A broader concept of voluntary

Many people have seen the videos made last week which clearly show, prove, and demonstrate how law enforcement officials in Boston, in their pursuit of a severely injured teenager, pulled innocent civilians out of their homes AT GUN POINT, frisked them in the front yard while barking orders at them, then raided their homes against their will.

This would appear to seriously call into the question the claim that the lockdowns and the searches were “voluntary”. It would also appear to illustrate that even the people who did not need to be pulled out of their homes, because they came out obediently in the first place, only did so because of the fear generated by the ridiculously unnecessary display of force. A display of force that was proven unnecessary when the military tactics did not produce results, and instead the suspect was eventually spotted by some guy smoking a cigarette in his backyard. All of these things would appear to be true, yes.

But, in fact, things are not always as they appear. You see, despite the tanks in the street, and the federal agents pointing automatic rifles at their chests, the members of the community still acted voluntarily. To understand this, you must first understand that we are working with a more inclusive definition of the word “voluntary”. The boring, old fashioned, government-limiting, “actual” definition of “voluntary” is: “Acting or done without compulsion or obligation.” Now, according to “the dictionary” (pffft there’s a biased source for you) it’s unavoidably clear that there was literally nothing voluntary about anything that happened. After all, once you introduce armored trucks, SWAT teams, and rifles being shoved into faces, one would assume that these things could be defined as slight-to-moderate “compulsory” factors.

But, fortunately, the government has broadened the concept of “voluntary” to the point where now it can be defined, in two parts, as follows: “A) Anything anyone does at the behest of a government agent, regardless of compulsion, regardless of threats of detainment, arrest, and/or death, regardless of the tank in their front yard, regardless of any force or manipulation employed, regardless of the fear and panic that had to be manufactured and then exploited to coerce the desired action, and regardless of the guy screaming “DO THIS OR I’LL SHOOT YOU”. B) Not voluntary.”

So, you see, there’s still nothing to worry about. Besides, the government only acted this way in this ONE, SINGLE, SOLITARY case. It was different, you know, because there was a potentially dangerous suspect on the loose. I mean, law enforcement agents hardly EVER chase potentially dangerous suspects. I mean, it’s not like every police department in every major city spends every day pursuing dangerous, violent felons. No, not at all. This was different. I mean, plus this guy was a terrorist, as opposed to being something safe and non-threatening like a serial killer, or a mass murderer, or a gangbanger, or a home invader, or an armed robber, or a kidnapper, or a serial rapist. I mean, I lived in the DC-Baltimore area when a sniper was running around the region, blowing people’s heads off as they pumped their gas or stood at a bus stop. He was a FAR greater threat and, yet, I never saw 9,000 agents shutting down an entire city to find him. But, that’s, like, different. Or something.

Just shut up. Stop asking questions.

Go back to sleep.

Everything is fine.

Everything is OK.

Big Brother is taking care of you.

You’re safe. You’re safe. You’re safe…Shhhhh…

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.