Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (13872)	5/21/2001 10:20:01 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I read a number of accounts of the incident - you can probably find them if you look - and the action seemed wildly excessive. Common sense is certainly important in making arrests. In general, I would say that common sense suggests that in cases where the actions of the person in question are peaceful, involve minor offenses, and pose no significant threat, the force used should be as minimal as possible. In cases where violence or heavily armed individuals are involved, common sense is on the side of overwhelming force - the faster the arrest can be made, the less likely it is that sustained violence will erupt. In cases where arrest is resisted with armed force, and federal agents serving a legal warrant are killed, it is fairly normal for the government to use overwhelming force (if Waco had involved a crack house instead of a cult compound, nobody would have given a damn). In cases where an unarmed woman is driving a carload of kids - I may not have this exactly right, but my recollection is that one of the kids had dropped something out the window, and she backed up and allowed the kids to remove their seat belts to look for it - it behooves government to impose the law a little more mildly. Of course we see double standards on both sides. If a black guy gets shot 20 times because he reached for his ID and a trigger-happy cop thought he was going for a gun, the liberals moan and the conservatives don't give a shit. If a right-wing cultist gets blown away resisting arrest, the conservatives howl and the liberals don't give a shit. Kind of makes one suspect that a lot of people on both sides of that equation are full of shit.

To: Bill who wrote (13872)	5/21/2001 11:45:26 AM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Depends on the circumstances. Was she a habitual bad driver? Did she cause an accident? Did she endanger others, or her kids? Did she ignore subpoenas or other court orders? I don't know the specifics. Then read the case, or at least a reliable report of it. Brief answers to your questions. No. No. Arguably. No. The arguably is that simply by driving with her children not seat belted in, she was endangering them. She wasn't driving badly, she wasn't driving dangerously, she wasn't drunk. She simply didn't have the seat belts in her car or van fastened. They called that child endangerment and arrested and handcuffed booked her for it. Our local sheriff suspects that the real reason she was arrested was DWA. DWA doesn't show up on any statute book, but every cop knows the offense. Oh -- what is DWA you ask? Driving with attitude. Mouthing back, not anything bad enough to constitute interference or non-cooperation, but enough to annoy a cop, which is generally a bad thing to do to a guy who carries a gun and handcuffs.