Monday, January 4, 2021

Most police won't support the Constitution - they'll support those who pay them

 

I've worked alongside police in a law enforcement support function (as a prison chaplain).  I number several police officers among my friends (and my comments here certainly don't apply to them).  Nevertheless, painful though it is to say this, I have to admit that many police in this country - certainly in the larger departments - will not take a stand in defense of our constitution and laws.  Instead, they'll take a stand to support those who give them jobs and pay their salaries.  They'll back the status quo rather than what's intrinsically right.

We're seeing this in riot-torn and unrest-plagued cities across the USA right now.  The police are not being allowed by their governing authorities to take action against those responsible for the unrest.  Indeed, in all too many cases, they're acting against those trying to stop the people responsible for the unrest.  They're choosing sides - or, rather, being ordered to take a side - and it's not the side of law and order.  It's the side of political correctness - and ordinary people are taking note.

Michael Yon reports, somewhat cryptically:


The situation is clear.  There is a clear sea change in Oregon -- increasing numbers of people who are avoiding conflict, and those who are joining battle, are turning away from Back the Blue.

I saw this to a more limited extent in D.C., but now in Oregon the pattern is as clear.  Iraq and Afghanistan veterans will see this and know exactly what is going on.  As will Vietnam vets.  Before my time, but they know this story, too.


In a subsequent comment below that report, he adds:



More extreme forces on the right of US politics appear to be openly defying such partisan policing.  A Twitter thread filled with video reports demonstrates how that played out in Portland a few days ago.  Click over there to see and read for yourself.

Herschel Smith points out:


While allowing Antifa/BLM thugs to do whatever they wanted in various places in the U.S., the most worrisome thing for patriots is what the “justice system” would do to them if they fought back.

Here is the chain of command.  Officers report to their chief, and their chief reports to elected officials.  The elected officials determine policy.

LEOs the world-over will work ensure one, single, solitary thing: the continuance of the status quo and their chain of command.  They will obey orders.  They work to ensure continuity of government, not justice.

. . .

We’ve discussed how LEOs aren’t required to protect anyone under rulings in Castle Rock versus Gonzales and Warren versus D.C.  There is no need to rehearse that now.

The point is that even patriot groups are turning on LEOs where Michael is right now.  We are entering a very dangerous time in the history of the republic.

Only an idiot wouldn’t see this.


There's more at the link.

I am emphatically not anti-police (and commenters please take note:  if you try to turn this article and responses to it into an anti-police polemic, I'll delete your posts - that's not what this is about).  Policing is a necessary function in society, provided that it's properly and fairly carried out.  Nevertheless, I have to admit that law and order departments and agencies are typically controlled by the powers that be.  They make sure to pick chiefs of police and senior officers/administrators who will "toe the line" and do as they're told.  Ordinary men and women in uniform may try to be fair and even-handed, and when operating individually, they can often do that;  but as soon as they're called into larger forces and formations, their individual freedom of action goes away.  They have to work with those on either side of them, or take the consequences.

I know several honorable men and women who've resigned or retired from law enforcement positions, rather than enforce what they see as the creeping politicization of police work.  Others are still on the job, doing their best as individuals to uphold the constitution and laws, and turning a blind eye to unconstitutional rules and regulations.  Some, particularly sheriffs and their departments, are going so far as to openly refuse to carry out unconstitutional orders - and full credit to them for doing so.  Nevertheless, the majority of officers I've met will, I think, "go with the flow", and obey the orders of those who issue their paychecks.

That's what the progressive left are counting on when it comes to law and order.  History suggests that the average law enforcement function or agent will "play nice" with the powers that be, enforcing the "new order" when it comes and punishing those who resist it.  To mention just one example, note the number of former Nazi policemen and agents - even of the Gestapo - who joined the East German Stasi after World War II, and immediately became as enthusiastically Communist agents as they had been Nazi bully-boys, enforcers and torturers.  See here for a devastating catalog of Stasi excesses - and compare them to, for example, the recent Homan Square scandal involving Chicago's police department.  Notice any similarities?

I hope and pray it doesn't come to that in this country.  Many Americans will not "knuckle under" and blindly obey, and will resist those who try to make them do so.  That's a recipe for social turmoil and the collapse of law and order - for everyone, not just left- or right-wing - if ever I heard one.

Meanwhile, if you find yourself forced to take action to defend yourself, your loved ones or your home against "politically correct" rioters and unrest, remember that the police may not be on your side, no matter how justifiable your actions may be in terms of a traditional understanding of law and order.  I wrote about this a few months ago, in two articles:



I recommend both of those articles to your attention, if you missed them the first time around.  Under the circumstances discussed above, they may have been prescient.

Peter


20 comments:

The Freeholder said...

I have seen this very thing over the summer here where I live. Police supporting the "peaceful protestors" to the point of kneeling with (for?) them, allowing a number of illegal acts, while strictly enforcing the letter of the law on the counter-protestors.

I know some on this force are good people. I've met them. Unfortunately, most are going to go along to get along. They have bills and kids to feed. I understand that need, but I can't respect those who ignore their oath to do so.

Anonymous said...

I have always thought that when it came down to it, police were not going to follow illegal or unconstitutional orders. I am a big enough man to admit I was wrong, and if it turns out I am, will direct withering fire in whatever direction it is required.

Bobo the Hobo said...

Neither will the Army. You should know this by now.

Unknown said...

Following the orders not to interfere or to back away from a riot is not unconstitutional. If so the LAPD has been doing exactly that since the Rodney King riots. Not writing tickets or arresting people for misdemeanors is not unconstitutional. It maybe tragic and piss poor police work but not a crime when following procedures of their department. Uncle Sam's DOJ is always more interested in arrests than non-arrests when they look for civil rights violations.

I do agree this will chase officers from big city departments to smaller more traditional organizations.

Gerry

rognuald said...

This was first demonstrated in California when police would not protect Americans who went to Trump rallies. It was demonstrated again at Charlottesville, VA when police pushed the legal protesters toward those who had arrived to protest against them.

If you are a person with traditional American values and you live in a Leftist city, you are considered the bad guy. And with that consideration, they will create the far right extremists they've always talked about. And yes, many of those police who won't do their duties to uphold the constitution and protect good folks,have kids and families to feed.

Third Boxcar Midnight Train said...

Here in Seattle in this last election, the people of King County voted (60+ percent) to make the position of King County Sheriff an appointed office rather than an elected one.

The King County Council will henceforth appoint the Sheriff.

The reason given was that making this change would allow the council to appoint the Sheriff from a nationwide pool, rather than restrict it to residents of King County.

In reality, this will ensure that the Sheriff will be someone that can be controlled.

This is the same county that changed the reason for the name King County.
The county was named in 1852 to honor then Vice-President King.
In 1986, the King County Council decided that this wasn't "woke" enough, so the namesake was changed to Martin Luther King.


Charlie said...

I see the police depts, top to bottom, have chosen their side. Sadly it is with their paychecks, pensions and antifa.

They have made their bed, now they may sleep in it.

I will not 'back the blue'.

They have truly become just another gang full of thugs, just in better uniforms. May God have mercy on their souls.

JPD said...

Good lesson for those who have never cracked a history book. This has been the case since Cain bopped Abel with a rock.

In 4000 years of recorded history, law enforcement (whatever form that took) has ALWAYS been a tool of those in power (or in the process of assuming power). My study to discover an exception have been unsuccessful.

I am amused by those who seemed surprised by this.

Eric Wilner said...

Back in the 1990s, when my social group included various retired and part-time cops, I kind of got the impression that it was much easier to get rid of a good cop than a bad one.
The good ones will go elsewhere if you make their lives unpleasant and their jobs unnecessarily difficult (or outright forbid them to do their jobs). The bad ones, well, they don't care what you think, and the union will protect them.

Jimmy the Saint said...

People do what they're paid to do, and far more often than not, money trumps any principles/integrity people have, because people also have bills. While we may silently admire the honest man who beggars himself rather than compromise on principles, the fact remains that he's still beggared himself; hence, it rarely happens.

Think of it this way: most of the killers in the Einsatzgruppen? Prewar police, and for the vast majority who were never prosecuted? Postwar police, too. People took the money.

MrGarabaldi said...

Hey Peter;

In the smaller towns, the police are more responsive to the citizenry, but in the big cities, it is easier to "hide" and of course the policies of the Big cities are conducive for the liberal big government policies and the police will back their political masters because the Chiefs tell them to. It is a lesson there.

dogsledder said...

I have lived in places where the police department is BAD. Bad because their bosses, the city administration encouraged or even forced them to be bad. In other cases, the administration allowed the police to be bad and looked the other way. If you live in one of these places, you are better off to move away. You can't change them. On the other hand, the place where I live NOW, has a very good police department, as MOST places that I have lived do. Here, I have found it easy to get along with the police, as I do not intentionally break the laws with the possible exception of the speed limit. And I am always polite and respectful of the police, since they have a gun and can take you to jail. In case of a tie, THEY win.
Fortunately, where I live is not a riot-prone area. The nearest large city is over one hundred or one hundred fifty miles away, depending on your definition of what is a 'large' city. There is a small city about 70 miles from me. But it is an indirect route from here to there. I think that there is a better chance for civil war than riots. And pity the fool who comes to the sticks looking for trouble.

dogsledder said...

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ynJk8yteXyQ/X_JpG_1TWwI/AAAAAAAAq9s/lGDy7AMQW-gVv1PI2bzcnvJj2L5_CBedQCPcBGAsYHg/s577/Meme%2B-%2Bpick%2Bup%2Byour%2Bbrass.png

Ed Bonderenka said...

I have steered away from an unabashed Back the Blue for this very reason.
My support is qualified.
I've known too many bad apples, though quite a few good ones.

John T. Block said...

We saw this here, in D.C. when Metro PD actually pulled Antifa and BLM BEHIND THEIR LINE, to protect them from the Proud Boys. P.B. got arrested, not the rioters who had been attacking elderly Trump supporters RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE COPS. We are truly in Heinlien's "Crazy Years"...

Paul said...

Any one who works for the government at any level or in any way gets paid my taxes. MY taxes. I am tired of paying for this crap.

Noveske's Rock said...

In my experience police chiefs are appointed while sheriffs are elected. Police departments trend Democrat while sheriff departments trend Republican. Reminder that the sheriff is the senior elected official in a county (above judges, commissioners, etc.) while a police chief is just another city employee serving at the pleasure of their bosses.

kurt9 said...

The police will work to protect their pensions. The problem is that the liberal lefty states that are having all of the problems with Antifa and other riots also have serious budget shortfalls with their pensions. The implications being that those police pensions are already at risk before all of this riot stuff showed up. There is no telling how the cops will fight in this. There may even be cops fighting cops. I suspect a lot of cops will walk off the beat when the chips are up. Others will do minimum work. There will be more bad cops who will shake people down for money.

Chip Anderson said...

There are good policemen out there. While they may know who butters their bread they also know where there authority resides. Many years ago, Louisiana enshrined the right to bear arms but for concealed carry. A pistol in a holster was considered to be concealed. Which is of course bullshit. It is all in how those in power want it to be until they lose power.

Bear Claw Chris Lapp said...

It was said yesterday a patriot told a capital policeman we will no longer haver your back. Doubt he cared much about the statement since the patriot doesn't sign his paycheck.