David Boaz, writing for USA Today, draws parallels between the Arab Spring and the protest of the Staten Island grand jury finding of no official misconduct in the death of a seller of loosies.  The common theme: Mohamed Bouazizi of Tunisia hit legal obstacle after legal obstacle in attempting to set up a business, and Eric Garner of Staten Island similarly hit legal obstacle after legal obstacle in attempting to sell a product that cash-poor consumers wanted.  And public policies that tax consumption are public policies that encourage smuggling.  Hell, I knew Scout leaders and police officers in Milwaukee that would on occasion make a family jaunt to Illinois.  Not for a Cub game.  To buy oleo.  Thus, perhaps in the death of a Staten Island street vendor, there might be a broad coalition for the rollback of overweening government.
Let's hope this coming spring brings a wave of police reform in the United States, and also a reconsideration of the high taxes, prohibitions, and nanny-state regulations that are making so many Americans technically criminals and exacerbating police-citizen tensions.
That change will not come without arguments over the proper role of the state. Charles C. W. Cooke notes that friends of the administrative state reject the radical argument that regulating everything makes everyone a criminal. "As a rule, progressives believe that human nature can be changed over time, that abuses of power can be rooted out with better education and the selection of more angelic enforcers, and that by playing with societal variables in precisely the right way we will be able to turn the state into a benevolent and loving force."  Robby Soave is more forceful.
When a million things are highly regulated or outright illegal—from cigarettes to sodas of a certain size, unlicensed lemonade stands, raw milk, alcohol (for teens), marijuana, food trucks, taxicab alternatives, and even fishing supplies (in schools)—the unrestrained, often racist police force has a million reasons to pick on people. Punitive cigarette taxes, which disproportionately fall on the backs of the poorest of the poor, contribute to police brutality in the exact same way that the war on drugs does. Liberals readily admit the latter; why is the former any different?

If you want all these things to be illegal, you must want—by the very definition of the word illegal—the police to force people not to have them. Government is a gang of thugs who are paid to push us around. It's their job.

A well-meaning liberal who doesn't want people to smoke but also doesn't want the government to kill them for doing so has plenty of other options, by the way. There are countless organizations and products dedicated to helping people quit cigarettes voluntarily.

But anybody who wants it to be a matter of law must accept that resistance will be met with fines, prison, and death.
Or else, that there are unicorns.  In the absence of unicorns, "Decriminalize normal nonviolent daily activity, and the police will have a lot fewer excuses to harass people they don't like and who can't fight back."

No comments: