There’s a video (warning: graphic language) that’s been floating around on the Internet showing a young lady whose companion (driver) is placed under arrest for what I assume is a moving violation (the video begins with the guy in handcuffs and being led off by the arresting officer.
As the video continues, a young lady inside the vehicle begins to forcefully invoke her rights as the police officer calmly informs her what is about to happen. Throughout the video, the young woman defies the officer and vociferously declares her rights until finally, he arrests her and she explodes with a venomous verbal attack.
A few things came to mind as I watched this unfold:
- She says that she doesn’t have to obey the laws because she’s a ‘free inhabitant’ and yet to back her claim she points to a…yes, another law. So you’re claiming that you are free from living the laws of the land and yet you affirm that right by referring to a law that doesn’t justify and substantiate your point it really just confirms that you don’t understand
- Because she’s a free inhabitant she can do whatever she wants because she is not subject to the laws of the land. That would be nice, if we were a) living on the set of a Bollywood movie; b) wild dogs in the wilderness or c) living on a deserted island, at which point we would still be subject to the laws of nature. First law of nature – only the strong (smart) survive.
- She asks officer to get a superior – It’s wise to ask for a supervisor when you’re at Denny’s or on the technical support line for HP or even when you suspect that your local Jiffy Lube technician is trying to sell you a faulty air filter. But asking for a supervisor when you’re being stopped by a police officer for breaking the law is like asking for a surgeon for a second opinion while he’s removing your pancreas. You have the right to debate your point (even if you’re a free inhabitant) with a police officer but he has the right to enforce local, state and federal laws. Compliance does not always mean consent. Asking for a superior implies that she believes that everyone is subject to a higher authority; by her own words she is inferring that everyone reports to someone. Everyone, it appears, except her – the lone free inhabitant ranger
- She keeps quoting the Articles of the Confederation which is commendable only for the fact that she can memorize random sections of a constitution that was superseded by the United States Constitution in 1789. Shortly after its incorporation as the constitution, members of Congress realized that the original Articles, drafted by representatives from the original 13 States was flawed and weak. The article that the misinformed young lady continues to quote in her diatribe states:
Article IV. The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states, paupers, vagabonds and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states; and the people of each state shall have free ingress and regress to and from any other state, and shall enjoy therein all the privileges of trade and commerce, subject to the same duties, impositions and restrictions as the inhabitants thereof respectively, provided that such restriction shall not extend so far as to prevent the removal of property imported into any state, to any other state, of which the Owner is an inhabitant; provided also that no imposition, duties or restriction shall be laid by any state, on the property of the united states, or either of them.
See any flaws here? Nothing? Do the words paupers and vagabonds raise any red flags? And free inhabitants in the context of this document refers to inhabitants of the ‘free states’ and the ability to ‘be free’ refers to financial and economic ability to freely trade between States, not your own definition of concept of freedom from any jurisdiction.
- She says, “That law only applies to U.S. citizens.” After which she informs the officer that she is not a citizen of the United States and she is ‘of the earth.’ Thank you for clarifying that point because until that point I was convinced that the officer was dealing with an extraterrestrial being. Beam her up – Now!
There are a number of these types of videos circulating the Internet of people whose interpretation and adaptation of the laws in any country to rationalize or excuse behavior is humorous. But there is a dark side to this as well and the officer in this particular video states it so simply that it rings poetic when the young woman says, ‘free inhabitants are free people with all the rights in this country without having to follow any laws.” [Editorial note: I almost stabbed my ears with dynamite at this point]
Officer: Well that would be pure anarchy
I’m not a doomsday kinda guy but I do believe this – our laws and those who protect and enforce those laws are quickly becoming laughable. This young woman clearly illustrates what is sadly becoming commonplace. I feel like I’m watching droves of miscreant children screaming at a patient parent who is trying their best to teach a simple principle: laws are meant to help us not weaken us. If we disagree with a law than change it through the proper channels which does not include yelling at a local cop, but rather at his (her word) superiors using fact based analysis of and rebuttal of the law.
Is the world going to hell? Maybe, maybe not but we’re sure helping the process move along at a clipping pace.
On my way to test my immunity to the laws as a free inhabitant of a local Friday night high school football game. Wish me luck.