Pet Peeves...Police Check Points!!!

I am always amazed when the average citizen freely gives up their rights to privacy and over all, basic unimpeeded activities, so that the police can randomly search citizens who have shown no sign of committing a crime and caused no reason for suspicion. Once again the free American allows a police state in where the civil servant becomes the MASTER in order to "protect" or "prevent" us from being the victim of or causing crime. It is a gross violation of my rights to force me to stop what I am doing to be inspected by police for no reason other than a random check for the purposes of crime prevention.

Many out there, and more so on the Conservative side, defend these actions claiming if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. The other aspect is the respect the conservative movement gives the police and the pedestal they are placed on that allows their train of thought to leave the realm of liberty, and move into the realm of crime prevention by intrusion. They site the number of DUI arrests, illegals caught, and unlicensed drivers found as the reason these checkpoints are so necessary. Statistics on the amount of deaths due to DUI accidents and incidents involving unlicensed drivers are used to support these stops.

I can see how the people who support these measures make their case, but again I believe their logic comes from a skewed ideal and inconsistant view of governments role. Conservativism mandates that the rights of the people and the limit of governments remain at the highest priority. The smaller, less impeeding the government, the better. However, as I have pointed out before, this argument is only used against those who seek to expand social agendas through government. The conservative movement completely leaves the reservation when it comes to growing the military or police force beyond control.

It is beyond control!! There is no point or possibility for the American citizens today to rise up against tyranny. For every growth in military or the police state America goes farther down the path of tyranny. The fascism of the right wing in America is a dangerous road.

So police checkpoints. Just another measure to keep us "safe?" Again, what is your value system in regards to government? Are you a true conservative who believes that the government should remain small and completely unintrusive to the law abiding citizen? Is liberty America's gospel or is safety? Are you one of those who believes we should take a certain amount of risk in order to preserve freedom and limit government control? Personally I have absolutely no problem risking my life for liberty. That is what every police officer or military member should have understood when taking the oath. The average citizen needs to be willing to assume some risk to avoid becoming a police state.

Everytime the right wing comes out in support of preventative police measures and places the value of the civil servant and the safety of the citizen over the LIBERTY of the citizen, we have marched farther down the tyrannical road. The real debate needs to be on the topic of taking back our identity and deciding, do we believe in police crime PREVENTION or LAW ENFORCEMENT. One assumes an intrusive pre-crime role and can abuse every possibility of intrusion not specifically coverd by the Constitution, the other assumes a reactive state in which justice for the victim is granted by the State and done so in such a severe manner that crime is prevented because the justice for others serves as a deterant to the would be criminal.

The problem will not go away unless we rise up in one voice against these abuses of power. We must demand liberty over safety. We must also change the mindset in America to be once again on the side of the victim, not the criminal. The key to crime prevention is not the loss of civil liberties and the intrusion of law enforcement. The key to crime prevention is deterrence through swift and sever punishment of convicted criminals.

For Liberty!

Zimmerman: This Is NOT About Gun Rights, It's About Vigilantes

Your leaving dads home....it's late and you just stopped by the convenience store to buy candy and ice tea.  Your a teen with a split home, maybe an ego, an athlete, and probably a tough kid.  You are unarmed and headed home.  You look behind you and notice a sulking, shady figure following you, seems to be stalking you...you might feel excitement, you might feel intimidated, you may very well be scared.

Combat stress classes tell us the body is designed to do two things when you receive and adrenaline spike from fear of the unknown: fight or flight.  Many people when being stalked might chose flight, others who feel threatened, maybe grew up in a tough neighborhood, might choose fight.  What would you choose? Most of us don't know, but many of us are quick to judge the actions of others with different responses.  Self defense, that animal instinct to protect oneself can be strong.  There are few Marines I know who would choose flight in a situation like this.  In today's age, I doubt being stalked and snuck behind would lead to flight by almost anyone...most tough young kids would address the stalker.

So there are some basic questions:

1.  Why are you being followed?

2.  Are you breaking any laws?

3.  If you confront the stalker and he poses a threat, what will you do?

Most people want to defend Zimmerman based on the fear that a conviction will lead to more gun control.  Others are simply racist and believe Treyvon was stalked, confronted and murdered based on him being black wearing a hoodie.  Here is the point, we will NEVER know for sure what happened because we only have one side of the story.  Some facts we do know.

1.  Zimmerman's statement begins with an explanation of break ins in the past and why he had a neighborhood watch.  

2..  Zimmerman was driving to the store, armed, had 911 on the phone and followed Treyvon.  He found multiple reasons to get out of his car.

3.  Treyvon clearly knew he was being followed after stopping at a convenience store and felt threatened, which explains the question"do you have a problem."  

Based on Zimmerman's actions, ignoring the police instructions, justification of why he is so paranoid leading the statement to police, and getting out of his car multiple times, he clearly DID have a problem.  The kid was big, but he was NOT armed, Zimmerman was.  Anyone who also knows human nature, or the character of a person willing to "pack heat," disobey the 911 operator, and get out of his car multiple times to follow Treyvon, knows Zimmerman DID have a problem, and most likely is lying when he says he stated "NO" when asked if he had a problem.  Somehow this neighborhood watch starting, gun carrying, 911 operator ignoring, follower of people because they look suspicious, is Mr. Meek "no" [i don't have a problem]???

Sometimes finding justice boils down to a few basic facts.  Zimmerman was armed, suspicious of a black male in his community, ignored authorities himself, and was in some way confronted or even himself confrontational.  And frankly, an unarmed kid leaving dads house is dead. Period.

  Even after shooting an unarmed kid, he admits holding Treyvon's hands down and asking for help to restrain him!!!  That alone is sick!  He never once in his head clicked into, "damn, I just shot this guy, this guy is in shock, I need to start thinking about addressing the fact he might die!"  Basically, dude started the fight by disobeying authorities and evoking the "fight or flight" instinct in Treyvon.  He was loosing the fight he inevitably started, and he killed a kid.  

I am not afraid of loosing my gun rights because of this case and will not be coaxed into defending a clearly guilty man because of fear.  I am also exposed to way too many cultures in the military and way to many young people and know Zimmerman's actions begged for a fight.   I know that Zimmerman killed an unarmed kid ONLY because HE put himself in the wrong place when he was told not to.  The fact is, Zimmerman is guilty of at minimum manslaughter.  

I wonder why there are less conservatives willing to speak for the dead boy named Treyvon than for the authority ignoring, confrontational (following him and getting out of the car while packing heat alone  PROVES he is a confrontational man) Zimmerman.  If we are on the wrong side of this one, the right wing will deserve its criticism of racist...because I have read it all, debated it many times, and there is simply no other defense for this murderer.  You don't KILL because you are losing a fight YOU picked by scaring a kid into his "fight" response after disobeying authorities.  I'm not afraid of losing gun rights, because murderers should be punished.  Zimmerman is not the innocent man carrying a gun, he is the criminal who used it to kill a kid, like any other criminal.  

The Conservative Case Against Arizona's Immigration Law

I have friends who have rallied with the minutemen and I have family who are Hispanic that are very opposed to illegal immigration as I am. Despite their concerns, I must and always will side with our nations ideals and the ideals of the Founding Fathers who gave birth to it. Let me explain the principles that first guide my opposition.

I believe that Constitutionally, no person within the United States has the right to be searched, harassed, or otherwise encumbered by the government or any law enforcement without first being directly suspected of committing a crime. In order to be suspected of committing that crime there should be a warrant issued or overwhelming probable cause present to demand my immediate search or retention. Without this, no person within the United States should be subject to government intrusion of any kind. 

Article IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The key to this entire article is “and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation…” People sometimes separate these conditions for search, but they cannot be separated and they require something before any warrant can be issued or immediate search take place; probable cause supported by oath/affirmation.

So first, before attacking my opposition to this Arizona law ask yourself; 

“Does Uncle Sam have the constitutional right to search me without having oath or affirmation that I have committed a crime?”

And second; “ Does the government have the right to search me anywhere they wish or are they restricted to particulars as to the place, persons and things to be searched, in order to obtain or for that matter, NOT obtain evidence, until they are satisfied that I have or haven’t committed the crime?"

So before any law is enacted or supported concerning government intrusion, ask those questions, and apply them to YOUR person and YOUR property.  Now, the best way to describe why I am, and any conservative should be, against this law is to tell it through my story of the one encounter I had with the minutemen in Fallbrook, Ca. 

While making a purchase at the gas station in Fallbrook, the teller began complaining of the minutemen shouting at the Hispanic men who were standing on the driveway corner. She said she wanted them all to go away because it was irritating. I paid for my water and then stepped out and just observed. I saw minutemen protesters holding signs and shouting at the Hispanic males who were about five to ten in number and were not saying anything. The presumption is that they were waiting for work or someone to hire them for odd jobs or labor. Watching this I had one series of questions pop into my mind that made the whole encounter happen the way it did.

First: How did the minutemen know these Hispanics were not legal?

Second: How can these minutemen go about finding out for sure these men are in fact illegal so that they can be arrested.

Third: in the ignorance of answers to both questions, and knowing a tad about the culture of the Hispanic poor, what exactly is wrong with men waiting on the side of a street corner in order to obtain an odd job to make a little bit of money?

So, with these questions I drove in between the two groups who were separated by the driveway entrance and rolled down my window to ask the minutemen question number one. The answer was an eye opener…

Me: “I got a question, how do you know these men you are shouting at and about are, in fact, illegal?”

Answer: “It doesn’t matter.”

Me: “What do you mean it doesn’t matter, so is it a race thing?”

Answer: “It doesn’t matter.”

Now with my understanding that this white female didn’t care to know for sure if the men they were mad at were illegal, all the flags went up. Is this more about race? What is it you are really mad about? What then gives you the need to protest men you aren’t even sure are illegal? So I asked my second question.

Me: “Well how can you find out if these men are not illegal? (At this point the head man of the groups and his camera man ran up to me demanding me to repeat my questions which I did). How do you know these men are illegal? Because if they are not your protests are pointless! Even if they are illegal, what are they doing that is bad enough that potential American citizens (or legal guests) should be harassed and searched or even arrested (if no papers are on their person) ? If they are citizens, or at least if you cannot legally or constitutionally prove they are not, your protests become void and hollow.

Answer: “If they are citizens why are they not at the unemployment lines like all the other Americans or at temporary job agencies instead of our here looking to work for cash or under the table…”

Me: (What I said) “Listen, you have no proof they are NOT citizens, you have no way to prove it without violating their constitutional civil rights. Your friend here doesn’t even care if they are illegal so I assume for her it is a race issue. You would trample the constitution just because you are pissed and unwilling to do the work they are willing to do. You have no clue about liberty.”

WHAT I SHOULD HAVE SAID: The constitution does not allow for you to have these men searched simply because they stand on a corner looking for work. Civil rights cannot be violated simply because in their culture they would break their back in the fields rather than beg on the street corners like the American homeless do. You have no proof that they are illegal and yet you are out in force…and it boils down to one reason…because they are Hispanic men standing on a street corner. That is the extent of your probable cause. Not only this, but your excuse as to why this behavior IS probable cause even more disturbing. Minutemen are typically American conservatives of the Republican party. You should OPPOSE government welfare and unemployment handouts. You should be applauding the willingness to make it on your own and break your back for a living instead of stealing taxpayer dollars while you look through the want ads and wait on temp agencies to find you your job! Are you that much of a hypocrite, that your probable cause boils down to you wanting these Hispanic men to cower to a way of life which you, every other day of the week, swear up and down you do not even support??!!

The law in Arizona supports a slippery slope to American tyranny and fascism. It allows law enforcement to essentially card and I. D. Americans simply because they are Hispanic and are not conforming to the welfare system of America which even now the Republican so-called conservatives are trying to empower rather than condemn. Are we really willing to hand over more freedom to police officers simply to react to an illegal immigrant problem that this law will not even make a dent in? Is racial profiling and warrantless violations of the 4th Amendment worth it?  Really?

Why I Don't Cry "Buy Made In America"

Not to be "that guy" ... but just a reminder; We threw the tea into the harbor back in the day because 

1. They MADE us "buy British" and then 

2. Taxed it unfairly. 

So just sayin...the "buy 'made in America' " cry is not always patriotic...sometimes Walmart is more of a patriotic concept, shipping for the the cheapest goods, made in China, for the larger profits, offering Americans the most jobs and even benefit packages for cheap labor positions, is WAY more patriotic than buying that Chevy who accepts tax payer bailouts and uses "American Made" to rip us off more.

John Hancock was a notorious smuggler.