Police Abuse

Want to Stop the Shooting of Innocent Police Officers? Rein In Police Unions

They insulate the worst offenders from accountability, breeding frustration and resentment

|

Whether the spate of acquittals of police officers involved in the death of Freddie Gray – the Baltimore kid who was killed during what seems to the naked eye like a "rough ride" in a police van –

Police Geared Up
Gmeviphoto | Dreamstime.com

are justified may be debatable. But what is not debatable is the awesome powers of police unions that make such acquittals, even of guilty officers, more likely.

Indeed, in the last two weeks, the country has been wreaked in a horrific cycle of violence with police officers shooting innocent black men in Louisiana and Minnesota and black men shooting innocent police officers in Dallas and Louisiana.

President Obama blames this spiral on everything under the sun from excessive guns to underinvestment in minority schools. Donald Trump, a master of tautology, blames it on the breakdown of "law and order" in inner cities.

Both are evading one of the main causes: "Hidebound police unions that block elementary transparency and public accountability at every level," I note this morning in The Week. "Yet it is inconceivable that any profession that has managed to so insulate itself from elementary checks and balances isn't rife with abuse. And if that's the case, then it would be a miracle for the most vulnerable communities to not be disproportionately affected. That is just how the world works."

Go here to read the whole the thing.

NEXT: Is the overthrow of a democratically elected government ever justified?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. When the so-called good cops do something about the bad cops, I’ll be more concerned about their safety.

    Every fucking cop in America is going to be even more of a paranoid trigger happy coward.

    1. And they’re going to be given more and more leeway to shoot people with no consequences.

    2. I’m making over 17k dollar a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do… http://www.trends88.com

    3. I’m making over 17k dollar a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do… http://www.trends88.com

    4. I got one god damn thing to say about dead cops — a little wisdom that I have yet to see reproduced by anyone, anywhere, in the 24/7 comment blitz on all things cops and black people…

      DON’T FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON

      Most of the truly damning slaying of unarmed black people by spineless cowards with a badge and gun could have been avoided by simply laying this burden of duty upon America’s police force. We require if of our soldiers in war zone’s when enemy combatants are nigh a guarantee; but on home soil it’s too much for the police? Cops lives are more important than the sea of civilians they wade through daily? From Philando Castile to Tamir Rice; none of these people would be dead if all cops dutifully obeyed one simple maxim.

      And seriously if some evil man fires upon police, send in the robot cop army in and destroy the villain — I will call that justice! But police need to have the god damn courage to not open up on children without crystal clear confirmation of firearms.

      And people will say, “oh you monster this will put cops lives in danger!” — No it fucking won’t. Philando Castile, the baton rouge guy, Tamir Rice; they weren’t actually armed, no cops would have died on the day these men were slain if the cops chose to not use deadly force; yet so many lives could have been saved, including every cop who’s been slain in revenge killings.

      DON’T FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON — this is the answer to America’s cop/black problem.

  2. “We the People, in Order to destroy this country with Imperfect Unions…”

    1. Oooh, nice one.

    2. +1 Schoolhouse Rocks

  3. Media has no blame whatsoever in this…they just reported the truth narrative.

  4. Rein In Police Unions – They insulate the worst offenders from accountability, breeding frustration and resentment

    Huh – just like the teachers union, the transit workers union, the hospital workers union, &c.

    1. Various Unions once served laudable purposes in our society. But like every human institution, they are subject to calcification and mission drift. If there is a public service union in the country that should not be harried out of town with torches and pitchforks, I haven’t heard of it.

      1. have no issue with them in the private sector. Public sector unions should all be dissolved though.

        1. I think they’ve been abused in the private sector but I don’t oppose them on political grounds.

        2. I do. My main gripe is that unionized government workers will only farm out work to their own kind, raising the cost on pretty much everything they do.

          1. Best line ever from NYPD Blue:

            Sipowitz (on the new black LT): “Oh great, now he’s gonna bring in a bunch of his people.”
            Simone: “Hey Andy, they don’t call it Irish Welfare for nothing.”

        3. I think the particular issue is whether public sector unions as voters already have the power to collectively bargain by voting for people who will negotiate in a certain manner. Or whether people who singly or collectively bargain for salaries and benefits ought to be able to vote.

        4. have no issue with them in the private sector.

          So long as they are simply used for collective bargaining. BUT, when politicians write legislation favoring unions over business, I have a big problem with that.

          1. Yeah, I would say that applies across the board

          2. Somewhat off-topic question: do you think it’s ethical for unions and *private* employers to negotiate “closed shop” rules? It’s obviously an attempt to get more money for the union and shut out people who won’t pay the dues. But on the other hand, if the employer agrees to only obtain labor from that particular union, that’s not really a violation of anyone’s rights… There are lots of instances of one party agreeing to exclusively purchase a given commodity from another party. Do you think this should be allowed?

            1. But on the other hand, if the employer agrees to only obtain labor from that particular union, that’s not really a violation of anyone’s rights…

              A “union” is a “private club” just like Augusta National. The whole idea of unions was to prevent the blacks from being allowed to work at an industrial plant, and “closed shop” rules were simply the owners agreeing with and reinforcing the racism of the white unions.

              Dad was a union steelworker in the 60’s-70’s (if you want to see sad, go here). No members, no assets, they got $363 from someone’s dues, and $473 from “other receipts”.

              The officers payout is listed as $11K combined (though the individual numbers say it was more like $16K). Yet, “total spending” was over $100K. Hmmm….

    2. are state-owned hospitals shit too?

      1. Look at the VA

      2. I don’t have personal experience with them but I added them in because they’re always trotted out as the “most powerful union” in NYC – they must be evil.

  5. Not going to happen when even the most anti-government union Republicans carve out exceptions for police and fireman’s unions. Cops are part of the way respectable middle and upper class Americans make sense of the world and feel safe. They’re the voting bloc that reflexively supports police in all circumstances and thus so do the politicians who rely on their votes.

    1. Like John Kasich?

      It almost cost him an election when he added the police/fire unions to his “public union busting” legislation in 2010. It was overturned by the Democratic Party hydra thru a referendum

  6. BLM killed any possibility of that happening.

    1. Yep. We were starting to have an adult conversation about police conduct. That is now over for the foreseeable future.

      1. The cops seem awful surprised that a couple of military trained people took this “War on Cops” thing seriously after being told that they and theirs were on the other side. I hope the shootings stop, but the “War on Cops” rhetoric was all from one side, and now that side has decided they don’t actually like war. Good. Maybe they’ll take the lead in toning it down.

        1. That’s an interesting point. When lone military-trained individuals can take out groups of cops it makes one wonder if the cops might stop playing war hero.

        2. ???Maybe they’ll take the lead in toning it down.

          I admire your optimism.

          1. I read that as “take the lead” as in bullets

        3. If their military training is anything like my experiance they learned to set up tents, expect an oversized government paycheck and are a worse shot after the experiance. Looks like bothe these guys had been members of the Nation of Islam and the new black panther party. Perhaps they were just asshole racists who wanted to kill cops.

          1. You must have been in a very, very different Armed Forces than the one I was inn from 1985-2012.

            1. Agreed. Thank you for your service, SS. My term was 1978 – 2001.

  7. Both hands above the table please. No bringing your own condiments

    http://nbc4i.com/2016/07/18/mc…..i-fi-porn/

    1. I can’t believe they weren’t already filtering it. That would cost them, what, ten bucks a month? Most outfits that know what they’re doing have been filtering for 15+ years.

      1. I found that odd, too. Like they wouldn’t have a firewall on their guest network that used a websense-like service. Not sure why this is even news.

    2. Damn! And I liked Mickey D’s. No more Big Macs.

    3. Huh. I actually was at MacDonald’s like an hour ago, and couldn’t access Reason from their wifi. Probably all the keywords like gay and Mexican ass sex

      1. Sorry about that.

        1. Agreed – probably SF’s fault.

      2. I’ve been curious, is Mexican ass sex so great? Is it significantly different than ‘regular’ ass sex? I’ve never had either (given nor taken) and want to know.

        1. It is if the Mexican in question is Selma Hayek

        2. Two words: pinto beans

  8. There’s been coverage of several “discussions” held by churches and community groups in my area. The
    “reigning in police unions” idea hasn’t been mentioned (at least in the media coverage) even once.

    1. Hopefully they are reining them in like the article title correctly spells it.

      1. Making it rane in here, bitchez!

      2. I’ll be watching your spelling, Brett, to make sure you tow the lion in the future!

  9. Watch out, Ezra Klein… Your King of the Dumbasses crown in under threat!

    If Police Unions Want to Make Themselves Useful They Should Fight For Gun Control

    1. Now that the drug war is dying down they will try to start up a War on Guns. The Cleveland union boss tried it yesterday by saying the governor should suspend open-carry during the convention.

      1. If there is going to be this “War on Cops,” can it at least be against fucks like that Cleveland union guy?

      2. Now that the drug war is dying down

        Wha-wha-whaaaaat!

    2. Because disarming the citizenry will magically turn psychotic police into calm, rational public servants.

      1. It’s certainly helped curb psychotic criminals. That’s why Chicago is one of the safest cities in the country.

    3. Aren’t they bankrupt or something?

      1. Not yet, I guess.

    4. “If you’d like to report police misconduct, please remain on the line. A police misconduct civilian oversight committee member will be with you in, SEVENTEEN, hours…”

    5. there are some surprisingly sane comments on there.

      1. Was this sarcasm, because most of the comments I saw there made me want to scream.

        Although it was true that there were ‘some’, where ‘some’ is defined as a very small number.

        1. Frankly anyone who willingly clicks on a Gawker article gets what they deserve. #NeverGawker

  10. Or we could just end the War on Drugs which is causing most of the problems.

    1. Honestly, I’m not certain it would have the effect we libertarians want to believe it would. The jobs aren’t there, the education is utter shit, and the lack of family structure has created a dangerous set of social dynamics for inner-city blacks. Without structure or opportunity, young black men are always going to turn to criminality to survive. They’ll have trouble peacefully integrating with the wider world whatever criminal vocation they undertake.

      1. I imagine that many said the same thing about the Italians as Prohibition winded down. Of course, alcohol prohibition didn’t last nearly as long as the war on drugs has.

        It definitely won’t be a panacea, but it’s one less thing we’d all have to worry about.

        1. It’s amusing that a lot of libertarians think it’ll still be profitable for young black men with no education to sell adulterated crack off the corner when you can get it in a blister pack from a legit lab at the gas station next to the tall boys and slurpees. Ending drug prohibition would be a good idea, but it isn’t going to do shit to address the structural problems in many black communities. In fact, in the short term you might see a little spike in crime when he drug dealers end up on the dole because suddenly a viable source of income just disappeared overnight.

          1. It has to do with incentives. Right now the “thug life” supposedly pays better than “legit life”. Get rid of the black market in drugs and inner city residents will have to change their ways. Have to. Unless they don’t want to eat. It won’t happen overnight, just like the problem has been festering for decades. But things will change.

      2. Putting out the fire doesn’t rebuild the house. On the other hand, trying to rebuild the house before putting out the fire is an exercise in futility.

        1. Does anyone else read ant1sthenes’ posts in the voice of the the ant from “The Ant and the Aardvark”? It really works sometimes!

  11. Good point. I’m surprised they aren’t more opposed to body cams, which will expose their worst offenders.

    1. You mean the ones that are always broken or “fell off” when other video seems pretty damning of the cops’ actions?

  12. “Hidebound police unions that block elementary transparency and public accountability at every level,”

    This will be THE hardest thing to get traction on, because it’s the cause of the problem.

  13. While I agree it would be great to rein in police unions, it’s rather silly to think that is going to stop the hatred and violence towards law enforcement.

    1. Cops’ ability to act without repercussion, enabled by the police unions, is the reason for most of the hatred in the first place.

      1. The bad apples are definitely in the minority of cops. So you fix the unions, sure you might eliminate some problems, but you aren’t changing the amount of daily interactions cops have with people. You want a real change get politicians to stop using the police as revenue collection service. Go after crimes with victims and stop the war on drugs. When I say “crimes with victims” I’m referring to the narrowed down Libertarian view of “crimes with victims”.

        1. Get rid of all government police, prosecutors, judges.

          Victims hire police and prosecutors, just as for civil suits.

          All parties to a case hire a court / jury / judge / preacher / guy in a kiosk in a mall, whoever they can agree on.

          You not only eliminate victimless crimes, you eliminate nanny police patrols. You get rid of judicial patronage and corruption. And because anyone can be a cop, lawyer, or judge, you eliminate that thin blue line.

          (And if the parties can not agree on a single common court company, they can go ahead and hire their own, but but any biased verdict would be so defective as to be worthless.)

      2. To what extent is the heavy-handedness of police officers necessitated by the conditions in which they work? This is the theory I’m hearing promulgated after the Harvard study: officers are more likely to engage in low-level use of force not because they’re inherently racist or abusive (although they may be), but because these encounters are often dick-waving exercises in exerting authority on combative suspects. So initial contact between cops and blacks appears to be rougher but rates of escalated violence, including shootings, even out regardless of race.

        Like I said about decriminalizing drug use above, it’s not clear that curtailing police use of force is going to immediately restore faith in cops, much less reduce the high rates of criminality. There’s a confluence of factors responsible for bringing about these hopeless, luckless hard cases, having to do with intergenerational poverty, welfare dependence, shitshow schools, terrible local politics, municipal corruption, and the great failure of the progressive ethos… reforming cops is a definite good amidst all that, but it’s not clear the changes being made in Chicago or Baltimore are proper reforms or that they’ll improve the lives of noncriminal citizens.

        1. No. The current violence has to do with cops shooting unarmed civilians. The rest of the things you noted are deplorable and challenges to our society but have nothing to do with the current spate of violence. If the rest of what you posted were true we’d have seen outbreaks of mass shootings of cops long before now as these problems have been endemic in the inner cities for decades now.

    2. And what makes you think law enforcement is worthy of our respect and unquestioning support?

      1. Law enforcement may or may not be. Rule of law certainly is, and unfortunately, you need someone to enforce it.

        1. Good point.
          I was referring to “law enforcement” as it currently is, not in an abstract “rule of law” sense.

          1. Almost makes you wish for a sect of legal warrior priests who take their jobs philosophically as well as politically seriously. Cop mentats, or something. Would probably be disastrous in practice… Judge Dredd or something.

            1. As the great Ken White has noted, our legal system has become a vehicle of career advancement more than anything else. While it’s nice to think that people in the field are committed to justice, many of them care far more about power.

    3. Of course it will. The hatred and distrust of law enforcement has come largely from frustration over an entire class of civilians who are both explicitly and implicitly protected from any kind of accountability.

      What would be a criminal matter for you and me becomes a mere employer/employee dispute for the police officer handled via arbitration and adjudication through union channels.

      As our constitutional rights are literally curtailed, there are always exceptions for “active and retired police officers”.

      So yes, I’m angry and distrustful of the police.

      1. So true. I’ve had a couple of minor run-ins with asshole cops, but nothing unusual. I live in one of the safest cities in the U.S., but I’ve learned to distrust cops because of what I see happen to other people in other locales (and the glee my police officer brother-in-law displays when he tells stories of being a dick to citizens). Unlike my law-and-order friends, and most people, I judge my sentiments on everything I see – not just what happens to me, or is likely to happen to me. This dichotomy of views is a real problem – those safely tucked away in their middle class white enclaves won’t accept that there are real problems faced by some people because of the nature of police forces.

        1. Yet their time will come. If working with people has taught me anything, it’s that if you don’t curtail poor behavior it will increase over time as people seek the limits of what is permissible. Heaven help us when there are no limits set to a person’s behavior.

    4. Very true.

      The problem is that a great many of the laws they enforce are unjust.

      So when enforcing the law is an act of injustice, it is only natural to hate the enforcers.

  14. Goddammit, ArtificialSweetnerMan, I only made it about halfway into the second paragraph before my ears started ringing and I developed a severe case of tunnelvision.

    The intense headache I attribute to banging my head on the desk. Repeatedly.

    1. I’m telling you, Klein is in trouble.

      Nolan also had an article earlier that the way to solve the housing crisis was to build more housing.

      1. What a maroon! You bulldoze housing. The sudden hike in value for remaining properties encourages more production. As long as you carefully bulldoze as many old homes as new homes are created, you’ll have full homeownership in no time. It’s just math!

  15. Unions at one time served a important role for worker. They have in recent years been used more for protecting lazy unproductive disruptive trash. I was a union member fo 45 years and watched while list ground protecting people that didn’t deserve the jobs they had.

    1. Unions were born of collective protectionism, at at time where imperfect information and geographic limitations forced the poor to work where they lived.

      Now, in the age of the internet, where any self-interested individual can find approximate salaries, reviews of bosses, tax disclosures, and names of shareholders all while sitting nude in their abode at 3 in the morning, the idea that “workers need to collectivize” in order to protect themselves against abuse is silly. Naivety is not an excuse for lack of rational self interest.

      1. Unions weren’t justified solely on abuse grounds. There was/is a view that businesses have “unjustified” market power when they can bargain against individual workers. Progressives will never be disabused of that notion, since in their minds businesses (i.e. anyone trying to make a profit) are inherently evil, so any power they have needs to be lessened.

  16. Reining in police unions needs doing, but it’s a symptom, not the cure. If you want to change the way police do business you need to sweep out the politicians, from city hall to Congress, who pull the blue strings.

    There aren’t any kinder, gentler ways to enforce prohibition, finance government through petty fines, and seize assets.

  17. Yes unions insulate problem officers from scrutiny. Yes unions cause budgetary problems and meddle in politics. Yes unions defend cops who have clearly done wrong. But the grounds for that union paid defense and the primary reasons officers don’t get convicted of nearly anything they do while costumed, is qualified immunity. I put it in bold because it hardly gets talked about compared to all the symptoms people mistake for root causes.

    1. qualified immunity = bought and paid for by your benevolent buddies

  18. The problem is simply that there are too many. They are the victim of their own success. Now that they’ve solved all the drug crimes, and found all the state secrets hidden within Chelsea’s wedding plans, they are out on the prowl looking for ex-military and emotionally challenged kids to incite into violence against them. I think it’s fine, if sad and ironic. But hey you need a reason to live, even it’s to get others to try to kill you.

    1. Too many police or too many laws?

      Part of the reason we have so many police is because we have so many laws. (And probably too many federal incentive programs.)

  19. My in-laws are of the opinion that only cops should have guns. Anecdotal evidence provided: the plain-clothes officer that was shot and killed by another officer when he responded to an active shooter near a police station.

    So, because cops can’t be bothered to identify their targets (RULE #3!!) and kill other cops, only cops should have guns.

    1. Counterpoint: Dallas massacre. Number of open-carrying citizens killed: 0. Number of cops killed by open-carrying citizens: 0. Number of uniformed officers killed by murderer: 5.

      1. Well, to be fair, the shooter was technically open carrying as well.

  20. Hysteria catchments like Drudge holler center-top headlines like a donkey with its leg sawed off when cops are murdered even as they post in the most prosaic and unperturbed manner today’s news on the outright execution of even marginally non-compliant citizens by police.

    Life should never be valued from the precipice of a goddamn guild like the F.O.P. or any other fucking labor organization- all of which pull wagons tighter than a butthole sucking furious vein king.

    The law and order ilk festival has decided to pull up their common sense and ethics and throw what remains of their brains into a very fucking corrupt stew that is toiled over most cleverly by calculating authoritarians who understand perfectly how fear can be leveraged across social strata.

    Fucking getting a union to admit to anything that potentiates power lessening equates to walking clouds with gods.

    1. Or, in the most poetic way, this, 100%.

  21. Uh Oh. Looks like we may have a short period of LEO accountability on our hands. Of course once all this blows over, it’ll be back to business as usual.

    “Judge Rejects as Too Lenient Plea Deal for Ex-Sheriff Lee Baca in Jail Abuse Scandal”

    http://ktla.com/2016/07/18/ex-…..ail-probe/

    1. It says right there in your headline Ex-Sherriff.

      His aura of protection has worn off. Also, since he was Sherriff, he’s not part of the union.

      Do you suppose any of the rankandfile went down for this?

  22. RE: Want to Stop the Shooting of Innocent Police Officers? Rein In Police Unions
    They insulate the worst offenders from accountability, breeding frustration and resentment

    Such nonsense!
    The public employee unions have done nothing but improved the lives of the little people. Just look at how much money has been taken from us to ensure the public workers are in many cases better paid than their peers in the private sector. Just look at the plethora of benefits public employees enjoy as compared to their counterparts in the private sector. Just look at how many employees are working for The State as opposed to the private sector. Just look what all this redistribution of wealth has done for for the economies of Detroit, Chicago, California, New York, Illinois and New Jersey. Just look at what a bright future these states enjoy due to wonderful and wise policies these public sector unions have given the rank and file of their members. One can only conclude public sector unions are definitely an asset in every union friendly state, county, or municipal government, and they will continue to enjoy all the economic benefits of bankruptcy, foreclosures and financial ruin.
    What a wonderful future that is for everyone.

  23. I applaud your alttext Shikha!

  24. Want to Stop the Shooting of Innocent Police Officers? Rein In Police Unions

    And Police Unions will counter that by saying that the problem is that there are too many guns on the streets.
    Around and around we go.

    Donald Trump, a master of tautology, blames it on the breakdown of “law and order” in inner cities.

    Like blaming ailments for disease, right? Yeah, he’s like that.

  25. Anecdotal evidence provided: the plain-clothes officer that was shot and killed by another officer when he responded to an active shooter near a police station.

    In one of the multitudinous “Open Carry Failed in Dallas!” articles, the question was raised, “What about if that ‘good guy with a gun’ shot some innocent bystander? What about that, Mister Smartypants NRA Shill?” The obvious implication of which is that such a thing could never happen if only the cops were armed.

    1. If no one else were armed, the cops wouldn’t need to be armed, either.

      Think about it.

      No, really, think about it.

      1. It’s why citing estimates of private gun ownership is instructive (and hilarious).

        What are we going to do about four hundred million guns owned by private citizens? A good number of those, at least the guns anyone in a sane world would be worried about, are already illegally owned. Are we somehow going to do a better job of mass indiscriminate confiscation when we can’t even manage targeted restrictions?

          1. Perhaps we can get ATF on it. Their track record is stellar.

  26. And here I was thinking that Shikha was going to try and pin police violence on some obscure Indian religious cult.

    1. KALI-MA!

  27. Can the unions, make police chiefs an elected position like sheriffs, not because it will affect peoples opinions but it’s the right thing to do. It won’t make a damn bit of difference to those who hate cops, that hatred is not at all caused by the vast majority of cops but is something akin to and as stupid as racism, it’s not logical to begin with.

  28. While police reform is absolutely needed and public unions should probably be illegal, this is exactly the equivalent of saying “Don’t want so many black people shot by cops? Throw the criminal scum in jail so they aren’t out in the street provoking cops”. There’s no excuses for killing innocent people. None. Full stop.

  29. Police unions have it best: they’re supported by union-loving Democrats and by law-and-order Republicans. They will be supported by union-strengthening laws when Democrats are in power and supported by “blue lives matters” laws when Republicans are in power (and generally exempted from whatever union-busting legislation that is dreamt up at the same time).

  30. There’s no justification for shooting cops barring a coup by their ranks. Does the tea party or anti war activists have grounds to shoot at our soldiers or politicians for the sins of the government?

    Violence is counter productive to any solution. Ron Paul fans argue our interventions inspire radical Islam, and yet, if the terrorists (a younger generation from middle class removed from any conflict) continue to blow up innocent people in countries that had nothing to do with wars, the public won’t favor disengagement. They won’t favor free trade and open borders.

    The current situation is largely the same. If the BLM fringe target cops, it’ll be that much harder to reform the union. And even if the union voluntarily implemented reforms, the public will have seen that the BLM;s agenda is a bit more sinister than addressing police brutality. These are racialists who crashed gay parades and memorials for shooting victims. If union reform led to more qualified white officers entering the force, they’ll start foaming at the mouth.

    Americans won’t seek reform because they cow in threat of violence. Most people won’t. I’m a bit disappointed at Shikha here.

    1. Going by current events, cops will have to reform themselves. The disgruntled have started shooting, and I don’t think they’ll stop. Cops are going to have to stop walking around like they can do whatever they want. Unions won’t help them, a biased court system won’t help them, Blue Lives Matter rhetoric won’t help them. Whether or not they realize it, they’ve created the conditions by which an insurgency can arise and hide within a population. It’s a common result when a society becomes more authoritarian. If they want to end the insurgency, they have to broker a rapprochement with the public and thus end the “sea” in which the insurgents swim blending in with the populace.

  31. I quit my office job and now I am getting paid 92 Dollars hourly. How? I work-over internet! My old work was making me miserable, so I was to try-something different. 2 years after…I can say my life is changed completely for the better! Check it out what i do…

    Go to the web—–> http://www.Aspire-Jobs.com

  32. One of your best Shikha. Inner-city blacks are at the mercy of TWO unions, teachers and police. Guess who’s on the plantation, within the larger Democrat coalition. But tThe worst abuse is not union related, as far as I know,

    When a cop shoots an unarmed person (nearly 60% of all police shootings), all he has to say is he “believed” the corpse had a gun. That’s it. Even if the gun was a squirt gun, in one case. Or a cell phone.

    What if I sincerely believe Obama is trying to kill me? Or Trump? Hillary?
    Oh wait! I’m not a cop.

  33. I think it’s funny how the government is supposedly the ultimate arbiter of mercy and fairness towards workers – which allegedly gives them power to mandate wages, benefits, and working conditions – but apparently, they can’t be trusted to treat their own workers fairly as evidenced by the existence of so many public sector unions.

  34. We can even create playlists of them so it will be very easy to find our videos which we like. We can also download those videos and can watch them offline. Showbox for pc

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.