To be clear, I don't mean threat as in a physical danger, I mean threat as in "I am going to make your life more difficult"
"1-800-how is my driving" "Let me talk to your manager" "I play golf with your boss" "You will be hearing from my attorney" "Give me your name and badge number". It puts the relationship in a very different light. You go from trying to establish common ground, and a rapport, to CYA mode, right quick. Understandably. And, as a public servant, a police officer is obligated to provide that info when asked. But, there is a difference between "Give me your name and badge number" when writing down all the details at a traffic accident, and "Give me your name and badge number" I am going to see you fired. From everything I read, it was the latter that was under discussion. Even this behavior, though, is not reason for an arrest. Being belligerent to the police is NOT a crime. But if you DO cross the legal line, after exhibiting such behavior, is it really a surprise if you get to meet a new group of friends? I am as libertarian as the next guy - any overuse or abuse of power, be it Presidential, or the meter maid, gets my blood boiling. But I also tend to give the benefit of the doubt to _anyone_ whenever I can. As for checks and balances, I would think in this PARTICULAR case, you would side with the poor (economically, socially) cop over the rich, powerful media personality. In this case, the balance of power is WAY over on Gate's side. On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Judah McAuley <ju...@wiredotter.com>wrote: > > >But telling me that asking a police > officer (when there is no imminent threat of harm) constitutes a > threat riles my inner libertarian. > > Police do an extraordinarily difficult job. And for them to do that, > we have to give them a great deal of power. However, principles of > civil liberty dictate that we when you give a great deal of power you > also need to provide a great deal of checks and balances to prevent > abuse of that power. We've lost sight of that and I find pointed > criticism of those who do exercise what minimal checks and balances > remain to be odious in the extreme. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:300912 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
