So we have video of cops beating the **** out of a homeless, probably mentally unstable guy. The problem isn't with the judicial process though...if only the mentally ill homeless guy had been armed, everything would have gone fine. Got it.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes ipsos custodes?

No, the problem is that you can't correct the system with sunshine and lollipops, no matter how much it makes you feel good to believe you can.

The problem isnt that cops have guns. Crazy Montana weirdos have guns, and I'm not worried about one of them thinking I have pot or wasnt showing him enough respect.

The mentally ill homeless guy being armed is not the solution to this problem.

Um, actually, you can. Well, close enough. You correct the system with transparency, training, professionalism, etc.

One of the many many many hilarious things about libertarian rhetoric about cops is a fervent belief that things are getting worse(reflected in this forum's numerous threads devoted to labeling every police department(with the exception of Sanford, FL, for some reason) as being full of sociopaths). Now, I realize that "Situation improving but still unacceptable" doesn't sell Survival Reports quite as well as "JACKBOOTED THUGS ARE GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS AND TAKE YOU TO FEMA CAMPS WITH NO KNOCK WARRANTS IF YOU FILL OUT THE CENSUS" so I ain't hating on anyone making money off this, but come on.

Without the video tape here, this story never gets out. The cops lie and claim they were in imminent fear of their life, there are 6 of them so everyone believes them, they sprinkle some crack on the body, and that's the end of it.

There's a reason **** like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Christmas doesn't happen anymore, and it isn't because they've dramatically reduced gun control laws since the 50s.

You've made like 10 posts hinting at what you think the problem is, but not one explaining it. I am a pretty strong reader and I kind of make a hobby of studying the paranoid style in American politics and I have no idea what you're getting at. The problem is that cops have authority? The problem is that laws exist? Are you signing on to DBL's hilarious "Cops don't beat people to death if there are CCW laws but after some dude looked up the actual stats they must redirect those energies into other forms of misconduct" theory? SPIT IT OUT MAN

How do you correct this problem, six officers beating a defenseless citizen to death without any cause, with "training and professionalism"?

Why is the solution to crooked government problems always along those vague, immeasurable lines (transparency, training, professionalism, etc)? What do these 'solutions' even produce or intend to produce? Nothing, besides waste even more stolen money. Just google "Obama transparency" and 8 of the first 10 hits are news sites that trash his empty rhetoric.

The problem is monopoly -- the solution is to undo the monopoly. What is the purpose of a police force after all? To protect people and their property from harm? Or to serve in an adversarial environment as the murderous violence wing of an institution that forces a select fews' morals down an entire society's throat?

What, specifically, do you believe police officers have a monopoly on?

one main problem is that none of this has been seriously implemented with safeguards in place.

Another way to help is actually convict some of these cops that do this instead of a 2 week suspension w/o pay.

b

To kind of skip ahead, I want everyone to guess on which side razrback is on in the other "authority figure kills unarmed person" thread currently on the front page.

That's QUITE the stretch, to put it mildly.

judicial services, of which police officers have become some contrived paramilitary enforcement wing (equipped with soon-to-be-armed drones, and the full spectrum of spec ops surveillance, infil/exfil, every range of human target reduction weaponry, body armor, and an institutionally encouraged "get some" attitude, all in the name of protecting and serving American citizens)

(oh, and "believe"? really?)

to skip ahead here, no, a developed market built around the protection of person and property would not result in anything that resembles such a killing machine.

This is like saying that a way to help win the drug war is to capture and convict a few of these drug criminals.

The entire system in place will continue producing deadly violence against citizens.

Huh?

Im on the "F*** GZ" side, as I clearly stated in one of my earlier posts in the thread.

lol at "authority figure"

So how did the monopoly on judicial services cause this situation? 6 *******s beat a guy to death. In ACland would this have been settled by binding arbitration? If there's one group of people who are definitely clamoring for the unregulated free market, it's mentally ill homeless people.

It's a tragedy. It's an injustice that currently only 2 of them have been charged with a crime, but as the Martin case and the various related examples of "unarmed people who got shot by self-defense claiming *******s" shows, injustice happens all the time. It wasn't until the "race instigators" of whom you complain about so bitterly raised a public outrage that Zimmerman was charged.

Also, the only actually bad thing you complain about there is the alleged institutional attitude. Since you listed that I assume you no longer need me to answer how additional training and professionalism can improve policing? OMG they have "infil/exfil" these days? Um, the police have had cars for a while. Before that they had horses.

Do you, like Murray Rothbard, base this belief on how effective private detectives are in novels?

And again, yeah, this "its getting worse!" tone just makes you look enormously ignorant.