Posted on 02/18/2006 1:46:55 PM PST by freepatriot32
Here's a question for you: Can you get through 24 hours without breaking a law? Before you answer, consider:
In January, an Atlanta man was arrested and handcuffed for selling a subway token at face value. Donald Pirone observed another passenger having difficulty with a token vending machine, so he gave him a $1.75 token. After the man insisted on paying him, Pirone was cited by a transit officer for a misdemeanor, since state law prohibits selling tokens -- even at face value. A MARTA spokesperson denied that handcuffing a customer for helping another customer was excessive. "There are customer service phones for people who are having trouble getting tokens out of the machine," she said.
Meanwhile, in late 2005, an Ohio man spent three days in jail because he didn't put identification tags on his family's pet turtles and snakes. Terry Wilkins broke a state law requiring owners of native reptiles to tag them with a PIT (personal-integrated transponder). The tags, which are the size of a grain of rice and can be inserted under the animal's skin, contain a bar code readable by a scanner. Wilkins refused to tag the animals because he said PIT tags cause health problems in small reptiles.
It goes on. In Kentucky, Larry Casteel was arrested for not attending a parenting class for divorcing parents, as mandated by state law. He spent the night in jail. In New Jersey, police are giving tickets to people who leave their cars running for more than three minutes in store parking lots. Stopwatch-wielding police hit the offenders with a $200 fine for violating the state's anti-idling law. In northwest Georgia, 49 convenience store owners were arrested for selling legal products to customers. The owners -- mostly of Indian background -- sold cold medicine, baking soda, table salt, matches, and lantern fuel. Police said the ingredients could be used to make methamphetamine. In Burlington, Vermont, police are ticketing people for not removing keys from the ignition and locking their cars. Police said the state law prevents car thefts. Violators are fined $79.
So -- are you still sure you can get through a day without violating a law? If so, don't worry. Legislators are making more things illegal. In New York City, a city council member wants to make it a crime to ride a bike without a registration number tag. Violators would face up to 15 days imprisonment. In Illinois, a state senator wants to make it a crime not to have a carbon monoxide detector installed in your home. In Pennsylvania, a state senator filed a bill to allow police to fine drivers $75 if they don't clean snow off their car. In Virginia, a state legislator wants to make it illegal to show your underwear in public. Girls (or boys) with low-rider pants would get hit with a $50 fine if their thongs show.
Novelist Ayn Rand once wrote: "There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible to live without breaking laws."
Have we reached that point? Is it impossible to live without breaking laws? Before you answer, better check to make sure that your pets have transponder tags, that you didn't leave the keys in your car, and that your underwear is not showing.
Sources:
MARTA token: http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=1390140 Pet TIPs: http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/13309603.htm Parenting class: http://www.reason.com/brickbats/bb-2005.shtml NJ anti-idling law: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060108/LIVING/601080331/1004/LIVING&theme=
VT locked cars: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060108/LIVING/601080331/1004/LIVING&theme= Convenience store: http://www.iacfpa.org/p_news/nit/iacpa-archieve/2005/08/19/civil2-19082995.html NY bikes: http://ridl.us/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=4889&sid=7bad222acdd8dc2f133555e0e62b5f34 CO2 detector: http://www.pioneerlocal.com/cgi-bin/ppo-story/localnews/current/ba/01-19-06-807026.html PA snow: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/08/874.asp VA underwear: http://www.timesdispatch.com/
And the bad law stands...
Ping.
School zones are worse for that. In the "opening door into traffic" case, a prudent motorist should wait until there's no vehicle visibly approaching which would arrive before the motorist was out of the traffic lane. If the motorist opens his door, exits the vehicle, closes the door, and walks out of the traffic lane before the other vehicle arrives, there's no basis for a citation.
As it would if you were sitting in jail for contempt.
If a law is obviously ridiculous, then juries aren't *supposed* to find someone not guilty because they disagree with it, if all the elements have been met beyond a reasonable doubt. But enforcing this is virtually impossible. So if someone would stick me in a time machine and parachute me into a jury box in a fugitive slave trial, I could dig up some reasonable doubt somewhere, keep anyone from going to jail, and no one would be able to do anything about it.
I just bought 200 sq. ft. of Reynolds Wrap.....I should be safe!
And the precious Law would stand.
Under those circunstances I could hope that my case would bring enough glare onto the offending law to have it overturned.
Yes, it would. There is no way a jury could get rid of it. Only a judge or the legislature can do that. A jury is, however, able to keep it from being enforced in that instance.
I take it Louisana doesn't allow jury nulifcation?
The keys have never left the ignition of my pickup truck in 40 years and i'm sure not going to start now!
If what seem to be "slam dunk" cases result in acquittals and mistrials because jurors find things "don't smell right", that will tend to attract more notice than a rejected juror sitting in jail for contempt.
Dagnabit! I did do a spell check...
What, are you talking about judgment non obstante veredicto? Yeah, we have that. But the standard is pretty high. It's hard to pull off, and likely to be overturned on appeal. Especially if used against a criminal defendant.
All a jury can do is acquit a particular person accused of breaking a law. Even in places where jury nulification was common and accepted, that was true.
One thing that has changed over time, however, is that the amount of harm an indictment can do. It used to be that an innocent person who was indicted could expect to be acquitted within a month and there'd be little point indicting people if their cases wouldn't hold up. Now, the government can seek to punish people administratively before trial, and just shrug when the people are finally acquitted.
Having a the Judge shake citizen like a pitbull with a two year old keeps it from simply fading from attention.
YMMV...
Not true, see post #71.
One thing that has changed over time, however, is that the amount of harm an indictment can do. It used to be that an innocent person who was indicted could expect to be acquitted within a month and there'd be little point indicting people if their cases wouldn't hold up. Now, the government can seek to punish people administratively before trial, and just shrug when the people are finally acquitted.
Too true!
*sigh* Post #71...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.