"I Don't Make the Laws I Just Enforce Them"

While many a thread has all ready been made about the absurd policies of shutting down lemonade stands and even arresting lemonade vendors, I was watching a Youtube video just now where D.C. Capitol police arrested some "lemonade activists" who, as one policewoman put it: "You guys want to be arrested for your cause of lemonade liberation." This is the same brutish loutish police woman who continually shoves her hand into the cameraman's camera with clear intent to harm. At the end of the video there is an interview done with one of these police officers who states "I don't make the laws, I just enforce them."



All law enforcement officers take an oath of office to uphold the law and support and defend the Constitution. For these D.C. Capitol police that Constitution would be the federal Constitution. For local police in any state, the State Constitution would be their Supreme Law of the Land as the federal Constitution is for the D.C. police. Every Constitution makes clear that individuals have rights that are not to be infringed, and in no way is there ever any express "get off the hook" Clause that clarifies that these rights may trampled upon if Congress or state legislatures "make a law" allowing the brutish loutish behavior seen in that video.

All too often this is the lame excuse LEO's give for breaking the law. "I'm just doing my job." However, no law enforcement officer ever has any obligation, nor any duty to act unlawfully. They do have a duty to protect the rights of individuals and do have the lawful authority to refuse to acquiesce to unlawful legislation, but do they? Will they? What is to be done?

I always wonder what percentage of the cops in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's wrestled with blasting negroes with fire hoses, sending in dogs after the coloreds, chasing homosexuals out of private bars for being homosexual and so on.

Their oath must be powerful to prevent human decency from surfacing.

I can see the sad cop with tear in eye and baton raised as some lanky mustached man in cut-offs and a half-shirt attempts to block the blows to his head with his arms.

Poor cops. Must be hell to enforce those laws.

That excuse didn't work during the Nuremberg trials and it isn't going to work in the court of whatever mob tries these "people". In my opinion just making a comment like that is a clear indication they know what they're doing is wrong.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


LEOs have been doing some pretty stupid things lately, and I have been very vocal about it. That being said, this was not a freedom of speech issue, it was a zoning issue. Just think what the National Mall would look like with hundreds or thousands of unlicensed vendors cluttering up the public space and leaving their garbage behind. I know that if I were to visit the Capitol, the last thing I want to see is a county fair atmosphere where people are selling Elephant Ears and cotton candy.

If these protestors had GIVEN the lemonade away as a form of speech then I don't think the police could have done anything about it; but then again, there's the dancing thing. Who knows.

Still, the "I don't make the laws" excuse is kind of lame.

I dont agree with Stossel on alot but his whole 'Everything is Illegal' thing is well done. He used the Lemonade Stand as one example of how the government has gone mental. He even shows all the trouble you need to go through to open a Lemonade Stand legally. The government is out of control.

Worth a watch.

When a cop makes that responce, they are admitting that they are just another beaureaucratic tool in the government's aresnal. Like Rip Torn says in Men In Black

Gentlemen, congratulations. You're everything we've come to expect from years of government training.

Police are government employees, just like the jerks down at the DMV.

Why should we expect anything more from them than we do from any other government employee?

reply to post by OldCorp


It is fallacious reasoning to assume that "unlicensed vendors" would leave their litter behind. If licensing schemes were so effective death by doctor would not be the third leading cause of death for Americans. Of course, we are rapidly approaching a time where death by law enforcement officers will make the top ten of leading causes of death for Americans if we continue to feed the beast. Acquiescing to licensing schemes is feeding the beast. "Do you have a license to sell that lemonade?" Seriously?

What would be so wrong with thousands of vendors lined all around the D.C. Mall? Hell, it is reported that the average teen unemployment rate is 50.1%. How bad could it be to have some of these kids selling lemonade and other products along the Mall? A teen vendor selling copies of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Lord knows that idea just scares the crap out of the federal government.

Even if acquiescing to dubious licensing schemes were a good idea, if any child wanted to open up a lemonade stand in their neighborhood in Washington D.C. they would first discover this:

NOTICE: The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs is currently not authorized to issue street vendor licenses for those seeking to vend on city sidewalks. We have published new rules that, once approved by the DC Council, will allow us to begin issuing new vendor licenses and permits. Currently, we are only authorized to issue licenses for Mobile Food Trucks. For more information, please email [email protected].

Assuming that the D.C. council ever gets around to approving these new rules, this is what it would cost a child to become a licensed lemonade vendor in D.C.:

Category License Fee: $338.00

Application Fee: $70.00

Endorsement Fee: $25.00

Technology Fee: 10 percent of total

All just to sell some lemonade.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by OldCorp

 

It is fallacious reasoning to assume that "unlicensed vendors" would leave their litter behind.

No, it's 48 years of living on a planet watching people leave their garbage behind.

If licensing schemes were so effective death by doctor would not be the third leading cause of death for Americans.

I took the pre-med track in college, and I'm pretty handy at identifying tissue under a microscope and naming the bones of the body. Would you prefer that I, or someone who is actually qualified, perform surgery on you? Granted, some people just barely get their licenses to practice medicine, but at least we are guaranteed that they have a bare minimum of medical knowledge.

Of course, we are rapidly approaching a time where death by law enforcement officers will make the top ten of leading causes of death for Americans

You may be right about that.

What would be so wrong with thousands of vendors lined all around the D.C. Mall?

Have you ever been to a county fair?

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

"You guys want to be arrested for your cause of lemonade liberation."

Would have been funnier if she said libation.

I have to admit, I often use this excuse. I do some things in my job I don't often agree with, but we are enforcing the statutes as written. If someone wants to change the statutes, they need to contact their legislator, not the officers enforcing the laws. It is a lame excuse, but I also need my job!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

"You guys want to be arrested for your cause of lemonade liberation."

Would have been funnier if she said libation.

I have to admit, I often use this excuse. I do some things in my job I don't often agree with, but we are enforcing the statutes as written. If someone wants to change the statutes, they need to contact their legislator, not the officers enforcing the laws. It is a lame excuse, but I also need my job!

job....morals, job....morals. I know what I'd choose, I know the difference between right and wrong. But then, I'd never put myself in the position to enforce anything on anyone. I do not see it as my right.

I wish the police could just go back to arresting bad people. Instead of criminalising as much of the population they possibly can, using flimsier and flimsier "laws" to do so. All to collect tax money for private investors. That's pretty much all the scum are these days, tax collectors. (and bullies/voilent thug scum)

But still, it's a job innit. I'd rather kill myself, but that's just me. I have morals.

reply to post by Acidtastic


It must be a lot like working in a department store.

You get hired for a department you know and like.

Suddenly you find yourself covering for people in departments you hate and with products you dont know anything about.

The job was good now it sucks. But at least once in a while you get to cover the department you like and you do need a job so you put up with it.

Once in a while they get to bust bad people. Just most of the time it's prohibition, petty nonsense, victimless "moral" crimes, revenue generation and shuttling drunks around. But once in a while you can be a hero. Maybe. You hope.

reply to post by Acidtastic


If only it were that easy. There are never any clearly bad people, and there are never any clear moral obligations.

Suppose two people violate the law. One is a serious allegation, but difficult to prove, one is a very minor violation, but it is obvious. Who do you suppose the government spends its resources enforcing? It isn't a moral issue, they are both guilty, but it certainly isn't right to throw the book at one and not go after the other.

Suppose someone makes a mistake, and you have information that cannot be shared with them, but it would help them a great deal. You know they had the best of intentions, and you know how to help them, but it technically violates the privacy of someone else, but that someone else would never know it happened. Do you ignore your obligations and the privacy issue, and put your own job and freedom at risk to help the person, or do you let them get a more severe penalty even though it doesn't feel right?

What about just plain ol difference of opinion of liberties? What about arresting a prostitute? I have no moral qualm with prostitution, I don't think it should be illegal, but it is illegal. Should an officer ignore a law that the majority of the population agrees with, or should the officer enforce the law even though they personally disagree with it?

Reply to post by getreadyalready

Isn't enforcing a law you disagree with not unlike prostitution?


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Reply to post by getreadyalready

 

Isn't enforcing a law you disagree with not unlike prostitution?

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

In-line with your earlier post.... you think even prostitutes enjoy their job from time to time, and they just endure the rest?

I think our country was founded upon the idea of majority rules. I enforce laws that the majority has decided were important, but I personally disagree with. I never lie, I never claim to agree with them, and I often empathize with those affected, but I still do the job I am paid to do and enforce the laws the majority has decided upon.

The ones that are difficult are where it is budgetary concerns forcing the departments to enforce petty stuff with maximum penalty instead of dedicating resources on difficult stuff with the possibility of no penalty in the end. On the one hand, the departments have an economic responsibility to tax payers to show results, but this contradicts the responsibility to use fairness and discretion and go after the most serious offenders and ignore the easy stuff.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

"You guys want to be arrested for your cause of lemonade liberation."

Would have been funnier if she said libation.

I have to admit, I often use this excuse. I do some things in my job I don't often agree with, but we are enforcing the statutes as written. If someone wants to change the statutes, they need to contact their legislator, not the officers enforcing the laws. It is a lame excuse, but I also need my job!

I have quit jobs, even relatively well paid ones, because I could not sell my dignity, morals or integrity down the river for a paycheck. Sadly, some people don't have the dignity, or integrity to do so, the are the ones causing society to rapidly crumble.

How dare these people assault our capitalist leaders by taking selling lemonade. This is a prime example of evil in the world. If we dont stand hard by these laws anybody could just up and start a business from scratch. With all the new competition coming in from people starting business from the ground up without the banks being involved and without having been born into a well off family they will start imposing on our capitalist leader's american dream. We just cant allow this. How dare these little terrorists try this little stunt.

Do you think they can still come after me for making and selling Lemonade when I was a child, maybe I shouldn't be posting this because it may make put me in jeopardy.

They may also come after me for making Hollyhock Dolls, we took the flowers from neighbors and the toothpicks from our parents and sold them for 2 cents each, no investment on my part unless you want to count labor.

Of couse we didn't have permts, those were only for building a house,

The whole world has gone nuts while we stood back and watched and still are.

It's retarded out there.... My cousins son got a visit by the police last summer. For putting handmade fliers letting people know he would mow lawns in some mailboxes..... Are you serious? And people wonder why the world is going to crap, we are teaching children early that being an entrepeneur is not worth the hassle anymore....

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


It's money the government can't tax and take.

That's what it all boils down to.