That's not my view of reality, rather your incorrect interpretation of my post, and subsequent extension thereof into absurdity.Originally posted by Simon Templar
By this train of logic, the Police are some sort of omnipotent Order of all-powerful protectors which are your only possible hope of shelter from random attack, death, and dismemberment. Therefore, if one of these Holy sentient beings were to unfairly push you about... you should be quiet and thankfully accept such treatment as some sort of kharmic payment ... That is one incredibly Orwellian view of reality you have there.
What I ACTUALLY SAID (if you correctly interpreted it) is that law enforcement exists to create order in society as a way of minimizing chaos and crime. In order for such an institution to work successfully, the general law-abiding public must be socialized to be subservient to law enforcement officers, respect them, and do as they're told. (EDIT: The following is an aside in reference to your post.) It is my observation that TO A DEGREE, the average citizen WILL submit to unjust treatment from officers.
It is also my belief that traffic violation enforcement is one way of reinforcing the authority figure image in society. Just observe the procedures used to ticket people. Officers obstruct traffic, flash lights, and increase visibility to an absolute maximum. These things are not necessary to enforce traffic laws. Just limit cars to 65 mph and you're way ahead of the game as it is now. If the government REALLY wanted to enforce traffic laws, speed limits in particular, they could much more easily and cheaply create a requirement for computer-controlled speed limiters that feed off of radio-wave speed limit signs, transmitting local speed limits on radar frequencies.
Instead, they give you the ability to break "the law" so you can get caught and "punished". Why do YOU think that is? Think about it.
Reply With Quote