Crime and Punishment
Posted in Of The People by R Lee Wrights on April 18th, 2007 by Ed Lewis
- Jack McLamb, Retired Police Officer
Before we can discuss crime and punishment, we must first understand what a crime is.
Let us say you accidentally damage your neighbor’s house, perhaps because your lawn mower picked up a rock and threw it through a window on your neighbor’s house. Was a crime committed?
Let us say you pick up a rock and intentionally throw it through your neighbor’s window. Was a crime committed?
Let us say that you speed intentionally and nothing happens except that you traveled rapidly on our highways. Was a crime committed?
Let us say that you speed intentionally and accidentally smash into another’s car? Was a crime committed?
Let us say that you speed intentionally and intentionally smash into another’s car? Was a crime committed?
Let us say that you use marijuana. Do you commit a crime?
Let us say that you had a taillight out and some law enforcer stopped you and gave you a ticket? Have you committed a crime? More important, was a crime committed?
Let us say that you use marijuana and that sometime during the usage, you accidentally run into another person’s car. Did you commit a crime?
What if you run a stop sign and do not hit another car? Was a crime committed?
What if you fail to mow your grass? Did you commit a crime?
What if you break into your neighbor’s house and take some of his stuff without his permission? Was a crime committed?
What if you hold up a store? Was a crime committed?
What if you fail to show up at a municipal court, meaning a state-created administrative hearing, for violation of some city or county ordinance or some other bill of pains and punishments enacted by the state legislature? Have you committed a crime?
The answer to most of these is, “No, you haven’t committed a crime, but the State, city or county has if you were arrested, tried, fined, and/or incarcerated.
Our prisons are full of people that have committed no crime, roughly 70 to 80 percent. When one understands “redress to the victim” or “redress that may be granted upon a claim”, the fact that government is filling privatized prison systems and treating non-crimes as crimes in order to facilitate revenue collection becomes clear. Prisons and jails are money-makers for the controllers.
When one understands the true intention of prosecuting “crimes” and how the de facto governments and quasi governments (city and county chartered corporate “governments”) have distorted justice and the philosophies behind claims to which redress may be granted, one will understand more completely the meaning of justice and the justice system. True justice, you see, is not to be confused with the horrible mess our people are now subjected to for both “crimes” and “non-crimes”.
Always, without fail, we must ask, “qui bono”, or who benefits when we discuss crime, punishment, and one might add the victim in the case of a bona fide crime. When this question is answered, one easily comes to realize that we people have allowed the de facto governments to establish “rule” over us.
When I was maybe nine years old, I stole a package of gum from a small grocery store (all of them were small then, as the mega impersonal corporate “super” stores were just beginning to spawn across our land).
Did I commit a crime? Yes, I did.
Did the victims get redress? Yes, they did.
Did public servants or any corporation profit? No.
Was justice served? Yes, it was.
Was all made right by the actions taken against me? Yes.
Was I handcuffed, treated like a crazed animal and jailed? No.
In fact, were any dumb-as-an-ass law enforcer, prosecuting attorney (the bane of a free society), and judge involved? No, there weren’t and not even a peace officer was involved.
And, yet, the writer has the audacity to state that justice was served. How can that be?
Another time the writer shot out 40 streetlights with his air pistol? Was a crime committed? Yes.
Was a peace officer involved? Yes, the Chief of Police.
Was I handcuffed and taken to jail? No.
Did the victims receive redress? Yes.
Who were the victims? I daresay not what or who most people would think.
Did the state legislatively created corporate CITY OF BROOKFIELD Government profit? No.
Was justice served? Yes.
Was all made right with redress to the victims and the one damaging them punished? Yes.
What is the difference then to now as kids are arrested, fingerprinted, and jailed for pretending their fingers are guns or for other stupid reasons to far to enumerate in this commentary?
The difference is that once upon a time in America justice was served rather than injustice against people, whether the one doing the damage or the one damaged. Also, there is now the use of terrorism by public servants to force compliance to ex post facto laws and bills of pains and punishments (non-lethal bills of attainder) thereby committing crimes against the people.
The difference also is that corrupt government has created crimes when no crime exists. This is nothing but a racketeering business by what is called government, giving it huge revenue amounts and unconstitutional control over people.
You see, unless there is a human victim intentionally damaged, there can be no crime. Only artificial persons can violate statutes and ordinances. In other words, statutory crimes can only apply to corporations and other artificial creations of government.
Without a damaged human being by another natural or artificial person, there is no human being to which redress may be granted.
Furthermore, the damage done to the human being or his property must be intentional and recognized as a crime. This includes murder (to which the people are the prosecutor, as in “The People v. …”), burglary, assault, and rape, the four classes that the F.B.I. keeps stats on as offenses against the people, or the person in common language usage.
Keep in mind that the purpose of redress is to offset the loss by the victim, whether it is a criminal act (with intention) or an accident.
To summarize:
1. There must be a human victim, as fictions cannot be injured; they exist only in our minds.
2. There must be the intention to harm another human or his property; otherwise, it is an accident.
3. The act must be defined as a crime, not by statutes, but by our Law, Nature’s Law, which is easily derived from the Ten Commandments our justice is based on, whether one is a true Christian or not.
Now, the writer asks you - why should governments profit from crimes committed by one or more of our people against others? Well, they shouldn’t. Being convicted of a crime should entail first and foremost redress to the victim. The State government, for example, does not suffer a loss, as the people pay for our courthouses and all materials. Nor do the chartered City or County, since police and sheriffs are paid for by the people and are supposed to be servants protecting the rights - all of them - of the people.
Can the victim get redress if the convicted accused is put in jail? No.
Does the government profit if the convicted is put in jail? Yes, it does, if reporting on bid bonding, fines, selling of recovered stolen property, property seized and sold through alleged ties to crime, and so on are factual.
I believe the reports are true, particularly since fines do not come to the victim. Then, there are many sources one can read about bid bonding, the incentives for arresting people and getting convictions, PERS (retirement funds), prisoners as slave laborers for corporations, and the fact that one of the biggest complaints the writer has heard is that goods were recovered but the victim never got anything back.
In fact, CBS a few years ago ran a television special on Louisiana law enforcement. The judge received 50 percent, the prosecuting attorney 30 percent, and the arresting officer(s) 20 of the proceeds from fines and property confiscation. Actually, due to demand, CBS ran the special a second time. The actions against innocent people were so atrocious, the writer vowed he would never travel across Louisiana again, and he hasn’t even though it is the shortest way to get from a brother’s home in Mississippi to another brother’s home in Texas.
In regard to recovered goods, the writer knows for a fact this happens, as it has happened to him. In 1977 or 1978, his home was broke into. The Johnson County, Missouri Sheriff (I do not recall his name) told him the burglar had been caught and his goods recovered. After two years of trying to get my stuff back, I was traveling a great deal in sales and finally gave up, figuring the people in the sheriff’s department was going to keep it or had already sold it. Either way, I received no redress and never even found out if the guy had been convicted.
The same happened to a brother, but in his case, the police department used his VCR (then in the 400 to 500 dollar range) until it wore out. Every time he asked about it, just as with the Johnson County “server and protector” and myself, the stolen property had to be kept as “evidence” in the trial.
Anyway, readers have enough information to answer the above questions and many others for them selves. After answering them, think “qui bono” - who or what benefits from making millions of rules falsely turning nearly everyone into criminals - except the clods in public offices - when, in fact, it is those writing and enforcing statutes upon the people that are the criminals, committing hundreds of thousands of bona fide crimes against the American people every year.
Think about that the next time you pay a fee to exercise a right or pay a fine for exercising a right.
Think about it, as the prisons are over-flowing with people that have not, in fact, committed a “crime”.
This isn’t America, Good Folks, this is the bastardized land of injustice - Ameri-Ka - the land ruled by the cartel of thieves, murderers, and racketeers we mistakenly call “our government.”
Oh, yes, as to the two cases mentioned way above, I did steal a pack of gum from Ridgeway’s Market and my dad found out, I think from one or both of the brothers. I had to go apologize to the brothers, the owners of Ridgeway’s Market, pay for the gum, and offer my services to them in retribution. My dad trailed along to make sure I did it right.
In the other case, it is true I shot out a bunch of streetlights, so the police chief acting on a report came to my house and told Dad. They decided my punishment would be to pay for every light that was out, instead of using my meager earnings (35 cents per hour for just under 40 hours a week) for me until the cost of the lights was made up.
In both cases, justice prevailed and all was made right with the world. The victims (Ridgeway brothers and the people living in Brookfield whose tax money paid for the lights) got redress and it was the beginning of my turning away from a ‘life of crime.’
Compare these two cases of my wayward youth to the Gestapo tactics used against our young today by out-of-control jack-booted thugs, so to speak, wearing badges but devoid of any common decency, rational and righteous thinking, and constitutional righteousness.
