LouderVol
Extra and Terrestrial
- Joined
- May 19, 2014
- Messages
- 58,855
- Likes
- 59,687
I can agree, to an extent, with what you are saying but maybe not to the degree you think.I think we as a society place way too much emphasis on the thought that police are there to protect our rights, when in fact their true nature is to be the army of the elite who are responsible for passing laws that are meant to keep the people in line and in their respective income and social brackets.
As far as where the line of thinking ends, I think that once the cops prove they're capable of being held accountable for their actions, just like everyone else, then this line of thinking will end.
I think where the cops are now, at least leadership wise, is pretty close to how you think. But I dont think jumping to nothing is a net improvement for society. I think if we got rid of party loyalty and could judge the individuals in charge based solely on their individual merit, we could clean up a lot of this. Or at least ensure we had a constantly rotating number of the corrupt instead of the same ones for 40+ years.
I think the actual role of the cops should be closer to a "Mayberry" rather than a "Venezuela". And even though we are closer to Venezuella than Mayberry doesnt mean scrap the system.
The destruction we are seeing by our own, citizen, hands is at least on par with what the cops are doing. So we cant trust ourselves. And it isnt any better that John Doe is denying my rights vs Sgt. John Doe. Especially in a system where I dont have any recourse except for personal violence to stop John Doe.
That interaction from the cops works both ways, or should. You cant just remove that link.
