Replies

You have implied...

I implied no such thing. Quit your whining.

My post simply pointed out that it is easy to dismiss abuses when they occur to someone outside of a familiar social circle. But when the same (or similar) abuses hit close to home, ones hackles are easily raised.

The folks in the Fox Valley have just had their first taste of what others have long known.

And what's wrong with my HTML skills?

Would you have rather had me post a color picture?

You quoted a prior poster, dljordan, who stated that the "cops are criminals", etc., following which you show a photograph of a thuggish looking ghetto type, above which you stated, "And some folks wonder how this guy ever came up with the ideas for his raps." It is reasonable to assume that you were equating those who oppose what was out of bounds behavior by a local police department (if the news reports are valid) with those who advocate killing cops.

There is a cadre of FR posters who would defend police agencies even when they bully 80 year old women and place them spread eagle and handcuffed on their own front porch or when they storm an innocent family's home in full ninja gear without knocking, smashing the furnishings, beating up and cursing the residents, and shooting the family dog. These people also accuse anyone who even holds moderate skepticism of the Federal "War on Drugs" as being a drug-addled libertine hippie.

I am no "anything goes" libertarian. I recognize that the maintenance of public order may necessitate the enforcement of certain laws on a state or local level against "victimless crimes." However, laws will never eradicate drug abuse, prostitution, etc., with anything less than a full fledged police state and the suspension of civil liberties. As an example, Mao Tse-Tung ended the century old opium problem in China by imposing a brutal Communist dictatorship. The price of Mao's "cure" was far too steep.

OTOH, I am aware that laws against "victimless crimes" also lead to police corruption. Payoffs to police agencies by brothel owners, gambling house operators, and other purveyors of illegal items have been a fact of life in American cities since the mid 19th Century. Laws and lawmen are imperfect, but both are necessary in an orderly society. However, the reach of the laws and the power of lawmen must be restrained in order to preserve individual liberty and limited government.

(Additionally, my comment regarding your HTML skills was meant to be complimentary. Posting pictures on a Web site is a skill most DUmmies ever achieve. Sorry for the misunderstanding.)