Government officials and law enforcement officers are more terrified of the average citizens armed with cameras than they are of an entire constitutional militia armed with guns. One who is inclined to thoughtful reflection might wonder why this should be.
Government (and yes that includes your local government and it's officials as well B-town!), by its very nature, is a violent organization. They need to use force, intimidation and coercion in order to exist. They have, in fact, claimed a monopoly on the use of force. If you were to try to try to do the same things these people do everyday you’d be arrested in a heartbeat. To those of you who are reading this and think that police brutality and corrupt government officials are "big city" problems that do not effect us here in "small town" Bloomington, I say let us not forget the tragic case of James Borden Sr. who was murdered by two Monroe County jailers on Nov. 6 of 2004.
Borden had been transported to the Monroe County Jail from his home in Lawrence County for violating house arrest. He was a diabetic whose father had just died, and he was not taking his medication. Police reports say he was disoriented and seemingly mentally confused, reportedly talking to inanimate objects.
In a written report immediately after Borden's death, Shaw explained the first of three shocks he administered: "Borden was handcuffed behind his back. I was facing Borden at that time. (Borden was not wearing shackles). Borden was wearing a pair of shorts which was around his ankles. Also had on blue boxers. I asked Borden to lift his foot as to remove the shorts, but he was being combative and refused. I (D. Shaw) dried stunned Borden in the lower abdominal area. At that time Borden lifted his feet so we could remove his shorts."
Brown went so far as to suggest that Shaw may have shocked Borden as punishment for dying. "Jail officers have reported that Borden was kicking and struggling while pinned, face down, on the floor with his hands cuffed behind him," the H-T reported. "But Brown suggested in court that the man could have been dying at the time — or at least unable to breathe."
Imagine yourself as that citizen, on the floor of our jail, hands cuffed behind your back, in your underwear with four deputies constraining you, being shocked with 50,000 volts of electricity from a man, who seemed to be enjoying himself.
That image is the disturbing but inevitable consequence of a community whose "leaders" have their heads firmly embedded in quicksand on the subject of police violence and accountability. It is but the latest in a lengthy, well-documented history of police brutality and abuses of power in and around Bloomington.
High-profile, historic examples are many, from the disappearance of a barn full of marijuana under county sheriff control in the 1980s to the BPD People's Park lineup in 1995 to the ISP sidewalk beating of County Councilman Scott Wells in 2002. Others, while not rising to the level of lore, are no less disturbing.
Such as the story in the H-T in the early 1990s about a deluded, elderly man who had barricaded himself in an apartment on South Walnut Street Pike with a gun. Police subdued him, and no one was hurt, except the man. Buried in the story was a line that he suffered a broken arm while being taken, in handcuffs, to the police car.
Then there's the time police bloodied up local activist Mike Andrews during a bicycle protest in downtown Bloomington. His crime: crossing the centerline into a lane that the police told him to stay out of.
That a cadre of cowboy cops routinely cross the line, sometimes violently, in the performance of their duties is not news to our community "leaders", yet they continue to turn their heads and allow such injustices to be practiced here in Bloomington.
Read original article about the James Borden murder from the Bloomington Alternative here http://www.bloomingtonalternative.com/articles/2004/04/25/7508
But the government (both globally and locally) and there elected officials, including the police, do not want you to think about them in this way. They want you to think of them as benevolent. They don’t want you to think of them as thieves, they want you to think of them as charitable angels saving the under privileged. They don’t want you to think of them in terms of generating revenue for their own self interests, they want you to think of them in terms of providing public safety. They don’t want you thinking of them as cheaters who won’t follow their own rules, they want you to think of them as more knowledgeable than you, superior to you, and better able to determine what is best for you. And one way or another you’ll pay them to do so. They don’t want you to think of them as violent thugs violating the rights of innocent humans which they supposedly took an oath to protect, they want you to think of them as super humans who never make a mistake, never arrest an innocent, and instinctively know when someone has victimized another human being. They want you to believe that their good intentions make the wrongs they do okay.
Image via WikipediaThey want you to believe these things so much that they start teaching them to you at a very young age. Of course, they are a little more subtle about it. They may do it under the guise of public education, but what they are really doing is forcing the vast majority of the populace to spend a large portion of their day at federally funded government indoctrination centers. They then teach us that this is the greatest nation in the world due to government rather than due to lack of government, faith in the free markets and the ability for the people to control their own destinies. They force children to recite a pledge that was written by a socialist flag salesman, Francis Bellamy, instilling a sense of necessity to defend government even when its actions may be questionable or indefensible. They teach obedience to authority rather than the axiom to question authority and to hold them accountable for their lies, misrepresentations and lack of respect for the laws they swear an oath to uphold. We are taught to memorize the facts they want us to memorize. We are taught their version of events, their version of the facts. We are never taught to explore other versions, other points of view and to evaluate them to determine which version is the closest to actuality or how the different versions could mesh to create another version even more likely to have occurred.
This type of learning can make it difficult to point out problems the system might be suffering. It makes it difficult to convince some people of the reality of an event or situation. If it isn’t seen, or isn’t reported on, then it must not be true, particularly if it goes against the dogma of great governance that the populace has been brainwashed to believe in since childhood. This is when the camera can be so important. The camera’s eye doesn’t lie. When it records the violence that the state engages in, those who continue to sing the praises of the state and believe in an innate goodness of government that isn’t there do so at their own peril. Those who wish to believe these examples don’t occur that often, that they are the exception instead of the norm, will find it harder and harder to maintain that stance as more and more occurrences are videoed.
Image via WikipediaGovernment agents and police officers are far more frightened of video cameras than they are of guns. They know how to handle guns. Common folks threatening violence against statist criminals may find it difficult to succeed in their efforts. The only thing the state knows is violence. It only knows enforcement. It wouldn’t surprise me to find many of the tax bottom feeders chomping at the bit to get a chance to exercise that which they know best. Common folk armed only with cameras, however, that’s another story. The statist criminals are going to find it very difficult to beat such efforts, as all options should eventually lead to their demise.
Cameras are something these people have been using against the general public for years. We have red light cameras, speeding cameras, public security cameras, all kinds of cameras in different areas set up to make sure we don’t break a myriad of victimless laws they’ve created for revenue generation. When anyone complains about it, about the lack of privacy or violating rights, their standard reply is “if you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.” Well, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Why are they so afraid of cameras if they’re doing nothing wrong? Why would they have laws against operating video in courtrooms and other venues where they supposedly work for us? If they are doing nothing wrong, what do they have to hide? Think about that the next time you hear about mindless police automatons asking legitimate protestors and political activists to put away their cameras on public property. Don’t believe the security excuse. The only security they’re worried about is their own. They do have secrets to keep and things to hide, and they don’t want the general public to find out, mostly because they are doing something wrong, and likely they know it.
The camera can expose all this. It can provide proof of wrongdoing. It can provide a tool to help hold accountable those who break their own rules, and the rules they expect the common folk to obey. Most of all, it can help change the way people think about our government servants and how they behave. It can help create an overwhelming righteous indignation toward arrogant government agents who feel they are better than the common man and above the law. The camera may, in effect, be a weapon far superior to the gun, for it is a weapon that helps win the hearts and minds without causing significant blowback. When one is not physically harming another, revenge is less likely to be sought.
Government agents and police officers are afraid of the camera, and with good reason. After all, one of the hardest thing for a human to do is to confront the monster in the mirror. Documenting the rise of the police state on video, exposing the cheating and corruption, publicizing the violations of human rights by government agents, etc., holds a mirror to society and forces us to ask if this is the road we wish to take. It can also help the individuals involved evaluate their own behavior. The camera is the new "weapon of choice" not because it is a weapon that kills, but because it is an effective weapon that defends human rights and has the potential to heal. We should all be armed and ready to use it wherever we see wrongs being committed, and we should be allowed to carry one whenever we have to deal with our government servants, including and especially on the streets and in courtrooms, if only for our own protection and the protection of all involved in such a situation.
So the camera is the new “weapon of choice” and more and more activists are using today’s technology to hold law enforcement officials accountable, or in other cases to clear the accused officers of any wrong doing. Think of all the controversey that could have been avoided with the recent shooting of a kid in downtown B-town if only some one had began recording. Most all cell phones available today are capable of video. Most of us have our phones at hand and ready, so the ability to document and communicate is readily available.
Government (and yes that includes your local government and it's officials as well B-town!), by its very nature, is a violent organization. They need to use force, intimidation and coercion in order to exist. They have, in fact, claimed a monopoly on the use of force. If you were to try to try to do the same things these people do everyday you’d be arrested in a heartbeat. To those of you who are reading this and think that police brutality and corrupt government officials are "big city" problems that do not effect us here in "small town" Bloomington, I say let us not forget the tragic case of James Borden Sr. who was murdered by two Monroe County jailers on Nov. 6 of 2004.
Borden had been transported to the Monroe County Jail from his home in Lawrence County for violating house arrest. He was a diabetic whose father had just died, and he was not taking his medication. Police reports say he was disoriented and seemingly mentally confused, reportedly talking to inanimate objects.
In a written report immediately after Borden's death, Shaw explained the first of three shocks he administered: "Borden was handcuffed behind his back. I was facing Borden at that time. (Borden was not wearing shackles). Borden was wearing a pair of shorts which was around his ankles. Also had on blue boxers. I asked Borden to lift his foot as to remove the shorts, but he was being combative and refused. I (D. Shaw) dried stunned Borden in the lower abdominal area. At that time Borden lifted his feet so we could remove his shorts."
Brown went so far as to suggest that Shaw may have shocked Borden as punishment for dying. "Jail officers have reported that Borden was kicking and struggling while pinned, face down, on the floor with his hands cuffed behind him," the H-T reported. "But Brown suggested in court that the man could have been dying at the time — or at least unable to breathe."
Imagine yourself as that citizen, on the floor of our jail, hands cuffed behind your back, in your underwear with four deputies constraining you, being shocked with 50,000 volts of electricity from a man, who seemed to be enjoying himself.
That image is the disturbing but inevitable consequence of a community whose "leaders" have their heads firmly embedded in quicksand on the subject of police violence and accountability. It is but the latest in a lengthy, well-documented history of police brutality and abuses of power in and around Bloomington.
High-profile, historic examples are many, from the disappearance of a barn full of marijuana under county sheriff control in the 1980s to the BPD People's Park lineup in 1995 to the ISP sidewalk beating of County Councilman Scott Wells in 2002. Others, while not rising to the level of lore, are no less disturbing.
Such as the story in the H-T in the early 1990s about a deluded, elderly man who had barricaded himself in an apartment on South Walnut Street Pike with a gun. Police subdued him, and no one was hurt, except the man. Buried in the story was a line that he suffered a broken arm while being taken, in handcuffs, to the police car.
Then there's the time police bloodied up local activist Mike Andrews during a bicycle protest in downtown Bloomington. His crime: crossing the centerline into a lane that the police told him to stay out of.
That a cadre of cowboy cops routinely cross the line, sometimes violently, in the performance of their duties is not news to our community "leaders", yet they continue to turn their heads and allow such injustices to be practiced here in Bloomington.
Read original article about the James Borden murder from the Bloomington Alternative here http://www.bloomingtonalternative.com/articles/2004/04/25/7508
But the government (both globally and locally) and there elected officials, including the police, do not want you to think about them in this way. They want you to think of them as benevolent. They don’t want you to think of them as thieves, they want you to think of them as charitable angels saving the under privileged. They don’t want you to think of them in terms of generating revenue for their own self interests, they want you to think of them in terms of providing public safety. They don’t want you thinking of them as cheaters who won’t follow their own rules, they want you to think of them as more knowledgeable than you, superior to you, and better able to determine what is best for you. And one way or another you’ll pay them to do so. They don’t want you to think of them as violent thugs violating the rights of innocent humans which they supposedly took an oath to protect, they want you to think of them as super humans who never make a mistake, never arrest an innocent, and instinctively know when someone has victimized another human being. They want you to believe that their good intentions make the wrongs they do okay.
Image via WikipediaThey want you to believe these things so much that they start teaching them to you at a very young age. Of course, they are a little more subtle about it. They may do it under the guise of public education, but what they are really doing is forcing the vast majority of the populace to spend a large portion of their day at federally funded government indoctrination centers. They then teach us that this is the greatest nation in the world due to government rather than due to lack of government, faith in the free markets and the ability for the people to control their own destinies. They force children to recite a pledge that was written by a socialist flag salesman, Francis Bellamy, instilling a sense of necessity to defend government even when its actions may be questionable or indefensible. They teach obedience to authority rather than the axiom to question authority and to hold them accountable for their lies, misrepresentations and lack of respect for the laws they swear an oath to uphold. We are taught to memorize the facts they want us to memorize. We are taught their version of events, their version of the facts. We are never taught to explore other versions, other points of view and to evaluate them to determine which version is the closest to actuality or how the different versions could mesh to create another version even more likely to have occurred.This type of learning can make it difficult to point out problems the system might be suffering. It makes it difficult to convince some people of the reality of an event or situation. If it isn’t seen, or isn’t reported on, then it must not be true, particularly if it goes against the dogma of great governance that the populace has been brainwashed to believe in since childhood. This is when the camera can be so important. The camera’s eye doesn’t lie. When it records the violence that the state engages in, those who continue to sing the praises of the state and believe in an innate goodness of government that isn’t there do so at their own peril. Those who wish to believe these examples don’t occur that often, that they are the exception instead of the norm, will find it harder and harder to maintain that stance as more and more occurrences are videoed.
Image via WikipediaGovernment agents and police officers are far more frightened of video cameras than they are of guns. They know how to handle guns. Common folks threatening violence against statist criminals may find it difficult to succeed in their efforts. The only thing the state knows is violence. It only knows enforcement. It wouldn’t surprise me to find many of the tax bottom feeders chomping at the bit to get a chance to exercise that which they know best. Common folk armed only with cameras, however, that’s another story. The statist criminals are going to find it very difficult to beat such efforts, as all options should eventually lead to their demise.Cameras are something these people have been using against the general public for years. We have red light cameras, speeding cameras, public security cameras, all kinds of cameras in different areas set up to make sure we don’t break a myriad of victimless laws they’ve created for revenue generation. When anyone complains about it, about the lack of privacy or violating rights, their standard reply is “if you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.” Well, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Why are they so afraid of cameras if they’re doing nothing wrong? Why would they have laws against operating video in courtrooms and other venues where they supposedly work for us? If they are doing nothing wrong, what do they have to hide? Think about that the next time you hear about mindless police automatons asking legitimate protestors and political activists to put away their cameras on public property. Don’t believe the security excuse. The only security they’re worried about is their own. They do have secrets to keep and things to hide, and they don’t want the general public to find out, mostly because they are doing something wrong, and likely they know it.
The camera can expose all this. It can provide proof of wrongdoing. It can provide a tool to help hold accountable those who break their own rules, and the rules they expect the common folk to obey. Most of all, it can help change the way people think about our government servants and how they behave. It can help create an overwhelming righteous indignation toward arrogant government agents who feel they are better than the common man and above the law. The camera may, in effect, be a weapon far superior to the gun, for it is a weapon that helps win the hearts and minds without causing significant blowback. When one is not physically harming another, revenge is less likely to be sought.
Government agents and police officers are afraid of the camera, and with good reason. After all, one of the hardest thing for a human to do is to confront the monster in the mirror. Documenting the rise of the police state on video, exposing the cheating and corruption, publicizing the violations of human rights by government agents, etc., holds a mirror to society and forces us to ask if this is the road we wish to take. It can also help the individuals involved evaluate their own behavior. The camera is the new "weapon of choice" not because it is a weapon that kills, but because it is an effective weapon that defends human rights and has the potential to heal. We should all be armed and ready to use it wherever we see wrongs being committed, and we should be allowed to carry one whenever we have to deal with our government servants, including and especially on the streets and in courtrooms, if only for our own protection and the protection of all involved in such a situation.
So the camera is the new “weapon of choice” and more and more activists are using today’s technology to hold law enforcement officials accountable, or in other cases to clear the accused officers of any wrong doing. Think of all the controversey that could have been avoided with the recent shooting of a kid in downtown B-town if only some one had began recording. Most all cell phones available today are capable of video. Most of us have our phones at hand and ready, so the ability to document and communicate is readily available.
Some of us are bolder than others and have no problem confronting situations of concern head on. Some have no outwardly apparent concern of the possibility of being arrested, or confronting the offender verbally with camera prominently displayed. I am reminded of Sullivan chasing the cops with a camera in hand down at People's Park just a few years back. Some of us are not that ballsy however and would love to contribute from the sidelines, to avoid becoming a target. For those of us in the background, we do realize that we need you just as much as you need us, to give support to those that do. Not only that, but as for me, I thank you for “standing on that line”.
If you do decide to put yourself on the line with conventional methods of video recording an incident, you not only run the risk of getting harassed, but you may lose your footage as well. Or your camera “accidentally” gets “damaged”. On a side note - an acquaintance of mine had his decoy camera confiscated during a traffic stop, but quickly received it back when the police officer in charge was notified that his backup cameras had vlogged one of his officers threatening him, as well as stealing his property.
The Anti-Society encourages others to visually document the negative/illegal behavior of the police and local government officials, especially here in B-town. The success with any activism is numbers. Many are willing to help, but do not know how they can contribute, what they can offer or what they can do, so if the very least you can do is educate and inform, then that is a positive step in the right direction. If you or someone you know has video footage that you would like to get into the public eye you can contact Anti-Society t.v. HERE!
Send a message to the local officials here in B-town that WE are watching THEM!
