Statists often claim that the state is necessary to protect the people. I find it rather strange to argue the need to have murders, extortionists, and rapists employed to protect us from murders, extortionists, and rapists. The police are not men of good will who benevolently protect the people from evil. Instead the police are criminals themselves. They murder anybody who resists their tyranny, extort people by issuing fines for nonviolent actions, and even commit rape:
The FBI defines rape as “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object … without the consent of the victim.” By this definition, Vagnini raped multiple people while he was on the job. In one instance, he allegedly caused his victim to experience anal bleeding for days. In another, he added insult to injury by allegedly planting drugs on his victim.
Rather than serving and protecting, other officers chose to aid and abet. In one incident, Vagnini’s victim was held down by other officers while Vagnini raped him. Furthermore, the Milwaukee Police Department was aware of these incidents for “a couple of years.” They waited “until authorities recognized a pattern” before they did anything to hold him accountable. Translation: The police department was aware that Vagnini was committing rapes, but they waited to do anything about it until they had determined that he was a serial rapist.
This story is appalling, but sadly it is not unique. For example, in Utah police officers have been known to conduct “forced catheterization” searches, which consist of forcibly inserting a catheter into the victim’s urethra to perform drug tests. In 2004, Haley Hooper was held down by four officers while a catheter was inserted into her vagina. While this met the legal definition of object rape, her lawsuit was dismissed on the grounds that the officers were protected by “qualified immunity.” Officers involved in another forced catheterization were promoted rather than prosecuted.
State protection is a fallacy because it implies the state actually protects people. In reality the state claims a monopoly on violence and uses that claimed monopoly to do whatever it pleases. Those tasked with enforcing the state’s decrees are often given special privileges including the ability to break the very laws they’re supposedly upholding. While the state claims any form of penetration without consent is rape it often forcefully penetrates individuals under the guise of searches. By their very definition they are committing rape. How can we expect individuals to uphold the law when they are given permission to break the law?