Execution by Firing Squad: The Militarized Police State Opens Fire

The Second Amendment was enshrined in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution as a means to ensure that a well-armed populace would be able to defend itself against all domestic and foreign enemies. The U.S. government, however, has been pushing back against that, effectively authorizing law enforcement to prosecute and murder Americans for merely exercising their constitutional right to bear arms.

By John W. Whitehead

“It is often the case that police shootings, incidents where law enforcement officers pull the trigger on civilians, are left out of the conversation on gun violence. But a police officer shooting a civilian counts as gun violence. Every time an officer uses a gun against an innocent or an unarmed person contributes to the culture of gun violence in this country.”—Journalist Celisa Calacal

Legally owning a gun in America could get you killed by a government agent. While it still technically remains legal to own a firearm in America, possessing one can now get you pulled over, searched, arrested, subjected to all manner of surveillance, treated as a suspect without ever having committed a crime, shot at, and killed. This same rule does not apply to government agents, however, who are armed to the hilt and rarely given more than a slap on the wrist for using their weapons to shoot and kill American citizens.

According to The Washington Post, “1 in 13 people killed by guns are killed by police.”

Just recently, for example, a Minnesota jury acquitted a police officer who shot and killed 32-year-old Philando Castile, a school cafeteria supervisor, during a routine traffic stop merely because Castile disclosed that he had a gun in his possession, for which he had a lawful conceal-and-carry permit. That’s all it took for police to shoot Castile four times as he was reaching for his license and registration. Castile’s girlfriend and her four-year-old daughter witnessed the entire exchange.

Police State Books John Whitehead

Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that Florida police will not be held accountable for banging on the wrong door at 1:30 a.m., failing to identify themselves as police, and then repeatedly shooting and killing the innocent homeowner who answered the door while holding a gun in self defense. Although 26-year-old Andrew Scott had committed no crime and never fired a single bullet or lifted his firearm against police, he was gunned down by police who were investigating a speeding incident by engaging in a middle-of-the-night “knock and talk” in Scott’s apartment complex.

As attorney David French writes for the National Review, “Shooting an innocent man in his own home because he grabs a gun when an unidentified person pounds on his door or barges through it isn’t just an ‘unreasonable search or seizure.’ It’s a direct violation of his clearly established right to keep and bear arms.”

Continuing its own disturbing trend of siding with police in cases of excessive use of force, a unanimous Supreme Court recently acquitted police who recklessly fired 15 times into a backyard shack in which a homeless couple—Angel and Jennifer Mendez—was sheltering. Angel Mendez suffered numerous gunshot wounds, one of which required the amputation of his right leg below the knee, and his wife Jennifer was shot in the back. Incredibly, the court ruled that the Los Angeles County police officers’ use of force against the homeless couple was justified as a defensive action, because Angel was allegedly seen holding a BB gun that he used for shooting rats.

In yet another case, a Texas homeowner was subjected to a no-knock, SWAT-team style forceful entry and raid based solely on the suspicion that there were legally owned firearms in his household. Making matters worse, police panicked and opened fire through a solid wood door on the homeowner, who had already gone to bed.

Bug Out While You Still Can! Learn More…

In Maryland, a Florida man traveling through the state with his wife and kids was stopped by a police officer and interrogated about the whereabouts of his registered handgun. Despite the man’s insistence that the handgun had been left at home, the officer spent nearly two hours searching through the couple’s car, patting them down along with their children, and having them sit in the back of a patrol car. No weapon was found.

In Philadelphia, a 25-year-old man was confronted by police, verbally threatened, and arrested for carrying a gun in public, which is legal within the city. When Mark Fiorino attempted to explain his rights under the law to police, police ordered him to get on his knees or else “I am gonna shoot ya.” Fiorino was later released without charges.

What these cases add up to is a new paradigm in which legally owning a gun turns you into a target for government sharp-shooters.

Ironically, while America continues to debate who or what is responsible for gun violence—the guns, the gun owners, or our violent culture—little has been said about the fact that the greatest perpetrator of violence in American society and around the world is the U.S. government.

Government violence is the missing link in the gun control debate.

Violence has become the government’s calling card, starting at the top and trickling down, from the more than 80,000 SWAT team raids carried out every year on unsuspecting Americans by heavily armed, black-garbed commandos and the increasingly rapid militarization of local police forces across the country to the drone killings used to target insurgents. The government even exports violence worldwide, with one of this country’s most profitable exports being weapons.

Thus, any serious discussion about minimizing the violence in our society needs to address the manner in which the government and its cohorts (the police, the various government agencies that are now armed to the hilt, the military, the defense contractors etc.) use violence as a means to an end, whether domestically or in matters of foreign policy.

You want to reduce gun violence? Start with the government.

Except that the government has no intention of scaling back on its weapons. To the contrary, the government’s efforts to militarize and weaponize its own agencies and employees is reaching epic proportions, with federal agencies as varied as the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration placing orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of hollow point bullets.

Talk about a double standard.

The government’s arsenal of weapons makes the average American’s handgun look like a Tinker Toy.

Under the auspices of a military “recycling” program, which allows local police agencies to acquire military-grade weaponry and equipment, more than $4.2 billion worth of equipment has been transferred from the Defense Department to domestic police agencies since 1990. Included among these “gifts” are tank-like, 20-ton Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, tactical gear, and assault rifles.

Ironically, while gun critics continue to clamor for bans on military-style assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and armor-piercing bullets, expanded background checks, and tougher gun-trafficking laws, the U.S. military boasts all of these and more, including some weapons the rest of the world doesn’t have.

Included in the government’s arsenal are armed, surveillance Reaper drones capable of reading a license plate from over two miles away; an AA12 Atchisson Assault Shotgun that can shoot five 12-gauge shells per second and “can fire up to 9,000 rounds without being cleaned or jamming”; an ADAPTIV invisibility cloak that can make a tank disappear or seemingly reshape it to look like a car; a PHASR rifle capable of blinding and disorienting anyone caught in its sights; a Taser shockwave that can electrocute a crowd of people at the touch of a button; an XM2010 enhanced sniper rifle with built-in sound and flash suppressors that can hit a man-sized target nine out of ten times from over a third of a mile away; and an XM25 “Punisher” grenade launcher that can be programmed to accurately shoot grenades at a target up to 500 meters away.

In the hands of government agents, whether they are members of the military, law enforcement or some other government agency, these weapons have become accepted instruments of tyranny, routine parts of America’s day-to-day life, a byproduct of the rapid militarization of law enforcement over the past several decades.

This lopsided, top-heavy, authoritarian state of affairs is not the balance of power the founders intended for “we the people.”

The Second Amendment, in conjunction with the multitude of prohibitions on government overreach enshrined in the Bill of Rights, was supposed to serve as a clear shackle on the government’s powers. As 20th century libertarian Edmund A. Opitz observed in 1964, “No one can read our Constitution without concluding that the people who wrote it wanted their government severely limited; the words ‘no’ and ‘not’ employed in restraint of government power occur 24 times in the first seven articles of the Constitution and 22 more times in the Bill of Rights.”

To founders such as Thomas Jefferson, who viewed the government as a powerful entity that must be bound “down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution,” the right to bear arms was no different from any other right enshrined in the Constitution: It was intended to stand as a bulwark against a police state.

Without any one of those freedoms, we are that much more vulnerable to the vagaries of out-of-control policemen, benevolent dictators, genuflecting politicians, and overly ambitious bureaucrats.

Writing for CounterPunch, journalist Kevin Carson suggests that prohibiting Americans from owning weapons would be as dangerously ineffective as Prohibition and the War on the Drugs:

[W]hat strict gun laws will do is take the level of police statism, lawlessness, and general social pathology up a notch in the same way Prohibition and the Drug War have done. I’d expect a War on Guns to expand the volume of organized crime, and to empower criminal gangs fighting over control over the black market, in exactly the same way Prohibition did in the 1920s and strict drug laws have done since the 1980s. I’d expect it to lead to further erosion of Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure, further militarization of local police via SWAT teams, and further expansion of the squalid empire of civil forfeiture, perjured jailhouse snitch testimony, entrapment, planted evidence, and plea deal blackmail.

This is exactly what those who drafted the Constitution feared: that laws and law enforcers would be used as tools by a despotic government to wage war against the citizenry.

This phenomenon is what philosopher Abraham Kaplan referred to as the law of the instrument, which essentially says that to a hammer, everything looks like a nail. As I explain in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we the citizenry have become the nails to be hammered by the government’s battalion of laws and law enforcers (its police officers, technicians, bureaucrats, spies, snitches, inspectors, accountants etc.), and we’re supposed to take the beatings without complaint or reproach.

Now don’t get me wrong. I do not sanction violence, nor do I believe that violence should ever be the answer to our problems. As John Lennon warned: “When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you—pull your beard, flick your face—to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you.”

Still there’s something to be said for George Orwell’s view that “that rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer’s cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

The Second Amendment serves as a check on the political power of the ruling authorities. It represents an implicit warning against governmental encroachments on one’s freedoms, the warning shot over the bow to discourage any unlawful violations of our persons or property.

Certainly, dictators in past regimes have understood this principle only too well.

As Adolf Hitler noted: “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”

It should come as no surprise, then, that starting in December 1935, Jews in Germany were prevented from obtaining shooting licenses, because authorities believed that to allow them to do so would “endanger the German population.”

In late 1938, special orders were delivered barring Jews from owning firearms, with the punishment for arms possession being 20 years in a concentration camp.

The rest, as they say, is history. Yet it is a history that we should be wary of repeating.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available from the American Free Press bookstore. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.

image_print

4 Comments on Execution by Firing Squad: The Militarized Police State Opens Fire

  1. Jews declared war on Germany in 1933. Israel now is committing genocide on Palestinians and the Palestinians are provided with guns made in the United states, by what two countries?

  2. Texas requires that you tell a policeman that you have a gun in the car if you’re stopped. So there, you are required to tell the most dangerous person to you at the moment that he can shoot you if he feels like it.

  3. The U.S. government, however, has been pushing back against that, effectively authorizing law enforcement to prosecute and murder Americans for merely exercising their constitutional right to bear arms.

    WHY?
    Why make such an empty statement like above, when you could have said:

    OBAMA IS A CIA AGENT & DID WHAT HE WAS TOLD!

    HE WAS FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS ON THE PHOENIX PROGRAM, WHICH IS IN OPERATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST, EUROPE AND AMERICA.

    BUSH AND CLINTON CARRIED IT OUT AND TRUMP WILL CARRY IT OUT ALSO!

    FERGUSON WAS PART OF THE AMERICAN PHOENIX PROGRAM.

    THIS IS WHERE THE CIA USED BLACK AGENT PROVOCATEURS TO CREATE RIOTS, PROVING TO THE VOTERS THAT THE POLICE MUST BE MILITARIZED.

    OVERTHROWING OTHER PEOPLE’S GOVERNMENTS:

    THE MASTER LIST

    By William Blum – Published February 2013

    [The United States routinely interferes with elections of dozens of other nations and even “installs” political leaders through various CIA operations, including CIA-led coups and assassinations of foreign leaders].

    Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government)

    •China 1949 to early 1960s

    •Albania 1949-53

    •East Germany 1950s

    •Iran 1953 *

    •Guatemala 1954 *

    •Costa Rica mid-1950s

    •Syria 1956-7

    •Egypt 1957

    •Indonesia 1957-8

    •British Guiana 1953-64 *

    •Iraq 1963 *

    •North Vietnam 1945-73

    •Cambodia 1955-70 *

    •Laos 1958 *, 1959 *, 1960 *

    •Ecuador 1960-63 *

    •Congo 1960 *

    •France 1965

    •Brazil 1962-64 *

    •Dominican Republic 1963 *

    •Cuba 1959 to present

    •Bolivia 1964 *

    •Indonesia 1965 *

    •Ghana 1966 *

    •Chile 1964-73 *

    •Greece 1967 *

    •Costa Rica 1970-71

    •Bolivia 1971 *

    •Australia 1973-75 *

    •Angola 1975, 1980s

    •Zaire 1975

    •Portugal 1974-76 *

    •Jamaica 1976-80 *

    •Seychelles 1979-81

    •Chad 1981-82 *

    •Grenada 1983 *

    •South Yemen 1982-84

    •Suriname 1982-84

    •Fiji 1987 *

    •Libya 1980s

    •Nicaragua 1981-90 *

    •Panama 1989 *

    •Bulgaria 1990 *

    •Albania 1991 *

    •Iraq 1991

    •Afghanistan 1980s *

    •Somalia 1993

    •Yugoslavia 1999-2000 *

    •Ecuador 2000 *

    •Afghanistan 2001 *

    •Venezuela 2002 *

    •Iraq 2003 *

    •Haiti 2004 *

    •Somalia 2007 to present

    •Honduras 2009

    •Libya 2011 *

    •Syria 2012

    •Ukraine 2014 *

    Unless Americans study, THE CIA AS ORGANIZED CRIME and THE PHOENIX PROGRAM, by Douglas Valentine, they will continue to live in La La Land!

    Start in chapter 13 of THE CIA AS ORGANIZED CRIME! This will show you what the CIA is doing TODAY and then you can go back and start reading the rest of the book.

    The CIA is the greatest Terrorist Organization, in the world!

    The CIA makes Muhammad look like a Boy Scout!

    VIETNAM SLAUGHTER:

    *nearly four million Vietnamese killed.
    *more bombs dropped on Vietnam than by all sides in all previous wars throughout history, and three times more dropped than by all sides in the Second World War.
    *19,000,000 gallons of herbicide poisoned the land.
    *9,000 of 15,000 hamlets destroyed in the South of Vietnam.
    *In the North, all six industrial cities devastated; 28 of 30 provincial towns and 96 of 116 district towns leveled by bombing.
    *The United States threatened to use nuclear weapons thirteen times. Nixon chided Kissinger for being too squeamish about this. Nixon said he, himself, just didn’t give a damn.
    *After the war, unexploded bombs and mines permeated the landscape and took an additional 42,000 lives. Millions of acres of land have still not been cleared of live ordnance.
    *Agent Orange and other defoliants have caused severe health problems for millions of Vietnamese.
    *Nearly all of Vietnam’s triple canopy forests were destroyed.
    *3,000,000 tons of ordnance struck 100,000 sites during the “secret” war in Cambodia, causing widespread social dislocation, destruction of crops, and starvation. The U.S. bombing campaign in Cambodia was directly responsible for the rise of the Khmer Rouge under Pol Pot and the genocide that took place afterward (The United States actually sided with Pol Pot when Vietnamese troops finally ended his reign of terror).

  4. “Just recently, for example, a Minnesota jury acquitted a police officer who shot and killed 32-year-old Philando Castile, a school cafeteria supervisor, during a routine traffic stop”

    According to reports, it was not a routine traffic stop — the cop thought he was the bank robber he was on the lookout for.

    “merely because Castile disclosed that he had a gun in his possession, for which he had a lawful conceal-and-carry permit.”

    And because he was going for the permit — which looked just like he was going for a gun. I was taught to put my hands on the wheel, inform the officer I had a permit, ask him to direct my actions, and then to perform them _slowly_.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*