Cruz was arrested and charged with breach of peace, a misdemeanor, for bringing a BB/pellet gun to his acting class. It was to be used as a prop in for his acting class.
We don't care why you did it. We don't care that no harm was done. We don't care that you're a productive member of society. We don't care if your record is clean.
You have displeased the Overlords. You must be punished.
13 comments:
Well, there it is. Logic and reason are now dead as well. Wonder what's next?
I find it hard to have sympathy for the young man. Though, I agree that this is wrong and should not be. Especially as the only illegal acts have been carried out by the police, the university, and the lawmakers that have violated the constitution, in denying this young man his rights, and everyone else,also.
My lack of sympathy arises from his defense of himself. It sounded to me like he thinks he should be an exception because he is a "nice" person. He may well be. He has, if all is to be believed, led an exemplary life to this point. He doesn't seem to have realized that he should NOT be an exception, that that treatment he thinks he is due, is also the due of every other citizen of this nation and they should be treated just exactly as he wishes to be now.
Perhaps by the time every jumped up purveyor of "what is good for the common man" is through with demonstrating just how worthless and subjugated he is, and that everything he aspires to or wishes for himself is only at the sufferance of his self appointed "betters", if they deign to allow it, he will understand that he is not an exception. Liberty does not feed on exception. Exception poisons liberty, deny it to any man and you have set a mechanism that will ultimately deny it to all but the most vicious and unprincipled.
That we allow the most vicious and unprincipled to govern by our own selection of them is obscene. Perhaps this young man will eventually come to realize that and not want to be an exception to laws that he thought were for "those other people" and realize he is "those other people" with the rest of us.
Until that time, I will withhold my sympathy for him, though I support his cause and agree that what is happening to him is wrong.
What say the rest of you? Am I too harsh? David? David? RJ?
Straightarrow, I don't think much of the "I'm a nice guy" defense, either, but remember, Rick Stanley openly carried in Denver, fully expecting to challenge Denver's "home rule" based on the U.S. Constituion and the 2A. Trouble was, the judge flat-out denied him the use of the Constitution for his defense. So, "I'm a nice guy" may have been the only defense left to this student.
david codrea, did you attend ksu in 1970 ? If so please e-mail me @
don.wilson@grandfinancial.net
straightarrow, I agree with you. The kid is a "justice and law admin" major, and he's trying so hard to show the authorities how warm and fuzzy he is, he's not getting indignant and standing up on his hind legs. The lesson here is, do everything they tell you to and they have contempt for you. Maybe that'll sink in.
Donny--bro! Long time--will email you right away!
David C. you went to KSU? I didn't but I lived in Manhattan for a couple of years. Nice little town when I lived there about '76 or '77. Of course, I have lived almost everywhere in America so, you may hear me tell someone else I lived where they did, and it will be a different place. I ain't lyin', just peripatetic (sp?). What my mama used to call fiddle-footed.
RJ, all I can say about that is I would have been one Hell of a bad man to deny the use of the law in my defense, while lesser law was being used against me.
Stanley got screwed, no doubt. As long as there is no price to pay for trampling people there are some like the judge that will trample them. I have found much to my sorrow that only a personal awareness of the downside for abusers will stop them. I will chase them outside the law if that is what it takes to secure justice or die trying to secure it. But I will not surrender to limited abuse as an alternative to greater abuse.
Pragmatism is the enemy of principle oft times. Universal liberty cannot survive outside principle. Despotism does quite well out there.
straightarrow: Kent State University, as in "four dead in O-hi-o."
RJ--you might be interested in the letter I wrote the judge on behalf of Rick Stanley.
My sentiments exactly, straightarrow! The New War for Independence is closer now than ever! Soon, the ammo box will be all we have left to appeal to. The tyrants must soon know there will be consequences for their actions!
David C., thanks. I'll look that letter up.
Excellent letter, David C.! ZBy the way, if you were in Rick's place, and the judge told you that you couldn't reference the Constition in your defense, what would you do? I'm thinking that I'd tell the judge that I WILL use it, whether he liked it or not.
Thanks RJ--tough to answer. I wouldn't be in Rick's place because I know acts of public defiance will not be backed up with support by others. Anyone who followed suit would, like Rick, be left twisting in the wind at the mercy of despots who, by definition, are merciless. They can and will do with him as they wish, and there will be but the smallest of outcries, noticed only by a few. The rest of the world will keep on keepin' on as if nothing had happened, and his continued plight will go sadly unnoticed.
A cost/benefit tradeoff analysis comes up way too lopsided for me.
I respect what Rick has done, but would not choose that course for myself because of this, and because I subscribe to the Patton philospophy, i.e., wars are not won by dying for your country, but by making some other poor sob die for his country.
If you're going to choose defiance, my advice is to remain anonymous and have a strong alibi.
The object is to win. You can't win if you've been sidelined.
That's probably the best way to handle it, Davi C. Thanks.
*Ahem* "DAVID C". Seems I stumble a lot with my fingers.
I surely do like Patton's advice!
Post a Comment