Rand Paul Stole The Idea To Demilitarize The Police From Democrats

rand paul sad

Noted plagiarist Sen. Rand Paul wrote in an editorial today about the need to demilitarize the police. However, this wasn’t Paul’s own idea. Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson first wrote about his legislation in March.

Rand Paul wrote for Time:

Not surprisingly, big government has been at the heart of the problem. Washington has incentivized the militarization of local police precincts by using federal dollars to help municipal governments build what are essentially small armies—where police departments compete to acquire military gear that goes far beyond what most of Americans think of as law enforcement.

….

The militarization of our law enforcement is due to an unprecedented expansion of government power in this realm. It is one thing for federal officials to work in conjunction with local authorities to reduce or solve crime. It is quite another for them to subsidize it.

In March of this year, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) wrote in USA Today:

This is why Rep. Johnson plans to introduce legislation to reform the 1033 program before America’s main streets and civilian police militarize further. The program currently lacks serious oversight and accountability, and it needs some parameters put in place to define what is appropriate. The legislation will ban MRAPs, other armored personnel carriers, drones, assault weapons and aircraft. Finally, the legislation will ensure that the Department of Defense undertakes an annual accounting of what’s been transferred, by whom and to whom to prevent military items from being auctioned on eBay or sold to friends.

Militarizing America’s main streets won’t make us any safer, just more fearful and more reticent. Before another small town’s police force gets a $700,000 gift from the Defense Department that it can’t maintain or manage, it behooves us to press pause on Pentagon’s 1033 program and revisit the merits of a militarized America. And do it now before Kankakee looks like Kabul or Boise looks like Baghdad.

When the situation in Ferguson, MO erupted, Rand Paul picked up Rep. Johnson’s idea and made it his own. Rep. Johnson announced today that he will be introducing his legislation. As Johnson pointed out in his article, the problem is that the Pentagon loves to give the surplus equipment to local law enforcement because it allows them to ask for more new equipment in next year’s budget.

The problem isn’t the Republicans’ favorite vague boogeyman “big government.” The real issue is their favorite form of welfare in disguise, which is military spending. Notice that Sen. Paul never once called out the Military Industrial Complex that is fueling this program. He can’t risk alienating Republican primary voters by looking like he is against a big red state job creator.

Democrats and liberals should not fall for Rand Paul’s act. The next original idea Sen. Paul has will be his first. The reason so many on the left like the idea of demilitarizing the police is because it first came from one of their own, Rep. Hank Johnson.

54 Replies to “Rand Paul Stole The Idea To Demilitarize The Police From Democrats”

  1. Well… he’s a known plagiarist, eh? Like the snake who bit you after a favor, you _knew_ he was a snake when you picked him up. All respect to real snakes.

  2. I don’t see how anyone can honestly look at this clown and seriously believe that he has what it takes to be POTUS. SMDH

  3. as is usual… reducing a problem to sound bites never actually gets to the heart of the problem… or even the liver…

    one of the reasons for police militarization is mission creep… when assault weapons started creeping into the underworld, ie gangs, white supremacists, general dumbasses, the police were terribly outgunned..

    intro the 9mm instead of the .38 police special…

    eventually it became easier and easier to add to arsenals… Colt AR15s for the SWAT guys… tanks or heavily armored vehicles…

    this is an oversimplification of course and its lovely to demand demilitarization of the police but the flip side is disarming the thugs and dumbasses… ask Pseudo Libertarian how he feels about gung control and watch the stammer….

  4. The militarization of the police began in 1994, the year of the Contract on America. Our police are increasingly infiltrated by Oathkeepers, and while the guns are never turned on genuine (white, right-wing) insurrectionists like Bundy or the Murrieta rioters, tanks roll against a (poor, nonwhite) community of demonstrators protesting the extrajudicial execution of its youth. I suggest that such developments are neither recent nor spontaneous, but long in the planning.

  5. I don’t care if he wants to demilitarize the police or legalize every drug in America or do whatever else he thinks will help him gain support for a presidential run (especially support from young people, which he is courting FEVERISHLY).

    Rand Paul is about one thing and one thing only: RAND PAUL.

    He is no true libertarian and quite frankly, libertarianism isn’t all that and a bag of chips either.

    Here’s a campaign slogan for Rand Paul, one that will sum him up quite succinctly:

    “Liberty for ME but not for THEE.”

    He cares nothing for liberty. Nothing at all. It is a means to an end for him, nothing more.

  6. You guys should honestly try a little harder on your Rand Paul hit pieces. Lots of people want the police demilitarized, Hank Johnson wasn’t the first person to propose this. You guys sound desperate.

  7. Drop the labels of democrat and republican. Go to the underlying political philosophy. Is it not surprising that political philosophy could be shared by more than two people of different parties. If Rand Paul espouses an admirable position how is that theft? Rand Paul also filibustered the nomination of people involved with the growing police state. He has been concerned, as Libertarians are generally, with the expansion of state powers, now becoming full scale totalitarianism. Should we not march together, opposed to tyranny, rather than accusing each other “stealing” the idea of being opposed to it? The powers that keep us divided must be laughing hard today.

  8. Libertarians are generally into corporate rights. With you left holding the bag.

    Have you found some tyranny somewhere?

  9. Of course most people want the police demilitarized. That’s hardly a unique position and while most of us have a variety of reasons why that should happen, Rand Paul has just one reason…

    Because it is politically expedient for him to take that position.

    His every move is nothing more than an expression of what is good for HIM politically.

    That’s it.

    Libertarianism is not Paul’s political philosophy – he is a Republican first and foremost. If one wants liberty, one will not find it in Rand Paul.

  10. No, Rand Paul sounds desperate.

    First, he runs away from a DREAMer, now he has to deal with this.

    Paul is a political con-man like his father. He’s just not as good at it.

  11. Rand Paul is a neo-confederate. He’s a fake libertarian. And libertarianism is pretty lame on its own without his help.
    Just because I may agree with him on this one issue doesn’t change that.

    I could care less whether or not he stole this idea from somebody else. I just don’t think he’s sincere. He opposes Civil Rights legislation which is why he’s only focusing on the police militarization issue while ignoring the racial one. What happened in Ferguson is exactly why the Civil Rights movement happened 50 years ago. Yet, if he had his way, sure the Ferguson PD may have not had military weaponry, but they would have still been able to act like vicious idiots.

    Police don’t need military hardware to be assholes and harass the communities they are suppose to protect. I see right through Paul’s arguments even if you can’t.

  12. He’s not even a Republican. He’s a neo-confederate. He’s only using the Republican Party to legitimatize his wacky dreams of “The South Will Rise Again.”

  13. Rand did not copy from Johnson’s work, so how is it plagiarizing? Rand Paul agrees with some democrats about de-militarizing the police. I guess two people can’t both write about being in favor of the same political position without plagiarizing each other.

  14. Militarizing the police is just another cog in the military industrial complex machine which Eisenhower warned us about in 1961.

    Additional military surplus guns/weaponry/armor for the police means mo’ money for the defense contractors and their puppets in congress.

    Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

    ~ President Dwight D. Eisenhower

  15. Where is the Democratic opposition to the NDAA and the now legal ability for the military to disappear Americans with charges or telling anyone. I wish some Democrats would steal that idea from Rand and the house republicans who have spoke and voted against it.

  16. I have no problem with Rand Paul picking up the idea from Hank Johnson as long as he does not try to introduce a separate bill to compete with Johnson’s bill. This should be a bi-partisan issue. Most politicians try to make everything sound like it was their own idea. The issue is whether he cooperates with Johnson or competes with him.

  17. Your characterization of NDAA is simplistic and wrong. NDAA covers the entire operation of our US military. It’s not a neat and tidy bill that could be opposed and the military could still function.

    Besides, Rand Paul is only interested in federal tyranny, not state or local. And he doesn’t care about the civil liberties of huge segments of his fellow Americans.

    He’s a poser, a con-man, and a neo-Confederate posing as a libertarian. So, sorry if I and others aren’t as gullible as you.

    His father was much better had hiding the darker side of his political agenda when he was Congress. As for Rand, he’s really bad at it and yet still, he’s got nimrods falling for his BS.

  18. I’m sorry, where are the facts to solidify your argument that he “stole” the idea? So two men have the same beliefs and now that means one is stealing from the other? How bout you review Rand Paul’s stance on this and many other issues dating back to when he entered into politics…God forbid we have a couple politicians trying to make a point to the American people about the militarization of the police force. I suppose you’d rather only a liberal be against that so you can rail on anyone else who is part of a different political ideology? This type of article is exactly the problem with American. Divide and concur everyone else. We should be praising the fact that a republican and democrat agree on something and might be able to make a change for the better for all American’s.

  19. You know you fan boys of rand can put this to a rest. Let him co-sponsor a bill to correct this bullshit. But he wont because he got ballwashers like you defending what he says not what he would do

  20. How can you possibly be this stupid? Libertarians have been talking about police overreach for several years. Ever heard of Radley Balko?

  21. How can you be so stupid. I have yet to see you white libertarians stand up for the blacks who have lived in a police state

  22. Another sophomoric column from a website that seems to be run by teenagers. More than one person can have the same viewpoint.

  23. Well fanboy of Rand will he introduce a bill to correct this. That is the question YOU should be asking but you wont because the smell of ballwashing is victory

  24. More appropriately, Rand “hijacked” the issue of militarized police. Rand’s “concern” is the Federal dollars used in the procurement process. Rand’s primary issue is “Big Government”, but he has no issue with a local government or Militia buying a Stealth Bomber if they choose to exercise their Liberty in that way.

  25. It is amazing how you accuse him of stealing the idea when the comments are just now coming out in Time mag WHICH the story was submitted weeks ago. The legislation the left is quoting was just announced yesterday… Who’s rendition was first, I submit the article in Time Mag proves the public is being misled by the left yet again……

  26. I’m glad that liberals have finally woken up to the militarization of police that Democrats helped to create. I only wish that they would recognize that libertarians have been protesting against such militarization for more than 40 years. So much for the idea that Paul stole the idea from liberals.

  27. This Ron Paul would do anything for votes, as he lies, steals, and deceives the GOP=TPers base of greedy hateful people!!!…………….. joe

  28. Rand Paul has yet to prove he’s sincere about anything other than his own personal ambition.

    And it doesn’t help that he doesn’t support civil rights legislation which the current incident in Ferguson, MO has clearly demonstrated we still need.

    Sorry, but don’t be surprised if many on the left don’t trust this man. Besides, as usual, libertarians are trying to hop a ride on one of the two major political parties because they are politically illiterate and lazy. They were dumb enough to let fake-libertarians like Ron and Rand Paul into their fold but yet still expect others to take them seriously? And libertarians, given their 40-year track record of political laziness and ineptitude still think they have the cahones to take over the GOP?

    Rand Paul is a joke and so is the political philosophy he claims to support. Take your fanboy worship of Paul somewhere else!

  29. No, it’s American Libertarian Party that’s run by a bunch of sophmoric teenagers who never graduated from college!

    And you let those fake libertarians, Confederate-loving, the Pauls, hijack you?

    This is why even Ayn Rand tried to separate herself from libertarianism with her “Objectivism.”

    You guys are a political joke who all you’ve managed to do for the last 40 years is split votes. Get over yourselves!

  30. And who’s really acting like the teenagers here?

    It is all you Rand Paul fanboys coming over to left-leaning website downvoting every comment negative towards your fake-libertarian champion?

  31. This is the poorest argument I’ve heard in quite a while. Stating a position is not stealing; or the Democrats better sure as hell apologize to the Libertarians. To suggest he stole the idea implies that he agreed with militarized policing before hand. No evidence suggests this. In fact, given his record supporting civil liberties in regards to non violent felons and the NSA, it’s a reasonable assumption he would have agreed with demilitarization in the first place. I think this site knows the strong possibility the Paul becoming president; rather than be responsible and report facts, this site once again resorts to 3rd grade rhetoric to try to sway the unintelligent. Lame excuse for a media source.

  32. The odds of Paul even being close to being elected are as good as the odds of you jumping from here to the moon. That man is carrying baggage

    Paul is not a libertarian

  33. Let’s talk about Rand Paul’s stand on civil liberties. What about his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Rand Paul is NOT a champion of civil liberties! End of discussion!

    Please sell this BS somewhere else. Paul is racist and misogynist and yet somehow, you idiots think he can bridge a gap? Do you honestly think women and non-whites are so stupid? And to add insult to injury, your movement is 97% white male! Are you kidding me?

    Once again, get over yourselves. You’re a bunch of lazy thinkers who condone sociopathic behavior.

    Democrats apologize to libertarians? Why? Neither Rand Paul or the libertarians are original thinkers.

    You are not as important or relevant as you think you are. Especially since most subscribers to your philosophy reject it the moment they graduate from college.

    So, once again, get over yourselves.

    Besides, it’s only a matter of time before Paul walks back this position too.

  34. Besides, it’s only a matter of time before Paul walks back this position too.
    ————————–

    And it may come Monday when the drug addicted fat one takes him to the woodshed

  35. Oh Poo poo. His father was talking about this decades ago and my goodness let’s not have people agreeing that would be a scandal ! How ridiculous to give a similar opinion a bad name. The partisan baloney needs to stop and the children need to grow up on both sides…better idea. Get rid of the stinken parties and vote for individuals on their merit and ideas. I guess that would be too much work for the average lazy party line voter right? :p

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.