It used to be that you had to be suspected of a crime before armed government workers could force you to even speak with them.
Now, they can just say you’re “suspicious.”
This is handy – like “climate change” – because it can mean almost anything. There is no way to disprove the assertion of “suspicion.”
You just are – if an AGW says you are.
The video above illustrates how it works.
A man named Keilon Hill is walking through a neighborhood when he is approached by an AGW who tells him “someone” called in to report a “suspicious” man. No assertion, even, that anything illegal has happened.
Hill is calm and articulate; he explains he’s out canvassing for a candidate prior to the midterms.
There’s nothing else going on.
It ought to have been enough.
It wasn’t.
The AGW continues to prattle on about his “suspicion,” but can’t come with a reason for it. He is just . . . “suspicious.” Like some old gypsy woman.
Except armed. And – worse – with a badge.
Hill asks: “I’m just trying to figure out what we were concerned about.” And then, reasonably: “I’d like you to leave me alone, sir. I’ve not broken any laws.”
Quite.
The AGW reaches for something. Anything. He starts talking about Hill “soliciting,” which Hill calmly rebuts – correctly pointing out that “soliciting is what . . . offering services… I’m not offering a service.”
He is handing out campaign literature, which is entirely legal – regardless of “someone’s” alleged “suspicions” … of nothing in particular.
Who is this “someone” who is “suspicious”? And what about that ancient business of an accused person having the right to confront their accuser?
Never mind.
Hill declines to give his ID or name and begins to object to the continued pestering without cause by the armed gypsy creature.
The law – which law enforcers like this one insolently ignore – is that people cannot (legally) be forcibly prevented from continuing on their way (“detained”) for more than a short time, absent some tangible reason (evidence) to suspect them of having committed a specific crime. Something actually on the books – and which circumstances at least suggest the waylaid individual may be guilty of having transgressed.
An AGW may briefly stop a person and ask them questions, i.e., “investigate” the situation. But the mere assertion of “suspicion” – of nothing in particular – isn’t enough to (legally) continue detaining the person, nor is that person legally obliged to produce ID.
Hill knew the law better than the law enforcer – which seems to have annoyed the enforcer, who just wouldn’t let it go
.
“You’re a suspicious person,” says the AGW.
“Suspicious how?” asks Hill.
No direct answer to this reasonable question.
Instead, the AGW demands to know “why (Hill) is being difficult about this.” In the mind of an AGW, any failure to “comply” – regardless of the legality of the AGW’s demands – is itself an affront.
And a tactic.
AGWs have been trained – not to shoot accurately or drive competently or even to obey the laws they enforce upon others – but in adversarial conversation techniques. Hill’s assertion of his rights is twisted into an act of defiance, to lay the groundwork for the AGW’s escalation of force.
Hill says – correctly, again: “I’m not being ‘difficult’ because I haven’t done anything wrong.”
Exactly.
Hill then commits the “crime” for which he’ll be placed in manacles a few minutes later: Contempt of Cop. It is not a statute you’ll find in any code book, but it’s one that’s enforced with uniform severity.
Hill – politely, in a most non-aggressive manner – tells the AGW: “With that being said, I’ll go about my business.”
The AGW’s blood is up now. “Hey, I’m not done with you yet; you’re not free to go.”
Hill turns and reiterates the question he’s already asked: “Have I broken any laws”?
“I’m talking to you, I’m not done,” says the AGW – now aggressively following Hill on foot.
“I can detain you for not listening,” he says.
Yes, really.
Remember: Contempt of Cop. Turning one’s back is almost a capital offense – and sometimes actually is. Hill was lucky; he is still alive, at least.
“Have I broken any laws,” Hill asks . . . again.
“Stop,” says the fatty AGW, who has the appearance of being afflicted by Down Syndrome but unlike most Down Syndrome victims, he isn’t friendly – and is armed.
Hill asks – one more time – “Tell me what laws I’ve broken.” The AGW growls, “stop.” The AGW radios in that Hill is – here it comes – being “uncooperative.” You can tell where this is headed.
“Have I broken any laws?” (again).
“That’s not the point,” says the AGW.
Italics added to emphasize what “the point” really is. It is submission – the thing which AGWs have been “trained” to expect, demand – and which when not delivered results in just what happened to Hill.
And worse. People have been summarily executed by AGWs for this “crime.”
Hill probably has 30 IQ points on the AGW – who has 80 pounds on Hill, at least – plus the gun. He turns the adversarial conversation tables on this tubby “hero,” stating that he is “suspicious” of the AGW – and that his “suspicions” are based on grounds just as solid.
The Down Syndromian oaf with the badge and gun can only respond with a dull-witted “really?”
Then – ta-dum-dum – “Turn around, put your hands behind your back . . . because you’re not listening to me.”
Out come the cuffs. “Do not be resistant to me,” says Officer DS.
Hill was subsequently charged with “harassment of a public official” – because of course Contempt of Cop isn’t on the books.
By the cop who would not leave him alone.
An also Down Syndromian spokesman for the AGW’s department later told CNN that if they determine Hill was treated unfairly (how about unlawfully?) ” . . .our department will take immediate action to the level expected of our officers.”
Grammar is another not-strong-suit of DS AGWs.
CNN presented this video as an example of racial profiling but it’s really an example of a much more serious problem: Law enforcers enforcing nonexistent laws. Who cannot abide people who decline to roll over and present their soft parts upon command.
Regardless of the law.
What happened to Hill happens to people generally – not just to black people. YouTube teems with almost identical examples of people who’ve not committed any crime being accosted by AGWs who claim they are “suspicious” . . . because “someone” said so.
In effect, there no longer is any law – just the arbitrary force of those who have the guns and badges. Who have empowered themselves to do as they like, to whomever they like whenever they like.
That’s how it was in Russia after Lenin got his hands on power. And his emulators in Germany later on.
And now, here.