Think Freely Media presents Common Sense with Paul Jacob

During the Soviet era, there was a joke going around about how Soviet citizens expressed their feelings about life under Communist rule.

Whatever a citizen is asked about, he shrugs and says, “I can’t complain.” Finally the exasperated interviewer asks, “Well, is there anything about life in the Soviet Union that you do dislike?” Of course the answer is “I CAN’T COMPLAIN!!!”

In certain societies, persons who complain too pointedly or publicly are subject to arrest and imprisonment, if not worse. Luckily, being arrested for complaining, especially in a civil, peaceful, non-rights-violating way, would never happen in the U.S., right?

Don’t tell it to Jim Howe, the Tennessee parent arrested by a splenetic officer, Avery Aytes (“Officer Absolute Obedience” as Cory Doctorow dubs him), for calmly articulating disagreement with a new school policy on how his kids were to be picked up from school. The policy created traffic jams, so Howe walked to the school to get his kids. When he continues to calmly express his viewpoint despite being told to zip it, Aytes slaps on the cuffs.

The crime: talking.

County Sheriff Butch Burgess says he doesn’t even need to look at the starkly unambiguous video of the incident to know that the arrest was justified, Aytes was just doing his job. This means that all arrests by law enforcement officers are per se justified because they are arrests by law enforcement officers. Which is a prescription for cowed submission to tyranny.

That’s not common sense.

I’m Paul Jacob.

By: Redactor

4 Comments

  1. JFB says:

    Even if the judge knows better, it is chilling and tyranny.
    The sheriff should lose at the next election and the officer retrained or reassigned, preferably to the canine clean up unit.

  2. Jay says:

    Since I DO NOT KNOW, NOR HAVE YOU PROVIDED, any other details. I will withhold judgment.

    As a former teacher, and with family who had been in education —
    a few points:

    1. The school tries to make rules- granted one size for all- but anarchy if differnet rules for every person.

    2. As an example- some years ago–here- a BOY FRIEND of the mother (live in), wanted to be able to EVERY DAY have lunch with his g.f.’s daughter. The school refused. A former friend of mine told me the school was worng. MY RESPOSNE- SEE THE RELEVANCE– THE SCHOOL HAD SEVEAL HUNDRED CHILDREN.

    WHAT WOULD BE THE RESULT-IF THEY ALLOWED THIS PERSON- EVERY DAY- HAVE LUNCH–AND EVEN 25-35% OF THE OTHER PARENTS WANTED THE SAME?

    ANARCHY.

    The same MIGHT BE THE CASE HERE.

    By the way, any reason the father was not at work?

    And, HIS VERSION- talking. How? was he threatening?

    Again–big stink here a few years ago– Sheriff’s arrested first grader; OMITTED–SHE BIT THE PRINCIPAL; A.P.; AND A SECRETARY. DEFECATED AND URINATED OVER PAPERS; WAS UNCOTROLLABLE. HAD HIT AND KICKED TEACHERS. MOTHER ADMITTED CHILD WAS UNCONTROLLABLE-AT HOME ALSO.

    BUT THE PICTURES- WHITE DRESS; LOOKED LIKE AN ANGEL.

    So, before blaming whom you do not like, PRINT ALL OF THE FACTS.

  3. Drik says:

    Failing to follow directions of an officer is an offense. Following the directions of an officer who directs you to shut-up is a violation of your constitutional rights. Zip it. Film it. Sue them.

  4. Jay says:

    Drik,

    Read my comment again–how was he talking? In a civil manner? A threatening manner? Interrupting something that the school considered more important then HIS CHILD OR CHILDREN? EVERYONE SEEMS TO THINK THAT THE UNIVERSE REVOLVES AROUND THEM AND THEIR CHILDREN. IT DOES NOT.

    Had the person considered a phone call to set an appointment? If he was there at dismissal time, which seems to be the case– the school DOES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO INSURE THE SAFETY OF THE STUDENTS, AS THEY LEAVE.

    AGAIN–MANY–MOST DETAILS ARE MISSING.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2017 Common Sense with Paul Jacob, All Rights Reserved. Back to top