Remember Our Forefathers

“Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.”

 (The more numerous the laws, the more currupt the State.)

Cornelius Tacitus, Ab excessu divi Augusti (Annals), c 117 AD

Amongst other things, and not all good, John Adams is remembered for his 1780 quote on creating a “government of laws and not of men.” When we think of this maxim we must consider how it was originally intended and why it was of such importance to not only colonial America, but dating all the way back to the Middle Ages and even to Ancient Greece. The men who espoused this principle did so to defend their liberty from overbearing sovereigns who believed that they were the law and not subject to it. Fast forward to modern times, and we suffer from this exact form of oppression.

First and foremost, criminal and civil laws are created by our proxies, elected representatives at all levels of government. This premise is of extreme importance and must be remembered at all times. The laws are written by men (and women) and because they are such they are subject to human error. Throughout history, when laws contrary to liberty have been written there have been two ways to correct such injustice: 1, by demanding repeal of such laws by the representatives who wrote them or by replacing such representatives with those who will, and/or 2, by civil disobedience and nullification (both state and jury). With nullification effectively erased from society’s memory by those seeking to further their own power, and until the day it is rightfully reclaimed by the populous, the only forum for correcting the law is through the election process – the pinnacle of power in a free republic. When those who we have chosen as our representatives choose to stray from the just reasons of their election, they can always be tossed out after their term, and in rare cases of egregious wrongdoing by a representative, there exists the option of impeachment. Thus we can exercise authority over and hold accountable our representatives for their deeds while acting as our proxies, from the local town council all the way up to the highest seats of government.

But who holds to account the police officer who operates his/her cruiser with a cell phone glued to his/her ear? What about the officer who endangers the lives of other drivers on the highway so that he/she may get to the left lane and fly down the road at speeds that would have our vehicles impounded? How about the myriad officers who violate the liberties of individuals with unwarranted searchs and seizures? Who holds the police who murder innocent civilians accountable for their deeds? Who punishes the police? Internal Affairs departments you say? That’s like saying that a group of politicians within the larger body should wield the power to be judge of their colleagues’ performance. If we have the means to hold politicians accountable for their actions in writing the law, why should we not have those same means to hold the enforcers of the law accountable for their actions in upholding the law? And if accountability for their actions is not enough of a reason to have the same veto power over law enforcement officials as we do over politicians, then perhaps the fact that their salaries are extracted from us without our consent gives us the right to demand governance over their performance.

That is right, I am asking why it is that we do not have the elective power to keep in check those in charge of upholding the laws. I could ascertain the prime criticism for such a suggestion as it being burdensome to the election process, making it entirely too long to elect an entire police force, especially in larger cities. To this I say the following: perhaps then that means that there are too many police officers and their ranks should be cut down, and if certain large cities require larger forces then perhaps those forces should be broken down into smaller precincts electible as smaller units by the smaller boroughs of the larger whole. There is no legitimate reason as to why law enforcement officials should be exempt from the same accountability that their fellow public servants operate under. The laws are meant to protect and serve the people of the community who reside under said laws, and seeing as how public officials are our servants rather than our masters, it makes perfect sense that the populace should have firm control over them. As a matter of fact, we already do have an elected head of law enforcement, the county sheriff. So let us begin from there.

It is high time that people realize, if they haven’t already, that the modern police force serves as nothing more than an extractor of wealth for the State with no compelling reason or obligation to protect the people who pay their salaries (see Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005)). Worse even than being merely pickers of our pockets, the police state under which we live is becoming increasingly more violent, and it is not the citizenry fueling the violence. A 2007 article in USA Today citing Justice Department statistics showed a post 9/11 rise in “excessive force or other tactics to violate victims’ civil rights [by] 25%” between 2001 and 2007. What’s more, according to termlifeinsurance.org there were 2,541 reported incidences of police misconduct from January to June of this year alone! 23%, or approximately 592, have been the use of excessive force of which 13%, or roughly 77, have been fatal. Remember those in charge of checking our wonderful police, Internal Affairs? Well, according to that USA Today article, the number of all reported incidences referred for prosecution but were declined was an astonishing 98% in 2005 and 96% in 2006! Who, if not us, will hold these people accountable?

If we are to begin to exercise control over and hold accountable those who enforce our laws, we need to begin the cleansing at the local level. Municipal police departments must be abolished. Those unproductive members of society who have done nothing but serve themselves can then take up occupations within society which will actually benefit society rather than hinder and enslave it. (As a side point, in addition to taking ticket writers off the street, which will save the citizenry precious money, most municipal budgets would shrink tremendously once the subsidized extorters are removed from the books). Once that is accomplished, every locality can add a sheriff to their ballot, and determine whether additional positions are necessary. If deemed necessary, the local government can then decide whether these additional positions are to be elected or appointed. It must be noted that appointed officials are still accountable as they can be removed with the election of a new sheriff.

The problem arises when one begins to consider areas with high crime rates. The question at that point is, are the crime rates high because bad people are violating good laws, or are bad laws making good people bad? Without going into exhaustive detail over the damage it has done, the amount of liberty it has stolen, or the amount of money it has cost, the War on Drugs is a perfect example of how bad laws are making good people bad (and we can ignore person moral beliefs regarding drug use, as they are simply that, personal). That brings us to the second step in our quest to hold the enforcers of the law to account: ridding ourselves of what Tacitus so aptly put nearly two thousand years ago, the numerous laws of our corrupt State. By merely ending the War on Drugs (or through its nullification by state and local officials) and every other Nanny State law that serves no purpose and is truly quite contrary to the principles of individual liberty upon which this country was founded, nearly all need for additional law enforcement will eradicated like the plague that it has become. Once we rid ourselves of our corrupted system of positive law, we can transform law enforcement from the paramilitary force that it has become to the Conservator of the Peace that it once was. That means that your sheriff and his/her deputies and officials will exist only to: arrest people officially charged with a crime, serve people with subpoenas, operate local prison facilities, and maintain the peace from unlawful aggression.

The movement toward Liberty is just beginning. Given the results of the most recent election, it appears as though average Americans are beginning to wake up to the mess that is surrounding them, but we should not allow this progress to stop at minor reforms of the federal government. If we are to truly be free, we must take back our lives from every form of aggression and oppression leveled against us over the past 150 years. From self aggrandizing politicians at all levels to unruly and vicious police officers, the promises of Liberty and Justice are far from being lived to their fullest. It is only through education and action that we can truly live the real American Dream envisioned by those men who shed their blood to remove tyranny from the this continent over 240 years ago. Will we let them down? Or will we be the first generation in almost two centuries to see their dreams come to fruition?

One Response to “Law Enforcement: Why the Enforcers Should be Elected”