Thursday, January 25, 2007

we need to take care of our warriors

Cleveland officer investigated on claim he beat suspect--I really don't know what is at play here, but in general what we as a community need to remember is that, when we pay a policeman to go to war for us--the regular economy--against the drug economy, we need to support him as he uses his best judgment in an attempt to get our drug bait back. What does 5.5# of cocaine cost, and who pays for that if the drug dealer decides to play cute and keeps it hidden in his house? We paid the policeman to use bait to trap the dealer, and we also charged him with recovering the bait. Criminals need to understand that they give up certain rights and put themselves at unnecessary risk when they commit crimes and then fail to cooperate.

We must protect our warriors, first and foremost. We must protect our community. Those who work against the best interests of the community, who take from the community and make it sicker and weaker by distributing drugs and robbing people of their potential, deserve no sympathy from the court system. We need to write special rules of engagement when it comes to the war on drugs.


  1. So it's OK to torture a person who is suspected of a consensual crime?

  2. It's OK to recover stolen goods from thieves when they steal them right from under your nose and then try to play stupid--let's quit trying to put this in another context, using terms like "torture" and "consensual crime." Quit the weasel-word drill.

  3. Officer Ansari allegedly inflicted pain as a means of extracting information. If that is indeed what happened, then it meets the definition of torture. The crimes to which Mr. Alexander pleaded guilty, intent to distribute cocaine and a weapons charge, are both consensual crimes.

  4. Thanks for the slick redefinitions and subjective interpretations. You've got some swell ideas, so why not go out and put them into action? Go adopt a drug dealer, take it home, defend it, coddle it, nurture it, trust it, and let me know how things turn out. Maybe you can get government funding, or become another parasitic nonprofit.

  5. I'm not redefining anything. The Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary defines torture as "to treat (someone) cruelly or painfully, as a punishment, or in order to make him/her confess something, give information etc." Peter McWilliams, author of Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do, defines consensual crime as "any activity - currently illegal - in which we, as adults, choose to participate that does not physically harm the person or property of a nonconsenting other." The definitions aren't mine.

    So, I'll ask again, are you saying that it's OK to torture a person who is suspected of a consensual crime?

    As for those new rules of engagement you advocate, it seems they're already in effect, with disastrous results. Check out this Cato Institute paper by Radley Balko.

    Finally, Mr. Ferris, if you think I want the government to coddle drug dealers, you're mistaken. To the contrary, I want the government to put drug dealers out of business, and the way to do that is the same way the government put bootleggers out of business with the 21st Amendment.

  6. Jason, when are you going to get the hint that your contrived, artificial question doesn't warrant a direct answer, or a polite answer? If you're so set on using reference works, do some digging on the concept of "sophistry." And, do you think it's OK to torture me and my readers with any more of your palaver? We're here just sort of like sitting ducks. Finally, I think that drug dealing doesn't fall into the category of your "consensual" fantasy crimes--drugs take from all of us in that they harm our people, our common property, and our society as a whole. Leave me alone.