Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Slogans or what happened to free speech?

Expand Messages
  • Mary Jo
    And the Dems are changing things? Yeah, fixing sheep. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CheY0jYXJjY Mary
    Message 1 of 24 , Sep 18, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      And the Dems are changing things? Yeah, fixing sheep.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CheY0jYXJjY

      Mary
    • eupraxis@aol.com
      Wasn t the Dems. It was our new Police State cops. Wil ... From: Mary Jo To: existlist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 8:55 am
      Message 2 of 24 , Sep 18, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Wasn't the Dems. It was our new Police State cops.

        Wil







        -----Original Message-----
        From: Mary Jo <maryjo.malo@...>
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 8:55 am
        Subject: [existlist] Slogans or what happened to free speech?

























        And the Dems are changing things? Yeah, fixing sheep.



        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CheY0jYXJjY



        Mary





















        ________________________________________________________________________
        Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Mary Jo
        Wil, First I was appalled by Kerry s acquiescence, both in conceding the election and then not loudly protesting this police action; also by the ultimate
        Message 3 of 24 , Sep 18, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Wil,

          First I was appalled by Kerry's acquiescence, both in conceding the
          election and then not loudly protesting this police action; also by the
          ultimate provocation for the arrest, the student's mention of the Yaley
          secret society.

          My recent criticism of the Dems is consistently directed towards their
          feebleness and my suspicions that they're all bought and sold already.

          The Left Bank existentialists were opposed to fascism in all its ugly
          disguises. I stand on that slippery slope.

          Mary
        • eupraxis@aol.com
          Mary, For what its worth, I am standing with you. Wil ... From: Mary Jo To: existlist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:29 am
          Message 4 of 24 , Sep 18, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Mary,

            For what its worth, I am standing with you.

            Wil







            -----Original Message-----
            From: Mary Jo <maryjo.malo@...>
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:29 am
            Subject: [existlist] Re: Slogans or what happened to free speech?

























            Wil,



            First I was appalled by Kerry's acquiescence, both in conceding the

            election and then not loudly protesting this police action; also by the

            ultimate provocation for the arrest, the student's mention of the Yaley

            secret society.



            My recent criticism of the Dems is consistently directed towards their

            feebleness and my suspicions that they're all bought and sold already.



            The Left Bank existentialists were opposed to fascism in all its ugly

            disguises. I stand on that slippery slope.



            Mary





















            ________________________________________________________________________
            Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • bhvwd
            ... election. His howling objection to being tasered makes great footage for a law suit. He also sets himself up for a spot as a student leader. We surly
            Message 5 of 24 , Sep 18, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary Jo" <maryjo.malo@...> wrote:
              >
              > And the Dems are changing things? Yeah, fixing sheep.
              >
              > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CheY0jYXJjY
              >
              > Mary, it seems he was asking questions about the last presidential
              election. His howling objection to being tasered makes great footage
              for a law suit. He also sets himself up for a spot as a student
              leader. We surly need some involvement from the "sheep" you
              mentioned. I have spent my time on the electrode and baton and riot
              gas. It is the turn of the young to resist the storm trooper world they
              bow to. The generation now in the burbs wants the government to bail
              them out from their dreams of living in a mansion. The oil world is
              straining and stretching and only the rich are poised to profit. The
              young will be complete slaves if they do not take back the government
              and tax the rich. I don`t think they have the balls or energy. I do
              not feel sorry for them but would vote to stop the accumulation of
              wealth in the upper social strata. How will the sheep react when the
              black water merks come home? I see much of our generation worn out and
              in need of retirement. Watch the fed this afternoon, they will give
              some direction as to how much bail out the overextended can expect.
              The economies of the upper middle class are under assault from
              educational costs , housing costs and fuel costs. if they don`t get in
              the game the traditional pillars of this country are gone. Bill
            • louise
              It would be good to discuss free speech from a more philosophical view than is afforded by this inward-looking US political analysis. So many practical
              Message 6 of 24 , Sep 18, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                It would be good to discuss free speech from a more philosophical
                view than is afforded by this inward-looking US political analysis.
                So many practical concerns are demanding my attention in recent weeks
                that I find it difficult to summon the needful continuity of thought.

                Louise

                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
                >
                >
                > Mary,
                >
                > For what its worth, I am standing with you.
                >
                > Wil
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: Mary Jo <maryjo.malo@...>
                > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                > Sent: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:29 am
                > Subject: [existlist] Re: Slogans or what happened to free speech?
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Wil,
                >
                >
                >
                > First I was appalled by Kerry's acquiescence, both in conceding the
                >
                > election and then not loudly protesting this police action; also by
                the
                >
                > ultimate provocation for the arrest, the student's mention of the
                Yaley
                >
                > secret society.
                >
                >
                >
                > My recent criticism of the Dems is consistently directed towards
                their
                >
                > feebleness and my suspicions that they're all bought and sold
                already.
                >
                >
                >
                > The Left Bank existentialists were opposed to fascism in all its
                ugly
                >
                > disguises. I stand on that slippery slope.
                >
                >
                >
                > Mary
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                ______________________________________________________________________
                __
                > Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL
                Mail! - http://mail.aol.com
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • eupraxis@aol.com
                Well, then, have at it, Louise. How would you like to proceed in discussing the public attack against a student while a former US presidential candidate and
                Message 7 of 24 , Sep 18, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Well, then, have at it, Louise. How would you like to proceed in discussing
                  the public attack against a student while a former US presidential candidate
                  and the general public looked on? Something from Aristotle maybe?

                  WS


                  In a message dated 9/18/07 5:19:51 PM, hecubatoher@... writes:


                  > It would be good to discuss free speech from a more philosophical
                  > view than is afforded by this inward-looking US political analysis.
                  > So many practical concerns are demanding my attention in recent weeks
                  > that I find it difficult to summon the needful continuity of thought.
                  >
                  > Louise
                  >
                  >
                  >




                  **************************************
                  See what's new at http://www.aol.com


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • louise
                  No. I should like some of the other members here, in particular those from countries other than the US, to participate. Louise ... discussing ... candidate
                  Message 8 of 24 , Sep 19, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    No. I should like some of the other members here, in particular
                    those from countries other than the US, to participate. Louise

                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
                    >
                    > Well, then, have at it, Louise. How would you like to proceed in
                    discussing
                    > the public attack against a student while a former US presidential
                    candidate
                    > and the general public looked on? Something from Aristotle maybe?
                    >
                    > WS
                    >
                    >
                    > In a message dated 9/18/07 5:19:51 PM, hecubatoher@... writes:
                    >
                    >
                    > > It would be good to discuss free speech from a more philosophical
                    > > view than is afforded by this inward-looking US political
                    analysis.
                    > > So many practical concerns are demanding my attention in recent
                    weeks
                    > > that I find it difficult to summon the needful continuity of
                    thought.
                    > >
                    > > Louise
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > **************************************
                    > See what's new at http://www.aol.com
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                  • eupraxis@aol.com
                    Louise, Well that is an odd preference, I must say. So persons for whom this police state act is a direct insult shouldn t make comment? What possible reason
                    Message 9 of 24 , Sep 19, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Louise,

                      Well that is an odd preference, I must say. So persons for whom this police
                      state act is a direct insult shouldn't make comment? What possible reason do
                      you have for that? That seems arbitrary -- or unphilosophical -- to me. Maybe
                      only folks from Lichtenstein and Pango Pango should make remarks about matters
                      in the US. Would you prefer that?

                      The fact is that there is hardly a more relevant matter than politics and
                      free speech for philosophy. Plato can hardly shut up about it -- something about
                      Socrates and hemlock, if memory serves me right. And the subject seems to be a
                      major one throughout the centuries right up to the present -- even here in
                      the US. But neither you nor the UF campus goon squad would like us to
                      "participate". How unfortunate.

                      Wil

                      In a message dated 9/19/07 2:14:03 AM, hecubatoher@... writes:


                      > No. I should like some of the other members here, in particular
                      > those from countries other than the US, to participate. Louise
                      >
                      > --- In existlist@yahoogrouexistl, eupraxis@... wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Well, then, have at it, Louise. How would you like to proceed in
                      > discussing
                      > > the public attack against a student while a former US presidential
                      > candidate
                      > > and the general public looked on? Something from Aristotle maybe?
                      > >
                      > > WS
                      >
                      >
                      >




                      **************************************
                      See what's new at http://www.aol.com


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Mary Jo
                      WS, Yes, and bit ironic that it was a British poet who brought the YouTube video to my attention early yesterday morning, saying they feared the same would
                      Message 10 of 24 , Sep 19, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        WS,

                        Yes, and bit ironic that it was a British poet who brought the YouTube
                        video to my attention early yesterday morning, saying they feared the
                        same would soon be happening in their country.

                        MJ
                      • louise
                        ... YouTube ... Mary, Not ironic, surely. However different at times the interests of our respective countries, it is desirable that British and American
                        Message 11 of 24 , Sep 19, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Mary Jo" <maryjo.malo@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > WS,
                          >
                          > Yes, and bit ironic that it was a British poet who brought the
                          YouTube
                          > video to my attention early yesterday morning, saying they feared the
                          > same would soon be happening in their country.
                          >
                          > MJ
                          >

                          Mary,

                          Not ironic, surely. However different at times the interests of our
                          respective countries, it is desirable that British and American
                          patriots should be on good terms. You know from my own long-standing
                          contributions to the group that free speech is a cause dear to my
                          heart. I am passionate for a return to traditional English liberties,
                          ahd have never been under any illusions that the road will be a long
                          one.

                          Louise
                        • Exist List Moderator
                          Studies in psychology have shown that leaders in various political systems are quite similar, regardless of political views they espouse. There are more
                          Message 12 of 24 , Sep 21, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Studies in psychology have shown that "leaders" in various political
                            systems are quite similar, regardless of political views they
                            espouse. There are more extreme versions, dictators, but in any
                            system based on popular support (usually the support of a powerful
                            minority, granted) there are certain charismatic traits that matter.

                            Once those traits are lost or the veneer of them is lost, the support
                            slips. On the other hand, someone dedicated to actual ideas -- even
                            "wrong" ideas -- and with genuine charisma, can actually stay in
                            power / popular when people disagree with that person. In other
                            words, we will support someone with whom we disagree if we believe
                            the person is honest and if the person has a level of charisma.

                            The human brain, in my view and that of many others, evolved certain
                            social tendencies. These are not logical or philosophical tendencies,
                            but low-level tendencies that we either fight through logic or accept
                            as part of human nature forever. I think the more we use logic, the
                            more developed those tendencies will be (assuming humans last another
                            million years).

                            Even the greatest philosophers didn't manage to live by their ideals
                            -- ideals are goals. Often, men and women of high ideals are suckered
                            by politicians / leaders with charisma. We can point to various
                            charismatic leaders who, looking back, were lousy leaders for the world.

                            Philosophy is a process, but we tend to support people based on
                            emotions.

                            I'm taking a doctoral seminar in Communications / Statistics that
                            looks at surveys and methods. The instructor is a physicist, of all
                            things, and quite sure that the general public will never grasp why
                            elections, the census, or anything else dealing with large numbers of
                            people cannot be accurate enough to please the populous.

                            He's addressed studies on the following: why we think voting can be
                            perfect, why the tallest candidate usually wins, why we suffer such
                            terrible input bias, why conspiracy theories work, etc. Charismatic
                            groups / leaders depend on appeals to "commonsense" instead of what
                            is statistically, physically, scientifically valid. Commonsense, it
                            turns out, is often wrong, but a charismatic can make it seem right.

                            Emotionally, we want every vote to be perfect, every census to count
                            every person, every system to function according to design. A
                            politician can easily play into that desire, as can any conspiracy
                            group.

                            Brian Greene, a noted mathematician from Columbia, has written that
                            our problem is that we don't like admitting / accepting error rates.
                            Hard drives scramble some unknown x% of data, manual voting machines
                            also scramble x% even under ideal conditions. Greene points out that
                            even a 0.5 percent error rate in life is more than our modern "isn't
                            technology perfect" mindsets can handle. That's why we sue doctors,
                            demand perfectly safe everything, and can't understand that 100,000
                            or more votes will always, always, always, be lost or mangled no
                            matter what we do.

                            But a charismatic politician or group can make us safe! They can
                            regulate, mandate, and investigate! The world will be perfect!

                            Philosophers generally know better. Our emotions don't. We like that
                            safety idea.

                            John Kerry's problem was he was actually logical and often rambling.
                            He talks like a professor and knows the world is complex. That's no
                            way to appeal to the masses. It's a way to pass a philosophy or even
                            a science course with a good grade, though.

                            - CSW
                          • Exist List Moderator
                            ... You have the threats to speech in Russia, China, and most other nations, too. We must support speech everywhere -- which is why groups like Reporters
                            Message 13 of 24 , Sep 21, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On Sep 19, 2007, at 7:54, eupraxis@... wrote:

                              > Louise,
                              >
                              > Well that is an odd preference, I must say. So persons for whom
                              > this police
                              > state act is a direct insult shouldn't make comment? What possible
                              > reason do
                              > you have for that? That seems arbitrary -- or unphilosophical -- to
                              > me. Maybe
                              > only folks from Lichtenstein and Pango Pango should make remarks
                              > about matters
                              > in the US. Would you prefer that?

                              You have the threats to speech in Russia, China, and most other
                              nations, too. We must support speech everywhere -- which is why
                              groups like Reporters without Borders are worthy of support, even
                              when I think there are biases beyond factual reporting.

                              Stifling this student might have been acceptable, given his record
                              for pranks and self-promotion, but the Taser only served to make him
                              famous. Seems he accomplished what he wanted.


                              - C. S. Wyatt
                              I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
                              that I shall be.
                              http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
                              http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer
                            • jimstuart46
                              CSW, With regard to the incident at John Kerry s University of Floria meeting, you write: Stifling this student might have been acceptable, given his record
                              Message 14 of 24 , Sep 22, 2007
                              • 0 Attachment
                                CSW,

                                With regard to the incident at John Kerry's University of Floria
                                meeting, you write:

                                "Stifling this student might have been acceptable, given his record
                                for pranks and self-promotion, but the Taser only served to make him
                                famous. Seems he accomplished what he wanted."

                                I think the taser also served to show the whole world US police
                                methods. To me the completely unnecessary use of the taser – there
                                were four police/security officers well capable of restraining him
                                and escorting him out of the hall – is more revealing of the state
                                of US society than that he had his microphone turned off after one
                                minute. I gather that the one-minute rule was applicable to all
                                questioners, so I think the central issue arising out of this
                                incident is police/security forces out of control rather than the
                                suppression of free speech.

                                Has there been any public discussion about the over-use of tasers in
                                the US, and figures for fatalities resulting from taser use/abuse?

                                The following link shows the sort of discussion in the UK about
                                these weapons:

                                http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6973610.stm

                                I agree issues of free speech are central to a good society, but I
                                think the reaction to this incident over emphasizes the free speech
                                issue and under emphasizes the police/security forces out of control
                                issue.

                                Jim
                              • Aija Veldre Beldavs
                                ... i remember participating in a list about another student who lingered in the university library when he didn t have his student card on him. the tasering
                                Message 15 of 24 , Sep 22, 2007
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  jimstuart46:
                                  > I think the taser also served to show the whole world US police
                                  > methods. To me the completely unnecessary use of the taser – there
                                  > were four police/security officers well capable of restraining him
                                  > and escorting him out of the hall – is more revealing of the state
                                  > of US society than that he had his microphone turned off after one
                                  > minute. I gather that the one-minute rule was applicable to all
                                  > questioners, so I think the central issue arising out of this
                                  > incident is police/security forces out of control rather than the
                                  > suppression of free speech.
                                  >
                                  > Has there been any public discussion about the over-use of tasers in the US, and figures for fatalities resulting from taser use/abuse?
                                  >
                                  > Jim
                                  >
                                  >

                                  i remember participating in a list about another student who lingered in
                                  the university library when he didn't have his student card on him. the
                                  tasering occurred as he was in fact leaving after an altercation with
                                  personnel.

                                  here in Bloomington (home of IU campus) a distraught mentally ill young
                                  man having learned of the death of his father was arrested for wandering
                                  in the streets and acting erratically. he was killed by being tasered
                                  half a dozen times AFTER being secured in a jail cell, hands handcuffed
                                  behind his back. the tasering was applied because he allegedly refused
                                  to follow orders, which almost certainly he couldn't understand in that
                                  state. the incident became public because it was picked up by the prison
                                  camera.

                                  even leaving aside ethics, a goal of minimizing risk to approach zero
                                  for enforcement at the cost of corresponding increasing risk to the
                                  public is not maximizing security for society as a whole.

                                  eventually it comes around when that space is extended accepting as
                                  unfortunate but necessary of people being killed because of their
                                  deviance from the norm in appearance or behavior, nevermind why, ask
                                  questions later.

                                  aija
                                • Herman B. Triplegood
                                  An English professor once said, to the freshman English class I attended some thirty years ago, that the university is a business. At the time, this kind of
                                  Message 16 of 24 , Sep 22, 2007
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    An English professor once said, to the freshman English class I
                                    attended some thirty years ago, that the university is a business. At
                                    the time, this kind of upset me. I wanted to be idealistic about it.
                                    I was young. I didn't know what it was like, yet, to have to work
                                    hard to pay the rent and keep myself fed.

                                    Perhaps, in the final analysis, he is correct.

                                    It all comes down to economics. Who has the resources, or access to
                                    the resources, and who does not.

                                    I read philosophy, think philosophy, because I can, because I have
                                    leisure time. I work because I must, and my work has nothing to do
                                    with philosophy.

                                    Hb3g

                                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Exist List Moderator
                                    <existlist1@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Studies in psychology have shown that "leaders" in various
                                    political
                                    > systems are quite similar, regardless of political views they
                                    > espouse. There are more extreme versions, dictators, but in any
                                    > system based on popular support (usually the support of a powerful
                                    > minority, granted) there are certain charismatic traits that matter.
                                    >
                                    > Once those traits are lost or the veneer of them is lost, the
                                    support
                                    > slips. On the other hand, someone dedicated to actual ideas --
                                    even
                                    > "wrong" ideas -- and with genuine charisma, can actually stay in
                                    > power / popular when people disagree with that person. In other
                                    > words, we will support someone with whom we disagree if we believe
                                    > the person is honest and if the person has a level of charisma.
                                    >
                                    > The human brain, in my view and that of many others, evolved
                                    certain
                                    > social tendencies. These are not logical or philosophical
                                    tendencies,
                                    > but low-level tendencies that we either fight through logic or
                                    accept
                                    > as part of human nature forever. I think the more we use logic,
                                    the
                                    > more developed those tendencies will be (assuming humans last
                                    another
                                    > million years).
                                    >
                                    > Even the greatest philosophers didn't manage to live by their
                                    ideals
                                    > -- ideals are goals. Often, men and women of high ideals are
                                    suckered
                                    > by politicians / leaders with charisma. We can point to various
                                    > charismatic leaders who, looking back, were lousy leaders for the
                                    world.
                                    >
                                    > Philosophy is a process, but we tend to support people based on
                                    > emotions.
                                    >
                                    > I'm taking a doctoral seminar in Communications / Statistics that
                                    > looks at surveys and methods. The instructor is a physicist, of
                                    all
                                    > things, and quite sure that the general public will never grasp
                                    why
                                    > elections, the census, or anything else dealing with large numbers
                                    of
                                    > people cannot be accurate enough to please the populous.
                                    >
                                    > He's addressed studies on the following: why we think voting can
                                    be
                                    > perfect, why the tallest candidate usually wins, why we suffer
                                    such
                                    > terrible input bias, why conspiracy theories work, etc.
                                    Charismatic
                                    > groups / leaders depend on appeals to "commonsense" instead of
                                    what
                                    > is statistically, physically, scientifically valid. Commonsense,
                                    it
                                    > turns out, is often wrong, but a charismatic can make it seem right.
                                    >
                                    > Emotionally, we want every vote to be perfect, every census to
                                    count
                                    > every person, every system to function according to design. A
                                    > politician can easily play into that desire, as can any conspiracy
                                    > group.
                                    >
                                    > Brian Greene, a noted mathematician from Columbia, has written
                                    that
                                    > our problem is that we don't like admitting / accepting error
                                    rates.
                                    > Hard drives scramble some unknown x% of data, manual voting
                                    machines
                                    > also scramble x% even under ideal conditions. Greene points out
                                    that
                                    > even a 0.5 percent error rate in life is more than our
                                    modern "isn't
                                    > technology perfect" mindsets can handle. That's why we sue
                                    doctors,
                                    > demand perfectly safe everything, and can't understand that
                                    100,000
                                    > or more votes will always, always, always, be lost or mangled no
                                    > matter what we do.
                                    >
                                    > But a charismatic politician or group can make us safe! They can
                                    > regulate, mandate, and investigate! The world will be perfect!
                                    >
                                    > Philosophers generally know better. Our emotions don't. We like
                                    that
                                    > safety idea.
                                    >
                                    > John Kerry's problem was he was actually logical and often
                                    rambling.
                                    > He talks like a professor and knows the world is complex. That's
                                    no
                                    > way to appeal to the masses. It's a way to pass a philosophy or
                                    even
                                    > a science course with a good grade, though.
                                    >
                                    > - CSW
                                    >
                                  • Herman B. Triplegood
                                    The use of force is the end of the argument. When the police taser a dissident student, or an unruly drunk, the following message is conveyed to the public:
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Sep 22, 2007
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      The use of force is the end of the argument.

                                      When the police taser a dissident student, or an unruly drunk, the
                                      following message is conveyed to the public: We, the police, have the
                                      absolute power to end of any discussion. We, the police, carry upon
                                      our belts, the final solution to every social problem.

                                      The police want the dissident student to shut up. The police want the
                                      unruly drunk to grovel in abject submission to their authority. The
                                      police want the lingerer in the library to leave. The police want the
                                      distraught son to be normal.

                                      Clearly, the police are sending the message that they, the police,
                                      are the ones who are really in charge.

                                      It isn't about free speech. It is about free anything.

                                      And so, it goes on and on.

                                      Hb3g

                                      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Aija Veldre Beldavs <beldavsa@...>
                                      wrote:
                                      >
                                      > jimstuart46:
                                      > > I think the taser also served to show the whole world US police
                                      > > methods. To me the completely unnecessary use of the taser –
                                      there
                                      > > were four police/security officers well capable of restraining
                                      him
                                      > > and escorting him out of the hall – is more revealing of the
                                      state
                                      > > of US society than that he had his microphone turned off after
                                      one
                                      > > minute. I gather that the one-minute rule was applicable to all
                                      > > questioners, so I think the central issue arising out of this
                                      > > incident is police/security forces out of control rather than the
                                      > > suppression of free speech.
                                      > >
                                      > > Has there been any public discussion about the over-use of tasers
                                      in the US, and figures for fatalities resulting from taser use/abuse?
                                      > >
                                      > > Jim
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      > i remember participating in a list about another student who
                                      lingered in
                                      > the university library when he didn't have his student card on him.
                                      the
                                      > tasering occurred as he was in fact leaving after an altercation
                                      with
                                      > personnel.
                                      >
                                      > here in Bloomington (home of IU campus) a distraught mentally ill
                                      young
                                      > man having learned of the death of his father was arrested for
                                      wandering
                                      > in the streets and acting erratically. he was killed by being
                                      tasered
                                      > half a dozen times AFTER being secured in a jail cell, hands
                                      handcuffed
                                      > behind his back. the tasering was applied because he allegedly
                                      refused
                                      > to follow orders, which almost certainly he couldn't understand in
                                      that
                                      > state. the incident became public because it was picked up by the
                                      prison
                                      > camera.
                                      >
                                      > even leaving aside ethics, a goal of minimizing risk to approach
                                      zero
                                      > for enforcement at the cost of corresponding increasing risk to the
                                      > public is not maximizing security for society as a whole.
                                      >
                                      > eventually it comes around when that space is extended accepting as
                                      > unfortunate but necessary of people being killed because of their
                                      > deviance from the norm in appearance or behavior, nevermind why,
                                      ask
                                      > questions later.
                                      >
                                      > aija
                                      >
                                    • louise
                                      ... Herman, I think this a misleading way to characterise the situation, at a forum dedicated to existential philosophy and literature. Once more, we
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Sep 22, 2007
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Herman B. Triplegood" <hb3g@...>
                                        wrote:
                                        >
                                        > The use of force is the end of the argument.

                                        Herman, I think this a misleading way to characterise the situation,
                                        at a forum dedicated to existential philosophy and literature. Once
                                        more, we encounter the distinction between the ontical world and the
                                        ontological reality. The brute force of a policeman or a soldier,
                                        or, for that matter, a self-appointed vigilante, may silence a
                                        particular individual, thereby frightening others into submission,
                                        should they happen to sympathise with the form of his dissent.
                                        Philosophically, though, the argument is unaffected. Truth is not a
                                        placard, which may be confiscated. It is eternal. The Enlightenment
                                        values to which Wil alludes depend on human beings, to keep them in
                                        existence. My expression here echoes and translates, in some manner,
                                        William Blake's assertion that "God only acts and is, in existing
                                        beings or men" (from memory, unsure whether I have the words right,
                                        or from which prophetic book they derive). Louise

                                        >
                                        > When the police taser a dissident student, or an unruly drunk, the
                                        > following message is conveyed to the public: We, the police, have
                                        the
                                        > absolute power to end of any discussion. We, the police, carry upon
                                        > our belts, the final solution to every social problem.
                                        >
                                        > The police want the dissident student to shut up. The police want
                                        the
                                        > unruly drunk to grovel in abject submission to their authority. The
                                        > police want the lingerer in the library to leave. The police want
                                        the
                                        > distraught son to be normal.
                                        >
                                        > Clearly, the police are sending the message that they, the police,
                                        > are the ones who are really in charge.
                                        >
                                        > It isn't about free speech. It is about free anything.
                                        >
                                        > And so, it goes on and on.
                                        >
                                        > Hb3g
                                        >
                                        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Aija Veldre Beldavs <beldavsa@>
                                        > wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > jimstuart46:
                                        > > > I think the taser also served to show the whole world US police
                                        > > > methods. To me the completely unnecessary use of the taser –
                                        > there
                                        > > > were four police/security officers well capable of restraining
                                        > him
                                        > > > and escorting him out of the hall – is more revealing of the
                                        > state
                                        > > > of US society than that he had his microphone turned off after
                                        > one
                                        > > > minute. I gather that the one-minute rule was applicable to all
                                        > > > questioners, so I think the central issue arising out of this
                                        > > > incident is police/security forces out of control rather than
                                        the
                                        > > > suppression of free speech.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Has there been any public discussion about the over-use of
                                        tasers
                                        > in the US, and figures for fatalities resulting from taser
                                        use/abuse?
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Jim
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        > > i remember participating in a list about another student who
                                        > lingered in
                                        > > the university library when he didn't have his student card on
                                        him.
                                        > the
                                        > > tasering occurred as he was in fact leaving after an altercation
                                        > with
                                        > > personnel.
                                        > >
                                        > > here in Bloomington (home of IU campus) a distraught mentally ill
                                        > young
                                        > > man having learned of the death of his father was arrested for
                                        > wandering
                                        > > in the streets and acting erratically. he was killed by being
                                        > tasered
                                        > > half a dozen times AFTER being secured in a jail cell, hands
                                        > handcuffed
                                        > > behind his back. the tasering was applied because he allegedly
                                        > refused
                                        > > to follow orders, which almost certainly he couldn't understand
                                        in
                                        > that
                                        > > state. the incident became public because it was picked up by the
                                        > prison
                                        > > camera.
                                        > >
                                        > > even leaving aside ethics, a goal of minimizing risk to approach
                                        > zero
                                        > > for enforcement at the cost of corresponding increasing risk to
                                        the
                                        > > public is not maximizing security for society as a whole.
                                        > >
                                        > > eventually it comes around when that space is extended accepting
                                        as
                                        > > unfortunate but necessary of people being killed because of their
                                        > > deviance from the norm in appearance or behavior, nevermind why,
                                        > ask
                                        > > questions later.
                                        > >
                                        > > aija
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      • eupraxis@aol.com
                                        Louise, I think that you may be mistaking the Heideggerian ontical/ontological with the mundane/ideal in the Platonic sense. As you may remember, Heidegger s
                                        Message 19 of 24 , Sep 22, 2007
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Louise,

                                          I think that you may be mistaking the Heideggerian ontical/ontological with
                                          the mundane/ideal in the Platonic sense. As you may remember, Heidegger's whole
                                          point is to show how Plato's idealism was the inaugurating moment in the West
                                          that foreclosed the ontological or the meaning of Being.

                                          But even if that were not so, yours is in any case a statement of extreme
                                          idealism when you say that philosophy is eternal. Even Kant would say that
                                          philosophy is an attempt to understand the noumenal; and as such it is the limit of
                                          Reason, or the limit of a phenomenal being to know the noumenal, that spawns
                                          philosophy. An Eternal Philosophy (that is, a meaning that inheres forever
                                          regardless of any Subject) implies a noumenality without end, and thus an
                                          inherently divided Subjectivity without a phenomenal Subject.

                                          Still, yes, it will take a lot more than a campus cop to quell Delphi.

                                          Wil

                                          In a message dated 9/22/07 6:44:02 PM, hecubatoher@... writes:


                                          > Herman, I think this a misleading way to characterise the situation,
                                          > at a forum dedicated to existential philosophy and literature. Once
                                          > more, we encounter the distinction between the ontical world and the
                                          > ontological reality. The brute force of a policeman or a soldier,
                                          > or, for that matter, a self-appointed vigilante, may silence a
                                          > particular individual, thereby frightening others into submission,
                                          > should they happen to sympathise with the form of his dissent.
                                          > Philosophically, though, the argument is unaffected. Truth is not a
                                          > placard, which may be confiscated. It is eternal. The Enlightenment
                                          > values to which Wil alludes depend on human beings, to keep them in
                                          > existence. My expression here echoes and translates, in some manner,
                                          > William Blake's assertion that "God only acts and is, in existing
                                          > beings or men" (from memory, unsure whether I have the words right,
                                          > or from which prophetic book they derive). Louise
                                          >




                                          **************************************
                                          See what's new at http://www.aol.com


                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        • louise
                                          Intuitively, at any rate, I know what I mean, and will probably need to take a careful digression into Scholastic terminology, to elucidate sometime. Gee, am
                                          Message 20 of 24 , Sep 23, 2007
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Intuitively, at any rate, I know what I mean, and will probably need
                                            to take a careful digression into Scholastic terminology, to
                                            elucidate sometime. Gee, am so sleepy, and must be sure not to
                                            forget the rice and pulses simmering on the hob. Until later. L.

                                            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
                                            >
                                            > Louise,
                                            >
                                            > I think that you may be mistaking the Heideggerian
                                            ontical/ontological with
                                            > the mundane/ideal in the Platonic sense. As you may remember,
                                            Heidegger's whole
                                            > point is to show how Plato's idealism was the inaugurating moment
                                            in the West
                                            > that foreclosed the ontological or the meaning of Being.
                                            >
                                            > But even if that were not so, yours is in any case a statement of
                                            extreme
                                            > idealism when you say that philosophy is eternal. Even Kant would
                                            say that
                                            > philosophy is an attempt to understand the noumenal; and as such it
                                            is the limit of
                                            > Reason, or the limit of a phenomenal being to know the noumenal,
                                            that spawns
                                            > philosophy. An Eternal Philosophy (that is, a meaning that inheres
                                            forever
                                            > regardless of any Subject) implies a noumenality without end, and
                                            thus an
                                            > inherently divided Subjectivity without a phenomenal Subject.
                                            >
                                            > Still, yes, it will take a lot more than a campus cop to quell
                                            Delphi.
                                            >
                                            > Wil
                                            >
                                            > In a message dated 9/22/07 6:44:02 PM, hecubatoher@... writes:
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > > Herman, I think this a misleading way to characterise the
                                            situation,
                                            > > at a forum dedicated to existential philosophy and literature.
                                            Once
                                            > > more, we encounter the distinction between the ontical world and
                                            the
                                            > > ontological reality. The brute force of a policeman or a soldier,
                                            > > or, for that matter, a self-appointed vigilante, may silence a
                                            > > particular individual, thereby frightening others into submission,
                                            > > should they happen to sympathise with the form of his dissent.
                                            > > Philosophically, though, the argument is unaffected. Truth is not
                                            a
                                            > > placard, which may be confiscated. It is eternal. The
                                            Enlightenment
                                            > > values to which Wil alludes depend on human beings, to keep them
                                            in
                                            > > existence. My expression here echoes and translates, in some
                                            manner,
                                            > > William Blake's assertion that "God only acts and is, in existing
                                            > > beings or men" (from memory, unsure whether I have the words
                                            right,
                                            > > or from which prophetic book they derive). Louise
                                            > >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > **************************************
                                            > See what's new at http://www.aol.com
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                            >
                                          • Herman B. Triplegood
                                            I was being sarcastic. Instead of reading The use of force is the end of the argument read [The behavior of the police leads me to conclude that they act as
                                            Message 21 of 24 , Sep 25, 2007
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              I was being sarcastic.

                                              Instead of reading "The use of force is the end of the argument"
                                              read "[The behavior of the police leads me to conclude that they act
                                              as if they think] the use of force is the end of the arguent."

                                              I certainly don't believe that this is true.

                                              Hb3g

                                              --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Herman B. Triplegood" <hb3g@>
                                              > wrote:
                                              > >
                                              > > The use of force is the end of the argument.
                                              >
                                              > Herman, I think this a misleading way to characterise the
                                              situation,
                                              > at a forum dedicated to existential philosophy and literature.
                                              Once
                                              > more, we encounter the distinction between the ontical world and
                                              the
                                              > ontological reality. The brute force of a policeman or a soldier,
                                              > or, for that matter, a self-appointed vigilante, may silence a
                                              > particular individual, thereby frightening others into submission,
                                              > should they happen to sympathise with the form of his dissent.
                                              > Philosophically, though, the argument is unaffected. Truth is not
                                              a
                                              > placard, which may be confiscated. It is eternal. The
                                              Enlightenment
                                              > values to which Wil alludes depend on human beings, to keep them in
                                              > existence. My expression here echoes and translates, in some
                                              manner,
                                              > William Blake's assertion that "God only acts and is, in existing
                                              > beings or men" (from memory, unsure whether I have the words right,
                                              > or from which prophetic book they derive). Louise
                                              >
                                              > >
                                              > > When the police taser a dissident student, or an unruly drunk,
                                              the
                                              > > following message is conveyed to the public: We, the police, have
                                              > the
                                              > > absolute power to end of any discussion. We, the police, carry
                                              upon
                                              > > our belts, the final solution to every social problem.
                                              > >
                                              > > The police want the dissident student to shut up. The police want
                                              > the
                                              > > unruly drunk to grovel in abject submission to their authority.
                                              The
                                              > > police want the lingerer in the library to leave. The police want
                                              > the
                                              > > distraught son to be normal.
                                              > >
                                              > > Clearly, the police are sending the message that they, the
                                              police,
                                              > > are the ones who are really in charge.
                                              > >
                                              > > It isn't about free speech. It is about free anything.
                                              > >
                                              > > And so, it goes on and on.
                                              > >
                                              > > Hb3g
                                              > >
                                              > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Aija Veldre Beldavs <beldavsa@>
                                              > > wrote:
                                              > > >
                                              > > > jimstuart46:
                                              > > > > I think the taser also served to show the whole world US
                                              police
                                              > > > > methods. To me the completely unnecessary use of the taser –
                                              > > there
                                              > > > > were four police/security officers well capable of
                                              restraining
                                              > > him
                                              > > > > and escorting him out of the hall – is more revealing of the
                                              > > state
                                              > > > > of US society than that he had his microphone turned off
                                              after
                                              > > one
                                              > > > > minute. I gather that the one-minute rule was applicable to
                                              all
                                              > > > > questioners, so I think the central issue arising out of this
                                              > > > > incident is police/security forces out of control rather than
                                              > the
                                              > > > > suppression of free speech.
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Has there been any public discussion about the over-use of
                                              > tasers
                                              > > in the US, and figures for fatalities resulting from taser
                                              > use/abuse?
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Jim
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > i remember participating in a list about another student who
                                              > > lingered in
                                              > > > the university library when he didn't have his student card on
                                              > him.
                                              > > the
                                              > > > tasering occurred as he was in fact leaving after an
                                              altercation
                                              > > with
                                              > > > personnel.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > here in Bloomington (home of IU campus) a distraught mentally
                                              ill
                                              > > young
                                              > > > man having learned of the death of his father was arrested for
                                              > > wandering
                                              > > > in the streets and acting erratically. he was killed by being
                                              > > tasered
                                              > > > half a dozen times AFTER being secured in a jail cell, hands
                                              > > handcuffed
                                              > > > behind his back. the tasering was applied because he allegedly
                                              > > refused
                                              > > > to follow orders, which almost certainly he couldn't understand
                                              > in
                                              > > that
                                              > > > state. the incident became public because it was picked up by
                                              the
                                              > > prison
                                              > > > camera.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > even leaving aside ethics, a goal of minimizing risk to
                                              approach
                                              > > zero
                                              > > > for enforcement at the cost of corresponding increasing risk to
                                              > the
                                              > > > public is not maximizing security for society as a whole.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > eventually it comes around when that space is extended
                                              accepting
                                              > as
                                              > > > unfortunate but necessary of people being killed because of
                                              their
                                              > > > deviance from the norm in appearance or behavior, nevermind
                                              why,
                                              > > ask
                                              > > > questions later.
                                              > > >
                                              > > > aija
                                              > > >
                                              > >
                                              >
                                            • louise
                                              Again, I find that your terms, though clear in themselves, are obscurantist in effect. They are quite separate domains, that of philosophical enquiry, and
                                              Message 22 of 24 , Sep 26, 2007
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Again, I find that your terms, though clear in themselves, are
                                                obscurantist in effect. They are quite separate domains, that of
                                                philosophical enquiry, and that of ontical practicality, in which the
                                                police must carry out their duties. In other words, our task as
                                                thinkers is to enquire, first, what are the realities of policing in
                                                a particular situation, in a particular country, the USA in this
                                                instance, and, secondly, to consider how, if at all, philosophical
                                                thinking may contribute some useful insight. If, as I assume from my
                                                British standpoint, the duty of a police officer in a democracy is to
                                                uphold the law and protect the innocent, why is there an 'argument'
                                                in the first place? The question for me, as for Jim, would be, was
                                                that not a wholly disproportionate use of force, in the given
                                                situation? I was appalled at what I saw. Insofar as I understand
                                                your own characterisation of what happened, you give up on the
                                                situation philosophically, saying that, if the police believe they
                                                have the power to enforce a rule in such a dangerous and
                                                disproportionate manner, there is nothing more to be said. Well, if
                                                one were the student concerned, certainly compliance would be wise.
                                                We, however, may discuss philosophical implications, and whether our
                                                sedentary efforts may connect at all with the life of the street,
                                                where conflict may be bloody, and potentially fatal. Louise


                                                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Herman B. Triplegood" <hb3g@...>
                                                wrote:
                                                >
                                                > I was being sarcastic.
                                                >
                                                > Instead of reading "The use of force is the end of the argument"
                                                > read "[The behavior of the police leads me to conclude that they
                                                act
                                                > as if they think] the use of force is the end of the arguent."
                                                >
                                                > I certainly don't believe that this is true.
                                                >
                                                > Hb3g
                                                >
                                                > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                                                > >
                                                > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Herman B. Triplegood" <hb3g@>
                                                > > wrote:
                                                > > >
                                                > > > The use of force is the end of the argument.
                                                > >
                                                > > Herman, I think this a misleading way to characterise the
                                                > situation,
                                                > > at a forum dedicated to existential philosophy and literature.
                                                > Once
                                                > > more, we encounter the distinction between the ontical world and
                                                > the
                                                > > ontological reality. The brute force of a policeman or a
                                                soldier,
                                                > > or, for that matter, a self-appointed vigilante, may silence a
                                                > > particular individual, thereby frightening others into
                                                submission,
                                                > > should they happen to sympathise with the form of his dissent.
                                                > > Philosophically, though, the argument is unaffected. Truth is
                                                not
                                                > a
                                                > > placard, which may be confiscated. It is eternal. The
                                                > Enlightenment
                                                > > values to which Wil alludes depend on human beings, to keep them
                                                in
                                                > > existence. My expression here echoes and translates, in some
                                                > manner,
                                                > > William Blake's assertion that "God only acts and is, in existing
                                                > > beings or men" (from memory, unsure whether I have the words
                                                right,
                                                > > or from which prophetic book they derive). Louise
                                                > >
                                                > > >
                                                > > > When the police taser a dissident student, or an unruly drunk,
                                                > the
                                                > > > following message is conveyed to the public: We, the police,
                                                have
                                                > > the
                                                > > > absolute power to end of any discussion. We, the police, carry
                                                > upon
                                                > > > our belts, the final solution to every social problem.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > The police want the dissident student to shut up. The police
                                                want
                                                > > the
                                                > > > unruly drunk to grovel in abject submission to their authority.
                                                > The
                                                > > > police want the lingerer in the library to leave. The police
                                                want
                                                > > the
                                                > > > distraught son to be normal.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > Clearly, the police are sending the message that they, the
                                                > police,
                                                > > > are the ones who are really in charge.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > It isn't about free speech. It is about free anything.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > And so, it goes on and on.
                                                > > >
                                                > > > Hb3g
                                                > > >
                                                > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Aija Veldre Beldavs
                                                <beldavsa@>
                                                > > > wrote:
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > jimstuart46:
                                                > > > > > I think the taser also served to show the whole world US
                                                > police
                                                > > > > > methods. To me the completely unnecessary use of the taser –

                                                > > > there
                                                > > > > > were four police/security officers well capable of
                                                > restraining
                                                > > > him
                                                > > > > > and escorting him out of the hall – is more revealing of
                                                the
                                                > > > state
                                                > > > > > of US society than that he had his microphone turned off
                                                > after
                                                > > > one
                                                > > > > > minute. I gather that the one-minute rule was applicable to
                                                > all
                                                > > > > > questioners, so I think the central issue arising out of
                                                this
                                                > > > > > incident is police/security forces out of control rather
                                                than
                                                > > the
                                                > > > > > suppression of free speech.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Has there been any public discussion about the over-use of
                                                > > tasers
                                                > > > in the US, and figures for fatalities resulting from taser
                                                > > use/abuse?
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Jim
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > i remember participating in a list about another student who
                                                > > > lingered in
                                                > > > > the university library when he didn't have his student card
                                                on
                                                > > him.
                                                > > > the
                                                > > > > tasering occurred as he was in fact leaving after an
                                                > altercation
                                                > > > with
                                                > > > > personnel.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > here in Bloomington (home of IU campus) a distraught mentally
                                                > ill
                                                > > > young
                                                > > > > man having learned of the death of his father was arrested
                                                for
                                                > > > wandering
                                                > > > > in the streets and acting erratically. he was killed by being
                                                > > > tasered
                                                > > > > half a dozen times AFTER being secured in a jail cell, hands
                                                > > > handcuffed
                                                > > > > behind his back. the tasering was applied because he
                                                allegedly
                                                > > > refused
                                                > > > > to follow orders, which almost certainly he couldn't
                                                understand
                                                > > in
                                                > > > that
                                                > > > > state. the incident became public because it was picked up by
                                                > the
                                                > > > prison
                                                > > > > camera.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > even leaving aside ethics, a goal of minimizing risk to
                                                > approach
                                                > > > zero
                                                > > > > for enforcement at the cost of corresponding increasing risk
                                                to
                                                > > the
                                                > > > > public is not maximizing security for society as a whole.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > eventually it comes around when that space is extended
                                                > accepting
                                                > > as
                                                > > > > unfortunate but necessary of people being killed because of
                                                > their
                                                > > > > deviance from the norm in appearance or behavior, nevermind
                                                > why,
                                                > > > ask
                                                > > > > questions later.
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > aija
                                                > > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > >
                                                >
                                              • eupraxis@aol.com
                                                Louise, What alarms some of us here in the US is the rising presence of police tactics in all areas of the social sphere. If it were isolated incidents, than
                                                Message 23 of 24 , Sep 26, 2007
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Louise,

                                                  What alarms some of us here in the US is the rising presence of police
                                                  tactics in all areas of the social sphere. If it were isolated incidents, than it
                                                  would be much ado about nothing; but things look far more intrusive than that,
                                                  especially since our present want-to-be junta came to power.

                                                  Actually, matters in the UK look even more bleak to me. It appears to me that
                                                  Mr Bliar was every bit the autocrat as Mr Bush, both sanctimonious sacks of
                                                  s**t, in my opinoin.

                                                  WS


                                                  In a message dated 9/26/07 5:39:47 AM, hecubatoher@... writes:


                                                  > Again, I find that your terms, though clear in themselves, are
                                                  > obscurantist in effect. They are quite separate domains, that of
                                                  > philosophical enquiry, and that of ontical practicality, in which the
                                                  > police must carry out their duties. In other words, our task as
                                                  > thinkers is to enquire, first, what are the realities of policing in
                                                  > a particular situation, in a particular country, the USA in this
                                                  > instance, and, secondly, to consider how, if at all, philosophical
                                                  > thinking may contribute some useful insight. If, as I assume from my
                                                  > British standpoint, the duty of a police officer in a democracy is to
                                                  > uphold the law and protect the innocent, why is there an 'argument'
                                                  > in the first place? The question for me, as for Jim, would be, was
                                                  > that not a wholly disproportionate use of force, in the given
                                                  > situation? I was appalled at what I saw. Insofar as I understand
                                                  > your own characterisation of what happened, you give up on the
                                                  > situation philosophically, saying that, if the police believe they
                                                  > have the power to enforce a rule in such a dangerous and
                                                  > disproportionate manner, there is nothing more to be said. Well, if
                                                  > one were the student concerned, certainly compliance would be wise.
                                                  > We, however, may discuss philosophical implications, and whether our
                                                  > sedentary efforts may connect at all with the life of the street,
                                                  > where conflict may be bloody, and potentially fatal. Louise
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >




                                                  **************************************
                                                  See what's new at http://www.aol.com


                                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                • Exist List Moderator
                                                  The question of free will in a state with cameras everywhere (the U.K.), immediate search (France, Germany), and compulsion letters (U.S.) is a very
                                                  Message 24 of 24 , Sep 26, 2007
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    The question of free will in a state with cameras everywhere (the
                                                    U.K.), "immediate search" (France, Germany), and "compulsion
                                                    letters" (U.S.) is a very serious question indeed. If I know the FBI,
                                                    MI-5, or some other group of "concerned patriots" can enter my house
                                                    or ask for my Internet activity logs, then I might behave quite
                                                    differently than in a state of utopian anarchy.

                                                    A day or two ago, I was ridding along at a nice clip, wearing my
                                                    helmet and following almost all the other important rules. I knew I
                                                    was speeding a bit, but thought nothing of it until I saw the cop on
                                                    his parked motorcycle, radar gun in hand. Ooops. I slowed. I wondered
                                                    if he was going to give me the blinking lights. My heart rate
                                                    increased. I worried... He waved and smiled. Maybe it was some two-
                                                    wheeled camaraderie.

                                                    We all "fear" police for good reasons and bad. I was in the wrong,
                                                    admittedly. But I was still afraid of the man on the very nice Harley.

                                                    Police are a necessity. The question is how we train them and monitor
                                                    them. How do we compromise reasoned use of authority with the need
                                                    for order? That's not an easy question. Police and state authorities
                                                    have a lot of power and believe they are acting in the best interest
                                                    of society. Some will follow the law literally, which can lead to
                                                    heavy-handed tactics. We *could* ticket everyone for speeding,
                                                    jaywalking, and a half-dozen other legal infractions. We don't. We
                                                    selectively enforce most laws -- which is how it should be.

                                                    I understand police overreacting at times. I live in Minneapolis
                                                    where there were four murders last week. The police in the 3rd
                                                    Precinct are afraid and rightfully so. There are shops that sell
                                                    Latin Kings and Chicago Crips shirts with pictures of dead leaders.
                                                    The gangs are glorified. If I'm a cop in that area for too long, I'll
                                                    start acting like everyone is a threat. That's why police shouldn't
                                                    serve in such areas for more than a couple of years. There is a
                                                    psychological effect we don't fully understand or appreciate.

                                                    Do police abuse their authority? Yes. Do state police/investigators
                                                    do the same, without the physical violence aspect? Yes.

                                                    It's a matter of the police becoming what they think they are
                                                    supposed to be. We need to constantly remind our state operatives
                                                    that not everyone is a criminal, not every loudmouth is a physical
                                                    threat. And we also need some police / agents willing to stand up and
                                                    say "no" to some orders. That's a lot to ask.


                                                    - C. S. Wyatt
                                                    I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
                                                    that I shall be.
                                                    http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
                                                    http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer
                                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.