The Role of Spanish Colonization in Preserving Latin American Indigenous Languages and Cultures

OPINION—It’s always entertaining to hear progressives declare that the Spanish colonized Latin America and obliterated its languages, as if many indigenous cultures uniformly operated with written systems. Most pre-Columbian societies in Latin America were oral societies. This posed inherent challenges to preserving their linguistic and cultural heritage which colonization further impacted the survival and interpretation of these traditions. Modern understanding of surviving pictographs, glyphs, and symbols is therefore inevitably shaped by subjective perspectives.

For societies with writing systems or other forms of physical record-keeping, documentation was greatly facilitated; however, this primarily benefited larger indigenous empires or a few well-organized smaller societies.

Yes, the Spanish engaged in warfare—both with and against indigenous groups—but ironically, their documentation efforts have become an indispensable resource for modern scholarship on pre-Colombian languages and cultures that survived their conquest. Loanwords in Spanish today bear testimony to the rich linguistic communication of indigenous societies, preserved through colonial texts. It’s worth noting that without Spanish record-keeping, we’d have far less insight into the intricate dialects and traditions of these oral societies.

While colonization undoubtedly came with atrocities, including bloody violence and losses of lives and many cultural traditions, blaming the Spanish for failing to preserve what oral societies themselves could not document is a reductive oversimplification that ignores the complexities of history. Oral traditions are invaluable for sharing stories and culture; however, physical record-keeping transcends the limitations of a human lifespan.

We can acknowledge the harms with coercive assimilation and the near-total destruction of indigenous languages and traditions, but we cannot dismiss the cultures and records that have survived or been expanded upon after Spain’s conquest.

Black Lives Matter Isn't About Social Justice

OPINION - Black Lives Matter, as a movement, has been notorious for claiming to be the fighters for social justice in the black community, however, these groups are demanding far more than what they deserve, while also bringing havoc to some communities across this great nation.

Black Lives Matter has been around protesting for almost a decade already. There are numerous examples from the Michael Brown incident to the recent George Floyd riots. It stemmed from accusations of police brutality where individuals, who may have done criminal activity in the past, were, in some people's eyes, mistreated by law enforcement. In some of these cases, the one they protested for ended up being killed at the hands of police officers. These individual cases are then shared throughout social media before the truth comes to the public, and protests ignite where some of them have ended in destruction and death. Quickly, Latinos, and Hispanics, with other Americans take to the streets in what they call "solidarity".

Black Lives Matter, the movement, is very impulsive with their opposition. Their calls for justice are well-intentioned but surrounded by rhetoric that makes it seem as if the police are the problem. Police and authority figures who promote unjust laws that criminalize everyday actions, yes, that's very much a problem; That is only one place where I can sympathize with Black Lives Matter. Yet the destruction that has brought Portland, Oregon to its knees is a shining example - a bright example - of "flaming passion" that I cannot support. Looking at Black Lives Matter's reign of destruction throughout the country, from my perspective here in Florida, shows me that the real threat to our society and minorities isn't the police, even though they do need improvement, it is Black Lives Matter itself and racial organizations that reject American values - libertarian values.

Many minority businesses and minority communities have been affected by Black Lives Matter violence. Although they claim to fight for these communities, mostly Black communities, they ultimately destroy the chances that people had to improve themselves locally regardless of their race, religion, or ethnicity. The Black Lives Matter organization itself has been very vocal about its opposition to American values and focuses on fighting "systemic racism" with what I perceive as more racism. They don't focus on improving the economic and social liberty of minorities as a whole. The calls to defund the police are admirable, but Black Lives Matter does not want that wealth to return to the pockets of hard-working citizens, instead, they prefer more welfare for failed social programs that hurt minority communities. Perhaps, they may want that money to make victims out of habitual violent criminals who have served as a liability not only to their communities but the country.

There's a lot to be said about improving policing in America. Yet, the riots throughout the country are not justified. Black Lives Matter, including the general community, and the organization, seem very opposed to the ideals that made this country great. They seem to be opposed to the nuclear family, and free speech - they are opposed to liberty. Black Lives Matter isn't about social justice; Black Lives Matter is about envy, jealousy, and victimization.

Cuban-Owned Restaurant 'Threatened' By Black Lives Matter Protesters

A Latino-owned restaurant of Cuban refugees in Louisville, Kentucky was harassed by Black Lives Matter supporters who made demands that the business must sign a contract to pay primarily black organizations a monthly fee and officially declare that they will increase the number of black employees to reflect the demographics of the city. They have also made numerous other demands in their 'contract'.

La Bodeguita De Mima, the Cuban-owned restaurant, received demands from local Black Lives Matter supporters such as maintaining that roughly 23% of their employees are black and they included to increase the representation of black products by the same proportional amount. The demands from Black Lives Matter have also included that the restaurant pay organizations like Black Lives Matter 1.5% of their monthly profits if they don't meet the targeted representation numbers. The protesters have set their deadline for their demands for August 17, 2020. There are also many other demands made by the protesters which include further 'protests' at the establishments who do not sign the contract.

Fernando Martinez, a partner of the Ol Restaurant Group who owns the La Bodeguita de Mima and Taco Luchador, publicly rejected the demands made by the Black Lives Matter local group. Martinez labeled the demands as "mafia tactics". Many supporters of the Latino-owned business have also voiced their concerns and also have rejected the demands from BLM activists. Fernando Martinez and associates feeling threatened by these demands have replied to protesters that "La Bodeguita is open to everybody." He stated, "How can I be called a bigot and a racist when my family is Black? When my son is gay?" Martinez, who escaped Cuba to come to the United States, could not believe that he would be under this level of scrutiny after all that he has experienced.

Sadiqa Reynolds, the CEO of the Louisville Urban League and one of many voices who have supported the protests against the restaurant, has made multiple public statements on behalf of the local BLM community and dismisses their statements.

This business stood up against the protesters as other local businesses agree to the demands. Talesha Wilson, a local activist who also assisted in writing the list of demands, says she believes that it was a "temper tantrum that could have been solved by a conversation." It is expected that they will be boycotting the organization as protests pick up against the restaurant owner. 

Anarchism Is Not 'Extreme'

OPINION - Anarchism isn't the 'extreme', it is the natural 'order' of the world. What is extreme is the millenniums of abuse by governments to try and submit the will of the people to its own doctrines or rules of what is 'moral' for society.

Anarchism has had a very negative connotation especially when it comes to statist Americans defining them within in the United States. The typical anarchist in the eyes of authority is just a group of violent individuals who want to seek the destruction of common way of life, even though the vast majority of anarchists are actually community-oriented individuals working together to better each other's lives including their own. Anarchism and chaos go hand-in-hand according to conservatives and Democrat liberals that dominate our two-party system yet its this very two-party system that has led to major disasters across the globe. They both blame the anti-war crowd for their own failures, or they point the blame at the opposing party without taking any responsibility for the violence they promoted. Who are truly the violent ones? The violent ones have been consistently those who advocate for violence against peaceful people, no matter if you're on the left or the right, the violence has been here for centuries and it has continued in many of our communities whether white, black, or Latino (and for others).

Anarchism is no more extreme than you telling your neighbor that you don't wish to be oppressed by their political views, naturally, your neighbor won't care because at the end of the day the democracy or the constitutional republic that we are in, are filled with people who do not want to protect your rights, and will ultimately not care about your personal individual feelings of oppression by the system that they defined, defend and prop up. That very system is the authority, or the force, that comes in with armoured personnel with armoured vehicles ready to turn on the hoses and force the community away from the protests they justly formed. Again, they force this action against the public who has very just concerns. Why is nonviolence an extreme for one group, but the system can exhibit all forms of censorship and violence, and yet do not get the same treatment for the rhetoric and the actions they actually have committed? Why is anarchism generally an 'extremist' ideology and statism is not?

It's unjustified to claim Anarchism is extremist in most cases, unless you truly believe living peacefully and nonviolently without fear of government coercion is extreme in our society. I don't believe it is extreme, we were all born free, it was a 'society' that pushed their thoughts and bigotry onto the individual, it wasn't the individualist anarchist.

The ICE Raids Are Not About Following The Law

OPINION - The ICE raids that will begin on Sunday (the raids have been postponed until further notice) are not about following the law. This is a targeted effort by the federal government to target and disrupt Latino communities.


Donald Trump and other politicians have repeatedly blamed Mexico or Central American countries for the number of illegals that are in the United States. They have targeted these nations, but make no mention, or say little about illegal immigrants from Canada, China or those from Europe. Their rhetoric has always prioritized the targeting of the Latino community, while they convince their constituents that this is about the law. Make no mistake, if this was about the law they would also spread the rhetoric about illegal Canadians, illegal Englishmen, and Irishmen.  They also demand, primarily for Spanish speaking immigrants to speak English in the United States, while totally ignoring Mandarin speakers of Chinese-descent or origin, or those of whom who speak French, Italian, Creole, etc.

In their calls for the raids, it has been reported that they will be targeting 10 major cities, which include Miami, Florida; New York City, New York; San Francisco and Los Angeles, California; Houston, Texas, among others. All of these cities have one thing in common, a very large Latino population, and in some cases, the Latino demographics within these cities exceed over 25% of the local population. For example, in Miami, Florida the Latino population exceeds 70%. Some states and major cities have denied supporting ICE agents in their raids like the entire state of California, and Miami, Florida as examples. These raids are a major problem especially for refugees from Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Cuba.

There is no question that there is still a major race issue within the United States, but this goes beyond racism, this is ethnicism. Latinos are being targeted because of their Latin names, the way they look and how they speak. ICE agents under the Trump Administration have already targeted US Citizens, or immigrants that are legally in this country, what is worse they have even deported Latino Veteran immigrants, and have even attempted to deport US Citizens who are also veterans. This isn't about following the law, this is a coercive exodus of the Latino population; these are intimidation tactics. At the border, US border patrol agents have shot and killed teenagers who were protesting their actions against their border cities, and in most cases, these border agents are acquitted for their violence against unarmed teens. They even shot a young Mexican citizen in the back of the head as he was fleeing and US officials found no wrongdoing and acquitted the case. This kind of violence has even dated back to Obama's Presidency.

In response to their violence and their rhetoric, many Latino communities have risen up in opposition to these unjust deportations, and are heavily arming themselves and preparing for the worst. It is very clear that the Republican party only seems to care about freedom and liberty when a Democrat is in power, but are readily going to give up peoples rights and abuse their own US Citizens when they control the House and the Senate. Latinos are being targeted in their own communities and this has to stop before it gets violent.

Cops Kill Rapper Who Was Unconscious In His Vehicle

Bodycam footage has brought more questions for the public during a case where a California rapper by the name of Willie "Willie Bo" Mccoy, 21, was killed by police while he was sleeping in his vehicle that was parked on February 9th, 2019. He was found with a gun and his vehicle was on.

Before the officers opened fire, eyewitnesses said Mccoy was in his vehicle parked at a local Taco Bell parking lot in Vallejo, California around 10pm. A Taco Bell employee called in about a man dozing off in his vehicle at approximately 10:36 pm. Willie Mccoy was in a Silver coloured Mercedes. The police were called and they realized at the scene that Willie Mccoy also had a weapon within his vehicle on his lap, which the police decided to proceed with cautionary measures by calling for backup as the man was unconscious in his vehicle.

According to one police report, the vehicle was locked and the vehicle was in drive. The driver, and the only occupant of the vehicle, "suddenly began to move", presumably as he realized that random men are flashing lights in his face and attempting to enter his vehicle. The calls to remain still were drowned out by shots from their pistols. The officers did request immediate medical assistance, but the driver was pronounced dead at the scene. No bullets were shot by the man in the vehicle.

Investigators concluded roughly 20 bullets were shot at the musician, there were more than 5 officers at the scene. They fired from the "blind spot" of the driver, the driver door, the front left bumper, and the right front bumper (behind another vehicle).

The police officers involved in the shooting received no punishment.

The community at large is puzzled as to why such a nonviolent action such as this led this young man to his death. People suggest that the shooting is not justified since the officers did not actively attempt to wake the man and calm him down before discharging their weapons, which was within a manner of seconds.

Eyewitness Disputes and Bodycam Footage

According to bodycam footage and witness footage the man is seen simply scratching his arm, visible to the body cam, as he slept. After that, verbal commands were made and Mccoy was immediately startled and began moving in his vehicle. Police alleged that he was reaching for his pistol and thus the officers began opening fire. There was no considerable effort to wake up Mccoy.

"The police didn't even try to find a peaceful solution," said Mark Mccoy, Willie Mccoy's older brother, "... You are not judges, not jurors, and not executioners. We will never overcome this..."

Several local musicians are also mourning this death.

Supreme Court Limits Civil Asset Forfeiture

In a major blow to the Trump administration, the United States Supreme Court recently ruled that Civil Asset Forfeiture will be limited in all 50 states due to excessively high fees and abuses from police and officials.

...related news...

Trump Is Getting Sued By The ACLU!

Civil asset forfeiture can be seen as a breach of the 8th amendment within the United States Constitution. It permits the authorities to take private belongings if the authorities simply believe that object or money was obtained from illicit practices, without a hearing or due process. Objects include cars, jewelry, electronics, and property (like offices, houses, shops, warehouses, etc). Supporters of it believe that this will help slow down drug trafficking and can be used to generate revenue from drug offenders. Opponents believe it is morally wrong and likely to be abused for political gain, or personal, while it also being blatantly unconstitutional.

All 9 court justices ruled in favor of the expansion of the excessive fine ban, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg being the judge who wrote the motion. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was appointed to the position by former President Bil Clinton, and she assumed office August 10th, 1993. The ruling will apply the federal excessive fine ban to all states in the US, even if it does face opposition in states like Indiana.

Donald Trump is in favor of civil asset forfeiture, and eminent domain, and planned to use it to enforce his border policy by using the money taken from Americans and criminals to build his national border wall. He is currently facing extreme opposition from both the left and the right.

Abuses of Civil Asset Forfeiture

In Detroit, police seized more than 40 cars from "Funk Night" at the Contemporary Art Institute of Detroit. The police came because The CAID did not have a liquor license to serve alcohol. They claimed that if you drove your vehicle to go to the event then you were complicit in the crime that CAID committed and must have your property seized for associating yourself with a university without a liquor license. Attendees had to pay $900 just to get their cars back, and even one car was seized from over a mile away from the location associated with the party. A federal court judge ruled the seizure unconstitutional.

Illegal Immigration Is NOT The Problem

OPINION - The cost of illegal immigration is heightened by a flawed immigration system and a drug war that actually creates an incentive for some people to cross the border joining gangs and committing violent crimes while costing taxpayers billions in health costs!

This isn't to say illegals are all drug dealers or criminals, as the supermajority of these immigrants are peaceful and enter into the job market while a very small percentage of them end up in gang-related violence or violent crimes. Prohibition costs a great amount to American taxpayers with policing and police brutality settlements, and in regards to healthcare, the pharmaceutical industry has too much control and thus can monopolize a cure using patents, or other intellectual property law protections. It's artificially increasing prices in the market, thus making the costs for healthcare increase not just for illegals but across the board for everyone. This is costing US taxpayers far more in Medicaid and Medicare receipts for American citizens over time.

This doesn't include illegal immigrants who are barred from promotions in a business setting. Some must work in entry-level jobs and cannot maintain balanced finances. Illegal immigrants pay taxes for those jobs using an Individual Tax Identification Number (ITIN) given to them and approved by the IRS. Since they can't legally get any farther without raising eyebrows and are pushing it with using an ITIN, it is unlikely that they will ever reach the middle class. Under those circumstances, they are legally allowed to use some federal welfare benefits as stated within the laws in their respective states, or federal law itself.

Although it would be nice for the money used for illegal immigrants' welfare to be used on Americans, it really shouldn't. That money is in the market and if Americans or immigrants with businesses want to make deals with others, then they should be free to do so without being punished with further taxation.

The problems cited by Republicans and conservatives are based on fabrications, including the war on terror. The source of the problem isn't illegals, it's welfare. While the solutions for these problems from Democrats and progressives have proven to be not sustainable, and, although well-intentioned, will just serve as another failed welfare project.

Solutions For The Illegal Immigration Crisis

I think the solution to this problem would be to cut welfare and deregulate labour laws for illegal immigrants and integrate them into the US, while also barring them from federal welfare programs, except for emergencies. We should also deregulate the intellectual property laws to make it easier for not only creative works to flourish (dealing with copyrights and trademarks) but also permitting medicinal and technological breakthroughs to be easily accessible to the masses by letting companies & individuals handle intellectual property protection directly, without government laws. Also, the drug war has done nothing but serve as a catalyst for more violent organized crime in this country and on our southern border.

My stance stays the same as this country should continue to deregulate their industries overall and decrease taxes for everyone while also restructuring welfare with serious cuts for the time being.

Gun Rights Are Necessary For A Free Society

As each year passes us by, we are struck by another tragedy that gets greatly politicized. Whether it be school shootings, mass shootings, etc., These events rile up the public and polarizes them. We have pro-2nd amendment groups fearing that their guns will be banned and we have pro-"sensible" gun regulation (along with fringe, Anti-gun) groups demanding that their rights be limited. It's a constant cycle that has become predictable even though in some cases these events are not predictable at all.

These events, are used and abused for political gain and public hysteria is absolutely loved by the media. It's tragic that these things happen, it absolutely is, but I am dumbfounded that people are willing to limit their freedoms and fear monger each other into believing that the police should only have these weapons, or that the government should limit gun rights. Yet, it was just a few months ago that people were protesting about police brutality and government cover-ups and corruption, so they are very inconsistent with their positions, as it seems.

Just for your information, I do not support the 2nd amendment. I personally believe that The Constitutional amendment should not be the end all be all. I support gun rights through and through and I don't believe our rights should be limited in those regards. The Constitution is but a document, a document that is manipulated and cherry picked, and quite frankly, hasn't limited the government as it was intended.

Gun rights, in my opinion, are absolutely essential for the freedoms we look forward to in a free society. Not only do guns help protect our own lives on the street or protect the lives of others, it also prevents the government from over stepping their boundaries. History has shown to us that government isn't always the best, and is not at all honest. History also shows that when gun confiscation comes, then violent crime rises, or worse, government genocides or outright government massacres. In order to be free one must be able to defend themselves from those wishing to abuse them or their rights. If they choose not to then it is their choice, but in a dangerous circumstance, they likely wish that they had some form of protection. Police may help, but only after the carnage has begun.

Now, I must say that the mentally ill should not own weapons, but who am I or the government to determine that they indeed are mentally ill? What if the government has decided one day that being anti-government is a mental disorder? Would it be justified to limit my gun rights?

I think with the issue of the mentally ill and weapons, it gets really convoluted. How can we know for certain they are suitable to own a weapon? Obviously, I'm speaking about the mentally ill in general, which could mean various amounts of diseases/disorders. I personally believe that the gun seller should determine who should buy the gun, not the government. Everyone should be free to buy a gun but it shouldn't be forced upon responsible gun sellers.

Should gun sellers also sell grenades? Or maybe even tanks and RPG's? Absolutely, if they so choose. As technology improves, it becomes easier to expose unjust violence, and as such, it becomes easier to hold people accountable for their actions. If the second amendment was meant for us to defend ourselves from the government (which it was) then why has the government limited our rights? For control. If we are disarmed, if we are weaker, then we become easier to control, we become easier to become victims of oppressors whether it be a street thug or a raging dictator.

Imagine if North Koreans were able to buy guns, the Un dynasty would not have the amount of dystopian authoritarian control that they currently hold. They would be free from such an oppressive regime, similar to us here in the US but sadly some Americans want us to be easily controlled. Gun rights are essential to a free society and Americas history has shown how great gun rights are for ending dictatorial control, but why are we slowly becoming more of a dictatorship, especially overseas?

It's a no brainer... I understand this is controversial but freedom should be praised, not rejected. If we lose our guns, we lose our capability to fight back and speak out against injustices committed by our government. Gun rights weren't meant for hunting, they were meant to protect ourselves. For a minority of gun users who commit atrocities, why are all gun owners villifies and threatened to give up their rights? That doesn't seem right to me.

Police Killed and Victimless Crimes

Violent police actions and police brutality incidents have been now made more publicly accessible than ever before and this is changing and evolving traditional media. Many officers have been put on trial, however there have been many cases in which officers only received administrative leave, or they were allowed to stay within the force without facing a serious conviction in court, some weren't even charged. People have publicly spoken about their animosity against the law enforcement officers and the special treatment they get within the legal system, while some call for officers to be shot and killed for their injustices (which a handful of people share this sentiment in various communities). These cases are very conditional, and emotionally charged just like most public hysteria promoted by the mainstream media. There is a valid question, is the hatred for police justified? That is a really interesting question, but are any of the laws in place justified?

Cops Being Killed

It's very tragic to be working in a job where the public has had strong distrust not only for the badge and what it's supposed to represent, but for the state governments and the federal government itself. It has gone as far as getting many of these 'innocent' officers killed in the line of duty. Some of these cases may be related to drugs; A failed drug war that has only increased incarceration rates while destroying poor inner city families. As an example of the drug war, the youth resort to joining gangs and violent cliques that only seek self-benefit at the harmful cost of everyone else and the men in blue patrol the streets for low level criminal transactions, in which majority of the time those transactions are nonviolent. Is the death of another officer worth it, or another unarmed citizen?

Ghettos and Crime

In this environment in the ghettos and outskirts of wealthy cities, you have slums riddled with drugs and violent crime. It seems the inner city is constantly abused by the police force. It's a recurring cycle of drugs, welfare and abuse, regardless if these families are sincerely working and making an honest living without violence. Poor men who work get caught with marijuana, or a different illicit drug, have their lives instantly go down the drain with a felony charge. Returning to the workforce will be an endeavor, an endeavor for many financially struggling families, especially those looking for work and having a felony on their record. Education and future income is heavily affected by the family's current income; some of these families even go homeless within our very borders, an untold story. Would you not think that this would increase tension between the cops and the low income earners?

Many believe in this notion that if 'its law then you must follow it'. I assume the entire police force believes in this virtue and pin the entire populace to believe into this unrealistic love for a document limiting our rights. Sure, it is arguable that laws are here to ensure a 'stable society' and the officers are here to ensure the protection of us through a perception of law, but why have inefficient laws? I believe we have all the rights in the world for civil nonviolent disobedience. Honestly, in some form or another you all commit into civil disobedience even as officers. As citizens we should reject unjust laws, and I believe the police force should speak out about the inefficiency of these laws.

Like the men and women being killed in the high profile police brutality cases and the following uprisings and protests; How do cops feel when their own brothers and sisters are killed in the line of duty for the most pettiest of actions? This animosity is directed at the wrong people, surely (criminals and police, vice versa), but many times people should realize, and if they don't then they should be responsible. Many officers, of course many citizens, view their acts as nothing wrong. Yes, it is admirable that they hold their position as an officer with honor, however upholding the Constitution and being an example of standing men of freedom should be a preferred first impression to the global community, rather than being viewed as brutal paramilitary soldiers in blue. Of course, other countries are worse with civil rights violations, that is blatantly true, but America stands for freedom and our police and laws should represent this, and respect freedom.

Victimless Crimes and Law

The violent cases that we see are just a result of terrible drug policy and economic policy. Prohibition has caused many problems in multiple industries. The smallest infractions of jaywalking, and speeding is rather pointless. As an alternative we should have crimes based on only if the final result was violent, or deadly. Many preventive crimes fill up the victimless crime behemoth policy which terribly affects the efficiency of this nation, and quite frankly angers the populace.

Sin taxes, the 'police brutality' case of Eric Garner itself was interesting, and in the end it lead to the death of a sick man. I believe that crimes should only be violent. Being harmful is one thing, that is debatable like secondhand smoke, but violent crime should be the priority. Speeding tickets should be removed, and if there is a person who 'speeds' and crashes then they should be held directly responsible. The act of speeding shouldn't be illegal, but the act of being aware of recommended speeds and crashing going above the speed recommendation, then, rightfully so, you are responsible. This is just one idea of many others that people can brainstorm together on to ensure public safety alternatives without enforcing a policy that serves as revenue generation.

I view the infraction laws we have today as predatory, it is blatant extortion of the masses. Without any violent actions taken place, people are being charged, and even convicted. Responsibility is key in a free society and as many countries today work on improving rights and their own freedom for individuals, America in my own opinion should be at the forefront of global freedom, but it seems times have changed.

As people continue to be charged with victimless crimes then there will likely be more protests. Currently, the relationship with the public and the police could be much better, but not many police officers have spoken out on the issue which is quite sad. I can only worry for both the citizens and the officers involved, as there may be violence, as there have been in the past. Each person in each individual case could likely be a victim of the law itself, and it may even end lethal. Politicians should be held accountable. 

Civil Disobedience and Political Activism

Today, technology has propelled society in many ways. Cars, the Internet, the Super Bowl; All here to entertain you, and serve you whenever you need. One thing that stays stagnant that generally seems to lag behind the pack is the government and its various agency that we are coerced to fund.

Cameras today are recording everything from weddings, to you walking by a busy street. A surveillance nation surely, but this surveillance is also a stand for freedom. The police today should embrace the use of cameras as there have been some cases that have held the citizens accountable for when they lie. The citizens and the police, as a sign of virtue should allow third parties free access to these resources if they so choose. I have seen the cop block community, and many police reactions have seemed to be unwelcoming.

The men in blue should not only respect the cameramen and -women, but, as I stated, be a bastion of freedom for the citizens. Nonviolence on both sides is the key. This isn't betraying the law but rather taking a stand for the American people with respectable men and women on the force backing up what's right; Trained professionals calling foul on the laws in place.

YouTube, and Twitter have been known for becoming a home for alternative media. The public shares these atrocities that occur with all their friends, and some become viral. The arab spring, the occupy movement, black lives matter and other protests have risen from social media. These grassroots media campaigns in America (and globally) have helped change a rigid traditional mindset. I believe we should get with the times and reform our criminal justice system before more lives are lost to faulty laws.

Are They Good Cops or Bad Cops?

The question is very eery, and could bring emotional reactions depending on the kind of answers you get. Naturally, you can view a 'good officer' as a man or woman who is great at their job. Doing their paperwork, picking up shifts, being an all around stand up officer of the law. This is the honorable side of working on the force, the part that makes men and women proud of their job even knowing the harmful things that may come. Logically, however, the reality of the situation isn't so wonderful. It's a sham! Many people are unaware of this, and this isn't just about the police but about the public entirely.

The cops are not good. Simply put, these laws are terrible and the police protecting and enforcing these laws really increases the tension, and we've seen in other countries that show us that freedom is optimal, and a preferred social policy. Portugal's drug laws are an amazing example. Many citizens get harassed, and the police harass individuals on the daily for petty crimes -- On actions that harmed no one. It's a shame to blame the police for this, it truly is. When the police don't speak, then who do we turn to? 

Politicians have placed the citizens and the police that protect us in a very interesting and violent situation. No American wants to harm another American nor take their rights away. That's not who we are, we are the progression of freedom not a malevolent empire of regulations. The police and the citizens should not be fighting but instead create viable alternatives to solving petty crimes. Violent crimes should be our priority in the criminal justice system, and we should promote freedom and responsibility!

I think the founding fathers of the United States of America would be really upset about the predatory limits to our freedom. Our freedoms are not something to profit off of.