They did not do this to pursue the DC sniper, or to go after the Kennedy assassin, and I fear the precedent. It is eerie that this happened in an American city, and it should be eerie to you, no matter where you fall on the spectrum. You can tell me that most people in Boston were happy to go along with it, but that’s not really the point, either. If two criminals can bring an entire city to its knees like this with the help of the state, then terrorism truly is a winning strategy. (And we should also keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of the massive police response did not aid in capturing the suspect—it ultimately turned on that old fashioned breakthrough—a normal denizen calling the authorities with information.)

Britain's largest police force stole the identities of an estimated 80 dead children and issued fake passports in their names for use by undercover police officers.

The Metropolitan police secretly authorised the practice for covert officers infiltrating protest groups without consulting or informing the children's parents.

This kind of entrapment and official deceit by police should alarm every American. It’s bad enough when police plant evidence and lie about evidence in order to win convictions, since it means innocent people will be sent to prison or worse. But with the new post 9-11 terrorism laws, like the state terrorism statutes in Illinois being applied in these cases, it becomes far more difficult for a victim of such police and prosecutorial misconduct to challenge the case against her or him. In terror cases, the government can claim “national security” to hide the evidence and even the identity of the witnesses from the defendants and the courts, the jury and the public, and can avoid ever being questioned about it publicly. In a worst case, the federal government doesn’t even need to bring the case to trial. If the victim is accused of being a terrorist, under the latest National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and various executive orders, that person can be locked away indefinitely without trial — exactly the kind of abuse that led American colonists to rise up against their British colonial overlords 237 years ago.

Jesse did not commit a crime. He was not a suspect in a crime. He was being questioned by a power-hungry thug. He is a minor, who, if questioned has a right to have a parent present. He is mentally challenged and doesn't understand what is going on. He doesn't know that cops are dangerous to all peaceful people. He doesn't understand that many of them, like Officer Willie, are mental cases who get their rocks off by hurting people and ordering them around.

Even if having police is a desirable thing, we cannot do so safely until the bad laws are off the books, and then it would be best to fire all police and start over. If having had a severe criminal record tends to disqualify people from the job, so too must having been a reputable police officer. If I am too harsh in this regard, it is just one more reason to abolish the government’s police and allow for the market to take over. Allow entrepreneurs to decide which former government police are redeemable and employable as private security and which are not.

Above and beyond everything, the Founders' hideous, destructive omission must be corrected and the Bill of Rights equipped with a "penalty clause" for politicians, bureaucrats, or policemen who violate its precepts. The point must be made that no portion of the Constitution allows it to be set aside in the case of an "emergency". The Posse Comitatus Act of 1876 must be reinstated in full, and the most Draconian punishments imaginable established for its slightest violation.

Creating and enacting such a penalty clause must become the highest priority for Libertarians, Constitutionalists, "Tea Partiers", and any others who interested in restoring freedom to this once great country.

To individual members of the police and military, we say the time for denial is over. If these proposed measures anger you, remember that Bill Clinton did it to you. Janet Reno did it to you. Louis Freeh did it to you. Larry Potts did it to you. Lon Horiuchi did it to you. George W. Bush, Richard Cheney and their minions did it to you. And now, Barack Obama, Janet Napolitano, and Eric Holder are doing it to you.

You have let them do it.

Thanks to them, you are despised by the very populace that you're supposed to be protecting. You are feared—and if you enjoy that, there's something deeply wrong with you—and you have forgotten that frightened people are dangerous. Until you are willing to prove the contrary to the those you have sworn to serve, you are no different from the politicians listed above.

It is inappropriate for sovereign individuals to be labeled, sorted, and tracked as if they were livestock. Naturally, there is no provision for these activities to be found in the Constitution. Fingerprint records and other identification systems presently maintained by government or its surrogate corporations must be destroyed. Voiceprinting, retinal photography, and the "preventive" collection of DNA samples must be forbidden. Electronic tracking systems must be banned, and government forbidden to use Global Positioning Systems, especially in telephones, to track or find individuals.

First, there being no provision whatever in the Constitution for a national police force of any kind—and in compliance with the 9th and 10th Amendments, as well as with Article 1, Section 8—all federal "law enforcement" and investigative agencies must be abolished and their present and former employees subjected to legal scrutiny of their current and past activities for possible criminal behavior and crimes against the Constitution. As "interim" measures, these agencies and their employees will be forbidden to use or carry weapons of any kind (except off duty as ordinary individual citizens), and will be permitted to operate at all only under close supervision by local police.