Re: Warrentlesss SEarches

[Llywelyn <samman@CS.YALE.EDU>]

> > 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]
> 
> -<Indeed these are excellent points. However, many people get their information 
> from the mass media. I also go to school in new haven, so I have the same 
> sources for information that you do. I am more than willing to admit that most 
> of my info is from what I se and read in the papers and on the news. But at 
> least I make the effort to stay informed.
> Also, you say that you "live in this kind of neighborhood at home." That's at 
> home. You are here in New Haven. And it's only like CHA. You don't live there 
> so don't expect me to think that you are right just because you live in an area 
> that is similar. Unless you have actually _lived_ in Cabrini Green, I will take 
> your thoughts with a grain of salt.>-


Take my comments any way you want.  I really don't care.  However, I went
to an inner city high school, no not in New Haven, but on the other side
of the country, <see above>  and as such I base my information on how and
where I grew up for the past 18 years of my life before I came to Yale.

The section of New HAven where Yale is, honestly, is a sheltered environ,
that I will grant, and redily acknowledge it.  However, if you came to
visit my home in Oakland, you'd see that across the street are the Acorn
Projects(which are public, low income housing) as well as down the street
is the police station.  I've gone to a friend's house to hang out only to
have our reveries disturbed by gangs shooting each other up outside.  No,
unless you grew up most of your life in the inner city, unless you went
to school and saw your buddies get blown away because they were in the
wrong place at the wrong time, unless you've attended the funerals of
friends who died senselessly can you tell me that you have the same
sources of information that I do.

My information I gather empirically--with my own eyes.  Can you say the
same?  How long have you lived in New Haven?  New Haven is nothing let me
tell you.  There's poverty here, there's needless suffering, but taking
away these people's basic diginity and civil rights, by searching them
for somehitng that isn't contraband is not going to do anything to get
these people out of the hole they're in.  Rather, its going to make them
more resentful and more angry at what they percieve to be a government
that is unresponsive to their needs.  Remember, they are perfectly
justified in feeling disenfranchised, because honestly they are.

> > 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!]
> 
> -<I didn't say that you didn't. And I too applaud the neighborhood 
> responsibility. There is always safety in numbers, be they people or a cypher. 
> But I wasn't saying how important these guns are except that the gangs have a 
> hell of a lot more than the cops do.>-

So taking away normal, law abiding citizen's guns that they use to
protect themselves is going to cut down on the amount that the gangs
have?  Hardly.  Ever walk down the street and been offered a gun?  I
have.  I didn't take it, never know what condition its in, or where its
been. :)

> 
> > 3)Not everyone who lives in these neighborhoods is bad simply as a result of
>   
>   [snip...with regret] 
> 
> -<I never said the people who live in these neighborhoods are bad. I also never 
> implyed it. I was only talking about the gangs. Never mentioned where they get 
> their members, never mentioned where they get their guns, or drugs, or 
> whatever. I was only saying how the people in the CHA buildings were fed up 
> with the bs that was going on and decided to do something about it.>-

And they should.  But they shouldn't be forced to give up their civil
rights to be able to 'do something about it.'

No you're right.  You never did MENTION that everyone in these
neighborhoods are bad, but by blanektly abrogating EVERYONE'S rights
there's a tacit assumption there that someone did something wrong.  We
take away the rights of convicted felons--not the innocent people who
happen because of unfortunate circumstances to have the government as a
landlord, there less of a public outrage.

The American public feels unattached and holds in no specific esteem us
inhabitants of the inner city.  Thus we get things like the searches that
are the topic of discussion.  And this is what frightens me the most.  I
can picture a scenario when middle white America decides that what the
inner cities need is a little law and order, like the National Guard or
the Army to camp out.  Sure this will reduce crime, but it'll also
curtail civil liberties.

> -<You seem to want to turn this into a discussion about race and class. I never 
> started in on this, and am going to leave the whole thing about black/white and 
> upper class/middle or lower class alone. I refuse to touch it.>-

Yes, but I am.  I admit it.  I see that there is an inherent prejudice
here.  Allow me to pose a scenario:

Beverly Hills is ravaged by a terrible crime wave.  Dope dealers are
hanging out on every block.  People are dealing drugs out of homes and
every so often it gets out of hand and people are shot.  

Do you think that they will start abrogating these people's rights by
subjecting them to house-to-house searches for something that has yet to
be ruled illegal?  I personally doubt it.  And I doubt it because these
people have more political clout, because of the enormous hue and cry
that would erupt if such acts were to take place.

However, if we subject people(yes people, just like the ones on Rodeo
Dr.) that happen because of an accident of economics to have the
government as their land lord to these unreasonable searches, then there
is more of a mentalitiy of 'Good for them.  It's working'  But it ISN'T!

You know what will work?  Community groups that go down to the gun range.
That arm citizens.  That teach them to fire guns.  That licence them to
carry concealed weapons.  You think the dope dealers are gonna push, if
they know that the parents of their targets are armed and pissed off? 
No! I'm not advocating vigilantism, but there is much to be said for the
ability of people to arm themselves and protect themselves, their
families, and their possessions from any interloper--the same rights that
Jefferson speaks of, "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."


> I know the Bill of Rights also, and I'm not saying they should abandon it. But 
> until they can come up with something to deal with these gangs, I think that 
> the searches are appropriate.

Good...You don't think they should abandon the BoR, but you think that
its okay to sign away a few rights at a time to ensure their safety?  One
day when this government is everyhwere, when they can read your mind,
when they know what you're doing, will you be totally secure.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, and with liberty comes
personal responsibility.  It is easier to sign away your rights and have
someone promise to protect you, but its like  a tiger that you get ride
on--if you get off, you'll get eaten, so you're forced to go wherever it
goes.

The first burden of personal responsibility begins with the individual. 
There's no one that can help you do that, this is something that you have
to do.  And if you're willing to protect yourself, then there's no one on
this earth that can take that away from you without losing some of his
blood in the process. 

Ben.


ASIDE:  I often wonder why people don't want us in the inner city to have
guns.  I wonder if its just a bit of racism that fears the empowerment of
people with guns, kinda like there are some elements of the political
system that are afraid to give women guns.  Are they afraid that with the
great equalizer, that the underclasses will one day come to their senses
and realize how they've gotten shafted and decide to take out their rage?
Maybe they fear what sort of destruction will result as in the Watts and
recent King riots, if the rioters were armed.

The roots of social unrest in the inner city has nothing to do with
crime, and everything to do with economics.  You give these people jobs,
you give them traning, and you give them a stake in society, and you'll
see how far they'll go to defend you.  Its because of this frustration,
of the lack of vehicles for social mobility that the inner city is the
way it is.  I can't tell you how intoxicating the lure of dealing drugs
is.  The power to do what you want, to get any woman you want, to drive
any car you want, all for just a little bit of work.

Right now they're frustrated, and they don't believe they're anything in
this society.  You see, these high and lofty ideals that are embodied in
the BoR and the Declaration mean nothing.  Ever been stopped and given
the third degree for simply being in the wrong neighborhood?  The
exchange when something like:

Cop: "What are you doing here?"
Me: "Driving"
Cop: "Where are you going?"
Me: "To visit a friend."
Cop: "What's the address?"
Me "I didn't realize that we had a pass law in effect.  Did I take a wrong
    turn and end up in Pretoria?"
Cop: "Get out of the car."

I don't believe that I've gotten as fair of a shake when it comes to
authority as compared to many people in the burbs, that's why I'm
skeptical of any such wonderful ideas to take away rights from the
underclass.

End Aside.