Pennsylvania Democratic U.S. House nominee Chris Rabb put a curious spin on police reform proposals this week. When confronted by Sean Hannity on Fox News, Rabb explained matter-of-factly that the Founders did not have a clue about what “policing” was, suggesting that policing was a later-developed concept. It appears that not just our Constitution, but our history must be rewritten to meet contemporary political demands on the left. Rabb’s claim is historically unfounded. Just ask John Morton, signatory to the Declaration of Independence and local county sheriff.
In the interview, Rabb reaffirmed his alliance with socialists and categorically rejected the notion that undocumented people entering this country are “illegals.” Hannity asked, “Would you like to abolish prisons and abolish the police?”
Rabb responded:
“Well, what’s interesting about that statement is, long before there was any notion of policing, we had founders that did not even understand that term. Policing has evolved. Ultimately, we want communities that are safe. And 99% of what police do [is] not going after the bad guys, all of that can be done in different ways by professionals who are trained to do so.”
It is a gross over-statement. Signatory to the Declaration of Independence, Morton would likely beg to differ after serving as a local sheriff. He would probably note that in the 1600s, colonies organized “night watch” forces that were precursors to formal police departments. The British governors also enforced criminal laws through their own forces. Constables were prevalent.
The suggestion is that the colonies and early American states had no notion of policing for crime. In fact, the first constable was appointed in the Plymouth Colony in 1632.
Likewise, the first prisons stretch back to 1720 in York, Maine. There was also the establishment of the larger Newgate State Prison in Greenwich Village in 1796 and a similar prison in New Jersey in 1797.
It is not clear what Rabb is suggesting. He is certainly correct that, like other aspects of modern life, policing evolved with technology and conditions. The use of private prosecutions was initially carried over to the colonies. However, public safety was a concern in the colonies as it is in early states. It is simply not true that the Founders lacked “any notion of policing.” Constitutional amendments from the Fourth (on searches and seizures) to the Fifth (on the right to remain silent and due process) to the Eighth (on cruel and unusual punishment) all limit the police and the courts in criminal cases. American grand juries were used to investigate and charge crimes.
The punishments in colonial and early American cases tended to be swift and final, viewed as needed deterrents of crime. That included floggings, pillories, branding, and, of course, capital punishment. Many of these traditions came from Great Britain, which protected public safety through a mix of constables, sheriffs, attorneys general, and private prosecutions.
This historical account appears to be an attempt to justify the common mantra to “reimagine” policing and prisons. Such changes are clearly choices for the public to make in the democratic process. However, suggesting that there was no conception of policing is untrue.
Rabb may be concerned about the recent uptick in police violence against active shooters who are in the midst of killing people.
https://babylonbee.com/news/democrats-express-concern-over-increase-in-gun-violence-against-active-shooters
You can thank “Crazy Abe” Lincoln—the author and finisher of the destruction of American freedom—for the likes of Chris Rabb.
The American Founders would never have admitted Rabb or his ancestors to become a citizen.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798, 1802 (four iterations for maximal clarity)
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof….
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,…secure the Blessings of Liberty TO OURSELVES and OUR POSTERITY….
– Preamble to the U.S. Constitution
And you thought Anthony Fauci was bad; Lincoln, rather than simply passing appropriate legislation, shut down the country and started killing people, then gave orders that have led to the current onerous and oppressive communist American welfare state—enter Zorro Madman, Barrack Obongo et al., and the Mooselamb commie parade.
LAME !! Blaming Abe for today? ha ha ha ha ha
Lincoln is to blame??? ha ha ha ha ha What a DF
Hey Dustoff, learn to write, spell and punctuate.
He fool.
I haven’t post anything. Moron.
I thank God for inventors such as Thomas Edison, Alexander G. Bell, and the many others who enabled recording of voice and images so that the lies can be exposed
Be it a guy like Joe Biden or Tony Fauci or these newly-minted Democrat socialists, thanks to recordings we have a record of their knowingly lying
Yeah, and we have numerous clips of Trump doubling down on lies already debunked.
Are you trying to tell me he didn’t shoot a 70 in that golf match?
He did. it was 9 holes.
You got trolled
Worse you knew it and bit anyway
Excellent
I want to make this short, but it requires YOU THE READER to fill in the blanks.
I read commenter Sam’s earlier post (@11:13) about “socialists/communists” and their modi operandi.
I immediately thought of the rise of Democratic Socialists in this year’s primaries (many endorsed by Mamdani) as well as other concerning developments (e.g., Rabb shares this with Wisconsin’s D-Socialist gubernatorial winner Francesca Hong: hater of prisons and police; El-Sayed in MI; even the one who bragged using the American Flag for a napkin (Darializa Avila Chevalier) WON the Democrat primary in her NY district.)
Then I think of the oft-repeated variations of decades-old braggardly statements from Nikita Khrushchev about “we will destroy you from within,” “without a single shot,” etc., and subsequent denials that such statements were made.
Here is what I believe to be actual sobering document from archived CIA files regarding what Khrushchev actually said about “This is how we understand the question of the inevitable victory of socialism and of communism over the capitalist system.” (p. III-8)
Save this to your files and take the time to read the whole thing (about 8+ pages of well-spaced parenthetical text).
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP73B00296R000200040087-1.pdf
thanks for following this.
excerpt, p.II-4:
“You will remember my speech in America when I said that your grand-children will live under communism. I do not say that we shall destroy capitalism by means of war…I said that the development of human society leads to a progressive regime winning over an obsolete regime. Therefore, capitalism, having played out its positive part, has grown old, and socialism and communism are coming to take its place.”
It’s all an exercise in what if the depraved and the stupid ruled the world.
It looks very boring and not worth anyone’s life. A waste of time is what it looks like.
Adieu
What happened in Russia? I guess communism ran its course and now these people are looking for something else. Been there done that.
We will bury you? Can mean we’ll outlive you. I’ve noticed so many people trying to immigrate to the soviets and running from the US. Right.
Yeah, everybody is immigrating to Russia to volunteer to fight in Ukraine.
^^^ That’s how stupid this socialist communist junk is. NO ONE was trying to get in but capitalist countries had to bar the doors.
It’s ruined now.
Lin, you and Sam are both Estovir.
@Lin
Thank you!
Professor Turley,
Law enforcement existed at the time of the Founders, but “policing” did not. This distinction is lost in your article. Structured mechanisms for law enforcement were well-established, but policing as a professional, proactive, and permanent institution did not yet exist.
The first publicly funded, organized police force with officers on duty full-time was created in Boston in 1838.
“Policing in Colonial America had been very informal, based on a for-profit, privately funded system that employed people part-time. Towns also commonly relied on a “night watch” in which volunteers signed up for a certain day and time, mostly to look out for fellow colonists engaging in prostitution or gambling. (Boston started one in 1636, New York followed in 1658 and Philadelphia created one in 1700.) But that system wasn’t very efficient because the watchmen often slept and drank while on duty, and there were people who were put on watch duty as a form of punishment.”
https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/
There were constables, but they didn’t wear badges. In many early American towns, the position of constable was treated as a mandatory civic obligation, similar to modern jury duty. Towns would elect or appoint local merchants, artisans, or farmers to serve a one-year term. It was considered a chore, and wealthy citizens often paid a fine or hired a substitute to avoid doing it.
You note that Plymouth Colony had a constable in 1632, which is accurate, but that role was a part-time mandatory civic obligation, not merely a “precursor” to the modern day police captain. While it was an early form of law enforcement, the organizational structure, authority, and day-to-day duties make a direct comparison inaccurate.
Also, the “High Sheriff” role of John Morton was more of a tax collector, court admin, and jail management role than a cop (because that didn’t exist yet). Morton died about 50 years before the first public police force was created, and about 80 years before nearby Philly got one. Add another decade before Chester, his hometown, had its first police force.
So, honestly, Chris Rabb is not wrong. I don’t agree with folks who want to get rid of the police, but Turley, you are the one rewriting history here, not Rabb.
Honestly? How does “honestly” supersede fact based information?
Turley is not rewriting history, but Raab is, I swear. Honestly!
Well SOMEBODY doesn’t understand the term policing but it’s not the founders.
The guy is an idiot and a pity anyone is wasting time attempting to decipher his drivel.
At the end of the day, the only thing produced was a lot of name-calling.
Tucker Carlson unveiled a 10-point vision for the United States on Wednesday, deepening his split with President Donald Trump and fueling speculation that the podcaster and former Fox News host will create a new political party.
In a nearly two-hour livestream, Carlson said that “both parties have colluded against the population to make their lives better and our lives worse.” Instead, he argued, America should be: 1) “fair,” with laws applied equally; 2) “sovereign,” free from foreign and corporate control; 3) “productive,” with revived manufacturing and agriculture; 4) “beautiful,” with clean, safe, and attractive cities; 5) “healthy,” with cleaner food and less dependence on drugs; 6) “honest,” with officials punished for lying and government records disclosed; 7) “optimistic,” encouraging Americans to have children as a basis for long-term thinking; 8) “wise,” with practical, reality-based education; 9) “decent,” rejecting unnecessary wars and support for atrocities; and 10) “united,” with a common national identity and a pause in mass immigration.
ano
Fox News host will create a new political party.
___________________________
His ego is getting the best of him. Or just maybe he likes DSA style.
What a stupid comment.
Oh, its just Dustoff, what did you expect?
So Trump polices as if he wrote them – got.it
Same as O-dumber… and joey
Tucker’s an idiot
At the risk of sounding snarky, it’s too bad Hannity didn’t have the foresight to have an historian like yourself on hand to counter these ignorant remarks. But then there’s hardly room for anyone but Hannity on his show, let alone 2 guests! 🙂
Hannity loves to hear his own voice and I hardly ever watch his show because of it. Well that and if Trump said the sky is green Hannity would have Laura Trump on to show how blue is now green.
As a supporter of most of Trump’s policies, albeit not his braggadocio, embellishments, his tacky gold fetish and his need to attack the lowest of the low due to his thin skin, even I can’t stomach Hannity’s knee pad treatment.
What about those voices in your head? Seems hate is your goal in life. You hate everything and everyone.
Can’t count the number of times you made a point of hating commenters.
You are a hatemonger.
What in the heck are you talking about? No really.
Hullbobby comments on today’s events.
You and the other Ano’s clowns throw out hate 7/24.
Dustoff you are a lying mongrel idiot. You waste the entire day posting unintelligible screeds. As for those hate posts, you are exactly the same as that hatemonger hullbobby.
You’re 74 right and you waste time here. You have internet sickness.
They shot Charlie Kirk and many others. Good reason to hate? Best to use reason, logic and remove hate. Title for tat is in order.
Who is “they”? Sounds like conspiracy nonsense or just someone with a head full of demons. .
henriettasducks the issue. The issue is about abolishing the police by the DSA and ducking henrietta goes off about Hannity. Ducks are not really very smart and are not capable of following a train of thought. And so we have it.
My response was about having an historian to counter Rabb’s ignorance – the snark was an aside. Perhaps your rush to mock kept you from following the point?
Moronymous,
You could not be more wrong.
As usual.
HullBobby and DustOff make interesting comments and observations.
You are the one filled of hate and rage, like stemming from your failure to launch status and disappointment from your parents.
Hannity is AI now. Just using his image. I don’t know if he’s getting royalties.
If the constituents of PA3rd Congressional District, in and around Philadelphia, elect this moron who favors abolishing the police as we know it and abolishing prisons, they will have no one else to blame if criminal death and destruction there continues, and likely worsens, result. Replacing armed police with unarmed social workers when confronting an armed, crazed and psychotic criminal who has no respect for the law and with whom reasoning is impossible will likely result in a dearth of social workers available for that job, if any were willing to take that job in the first place. It is ashamed at what has happened to that once-great city.
Without police, how are you going to confiscate all of that personal property?
Without slaves, who will do all of the work?
The dems just love slaves. Even today. Why do you think they want to keep the Illegals here.
AI and robots. Free time. Transition is disruptive.
AI and robots. Free time. Transition is disruptive. No more slaves, just kill them all and WE the deserving will have our Free time with no more disruptive slaves the AI and robots will serve us well.
There is considerable historical evidence to refute Mr. Rabb’s claim about no concept of law enforcement even prior to the formation of America. It’d be interesting to find out what his concept of “policing” is. Frankly, the cops would be thrilled to be relieved of responsibility for dealing with those with mental health issues. However, as I understand it, communities who’ve tried an alternative have had a significant retention problem in that employment category. Including, per one report, the guy who spear headed the program after experiencing the realities involved.
As to alternatives to law enforcement and prisons as we know them, the late, great Robert Heinlein and history provide clues. His prevalent future featured “proctors” who’d ask “May I do you a service, citizen?” They were also equipped with stun grenades and other methods to assist them with those anti social individuals who were disruptive. I expect anti social citizens under the “progressive” system to be placed in resocialization clinics.
When did Rabb say there was no concept of law enforcement? Could you please provide that quote?
He said “policing” not law enforcement. Do you understand the difference?
What a stretch. Policing, law enforcement is for crime. What’s yours? Rab is a power monger.
“. . . all of that [policing] can be done in different ways by professionals who are trained to do so.” (Rabb, the DSA candidate)
Those “professionals” are called the Cheka, NKDV, KGB. Those “different ways” include abducting citizens in the middle of the night, then “disappearing” them.
The socialists/communists ultimate goal is not to defend or dismantle the police. Nor is it to abolish prisons. Their goal, as it was with Lenin, is to replace the existing police with mindless thugs who blindly obey their edicts. And to replace the existing prisons with “re-education” camps and gulags.
In substance and in form, the D’s vanguard (from Piker to Mamdani on down) are *not* socialists. They are Soviet style communists fused with Islamic theocracy. Piker, in particular, is the lowest type of Soviet communist — a Stalinist (who also happens to worship Mao).
“Constitutional amendments from the Fourth (on searches and seizures) to the Fifth (on the right to remain silent and due process) to the Eighth (on cruel and unusual punishment) all limit the police and the courts in criminal cases.”
Exactly this. If no concept of “policing” existed, what need was there for Constitutional restraints on exerting police authority? Even if Rabb more had in mind some kind of nanny state morality enforcement at the State or local level, while I personally object to such a thing, I strongly suspect that it existed fairly widely until after the 14th Amendment was being uniformly enforced as a result of specific court precedents.
The method used over and over is to change the definition of a term. Policing unequivocal definition as a Genus and then create twisted definitions of species of police.
“The method used over and over . . .”
Well said.
They play the same definition con game with “socialism” (the genus) and “democratic socialism” (a species).
It’s also pretty bizarre to suggest that “99% of what police do [is] not going after the bad guys,” and that that function should be “done in different ways by professionals who are trained to do so.” Will you vote for an idiot who claims that police are not “trained to go after bad guys?”
Much as I disagree with Rabb, there is a common misunderstanding in terms of the responsibilities of LEOS. Cops are responsible for apprehending all law breakers. The congruence between a specific law and morality can be debatable.
Not really. Go for the big 3.
That would be insane, Hefner.
Interesting how the rabble are preoccupied with the elimination of police, law and order. Every other sentence from their mouths is defund or eliminate police. Maybe they have a Lavrentiy Beria type in mind to keep us safe or should I say keep them safe? Each morning he’ll get a list of ne’er-do-well’s to visit?
“Maybe they have a Lavrentiy Beria . . .”
Exactly (except for the “Maybe”).
Just look at their models: Mao, Castro, Soviet Russia.
Sheriff is the direct lineal descendant of the Shire Reeve from well before the Norman conquest of England. You can trace the evolution of keeping the peace by a sheriff right back to the Shire Reeve. Rabb even admits that when he says “ Ultimately,we want communities that are safe”. Why? Because history has taught us that’s what policing does. Rabb is hand and glove into the same history retelling firestorm going on at the Smithsonian. To voters I would say just walk away.
They won’t walk away. Rabb will win. It’s deep-blue Philly where the D candidate always wins. Jeffrey Dahmer would win if he had a D after his name.
“Keeping the peace” is law enforcement, not “policing.”
Rabb is distinguishing the two. You should understand the difference.
Difference without a distinction…
It is literally the central point of contention in the conversation Raab on Fox
Whether Rabb’s statement is true or false, what is its relevance to the question Hannity asked? It comes off as a non sequitur.
Apple design team member: I think we should redesign the iPhone’s user interface.
Apple design team manager: Why?
Apple design team member: The Founding Fathers did not have iPhones.
Rabb, like so many Democrats and lately their malignant offspring, the DSA Marxists, have zero grasp of history. The original group of “constables on patrol” in John Morton’s era became, for brevity: “cops.”
Policing, although led by professionals, used to be everyone’s business. Witness thte hue and cry. Wikipedia:
” By the Statute of Winchester of 1285 (13 Edw. 1. St. 2. c. 4), it was provided that anyone, either a constable or a private citizen, who witnessed a crime shall make hue and cry, and that the hue and cry must be kept up against the fleeing criminal from town to town and from county to county, until the felon is apprehended and delivered to the sheriff. All able-bodied men between the ages of fifteen and sixty, upon hearing the shouts, were obliged to assist in the pursuit of the criminal”