Just Don’t Talk To Police
.I think I’ve blogged about this subject before, but with my real web server still down, I can’t check… but even if I have, and even though this was on BoingBoing and probably other major linkgrounds, and even though the primary speaker is a Law Professor at Regent University, it’s still important to watch these videos.
They explain, quite well, why it simply never makes sense to talk to police. The reasons Professor Duane goes through are quite compelling indeed, even if I was convinced of his case before he started speaking.
There are two things he doesn’t cover in much depth that I think are worth a little examination. First, while it’s robably true that a suspect has never talked his way out of being arrested (excepting the powerful and well-connected, who can talk their way out in a different sense), it’s quite possible that refusing to answer a police officer’s questions will piss them off enough so that they do arrest you. This puts you in a bind—talk and risk having your words used against you in unfair fashion, or clam up and risk getting stitched up because they’re annoyed. I think it takes more effort for them to really get you for something serious if they have nothing, so while you might risk increased minor annoyance by remaining silent, you’re more likely to avoid the major life troubles that talking to them freely risks exposing you to.
The other thing is what Professor Duane discusses at about 06:00—that there are simply so many laws that it’s fairly guaranteed that any given person is in, or has recently been in, violation of one of them. He uses 16 USC 3372 as his example, and a good one it is too, stating:
It is unlawful for any person–
(1) to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish or wildlife or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in violation of any Indian tribal law;
(2) to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce–
(A) any fish or wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State or in violation of any foreign law, or
(B) any plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State;
(3) within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States (as defined in section 7 of Title 18)–
(A) to possess any fish or wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State or in violation of any foreign law or Indian tribal law, or
(B) to possess any plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State;
(4) to attempt to commit any act described in paragraphs (1) through (4).
Well, shit. Do you think they might have been trying to cover all the bases when they wrote that?
You can argue that Duane is a conservative professor at a right-wing university who’s rewarded to speak about the evils of Big Government. You can claim that 16 USC 3372 is an obscure piece of law that “nobody ever uses”. You could even try to persuade yourself that it’s too far-reaching to stand up against a constitutional challenge (say, at the Supreme Court). But the fact is that that piece of glaring over-reach (“violation of any law or regulation of any State or in violation of any foreign law“) is the law of the land. It’s as much American law as laws against murder or burglary, and it can send people to jail just as easily. If not more easily.
There really are too many laws, that’s a fundamental problem with bureaucracies—they expand. With so many laws, the government can basically get anyone it wants to, and don’t be naive—that’s a feature, not a bug.
In any case, the main lesson: just don’t talk to police. Politely decline, and wait for your lawyer to show up.