From the Easy Chair

Law Enforcement

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Conversations, Panels and Sermons

Lesson: X-214

Genre: Speech

Track:

Dictation Name: RR161CG155

Year: 1980s and 1990s

Dr. R. J. Rushdoony, RR161CG155, Law Enforcement, from the Easy Chair, excellent colloquies on various subjects.

[ Rushdoony ] This is R. J. Rushdoony, Easy Chair number 265, May the 13th, 1992.

Tonight discussing, first of all, law enforcement. Douglas Murray and Mark Rushdoony are with me. Otto Scott is out of the state and will not be back for a few days so we will miss him.

The subject of law enforcement is a critical one for us because we are lacking on two counts. We don’t have any real law anymore. Law has disappeared because God’s law is no longer respected , honored or obeyed.

I was talking to someone from Europe at our Seattle conference and learned that today in Europe no one knows what the law is, because the European community, EC, now has a court of Europe which wipes out the constitutional privileges and the laws of the various member countries on its own say so. There is no constitution for Europe as a whole, but the court of Europe arbitrarily overturns long standing laws in terms of its humanistic presuppositions so that no one any longer knows what the law is or what really to enforce.

We have a similar situation here because the U S Supreme Court has paid no attention to God’s law and it has paid no attention to the Constitution. The Constitution, for example, forbids the federal government to own land in any state other than post offices and military installations. But in some western states federal ownership of land is as high as 90 percent.

In one sphere after another what we now see is the decline and the disregard of law. For example, the May 10 Sunday Sacramento, California Union has an article on the death penalty. Fore the first time in 25 years because earlier Robert Allen Harris was executed, the door seems to be opened to the execution of 327 men and two women on California’s death row. All across the United States a great number of people who were sentenced by judges and or juries to the death penalty have been sitting in jail because games have been played with the law. And, as a result, there is an increasing contempt for the law. And the consequence, of course, is a major crisis in American life. The law doesn’t mean anything. If men can sit in death row for as much as 25 years and play games with their endless appeals and the courts and various legal organizations conspire to perpetuate this kind of game playing with the law, how are you going to have law enforcement?

Douglass, would you like to make some general statements and comments?

[ Murray ] Well, I think that the term that was coined many years ago—I believe it was by Joseph Longball—about the thin blue line referring to the diminishing capacity of the policeman to do his basic job of keeping the peace is finally should be dawning on the country that the thin blue line has holes in it...

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] Gaping holes in it. In the recent riots the police were ordered off the streets by the m mayor of Los Angeles and the ... the... the statement was made by chief Gates in answer to the question why the police left the area where the truck driver was beaten to death and he said that he was ordered off the streets by the...

[ Rushdoony ] That is nearly to death. He had survived.

[ Murray ] Yeah. By the ... the mayor’s office. So law enforcement has become a political football. And it almost leads one to the conclusion that an effort was... was made to cause this riot both the riot itself and the ... the extended consequences of the riot in order to dramatize the plight of the urban areas. Mayors have been going to the federal government with hat in hand for many years wanting a hand out. And now that the ... the federal government is finally becoming plain that the federal government is broke and isn’t going to pump any money into the inner city, apparently the mayors now are in a position that they feel free to take matters into their own hands.

There was a police officer the night before last on television who was resigning his position. This was not just a... a patrolman. This was a lieutenant in the L A police department. And he made the statement that the Dan Lundgren, the attorney general should prosecute and indict and prosecute the mayor of Los Angeles for inciting to riot because the statements that he made on television encouraged...

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] ... people. And actually increased the intensity right at the height of the riot, increased the.... It prolonged it and increased the intensity.

[ Rushdoony ] In the hearings before the Los Angeles city council, even a 13 year old girl came in to testify and to demand that Mayor Bradley resign, because he had virtually asked the people to riot.

Mark, would you like to make a general statement?

[ M Rushdoony ] Well, I think the fact that Mayor Bradley is black and reacted so poorly to the riots and even, in effect, said during the riots that they had good reason to riot, he is not going to suffer the political fall out because I think people are afraid to criticize him in Los Angeles because he is black. And so the... the... the race issue overlaps even this. People are afraid to criticize Bradley’s, in effect, racist attitude towards the problem and he approached it from a racist attitude and, you know, it increased the problem greatly.

I though the riots were very predictable. The first thing I held... I heard... I forgot what time of the day it was, but it was mid day or... or earlier when I heard that the police officers had been found not guilty. The first thought that occurred to me was: There is going to be rioting.

[ Murray ] Well, Gates, chief Gates knew that the riots were coming. It was... if the jury came in with an acquittal. The mayor’s office had to know, had to know.

[ M Rushdoony ] Well, I live hundreds of miles away. I don't even have my finger on the pulse of Los Angeles.

[ Murray ] Sure.

[ M Rushdoony ] And I knew there as going to be rioting. They have rioted over lesser things. And if they had organized their forces when they knew there was something they could have... they could have done a lot more, but I think they wanted to prevent calling in the national guard or even alerting the national guard for some time, because they didn’t want to ... to look like they were being too assertive. They were going to let the ... they were going to let them vent their anger. They, in effect, said, “We are going not let them riot,” I think.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, the sad part is that in Los Angeles, the police disarmed Asiatics who were defending successfully their own stores.

[ Murray ] Well, their only mistake was that they went out on the street with the weapons. If they had stayed inside their stores the police would... could not have disarmed them.

[ Rushdoony ] It...

[ Murray ] Because they are under law they are entitled to have weapons on the premises to defend themselves and their... and their businesses. But when they go out on the street that is where they stepped over the line and that is the reason that their weapons were taken away from them.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, we were in Seattle and the riots broke out there also. And the police chief there was very plain spoken. He said he knew most of the rioters. They were hoodlums. They had police records.

Now he was criticized for that statement, but they backed off because he proved his point. Now the one commentator who made sense on the whole subject was Mike Royko, R O Y K O of Chicago. And he made it clear that nothing he saw on television indicated anger and a cry for justice. What he saw was people walking out bleakly with a new stereo set and all kinds of things and rejoicing in the loot. One person, of course, I heard say he had gotten several thousand dollars worth of new stuff and he was coming back for the third load.

Now this is the kind of thing that happened. So the idea that the rioters were making a statement about justice was nonsense. Most blacks were also opposed to the rioting. They were the victims of it as much, if not more, than most.

[ M Rushdoony ] Oh, I believe that.

[ Rushdoony ] But these hoodlums have made it impossible for the police to work in their areas.

[ M Rushdoony ] Well, the gangs were heavily involved in the riots, too.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] The gangs were the... the real instigators of the rioting which, of course, the gang problem in L A is ... is terrible. And so if just the gang members had turned to rioting it would have been as serious problem.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, today’s paper said that four young men were arrested for the beating and near killing of the truck driver. And their records were well known to the police.

[ Murray ] Well, the... the ... the problem in law enforcement is much more pervasive. You know, we are just seeing... this is the first major instance of the problems bubbling to the surface. And I think there is no question in anybody’s mind but that the emperor has no clothes. The government cannot protect us. The government will not protect us. They have actually taken a conscious decision not to get in the way. And law enforcement is in crisis all over this country. There is no state that you can go to where there is not a crisis in law enforcement beaus the police don’t know what they are supposed to do any more. They are... they have got so much citizen oversight that interrupts the chain of command, there are so many conflicts that the officer has to... he doesn’t know where he stands. When he gets out on the street he doesn’t know what level of force that he can use regardless of what they say. He has got to make the decision in a split second and he has got to run down a whole line of criteria before he can take action. And you just can’t put somebody in that position. These people are not super men. They are just people who, you know, who have a little bit more training than the average, but a lot of people don’t realize that a plain citizen has more arrest powers than a police officer does.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] That... well, the... talking about the police department. They get their same, their pool of labor from the same place everybody else does. I mean, they are largely public school graduates, somebody who tested police... prospective police officers who were applying for the job in a... in the Bay area told me that out of every group tested—and they tested in large groups—they have to sign a statement saying that I have never used illegal drugs. He said the people who apply to be police officers one third of them fail because they can’t sign that statement. He said another third of them who ... who sign it will get thrown out with a lie detector when they are asked that same question. That is two thirds of them are eliminated for one reason, illegal drugs. So two thirds of the people applying for the job have used illegal drugs.

[ Murray ] Oh, it... it... it fits the general statistics of ... what percentage of high school kids have used drugs, you know, it falls right there in 50 to 60 percent.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, just after the rioting began the Sacramento Union, Friday, May the first, Linda Bowles wrote on the subject, “Public Schools: Indoctrinating, not Educating.” And she said a great deal in this long column. I quote a little bit of it.

“Laurel Kovosos, former secretary of education, estimated that among Americans 27 million are functional illiterates and another 40 to 89 million could be called marginally illiterate. Conclusion: Public schools are failing at the most rudimentary assignment we gave them: teach kids to read. Studies by the prestigious Brookings Institute had compared the performance of poor inner city students in public schools and private Catholic schools. The same type of poor kids educated at Catholic schools achieved 27 percent higher SAT scores and were three times as likely to graduate on time. And they were educated at half the cost. Conclusion: Our public schools with twice the resources can’t even come close to competing with private... with a private system in the education of children, including under privileged children from single parent homes.

“It would not be fair,” she goes on to say, “to say that our kids are graduating empty headed. On the contrary, their heads are crammed with a lot of stuff. While they have not been educated, they have been indoctrinated. While they have not accumulated knowledge, they have accumulated attitudes.

“Johnny may not be learning how to read, but he is learning that God is irrelevant, teachers are underpaid, big business is ruining their environment, rewards should be based on need rather than performance, the Alamo was a great Mexican victory, society rather than the individual is responsible for crime, teachers are underpaid, competition is destructive, rich people enjoy stomping on poor people, one person’s opinion is as good as any other, the right to kill an unborn child is sacred, teacher are grossly underpaid and the only hope of the world is for workers everywhere to unite and take control and, of course, is learning how to put on a condom.

“Not every one is unhappy. Many in the Democratic party vigorously defend the job the public school system is doing. After all, millions of kids who can’t read with comprehension have no sense of history, can’t think logically and have been indoctrinated to look to the government for their salvation have been well prepared for a lifetime of active membership in the Democratic party. Indeed, without this reservoir of carefully prepared minds from whence would come the Alan Cranstons, Wily Browns, Barney Franks, Ron Delhams and Vic Fazios of the future?” unquote.

I think you could say the same about their training for the Republican party. But our schools are teaching a lack of responsibility and they are major contributors to the breakdown of law enforcement, because the children have no idea what law is because they are not taught the Bible. They are not taught to respect authority. In fact, they are taught to question authority and to deny it.

[ Murray ] Yes, yes. No question about that. I was just... you took the words out of my mouth. They are taught not to respect authority. And it is... it is almost a joke in the public school system. And yet the teachers are always the ones who are most surprised when they are attacked or shot. They say, “How can this be in public schools?”

In fact, a lot of them have to wear bullet proof vests along with the kids and they are shocked and surprised and they don't seem to be able to figure it out. But the... the chickens are coming home to roost. I see in the... I think the Sacramento school system they are having to weigh up all their security people.

You know, it... it seems odd. When I was a kid it would have seemed unreal to have policemen on a school campus just... I mean even at the university level. You know, I... I never heard of it until just the last 15 or 20 years. Now you have whole police forces. You know, good sized police forces, you know, good size police forces with patrol cars and red lights and sirens and... and detention cells and handcuffs and, you know, all the trappings. It is like a city within a city and now the city of Sacramento is going to have to lay a lot of these people off and. beaus they don’t have the money anymore. The system is breaking down.

[ M Rushdoony ] Well, that is more true in, I think, the cities than it is in the suburbs in outlying areas, because the parents are the first to object if anybody suggests bringing police on campus to look for drugs, to search lockers for drugs. They don’t want to hear about it.

[ Murray ] Well, it happened right here in our little community. They had {?} local high school. They... they would not allow the sheriff’s office to come in check for drugs in the lockers for a long time until finally they... they finally gave in. But even small towns they resisted, because you have got... you have got big city attitudes among the school administrators.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. They ... that is exactly what I was going to say. They are trained at the universities. Their attitudes are urban.

Well, I think certain things have developed from the Los Angeles, Seattle, Las Vegas, Atlanta and other riots that came as a result of the Rodney King solution. One of them is that people don’t know what they are talking about. Just after the trial ended I had a call from someone who lived close by who followed the trial very closely. And he called to tell me something which I understand was subsequently on cable television, namely that the trial brought out very clearly, they had enlargements of the, oh, video shots of the ostensible beating, that the enlargements of those frames made clear that Rodney King was not beaten. He had hurt himself when he stumbled and fell in trying to run away. But the police were doing what they are taught to do, when he was down to disorient him and prevent him from reaching possibly for a weapon or resisting. They were striking next to his head on the pavement to disorient him. If they had hit him with the force they were striking the ground they would have broken his skull. They would have killed him.

So that there was no brutal and unusual treatment. It was a standard practice.

[ Murray ] Well, I think the... the interesting thing here its the perception of the public in what they saw in that film.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, what the media wanted them to see.

[ Murray ] Exactly. It was repeated over. I have never seen one film of any incident repeated so many times.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] Incessantly and still being repeated.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] ...even to the day of this taping on the evening news, because they want to keep that shock factor going. But it is interesting. It touches on what we were talking about earlier that we really do... don’t have an educated public. And the public cannot take a ... a step back and say, “Let’s take a look at the evidence. Let’s wait until all the facts are in. Let’s find out what really happened.” They are so conditioned now. I think I read a... a statistic where the average kid today by the time he goes into kindergarten has seen over 3000 hours of television with no value system attached to it.

[ Rushdoony ] No.

[ Murray ] And so by the time a kid gets out of high school today without an education, without being about to read or write, his value judgments are based purely on visual... his visual perception and ... and the visual perception has been trained by television.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] So that it is really a form of mind control. Television has become a... a vehicle of mind control of the general public. And one has to wonder if this has not been engineered this way. We have an educational system that won’t teach and we have a media that takes advantage of that, essentially that ignorance, the inability to ... to utilize logic and problem solving ability and feeds strictly on emotion, on visual images.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Well, what is obvious is that without knowing a thing about the trial or what was really involved in the way of testimony, Governor Pete Wilson, President Bush, Clinton, the Democratic candidate and Brown and other politicians were quick with statements passing judgment on the jury without knowing what they were talking about. So truth was a loser in this thing.

And then I think another loser was the black community. It is very clear that although most blacks did not favor the rioting their leaders did not step forward and condemn it and express their strong dissent. As a result the public sentiment, not that of politicians, the public sentiment was very, very strongly we have had it. These black hoodlums have been drawing welfare. They have been preying on public sympathy and they have gone too far. The third loser—first the truth, second the back or African American community—and, third, the politicians of both parties and both political parties, because most people reacted with a radical disgust at their proneness to take a side with the hoodlums.

It was obvious from the TV coverage that these people were not raging at injustice. They were out to loot and they were enjoying it. So what can you say for two political parties that come out with pompous statements defending hoodlums? It means that our political process is hopelessly corrupt. The politicians have lost touch with the people. They don’t know what they are thinking and talking about. And, as a result, we are in deep trouble. I think this may be the beginning of the end for both political parties. I will be surprised if by the end of this decade both the Republicans and Democrats have not fractured and begun their disappearance from the public scene.

[ Murray ] Well, I think the... the parties are going to follow what the people are... are doing in this country. You know, we have got every group, every ethnic religious group at each other’s throats in this country because of the politics of envy.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

Now to go on to a different aspect of law enforcement and its breakdown. The May 11th Sacramento Union had the front page story from New Haven Connecticut and I will read you just a portion of it to give you the general impact, because it does deal with a major and growing problem in this country.

“Lesley Care Oda made a name for herself as a zealous federal prosecutor who seized millions of dollars worth of property tainted by the drug trade. In seven years of going after homes and businesses and cars used in drug deals she never lost a case. She travelled the country lecturing prosecutors and law enforcement officers how to hit dealers where it really hurts. Then in December the tables turned. Her 18 year old son Mickey was arrested for selling LSD out of her car, their own town of Glastonbury. There was also evidence he sold marijuana out of his parents’ home in one occasion in 1989. The arrest cost Oda her high profile position and though law enforcement authorities ultimately decided against it, Oda risked losing her car and house under the very asset forfeiture law that she had championed. Her fall was occasioned... has occasioned little sympathy from those she prosecuted.

“‘I don’t feel very sorry for Oda,’ said Paul Durbacher, 83 of Hamden who was forced to sell his house in 1988 after his grandson was charged with selling and storing drugs there. ‘My wife thinks she is a barracuda.’”

And it goes on to cite others who have lost their properties because of this woman who feel that she is being let off easy because they are not seizing it.

Now at the same time Reason magazine for May, 1992 has an article by a Cynthia Cotts, C O T T S, “Year of the Rat” and it is precisely about this kind of thing, how by seizing properties, cars, anything they have created a situation where they have turned a lot of people into bounty hunters. It means that if somebody gets into your car, has possession of a little narcotics unbeknownst to you or comes into your home, your car and your home can be seized and sold. And you are out in the cold. However innocent you may be, it makes no difference.

Well, the evidence that this article in Reason brings to light is that you now have criminals who are accusing a variety of people, criminal and non criminal, and everything is being seized. And some of them are actually millionaires even though it is now beginning to be apparent than some of their evidence is manufactured.

[ Murray ] You have to choose your friends very carefully.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. So it is a horrifying article. And the implications of this are far reaching. It means that our federal authorities and all our drug authorities are involved in a conspiracy to seize property from people.

[ Murray ] Well, let’s... this is the out growth and brings into question the RICO Act.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] You know, as part of the trashing of the Constitution. As much as we may find the drug trade and the results of the drug trade objectionable, when you throw away the constitutional safeguards you throw them away for everybody.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] And it is giving the government way too much power. It has become, as you say, it has become a bounty hunter game and it is... it really has nothing to do... it almost has nothing to do with law enforcement any more.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] It is a means of funding... it feeds on itself, because a percentage of that money is fed back into the machinery that does the seizing.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] So there is an enormous incentive for them to be very efficient at what they do.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, she makes the statement, “Federal laws have produced a glut of jailed martyrs and spurious informants. Too often prosecutors recommend lenient sentences for king pins who cooperate while throwing the book at middle men who won’t talk.” She also says, “The downside comes when a minor defendant doesn’t know enough to be useful. The law says you can’t buy silence, but little people who are ignorant of the scope of the conspiracy often land in jail while the big shots go free.” Again she says, “Like birds assembling a nest, jail house informants faction a story out any available source, newspaper clippings, police tips and legal documents ripped off from fellow prisoners.” Again, “For every bust the law allows the DEA to pay the informer a commission of up to 25 percent of seized assets, but a ceiling of 250,000. Some career informants have become millionaires and so on.”

So we are in the name of fighting drugs building up an evil agency and creating wealthy people who are really in the drug trade or I the business of inventing the drug deals in order to put people away and collect money.

[ Murray ] Well, the alternatives are limited, but I believe I asked you once before what the biblical perspective was on the death penalty for drug dealers and I think you said that there was some area in there that had to do with pharmakea or poisoning...

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] And that pretty well describes what is happening and they are poisoning not just one generation, but successive generations.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] And they are poisoning our society.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Well, thou shalt not suffer a witch to live is literally thou shalt not suffer a poisoner to live.

The whole problem of law enforcement is well dealt with in an article in the Wall Street Journal a while back which says that our problem begins with the breakdown of the family. And nothing is going to solve it until the family is again rehabilitated.

[ Murray ] Isn’t it refreshing to hear government leaders now starting to talk about rejuvenating the family after they have tried everything else? They have bankrupted the country.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] They have done everything else imaginable and finally they are beginning to come back to the basic building block of society. They are admitting that government has failed.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] I think that is great.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, at the same time through the schools they are helping destroy the family.

[ M Rushdoony ] We are turning to the right about this as far as destroying our society. There was a lot of talk just after the riots about how our social welfare programs have failed. And, of course, with the blame being put on the liberals. And, of course, the liberals use two lines of reasoning. One was the predicable. Well, if you hadn't cut so much from the program this wouldn’t have happened. But the other line of reasoning was, hey, these programs started under Democrats, but you Republicans continued the program, so don’t blame us. And I think that was very interesting that because the Republicans have done the same thing as the Democrats. So it has been across the board, across both political parties that they have continued these social programs that have ...

[ Murray ] Not worked.

[ M Rushdoony ] That have ... well, {?}

[ Murray ] Well, it is... it is now that is one of the underlying reasons why people can no longer see any difference between the two political parties. There is no choice because they continue to perpetuate the same failed programs from the previous administration regardless of what party it was.

[ M Rushdoony ] And that is... in the next two years as the debt problem becomes acute that is going to... it is apparent with that, too. The Republicans really haven’t offered a solution to the... our debt problem. No political party has.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] And they are still not talking about it in this presidential election.

[ Rushdoony ] That is right. In fact, they are both talking about more spending.

[ M Rushdoony ] Yeah. I am just waiting for the time when it suddenly becomes headlines and then the political candidates start talking about it like we have got a solution as though the problem just appeared and now they will solve it.

[ Murray ] Well, I heard some numbers thrown around in the last few days that the United States has spent two and a half trillion dollars on the... on the great society programs, two and a half trillion dollars which is over half of our national debt and we are worse off today than we are when we started. So we are just pouring gasoline on the fire. It still goes back to the responsibility of the individual and government simply cannot do it.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, as I said at the beginning, the whole problem of law enforcement is a religious problem. And everything has been done to undermine religion. As a result we have an evil society all around us. I have mentioned to both of you a book I read recently. The authors are Sam and Chuck Giancana, the godson and the brother of the mob boss Sam Giancana and the title is Double Cross. And the criminal syndicate is controlled to—in varying degrees—every president from Teddy Roosevelt to the present. Perhaps most of all Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson and Kennedy. And their control has been in the areas of labor unions, big business, the federal, state and local governments. Their controls extend into the life of churches. It means that as a very powerful force they are used by the federal government. Sam Giancana worked for the CIA as well as other groups and it is a grim story of the extent of the corruption that exists and how many aspects of American life are involved in it. The world of entertainment and the life is very deeply involved.

So we have a situation of very, very extensive corruption. And nothing is going not change it, because the federal government is a key player in all of this. Only a change in the lives and faith of the people is going to turn the country around. Law enforcement begins with the individual.

When the American people, by and large, who profess to be Bible believing, believe in most cases in only four of the 10 Commandments, you have got to say that their faith is worthless, their profession is an empty thing and they have no contribution to make to anything in the way of growth and law enforcement, only to corruption.

[ Murray ] Or they follow the 10 Commandments, but only one at a time.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. And I think most of them don’t know the 10 Commandments, because in most churches they are no longer taught. Most churches believe that we are dead to the law and I have known of pastors who ... who declare themselves to be Bible believing who forbid the posting and use of the 10 Commandments by any Sunday school teacher. So how are the children to know thou shalt not steal nor commit adultery nor bear false witness or honor thy father and thy mother?

[ Murray ] I think the most poignant thing that was on television during these riots was the black business man who was just shouting at the crowd.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. I remember that.

[ Murray ] How can you teach your kids to steal? I mean he had already lost everything.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] But he was worried about other people. And ...

[ Rushdoony ] And nobody answered him.

[ Murray ] No.

[ Rushdoony ] Nobody.

[ Murray ] And I notice that the ... in the ... the ... I saw it the first time that it was broadcast because it was live and he said that... something to the effect that you have to teach them about Jesus. And by the time the networks got around to repeating it they had edited out that portion of his impassioned plea to the crowd.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Well, even the comic strips are beginning to see the irony. Perhaps you saw the Wizard of Id recently. This little boy is kneeling and praying and he is arrested and taken to the king. His offense? He was praying in a public place for the king. So he is let off with a very stern reprimand and he walks down a street with nude bars, porno shops, every kind of thing. So that is all too true.

[ M Rushdoony ] And in the sign of each one there is...

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ M Rushdoony ] ... a sign that says, “Praying allowed.”

[ Rushdoony ] Praying allowed.

[ M Rushdoony ] Every where but in the schools, government property.

[ Murray ] Well, if it is... if we are going to turn things around it is going to be from the bottom up. It is obviously not going to be from the top down so everyone has to take some responsibility for turning the ship around and...

[ Rushdoony ] I am glad you have stressed that, Douglas, especially in an election year. We need to stress nothing is going to improve from the top down. Neither party has in it anything to contribute to the change that is needed. It is going to begin in the families with persons who apply their faith.

[ Murray ] And in the Christian schools.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] There is a... a great deal to be said for patience and waiting for the next generation, but it has to be a generation that is brought up in the Christian traditions and it is the only hope we have, really. It is the only hope I see, because there is nothing on the political scene. These people at the top of the political heap are totally devoted to perpetuating their own jobs and their own fortunes and they care nothing, absolutely nothing for the people on the bottom. They can piously talk and pontificate about all of the things that should be done, but when it comes to action they are paralyzed, because they know that in taking action they are going to get some group or other mad at them and put their own re-election in jeopardy and their own fortunes in jeopardy and they are just ... we are in a grid lock. And I think the people are beginning to realize it.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Some years ago some one in politics told me that no party will consider an issue unless they feel between 35 to 50 percent of the population is in favor of it. Then the begin to express themselves on the subject and if they feel it has passed over 50 percent then they are ready to go for it, which means that they are not the trend setters. They are the trend followers.

Moreover, they are behind times usually because they keep riding something long after others have abandoned it.

[ Murray ] Well, it is ... it is the Jerry Brown philosophy of leadership. It is find out which way the crowd is going...

[ Rushdoony ] Yes.

[ Murray ] And then run around in front and say, “Follow me.”

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Now the 60s was the youth generation, so-called and the time of youth protests. And it was amusing how many politicians assumed the mantle of youth and in their hair styles and dress they acted as though they were overgrown 20 year olds.

[ Murray ] Well, they were... they were told by professional people that image is everything and substance means nothing.

[ Rushdoony ] Yes. Now it is interesting. The first person to realize that times had changed was Teddy Kennedy. He has around him a team of highly intelligent if not in a very moral advisors. And they very early saw that the trend was increasingly of an aging population. So suddenly Teddy Kennedy became the advocate of the senior citizens who are now over 25 percent of the electorate. I believe 27 percent, something like that. And he is the darling of the retired people. The overwhelming majority think Teddy Kennedy is the finest man in Washington because he is always thinking of them.

So that is your astute politician. He is a weather vane. And it is interesting that as far back as the late 30s I heard a churchman who became one of the top men at his particular denomination see the weather vane as the best symbol for a good church, because it was always aware, he said, of the direction of the popular opinion that was blowing.

And I said, “It should resist the popular opinion in favor if God’s Word.” And he found that an interesting thought.

But our politicians have become weather vanes. And law enforcement depends on people who say, like Luther, “Here I stand. I can do no other, so help me God.” They are going to stand in terms of their faith, their belief in God’s law.

We have just a few minutes. Is there a final comment that you would like to make, Mark?

[ M Rushdoony ] I have a question for Douglas. You touched on it early in the riots. But with... if you assume that... that law enforcement, especially in crisis is going to be increasingly political, if people have to defend themselves, what is the law about defending yourself and, for instance, having a weapon? And you mentioned that some of these people stepped over the line when they took it out in front of their stores. What right currently do ... does an individual have to defend themselves?

[ Murray ] You have... you have the right to use any force necessary on your premises in your home or in your business, but you have got to be inside the building and it has to be clear that the person who is ... that you ... if you do shoot, it has to be clear that that person is advancing towards you in a menacing manner and is a clear and present threat. In other words, they are holding a weapon which can be anything. It can be a piece of pipe. It can be a large rock. It could be a gun. It could be a knife. It could be a baseball bat. It can be anything. And you have to be in a situation where you are in fear of your life before you can shoot. Even police officers are in this position except in the case of a fleeing felon. If... if a convicted felon, for instance, if they have stopped an automobile and the ... they find out through checking that the individual inside is a convicted felon, from the teletype and the guy gets out of the car and runs, then they ... they can shoot him and bring them down. But that doesn’t happen very often, because they are ... they are really not too sure whether they are going to be taken to task over it or not. They don't want to go through the... the meat grinder of internal affairs.

But for the average citizen if you are inside your house and somebody is coming through a door or through a window, you have to make sure that they are inside. They have to be a clear and present danger.

[ M Rushdoony ] So... so looting is not defined by the court as... as a justifiable...

[ Murray ] Yeah, they... they... they come in your store. Well, no, not... not looting. If ... that is a gray area. Now it used to be that you could defend your life and your property, but it depends on the prosecutor in the particular jurisdiction that you are in. They don’t regard property as worth a human life, regardless of whose it is. In some jurisdictions in some parts of the country if you shot somebody who was looting your... your store, you would be acquitted of any charge. In fact, you wouldn’t even... you wouldn’t even be prosecuted. You would go to a... a coroner’s inquest and they would, you know, determine whether it was a wrongful death or justifiable and that would be the end of it. There would be no prosecution.

But in most urban, large urban jurisdictions, you have to be very careful because the public prosecutors in large urban jurisdictions are political animals and they are only interested in carving out another notch on their gun butt. And for them to throw you into the meat grinder on a technicality is done every day.

[ M Rushdoony ] It used to be after a natural disaster such as a hurricane in which case many of they ... much of the locale was actually abandoned by the populous that they would say looters would be shot on sight. Is that ever done anymore?

[ Murray ] I don't think it has been done for a long time, because usually the national guard goes in immediately. You don’t have this three or four day delay like you had I the case of Los Angeles where it built up to a fever pitch. But you had to be very careful and you have to find out what the law is in your state and it is, you know, you have to find out what has happened in... I other cases to find out, you know, what the current temper of the local prosecutor is.

[ M Rushdoony ] I mean does... does the mayor or the chief of police have the right to order such a thing to stop rioting? It seems to me it would stop it. I mean Kent State and it is about the student riots of the 60s.

[ Murray ] Well, it is based on state law, state penal code. But that varies from state to state.

[ Rushdoony ] Well, our time is up. Thank you all for listening and God bless you.

[ Voice ] Authorized by the Chalcedon Foundation. Archived by the Mount Olive Tape Library. Digitized by ChristRules.com.