if my words were becoming a bit 'tin foil hatish'.
A recent comment on a friends Facebook page really was for myself. My words are a release for me, getting my thoughts out on paper helps me. If these words help another, then that's a bonus! Now, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I AM NOT A CONSPIRACY THEORIST. I look at facts and form a plausible opinion, some of my opinions may take a little creative license but they are my opinions, this is my sandbox and my toys. Don't like them find another sandbox. Now that we have that disclaimer out of the way....

There has recently been a huge surge in an 'Us against them' mentality when it pertains to the police. What should be a local issue, many issues in the news appear to be pulled to the national spotlight prior to being vetted as an issue altogether. While there has seemingly been a few instances of, what could be deemed, overreach of authority, it appears to be relatively isolated and, in many cases, erroneously placed. The current political followers have put there faith in a media that places sensationalism above journalism, paid mouthpieces like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson (I refuse to call him Reverend, no 'Man of God' would run his mouth like Jesse) to drive their collective viewpoint. I, personally, stand with local police as those who should be enforcing the law.

Those that put on a uniform with the express intent of enforcing the laws of local, state and federal society should be lauded for their service. It's can not be an easy task to get up in the morning (or night) put on that outfit complete with bullet proof vest and say goodby to your family, for what could be the last time. It also has got to be unbelievealby frustrating to be demonized by a public that expects you to question every move you make, up to and including, taking a life to protect your own or innocent bystanders. If any of my readers are in the category of 'Cop Haters', stop reading now, for I'd hate to burst your bubble. If you think your bubble ain't all that strong to begin with, keep right on reading.

Policeman with two lost dogs (Click to follow link)

Police are often described as highly trained individuals when in fact many local police are fresh out of a quick training course that merely emphasizes safe handling of a firearm, safe driving, basic overviews of laws and rules and personal conduct. These people are very often someone that resides in the area and have a vested interest in it's safety. These are people that are our brothers, sisters, cousins, friends. The vast majority of them have chosen this path because they truly believe they can make a difference. While in any profession there are bad people, I don't believe for a second that all those whom choose this path are bad. There are some extremely horrible chefs out there, but you don't go into a restaurant expecting the chef to poison you do you? Why is it that we currently have people in areas protesting police and going as far as chanting 'Kill All Cops'? What would happen if we were out in the street chanting 'Kill All Chefs' because of a bad chef taking out a few people with salmonella? Can you see the irony?

Here's some 'tin foil hat' shit for you to chew on, what if it's a coordinated effort to strip local control? What could the federal government gain from destroying the belief that local police have your best interest at heart?

Would you rather run TO this?

Imagine, if you will, an America that no longer had local police. An America where when you needed an enforcer of our system of laws and rules you'd call a representative of the federal government, to which they'd send someone out. What would that person look like? Would that person be a local? Would that person have a vested interest in the safety and well-being of his neighbors? I think not. I think that a federal police force would look very much like an army. In order for these 'officers' to follow orders blindly, without question, they would need to be taken from an area and relocated as far away from home as possible. With no vested interest in the local people, it really takes no thought to, bruttally if needed, enforce the law. Maybe even enforce a quickly crafted dictate to strip that locale of it's rights and liberties if those in power deem necessary.

Or would you rather run FROM this?

In a perfect society, we wouldn't have to worry about criminal activity, but we are a decidedly imperfect society. A society with a mix of all walks of life. In our country we have individuals from every nationality across the globe. All came to America for a better life, for the chance to grab at the gold ring, a chance afforded to all of us. We are a proud people, we are a free people, but all that could change in a generation. What can be perceived as a little thing, reliqueshing any of our liberties or local control quickly balloons into a federalists state, a country with a central government. A government that could easily be converted to a tyrannical dictatorship. Already we are seeing a President that cares not for the Constitution that he pledged to protect applying his 'Executive Orders' as he sees fit. Selectively enforcing laws and rules to help 'friends of the state'. Are you considered a friend of the state and how long will your usefulness take you?

How long before we no longer recognize our own country? How long before we are no longer the beacon of light for many whom struggle to get to our shores for a better future? All questions that, sadly, I'll wager I'll see answered in my time left on this big blue marble swinging through our universe.

That's my two cents, spend 'em or put 'em in the dish for the next person.

Right vs. Left, Who is really correct?

I've been binge watching documentaries due to a shoulder injury that has left me a bit sedentary for a number of weeks. My viewing taste varies but inevitable I find myself watching topics on what drives our societies. From the earliest records, the present and into the future, the driving force behind our evolving social strata is human nature. Currently residing in the United States, places me in a time of extremes. Our current governmental structure seems, at best, corrupted with factions on the Left and Right crafting legislation and orchestrating crimes to further their respective agenda. Who, the Left or the Right, has the answers?

On the Right, we have people whom believe that man can create, progress and thrive in unchecked capitalism. While this is true to an extent, unchecked capitalism can and does infringe on the liberties of others. Whether it be pollution, depleting resources or taking advantage of labor, capitalism needs some oversight. I do believe that we could easily accomplish this with stronger whistle-blower laws. Billion dollar fines from a government that will not use those monies to improve a situation is not the answer. Instead some well-meaning politician will spend those monies on a feel good project. One that big government sees fit to oversee, which uses 3/4 of those monies just to administer. Which brings me to another ideal of the Right, smaller, less intrusive government. This is an ideal that I think we all could get behind. When has the government done anything that has not had terrible unintended consequences? Also, bailouts for businesses should not be the job of the government. The Right regards this as both bad and good with no solid stance. It all depends on who happens to be benefiting from it.

On the Left, we have a pretty simple social ideal. People on the left want equality. Across the board equality. This is an fools folly. Why you ask? Simple, Human Nature. This quality we all have prevents us, both Liberal and Conservative from creating a perfect utopian society. We have crafted a system of government that tries to give all people a chance at the gold ring, but equality..socially, economically and judiciously will always be stratified. It sounds wonderful but it's unattainable.

Quick example: If we suddenly adopted a utopian, socially equal society, without a monetary base there would have to be some sort of system that equally distributed the resources. This system would have to be overseen by some sort of elected or appointed officials. Now, the way that this system would work would be to give resources to those who need it, but who would determine need? What happens when a resource becomes scarce? Who would be those that would work to make and provide these resources and would they be compensated at a higher rate than those that don't contribute to the work load?

You see, in a system such as this, Human Nature and Self Preservation kicks in. If resources get scarce, people start to horde them, taking more than their 'fair share'. People at the top will take the most resources believing that they are in a higher position and are deserving of more. People that work to provide the resources give up working because they get the same as those that do nothing. Society comes crashing down upon itself. We do not adhere to a hive mentality so therefore shall never be able to build a utopian society until we can quell free will and that will never happen.

So who is correct? Which ever side of the aisle you place yourself on, I don't believe either side is correct. A balanced approach is the only one that will stand the test of time. Our founding fathers knew this and addressed these issues in our founding documents. Maybe y'all ought to read them before placing yourself on the Right or the Left.

That's my two cents, spend 'em or put 'em in the dish for the next person.