Eric Garner: A Libertarian Cautionary Tale

As most now know, the police officers responsible for the death of Eric Garner - unarmed man who was accosted while selling illegal cigarettes on the street and then nonviolently failing to comply - have not been indicted. Legally speaking, this might be 'reasonable'. The laws are unreasonable, after all. When you stack your house on that foundation, injustice is bound to result.

Of course, because Garner was black, this has ballooned into a racial narrative, piggy backing on the Mike Brown case in Ferguson where an unarmed black man was shot by police while involved in a physical altercation. The two situations aren't even remotely the same, but I'm here to talk about Eric Garner. He deserves undivided attention. He represents, in tragic detail, the problem with our legal system, the politicians who create it, and the police who enforce it.

First, let me say, selling cigarettes without a permit should not be illegal. The reason it is illegal is simple. Taxes. Big Brother government cannot make a cut on what you are selling - certainly not the insane cut the state of New York makes per pack - and therefore it must be illegal. It is ironic, I think, how many laws exist for the express purpose of taxing people, given the history of how this nation was freed from the iron fisted rule of England. And let's not forget that these taxes target and hurt the least fortunate in society. Don't pay too much attention to that, because most of these insane taxes were written and implemented by politicians who took power by claiming they cared about the poor and the plight of the poor. Nanny State laws are generally always written by the very people who win elections at the hands of the poor who they exploit. But that's a topic for another day. For the purposes of this main point, suffice it to say, if we cut all the laws on the books that have no victim (like selling cigarettes on the street) the law would be concise enough to fit in a pamphlet.

So, you have a man selling cigarettes, yes illegal, on the street. Now, a reasonable person would say, "Dude, you can't sell those here," and move on. But why don't the police do this? Because they are encouraged to enforce these laws, no matter how nonsensical. One of the primary roles of the modern police is bringing in revenue. They ticket people for these behaviors with regularity. That's money for the government. Convenient, that. Writing laws with no victim that you know people will break so that you have built in revenue. One might even say, it's corrupt as fuck. I'll say it. It's corrupt as fuck. Now, as a citizen of the police state, you are required to take your ticket like a good little boy or girl, pay your fine and be done with it. But what if you question? Well, if you question, apparently you get dragged to the ground, put in a chokehold, and your pleas for mercy are completely ignored.

Why, you might want to ask yourself, would a reasonable person look at the Eric Garner video and conclude the police had the right to do what they did? A culture that gives police the right to use almost any means necessary to 'subdue' someone who is 'resisting'...and we seem to have an incredibly liberal interpretation of the words 'subdue' and 'resisting'. Eric Garner was clearly nonviolently refusing to comply. Since when, in a country that constantly harps about its freedom and liberty, did nonviolent refusal to comply equal resisting arrest? And since when was such an act of 'resistance' grounds for physical assault? Eric Garner was, in no way shape or form, a threat to the 5 or so police standing around gawking at him. And yet, they have the right to take him down. Why? Because we've deemed the sale of illegal cigarettes (and violation of tax money into the hands of the State) so egregious an offence, this hardened criminal had to be removed from society immediately for fear of public safety? Really? Who is buying that?

Race, of course, plays a role in this discussion. And a good portion of that narrative is one that the media and people who benefit from dividing us have created to generate more controversy. That is not to say black men are not unfairly targeted by police. I do think that is inarguable at this point. But these things could literally happen to anyone, regardless of color.  We don't NEED to generate more racial controversy. This event, by itself, should be controversial enough. This happens to people of all colors. This is a law problem. This is a police problem. And this is a political problem. When you start asking the government to fix and regulate everything, you are going to get a lot of bullshit laws. And when you want those laws kept, you are going to have to give the government (police) the power to enforce them. And when you are enforcing those laws, you cannot be impeded by anything as petty as a free citizen's right to refuse to comply or exercise his free speech. And so, you get what we have here. A tragic case of how Government overreach literally chokes the life out of us. In this case, it choked the life out of Eric Garner.

And because nothing can happen in America without team cheering, we have people who supposedly believe in Small Government claiming that Mr. Garner should have 'complied'. And we have the very same people who voted the Statists in office wondering why the police have so much power. If people could look past the divisive racial soapboxing, the Republican v. Democrat nonsense, and our need to be defensive, we could actually talk about the bigger issues here and make headway on fixing them as a society.

I asked my Facebook friends this:

Constitutionalists: I have the right to bear arms for my own purposes, not limited to but including the right to protect myself from the government should it try to infringe on my rights and/or property.
People who claim to be Constitutionalists: Always comply with everything a law enforcement officer tells you. 

Someone explain this. 

Statists: The government has the right to limit and regulate and ban all behaviours that could be deemed a threat to the State and/or public safety in the name of the greater good of society as a whole.
People who support Statists: Why are police attacking people for selling cigarettes in the street? 

Someone explain this.

I kind of doubt I'll get any explanation. We are more comfortable sticking to script. But I post the same challenge to you. Can you explain this? Should anyone be tackled to the ground for selling 

loosies? Do police have the right to physically assault people posing no threat who are behaving nonviolently? Do Government regulations help or hurt this problem? You decide.