Re: Warrentlesss SEarches

[dwomack@runner.utsa.edu (David L Womack)]

> 
> 
> > 	Think about it. The cops are out-gunned and out-manned. What would you 
> > of coming up with an alternative.
   [snip] 	
> > 	Maybe if you spent a little time thinking about what it's like to live 
> > in a place like this, you might shut up about the cops not doing their jobs.
> 
> Ok, Let me respond
> 
> 1)I live in this kind of neighborhood at home when I'm not at school.  That's
> right, I live in West Oakland, California.  I was born and raised in the inner
> city.  Don't tell me how these places are, don't tell me how they're run, don't
> tell me how dangerous they are.  I've lived it.  Have you?  All you know is what
> you see on the news, on the television shows, and what is portrayed in mass media.
  [excellent points all]
> 2)I know the value of a gun in this environment.  I know how many times our home
> has been kept safe because my father has been willing to wield a gun against
> either intruders or against 'undersireable' characters coming around(read drug
> dealers, crack heads, you name it).  Our part of the block has a reputation for
> not being somewhere for these pepole to hang out because my father and our
> neighbors have taken a stand against such scum.

  [Bravo!  Would that more people took personal responsibility!]

> 3)Not everyone who lives in these neighborhoods is bad simply as a result of
  
  [snip...with regret] 

> 4)My family has not broken any law simply by trying to protect ourselves.  There
> is no way in hell that the police can be everywhere at once, even if they are as
> efficient as you in the 'burbs seem to think they are, keeping out and harassing
> all the minorties that come your way.  Until they get there, the only way we can
> protect ourselves is with our guns.  We havne't broken any laws, we're not the
> ones who have severed our contract with society by choosing to live outside of
> it, its not us, its the people who prey upon us in our homes and in our schools,
> and it is not us who should lose our rights, but them.  By simply lumping us in
> with them by sheer virtue of where we live and how much we earn is not only
> sheer folly but is also classist.

  [And, even in the finest 'burbs, the police cannot be everywhere!
   Indeed, if you study police doctrine, it very clearly states that
   police and DETER crime, they can APPREHEND criminals, but they
   cannot PREVENT crime.  Even a 5 minute response time will not solve
   the problem.  Indeed, a 1 minute response would not...because
   someone must call them first!  Still more significantly, the criminals
   are not stupid.  They go where the money is...and if it is easier to
   steal Rolex's and 'Benzs in Suburbia...guess where they'll go?  The
   city manager (!) here in San Antonio found this out when he was
   robbed in the driveway of his house.  <no, he doesn't live in the
   inner city.  >]
> 
> 5)Yes we worry about the rights of the accused.  I do.  I've been arrested and
> harassed when the only crime that I committed was being in the wrong place at
> the wrong time, and not having the right skin color.  Yes, I worry about those
> rights, because for me, it might be that one day, that it is I who is on trial,
> it is I whose rights are being questioned, and it is I who wants my day in
> court, and unless we protect the rights of the accused, even if they don't look
> like us, it reaps a beneficial result to society as a whole.  Thomas More in the
> movie _Man for All Seasons_ makes an excellent point when he asks young Will, if
> he would cut down all the laws in England to catch the devil.  When Will
> responds in the affirmative, More asks him, "And what would you do when the
> winds rage about you?"

  [Elegant!  My apologies for the bandwidth, but this quote needs to
  be repeated daily by the administration <and every citizen too>]

> 
> You see, if you don't protect the rights of the accused today, there might come
> a day when you're in their shoes and you'll wish that you still had those
> rights--remember the 5th amendment?  The 4th's prohibitions against unreasonable
> seach and siezures?  What about the 14th's due process clause?  It is the rule
> of law, not of decree that makes this nation great, and there's no way in hell,
> I'm going to sit idly by and watch this nation become an autocracy simply
> because some people in suburbia decided that it would be easier to do away with
> the rights of the accused in their racist, xenophobic fears. 
> 
> Any comments?
> Ben.

   [I'm as xenophobic as the next guy ;-), but I don't think the problem
   is necessarily suburbia;  rather, it often seems that people in general,
   and irregardless of socioeconomic status, are eagerly discarding
   rights in order to escape personal involvement.  Merely voting is
   (seemingly) too tedious; and anything more demanding is (again, seemingly)
   completely out of the question.  Who was it who said "He who would
   trade a little liberty for a little security deserves neither"?]
> 
>