INSTITUTIONALIZED GOVERNMENT DISCRIMINATION (continued)...

PENAL CODE

SECTION 240-248

240.  An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another. For instance; 241.  (a) An assault is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by both the fine and imprisonment.

   

But! (b) When an assault is committed against the person of a parking control officer engaged in the performance of his or her duties, and the person committing the offense knows or reasonably should know that the victim is a parking control officer, the assault is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by both the fine and imprisonment.

QUESTIONS: Why would the fine be more for assaulting a government employee than a tax paying citizen? This proves institutionalized government discrimination not only exists; but is also considered be to an "acceptable" part of our system of justice. If anything; those tax paying citizens (local and county taxes etc) should be protected MORE than government employees; as those tax paying citizens fund this government folly; do they not? ALL PEOPLE MUST BE PROTECTED EQUALLY TO ERADICATE ALL FORMS OF UNFAIR DISCRIMINATION IN OUR SOCIETY...

READ MORE @ http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=240-248 + SEE ALSO: http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/07/institutionalized-gender-discrimination.html + http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/07/institutionalized-gender-discrimination_25.html

NOTE: WHILE PART OF THE REASON JOHN DESPISES THE IDEA OF BEING A HOLLYWOOD STAR IS BECAUSE OF THE PRIVACY-INVADING PAPARAZZI SCENE IN HOLLYWOOD (paparazzi who essentially gather intelligence information for the NSA/CIA); The new law signed by California Governor Brown aimed at protecting celebrities and/or public figures from paparazzi harassment (including the children of police officers; perhaps due to Johns' bold, heroic actions which were ultimately aimed at bringing attention to Johns' situation) is not only; 1) another good and/or bad example of the imbalance between how the rich and poor are treated (did anyone see the movie TITANIC?); 2) but also a good and/or bad example of how some people are discriminated against in an attempt to help others; 3) as well as a good and/or bad example of how many laws are written so vaguely; at certain points within the language that they cannot be successfully/broadly applied without ensuing conflict. (It is as if these vague laws are perhaps written and passed on purpose so it can be "whatever way the wind blows" when it comes to [psychotic and/or bipartisan] judicial interpretation). The truth remains that anyone and/or everyone who is in public is a public figure; and the press is still free regardless of this new, partially unconstitutional law. > go to: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-brown-bills-paparazzi-20130925,0,7649417.story

> AS ABOVE ~ SO BELOW? -- Other good and/or bad examples of institutionalized government discrimination: 1) members of the U.S. Congress legally involved themselves in insider trading regarding bills they are about to pass; while average citizens will be incarcerated for doing the exact same thing. This not only has made being a member of Congress more about making money than making sound decisions; BUT IT ALSO ANOTHER GLARING EXAMPLE OF INSTITUTIONALIZED GOVERNMENT DISCRIMINATION. 2) If the same thing that happened to John over the last ten years happened a judge and/or a police officer; swift action would have been taken to stop the stalking and harassment long ago; as well as the "minor" attack by Doug Ward; this would have been a FELONY if the same force was used against a police officer. CAN ANYONE SAY DISCRIMINATION? I didn't think so. 3) Another example of this: (Excerpts from the S.F. Chronicle) "But there was no such clemency across the bay in Oakland at the Wiley W. Manuel Courthouse, where Commissioner Taylor Culver reigns over his courtroom with sarcastic 'humor'. During a red-light camera trial on a recent afternoon, when one defendant asked for a reduction in his fine, Culver boomed, "Nobody here is special or better than anybody. There's nobody here special but me." (can anyone see the direct contradiction within that statement? nobody is special while someone is special? ok whatever...what a stupid thing to say) This not only shows a gross arrogance (and/or sheer stupidity) on the part of some government employees; but mainly shows how discrimination has become an "acceptable" part of our society. It shows that some people we are told to look up to; are clearly not worthy of being looked up to. > http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Soaring-fines-give-ticketed-drivers-sticker-shock-4857979.php

SEE ALSO: ACTION FOR NEGLECT TO PREVENT @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/03/action-for-neglect-to-prevent.html