Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

Here is a story about a town who used its police to legally steal money from peaceful people in an amount equal to $483 per capita.

By 2020 Brookside made more misdemeanor arrests than it has residents. It went from towing 50 vehicles in 2018 to 789 in 2020 – each carrying fines.

[...]

Defendants must pay thousands in fines and fees – or pay for costly appeals to state court – and poorer residents or passersby fall into patterns of debt they cannot easily escape.

“Brookside is a poster child for policing for profit,” said Carla Crowder, the director of Alabama Appleseed Center for Law & Justice, a nonprofit devoted to justice and equity. “We are not safer because of it.”

[...]

By 2020 officers in the sleepy town were undergoing SWAT training and dressing in riot gear, even as the city continued with only a volunteer fire department. It parked a riot control vehicle — townspeople call it a tank — outside the municipal complex and community center. Traffic tickets, and criminalizing those who passed through, became the city’s leading industry.

[...]

“It’s not about making a dollar,” Jones said.

Yet the town with no traffic lights collected $487 in fines and forfeitures in 2020 for every man, woman and child, though many of those fined were merely passing by on I-22.

[...]

Lawyer Martin Weinberg had a client in Brookside, a young man named Thomas Hall, who was stopped for speeding and found with a small amount of marijuana.

He was charged with misdemeanor possession, but also five counts of possession of drug paraphernalia, for:

Rolling papers
The baggie that held the marijuana
Cigar wrappers
A small jar “that once may have held marijuana”
And a small tray that “might have” been used to roll a joint

The names of the officers were not listed on the tickets in secretive Brookside. Instead, the arresting officer was listed as “Agent JS,” while the assisting officer was “Agent AR.”

A judge set Hall’s fines at $6,000, and he had to post $12,000 bond while he appealed the case.


Read Full Article

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

According to this source, over 75,000 people are in solitary confinement in the USA alone.

Of course, that's just at any one time. So the number of human beings permanently damaged or driven insane by the procedure over the course of a year or decade is much, much higher, immeasurably so.

John Oliver just did a very informative episode about it in which he reported the following:

In general, researchers have found violence is typically NOT the most common reason people are sent to solitary.

In Oregon, researchers once found that disobedience was the infraction resulting in the most solitary confinement sanctions. And nationwide, people have been sent to solitary for reasons including– and these are real – not making their bed, using Facebook, and having too many envelopes.

...a 2016 report found that “there is little evidence that administrative segregation has had any effects on overall levels of violence” in correctional facilities. In fact some research has found subjecting people to solitary can lead them to become more, not less, violent.

..by the mid-1800s, the psychological harms of isolation were becoming clear. And by 1890, the supreme court declared that solitary confinement made prisoners, quote, “violently insane.” After that, the practice was largely abandoned until the 1980s, when mass incarceration led to prison overcrowding.

Keep in mind, the vast most of inmates in the USA are only charged with non-violent crimes, such as marijuana possession.

Some of the people being driven literally insane by the torture of solitary confinement are full-blown pacifists who are more peaceful than MLK and Gandhi. Of course, that's no surprise since both MLK and Gandhi were themselves repeatedly arrested disobedient criminals who both did jail time.

But unlike many inmates today, MLK and Gandhi were actually guilty of the crimes with which they were charged.

Many people in jail or prison for non-violent crimes today aren't even guilty of the allegations, not that it matters, since the allegations are for non-violent victimless activities like marijuana possession.

More often than not, the violent victimizers are law-abiders.

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

#WarOnDrugs #CivilForfeiture #Statism #NannyState #MassIncarceration #DefundTheDEA #EndTheWarOnDrugs

Selected quotes from video:

Often acting on little or no information, federal Drug Enforcement Administration agents target certain travelers and bully them into letting their bags be searched.

The DEA agent claimed that he could keep and search David's bag. But that's just not true. The Fourth Amendment protects the stuff in your bag just as much as the stuff in your pockets.

In the moment, I felt extremely violated by his actions. I felt extremely angry and extremely shocked by what happened. I think over the past few months, as the anger has dissipated, it's been a feeling of just privileged in the sense that nothing had happened to me, but injustice for those where something much worse had happened to them.

What happened to David was illegal, but sadly it occurs every day at America's airports. The reason? Something known as civil forfeiture. It is completely legal to travel domestically, as David was, with any amount of cash. But agencies like the DEA seize cash anyway. Why? Under civil forfeiture laws, they get to keep the lion's share of any cash they can seize and successfully forfeit. So if David had been flying with a large amount of cash, the agent would have seized it, just like what happened to our clients Rebecca Brown, Stacy Jones, Kermit Warren, Jerry Johnson, Rustem Kazazi, and others.

[Samana Johann]

Why not a topic that shares goodness? Once aversion enters one's heart, yours know,...

After all, it's always an individual act, and also hard to know all right.

[value]

I once reported about a case that involved repeated solitary confinement of an elderly man with a Nazi camp syndrome.

SP Raises Parliamentary Questions on the Fatal Mistreatment of Elderly Nazi Camp Survivor

The recent death of a dementia patient with a history of Nazi camp internment has ignited a firestorm of ethical debate and political inquiry in the Netherlands. The incident, which occurred at the Haarlem clinic 'De Geestgronden', involves allegations of what the family describes as torture, raising profound questions about the nature of care, institutional responsibility, and the long-term effects of historical trauma.

Joop van Put, a 77-year-old man suffering from dementia and what his family terms "camp syndrome," died on January 2nd following a series of controversial interventions at the psychiatric facility. Despite explicit warnings from his daughter about his vulnerable psychological state and traumatic past, Mr. van Put was subjected to isolation practices that his family claims directly contributed to his death.

The sequence of events began on November 21st of the previous year when Mr. van Put was forcibly admitted to the crisis unit of Zuiderpoort, a facility operated by GGZ inGeest. Upon arrival, he was sedated, stripped of his clothing, and placed in isolation—actions that, given his history as a camp survivor, carry particularly weighty implications.

Mr. van Put's daughter recounts finding her father "crying and shivering from the cold" the day after his admission. She emphasizes that she had informed the attending psychiatrist of her father's internment history in Nazi camps during World War II, stressing his status as a recognized war victim. Despite assurances that further isolation would not occur, Mr. van Put was again placed in seclusion merely three days later.

"My father was totally broken," his daughter stated in a radio interview. "That isolation ripped open his Nazi camp past with a large dagger." The family contends that Mr. van Put's subsequent death from a heart attack was a direct consequence of his treatment at the facility.

Clinical psychologist and seclusion expert Bert van der Werf characterizes the use of isolation in this case as "disproportionate," asserting that "placing elderly people with dementia in isolation is an absolute contraindication." Van der Werf suggests that the mishandling of Mr. van Put's case stems from systemic issues, including inadequate specialized care for dementia patients.

The incident has drawn the attention of political figures, with SP Member of Parliament Henk van Gerven describing the seclusion as "pointless and inhumane." Van Gerven has posed parliamentary questions to the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport, seeking clarification on the events and expressing concern about potential systemic issues within the institution.

Adding to the controversy, it has emerged that the Health Care Inspectorate was not initially informed about the seclusions, a required reporting procedure. Inspectorate spokesperson Wouter van der Horst confirms that contact has been made with GGZ inGeest following the news reports, stating, "Both seclusions were not reported, and they should have been."

GGZ inGeest has declined to comment on the specific incident, citing privacy concerns. Deputy medical director Paulan Stärcke offered only a general statement, noting that seclusion can be used as a last resort for dementia patients when necessary to ensure safety, but it is "absolutely not the first choice."

The institution's reticence has further fueled criticism. Van Gerven expresses dismay at the lack of transparency, stating, "I'm surprised that no one from the institution is saying: this can't go on like this. Is there no one who thinks this should be prevented? If we start to consider this as normal, the norm will keep shifting further."


https://www.zielenknijper.com/ (shrink.com)

The critical blog zielenknijper.com took on such cases between 2006-2014, as part of its fundamental questioning of the idea that mind is produced by the brain. It is nice to see that the author of this forum cares for similar cases.

Why not a topic that shares goodness? Once aversion enters one's heart, yours know,...

After all, it's always an individual act, and also hard to know all right.

The advice that I have always given to people: maintain focus on how the world should be. Perhaps you are right to some extent, but when it concerns questions of human culture, it might be argued that these cases should not be neglected.

[Samana Johann]

Why not a topic that shares goodness? Once aversion enters one's heart, yours know,...

After all, it's always an individual act, and also hard to know all right.

The advice that I have always given to people: maintain focus on how the world should be. Perhaps you are right to some extent, but when it concerns questions of human culture, it might be argued that these cases should not be neglected.

Good householder. It's global media culture to elevate one's ideas by pointing on the bad. That was just a tiny point on how "Big governments" act. In cases of good, there seems to be any neglection.

It's not about how the world should be, but how one could view things, address things, so that it is conductive for one's own well-being and that of others. Witch-hunting might be an easy tool to catch following, yet one might forget that it's easy to become the witch himself.

Harm is never overcome by harm, but only by no-harm.

[value]

A philosopher on [external link] once mentioned the following:

"There is no greater example of mental weakness than the idea that military technology and might is the solution to war. It is this very weakness that fuels our wars. Violence begets violence and nothing more."

Spinoza argued the following:

He who is led by fear, and does good in order to escape evil, is not led by reason.
...
Corollary.--Under desire which springs from reason, we seek good directly, and shun evil indirectly.

This is what I intended to indicate: to maintain focus within the scope of reason. To maintain focus on good. Start from a vision of good, even when addressing the bad.


You wrote the following:

Why not a topic that shares goodness? Once aversion enters one's heart, yours know,...

After all, it's always an individual act, and also hard to know all right.

When addressing cultural problems, such as is being done in this topic. Can you please describe more specifically what is detrimental about it in your opinion? Would it be wrong to hold the greater authority responsible in the case of the cited incidents?


As an example: LuckyR suggested that the incidents reported in this topic cannot be connected to a 'state' or 'police officers' acting as a whole, but when the issues are neglected and unreported by those enforcing authorities, then it can be an argument that the state or police officers are to be held responsible as a whole, and thus it would become the responsibility of others to act on behalf of the moral responsibility to foster 'ought' cultural change.

Just to clarify, the police are representatives of the government when they enforce governmental laws according to governmental guidelines. Rogue cops acting outside of the above are just individuals acting badly (which no job description is immune to, even authors).

The case that I shared in my previous post is about that. It shows a politician asking "I'm surprised that no one from the institution is saying: this can't go on like this. Is there no one who thinks this should be prevented? If we start to consider this as normal, the norm will keep shifting further.".

The reporting is about more than the bad in the incident. The case reveals a more fundamental problem at the institutional level: people within the institution are being silent by which severe problems can manifest, because of which the institution and even its higher authority in the form of a medical authority is to be declared responsible.

What is the reason that the nurses in my example case were silent? What appears to be an incident or 'individual bad actors' may actually reveal something more fundamental at the higher authority level: the culture of the greater medical profession or authority that the institution is a part of.

[Samana Johann]

People always like to claim others for their misery, and usually start by their parents, teacher, leader. Yet nobody asked them to come, but accepted them at first place.

Seldom does on focus on his duties, obligations, in regard of goodness. Yours does no more go after culture, does not even understand what cultivation means but sees delight in de-generating for the sake of feeling remorseless and gifted to consume.

It's the age of frogs biting snakes. Parents act as slaves of their children...

If able to solve an issue, and acts are the causes of issues, meaning prevent someone acting wrong, or encourage to bend ways, that's praiseworthy.

Compensation justice, again, has no use for anybody, it just makes people hang on an illusion that ideals can be demanded, and broken could be fixed. People meet the fruits of their deeds in all cirumstances, there is no way to escape.

Rebelling the foolish mass against their authorities makes things just worse. Yours wouldn't be able to look after them either. People gather together, find together, again and again, on an element. Certain nourishment, and ways of gain (virtue) is the spectrum of elements.

Sharing good deeds, of oneself and others, is not only generous, meaning certain liberating, but helps also to bend wrong into right view, which leads even toward the Brahmas and beyond.

At least, ill-will or desire to keep control, is one of the five hindrances for doing one's task, saying "I only will do, if I get what I think it should be". This fool spends all his time to sympathies with hellish states by touching things far out of his control and his own work stays undone. Is unable to gather effort and go on.

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

Reuters (July 23rd, 2024): Video of Illinois deputy shooting Black woman

Massey [the victim] then said: "I rebuke you in the name of Jesus," after which Grayson [the cop] aimed his gun at her and threatened to shoot her in the face.

As Grayson [the cop] instructed her to drop the pot, Massey [the victim] said, "I'm sorry" and began to duck.

During this exchange, Massey [the victim] made no apparent verbal threats nor any movement in the officers' direction.

Grayson [the cop] made two steps toward the kitchen, yelled at her to drop the pot again and began shooting. He then alerted his superiors that he had shot Massey in the face and turned on his body camera. The entire incident was caught on the second officer's camera.

He was smart enough to wait to turn on his body cam until after shooting the poor woman in the face while she ducked in fear.

He would have gotten away with it if only it hadn't been caught on the other cop's body cam.

meddling-body-cams.jpg (93.8 KiB) Viewed 513 times

[Eckhart Aurelius Hughes]

Riverside Country, California:

Video: Cop forces his way in house, says, "Now that I am inside your house, I own your house," then attacks and arrests peaceful mom in her own house.


^ Click the link above to view the full video.