When There’s No Law and Order and the Politicians are ALL Corrupted

without rule of law

Without Rule Of Law

This is going to come to a head. I will tell you what’s coming in this country. When there’s no law and order and the politicians are all corrupted, and they’re all on the take, and the judges are totally worthless… I’ll tell you what happens…

It’s called vigilantism.

It has happened throughout history. The people had to defend themselves because society could not do it. People took the law into their own hands. They had to, in order to survive. And that’s what’s going to happen.

I’m not recommending that, and it would be illegal for you to do so. But I’m telling you, for society at large that is what is coming. More and more people will take the law into their own hands when the government refuses to do so. It’s that simple.


The words typed above are a close transcript of what a popular radio talk show host said the other day. His geographical reference was his own region, San Francisco. The streets of which have apparently turned into a hell-hole, so to speak. His words got me to thinking… Let me explain:

There are cities in the United States, right now, that are essentially without the rule of law in many aspects. That would include cities like Portland, San Francisco, and others where far leftist mayors and apparent corrupt leadership at law enforcement, are, in a word, corrupted and politicized.

Those who have watched or read about the goings-on in those cities and others, know exactly what I’m talking about. It’s a real problem.

Here’s the thing though:
There’s a very thin line between civility and civil breakdown.


What is vigilantism?

Taking the law into one’s own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one’s own understanding of right and wrong; action taken by a voluntary association of persons who organize themselves for the purpose of protecting a common interest, such as liberty, property, or personal security;

The history of vigilantism in the United States is as old as the country itself. In many ways, the history of the United States began with vigilantism. On December 16, 1773, American colonists, tired of British direct taxation, took part in what came to be known as the Boston Tea Party. As part of the resistance, they threw 342 chests of tea into Boston Harbor.

Since then, we have become a nation of laws. State and federal governments are given what amounts to a Monopoly over the use of force and violence to implement the law. Private citizens may use force and violence to defend their lives and their property, and in some instances the lives and property of others, but they must do so under the specific circumstances allowed by the law if they wish to avoid being prosecuted for a crime themselves.

Taking law into their own hands

By taking law into their own hands, vigilantes flout the rule of law, effectively becoming lawmaker, police officer, judge, jury, and appellate court for the cause they are pursuing.

We all know the system is corrupt, right? (there’s corruption in nearly all institutions). It is the way of man. The issue however is this:

We are going to see vigilantism when a tipping point are fed up with what they see as injustice, and when the entire system itself is perceived as totally corrupt.

I’m not saying that I recommend it. I’m just saying what will be a logical outcome as the system decays into total corruption and injustice.

ANTIFA lawlessness | Social Injustice Warriors

We are already seeing this with Antifa (the anti first amendment group). They are violently acting out and getting away with their violence under the willingness of city mayors and police leadership which have been allowing it. It’s going to get worse. “Social Injustice Warriors” have evident “open season” on conservatives, whites, males. It’s getting ugly. If you wear a MAGA hat in these cities, you will likely end up with a cracked skull. And if you defend yourself in this instance, YOU will likely be the one in jail. This is present reality folks…

It gets worse. I’m NOT disrespecting the police. They are actually under attack by the antifa types, anarchists, social injustice warriors, and even the public at large in some cities. What’s worse, the mayors are NOT standing up in defense of their police even as they are being attacked. The more WROL is allowed to happen, the worse it’s going to get!


Without Rule Of Law

As all this escalates and these far leftist vigilante groups push further and further into the faces of conservative Americans who just want to live a peaceful good life… If the rule of law does not stop these radical groups, there WILL be a tipping point. And when that happens, it’s going to be nuts.

Why? Because once you flip that switch to the “ON” position, it’s going to be ON. It’s going to get really, really ugly in those regions where this is being allowed to happen.

I’m not advocating this. But I’m expressing my opinion based on what I’m seeing, reading, hearing, and observing. We don’t seem to have consistent law enforcement across this nation. In fact there is quite a lot of egregious inconsistencies and much of it is POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. It’s happening in so many places, SELECTIVE enforcement of the law based on POLITICAL IDEALS of the city/region itself. That is not good. We’re splintering.

When Civility turns to Civil Breakdown

How many cities? How many of these regions are already rife with political corruption and extreme leftist policies (including selective enforcement of the law)?

And what’s going to happen to rule of law if and when we sink into a Greatest Depression?

Will WROL spill over beyond the city regions into the burbs and rural areas?

Is there some point where it all just starts to crumble and vigilantism runs rapid? Or is this the point where Martial Law is declared? (Will that even work under extreme conditions)?

Is Civilization Just A Thin Veneer Between Civility and Civil Breakdown?

Top Conservative and Liberal Cities in the United States

What Would Happen If Martial Law Is Declared?


  1. It will definitely be better to not be anywhere near a large metropolitan area. I can see vigilantism as an effective tool in a tight knit rural community where the police can not respond because they are bogged down in an urban area.
    If there is no rule of law is vigilantism illegal?
    Something to ponder,
    Kinda like that whole tree falling in the forrest thing.
    Vigilantism, may well be the only justice that will exist at some point, and it can also be an effective tool to facilitate the enlightenment of a corrupt political class.

    1. Kula

      There are only 3 ways into our town (5 if you count up and down the river). I have been planning to try to convince our town officials to have a posse to block all those entrances.

  2. There is no law and order when 90% of the laws in this country are liberal or neo conservative laws which violate fundamental freedoms. Us conservatives need to wake up and realize that blindly supporting the police and police state is not helpful to us when those cops just “follow orders” of liberal politicians. Those cops are hired by liberal and neo conservative bureaucrats. The cops are not doing good when they are arresting people for violating a liberal law; they are being the bad guy. Just because we don’t want to see certain groups run wild like they do committing a disproportionately high amount of violent crime doesn’t mean we should ignore that cops do the same just in the name of liberal politicians whether it is gun control, taxes, enforcing court orders against Christians, speech restrictions (free speech is banned in Europe and may be here with majority rule)

    1. Laws are part of the social fabric, a contract that holds us together. When a police officer arrests someone who violates that contract. Who acts outside the law then it is NOT just ‘following orders’. Your perception or attempt to compare ‘certain groups run wild like they do committing a disproportionately high amount of violent crime’ with cops doing the same thing has a warped skewed view of how our system works. The police, who by the way risk their lives every single day to protect us, are not the same as antifa or anarchists burning their own neighborhood grocery stores.

  3. it aint of matter of IF BUT WHEN this happens the anti gun nuts the unprepared WILL be in those that die first and i aint gonna lift one finger to help those kind

  4. Interestingly enough, the origins of the KKK came about through the WROL imposed on the south during “reconstruction”. Please don’t look at this comment as promoting or endorsing the present day KKK, rather as a historical fact.

    The Klan began as a vigilante force to protect southern whites who found themselves at the mercy of northern civil authorities who refused to enforce laws to protect the citizenry. I was taught in school that the original Klan would visit outlaw whites just as readily as they would blacks who had committed evil acts, when the northerners in authority refused to enforce the law.

    Again, this is no way intended to justify what the Klan evolved into later.

    1. Dennis absolutely correct. The carpet baggers were running rampant as well as crooked lawyers and anyone else WHITE taking advantage of the ravaged south. Most who lost were middle class and poor whites. General Forest a wealthy man, wanted to ‘even the score’ so to speak. Yes, later it morphed into pissed off scumbags and some who wanted power over anything and anybody.
      So it is with war. No matter where or when in history. Chivalry and civility are gone for the most part.

  5. I have pondered this many times, and have come to this conclusion. While there may be a period without rule of law it won’t last long. The .gov will not give up control and will be back to mete out justice (or injustice) eventually. Keep this in mind while you have revenge fantasies about your PITA liberal neighbor that complains when you use your backyard range…

    1. With all due respect i disagree, in the event of a complete break down of the rule of law in a country as large as America, even if the government were to deploy ever member of the US military. Along with everyone in law enforcement there just isn’t enough man power to control this country. The reason i say this, the total amount of man power for all forces involved would be around 3, to 3 1/2 million men.

      That amount of man power would not be nearly enough to control the whole country. Now granted, they could control some of the large city’s, but you could forget about them having any control outside of the city’s. Not only that, but the city’s would be VERY vulnerable to attacks on infrastructure that keeps a modern city running.

      Things such a cross country power lines, power sub stations, water pumping stations, fuel pipe lines and fuel tank farms. Not to mention that almost all the food that comes into a city is grown outside the city, and is transported via interstate highway, or rail. Both of those forms of transportation would be very vulnerable to attack.

      Yes the government could hold and control some city’s, but MOST parts of the heartland of this country would be a no go zone. Lets just hope that we never have a WROL event to find out which of us is correct.

  6. I live in the heart of former vigilantism. Our first senator, “Wilbur Fisk Sanders” was a vigilante It solved the problem with Sheriff Henry Plummer and the road agents. 3-7-77 was the symbol used by the Montana Vigilantes (Vigilance Committee) in Virginia City, Montana. People who found the numbers ‘3-7-77’ painted on their tent or cabin knew that they had better leave the area or expect to be on the receiving end of vigilantism. The numbers are used on the shoulder patch of the Montana Highway Patrol, who claim they do not know the original meaning of the symbol, though the Association of Montana Troopers web site says “Regardless of its meaning, however, 3-7-77 is emblematic of the first organized law enforcement in Montana.

    1. “How many times shall I forgive my brother?”

      The Hebrew law said three times–Peter gave it the extremely generous (by the law) 7 times. Christ said 70*7. I’m guessing this was the reference. “We’re fed up.”

  7. Unless the Government is kaput there IS no WROL. They may not be where you are today due to limited assets and more pressing need but they will maintain POWER even if they have to ally with Criminal Elements as aux forces. See Venezuela for details, they have had all that Ken has described in this article for over 7 years. Criminals make good (Deniable) shock troops as Real Police-Soldiers may hesitate to fire on unarmed protesters but criminals will not.

    Prime Directive of Government is to maintain POWER. They know power flows from the barrel of a gun. Thus their strong dislike of anybody usurping their “Power” by Vigilante actions.

    Aside from that is the problem of ID of the enemy. Hard to go out to DO Justice when your struggling to ID exactly who the “Bad Guys” are.

    Thus the unending warfare that the Protestant and Catholic Irish suffered over the DECADES of the “Troubles”. You shot my Son so I’m going to shoot you and your friends, over and over again the cycle continues. How do you see it stopping? Took DECADES of British Troops Actions to cool it off enough for them to even talk to each other.

    But then again it’s part and parcel of the 90% DIE OFF our country will suffer when collapse occurs. I have no problem defending me and mine, I still have to face my Creator.

    Micah 6:8 “What does the LORD require of you O Man? To DO Justice, to Love Mercy and to Walk Humbly with they God.”

    What Mercy is involved seeking to “Do Justice” (Who’s defining that BTW?).

    1. Since all governments are a monopoly of power, it naturally follows any government must establish and maintain power. This is not a bad thing, it is just the very nature of all government.

    2. I think it also depends, though, on what you count as “law.” Currently we are in a condition of WROL simply because the laws are not being enforced legally or evenly. The rich can buy their way out of anything, the poor have no recourse, people can be beaten on the street and jailed for defending themselves. This is not rule of law. This is rule of force. So when the law is corrupt, are we not already without rule of law?

      WROL in the sense of full breakdown of government, I agree with you. Not going to happen. Even after things start to settle, someone will come out and claim the government and start enforcing laws again. But that doesn’t mean that WROL is finished. Government is not law. In many cases, government is as far from rule of law as it is possible to get.

  8. – To quote Nailbender, quoting Ol’ Remus,
    1) “Stay away from crowds”.
    2) “Don’t join a group thinking you will make anything better, you won’t”
    2) “Stay away from crowds!”
    – Papa S.

    1. Not sure about my math but the individual trying to survive alone in a collapsing nation would not be the 3% that defended the country against the British overlords but about .0000000028571%

      I guess if you are but one ant in a population of millions, you may be able to hide for a while – if you want to live that way in a cave.

      1. Hermit, its called blending,,,
        Nobody cares about that guy with the dirty clothes and walking stick who is always mumbling,
        But then again,
        Who said the III% were standing out in the square with a sign on their chest?

  9. Without Rule of Law, or WROL, is a relative term. I know Ken is referring to a time when WROL applies nationwide, or even worldwide. He may be talking about right now when folks like the Clintons routinely get a pass on obvious infractions, while others are nailed to the wall or persecuted on trumped up (pun intended) charges.

    Take Chicago, or at least certain sections of Chicago. Police hesitate to enforce the law in certain areas for fear of being scapegoated should they be forced to protect themselves. The good, law abiding folks in these sectors (yes, they exist) are left at the mercy of the gang bangers and other evil doers. Suffering under restrictive gun laws that only law abiding folks follow, they are at the mercy of those who don’t follow the rules.

    Contrast that to where I live. Remote, sparsely populated, 25+ miles from the closest town, the county seat, which is tiny by most standards. Emergencies? Depend on 45 minutes to an hour response time from law enforcement, sometimes longer. No regular patrols by law enforcement, and we have our share of low lifes. Yet, violent crime rarely occurs.

    What’s the difference? Maybe it’s because gun ownership approaches 100%. Folks around here are accustomed to taking care of business themselves if necessary and letting law enforcement sort it out when they finally do show up. In the past, normally whoever is still standing is declared righteous.

  10. The San Francisco Committee of Vigilance was a vigilante group formed in 1851, and again in 1856. So, civil militias banding together to re-establish order in a city, patrol its streets, eliminate corrupt politicians and execute criminals, is not new to the United States.

    This vigilante group arrested and imprisoned criminals, conducted trials, and carried out their justice upon them, and even arrested and imprisoned a State Supreme Court justice, when they were active.

    They voted themselves into being, took care of business…then voted themselves out of being, when the problems were resolved. Can you imagine a modern political body voting themselves into, and out of, existence, today?

    Vigilantes may arise during social chaos, but conditions must allow them to do so. If the situation is dynamic enough, social order will only become possible once the afflicted society has its population greatly reduced and militia vs militia struggles are decided to the point where territories become somewhat stable.

    Naturally, the “Law” will be different in each area of control, which could be neighborhood to neighborhood…and block to block…as the power struggles continue to evolve, or, until it really becomes pointless.

  11. The “Rule Of Law” has become the “Power Of Pull.” The law exist now only to pull money from your pocket, or to get you to pull you to vote in a specific direction. There is no direction one can turn without breaking a law. Criminals and illegal aliens are using the law against itself… and WINNING… There’s no path to victory here… except going Galt…

  12. A while back, Matt asked me if I knew of any leader that could pull all the law-a-bibing factions together to fight against the decline of this country.

    I have thought about an answer and can only come up with this:

    We need someone that will uphold the Constitution and Freedoms. There are several individuals that display some of the characteristics needed – some past Sheriffs, the past secrete service guy on Fox, Tucker, …. law and order types, but we also need someone with the carisma (unfortunately a necessity for the masses) to bring people together for the “vigilante”.

    So no, I have not heard the individual needed, but you all could give me some suggestions.

      1. “DRAKE BAILEY”
        I’m laughing so hard I’m crying. You think he can UNITE folks? He can’t quit cussing them, and their doings, out long enough to catch a good breath.

        The reason no one can just pop up a reasonable name is that it doesn’t exist. Neither of the sides respect anyone from the other. It’s too divided. Prove me wrong and give me a democrat name.

        1. Tulsi Gabbard,
          Just my opinion,
          She is a good person, strong family, still actively serving in the NG, and is reasonable. No she is not perfect, none of them are,
          No she doesnt align with all the ideal traits folks such as us would like to see, but in reality, none of them do,
          She is respectable though, moderate, consistant

          1. I like Tulsi as well, but does she have the business expertise to manage the country – because that is the pervieu of the Executive Branch. For some reason, she is not getting the exposure of some of the crazies running.

          2. Matt,
            Whats to say a R would be any different.
            Look what fun GWB gave us,
            Patriot act.
            Talk about an intrusive potentially abusive set of laws,
            Already had that SPLC yanking the DOJ around by the balls with that one,
            None of em are much good.
            Not so sure this is the place for this discussion

          3. Hermit,
            She is not towing the far left line, she actually loves the country, the rest are just trying to see who can promise the most free BS to get votes and could care less about our country.
            Yea, sure, DJT is an R
            If ya ask me he wasnt elected because he was the best, but because he was the biggest jerk
            We need to move this, not the place for this discussion

          4. The “R” ain’t no different. The current one enacted illegal legislation against the 2A.

          5. Matt,
            I know,, there is no honor, it has become us vs them, is why honestly i have very little confidence or hope for a good future. Thinking just stay out of the fray, out of the way, and enjoy every free day as much as i can.
            In the end, we really have little say or influence in any of it

          6. Kulafarmer my dear friend,

            Many of your posts are enriching and educational and I have enjoyed them greatly, but your choice of a Socialist Anti–Gun, Anti-Constitution Hindu is concerning…

        2. That Dr. Hanson that comments on Fox has reasonable and intelligent opinions. But he is missing the wow factor needed to swing over the low information voters.

        3. This right here is the problem, just like in Scotland and Ireland back in the day, they couldn’t put there differences aside and in the end it was the downfall of any chance of freedom they had.

          1. Kulafarmer & Anonymous;
            Honestly who in their right mind would want the job???
            No mater what one dose it’s always 100% wrong in the minds of the “others”.
            Just look at the crapo that Trump AND Obama and 99% of past Presidents have gone through.
            No Thanks, I’ll pass on that one, but they do have a cool office :-)

  13. Interesting fact about Florida during the last hurricane. Before the Storm hit The Governor came out and declared that all conceal carry laws were suspended and open carry was fine as well. He then continued to inform all Floridians that there would be no emergency responders available during the storm and the aftermath to include LEO. He stated “you were on your own”. Well that was a clear sign to lock and load. Not too many looters in my area however.

    I guess that would qualify for a mini WROL. No Law enforcement, the citizen is responsible for their own security. As long as you are not gunning people down for a stupid parking space. ;)

  14. You mentioned Antifa, so here are some facts about them. They are NOT an American group as there are Antifa branches in almost every country in Europe. A few years back Antifa held a meeting with two Jihadi groups, Hamas and Hezbollah in Gernamy and agreed to work with them. Antifa is modeled after a similar group in Russia and most Communist countries have similar enforcement groups such as ” Red Guards” in China and ” Collectevos ” in Venezuela. Of course Hitler had his ” Brown Shirts” too. As Mao said ” Political Power comes from the Barrel of a Gun”.

    Yes I agree with Ken in a way, violence is approaching, but I would not be surprised if it is either a World War or Civil War 2. Only God knows. Pray for peace, prepare for war

    1. In Venezuela the Colectivos are called ” Angles of Socialism” by the tyrant Maduro. Much like many of our bigger cities, when Communism takes over, the laws go out the window and the Powers that Be use the street gangs to suppress any resistance.

  15. Law and Order? Its all about politics and deep state power.

    The powerful will do absolutely everything possible including a body transplant to keep RBG in office until this November.

    Why November, because there is supposedly an agreement in place for the Senate not to approve any SCOTUS appointment less than a year before a Presidential election.

    Trump may surprise them and hopefully the Senate will see the writing on the wall if they do not approve the appointment.

    1. Hermit, I believe that that rule is in the Constitution. I have read it somewhere, no SCOTUS appointments within one year of the General Election.
      Someone please correct me if I’m wrong.

      1. CR,

        No, there is no restriction in the constitution concerning SCOTUS appointments in an election year.

        There has been an unwritten agreement in the senate concerning the confirmation of a SCOTUS nominee in in the last year of a “lame duck” presidency (a president that has either been voted out or is not eligible to run again). Mitch Mc Connell cited that when he refused to schedule confirmation hearings for Obama’s nominee for SCOTUS after the death of Anthony Scalia.

        On the plus side, if you want that “rule” to go away, McConnell is a scoundrel and would violate the same rule he cited then if he thought it would be in his own political interests. He has already invoked the so called “nuclear option” (ignoring another time honored, but unwritten rule) requiring a simple majority rather than a 2/3 majority to confirm. I called McConnell a scoundrel, but he was just paying back democrats for what Harry Reid did during the Obama years.

      2. CR,

        The libtards want you to believe that there are rules about not selecting a Supreme Court Judge within 1 year of a General Election but that is FALSE.

        Please pick up a copy of The Constitution and read it. We would be in much better shape if more of us did that.

        Back to SCOTUS, I’m in favor of impeaching at least 4, maybe 5 of the clowns that are currently on the court. Nothing in the Constitution states that we should have 9 judges, only that Congress determine the number.

        Hope this helps.

  16. Let’s turn this around: When the Politicians are ALL Corrupted There’s No Law and Order.

    Corrupt politicians in Flint fail to follow the law requiring testing of municipal water supplies and end up poisoning their constituents. Leftists pols in Maryland prohibit local authorities from cooperating with fed guv and end up with a rape epidemic perpetrated by repeat illegal alien offenders. Seattle’s commie leadership decriminalizes “petty” crime and is shocked at the skyrocketing assault, drug dealing, burglary, homelessness, and mess on the streets. The innocents suffer when their guardians repeatedly vote into power those who have proven their worthlessness.

    Filth filling up Baltimore, Detroit, and other broken, bankrupt inner cities, urban wildlings and flash mobs with assaults and property damage, pockets of massive murder and violent crimes, May Day riots around the country, riots after police shootings, escalating assaults based on “identity”, resegregation, Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, Antifa, outbreaks of violence on campuses when a conservative is scheduled to speak, violence instigated at Republican political rallies, Anonymous and other anarchists taking advantage of peaceful marches – what do they all have in common? Large, liberal cities demonstrating the ultimate failure of libsider policies to keep their promises or even protect their supporters from one another.

    There will be no militias or even vigilantes riding to the rescue of the majority of Americans. Mayors, LEOs, then governors, the National Guard, and the Red Cross will be the ones charged with restoring order, if it comes to that. Lone exception apparently will be Asian businesspeople protecting their establishments.

    The militia as most of us understand it, should it ever be formed up, will be focused on keeping smaller law-abiding communities safe. We’ll each have our own micro-militia at home, hopefully. Should the country, and not just areas in and around big cities, suffer a time WROL, then I fear steps would be taken to isolate the cities on a more or less permanent basis. I fear for the good people and innocents without means, resources, or foresight to get away in time. That’s a conversation we do need to have while there’s breathing space – rescue missions.

    For me, after seeing that bunch of pasty boys in Portland physically abuse older gay men and scream racially charged language at African-Americans, Antifa does not stand for anti-fascist or even anti first amendment. It obviously stands for anti f* all.

  17. Which will all lead to what is known as ‘Balcanization’ – the breaking up of a society into geographical boundaries, each supporting and defending itself from outside elements.
    Similar to the castles and fiefdoms of the Middle Ages.

  18. Months ago this is why I started posting. I concur we are headed towards balkanization our problem here is denver and boulder our governor and the socialists habits he is mimicking. Kowtowing to racist agitators and social justice warriors to politicize a police shooting investigation. This once great state is now nothing more than the next suburb of San Francisco. Legalization of pot has facilitated cartel activity and heroin in the schools. The colorado flag should now include the hammer and sickle. Free Pineland! DOL

    1. I wonder how many people will get that reference? (Or maybe I’m reading something into it that isn’t there) ROFL

      Krasnovians unite!

      1. OK, apparently I was readying something into it that wasn’t there. Larry Correia got himself banned from spacebook last week for a slur toward an imaginary country he called Pinelandia. The Pinelandians and the Krasnovians have an ongoing feud about whether waffles or sandwiches are superior. I saw “Pineland” and my brain did a backflip into giggles territory.

  19. Said it before gonna get real sporty between harvest this fall and unaugeration dat 2021.

  20. Without Rule Of Law or police state, which form of freedom would you prefer?

    We might say we are a land of laws, but when the military can violate the Posse Comitatus act and kill women and children in Waco, or politicians and law enforcement can seize your property through civil asset forfeiture, or violate your second amendment right with red flag laws, where will you stand?

    Vigilantism is a better choice than mob chaos. I would prefer the local militia, as the founding fathers of our constitution defined it.

  21. Perhaps citizens, who are able, will simply move from the areas WROL, and relocate to a location where ROL is respected.
    Some may move to a distant locale, and plant new roots. Others may choose to relocate nearby and commute a little further to the same place of employment.
    Once locals tire of the WROL antics and violence, perhaps they will realize the need to vote for someone that will put a stop to it, and restore order and peace. A Sheriff David Clark type, who knows how to garner respect, and local support, and get the job done.
    We have an abundance of brilliant minds, and great leaders who are capable.
    Perhaps working on areas close to the most affected areas first, and then when residents of the most affected areas see the great change and difference in the neighboring communities, they in turn will want to try the same course of action.
    Homeless hamlets, and rats are not the answer.
    The diseases of unsanitary conditions will eventually take their toll. With all of the rats, is bubonic plague a potential reality in Baltimore?
    This should probably have been on the off topic thread. Not sure what it has to do with vigilantism. 😯

  22. The majority of the population are under rule of law however the elite are not, along with the urban criminal element who are key part of the liberal destruction plan for America. WROL exists in politics, Hollywood, urban ghettos and in law enforcement including local, state and federal officials. The internet has just provided the means to expose to the masses what has been going on for years but now it is just accepted as there is nothing the average person can do to correct it without resorting to vigilantism.

    The decline of America started in the 60’s and it will continue until the country collapses both socially and economically and those responsible will never be held accountable. In their day the Kennedys were untouchable, then the Bushes, the Clintons and now it’s Obama, Comey and the rest of the politicians subverting our nation.

    Anyone looking for justice in a courtroom may as well be asking Santa Claus to bring them a unicorn for Christmas as it is nothing but a wishful fantasy from a long gone era.

  23. Lets hope we never fall this far down. It will be the day you see foreign troops on our soil, Blue Helmets most likely. Foreign troops will rob, rape, and kill U.S. citizens for fun.
    We will have to fight every foreign power to keep this land and its resources if we fall into chaos.

  24. I see something in all this discussion that I find disturbing–it’s the accepted notion that “law” can only exist in the presence of force. That governments, by themselves, are the definition of and define law.

    If I can’t walk the streets without being assaulted, that’s WROL. If protecting myself from that assault lands me in jail, WROL. If I am then set on by someone IN the jail, WROL. If I appeal to the jail authorities and nothing is done, WROL. If my court date never happens because of politics, WROL.

    If a government is recognized by the people as a law in itself (as seems to be the prevailing understanding) then the people have no recourse. Yes, governments will try to maintain their power. That’s what they do.

    The people in Hong Kong right now are experiencing WROL. The people in Venezuela are experiencing WROL. Those conditions are created BY their governments.

    Law is individuals, living their lives to the best of their ability. Yes, law is aided (at times) by government, but the people, in themselves, constitute the true law. If the government no longer enforces the law, we are in a condition where the law reverts to the people.

    This does not result, in itself, in the condition we refer to as WROL (or even vigilantism). Many areas live essentially without “law” but do just fine. Many of those are rural, but not all. The absence of government does not immediately and automatically result in chaos as long as the people remain civil and take care of each other. When that civility breaks down, that’s when vigilantism and WROL raise their heads.

    Vigilantism and WROL can be as easily created BY governments as created by their absence (just look at certain alphabet agencies). Which means that the true law rests with those who live under both conditions.

    1. Very good points Lauren,
      Stuff to think about,
      Its like anything else, theres shades of grey.

      1. There is only black and white..which make up various shades of gray for those confused as to how to see in black and white.

    2. Lauren
      Show me the exact example where law exists without force where humans or animals are.
      All animals have pecking orders that are enforced through violence.
      I disagree that Hong Kong is WROL in fact the opposite. They are learning where their law comes from. They didn’t accept it through peace so now it will be forced on them through violence. Rule of Law is very much in place and about to flex very hard.

      1. What you refer to as “law” is in reality force. Even though we believe in the constitution, as a culture we have been taught that force is more important and stronger than the will of the people.

        There are numerous examples throughout history of societies which didn’t need “law,” i.e., force, to thrive. The first that comes to mind is the English “common law,” which was later misused by the aristocracy and became the rule of force. Our own constitution is in part based on this revolutionary idea, that the people have the ability (and the responsibility) to govern themselves.

        The very idea of our constitution is that people are the law–the government is only there to support the people. And yet our society has internalized the idea that FORCE is law, and most actually believe it.

        In Hong Kong right now there is a battle going on. The Chinese have a strong history of philosophical thought, and one of those ongoing philosophies is that if the people rise up it’s because the government needs to fall. This in fact was one of the arguments used by the communist government in overthrowing the emperor. That’s why the government uses force to control their people so harshly. Because it’s built into the culture that the law is held in the hands of the people.

        When you greet your neighbor instead of shooting him, you’re conforming to law. No one is forcing that behavior. No one is standing there with a gun to your head saying “Don’t shoot!” You don’t shoot your neighbor because it’s the right thing to do. THAT is law. If a policeman stood there with a gun to your head (even if the government says he must) and told you to shoot your neighbor, that’s force.

        Dennis mentioned another, more recent example, of a rural community where the police, i.e., force, is far away. People handle their own problems, and I would guess that it’s mostly without the use of force. No one is driving that, except the common “law” of decency and appropriate human behavior.

        There are other examples in history where an entire culture held an ideal of “common law” that didn’t require external enforcement. The period of the Judges in the Old Testament was one. There were others. Most were superseded, by force, with aristocracies of one kind or another. But hints still exist.

        Cultures CAN live without external force to dictate behavior. But it all depends on the individual’s willingness to control himself. When the majority of individuals are no longer willing to control themselves, that is Without Rule of Law.

        1. Lauren
          We will simply not agree on this.
          There is no law without it.
          Force, punishment and/or fear of it is what makes and keeps the laws in place.
          There are no cultures that existed without it.

        2. Without force, there is no law.

          Civil Laws are backed by the idea that breaking them results in a social retaliation of some sort. Since government is the monopoly of force, government decides what the retaliation shall be and arranges for the administration of this retaliation. Any instigation of force by any individual, without the express permission of the government, infringes upon this monopoly of force, no matter its cause, and is, therefore, against the law.

          Please understand Justice, Morality, or Philosophy, are not involved here, merely Force.

          Laws may be barbaric, irrational, arbitrary, and unnecessary, but they are all backed by the threat of force. What is a Law without any punishment for breaking it? It is an expressed desire made by some entity, which may be totally ignored…not a law.

          Many people get the notion governments are not needed because they may abuse their monopoly of force. However, this notion is completely irrational, as government is ubiquitous with Humanity in every social construct they have ever known, from the tribal family on up.

          If one does not like a law, or would like to have a law enforced with greater efficiency, one must direct their efforts toward whatever existing government is responsible for the force backing the law, or its administration. If this cannot be accomplished, the only choice left is the application of force against the offending government, which is designed to achieve the desired change in government behavior. This would mean placing oneself in harms way and being considered a criminal by the offending government.

        3. Lauren, you’ll find that case law has been reigning supreme(no pun intended 😯) over common law, for some time now.

          1. There’s no reason to continue this. Not one of you has addressed my original point. I’ve tried to explain, but apparently I can’t explain the taste of salt.

    3. Hi Lauren

      Don’t be disheartened. When you say “law” is individuals, basically living rightly, you are employing a definition not in common use. I would describe your “law” as moral code/morality as it applies to individuals and civility/civilization as it applies to groups and societies; religion, conscience.

      There is the law written on the heart by G-d, and in scripture be men, the Golden Rule, which was seen as the basis for English common law, for our Constitution and Bill of Rights, and the foundation of what we commonly call law – codified behavior; a bunch of thou shalls and thou shall nots.

      When I did compliance work, I described it as ensuring laws (legislative), rules (judicial), regulations (executive), policies (departmental), and procedures (agency) were carried out. Laws promulgated by governments are, in our form of representational democracy, agreed upon in the ballot box or voting booth. They are laid on us as our civic duty; many in our polarized nation prefer the term “imposed.” For such governmental actions to have effect, there must be enforcement, and a penalty for noncompliance. One standard saying is that if you can’t enforce it, it’s not a rule.

      For example, it’s one thing to say “be nice.” Can’t enforce that, though most folks would agree on the meaning. However, there are statutes and now plenty of case law that clearly defines what constitutes a prohibited hostile workplace environment. And the recourse is to seek enforcement through appealing to authority or via litigation.

      I wish everyone followed the good conscience I believe they were born with, but that’s not the world I’ve lived in.

      1. It’s not just the “law,” although that definition is probably part of the confusion. Conscience is only part of it. I can’t explain it any more clearly than I already have. My brain works differently from most people, sees connections where most see none. I should be used to it. There’s a societal disconnect that my words aren’t getting past. I can’t even tell where the disconnect is because I see the problem so clearly.

        Like trying to explain the taste of salt. If I try to explain more it’s just going to add to the confusion, so I’ll shut up now.

  25. Wait for it.

    When a fight erupts in a Popeye outlet because they are out of chicken sandwiches, what the hell will happen when people get real hungry.

    One day with no EBT card purchases, then close to 40 million people rioting.

    1. Another one on FOX. Customer throws stuff and assaults staff because they were out of ice creme.
      When the populace sees there is not punishment for major political crimes, why should they fear punishment for minor ones – some counties do not prosecute for shoplifting – its going to get rough.

Leave a Reply

>>USE OPEN FORUM for Off-Topic conversation

Name* use an alias