Fucking pigs busted me -- LiveWire Teen Forums

Sorry this is so long. I should be studying for midterms, so instead I'm putting way too much time and thought into posts.
That's terrible dude. I'm truly sorry and share your frustration that you were busted because pigs were being cunts, not because you were doing something stupid. On that note:

To the debate of whether or not PewPew is an idiot. If a substance is illegal, being caught with it results in prosecution. This seems obvious. It might then seem that someone in such a situation who is indignant is being unintelligent.

In PewPew's situation I think that there are two justifiable reasons to be angry.

1) Being negatively affected by a law that you perceive as amoral sucks. The immediate temptation is to draw emotionally-charged parallels to past laws, generally those involving the relationship between a person's social status and skin color. Fenris and the likes have been quick to rebut with an argument that, as I understand it, boils down to "it doesn't matter if the law was just or not; you knew it, you broke it, and that takes away your grounds to act offended/ violated." (Am I on the mark with that?) This ties into the next reason.

2) His situation is the result of bad luck.

This one might take some more defending. First, a few words on bad luck:

Let's say that there's a pill. It's not a pill that anyone ever has to take, but it has some nice benefits: maybe it gives you more energy, or helps with insomnia or stress. There are, for the most part, no side effects. An incredibly tiny percentage of the population is fatally allergic to this pill, and there is no way of knowing whether or not you have this allergy. The good news is that it is more likely for your death to be directly caused by a bowling accident than it is for you to be allergic to the pill and die.

I take the pill, I die.

Was I stupid for taking the pill? I don't think so. If you say I was stupid for taking a risk like popping a pill that could kill me, you'd have to call me stupid for bowling or driving a car, because these things can kill me, too (specifically bowling, which is an unnecessary leisure activity with a higher chance of death). It is generally not inherently stupid to do something if there is an extremely low chance that something bad will happen as a result.

Can I say that this was the result of bad luck? I think so. Obviously the drug was the cause of my death, not luck, because luck can't cause anything. As such, we can't define "because of bad luck" as literally meaning "luck caused this to happen." Rather, when something happens because of bad luck it is because something statistically unlikely and bad happened.

And now the final point.

You didn't get busted because of pure bad luck, you got busted because you did something illeagle.
Take responsibility for being guilty of doing something illeagle. If I get caught speeding, I can give all the BS I want about being in control of my car, no danger when I speed 15-20 mph over the speed limit, the only reason I was stopped is because I was driving a shitty car and am young. It all sounds so foolish. I may try to get out of the ticket, but at least I'm honest with myself and accept responsibility for what I did.

Who here can name three times that they passed a police officer going 20 over and had nothing happen to them?

Is it reasonable to expect that you can speed 20 over, even in front of cops, and not be pulled over?

Who here can name three times that they, like PewPew, walked to a store completely sober, were confronted by cops regarding something illegal that they didn't do, and were searched because the cops were hasseling them about a crime that they did not commit?

How often do police search you when you leave your home and don't openly violate any laws?

When you walk outside of your home is it reasonable to expect that you will not be searched if you don't do anything that would draw police attention to you?

I'm not trying to argue that nothing should happen to PewPew, but I think that people like Fenrir aren't looking at the whole picture when they say that it was dumb for him to have a bag on him when he bought some doughnuts/ turn to the irrelevant discussion of having the law changed. PewPew had a reasonable expectation that an arguably amoral law would not cause bad things to happen to him, and he would have been right (again) if it hadn't been for a highly unlikely situation involving officers arguably doing their job poorly and hassling him over a crime that he did not commit. His reaction seems justifiable to me.

Post edited at 8:21 pm on Oct. 14, 2008 by Wilder

-------
If you have a problem with hedonism, you're probably not doing it right.

673 users online 184699 members 919 active today Advertise Here