John Stossel And Dog The Bounty Hunter Make The Case For Privatizing Law Enforcement

Yale: that is why you couldn't pay me to live in a metro again!

However, outside of the artificially created prey zones (metros/innercities) you will find more people less tolerant of the admittedly dangerous situations you describe. Neighborhood watchs have helped to 'take back the night' in a lot of areas and as more and more people start carrying, these watches will become more and more effective.

Slofiveoh: You hit the nail on the head once again: responsibility for one's actions has been so undermined and replaced with brainwashing that the police are the answer to all problems that our society is litterally held hostage in their own homes after dark and sometimes/some places 24/7.

Now, I do not say that folks should be the 'neighborhood watch dog,' but you will find that in smaller towns and more rural areas, folks look out after each other. My 70+ neighbors cannot go out at zero-dark-thirty to check their property, but my guard dog that starts barking because he heard something over on their property gets me out to do a quick looksee. And, now that the other neighbor (at the other end of the block) has FINALLY gotten his new dog trained, we have both ends of both blocks under guard LOL

Still, how many of you can say that you can leave your doors unlocked at night, even open all night long without fear of someone invading? I can. But I am still armed or gun on nightstand 24/7.

Brass Magnet said:

I wrote"MORE people who actually care." Please don't misquote me.

Click to expand...

Sorry about that...I should have included "more."

ManInBlack said:

And this is exactly why people like you accept tyranny.

I don't know who you hang out with, but if "law enforcement" went away tomorrow, 99.99% of the people I know would behave in exactly the same manner as they do now, with the possible exception of driving maybe 4-5 mph faster. The whole notion that, if not for thin blue line of "law enforcement," the barbarians would break through the city gates and society would descend into chaos is purely an illusion foisted upon us by the government caste, statists, and degenerates like Thomas Hobbes.

EDIT: I hasten to add that the .01% that are criminals would also continue to behave in the same fashion, but that is why I carry a gun.

Click to expand...

Well, since it is 99.99% then I stand corrected

You are associating LEO's with tyranny. While there can be a police or military complex that is tyrannical, I would say that the LEO issue is not tyrannical.

You should also research criminal activity in the United States of America. I say this because there are millions of individuals incarcerated at this moment, and that accounts for more than a mere .01%. You're being a bit dramatic.

ccwinstructor said:

LEOs are a relatively new phenomena, about 160 years old or so.

Before that, enforcement depended on citizen militias/posses formed by a sheriff, or by the Army.

Click to expand...

First, 'relative' to what? The moon? The Constitution? AK-47's?

slowfiveoh said:

All these things add to the mentality pervading modern society, mostly fuelled by the proponents of "law and order". The mentality that offloading our personal responsibilities to an external entity are appropriate, and/or right. The dismal belief that whilst one gets their belongings damaged, their faces beat in, their children murdered, or their wife raped, that one should...

Click to expand...

Slow, another rant about this 'thing' called "personal responsibility." Slow is arguing that it's the fault of everyone else, while at the same time ranting about personal responsibility, interesting.

sudden valley gunner said:

[snip]

Notice though she doesn't talk about violence its "social order", socialism and positivist view points have to have a violent unit to override our innate natural desire for liberty.

Click to expand...

You really should clarify your response.

This purported "natural desire for liberty" can result in the utilization of violence. The means is violence. The end is Liberty (whatever Liberty might mean in the particular individual or social context). I should mention that you are merely asserting that Liberty is a Natural Desire of human, sorry, an "innate natural desire."

Beretta92FSLady said:

First, 'relative' to what? The moon? The Constitution? AK-47's?

Click to expand...

Relative to civilization.

Beretta92FSLady said:

Well, since it is 99.99% then I stand corrected

You are associating LEO's with tyranny. While there can be a police or military complex that is tyrannical, I would say that the LEO issue is not tyrannical.

You should also research criminal activity in the United States of America. I say this because there are millions of individuals incarcerated at this moment, and that accounts for more than a mere .01%. You're being a bit dramatic.

Click to expand...

Not so terribly dramatic as such figures go - think he was just using artistic license, not quoting/citing precisely.

One in every 99.1 adults is behind bars - we can safely say that 1% of the population is incarcerated.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/28cnd-prison.html

Grapeshot said:

Not so terribly dramatic as such figures go - think he was just using artistic license, not quoting/citing precisely.

One in every 99.1 adults is behind bars - we can safely say that 1% of the population is incarcerated.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/28cnd-prison.html

Click to expand...

Of course, then we get into the difference between crimes and "crimes" - those acts which, while not inherently injurious to life, liberty or property, have been prohibited by 50%+1 of busybodies in a room.

While I was just throwing out a number, I would actually be surprised if I am that far off the mark when it comes to estimating the percentage of the population that commits mala in se acts.

Beretta92FSLady said:

Slow, another rant about this 'thing' called "personal responsibility." Slow is arguing that it's the fault of everyone else, while at the same time ranting about personal responsibility, interesting.

Click to expand...

I guess you need to figure out how to understand the fact that it is the individuals that make up "everyone." So when most of the indivuals refuse to take responsibility for their actions, then you end up with a situation where "everyone" (obviously it isn't everyone, and saying "most people" would be more accurate; but whatever) is at fault for the situation.

Aknazer said:

I guess you need to figure out how to understand the fact that it is the individuals that make up "everyone." So when most of the indivuals refuse to take responsibility for their actions, then you end up with a situation where "everyone" (obviously it isn't everyone, and saying "most people" would be more accurate; but whatever) is at fault for the situation.

Click to expand...

I see. So we are all responsible? I agree.

Beretta92FSLady said:

Slow, another rant about this 'thing' called "personal responsibility." Slow is arguing that it's the fault of everyone else, while at the same time ranting about personal responsibility, interesting.

Click to expand...

Incorrect kiddo.

Slow is arguing that it is every individuals fault for allowing these things to come to pass.


Good God learn to read child.

Beretta92FSLady said:

I see. So we are all responsible? I agree.

Click to expand...

We are all, individually responsible. Yup.

I think this whole time I might have been wrong about where to recommend you get educated. That is to say I assigned you the wrong classes.

You need math classes, badly.


All cumulative results are formed on the basis of the number 1.

As Carl Sagan put it, "The concept of the number one, has an elaborate logical underpinning." So does it as well in society.


Perhaps not so much for your own benefit, but for the benefit of others, I will elaborate.

All social structures are comprised of the lowest common denominator. The factual existence of the number 1. All cumulative results, are the effects of many sentient singularities. The sampling may vary, but only based on the individual standards. That is to say, that the product of an equation, is dependent on the lowest possible integer, since humanity cannot be measured in fractional terms without devaluing of the individual in the face of equality. Such is the correction of wrongdoing via civil rights movements in this country.

Society as it is right now, is comprised of many who are ignorant of their independent nature. This corrupts the sampling. They have been led to believe that others will defend their well-being, so despite the logical fallacy of dependence upon others for protection, they buy into the ideology in the face of their own mortality.

You may talk about "collectivity" until your face turns purple and you die of a rage induced stroke, but your argument is baseless, and meaningless, without conceding to the number 1.

Beretta92FSLady said:

This! "Accountability" is the issue. I have rarely heard any individual advocating LEO's no longer existing. LEO's are necessary for social order, IMO. What I do hear from individuals, no matter the ideological stance, is that, accountability must be established, and enforced.

Click to expand...

Funny, we had social order for over 100 years in USA before police came along. As always the best way to protect social order is an armed populace. Places with such do not have riots.

Daylen said:

Funny, we had social order for over 100 years in USA before police came along. As always the best way to protect social order is an armed populace. Places with such do not have riots.

Click to expand...

Social order/justice is often a matter of perspective or even selective memory.

Very early on the church provided some of the control and punishment. Some problems were settled with duels; others became family feuds. Then there were Cattlemen's Associations and vigilantes who meted out on the spot justice - not always to the correct person.

Coupling "Might makes Right" with "Dead men tell no tales" was not infrequently how extreme social justice was dispensed. I'm not really interested in returning to those standards.

Daylen said:

Funny, we had social order for over 100 years in USA before police came along. As always the best way to protect social order is an armed populace. Places with such do not have riots.

Click to expand...

I am sure the individuals on the receiving end of the Salem With Hunts (a bit further back than 100 years) would disagree with you. I wonder if you actually believe that we are worse off with a police force than without. Sure, an armed society is just dandy, but a more polite society...I beg to differ.

We have an armed populace, and yes, we do have riots.

Also, I am not sure about the rest of you, but I have ran into, when OC'ing, as well as CC'ing, pricks. More guns does not equal less a$$heads walking around out there.

Slow, let me take a moment to thank you for taking the time to reply to my post. I want ot make it clear that I'm not argueing with you but simply disagree with some of your points based on my 43 years of experiance and world view. If I may, I have a few short moments and can't address everything but do want to touch on a couple of things and return later when I have time to continue our discussion.

slowfiveoh said:

All these things add to the mentality pervading modern society, mostly fuelled by the proponents of "law and order".

Click to expand...

This mentality has been building for nearly 100 years as more social programs were intrduced and more government services offered. I don't see a major cultural shift occuring in the near future. The majority of people are "programmed" to accept it as part of modern life. They pay taxes and expect that certain things will be taken care of by their public employees.

No you call the cops. I certainly do grab my firearm, make sure the wife and children are situated, and investigate personally any possible follishness occuring on my property, endangering the life of my family, and the integrity of my life belongings. I will do this today. I will do this when I'm 90. Its ok. The wifes Mossberg will have the final say should anything happen to me.

Click to expand...

And I respect that but for many people that is not a safe action or option. They default to the paid proffessionals to come out and look around. The guys and gals who are trained with firearms as well as less than lethal alternatives (Tasers, OC spray, etc) and who are wearing kevlar and have backup coming with just a press of the radio mic.

If said girl was aptly armed, she could easily solve this situation herself, and likely in a non-violent manner. When "ex-boyfriends" and other abusive types learn that their preying on the weak will not be tolerated, only then will society change. Not because some dork with a badge showed up after the boyfriend already left to do nothing but file a report so you can report it to your insurance. While this girl submits her claim to the insurance company and prays to god the freshly filed restraining order be abided by, maybe she can say a prayer for the next girl this dirtbag abuses. Its cool though, because the police filed a report for you. Right?

Click to expand...

Or she brings a firearm into the situation resulting in the death or injury of the Ex or herself if he gets control of it. It's a civil situation which has turned criminal. The police can show up, take the report and her insurance can repair the car and nobody dies. If the Ex is still on scene he can be arrested for various laws he broke while acting a fool. It's not cool and a restraining order won't be an invisible force field around her but it is a legal step and should she need to use deadly force, is evidence that she took the steps to protect herself.

Problem completely solved by the presence of a pistol on her hip, and on her person at any and all times. Hell, I gave a dude with no freaking legs a ride to his house after the city bus left him stranded at the local convenience store. He told me, "Sir thanks for the ride, but I am capable of defending myself if need be. I just thought you should know!" I smiled and laughed at the coincidence that I had literally opted to leave the RIA 1911 in its holster back at the house. This was supposed to be a quick smoke run. I of course let him know that this didn't bother me in the slightest, and asked him what he was carrying. Turns out he has a preference for Lugers, and his was a beautiful black matte finish one at that..

So if I had decided to turn into Charles Manson that night, and start serial killing old disabled men, I have no doubt his "equalizer" would have left particulates and matter all over my windshield.

I am also thinking maybe you are unaware that a large percentage of handicapped people do in fact carry? Lot's to be learned there.

Click to expand...

I'm aware that many handicaped people carry firearms but there are plenty who don't and while we may be progun here on this board many people aren't or don't live where they are able to legally carry.

So you forego any idea that maybe a societal change needs to be evoked in the people? That perhaps, responsibility, as a "diminishing" factor as you allude to, should be responded to by allowing government to take control of those "not responsible".

What a tangled web we weave...

Click to expand...

As I mentioned before, I beleive that several factors ahve been shpeing our society for decades and I don't see a significant "societal Change" taking place anytime soon.

More later. So much to discuss, so little time.
To be continued......

All we need now is a half man half machine robocop to help the citizens fight back!

OC for ME said:

....three words....OCP....

Click to expand...

Beretta92FSLady said:

I am sure the individuals on the receiving end of the Salem With Hunts (a bit further back than 100 years) would disagree with you. I wonder if you actually believe that we are worse off with a police force than without. Sure, an armed society is just dandy, but a more polite society...I beg to differ.

Click to expand...

I'm sure people murdered by police would think things have not changed much with police except maybe to get worse; who do you go to when its the government that wants you dead? Yes, I do think we are worse off with police. I'm fine with a sheriff's department, Marshals and militia, but I see no benefit to police. Speeding tickets? Harassement? enforcement of illegal/unconstitutional laws? No thanks. As to Salem wiTch hunts, that was not a problem from a lack of police, that was a problem of JUDGES and law.

We have an armed populace, and yes, we do have riots.

Click to expand...

As a Republic sure, but I've never heard of riots in well armed LOCALITIES. And I don't mean keeping arms as being armed, I mean keeping and BEARING arms. Where have riots happened where there is a well armed populace?

Also, I am not sure about the rest of you, but I have ran into, when OC'ing, as well as CC'ing, pricks. More guns does not equal less a$$heads walking around out there.

Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Though perhaps better manners would be common if we brought back dueling.

Daylen said:

....snip..... perhaps better manners would be common if we brought back dueling.

Click to expand...

Only if you buy into the Hollywood version where the good guy/hero always wins. :uhoh:

Seriously though, even jokingly, this suggests use of deadly force to settle personal grievances or perceived slights - not something to which I could subscribe.

Grapeshot said:

Only if you buy into the Hollywood version where the good guy/hero always wins. :uhoh:

Seriously though, even jokingly, this suggests use of deadly force to settle personal grievances or perceived slights - not something to which I could subscribe.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I also think if dueling were to come back that it would actually be worse than before because of just how easy so many people get offended. I mean hell, just think of the gangsters who if you LOOK at them wrong they want to kill you, and dueling would give them a legal way to do it.