GD> SK> Unjust laws SHOULD be broken. 
GD>I don't understand why you don't use the democratic process.
I do use it.
GD>  If you 
GD>disagree with a law, then you go to your elected representatives and 
GD>tell them how you feel about a particular law, and have them fight
GD>for  you. 
And if the powers that be don't respond? If the majority of people are 
sheep? If the majority LIKE a police state...and want even MORE of the 
same? I believe ALL of these apply, in one form or another.
Thus, civil disobedience has it's place. It's only ONE tool, though.
Blacks sat at "Whites Only" lunch counters...and were arrested. Rosa 
Parks sat in the front of a bus..and was arrested. Those actions changed
history AND the laws. They were only SOME of the things that were done 
to promote change. They were damned effective, though.
Hey, and people violated the law and helped slaves escape bondage. It 
was the right thing to do. It isn't as if that was the ONLY actions that
were taken.
Laws can be wrong. And most are, IMLTHO.
GD>I have heard too many people say that the democratic process doesn't 
GD>work, but when asked if they ever contacted their representative,
GD>they  always retract their statement, and say they know someone else
GD>who  had a problem and they weren't helped by the representative. 
It can work. It doesn't always work, though. The democratic process 
often needs a kick in the pants to get it moving.
An absolute democracy is a very dangerous thing, because %51 of the 
people could vote to kill the other %49. Of course I'm being absurd to 
make a point, but it is true in theory. THAT is why we need codified 
basic rights that can not be taken away....even if it seems like the 
right thing to do in the short run, because in the long run we'll become 
accustomed to forsaking our basic rights. It seems that quite a few 
people already are.
GD> TR> and you wouldn't be doing anything noble or patriotic, just the 
GD> TR> opposite. 
GD> 
GD> SK> In your less than reasonable, and reasoned, opinion. 
GD> 
GD> TR> You would be obstructing justice at the very least, 
GD> 
GD> SK> What justice would that be? Being forced from my own vehicle
GD> SK> under  threat of imprisonment, or immediate physical punishment,
GD> SK> so it can  effectively be stolen and used in a hazardous manner
GD> SK> is justice?  
GD>Whoever said that the police officer would remove you from your own 
GD>vehicle, and that he would use your vehicle in a reckless manner.  In
GD>most probability, if an officer were to need the use of your vehicle,
GD>it would be to follow a suspect or to get to another area quicker
GD>than if he were to walk or run. 
I know what the reasoning for the act would most probably be.
 
GD>It doesn't mean he is going to have you break traffic laws. 
Well, if the cop ain't in a hurry...why the drastic measure?
A nice "I need your help, sir...please drive me to 4th & T" would 
suffice. About as many words as "GET OUT OF THE CAR! NOW!".
 
GD> SK> If an actual emergency were to need my involvement I would get 
GD> SK> involved. 
GD> SK> The point is, _I_ will decide what is worthy... _I_ will help to
GD> SK> my  fullest if _I_ see a good and just cause. A person in a
GD> SK> uniform is  
GD>I believe this is the crux of the whole arguement.  You would get
GD>involved  if you understood everything, but how long could it take to
GD>explain the  whole situation to you. 
I would get involved in an emergency that _I_ knew the situation of. Or 
I might respond to a reasonable request. An order in not a request.
GD>Would you drive while the officer explains it to you, or would you
GD>make  the officer explain it, first, and in the meantime defeat the
GD>purpose  of the officer requesting your assistance in the first
GD>place. 
I'd just refuse if he wanted to take my car. I don't know they are a 
cop....what they are planning...if it is a cop that has gone 
"postal"...or if my allowing my car to be taken might result in deaths 
due to another stupid police chase.
You see, I believe in responsibility. Some times police don't act in a 
reasonable and responsible manner. I won't risk being responsible for 
helping them be so. For instance, I wouldn't wish to contribute to a 
cops chase of Rodney King. Just as I wouldn't lend one of the cops that 
beat him down my baseball bat.
And, if I saw an emergency...I would respond. No need for anyone, cop or 
kindergardener, to explain the situation to me.
  
GD>If the officer were to unfairly commandeer your car, or were to cause
GD>damage to your car, I am sure that there would be a lot of lawyers
GD>who  would be more than happy to take on the lawsuit. 
I'm not concerned with my car, I'm concerned with my rights.
And, I'm adverse to police states.
---
þ CMPQwk #1.42þ UNREGISTERED HANDGUN COPY
---------------