About an hour and a half ago, while I was filling my daughter's wading pool in the front yard, a car pulled up, stopped, and shut off the engine. A woman got out and made some comment that I didn't quite catch due to the loud sound of the hose spraying into the pool.
I shut off the water, looked up, and she said "Hi, I'm ____ and I'm here for the census."
I simply said "No thanks" and started filling the pool again, ignoring her completely. She stood there for 30 seconds or so (I have no idea if she said anything else or not) before finally getting back in her car and driving away.
I do not consent. Not to be counted or categorized, nor to be governed.
-----------------
Added: And good luck to them trying to find out any accurate information on me from neighbors. I just moved in to this house at the first of the year, and have barely spoken to any neighbors. I seriously doubt they even know for certain how many people live here, much less anything more compromising.
*********************
Thursday, May 27, 2010
'I'm with the government. Look at me!'
'I'm with the government. Look at me!'
Why does a suspected theft require shutting down a section of town? Because government likes to be seen "doing something". Even if that "something" is misguided, melodramatic, and downright ham-fisted. You can't justify your budget if you aren't noticed, and the best way to be noticed is to cause a scene and inconvenience people.
Albuquerque police were "forced" to shut down streets because a security camera caught a man on a roof. The suspicion was that the man was stealing copper, but even if not, he was trespassing. Of course, you or I could have dealt with the situation without violating property rights or the right to travel, but since government "owns" the streets it claims the right to close them anytime it wishes.
This is why leaving "policing" to government is a really bad idea. Even when it manages to protect someone's interests, it can't seem to do so without harming those around who had nothing to do with the problem. This doesn't even take into account where the money to pay these police comes from or how it is obtained. Any individuals who cause harm should be held accountable even if they are doing what they think they should, and even if it is their "job".
Why does a suspected theft require shutting down a section of town? Because government likes to be seen "doing something". Even if that "something" is misguided, melodramatic, and downright ham-fisted. You can't justify your budget if you aren't noticed, and the best way to be noticed is to cause a scene and inconvenience people.
Albuquerque police were "forced" to shut down streets because a security camera caught a man on a roof. The suspicion was that the man was stealing copper, but even if not, he was trespassing. Of course, you or I could have dealt with the situation without violating property rights or the right to travel, but since government "owns" the streets it claims the right to close them anytime it wishes.
This is why leaving "policing" to government is a really bad idea. Even when it manages to protect someone's interests, it can't seem to do so without harming those around who had nothing to do with the problem. This doesn't even take into account where the money to pay these police comes from or how it is obtained. Any individuals who cause harm should be held accountable even if they are doing what they think they should, and even if it is their "job".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)