Every one of our thirteen original colonies formulated a system of laws, administered by an executive magistrate, and enforced by his subordinates, sheriffs and constables.
Right. No standing army of police, nor yet a police state such as we have today.
Any of the Founding would have back-handed you for your presumption.
You didn't have the grace to admit that your statement was wrong. Instead, you did two things:
(1) You tried to make this personal and nasty by saying:
LOL! Somebody from the slave state of Delaware presumes to lecture a free American about his precious little Police State.
From which I suppose you wish the reader to infer that: (a) I am presumptuous; (b) my method of correcting you is pedantic, supercilious; (c) my relationship with the state I live in is idolatrous; (d) the State of Delaware is not of equal status in value and influence of any other state of the Union; and (e) the police govern the state and its inhabitants, rather than vice versa.
This stab at misdirecting the reader's attention from your flawed statement is utterly without argumentative value.
(2) Then you try to shift the grounds of the issue from "the" to "now":
Right. No standing army of police, nor yet a police state such as we have today.
The point is (a) without virtue in supporting your claim that at the beginning, our Republic had no police as officers of the law, written into each state's Constitution (also having been in existence from the foundation of each colony, having been copied from English common law from before 1066 AD), and (b) this particular issue is about then, not now, and in this you are wrong again.
(3) Then you proceed to bluster, implying that you are speaking on behalf of our illustrious forbears:
Any of the Founding would have back-handed you for your presumption.
. . . when in fact your argument is ripped to pieces by their drawn swords of established law and logic. Our Founders were firmly in support of obedience to law, wrote the Declaration of Independence as a response to misapplied authority, and wrote their own Constitutions (Federal and State) to express what the law was to be. In each one, the measures of enforcement and officers for it were instituted.
You know, if your responses were not bound by ego, you could exercise true freedom from falsehood and simply admit, "In this case you were right, and I was wrong."
On the walls at Langley: "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Jn. 8:32)
Do you want to be free indeed? Then don't come to Delaware and insult the cops doing their duty if you decide not to obey the laws.
(BTW, I see that you got my Delaware domiciliary state from the FR personal pages. Are you too ashamed of your police state to list it?)