US Policing: The Existential Threat to All Human Liberty in North America by Bill Buppert


I have written about the cop plague in America for years and a number of readers have asked to see all the essays compiled in one place. Alas, I have written so many I can’t keep track of them but if an enterprising reader were to take the time to catalog them, I’d be happy to put them in one place along with the media appearances where this grisly subject is entertained. You’ll find a brief summary of some of them at the end of this essay.

I’d like to make several new observations.

It bears repeating: immoral means do not yield moral ends and don’t hit and don’t steal is a maxim that benefits everyone except the badged thug-scrum class in the US. Terrorism is the use of threatened or actual violence against innocents to achieve political ends. If that ain’t policing in America, I don’t know what is.  Absent violation of the Ten Commandments daily, the practice of terrorism and the liberal application of wood shampoos on the slightest pretense, what would cops do? The government will never stop creating malum prohibitum crime; it is its bread and butter in power accrual and revenue aggrandizement.

The apparent revelation that cops are more savage and murderous today than past eras is patently false. The primary difference today is the sheer abundance of video and audio footage that consistently demonstrates not only the barbaric behavior of cops but the national sub-culture of lying, document fabrication and collusion with other government elements in the massive American penal complex for whom cops are the primary entry agent for screening potential inmates or corpses. I find the tactic innovative and revealing of releasing the video footage after the official reports are filed by the cops. How do you know a coproach is lying? His mandibles are moving. A two for one in that you prove both the deceit and the malice in one fell swoop.

Since 1972 and the coincident increase in the size and reach of the Federal government in concert with the Drug War, the police state started to metastasize into the cancer it is today. The increasingly militant foreign policy planet-wide after the fall of the USSR in 1989-1991 started to transition the American policing institutions from the petty savagery of localized thuggery to the more sophisticated militarization that has permeated copdom since then. This has been enhanced by Pentagon “leasing” arrangements of military equipment to unleash on the tax Helots, much of it unaccounted for.

The emergence of the Malum Prohibitum State married the coercive monopoly of the Federal government to all its satraps in the 19,000 government-policing jurisdictions throughout the United States. Some worthies of late have expressed fear at the emerging calls for a federalization of all police forces in America. Too little and too late, they are de facto and de jure Federalized since that Drug War inauguration in 1972 but I would date the beginning of this Federal takeover of law enforcement to the adoption of the Volstead Act in 1919. When this is combined with the absurd Palmer Raids and vicious Wilsonian American Protective League, you have the recipe for the unlimited functionality and bleating of every state – national security apparatchik for more laws and powers confined to the Only Ones. This hue and cry gives carte blanche to any government to crush every aspect of individual liberty for the protection of the herd. Thus the new charter of the FBI has become just that.

Street police thuggery is the tip of the iceberg of the barbarous Federal system presently behaving like an occupation force on American soil in every nook and cranny. The two additional components is the rigged and fixed infusion system and gate-keeping in the “justice” system that nominates future inmates for probation, cages and parole; if you think the thousands of civilians murdered by uniformed armed government employees is tragic, it is a mere fraction of the maiming and killing that goes on in the gulag system across the country (and black sites planet-wide for non-Americans caught in the national security dragnet). Both of these components, the “legal system” vetting candidates for cages or extermination and the actual prison system will be a mother lode for future historians to mine and excavate the actual internal workings of these vast gulag complexes because you will not get a true reading of what goes on there now. There is a reason the California prison guards are such an influential political arbiter as a union.

Keep in mind that unions in the government are a wretched cocktail of underemployed state employees matched to a creed of socialism and entitlement that would put a smile on any communist agitator’s face. Apart from war, a legal system is the most lucrative business for government to control. It not only acts as a strong-arming organization for all facets of zoo-keeping the tax Helots across the Fetid Plain for the mountains of revenue lifted at gunpoint from the pockets of Americans; it creates the mass incarceration system that dwarfs the Soviet system at its peak, fills it to capacity and uses this as a primary means to life even more revenue from the citizens toiling to pay for housing all the malum prohibitum violators. More than 85 percent of all inmates in the Federal system are caged for non-violent crimes.

Want to see the system at its entry point without going to jail (yet)? Then spend a day or week watching the proceedings at your local courthouse. You will be aghast and ashamed of the behavior of the ingrates from the overweight bailiffs to the perfumed robed government employees who lord over the proceedings deciding the fates of dozens and ruining the lives of entire families for mostly manufactured offenses with no victim but the state.

And let’s remember; besides the immoral defense that they are simply obeying orders is sufficient they get special treatment in the “legal system” that is preferential to their sainted position as political enforcers. Examine the literally incredible and morally indefensible legal defense of the attorneys for the deputies who flash banged a baby in a crib in GA. You simply cannot make this stuff up.

In his report, Grigg explains how Baby Bou is the chief plaintiff, and notes the claims made in the Tenth Defense (see page 35) that the injuries and damages “were caused by the deliberate, criminal conduct of plaintiffs.” As the department has failed to specifically denote the parents as the plaintiffs, the defense mounted on behalf of Sheriff Joey and his minions focused squarely on the lead plaintiff, the infant who was nearly murdered in his sleep.
The sleeping infant was engaging in criminal conduct. Enough said. This in a nutshell is the state of American policing today. Keep in mind that adults with post-graduate degrees mounted this defense in a government sponsored star chamber in front of a robed government employee with the utmost seriousness.

So what is to be done?

Never ever talk to the police. Except to verbally invoke your right to silence. Modern cops are not only thuggish but act as concierges for a imprisonment complex that is always seeking new victims.

The day that a road pirate stops a motorist for a rule violation on the side of the road and a dozen cars pull over to film the encounter and this becomes a common occurrence things may improve marginally. The more cameras and video feeds rolling whenever the police are conducing their nefarious activities will go a long way toward breaking the government-education-media complex meme that “law enforcement” is a force for goodness and civilization is the flawed premise it is. As Higgs makes clear in the illustration above, this is patently false as the police across the board excuse all their misbehavior on the morally hazardous position that they are simply following orders. This cannot be said enough, if it were not for police, no political bad actor (aren’t they all?) in history could enforce the totalitarian notions that are at the heart of every political action and motivation.

If you don’t have a 360-degree recording system in your car, you are wrong. You should video record any encounter you have with these official occupation authorities. They do not have your safety or welfare in mind, only their own. They are equipped with special rights and privileges that are state approved that are the equal of a license to kill. You stand a much better chance of being struck by lighting twice and mauled by a great white shark at the same time than being attacked by a foreign borne terrorist but the government approved badged domestic variety is far more lethal to your survival than that.

Stop watching police procedurals on television and at the theater. It is all fiction, disinformation, and deception. These may be the most effective propaganda instruments in the last one hundred years beside the constant drumbeat for idolatry to the parchment that started all this mischief in the first place. As revealed of late and historically if you pay attention, fabrication and deceit and disinformation is the touchstone for making such a gross system of rights violation work. Whether the FBI penchant for lousy forensic science or helping foment domestic terrorism, the system is permeated with bad science as the Innocence Project has proven time and time again for the wrongly convicted. How about the hundreds of thousands of untested rape kits littering evidence rooms at police stations across the country? My, my, we would not want to pursue a real crime when illegal vegetation beckons with a chance to increase revenue and dress like obsess soldiers to nab the “bad guys”. Incentives play a huge role in how people behave.

As a matter of fact, don’t subscribe to any non-streaming media service for your Glass Teat. Throw the satellite and cable intrusion out of your house.

There is enormous mis-, under- and non-reporting of police savaging, beating, maiming and killing of civilians in America. There was a popular meme that described how 400 people a year die at the hands of American police every year since 9/11, more than killed by foreign terrorists on that tragic day. I always knew it was a terrifically low number by thousands. And, of course, the Federal government maintains no database to track these killings. Curious in that the Federal government tracks things minutely that have far less gravity but the absence of such accountability serves the political establishment for whom the cop ultimately work. The police are the pointy end of all politics and they will give it you good and hard. So turn the informer meme championed by your government betters on its head. Don’t become part of the government informant state but proclaim loudly through all media you participate in every time a badged thug maims or kills a citizen locally.

And, of course, the ultimate solution to all this tawdry behavior and mischief is the historical rule and not the exception – secession. DC cannot be fixed by anything less. And DC is the Eye of Mordor when it comes to why American policing looks as ugly and murderous as it is today.

This is not a free country and free speech is not unlimited therefore I cannot propose the drastic and most obvious solution to out of control policing in the United States. A cursory reading of history will reveal exactly what that is.

The following is a brief snapshot of some of my earlier coverage and commentary on what is the greatest threat to liberty of mankind. Most likely it is by no means exhaustive of my writing on the subject.


54 thoughts on “US Policing: The Existential Threat to All Human Liberty in North America by Bill Buppert”

  1. highlanderjuan

    The question that must be asked and answered today is how to dissolve the master/slave plantation system we call government. Government at all levels only supports the elites – it never serves the people. We don’t need leaders – we need freedom – freedom from the Malum Prohibitum laws and the accompanying force and violence used to enforce them. Humans can do much better than they are doing now, but they first need to remove the chains that bind them.

    1. Thoreau showed us the way:

      ‘A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible. If the tax-gatherer, or any other public officer, asks me, as one has done, “But what shall I do?” my answer is, “If you really wish to do anything, resign your office.” When the subject has refused allegiance, and the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is accomplished.’

      1. highlanderjuan

        Brilliant quote, Darren. Thanks. My question was intended to help others focus on solving the right problem, namely thinking about and actually shutting down the plantation.

        I think I have to read some more Thoreau. It’s been a while, and we certainly agree on this topic. 😉

  2. Pingback: Buppert: The Existential Threat to All Human Liberty in North America | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  3. Pingback: US Policing: The Existential Threat to All Human Liberty in North America by Bill Buppert | From the Trenches World Report

  4. Pingback: U.S. Policing: The Existential Threat to All Human Liberty in North America | LibertasIntel

  5. MtTopPatriot

    Our lives, our freedoms, and yes our liberty hinges on the truth, and what we are to do with it, the truth that all involved in denying us our beloved liberty do so because they do not want to be ruled by anything, especially liberty and freedom and the moral imperative which is integral to freemen of liberty.

    The only rule here is there are no rules.

    But there are rulers. In prospective, because rules don’t matter to them, it is anarchy in a blue uniform and a Glock on the pointy end. And if there are no rules, what choice but to defend ones life and liberty by way of not following the rules either?

    I think our society is run by savages in suits with fancy titles. It is a controlled kind of anarchy. They are a clan with no rules but what defines the fluid dynamic advantage of the moment, their influence spans every facet of our society, and its influence is a trickle down cascade. There is ruling clans, administrative clans, clans which rubber stamp the diktat of the ruling clan set forth by the administrative clan, secret clans who are tasked with ferreting out those who are supposed to follow the rules but refuse to comply, and report back to the ruling clan who and where enemies lie, there are clans which perform the fictitious duty of representing the rule followers, sub clans that carry out the intricacies of the con of the representative clan, and at the pointy end the sub clans who employ the necessary extortion force and violence to keep the various rule slave clans subservient and submissive.

    The slave clans are growing restless. The ruling clan is nervous. More force, more violence, less bread and theater, is required to keep the rule slaves enslaved. It is starting to cascade. All of it. Preference for the no rules and not to be ruled.

    One thing which is becoming clearly evident, liberty is something which may be the most powerful thing in human history, dare I say which God created?

    Look at the forces of evil and the immense array of resources devoted to eradicating it employed in doing so. It is now the sole purview of our government, its entire reason for being, invested in denying everything and anything to do with liberty. And it goes further, corporate, religious, and economic forces are arrayed against just our simple liberty. The entire system of the world governments and corporate lickspittles are out to deny us our simple little liberty.

    Think about it. Does it bake your noodle to know the absolute legitimacy of your liberty. That the entire worlds resources are being rallied to deny you your liberty or kill you?

    And still, this leviathan for all its mass, its immensity, has not a shred of gravity of legitimacy.

    And here you sit, on Bill’s blog, trying to grok the nature of it all.

    By just doing so, by just believing, of understanding, of sensing your primal dignity of liberty, you are free.

    Doesn’t that beat all.

  6. I just started reading, but a thought occurred to me that may or may not be addressed. With regards to the racket of police brutality, the “trick” is that, should on of their cronies be caught and actually lose a civil suit, the tax payer, who is also the plaintiff, will pay for the suit and any award given. Granted in some level, the individual may pay from his own, but the bulk of the monetary award, if any will be sources from the public, and no budgetary reduction will be emplaced as a penalty for the brutality.

  7. MtTopPatriot

    Enforcement in “law enforcement” has nothing to do with law.

    Wasn’t it Jefferson who espoused the ideal of the precinct system where families, villages and communities concerned deal with breaches of the peace and trespasses on liberty as a system and jury of peers?

    It would seem to me the very moment the administrative state usurped this solemn and wholly moral appropriate local system of maintaining civil composure, more than any instrument of tyranny, the idea of rule of law and not rule of men was kaput.

    1. Consider what Patrick Henry said arguing against the CONstitution:

      “O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone…Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all? You read of a riot act in a country which is called one of the freest in the world, where a few neighbors cannot assemble without the risk of being shot by a hired soldiery, the engines of despotism. We may see such an act in America.

      “A standing army we shall have, also, to execute the execrable commands of tyranny; and how are you to punish them? Will you order them to be punished? Who shall obey these orders? Will your mace-bearer be a match for a disciplined regiment?”

      Today, the “standing army” that we have to worry about domestically is the huge law enforcement establishment. I’m talking about not only state and local police but also agencies like the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and ad nauseum. Rather than deploy troops on the streets they use law enforcement to control us. While these agencies exist our liberty will always be in danger.

      Patrick Henry was right. Gun owners today can’t stand up to the law enforcement establishment much less the military. People that advocate civilian guns to counter-balance the government’s weapons are engaging in a dangerous fantasy that is rightly ridiculed. In the US since the government can’t disarm us completely they have armed themselves to the hilt. This has a similar effect as disarming us. One only needs look at the militarization of the law enforcement establishment to see this. There is only one answer and that is institutional change shutting down those agencies while building up the private means of defending ourselves. We need to move to a system of private security. There is no need for local police.

      1. “Gun owners today can’t stand up to the law enforcement establishment much less the military.”

        Of course they can. Not only can they, but if they did the whole thing would be over in time for dinner.

        They don’t want to–at least right now–and there’s nothing else to it. Everything else is derivative. They don’t want to because they don’t understand, and they don’t understand because they were taught that they shouldn’t understand. They genuinely believe that their lives are properly in the hands of someone or something else.

        It’s a con job so huge that it’s nearly inconceivable.

        1. Jim, with all due respect you misunderstand the problem. You’re right about the con job but that’s not the major problem. We’re not organized into military units so we can’t stand up to organized police & military ones. Guns owners would be throwing themselves at the govt as individuals or as a mob. The whole point of the 2A is that the govt not have organized bodies of armed men on its payroll. The govt is supposed to have to call up the militia when it needs to use force. The militia being part of the people not the govt. We need to disarm the govt & arm the people. Only when the govt is incapable of oppression will we be safe.

          1. MtTopPatriot

            I’m going to be blunt with you Darren, my liberty, my life, my family, everything which constitutes my happiness is non-negotiable.

            Your sentiment is admirable but it is full of holes. My liberty is all inclusive, just as there is no such thing as little bit of slavery as acceptable, partial liberty is not liberty. You miss the point, it does not matter if there are 10 million government actors with nuclear weapons ready to kill anybody who defies the state or chooses to not comply with them. It is therefore proper and moral by whatever means required to resist tyranny. That there is the whole point. It does not matter if it I am one man or a million, every man is alone or an organized resistance, it is making the choice “I Won’t!” which is the crux of the matter. It is inviolate. That is my choice. It is not contingent on how many guns the state threatens me, my liberty with. If I am a lone resister or I am legion. Don’t you get it? It is resistance, not using our guns, but what those guns in the hands of free men who refuse to comply, which matters.

            Look at it from another angle. Everything is about guns. Who has guns, who doesn’t have guns, who control guns, who is controlled by guns. Who fears who has guns, and who is indomitable who has guns.

            The state can not afford to be controlled by guns, and must if it is to survive its illegitimacy, use guns to control everybody who is not a part of this system of tyranny.

            I was very careful to read what you wrote here. I must comment either your reasoning is either ruled by your fears, or you are baiting me. I’m not sure. But your argument of the futility of resisting because you believe the state is too powerful for successful resistance to take place and therefore is not worth the risk flies in the face of the very reason liberty exists. It is an argument which smacks of statist mindset. It is in my mind and heart totally unacceptable. Of course it is your liberty to do as you choose, but to conflate your thinking with how it fruitless to defy and resist tyranny because it has more guns and is better equipped and organized is itself profoundly futile and fruitless.

            That is not to say peaceful lawful methods of redress of wrongs is not worthy, it very much is worth every effort. We would not be on Bill’s fine blog if it where not so, right?

            The cold hard truth here is it has not worked out too well, from the moment the ink was dry on a certain piece of parchment. And the only thing that document got right was written words which stated the most obvious natural thing where our arms and their use to defend ourselves are a right which has always existed, and is every logic and reason a most proper remedy to tyranny and tyrants. Just as secession and abolishing the state is and living free of such constructs of rule over our lives is natural and wholesome. To negotiate these truths of us with those who deem us unfit to live as we see fit is basically madness. There is no compromising on this.

            Your argument leaves much unconsidered and much to be desired. If for only one reason, it is negotiating with tyrants who do not, will not, and care not to negotiate on your or anybody else’s liberty and freedoms. Case in point is if I am wrong, why are guns, use of force, and threat of violence employed against a society who only wishes to be left alone to pursue its lives in freedom and happiness and has not raised up in arms to begin with?

            How does one negotiate any of that?

            Why should any of that even be negotiable to begin with?

            Please, explain to me how and why? Justify your position here with reason.

            I ask this of you, because the state and its actors armed to the teeth arrayed to use bodily harm and death as a fulcrum to force me to comply or kill me if I resist is not reason, it is a means to enslave me and deny my liberty.

            That is an honest question, my friend.

            I know the answer, but do you?

            1. All I’m trying to do is point out what kind of institutional framework is needed to assure liberty. The bottom line is that power must lie in the people’s hands. I’m building on the ideas in John Trenchard’s 1697 book “An Argument Shewing, that a Standing Army is inconsistent with a Free Government, and absolutely destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy”

              “It’s the misfortune of all countries, that they sometimes lie under an unhappy necessity to defend themselves by arms against the ambition of their governors, and to fight for what is their own; for if a prince will rule us with a rod of iron, and invade our laws and liberties…we…must patiently submit to our bondage, or stand upon our own defense; which if we are enabled to do, we shall never be put upon it…”


              “This subject is so self-evident, that I am almost ashamed to prove it: for if we look through the world, we shall find in no country, liberty and an army stand together; so that to know whether a people are free or slaves, it is necessary only to ask, whether there is an army kept amongst them?”

              You may choose to make a vainglorious stand against tyranny & I’ll say you’re braver than me & had every right to do so. Most won’t go down that road.

              Regardless, before we talk about fighting the govt shouldn’t we talk about not supporting it? If we stop paying taxes it will starve pretty quickly & with less violence. See my comment above quoting Thoreau.

              1. That’s all fine, Darren; civil people seek to be civil. But you’re also saying, “Resistance is futile” and that’s going to put you in the grave just as surely as resistance will. It is THIS recognition that maybe one day will give people the courage to resist…even physically if that’s necessary.

                Just consider if the Colonists had bought your argument, and what history would look like instead.

                Besides…thanks to the 2nd, which is the ONLY thing that really made this country any different than all the others, the claim is false anyway.

                1. I’m really trying to understand your POV. I’m not against resistance I’m against making a vainglorious stand that will only serve the govt’s propaganda machine. “Look how we saved the people from this dangerous, radical gun nut”, said White House spin person B.S. Talker.

                  What about my idea of not financing the govt first? If you’re willing to risk your life fighting them shouldn’t you be willing to risk your assets not paying them? After all, the colonists engaged in tax resistance too before they fought the revolution.

                  See point #7

                  1. The fact of the matter is that no matter how large a standing army might be, whether multiple trained police forces or federally trained troops, the veterans in this country have received the same training, outnumber beforementioned forces nearly 8 to 1 and many have seen recent combat; most however go back 20 years or more. And they’re watching; taking it all in; and they’re waiting. All that is needed is for a crier to sound the alarm and a large percentage will remember that the oath they swore has no expiration date. Factor in civilians who will receive cascaded training from those who already have it and the number only increases. If things become desperate, you will witness an uprising of a magnitude this world has never seen before. THAT is the ultimate purpose of the BoR and USC. And that is why this won’t be a shooting war. It’ll be one of finances and attrition. It’ll be a Great Depression scenario. It’ll come down between the haves and the have nots.

                  2. MtTopPatriot

                    Darren, you are still dancing to the bastards tune. You want to make a point right? You want to understand what is going on here? As long as you or I or anybody reacts to the actions of the state, they have power over you. It is up to each of us to act in our liberty, in doing so the state only has the power of their guns. And if you or I refuse to comply, then they can only force us to do what we allow to be forced upon us.

                    That entails nothing to do with the power of the state, everything to do with the power each of us naturally possess to comply or not comply. It is the highest order of the moral imperative which is vital. Hold that high ground, if a plurality of people refuse to give up this strategic advantage, the illegitimate ground the state holds pits the state at the greatest disadvantage imaginable. If any of us comply, it lends the appearance of legitimacy to the state. They need that compliance like a fish needs water, even if it I forced or coerced, it is subservience, it is the only way the state realm retains the power it projects. Look a government of consent does not require any coercion or force to function, it has no need of it. None. It is the self appointed elitists, from the local dog catcher to the POTUS, who must have compliance, tacit, willingly, or forced, to have power. And playing to the tune, reacting to their diktat through negotiation, the moral high ground of primal God given freedom is relinquished. It is basically surrender.

                    It really boils down to this, because without this dignity of place and worth and unassailable natural rights as a living breathing human, this liberty, you hold nothing. You talk about peaceful lawful means right?

                    Well there it is in beautify glory of your sovereign being. Nothing is more legitimate or of more paramount value than that primal dignity of ones liberty. Could you imagine ten thousand people who say I Won’t! No negotiation or convoluted drama. It just is liberty. Standing one’s ground on this is the crux of true rightful liberty, no matter the odds or forces arrayed against liberty. It is first principles, it is virtue beyond question, it is conviction undeniable, it is indomitable spirit, and will to persevere regardless.

                    It is the most beautiful thing imaginable. From this everything is possible, including our destiny as free men.

              2. MtTopPatriot

                Darren, I think your conflating two things that can not be.

                Being vainglorious has absolutely nothing to do with it.

                Liberty is non-negotiable, by words, or deeds, or anything. That’s it my friend. You can rationalize all you want. My liberty is non negotiable.

                Get it?

                Mental gymnastics is not a prerequisite for my liberty, and it certainly isn’t a matter of a last stand. Liberty, rightful liberty is beginning and end, and middle.

                You can equivocate till the cows come home. Dying for my liberty has nothing to do with my liberty, the state killing me for my liberty has nothing to do with my liberty. Because, I am a free man, dead, I am a free man, fighting for my liberty, I am a free man. Get it through your head, Darren.

                All your arguments, your thoughtful reason to use the methods of redress you advocate, your life, don’t amount to a fart in a mitten if you don’t understand your liberty is non-negotiable.

                You will always be a slave ’til you figure it out. That is when you become a real free man.

                Liberty is the fulcrum upon which we are slaves, or freemen. There are no half-measures in this. It is all or nothing.

                When you grok this, you will understand it isn’t about winning against or losing against armed actors of the state, it is about refusing to comply with any of their crap. Period. That is when you win liberty. They can throw you in a gulag, torture you, threaten you, deny you anything they wish, they can kill you, but they can never make you bend a knee. Only you can do that.

                It is called defiance. Total resistance.

                I Won’t!

                Darren, don’t take offense, none I intended nor given. Take it in the light given. You are behind the curve, but your almost there. We where all behind the curve once.

                I think now, you’re looking for answers. Maybe you don’t know there is an answer, but I’m telling you it’s there, and it will find you if you let it.

                Oh and by the way, I’m not brave, no more than what’s in you probably, but unlike you I have chosen something. Courage is a funny thing. Real courage is being afraid, but going forward regardless, because you choose to. That is being brave. It’s not facing an armed horde of badged thugs out to kill you. It’s the courage of your convictions.

                Think of it this way, consent is something you give. It cannot be taken, it can only be given, tacit or otherwise.


                Consent is powerful stuff. It is what the sonofabitches want. It is what they need. And they fear people will withdraw consent. Because it can only be given. The only alternative is to kill every man woman and child, and dog too, who refuses to consent.

                You’re putting your horse before the cart here.

                Think about it.

                  1. MtTopPatriot

                    My answer to you is you must ask yourself that very question.

                    Are you?

                    You still haven’t figured it out yet.

                    Think of it this way. How I implement my refusal to comply is not what matters, but that I do refuse to comply. You have to choose not to comply before you can implement your acts of resistance. It is a holistic mindset. You begin small, develop habits of thinking so it becomes once again the natural state of mind which has been bred out of us.

                    You’re intelligent, you’re inquisitive, free your mind, Darren. The answer is within you.

                    it begins with each of us. It really does. That is open source rejection of the status quo.

                    It really must and can only begin with each of us.

                    It doesn’t matter the particulars, it is the act itself which makes one free. Acting in liberty is a result of how you think first and employ your reason.

                    Maybe that is corny sounding, but call me provincial please.

                    How can you be free if you don’t think and feel in your heart you are free first?

                    Believe me, it is transformation, it becomes manifest.

                    You grok?

            2. Cumberland Minuteman

              “Just as secession and abolishing the state is and living free of such constructs of rule over our lives is natural and wholesome. To negotiate these truths of us with those who deem us unfit to live as we see fit is basically madness. There is no compromising on this.”


          2. It is up to all of us to defend our piece of ground to the last bullet, to the last breath. Pray that your heart fail you not.the Lord Christ is with you always if you BELIEVE!

          3. Darren, don’t you realize that a good number of gun owners are either combat veterans or hunters or both? What you just said is that gun owners aren’t organized in military units; however, those who are combat vets can easily do that; so can hunters.

            You also omitted determination and/or motivation. People who defend home and kin are extremely motivated/determined, and can win. The Colonists did that against the most powerful empire on Earth in the mid 1770’s; they won, even though it took 8 years to do so. If they had listened or read comments like the one you posted, we’d still be under British rule.

            1. Eileen, You’re standing reality on its head. The colonists won because they were organized into military units. They won precisely because they did things the way I advocate.

              1. “The colonists won because they were organized into military units.”

                Oh. And what, the most powerful empire on the planet wasn’t?

                You’re busy looking at inessentials and that’s why you’re not hearing anything. You’re looking outward for that which will bring liberty to your life. Simply put, that’s the wrong direction. Hear it or don;t; that too is up to you.

            2. MtTopPatriot

              Funny you say that about organized military resistance to King George’s tyranny. Quite a bit of history exists Gen Washington and his Continental army wasn’t the resounding success mainstream history portrays. It was various guerrilla outfits and acts of loosely organized and unorganized insurgency by americans working independently of the Continental army who where very effective in disrupting and wearing down the British army.

      2. Cumberland Minuteman

        ” People that advocate civilian guns to counter-balance the government’s weapons are engaging in a dangerous fantasy that is rightly ridiculed. “

        You may not want to mention the Vietnamese, Iraqis and Afghans that did just that, armed mostly with AKs, for history will surely hand out its own well deserved ridicule.

        1. Once again the insurgents you mention had something we don’t, they were organized into military units. In the US we’re individuals with guns. Even if most wanted to resist we couldn’t deal with the govt’s organization & infrastructure. I wish it were different but I refuse to engage in fantasies to feel empowered.

          1. Sheesh…still at it, eh? Now you’re getting into the absurd, as if those insurgents all went through basic and their leaders through OCS. Y’know, “individuals with guns” can still walk and fight together, and sometimes they do.

            Plus, you’re completely overlooking the numbers…quantity with a quality as they say.

            Y’know I’m not some advocate for armed insurgency…I believe rather more in life than in death. But to put yourself in a position of slave while disregarding that the slaves in fact have more power than their so-called masters…well, that’s a falsity that I just can’t abide. Besides, my interest here isn’t the state of the country or the world; it’s the state of YOU…

            “Further, I’m claiming that if you continue to believe that your freedom rests upon the actions of others, then you will live your entire life not knowing it.”

            1. Insurgents get training. It can be in the field or at a base but no one is effectively going to war without training & organization.

              “OK, so how are you implementing your non-consent? Are you living free from the govt’s tyranny or are you forced to submit to it?”

              Perhaps you’ll answer the question.

              1. Stop distracting. How I do or do not instantiate my freedom has nothing to do with anything…well, except my own life, of course.

                The topic here, at least the one I’ve brought up since my very first comment–you can go look–is why you are trying to persuade people of the futility of standing up for their own freedom. Your thesis is that Americans who wish to live their lives freely–as was the clear intention of the Founders after July 4, 1776–should surrender even the possibility of that happening because they have insufficient “training and organization,” itself a dubious premise.

                The premise is bullshit–as shown by Cumberland Minuteman above–and the conclusion is extraordinary bullshit…that free men and women have no possibility of living freely because the big bad boogeyman is just too powerful.

                You can’t defend the thesis in fact, so the only question that leaves is, “Why is it important to you that others buy into it?”

                Answer it or don’t, but there’s nothing else to discuss.

                1. OK so you’re another one that claims to be free but won’t say how. Stop evading. I’ve never said resistance is futile, what I’m saying is that it has to be done correctly. I’m genuinely curious as to how you guys are free in an unfree world. Do you mean you are actually free of govt coercion in the physical world or do you mean you have freed your minds?

  8. Mission number one: know each and every enemy occupier by name and facial recognition, next is radio frequencies and movement patterns.

  9. Darren, I hope you read MtTopPatriot’s comments carefully, cuz he’s got the ethics of it down pat. It’s not about the Tyranny of the state, except indirectly. It’s about YOU and how you’ll live YOUR life.

    I can’t say it as well as MTP did, but it’s an issue of turning around the focus. You’re trying to figure out a way to make the tyranny go away. But when people start living their own lives for their own benefits, then the tyranny just won’t be there. Tyranny is the OPPOSITE of individuals living their own lives.

    Yes, when you make that choice, there are consequences that go with it…sometimes loss of friends or family, sometimes loss of wealth, and sometimes even the need to resort to lethal defense. Doesn’t matter, because the goal is worth it. You’ve got exactly one life on this Earth—do you really want to live it as a slave?

    If not, the answer is simple…then don’t. Try this maybe…

    1. I get you guys point & think that in many ways we agree. No, I don’t want to live as a slave, but the alternative of defying the govt by myself is worse. Just as I once gave a mugger who pointed a gun at me money I give to the govt for the same reason.

      Liberty isn’t negotiable, I agree. Thing is that the govt isn’t negotiating they’re making demands at gun point. Yes, you can choose to defy them & suffer the consequences, most won’t go down that road. That’s why my focus is on an institutional structure that protects liberty. After all, if you’re going to fight the present institutional structure you’d better have one to replace it in mind or who knows what you’ll get instead.

      1. “That’s why my focus is on an institutional structure that protects liberty.”

        And that’s your error. It’s not that what you’re saying isn’t sensible; it’s that it completely misses the crux of the matter.

        MTP can put it better than me; inspiration was never my strong suit. You’re looking for something outside of yourself–an “institution” you call it–that will somehow defend some concept that’s likewise outside of yourself…”liberty,” you call that.

        Liberty isn’t a concept; the concept “liberty” is that.; The concept refers to something and that something is YOUR life…and yes, you can live it even now. Get that, and everything else will fall into place.

        The point isn’t that individuals therefore shouldn’t work together and create institutions that defend their lives. The point is that in order to do that, they’ve got to understand what the hell they’re defending. Like so many people nowadays, you’re putting the cart before the horse. That’s why the cart never goes anywhere.

        YOU can create Liberty, even in the face of all this madness. And don’t even think of asking me, “How?” Your life isn’t mine to decide, and that’s the whole point. The WHOLE point—that’s what “liberty” MEANS.

        1. Considering that oppression comes from outside of myself it seems like a good place to start.

          BTW, I get liberty based on the Non-Aggression Principle. Since you’re claiming that you’re free I think that asking how is a fair question.

          1. “I get liberty based on the Non-Aggression Principle.”

            You got it backwards, and that’s cuz you’re looking in the wrong direction. And I’m claiming rather more than that I’m free. I’m claiming that you are too.

            Further, I’m claiming that if you continue to believe that your freedom rests upon the actions of others, then you will live your entire life not knowing it.

      2. MtTopPatriot

        Come on Darren, we need to be allies like never before, all of us. You’re treading on the fringe of that resistance is futile thinking again. I’m not saying this to bust your balls friend, it is out of the greatest care born from the passion for liberty, you have to give it up, throw it all away, doubt, fears, free your mind.

        Look at it from another perspective. After 230+ years, it hasn’t worked, so called limited government, the parchment con, it was never intended to work as advertised, that was the whole point. The compact of confederation was working, it was liberty for all.

        After all the history of man and his tyranny after tyranny, at the very absolute least, what is there to loose casting aside the mind numbingly repetitious pattern of doing the same thing over and over again and hoping for different results?

        How can life and liberty be worse under secession than the tyranny we humans keep creating? How has that structured system of administrative rule over our lives worked out so far?

        I know it is a scary leap of faith, you have to take that leap Darren. We have been down that same old path before, care to be deadly frank and consider where it leads? For yourself if for nothing else?

        Anything is possible if you try. But you have to try. There is nothing to loose here, everything to be gained. I think a freaking shitload of people are ready for abolition, they may not know it, but when they see it they will be. In every constitutionalist there is an abolitionist waiting to be let out. Your and their words belie this. That leap of faith hasn’t been jumped yet.

        Hey, we almost made it. The reset is coming, it is a runaway train of tyranny, nothing is going to stop it. We get another serious shot at this thing called liberty, and that has never happened. We get another chance to get it right. To decide our destiny ourselves.

        Re-write the constitution? Or a hybrid version? Who decides this creation and administration. You? Me? Not on our lives friend.

        Re-design what never worked from the moment that ink was indelible on that parchment? How can we as humans give other humans permission to have power over us as individuals, as freemen, and keep that power free of abuse at our suffering and expense? Better yet, how can anyone claim freedom from the state can not work when it has never been lived fully?

        Never permitted because the very ones who stand to lose and not gain by tyranny have committed every conceivable sin and atrocity man is capable of to keep rightful liberty from being created?

        That right there is the tell to beat all tells. If the non stop never ending stream of tyrants and their tyranny do everything within their power to deny such a state of liberty for men and mankind, I say it must be viable, it is doable, if for the only reason, and brother the benefits are endless and limitless, that such a state of human dignity has such legitimacy, and the natural power of right and legitimacy, that it will eclipse all forms of government by the light of supreme legitimacy casting its sanitizing rays upon the evilness the structure of the state embodies for all who care to see.

            1. MtTopPatriot

              Allow me to reframe that, you alluded to the choice of creating a structured government suitable for liberty through standard accepted political norms verses violent means. That is the impression I got from what you wrote.

              1. I didn’t get that myself MTP, but that’s because Darren didn’t get that far. The way I read him was, “Resistance is futile” more or less, or at the very least futile until someone else does something…organization, basically.

                Obviously I’m not against organization and that would indeed be a great thing in this war against tyranny. I just think it misses the focal point of all this, which is one’s own freedom. We’re so accustomed to thinking that our own lives rest on what others do, that even when it comes to Individual Liberty, it seems we can’t get out of that mindset.

                You gotta give ’em credit…they did one helluva job, those assholes.

                1. Hmm…the first thing I posted was Thoreau on not paying taxes. Then I posted about disarming the govt. Not very “standard accepted political norms” if you ask me.

                  To repeat “before we talk about fighting the govt shouldn’t we talk about not supporting it? If we stop paying taxes it will starve pretty quickly & with less violence.” That sounds like resistance, doesn’t it? The fact that I think we should resist nonviolently at least at first doesn’t mean not resisting.

                  1. Darren, I think I’ve made it clear that you don’t have anything wrong…words like “sensible” are the tipoff to that.

                    And yes, you’d have to be nearly crazed to seriously want violent action in preference to non-violent action.

                    My gripes are what I’ve said they are. First was what I directly cited in my very first comment—“Gun owners today can’t stand up to the law enforcement establishment much less the military.”

                    That’s false in the extreme. It would be a cakewalk the other way IF those gun owners decided. Granted they have not.

                    And then, there’s the ethical principle that liberty is about you and your life, not what some group of people decide. I happen to think that’s an essential point in all of this, and I’m quite sure MTP does too.

                    That’s all. It’s not about you; it’s about the principles involved. If you think i’ve got any of them wrong, then I’ll be very grateful if you’d point them out.

                    1. I’ve been observing the conversation from the cheap seats.

                      Buppert’s Law of Military Topography: “A rifleman’s culture with men who know what they are about in mountainous terrain cannot be militarily defeated.”

                      SE and SW Asia are a testament to what light-fighters are capable of doing to first-world armies on contested terrain that does not belong to the invaders.

                      Americans do not have an aggregate will to be free of chains and the “apparent affluence” (a curious amalgam of Ponzi schemes, Stockholm Syndrome and the Milgram/Stanford demonstration) tends to make the serfs more complacent to the bonds, perceived or not.

                      Curious what happens when you turn an economy into a hedge fund married to infinite derivatives. Why do you think the masters want to get rid of cash?

  10. One of the freedom sites posted an article about police killings and cited like three different sources for stats on it.

    I can’t find the link, anyone know what I’m talking about?

    1. Fatal Encounters:

      Killed By Police:

      The Counted:

      Per coproach deaths and you know they will report every last one accurately, look at the numbers for 2015 so far.

      54 total of which 2/3 are related to obesity, health and vehicular accidents. I will be as broad as possible but that still means 20 are line of duty where a pursued human killed them. 20! Out of an estimated million badged thugs in 19,000 departments…

  11. Ralph DeScoville

    It’s an inspiring exchange of views, and I tend to agree with the view that the armed populace holds the upper hand in terms of numbers and tactical advantage, but the mindset…ah, the mindset. Therein lies the rub.

    The point I’d like to make is this: Not paying taxes wouldn’t amount to much – the Federalis (and, by extension, the state and local goons) are funded by the unlimited Federal Reserve, not taxes. The only true function of taxation is control, not finance.

    Now, as a gesture of protest it would send a very strong message and most welcome in my view; just realize it will have negligible impact, at best, in terms of finance.

    Locally, a couple months ago I tried to organize a citizens task force – to shed light on the faces, finances, and operations of local law enforcement and to put a check on the Federalization and (further) militarization. Even got a couple of retired LEO’s signed up – but then, crickets. Since then, there have been three (additional) shooting deaths, in a small rural area, and now? Crickets.

    Nope, until the food stamps, disability and retirement checks stop coming in, nothing’s going to change – at least not for the better- in terms of liberty.

    1. You forget that govts can only go into debt based on their ability to tax. Otherwise how will they pay back that debt? Not paying taxes cuts off the govts ability to borrow.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top