I’m going to start this article with a definition: the term “gangsters” signifies a minority-group of people who believe they are so “special” that they are not subject to the law that applies to the majority. These “gangsters” often justify their exemption to the law of the majority based on claims of racism, injustice, poverty, or even necessity as in “my baby momma hungry, so I steal sumpin’.”
If it’s true that “gangsters” are minority groups who feel entitled and justified to be exempt from the law of the majority, aren’t the police, in particular, and government in general also “gangsters”?
Don’t the police enjoy immunities from legal liabilities that would get most people thrown in the slammer or even executed? Can’t the police get away with murder? With lying on the witness stand? With lying to suspects? To falsifying evidence? With initiating prosecutions against people for victimless crimes? With enforcing fictional jurisdictions?
The whole idea of a “police state” makes the police seem special and entitled to break the law. The American police state has been growing since the 9/11 attack in A.D. 2001 and subsequent enactment (without being read by Congress) of the “Patriot Act”. As a result of the “Patriot Act,” government in general and police have enjoyed new “immunities” for violating the law.