Said Idiots spending the next quite a while trying every excuse possible for their screwups?
…Vanessa Guerena’s $20 million wrongful death lawsuit against the four police agencies was recently settled for $3.4 million. Even with that extraordinary settlement, the police of Pima County, Marana, Oro Valley, and Sahuarita have been loath to admit fault.
Of course they have; taking lessons from the EffingBI, they NEVER want to just say “We screwed up, let’s make this right and learn from it”, oh no.I understand the widow being willing to take a settlement, but I have to say: I would have LOVED it if they’d taken this to a jury, and put every one of the incompetents involved under oath and in a witness seat. God knows what all would’ve come out.
Joel brings us the following:
You hear it here, first!
(Courtesy of Fill Yer Hands, in part)
In a landmark ruling today (08-16-14) in the lawsuit against Cinemark by victims of the Aurora, Colorado theater shooting, US District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson ruled that because they are Gun Free Victim Zones,
“the patrons of a movie theater are, perhaps even more than students in a school or shoppers in a mall, ‘sitting ducks.’”
This means that the owners of the Century Aurora 16 Theater should have known its patrons faced a risk, and taken steps to protect them, which they did not.
Perhaps this is FINALLY the beginning of the end of forced victim, free-fire, targets-of-opportunity zones. Now, if we can extend this to all schools, colleges, churches and government buildings, we can take back some of our sovereignty!
And our right of self defense.
stolen borrowed from Free North Carolina, courtesy of Gabe Suarez)
The concern is that the good guy CCW, or off duty LEO for that matter, taking out the bad guy might be misidentified by responding police and shot. Police shoot one of their own every 18 months around the nation so it is a very plausible event. Contributing factors seem to be as follows -
You are more likely to be mistakenly shot by police in areas where the carry of weapons by citizens is not common. Places like New York or Los Angeles immediately come to mind. The notion seems to be that only cops or criminals have guns. This is not the attitude I see nationwide but it is prevalent enough in those areas to be aware of it.
You are more likely to be shot if the first thing the police see is the gun….specially if it is pointed in their direction. Understand that not all officers are well trained by their agencies and some may over react to the obvious sight of a weapon, not stopping to think of who is holding it or why.More @ Suarez International
(I’m doing MY part! – Guffaw)
I’ve said it here and elsewhere, but I’ll say it again:
Democrats are the party of hatred, envy and bigotry. It’s the basis of everything they do, and they use it at every opportunity.
If you disagree with them on race, it’s because you’re white (even if you’re Thomas Sowell, Mia Love or Marco Rubio). If you disagree with them about women’s rights, it’s because you’re a man (even if you’re Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter or Megyn Kelly). If you disagree with them about gay rights, it’s because you’re straight (even if you’re Liz Cheney, Jimmy LaSalvia or Chris Barron). They’re not interested in empowering minorities, they’re only interested in punishing white people. They’re not interested in empowering women, they’re only interested in punishing men. They’re not interested in empowering gays, they’re only interested in punishing straight people. They’re not interested in helping people become successful, they’re only interested in punishing the wealthy. They don’t want justice, in fact they work hard to subvert it… because they pander to those who want revenge.
Of course, they’ll always claim the opposite. But it isn’t the Republicans who wanted a Supreme Court Justice who thought she could do better than others because she wasn’t white. It isn’t the Republicans who called a black politician a “house nigger.” It isn’t the Republicans who coined the term “white hispanic.” It’s not the Republicans who TO THIS DAY call Justice Thomas an “Uncle Tom.” It’s not the Republicans who delight in “Teabagger” as a derogatory term.
It isn’t the Republicans who are proud to be associated with openly racist organizations like the NAACP and La Raza. It wasn’t the Republicans who proudly put a sexual predator in the White House in the 90s. It wasn’t the Republicans who were proud of voting for our current President because he’s not white. It’s not the Republicans who have fought tooth and nail to make it easy to get on welfare, but hard to succeed in business.
Democrats have spent the last several years calling Republicans “terrorists,” “suicide bombers” and “hostage takers.” But virtually every supporter of Hamas in America is a Democrat.
I’m an agnostic, and yes, I find it annoying when Christians act as if I’m some poor deluded soul who must be saved from his own stupidity. But at least Christians treat me as if I am a human being, and by their lights they are trying to help me. They’ll try to change my mind, but they don’t try to have me arrested or outcast when I don’t. The anti-Christian left thinks I should be punished for daring to disagree with them, IF they concede that I should be allowed to exist AT ALL.
“Diversity” my hairy butt. I want my doctor, my lawyer, my local police and firefighters, to be the best, and I don’t care what color they are, whether their underwear has a fly, or who they kiss when they go home in the evening.
My largest bone of contention with this rant is two-fold. First, they say Democrats, when I would say PROGRESSIVES – not necessarily the same thing. Second, they don’t rant at the Republicans, for all their misdeeds – The Patriot Act and it’s evil children, for example.
I’m a libertarian (small L), and I say vote ‘em ALL OUT! Of course, the only problem with that, of course, is with whom do we replace?
Rand Paul:”If I had been told to get out of the street as a teenager, there would have been a distinct possibility that I might have smarted off. But, I wouldn’t have expected to be shot.”
The outrage in Ferguson is understandable—though there is never an excuse for rioting or looting. There is a legitimate role for the police to keep the peace, but there should be a difference between a police response and a military response.
The images and scenes we continue to see in Ferguson resemble war more than traditional police action.
Glenn Reynolds, in Popular Mechanics, recognized the increasing militarization of the police five years ago. In 2009 he wrote:
Soldiers and police are supposed to be different. … Police look inward. They’re supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force.
It’s the difference between Audie Murphy and Andy Griffith. But nowadays, police are looking, and acting, more like soldiers than cops, with bad consequences. And those who suffer the consequences are usually innocent civilians.
You should go and read the whole article.
Now I’m in no way suggesting disarming the police. However, as with so many things, this is about mindset. When I took Police Science courses (1973-75), it was about apprehending lawbreakers and protecting the rights and persons of all involved – suspects, subjects, witnesses and police. For some reason, we seem to have lost that. And the term Peace Officer is no longer in use. The doctrine of posse comitatus is no longer in effect. We are no longer worried about the military being used as civilian police. The police have become the military.
h/t Brock Townsend
(in part from PawPaw’s House)
It seems that a bunch of golfers were frisked when Obama showed up at a club to play a round of golf.
Regulars at the Vineyard Golf Club in Martha’s Vineyard were gobsmacked when President Obama unexpectedly strolled onto a nearby green and they were immediately frisked. “There was no warning he was coming,” sniffed a guest.
If the President showed up at my club and the members were frisked, I’d be pissed, but I don’t know all the niceties of presidential visits. So, I waited for Instapundit to weigh in. We realize, of course, that Insty is a professor of law in Knoxville.
How come nobody ever tells them to buzz off, and that if the President wants to play golf he can damn well respect the rights of others? The response to the ominous “So, you’re not cooperating?” should be “No, are you assaulting me?”
If the President wants to go out in public, fine. If he can’t do it without assaulting the rights of citizens, then he should stay home. But hey, most of these folks probably voted for him. So: Enjoy!
Citizens of a republic shouldn’t be subjected to frisking or wanding just because the boss shows up.
There was a time when most folks had access to firearms, and one could walk into the White House unimpeded. And nothing happened. Now, not only is visitation severely controlled and restricted, but encountering the Chief Executive on the golf course means impromptu cessation of civil rights.
What if he went jogging? Have an advance team feeling-up all the folks in advance of his running by? (And yes, I know Clinton went jogging – and even he didn’t molest the spectators!)
Just let me know if The President will be in my vicinity. I would leave, anyway, even if I weren’t legally armed.
…tell us what you REALLY think!
(from Cold Fury, in part)
Moreover, as Madison and Hamilton took for granted in The Federalist Papers, which they wrote (with five by John Jay) to urge ratification of the Constitution, taxes would chiefly take the form of import duties or excises on such commodities as whiskey—and these taxes, Hamilton asserted, were naturally self-limiting because if they grew excessive, people would stop buying the overtaxed article, and overall tax revenues would fall. In the unlikely event of an imposition of any direct tax on everybody, or on citizens’ land or wealth, as opposed to these indirect levies, Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution required that it be levied equally or proportionally, though scholars debate the meaning of that clause. But one thing the Framers never dreamed of was a tax on incomes. And for generations, they were right.
But in 1913, after 20 years of Progressive-era agitation, the Sixteenth Amendment, passed by Congress in 1909, won ratification. It imposed a graduated income tax—a direct tax that did not fall proportionally on all. Indirect taxes such as import duties and excise taxes, the argument went, fell disproportionately on the poor and provided too unpredictable a revenue stream to a federal government that Americans increasingly thought needed strengthening. Though the income-tax rates were but 1 percent for incomes up to $483,826, rising to a modest 7 percent on incomes over $11.6 million, the now-constitutional machinery for the tyranny of the majority that Madison had feared was fired up and ready to confiscate wealth as surely as the Stamp Act confiscated property. And since in 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment—instituting direct popular election of senators—also won ratification, the upper house no longer served, even theoretically, as a brake on the passions of the people.
Today, Madison’s nightmare has become America’s everyday reality.
And, remember folks, 1913 was 101 years ago.
What has happened governmentally in the past 100+ years that has been detrimental to this Constitutional Republic?
I’m thinking A LOT!
Go to the link to see the whole thing.
Protesters in Texas thought that showing up topless to an Open Carry rally to protest the protestors was a good idea.Carrying signs that said, “Boobs are for Babies” they had no idea how big a favor they were doing for the Open Carry folks.These protests for open carry are to draw attention to the issue. Who knew that 4 nipples would bring so much attention.–Too bad the breasts were not nicer looking. (The Miller)
…or Queen. King?
( with apologies to R. Kipling)
“It is so special to me personally and I think that it is very special between our two countries. There is just not just a common language, there is a common set of values that we can fall back on. It doesn’t matter in our country whether it is a Republican or Democrat, or frankly in your country whether it is a ‘Conservative’ and ‘Tory.’ There is a level of trust and understanding. That doesn’t mean that we always agree because of course we don’t.”
SERIOUSLY? A woman whose only claim to fame was to be a dishonored Watergate prosecution attorney, married to a serial rapist, who was from Arkansas, then magically became a United States Senator from New York, then the perennial presidential candidate became the Secretary of State. And doesn’t know this?
And I’m not even mentioning Whitewater or Benghazi…
Vote for HER for president? Not on your life!