Peter Quinones

So, Tell Me, ‘Do You Hate the State?’

So, Tell Me, ‘Do You Hate the State?’

This is a simple question. One you should ask yourself often (some of us ask and answer it everyday). Murray Rothbard’s short article quoted in the title is a masterpiece, but was written in 1977. The last remnants of the gold standard had just been done away with and the remaining soldier/diplomats in Vietnam had come home a couple years prior. We are living in a different world but the question is as relevant today as it was in 1977, maybe a little more so.

Afghanistan is the longest war in American history and is responsible for the death, maiming and torture of countless tens of thousands of Afghanis. That number could be over 100,000 and the people who started it, and refuse to end it, will make sure we never know the real total. The Americans who are sent to fight in Afghanistan suffer the same fate – killed, maimed and sometimes tortured. Often times that torture is mental, in some cases caused by “following orders” of the State, and has resulted in 22 veterans a day committing suicide. Of course those veterans not only served in Afghanistan but also Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Ethiopia and on and on. No matter what you’ve been told, soldiers aren’t peacekeepers. They serve one purpose. Expansion of elitists’ power. By defending and supporting the State, you defend what soldiers are sent there to do.

Many Americans continue to be locked down in their homes. Businesses have been forced to close or operate using guidelines that make it impossible to remain open (“It’s a private business, bro, they can do what they want!” Except open I guess). Wealth has been decimated. Stores that have been open for generations are gone. And if you point this out, people run to default responses like, “you don’t care that people are dying,” or, “you want to see my grandma dead!” But when peer-reviewed studies disputing that lockdowns had any effect are highlighted by “Cathedral” news outlets, they are ignored. The experts are telling you they got it wrong, but they’re not apologizing. Why? Because they don’t care that you lost your nest egg, home, business or loved one to suicide. By defending and supporting the State, you defend the “experts” who did this.

So, they got the lockdowns wrong, the masks are shown to be ineffective, and it has been ten months of a two-week lockdown to “flatten the curve.” After all of the chaos and guessing on their part, after governors sent the infected back into nursing homes to spread the virus to the demographic most affected by it, after every measure they took harmed people more than it helped, they expect us to trust a rushed to market vaccine developed by companies who suffer no liability if it’s ineffective or harmful. And this is where libertarian/anarchists/whatever drop the ball. Medical freedom is one of the most important issues to sovereign individuals and so many are afraid to advocate for it lest they be called kooks or “anti-vaxxers.” If you do not have the ability to decide when and what can be put in your body are you free? Please stop and answer the question. I don’t care that the State exists and claims ownership over the commons. That’s just autistic, Libertarian BS! Are you really free if you can be forced to accept something into your body you don’t want there? Maybe ask a rape victim? “bUt iT’s A pRiVaTe cOrPoRaTioN rEqUiRiNg it! Shut the hell up! By defending and supporting the State, you defend its ability to force anything it wishes into your body and use “private companies” to do it.

I could go on and on with examples but I hope these hit close enough to home. Most people know someone lost, hurt or traumatized by the “terror wars.” Many know, or are themselves, the people destroyed financially and/or emotionally by the lockdowns. And I hope most of you are questioning a vaccine that would almost assuredly have gone through several more trials and tests even in a “libertarian society.” Again, do you hate the State? Do you see costumed morons running around the Capitol building where all of these horrors are planned and clutch at your pearls? If you do, if that’s your first impulse, you’re on the side of the blood-soaked monsters. Why would you want to be there?

Libertarian Messaging For 2021: Part 2

Libertarian Messaging For 2021: Part 2

Let’s just jump right in since you can go to part 1 and see my yada, yada qualifications and such. Here’s the Tweet:

Screenshot 20201204 070450 Twitter

End all corporate bailouts/welfare

For those of you who remember the great recession of 2008, or have read about it in books such as Tom Woods’ classic, Meltdown, you recall that the majority of the people were against the bank bailouts. Did that stop your “betters” in DC from bailing out their biggest campaign donors? No, it did not. Did any of you who lost a house or savings or any wealth you worked your ass off for get a bailout? None of us did. And the elite power brokers, working in tandem with the politicians you elected, grew richer.

This year those same people told you to stay home, be afraid and threatened you if you left your house. Many people have defaulted on their homes. Others have lost their nest egg. Even more are suffering psychological damage due to isolation. When the CARES Act was passed, what was there for you? $1,200? If 100,000,000 people received that amount, that is one hundred twenty billion dollars. If 2.2 trillion was given out, where did the other 2.08 trillion go? To corporate cronies who saw record profits in 2020 while you were wallowing in lock-down misery.

When you realize that this is how crisis’s always play out, how can anyone with a straight face ever say we have a free market again. You’ve been had people. This corporate welfare must end. There was no welfare for the small business owner who was devastated in 2020 and continues to be with no end in sight. End this!

Support self-defense by armed citizens against rioters and/or cops

As more people grew to see that the government was their enemy this year, beginning in the end of May, many in certain areas saw a greater threat where the state stepped in and told good people that if you act in self-defense, we will prosecute you. The riots that started in the wake of the death of George Floyd were a perfect example of how not only are police, and the government, not here to protect you, but they will actively persecute you if you seek to protect yourself from roving mobs of criminals. The very nature of self-defense outside the law allows you to use as much force as needed to protect yourself, your family and your property.

That was taken away from certain groups even in states where gun ownership is prolific (Washington, Oregon). These politicians and power-brokers must never be allowed to do this in the future, AND, should be held accountable for their recent actions.

Many this year have also woken up to the fact that not only are the police not here to protect them, but in many cases will actively follow the decrees handed down by politicians without question. This includes enforcing laws in which there is no victim but allows police to escalate conflict, up to and including violence and even murder. In the case where a police officer is putting the life of innocent people in jeopardy, armed citizens must be allowed to protect themselves, or another. This is logical and accords with natural law. Without the ability of sovereign individuals to be able to protect themselves from government workers trespassing upon their rights, we must admit that we live in a police state where every encounter with a state agent is a hostage situation.

Resist the cathedral always

So, what is the “Cathedral?” It has three parts but the first must be explained in order to understand how they work with the other two. The first is what I refer to as the “Public Servant State.” That is, the millions of public “servants” who have positions of power no matter what party controls the White House, congress or the judiciary. We’re talking specifically about those employees at the State Department, CIA, FBI, Pentagon, etc., who wield power and influence no matter who the show pony in the White House is. In the last four years many have come to call them the “Deep State.” They plan the wars, make policy and never suffer any consequences.

How do they do this? With the help of the other two groups, the corporate press and the universities. In recent history, many people, especially those who identify with the Right, have come to have a radical distrust for all three. Many have woken up to the fact that the press is a mouthpiece for the CIA. Watch panels on every cable news station and there is almost always a “former” CIA or FBI agent present. Many just don’t trust the corporate media anymore. Add in the universities where more and more parents are waking up every day to the fact that they are indoctrination centers in which their children are being brainwashed to embrace Marxism and socialism which inevitably leads them to looking to the State as their mommy or daddy and you see how they work together.

Thaddeus Russell shows in his forthcoming book on American foreign policy that every war in the 20th century saw its genesis in the halls of academia. Thomas Sowell, a Harvard graduate, is quoted as saying, “in any great disaster, there’s a Harvard man in the middle of it.”

These three working together must be called out constantly and there is no better time to communicate this as there is now, even more so than 5 years ago, a segment that knows that this collusive force is dangerous and must be resisted.

Libertarian Messaging For 2021: Part 1

Libertarian Messaging For 2021: Part 1

This is a continuation of my pieces on the LP and what it would take for me to support them. The great Dave Smith made a Tweet yesterday in which he laid out what the libertarian message should be for 2021. Since he is confined to 280 characters by Twitter I thought I’d go through each and say how I would communicate them in a little detail. Here’s the Tweet. I’m only going to hit the first three points today.

Screenshot 20201204 070450 Twitter

End the lock-downs immediately and open the economy completely

Where in the hell do politicians have the right to tell you that you can’t leave your house and open your business or go to work, and if they do have this right, how do you still believe you live in a “free country?” If they do, change that right now! This is the most tyrannical period a “free people” have ever experienced in this country and that’s not being hyperbolic. After 9/11 you were allowed to leave your houses, encouraged to engage in commerce and 3,000 people were slaughtered in one day! Open your eyes to what has been done to you and take notice of how the culture has changed around you. Fear has become the front and center spirit of the zeitgeist and you are not seeing it. If you have children who are in their formative years what do you think the lasting effects of this prison of the body and mind is having on them? Why have you allowed politicians you know deep in your heart are corrupt to destroy your finances and everything you’ve worked so hard to build?

End all foreign wars

You are being ruled by blood-soaked monsters. The majority of you believe that US troops do not belong in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Most of you don’t even know about the continued wars/bombing in Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Chad, Niger and so many others. Is this where you want the wealth extracted from your pay to go to? Can you even find these countries on a map? Do you trust those politicians you know are corrupt to have your best interests at heart when mounting these military actions, some of which technically could be called genocides? How does it make you feel to know that while you are having your wealth decimated by government imposed lock-downs, etc., that Boeing, Northrop Grumman and other “private” companies are getting rich off of your tax dollars because they build the bombs, planes and ordinance needed to keep these so-called military actions” going? Why is the military protecting people in other countries while the enemy at home, the government who has stopped your life because of a virus, is ignored?

Audit/End the Fed

My fellow Americans, why is an unaccountable, secretive organization in charge of the money supply when your beloved Constitution says that is the job of the Congress who, if they aren’t doing their job properly, you can fire through your vote? Do you even know what the Federal Reserve does? It literally creates money out of thin air. The more money there is, the more worthless it is. If you had what you thought was a rare book, and all of a sudden a stash of 100,000 copies were found, how much is your “rare” book worth now? That is a simple example of what has happened with Federal Reserve money creation. When the 2.2 trillion dollar CARES Act was passed earlier this year (did you vote on that by the way?), do you think that money was sitting in a vault somewhere? No, that was created with key strokes on a computer. Do you think 2.2 trillion dollars being pumped into the economy will not eventually affect the value of the dollars you hold? The Federal Reserve is the enemy of your prosperity and must be first audited, so you can see the damage they’ve done, and then ended when you come to the realization that you’ve been had!

More to come on messaging for 2021.

The Libertarian Party Will Never Have Political Power

The Libertarian Party Will Never Have Political Power

Just give it up already. Those who are holding onto the dream that the LP will be able to wield any significant political, or cultural power have not thought this through. An ideology of non-aggression and voluntary interactions has no place in the political sphere unless they are willing to become like the other two parties. Their message is that we are not like them. It is one of incompatibility when it comes to Machiavellian power structures.

The purpose of politics is to seize power and centralize it to your party. The Left knows how to do this even when they aren’t in power and the Right fails even when they hold all the cards. As Curtis Yarvin puts it,

“Progressives see power as an end; conservatives see power as a means to an end. As soon as conservatives get even a sliver of power, they start trying to use this power to create good outcomes. This is irrational.

The rational way to use power is the progressive way: to make more power. Your power grows exponentially. Eventually you have all the power, and can get all the outcomes you want.

There is not one progressive idea which does not yield a power dividend. I cannot think of a conservative idea that does. If one did, the progressives would steal it. Then the conservatives would persuade themselves to oppose it, and all would be well.”

Anyone paying attention knows this. In our lifetimes the Left has grown their power – especially over the culture – to an insurmountable level. The Right has become what the Left was 25 years ago, and they always play catch-up. I hear echoes of Michael Malice saying, “Conservatism is Progressive driving the speed limit.”

What does this all mean for the Libertarian Party? It should be obvious. What is described above IS politics. It is the dirtiest, slimiest, most reprehensible way of gaining power over mankind. To argue against that is to be naive beyond measure. An ideology promoting the Non-Aggression Principle entering into the American political realm is like a kindergartener entering a UFC match. The outcome is inevitable.

And don’t think I’m just talking about the 202-area code. No, local politics is just as bad. If you’re walking in there as “the good guy” the inevitable “bad guy” will rear their head and take you out. And if you’re a Libertarian and you are “consistent” in your ideology, you won’t fight dirty because once you do you are out of the realm of libertarianism. You’ve just became “The Swamp” (even the local Swamp).

Once you understand this you realize that the old argument about whether the purpose of the Libertarian Party is one of “education” or “getting people elected” to institute political change is easily answered. You are a party of education. And one that will always be a joke in the eyes of those who understand the Machiavellian nature of politics. But is education even possible if you won’t do what it takes politically to even get on a debate stage ignoring the inability to centralize all power to you if you do get elected?

Maybe there are better ways to spend your time rather than tilting at windmills.

The ‘Private’ Dilemma

The ‘Private’ Dilemma

There is an issue that “Libertarianism” refuses to take a nuanced approach to that will inevitably further marginalize it in the eyes of the general public. When it is brought up the “consistent” libertarian/anarchist retreats into the world of informal fallacies, most notably the “false dilemma” fallacy, in which it is assumed by the participant that there are only two opinions to hold on the presented subject. This is usually characterized by canned answers such as, “they’re a private company bro, they can do what they want,” when a company is allegedly acting on its own accord, and in one example, temporarily bans the nation’s oldest newspaper from their platform.  

When people such as this author presents evidence that a certain platform will delete accounts on the orders of the American and Israeli governments, they are met with the same vapid response about private companies, yadda, yadda, yadda. In the mind of some who claim to be all about private property, but also preach an anti-State message, it becomes clear they haven’t given consideration to the fact that government actors (GAs) have planned out these schemes with the express intent of making it so that the libertarian/free market type is forced into a corner of not wanting to abandon their principles while GAs construct a system of tyranny around them that they refuse to criticize. 

What is even more maddening is that when someone tries to sound the alarm on this loophole the GAs have found, many are met with the insane response that they want the government to do something about it so that makes them statists. Did you hear what they said? The government is the one using this to their advantage. Can thought lacking nuance be abandoned for five seconds so that a third way can possibly be found besides the two that have been defaulted to?  

How about loudly speaking out against this arrangement (GAs)? Unfortunately, many are not only so steeped in one mode of thinking when it comes to that “private company bro,” but they also may not want to be seen as being “anti-business” like their blood-enemies the socialists. Where is that going to leave you? Technically, the monopoly power provider in a certain neighborhood may decide they don’t want to do business with the local “white supremacist” (whatever that means anymore). If they turn their power off in 100-degree heat is it just a “private company bro?”  

Libertarian/ANCAPS need to address this exploding phenomenon of government using “private” companies as a shield to carry out their war on everything from free speech to mask enforcement. At present, the Right is ramping up efforts to repeal Section 230 which would effectively allow the government to regulate social media platforms, or any contribution sites, as if they’re the public square. This author sees the government as the problem in almost all instances and never the solution. That does not mean these “private” companies should be let off the hook for their collusion. On the contrary, everyone needs to start calling them out on it. That would be a good start for the “libertarian.” 

A Lost Year – Where Do You Go From Here?

A Lost Year – Where Do You Go From Here?

The point of no return may have been reached. The effects of the government-mandated shutdowns due to Covid-19 on businesses—especially small businesses—may not be known for months, even decades, but anyone who is paying attention is beginning to realize we are somewhere new. A place no one could’ve predicted at the beginning of 2020 when onlookers were just anticipating an ugly election year. They got more, much more.  

Leaving aside an economy that is at best questionable: the culture, interactions amongst family members and strangers, have been negatively affected in an already insane age where one’s character is judged by whether they believe Donald Trump is “literally Hitler,” an amusing deviation, or the Messiah who has come to deliver us from the Left.” This cultural phenomenon was already in full swing before the war between the “masked” and “unmasked,” or those who believed CV-19 will “have people dying in hospital parking lots,” and those who look upon it as just a “spicy cold” started. 

As if all of this wasn’t enough, in May a video was released of Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin with his knee forced onto the neck of a prone George Floyd who died during the 8 minute and 46 second assault. Protests, rioting and looting immediately sprung up in Minneapolis which spread all over the country and continue to the day this is being written. Calls for various sorts of police reform have largely gone ignored by those with the power of change. 

Some students of history may look at the past several months and see a government that is out of control. A few may see one that is at the top of their game, especially at the state and local level. Others might see a dying wild animal, losing power and lashing out; a sort of death throes. No matter how it is being interpreted by the onlooker, something big has to happen next. Solutions have to be presented.  

Shortages of certain items have already occurred but they are finding their way back onto shelves. But what if another lockdown is ordered? Production precedes demand and if production is further hindered, those shortages that were warned of could become a reality.  

It would not be unfair to ask if civility is dead. If people are willing to threaten each other’s livelihoods and, in many cases, yell at strangers in public for everything from politics to how to handle the CV-19 crisis, how does one cope? 

If there are dangerous, violent mobs in the streets, how is one to feel safe? If those mobs include the police, is there any reason to be optimistic about the future? 

Counter-Economics and Networking 

Samuel Edward Konkin III developed the idea of agorism. Many people now call themselves “Agorists” but agorism is something you do. The idea of counter-economics, doing business outside of the government approved market is nothing new. Sam was just the first to give it a name and develop it as a strategy. 

Sam’s vision was that if enough people can start to operate outside of the “white market,” interactions where taxes aren’t collected and delivered to the overlords, eventually the State could be starved, and subsequently toppled and replaced by a truly free market. As economist Per Bylund once put it, “agorism in action creates its own institutions and builds the institutions of a free society within the shell of the old. When people start offering services, they create markets and prices. When they have conflicts, they find means to arbitration and protection. That’s what’s so beautiful with counter-economics: by withdrawing your support (stop feeding the beast) and start acting economically in freedom, you bring about the market institutions we will need (and must rely on) when the state fails.” 

In the age of forced government lockdowns and potential shortages of bare necessities, the “black” and “gray” markets may become essential for survival. Constantly communicating with your local stores is a good idea. If a store owner feels like a shortage is coming, they may hold back supply for themselves so starting a relationship with them in which they may allow you to buy some of that supply for yourself is smart. For those who can access private farms the same kind of friendship would be prudent for in the experience of this author farmers are more apt to participate in such activities. 

Preparation is key and can in many cases save you in a time of hardship. 

Counter-Economics and Income 

At this point it is no longer just people who are “extremely-online” who are familiar with the putrid phrase “cancel culture.” A few short years (months?) ago it presented itself mostly in the online arena where someone who was making their living in the media or arts said or wrote something that a certain group found so offensive that they made it their goal to get that person fired and to make sure they were not re-hirable anywhere in their industry. A popular example is former Google engineer James Damore who wrote an internal memo where one of the things he suggested was ways tech could appeal to a more diverse demographic, especially women. More recently numerous employees of Cisco were fired for posting “All Lives Matter” on internal message boards. 

At a time when even private companies are bending the knee to the mob and destroying people’s livelihoods for having an opinion contrary to an incredibly small minority, it has never been more important to start a side-hustle outside of your day job. Quality 3D-printers can be had for under $300. There are free files all over the web that allow you to make wallets, statues and trinkets that can be sold on eBay, Poshmark, Etsy and other sites that will allow you to bring in tax-free income. People who live in apartments can grow potatoes in 55-gallon drums on their porch and sell them to friends or at the local farmer’s market. Again, untaxed income.  

Whatever you come up with just start doing it. Get moving. Protect yourself and your family in these extremely uncertain times. 

Counter-Economics and Safety 

Contrary to popular opinion the police are not there to protect you. If you are in the process of suffering a home invasion and the closest officer is five minutes away, that can be the longest five minutes of your life. Or it could be the end for you. The protests that have turned into riots and lootings clearly show the police are not only not willing to protect private citizens but, in many cases, they are abandoning their own precincts and allowing the mob to take them over.  

If you own firearms get training. In the experience of this author, most firearm instructors work counter-economically. Meaning, they will accept cash in exchange for their services. Many will even teach you how to buy a weapon privately and off the books (no taxes collected) if that is legal in your area. 3D-printers must be mentioned along with CNC machines as they will allow you to manufacture a quality weapon in the privacy of your own home. 

That there are still people out there who have experienced the last four months and are relying on the government for necessities, security and safety is a testament to how well the State has convinced us that they are mommy and daddy. The time for begging for scraps and calling for them to act is over. If we are to survive this chaotic epoch, it is incumbent upon the individual to act, that he or she takes matters into their own hands and becomes as independent from the system as they can. Many lives have already been lost or irreparably damaged due to either the action, or inaction of the State. Make a decision to cast them aside and live free. Death is on the table. 

Anatomy Of A Monopoly

Anatomy Of A Monopoly

Anyone who has ever tried to start a business knows the difficulty in just getting it off the ground. Ignoring licensing, etc., consider that most potential entrepreneurs start off in a financial hole. If you have to hire employees this will be your biggest expense. The necessity of a brick and mortar location adds another hurdle to success. Then, most importantly, what are you offering? Most will have to provide a good or service that the public wants or needs to stay in business and climb out of the “red.” This can take months but in many cases the timeline is longer. Much longer. 

But what if there were another way. What if one had the power to force people to consume their good or service. And not only that, but could dictate whether competition could rise up to challenge them. Imagine that they held a monopoly on the biggest guns so that anyone who would question their authority would be crushed under their feet. That might be obvious to people though. The subjects may question whether they were living under tyranny. What if some of the brightest minds in the “agency” came up with a plan to educate their “customers” from the time they begin to speak that without their services there are people who want to kill them and that their organization would be the only one capable of protecting them from the “barbarians at the gate.” 

Of course, these services will not be free so the “agency” will require payment. But don’t worry about having to come out of pocket for it, you won’t even notice because before you get paid by your employer, they will extract just the right amount they need to “service” you. They will allow you some control over the amount extracted per pay period but you will have to offer an accounting at the end of the year. If you miscalculate you will have to write them a check for the amount you tried to hold back or face consequences. And since they have the “big guns” you will comply.  

There may come a time when this “agency” decides that they cannot provide these “services” properly; that they need more help. So, they may go on a hiring spree. These are new workers that will have to be paid. Since these new employees are working for your “benefit,” the amount the agency requires from you will have to be increased. Do you have a say in this? Well, you can say something, but ultimately this is a required service and their people need to be compensated. 

The “agency” allows for businesses to register with them so that these businesses can provide services that they don’t (in some cases they may even allow competition, but on their terms). By doing so, these “non-agency” businesses submit to certain guidelines that must be followed or they suffer the wrath of the “agency.” If one of these “approved” businesses becomes successful they too will have to pay the “protection service” fees. In many cases at a greater rate than an individual.  

The smart, approved business will realize that one of the most important things it can do is get on the “agency’s” good side. So, they will send their representative to members of the “agency” and offer them additional (private) fees in exchange for special “privileges.” What kind of “privilege” would an approved business want? Since the “agency” decides who can do business and not, they may make it so that the approved business can operate with no competition. The “agency” may pass laws that say that only “approved company A” can operate within a certain land mass. In addition, the “agency” may grant members of “approved company A” certain immunities if their business were to harm one of their customers. “Approved company A” may be held liable but the person or persons within who made the ultimate decision that resulted in damages are not.  

In some special cases, especially if “approved company A” is doing business on behalf of the “agency,” the “agency” may make it so that “approved company A” cannot be held liable at all. The “agency” may decide to take on the burden of the liabilities for “approved company A.” Of course, this expense will have to be funded from somewhere so the agency will probably increase the fees charged to individuals. Again, do you have a say in this? Not likely. 

To go back to where we started, what choices does the enterprising individual have within such a system? The “agency” has obviously placed obstacles in their way that can be overcome (but in many cases such as “approved agency A,” the individual may not be able to even open a business in his location). What if the individual’s business were to interfere with “services” offered by the “agency?” They will either be denied access or forced into “going into business” with said “agency.” 

In the worst-case scenario, if the individual has a breakthrough product, one that could change the world, but the “agency” denies “permission” for it to be produced, what can the entrepreneur do? 

When faced with such obstacles that need to be overcome, is it any wonder that so few even bother trying? In the scenario of facing down a monopoly, especially one with the license to end your life, one may ask how innovation happens at all. 

Why Did The Police Abandon Their Posts?

Why Did The Police Abandon Their Posts?

The riots and looting that have taken place in the aftermath of a Minneapolis law enforcement officer suffocating a man to death — which was caught on video by a bystander — has people questioning the idea of policing and how it is done. Should police be taught de-escalation tactics? Would it be prudent for them to live in the area they patrol? Why is law enforcement still performing “broken window policing?” In the wake of the murder of George Floyd by Derek Chauvin these are all things to ponder. 

Taking all of this into consideration, people aren’t asking why it is that police are abandoning their precincts, leaving them to the mob, and suffering no consequences for this action. A few have asked why the police aren’t protecting the public and its property but one would think that in the least the cops would protect “their own house,” right? It is apparent that people learned nothing from the Parkland school shooting when it comes to “law enforcement” being the “security force” of the people. Even after it was determined that the officers who cowered outside had “no duty to protect,” the public still didn’t grasp the message the courts were sending. 

The idea that law enforcement is there “to serve and protect” individual members of the public has been ruled against over and over again, and the facts surrounding some of the most famous cases are particularly heinous. 

Warren v. District of Columbia (1981) 

Warren v D.C. is probably the most cited case when it comes to the fact that police aren’t mandated to protect the individual. 

The details of the case are terrifying: 

In the early morning hours of Sunday, March 16, 1975, Carolyn Warren and Joan Taliaferro, who shared a room on the third floor of their rooming house at 1112 Lamont Street Northwest in the District of Columbia, and Miriam Douglas, who shared a room on the second floor with her four-year-old daughter, were asleep. The women were awakened by the sound of the back door being broken down by two men later identified as Marvin Kent and James Morse. The men entered Douglas’ second floor room, where Kent forced Douglas to perform oral sex on him and Morse raped her.  

Warren and Taliaferro heard Douglas’ screams from the floor below. Warren called 9-1-1 and told the dispatcher that the house was being burglarized, and requested immediate assistance. The department employee told her to remain quiet and assured her that police assistance would be dispatched promptly.  

Warren’s call was received at Metropolitan Police Department Headquarters at 0623 hours, and was recorded as a burglary-in-progress. At 0626, a call was dispatched to officers on the street as a “Code 2” assignment, although calls of a crime in progress should be given priority and designated as “Code 1.” Four police cruisers responded to the broadcast; three to the Lamont Street address and one to another address to investigate a possible suspect.  

Meanwhile, Warren and Taliaferro crawled from their window onto an adjoining roof and waited for the police to arrive. While there, they observed one policeman drive through the alley behind their house and proceed to the front of the residence without stopping, leaning out the window, or getting out of the car to check the back entrance of the house. A second officer apparently knocked on the door in front of the residence, but left when he received no answer. The three officers departed the scene at 0633, five minutes after they arrived.  

Warren and Taliaferro crawled back inside their room. They again heard Douglas’ continuing screams; again called the police; told the officer that the intruders had entered the home, and requested immediate assistance. Once again, a police officer assured them that help was on the way. This second call was received at 0642 and recorded merely as “investigate the trouble;” it was never dispatched to any police officers.  

Believing the police might be in the house, Warren and Taliaferro called down to Douglas, thereby alerting Kent to their presence. At knife point, Kent and Morse then forced all three women to accompany them to Kent’s apartment. For the next fourteen hours the captive women were raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon one another, and made to submit to the sexual demands of Kent and Morse.  

Warren, Taliaferro, and Douglas brought the following claims of negligence against the District of Columbia and the Metropolitan Police Department: the dispatcher’s failure to forward the 6:23 a. m. call with the proper degree of urgency; the responding officers’ failure to follow standard police investigative procedures, specifically their failure to check the rear entrance and position themselves properly near the doors and windows to ascertain whether there was any activity inside; and the dispatcher’s failure to dispatch the 6:42 a. m. call. 

The women sought to sue the District of Columbia and several individual members of the Metropolitan Police Department on two different occasions. The results were: 

“In a 4–3 decision, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial courts’ dismissal of the complaints against the District of Columbia and individual members of the Metropolitan Police Department based on the public duty doctrine ruling that the duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists. The Court thus adopted the trial court’s determination that no special relationship existed between the police and appellants, and therefore no specific legal duty existed between the police and the appellants.” 

Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales 

The importance of Castle Rock v Gonzales cannot be overstated since, unlike Warren, this case was taken to the Supreme Court of the U.S.A. for its ruling.  

The events that precipitated the ruling are tragic to say the least: 

During divorce proceedings, Jessica Lenahan-Gonzales, a resident of Castle Rock, Colorado, obtained a permanent restraining order against her husband Simon, who had been stalking her, on June 4, 1999, requiring him to remain at least 100 yards (91 m) from her and her four children (son Jesse, who is not Simon’s  biological child, and daughters Rebecca, Katherine, and Leslie) except during specified visitation time. On June 22, at approximately 5:15 pm, Simon took possession of his three daughters in violation of the order. Jessica called the police at approximately 7:30 pm, 8:30 pm, and 10:10 pm on June 22, and 12:15 am on June 23, and visited the police station in person at 12:40 am on June 23. However, since she from time to time had allowed Simon to take the children at various hours, the police took no action, despite Simon having called Jessica prior to her second police call and informing her that he had the daughters with him at an amusement park in Denver, Colorado. At approximately 3:20 am on June 23, Simon appeared at the Castle Rock police station and was killed in a shoot-out with the officers. A search of his vehicle revealed the corpses of the three daughters, whom it has been assumed he killed prior to his arrival. 

Gonzales filed suit against the Castle Rock police department and three of their officers in the U.S. District Court of Colorado claiming they didn’t protect her even though she had a restraining order against her husband. The officers were declared to have “qualified immunity” and thus, couldn’t be sued. But, “a panel of that court… found a procedural due process claim; an en banc rehearing reached the same conclusion.” 

In this case, the government of the town of Castle Rock took the decision against it to the Supreme Court of the U.S.A. and got the procedural due process claim reversed, finding 

The Court’s majority opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia held that enforcement of the restraining order was not mandatory under Colorado law; were a mandate for enforcement to exist, it would not create an individual right to enforcement that could be considered a protected entitlement under the precedent of Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth; and even if there were a protected individual entitlement to enforcement of a restraining order, such entitlement would have no monetary value and hence would not count as property for the Due Process Clause.  

Justice David Souter wrote a concurring opinion, using the reasoning that enforcement of a restraining order is a process, not the interest protected by the process, and that there is not due process protection for processes. 

Lozito v. New York City 

This one was saved until the end because, unlike the previous cases, the officer in this one admitted under grand jury testimony that the reason he didn’t come to the aid of Joseph Lozito is because he was scared that Lozito’s attacker had a gun. 

On February 11thMaksim Gelman, started a “spree-killing” by stabbing his stepfather, Aleksandr Kuznetsov, as many as 55 times because he refused to allow Gelman to use his wife’s (Gelman’s mother’s) car. Gelman would end up killing 3 more while injuring 5, the last injured person being Joe Lozito on a northbound 3-train while on his way to work.  

The facts of the Lozito attack are startling: 

“Joseph Lozito, who was brutally stabbed and “grievously wounded, deeply slashed around the head and neck”, sued police for negligence in failing to render assistance to him as he was being attacked by Gelman. Lozito told reporters that he decided to file the lawsuit after allegedly learning from “a grand-jury member” that NYPD officer Terrance Howell testified that he hid from Gelman before and while Lozito was being attacked because Howell thought Gelman had a gun. In response to the suit, attorneys for the City of New York argued that police had no duty to protect Lozito or any other person from Gelman.” 

Lozito had heard of the previous cases stating that the police had “not duty to protect” but decided to go to court representing himself.  

The court would have none of it: 

“On July 25, 2013, Judge Margaret Chan dismissed Lozito’s suit, stating that while Lozito’s account of the attack rang true and appeared “highly credible”, Chan agreed that police had “no special duty” to protect Lozito.” 

As segments of the country continue protesting, rioting and looting as a “response” to the George Floyd killing, and local governments are questioning funding their enforcement agencies, people should retreat a few steps and take a macro view of their “protection services.” While some are rightly railing against police brutality and aggressive policing, they should go back to the beginning and ask whether any of these “fixes” are going to work if the most basic assumption when it comes to “serving and protecting” is a farce.  

If the police are just there as a clean-up crew, or historians after the fact, why not designate them as such. If in the overwhelming amount of cases they get there after a crime has been committed, it’s time to take that 2nd Amendment seriously and remove the barriers that keep many people, especially those in high crime areas, from protecting themselves. “Armed” with the knowledge that those you have falsely believed were there to protect you are in fact serving another purpose, rational individuals should be looking for realistic options when it comes to protecting yourself from any threat that may come your way; public or private. 

News Roundup

News Roundup 1/25/21

US News 5,000 National Guard soldiers will remain deployed in DC through mid-March to provide security during Trump’s impeachment. [Link] A cop beat a young man who was handcuffed and at the hospital for psychiatric help. [Link] A Washington police officer ran over a...

Blog

Global Day Of Action: World Says No To War On Yemen

Call or write your members of Congress and Senate - Biden ran on ending support for the war on Yemen, he needs to be pressured to keep that promise. Sign up here Watch here Over 300 organisations from 18 countries have signed up for a call to action against the war on...

RIP Jeff Riggenbach

My dear old friend Jeff Riggenbach died today. Jeff was a brilliant writer who penned two pieces on Randolph Bourne, the namesake of Antiwar.com’s parent foundation, The Randolph Bourne Institute. The Brilliance of Randolph Bourne Randolph Bourne Biography As a...

This Morning on Antiwar Radio

This morning on Antiwar Radio: Hassan El Tayyab about how you can help force Biden to end the war against the humans of Yemen. That's at 8:30 Pacific time, 90.7 FM @KPFK in L.A. kpfk.org

The Scott Horton Show

Free Man Beyond the Wall

Conflicts of Interest

COI #62 – Yemen Can’t Wait

On COI #62, Kyle Anzalone breaks down the war in Yemen. Since 2015, the US has enabled Saudi's brutal air war against the people of Yemen. At least a quarter of a million died in the war. US-made bombs have been used to destroy weddings, funerals, and even a school...

COI #61 – Biden’s Foreign Policy Takes Form

On COI #61, Kyle Anzalone covers Biden's foreign policy. Kyle breaks down the confirmation hearing for DNI Avril Haines and Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Haines was confirmed after reaffirming to Congress she will not investigate the torture program. In good...

COI #59 – Save the Whales and Yemen!

On COI #59, Kyle Anzalone discusses several recent news stories. A new study finds US sonar tests are killing whales in the Pacific. The sonar is for detecting submarines but it likely causing marine life to become beached and die. Several Senators in Guam are trying...

Don't Tread on Anyone

The Secret to Saving Progressivism!

https://youtu.be/UDodvhgygd8 Gary Chartier is a left anarchist, consultant, speaker, coach, writer, philosopher, and teacher. http://www.garychartier.net/​ https://c4ss.org/...

Privatize Everything. Hans-Hermann Hoppe & Scott Horton

https://youtu.be/kKlSw-zfcRw ... the only thing we can do for the impoverished Second and Third Worlds — is to tell them: look, here is how we became prosperous: by defending the rights of private property and free exchange, by allowing people to save and invest and...

Liberty Weekly Podcast

How 2021 Could Be Better Ep. 149 ft. Jose Galison

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2oCgFf2cLs&feature=youtu.be I joined Jose Galison on "No Way Jose" to finish up a belated recap of 2020. We discuss the 2020 campaign trail, allegations of election fraud, Hunter Biden, internet censorship, "trusting the experts,"...

Abominable SCOTUS Decisions Ep. 147 ft. Dean-O-Files

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJpiZ1ByEmA&t=3759s Dean is a second year law student at Zoom University, School of Law. He has just finished his Constitutional Law class. He shares his experience in law school. We discuss the SCOTUS cases that your Constitutional...

Year Zero

Ideology And The Death Of Nations w/Coop

Tommy invited Coop onto the show to discuss the parallels between modern culture, relativity, objectivism, and how nations enter the period of their ultimate demise. https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/strangerencounterspodcast/coopfinal.mp3

Red, White, and Clear; An Interview With Me

Last Friday Mike Korbel asked me to be a guest on his podcast, The Invictus Mind. I’ve known Mike a few years and happily agreed to appear. We have a laid back informal chat about the growing technocratic state and how people may find avenues to free themselves from...

Our Books

Shop books published by the Libertarian Institute.

Libertarian Institute Merch from Libertas Bella

Support via Amazon Smile

Enoughalreadyproof

Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

No Quarter: The Ravings of William Norman Grigg

by Will Grigg

Book Foolssm

Fool’s Errand: Time to End the War in Afghanistan

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

Coming to Palestine

by Sheldon Richman

Book Foolssm

The Great Ron Paul

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

What Social Animals Owe to Each Other

by Sheldon Richman

Enoughalreadyproof

Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

No Quarter: The Ravings of William Norman Grigg

by Will Grigg

Book Foolssm

Fool’s Errand: Time to End the War in Afghanistan

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

Coming to Palestine

by Sheldon Richman

Book Foolssm

The Great Ron Paul

by Scott Horton

Book Foolssm

What Social Animals Owe to Each Other

by Sheldon Richman

Pin It on Pinterest