A Fervent Cop Supporter Changes His Mind About NYPD After Gravity Knife Arrest | Village Voice

There is a reason I do not support police as a job role or necessary segment of society. While I would gladly support local township/county sheriffs who did not in any way accept or benefit from outside support and were beholden only to the locale in which they worked, I cannot see the benefit of state enforcers. The linked article shows why. And now another former cop lover understands why the majority of citizens in this country detest cops as they are and as they act now.
This being said, always be armed, always be smart and stop blindly obeying these state enforcers and their masters. Personally I prefer to carry either a Spyderco PM2 with a 3.5 inch blade or a CRKT M16 folder with a 3″ blade or another favorite and well tested knife the

Kershaw Ken Onion Leek with a legal length blade
Be safe, be smart and be prepared!

The following article details one mans journey from being a supporter of police to now understanding why police are seen so negatively.



About Jesse Mathewson

Jesse Mathewson is the author of the popular blog, jessetalksback.com and provides commentary to many varied places based on a background that includes education in criminal justice, history, religion and even insurgency tactics and tactical training. His current role in his community is as an organizer of sorts and a preacher of community solidarity and agorism. He also runs Liberty Practical Training, a self defense school specializing in the practical applications of defensive approaches versus the theoretical. As an agorist, voluntaryist and atheist his life is seen as crazy and wild by many, though once they get to know him most realize he is a bluntly honest individual who will give you the shirt off his back if he believes it is necessary to help you. Very simple, "That which is voluntary between all individuals involved is always right, if it is not voluntary, it is always wrong."
This entry was posted in Authored by Jesse Mathewson, Reviews, Self Defense and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to A Fervent Cop Supporter Changes His Mind About NYPD After Gravity Knife Arrest | Village Voice

  1. Yes, however, private security works for those who pay for it. Right?

    Liked by 1 person

    • jeffreycanthony says:

      The idea of private = who pays = get results is real, but the problem is when people define sheriff vs defining security. There’s huge differences, in that one sheriff only = can pressure others by force to do what only those that pay them into. Security tends to not be on the aggression side of law enforcement.

      Setting a force monopoly up based on accountability by loss of job from funding simply leaves that force monopoly beholden to the highest bidder. A sheriff isn’t private security, since private security does not require monopoly to work.


  2. jeffreycanthony says:

    What if half the town wants one sheriff and the other half a different one, not based on geography? That’s my concern. It could create a situation where only the rich get their way through monopoly of control by force again. Happened in the past as well.

    Can be fired and replaced is what most people claim works in our present tyranny of the majority.


  3. And again, privately hired sheriffs who are only beholden to the residents who pay them…can also be fired and replaced. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Remember, when the local sheriff was hired privately by the individuals in an area, crime was less and so was corruption generally speaking.

    Liked by 1 person

    • jeffreycanthony says:

      While I like the idea, and I do agree there are proven realities to it, I’m mostly concerned by having the weak spot of one person based on everyone’s vote or hire. It’s better than now, but I’m finding a lot of the interesting possibilities many discuss of market competition of security needs keeping us from having that one person that might be great, but if that person isn’t, we have a ton of problems.

      I can say that we had a lot of monarchs that were very benign and cared about their people, and various nations prospered under their rule, and I am starting to feel that it’s better than our present blame displacement system because a monarch has a bit more direct accountability for the success or failure of things, yet get a bad monarch and you have far more strife than if we had ruled ourselves, or if the people built structures.

      I prefer a model where competition has people hiring who they feel works for them. And if that happens to be one sheriff, great, but the idea that they aren’t locked into a single point failure possibility is important.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. jeffreycanthony says:

    There’s so many layers to this, I’m glad one person changed his tune. Sadly I feel like we are in the minority even when there’s evidence to the contrary. Most people wont break past the “why bother we can’t change it” mentality. My place on that: don’t decide what’s right based on the fact that lesser of evils are the only choices. Make sure to always evaluate what is ethical regardless of what things look like. That “but i can’t do anything about it” is why women continue to stay with men after being abused. It’s like we all are domestic abuse victims in some way.

    Personally i don’t even buy into individual sheriff / local stuff since it’s still unaccountable monopoly on the use of force in a region. Better than what we have now, but it’s a “just the tip” argument to me.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.