They need a better trap. Scarborough got away. 
If miscegenation laws are on the books (and have not been specifically struck down by Supreme Court ruling, which, if I understand the lawyers writing in this thread, means the law is still enforceable in that locality), then the officer has every right to arrest an interracial couple. It doesn’t mean that I or the arresting officer feels he should arrest the couple, just that he has the right to do so. If someone in the department has said, “This week, we are focusing on the following areas: public drunkenness, litter, and miscengantion.”, then the officer not only has the right, but the duty and the directive to actively enforce the law.
The reason that every law is not enforced all the time is that, despite the whinging, we really don’t live in a police state, and we don’t have enough police to spend the time constantly enforcing the tens of thousands of statutes out there.
[WAG]Per the article, it sounds like the officer showed the statute to the couple. I would guess that he had to look it up himself before enforcing it, which might be why he had it available.[/WAG]
I personally would like the police to act as peace keepers rather than law enforcement robots. It seems to me that this officer created a problem where this wasn’t one, you can argue whether it was legal or not legal but it was definitely wrong IMO. I’m not saying that the cop didn’t have the right to break down the door but for fucks sake use some discretion. This guy isn’t an axe murderer, plus he complied with the stupid unconstitutional law and took the flag down. I don’t doubt for a second that the cop had a jingoistic hard on for this guy because of his politics and acted accordingly. That sort of behavior should not be tolerated.
The problem with a lot (not most just a lot) of police officers is that they seem to escalate problems instead of diffusing them, we see that especially in political situations (peaceful demonstrations turned to riots). They should be there to maintain the peace and not blindly enforce laws.
I think it was buttonjockey who said that sometimes people get ‘nuisance’ tickets. Not having been there, I won’t say this was or wasn’t one. Sometimes, a person will do his best to give a LEO a hard time and earn a ticket s/he wasn’t going to get, had they been polite. Simply that they removed the flag does not mean they weren’t being difficult and antagonistic about doing so.
Just to clarify before certain posters fit me with honorary jackboots, I’m simply posting a possible*, alternative scenario. A single news article and a single eyewitness statement aren’t enough for me to have any sort of informed decision. Obviously, others have their minds already fully made up. I hope, should I ever be arrested and go to trial, that some of these are on my jury, as their immediate assumption that the police are lying bastards is sure to free me, no matter how many dead babies I stuffed into the blender.
Cops aren’t lying bastards? What makes them any better then the rest of the populace?
George Carlin puts it all in perspective:
I support the police having discretion, at least as it relates to minor offenses. Discretion means that they are allowed to ignore miscegenation violations, AND they are allowed to enforce violations. I don’t think the enforcement of “crap law” violations is entirely a bad thing because it puts the law in the spotlight so that the courts can rule it unconstitutional.
Laws should be written so that the police can enforce them when they are broken, we should not be relying on the police to re-write our laws in the field so that they’re not idiotic. Unenforced laws are like old land mines, waiting for some poor schlub to set it off.
Exactly. In fact, if there are miscegenation laws still on the books (I think there are), I want police to try and enforce them so we can get them off the books. No state legislature is going to sit by idly while an arrest warrant is out for some inter-racial married couple.
Same with this flag desecration law. I have no doubt that the SCOTUS will rule it unconstitutional, along with the other laws it has found to be so.
Of course I do! We need more law enforcement personnel interested in art.
Monty, your act needs some more work before you take it on the road.
I recall talking to someone who worked in the US House of Representatives. It involved the “codification” of the law. One of their duties was, per some committees request, was scan for laws that were deemed archaic, unenforceable, obsolete, or unconstitutional (or political incorrect?). The group would spend time looking for the laws and any court decisions that the law was used for, and few other items (this was 15 years ago). They would send a report to committee and try to define what the impact it would have at least at the statutory level. The committee would then study, modify and vote on it and send it on to the House. I’m not sure I got the full story, but I find it hard to believe that something like this wouldn’t exist at the state legislative level. Why would you want to risk a future cost of litigation when you know, say the law is declared unconstitutional? (e.g., miscegenation).
I know what happened - he cut himself on Occam’s Razor.
Well put. I think you’ve articulated why this made me so mad.
Fortunately a lot of LEOs do know the value of de-escalation, and put effort into calming situations down, rather than the reverse. Especially in a town like Asheville, I’ve got to think (hope) this guy is an exception.
ETA:** user_hostile**, part of the problem is politics. No one wants to have a record of “voting for flag burning” when re-election time comes around. These days it’s easy enough to vote to do away with forced sterilization and antimiscegenation because the vast majority of the voters revile both ideas. Vote against flag desecration laws or for not killing people who may actually be innocent of murder after all, and you will be labeled as “unpatriotic” or even “treasonous” and “on the side of murderers” or “soft on crime.”
Very nicely done, my friend.
Thanks. Kind of you to say.
Tell ya what, Dio. After several years of reading you spew bile about any form of the gummint which you despise, which is, most of it, I suggest you do the right thing and go off the form the Utopia of Diostan, far, far away from teh evil United States!!1!1
You won’t need police or a military in Diostan, as all conflicts can be resolved by reading a few pages of Rants from Chairman Dio, followed by singing Kumbayah, and a group hug.
After a short while, you’ll be able to show the rest of the myopic planet how to achieve peace, prosperity, universal health, education, and how to pull in far away stations by putting tinfoil on rabbit ears. Then, we at the Dope who though you to be a gibbering loon will be forced to admit your prescient abilities when you take your place with the true greats of time, such as Al Sharpton, Marvin Mandel, and Sammy Sosa.
If you contact Billy Joel now, he may allow you use of Angry Young Man as the National Anthem of Diostan.
Good luck
danceswithcats, I had no trouble seeing Diogenes support for the very basis of our government: the Constitution and, in this case, for that branch of the government which assures us that we do continue to have freedom of speech as guaranteed to us in the Bill of Rights in that Constitution – the Supreme Court. If you don’t see that as part of the government, I am puzzled.
I’ve never been one to want people to leave when they don’t like parts of the way things are. I tend to go along with such Founding Fathers as Thomas Jefferson who believed that if something is wrong with the way things are, we should make our voices heard and fix the problem.
Duke of Rat, thanks for clearing up the information about identification. That’s a relief!
The police really have to use discretion. “Zero tolerance” doesn’t work in school or at home or in the community. Even the linked newspaper article (See post 159) said that it is a rarely enforced law.
John Mace, rather than tying up our court systems, maybe we should petition our state legislatures to recind some of these stupid or apparently unConstitutional laws. (Just not in an election year.)
I wish that the Supreme Court had some other way of reviewing these State laws and getting them off the books.
Agreed, excepted as noted here: The problem with this particular law is that it is quite popular, at least in many states. If push comes to shove, legislatively, we might just end up with a US Constitutional amendment banning flag “desecration”. We came pretty close to that happening 6 times since 1995, with it being defeated by only a slim margin the Senate.
I don’t, either, but Dio only wants that part of government which protects his rights to do and say what he wishes. He can’t be bothered with the other aspects when they don’t come down on his side of the argument.
Dio can make his voice heard by contacting his local representative and senator to redress a specific problem. An occasional post here is fine, too. Like a few others who never have a good thing to say about the gummint, he’s well into the land of One-Trick-Pony.
The local law enforcement people received a complaint, and had to act thereon. The officer went to the residence to serve a citation, and in the process of performing his lawful duty was assaulted. Yes, officers can and do use discretion, but in the case where a complaint was filed, to “use discretion” and do nothing is otherwise known as deriliction of duty. Change the law-don’t bitch at the officer for doing their job.
You are hilarious. Sorry for the typo…I’ll try it again…statuTe.