Yesterday I called in to Keene’s open-phones local news show, Talkback, after the main host, Cynthia Georgina suggested jail telephone systems were too expensive. She didn’t understand why such an expense was necessary where jails are ‘supposed to be punishment’.
In the program, we were only able to touch on a few aspects of her belief, when there’s so much that could be said about that mentality. People who are not affected by jails can fail to recognize the unnecessary strain on human life created by conditions of caging. In the nation that has 25% of the world’s institutionalized inmates, it is still easy to ignore the plight of others when they are removed from sight and mind.
Because Cynthia was specifying jails, she was endorsing punishment of people held for either misdemeanor convictions (facing a penalty of under a year of incarceration) or those being detained pending trial. Detention pending trial could simply mean one is too poor to afford bail, or that they were in violation of any number of stringent bail conditions. When I brought up that New Hampshire jails are occupied by a large number of individuals convicted of driving infractions, Cynthia was surprised, unaware of the mandatory minimum prison sentence written into state law for those designated habitual offenders.
Dale and Cynthia leaped to the point that driving infractions are sometimes dangerous. This is true enough, but New Hampshire law does not discriminate between a lost license over a speeding ticket versus an aggravated DUI. Enough rolling stop violations can get your license taken from you, and if you drive thereafter, you will spend a minimum seven days in jail. Drive following the conviction, and your misdemeanor just became a felony, and a mandatory year in state prison. While there is a provision allowing for the sentence to be served through home confinement, the exception is only granted if the offender has served a consecutive 14-day period in state custody.
I wonder if, in saying that people in jails should be punished by not having access to telephones, Cynthia failed to see how punishing an involuntary incarceration already is.
Something else to consider about New Hampshire’s license suspension laws is that,
Evidence that the notice of suspension or revocation was sent to the person’s last known address as shown on the records of the division shall be prima facie evidence that the person was notified of the suspension or revocation.
Which means that it is not unheard of that someone is pulled over for a menial driving infraction, and finds themselves in handcuffs for driving after revocation. Fortunately the law is not so stringent as to tie these two offenses together into a habitual offense, which indicates an infraction following a primary conviction of operating after revocation.
So just in case it was not clear, you can go to prison on a felony charge just for racking up enough victimless driving violations and continuing to drive. In 2013, should cages continue to be used for such purposes?
Don’t these people have jobs? Do they have nothing better to do during a workweek afternoon than wash chalk away and antagonize people?
Don’t you people have jobs? Do you all have nothing better to do during a work week afternoon than write chalk graffitti all over the place and antagonize people?
I finding highly amusing and ironic that a FreeKeene loser would question if other people have jobs. Good one.
No hitting, no stealing, no lying. Some people can’t comprehend the basics taught in kindergarten.
Respecting people’s personal space and privacy is something the FreeKeene douche squad doesn’t seem to comprehend as well.
NO HITTING!
Actually you are provoking this guy. Your video is prima facie evidence aganist any claim you might have of assault. Run along, little boy. You keep it up and you’re going to get seriously hurt – and it will be entirely your fault.
How wil he get hurt? Are you going to hurt him?
If he keeps provoking people like that he will eventually get the beatdown he so richly deserves.
NO HITTING! –
I’m still trying to figure out the logic of a freekeene hater coming to the freekeene website and posting “run along.” Isn’t this blog where the freekeerers run along to? If you really want them to get away from you, then why are you following them here?
NO HITTING! THIS IS NOT DIFFICULT!
Thank you Derrick J.
Complaining about so-called “bullying” is un-libertarian. A true libertarian would defend the bully’s right to non-aggressive free speech, no matter how offensive.
err, um.. no. there is a line between non-aggressive free speech and intimidation/bullying. the latter is, in fact, aggression. a libertarian society is one that uses the freedom of decent people, via their own free activity, to punish the aggressors in society. this is well-demonstrated by the above video. if i am walking down the street minding my own business and an individual or a group begins to berate me and attempt to intimidate me, a wonderfully libertarian response is to capture that interaction on video and embarrass the individuals who “started it” (and by doing so, hopefully change their… Read more »
if i am walking down the street minding my own business and an “individual or a group begins to berate me and attempt to intimidate me, a wonderfully libertarian response is to capture that interaction on video and embarrass the individuals who “started it”…by forcing them to see themselves as others do, and to force them to be seen by others, as they have essentially relinquished their pre-existing right to be left alone by taking that right away from others. You’re saying that “berating” justifies responding with force? Webster’s defines berating as to scold or condemn vehemently and at length.… Read more »
you’re getting caught up in semantics (legal aggression and force vs. contextual aggression and force). you are simply “forcing” the other person to -feel the same infringement of a “right” (as would be agreed upon by decent people, not by law, at least not initially) to be left alone and not intimidated/berated when going about one’s life without infringing upon others as they have “forced” upon you by violating your “common decency applied right to be left alone”. these are not involving the use of state “force” or the threat of violence. you could simply replace “force” with “cause” in… Read more »
Several centuries ago, the word to describe what we now know as libertarian was “liberal.” When the opponents of freedom succeeded in corrupting that word, those erstwhile liberals then needed to qualify the term, giving us “classical liberal.” More recently, libertarians felt comfortable being identified as “convervative.” Then came the neo-conservatives, and with them the need to qualify the old meaning of the term as “paleo-conservative.” Now, with the word libertarian fairly conveying the meaning of one who supports the non-aggression axiom, it is those such as David McCarthy who perform the contemporary work of modifying its meaning, and emasculating… Read more »
i have a few succinct responses: one would be “the fastest way to doom libertarianism is to rely strictly upon state-enforceable rights as the only recourse for individuals in any given situation”. but before i go any further, i respect your intellect on a certain overly literal level. you’re obviously a smart guy, i’m sure smarter than me, and the funny thing is i *think* we’re on the same side on just about every issue. but because you’re so literal, and yes, you get caught up in semantics in situations where the semantics pale in comparison to the importance of… Read more »
While I regret time does not permit me (at least now) to give your post the full and considered response it deserves, I will take a moment to apologize for suggesting you were backing out of the discussion. Your comment “that’s it for me” was similar enough to the excuses others have made that I mistakenly thought you also lacked confidence in your beliefs. I hope you can forgive me for the incorrect assumption, and for denying you the rebuttal to your misguided views from which you would benefit had I not other more immediate priorities to attend to.
So how do you suggest one should attempt to record the incident as they are getting the absolute snot kicked out of themselves? That is what Derrick and people like him are setting themselves up for.
[…] http://freekeene.com/2014/06/17/how-to-act-like-an-adult/ […]
[…] http://freekeene.com/2014/06/17/how-to-act-like-an-adult/ […]
It’s obvious that Derrick goes looking to incite an altercation with this individual, which would get Derrick arrested for disorderly conduct if it got out of hand. The fact that there was also someone else recording this from across the street shows a premeditated action, which would not bode well for Derrick. I think the KPD has had about enough of FreeKeene, and will start cracking down on them for the smallest of infractions to put them all on notice.
Do you guys just like going to jail, because that’s how it is going to end for FreeKeene.
[…] Keene Bullies Taunt, Grab at Camera When I began recording him, however, he wasn't so courageous. He came up to my camera and twice tried to grab it from me, but he was too slow. I look forward to one day living in a world where adults can walk down the street without being harassed for … Read more on Free Keene […]
The only people that need jobs are the imbeciles and trouble makers that plague our public areas and streets. New hobbies? Perhaps a girlfriend? I suggest you might join a club, ride a bike, fly a kite, do something other than antagonize people and reduce the quality of life in our area. Free speech? Sure…stage a sit in, a picket line, write an article, hold a sign. Stop defacing our city, harassing our citizens and destroying our community.