11,857. RUDIMENTS, pt. 726

RUDIMENTS, pt.726

(here's a proposition for you)
Many of the oddest moments
of growing up still seem to 
resound around cliches : the
older person, sweet and jovial,
cherubic and wise, bending 
down in some silly grandparent 
pose, saying things like 'What do
you want to be when you grow
up?' like it mattered to them;
like they had anything to do
with it, like they even cared. 
'Well, first I'd like to derail a
train filled with people, then
maybe go to El Paso and rob
a bank, and then, returning
home, knock out all the kids
I once knew, with a baseball
bat.' Just saying....Mostly,
what a kid has to go by is what 
he or she sees, and that's it.
-
 The law is an odd thing,

and one that I was never

attracted to. When, as a

youngster, I did send a

letter to J. Edgar Hoover

about my interest (at

probably 11 years old) in

an FBI career. I received

a fairly basic form letter

back, with I guess his

signature at the bottom,

saying how my aspirations

were notable and that my

best efforts ought to go into

school and learning and

loyalty in the continued hopes

of, at an older age, sustaining

my interest and undertaking

the rigorous course of action

needed. Oh well, at least it

didn't come with a plastic

FBI badge, and a pair of

white socks. (ha).

-

I used to send letters to lots

of places. It was an odd idea;

one of my aunts, or maybe it

was a neighbor, mentioned

to me once, in a visit  -  my

mother often had what she

called 'coffee clatches' with

neighborhood ladies and/or

visits from aunts and others.

Whoever it was made a

mention how the best way

of getting information about

cities, towns, places, counties,

etc., was to just send a letter

to the Chamber of Commerce

requesting information. She said

every place had one  -  towns

and villages, cities and counties.

The idea behind it all was a

sort of boosterism, for visitors

and for businesses, to move

there, invest in a factory, visit,

etc. I many times wrote simply

to places like, 'Clayton Chamber

of Commerce, c/o City Hall,

Clayton. Indiana' (just a made

up example). The letters always

seemed to reach them, even with

the crummy addresses as shown.

(Before zip codes. Well before

computer look-ups and internet

references). I'd get 9x12 envelopes

back, often filled with cool stuff.

packets of info, maps, history,

photos sights, notable people

and occurrences. It was very

interesting. It was a nice way

to learn.

-

Anyway, back to the law. It's

a funny thing about the law. It

doesn't exist until someone

violates it. Sort of, and awkwardly

put; but I'll try to explain. It's also

the reason, or one of the reasons,

I could never be a cop, to 'enforce'

the concept of 'Law' or a law. It's

all too cryptic and pliable. I'll

lay down here two very simple

instances, one about the law not

really existing until broken, and

the other about the uselessness

of policing  -  in a political sense.

First; in the town I'm in, there's a

law against fireworks. I've called

dispatch numerous times to again

have reiterated to me the law that

forbids fireworks in the air. That's

a curious footnote, but one that was

told to me by the desk cop (Horvath).

No fireworks are allowed (without

a permit) that leave the ground. That's

foolish in and of itself, because there

are plenty of fireworks ('blockbusters,

etc.) that are loud and resounding,

and damaging too). Stipulating only

those that fly up is dumb. But no

matter  -  because both forms go 

on here at least 3 nights a week, 

connected to no holidays, nothing 

festive, except maybe the continued 

inanity of yard barbecues, beer,

jerk-fests, and the usual assortment 

of moronic kids and adults up to 

their wee-wee pads in boredom. 

I ask, point-blank, in the call,

whether or not this is a violation

of the law, and then I say, why 

then do you have the law if 

you don't enforce it? 'Yes

sir, we'll send a car.' This has

happened twice already : the

fireworks continue, the cop

arrives, doesn't see anything

going on, no fireworks at

that moment 'underway.' The

guy denies he was doing so.

Ballsy to lie so, but, yeah. The

cop says, coming back to me,

'Sir, there's nothing I can do, I

didn't hear anything and he

denies that he was doing so.'

So I guess the law does not say

an 'officer must be present and

witness the undertaking to cite

it as a violation.' That's all pat,

and pretty cool too, if you wish

to blow off fireworks.

-

As far as concepts go, the idea

would be the same as denying a

New York City bank robbery

while in the midst of its cash

because that denial would allow

Mr. Cop to pass on acting. I grant

you it's not the same thing at all,

but I said 'concept.' The concept

of law is that it is enactable

within the conditions of the

activity which is proscribes. The

law of torts, and damages, and

personal infractions, and civil

disorder, each  -  I would think  -

owe their validity to the idea

that they are to be put into

practice. Or, as I say to Horvath,

'Why then does such a law exist?'

To excuse idiot behavior (not

mine either, wise-guys).

-

The other option of the more

strict uselessness of law and the

extreme brainlessness of a

police person is as follows, and

concerns the idea of 'Community.'

It would go like this : a small

town or village  -  or any town

or village  -  peaceful and settled

in its ways, has local legislators,

mayor and crooks, who give in to the

business and real estate interests,

as usual always seeking growth and

expansion. The old town opposes

it. All that the 'town' has ever

stood for or been about  -  and the

supposed 'history' of the place 

(which too is played up and applauded,

even in falsehoods and plaques) is

slowly being destroyed  -  as the

payoffs are put in place and into

effect  -  variances and zoning changes

are given approval (again over the

objections of townsfolk), the

requisite site clean-ups, permits

and paperworks done. The projects

begin. Areas are fenced off. Work

is underway, people are angry. The

town sends cops, to guard the

site, watch the fences, and, generally,

when you come right down to it,

protect the crooks and the thievery.

They are working for the corrupt, not

for the people who pay them  -  and

even if the cop himself opposes the

project, he has had to check his brain

at the door, to uphold the crooked

law(s) and deals. Because that cop

is (somehow) beholden by having

'sworn' to uphold the letter of the

law. It's all so ghastly as to be

untrue, and can only result in a cop

being seen as a jerk, and nothing

more. A robotic automaton running

by command. It's not that much

different, actually, than any

situation  -  Venezuela, China,

some Arab Spring uprising, or,

even, Hong Kong. People see

this, and they just end up 

wondering, 'will the police

hold, will they stay loyal to the

denounced dictator? Or will they

begin going over to the other

side, the rebels, the opposition?'

It always comes down to 'Security.'

-

Now, send that to the Chamber 

of Commerce, and see 

what they say.