Unwarranted Violence
by
William Norman Grigg
by William Norman Grigg
DIGG THIS
Henry Blake:
Pierce….
Hawkeye
Pierce: What is it? What?
Blake:
I wouldn't try to leave camp.
Hawkeye:
Wha – I'm under arrest?
Blake:
I didn't say that. You're restricted.
Hawkeye:
That means I’m under arrest.
Blake:
Not at all, you're only restricted up to the point where, er – where,
er – you're under arrest.
Hawkeye:
Henry, what's happened to you? Did you sneak off behind our backs
and enlist? You're regular Army now!
Blake:
Sit down Pierce, that's an order!
Hawkeye:
You're forcing me to stand.
Blake:
Please.
Hawkeye:
That's an order I can take.
A
key exchange between Lt. Col. Henry Blake and B.F. "Hawkeye"
Pierce, from the M*A*S*H episode "For
the Good of the Outfit."
Government,
as we must never forget, is force. And as Simone
Weil so memorably observed, force is that mysterious influence
"that turns anybody who is subjected to it into a thing.
Exercised to the limit, it turns man into a thing in the most literal
sense: it makes a corpse out of him."
Every government
function, no matter how mundane or apparently harmless, carries
with it the implied (and often overt) use of lethal force against
those who do not submit. Stefan Molyneux perceptively describes
this as the
principle of the "Gun in the room": Whenever anybody
refers to the supposed virtue of a given government undertaking,
Molyneux sagely observes, the central question is not whether the
end is desirable, but rather "whether I am allowed to disagree
with you without getting shot."
Not every government
functionary carries a gun and a license to kill other human beings.
But every government functionary collaborates closely with those
who are thus equipped to compel the rest of us to submit. The people
in question are readily identifiable by the blue, brown, or black
clothing they wear, which is usually accessorized with a conspicuous
piece of chintzy costume jewelry called a "badge."
At some point
or another, it becomes obvious to everyone save those hopelessly
in the thrall of official propaganda that the central purpose of
law enforcement bodies is not to protect private property*, but
rather to extract revenue for the State.
Granted, police
agencies are advertised as a way of defending private property from
the depredations of private criminals, and many individual police
officers have carried out that function with courage and compassion.
But that is not the central institutional purpose of such
entities; it is an ancillary function that provides some limited
benefits to society. Besides, as Albert Jay Nock observed, government
isn’t interested in punishing or preventing crime, but rather in
establishing and preserving a criminal monopoly.
The order of
priorities that government law enforcement today can be appreciated
in this contrast:
Under existing
judicial precedents, a police officer cannot be held criminally
or civilly liable for failing to come to the aid of an individual
citizen whose person and property are under criminal attack.
However, police agencies across the country routinely discipline
police officers who fail to fill their quota of traffic citations.
This may at
first glance seem to be a spurious comparison. But consider it in
light of the principle of opportunity cost as applied to the time
budget of the typical patrol officer: Should he organize his time
in such a way that he can be available to help a victim of violent
crime, or in the best way to take advantage of "hot spots"
for traffic violators, thereby making his quota and enhancing his
prospects for lucrative overtime?
A given officer
can be in only one place at a given time, after all, and each hour
spent trolling for inattentive drivers represents an hour taken
away from the task of "serving and protecting" the local
population.
Here in Payette,
Idaho (population circa 7,000), the local police force has not one
or two but no fewer than three undercover, unmarked cars
(recognizable from some angles by the antenna cluster at the back)
that apparently circulate through the town in search of traffic
violations. One of them can be seen every morning making circuits
through a local "hot spot": It’s a section of a business
route branching off I-95 where the speed limit suddenly dips from
35 MPH to 25 MPH for several blocks.
This kind of
ticketing-by-quota
– the existence of which is indisputable,
the anguished denials from police officials to the contrary notwithstanding
– isn’t "law enforcement"; it’s revenue enhancement. And
it’s increasingly common as the economic implosion accelerates and
governments at the municipal and county levels are starved for tax
revenue.
"When
I first started in this job 30 years ago, police work was never
about revenue enhancement," observes Michael Reaves, a police
chief in Utica, Michigan. "But if you’re a chief now, you have
to look at whether your department produces revenues. That’s just
the reality nowadays."
The Detroit
News article containing Reaves’ lament was entitled "Traffic
fines help fill city coffers: Officials increasingly target drivers
to bolster budgets." The piece, the first in a two-part exposé,
reported that "Court and police records from 20022007
[show that] many Metro Detroit police departments have drastically
increased the number of moving violations issued in what some people
say is an effort to offset budget shortfalls caused by the sluggish
economy."
One former
Detroit-area police officer summarizes: "A portion of the tickets
our officers write helps pay their salaries, but the rest is profit
for the city. Profit’ may not be the right word to use in
government, but that’s pretty much what it is."
No, "profit"
– a term describing material gain honorably earned through mutually
beneficial commerce – is not the correct word. "Plunder"
is.
Detroit and
its environs are in the throes of a severe and deepening depression,
and suffering a predictable increase in property crimes and violent
assaults. And yet, as the perspicuous Karen DeCoster (herself a
Detroit native) points
out, "the cops do nothing to prevent the scores of home
robberies, car thefts, and assorted property crimes because they
are too busy sitting in 'hot spots' that are good for catching the
more dangerous types, like speeders and drivers who don't come to
a complete stop at a stop sign in an empty intersection."
That’s opportunity
cost at work. And this underscores, once again, the true priorities
that define police "work": Revenue collection for the
government über alles, protection for the governed … sometimes.
The embodiment
of the Detroit-area police plunderbund is Officer
David Kanapsky, the champion pen-slinger for the Warren Police
Department. During 2007, the Warren PD issued 54,100 traffic tickets
– an increase of 20 percent over the previous year’s total of 44,809.
Kanapsky, a
physically unimpressive wad of aging cholesterol who couldn’t chase
down a robber or wrestle an assailant to the ground without risking
an immediate coronary infarct, wrote ten percent of Warren’s citations
during 2007.
Most of them
were issued at Kanapsky’s favorite fishing hole, an intersection
with a stop sign at which some drivers would make a "rolling
stop."
But then again,
it doesn’t really matter whether drivers come to a full stop, since
Kanapsky – by virtue of the costume he wears to what he calls "work"
– enjoys the benefit of the doubt when tickets are contested in
court.
And since Kanapsky
is paid (note carefully: not "earns," but "is paid")
overtime simply for appearing in court, he actually has a perverse
incentive for issuing citations he knows will be challenged. Last
year he was given $21,562 in overtime simply for dragging his
tax-engorged corpus into court to wheeze out his allegations before
a judge.
Each of those
contested tickets was a case of Kanapsky’s word against that of
his victim – the word of a self-interested tax-feeder against that
of a productive citizen. Naturally, the judge invariably takes the
side of his comrade in the tax-feeding class. So Kanapsky is let
free to grow another subsidized chin and prey on other innocent
people; meanwhile, those who dared object to Kanapsky’s predations
are out the price of a ticket and the valuable time spent in the
useless, infuriating, self-abasing attempt to contest it in court.
Any citizen
is free to pursue that disagreement further, at his own time and
expense, in the same system that depends on the support of armed
predators like Kanapsky. However, if that citizen simply shrugs
his shoulders and says, in effect, "You’ve proven nothing,
and I have no intention of surrendering my legitimately earned money
on the word of a self-interested thug," he’ll eventually learn
that he can’t persist in his disagreement without getting shot.
It’s important
to recognize that many police officers are nauseated by the use
to which they are put by the governments that hired them.
"The people
we count on to support us and help us when we're on the road are
the ones who end up paying the bills, and they're ticked off about
it," observes Trenton, Michigan Police Sgt. Richard Lyons.
"We might was well just go door-to-door and tell people, 'Slide
us $100 now, since your 16-year-old is going to end up paying us
anyway when he starts driving.' You can't blame people for getting
upset. No politician wants to be the one to raise taxes, but if
the community needs more money they should go ahead and raise taxes.
At least that's more honorable than chasing down cars for doing
five miles over the speed limit."
Of course,
no politician wants to raise taxes overtly, and with property values
and retail earnings sharply declining, property and sales taxes
are being choked off. This is why police nation-wide are increasingly
being deployed as armed revenue farmers – and why the already lengthy
lines outside your local traffic court get longer every week.
Roadside police
holdups aren’t the only creative means of illicit revenue extraction
being employed by local governments; "code enforcement"
citations are likewise proliferating, often in the name of maintaining
property values amid the housing collapse. Given the dimensions
of the housing bust, this is a bit like swimming against the tidal
pull of Charybdis. But the intent here, once again, is not to aid
homeowners, but rather to contrive new opportunities for revenue
collection.
This brings
us to the case of Ian Bernard (also known as "Ian Freeman")
of Keene, New Hampshire. Last summer, Freeman received
a citation – delivered, as it turns out, by a retired police
officer who is "working" part-time as an ordinance officer,
while drawing a tax-provided pension – for allowing the occupants
of a rental property he owns to store a couch in its front yard.
Mr. Freeman,
recall, owns the rental property. No respectable person complained
about the couch; the source of the complaint was another city official.
Quite properly perceiving this to be a matter of property rights,
Freeman refused to pay the citation. In early November Bernard wound
up in District Court before a judge antagonistic to Mr. Bernard’s
beliefs, which are well-known in Keene.
In the mistaken
belief that he would make a point of some kind, the judge arranged
for a little demonstration during Freeman’s hearing: Knowing that
Freeman and other local freedom activists reject the stilted formality
of court hearings, the judge summoned several Bailiffs to the courtroom
and instructed them to be ready to arrest Freeman or any of his
associates who failed to display the expected deference by standing
when the judge sashayed into the room, and sitting promptly when
instructed to.
Like Hawkeye
Pierce, Freeman and his friends live by the axiom that someone who
"orders" them to sit down is forcing them to stand, and
vice-versa. This is an entirely commendable thing.
So it was that
the judge ordered that Freeman be arrested for contempt for standing
a barely perceptible fraction of a second longer than the judge
thought proper. A special closed trial was then held, at which Freeman
received a sentence of 93 days in jail – three days refusing to
pay the original fine, and a total of 90 days for contempt.
Once again:
This individual, who did nothing to harm anybody, will spend more
than three months in jail for asserting control over his own legally
acquired property, and refusing to offer slavish obedience to some
fellow with a Liberace complex.
It could have
been worse.
Oh, my, yes:
In a time when armed tax harvesters consider it their right and
duty to subject people to electroshock
torture at the first sign of resistance, it can always get much
worse.
Just two days
ago (Wednesday, November 19), Houston resident Marvin Driver, the
father of Green Bay Packers receiver Donald Driver, was
reportedly beaten bloody and unconscious by a pair of Houston’s
Finest who had arrested him because of outstanding traffic tickets.
Marvin Driver,
56, was "unresponsive" when taken to jail. Shuttled to
a local hospital, he was treated for a cerebral hemorrhage resulting
from blunt force trauma. Left speechless by the assault, Driver
scribbled some details about the assault. He was arrested outside
his mother’s home; his brother Winston, who witnessed the arrest,
says that one of the officers threatened him, ordering him to get
back in the house. As the police drove away, Winston called 911.
The
next thing the family knew, Marvin was in the hospital. He claims
to have been dragged behind a gas station and beaten by the police,
who also tried to shove something down his throat. At one point,
Marvin recalled,
one of the assailants tauntingly told him he was "going to
see Jesus."
Mr. Driver’s
injuries – which included abdominal bruises from being kneed to
the stomach – were consistent with his story.
While it was
clear that Driver came to serious harm while in police custody,
the department’s initial reaction was that it couldn’t account for
or comment about Driver’s condition until after a lengthy
inquiry. However, the force quickly
reassigned three officers – Bacilio Guzman, Gilberto Cruz and
M. Marin – believed to have been involved in the assault.
Officers Cruz
and Guzman both became sworn police officers within the last 18
months. Mr. Driver has said that the beating he endured was less
painful to him than the fact that he had known one of the assailants
in the neighborhood before he grew up to be a police officer. They
had been on friendly terms until one of them was given the assignment
to collect revenue for the government, and the power to turn his
erstwhile friends into corpses.
November
25, 2008
William
Norman Grigg [send him mail]
writes the Pro Libertate
blog.
Copyright
© 2008 William Norman Grigg
William
Norman Grigg Archives
|