5 thoughts on “Losing Our Liberty”

  1. The US needs (probably) one federal law enforcement agency. And the sworn law enforcement agents of that one agency should be the only federal agents given the power of arrest, or authorization to carry weapons.

    Too often it seems that agencies purchase high-end weaponry, including crew-served automatic weapons, as something of a ‘gun club’ for the senior staff. Why does the Department of Education (for example) require a SWAT Team? Why does the Postal Service require armed agents?

    This agency (for argument, lets call them the US Marshals Service) can be trained and equipped to a uniform standard. They should be responsible for serving federal warrants, and for apprehending federal criminal suspects. If they don’t have the time, or inclination, to serve or arrest in a particular instance, well then – it doesn’t happen.

    Likewise, the concept of ‘immunity’ for these (and all) federal employees needs to be done away with.

    The FBI, the DEA, ATFE, have all demonstrated incompetence and a willingness to violate the Constitutional rights of the citizens.

    That needs to end. Soon

    1. I used to think “Defund the Police” was about taking guns from citizens and the police, such as was done in the UK.

      Now I fear “Defund the Police” is about establishing one federal police force over all. Power corrupts regardless of level of power. I think sometimes what saves us from the corrupt is a distributed system that both curbs power and sometimes has opposing goals as well common ones.

      Otherwise completely agree with the above from Doc. And we have too many federal agencies with law enforcement power. DeptEd shouldn’t even exist.

      1. Recent history has shown that Democrats love law enforcement when it is used against their political enemies. The capitol police got huge funding increases. The NSA and DOJ are showered in money and extrajudicial powers. The Democrats don’t want to defund the police, they want to defang the police when dealing with Democrats and add a couple extra rows of teeth when dealing with Democrat’s enemies.

        Local control of law enforcement does hinder efforts to subvert and take over law enforcement in cities, so it does make sense that they would push for federalization of law enforcement. Then they only have to control congress, or the DOJ through unelected partisan career civil servants, and not win elections in 50 states and countless cities.

        However, they have a multipronged pronged approach. The goal is to control the police and there are many routes to achieve this. One of them is to chase out the good cops and replace them with Democrat party cops, just like they are installing AGs that operate on Democrat party orders rather than the law. They are also passing laws locally that limit cops ability to respond to crimes committed by Democrat interest groups while at the same time require cops to go after Democrat’s enemies.

        Federalization would allow them to abuse the populace in cities and states not controlled by Democrats but until then, they work toward that goal of turning law enforcement into Democrat enforcers in the cities and states they do control.

  2. One of the underpinnings of our Republic is that the government is delegated its powers (it has no rights, only powers) by the consent of the governed.

    It is time to announce that the governed have revoked our consent.

    1. I think that announcement is being made by the governed with Pelosi’s star chamber hearings. If you don’t like the announcement, she’ll be happy to send you off to federal prison too.

Comments are closed.