Talk-Polywell.org

"The police aren't really interested in arresting these people because they are in possession of residue, they're interested in arresting them to achieve a different purpose," said Geoffrey Corn, a professor at South Texas College of Law. "But the DA has an obligation to prosecute crime, not people. You don't target people, you target crime."He said the argument by police is understandable, but it disregards the presumption of innocence.

"It's problematic to endorse a concept that is, effectively, preventive arrest," Corn said.

http://www.chron.com/default/article/Cr ... php#page-2

Should we be arresting drunks because because people on alcohol are more likely to commit spousal abuse?

Should we arrest people for espousing anarchist views because some anarchist are prone to commit property crimes?

Do we really want a police state? Or would we rather live with the imperfections that liberty allows? For a very long time we (as a country) preferred liberty. Some of us still do. The police seem to be of a different opinion. At least in Houston. Where there seems to be a problem.

“The error seems not sufficiently eradicated that the operations of the mind as well as the acts of the body are subject to the coercion of the laws. But our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them. The rights of conscience we never submitted, we could not submit. We are answerable for them to our God. The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.” -Thomas Jefferson Notes on Virginia Query 17, 1782.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. - Thomas Jefferson

We used to live by those words. Now we just mouth them. Well I'm old school. I intend to live my life as a free man. If some one objects they can always kill me. And some day they just might. No matter. Such a death would be a victory for liberty. Live free or die. Maybe live free and die. I was a dead man the day I swore the oath. I am 40+ years to the good.

I have revised and extended my remarks:

http://classicalvalues.com/2011/12/disr ... innocence/

I agree. It is all very hypocritical as well. These types of policies often lead to inequality and abuse and destruction of liberty, and yet they do not apply their own logic to it. They only wish to 'prevent' certain types of misconduct and not others. It seems just all too convenient that the misconduct they wish to 'prevent' is of the populace, while empowering themselves.