Pat Watson is former military/law enforcement and is the host of the Uncensored Tactical Podcast.
Pete asked Pat to come on to talk about ways to reform modern policing but it quickly turned into an exposition of governmental bureaucracy detailing vast chaos in its “organization” and proving that it cannot be fixed but must be jettisoned.
Thaddeus Russell is the founder of Renegade University and the author of “A Renegade History of the United States.” Thaddeus comes on the show to examine the Black Lives Matter movement and to give his opinion on their motives with the revelation that their leadership refers to themselves as “trained Marxists.” He also answers questions the removal of statues and a couple other topics.
Defunding the police is only a small part of only one side of the equation. All anti-vice laws must be erased, and the people, individually and in voluntary combination, must be freed — including freed from taxation — to see to their own security, their own education, their own health care, their own this, their own that, and their own the other. When that stuff enters the discussion, it will have gotten serious.
Pete welcomes an active duty LEO who wants to be identified as Zan to the show. Zan is leaving the force due to a change in ideology but is still on the job. He talks about why he’s leaving and answers the big question as to whether most of his co-workers will enforce draconian measures that will stay in force even after this “pandemic” is over.
Civil libertarians and police corruption watchdogs have much to celebrate these days. The fact that most people are walking around with high definition video cameras in their pockets has done much to shine a light on what these groups have been talking about for decades; that the “occupation” of law enforcement in the United States ceased being about protecting and serving, and has morphed into intimidating and subjugating.
Whether it be turning a traffic stop for a burned-out brake light into a drug search, or it actually becoming a “head stomping” opportunity for a Gwinnett County sheriff, even people who formerly considered police to be heroes, are starting to question why as individual violent crime is decreasing, police violence is increasing. Of course, many have become accustomed to these stories as sites such as The Free Thought Project chronicle them daily, but the scandal that has come out of Louisville, Kentucky involving two police officers’ sexual abuse of children in their Explorer Program should sound alarms and question whether policing in its modern form is an anachronism.
Allegations of Sexually Abusing Children
Former Louisville Metro Police officers Kenneth Betts and Brandon Wood were accused of criminal charges “in Jefferson Circuit Court stemming from their alleged sexual abuse of teens under their supervision as part of a program for young people interested in law enforcement careers.” The allegations against Betts stretched from his first year in the department, 2006, through 2016. Federally, he was charged with sending pictures of his penis to someone under the age of 16 and attempting to have sex with males and females who were not yet 18.
In U.S. District Court in Louisville on December 6, 2018, Betts pleaded “guilty to charges of knowingly distributing child pornography, possession of child pornography, transferring obscene material to a minor, enticement and attempted enticement, among other charges.”
In addition, the State of Kentucky charged Betts with two counts of sodomy involving two alleged victims. The indictment in state court alleged Betts engaged in “deviant sexual intercourse” with one of the victims through the use of “forcible compulsion” over a five-month period in 2007. Betts was also accused of committing sodomy on July 26, 2013 with a minor “he came into contact with as a result” of his position as a police officer. Betts pleaded guilty to these charges on July 8, 2019 and received “five years for two counts of sodomy in the third degree. That sentence is on top of the 16 years he was handed down by a federal judge. The five-year sentences will run concurrent to the time he’ll serve in his federal sentence.”
Officer Brandon Wood was charged, and pleaded guilty to attempted enticement, United States Attorney Russell M. Coleman said on January 28, 2019. “According to a plea agreement, between 2011 and 2012, Wood attempted to entice John Doe 1, who had not reached 18 years of age, to engage in sexual activity. Wood met Doe through the LMPD Explorer Program during a camp held in Bullitt County – where Wood was a counselor and sworn LMPD officer.”
“A federal judge sentenced Brandon Wood, 33, to 70 months in prison on a felony attempted enticement charge on May 28, 2019.”
“When he pleaded guilty in January, Wood reached an agreement with federal prosecutors for a 60-month sentence, but U.S. District Judge David Hale rejected that agreement Tuesday morning saying it was too lenient.” He was sentenced to 70 months in jail.
Civil suits against the two officers are ongoing.
In the case of Kenneth Betts, as if his actions against minors wasn’t enough, in November of 2019, a fellow officer identifying himself as “Darryl,” came forward on a FOX-WDRB podcast to make the claim that he had been raped by Betts.
“It was almost like a super power came over (Betts),” an accuser, identified only as Darryl in the podcast, told FOX News Reporter Andrew Keiper. “He had a hold of my ear, and he was still exposed in the front of his pants. We’ll just say he, yeah, he forced me, yeah.”
Darryl describes himself as older and bigger than Betts but he has decided to not pursue a lawsuit. He hopes that by coming forward it will help others to do so.
The interview took place in the first of a four-part podcast called “Derby City Betrayal.” The series details the investigation into the sexual abuse case against Betts and former LMPD officer Brandon Wood, as well as their subsequent arrests.
In the same podcast series, one of the victims from the Explorers identified as C.F., now an adult, went into detail about what he experienced:
“It was on a regular basis. (Betts) would ask for nude photos, ask for me to come over, all sorts of things,” C.F. said. “Some messed up things happened.”
Considering the depravity involved in this story it’s easy to write it off as an anomaly but that doesn’t answer the question that if these two “bad apples” can find themselves in the same department (and a third officer to help them cover it up as well as a fourth accused of sexual abuse), how rampant is this activity amongst those that are seen as authority figures and our “protectors?” And how many of these go unreported due to fear of reprisal by “good guys” with guns?
The argument has been made that to hand mortal men the kind of power that comes along with the profession of law enforcement officer will certainly attract those with evil intent. What better way for a sociopath or deviant to hide his crimes than behind a badge? As long as the government holds a monopoly on violence and force expect this to become more rampant, but as the information age progresses, anticipate that these malefactors will be exposed for who they really are. Looking at the damage being currently done by this vocation, we can only hope that people awaken to the realization that they are a danger to us all.
Pete invited John Baeza to come on the show. John recently wrote an article for LewRockwell.com entitled, “How I Survived 3 Years as a Libertarian Cop.” John details his successes in applying libertarian principles to monopolistic policing and talks about what ultimately led to his separation. He also talks about police reforms he’d like to see now that could drastically reduce violence and harm to all parties involved.
John Baeza was was involved in hundreds of criminal investigations in his 20 year law enforcement career. Det. Baeza began his career as a New York State Correction Officer at Sing-Sing Prison; worked patrol in Harlem’s 32nd Precinct; and served as an undercover Police Officer and Detective in the Manhattan North Narcotics and Major Case Units. He transferred to the Manhattan Special Victims Squad, where he was responsible for the investigation of sex crimes, serial rape, sexual homicide, and child abuse. During his tenure in this assignment he expanded his knowledge of law enforcement investigation procedures. Det. Baeza has been published in the Journal of Behavioral Profiling and books such as the Rape Investigation Handbook, among other publications, and he maintains a large reference library including many of the seminal investigative textbooks.
Chris McMillon of the Truth Conduit Podcast asked Pete to come on and they talked about a bunch of subjects including solutions to modern policing, Pete’s documentary, Pete’s books as well as his forthcoming one. Pete also explains the different schools of thought in the liberty movement.
In another throwback episode, Pete welcomed Brooklyn College professor Alex Vitale to the show to talk about his book “The End of Policing.” Dr. Vitale talks about how violence by police has been amped up in the last 40 years and talks about the history of policing in this society.
If people properly understood the role of police in the American system, they would probably trust anyone standing next to them in the grocery store to have their best interests at heart more than a “law enforcement” officer. There’s an important reason for this. According to a Cato study, if you are an American, you are 8X more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist. According to a Reason article, by Dec 9th 2014, police had killed 1,000 people that year. A search couldn’t find stats on unarmed people that police have killed outside of African American groups who keep track of it. The epidemic has reached the point that better data collecting is needed. But, if you just look at the number of unarmed black men (no weapon at all) killed by police in 2015, 104, and compare it to the amount of Americans worldwide in 2014 (including the US) whose deaths were attributed to terrorism, 32, American police killed over 3X as many unarmed black men in the US as terrorists killed Americans worldwide. Even if you want to say half of them were out of their minds on bath salts that’s almost 2X as many unarmed black men killed by police as Americans killed by terrorism all over the globe.
It is clear why many, including former law enforcement, believe this is such a huge issue. Trillions are being spent to combat terrorism worldwide, yet millions are being funneled to support the bigger threat to us, the imminent one in which uttering the wrong phrase at a traffic stop can change your life forever… and even end it without consequence to the one who steals your most precious possession. Your life, your very existence.
Those who have had a chance to consume, cover to cover, James Duane’s book, “You Have the Right to Remain Innocent,” share the same sentiments, mostly anger and despair. The amount of cases he discusses where innocent people lost decades of their lives because they decided to answer a police officer’s questions is infuriating and sad at the same time. They have a job to do and it’s not to protect you, it is to gather evidence against you if they suspect you’ve done something wrong. And the amount of innocent people that gave them just enough information in what they believed was an informal discussion that allowed a flawed and corrupt system to frame a narrative to “get their man/woman,” that a jury of people too stupid to get out of jury duty, or ones that know nothing of jury nullification, convicted them on is heartbreaking.
And then there is the epidemic we’ve seen pop up that really came to the forefront at Waco. The first thing the Federal police did was shoot the dogs. They weren’t guard dogs, they were pets. They were in a pen. Recently a police officer, who was eventually fired even though his police chief said he did “nothing against procedure,” shot a 9-pound dog in the face because his owner wouldn’t come to the road to talk to him. Officer Keenan Wallace, formerly of the Faulkner County Sheriff’s Office in Conway Arkansas, did it out of spite. On July 5th, 2016, The Nation published an article reporting that police nationwide are killing 25 dogs a day. That’s over 9,000 a year. And the courts have ruled they have the right to do this. Why? The system is not your friend and the front-line soldiers are police.
People who believe this is a grave issue have the ability to fight back against this tyranny by gathering concerned neighbors and implementing a strategy that has proven to drastically reduce the footprint of “law enforcement” in their neighborhoods. Some of these you’ve probably heard of, but a few in particular many have no idea exist, or have existed.
Before solutions are presented, history can provide a good deal of context.
State law enforcement was not the norm in the original thirteen colonies. Early colonial governments played no active role in apprehending and prosecuting lawbreakers and police departments and prosecutors did not exist as they are known today. Therefore, a crime victim had to serve as policeman andprosecutor who, if he chose to apprehend an offender and initiate prosecution, did so directly and at his own expense. He did not have to rely on government agencies. On the contrary, he could not rely on them even if he wanted to because they either did not exist, or did not perform the function he sought. By the same token, he was obviously not constrained by such agencies to proceed with a prosecution if he chose to withdraw.
Public courts were available in most colonial capitals, but distance and poor roads made use of them for many colonists expensive. Thus, government trials could be, and frequently were, simply bypassed in favor of direct bargaining or third-party arbitration or mediation, with restitution to the victim from the offender being the dominant sanction. Again, early Americans held a restitutive theory of justice whereby forced reparations by the criminal to the victim were ordered, but punitive measures taken against the offender to the benefit of the victim were also demanded.
What would be the benefits of this? One, if you have to take money out of your own pocket to catch someone who has transgressed against you, and there are no police, false allegations would seem to all but disappear except in the case of someone who just has it out for someone; and even in that case, they are probably looking to do violence to the person other than seeking restitution.
Notice, this isn’t about some abstract concept called justice that is carried out by a “State” in which they don’t care if you are made whole or not.
Something else to take from this: would neighbors at the time have a stake in making sure this person was caught? Absolutely. The concept of a public protector doesn’t exist, so if there is someone going around stealing or damaging property it makes sense that one would want someone caught who had the potential to do the same to them. So, just by putting the word out it would make sense that you would have volunteers joining you in your search.
Going back to the rank psychopath who may just be seeking vengeance against someone he views as a foe, do you think people who are hearing the story of whatever the accused may or may not have done have a stake in making sure the accusations are accurate? Yes, or they could be the next victim of a false complaint.
All of this points to something that always makes a community, and especially a tight knit one, open to the ideas of self-policing; and that’s self-interest.
Before real solutions are presented, don’t discount the lesson of the previous. With everything mentioned about the colonies, one can see the importance of central power was not deemed important, so how much money could public officials demand. It is clear why they needed to expand their power. Any fines levied would find their way into public coffers and not back to the damaged party. Power as such generates income and one could argue a good free-market security force could demand a high price but that would be voluntary on the consumers part and that should be the goal.
The ‘Wild, Wild West’
What of the widely held perception that the eighteenth-century West was a lawless society dominated by violence, where the strongest and most ruthless ruled by force? It is true that miners, farmers, ranchers, and many other individuals moved westward much more rapidly than government entities could expand the state’s law enforcement system, particularly from 1830 to 1900. But this does not mean that the frontier was lawless.
Remember who writes the history books. That the West was a wild, violent, and lawless place is not just something that is popularly believed but rejected by researchers. Many simply assume (or assert) that violence was prevalent and then proceed to explain why that should be the case. Is there any real evidence of relatively violent behavior in the West?
Some historical accounts focus on a particularly notorious event or individual, and these certainly existed. But there appears to be a serious selection bias problem when the entire West is characterized on the basis of the conclusions of such studies. Interestingly, even those studies discover a good deal of social order. When you examine the Texas frontier from 1875–90, for instance, one finds that many kinds of criminal offenses common today were nonexistent. Burglaries and robberies of homes and businesses (except for banks) simply did not occur. Doors were not locked, and hospitality was widespread, indicating that citizens had relatively little fear of invasive violent or property offenses. Shootings did occur, but they typically involved what the citizenry considered to be “fair fights.” Stage and train robberies occurred, but these incidents were isolated from most citizens and caused them little to no concern.
So again, one must ask whether government, the monopoly on violence, should be in charge of policing. If at a time where the closest “government protector” could be hours away, the crime rate was low. Why is it so high now? Because so much of what is considered a crime is something where there is no injured party. When you see on a charging document, “THE STATE OF….” Vs “so and so”, the damaged party isn’t present. No victim, no crime. Violations of person and property are the only crimes.
One would do well to argue that you would want people you are either paying voluntarily to protect you, or people you trust.So, what are a few ways in which that can be done absent government actors.
To spend time on the concept of the “neighborhood watch” isn’t warranted. Most people are familiar with the concept.
There is an example of a good “free market” approach that has been seen in recent decades. Dale Brown, the founder of Detroit Threat Management, started out with the idea that people had to be responsible for their own security. He figured out that policing is not based on protection, but on prosecution. So, if police show up on average less than 5% of the time to stop a crime, what are you to do? Police are historians, they do not work in current events. They are evidence gatherers, and the sooner the masses come to that realization, the better.
When you start speaking out against modern police techniques, the first response you get, without fail, is, “Well if you get in trouble, call a crackhead!” This is common. And before we proceed further, one thing Dale says that should stick with you is that law enforcement is for people who have broken the law, or CHOSEN to have laws enforced against them. He is saying YOU CHOOSE THIS.
Dale designed a system in which he was training people, families and groups how to protect themselves from violence. He was doing this in parks, pretty much anywhere he could. An owner of an apartment building let him use an empty space.
The turn for him was the realization that teaching people to protect themselves was not going to be enough. There were people who just couldn’t do it. He taught pre-emptive techniques like securing your dwelling which is absolutely essential. Something he says which should be considered but most people don’t is that if someone breaks into your home, and you defend it by killing or hurting that person, you’ll probably want to move immediately. People have family and friends, and having them know exactly where you are puts a target on your back. Revenge is very real. So, making sure you secure yourself and your dwelling isn’t an option, it’s essential. Another point he makes is, just because you have a gun, and know how to use it, doesn’t mean anything. Every dead cop had a gun. So, prevention is where you start. Understanding human behavior is more important. Think about the name of his company, Threat Management. It’s about preparation. Getting to the point where you actually have to fight, should be a major outlier.
It’s easy to see that even though this is about the entrepreneur, or entrepreneurs who may wish to begin an endeavor as such, there is also a lot of info for the individual. In his realization that many people couldn’t protect themselves he decided his strategy needed to evolve. In 1995 he approached, and was hired by building owners to be their security. This was in one of the roughest neighborhoods in Detroit that was rife with rapes, assaults and murders. His goal was easy. If he could make rich people richer (building and land owners having a safer environment to thrive in), he would be paid for his efforts.
In the beginning he, and those who worked for him, would get part of their pay with “free” housing. As it progressed, he could charge for his service. He now has a huge company, with contracts to privately protect some of the wealthiest and best neighborhoods out there. Mind you, many were not safe to start with, they are ones he cleaned up by letting people know that he was going to make sure they were safe by using all the techniques he found would prevent violence in the first place.
The most realistic example for pushing the government monopoly on violence and force out of the communities’ people live in is the Shomrim society? Shomrim is the Hebrew word for “watcher’ or “guard.” These are probably most famous in NYC although they have groups scattered through America and Britain. Shomrim will “work” with the police, but honestly, it is only because the cops have a monopoly on force. They would prefer to take care of their own, and should be applauded for it because in a truly libertarian society, that is who you’d want looking out for you even more so than any security you may hire.
The mission statement/message people get when they go to the “Shomrim Crown Heights” webpage:
Crown Heights Shomrim is a neighborhood patrol organization made up entirely of volunteers whose mission is to help protect the streets of Crown Heights and to give aid to victims of crime. Crown Heights Shomrim is based in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, New York, a neighborhood comprised of ultra-Orthodox Hassidic Jews of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement alongside a large West Indian and African American population. Founded in the 1960’s Crown Heights Shomrim is the evolution of the Maccabees – a first of its kind volunteer patrol – which was founded by residents of the neighborhood who were frustrated with an understaffed and ineffective police department which allowed residents to fall victims to violent crimes.
During the infamous anti-Semitic riots in 1991, Shomrim expanded its operations and today is the most veteran, respected and responsible organizations charged with providing residents with a reinforced sense of security. Shomrim works closely with members of the New York City Police Department and other branches of law enforcement as well as emergency rescue personal and many of our volunteers have received training by the NYPD, New York City’s Office of Emergency Management and the Department of Homeland Security.
If you start to run searches on Showrim groups you will find articles on blogs about how they may push people around and a couple of “mainstream” articles on abuses but that is not what should be focused on. Sure, these kinds of things will happen. But they’re not libertarians. What do they know about the non-aggression principle? Of course, you would want to tailor any group formed to the non-aggression principle.
Each Shomrim group maintains its own dispatcher and 24-hour hotline, whose number is known throughout the Orthodox Jewish community. Shomrim responds to a wide variety of crimes and cases, including reports of purse snatching, vandalism, car and bicycle thefts, and missing persons. Volunteers patrol the city streets in the wee hours of the morning as a deterrent presence. When they are not on duty, they remain on call, and are often summoned to help other Shomrim groups or other Jewish community rescue organizations such as Hatzalah and Chaverim during large-scale search and rescue operations.
Shomrim has been effective in apprehending suspects of burglaries, robberies, assault, car thefts, vandalism, domestic violence, nuisance crimes, and antisemitic attacks. In an incident in 2010, four Brooklyn South Shomrim volunteers gave chase to a suspected child predator who drew a gun and shot each of them after they had tackled him to the ground. The shooter was later acquitted of all charges except possessing a gun. Following that incident, the Brooklyn South Shomrim were issued bullet-proof vests by the New York State Senate.
Shomrim volunteers have occasionally been criticized for using excessive force with suspects, particularly non-Jews. In 1996, a Crown Heights Shomrim volunteer was convicted of assault charges after repeatedly hitting a suspect on the head with a walkie-talkie after the man had been subdued. In 2010 a Baltimore Shomrim volunteer was arrested for allegedly striking a black teenager. He was suspended pending internal investigation, with Shomrim confident that he would be vindicated in court, and was sentenced to three years of probation in 2012. In 2011, two Monsey Shomrim volunteers were charged with misdemeanors in a fracas that erupted after a girl hit a passing van with a water balloon.
Shomrim volunteers, who are unpaid, are mostly members of the Haredi Jewish communities that they serve; however, around 70 percent of the victims they help are not from the Orthodox Jewish community, usually just local residents from any race or religion. In Brooklyn, Shomrim members, according to their coordinator, are fingerprinted and checked for a criminal record before being allowed to join the patrol.
Shomrim volunteers – who range from a few dozen to over 100, depending on the group – work on foot or in cars. Generally, members work two to a vehicle that is equipped with a radio and a siren. However, the UK divisions of Shomrim do not have audible or visual warning equipment (blues-and-twos) fitted in their vehicles. Some Brooklyn patrols have marked cars which resemble New York City Police Department (NYPD) vehicles, but most use their own unmarked cars. The patrols may also carry walkie-talkies. They wear identifying jackets and yarmulkes on the job.
The volunteers, says a coordinator, do not carry guns, batons, pepper spray, or handcuffs, and do not have the authority to make arrests. However, they are trained in how to safely track and detain suspects until police arrive, otherwise known as citizen’s arrest. They have been known to quickly mobilize area residents to block off streets in order to stop suspects.
Their funding comes from donations mostly, although some have been able to get tax-payer money as, especially in their local communities, they are a large voting bloc. A libertarian-type order would, of course, reject this.
These groups are known to prevent crime and actually solve a few, including missing persons cases.
Two examples have been presented to show how to drastically reduce the footprint of government police in any neighborhood. When thinking about publicly-funded law enforcement, it is important to remember a few points:
1. They are not protectors; they are there to record history and help prosecutors punish “criminals.” James Duane’s book, “You Have the Right to Remain Innocent,” is required reading.
2. They are hammers and all they see is a nail. Between shooting unarmed people and executing animals, wouldn’t you rather trust someone you know or are paying directly?
3. In the case of Detroit Threat Management, think of it as a business opportunity. Of course, as in all “free market” endeavors, you will only succeed if you do the job.
Governments, and members of their citizenry who were “just following orders,” killed more than 200 million people last century. It’s time for a better way, a more direct way, a way that if people see it working will seek to choose it over the status quo. It’s time to cast away monopolies who don’t care if the job is done well or efficiently. They certainly don’t care about you or your loved ones.
Anyone who pays attention to cases involving police shootings, especially those that result in a fatality, has noticed that the narrative we first hear coming from the press soon changes. It is no different in the case of Atatiana Jefferson, who was gunned down through a closed window in her home on October 12, after a neighbor called police to report that her front door was ajar at 2AM. Fort Worth police showed up for a “wellness check.” They didn’t bother knocking, instead deciding to pull their guns and lurk around the outside of the house with high-lumen flashlights. Officer Aaron Dean and his partner opened a gate to the backyard, entered, and noticed a silhouette in the window that turned out to be Jefferson. He never identified himself as a police officer, yelled “show me your hands,” and a split second later fired the fatal shot.
On Monday, 10/14/19, the Fort Worth PD announced that Dean had resigned from the police forcebefore they could terminate his employment. The same day the report came that FWPD had filed murder charges against Dean. He was arrested, and soon after made the $200,000 bond.
When the arrest warrant affidavit was released to the public, it was alleged that Jefferson’s un-named 8-year-old nephew, who was playing video games with her, claimed that Atatiana had noticed people lurking outside, picked up her gun and pointed it at the window. Granted, until an investigation is done, facts such as these are not expected to come out (not that it exonerates the officer). On Thursday, the 17th, the narrative surrounding the initial call to police was changed from that of a “wellness check,” to one of a “potential burglary.” Once again, anyone who has examined cases as such recognizes that this is often done in officer-involved shootings.
The subject here should not be what the original intent of the call to law enforcement was made for, but whether a “mundane” has a right to protect their home from a “protected class member,” especially one who failed to identify himself as such. That there are people willing to defend the actions of officer Dean should come as no surprise. But is there a precedent for defending your home from officers who do not announce themselves?
On February 19, 2015, a Corpus Christi SWAT team led a “no-knock warrant” assault on the home of Ray Rosas. They had a search warrant and were looking to arrest his nephew, Santiago Garcia, who they suspected of selling drugs. Garcia was not in the home at the time. One would think that simple surveillance of the property could’ve informed police of this. Or they could’ve knocked and asked if he was in the dwelling. But no, Rosas suffered the typical, cowboy-type SWAT raid that police, on average do 50,000 times a year. When you compare that to 800 per annum in the 1980s, one should ask, why?
The team threw a flash-bang grenade into the bedroom of the Rosas home, which was followed by three cops entering without announcing that they were, in fact, law enforcement.
Rosas, whose home had been shot at in the past during drive-by shootings, believed he was being robbed, so he pulled out his gun and fired 15 times, striking three officers, all of whom survived the shooting.
Rosas was arrested on attempted capital murder which, if convicted, carried a sentence of life in prison. During the trial, those charges were reduced to three counts of aggravated assault on a “public official.” Prosecutors argued that he should’ve known they were police because he had a surveillance camera outside his home.
But Rosas had always maintained he did not know they were cops, telling cops as he was being arrested that he did not know they were cops. He also told jailers the same thing that night as they were booking him.
The surveillance camera footage that allegedly captured the raid, was never released to the public.
How the case of Ray Rosas relates to the shooting death by law enforcement of Atatiana Jefferson should be clear. In Rosas’ case, the police never announced who they were, threw an explosive device into his bedroom, and trespassed into his home. A Texas jury decided that the testimony of police was contradictory, and that Ray was defending his castle from what he thought were criminals.
In Ft. Worth, the police officers never announced who they were and prowled around the outside of Jefferson’s home with flashlights, entering her fenced-in backyard. At 2AM, it is not unreasonable to believe that anyone who owns a firearm would’ve done the same. Many on social media have proclaimed they would have done the exact thing that Atatiana did. Yet, there are those who seek to make the inane argument that if Dean is held responsible for this murder, “Who Would Ever be a Cop?” That is a great question ignoring the shooting.
Using the precedent of the Rosas case, the conviction of Aaron Dean looks to be a slam dunk, although they differ in that the aggressor was unharmed and the peaceful inhabitant was slaughtered. The defense will no doubt rely on the Graham vs. Connordecision. Taking that into consideration, the prosecutor is now the one looking down the barrel.
If the people heeded the words of certain founders, had an unquenchable thirst for liberty and were not lost in their comfort and seeming security, the headlines in regard to the shooting by a local tax-feeding-jackboot of a 28-year-old woman through the window of her home, would be the same as above. That individuals have not recognized they are hostages in a free-range prison can only be credited to tradition, and a 15,000-hour education by the same people who distribute the salaries to said hostage takers.
Ft. Worth Texas resident, Atatiana Jefferson, was home on 10/12/19 at 2am, when a friend noticed that her front door was slightly open. The neighbor decided to call local police for what is called a “wellness check.” This is normally reserved for a relative to request if they know their family member is in-firmed or mentally unstable. The police are supposed to show up to check on the person but it often turns into a situation where the respondents “fear for their lives” and put down those they are there to check on. Ms. Jefferson was playing video games with her 8-year-old nephew at the time of the non-emergency call to the police (Yes, she had an 8-year-old up at 2AM. Does that somehow excuse the death sentence?).
Police officers arrived, and instead of knocking on the door and asking the resident if she was OK, walked the perimeter of the house at which time one noticed someone inside standing near a window. One officer shouted for Atatiana to put her hands up and immediately opened fire through the screened window striking Ms. Jefferson. She died at the scene. The police officer never identified himself as such, for all Ms. Jefferson knew, he was a trespasser, and she would’ve had every right to shoot him.
Rules of Engagement
Ask any American soldier who has been deployed to a war zone what the rules of engagement they have to follow are, and you will understand how “off the rails” domestic law enforcement is. If they are in a foreign land and see someone with a rifle, they are not allowed to open fire, or engage, unless that weapon’s muzzle is pointed at them. Contrast that with this story and what do you see? What about the Botham Jean shooting? A cop trespasses into a man’s apartment and kills him and police say to hold her responsible is a “war on cops?”
Does it need to be repeated? If you are doing a job where you are so scared of people who aren’t wearing the same uniform as you, go flip burgers. Even better, go work in a warehouse where you don’t have to be triggered by interactions with the general public. It’s a lot to ask those living off of other people’s labor to try their hand at the free market but hey, you have to stop living off other people some time, right? Isn’t that what your parents said when they kicked you out of the house?
Face it, they don’t exist. These officers didn’t have to receive a call to trespass upon “private property.” If they were driving by and noticed the door open, they could’ve taken it upon themselves to encroach upon someone else’s land. People who believe in strict property rights like to bring up that if someone is in their home, or on their property, who they wanted out of there, it’s their decision. No arguments. But if that person is wearing a uniform and a badge, many believe by default, they have a right to enter any dwelling. It’s almost guaranteed they’re fans of the Bill of Rights but are blind to the contradiction of having an expectation of privacy.
“Patriots” who defend murders like this one as a mistake, are almost always cheerleaders of the American Revolution, when the colonists got sick of police being quartered in their homes and harassing them on the streets. But even mention police reform and the “war on cops” trope is hurled at you. Talk about major changes, and you see how far the American spirit has strayed from its radical roots.
There Was a Gun in the House
When you can’t find the evil marijuana, you have to rely on something to get the copsuckers on your side. As was seen in the case of Philando Castile, a lot of them are all for gun ownership as long as it’s the “right people” owning guns. The NRA went silent on Castile and it is yet to be seen what their take on this one will be.
The police are saying that the officers didn’t know there was a firearm in the home until after the shooting. Then why mention it other than to try to paint the victim in a poor light?
Many pro-gun advocates have pointed out that it has been the State’s intention for some time, with help from their allies on the Left, to demonize any gun ownership. Some have commented that an outright ban, or “buy back,” isn’t necessary with the number of states who have decided to enact “Red Flag” laws. This allows them to confiscate guns from one person at a time. In the past week, a Washington state man had his guns confiscated under these laws because he posted a picture on Twitter holding two rifles which he captioned, “One ticket for The Joker, please!” Is this provocative? Yes. Did it warrant confiscation of property under an “Extreme Protection Order?” Only if you believe he’d be stupid enough to announce to the world his intentions. Or, if you are overreaching hoodlums looking to expand State power over the populace.
To sum this up, a 28-year-old woman, “safe” in her own home, playing video games with her 8-year-old nephew, was gunned down by State representatives who trespassed onto her property, “feared for their lives,” and executed her when they shot at a figure through a closed, screened window. To say that could be any one of us is a common refrain, but not hyperbolic in this case. The problem appears to be that very few believe it could be them.
US News On Friday, the Trump administration signaled TikTok would be banned. However, Microsoft is in plans to buy the US version of TikTok. Facebook is set to launch its own version of TikTok. [Link] Trump tweets Homeland Security will not leave Portland until local...
It’s amazing how many humans believe that they are so much more evolved than animals. We look upon traps that are laid for seemingly intelligent creatures and shake our heads at how they can fall for them. When will they learn?! These are the same people that fall...
People on the big-government left who are distraught over the condition of black lives in America are logically committed to opposing the police and teachers unions -- whether or not they realize it. That is because the first indispensable steps in the direction of...
The Silk road served as the first proof of concept for Bitcoin and consequently cryptocurrency and one author (Brian Iha) in his book said, "that was why Ross was the second most important figure in Bitcoin history after Satoshi." See the documentary for free here...
Lew Rockwell started off his book "The Left, the Right and the State" with the quotation that is the title of this blog post. I self-published a book in 2018 (it was written in late 2017), "The Kids Are Not Alright," with the following paragraphs: I’m sorry folks but...
This is the one the FTP covered last week where the cops knew they were going to a bogus noise complaint, they hid out of the way of the peephole after banging on the door in the middle of the night, then when the guy answered the door with a gun in his hand, they...
Branko Marcetic discusses a recent move by the Trump administration that will grant unprecedented powers to the CIA to conduct cyber attacks against foreign countries. This highlights a persistent trend throughout Trump's precedency that has seen him become perhaps...
Scott interviews Greg Mitchell about The Beginning or the End, his new book that tells the story of the making of the 1947 film of the same name. The movie was conceived as an exposé on the horrors of America's use of the nuclear bomb against Japan, partly at the...
Daniel Davis talks about the questionable Russian bounties story that is being used as an excuse to stop President Trump from pulling U.S. troops out of Afghanistan. Never mind the fact that America's intelligence agencies have come out to publicly disavow the story,...
Scott interviews Sheldon Richman about his new book, What Social Animals Owe to Each Other, a collection of essays exploring libertarian political philosophy, particularly as it relates to ancient Greek philosophy and the roots of liberalism. Libertarians sometimes...
55 Minutes Safe For Work Jeff Deist is the president of the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama and former chief of staff to congressman Ron Paul. Jeff was originally contacted by Pete to discuss his recommendation that people should stop using the term "libertarian"...
70 Minutes Safe For Work Tom Woods is a New York Times best-selling author and the host of The Tom Woods Show. Tom agreed to do his first ever "Ask Me Anything" for Pete's supporters. TomWoods.com Tom's Free Books Get Autonomy 19 Skills PDF Download Unloose The Goose...
51 Minutes Safe for Work Spiro Skouras is an Independent Journalist and contributor at ActivistPost.com Spiro joins Pete to talk about the near-future likelihood that a mandatory CV19 vaccine will come to "market". Spiro has written about mandatory vaccination...
70 Minutes Strong Language Jack Spirko is the host of one of the most successful podcasts out there, The Survival Podcast." Jack started investigating CV19 at the beginning of the year relying on his access to experts in various medical fields. Jack comes on the show...
On FPF #527, Will Porter returns to the show to explain why it doesn't matter to Boeing CEO who wins in November. Will and Kyle how the US will continue to wage wars throughout the world and spend hundreds of billions of tax dollars on unnecessary weapons and wars....
On FPF #525, I discuss Trump's decision to withdraw 12,000 troops from Germany. Washington hawks dusted off the worn-out Russiagate narrative to try to drum up fear that Trump was sacrificing the country's security to his master Putin. Trump's move is minor as the US...
On FPF #524, I discuss Trump's announcement to make retired Col. Douglas Macgregor the US Ambassador to Germany. Macgregor has been a long time advocate for foreign policy restraint. His name has been floated for prominent positions in the administration for years....
On FPF #523, Will Porter returns to the show to discuss the deteriorating relationship with China. Last week, the US forced China out of a consulate in Houston. China responded by evicting the US from a consulate in China. The breakdown in the relationship between the...
https://youtu.be/cABLDPeCY-g The belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self-contradictory; it is contrary to civilization and morality, and constitutes the most dangerous, destructive superstition that has ever existed....
https://youtu.be/obPbgtdqTDI Businesses are always eager for consumers to buy their product or service. On the free market, the consumer is king or queen and the “providers” are always trying to make profits and gain customers by serving them well. But when government...
https://youtu.be/ZJ2bDLSjjME ... it is a man’s right to do whatever he wishes with his person; it is his right not to be molested or interfered with by violence from exercising that right. But what may be the moral or immoral ways of exercising that right is a...
Tommy is joined by Sheldon Richman, Executive Editor and Co-Founder at The Libertarian Institute. They discuss Sheldon's newest book, What Social Animals Owe To Each Other, as well as why libertarians should abandon the term Capitalism for Freed Markets....
Tommy gives his opinion on the Portland incident before diving into the differences between Fascism, Socialism, and Progressivism. Though America displays many tenets of Fascism and Socialism it is neither. But there are those actively trying to change that....
What is QAnon? Who is Q? Tommy spent this last week stuck in a Q-hole attempting to gain insight on the phenomenon that is Q. What he discovered entertained, surprised, and intrigued him. There's no way to discover every angle of Q in a week, but Tommy wanted to avoid...
Tommy dives into the Ghislaine Maxwell arrest. He discusses Jeffrey Epstein's influence on Ghislaine, her friend's interview, obvious disinformation, and are the dominoes about to fall? Will she name names? Who's going down with her?...