Who said anything about the elimination of law enforcement?
Posted on 08/21/2002 9:15:06 PM PDT by mindprism.com
That's an awful lot of people to be shopping at KMart at that hour. If they were all shopping at KMart and ordering at Sonic, why would the mangagement of KMart or Sonic have complained to the police? They must have been raking it in hand over fist.
Leanne Williams said her 19-year-old son called her from jail and told her he showed police a receipt for bottled water from Kmart, but he was still arrested.
I always goes to KMart in the middle of the night for my bottled water. I just don't like the lack of selection at Circle K.
"They even arrested a 10-year-old girl who was having dinner with her father and took her to juvenile detention. "She got separated from her father and I asked her how old she was, and she told me she was 10," Demmler said. "She was dazed."
That happened to me once. I was with my ten-year-old daughter driving around in the middle of the night. She wanted some ice-cream, so I passed all the Circle K's and 7-11's and decided to stop at Sonic, even though there were 425 people hanging out and partying in the parking lot.
What was it like?
I have a question...one asked in all seriousness. One of the offenses for which some were arrested was trespassing.
Let us suppose that I - on the wrong side of 40 by a large margin - take leave of my senses and go to a Kmart store that is open and doing business at 12:30 AM some Saturday. I walk in, look around, and don't find anything that I want. I then walk out.
Have I committed criminal trespass? Am I subject to arrest at this point?
Suppose that I notice Sonic, and decide to walk over to that establishment. I don't move my vehicle - in this scenario, it would still be in the Kmart parking lot. I purchase a food item and begin to consume it.
At this juncture, am I committing criminal trespass? Am I now subject to arrest?
I note that the Texas statute regarding criminal trespass makes no mention of the time. You may read it yourself HERE
Which begs the question - if I were to do any of the above listed acts at 2:00 PM on a Wednesday, would I not (per the standards of arrest apprarently followed by the Houston PD) be subject to arrest? Dare I go shopping...anywhere?
Thanks in advance for your insights.
Now, regarding your items in this thread:
You state in item #9 of this thread "That's an awful lot of people to be shopping at KMart at that hour. If they were all shopping at KMart and ordering at Sonic, why would the mangagement of KMart or Sonic have complained to the police? They must have been raking it in hand over fist. "
Quite possibly, they were coerced. Please note the thread of FR HERE
Also, it doesn't matter. If 424 of them weren't shopping, it doesn't make it legal (or morally just) to arrest the 425th one who was a legitimate customer.
You also mention in your item #9 "I always goes to KMart in the middle of the night for my bottled water. I just don't like the lack of selection at Circle K."
Clearly, the businesses involved believe that the level of business available at that hour justifies being open. One can only assume that someone does, in fact, purchase water or other goods at that hour. It may be that the businesses suffer from incompetent management - their Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing may be suggestive - but that doesn't matter either. They were open for business.
Lastly, you comment in your item #9 "That happened to me once. I was with my ten-year-old daughter driving around in the middle of the night. She wanted some ice-cream, so I passed all the Circle K's and 7-11's and decided to stop at Sonic, even though there were 425 people hanging out and partying in the parking lot. "
I am not aware of any law that prohibits such acts. You might wish to avoid San Antonio during Fiesta - a crowd exceeding 500,000 hangs out and parties along the river. Vendors even sell ice cream. Beer too.
Indeed. Or the 4,250th, 42,500th, 425,000th, 4,250,000th, or even the 42,500,000th. In fact, if there is the possibility that even one innocent person might be arrested out of the 250,000,000-odd souls in this country, the JBT police ought to be prohibited from arresting anyone. It is the only moral and principled postion to take.
I'm finally starting to see the impeccable logic of libertarianism. Lest one innocent soul suffer unlawful infringement of his unalienable rights by government, government and law enforcement must be eliminated. Free, free, free at last!
On the other hand, perhaps this was just a botched and poorly planned raid that for the most part properly targeted thugs and scofflaws whose behavior was impinging on the local business' right to make a profit and law-abiding citizens' right to shop. If so, perhaps the officials responsible should be and will be fired anyway and law-abiding citizens who were unjustly arrested will receive just compensation for their inconvenience and poor treatment. Hopefully the next raid will be much better planned and executed, and no innocent shopper will be inconvenienced. That would make sense to me.
In the final analysis, even in law enforcement the perfect should not be made the enemy of the good. The alternatives--anarchy, tribalism, or private police forces--are much worse than an occasional botched raid such as this.
As usual, another right-on analysis based on conservative common sense which rational people expect and appreciate from you, Kevin, in juxtaposition to the usual nonsensical anarchic rants and liberal whines of the ideologues. Kudos.
Who said anything about the elimination of law enforcement?
Furthermore, I'd like to see how you justify the police going ahead and arresting the people who showed them receipts of their purchases. It's easy for a cop to claim that he didn't understand the law in question well enough to know that it hadn't been violated--but it's far more difficult to dismiss the simple fact that many of the arrestees both here and at the Coney Island restaurant were paying customers who had receipts to prove it and the overzealous cops went ahead and arrested them anyway.
Kevin's "anaylsis" is a "lesser of two evils" argument that presents the situation in pure either/or terms. Either we give the police free rein to operate as they wish without any fear of reprisal or repercussion if they screw up, or we have total anarchy, and there is no middle ground. That you label this kind of "analysis" as "common sense" is telling.
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.