Posted on 06/23/2020 9:03:27 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
Given increasing incidents of vandalism and violence in our country, it seems prudent that the common people, who have an interest in maintaining the peace and keeping order, exercise the authority to guard and protect lives and property beyond their own homes, and do so in conjunction with higher levels of enforcement.
To that end, I would suggest exploring the possibility of having local sheriffs vet and deputize able citizens, so that they may act in support of law enforcement more tangibly. That is to say, authorize them to stand guard in places where vandals are more inclined to wreak havoc, such as cemeteries and statues, and other public landmarks that trigger the left of late.
They need not be armed with lethal force, but they need be diligent to witness, record, and report as needed. If allowed, some non-lethal deterrents such as sounds (classical music) or pepper spray may also be of help.
I would very much like to see a groundswell when it comes to confronting civil unrest and supporting proper law enforcement. Moreover I am convinced the population of “normals” in our midst is more than adequate to the task.
What do you think? How can we do this? What are the practical implications? Is it even legal?
Armed only. Why be there as unarmed monitor? You’re too likely to become a victim.
Yep.
More and more people aren’t waiting.
The Columbus statues, the Alamo, those folks in Idaho...they ain’t waiting to be deputized.
Good for them.
I’ve become less trusting of the police and sheriff’s because of the powers that be. A well regulated militia is more appealing.
I could see that as an option, but not essential. Most of these yahoos act in the dark when no one is around. The presence of others is less likely to result in action. Myself, I’d love to tag them with a well-aimed pepper ball, but would hope they just go home and stay there.
Local sheriffs may be the best instrument is forming just that thing.
For one thing, cops should stop getting involved in politics and instead drop their badge and tell the politicians to solve their political unwill to solve corruption, crime and terrorism problems. Instead of begging/negotiating for jobs at the ChAZ or for more benefits each time things go out of hand, or for media recognition kneeling like dumba$$es, they should sense the responsibility that the political approach in this need to be fundamentally changed so that they can focus back on being proud of being able to do their job well. The goal of the cop should be to regain his respect and dignity before a token pay or benefits raise as a pacifier by politians who tell them to do something while telling them to not do their job the way they do it because of political repercutions.
We are in a Vietnam situation before crime and the police is in the crossfire. There is need for mutual support between police and willing militia civilians combating crimes and evil foreign politics invading and giving illegal orders to police. China is fully behind antifa as seen in their twitter which since then has been taken down. This is an untenable political solution for a dignified cop to get into.
To be sure, in more populated areas the sheriffs may be corrupt. If they sanction civil unrest they should be removed from office. The whole idea of a Constitutional Republic is civil order.
I’ve always thought a police presence to be predominantly a necessary evil in the event local civil order gets out of hand, so that he may apply proper force to mitigate damage.
“To serve and protect” is their motto, no? Well, “serve” carries a lot of baggage. You are right. They have been saddled with so many duties beyond keeping the peace it is a wonder anyone would sign up.
“Local sheriffs may be the best instrument is forming just that thing.”
We have a great sheriff in our county. Liked and respected. Outside troublemakers would be in big trouble here.
Yes, they are what I like to call hunters of humans which keep an ecosystem of sorts. I thus prefer them to have bagging limits (limited take and ammo depending on the needs of the crime area) and to target dangerous game instead of easy rabbits, but rabbit population (small vehicle infractions for example) needs to be sheared of course now and then. Giving them too much ammo and power turns them into no limit open season specie eradicators and genociders invariably. Irony that those screaming Black Live Matters are specifically calling for a big complex government of many social laws without limits which will surely destroy blacks as a specie eventually.
Of course this should happen.
At my advanced age, I would have no problem holding down a desk.
Should I someday find myself with rebuilt hips and knees, I would never sit behind a desk.
But the short answer is: Yes, and it depends.
There are some environments where law enforcement just isn't the right tool. Case by case. Those are extreme situations: you are not arresting anyone, you are restoring order by the generous application of deadly force. This wisdom is knowing when to use it.
LA Riots: there was no application for law enforcement in Compton for about three days. it required men with rifles and the California Guard provided 6,000 of them. They did not don riot gear because absorbing violence at that stage was wholly inappropriate.
But this would be a bad example in Seattle. A governor that doesn't want to use force and an adversary that wants the President to use it. But what happens when the Sheriff won't either?
Folks, that is the genius of the militia Dr Edwin Vieira speaks of: the Militia of the States, which includes the unorganized militia in 10 USC Sect 246.
But considering that my last day in uniform was almost half a century ago, prudence must take precedence over desire.
Good to know. And believe me, you are not alone.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.