YT’er Shawn Lewis Has His Head Up His Ass
I caught this little chunk of utter fucking stupidity at YouTube a few minutes ago and couldn’t help but respond:
Regarding people knowing their rights at sobriety checkpoints and not submitting to illegal search and seizure or illegal detention:
“Right on dude, someday these little morons will grow up and finally figure out these officers are here for preventative measures.”
“…you have no proof that these checkpoints don’t help, just like there is no proof that they do help, but you know what, you can’t catch a drunk standing around doing nothing. People bitch and make fun of officers for being at donut shops doing nothing and people bitch for officers being out there trying to make a difference. It doesn’t hurt for them to be there, quit being so damn paranoid and freaking relax. No ones rights are being taken away, I have a CHL to prove that. Relax and get on the responsible side of the fence for a change and quit making problems for these officers, they have enough to deal with already, just cooperate and move the hell on!”
Well sir allow me to elucidate upon you a retort which may salve the burn which may be suffered at the revelation that you are not the paragon of virtue that you think you are and serve yeoman duty to the job of Little Dutch Boy for your leaky argument. Facile arguments do not make your point. Proof of the non-existence of something is never required and is in fact logically impossible. The requirement for proof of claims is incumbent on the one making the affirmative claim. In this case that’s the claim that checkpoints have a positive effect at reducing DUI.
There are published studies indicating that net positive effects are possible and even likely. Unfortunately, not enough analysis has been done in thorough and disinterested ways or by enough sets of researchers to generate anything other than further conjecture and hypothesis. So the idea that they work is just unproven hypothesizing. The hypothesis that concentrated targeted patrols work better has actually borne some fruit but not enough to start making blanket statements or broadening adoption beyond that amount necessary to further the study. Those are facts.
Officers do spend an inordinate amount of time looking for something to do. Yes people don’t understand that that is the nature of law enforcement. Nobody goes out looking for a cop to be nearby when they’re up for committing a crime. So the perception and the fact are spot on though the stereotype is a little unflattering. Most of an officers day is mind crushing boredom.
To the point of it not hurting for them (cops) to be there (checkpoints). Well, you’re arguably not just wrong but so wrong it’s almost to say that you have redoubled your derp after losing sight of your politics. It does hurt. We are a free society and that freedom is based on freedom from being stopped and investigated for a crime we showed no signs of having committed. That’s unlawful search and seizure and it’s a violation of the constitution unless appropriately strict scrutiny has been applied and an overwhelming case can be made. Even when such a case has been made the infringement must be kept to the absolute minimum intensity and duration which will accomplish the goals of the state. Rights are being taken away and the false analogy of you having a CHL is MEANINGLESS and contradicts your point. You should not need a CHL. It’s your right to defend yourself. But no, you think the government has to ratify that right on a little card you carry with you. Rights are inviolate. Privileges are not.
Secondly, police across the nation have over the past 30 years gradually been adopting a more militarized mindset. One of being the law instead of being there to effect the enforcement of law. Much of this has come from the fairly recent practice of hiring former soldiers on a large scale. When I was in the field the hiring of former soldiers was not nearly even as common as it is now. For the most part people either went into the military or into civilian life and by the time someone spent 20 years getting a pension as an MP in the Army they were too old to transfer in as a probie to a civilian police department. Apart from that the standards of military policing and civilian policing as far as training and knowledge requirements was very different. You’d really have to drop the military after a short-hitch and then go to the academy which didn’t allow a lot of room for combat troops to become police. After 9/11 though that’s almost all that any department hires. Hell for a while the LAPD reportedly had a pretty near permanent recruitment aimed at the marines returning to Pendleton from playing in the sand box.
The point is we’ve gone to a militarized police force, manned by former military, using military tactics and equipment and military style checkpoints and investigational techniques. Not a damned one of those is really a good idea in the civilian world and most of them are flatly illegal or just plain fucking stupid. Shawn Lewis: You are the one that is the problem. You think that you are morally superior and a better person and would never be caught up in an unfortunate encounter with law enforcement overstepping not only their bounds but all reason and righteousness.
You think that militarized police acting like we’re in a police state is fine as long as you didn’t break any laws. You think someone can go through a whole day and not break laws they couldn’t even have guessed existed or that every violation of every law deserves jail time and a beat down by the stasi. You’re the one trying to destroy the rights of the masses by claiming that they don’t need them or shouldn’t exercise them. You are the problem and you should really dig out that rectal cranial inversion and reconsider the facile, failed and foolish thought processes that have led you to harbor them. I say that you represent the appearance of being a pretty fucked up person and a terrible ambassador of gun rights.
I tell you good day. Drops mic.