Russell Arrested 5/29/08 for no government drivers license

[kola]

Russell, I wonder if they consider you a repeat offender or if you have an "official" label yet? (criminal extremist, domestic terrorist etc) You guys should file of FOI request or contact ACLU, if interested.
Just be damn careful.


Kola

[Raineyrocks]

So even tommorrow when it's Saturday...............

I got that one right away, OMG, you are hilarious!   The day I quit smoking and you crack me up, that's pretty good!  I wish I had that green laughing smiley guy, I'd put 9, (one of my favorite #'s), on this post to you.

rainey,
This is one of the green smiley guys. "" Just type this in your message with a space before and after it. And don't use the quotes.

Hi Pat,

How's it going?  Thanks for giving me the smiley guy's thing and telling me how to use it now I don't have to write it.  It just isn't the same as seeing the smiley.   I wonder what ever happened to all my smileys.

I also was just thinking that maybe I got Pat K and Russell's posts all wrong.  I see that Russell used a lowercase F for his second mentioning of Friday, so I think he actually meant because it is the day friday not the person Friday so therefore it makes Pat K's post funny but not as funny as I originally took it to be.

Now for the fun question, do you understand anything at all that I just wrote?

One more thing I just copied the smiley guy, quotes and all until I saw that you wrote and don't use the quotes.  Your really getting to know me I think.  Uh,oh!

[Raineyrocks]

Did the smiley come out right?  It won't show up on my screen?

[Dave Ridley]

video up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVU9wyaN8rk

[Pat K]

Yes the smiley came out right.

[Pat McCotter]

Did the smiley come out right?  It won't show up on my screen?

Yes it came out correct.
Here are some of the basics:
:) = smiley
;) = wink
:D = cheesy smile
;D = grin
>:( = angry
:( = sad
:o = shocked
8) = cool
::) = roll eyes
:P = stick out tongue

[Shane Maxfield]

First, to Dr. Kirk, "You win."  There, now go play with your blocks and leave the grown-ups to talk.

Now that the flurry of "outrage" and name-calling has subsided a bit, I will speak, given that several people have demanded to know the why's, how's etc.  No doubt most will disagree with my views, but you've asked and I'll answer, and civilly.

First, some background.  I have outlined, in detail to Lauren and more basically in these forums, my views on the "Driver's License" concept.  Call them "papers" if it makes you feel better, but whatever you call them, they are NOT a requirement to live in this country, not even to travel.  However, if you want to be in control of a car, you need a license.  The reasoning behind this is simple: there are lots of people out there who regularly endanger the rest of us (and our families).  Whether they routinely drive drunk, drive recklessly (like the motorcyclist from the other day who initiated the events that eventually led to my arresting Russell), habitually speed etc.  The licensing process attempts to keep them off the roads by having the requirement that everyone needs one to drive, and when you lose your license you lose your privilege to drive that 2000lb hunk of steel on the roads.  The consequences of getting caught driving without a license, or on a suspended license, deter most of those dangerous drivers, in my experience.  And keeps them from driving, and endangering you and me.

"No victim, no crime," is what is thrown at me now, and I say again, there's never a victim until BAM, people burn to death or are maimed for life, or just have their car wrecked.  Everyone says "Wow, what a bummer," but usually it's not your wife who's dead, or your seven year old daughter who is decapitated by a drunk driver (exaggeration?  Here's the link: http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/05/29/o.lifesaving.lesson/index.html ). 

Now, I don't agree with suspending people's licenses for non-payment of child support, or for blowing through an EasyPass toll gate.  But I do support the basic premise, and purpose, behind the driver's licensing system.  Because of that, I do not let people just drive off when I know they're suspended.  While I have given many people breaks for a joint or baggie of dope or pot pipe, I have not for driving suspended.

Russell's account of his arrest was quite accurate.  He's a good man and I've yet to find him being dishonest or trying to bullshit, even when it might benefit him.  This is what happened through from my viewpoint:   Two of my officers had stopped a motorcyclist for slaloming through traffic, in the oncoming lane, at over a hundred miles per hour.  Some of you will say "Where's the problem?"  We saw a problem and addressed it.  We managed to stop him on West Street at Base Hill Road, where the Country Club is.  As the Shift Commander I went over to offer my assistance, and found that my two units and the motorcycle were filling most of a lane, so I got out to help traffic around.  As I was doing so, Russell drove up and stopped at the stop sign, I immediately saw that was him.  I was sure his license was suspended (because it has been since I've known him and he's repeatedly told me and others he doesn't need a license to drive), so I walked over to him.  He was smiling, and asked me what was going on.  I told him, and told him to pull over near where the motorcycle was, and he did.  He got out, there was some discussion about his license, and I asked why, if he was paying California the child support stuff, they couldn't reinstate his license?  I think he said something about it would take months for them to do that.  His license was confirmed as suspended, and we arrested him.  A tow truck had been requested for Russell's car, but he asked if Kat could just take it, I said sure and cancelled the tow.

At the PD, Russell was cooperative and agreed to be bailed.  However, a closer check of his motor vehicle record indicated that this current charge would only be a violation, so I told my officer to cancel the Bail Commish for him and just release him on a Summons.

To sum up: I saw Russell driving, knew he was suspended, detained him and double-checked it, and arrested him.  He was processed and released on a Summons.

I will explain, as I have to Russell probably a couple times.  When people rack up enough points on their driving record, they will eventually be declared a Habitual Offender.  When they get arrested for driving again, they will get charged with a felony and will go to jail, most likely for a year.  The courts don't give a rat's ass about anyone's politics, or their opinion of whether they should be required to have a driver's license.  It's the law to have one, and they will put you in jail over it.

As I see it, there's a sizeable portion of the population who would support reform of the drug laws.  That support seems to be growing, and indeed I support that as well.  However, in regards to driver's licensing, I think you will find the vast majority of people support it.

The retort I get to this is "Mob rule."  Fine, but be honest...if the "mob" agreed with your views you wouldn't have a problem with it.

While we're talking about laws and change, I'd like to take this opportunity to discuss just that.  No intent to insult or put you guys down, just my opinions.  I see, as I've said before, many good ideas in this movement, much correct thinking.  I also see disorganization, lack of leadership and a hodgepodge of actions limited to the tactical level (that's the local stuff, like the open-carry litter pickups, copwatch, puppet shows, "I'm gonna drive on my suspended license"  etc.).  In some ways this is good (it's difficult to smash an organization that is as decentralized as you guys, to put it bluntly).  However, tactical actions alone will not affect much change.  You may attract individuals to join your movement from here and there, you may get individuals from within the hoovernment to join you, or at least agree with you on some levels (as I do).   Some tactical actions might attract negative attention from the very citizens you're trying to "wake up," making them think you're a bunch of kooks (even before they check out some of the more, uh, extreme personalities on this forum!).

In order for you guys to affect change (change or eliminate certain laws or whatever), you're going to need the support of the general population, or at least a goodly portion of it.  You just don't have the numbers or support for a "revolution" if that's what you're after.  To think you're just going to rip down the current political structure of this state or the nation is a pipe dream, at least for now.  You should get some people thinking "strategic," which means putting your own reps and senators in the state house, or at least winning many more current ones over to your thinking.  Then you can work to repeal laws to your heart's content.  I suspect once people around the country see "it" working in NH, you may spark efforts in other states, and eventually the nation.  It will take time, and effort.  And if eventually it is legal for Russell to drive around with no license, and with a huge doobie hanging on his lip, I'll be more than happy to wave to him as he drives on by.

Lastly, for the three of you who have listened to this point, I came to this forum looking for neither "buddies" nor the subversion of your cause.  I came because I agree with many of your views, and I thought that communication (I called it détente earlier) could only benefit us all.

Enjoy your weekend, I'm going camping.

[hook]

Did you get a fire permit?

[Jim Johnson]

Did you get a fire permit?

He doesn't have to... he can flash his badge.

He doesn't have to worry if he has a tail light out or if he speeds or even if he camps in the wrong spot... he's a cop.

[Jitgos]

Political action is being taken by many. It's just not discussed too much on this forum. Check out the forum on http://nhliberty.org. Dennis Goddard called into Free Talk Live last night and talked about the great success the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance is having. On their yearly report card of representatives usually they find 2 rated A and this year there's ~18 or so. That's not verbatim, but is the gist of what he said. In other words many more reps voted pro liberty this year due at least in part to the new activism. One hundred volunteers reviewed every single bill this year and gave it a liberty rating and then papers with the NHLA recommendations where handed out at the state house. This is the only organization is the country (world?) doing this. So the political side is very very active. In fact it's unprecedented in modern times.

As far as being disorganized. It's nearly impossible to organize libertarians on any massive level. It's the antithesis of libertarian/voluntaryist thought to believe that a top down, bureaucratic structure is the most effective. Each person will do there own thing including organizing at times with others. But I reject the notion that there's an "us". That's just not the way it is. I agree that some things people do may not be strategically beneficial. There will certainly be people who do things that I personally disagree with and vice versa. But when person A does something you don't like you should not see person B on the street and paint B with that same brush. Not that you do, but it's common to want to try and group people and not look at each person individually. I'm sure people do that with cops. It's not just or fair in most circumstances.

[Pat K]

I guess he doesn't even realize how drippingly
smug he comes across.

I guess when a man enforces his  "views"
at gun point with a gang for back up it is
just inevitable.

[hook]

Political action is being taken by many. It's just not discussed too much on this forum. Check out the forum on http://nhliberty.org. Dennis Goddard called into Free Talk Live last night and talked about the great success the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance is having. On their yearly report card of representatives usually they find 2 rated A and this year there's ~18 or so. That's not verbatim, but is the gist of what he said. In other words many more reps voted pro liberty this year due at least in part to the new activism. One hundred volunteers reviewed every single bill this year and gave it a liberty rating and then papers with the NHLA recommendations where handed out at the state house. This is the only organization is the country (world?) doing this. So the political side is very very active. In fact it's unprecedented in modern times.

As far as being disorganized. It's nearly impossible to organize libertarians on any massive level. It's the antithesis of libertarian/voluntaryist thought to believe that a top down, bureaucratic structure is the most effective. Each person will do there own thing including organizing at times with others. But I reject the notion that there's an "us". That's just not the way it is. I agree that some things people do may not be strategically beneficial. There will certainly be people who do things that I personally disagree with and vice versa. But when person A does something you don't like you should not see person B on the street and paint B with that same brush. Not that you do, but it's common to want to try and group people and not look at each person individually. I'm sure people do that with cops. It's not just or fair in most circumstances.

Shane Maxfield is correct in his assessment of the political atmosphere for the driver license issue, its a non-starter. Most people have been brainwashed into thinking along the scenarios he outlines, fiery chaos, death and spilled milk.

[kola]

I guess he doesn't even realize how drippingly
smug he comes across.

I guess when a man enforces his  "views"
at gun point with a gang for back up it is
just inevitable.

smug..yeah..and thats being nice Pat.

a smug thug with an ugly mug.

btw Shame thats a pretty nice place you live in, buddy. 

[Coconut]

In order for you guys to affect change (change or eliminate certain laws or whatever), you're going to need the support of the general population, or at least a goodly portion of it.  You just don't have the numbers or support for a "revolution" if that's what you're after.  To think you're just going to rip down the current political structure of this state or the nation is a pipe dream, at least for now.  You should get some people thinking "strategic," which means putting your own reps and senators in the state house, or at least winning many more current ones over to your thinking.  Then you can work to repeal laws to your heart's content.  I suspect once people around the country see "it" working in NH, you may spark efforts in other states, and eventually the nation.  It will take time, and effort.  And if eventually it is legal for Russell to drive around with no license, and with a huge doobie hanging on his lip, I'll be more than happy to wave to him as he drives on by.

Changes by the system have been tried. It's impossible to change a system by their rules. Too many Ron Paul supporters at a republican convention? Just postpone the convention. This isn't about changing "laws." Laws are words on paper. Be them your words, or my words, or the words of a group of "representatives," they're from humans, and have no moral or logical authority over any other humans. It's not even as much about changing minds. The majority of the country is politically apathetic, so from that standpoint, we already have the minds of millions of people who hate politics.

This is about changing actions, or specifically shows of force. I want Keene to be the place where we drive unregistered, unlicensed, and safely. I want it to be the place where humans break from their "just following the system" routine and treat each other as equals. We've changed, ever so slightly, the actions of Keene judges who choose to not levy fines against people who blatantly walk into a courtroom saying "I will not pay." I pray for the day that you see Mr. Kanning, or any other unlicensed driver, and wave to him because you know he's safe, and you choose right over wrong.

[Becky Thatcher]

Russell,

I just saw this post today.  Glad you are out enjoying the beautiful day. 

First, some background.  I have outlined, in detail to Lauren and more basically in these forums, my views on the "Driver's License" concept.  Call them "papers" if it makes you feel better, but whatever you call them, they are NOT a requirement to live in this country, not even to travel.  However, if you want to be in control of a car, you need a license.  The reasoning behind this is simple: there are lots of people out there who regularly endanger the rest of us (and our families).  Whether they routinely drive drunk, drive recklessly (like the motorcyclist from the other day who initiated the events that eventually led to my arresting Russell), habitually speed etc.  The licensing process attempts to keep them off the roads by having the requirement that everyone needs one to drive, and when you lose your license you lose your privilege to drive that 2000lb hunk of steel on the roads.

Shane,

I just have a couple questions for you.  You say the Driver's License is what keeps unsafe drivers off the road, and not having one means you are an unsafe driver.  Here are my questions.

How was Russell driving?  (I've seen him drive, he's one of the safest drivers I know.)  If the only traffic law he was breaking was the lack of Gov't ID, how does that make him an unsafe driver?

Did the motorcyclist have a driver's license?

Almost every accident I have seen, or been involved in, has involved licensed drivers.  I think we would all have to agree that having a DL does not necessarily equal competence.