Here is a video of a woman pulled over for “speeding” – for following a speed enforcer at the speed he pulled her over for. He hands her a piece of payin’ paper for the statutory offense – i.e., for having affronted the authority of the government – of driving 80 MPH on a road that the government has decreed may not be driven upon at faster than 55 MPH.

She points out that the speed limit enforcer was also driving 80 MPH and so also “speeding.” That all she was doing was driving at the same speed as the enforcer was himself driving. Ergo, logically, it is incongruent – it is ridiculous – for him to hand her the piece of payin’ paper. He did not perceive the incongruity, of course. He tells the woman that it is lawful for him to “speed.” That it is part of his “job” to “speed.” The woman did not ask the enforcer how it is that “speed” does not “kill” when it is an enforcer who “speeds.” Do enforcers have immunity from the laws of physics? No, of course not. But they do have immunity from the enforcing.

It’s disorienting, isn’t it? At least, to the logical – the sane – mind.

If a given action is outlawed on the basis of that action being a harmful thing, then it is always harmful. If there are exceptions granted to specially privileged people, then the asserted harmfulness is suspect on the face of it. The enforcer does perceive this – though he does not notice the incongruity of it. He defends his own “speeding” – a clear indication that he does not consider it to be harmful. If he did consider it harmful and continued to “speed” even so, then we could fairly diagnose him as a sociopath; i.e., a person who is indifferent to the harms he exposes other people to.

So, what we have is a disordered mind that thinks it’s not harmful for him to “speed” but is harmful for anyone else – who isn’t a cop, that is – to do exactly the same thing. Of course, this is not what he thinks at all. He knows perfectly well that there is no harm – as such – in “speeding.” That’s why he does it all the time. That’s why most of us do it all the time, too. The fact that we almost all do it all the time says something, doesn’t it?

As opposed to say stealing things that do not belong to us. And beating people up. Etc.

Nonetheless, he pretends there is something harmful about “speeding” every time he hands out a piece of payin’ paper. In other words, he’s a cynical and corrupt man who does not mind acting as a legally approved highwayman, relieving other people who’ve caused no harm of their money, some of which goes to pay him to hand out pieces of payin’ paper. He makes his living doing this sort if work, which in a way does qualify him for sociopath status in that he knows he’s hurting people who’ve hurt no one and doesn’t feel any remorse about doing it, even though he does exactly the same thing he’s handing out those pieces of payin’ paper for doing.

This – in a nutshell – is why what s styled law enforcement is a fundamentally corrupt enterprise. There is no objective right – and wrong – when it comes to enforcing laws. There is only enforcing laws. This is what enables the incongruence – and the sociopathy that flows from it. The law says we must obey the speed limit. That we are subject to being handed pieces of payin’ paper if we exceed the speed limit. It also grants exceptions – and immunity – for the enforcers of the speed limit!

Let it sink in.

The moral (as well as legal) corruption this fosters is enormous and monstrous. One class of people gets to do things; another class gets to punish people for doing the same things they get to do with impunity while berating the people they punish for doing exactly the same thing they do but aren’t punished for doing. The punished even pretends he deserves to be punished (hoping his pretending will result in the punisher giving him a “break”) while the punisher pretends to believe the person he’s punishing deserves to be punished for something he himself does and so knows in his mind is something along the lines of having long rather than short hair.

It is fundamentally monstrous – morally – to create “offenses” out of actions that have not caused the slightest actual harm to anyone. Everyone understands this at almost instinctive level. It is why few of us feel ashamed when we are handed a piece of payin’ paper for “speeding” or some other statutory offense because we know we haven’t harmed anyone and that what we’re being hassled over didn’t even entail a meaningful possibility that someone else might have been harmed.

It’s like having a gun pointed at you because you stepped on a crack and the gun holder says you just broke your momma’s back.

It’s a kind of codification of ninnyhood. The overbearing helicopter parent made official. This is the foundation of the Safety Cult that is America’s new religion. Its dogma – and pieties – must be respected, and will be enforced.

Have a nice day, now.

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

 

 

The post Rules For Us But Not For Them appeared first on EPautos - Libertarian Car Talk.