Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Jesse Jackson and a Detroit CoP:

you'd expect anything else?
Take note of the
It should be noted that a month after this article was published that the Detroit Police Chief in question was suspended for misconduct and retired for having an improper relationship w/ a subordinate (ironically the same reason his predecessor was fired). The subordinate, again note another police officer, made insinuations of suicide during the affair and was made to surrender her service weapon.

These are the people that gun control advocates like Ladd Everitt want to give a monopoly of force.

1 comment:

Luton Ian said...

"We can approach our thesis from another angle. If all men were good and none had criminal tendencies, then there would indeed be no need for a state, as conservatives concede. But if on the other hand all men were evil, then the case for the state is just as shaky, since why should anyone assume that those men who form the government and obtain all the guns and the power to coerce others, should be magically exempt from the badness of all the other persons outside the government?

Tom Paine, a classical libertarian often considered to be naively optimistic about human nature, rebutted the conservative evil-human-nature argument for a strong state as follows: "If all human nature be corrupt, it is needless to strengthen the corruption by establishing a succession of kings, who be they ever so base, are still to be obeyed…" Paine added that "NO man since the fall hath ever been equal to the trust of being given power over all."[11]

And as the libertarian F.A. Harper once wrote:

Still using the same principle that political rulership should be employed to the extent of the evil in man, we would then have a society in which complete political rulership of all the affairs of everybody would be called for.… One man would rule all. But who would serve as the dictator? However he were to be selected and affixed to the political throne, he would surely be a totally evil person, since all men are evil. And this society would then be ruled by a totally evil dictator possessed of total political power. And how, in the name of logic, could anything short of total evil be its consequence? How could it be better than having no political rulership at all in that society?[12]"

Excerpted from "myth 5" from the late Murray Rothbard's essay here;