Some Garbage Podcast EP026 – Muh Feels

Some Garbage Podcast EP026 - Muh Feels

Some Garbage Podcast EP026 – Muh Feels

I don’t know about you, but I’m alone on Valentine’s day. Go ahead, laugh it up. Say it’s because I’m a fat, bald, alcoholic loser who lives in his mother’s basement. While I certainly have a taste for whiskey, and my hair isn’t quite what it used to be – that’s not why I’m alone, and the rest is just plain inaccurate. But hey, have your fun. Why let the truth get in the way?

Last night I had Adam Kokesh on the show, and Adam was encouraging me to act in a more calculated fashion instead of reacting emotionally to things. That may well be good advice, but as it turns out I’ve actually been trying to be more in touch with my emotions lately.

As many men are, I was trained from a young age to detach from my emotions. I felt for a long time like they were primitive pack animal instincts that deterred me from loftier goals. We learn to turn them off to a large extent, and sure enough, this has some payoff. We can work all day without asking why we aren’t out enjoying our lives. We can fight our enemies without concern for their well being. We can analyze situations more “rationally”.

But to say we “shut them off” is inaccurate. We bottle them up. We stuff them inside a pressure cooker for years and years, ever tightening the lid hoping to keep them contained for eternity, but this is not ultimately possible. Eventually that lid blows off, and can leave a scene as gruesome as the Boston Marathon bombing.

This is even worse for libertarians. We are bombarded with imagery of the State and all its horrors, without the rose colored glasses our statist counterparts enjoy. When I see videos of policing murdering people and pets, when I see images of mutilated babies from war torn countries, I do not get the comfort of saying “they died for my freedom”. Instead I say “I could be next”. Rage, sorrow, fear. Bottle it up.

As an atheist, I lack the comfort of saying “God will make it right”. Hopelessness. Bottle it up.

Combine these things and throw yourself into the piranha pool that is the modern dating market. The entitled sense that most American women already walk around with goes nuclear when she finds herself a tiny and much sought out minority in a male dominated movement. Desire, competition, loss, envy, despair. Bottle it up.

Every penny you pay in taxes, you realize is a threat on your life. Every time you see a cop, you see a threat to your safety. Every political advertisement is a reminder that a competition to be your slavemaster is approaching. Bottle it up.

You fight for the freedom of the human race, but based on your gender, you are called an oppressor. Bottle it up.

Police show up at a guy’s house in what most people would see as a routine welfare check, and rather than take one more second of it, he puts a bullet through his skull. His fiance contacts you and lets you know he was a fan of your work. You’re reminded that you paint a very dark picture of the world, you know that it affects others, and you feel responsible.

That’s where I’m at right now, and I don’t much feel like celebrating.

So join me tonight, Saturday February 14th from 5-7pm EST for a Valentine’s Day commiseration special. Let’s be alone together, for the saddest episode of Some Garbage Podcast ever.

The number to call in if you would like to be on the program is 567-704-3182, and the more you talk the less I have to, so please do give us a call. Or send a Skype request to Skype username



This is what I do for a living, and it’s far from luxurious. I rely upon your contributions to continue producing this content. So if you appreciate the work I do, please consider donating, or advertising here, or shopping through my sponsors. If money is tight, I could also use some volunteers.

Follow me on, UStream, YouTubeFacebook, Twitter, Google+, LinkedIn, Tumblr, and Diaspora.

Subscribe via email and never miss another post!

  • Callum

    Things are shit, do what makes you happy, get the valentines lonely session out of the way and crack open the whiskey

    • kubel

      Self medication just numbs the pain, it doesn’t address the cause of it.

  • In all seriousness though Chris you work hard, you need a holiday.

    Once I’m a bit more financially stable myself I’ll try my best too donate too this website.

  • Dianna

    Adam isn’t dismissing the usefulness of emotions. He simply understands that emotions have their place. He’s right. communicating from emotions, instead of rational objective thought, leads to more conflict than not. You can do both once you determine for yourself when it’s best to use emotion and when it’s not.

    • Christopher Cantwell

      You’re 100% right, and I suppose this post might actually be a good example of that.

      • Dianna

        it’s good that you’re attempting to reconnect with your emotions. to deny our emotions is to deny we’re human. we need emotional connection to thrive. otherwise we live our lives miserable and some of us even live in fear of life itself. that’s not living, that’s just existing. So GOOD JOB man! Keep it up. Men are just as emotional as women when they allow themselves to be. 😀

        • Nilo BP

          There’s a good reason why we men tend to armor ourselves against emotion, while women feel perfectly fine giving themselves over to it.

          It’s because emotion can only be objectively advantageous if can you touch somebody else with it… somebody who, through non-emotional means, managed to improve his lot in life.

          Now that can work for women, but needy men are to women as naphthalene is to bugs. So men tend to find other ways to get through hardship, and furthermore they don’t want to become easy targets for women’s emotional grappling hooks.

          Also worth remembering is that it’s emotions that give religious zealots (such as statists) a cozy blanket of cosmic self-righteousness, allowing them to do incredibly stupid and evil things on a regular basis, in spite of reason and experience.

          So I think that this “our emotions make us human” talk is taking a really pessimistic view of humanity. If anything, I believe that emotions as we know them are an obstacle to overcome.

          • Dianna

            like i said, emotions have their place. Emotions are both a gift and a curse. A person’s perception decides how they view emotions and no one is responsible for said emotions except the individual. I agree that certain groups of people use emotions to their advantage and why shouldn’t they? to judge them for their use of what is innately theirs flies straight in the face of what members of the “libertarian movement” are preaching daily. it’s all a bit hypocritical. why not just allow yourself to have emotion, put them in their proper perspective for you and leave it alone? No one can dictate to another for any reason. We’re all entitled to our emotions and opinions. The need to FEEL “right” comes from a space of fear within people who haven’t yet learned to gain validation on their own. To me, blaming the state or government for anything is just an excuse to ignore individual responsibility of themselves, their thoughts AND emotions. I’ve always said the emotional maturity should be taught in schools. but then we have the issue of deciding who was best qualified to teach the class LMAO

          • Ian Sean

            Sorry, I respect your instinctual need to trick weak men into showing their cards so they can be blacklisted in the sexual gossip market, but some of us men actually want to reproduce. If you are serious about emotional men, then turn off the computer and booty call the most emotional nonrelated adult male you know. Sound like fun?

          • Dianna

            awww i’m sry you feel that way ian. you just proved your weakness by blindly judging someone you know absolutely nothing about. no need for me to “trick” you into being who you “instinctively” are. Looks to me like you have it all under control sir LMAO

          • Ian Sean

            Whatever. One of us is right and we can both talk all day. But the proof is in the pussy.

          • Dianna

            what is right for, is right for you. it don’t have shit to do with me at all. good day

          • Ian Sean

            No but you’re the one giving chris advice to show his emotions and I’m telling him that even if YOU actually mean it, when most ladies say that it’s generally a trap to weed out weak males.

          • Dianna

            chris is far from a weak minded man. but he’s able to defend himself. no need for me to help him in that regard.

          • Ian Sean

            Well that all depends if he chomps the bait now, doesn’t it? I recommend opening up emotionally to a woman you are sexual with, only if she won’t leave you alone and you want to scare her away!

          • Ian Sean

            But you could be an exception to this rule. Some do exist. My point is the only way to tell what kind of men a woman likes is what kind she sleeps with, because most encourage men to be emotional verbally, but not sexually. And frankly men too dumb to figure that out by watching don’t deserve to reproduce anyway!

          • Dianna

            i don’t think I’m an exception to anything. I think its a gross use of communication to say all men beat women, when clearly isn’t true anymore than all women intentionally manipulate men. Millions of men allow themselves to be manipulated as well, same can be said for women. I think that more woman would better themselves by taking personal responsibility for their emotions instead of blaming men for all their problems by default. At the same time more men need to stop putting women on a fucking pedestal of pussy which lead women to belief that pussy will get you all kinds of rewards….and it’s true. But that don’t make it ok to abuse a man’s emotions simply to get some monetary reward. If they wanna do that then they should stand on a corner, it’s the same fucking thing.

          • Ian Sean

            All is fair in love and war!

          • Ian Sean

            Also I never said “intentionally”. You did.
            I think most female manipulation is subconscious. I often wonder if ladies do believe themselves when they say they really want the opposite of what they keep going home with. When ladies are the first to bring up intention, I tend to suspect they are in fact aware of it all though.

          • Dianna

            send your challenge a whore. you might actually get somewhere with that. she’ll prove your point for you so you can feel validated in your thought process that all women are malicious in intention. i am done with this.

          • Ian Sean

            Ok now you’re just being deliberately contrary because this is the second time in a row you’ve put “intention” into my mouth and I’ve had to call it.

            But post red pill this makes sense. Arguments with women are about power, not about substance or content. That’s why it doesn’t matter if you accuse me twice in a row of saying women are malicious in intention when I’ve said there’s nothing intentional about it (I don’t think).

          • Dianna

            in short, both genders should be more active in their emotional growth rather than pointing fingers. fuck the blame game, handle your damn business

          • Ian Sean

            Doesn’t work that way. Long as females have the uterus they will hold all the cards and men will be responsible for their emotions. Why do you think “makes me feel” is such a common phrase for women? It’s accurate in their case but if a man says anything makes him feel then ridicule him. If yoy want to be kind to him. If you want to be mean to him then encourage him to let it out and make a fool of himself to his love interests.

          • Dianna

            Why would you dis empower men with a statement like “females have the uterus they hold all the cards..”? that’s not accurate. And like you, i take issue with the “made me feel” statement. NO! you didn’t make me “feeeel” anything! I own my emotions, if my emotions change because of your behavior or something you said, then I am the one in control of those emotions. They are mine, not yours. So how is it possible for one person to effect another person’s emotions? By allowing themselves to BE effected. Why does that happen? because the average person is not aware they can own their emotions, they can choose what effects them, they can choose the influence they allow themselves to be around, they can empower themselves through responsibility and awareness of self. But most people either don’t know, don’t care or think it’s to much work to be constantly aware of themselves. Most people have a hard time admitting when they are wrong, much less expect them to take on the task of being aware of themselves. That would mean they might have to actually be honest with themselves about their perceived flaws, god forbid. Looking in the mirror is hard to do when you’ve neglected yourself your whole life cuz no one taught you the mirror is your friend. sry didn’t mean to get off topic.

          • Dianna

            and you’re doing the very thing. playing the blame game by making statements like “the uterus rules all”, point the finger at the opposite sex so that you don’t have to take good honest and truthful look at yourself. it’s called Deflection

          • Dianna

            The bottom line for me is this: i will always encourage people to stop fearing themselves and open up because being closed minded has gotten us no where. I will always encourage a person before i attempt to tear them down because society panders to the weak and enables the sort of behavior that we’ve been discussing for two days. i will always encourage this very same type of conversation because it’s one that needs to be re-evaluated and redefined before men and women will ever truly get along in peace. United we stand, divided we fall has meaning and worth. continuing to bicker amongst ourselves serves no one’s best interest. just ask congress. lmao

          • Ian Sean

            It’s not about encouraging or tearing people down. Of course most women encourage emotional men and tear down unshakeable men. Then they fuck the unshakeable men and complain about their insensitivity to the emotional men, while telling them, “I wish I could be with a guy like you (only not you)”. Oncw you’ve seen this from both sides you can’t unsee it. The proof is in the pussy. I give zero fucks about what any woman says she is into. My challenge stands: if you really mean tgis about emotions, then booty call the most emotional male you know and vrag about it online after. It is the only thing that will convince a self respecting man.

          • Ian Sean

            No, I don’t blame women for anything. Again with the words in my mouth. I blame men for being foolish and naive enough to take a woman’s word at face value when all signs indicate it’s a no win situation.

          • Ian Sean

            A woman who owns her emotions is rare. Most will try to manipulate a strange man into attacking you if they feel upset about anything about you. Congrats if you apply this in practice. You are the one percent.

          • Ian Sean

            Think you’ve missed my whole point. You can’t blame anyone for instincts and (at least if feminists and patriarchs are to be believed) and you can’t blame women for anything. It is entirely on men to figure out how to satisfy a woman and whether it happens to be the same or the opposite of what she says it is, it’s still his job to get it right.

          • Dianna

            hahaha i get how society has taught men and women to think and behave. but just because that’s the way it is now, does not mean that’s the way it will always be. If individuals don’t begin to change their perception and thoughts around self accountability and responsibility then nothing will change. but i don’t agree with that the mentality that men are suppose to be mind readers and instinctively KNOW what a woman wants and needs without being told. Yeah, men can know these after months of spending time a female and learning her bahavior but there are some things that men just can’t know without the female telling him. same is true when you flip the genders, she’s not suppose to know what he wants all the time. it’s fucking ignorant to think that way imo.

          • Ian Sean

            Changing societal acceptance? Emotional accountability? (From your other post, to condense replies)

            Sounds lile you’re talking about some way you think things should be versus the way they are. Fact is it is mens job to be responsible for everything if they want to get laid.

            And equality is the last thing most folks want anyway. Take Ray Rice. Nobody will defend him. Not even me because I am not am equalist (apparently in practice). But nobody can seriously attempt to deny that it would not only be right to lay out a similar sized man for doing what she did, but also hilarious. Shrimpy dudes starting shit is a whole youtube genre. And what they get is called accountability. As opposed to impunity, which is what women enjoy in similar situations.

            And the fact is if you can’t defend/retaliate as an equal then you are not equals.

          • Ian Sean

            Are you beginning from a premise that genital engorgement is a voluntary reaction? Because it sure seems to happen to us all in spite of whatever we think should cause it.

          • Dianna

            and honestly, when it comes to changing societal acceptance of emotional accountability and responsibility the issue stops being about gender and more about individualism instead.

      • Ian Sean

        “Cyril, bare your soul!” -Archer

  • Richard Onley

    I’ve found that the only thing worse than not having someone to love, is HAVING someone to love. You bettuh awf!
    The religion of perpetual positivism (they try to fool us–and themselves–that it’s not, but that’s part of the concomitant delusion) simply makes impossible the sort of analysis crucial to effecting positive change.

  • IRONMANAustralia

    Okay. You’re alone on Valentine’s day because you’re a fat, bald, alcoholic loser who lives in his mother’s basement. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

    Any time you need someone to insult and laugh at you I’m happy to be of service.

  • Sam Cru

    V-day is just another holiday for marketing you overpriced bullshit that you don’t need. True affection is spontaneous. You don’t need a holiday for it.

  • Mike Fleming

    I’ve been alone on many Valentine’s Days including this one. It’s been many, many years since I took this holiday seriously. Even when I’m with someone I don’t care about it. When we want to spend time together doing something fun we do. We don’t need a special day. Who needs VD? 🙂

    In fact, a whole lot of people who look happy on VD, I can guarantee you, are just putting on a show.

  • Randbard Von Hayek

    I think you finding the men’s rights movement and putting those principles to use has really enhanced your work by making you more in touch with yourself. At least this is what I have seen from an outside perspective. I’m also just glad to see any man break that cycle.

  • UsedtobeaSuitBoi

    An important thing to remember about men and women in games; men and women dont actually play the same types of games. Sargon of Akkad on youtube is a great gateway into the subject; he’s been an exemplary chronicler of gamergate and the pseudo-academic bullshit that fuelled the original ”gamers are dead” articles that came in the wake of the Quinnspiracy. He touches on other subjects as well.

  • Coralyn Herenschrict

    Yeah respecting genuine feelings is important, including bad feelings. But misery and joy depend on what we choose to focus on. Making conscious efforts to dwell on the good is also part of honoring the importance of one’s emotional state. Of honoring one’s own worth. Of all people, those who fight to maximize prosperity and minimize injustice deserve happiness.

    We enjoy relatively more freedom of movement and speech than many people in history did. We enjoy a relatively better standard of living (health care, entertainment, access to information, transportation, protection from the elements, productivity tools) than most all the people in history did. Modern technology offers up incredibly exciting, cool, rewarding options in how to choose to live our lives that did not exist 50 years ago. And good people with good values whom we can love for those values do exist.

    All this should not be taken for granted, but constantly called out and celebrated. Appreciation is the essence of happiness.

  • Coralyn Herenschrict

    P.S. Being an asshole doesn’t tend to attract many prospects for mutually loving relationships. May want to reconsider that life choice. May I suggest as an alternative radical honesty (Brad Blanton), which includes all the benefits of complete frankness come-what-may while omitting the gratuitous nastiness.

    • Ian Sean

      Beats the hell out of being a pushover. And if radical honesty isn’t being an asshole then I don’t know what is.

  • Ian Sean

    Frankly it’s not men who determine their emotional capacity. It’s women. And an emotional male is untrustworthy. Who knows what he’ll decide his past word was worth? That’s why their instincts generate horrible fear when they see a weak (emotional, accomodating, romantic, supplicative) man but not so much a violent or abusive man (long as he is unapologetic about it, else it is worst of both worlds!).

  • IRONMANAustralia

    So I just watched your ‘Anti-suicide PSA’ clip on Youtube Cantwell. I assume it was cut from the above podcast, though I haven’t listened to the whole thing, (I have one of those annoying ‘real life’ thingies that keeps interfering with my online activities). But there’s something I wanted to run by you in relation to that, and have been wanting to since that previous speech you gave where you first revealed you’d seriously thought about ‘an heroing’, (and taking some government agents with you if I recall the details correctly). At any rate you were pissed off with your life being dicked with, for victimless crimes or whatever the fuck, and understandably weren’t happy with the perceived injustice or the petty cunts responsible.

    So, I’ve been making the case for some time that, (apart for the obvious reason of day-to-day self-defence), the Second Amendment was not put on the Bill of Rights just so y’all would be armed when the long-awaited nation-wide revolution comes. It also includes your right to get together with a few other people on your street and deal with a pack of Brown Shirts dragging a Jewish family out of their home at night, right? Which seems to be a common unspoken mental omission amongst liberty-minded people, as it is in the ‘Penn & Teller Bullshit!’ clip on the Second Amendment where they also talk about women defending themselves from rapists, and then skip over everything in-between to bloody revolution, (I can’t link you to it because your spam filter is fucking gay).

    The result is you have a lot of faggots who loudly proclaim they would ‘die for freedom’ sitting on their sorry arses polishing their guns, waiting for some critical mass where everyone else gets onboard, on the same day, so then y’all can storm the Capitol or whatever the fuck. That could certainly happen at some point, which is why you see people in other countries tear down all the statues of their beloved dictator eventually – but things usually have to get unignorably shitty for the average person before that happens, and an intolerable amount of injustice happens in the meantime. I put it to you, that Anarchists in the US waiting for the revolution are in for a much longer wait than they imagine.

    Also people correctly point out that by the time you get there, the gun-grabbers would have likely succeeded in getting many, if not most, of your guns and gun rights anyway piecemeal. Thus, removing the edge the Second Amendment was designed to give you when y’all are so sick of it you collectively decide to fight back. Not to mention as some people have pointed out, a 9mm pistol isn’t very effective against a Black Hawk helicopter, (and if you’re from New York you’ll only be allowed to have a magazine with seven rounds in it, which means you’ll keep having to duck and reload while you’re shooting at the exhaust manifold like you’re Luke fucking Skywalker). So good luck with that whole “Viva la Revolucion!” plan.

    On the other extreme, you have lone wolf revolutionaries – often legitimately pissed off with some recent unjust treatment at the hands of the government, (but some who are just whackos that skipped their medication and/or listened to an unhealthy amount of Alex Jones), that go out on an impromptu suicide mission. Trying to fight the revolution all on their own by indiscriminately shooting cops sitting in cafes and/or other government officers who are not directly and personally to blame for the injustices suffered, (I know you already take issue with that last part Cantwell and do not consider them “innocent”, but stay with me).

    These guys might imagine they are somehow “raising awareness” or that their actions might inspire others to act and thus spark the revolution you want for Xmas, they’re just the first to move to the front of the bus, but it never seems to work out that way. Usually the “innocent” cops who were just sitting there not lying, stealing, or beating anyone up for once, (even pigs have to take a break occasionally), are seen as the poor innocent victims and that narrative crowds out any legitimate rage the shooter had against the machine, (with a lot of help from the fucking media of course).

    Frankly, I think it’s a terrible waste of a man who is motivated to act, and downright pissed off and self-destructive enough to take some risk, (or at least beyond giving a fuck about the risks and personal cost),

    So I propose a third option somewhere in-between these two.

    It’s totally legit in terms of principle, constitutionality, and sensical state law. You can start doing it today, and really make a genuine difference starting today. It is most certainly dangerous, but not as dangerous as fighting an outright revolution, and it really would sort the men from the boys when it comes to who is genuinely willing to put their arse on the line for freedom. You can use your handheld firearms and don’t have to engage the sum total of the government’s armed forces, (at least all at once). Best of all, it gives people who have been unjustly treated, (and believe me I know that very, very special feeling), a way to fight back – a useful way to channel their rightfully wrathful thirst for some goddamned justice.

    First though, you have to forget the idea that any guy wearing a uniform is automatically a legitimate target for violence. On the day of a mass revolution you can validly trot out that Morpheus agents of the Matrix bullshit, but until then forget it. Not only is that not going to win you any popular support, (though that’s the least of your problems), but there are some well-meaning people in uniform who can help you, and you can help them fight against the systemic problems they deal with on a day-to-day basis. Which is to say, you’re better off with more “good cops” and less “bad cops” – and so are “good cops”, (I define “good cops” as one who does respect your rights – the same way any armed-and-willing-to-intervene-against-a-crime citizen does).

    You can disagree with cops being paid through taxation, but let’s separate that issue for the moment. Just remember, that some of the guys wearing Nazi uniforms weren’t all that crazy about Hitler and his policies, up to and including actively wanting him dead.

    I know something about that. I’m an ex-soldier who realised early on in my career that there was a good chance I’d find myself shooting in the opposite direction if put in a situation where some of my more unscrupulous colleges might decide to start stepping on the rights of innocent people in some far away land, (I didn’t sign up for that shit). I even have intervened to stop said scumbags from stepping on the rights of innocent civilians in their own land, during peacetime, (one of the reasons I can’t stand hearing people mindlessly and indiscriminately thank anyone in a uniform “for their service”).

    Once you take out the paid-by-taxes issue, you want “good cops” who are willing to act against “bad cops”. These people are allies. So for the moment let’s all agree to shoot the “oathkeepers” last shall we?

    Okay, so having said that, here it is: We need to be actively arresting cops who commit crimes – in situ – and forcibly so if they resist – up to and including lethal force if necessary and warranted, (in the same way you would not use excessive force in dealing with any other criminal).

    By which I mean, intentionally frequenting areas and engaging in lawful activities that have a high probability of police interaction, (eg. Border checkpoints), while having high quality cameras rolling from multiple angles, storing footage locally, and simultaneously transmitting and uploading to off-site backup so on-site evidence can’t be tampered with, (and/or any tampering by police will also be recorded). Evidence you intend to use in court to justify your own actions to a judge.

    With that in place, you also need sufficient man power and firepower close at hand backing up the guy interacting with the cop. Guys that can monitor the interaction and pop out of the woodwork to help effect a successful arrest if and when warranted – perhaps including a “non-combatant” suit with some lawyerin’ expertise as well.

    I can already hear the objections, and as I said before, I know this is dangerous, (both physically and legally), but before you start denouncing it based on specifics about your state laws being different, or ‘entrapment’ or the courts supporting the cops and whatnot, what I am suggesting is that there must be a way to do this, regardless of the details, and you have a fundamental right to do it in some manner, no matter what specific issues arise. Badges do not grant extra rights, and fundamentally you have the right to arrest a criminal, even if they are wearing a uniform.

    I imagine not provoking them in any way that could be construed as ‘entrapment’, (like letting them approach you first), then afterward just not being particularly polite, Contempt of cop is not illegal and obviously does not justify the subsequent illegal actions of butthurt cops we’ve all seen captured on video before. Getting a couple of bad cops off the street would be a win of course, but having every cop learn to keep his cool whenever a citizen is uncooperative or understandably upset, just because they might have a camera and a posse waiting in the wings, would be even better.

    I’d like to not only “train” cops to obey the law themselves, I’d also like to train them to stand there and take it like a good little public servant bitch when a taxpaying citizen not only fails to bow and scrape at their feet, but displays open contempt for their petty bullshit. Currently they imagine they are deserving of some kind of special respect. They’re not. No more than a nigger thug on the street has the right to assault me “disrespectin” him by looking at him funny or whatever the fuck.

    As people have previously pointed out, just getting footage of police abuse hasn’t worked out so well. I contend the reason is, the cop perpetrating the violation often suffers no significant personal consequence even after redress, while the victim already has. So the cop has no subsequent disincentive to act that way again.

    What I propose means that not only will the intended victim be spared the consequences, (like an cuffed beating by the cop), but the cop will be the one suffering the discomfort and humiliation of being forced to the ground and cuffed. Even if upon later redress he is given a “paid holiday” for his unlawful actions, the bitch already got dealt with appropriately – in situ.

    This creates a high probability of a win in most cases – no matter what happens afterwards.

    • If the cops act lawfully, you have footage with which you can commend good cops, and show people they don’t have to bow and scrape, or even be polite, and how cops are obligated to suck it up like any professional. I think this could be a very popular reality show, where you show people (lawfully) telling cops to more or less eat shit.

    • This would be cathartic for anyone motivated to be involved by a previous injustice at the hands of police. Sitting there knowing you have a posse ready to jump in and defend your rights would give you a confidence even the most adamant activist lacks when dealing with police, (the difference between just having a right, and knowing that right will be enforced). Being able to show open contempt for a pig knowing that this time he is the one for whom consequences will never be the same if he doesn’t stand there and suck it up, is practically a poetic justice owed these people.

    • If the cop is a thug, then you have everything one should need to jusify shutting him down, and for appropriate redress later.

    • Most importantly, the situation is also reversed in terms of what happens after any incident. If a cop beat up Cantwell for ‘Contempt of Cop’, then falsely claimed he “became aggressive”, resisted arrest, and assaulted an officer, (as is often the case to try to justify the obvious beating he got at the hands of the cop), then you have Cantwell suffering consequences he doesn’t deserve, the cops skating away scot-free, and it’s Cantwell’s problem to choose between seeking legal redress after the fact, or cutting his losses and just dropping it. In which case the cop wins by default. They can easily sweep it under the rug saying they did an investigation and found nothing actionable.

    But … if you arrest the cop before he beats up Cantwell, (significantly), then you have Cantwell with no significant consequences, and the cop under arrest with his own physical consequences and more if he resists, (which many would likely do simply due to the shock and disbelief that a citizen is actually arresting them – in which case you might find yourself thanking the Lord Jesus for the bountiful retribution he is about to receive). That puts the cop into the position of having to either dispute the arrest before a judge instead, or just drop it – in which case, you would be the one walking away scot-free.

    Kind of a ‘fortune favours the bold’ type scenario, where if you’re the one taking the action and assuming the respnsibility of justifying yourself later, you’re the one who gets to win by default when the other party fails to prove their case, or even challenge your action in the first place.

    In other words, the cops can’t just sweep the incident under the rug without letting you win.

    Now this is a situation where they’d pull out their lawyers and use the deep pockets of the state against you of course. So you’d likely need financial support of less physically involved activists who’d like to see you prevail in a case like this. If you have good quality unambiguous footage, then you can make a pretty good appeal to the public.

    Even if you lose you still win, because people would not only demand your release, but you would have clearly exposed corruption and/or shitty laws in technicolour, that cops can’t weasel out of with excuses, and you’re a goddamed hero for taking action, and putting your own arse on the line.

    But let’s say the worst case scenario occurs and you get totally screwed over by the legal system and go to prison for a long time, or get the electric chair, and nobody cares. At least you did fucking something. You had the balls to put your life and liberty on the line to fight injustice in a very real sense few people can legitimately lay claim to – and if you live in a nation so corrupt that a cop could clearly commit a crime on camera and you get put you in gaol for stopping him, then you’re exactly where all the good men in a totalitarian state “belong”, and are destined to wind up sooner or later, one way or another. At least you had the gonads to do it on your terms.

    Sure beats the fuck out of just impotently ‘an heroing’ in your bathroom anyway. So that’s my PSA. If you’re going to ‘an hero’ because you’ve been unjustly treated, how about instead you buy a couple of GoPro cameras, get a few like-minded mates together, and do something meaningful with your life that fights back. Something where you’re planning to live free and only die when you’ve fought every single battle you can fight?

    This whole concept is easier said that done, for a number of reasons, so yeah I know there are objection, questions, and details to iron out, but even done half-arsedly this is a noble pastime for any liberty-minded person to engage in.

    Ideally, a significant portion of any so-called Free Country would act and in situations they just happened to run into in their daily lives, (even without the cameras, at their own risk, just on principle), and the net effect would be that the citizens themselves would ‘police’ the police.

    That’s why a government really fears an armed population – not because they’re worried about you impotently shooting at their Black Hawk helicopters, but because you have the means to prevent their bullshit on a day-to-day basis as it occurs. The ability to enforce the rights you have one-on-one with their agents. Until all the courts are unabashedly corrupt, you can fight the cops themselves with their help.

    I’ll no doubt have people calling me a “provocateur” and “government shill” just for suggesting this, as if I’m just trying to get y’all to do something that gives the government an excuse to come after you, but you’ll have to decide for yourself. What exactly is wrong with suggesting arresting people who act criminally while they’re committing a crime?

    • Huss

      Are you drunk “ex-soldier”? Is that why this comment is so long and makes no coherent sense?

      “I’m an ex-soldier who realised early on in my career that there was a good chance I’d find myself shooting in the opposite direction if put in a situation where some of my more unscrupulous colleges might decide to start stepping on the rights of innocent people in some far away land, (I didn’t sign up for that shit).”

      You stepped on the rights of the Afghans or Iraqis the moment you stepped on their soil without being invited. You piece of shit. Oh, and you can sit there and claim you didn’t sign up for this or that, the reality is you mindless drone, you signed up to do whatever you were told, go wherever you were told, for the duration of your contract. Fuck your ‘service’. I say Afghans or Iraqis because it is unclear which invasion you were shamefully a part of, either way you have blood on your hands and anybody who wasn’t dumb enough to sign up for the military is automatically 10x better than you.

      • IRONMANAustralia

        My comment is so long because that’s how much effort it takes to get an actual argument through the base-layer of regurgatory moralistic horseshit the average ideological Anarchist has bouncing around in their skull – and you’re a perfect example. People like you are not used to dealing with long comments, because being a self-righteous douchebag doesn’t require any qualifying terms, careful caveats, or meticulous accuracy in language. So I can see why that kind of thing might seem incomprehensible to a simplistic dumbfuck like you, but it’s not enough to bleat holier-than-thou rhetoric to try to “win” the debate. Try actually engaging your brain and the actual argument, instead of knee-jerk reacting to your preconceived strawman version where I’m just a “bad” person and therefore everything I say must be wrong.

        I didn’t “step on” any Afghani rights, because as I alluded to above, it was relative peacetime while I was in the Army and I wasn’t personally involved in any foreign invasions, (maybe you’re thinking of Kokesh). I’m not going to pull a Brian fucking Williams and pretend I saw any action to gain unearned cred, so I’m sure as fuck not going to stand here and have a piece of brain-dead flotsam like you jump to conclusions about how much Iraqi blood I personally have on my hands.

        Oh .. and If you’re oh-so fucking concerned about those poor people in a faraway land, what have you been doing while all that shit’s been going on? Were you risking your life trying to overthrow the US government to immediately stop the war and I just didn’t hear about it? How is it you don’t have any “blood on your hands” when you as a US citizen (I’m presuming) have more of a say in the actions of your military than any Third World shit-kicker whose “soil” they are “stepping on”?

        Calling me a “mindless drone” who “signed up to do whatever [I’m] told” makes you sound pretty fucking deaf to anything outside your own mind considering I just said that’s precisely not the case. Ever heard of the Nuremberg Defence? The only reason you have heard that term at all is because even a soldier is expected to think for himself and take ultimate responsibility for his own actions – a concept so fucking old that Shakespeare for one was writing about it over 400 goddamned years ago.

        My worst crime is being part of an organisation that wastes tax dollars. Lots and lots of tax dollars, and Christ do I have some “war stories” about that. Witnessing that shit will give you a thousand yard stare all on its own.

        The only difference between an “oathkeeper” in a uniform and a citizen willing to use force in self-defence or the defence of others, is they are paid by taxation,
        (which you can certainly make an argument against), but neither could be accurately described as a “mindless drone” that just follows orders.

        What exactly do you think happens to oathkeepers who stand up to their criminal colleagues? A soldier in a war zone would be taking a greater risk than you’ve probably ever even thought about. There’s a good movie about exactly that called, “Casualties of War”, starring Michael J. Fox, based on an actual event in Vietnam, (I’d link you but Cantwell’s spam filter is fucking gay). So yeah, a guy like that is automatically “10x” worse than any apathetic arsehole on the street who wouldn’t lift a finger to defend anyone’s rights – just because he never signed up for the military. That’s the only criteria.

        Bull. Fucking. Shit.

        If we had soldiers, cops, and so-fucking-help-me politicians that would rather lose their jobs than violate the Constitution, we wouldn’t have a lot of these problems in the first place. You guys blame the state, but I contend the fundamental problem is the majority versus the individual and erasing the state can’t make that go away. For example, you can own 1% of the stock in General fucking Electric and later find out the CEO is abusing the company’s collective power to the detriment of other people’s rights, (eg. Inappropriately externalising a cost). Maybe they’re fucking over people in some shit-arse country too. So do you as a shareholder have “blood on your hands” and what should you do about it? What can you do about it?

        Same problem if the CEO of the US-of-fucking-A of which you are a minority shareholder with a vote decides to go against the company charter and blow up some innocent people. Same if you’re an employee of that company asked to do something outside your job description. Ultimately, you can only deal with the shit within your own purview. Meaning there’s nothing you can do to protect everyone’s rights all the time, but you can do the right thing when it comes to your own experience.

        Also you’ve obviously never heard of the term, “Conscienous Objector” either, since you can always opt-out of an entire unjust war by choosing gaol instead, (even if you’re already a serviceman). Better men than you have done so.

        • Huss

          “My worst crime is being part of an organisation that wastes tax dollars.”

          No, your worst crime is hearing that there’s a gang that is prepared to join any war America starts at any time, and saying “sure, I’m in”. Lucky you that were “serving’ during non-invasion-time which you call “peacetime”, you were still the moral equivalent of “maybe or maybe not we will gang rape a woman at midnight behind the barn, will you come to the barn anyway?” and you were like yes.

          “What exactly do you think happens to oathkeepers who stand up to their
          criminal colleagues? A soldier in a war zone would be taking a greater
          risk than you’ve probably ever even thought about.”

          I don’t give a fuck what happens to home invader A when he feels his colleagues, home invader B, C and D are going too far. If you agreed to invade the home in the first place I don’t give a fuck what happens to home-invaders A through D, even if you claim home-invader A grew half a conscience after setting foot in the home.

          “I’m not going to pull a Brian fucking Williams and pretend I saw any action to gain unearned cred”

          Only pieces of shit are impressed that someone saw “actions” in an unjust war.

          “Oh .. and If you’re oh-so fucking concerned about those poor people in a
          faraway land, what have you been doing while all that shit’s been going

          Keeping my hands clean and being better than you by not signing contracts to be a part of invasions should invasions come up.

          “Were you risking your life trying to overthrow the US government to immediately stop the war and I just didn’t hear about it?”

          I made my protests known. It has nothing to do with me what some gang of criminals is doing. If I had the power and wasn’t faced with overwhelming force, I would shut the gang of criminals down.

          “How is it you don’t have any “blood on your hands” when you as a US citizen (I’m
          presuming) have more of a say in the actions of your military than any
          Third World shit-kicker whose “soil” they are “stepping on”?”

          I don’t call myself a citizen or see myself as a citizen. I’m a person living in an occupied zone, occupied by a criminal gang, that I am not a part of, therefore I have no blood on my hands.

          The people of Iraq and Afghanistan who you call “third world shit-kickers”, (maybe you feel the same way about them that you do about “faggots”), have had their say every time they put a well-deserved bullet in the head of an Aussie troop.

          Go and ahead and type another 4,000 word response and pretend anybody is reading. If you want respect you won’t make excuses you will apologize for joining the military and confess your grave moral error.

    • Ian Sean

      “I didn’t sign up for that shit.” Oh yes you did.

    • Ian Sean

      Well this is one of the best ideas I’ve heard actually.

      But I doubt anyone in the USA would do it. Either we will film cops beating our families to death, or we will burn down private businesses over a robber any civilian should have shot dead.

  • Huss

    The idea of men with guns from the state coming to your home for a “routine welfare check” is absurd. Whoever called the cops is the one who should be feeling guilty. Not Chris. Did the fiance rat him out as thinking the illegal thoughts of suicide to the cops?

    Nobody who lives by the NAP should be for using force to stop suicide. Suicide is a last resort solution we should all have.

  • Huss

    What are peoples thoughts on this case?

    Google Bobby Gene Martin DWI

    He was sentenced to two life terms in prison, he will die in prison. He’s had 10 DWIs, but never injured anybody.