Kids Should Learn to Be Bullies and Kill

Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Posted in category police state
I was on campus at Georgia Tech a few weeks back and they were hosting an Police Explorer “thing”. In other words they had teenagers all dressed up in Police Explorer t-shirts wearing badges, cuffs, guns (fake I assume), and going through some sort of collection of perverse drills. One was where the kid sat in a police car, jumped out, grabbed a gun off a table and fired three times into something laying on the ground. All the while some loser was timing him and charting his progress. I guess the idea was to see just how fast they could kill someone ?!?!?!?!?!? I had to ask myself: what responsible parent would allow they child to participate in such a thing?
I ask: did the children have brush cuts and fake (stuffed) pot bellies?
Be Sociable, Share!
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

22 Responses to Kids Should Learn to Be Bullies and Kill

  1. Todd S. says:

    August 24th, 2010 at 10:34 pm

    “I ask: did the children have brush cuts and fake (stuffed) pot bellies?”

    Priceless. And sad. Why? Because it’s true. I witnessed an accident about a month ago, so I phoned it in as both of the drivers involved were too shellshocked and neither could operate her vehicle any more due to the damage. First, the police took about 10 minutes to get there – despite the fact that the police station was two blocks away. I could literally see it from my position. Second, the cop was almost comical he was so large. Like – I had no idea they made kevlar vests in XXXL. He was 300 if he was 150. And the worst part? He couldn’t have been over 25 years old. Do they even have standards any more?

  2. liberranter says:

    August 25th, 2010 at 1:38 am

    I had to ask myself: what responsible parent would allow they child to participate in such a thing?

    My firsthand observations lead me to believe that most of the “children” who participate in “police explorer” programs come from homes that have little or no meaningful parental influence of any kind. “Police explorer” programs are just another form of street gang and serve the same purpose as any other gang: to provide talentless little losers without purpose in life with a setting in which they can feel like they “belong.” But unlike the Crips, the Bloods, or the Latin Kings, the “Police Explorers” and their infantile, unchecked violence have the sanction of the State, which makes them far more dangerous than any of those other three.

    It used to be that loser thugs were hired right off the street and given a badge, a gun, and a uniform. Now they have a “farm system” in which the “made” guys teach them how to commit REAL crimes and get away with them.

  3. clark says:

    August 25th, 2010 at 2:57 am

    Well,… the world really has changed.

    These kids have to be conditioned to break the mold of what “society” thinks is right and wrong. Nothing outside the state and all that. That-a-ways when they drive the trucks in this video they won’t see anything wrong with doing that too:

  4. clark says:

    August 25th, 2010 at 5:56 am

    Maybe these kids will be operating the new pain weapons they’re testing on prisoners in the U.S. and mounting in airplanes for who-knows-what, eventually (or is that already?) to include discouraging political opposition?

    Or perhaps after these pain compliance beams are mounted on the x-ray trucks they can be both the executive and the judicial branches of government in one van and then we won’t need those pesky courts and judicial processes?

    This shit’s getting crazy and it seems like too many people think this is A-ok.

  5. M. Terry says:

    August 25th, 2010 at 3:03 pm

    When I was in high school, I recall that it was mostly picked-on losers wanted to become police officers.

    One kid who was in my dojo told me he was going to become a cop. (He did.) He told me he wanted to look someone in the eyes and shoot them with a .357 magnum.

    What a twisted piece of work.

  6. liberranter says:

    August 26th, 2010 at 12:35 pm

    He told me he wanted to look someone in the eyes and shoot them with a .357 magnum.

    Odds are that he probably has, one at least one occasion – and gotten away with it.

  7. rtaylortitle says:

    August 26th, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    Could this be a by-product of HAARP?

  8. Anthony Michael says:

    August 27th, 2010 at 1:31 pm

    Karen, you mentioned in previous posts that you were working on developing a new blog/website. Is that still in the works? Any idea on when it will go live?

  9. Karen De Coster says:

    August 27th, 2010 at 11:09 pm

    Anthony – yes, it is in the works! There’s been issues in terms of the best way to incorporate it into my current WordPress arrangement… soon as that is solved, it’ll be up. Definitely soon, since it is starting to get cold, and eventually forcing me indoors to get this thing done.

  10. Alex says:

    August 28th, 2010 at 8:50 am

    “My firsthand observations lead me to believe that most of the ‘children’ who participate in ‘police explorer’ programs come from homes that have little or no meaningful parental influence of any kind.”

    I tend to agree with that sentiment, Liberranter. Many of these kids deep down are seeking structure and validation. Eric Hoffer wrote about this in his classic, “The True Believer,” which is why when you have human beings of all ages, that aren’t self-disciplined, self-motivated, and self-aware, that are easy cognitive pickings for any force that will provide them with that which they think will make them “whole”; be it paramilitary organizations, gangs, (extremist) religious affiliations, etc. There’s a thread that runs through all of these activities, from Hitler and Castro, to Jim Jones and welfare state-promoting left- and right-wing intellectuals and politicians.

    Thanks to almost fifty years of Great Society influence, we have many sad minds in many sad bodies in our country that are looking to make up, in their heads and souls, the deficit left by bad parenting. That’s why Robert DeNiro’s character was the way he was in the movie, “Taxi Driver.” The hole in his soul could have been filled by any violent action. It turned out that his violence made him a “hero” to the welfare state and police, but earlier in the film another killing could just as well made him a “villain.” Like many of these young people, he was just a sad vessel waiting for whatever water, good or bad, to seek its own level in his soul.

  11. Brandon says:

    August 29th, 2010 at 4:09 am

    I am a peace officer in my 40′s and have a lean muscular build so not all cops are fat slobs. I live a primal lifestyle and do primal workouts. I love lifting weights, walking and sprinting.  My waist size is 31″ and will get it to 30″ so be nice Karen! :-)

    We do have fatties on the Department and there are no standards because of discrimination laws. I was in training a few weeks ago when a fellow officer wanted to grapple with me. He figured that his 265 pounds of fat could beat my 190 pounds of muscle. Well, he gave me his all and within 45 seconds he was winded and could no longer continue. I reminded him he would be dead if it was a real street fight. 

    Police Explorers more dangerous than gangs you got to be kidding. I grew up in a gang infested area of Los Angeles County and two of my friends were murdered by gangsters not by explorers. 

  12. Alex says:

    August 29th, 2010 at 11:15 am

    Brendan, I often wonder how cops that are openly and notoriously obese are allowed to stay on the force in my city. With all the drama we have going on in Chicagoland, the last thing we need on the streets, with cops being outgunned by inner city thugs, is someone in uniform who is only qualified to play understudy for Chief Wiggums on “The Simpsons” in the name of “anti-discrimination.”

    Let’s face it, there really is only two options for inner city youth: the quiet self-generating genocide of “benign neglect” (as Patrick Moynihan put it), which is NOT benign to the OTHER minority and inner-city, non-criminal senior citizens and working families who are terrorized (yes, TERRORIZED) by these young male (some female) apes and scumbags; or PEACEFUL national service (if they can’t be lawful and peaceful, at least we can put their thuggish energy to work improving our country’s infrastructure).

    Yes, I know national service is “the forced confiscation of one’s labor, etc.” (as Walter Williams would put it) but hell, these gang-bangers and thugs aren’t very LABORious to begin with (least not legally). So, to that extent, I’m with you, Brendan. I’d rather have these kids (let’s not pretend that all these inner city minority dropouts and low-IQ bearers are potential George Washington Carvers, Ronald McNairs, and Mae Jemisons) in Explorer programs than on the street terrorizing people who are trying to eke out a daily existence.

    Sorry, when it comes to crime, that’s where I part with the libertarian crowd. I’m more Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson than Nick Gillespie or Lew Rockwell. To put it bluntly, Brendan, in the darkest parts of my heart, I wouldn’t even have a problem if a few peace officers in Richard Daley-Land pulled a Kevin Costner (a la “The Untouchables”) and helped a few gangbangers to mysteriously fall off the roof of some high-rise buildings.

    Karen, I know that above sentiments are somewhat right-wing. I openly acknowledge I’m speaking out of adult frustration and anger at the breakdown of family, order, and common decency in our largest cities and the concomitant results; so I don’t mind an intellectual spanking from a voluntaryist perspective if I deserve one (lol).

  13. clark says:

    August 29th, 2010 at 3:31 pm


    Between you, LRC, Will Grigg and a few others I am really just amazed at learning how the world really works.

    Will Grigg’s latest article seems to suggest to me that those kids were in training partly so they would help to create an increase in reality TV viewership and therefore an increase by the public in their support for more of the same.

  14. liberranter says:

    August 29th, 2010 at 5:07 pm


    You claim to be a “peace officer.” Does this mean that you confine your official actions to preventing crimes against person or property, or do you “enforce” whatever statutes your superiors or their political masters order you to enforce, no matter how flagrantly unconstitutional they are, and no matter how much unnecessary violence, death, destruction, and suffering results from said “enforcement?”? If you witness your fellow officers engaging in acts of lawbreaking or misconduct, do you actively take measures to stop them or report them to your superiors? Or do you look the other way in fear of being labled a “rat” or a “snitch?”

    The only way you can legitimately call yourself a “peace officer” is if you confine yourself to the former examples in either case. Otherwise, you are a “law enforcement officer” and your actions have little or nothing to do with “protecting and serving” the citizenry.

    As for the exception you take to my characterization of “Police Explorers,” I stand by my comment. Again, the only difference between murder by a “gangster” and murder by a “police explorer” (and if the incident witnessed by Don Cooper that Karen cites is any example, it looks like the “Police Explorers” are following the Crips or Bloods’ lead) is that the violent behavior of one is sanctioned by the power of the State, the other isn’t. I’ve NEVER been bothered by gangbangers (and I live in a city chock full of them), and neither has anyone else I know. Why? Because we don’t associate with them or engage in behavior that would entail interaction with them. In short, we don’t bother them, and they don’t bother us I won’t speculate as to what your friends did to earn the wrath of the LA gangbangers). OTOH, if I try to ignore “Police Explorers”, or, more significantly, the “big boys” who are their mentors/idols/handlers, the consequences can be deadly, even if I’ve done nothing to warrant their attention.

  15. Iluvatar says:

    August 30th, 2010 at 1:49 pm


    Some great thoughts there.

    My only feeling (and I have said this more than once before) is that it really started under FDR, 80 years ago.

    Socialism has as its price the dulling of the human mind and the diminshment of the human spirit.

    Hayek WAS right…

    Great Societies are built from the ground up. Government has as its only responsibility the “allowance” of personal liberties.

    Pretty far cry from where we are “at” now, huh?

  16. clark says:

    August 30th, 2010 at 2:39 pm

    Karen, your blog always inspires me to think, thank you for your efforts.

    Questions and answers people often refuse to consider:

    Aren’t the gangbangers a creation of the government and the people who continue to support unjust law?

    Why are the lessons America learned from the Prohibition of the early 1900′s lost on people today?

    Why don’t people understand that there would have never been an Al Capone or widespread gang style shoot outs in Chicago in the early 1900′s and elsewhere without the laws that made them criminals in the first place?

    And more importantly, why can’t people connect what happened with Prohibition in the early 1900′s to what is occurring today with the War against Some Drugs?

    Is it even possible for the majority of people today to even relate in the slightest bit to the early Americans who lived for hundreds of years without a police force of any kind?

    This issue is a lot like the illegal immigration and welfare problems we have today too. Why don’t people see the connection between government policies that support this never ending pile which acts to break down the family unit which results in disaster for the nation?

    Do they not understand that in the past in places such as inner city Washington D.C. there was once a significant majority of black families and poor families which were solid units creating a low crime environment and high literacy rates?
    Do people simply ignore history and block out the role government and those who support these policies had in changing this?

    Why don’t people understand that if you leave table scraps outside every night animals will come and hang around to fight over the table scraps?

    How hard is it to see that the solution to the growing numbers of fighting and dangerous animals isn’t in the trapping and killing of the animals each night as they fight while simultaneously subjecting themselves to danger but rather simply removing the food which draws the animals in the first place?

    Not too mention, why can’t people see the wrong that occurs from taking the table scraps from their neighbors table to feed the animals and pulling the money for the ammo and the traps out of the pockets of the working class?

    Is it because people would have to face the fact that they are the source of the funding and manpower which supports the system allowing the violence and the destruction of families to continue without end, and is such a realization too difficult a burden to bear?

    Are those who support the taking and laying out of table scraps for the animals the true source of the violence and destruction the animals commit against the innocent such as the elderly who are robbed, the youth who are killed and on it goes touching so very many people in negative ways?

    And why don’t they realize if this support were withdrawn the criminal actions of the gangbangers would disappear the same way they did after Prohibition was repealed?
    And then the nation might be able to focus on the destruction the banksters are causing?

    Is this analogy the same as when a person leaves a livestock gate open and when the livestock escapes they blame the livestock or the gate itself and not the the person who left the gate open?
    Perhaps even going so far as to place a camera focused on the gate to remind themselves not to leave the gate open while ignoring the fact the camera also focuses into the homes of innocent people while at the same time taking advantage of the extra view?

    Why is it easier for a person to sacrifice their personal beliefs such as self-reliance and love of liberty in exchange for the chance to jail, pummel and fine their fellow man?
    For far too many people, is it mostly due to the security a paycheck provides from enforcing this system or some other monetary benefit they indirectly receive, or is it more to do with laziness, blood lust and hubris?

    Do you suppose a person who cannot see and understand all this simply loves money and government and loves being the source of violence more than they love liberty and even their own families, neighbors and mankind in general?
    Is that what many people call, evil?

    Or is it a matter of the Flouridation of the population successfully creating a population who are brain-dead and unable to think for themselves, they can only respond based on their emotions which are easily manipulated by those who benefit from maintaining the status quo?

    Does it seem like for far too many Americans all these matters are not to be thought about and discussed and the void is to always be filled with thoughts of things like the importance of regularly mowing the grass in the parks and on their perfect lawns, or sports, or high fashion and the lives of movie stars?

    And lastly, why do seemingly good people not see and understand the many other destructive and violent results from ignoring those who speak out, like the law professor in this video, who suggests that a person should Never talk to the police?

    I think I understand now.

  17. Alex says:

    September 1st, 2010 at 6:58 am

    “Aren’t the gangbangers a creation of the government and the people who continue to support unjust law…”

    I just roll my eyes when I hear pundits (including libertarians) say things like “Welfare and the Great Society destroyed the black family.” NO, black people and urban poor whites on welfare destroyed their own families. No one makes a man, of any color, walk out on his responsibilities unless he just WANTS to walk on those responsibilites. Yes, there was an expansion of the welfare state since FDR, but no one makes you take those dollars and subscribe to those programs unless you just have a disposition and desire to submit to the culture of poverty.

    Since we are in the age of anti-Muslim hysteria, I’ll just quote Satan from the Koran (lol). I had Muslims friends in college and have read their book, and one parable in that reading that stays with me was of the guilty being thrown into the fires of Hell on Judgment Day. As they are being fed to the fires, they see Satan standing on the side laughing at them. They point to Satan and say, “It’s HIS FAULT! HE is the one LED US astray!!” Satan just laughs at them and says, “Hmmphh. I had NO AUTHORITY over you….I just called you and you came!”

    I’m often reminded of that parable when issues of personal responsibilty and prevailing conditions come up. Yeah, we libertarian and libertarian-leaning types can blame government, etc. but ultimately all human behavior (as long as people have culpable minds) boils down to choices. The gangbangers CHOSE to be failed human beings, as opposed to those who they prey upon, who chose NOT to feed on the misery of others. So, I don’t buy all that “poverty makes you a criminal” crap that sociologists and welfare state politicos push (the only sociologist I can stomach is Edward Banfield). Yes, the government made anti-married-father-in-the-home policies and their “rewards” plentiful and available, but ultimately gangbanging and family breakdown is a matter of personal responsbility and choice (or irresponsibility). Like Brendan, I grew up “urban poor” as the pundits would term us (even though I never thought of myself as “poor” as a child) and took a lot of shit from all the miscreants around me who thought that reading books and wanting something better out of life made you a “f*g” (like all the characters in the movie “Idiocracy”). I made a choice, as did those who became gangbangers, who also made a choice.

    As previously stated, I have no sympathy for the gangbanger’s “plight.” Too many people have come from all over the world, from all races, all cultures, to our over-regulated, over-politicized, over-public schooled, over-taxed, over-big-government country and yet STILL have found ways to NOT become threats to their fellow human beings. The only good gangbanger is a dead gangbanger, whether they die at the hands of some statist cop, or an anti-state, libertarian, gun-owning little old lady who shoots one breaking into her home.

  18. clark says:

    September 6th, 2010 at 1:13 pm

    If the path was not cleared, few would walk it.
    Who clears the path?
    Those who say not to walk it.

    Beer vendors don’t shoot it out on the streets of Chicago today as they did in the days of Al Capone.

  19. Iluvatar says:

    September 7th, 2010 at 10:35 pm


    Here is the 2nd try at this (last one got blown away @ work????)

    To Alex & clark:

    Here is my (poor) try @ trying to resolve this

    Please remember that whenever the needle is pointing either all the way left or right – the answer is WRONG!!

    Life is a balance.

    So are all the problems.

    Alex argues from the point of view of Existentialism (actually), and makes a wonderful statement about the responsibility of the individual. If you should be confused – the books of Kant, Nietzsche, and Camus should calm you down (even though they are kind of unnnecessary for the Existentialist home-grown). Also, try Colin Wilson who does a wonderful survey in his 1st book “The Outsider”. Remember him? Dude was a member of the “Angry Young Men Of England in the `50′s”. Dude rocks…

    And I heartily agrees w/ Alex (dude for a 40-year old, you doin’ good!)

    clark rocks with the argument of the effects of SOCIALISM and the needs of societal responsibility.

    Actually, his arguments are very Existentialist (along Kantian lines) regarding societal responsibility.

    And I agreed (violently, since I am so upset w/ FDR and beyond), w/ him.

    Guys, the fault lies on BOTH SIDES. Socialisms bring our population down, tech-toys bring our population down, personal lack of conscious decision bring our society down. It is all connected. They work together to reduce our civilization to that of animals. There are multiple forces at work here fellas – you CAN NOT blame one or the other.

    Darn! I sure hope this ends this. Please see both sides of the spectrum. It is key.

    And, oh btw. those were great posts guys!

  20. Jeannie Queenie says:

    September 13th, 2010 at 1:26 pm

    Sometimes there is no seeing the other side when you have state workers or security guards wanting to play ‘I WILL FORCE YOU WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT”. Fact is, using force is a no-no, and no one can tell me that these bullies here deserve to be heeded. These morons show just how far they will go with bully tactics to deprive us of our free speech….while viewing this, I wondered why the crowd didn’t come to the aid of this guy, an older man, who was simply carrying a sign revealing his feelings about this pathetic administration. You see that this beefy trio with their six beer bellies, have no problem with picking on elderly citizens with whom they happen to disagree with. What a bunch of losers.

  21. Jeannie Queenie says:

    September 13th, 2010 at 2:35 pm

    What is it with these 40-50 something bullies picking on older men? Sign of things to come? is another video of an older guy who has just come home from town for a charitable fund raiser and loses his balance on getting out of his car…this is where brainless cops enter the scene thinking he is drunk…throw him on the ground and taser the hell out of him..and the poor guy already had a heart condition for starters..freaking believe it!
    Note how these a holes keep saying “don’t resist, don’t resist” as they guy lays writhing in pain….the cops mothers/wives should be so ashamed.
    Painful to watch this one……

  22. clark says:

    September 20th, 2010 at 10:02 pm

    And here’s yet another one, Jeannie:

    It’s not about a dial going from full left to full right as Iluvatar suggests, the balance he seems to seek is a confusion of what is right or wrong mixed together and called – shades of gray – which indicate uncertainty, or worse.

    There are no shades of gray.

    Either a thug is standing over you as boss, or he’s not, there is no in between in such a circumstance.

    Life is a balance all right, either you are ruled, or you stand on your own feet. There’s no riding two horses going different directions on that matter, a.k.a. shades of gray. Just riding one and dodging those on the other.

    As it stands, we’re ruled & bullied.
    Most people don’t notice until they stand out, or happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    Like it matters though, too many people benefit from maintaining the status quo.

Leave a Reply