T Nation

Paris Hilton: Victimless Criminal

A piece which highlights the internal consistency of libertarian principles. There is a difference between merely ranting against government intervention when convenient and passionately defending the Constitutional rights of known criminals. Such differences exist to distinguish true libertarians from the wacko neocons and liberals who think they understand, but don’t. This is how we separate the men from the boys.

Would you defend Paris Hilton in this situation?

She’s a horrible person, but she does seem to be scapegoated.

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Would you defend Paris Hilton in this situation? [/quote]

I would and I would win a case based on discrimination.

She was clearly punished harsher than average based on who she was…

Not that I like her, I happen to have a huge distaste for her.

I do think that libertarians have it wrong on this one.

You cannot have people driving around drunk and have them pay damages if they hurt someone because:

a) that someone hurt might be dead.

b) the one hurting might not be able to pay for the damage he/she caused.

While I am by no means a libertarian, I agree that Paris Hilton should not have been charged or given the prison sentence she received. Knowing Paris Hilton’s past though, I am tempted to speculate that the whole affair was a media event which she planned. Of course, that’s just speculation and doesn’t really matter as regards the question at hand.

In any case, I can’t commiserate with her as much as I would with the guy who gets sentenced to the State pen for cocaine possesion (it’s none of the states business what a person puts into his body). In the latter case, he is both robbed of time and probably ruined financially and otherwise due to his police record…not to mention what might happen to him if he decides to pick up the soap while in the pen.

Planned or not, right or not, this event fits well into Hilton’s scheme of grabbing the spotlight.

She was guilty. In most other communities she would have faced similar punishment. I know someone that worked during the day and had to go to jail at night and weekends for over a month for the same thing, a drunk driving followed by multiple driving without a license.

Just because California and LA in particular lets criminals walk the street does not make her crime victimless or make her a victim of anything other than her own stupidity.

Some people get more severe punishment than average because of skin color. She got more severe punishment than average because of media attention.

She was guilty of the crime and the punishment was within the legal limits. What is the problem?

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
She was guilty. In most other communities she would have faced similar punishment. I know someone that worked during the day and had to go to jail at night and weekends for over a month for the same thing, a drunk driving followed by multiple driving without a license.

Just because California and LA in particular lets criminals walk the street does not make her crime victimless or make her a victim of anything other than her own stupidity.

Some people get more severe punishment than average because of skin color. She got more severe punishment than average because of media attention.

She was guilty of the crime and the punishment was within the legal limits. What is the problem?[/quote]

From a hardcore libertarian point of view the problem is that she did not harm anyone but only disobeyed governments orders which are BS to begin with.

No malum in se only a malum prohibitum.

Fucking MADD lobby!

[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
She was guilty. In most other communities she would have faced similar punishment. I know someone that worked during the day and had to go to jail at night and weekends for over a month for the same thing, a drunk driving followed by multiple driving without a license.

Just because California and LA in particular lets criminals walk the street does not make her crime victimless or make her a victim of anything other than her own stupidity.

Some people get more severe punishment than average because of skin color. She got more severe punishment than average because of media attention.

She was guilty of the crime and the punishment was within the legal limits. What is the problem?

From a hardcore libertarian point of view the problem is that she did not harm anyone but only disobeyed governments orders which are BS to begin with.

No malum in se only a malum prohibitum.
[/quote]

Would a hardcore libertarian drive on government supplied roads?

If I got caught driving on a suspended license I would have gone to jail that night. Fuck her. She thought she was above the law and everyone else and could do what she wanted 'cause of who she was.

She comes out of jail she’s still a loaded brat. I do that, I’ll come out of jail jobless, pennyless and perhaps familyless. Pardon me is my sympathy is slight.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
She was guilty. In most other communities she would have faced similar punishment. I know someone that worked during the day and had to go to jail at night and weekends for over a month for the same thing, a drunk driving followed by multiple driving without a license.

Just because California and LA in particular lets criminals walk the street does not make her crime victimless or make her a victim of anything other than her own stupidity.

Some people get more severe punishment than average because of skin color. She got more severe punishment than average because of media attention.

She was guilty of the crime and the punishment was within the legal limits. What is the problem?

From a hardcore libertarian point of view the problem is that she did not harm anyone but only disobeyed governments orders which are BS to begin with.

No malum in se only a malum prohibitum.

Would a hardcore libertarian drive on government supplied roads? [/quote]

Never, ever, because government should not supply them in the first place but even if they do we still paid and pay for it, so what?

I´d rather argue that to physically endanger people for no good reason is a malum in se, even if the risk does not manifest itself in reality.

It is the argument that your freedom to swing your fist does not stop before you hit other peoples noses but before it becomes increasingly likely that you hit someones nose.

I am talking about acute, immanent danger here though…

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Would a hardcore libertarian drive on government supplied roads? [/quote]

Considering the fed and state gov’ts have a monopoly on roads there really isn’t much of an option–eminent domain and all.

I am currently building my own personal highway from my driveway to my parking space at work. I hope they don’t move my space–that would not be ideal!


They say Paris cried for her mommy when she was sent to jail. What do you think the girl in the picture cried when she got her face burned off by one of Paris’s partners in crime?

The asshole who wrote that deserves to get hit by Paris the next time she’s out drunk driving.

Paris got off way too easy and she certainly got far less than she deserved. I have a freind who spent a week in jail on her first offense for driving while impaired.

Paris deserved to be treated more harshly exactly because she is rich. When you are rich and you can afford a taxi or a limo, there is no excuse for drunk driving.

There is also no excuse for driving with a suspended liscence like she was. Again the rich bitch could afford a limo. They don’t go easy on average people who have to get to work to feed themselves and their family.

The author of that crap article also ignores the fact that .08 is well over the limit of .05 which is driving while impaired.

That rich bitch was a threat to the health and the lives of every last person who had to share the roadway with her when she was drunk driving. I’m glad that stupid bitch went to jail she deserved it.

Why didn’t Mel Gibson go to jail for drunk driving, then? Lindsay Lohan?

Nobody is condoning drunk driving or saying that she didn’t break the law but she does seem to be subjected to a double standard. I believe that is the issue.

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
Why didn’t Mel Gibson go to jail for drunk driving, then? Lindsay Lohan?

Nobody is condoning drunk driving or saying that she didn’t break the law but she does seem to be subjected to a double standard. I believe that is the issue.[/quote]

Did they follow up their DWIs by driving with suspended licenses?

[quote]SouthernBrew wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Would you defend Paris Hilton in this situation?

I would and I would win a case based on discrimination.

She was clearly punished harsher than average based on who she was…

Not that I like her, I happen to have a huge distaste for her.
[/quote]

I’d agree except for one thing;

Paris is a role model. By driving drunk/taking drugs, she sets a bad example for young girls across America. By that argument, you could argue she was fairly punished because of her position.

Don’t drug dealers who deal to younger children get harsher punishments? Or am I totally wrong on this one?

[quote]pat36 wrote:
If I got caught driving on a suspended license I would have gone to jail that night. Fuck her. She thought she was above the law and everyone else and could do what she wanted 'cause of who she was.

She comes out of jail she’s still a loaded brat. I do that, I’ll come out of jail jobless, pennyless and perhaps familyless. Pardon me is my sympathy is slight.[/quote]

Exactly.

I been arrested before and had many near misses… and the fact that these asshole rich prics get off lightly kills me.

It’s like that motherfucker that stomped on that guy’s arm during the Titans game, or the players in the Miami brawl… if [i] hit a guy with a bottle or stomp on a guy, I get assault and battery, assault with a deadly weapon, and maybe attempted murder.

These guys get suspended for two games. Fuck’em.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Exactly.

I been arrested before and had many near misses… and the fact that these asshole rich prics get off lightly kills me.
[/quote]

How did she get off lightly when the facts are that she served much more time in Jail than you or I would have?

You cannot fight discrimination with more discrimination…