Analysis by Kyle A. Lohmeier
While the existence of the government is itself a testament to its own disdain for most basic human rights, I preferred it when politicians and bureaucrats weren’t quite so cavalier and vocal in their loathing of liberty. Yet, it seems in recent years under the Obummer regime, the state has let its mask of “service to the people” slip, exposing the evil visage beneath. The current target of rancor on the state’s part seems to be the ages-old concept of due process; neither major party candidate has any use for it and, FBI director James Comey said on Wednesday that he doesn’t either.
Well, what Comey said was that the unconstitutional and blatantly immoral practice of “stop and frisk” is an “important tool when used right.” “Stop and frisk,” is of course just what it sounds like; where a cop rolls up on someone that looks black or otherwise “suspicious” and frisks them in strict violation of their Fourth Amendment rights; and then arrests them if they find drugs or weapons. Republican Nominee Donald Trump lauded the idea of using stop-and-frisk on Chicagoans, likely again just the black ones, in an idiotic attempt to suggest a solution to the non-stop violent crime plaguing that burg.
“Comey told the panel that police who search citizens without stating the reason should explain after the encounter why they decided to do so,” reads a portion of a very brief piece in Reuters by Julia Edwards.
Well, isn’t that nice?
“Hey, I know I just humiliated you and put my hands on you and basically assaulted you for no reason, violated your Fourth Amendment rights comprehensively and your basic human rights yet more so; but let me tell you why. See, it’s like this; you’re black, and I’m a cop and well…”
What the hell happened to this little thing called “due process” that we used to care about? A cop’s hunch or the fact a guy fits a “profile” should never replace a search warrant. What part of “The right of the people to be secure in their persons… against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…” from the Fourth Amendment eludes these people?
For her part, Hillary Clinton is no better, nor is the rest of the Democrat party. In June, House Democrats threw a fit, demanding a vote on a bill that would ban people on FBI watch lists from buying a gun. House Speaker Paul Ryan brushed them off and adjourned the house. Then, on Monday night, Trump agrees with Clinton that due process should be abandoned, that anyone on an FBI watch list should be denied their right to buy a firearm.
So, for those keeping score at home, neither major party candidate nor the director of the FBI has any use for due process or the basic human rights of Americans.
So, in case you needed another reason to “waste” your vote on a candidate the NRA won’t back because he’s “not viable” (as though Trump is at this point), here it is: Gary Johnson hasn’t yet come out as being against due process and human rights. And, as this insightful piece by Julian Adorney posted by Rare points out, your vote doesn’t matter much anyway. Statistically you’re more likely to win the lottery twice than you are to cast the deciding vote, even in a competitive swing state. So, instead of voting for Trump because you’re afraid Hillary will win – which is, infuriatingly, what the NRA appears to have decided to tell members to do – or vice versa – which is what Obama is trying to sell to undecided voters – vote for the one you actually want to win.
Actually, Obama went one better and said that not voting – another perfectly acceptable option given the choices – is a vote for Trump, which, mathematically, makes exactly no sense.
Leave a Reply