100% on board rebranding the red hat brigade as the “Red Coats”. It fits them so well.

"The police are not a 'foreign' army, like the red coats.""

Um, is this really what they taught you in those private schools you attended? Yikes! The redcoats were the British army/police. The colonies were British (until a small group of colonists claimed otherwise).

"You've spent a bunch of time and effort trying to convince me of your points"

I have done no such thing. Like I said, you've done nothing to interest me in correcting any of your errors in thinking.

"Well, I'm confused."

Yes, I'd say so.

"shirking your duty to pay taxes is theft and treasonous"

If serfdom make you happy, then by all means, be a serf! For me, there are many legal ways to avoid the non-duty. Just ask Romney and practically any/every crony and rich non-crony, and anyone who's actually paying attention. In the meantime, I've far better things to do with my time than attempting to argue you out of the kind of thinking which conduces the bottom of the social ladder.

2. I'm fairly certain there was drug dealing going on in at least one of those crowds harassing the cops. If not, it would be out of character for these groups.
3. Well, you said crime on private property is no one's business but the owner...that's Bullshit, which you admit now.
Shooting a gun violates public discharge laws, sends a projectile on a random arch to impact somewhere, and creates noise violations (especially in the middle of the night like these)...or can I come to your neighbors property and start my shooting range.
4. My point exactly
5. Use of taxpayer services while shirking your duty to pay taxes is theft and treasonous.
6. once gain, business regulation didn't cause the crime problem.
7. Are you suggesting giving the public property to private industries for them to 'take over' the entire city? First, can't happen. Second, shouldn't happen. Living in Disney is terrible, oppressive, expensive, and draconian. I don't see a difference between paying taxes for services and paying 'homeowner fees' for services, except homeowner fees are usually far more expensive for fewer services and more regulation. Not the direction I think most want to go, or a place where most Oaklandites could afford.
So, you aren't anti regulation, only if a Kenyan is doing it to you? That's just dumb.
8. Yes, but those reasons are not capped and/or solely created by having a democrat in power, as you and others suggest.
Most property owners in Oakland are absentee landlords that don't inspect their property regularly, because private ownership does NOT mean better management.
I get mob justice because you keep pushing for it, it's what the Mexicans did that you keep referencing, and it's what you get with a private, unregulated, armed 'group'.
9. Send me the URL to a company that gives actual security for $35 a month that isn't simply a guy you call on the phone who then calls the police. Never heard of any such thing, and if it exists, you are paying your on-post 24/7 security guard $1 a day, I don't think they'll care so much when you get knifed in the throat for that money.

So, you don't drive, you don't US dollars, food products, electricity, mail, internet, phones, water, sewers, public property, items that are imported, items that traveled inter-state, television, or any other service provided by the feds? Impressive. So many of your fellow Americans do that it makes semse for everyone to pay for part of these things so they are available to EVERYONE. Private institutions taking over make all of these for profit, removing their usage from many if not most people.
Yes, really, many people in the bay are having trouble paying their bills and feeding themselves, it's insanely expensive there.
I don't pay much in taxes, only my fair share. That's not enough to support one indigent. If you pay enough to support Oakland by yourself, you are either Bill Gates or a liar.
Most law abiding citizens have no inclination to grab their gun and go on the streets to patrol.
This didn't seem like you ignored me, neither did the 2 other posts that followed.
Sorry, mixed up the insanity.
You always have terrible governing from any governing body, from some point of view. It's a fallacy to conclude otherwise.
If you got your 'lack of governing' you would quickly get foreign governing.
So, there is no utopian free market, just the real, regulated one you're complaining about.
I don't think most libertarians agree with you that libertarian government is anarchy. I don't.
Well, I'm confused. You've spent a bunch of time and effort trying to convince me of your points, but you claim you know it's futile to even try...so what are you doing then?
To me, good government means doing the minimum it can to do what the populace wants, with safeguards to keep one group from taking unfair advantage of another. Better safeguards could make better politicians (yes, that's regulation, of politicians).
I know very little of 'praxology' that I didn't read in Foundation. Not in my science publications that I read regularly.
The tea party took over the libertarian party, and the republican party.
I do, I vote, and I pay my taxes. I don't have these problems, or over-regulation problems where I live. WOW! It worked!

And I paid for my excessive education, I only did 2 years in public school which was daycare. You don't seem to have any information I'm looking for.
If you think a mob of only your friends and family should roam the streets armed to 'protect your interests' then you support gangs. That's exactly what they are. To get enough to regulate activities in a place like Oakland would take a HUGE mob, far more than you have friends and family I'm certain.
I might hope you DO need the police to help you (with something minor, but enough to create your 'need'), then you might realize they are not all your enemy or useless and not far worse than anarchy. It's sad to think that it would take a personal need for you to realize that, but apparently it would.
The police are not a 'foreign' army, like the red coats.

Fast. The US is highly militarized. And its military/police are much better funded than in Mexico.

"a mob of random untrained angry armed strangers"

If they are my friends and neighbors, I would not call them a mob (I don't know how you view your friends but I don't see my friends like this) and I would trust them more than the police. So did the American Revolutionaries. They trusted their fellow colonists more than the "well regulated and trained" British Army. But even then, many trusted the establishment, the Red Coats.

And who are you even talking about? Because, to each other, they are not "random strangers." The police are the "random strangers!" For most people, anyway.

This scene comes to mind.
Like Corleone implies, it's good to know where your loyalties lie. And that of those who engage with you.

"I will trust the police. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. (and make no mistake, I don't trust the police much at all) That's just me."

Yep, that's just you, and some others, for sure. So what?

"I don't know about you"

Now you know.

And like I said: Good luck with that. I wish you the best and that you never have to 'rely' on the police to 'protect' you.

I thought it strange that the cop is touching Zimmerman without gloves on. You would think he'd have blood on him and the cop would not want that on his hands. On the red coat you wouldn't think it would show up on camera, but that grey shirt it would. So either he had no blood on his shirt and the jacket closed, and that cop stuck his hand in blood while checking him.......or there's no blood on him at all.

You do see the cop wipe his hand on his pants, but that's after he checks Zimmerman's back, which would be wet or have dirt on it if he was in the grass.

I see no bandages, nothing in his nose to stem blood flow from a broken nose. There is a point in the video where the light catches the crown of his head and you can see a line that may be indicative of a scrape or abrasion, but he would have a bandage if it were bad. The paramedics had seen him by this point, and he chose not to go to the hospital.

If I had just been brutally attacked, I'd want to go to the hospital and not the police station. Since the head beating was supposed to be bad, you don't know what the hell may have happened.....unless he was knocked crazy and was loopy from the beating. Which they would have made him go to the hospital at that point.

I also find it strange that they didn't take his clothes.


And for those whom are following the case, there's news out now that the police wanted to get an arrest warrant for manslaughter for Zimmerman, but were denied by the Attorney General. The expert the news interviewed said it was unusual, but not unheard of for an AG to not take police recommendation. That AG has recused himself from the case and they've put someone else in charge of the decisions now.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/newsnation/46883285/#46883285 This is a video where they discuss this.

I suspect Joe Oliver was let into the press to make Zimmerman look better, failed. So now Zimmerman's father has come into the picture realizing it looks bad.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Handbag-Heroine-Takes-On-Armed-Robbers-Attempting-To-Raid-A-Jewellery-Store-In-Northampton/Article/2011021159
25491

Includes footage of the shopkeepers in the jewelry store.

The woman is quoted as saying --
"My red coat has now been packed away for the winter and my red hair is being dyed green. And my black shopping bag is having a rest today, to give it time to recover from its bruises!"

>> ^csnel3:
" ^ The UK is about as imperialist as it is religious. The United States has more resemblance to our Red Coat past than GB does now. Always seemed like a bizarre irony that the Founding Fathers might be more at home in modern day Britain."

imperialist? I thought that he was saying "empirical" and "empiricism", Not Imperialism , completley two different things. I think I'm right! ( its my nature and my downfall). I'm suprised at how far you guys can miss the whole point of what they are saying by being off by one word.


I think it is you, not I, that needs to improve their comprehension. Please re-read my post and pay special attention to the person I was quoting. I am perfectly aware Fry was talking about empiricism, I would have thought the second part of my post demonstrated that well enough. I only mentioned our imperialist history to point out that it is just that, history, and as such actually has very little to do with modern day Britain.

I am surprised at how far you can miss the whole point of what I saying by being off by one word.

" ^ The UK is about as imperialist as it is religious. The United States has more resemblance to our Red Coat past than GB does now. Always seemed like a bizarre irony that the Founding Fathers might be more at home in modern day Britain."


imperialist? I thought that he was saying "empirical" and "empiricism", Not Imperialism , completley two different things. I think I'm right! ( its my nature and my downfall). I'm suprised at how far you guys can miss the whole point of what they are saying by being off by one word.

>> ^bluecliff:
A nice protestant free-for-all. Capitalist to the core.
Your greatest gift, Stephen, was and for ever shall be poetry. It's amazing that such a boringly imperialistic, and philosophically lukewarm people (except Hume and Hobbes) could produce the likes of... well the list is too long (but beats any other nation in Europe)


The UK is about as imperialist as it is religious. The United States has more resemblance to our Red Coat past than GB does now. Always seemed like a bizarre irony that the Founding Fathers might be more at home in modern day Britain.

I think the "Intelligentsia" are a much more dominant class in the UK which may stem from the relatively high proportion of people going through higher education and University. As a result our nation is characterised by sceptics and cynics. We export them to be judges on Talent Shows, everybody needs at least one Brit on their panel now. Our television is full of them too, mostly thanks to the leftist BBC, our comedians poke holes in every minutiae of society and politics, we must have THE monopoly on investigative journalism and Nature documentaries were invented by Attenborough. So yeah, we end up giving a lot of empirical minds with eloquent voices a spotlight while in other countries they struggle to be heard. Mythbusters had to disguise its scientific methodology in explosions.

It actually is possible to breed them tame, but they lose the red coat and their ears go all floppy.

>> ^jwray:
>> ^Kagenin:
The definition of "terrorist" is someone who uses fear, intimidation, and/or violence to further their agenda, political or otherwise.
That would mean anyone who has ever waged war (defensive or otherwise) is a terrorist... Including George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. Try another definition that involves something along the line of deliberately killing random noncombatants.


No such qualification is necessary. Washington was a "terrorist" to the British forces he fought against, and the Red Coats were "terrorizing" the American Colonists. Its all about perspective, which was the point I was making.

In that respect, Americans practically invented Guerrilla warfare. During the American Revolution, we targeted commanders, knowing full well the men they commanded would fall apart without their leadership. We continue to do this today, targeting leaders of political organizations, with far different results, however. In the short-term, we create power vacuums, but it isn't long before someone steps up to fill said vacuum, and energizes another generation of people to hate us.

>> ^Dignant_Pink:
i just watched this movie. i'm not sure why, i guess i just thought i was too happy and needed to cry my eyes out.


I remember watching this back in Grade 10 on recommendation from my History teacher; many of my friends went as well. I remember all of us walking out of the theatre with the some of the saddest feelings we've ever experienced.

It's an excellent movie, not quite sure I could handle a second go at it now.