We Have Police, So Why Not a Police State?!?

 Posted by on 3 August 2004 at 6:57 am  Uncategorized
Aug 032004
 

Not too long ago, I read Robert Garmong’s op-ed advocating the abolition of the FCC. It presented a good, clear, and straightforward argument. Apparently, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel published it, for yesterday my “Ayn Rand” Google News Alert pointed me to this lengthy response, entitled “Free market or just chaos?” Reading it reminded me of the fact that wisdom does not come naturally with age.

The response starts off by declaring that “there are elements desiring to destroy the very foundations of our country on which our forefathers worked so hard to build.” Yes, apparently our forefathers weren’t so concerned about free speech, but rather more with the great degradation of the public good that comes with the utterance of rude language. And yes, those destroyers are “Garmong and his Ayn Rand do-gooders.”

His next argument is almost unbelievable:

On Page 2, for example, we read our “correctional population” hit a high of 6.9 million people who are either in prison at this time or are on parole or probation. This alarming statistic means that despite the best effort of many defense lawyers, opponents of capital punishment and other “do-gooders,” over 3 percent of our fellows are or have been convicted criminals.

Imagine, if you will, what would happen if there were no criminal laws, no police and no correctional facilities? Would one expect that crime growth would decrease by osmosis? We read that with all the police and all the jails, the number of both Americans and foreigners under our own criminal control increased last year by 130,700 and is continuing to rise. No thinking person in any thinking country would consider living in a society without judicial controls, knowing full well the consequences of a policeless society.

Why, then, should we not want to control the filth that is slowly but surely taking over our radio and TV and nonsubscriber cable networks?

Ah yes, failing to regulate broadcast media for dirty words is tantamount to allowing criminals to run free! Oh, those nilistic anarchists of the Ayn Rand Institute! This argument, of course, would be an excellent method of eliminating all free speech. For example: Given that we shouldn’t allow criminals to run free, why should we allow people to express false and destructive political opinions? Given that we shouldn’t allow criminals to run free, why should we allow people to worship their false gods? Given that we shouldn’t allow criminals to run free, why should we allow people to ever say unkind things about each other?

Sheesh. I think we need a campaign to make “non sequitur” a household word.

   
Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha