• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Deprivation of Liberty over Cellulose

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
imported post

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0821081books1.html

This lady failed to return a couple of books to the library, so they arrested her. Cuffed her and took her downtown. Apparently, in this country, two books are worth more than the liberty of a human being.

God help us.

I disagree with you.

Library card use implies a contract between user & library - primarily to return borrowed books in good condition at the end of the loan period. Public funds were expended to obtain the books for the use and enjoyment of all citizens, and this lady decided to "appropriate" public property for her sole personal use.

The .gov tried politely to remind her that the books were overdue and needed to be returned. The the .gov politely informed her that if she did not return the books she would face penalties per a properly enacted city ordinance. Lady chose to disregard all communications regarding the necessity of returning public property to the library.

Lady suffered the consequences of disobeying the law, even when given multiple opportunities over an extended period of time to avoid said consequences.

Even after suffering all legal consequences, full due process was afforded to this criminal and she was able to quickly satisfy her debt (both literally and figuratively) to society and regain her freedom.

So, did I miss anything? Yes - I missed understanding what you are complaining about. Sorry.

stay safe.

skidmark
 

mzbk2l

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
425
Location
Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
imported post

Gotta go with skidmark on this one. IIRC, she even missed a court date about it. You miss a court date for anything and you're probably going to have a bench warrant issued.

Lady is an idiot who got exactly what she deserved.
 

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
imported post

skidmarkis right on with this. All of the citizens own the books and she wanted to "steal" them. If you kipe a candy bar from the convenience store you'll go to jail, too. Looks like they've got 2 more desperadoes to go after as well.
 

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

In the world I live in, a human being's liberty is not worth two late library books. There's no way this behavior should be addressed with a deprivation of liberty.

Take it up as a civil matter, if you have to. Attach her property, garnish her wages... there are plenty of ways to redress her breach of contract.

It's a shame, and a frightful thing, the power of the state to cuff you and criminalize you over two library books, and it's even more scary when citizens stand by and applaud. You guys are way too enamored of the state's power.

"Yeah! That'll teach her! You won't be late with yer books no more now, will ya, Lady!"

How petty.
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0821081books1.html

This lady failed to return a couple of books to the library, so they arrested her. Cuffed her and took her downtown. Apparently, in this country, two books are worth more than the liberty of a human being.

God help us.

Where is the break on what liberty is worth? Is it two books, ten books or how about the whole library?

She was reminded and chose to tell the Library to go chase thyself. :p Sounds like the Library and the Police did the correct thing here. :cry:
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
In the world I live in, a human being's liberty is not worth two late library books. There's no way this behavior should be addressed with a deprivation of liberty.

I'm League's camp on this one asa matter of general principle.

However, there is the question of how the library would enforce itsinterests AND give the citizen the opportunity rebut the library's claims. For any enforcement action--garnishment, etc, I'm thinking the person would deserve a day in court in case the library has fouled up their records or lost track that the citizen already paid late fees and returned the books.

Of the cuff, I'd saythe citizen deserves their day in court; and in this case, she elected to ignore the call.

It seems she was arrested not for the library book, but for ignoring the court.

The more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to say that risking arrest for ignoring the court isn't worth it when there are only two library books in play. At a certain point I have to ask,as an illustrative device,how much the citizen valued their liberty if they were willing to risk arrest for ignoring the court over two library books. Its not like she was avoiding the court because she was guilty of a felony and wanted to avoid five years for robbery.

Jeez. Pay the late fee and return the books.
 

Prophet

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2008
Messages
544
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

Why don't we open carry in New York City?Chicago? DC? Why don't we carry into federal buildings or courthouses?

Why? Because its against the law. We may not like the law in certain circumstance but we either adhere to it or we make a stand and pay the penalty until the law is changed. To that end, it wasn't as if this woman had 2 library books 3 days late and the goosesteppinggestapo busted down her door and hauled her away to a gulag never to be heard from again.

She stole from me. From you. From anyone who reads and after she waspolitely given the chance to make amends she told the library,judge, you and me to go stick our thumbs up our collective arses.

And she is not doing hard time...the authority got her attention after failing to do so previously and guess what? She paid her fine. Thats it, end of story.

By your logic League, no one should ever be arrested because someone will always question what a persons liberty is worth. In truth, by breaking a contract and failing to rectify it over several months and honest attempts on the victims part a sterner action was taken.

I have an innumerable amount of more sympathy to a California open carrier who gets hamstrung by some crooked cops and arrested for NOT breaking the law than I do for this girl who thumbed her nose at both the law and the public library system.

If everyone were to do this then there would be no books in the library and the whole system would fall apart. So League,maybe you just don't appreciate reading, or books, or the library enough to equate a serial thief and court dodger as someone who deserves to get arrested...I on the other hand do.
 

DopaVash

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
313
Location
Graham, Texas
imported post

Prophet wrote:
I have an innumerable amount of more sympathy to a California open carrier who gets hamstrung by some crooked cops and arrested for NOT breaking the law than I do for this girl who thumbed her nose at both the law and the public library system.
Quoted for Immense Truth.

All of the other points were more than valid too. Don't just look at the face of the issue folks, thats a gun-grabbing liberal thinker's method. Look at everything behind it too. Sure, she had her liberty temporarily revoked, but, who's choice was that really?

I fought the law and the...law won...

EDIT: not to say that one shouldn't fight the law when it is wrong, it should, but this is not the tactic anyone should use (Theft).
 

Pol Mordreth

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2008
Messages
153
Location
Smyrna, Tennessee, USA
imported post

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
[snip]

Take it up as a civil matter, if you have to. Attach her property, garnish her wages... there are plenty of ways to redress her breach of contract.

League, according to the article they tried that. They filed against her in civil court, and she ignored the summons to appear. Ignoring the summons is what got her arrested.



Respectfully,

Pol



EDIT: Sorry, I read it wrong. They filed against her in muni court, not civil court since it was a violation of a muni ordinance, not a breach of contract.
 

ScottyT

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
800
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
imported post

I was torn on this one until I heard about the notices and the missed court date, she asked for it.

If the locals get upset about it they can petition the city to change the ordinance/elect a new city council, but until then, the law is the law.
 

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

My point is that civil processes are entirely adequate to redress the wrong she committed. File a claim against her; if she fails to appear, you get a default judgment, and then execute by attaching property sufficient to pay all the costs she incurred. Garnish her wages, if necessary. She'll pay for the books, the court costs, and any penalties.

But no, that's not enough. Why, she's audacious. She *ignored the law, dagslabbit!* Arrest her!

The fact that "the law is the law" is precisely the problem here. It's a shame when human liberty is valued so little that two books should trigger an arrest.

The power of the state is frighteningly overblown. In this case, every necessary remedy can be obtained by civil processes instead, but for some reason our society is happy to handcuff, criminalize... you know, really sock it to her.

Sorry folks. I just don't think God-given human liberty is that cheap.
 

Pol Mordreth

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2008
Messages
153
Location
Smyrna, Tennessee, USA
imported post

I appreciate your point, League. I tend to agree with you, to a point. This should be a civil matter, but even in a civil matter she would have been thrown in jail for ignoring the summons.That falls under contempt of court. She would then have not only had a default judgement against her, but also a bench warrant.

I do have to say, though, that if the people in this municipality get aggravated enoughat things like this, they will change the laws.I don't remember who said it, but there really is some truth in the statement that the best way to get rid of bad laws is to aggressively enforce them.



Respectfully,

Pol
 

DopaVash

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
313
Location
Graham, Texas
imported post

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
My point is that civil processes are entirely adequate to redress the wrong she committed. File a claim against her; if she fails to appear, you get a default judgment, and then execute by attaching property sufficient to pay all the costs she incurred. Garnish her wages, if necessary. She'll pay for the books, the court costs, and any penalties.

But no, that's not enough. Why, she's audacious. She *ignored the law, dagslabbit!* Arrest her!

The fact that "the law is the law" is precisely the problem here. It's a shame when human liberty is valued so little that two books should trigger an arrest.

The power of the state is frighteningly overblown. In this case, every necessary remedy can be obtained by civil processes instead, but for some reason our society is happy to handcuff, criminalize... you know, really sock it to her.

Sorry folks. I just don't think God-given human liberty is that cheap.
I appreciate and agree with your value of indivual freedoms. However, I think you're a bit misguided.

The fact that "the law is the law" is precisely the problem here. It's a shame when human liberty is valued so little that two books should trigger an arrest.
What would you have the law be? Laws are not meant to be broken, and should they be, they deserve punishment. I agree that human liberty is not valued highly enough, but the two books aren't what caused her to be arrested. Her failure to follow the laws and her theft(make no mistake, thats what it is) is what caused her to be arrested. People are arrested for theiving CD's from Best Buy, is that not a suitable punishment for the crime? I understand that this situation is a bit more convoluted than that, but in the end she took something that was not hers, refused to give it back or pay restitution. That is theft in my book.
 

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

I understand your position about the need to obey the law. I just think it's bad when our laws consider our liberties to be so cheap, particularly when a civil remedy offers every bit of redress that it needed.

I would propose straight civil enforcement in situations like this. If you fail to return the books, the library takes you to court to get the value of the books, plus attorneys fees, plus court costs.

In a civil matter if you fail to show up, the court doesn't have you arrested, it simply enters default judgment in favor of your opponent. The library then takes that judgment and executes on it just like any other civil judgment.

The library gets full restitution. I would still insist that the lady right her wrong -- where I differ is in criminalizing her behavior and making her subject to arrest. It's just not worth it when we're talking about a couple of books.

Fortunately, TN law recognizes this principle of liberty in its code of criminal procedure. With some exceptions for certain offenses, generally a peace officer must issue a citation for a misdemeanor offense in lieu of taking a person into custody.
 

AZkopper

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
675
Location
Prescott, Arizona, USA
imported post

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
generally a peace officer must issue a citation for a misdemeanor offense in lieu of taking a person into custody.

They basically did that, that's what the court summons was. The problem was she didn't show up for court.

As far liens go, she has to have real property or a business to lien against. If she doesn't have a job (It dosen't say), wages can't be garnished.

Besides, as its been pointed out before, theft is a crime. If you owned a rental car company, and some schmuck rented a car from you, and then stole your car, would you want the court to say, "well, we caught him, but let him keep the car, and put a lien on him. If he ever makes $40,000 dollars, we'll garnish his wages and give it to you".

Please tell us what you "liberty threshold" is, dollar wise, for theft?
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
My point is that civil processes are entirely adequate to redress the wrong she committed. File a claim against her; if she fails to appear, you get a default judgment, and then execute by attaching property sufficient to pay all the costs she incurred. Garnish her wages, if necessary. She'll pay for the books, the court costs, and any penalties.

But no, that's not enough. Why, she's audacious. She *ignored the law, dagslabbit!* Arrest her!

The fact that "the law is the law" is precisely the problem here. It's a shame when human liberty is valued so little that two books should trigger an arrest.

The power of the state is frighteningly overblown. In this case, every necessary remedy can be obtained by civil processes instead, but for some reason our society is happy to handcuff, criminalize... you know, really sock it to her.

Sorry folks. I just don't think God-given human liberty is that cheap.

I like this thinking.

I didn't think of the default judgement.
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

AZkopper wrote:
LeagueOf1291 wrote:
generally a peace officer must issue a citation for a misdemeanor offense in lieu of taking a person into custody.

They basically did that, that's what the court summons was. The problem was she didn't show up for court.

As far liens go, she has to have real property or a business to lien against. If she doesn't have a job (It dosen't say), wages can't be garnished.

Besides, as its been pointed out before, theft is a crime. If you owned a rental car company, and some schmuck rented a car from you, and then stole your car, would you want the court to say, "well, we caught him, but let him keep the car, and put a lien on him. If he ever makes $40,000 dollars, we'll garnish his wages and give it to you".

Please tell us what you "liberty threshold" is, dollar wise, for theft?
Several years ago one of the local car dealers (in SC)allowed a fellow to test drive a car toshow it to his wife. They didn't know his wife lived in Colorado. :exclaim: After about three months they found out where he was and got the car back but could not charge him with theft. I never did hear if they got anything from him other than the car back but they were more careful about letting people test drive cars after that. :D
 
Top