Description

Jim Bovard shares the story of the death of Duncan Lemp, a 21-year-old Maryland man recently killed by police in his home in the middle of the night. The police aren’t releasing their side of the story yet, but it looks as though Lemp hadn’t even been charged with any crimes—police were simply executing a search warrant on what they deemed a “high-risk” target. The SWAT team threw stun grenades into his room, where he and his pregnant girlfriend were sleeping, then shot Lemp to death. Scott suspects that the officers responsible will face few to no repercussions for this crime, as is almost always the case.
Discussed on the show:
“Did Maryland Police Shoot And Kill A Sleeping Man?” (The American Conservative)
“Waco: The Rules of Engagement (1997)” (IMDb)
“Potomac man killed in police-involved shooting in Maryland” (The Washington Post)
“James Bovard Playboy 2000 Flash Bang You’re Dead SWAT Team Abuse” (jimbovard.com)
Jim Bovard is a columnist for USA Today and the author of Public Policy Hooligan: Rollicking and Wrangling from Helltown to Washington. Find all of his books and read his work on his website and follow him on Twitter @JimBovard.
This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: NoDev NoOps NoIT, by Hussein Badakhchani; The War State, by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.com; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott; Listen and Think Audio; TheBumperSticker.com; and LibertyStickers.com.
Donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal, or Bitcoin: 1Ct2FmcGrAGX56RnDtN9HncYghXfvF2GAh.

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

discussions

  • I caught this sketch the other day from an old episode of A Bit of Fry & Laurie about the privatization of the British police. It’s pretty funny as it contains every fear that statists have about privatizing the police, it even manages to fit in something about private roads.  Watch and laugh or cringe. “Peter, everybody had an chance to buy shares at the time of issue. It was all supervised by a reputable merchant bank… well by a merchant bank anyway. ”    

    Jump to Discussion Post 3 replies
  • For the past few years, police departments have been on something of a power trip in the United States. Only citing the lesser-known instances that come to my mind, cops have assaulted autistic teenagers and murdered unarmed civilians, and were subsequently cleared of all charges and let back on the force. A zealous, dogmatic conservative “fanbase,” alongside a legal system that actively defends police from facing charges of murder, manslaughter, or assault, assures that these men and women never see justice for their actions. It’s awful what police are doing in society, but it’s even worse that they can get off scot-free for it. Of course, most of you already know this. So here’s my question: has any United States representative or senator proposed a bill designed to fight against unjust acquittals or introduce charges that are harder to to be overturned? As an agorist, I’m partially convinced that this has never happened and that anyone who gets elected for public office in this day and age is a vapid authoritarian, but a sliver of hope remains for me somewhere. Have any of you heard of such legislation on a federal level? If not, then what about on a state level?

    Jump to Discussion Post 1 reply
  • Its seems they always skip over the issue. There is always this refusal to acknowledge or “give-in” in to the reality of what its happening on their part Does anyone know why this mentality exists? Is there anyway to stop it? Or try to get through to these people that’s its tyranny that is the enemy?

    Jump to Discussion Post 11 replies
  • http://www.socialmatter.net/2016/06/24/mass-shootings-make-sense/ Thoughts?

    Jump to Discussion Post 5 replies
  • When people are foolish into thinking that the “law” (police, written laws) protect them, does that afford them to not protecting themselves, because they think that the police, and or “law” is always going to be there for them? I feel this will only influence these ‘types’ of people to provoke others whom they dont like, because they know the “law will be on their side.” So as an example: When the person reacts, naturally, the instigator can turn around and say, “Help, help, police!” I feel that this is an abuse and exploitation of law and policing. When police and or law protects people, do people foolishly think that the law is on their side and they can bend it to their will, against their enemies AKA: people they dont like in society, and do they? My conclusion is that people use the police and law, to get THEM what they want against their enemies, because they KNOW the law will “protect” them in the process. So in many cases you find for example, bad co-workers, bosses, friends and family, who deliberately instigate a provocation KNOWING FULLY the other persons reaction, so that person they targeted, can be sent to jail or fined.  The police or laws are exploited as a mafia type agency for these types of people. One could say the strong arm of these types of people. All the while these people, DONT PROTECT THEMSELVES! Your thoughts?

    Jump to Discussion Post 2 replies