So I was driving home from work, I'm a bartender now, and I was listening to the radio. They were having a debate about a guy who got a DUI for steering a car 9 feet. He didn't have the keys, the car was not turned on. They were pushing it to get it out of the way because it was blocking another car. The cop watched this happen and then went and got the guy in trouble. So the question was whether or not the guy should've gotten a DUI. It's a grey area. The law states that you are not allowed to "operate" a vehicle. Well, technically this guy was operating, but let's not ignore the fact that that cop is a total prick and totally entrapped the guy. And last I checked, here in America, entrapment is a crime in and of itself. But they had callers and they all thought he shouldn't have gotten it but one person. The last person they had call in said that she strongly thought he should not have gotten a DUI because her husband got one for talking to his sister while sitting drunk on a four wheeler with the keys in his pocket. They got him because they said he had the "potential" to drive. What the fuck? Since when does potential become action? We can't arrest someone for the "potential" to commit crimes. This isn't Minority Report. Everything has potential to turn sinister. I drive but I could potentially hit someone so should I be arrested for potential manslaughter? I walk down streets should I get a ticket for potentially loitering? Where's the god damn line? The potential to commit a crime is not a crime committed. If that were the case then everyone should be in jail.
Heatedly,
Mav
"An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."
No comments:
Post a Comment