mikesoh.com

When news was released that a student was tased at a Sen. John Kerry forum, there was immediate reaction, primarily from students who were outraged that the police overstepped their bounds and infringed — no strike that — impeded his first amendment rights.

The biggest argument that I’ve seen is that the police tased Andrew Meyer for asking a question.

Now, if this was in fact the case, then I would agree.  However, a HUGE fact is being ignored with these arguments: Meyer was asked to leave.

Yes, read that again.  Meyer was asked to leave.

It is highly misunderstood that you have the right to be wherever you want to go.  For example, you cannot go into a secured government building, even though it’s public property.  Well, I guess you could try, but you might end up with a severe case of deadness.  You can enter a library but you can be asked to leave, despite the fact that it is, again, public property.  Finally, you could even go to the Capital building in DC, do the tour, and even watch a debate or two.  But if you look suspicious, you’ll be asked to leave.  And by suspicious I mean, your shoelaces are untied.

Whether this is right or not is beside the point.  The police can ask you to do whatever they want for one reason and one reason only: they have guns.

Let’s take the police out of this and look at this from a different perspective. 

I have a gun.  It’s not drawn, but you clearly see it in my holster.  I come up to you and politely ask you to leave my property.  In fact, I don’t even want to see you.  You have two choices: comply or not comply.  If you choose not to comply, I draw my weapon and ask again.  You, again, are faced with the same two choices: comply or not comply.  You remain defiant and say to me that you have the right to be near my property, but not on it.  I give you a final, yet polite, warning.  Again, two choices: comply or not comply.

What would you do?

Yes, we could discuss the legality and the appropriateness of me pulling a gun on you.  And yes, I may be doing something illegal.  But unless you are determined to get shot, then you will comply.

Now, let’s discuss the reaction.  I think The Colbert Report summarized it best

I find it sad that instead of the students doing something helpful at the rally, they instead video tape it and show their solidarity from the comfort of their computer.  Since the dawn of the blogging age, anonymity has been the best friend of students.  It gives a sense of security (however false) that they can say whatever they want without ramifications or consequences.  I particularly like what Colbert says near the end of his piece.  "This kid is saying, ‘I wish they would stop tasering this guy so that I can watch this guy getting tasered on YouTube."

And that’s what we’ve come to as a nation.  Instead of asking the police why they are arresting Meyer, instead of protesting at the forum, instead of doing something to even question the police, everyone is staring, video taping, probably even blogging, what is going on.

When it comes down to the wire of protecting civil liberties, you can count on the fact that these students are going to get as involved as they are in voting.

Note: I’ve added a new section!  A "politics" section will contain all my political editorials.  Please refer to the disclaimer.

About a month or so ago, Michael Vick, Atlanta Falcons Quarterback and Virginia Tech alum, pleaded guilty to federal felony charges related to his dog-fighting ring.  I’m not a pro-football guy.  Heck, I only watch my Terps play, and even then, I don’t even know the players!  When Vick was brought in for arraignment, there was a huge group of protesters outside the U.S. District Court, condemning him!  Here are some pictures, in case you don’t remember:

It’s great to see that PETA unconditionally trusts the police department as well as the government.  I’m actually encouraged that they believe that the police has done such a great job with the investigation that no public review is necessary.

In fact, I think we should get behind this.  I propose that we completely get rid of the judicial system here in America.  Yes, that’s right.  Think of how much time and money we’ll save by simply allowing public opinion dictate the punishment of everyone and anyone that is charged!  Seriously, it’s worked for several teachers that have been accused of raping their students.

In fact, in New York, there was a custodian accused of raping an 8 year old girl.  He was ostracized by the public.  The District Attorney’s eventually dropped the charges.  Why?  The DA said, "Oh, we simply got the wrong guy."  But had we gotten rid of the judicial system, we could have gotten rid of this sick pedophile.

Call your senators, your congressmen, your delegates, all your elected officials.  Tell them that you want them to pass a constitutional amendment abolishing the fair trail process in place of a trail by public opinion.

Please note: The preceding editorial is meant to be satirical.  It should not be taken seriously.  Images © 2007 by AP.  Used under fair-use policy of US Copyright Laws.

Congress stepped up to the plate to tackle the issue: "Are the gas companies shafting us?"  With prices at an all-time high and reports of CEOs of oil companies making hundreds of thousands, it’s a natural question.  However, the question neglects a very important fact: when demand goes up, so must cost.
In today’s editorial, I’ll discuss why prices are so high, why it’s everyone’s fault, and why not purchasing gas on one day can does nothing to the oil company and only ends up hurting the community.Consider the crudely drawn image below:

As you can see, when the price is low, Consumers want to buy like crazy!  Inversely, when prices are low, Suppliers aren’t too happy to sell.  Obviously, this is overly simplified, but you get the picture.  Now, consider the opposite.  When demand goes up, Suppliers must raise prices or their supply will run out.

Oil is an interesting commodity.  Oil cannot be "renewed" — meaning that once it is gone, it is gone.  Oil reserves are slowly decreasing (not at an alarming rate that many news reporters will have to believe).  However, the consumption of oil (read Demand) has increased.  Oil isn’t created "out of thin air", prices MUST go up.  Yes, read that again because so many people are blaming the gas companies when it is simple economics.

The price for oil must follow the red line since it is a limited commodity.  The new equilibrium price is shown by the orange line:

So why are so many people complaining?  Personally, I think it’s because all they see is the sticker price.  I find it ironic that the same people who complain about gas prices want more "biofuels" and hydrogen cars.  Many of these alternatives will cost the same, if not more, than gasoline.  (And the environmental savings is horrible.  More on alternative fuels at a future editorial.)

People are reacting saying that if everyone were to boycott buying gasoline for one day, it would A) increase supply, B) Send a message to the companies that we’re not going to take it, C) save the cheerleader, thus saving the world, D) Take money out of CEOs pockets.  (These are the reasons I’ve seen to date.)

All of these are simply ill-founded, for three main reasons:

1. Once the gasoline reaches the station, the gas has already been paid for.  Buy not purchasing gas on one day, it hits the local people that own the station, not Big Oil.
2. Not buying gas on one day doesn’t change demand.  It only changes on which day it is purchased.  We must collectively DECREASE DEMAND.  This means oil and oil by-products (e.g. plastic cups, wrappers, soap, shampoos, etc.)
3. Again, not going to a particular company doesn’t change demand.  We are simply purchasing from someone else.  Remember #1: Once the gasoline reaches the station, the gas has already been paid for.
4. Many of these e-mails, facebook groups, MySpace profiles, or whatever are done to trick you into sending it to all your friends.  Remember chain letters?

Consider the list below of someways to help you lower you gas consumption.  They make common sense because, well, they are.

• Don’t drive to work.  Consider public transportation, walking, biking, etc.
• Only use your car if you need to.  Public transportation decreases consumption by spreading it over multiple people.
• Convernserve as much energy as possible.  Use fans instead of air conditioners.  Open windows to circulate the air better.
• Drink water.  Other drinks must be manufactured and shipped, using gasoline.  Drinking water minimizes your gasoline "foot print."

(Note: Graphs on this post are released to the public domain.)

"We should learn to tolerate others."

"No one should tell us what’s right and what’s wrong.  That’s pushing you’re values on someone else."

Do these quotes sound familiar?  They are commonly spouted by "civil rights" groups.  The common response to these lines have often been, "Well, then, how far is too far?"

Obviously, murder should be, right?

According to an Australian news web site, two teenage girls killed one of their friends simply because they wanted to know what it felt like to kill someone.  "We just did it because we felt like it."

Frankly, I’m not at all surprised by this.  We live in an increasingly permissive society that doesn’t want (read: want) consequences.  Instead, we want nothing short of complete and utter liberty to do what we feel like, whenever we feel like.

I think the ACLU, along with the rest of us, should celebrate this as a leap in civil liberties.

The site looks like it did before!  Feel free to look around.  If something stops working, let me know.