Police arrest 11-year-old over 'inappropriate' stick figure drawing

kdvr.com ^ | 2/21/11 | Julie Hayden

[ChildOfThe60s]

Talking to a friend of mine in the UK today. Told him how hard we were trying to emulate them so we could come back into the fold.

After 5 years here in KY with us, he is NOT happy to be in England.

[jmcenanly]

Apparently, this is happening quite often
http://moms.today.com/_news/2011/02/15/6058506-6-year-old-committed-to-psych-ward-against-moms-wishes

[familyop]

"I beg to differ with both of you. We may do a lot of bad things here in the UK, but we don't put children in handcuffs, and we certainly don't arrest them for drawing skick figures, no matter how "threatening".

If that's what you fought a war for independence for, I think you took a wrong turning somewhere."

Agreed. That War was fought over the several issues that many Europeans had for moving over here (religion, land ownership, monarchies, government, family rights, taxes, speech freedoms, work occupations, opportunities, etc.). And since we've given the elite some of the same footholds that they had in Europe for delegating things to their own socially pathological kind.

But there are likely unusually interesting changes ahead due to errors in leadership (economic, propaganda, global planning, etc.). We'll see as to what we can do with opportunities presented.

[reg45]

I recently saw a comment from a German who had lived in America around 1985 and liked it. Then they went back home, only to return recently to have another look. I paraphrase: "What did you people do to your country? You used to be free! And Ronald Reagan was President.

[Apogee]

The child may have been disturbed; I know there were people I watched like a hawk even in college (sorry, if you write about “the real heroes of Columbine” I am likely to have a very negative reaction to any sudden movements on your part), so I don’t know that I would dismiss the threat out of hand without knowing more. Even so, who signed this arrest warrant?

On another note. I don’t recall the one we sang to the Marine Hymn - but here is another standby of my grade school days:

Deck the halls with gasoline
fa la la la la, la la la la
Watch it glisten watch it gleam
fa la la la la, la la la la
Watch the school ground burn to ashes
fa la la, la la la, la la la
Ain’t it fun to play with matches
fa la la la la, la la la la

[GladesGuru]

“Incidentally, you do realise by following that advice you forfeit all right to complain about soaring crime figures, falling detection rates, and spiralling police costs?”

How does not talking to cops without legal counsel present cause soaring crime? After all, the Donut Eaters would then spend less time grilling and entrapping citizens and might then spend more time catching criminals.

Well, that won’t happen, but I can hope.

Then, how does an innocent person not speaking to the Donut Eaters cause falling detection rates? Many crimes are solved not by “detective skills” but by blabbermouth crooks and informants.

Police cost are out of control because the police departments are out of control. Wages and benefits are astronomical.

Please, spare me the badge-lapper bit about the risks Donut Eaters take. Being a LEO (formal nomenclature for a Donut Eater) means one’s job doesn’t even make the ten most dangerous occupations according to the Department of Labor stats.

[Lancey Howard]

Also, if you answer the door and the badges ask you politely to “step outside”, do not step outside.

[Vanders9]

The world is worsening.

[Lazamataz]

Yes, it's much worse than 1917 when Russia gave birth to a communist state, or the late 1920's when there was a massive depression, or the 1930's when Stalin killed millions, or the 1940's when World War Two nearly destroyed Europe, or the 1960's when riots were widespread in America, or the 1970's when a gas embargo triggered a major recession and inflation.

Much, much worse than those.

[Lazamataz]

....but leaving that all aside for a moment, let's focus strictly on America. The primary reason that the police militarized in America, was because of the War on Drugs.

You cannot have a 'war' on a medical condition, namely addiction.

What we now have, inastead of police, is a Standing Army -- and the Founding Fathers of America warned us mightily against this.

[equaviator]

The excuse of having “erred on the sided of caution” is getting old. Don’t these people care about quality control and continuous improvement? It works in manufacturing engineering and there’s no reason why it couldn’t work in education, meteorology, seismology, law enforcement, journalism, government, American and World history, the music business, professional sports, popular culture in general...

[OneWingedShark]

There’s a second part to the video where he has a police officer talk; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE&feature=related
Interestingly, the FIRST thing the officer says upon taking the podium is “and everything he said is true.”

[OneWingedShark]

recently saw a comment from a German who had lived in America around 1985 and liked it. Then they went back home, only to return recently to have another look. I paraphrase: "What did you people do to your country? You used to be free! Twenty-five years ago, America was a great place, now it's like living in a police state!"

Interesting.

I think the answer to "What did you people do to your country?" is really two answers.
First, we let the idea that "everything is relative" expand to such a pervasive degree that you would be utterly unsurprised to hear someone say "what's true for you isn't necessarily true for me." Which shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of truth and indeed logic itself: even a child knows about the axiom which in formal logic is called 'the Law of Non-Contradiction' which states that no statement may be simultaneously true and false. Applied to language, especially legal language, this [relativism] is a disastrous philosophy because then words no longer have a definite dictionary-meaning -- what's true for you isn't necessarily true for me, or anybody else, remember? -- but are instead based solely on their emotive-connotations.

Second, we have let our officials get away with making-up things as they go along. This is partially supported by the second-part of the previous reason: words lacking meaning. It is precisely here that things like "it's for the children's safety" come up as excuses to enforce a statute which is itself illegal.

For Example:

New Mexico State Constitution
Art II, Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]

No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons. No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms.

vs.

NMSA 30-7-2.1. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises.

A. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises consists of carrying a deadly weapon on school premises except by:
(1) a peace officer;
(2) school security personnel;
(3) a student, instructor or other school-authorized personnel engaged in army, navy, marine corps or air force reserve officer training corps programs or state-authorized hunter safety training instruction;
(4) a person conducting or participating in a school-approved program, class or other activity involving the carrying of a deadly weapon; or
(5) a person older than nineteen years of age on school premises in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance, for lawful protection of the person's or another's person or property.

B. As used in this section, "school premises" means:
(1) the buildings and grounds, including playgrounds, playing fields and parking areas and any school bus of any public elementary, secondary, junior high or high school in or on which school or school-related activities are being operated under the supervision of a local school board; or
(2) any other public buildings or grounds, including playing fields and parking areas that are not public school property, in or on which public school-related and sanctioned activities are being performed.

C. Whoever commits unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon on school premises is guilty of a fourth degree felony.

Now, my polling-place here happens to be an elementary-school; suppose I took my firearm there -- open-carry, so as to not have to deal with concealed carry issues/technicalities/restrictions -- when I went to vote. Would I be in violation of the law? Why or why not? [The State Constitution specifically says "No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense," and a simple reading of the rest of the sentence yields a list (of further prohibitions against laws) and the qualifier 'lawful' is applied ONLY to those last items.]

Or, another example, and far more illustrative of the "authorities make crap up" argument. City and County Courthouses have posted on their buildings "No Weapons," despite that the State Constitution says "No municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms." AND, furthermore, there is NO STATE LAW which restricts weapons from therein! IOW, it's "because we say so" and if you *dare* to defy them, how much do you want to bet they'll sic their uniformed minions [be it city police or county sheriff deputies] on you?

[Lower55]

It’s ALWAYS 4.

[OneWingedShark]

Yes, it's much worse than 1917 when Russia gave birth to a communist state, or the late 1920's when there was a massive depression, or the 1930's when Stalin killed millions, or the 1940's when World War Two nearly destroyed Europe, or the 1960's when riots were widespread in America, or the 1970's when a gas embargo triggered a major recession and inflation.

Much, much worse than those.

Oh, don't go thinking that we-as-a-country are better than those: since 1973 America has wantonly killed between 45,669,050 and 36,391,255* of its own Citizens with complete and utter approval from our legal system -- in fact, so perverted it is that they can claim that it's a right.

* Just import it into your spreadsheet and sum the columns; http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats.html

[Lazamataz]

Well, yeah, you have a point.

[OneWingedShark]

....but leaving that all aside for a moment, let's focus strictly on America. The primary reason that the police militarized in America, was because of the War on Drugs.

Quite agreed.

You cannot have a 'war' on a medical condition, namely addiction.

Sure you can, it's just stupid to do so. ;)
But more seriously, IMO, is that there is no victory condition! Having been enlisted in the army myself, I find that to contemplate that is highly disturbing -- even moreso when thought of in RPG-game and philosophy terms: either it is a horrendous mistake equivalent to throwing your character into a no-win situation OR it is a devious and wholly immoral evil which is designed to sidestep "what the law says" in favor of "we feel..."

What we now have, inastead of police, is a Standing Army -- and the Founding Fathers of America warned us mightily against this.

Definitely; but we also have an actual standing-army: the active duty army. It "used-to-was" (before WWII) that there was no Regular Army, as such, but rather "the cavalry" (to use the old-west metaphor) was commissioned* for specific duties and its members were drawn from the militia of the Several States.

*funded, for not more than 2-years, as per the Constitution