Joe Biden

Joe Biden Basically Admits Libertarians Were Right All Along: Cops Shouldn't Have Military Gear

Biden voted for the 1997 bill that created the Pentagon's 1033 program, which allows surplus military gear to be passed along to local cops. It took 23 years, but he finally changed his opinion.


In a Tuesday speech addressing the recent civic unrest that has roiled America since the killing of George Floyd, former Vice President Joe Biden called on Congress to pass a series of reforms aimed at improving "oversight and accountability" in the nation's police departments.

Among those ideas is a proposal "to stop transferring weapons of war to police forces," Biden said in Philadelphia.

That's a good idea. Indeed, Biden is echoing something that libertarians have been saying for years.

Still, Biden is an awkward avatar for police reform. Back in 1997, the then-senator from Delaware voted in favor of the bill that expanded the Pentagon's role in handing off surplus gear to local cops. It was that year's National Defense Authorization Act that created the 1033 program, a vastly expanded version of previous military surplus programs that entitled "all law enforcement agencies to acquire property for bona fide law enforcement purposes that assist in their arrest and apprehension mission."

Like so many other bad ideas from the 1990s, this one was wrapped up in the war on drugs. The 1033 program gave preference to departments that sought military gear for counter-drug operations. That makes the program a double-whammy of bad ideas: It gave local police an incentive to more vigorously prosecute drug users in order to score free toys from the Pentagon.

The result was exactly what you'd predict. It's no longer unusual for local police departments to own mine-resistant vehicles, grenade launchers, and even tanks. These weapons of war have never been appropriate for police work, but billions of dollars' worth of them have been distributed to departments around the country—in part because Biden voted for the original legislation.

In his speech on Tuesday, Biden did not grapple with that unfortunate bit of his legislative history. Hopefully he will be asked about it soon.

In the meantime, some members of Congress are already getting to work. The New York Times reported Tuesday that a bipartisan group of lawmakers have launched an effort to shut down the Pentagon's transfer of military gear to cops. "It is clear that many police departments are being outfitted as if they are going to war, and it is not working in terms of maintaining the peace," Sen. Brian Schatz (D–Hawaii)—who previously worked with Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) on an ill-fated attempt to end the practice—told the Times. "Just because the Department of Defense has excess weaponry doesn't mean it will be put to good use."

As for Biden, his change of heart regarding military gear for cops fits nicely alongside the rest of his biography. As one of the most powerful members of the Senate in the 1980s and 1990s, Biden played a major role in passing several tough-on-crime policies that helped amplify the horrors of the drug war and filled America's prisons to the brim. He's had to reckon with that during his campaign for president.

Biden is, as Reason Editor at Large Matt Welch has observed, something of a rusty weather vane for the Democratic Party consensus. When the party was gung-ho about locking up criminal and throwing away the key, Biden was there to write the bills that President Bill Clinton signed. Now that the Democratic constituency is finally paying attention to criminal justice reform and police accountability, he's trying to undo some of the very measures he once drafted.

But it's still better to look like a hypocrite than to continue being wrong. Biden's evolution from a drug warrior who approved of arming cops with military gear to a critic of the drug war who wants to end abusive policing is perhaps a silver lining to this week's awfulness. He's a presidential candidate who is the embodiment of the Overton window, and it appears he has been shifted.

NEXT: Democratic Leaders Praise George Floyd Protesters, Show Utter Contempt for Everyone Else Still in Lockdown

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The result was exactly what you’d predict. It’s no longer unusual for local police departments to own mine-resistant vehicles, grenade launchers, and even tanks.

    Tanks have tracks not tires you dumb Yankee.

    1. Some departments were outfitted with M-113’s. They were tracked.

      1. The M113 is not a tank, it’s an APC.

        1. Jassica R. Gregg earned $5000 in my first month when I actually believed I could do this for a living! Now I am happier than ever… I work from home and I am my own boss now like I always wanted… I see a lot of unhappy people around me, working the same old boring job that’s sucking the life out of them day by day… Everytime I see someone like that I say START FREELANCING MAN! This is where I started… Read More

      2. The debates this year between POTUS Trump and VP Biden will be telling, assuming the DNC even lets VP Biden on the stage. VP Biden will have to defend his lengthy record, and behavior.

        And let’s be honest: VP Biden has lost his fastball.

        1. Biden will not have to defend that record because he will not be asked about the record. These are never debates, they are Q&A from Democrat party operatives. Candy Crowley and Mitt Romney proved that decisively.

          1. We’ll see = Biden will not have to defend that record because he will not be asked about the record

            There is no escaping POTUS Trump who will absolutely cite Sleepy Joe’s record chapter and verse. Crooked Hillary tried to dodge, and failed.

            1. I am now making $35/h by doing a very simple and easy online work from home. I have received exactly $8471 last month from this online work. RDs To start making extra income please…

              visit this site………………………….Work at Home

          2. People who want to lead the free world should be able to handle a question from Candy Crowley. My God, you people are pussies.

        2. He never had one!

    2. Not true. While all the current generation of Main Battle Tanks are tracked, a number of light tanks are wheeled. See, for example, the French Panhard AML, the M38 Wolfhound, the Guy Mark 1, the ÖAF, the Qatari VBCI 2, the Saudi LAV FSV, the UAE Rabdan,the FİAT 6636, the Italian Centauro and the US Stryker M1128 to name just a few.

      1. The Stryker is not a tank. It is an infantry fighting vehicle.

        1. The thing is, the definition of a ‘tank’ gets kind of circular with the tread requirement. There’s no reason why a ‘tank’ should have to have treads, but in practice, that’s what the definition includes. Such a definition excludes something like a Cadillac-Gage Armored Gun System, where the same 105 mm gun from an early M-1 or M-60, got stuck on an armored car-ish chassis. Is it a tank? It’s gotva tank gun, and tank speed over broken ground, but OTOH, it doesn’t have super tank armor. Though, IIRC, it was armored better than an equivalent IFV.

          The cops don’t have tanks. Not here anyway.

          1. Then you can get really confusing when you add in something like the M2/ME Bradley. Especially the M3, because it is a cavalry vehicle not an IFV/APC like the M2.

            1. But it is armed with a 25 mm Bushmaster and TOW missiles (although WWII light tanks were also armed with 25 and 30 mm cannons).

              1. Turret+tracks+armor=tank

                1. Not really.

                  Armor + big gun (direct fire) = tank
                  Armor + troop-carrying capacity = APC
                  Armor + big gun (intended for indirect fire) = artillery

                  Tracks have never been a necessary part of the definition for any of them. Tracks were a natural consequence of the need to distribute the weight of the vehicle regardless of which vehicle you’re talking about.

                  1. I Make Money At H0me.Let’s start work offered by Google!!Yes,this is definitely the most financially rewarding Job I’ve had . Last Monday I bought a great Lotus Elan after I been earning $9534 this-last/5 weeks and-a little over, $10k last month . . FDc I started this four months/ago and immediately started to bring home minimum $97 per/hr

                    Heres what I do……..… Click Here

        2. That depends on which configuration you’re talking about. There is a Stryker 1126 is an IFV issued to infantry units and used for transporting infantry. The Stryker 1128, however, is not a troop carrier. It is a light tank.

          1. Still not classified as a tank. It’s classified as a mobile gun system and armored vehicle.

            1. Distinction without a difference. The M1 Abrams could just as well be described as an armored mobile gun system.

      2. A local county sheriff’s dept had an APC from the giveaway.
        It was used in hiker rescues in remote areas where 4WD, ATV, helicopter rescue was not an option.
        Personell they carried included EMT and the injured.
        It was taken back.
        Carrying a hiker with a broke leg out on a stretcher ain’t as easy as driving an APC through second growth timber with little more than rabbit tracks.

    3. Tanks have cannons, I don’t know of any police force that has cannons other than water cannons. And why does the second amendment somehow exclude the police? I don’t have a problem with police having military grade weapons though I sometimes have a problem with how they use them, what pisses me off is that I can’t have them! What the fuck has happened to libertarians? We’re becoming left wing socialists.

  2. “The libertarian case for Biden” has come early this election

    1. The libertarian case for Biden was obvious long before the #TrumpVirus hit: Biden would be much better for Charles Koch’s open borders agenda than Drumpf.


    2. America is better than Donald Trump’s white supremacy. We are better than this! #Resist45 #VoteBlueNoMatterWho

      1. youre terrible at this screech

      2. I’m kinda new to wallowing in the muck that is the comments section. Is this Poe’s law at work?

        1. It’s a parody account. Best ignored.

          1. hahaha. Sevo rendering advice re what to ignore

            1. but he said to ignore you and he was right on with that one…

  3. Look, anyone who’s been in office as long as Biden will no doubt have made a mistake or two. Give the guy a break.


    1. Okay, pick a leg….

    2. Ask Neil Kinnock about Sleepy-Creepy-Handsy Joe’s mistakes.

  4. He’s totally being genuine too. After decades of policies ensuring that the state has everything it needs to lock people in cages, beat and murder people in the streets over minor offenses while he and his buddies walk around scott free no matter how many atrocities they commit, he finally sees the light. For realsies. You have to be fucking kidding me Boehm.

    1. He totally wouldn’t walk this back tomorrow if it helped his poll numbers. No siree.

      1. he wont even remember this tomorrow

        1. Someone will remind him when they feed him his Cream of Wheat.

    2. Biden would be all, “That was then, this is now. It was right for that time, but times have changed. I’m on top of things.”

      1. Quickly off the top of your head, name a situation that saying “That was then, this is now. It was right for that time, but times have changed. I’m on top of things” won’t get a politician out of if they’re on your side.

  5. I can just see 2087, some poor police department alld decked out in grand pappy’s old armored vests for the Chelsea Clineton Jr riots, the laughing stock of other departments for not being able to afford the modern ones.

    Will no one think of the cops’ childrens’ children?

    1. you have shit in your teeth SQLSRY

      1. He needs his energy switching between multiple socks the last few days.

        1. ya he been busy

  6. Not orange tho. So he gets the nod from Reason. You guys have fun at those cocktail parties.

  7. I have no problem with a pol whose position has changed over the years…as long as he admits he was wrong in the past. Biden, Trump, Obama, Clinton, Warren, Harris, Klobey…..change their positions all the time and never ever admit they ever thought different. And the media aids and abets this because they too can never admit to changing their minds.

    1. Very good point. It takes humility to admit you are wrong. These fucking hustlers just change their minds and never apologize.

    2. No, they’d be about that they’re keeping up smartly with the times, adjusting policies to the changing needs of the world. It was good to militarize police then, for the needs of that time, but now they need to demilitarize.

    3. Your acquiescence is admirable but, pols who do that don’t last long.

      If we just kept changing horses all the time, this wouldn’t be so much of a problem.

  8. I haven’t seen any cops defend Chauvin.
    Some seem even more pissed off than the general public, probably because they know to a greater extent than we do just how wrong it was.
    I know hating all cops is fun and easy, but it’s not exactly productive.
    If this thing hadn’t been immediately seized as a race issue and cop-hate in general, there was room for improvement.
    Aren’t we trying to do principles over principals?
    Then address the principles and see if you can get the principals on your side a bit.
    But if you frame it as (occupational) class and race warfare, there’s no room to work with. It’s total war.

    1. Thsts hard of course.
      Emotions is so much easier

      1. *emoting

        Also, it makes for better virtue signaling than trying to accomplish anything does

    2. You haven’t seen union hack Bob Kroll have you?

    3. I hate to say it, but Chauvin will beat the rap, and win back pay, because there is no case law that using that knee hold is unconstitutional/illegal. Therefore, qualified immunity wins. This shouldn’t be about race; this should be about qualified immunity and police abuse. I get that African Americans feel singled out by Leo’s, but “feels” aren’t facts. Maybe if the left, including the media and educators, weren’t brainwashing Americans 24/7, we’d actually be celebrating the amazing advance of civil rights and freedom in both this nation and the world.

      1. LEO s of course, but autospell insists that I mean Leo’s. I’m a Leo, I’m not a LEO. Fucking liberal Google, controlling my android spellcheck to only advance leftwing bs 😉

      2. Again. Qualified Immunity is a legal doctrine that applies when the officer is being sued civilly. It’s got nothing to do with the Murder case Chauvin is facing.

        Now, you can’t predict what a jury will do, but from the evidence shown so far Chauvin is deader than chivalry on Murder 3. I’d like to see if they can get one of his co-workers to testify against him that Chauvin intended to kill him Floyd.

        The reason so many cops skate on what should be easy criminal cases is that they get usually very deferential interpretation of their actions according to the ‘reasonable officer’ standard. If the cop perceives a threat of serious bodily injury, and a reasonable officer in that position could articulate such a threat, the officer’s behavior is likely going to be excused. Even if the ‘threat’ sounds absolutely ridiculous to you and me.

        1. ‘Kill him Floyd.’ Sigh.

          That Chauvin intended to kill Floyd, or was more than indifferent to the possibility.

        2. I guess you’re right. How depressing. I still think SCOTUS revisiting qualified immunity would be net good for freedom.

        3. They should up those charges to 2nd degree Murder and manslaughter and let him plea down or let jury convict him of a lesser charge. They might even be able to charge 1st degree since they had him in the police car and Chauvin took him out of the car for some unknown reason to kneel on his neck. Again, he can plea down to 2nd or the jury can choose to convict him of a lesser charge.

          1. I’m not sure if Minnesota lets a jury convict on a lesser included charge. The problem with overcharging him is that the jury might very well acquit him. And whoooo-weee, you thought you saw riots before…

          2. they had him in the police car and Chauvin took him out of the car for some unknown reason to kneel on his neck

            I find that extremely curious. I hope there is video of this. I’ve only seen Floyd being led away in cuffs and then laying under the back of that vehicle with the cop on his neck. What happened in between?

      3. What makes you think it’s ‘feels’ not facts?

        Just take one look at the national registry of exonerations. If African Americans aren’t being singled out then their exoneration rate would match their population percentage. Yet here we are with them only making up 13% of the population but 47% of exonerations.

        And that’s wrongful convictions.

        1. What if—and just bear with me on this; it might sound crazy to you—-African Americans didn’t commit crime in the same proportion that they make up in society? I mean, I’m really going out on a limb with this one, but…what if they actually committed crimes far in excess of their proportion of the population?

          If they committed, oh, 60 percent of the violent crime, then a 47 percent exoneration rate might not look so out of line. See, e.g.,

          That link is just for Murder in 2018.

          1. Has no bearing on the proportion of exonerations.

            It could literally be that a singular group is responsible for 90% of all crime as long as there is no bias in the justice system then the number of exonerations for that group should not exceed it’s own proportion of the population.

            If you’d like to see the math we can do that too.

            1. You’re a fucking moron. Initial description of suspect is black male, they catch and wrongfully convict a black male. Wrongful convictions do not exist in a vacuum you blithering idiot

              1. Someone’s getting all hot and bothered because their world view is being challenged. How adorable.

                1. If by worldview you mean a basic fucking understanding as to how criminal investigations work and by hot and bothered you mean my eyes hurting from the roll caused by your post and by challenged you mean noticed a toddler attempting to speak then sure.

                  1. This must be embarrassing for you.

                    For those reading through this who don’t understand let me explain. I already explained it literally does not matter how much crime each group is responsible for. I have shown the math on that. Exonerations will show where bias exists in the justice system. This thing’s statement doesn’t refute anything and actually bolsters my point. The fact that police and prosecutors are willing to go after any black person instead of the correct one shows bias exists.

                    He played himself.

                    1. Clearly if you’re employed as a statistician you should be fired. If you aren’t then you clearly never will be. Gen pop is irrelevant to the percentage of exonerations, the only thing that matters is the prison population. What’s more, in order to decide just how much the percentage of exonerations actually matters you need to control for other factors like vatiance in state law and how comparatively difficult it is to exonerate someone and the amount of money spent.

                    2. I work in Quality. Statistics is part of my job though I wouldn’t call myself a statistician

                      Now let’s go over you’re continued insistence on trusting your feels over facts.

                      “Gen pop is irrelevant to the percentage of exonerations,”

                      Why? It’s a pretty straightforward relationship. You take the number of wrongly convicted and compare it to it’s general population.

                      “the only thing that matters is the prison population.”

                      Sure, if you’re trying to determine if there’s any racial bias in how exonerations are granted that would probably be how you do it. Racial bias against the general population? Absolutely not.

                      “What’s more, in order to decide just how much the percentage of exonerations actually matters you need to control for other factors like vatiance in state law and how comparatively difficult it is to exonerate someone and the amount of money spent.”

                      Despite the fact you have shown you have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about you have somehow stumbled upon a point. Nuance does matter. It’s hard to tell if it’s a nationwide, state, or local problem, however it doesn’t change the fact that it’s still a problem. It may not be everywhere but it does exist.

          2. Fuck it let’s do the math.

            We’ll work with an imaginary population. Said population has a number of 1,000,000. Now let’s split the population into different groups.

            Group A has 600,000
            Group B has 200,000
            Group C has 150,000
            Group D has 50,000

            Let’s say out of the population 1,000,000 that 10,000 are convicted of a crime and 1,000 are later exonerated in the following groups

            Group A 300
            Group B 300
            Group C 200
            Group D 200

            Now let’s do the math. Here is each groups likely hood of being wrongfully convicted.

            Group A 0.05%
            Group B 0.15%
            Group C 0.13%
            Group D 0.40%

            As you can see there’s a clear bias. The only way that bias disappears is when each group is exonerated at the same ratio as it’s population group.

            Group A 600
            Group B 200
            Group C 150
            Group D 50

            Which leaves every group have having a wrongful termination rate of 0.10%. It literally does not matter how much crime each group commits. Exonerations will show where bias exists.

            1. Exonerations will show where bias exists.

              You completely missed the point. Because Group B is overwhelmingly over-represented in the convictions, Group B should be statistically over-represented in the exonerations. If Group B is committing 80% of the crime and only has 47% of the exonerations they are less likely to be wrongfully convicted.

              1. Except the math doesn’t show that.

                This something a few of you have kept repeating, but the numbers don’t bear it out.

              2. The problem here is you’re trying compare the exoneration rate to the prison population rather the general population which is silly. Comparing the exoneration rates to the prison population will tell you if there’s any bias in how exonerations are handled but it doesn’t tell you anything about any bias against a group in the general population.

                1. I have difficulty believing you can’t grok this if you’re actually someone who has any familiarity with basic spreadsheet math.

                  Taking your Population layout above and giving the groups have an incarceration rate of 0.5,1.5,1.0, and 0.25% respectively then each group’s share of the prison population is:
                  A 39%
                  B 39%
                  C 20%
                  D 2%

                  In a perfectly unbiased system where 1% of the convictions are wrongful then each group’s share of wrongful convictions is as follows:
                  # Share
                  A 30 39%
                  B 30 39%
                  C 15 20%
                  D 1 1%

                  If we vary the rate to create bias against Group B, this changes to the following:
                  Rate # Share
                  A 0.5% 15 18%
                  B 2.0% 60 71%
                  C 0.5% 8 10%
                  D 0.5% 1 1%

                  Your scenario only implies bias if you assume that crimes/total convictions are proportionally distributed throughout the population.

      4. Floyd/Chauvin may be the death knell for qualified immunity.

    4. Except for the couple hundred stationed outside his residence for the first two nights, who were literally defending him . . .

      I haven’t seen or heard of any police defend his behavior, which is a welcome change.

    5. Are they pissed cause they know it was wrong or are they scared it could actually cause some change to their status? I’m not a mind reader so my best guess is 50/50.

      Hating cops is easy (at least here) because even when they aren’t being douche canoes they still enforce unjust and immoral laws dreamed up by a political class that thinks they are the Lords and Ladies of the US.

    6. The media set the frame ………..immediately.

      They usually do and the sheeple and opportunists pile on.

  9. In his speech on Tuesday, Biden did not grapple with that unfortunate bit of his legislative history. Hopefully he will be asked about it soon.

    C’mon, man! Here’s the thing, ya toad-licking buttermilk pancake, you can check my record, I haven’t, I mean, c’mon! Get serious! This goes way back to Andrew Johnson and the Civil Rights Act and the other things I got passed in Congress when I was, you know, I was there when these things got done and if there’s one person you can say that was responsible for this sort of thing, it wasn’t me, Jack, I’ll tell you that, let me spell it out for you, make it perfectly clear, I was always against the stuff I was for and don’t let anybody tell you any different or you can just go vote for the other guy. Get outta here, ya knock-kneed floor buffer, you wanna step outside and say that to my face?

    1. This was actually more coherent than anything Biden has said in the last 5 years. Have you ever thought of going into the speech writing business?

    2. Brilliant.

  10. He doesn’t believe it, and neither does an unsympathetic press. It all depends on who’s doing the protesting and what the cause is.

  11. the Great Reason Dumpster Fire rages on.

  12. Was this in the same speech that he stated someone with a knife is “unarmed” and that cops should shoot people in the legs? Has anyone told him about the femoral artery?

    1. several times but… Alzheimer’s…

    2. I’ve seen a few demo’s that show a knife is much quicker and deadlier in a close up confrontation than a gun. But I’d rather not be the guy who try’s to prove it in real life. You know, the guy who brings a knife to a gunfight.

      1. Depends on the gun. Depends on the guy with the knife. Handgun wounds are basically round knife stab wounds with little tissue destruction beyond the tissue crushed by the bullet. It’s why so many people survive getting shot with one.

        They will usually penetrate deeper than an average stab wound though, and penetration is often the difference between cutting things the victim needs to keep on living—major blood vessels, vital organs like the lungs, heart, and liver—and missing them entirely.

        1. Also, if the guy’s any good at all with a knife, you’ll never see it until you get stuck, and a lot of times, not even then.

          1. Get stuck?

            Slash across the throat will allow the victim to see it……….before they collapse and die.

    3. Stop diminishing the danger imposed on the public by unarmed assailants.

      FBI Crime in America, table of homicides by weapon used
      672 people murdered by unarmed assailants using personal weapons – hands, fists, feet
      294 people murder by assailants using rifles of all identified types.

      AR-15s are a fraction of all rifles. Biden talked about handling people who refused to surrender their AR-15s by dropping Hellfire missiles from F15s on ’em. What should be done about the more deadly ignored scourge of unarmed murderers?

  13. I think I will wait until he comes out in favor of massive increases in the Civilian Marksmanship Program.
    Giver every ‘protester’ an M16 to replace their worn out old AR-15s.

    1. Can I have something else? An M1903 or something?

      1. Hell, I’d settle for a 12ga. I’ve been without a firearm for 20 yrs, ever since I left the desert and moved back to civilization.

    2. Screw that, I want a Man Deuce and a MK 19. Maybe a M134.

      1. The M2 because it’s a classic and I want to say fuck you at long range. The MK-19 because fully automatic grenade launcher, need I say more. And the M-134 because 6000 rpm of 7.62 mm NATO, that’s why.

        1. The CMP still subsidize ammunition? LOL. Holy crap, a 200 dollar DD stamp per 40mm shell, and it fires how many a minute? Getting into ‘Vera’ territory.

          1. About 120. Fairly slow cyclic rate and limited to about 300 m. But even given that a one or two second burst is more than adequate to fuck up someone’s day.

            1. I love the meme for it with some sergeant instructing a M-19 team: “See that guy standing way out there? Fuck him up, and everyone standing around him!”

              Supposed to be a temperamental thing though. As I was told, it’s like a military working dog team, in that both can be a giant pain in the ass to set up and get the most out of, but if you get a good one, they dramatically increase what your unit can do.

              HE kills.

              1. Mk-19, duh. Not that anyone is still reading this thread.

      2. *Ma deuce fucking auto correct.

        1. Auto correct getting corrected by an M2 HB would make the best YouTube ever

  14. But it’s still better to look like a hypocrite than to continue being wrong.

    What if he’s just a hypocrite and doesn’t actually believe anything he ever says?

    1. What if he’s just a hypocrite and doesn’t actually believe anything he ever says?

    2. This, I don’t for a minute believe anything he says.

    3. Right? It’s just a popular policy position to hold now, with acknowledgement of previous wrong. “Our police shouldn’t be outfitted like military.”

      But in many cases we’d be improved if our police acted more like our military because then they might have learned trigger discipline. Also, perhaps how to avoid pointing your weapon at things you don’t meant to destroy.

  15. “But it’s still better to look like a hypocrite than to continue being wrong. Biden’s evolution from a drug warrior who approved of arming cops with military gear to a critic of the drug war who wants to end abusive policing is perhaps a silver lining to this week’s awfulness.”
    Um no. After 40 years of fucking up peoples lives Biden has demonstrated over and over again that he he is contemptible piece of shit who will support any policy no matter how evil if he believes it has a constituency that will save his phony baloney job. He will without hesitation fuck up more lives if he sees a political advantage. Boehm would have us believe that this cynical wreckage of a human being has had some sort of epiphany and now see the errors of his misspent political career. It a fanciful idea that most people would be embarrassed to openly state.

  16. Biden is a mess and can’t remember from one moment to the next what he’s about.

    He’s in worse shape now than when Reagan left office.

  17. There are no Libertarians anymore, no, just Leftist beta-cucks who want to smoke pot all day long on live on other people’s work.

    1. We shouldn’t judge libertarians everywhere based on the silly shit we see the staff here post. Some journalists write about the auto industry without actually being a car, and some journalists write about libertarianism without actually being a libertarian.

      1. Are you talking about Spikey Pinhead the Anarchist?

    2. I’m a libertarian who smokes pot all day long while living off of my own work, thank you very much.

    3. I’m a libertarian who doesn’t want to smoke pot or live off other people’s work. But I support your freedom to smoke pot all day long, but not your desire to live on other people’s work.

    4. I’m afraid that after yesterday’s Reason articles effectively forgiving looters for their trespasses I’m with you on this.

      Where in Libertarianism is it O.K. to use force on others or destroy their property….or worse, just plain ass steal it?

  18. Biden should be given a dementia test before he is given the dems nomination. The irregular heartbeat he has is a very serious thing at his age and given he is not in great physical shape (runners often have an irregular heatbeat due to how efficient their heart and it isn’t a health issue is but in Biden’s’s old age and that is not good)

    1. He’d be older when elected than the oldest POTUS (Reagan) was when he left office. And, even if his mind wasn’t drifting into senility, he’s a fucking idiot, with a fucking idiotic platform, fucking idiotic advisors, looking to appoint a fucking idiot as a VP, all while belonging to a fucking idiotic party espousing fucking idiotic policies and ideologies.

      1. I thought his platform is “I’m not Trump”.

        1. Idiot vs. Idiot. I’d take Trump over Biden, just because I know what Trump thinks. Biden doesn’t even know what he thinks.

        2. You’re correct, Sevo….that is precisely what he is running on.

          Besides, it is only 4 words to remember: I’m not Trump.

          I truly hope there are debates, because Sleepy Joe will be systematically deconstructed (e.g. ripped apart) and laid bare for the world to see. He will be shown to be an old, doddering fool. And there is no fool like an old fool.

          Sleepy Joe put himself out there. No one forced him. I would rather not see an old man humiliated, but he made the affirmative choice. Gloves come off.

          1. “Besides, it is only 4 words to remember: I’m not Trump.

            More like 3.5 words.

          2. I understand Candy Crowley is furiously cramming a course on ventriloquism.

      2. Competence or mindfulness are not necessary. Presidents are just avitars or proxies for partisans anyway. They have been for a very long time.

        Haven’t you figured that out yet?

    2. Would you apply the same test to President Trump? Maybe just ask each the difference between orange and origin?

  19. No one including Floyd was killed by military equipment. Cops do need new rules of engagement and no immunity. They can have unions but unions cant have control over and above the law Or how they are disiplined

    1. Letting minion monopolies form unions was a JFK mistake. They are free to change jobs anytime.

      1. That was no mistake.

    2. The military equipment puts them in a soldier mindset, even if it’s only their own fantasy of what a military mindset is. It gives them a feeling of overwhelming advantage. This makes people act much different than a person carrying a .38 police special dealing with fellow citizens who might be just as well, or better, armed. The cops in Britain don’t even carry firearms. You know many people the cops in Britain killed last year? Two: the terrorist who stabbed two people, and one unarmed (sigh, black) man.
      Keep the 2nd, and demilitarize the domestic police. How is this not obvious to even the stupidest person?

      1. There was an interview I caught with some advisor to Scotland Yard (I recall he was missing a few fingers, but could never remember his name).

        Anyhoo, he was making the distinction between peace officer and law enforcement officer and the different roles and mindset they play, especially with regards to community policing.

        Military gear is a different beast altogether, and more akin to occupying force. There should be very limited application (if at all) to a civilian population, but then again the whole attitude towards policing has changed dramatically in the intervening years. As soon as it moved from cost to revenue generating, it was all but over for community policing.

    3. Unions are just gangs anyway. Always have been.

      They’ve been given way too much credit for improving working conditions against the “robber barons” than they ever really earned.

      But don’t tell your union friends that or you might take a long walk on a short pier.

  20. He’s a presidential candidate who is the embodiment of the Overton window

    What in the cinnamon-toast-fuck is this supposed to mean?

    1. That people determine what are mainstream opinions by what Biden says.

  21. Of course, to Democrats, semi-automatic rifles are the dreaded “weapons of war” (in other words “arms”), but if pictures of burning police cars prove anything, it is that maybe its a good idea for cops to have military surplus APCs.

    1. If cops were just Andy Griffith, I’d agree with you. But most are showing themselves to be like the Sheriff in Dukes of Hazzard. Fuck them having any military gear.

      1. Actually more like Don Knotts before he toned down his character to be believable for the Andy Griffith show.

  22. I keep hearing that Biden proposed that in order to prevent future riots, cops should be trained to shoot suspects in the legs–is this true?!

    I remember when he said that told his wife to fire a shotgun in the air if anybody ever pulled up their driveway, so I wouldn’t put it past him.

    1. Okay, I found video.

      If the cops are forced by Biden to only shoot people in the legs, does he imagine the bad guys shooting at the cops will only shoot them in the legs, too?

      Is Joe Biden retarded?

      1. Yes, yes he is.

      2. As SM mentions below, there’s also the femoral artery somewhere around there.
        Further, the hopes that anyone (especially the cops who seem to have a hard time hitting the barn when they’re inside with the doors closed) will, under threat of being a gunfire victim, carefully aim at some of the smallest parts of the opponent’s body.
        I’m sure Uncle Joe really believed those claims on TV shoot-em-ups: “It’s only a flesh wound!”

        1. I wonder whether he was remembering the old riot advice to shoot rioters in the legs, the traditional ‘shoot to wound’ target? Further, I have no idea, but I wonder how well that worked if cops were bouncing shot off the ground into rioters’ legs? No idea if it was birdshot or buckshot.

          I do know the IDF has used suppressed Ruger .22 rifles to wound Palestinian riot leaders, and probably just the most accurate rockchuckers, in the legs. Messes up the leg pretty good from the photos, but doesn’t permanently maim or kill them.

        2. 1999 first homicide in my hometown in three years. Kid tried to stop his dad from beating his mom. Hit the femoral artery. The dad bled out before he reached the ER.

          Shoot in the leg? Stupid advice.
          Unless it’s kill or get killed, don’t shoot.
          If it’s kill or get killed, shoot to survive.

      3. There’s a major artery that runs down the inside of each leg, and it’s a terrible, almost always fatal injury, if it’s ruptured by something like a gunshot.

        Biden’s dementia and his team’s retardation notwithstanding, this is probably just another example of a policymaker not knowing what the fuck they are talking about.

        For other examples, see just about every other elected official ever, and probably half of all judges.

      4. Well the trial lawyers would have a field day with that.

  23. Jack Posobiec

    BREAKING: 2 crates filled with pipe bombs discovered near Korean War Memorial in DC after suspects spotted in bushes. Federal assets in pursuit

    Peaceful protests

    1. I can’t find it on his page

      1. It’s there, but you have to scroll a long ways down.

    2. 3 days old, from Pizzagate guy, denied by US Park Service.

  24. So what does Mandatory Minimums Biden say about relegalizing enjoyable substances?

    1. If it’s girls / women and the enjoyable substance is whatever their shampoo, he’s against mandatory minimum ages. It’s the only thing he’s been consistent about.

  25. Cuomo hasn’t asked Trump for the National Guard to come into New York because he doesn’t want to help Trump in an election year . . .

    Does anyone else have a better explanation?

    I think the TDS is so bad on the left, Cuomo is too afraid to put down the violent mobs in his state for fear that it will ruin his political career.

    1. I don’t think a governor has to ask a president for use of his own national guard. Perhaps you misphrased that.

      1. Trump has offered to send the National Guard under the auspices of the Insurrection Act of 1807, which is what George H. W. Bush used to put down the LA Riots in 1992.

        Instead of taking Trump up on that offer, Cuomo excoriated the NYPD and its leadership.

        If Cuomo didn’t have the balls to use the National Guard himself, President Trump is one phone call away.

        The reason he chooses not to do that is because he fears making Trump look good in an election year.

  26. Biden voted for the 1997 bill that created the Pentagon’s 1033 program, which allows surplus military gear to be passed along to local cops. It took 23 years, but he finally changed his opinion.

    To be fair, Biden probably doesn’t remember 1997.

    1. You mean he was smoking that evil weed he was so against in 1997 that he has no recollection of what he was doing?

      I guess, unlike his contemporary, he must have actually inhaled.

  27. “In his speech on Tuesday, Biden did not grapple with that unfortunate bit of his legislative history. Hopefully he will be asked about it soon.”

    By whom? The media?

  28. Reason still mum on property rights. Telling.

    1. Yah. I had the same thoughts after yesterdays gagle of articles all but siding with the loser/looters.

      Like most of you, I have a great disdain for our current POTUS and wish he’d at least STFU most of the time. But, his tweat calling out the criminal losers last night was one of those times I was glad he didn’t. I have yet to see another pol call it like it is.

      I live in the suburbs where the ghetto dwellers from nearby urban centers have shown up by the car loads to burn, loot and steal. And of course, get on social media and justify it all with their supportive pols and even, police chiefs chiming in their support.

      In tiny little Rio Vista, a sleepy former farm community not far from me, they fired a fire Battalion Chief for posting that if a few looters were shot on sight, it would stop quickly on social media.

      It gets real old real fast.

  29. Biden is worse than Trump, but neither deserve my vote.
    It’s time for people to support a third party. Neither the Democrats or the Republicans have offered a decent candidate for quite a few elections. For me I will be supporting the Libertarian party in 2020.

    1. “It’s time for people to support a third party.”

      I’ve been supporting a third party since after I voted for Bill when I was 18 yrs old. It’s going so well that last election I voted for a guy that’s really only a libertarian when it comes to pot and prostitution and didn’t know what Aleppo is, and a VP that supported the Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton, who was on a t-shirt I used to wear with an ex across her face that said “Re-defeat Communism”. That’s right, I voted for a guy that supported the woman that I wore an anti-communist t-shirt with her face on it.

      Meanwhile, the flagship “libertarian” publication that I subscribed to the first half of my life, that played a part in shaping my libertarian thouggt, has transformed into a progressive rag that is pro open borders, deep state coup, and now, evidently doesn’t believe that a legitimate role of government is to protect property rights (and life in some cases) from angry mobs.

      Sorry, I’m voting Trump and whoever the Republican that runs against Whitmer is, and then only pro 2nd amendment candidates after that, when I do bother to vote. All while buying as many guns, ammo and other supplies as I can in the meantime.

      Because, I hope I’m wrong, but once most of the media begins lying to their consumers about large scale violence happening because it doesn’t fit their narrative, this fun little experiment is over, and the natural state of humanity: force wins, once again becomes reality.

      1. “I’ve been supporting a third party since after I voted for Bill when I was 18 yrs old. It’s going so well that last election I voted for a guy that’s really only a libertarian when it comes to pot and prostitution and didn’t know what Aleppo is, and a VP that supported the Democrat candidate, Hillary Clinton

        I’ve voted ‘L’ for every president since I voted for Reagan in his 2nd term in my first ballot after I turned 18. But in my “swing” state this time, I could not stomach the idea of Clinton winning because I chose to vote for these two non-Libertarians on the L ticket.

        At the time, I was convinced that since the media hates Trump, the Democrats hate Trump, half the Republicans in Congress hate trump, and since Trump in a white (orange?) male..there would be no free pass on anything so all the stupid things he might do would not scratch the surface of the evil Clinton could have done in office.

        I was basically a single-issue voter: SCOTUS appointments. I’ve not been disappointed there, too much.

        I’d like to be able to go back to voting ‘L’.

      2. You wouldn’t know reality if it slapped you in the tit. Do you seriously not realize that you sound insane?

        Sure, the country is falling apart right now. And who’s in charge again? Might it be a certifiably insane fat orange fucktard with an (R) after his name and his corrupt, wrinkled allies in Congress who have basically given up on humanity? How many passes are you gonna give these crooks because they dangle empty bullshit fearmongering in front of your glazed eyes about guns?

        You are a tool of evil people. They like you stupid. They need you to be.

      3. “has transformed into a progressive rag”

        Thank you. You said it better than I could have.

        My donations to the Reason Foundation are now suspended.

        I’m all for open dialogue and discussion from all sides. But somehow, the heart of libertarian thought has been co opted at Reason.

    2. nobody fucking cares virtue signaler

  30. Joe Biden Basically Admits Libertarians Were Right All Along: Cops Shouldn’t Have Military Gear

    I thought the libertarian position was “police should be privatized”.

    1. They promptly retracted it. Pussies.

  31. Making Every month more than $13,000 by doing very simple Online job from home.i m doing this job in my part time i have earned and received $13629 last month .I am now a good Online earner and earns enough cash for my needs. Every person can get this Online job pop over here this site….. SeeMore here

  32. So all the Democrat-run cities and counties are going to have to give up their war toys?

    1. It’s actually impressive that you people have turned Republicans’ inability to appeal to anyone except cousinfucking hillbillies into some kind of virtue.

      1. Hey Tony………….your mama!

  33. Let not forget the reason that the surplus military gear is going to the police. It is so the military can buy more and keep the contractors happy. It is a jobs program. I am sick of hearing about crony capitalism and make work jobs, when the Pentagon is exempt from the discussion. Biden and many other were wrong, many more are still wrong today.

    1. I thought most people knew that the military expenditures were largely a jobs program. Which is why I never understood why Democrats so opposed it? Call it welfare for contractors and you’d think D’s would jump in with both feet.

      1. The fact is both parties support military spending far to much. If you have a vehicle or weapon built in your state you can bet that Rs & Ds are both supporting it, sometime even when the military doesn’t want it. You got a base in your state it will have full support whether the military wants it or not.

  34. Next Reason article: “How Joe Biden Is Basically a Libertarian Now”

    1. That’s the Krugman usage of “basically”, which means “except for some minor, superficial point of similarity, they are completely different”.

  35. Is Biden’s Presidential campaign going to publish a list of his legislative accomplishments that he now disapproves of, or are they going to dig deeper to produce the far shorter list of the one or two that he’d still stand behind?

    1. No. The media is just to find old clips that make him look good. Reason drops a 20 minute classic depicting Biden as the goon he is and the corporate media responds with “but he criticized apartheid once”.

  36. The police militarization problem is not military gear.
    Us kids in the 50s bought our hunting camping fishing gear at the Army Navy Surplus store and never Wacoized anyone’s compound under Ruby Ridge Rules of Engagement.
    The problem is jack booted thug mindset and training replacing proper peacekeeping.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.