That's a good question. The sad fact is we only hear about bad news in every facet of our lives.
There's an old proverb that says that if you do something good for someone, that person will probably tell one or two people. On the other hand if you upset someone, that guy is going to tell everyone.
I've encountered good cops and some that are turdballs. Some have actually done a good deed for me on occasion. The turdballs, fortunately, didn't throw me in jail. And, unfortunately, my complaints about the trudballs with a badge fell on deaf ears.
Does all this mean that I can justify the statement that ALL cops are turdballs? Certainly not, I would guess that about 10% of all cops are turdballs. The other 10% are super-nice guys. In between, there are a mix of cops that might receive poor training, over-worked, , under-paid and run into people who think their a trudball.
I got a speeding ticket last year. The cop who gave it to me was just doing his job. AND I was guilty of speeding. He wasn't an ass about it. He was very professional and courteous. He would have been nicer if he just gave me a warning but I was guilty of speeding.
After he handed me the ticket, I shook his hand and thanked him for his courtesy. I didn't thank him for the ticket but for being nice about the encounter. Hopefully, if he's ever having a bad day he will remember that and not be a turdball.
We hear about all the bad encounters. We don't hear about the good encounters. While I am on that subject let's talk about the private citizens who bitch about the bad encounters with government servants.
You only hear their side of the story. Remember that there are THREE sides to every story. There are one person's word against the other's. Then there is the truth.
I heard all sorts of bad stories about a retired game warden in the area that I live. Everyone that had an encounter with the game warden told me what an asshole he was. Now, I had to take this with a grain of salt because I knew the people that complained about the game warden. Briefly put, I couldn't trust what they were saying was true.
That same game warden was always nice to me. Then again, I wasn't breaking any game regulations. So do I base my estimation of the game warden on just my personal experience with him or what the other folks said? The answer is neither.
He was always nice to me as long as I didn't break any game regulations. All I got from other folks was their version of the story and I couldn't trust them on anything they said on anything else. So I couldn't trust their assessment of the game warden.
That's a long way of answering your question about why we only hear about the bad encounters with government employees. Hopefully, I answered it. That is also a long way of acknowledging that we have turdballs in government; like Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. That doesn't mean that everyone in the FBI is a trudball; just some of them.
D
Deleted member 113831
Guest
Believe it or not I share the same frustration and contempt that you do. It's just that I have a lot more information than you do so my blame is more accurately placed.
Also, because of my job, I have spent a couple of decades studying human nature close enough to realize that all this shit was inevitable. All the republic had to do was survive long enough, and all this shit would be a given.
The fact that we had an internal reset in 1861 before there were any other nations strong enough to take advantage worked in our favor. WW's I &II also worked in our favor for a time.
A similar reset at this point would probably be fatal to the republic. It will be what it will be.
@Longshot231
The only bad encounter I have had is every week when I hand half the money I earned over to it under threat of force.
Other than that I avoid Government people as much as possible, USPS is about it really, next to the Mil they are the best, funny that both teh Mil and the USPS are required.. coincidence, I think not.
Not saying all or even more than average companies populations are bad people, I just want the Fed Gov doing what the Constitution allows and prescribes only, which is about 10% of the power they have assumed. The gov has become despotic and entitled as an entity, not all the people in it but as an entity.
7 of the 10 richest counties in America surround DC, that is a problem.
My experience living in Fairfax Va, is that they are real despots up there, I was visiting a lot during the Crisis and could not believe how wealthy DC became and how little they are impacted by economic downturns, They are not a government governing the willing anymore is what I am saying they best be careful how thay handle the shit they do, the majority of America an huge majority could do without them and would be better off without them.
The only bad encounter I have had is every week when I hand half the money I earned over to it under threat of force.
Other than that I avoid Government people as much as possible, USPS is about it really, next to the Mil they are the best, funny that both teh Mil and the USPS are required.. coincidence, I think not.
Not saying all or even more than average companies populations are bad people, I just want the Fed Gov doing what the Constitution allows and prescribes only, which is about 10% of the power they have assumed. The gov has become despotic and entitled as an entity, not all the people in it but as an entity.
7 of the 10 richest counties in America surround DC, that is a problem.
My experience living in Fairfax Va, is that they are real despots up there, I was visiting a lot during the Crisis and could not believe how wealthy DC became and how little they are impacted by economic downturns, They are not a government governing the willing anymore is what I am saying they best be careful how thay handle the shit they do, the majority of America an huge majority could do without them and would be better off without them.
I forgot to answer your last question. I don't think that 90% of the Federal government is bad. It's too darn big. Yet we do need some government.
The firearms business in this country was self-regulating for a long time. Even back when the gunsmiths were churning out muzzle-loading long rifles and fowling pieces they were motivated to produce a good firearm.
If it wasn't reliable or accurate, they were going to hear about it from their customers and weren't in business very long if that was the quality of their work.
Fast forward to the twentieth century. The firearms business is one of the most regulated industries in the country. That has done nothing to solve the crime problem because the leftists are attacking a tool and not the person wielding the tool.
IMHO, we don't need government to regulate suppressors, SBRs, AOWs and full-auto weapons.
On the other hand, we need some sort of government regulation on the nation's highways and streets. We need people to enforce the speed limits. If there were no limits on speed, recklessness or drunk driving then we would have a lot more deaths. Does that mean more regulation? Not necessarily.
Remember what I said earlier about judges turning illegals loose? Well it's the same with drunk drivers. I'm sure all of us know someone who can't get into a car unless he or she is drunk. They get busted, then they aren't put in jail for a long time to think about living a sober life. The laws are in place but it's the leftist judges who turn them loose.
Am I comparing apples to oranges when I compare road safety to firearms? Not necessarily. Gun owners are a different breed than most people who drive cars. Just about everyone who owns a gun in this country drives a car. Not everyone who drives a car in this country will own a gun.
A lot more people take an extremely relaxed view to owning and driving an automobile. You don't find that mindset in the firearms community as much as you do with some dirt-bags who get behind the wheel.
With that said, the highways are built for the entire public and paid for by the public. We all have a right to some sort of regulation in the use of those roadways.
That's another long way of saying that I agree with you that some government departments are useless. I just don't think that 90% is useless. It's a guess but I'd say about 25-30% could be abolished - see my previous comments about welfare leeches.
D
Deleted member 113831
Guest
So what does that do for you? Serious question, we all know it's been abused and twisted.
It wasn't some secretary working in an office or some inspector that did that shit. It was lawyers and judges that made that happen.
The constitution ideally limits the function of government, but puts no limts on it's size. Two related but distinctly different issues.
Yep thats the conversation that needs to be had, the best time to have it is when we go into full shut down of the government. Keeping on the way it is is going to end up in national disaster sooner than most think.
the first thing that needs to happen is DC needs to be shut down and dismantled, and the States need to resume taking care tof their own responsibilities,
Article 5 convention needs to happen.
or we will be at war with each other sooner than most think.
the first thing that needs to happen is DC needs to be shut down and dismantled, and the States need to resume taking care tof their own responsibilities,
Article 5 convention needs to happen.
or we will be at war with each other sooner than most think.
@ArmyJerry Its not just federal employees. Its everyone. Its even the food you put in your mouth. If you really want an eye opener type in a farmer or a rancher in your state.
https://farm.ewg.org/search.php?fips=00000®ionname=theUnitedStates
https://farm.ewg.org/search.php?fips=00000®ionname=theUnitedStates
D
Deleted member 113831
Guest
Geezus Jerry, you finally said something I agree 100% with. ?
thats the same shit I been saying my whole adult life since I left the Army.
Those subsidies are a small percentage of any operations gross
Here's an idea. Keep the subsidies, in return,
Don't make farmers raise animals for the hunters
Get rid of the absurd chemical/fertilizer/seed/etc regualtions
Stop blaming farmers for water quality issues when from coast to coast, raw sewage is dumped in the tributaries every time there is a half inch or more of rain. Not to mention all the over applied lawn fertilizers and the manure from geess deer and all the other wildlife farmers have to feed
Don't manipulate the commodity markets
Don't enforce bs patents like "rr2" that are the same as rr1 that expired
Don't teach South America and others how to farm so you have a cheaper food source
Etc
Bottom line? Those subsidies and crop insurance are for the American consumer not the farmer. They want a cheap reliable food source.
It's money from the taxpayer. To either grow or not grow something or disaster relief, cattle subsides. I get it. All the US DOA and DOI employees out on the ground working with Ranchers and Farmers making sure the paperwork is filled out right, etc are SOB's but the Farmers and Ranchers are hero's. If it wasn't for the taxpayers money most of the operators here where I live couldn't turn a profit and would be out of business.
Congress passes fucked up laws and all the agencies get to deal with them. They have no choice. The Wild Horse and Burro Act comes to mind. Congress passed the law but the Bureau of Land Management gets blamed for it.
I would rather our Farmers and Ranchers got the $$ that keep send all the money to the 3rd world so they can shit on us like they do.
money has little to do with it, its pure power grab by the fedgov and by giving the gov that much power you are thereby enslaved by the fucking scumbags, another unconstitutional racket these cocksuckers are scamming us on. But you know, "its for the children" .
Last edited:
It's a private industry largely subsidized by the taxpayer. It's purely a risk management tool used to make big operations bigger and lower the volatility of the commodities.
More cheap food policy. More .gov intervention.
Hey while we're getting rid of things. Get rid of "check off" dollars. This is where .gov steals a percentage of your crop/livestock sales and gives it others to "promote" sales.
Utter bs. Just a way for more leeches to get a check and vacations
I bet 99% of those farmers would be just fine without .gov and would give up all the subsidies in a heartbeat.
.gov and the epa is out of control with all their bs and buffers / etc.
Meanwhile .gov and their sewage /ground clearing/ shore line management etc get a free pass.
The intent by .gov of subsidies is to keep a stable cheap food supply. Nothing to do with helping farmers. They give just enough to keep the farmers coming in to the offices to report crops and try and stay in compliance with bs enviro policies.
And if your location is correct those farmers would do just fine without subsidies. Good crops and good basis there.
this guy usually makes me puke but he makes some interesting points here https://video.foxnews.com/v/5985464569001/?#sp=show-clips
And as usual, no mention of all the raw sewage dumped directly into streams lakes and rivers.
https://www.usaspending.gov/?#/agency
Do a search. All those contracts. All those companies sucking at the tete of .gov. Federal employees are the problem?
Do a search. All those contracts. All those companies sucking at the tete of .gov. Federal employees are the problem?
And every one of them are getting their checks as usual. It’s the emergency loan, going to the food bank, kids can’t go to college crowd, crying on tv because they have missed ONE paycheck so far, that I’m referring to.
charity has got us to this point, we need to let Darwin rules apply.
we fed all these fucking people streaming over the border right now with that fatass Sally fucking Struthers. Now we gotta pay for all their welfare here, we should have just let nature take its course.
we fed all these fucking people streaming over the border right now with that fatass Sally fucking Struthers. Now we gotta pay for all their welfare here, we should have just let nature take its course.
Last edited:
That is a source but municipalities report that facility improvements and new builds have cut the volumes over the last century. Many cities used to just to pay the fines and dump their shit if they had to do a repair of if there was a flood, then fines went up and many areas re-engineered their systems. That's ongoing nationwide but the price tag is huge. The DNR uses sniffers to find sources, like from homes on lakes and rivers, then uses dies to trace the direct dumps.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/...mississippi-river-and-what-we-are-dumping-now
http://www.bettendorf.com/?q=conten...rades-appear-be-reducing-frequency-quantities
The American farmer is feeding a disproportionately large fraction of the world's population and fertilizer use rates have been a key part of the crop yield picture.
https://www.earth-syst-sci-data.net/10/969/2018/essd-10-969-2018.pdf
Here's a link to the latest Rasmussen poll that says 53% of the voters want stronger borders and reject Nancy Mussolini's contention that walls are immoral.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...s_want_strong_borders_say_wall_is_not_immoral
DUMPING RAW SEWAGE! And no mention. And you discount it lol
And no mention of all the millions more acres of yards and golf courses that get over applied fertilizer in a big way
Or the millions more deer and other wildlife destroying the forests and putting manure directly in the water
We have a metric shit ton of regulations and all those problems already exist.
True but imagine how worse it would be without any regulations. Again, the courts let a lot of the offenders go free or slap them on the wrist. Then the consequences for any violations are not enough to overcome the profit incentive to break the law.
.gov protects the criminals. They wouldn't be running amok for long
No one to keep people from carrying guns without a permission slip would solve a lot of problems.
While i understand your thoughts on this, the theory that without government intervention, the people would handle the miscreants themselves.
I just want to point out that its been tried countless times around the world, and not in one single case has anarchy resulted in less criminal activity.
Ever been to Somalia?
Ever been to North Korea?
The second amendment is pretty clear. I must have missed the part about it only protecting shotguns for duck hunting that must be left at home
The second amendment is pretty clear. I must have missed the part about it only protecting shotguns for duck hunting that must be left at home
How much USDA inspected produce was recalled last year?
How many times have people gotten sick from home grown lettuce or bought from a farmers market?
As posted above, if government got out of the way, crime would plumment after a few child molesters were tied to a tree and set on fire.
The judicial system is a money making racket in its current form
If a person needs to be protected from their own life choices, they should give power of attorney to someone else, instead of incorrectly assuming everyone else shares their deficiencies.
Im not sure what the second amendment has to do with crime rates in countries with little/no government.
If your trying to say that North Korea has a terrible crime rate despite their governments existence, and because the population is unarmed, ive no reason to beleive thats true. The crime rates in North Korea aren't all that high.
Its a shithole, with concentration camps, and that may have something to do with the lack of an armed population. That however, is a completely seperate issue.
The idea that -the people- would put in the time and effort to handle criminals on their own, in the absence of government just isn't true.
The very first thing civilized people, people who dont shit where they eat, will do, is form a government and hire someone to enforce rules. People want to be able to go to work, and find all their shit still in the house, when they get home. Noone wants to come home, then spend the rest of the day trying to figure out who stole all their shit.
Plenty of people will 'talk' about what they would 'like' to do, but actually doing it is a different matter. Its actually perfectly legal, right now, for any citizen to go track down and arrest felons. Yet noone does.
People prefer to form a government, and hire cops to do that kind of work.
For example, your own city/state likely has a long list of wanted criminals. How many citizens are out actively looking for them vs going about their lives and letting the people they hire to look for criminals, go do it.
I would suggest that before we resort to disbanding government completely, and just hoping that someone will take it upon himself to go deal with the bloods, crips and ms13, we should try remodeling our courts and taking the restraints off of law enforcement.
Last edited:
Who puts the restraints on law enforcement?
Was it the same folks who said states couldn't enforce immigration laws?
Yes, the courts.
Judges, appointed by presidents, largely elected by the half of the US population that disagrees with everything you and I think are good.
The people get the government they choose. Half the people want the courts exactly as they are, they want law enforcement shackled, illegal aliens running amok, and our tax money redistributed to the most useless among us.
The disfunction comes from the fact that they only got to elect half the government. If they become the mojority of the voters, they will become the majority of the government. Then, there will be no more disfunction, and we will be truly fucked!
Last edited:
The exact reason the founders wanted most things handled at the state or local level.
If we went back to that California and New York could enact all their loony laws and it wouldn't affect the rest of the country. They could have (and pay for) government wiping their ass, and the rest of us could have freedom.
Quit whining.
Golf course over-fertilization is a similar problem to crop over-fertilization - both are done to make money. Now go find the numbers - tons of fertilizer put on golf courses and compare that to crop fertilizer tonnage. Put that in perspective.
I don't even slightly discount dumping raw sewage. But I also know there have been well-funded programs across the US to reduce municipal raw sewage dumping. For decades... And it is working. LOL.
I'm not going to criticize the wildlife for shitting in the woods. I see lots of wildlife feces on dry ground, so that's not the same as shitting in the water directly.
My original reply on this topic was in response to your comment:
"Stop blaming farmers for water quality issues when from coast to coast, raw sewage is dumped in the tributaries every time there is a half inch or more of rain."
The tag to rain implies CSO and related raw sewage dumps along with old systems with leaks that leak more during hard rain. The point you seem to be missing is that farm over-fertilization is usually mentioned in civil-engineering publications as a primary source of N & P leading to hypoxia. All of these sources are real and contribute to the problem but it's not like we need to point the finger at CSOs and ignore the fertilizer.
you probably believe everything those same "scientists" say about man made global warming. Er I mean climate change
The finger is NEVER pointed at non farm sources.
Edit. Your argument that golf courses and farms are both run for profit is retarded. A lot of the golf courses here are .gov ran. Fertilizer is a big percent of cost in a farm and they will skimp whenever possible. It's a small cost to a golf course and they will roll it on to keep it green. Same goes for residential and commercial yards, parks, ball fields etc.
And where do you think all the manure from the human livestock that have exploded in numbers is going?
The finger is NEVER pointed at non farm sources.
Edit. Your argument that golf courses and farms are both run for profit is retarded. A lot of the golf courses here are .gov ran. Fertilizer is a big percent of cost in a farm and they will skimp whenever possible. It's a small cost to a golf course and they will roll it on to keep it green. Same goes for residential and commercial yards, parks, ball fields etc.
And where do you think all the manure from the human livestock that have exploded in numbers is going?
Last edited:
You are incorrect. How long do yuh ou think fedgov has been involved in law enforcement?
Most our history fed gov had zero involvrment. As its not a delegated responsibility. Since they over stepped their constitution bounds they have become the biggest criminal enterprise in the country.
Most our history fed gov had zero involvrment. As its not a delegated responsibility. Since they over stepped their constitution bounds they have become the biggest criminal enterprise in the country.
Out of curiousity, at what point in US history did we not have government law enforcement?
Boston established a police force in 1631, New Amsterdam (later became new york city) established one in 1647.
The first federal le was established in 1789, the US Marshalls Service.
https://www.badgeandwallet.com/news/brief-history-law-enforcement
The first federal le was established in 1789, the US Marshalls Service.
https://www.badgeandwallet.com/news/brief-history-law-enforcement
