Random Thoughts (Political Edition)

[Hidden_Hunter]

Good to know that despite how fucked the US economy is, they still offered assistence to the floods in Queensland if required.

 

[salle]

you are assuming that everyone taking part is innocent

No you're wrong, I'm not. I'm just assuming that not everyone is guilty. I'm certain that the police doing the kettling will not be sure that every person they detain are guilty of anything besides being on the scene in an agitated crowd. Unless it is done as a preventative measure. Then people are de facto innocent.

until another method is come up with, it is, actually. If you have a suggestion i'm sure the police would love to hear it, because at the moment the only real alternative would be Tear Gas and water cannons, not much of an improvement imo.

How about not dressing up half london's police force in riot gear and riding horses around them acting very defensive towards them and thus creating a hostile situation before any riot has erupted. As a start. Then of course there's the whole make sure there's a huge group of adults joining in any protest so as to not have a youth protest as they do seem to have a much higher tendency for riots. So make sure parents gets involved in their children's political activism. Not everything has to be resolved by policing.

I don't believe in theorycrafting, and there is no evidence that it would other than that.

There is lot's of evidence that unjust treatment breeds hostility. But on the flip side there's the Stockholm syndrome too. But that's the exception to the rule.

quote me where i said that

You said nomix lived in an alternative reality. I equate that to calling him delusional.

dismount the high horse, just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean anything i have said is wrong.

I'm not on a high horse I disagree with loads of people but I do hope I'm a bit more civil in how I speak to them than you are. Oh and go back to the top if you want an example of where you're wrong.

 

[jmsprovan]

How about not dressing up half london's police force in riot gear and riding horses around them acting very defensive towards them and thus creating a hostile situation before any riot has erupted. As a start.

there are several squads of full time riot police who will always turn up in their gear, and then there is the normal police who change into their riot gear if the situation starts to go sour. Basically every outcome is fairly well covered that way.

Police tactics for this kind of event is well shown in this documentary http://www.channel4.com/programmes/coppers/episode-guide/series-1/episode-5

Then of course there's the whole make sure there's a huge group of adults joining in any protest so as to not have a youth protest as they do seem to have a much higher tendency for riots. So make sure parents gets involved in their children's political activism. Not everything has to be resolved by policing.

I agree, if they can actually achieve a fully peaceful protest then their cause can't just be brushed off as an excuse to riot by the government, its in their own interest to do so.

 

[Okaen]

In Butte Montana they celebrate St. Patrick's Day like no other place that I have seen. People from all over come to this place to stand in the streets and drink. Now it isn't quite the same as a protest, but it is a lot of people in a small area. The way the police keep this from getting out of hand is very effective. Up front everyone knows that if you do anything violent or illegal (other then public intoxication) you are instantly arrested. Why can't the police tightly police a crowd and remove any single person that poses a threat. No violent protest, no innocent people punished for the misdeeds of others.

 

[Blind_Io]

Ohio police use Tazer seven times on driver in diabetic shock, dislocate his shoulder

Ohio police use Tazer seven times on driver in diabetic shock, dislocate his shoulder

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/04/video-ohio-police-use-tazer-seven-times-on-driver-in-diabetic-s/

(video at link)

According to the Cincinnatti Enquirer, motorist John Harmon was on his way home from work when his blood-sugar got too low. As a diabetic, this meant trouble, and Harmon's vehicle veered into another lane. A nearby Hamilton, Ohio sheriff's deputy spotted the unintentional maneuver and pulled him over. The officer then approached the car with his gun drawn and screamed at Harmon before smashing his window open. Harmon, 52, was then cut out of his seatbelt and dragged him to the ground. On the way down, his elbow was severely dislocated but the pain didn't end there. During this process he received seven shocks from a Tazer and kicked in the head... all while cowering on the ground in pain. According to the account, an Ohio Highway Patrol Officer arrived on the scene and was shocked to find Harmon being treated in this manner. He separated the officers from Harmon, only to discover Harmon's diabetics.

Harmon is currently suing the sheriff's office, but the officers are all still working. In fact, the original officer on the scene filed felony charges against Harmon and his boss signed off on them.

The Highway Patrol video of the incident is available after the jump. A word of warning, however: While you can't see the commotion, you can hear Mr. Harmon's anguished voice.

 

[nomix]

That's just not how you treat people. I've seen people in diabetic shock, a baby poses more harm than them. And yes, it does look that way as well. They look drugged. But not the bad drugged, with amphetamines, but the good drugged of an heroin overdose.

I'm sure they though he had an heroin overdose and were just trying to.. give him the shock of life with their tazers.

 

[phuckingduck]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelo...onstitutionally-protected-from-discrimination

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said in a recently published interview that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment does not prohibit discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation.
"Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex," Scalia told California Lawyer. "The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't. Nobody ever thought that that's what it meant. Nobody ever voted for that. If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, hey we have things called legislatures, and they enact things called laws." (He voiced a similar opinion in a speech in September.)
Marcia Greenberger, founder and co-president of the National Women's Law Center, told the Huffington Post's Amanda Terkel that the comments are shocking. "In these comments, Justice Scalia says if Congress wants to protect laws that prohibit sex discrimination, that's up to them," she said. "But what if they want to pass laws that discriminate? Then he says that there's nothing the court will do to protect women from government-sanctioned discrimination against them."
The equal protection clause states: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in 1971 that the clause protected women from discrimination.

Yeah, as has been proven throughout the annals of history, every member of every legislative body ever has always been able to ordain every ramification of every nuance of every piece of law that they have ever been asked to vote on. Ever. So tell me, Mr. Justice, from where are you able to discern their intent? Las I looked at USC or the Constitution the intent is not written into the law. So if you feel that intent is a crucial point of law then please be kind enough to point me in the direction of the "book of intent" for my reference. It would really help me out if I knew the inclinations of lawmakers more intimately.

 

[tigger]

^ No surprise there, Scalia is an asshole.

The Copts are one community for which I do truly feel sorry. They have been present in Egypt for over 1500 years yet they can hardly seem to get a break.

True. It's also telling how the gov't instantly blamed the attack on a foreigner. They must really be worried about things getting out of hand.

Good to know that despite how fucked the US economy is, they still offered assistence to the floods in Queensland if required.

You won't be thankful if we send FEMA over. :lol:

Why can't the police tightly police a crowd and remove any single person that poses a threat. No violent protest, no innocent people punished for the misdeeds of others.

You're comparing apples to oranges there. You can't police a protest group of thousands the same way you police a St.Patrick's Day block party.

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/04/video-ohio-police-use-tazer-seven-times-on-driver-in-diabetic-s/

(video at link)

Disgusting.


It turns out that despite all the posturing, fiscal conservatives aren't any better at managing government finances than anyone else. Well, not that that wasn't already obvious. Anyway, Texas is in trouble.

A budget shortfall as high as $25 billion is projected as lawmakers head into the 2011 legislative session, according to estimates from economists and the comptroller's office. Texas writes budgets biennially, or in two-year terms, so the shortfall affects the 2012-2013 state budget.

Leadership in the Texas Legislature, which is dominated by fiscal conservatives, is not expected to support attempts to raise taxes to fill the multibillion-dollar hole. But social service advocates say the state's safety net system can't afford any further budget cuts.

Much more at the link. That's nearly as large a budget shortfall as California. But I wonder if we'll hear nearly as much about this as we did about California's shortfall?

 

[Blind_Io]

Driving to California tomorrow. I have been informed that this time I am not to pick a fight with the pin-headed limp-dick assholes manning the agricultural checkpoint or quote the 4th Amendment at them. I am also not allowed to say "My law trumps yours" when they say California law allows them to rummage through my stuff.

 

[tigger]

What the hell is an "agricultural checkpoint"? They confiscate your drugs and make you buy them in-state for 20% more?

 

[Kiki]

Yeah, I'm so driving the second part of the trip.

 

[Blind_Io]

What the hell is an "agricultural checkpoint"? They confiscate your drugs and make you buy them in-state for 20% more?

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/pe/ExteriorExclusion/borders.html

 

[phuckingduck]

Yeah, I'm so driving the second part of the trip.

...

Driving to California tomorrow. I have been informed that this time I am not to pick a fight with the pin-headed limp-dick assholes manning the agricultural checkpoint or quote the 4th Amendment at them. I am also not allowed to say "My law trumps yours" when they say California law allows them to rummage through my stuff.

Did I miss something?

Edit: never mind, found it.

 

[salle]

Why not just stop being an ass... they've watched those Border control(?) things from Australia and want to do the same... just let them protect their flora. It's not that difficult, is it?

 

[Cobol74]

I like flora:

 

[GRtak]

Driving to California tomorrow. I have been informed that this time I am not to pick a fight with the pin-headed limp-dick assholes manning the agricultural checkpoint or quote the 4th Amendment at them. I am also not allowed to say "My law trumps yours" when they say California law allows them to rummage through my stuff.

Well we know who wears the pants in this family dynamic.

Yeah, I'm so driving the second part of the trip.

Priceless.

 

[nomix]

True. It's also telling how the gov't instantly blamed the attack on a foreigner. They must really be worried about things getting out of hand.

Egypt and Mubarak is fucking scared of islamist extremists. That's why they blocked the border to Gaza, they're really scared of the idea that islamist extremists (Hamas) can win a democratic election. Still, I don't have much sympathy for him, after all, unlike how Mossad built up Hamas to fuck up Fatah, Mubarak and his predecessors built up their islamist extremists to fuck their own communists.

 

[Kiki]

Well we know who wears the pants in this family dynamic.

Priceless.

Wot? I'm still JD-less and not bar-certified... so no free lawyer expertise... yet.

 

[Okaen]

You're comparing apples to oranges there. You can't police a protest group of thousands the same way you police a St.Patrick's Day block party.

Go there sometime. There are thousands of drunken people roaming the streets.... Drinking. Different reason to be in the streets, but alcohol makes you unruly too. I don't think the idea can be dismissed as easily as you think.

 

[Blind_Io]

Why not just stop being an ass... they've watched those Border control(?) things from Australia and want to do the same... just let them protect their flora. It's not that difficult, is it?

Borders and Customs are not the same thing as these checkpoints, at least not in the US. Here there is a specific exemption from the 4th Amendment for Borders and Customs ports of entry.

California claims the agricultural checkpoints are voluntary, but will refuse to let you into the state unless you let some pin-head in a high-viz jacket rummage through your things. They threaten to escort you to their "facility center" and tell you that you "will have to sign a refusal form and then you will be escorted by California Highway Patrol out of the state." Yeah, sounds real voluntary to me - and like a violation of the Interstate Commerce Clause which states that no state can restrict entry of any US Citizen and that only the federal government can regulate interstate commerce.

The other problem is that they only inspect vehicles that don't display a California license plate. The website claims that some vehicles are inspected more closely than others, which is fine, but the agents at the checkpoints blatantly profile out-of-state drivers - as if non-Californians are the only ones that would buy produce at a roadside stand or bring some home-grown apples or peaches into the state. The profiling based on the state of vehicle registration, combined with the other questionable legal practices make me disinclined to make nice with them.

Oh, and if they find something they don't like, they take it away. They don't give your a receipt and they don't give compensation - since it is not a crime to be in possession of produce, the state can't deprive you of your property without due process, and if they use eminent domain (ie, make the argument that the seizure is for the good of the public at large), they must give compensation.

The last time I went through the guy looked at my apple and said, "That's a Washington apple, so I'll let you keep it." Gee, that was nice. Tell me, how the fuck does he know that the apple was grown in Washington? It didn't have a sticker or label.

And yeah, I'm the kind of asshole that will use a bureaucracy against itself and demand a receipt for my $0.20 apple.