Exploring the ethical dilemma of breaking the law to make a point

Say that someone supported the current war on (some) drugs, and refused to acknowledge the waste of tax payer money as anything but “sound governance” and all those convicted of marijuana possession “must have done something to deserve it.”

How would you make that individual change their mind?

Well, if rational persuasion doesn’t work, why not commit a crime? Find out where they live, crack their wifi to do some shady crap online then plant some drugs and kiddie porn under their porch then call an anonymous police tip line.

Illegal? Yes. Immoral? Yes. But will it bring the unholy power of the state down on a statist prick? Oh yes.

You see we live in a world where government doesn’t have an off switch. Police will send SWAT teams to raid a retired CIA analysts house over green tea leaves in the garbage after a visit to a gardening store for the grand daughters science fair project, at least in the state of Oklahoma. In North Carolina the legal system is much more lenient on small amounts of pot for personal use, but a couple of ounces with a list of “customers” makes “intent to distribute” a slam dunk for a prosecutor.

Is it worth ruining someone’s life to make a point? I don’t know, the fall from “respectable citizen” to “scumbag felon” is a very short trip in our current legal system and it is probably an irrecoverable fall. And simply by bringing up the “special” police powers given for the “war on (some) drugs” the system can utterly strip a citizen of power to the point where taking the plea bargain is the only rational option.

This isn’t the country I want to live in. But some people will obviously not abandon their statist position until they are victimized by the state.

The moral choice is to continue with rational persuasion, but it is probably not the satisfying choice.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Exploring the ethical dilemma of breaking the law to make a point

  1. B says:

    I got chills reading this post. When the election is over, this tactic will become the standard. Sadly there is no bullet proof vest for this attack except perhaps money and influence.


  2. DW says:

    OMG – did you just poke the hornet’s nest with a stick! B’s comment spot on – definite tactic of statists. For the record and those that are unaware, the tactic that our blogging host is describing is called “swatting”, although in this case he is using a very elaborate version of “swatting”.

    The definition of “swatting” ( according to the always accurate? Wikipedia: Swatting is the act of deceiving an emergency service (via such means as hoaxing an emergency services dispatcher) into sending a police and 911 response team to another person’s address, based on the false reporting of a serious law enforcement emergency, such as a bomb threat, murder, hostage-taking or other alleged incident.

    Also for the record – there is no upside to drug abuse. However does the government have any role in what an individual chooses to put in his/her body – absolutely not! Has the war on drugs had any positive effect on the US – absolutely not. Famous quote: those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it. Thus the lessons that should have been learned from prohibition were repeated beginning in the late 60’s with the drug enforcement acts & laws which also led to the militarization of the police, another useless 3 letter agency – DEA and the “money shot” ( which was probably the ultimate goal ) civil asset forfeiture! Browse the internet for the Chicago police abuse of civil forfeiture. Sadly not surprising given the current state of the union.

    Police abusing the people they are supposed to be protecting, it’s simply criminal that “law enforcement” does this to US citizens. The ghosts of the Gestapo are jealous with envy.

    Our founders heads would be spinning that we allow this crap. Due process? What the hell is that? However I do admit that while I would certainly think about it, regardless of the circumstances, I would have issues planting fake drugs to ensnare an idiot neighbor. Thus as our blogging host suggest, I am trapped in a moral dilemma. As of right now I still have electricity and hot/cold running water, so I am conflicted. Once we go Serbia, I may get clarity?


  3. DW says:

    To our blogging host:

    Based on the above post and the moral dilemma it brings to the forefront, I wanted to take this opportunity to see if I can solicit a blog post/comment on an problem for us “common folk” and one element of what causes our “dilemma” issue. That being a concept called the “normalcy bias”.

    I know the majority of my family group and myself would suffer from the normalcy bias. Based on your experiences and training, just looking for a bit of wisdom/advice on how to recognize and adapt as needed. I am acquainted with your blog heading – top right corner, yet still I ask!

    Via con Dios!


  4. rthtgnbs says:

    B, and having a last name of “Kennedy” or “Clinton” seems to really help.

    DW, survival is the most moral act. Whose survival is the ethical dilemma. As far as normalcy bias, you can recognize it by consciously asking yourself when you stopped driving through that neighborhood, and when you started carrying bribe money on your person. Rome didn’t fall in a single lifetime, but the “Great Leap Forward” reduce a nation to cannibalism in a few years. So the greater the change, the less likely normalcy bias is to be a factor in your day to day existence. The more gradual the change, the more likely it is that we’ll all get “boiled like a frog.”

    However, since the natural state of life is one of constant change and progress I’m not too worried about the normalcy bias for people who prepare for disasters. Prepping doesn’t stop the bad things from happening, they give you options for when the bad things happen. If life is changing so slowly that you don’t have to dip into your prepped resources, then odds are you’ll be fine. Neighborhoods don’t go to seed overnight, and Detroit took years to collapse (of course six decades of Democrat mayors isn’t a good sign for prosperity).

    I wish I had better advice, but as long as you can spend some time reflecting on your life, and the changes you see happening in your circumstances, you’ll probably be able to move out, dig in, or mitigate as necessary.


    • DW says:

      Thanks for the advice, it makes sense. I still have concerns if we somehow end up in a circumstance like Venezuela (financial collapse), at what point do I stop helping/providing for those that did not prepare? I guess faith & circumstance at the time will be the guide. I have been in emergency situations after hurricanes and I have seen first hand how humans behave in those situations. It’s not pretty.


      • rthtgnbs says:

        The Venezuela scenario (or Chile under Allende scenario, or China under Mao’s “Great Leap Forward”) is definitely a “rapid collapse” scenario brought on by:

        1, massive nationalization of industry
        2, government market control

        If you see those two things, start hoarding everything you can. Don’t share with anyone, don’t tell anyone you have stuff, and cache as much of it in places people won’t think to look as possible. You can’t help people if you are dead, and if people find out you’ve prepared for the very disaster that they created, they tend to get all pitchforky and “people’s court” rather than listen to reason.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s