This title has been on the list of stories to write since September 2017. It flowed in my head on many occasions. Felt kind of silly to write about it. Yet in December 2020, it feels much more relevant. Time passing has only added to the story. I feel to frame my stories in my own unique way. I feel it is worthy of contemplation for everyone. I respect the sovereignty of each individual. I desire to play my part to establish this mutual respect for everyone. My preferred way to do this is to encourage us all to look to the foundations of how our systems came into being. It is an optimal time to begin a new approach by questioning the long list of assumptions that have been made that has created our unsustainable system of systems.
One fine day in September 2017, I was beginning my routine day driving my then 12 year old youngest son to Junior High School. My favored path was engaged. I pass by an Elementary School that exists on a main neighborhood road. Quiet through most hours of the day. For about 20 minutes as school start approaches and 20 minutes after school lets out, it is congested. Hence, I and many others, choose an intersection to join the fray where there is a pedestrian initiated traffic light. When the light is red and stops the full traffic 10-12 of us can turn left with ease and grace. There is an unwritten code that has developed. The vehicle first or second in line sends someone out to engage the pedestrian light so that a cohort of us may turn left. Without this, we could wait 5-10 minutes before finding a safe turning opportunity. One by one, this would create quite the traffic backup. I have lived in the hood for 26 years in two different homes, using this approach during the tiny rush hour (more accurately minutes). I notice as I approach the turn that the traffic light is soon to turn green. Not before I seamlessly make my left turn. I enjoy driving safely and efficiently to my chosen destinations. This day, a police vehicle turns on its lights and appears to want me to pull over. Oh dear.
I choose to be direct and authentic in my style. I ask the officer to consider that this neighborhood traffic flow is smooth and efficient with the left turn he just witnessed. The relevant detail is that the road I turned from does have a stop sign in place. I and the local peeps have each long ago recognized the irrelevance of the stop sign while the traffic light shows red. One risks being rear ended if a stop for the stop sign occurred. A honk at the very least. Mr. Police was quick to report that his presence was in response to an official complaint from a citizen directing their attention to the lack of proper stops at this intersection stop sign. (I know … so petty). He declared that he would issue me a ticket for failing to recognize a traffic signal rather than failing to stop at a stop sign. He was doing me a favor by his own words because the $500 fine for failing to stop at a stop sign was higher than his issued ticket, $340.
This was the second time I was pulled over by the police with my youngest son in the car. He questioned my approach to the officer. I was polite yet shared my views in a calm manner. Lightheartedly, in fact. I enjoy sharing my perspective, haha.
I took a moment to try on the perspective of the person who made the original call which led to the Police Service presence on this 2017 day. (They have not returned, no surprise.) It fills my heart with compassion to feel how someone chose to express their frustration seeing multiple people on a regular daily basis driving through a stop sign. I have my authenticity scale that I play around with based on the consciousness scale shared by David R. Hawkins in his book Power Versus Force. Just go with me here, I have developed my intuitive abilities and I find it helpful. In March, 2020, I wrote an article describing the concept: Scale of Consciousness/Authenticity Scale – A Practical Tool. (Click title to view. My main objective in writing it out is to connect with others who may wish to collaborate with me.) For the individual who phoned the police to complain, I vibe 360. Full authenticity is 1000. I do gently encourage you not to be offended by this. It is by no means an attempt to be about hierarchy with my fellow human beings. I do see a great need for us to find ways to understand each other better. Consider this scale to represent how wide an awareness can be held by an individual. How many perspectives can be simultaneously held?
Consciousness is the basis of reality so I feel to be radically honest and transparent with this conceptual framework. I can also authentically say, we are all broken – to greater and lesser degrees and in a variety of different ways. Increasing awareness within ourselves is a fabulous start to raise the stage and change the conversation.
I desire deeply and sincerely to be a part of creating new frameworks towards solutions that support my personal mission statement:
To enable and empower optimal human health.
I cannot see how we will do this without considering how our systems support or interfere with the evolution of natural human beings.
My favorite questions right now:
What is natural for a human being?
How do natural human beings behave when in an empowered state of being?
I have come to believe that it is the mindset that determines this. There is room for a wide variety of mindsets to live and allow others to live harmoniously. However, I see a collective mindset that is caught up in the police state of mind. This chosen mindset is quite fixated on controlling the behavior of others. If this was not the case, nearly everything I have chosen to express on my two websites would be completely irrelevant. I would not feel any inspiration to share my perspective. Yet, here we are …
I interject here with my favorite fundamental questions:
What is a human being? Truly.
What is reality?
I dream of collaborating widely with many different people or groups on these two questions. To understand the variety of perspectives to the answers to these questions would create much understanding about how much choice is available to each individual. Not being consciously aware of one’s own mindset leads to much confusion and misunderstanding.
Unity consciousness, for me, does not require that we all agree with each other. Yet, to obliviously move through life requiring submission by all who coexist with you leads to much divisiveness and conflict. To gain understanding of the various mindsets and perspectives, I feel would naturally lead to the creation of new ways of establishing order. Natural order. This requires willingness.
Unity comes with understanding. Agreement is not necessary.
Yet basic respect cannot exist without some level of understanding. Transparency and radical honesty goes a long way towards World Peace. Even if it gets a little more chaotic before it improves, I prescribe this for any community: family, neighborhood, city, province, country, world.
After living through the lockdown era of 2020/2021, I feel we would all enjoy interacting together more than ever before.
Back to my story.
Upon first receiving the ticket, I had planned to simply pay it – with annoyance. As time passed, I recognized that I could not plead guilty to such an inaccurate charge. I planned to attend the automatically assigned traffic court date. It turned out I experienced a health crisis that prevented my attending in the first week of 2018. Upon recovering, I attended traffic court to request a 2nd date be issued. This began an education about the insanity of traffic court and the traffic law legal system. I adopted a friend’s euphamism the Just Us System. I witness many other laymen presentations to the court. Humans are so creative. I found it fascinating. I just absorbed it. I had once before represented myself in traffic court decades earlier. I included the details in a story Rules Are Meant To Be Broken years ago. (Click title to read.)
I was last to be heard. Request granted for another court date opportunity. I showed up to the reassigned day. I presented to a young woman administering in the courtroom. She had a robotic tone and tempo to her speech, not commonly experienced in my life interacting in the world. She used such fancy legal terms and was badgering me to just plead guilty rather than be heard in court. She stated that the officer had signed in and there was no way I would be successful. I truly was not expecting to be successful in that way. Yet, I desired to play out the scenario in order to have my own experience. I wanted to be heard. My biggest point was that I was driving safely. Pedestrians crossed the main road on my right. I deeply desired to ask the question, Is there a more safe time to turn left than when all cross traffic is stopped at a red light?
Yet, in the end, the Just Us system does not allow for reflection or contemplation about what is safe. It is a strange robotic assembly line that acts like a computer with limited actions available to choose. It feels to me like a feeble system to make it appear that individual citizens have any opportunity to discuss the fundamental issues and ensure their rights are not interfered with. It is a system to support payment of traffic fines. It has no mandate to consider the context of events. I knew this. Yet was inspired to follow through. Partly as I wish to see systems transform to support health, harmony and safety in the world.
My case was left to last again. Good in that I could gain more experience about how the system worked with the other cases. Not my preference as there were no witnesses present who were not a part of the incestuous system. It turned out that the officer was NOT present. I wondered if this might have been in my favor. Nope. Gave perspective about why the clerk pushed hard for me to plead guilty. Shocked at the strangeness of it. I expressed to the courtroom that she had clearly stated the officer had checked in. She flatly expressed to the courtroom that she had mistaken. He was attending a course that day.
I am requested to agree to adjourn. I do not. I ask for the matter to be handled that day.
Well, the Judge waxed eloquently out loud about the factors he takes into account in making his decision. I forget the details yet it was quite a long, slow soliloquy. I was dumbfounded. Key to his decision was the fact that I had missed a date also. True that. So another date way down the track was assigned.
So that date arrives. I present myself to the clerk. As I wait for the court to open, I am approached by the officer. He happened to be wearing what appeared more like an army camouflage uniform. He was quite a handsome fellow which had escaped me on our first meeting. He was authoritative yet polite. He was informing me that I will not win. He truly felt he was wasting his time (which I silently agreed that he was). I sensed that he was disappointed. He had done me that favor, remember? Issuing me a lower dollar value ticket. For me, it was not about the money. I had come this far. I wished to be heard. And for the full experience.
It is challenging to describe in words how my consciousness experienced being processed by the Just Us system. I am intuitive and perceptive in ways beyond the five physical senses. It was uncomfortable for me to see this system at work. Each individual has a small, conscripted task to play out. All the rules and regulations limit true communication. I was heard describing the context of my safe left turn. They are not at all concerned with safety. The energetic, almost sexual excitement, felt from the Prosecuting lawyer when he asked if I stopped at the stop sign and I said no. I find it so unpleasant to witness mental masturbation in my presence.
Not that I am not guilty of it also at times. He was exuberant like a hunter after the kill is made hearing my answer.
“Next!” So I experienced first hand that context is not relevant in this arena. It is like computer code: either a zero or a one. Safety has nothing to do with it. Energetically, I felt it was very powerful for me to state out loud to the entrained individuals remaining in the courtroom, “I will continue to drive safely”. I authentically needed to declare this truth. Implied is the futility of the work that occurs in Traffic Court. When there is no space for context, I see this as a dehumanizing system. The premise of the Traffic Safety Laws are to ensure safety on the roads. I do appreciate how petty this is. Yet it is a safe and simple analogy as to how all of our systems work. I appreciate that many could debate my approach from many different perspectives. This knee-jerk style of attempting to negate any sincere concerns has been running in a loop from time immemorial. I nudge you to consider widely how accustomed we have all become with systems that are not as fundamentally supporting to optimal human health as we might have been entrained to believe. I ask you to consider what you are complicit to. The most available choice accessible via mainstream media messaging is a form of complicity. World culture prefers to keep doing things as they have always been done. It is not celebrated to consider major system changes. Yet.
When all of our systems defy their “raison d’etre” on a daily, systematic basis, how do we develop harmony and order? I believe these things are an essential part of optimal human health.
So this silly story I hope might give some tangible demonstration about my little consciousness assessment of “360”. The rules and regulations taken without context creates a very different world than if we were committed to evaluation based on basic principles and vision.
I was unable to verify the date of the onset of the Alberta Traffic Safety Act. I imagine it was initiated decades ago. Then updated regularly since. So the whole setup and framework started long ago.
How related is the City’s requirement for financial resources to the number, amount and style of traffic tickets issued?
I have learned that my city is one of the most prolific in the country issuing photo radar speeding tickets. There are many perspectives. I know my own oldest son has adopted the concept that to avoid speeding is the best way to avoid tickets. Truth to that. Yet the radars tend to be setup where the signed traffic maximum could very well be 10 km/hour faster. So the cash generating ability is maximized. So, yes, a polarizing issue in a way. My point is more about encouraging us to be willing to evolve. What is the purpose and vision?
If safe driving is the main purpose and vision, I offer that we can do this without the Alberta Traffic Act. Robotic systems lead to robotic citizens. It is a trend.
Do you think it is optimal to be robotic?
I do not.
I happened to receive 2 additional traffic tickets for driving faster than the posted limit. One was just at the onset of lockdown in March. My photo was taken. Clear to see that I am all by myself on the 4 lane Calgary Trail north. I had picked up my son and his friend from a movie theater. I was driving safely. 12 km/hour about the posted limit. 100% safe with the context of 11pm and almost no traffic. The truth is I was enjoying conversation with the 2 young men. I reflect on every ticket I have ever received, I was driving safely. As I always do.
We were born into this police state of mind society. I recall just complying with the system years ago, knowing I would pay a couple or five hundred dollars annually with the City of Edmonton photo radar system. An extra tax.
The most recent ticket I received was given in person. Again, with my youngest son. An officer hides behind a pole with a handheld pointing device. Well, going 62 km/hour on a 4 lane road with almost no traffic. Yes, chatting with my interesting son. Driving safely, as always. I felt to tell the officer that he has a soul-sucking job. I said it sincerely, calmly and kindly.
My son later questioned that choice, yet the officer visibly drooped. He agreed. Then went on to describe how many people had shouted at him that afternoon during the issuance of a speeding ticket. I did not add to his burden. Yet, I clearly stated that I was driving safely. I went on to share with him that he is in a better position than I am to speak to the questionable practice of issuing tickets on roads where the speed limit would naturally be posted 10 or more km/hour higher if safety was the only issue. I, like most drivers, drive in the context of the situation. Extra attention with pedestrians nearby. Slower when congested traffic is at play. Etc. Do we really need little detailed, robotic rules and regulations?
When we are all in an optimal state, I firmly believe we do not.
This is just one of the systems that impacts our lives. There is quite a lot of entanglement showing itself these days. Most of our systems were initiated generations ago. One suboptimally setup system informing another and another.
When do we look deeper into the visions and values of each major system?
If, as a society, we desired to enable and empower optimal human health, we would need to re-evaluate everything that was setup long ago.
Do we value meeting basic human needs for all citizens?
If not, why not?
Once we get that in place, human beings naturally step into their best fit role to contribute and nourish their soul.
It is natural for a human being.
Being responsible to one’s self and others is natural for a human being who has been able to meet basic needs.
Our current unsustainable system of systems has created a lot of trauma to a lot of people. That will require some masterful solutions. Many hands, with hearts engaged and soul nourishing roles, make light work.
For The Record:
I will no longer participate in the Legal System. Otherwise known as the “Just Us” system. I will not accept anymore tickets for driving safely. I will not pay any money for driving safely, at the speed that I feel is appropriate to the environment. That may be above posted speed limits.
I encourage us all to NOT prop up a house of cards that is due to fall. It is falling. There is no need to help to build it again.
May 30, 2021. I just completed a 90 minute chat with a friend, Ida. Titled Connecting in Curiosity and with Consciousness. Click title to view. The themes from this article were discussed. I am pleased to no longer be simply talking to myself. (smile)
The prompt to complete and publish this article arrived with this chat. Three and a half years following the impetus to write it.
I trust my timing.
Addendum:
The Economics of Happiness. A big deal.
Click on the title to view an hour long film showcasing Tibet.
A 12 minute TED Talk about the Economics of Happiness by an acquaintance, Mark Anielski, an Economist calling Edmonton home. I long ago read his book by the same name. I was so enthusiastic I wrote to Oprah about it. She did not pick up on it. Haha
The Law of Non Judgment (click title to view a 14 minute video) by Tracey Milne.
The Universal Law of Honesty (click title to view 10 minute video). Another by Tracey Milne.
Transformative videos in my experience.