The Musings of a Magyar

Hearing bits and pieces about what all is going on in Iran right now with the presidential ballot problems, and various journalists and pundits discussing what the U.S. response is, should be, or should have been, I thought I’d let my imagination run wild and determine what kind of response some recent Presidents (and wannabe presidents) would have.

Reagan:  If you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for Iran and for the Middle East, then, Mr. Supreme Leader, recount those votes!

Bush (41):  Read my lips: no new political or military actions.

Clinton:  Now I want you to listen to me.  I’m not going to say this again: I did NOT have political relations with that country, Iran.  I never told anybody to protest, not a single time.  Never.  These allegations are false.

Bush (43):  What?  Trouble in Iran?  Nuke them.  I don’t care what it takes.  Get every gun, every plane, every piece of artillery and get them over that country. America is threatened by these yahoos, and we’re gonna protect ourselves by wiping out everyone else.  Just let me  at ‘em, they’re going to regret messin’ with George Dubya.

Obama:  Well, we’re going to have to have a dialogue here.  And mark my words, I’ll be adding to the agenda this whole election counting issue.  I definitely think we need to chat about this.  And after some dialogue, we can talk a little more and see if it gets anywhere.  And if that doesn’t work, we’ll send over a few billion dollars in stimulus money in an attempt to continue our efforts at dialogue.

A few others:

Al Gore:  At first I wasn’t going to comment because I’m not sure I can link this issue in Iran to global warming.  And after reading all about this on the Internet (which I helped invent), I really can’t make any statements.  I mean, I have no experience whatsoever of losing an election and then raising a giant stink by alleging voter fraud and miscounting and conspiracies.

John Kerry:  I don’t have much to comment on.  But I served in Vietnam.

This afternoon while walking outside through a rain-soaked parking lot, I felt a strange wet sensation on the bottom of my foot.  Further inspection showed that the bottom of my left shoe had worn down to the point that there was now a crack in it, allowing water to seep through.  And hence, my wet foot.

So, this weekend will bring with it a new adventure in shoe shopping.  Joy.

Meanwhile, I think I need to clarify my prayers a bit.  Someone up there got a little confused when I was praying for a holy soul.  Instead, I got a holey sole.

The other day I happened across a commercial that was attempting to sell reusable metal containers for people to tote water around instead of buying plastic bottles.  They made all kinds of pitches to induce you into buying such a container:

• Plastic bottles clog up landfills for eternity
• Ounce for ounce you pay so much more for bottled water than if you just drank from the tap
• Most bottled water is, in face, just glorified tap water anyway
• Recycling plastic bottles releases toxic chemicals which are apparently just as bad for the environment as having them occupy landfils
• Plastic bottles have been known to leach a synthetic estrogen, which can cause breast and other cancers.

Hmmmmm.  So a plastic bottle can cause the body to absorb synthetic estrogen.  The absorption of estrogen is, according to this source, a bad thing, because it can cause cancer.

But, ya know, there’s all those contraceptive “birth control” pills out there that are chock full of synthetic estrogen, and other hormones.  But it’s okay, there’s no cancer risk there.

Am I missing something?

This morning, the radio station did an informal, unscientific “heard in the street” segment wherein they asked random people if they could name two Supreme Court Justices.  Then they asked if they could name two American Idol judges.

Not surprisingly, 7 of the 8 people polled could not name two of the Supremes.  I think all but two could name some subset of American Idol judges.

I think that’s pathetic.  I seem to recall a few years ago, there was a similar segment with the question being “can you name the current Vice-President” and most people could not.  Equally pathetic.  Wake up, America!  These are some of the most powerful people in the country right now.  You should, at the very least, know their names. 

Maybe it’s time we have a prime-time series covering basic civics.

Of recent news in Philadelphia is the story of a brutal child rape earlier this week, followed by the primary “person of interest” being captured by local residents.  The group of locals who caught said person of interest were rather violent in their apprehension, and this individual ended up hospitalized with some injuries as a result.  Words are being tossed around in the media like “citizen’s arrest,” “vigilantes,” and “street justice.”  I wish they wouldn’t use such terms as it clouds objectivity.

The mayor has issued a finely worded statement about how violence is not to be condoned and let the police determine what is the right course of action in dealing with the group of captors.  The police commissioner has  subsequently stated that they cannot condone violence and this group  probably acted more forcefully than a trained police officer would, but ultimately there were to be no charges filed.

On the radio this morning, there was some banter among the DJ’s who were virtually ecstatic that there would be no charges filed against the citizens, and that these guys are heroes given how heinous the crime (child rape) was.

I disagree.

First off, the man has rights.  As far as I know, no warrant was issued for the guy’s arrest.  I don’t even think they had labeled him a “suspect” yet.  In other words, regardless of whether or not he actually committed the crime, he is innocent until proven guilty.  Just because someone is wanted for questioning does not mean he is guilty, and he has the same rights of being secure in his person, house, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seisures.  I’m not sure if there’s a legal difference, but I think there would be a theoretical difference if the guy were an escaped convict who had been eluding authorities for days.

Second, the concept of citizen’s arrest does not give the general public the authority to round up anyone who may have a warrant out for their arrest, or who may be suspected of a crime.  A citizen’s arrest may only be effected if the private citizen witnesses the arrestee in the commission of a felony.  (Not even a misdemeanor or summary offence.)  No citizen gets to hunt down people and haul them in just because the police are looking for them.  Even when alerts are issued, people are told to call 911 if they come across such a person to let law enforcement handle it.  Perhaps there are exceptions if one is appropriately deputized by a legitimate law enforcement officer, but that certainly didn’t seem to apply here.

Third, the use of force did not seem justifiable.  One might be able to excuse the over-exuberrence of the neighbors in catching and holding the guy even if they had no legal authority to do so, but there is no excuse for beating the daylights out of him.  If it were a one-on-one contest and both sustained injuries, one could argue self-defence, but we’re talking what seemed to be a mob here.

Yes, it was noble of them to try and aid the police in bringing this man in for questioning.  No, it was not proper for them to form their own mob in an attempt to subdue him and hold him.  I think the group acted strongly out of emotion.  This guy might have been the one that brutalized a little girl.  If so, he deserves to pay for his crimes.  But not before he is given the same rights to due process as the rest of us.  And not at the hands of a group of neighborhood folks.

They don’t deserve the title “hero.”  I don’t think they necessarily deserve to be locked up either.  But a stern warning to them, and to the population at large, that this is unacceptable behavior, even if with the best of intentions, does not seem inappropriate.  Maybe even charging them with assault, and then offering a suspended sentence after they strike a plea deal.  Otherwise, you’re sending a message that we’re going to look the other way when people take the law into their own hands.

And that could lead to some scary consequences.  I’m sure andy number of African Americans who grew up in Mississippi or some other southern state during the first half of the 20th century would be able to explain far better than me what the results could be.