Friday, July 30, 2010
Jetting
Out of town until late on Monday so most likely nothing until then, unless we just can't help ourselves.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Off topic but interesting, at least to me
The quaint English village of Shitterton historically has had quite a problem keeping its standard metal welcome sign from being stolen, for obvious reasons.
That vexing problem has most likely now been solved with the recent installation of a 3,000 pound replacement sign made of stone:
""We thought, 'Let's put in a ton and a half of stone and see them try and take that away in the back of a Ford Fiesta'," Mr. [parish council chairman Ian] Ventham said."
Now that's using one's brain.
That vexing problem has most likely now been solved with the recent installation of a 3,000 pound replacement sign made of stone:
""We thought, 'Let's put in a ton and a half of stone and see them try and take that away in the back of a Ford Fiesta'," Mr. [parish council chairman Ian] Ventham said."
Now that's using one's brain.
Sorry, Charlie
"U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel says he doesn't want "any special breaks" when it comes to charges that he violated ethics rules."
Then why is he at this very moment desperately attempting to "negotiate" some sort of deal with the House leadership that would presumably sweep the many serious criminal accusations levied against him under the tired old rug of "settled quietly behind closed doors"?
No dice and no deals. Lay it all out on the table for everyone to see just how criminally corrupt ol' Charlie's been lo these many years.
"The most ethical Congress in history", Ms. Pelosi? "Transparency", Mr. President? We're not seeing a whole lot of either in this matter. And where's the IRS in all of this, by the way? Any peasant accused of even a small portion of the tax shenanigans Rangel's accused of pulling would be in heap big trouble with that thuggish agency right about now. Why isn't he?
Then why is he at this very moment desperately attempting to "negotiate" some sort of deal with the House leadership that would presumably sweep the many serious criminal accusations levied against him under the tired old rug of "settled quietly behind closed doors"?
No dice and no deals. Lay it all out on the table for everyone to see just how criminally corrupt ol' Charlie's been lo these many years.
"The most ethical Congress in history", Ms. Pelosi? "Transparency", Mr. President? We're not seeing a whole lot of either in this matter. And where's the IRS in all of this, by the way? Any peasant accused of even a small portion of the tax shenanigans Rangel's accused of pulling would be in heap big trouble with that thuggish agency right about now. Why isn't he?
Britain's admitting defeat on socialized medicine - why won't we take notice?
England, home of the execrable National Health Service that our Dear Leader is so set on emulating, has now finally come to the conclusion that a large central health bureaucracy wastes money, shortchanges patients on care and plain just doesn't work, and therefore that country is now planning to reorganize the entire system to put resources and decision-making back into the hands of the doctors who provide the care in the first place.
Naturally, the usual suspects are vehemently protesting the plan:
"This would result in a further loss of jobs, health care unions say, and also open the door to further privatization of the service."
Oh no - efficiency would be increased, causing many make-work government jobs to be eliminated, and there might be privatization of something that never should have been placed under government control to begin with? The horrors!
The NHS doesn't seem to have much choice in the matter, since as we've previously discussed they're being increasingly forced to ration care and deny certain basic procedures to the very people who are supposedly paying for them:
"An investigation by The Sunday Telegraph has uncovered widespread cuts planned across the NHS, many of which have already been agreed by senior health service officials. They include:
* Restrictions on some of the most basic and common operations, including hip and knee replacements, cataract surgery and orthodontic procedures.
* Plans to cut hundreds of thousands of pounds from budgets for the terminally ill, with dying cancer patients to be told to manage their own symptoms if their condition worsens at evenings or weekends.
* The closure of nursing homes for the elderly.
* A reduction in acute hospital beds, including those for the mentally ill, with targets to discourage GPs from sending patients to hospitals and reduce the number of people using accident and emergency departments.
* Tighter rationing of NHS funding for IVF treatment, and for surgery for obesity.
* Thousands of job losses at NHS hospitals, including 500 staff to go at a trust where cancer patients recently suffered delays in diagnosis and treatment because of staff shortages.
* Cost-cutting programmes in paediatric and maternity services, care of the elderly and services that provide respite breaks to long-term carers."
These are the very sorts of draconian cuts that President Obama as well as the liberals in Congress have solemnly vowed won't happen with our upcoming attempt to emulate this utter fiasco. Given that Great Britain's foray into socialized medicine has been a complete failure and given our benevolent leaders' many other broken promises and failed attempts to engineer government takeovers of entire sectors of private businesses in the name of "saving" those industries, do you still believe them?
Naturally, the usual suspects are vehemently protesting the plan:
"This would result in a further loss of jobs, health care unions say, and also open the door to further privatization of the service."
Oh no - efficiency would be increased, causing many make-work government jobs to be eliminated, and there might be privatization of something that never should have been placed under government control to begin with? The horrors!
The NHS doesn't seem to have much choice in the matter, since as we've previously discussed they're being increasingly forced to ration care and deny certain basic procedures to the very people who are supposedly paying for them:
"An investigation by The Sunday Telegraph has uncovered widespread cuts planned across the NHS, many of which have already been agreed by senior health service officials. They include:
* Restrictions on some of the most basic and common operations, including hip and knee replacements, cataract surgery and orthodontic procedures.
* Plans to cut hundreds of thousands of pounds from budgets for the terminally ill, with dying cancer patients to be told to manage their own symptoms if their condition worsens at evenings or weekends.
* The closure of nursing homes for the elderly.
* A reduction in acute hospital beds, including those for the mentally ill, with targets to discourage GPs from sending patients to hospitals and reduce the number of people using accident and emergency departments.
* Tighter rationing of NHS funding for IVF treatment, and for surgery for obesity.
* Thousands of job losses at NHS hospitals, including 500 staff to go at a trust where cancer patients recently suffered delays in diagnosis and treatment because of staff shortages.
* Cost-cutting programmes in paediatric and maternity services, care of the elderly and services that provide respite breaks to long-term carers."
These are the very sorts of draconian cuts that President Obama as well as the liberals in Congress have solemnly vowed won't happen with our upcoming attempt to emulate this utter fiasco. Given that Great Britain's foray into socialized medicine has been a complete failure and given our benevolent leaders' many other broken promises and failed attempts to engineer government takeovers of entire sectors of private businesses in the name of "saving" those industries, do you still believe them?
Sunday, July 25, 2010
The Jack-Booted Thug(s) of the Week...
... is a split decision.
1. Our first honoree is NYPD Traffic Officer Daniel Chu, which gives him the "honor" of being the first two-time JBTotW winner.
This story confirms that "Officer" Chu has apparently learned nothing from the sensitivity training he was forced to attend after people complained about his power-crazy, thuggish behavior on several different occasions and whose antics only came to light after a City Councilman happened to observe Chu blatantly ignoring the laws everyone else there has to follow:
"The traffic agent accused of terrorizing Queens residents is the source of more outrage.
...
Tammy Fox is Agent Chu's latest victim. She was in the dirt near Elmhurst Hospital, trying to fix her flat tire, when Agent Chu sauntered up. Instead of offering help, like most New Yorkers would, he slapped her with a ticket.
"I said to him, 'are you kidding me? You're very insensitive. I'm going to visit my friend in the hospital who had cancer, and I'm trying to fix my flat tire, and you're standing here writing me a ticket?'" Fox said."
Why does this abusive little martinet still have a badge? We don't know, because the NYPD isn't bothering to return the reporter's calls.
2. Our second winner is the unnamed (of course) Vancouver, Canada police officer who is under investigation after he was caught on tape pushing a handicapped young woman who suffers from M.S. to the ground, apparently solely for the outrageous crime of simply attempting to pass as best she could by him as well as two other officers on a sidewalk in that city:
"[The tape] shows the 26-year-old disabled woman trying to weave her way through three male officers on a busy Downtown Eastside street last month.
One of the officers then appears to shove the woman to the ground, before walking away. The two other officers do not intervene."
Jerks. All three of them.
"Vancouver police held a press conference Thursday afternoon, a few hours after the video was made public."
Yes, we imagine they did.
"Const. Jana McGuinness, the force’s spokeswoman, said the officer involved reported the incident to his supervisor the same day it occurred."
As well as apologized to the woman soon after, according to McGuiness. We guess that makes everything better, as
"The officer is still on full duty pending the outcome of the internal investigation."
The fact that the incident happened in one of the crappiest areas of town seems to come into play here, as we can't imagine the cop getting anywhere near this level of consideration had that woman been bravely making her way down a more well-to-do street.
That judy-boy cop should be immediately fired and charged with assault, and his compatriots should also get the axe for allowing that sort of abuse to go unchallenged.
And police continue to whine about the fact that they can be photographed in public while going about their official duties.
Well, incidents such as this one are why, officers.
1. Our first honoree is NYPD Traffic Officer Daniel Chu, which gives him the "honor" of being the first two-time JBTotW winner.
This story confirms that "Officer" Chu has apparently learned nothing from the sensitivity training he was forced to attend after people complained about his power-crazy, thuggish behavior on several different occasions and whose antics only came to light after a City Councilman happened to observe Chu blatantly ignoring the laws everyone else there has to follow:
"The traffic agent accused of terrorizing Queens residents is the source of more outrage.
...
Tammy Fox is Agent Chu's latest victim. She was in the dirt near Elmhurst Hospital, trying to fix her flat tire, when Agent Chu sauntered up. Instead of offering help, like most New Yorkers would, he slapped her with a ticket.
"I said to him, 'are you kidding me? You're very insensitive. I'm going to visit my friend in the hospital who had cancer, and I'm trying to fix my flat tire, and you're standing here writing me a ticket?'" Fox said."
Why does this abusive little martinet still have a badge? We don't know, because the NYPD isn't bothering to return the reporter's calls.
2. Our second winner is the unnamed (of course) Vancouver, Canada police officer who is under investigation after he was caught on tape pushing a handicapped young woman who suffers from M.S. to the ground, apparently solely for the outrageous crime of simply attempting to pass as best she could by him as well as two other officers on a sidewalk in that city:
"[The tape] shows the 26-year-old disabled woman trying to weave her way through three male officers on a busy Downtown Eastside street last month.
One of the officers then appears to shove the woman to the ground, before walking away. The two other officers do not intervene."
Jerks. All three of them.
"Vancouver police held a press conference Thursday afternoon, a few hours after the video was made public."
Yes, we imagine they did.
"Const. Jana McGuinness, the force’s spokeswoman, said the officer involved reported the incident to his supervisor the same day it occurred."
As well as apologized to the woman soon after, according to McGuiness. We guess that makes everything better, as
"The officer is still on full duty pending the outcome of the internal investigation."
The fact that the incident happened in one of the crappiest areas of town seems to come into play here, as we can't imagine the cop getting anywhere near this level of consideration had that woman been bravely making her way down a more well-to-do street.
That judy-boy cop should be immediately fired and charged with assault, and his compatriots should also get the axe for allowing that sort of abuse to go unchallenged.
And police continue to whine about the fact that they can be photographed in public while going about their official duties.
Well, incidents such as this one are why, officers.
Why I carry a handgun for protection, Vol. 32
So that when two feral youths armed with screwdrivers ever force their way into our apartment to rob and attempt to rape the occupants even after they cooperate with the thugs (which is precisely what recently happened to a law-abiding couple in Tulsa, Oklahoma), our firearm will also be readily accessible to defend against such an unprovoked attack:
"Police say a woman had just entered her apartment when two men forced their way inside and demanded money.
The suspects were armed with screwdrivers and demanded money. After the victim gave them money, they told her to take her clothes off but she refused.
The commotion awoke the woman's boyfriend who came out of the bedroom and began struggling with the two intruders.
Police say the woman then got a handgun out of her purse and shot both intruders."
Quite accurately, it seems. One feral youth is deceased and the other is in critical condition with head and stomach wounds. Too bad for them.
The local cops are already correctly calling this an obvious case of justified self-defense. We imagine the rate of home invasions in the immediate area will shortly be nosediving.
Friday, July 23, 2010
It's good to be the nobility
Senator John "Lurch" Kerry apparently thinks it's not hypocritical at all to keep imposing more and more taxes on the peasantry while at the same time berthing his 76-foot luxury yacht in a state where he doesn't live in order to avoid paying a six-figure "Taxachusetts" bill on his new toy.
We wonder if he will use it to cruise lazily by the common proles up there who have no choice but to pay their crushing tax burden, all the while exhorting them to "eat cake".
But we're constantly being lecture by the likes of Kerry that it's the Republicans who are the party of the evil rich, not Democrats like him, as he selflessly devotes his existence to "fighting for the little person".
When he's not out yachting, that is.
November just can't come soon enough for us.
We wonder if he will use it to cruise lazily by the common proles up there who have no choice but to pay their crushing tax burden, all the while exhorting them to "eat cake".
But we're constantly being lecture by the likes of Kerry that it's the Republicans who are the party of the evil rich, not Democrats like him, as he selflessly devotes his existence to "fighting for the little person".
When he's not out yachting, that is.
November just can't come soon enough for us.
A welcome break in the "thin blue line"
Stoughton, Massachusetts police officer Richard Bennett has been forced to resign after he was found to have left his assigned patrol area to visit a local strip club to have a look at "Bridget the Midget", a porn star who was appearing there.
That outcome is probably as it should be, since Bennett was already in hot water over installing an unapproved laser sight on his duty pistol and then fibbing to his superiors about doing so.
What we find heartening about this incident is the significant number of Bennett's colleagues who refused to cover for his unauthorized little trip to Titillationville:
"Bennett stepped down after five officers reported he left his patrol to ogle Bridget the Midget, a 3-feet, 9-inch tall porn star, Stoughton Police Chief Paul Shastany said. Bennett was also facing discipline for putting an unapproved laser scope on his gun and lying to investigators, Shastany said.
Bennett, who was honored by the department in June for his work in helping catch an accused killer, installed a laser sight on his department-issued handgun and then lied to investigators about it, the chief said." (emphasis ours)
Bravo to those officers for not covering for Bennett's juvenile butt simply because he happened to be a fellow cop. Behavior such as this should not be tolerated in any workplace but especially not in law-enforcement, where seconds can make a critical difference in response times to crimes in progress.
That outcome is probably as it should be, since Bennett was already in hot water over installing an unapproved laser sight on his duty pistol and then fibbing to his superiors about doing so.
What we find heartening about this incident is the significant number of Bennett's colleagues who refused to cover for his unauthorized little trip to Titillationville:
"Bennett stepped down after five officers reported he left his patrol to ogle Bridget the Midget, a 3-feet, 9-inch tall porn star, Stoughton Police Chief Paul Shastany said. Bennett was also facing discipline for putting an unapproved laser scope on his gun and lying to investigators, Shastany said.
Bennett, who was honored by the department in June for his work in helping catch an accused killer, installed a laser sight on his department-issued handgun and then lied to investigators about it, the chief said." (emphasis ours)
Bravo to those officers for not covering for Bennett's juvenile butt simply because he happened to be a fellow cop. Behavior such as this should not be tolerated in any workplace but especially not in law-enforcement, where seconds can make a critical difference in response times to crimes in progress.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Disingenuous, to say the least
"Under this new law, all new private plans will provide basic preventive services — things like childhood immunizations and checkups, mammograms, colonoscopies, cervical screenings, and treatment for high blood pressure — absolutely free of charge. No copay. No deductible. No co-insurance needed." (Emphasis ours)
- First Lady Michelle Obama, in an email sent to supporters last Sunday touting her husband Dear Leader's socialist healthcare Ponzi scheme.
Except we all know better, right? Those poor saps on the other end of that missive have absolutely no idea how much all of that purportedly "free" stuff is going to ultimately end up costing them and everyone else.
"For moms like me, it makes our lives easier"
Because the purpose of government, in Mrs. Obama's apparent worldview, is to take control over every aspect of the peasants' lives in order to make things "easier" for them. Nothing could be farther from the truth, dearie. We can handle the details of our medical issues just fine on our own.
"Please visit HealthCare.gov and find out more about your care"
No thanks. We'd sooner gouge our eyes out with rusty fishhooks than view Dear Leader's plan to stick his nose into our private health care matters.
- First Lady Michelle Obama, in an email sent to supporters last Sunday touting her husband Dear Leader's socialist healthcare Ponzi scheme.
Except we all know better, right? Those poor saps on the other end of that missive have absolutely no idea how much all of that purportedly "free" stuff is going to ultimately end up costing them and everyone else.
"For moms like me, it makes our lives easier"
Because the purpose of government, in Mrs. Obama's apparent worldview, is to take control over every aspect of the peasants' lives in order to make things "easier" for them. Nothing could be farther from the truth, dearie. We can handle the details of our medical issues just fine on our own.
"Please visit HealthCare.gov and find out more about your care"
No thanks. We'd sooner gouge our eyes out with rusty fishhooks than view Dear Leader's plan to stick his nose into our private health care matters.
Monday, July 19, 2010
The Jack-Booted Thug of the Week...
... is Massachusetts State Trooper James Michael Vines, for his piggish and predatory sexual behavior towards female co-workers that has unbelievably gotten him banned from duty from both Logan International Airport as well as a local toll bridge.
Curiously, Vines's serial misuse of his official authority to attempt to garner favors from women somehow doesn't rise to the level of a firing offense for that particular agency. How useful can an officer be to them if he keeps getting banned from transportation centers?
" [A toll collector on the Tobin Bridge] is one of three women who filed complaints with the State Police in the past decade accusing Vines of sexually inappropriate behavior."
The hijinks finally culminated in Vines being slapped on the wrist with a 30-day suspension and a transfer to another barracks, presumably far away from female workers yet sadly still around the public. Sound disturbingly familiar? The toll-booth victim thinks so:
"'It’s like the archdiocese; they keep moving him around,' she said."
You know you've screwed up when your behavior is compared to that of church officials covering for a pedophile priest. Except Vines, for one, apparently doesn't seem to think he has a problem; he finally finished required sexual harassment training in 2009, three years after being ordered to take such a course.
Think about it. Would a walking liability suit like Vines be tolerated at your workplace? Of course not. So why are Massachusetts taxpayers being forced to pay such a wart on their society close to $130,000 annually to engage in these kinds of shenanigans?
Curiously, Vines's serial misuse of his official authority to attempt to garner favors from women somehow doesn't rise to the level of a firing offense for that particular agency. How useful can an officer be to them if he keeps getting banned from transportation centers?
" [A toll collector on the Tobin Bridge] is one of three women who filed complaints with the State Police in the past decade accusing Vines of sexually inappropriate behavior."
The hijinks finally culminated in Vines being slapped on the wrist with a 30-day suspension and a transfer to another barracks, presumably far away from female workers yet sadly still around the public. Sound disturbingly familiar? The toll-booth victim thinks so:
"'It’s like the archdiocese; they keep moving him around,' she said."
You know you've screwed up when your behavior is compared to that of church officials covering for a pedophile priest. Except Vines, for one, apparently doesn't seem to think he has a problem; he finally finished required sexual harassment training in 2009, three years after being ordered to take such a course.
Think about it. Would a walking liability suit like Vines be tolerated at your workplace? Of course not. So why are Massachusetts taxpayers being forced to pay such a wart on their society close to $130,000 annually to engage in these kinds of shenanigans?
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Off topic but interesting, at least to me
A woman with whom we are acquainted recently received a present from a friend that allowed her come to terms with a sad childhood incident, and at the same time helped repair her relationship with her mother.
We may have a small clue as to who that friend was.
Enjoy, Marie. You deserve much more than that small gift.
We may have a small clue as to who that friend was.
Enjoy, Marie. You deserve much more than that small gift.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
A couple of cases of less-than-professional police officers getting a little taste of their own medicine:
1. Phoenix, Arizona police officer Seth Samuel Castillo has filed a $500,000 notice of claim against the nearby city of Gilbert alleging excessive force and the violation of his Fourth Amendment rights because officers in that burg used a TASER on Castillo while attempting to arrest him for DUI.
There's apparently not much doubt that Officer Drunky was guilty of his alleged crime,
[Castillo] was found on Jan. 3 "slumped over" behind the wheel of a [running] black Jeep Commander, which was blocking an intersection in his Gilbert neighborhood, according to a police report.
1. Phoenix, Arizona police officer Seth Samuel Castillo has filed a $500,000 notice of claim against the nearby city of Gilbert alleging excessive force and the violation of his Fourth Amendment rights because officers in that burg used a TASER on Castillo while attempting to arrest him for DUI.
There's apparently not much doubt that Officer Drunky was guilty of his alleged crime,
[Castillo] was found on Jan. 3 "slumped over" behind the wheel of a [running] black Jeep Commander, which was blocking an intersection in his Gilbert neighborhood, according to a police report.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Busy busy
Final project for class due tonight, so no time to blog. Hopefully we can have something up later this evening or tomorrow morning.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Good stuff
"Anonymous" (but appearing on Iowahawk's site) has written a wonderful Canterbury Tales-like satire chronicling the exploits of Reverend John St. Edwards, Lord Plaintiff of Durham and Reverend Albert des Gores II, Earl Carbonet of Greenhouse. It's quite long but nonetheless well worth your time.
Heh. "porcelain arse-corks". That's worth the price of admission right there.
Heh. "porcelain arse-corks". That's worth the price of admission right there.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Two sets of rules
Austin, Texas police officer Damon Dunn, having just finished a traffic stop, decides to not stay parked and finish the paperwork but instead dumbly types merrily away on his squad car's laptop while driving down the street. The inevitable then happens as Damon runs a stop sign and takes out a 74-year-old motorcyclist:
Unbelievably, the officer faces no sanction at all for his dangerous and harmful behavior, despite the above clear evidence of his guilt:
"No disciplinary action was taken against Officer Dunn.
There is a law enforcement exemption that allows police to use mobile data units, such as computers, in their vehicles while driving."
Sorry, no dice. Police exemptions such as cell-phone use while driving, ignoring stop lights and other traffic laws, carrying guns in certain prohibited places and the like are in place to help protect public safety, not endanger it. Officers are supposed to use reasonable care and discretion when using their dispensations, not just go ahead and ignore all the laws whenever they wish simply because they can.
Officer Dunn wasn't on his way to another emergency call, and the data he was entering was from a traffic violation, not a felony crime, so it couldn't wait until the next red light or coffee break to be entered?
This cop should absolutely be held responsible for his negligent behavior that most likely has left an innocent man crippled for life. That sadly looks like it isn't going to happen solely because Dunn happens to be a "special person" who is above the laws the rest of the peasants must follow.
Austin cyclists, be mighty careful when riding around that town from now on. Apparently it's A-OK for cops to bowl you over with impunity, so long as they do it on duty.
Unbelievably, the officer faces no sanction at all for his dangerous and harmful behavior, despite the above clear evidence of his guilt:
"No disciplinary action was taken against Officer Dunn.
There is a law enforcement exemption that allows police to use mobile data units, such as computers, in their vehicles while driving."
Sorry, no dice. Police exemptions such as cell-phone use while driving, ignoring stop lights and other traffic laws, carrying guns in certain prohibited places and the like are in place to help protect public safety, not endanger it. Officers are supposed to use reasonable care and discretion when using their dispensations, not just go ahead and ignore all the laws whenever they wish simply because they can.
Officer Dunn wasn't on his way to another emergency call, and the data he was entering was from a traffic violation, not a felony crime, so it couldn't wait until the next red light or coffee break to be entered?
This cop should absolutely be held responsible for his negligent behavior that most likely has left an innocent man crippled for life. That sadly looks like it isn't going to happen solely because Dunn happens to be a "special person" who is above the laws the rest of the peasants must follow.
Austin cyclists, be mighty careful when riding around that town from now on. Apparently it's A-OK for cops to bowl you over with impunity, so long as they do it on duty.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Australia's Sydney Morning Herald recently concluded a year-long freedom-of-information court fight to obtain the results of a 2008-2009 trial by the police down there (results that the cops did not want released, judging by their fighting tooth and nail to avoid having this become public reluctance to give out the data) that was used to justify the apparently already-made decision to give a TASER to every officer in the state of New South Wales:
"The documents reveal that police and the government used the trial as window dressing to affirm a decision they had already made - to give the weapon to all general duties police - and ignored worrying results."
"Worrying results" is an total understatement, to say the very least.
Some of the many "stunning" and thuggish incidents of police misusing TASERS the paper uncovered were:
"Stunning a handcuffed child at a juvenile detention centre.
Stunning two suicidal people covered in fuel, which can be ignited by a Taser blast.
The repeated stunning of a compliant man who presented no threat and was surrounded by members of the riot squad. This is being investigated by the Ombudsman and police.
...
Since its introduction, 26 officers have been disciplined for not following police operating procedures, and the NSW Ombudsman has had 14 complaints.
...
There were cases of people being hit by a Taser as many as six times, and others where police appeared to use the weapon to make argumentative but non-threatening people comply with directions.
In one case a sergeant drew his Taser when he encountered two young men spray painting. He drew the weapon, he later said, because one of the vandals was carrying an extendable paint roller and he was ''unsure what their reaction would be to his presence''. He did not fire the weapon.
A mother was accidentally hit when police fired at her son in one incident and a police officer was accidentally stunned in another.
Police also pointed Tasers at groups of people, including protesters inside the Villawood Detention Centre, despite Tasers being acknowledged as an ''inappropriate'' weapon for use against crowds.
Police also appeared habitually to misuse the weapon in its ''drive-stun'' mode, in which the Taser is held against the target's body and causes pain without incapacitation. According to the Australian distributor, that mode is designed to be used only when the initial discharge fails. But the trial showed numerous examples of police using only drive-stun mode to gain compliance." (Emphasis ours)
Showing complete disregard for the TASER's intended use as a less-than-lethal defensive weapon, we remind everyone, not to mention a disgusting misuse of their official police powers.
Nope, no worries or concerns here, according to Assistant Police Commissioner Alan Clarke:
"'I believe the overwhelming evidence is that Taser are being used appropriately by NSW Police.'"
Then you are a liar as well as a thug, sir.
How long will it be until the peasants of the world decide that being herded by the functional equivalent of a cattle prod whenever and wherever abusive cops wish is no longer acceptable?
"The documents reveal that police and the government used the trial as window dressing to affirm a decision they had already made - to give the weapon to all general duties police - and ignored worrying results."
"Worrying results" is an total understatement, to say the very least.
Some of the many "stunning" and thuggish incidents of police misusing TASERS the paper uncovered were:
"Stunning a handcuffed child at a juvenile detention centre.
Stunning two suicidal people covered in fuel, which can be ignited by a Taser blast.
The repeated stunning of a compliant man who presented no threat and was surrounded by members of the riot squad. This is being investigated by the Ombudsman and police.
...
Since its introduction, 26 officers have been disciplined for not following police operating procedures, and the NSW Ombudsman has had 14 complaints.
...
There were cases of people being hit by a Taser as many as six times, and others where police appeared to use the weapon to make argumentative but non-threatening people comply with directions.
In one case a sergeant drew his Taser when he encountered two young men spray painting. He drew the weapon, he later said, because one of the vandals was carrying an extendable paint roller and he was ''unsure what their reaction would be to his presence''. He did not fire the weapon.
A mother was accidentally hit when police fired at her son in one incident and a police officer was accidentally stunned in another.
Police also pointed Tasers at groups of people, including protesters inside the Villawood Detention Centre, despite Tasers being acknowledged as an ''inappropriate'' weapon for use against crowds.
Police also appeared habitually to misuse the weapon in its ''drive-stun'' mode, in which the Taser is held against the target's body and causes pain without incapacitation. According to the Australian distributor, that mode is designed to be used only when the initial discharge fails. But the trial showed numerous examples of police using only drive-stun mode to gain compliance." (Emphasis ours)
Showing complete disregard for the TASER's intended use as a less-than-lethal defensive weapon, we remind everyone, not to mention a disgusting misuse of their official police powers.
Nope, no worries or concerns here, according to Assistant Police Commissioner Alan Clarke:
"'I believe the overwhelming evidence is that Taser are being used appropriately by NSW Police.'"
Then you are a liar as well as a thug, sir.
How long will it be until the peasants of the world decide that being herded by the functional equivalent of a cattle prod whenever and wherever abusive cops wish is no longer acceptable?
Friday, July 09, 2010
Outstanding journalism
One well-worded question from a gutsy reporter turns White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs into a poor imitation of Porky Pig:
Whoever employs this lady needs to promote her posthaste.
Whoever employs this lady needs to promote her posthaste.
Think before you give to this "charity"
The Better Business Bureau would like everyone to know the Brady Campaign to Take Away Your Rights Prevent Gun Violence isn't quite measuring up to their standards, to say the least:
"Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence (Brady Center) does not meet the following 6 Standards for Charity Accountability." (Emphasis ours)
Their overall score was a shaky 14 out of 20 for charity accountability. One would think their leader Paul Helmke would do a slightly better job of running this leaky boat, especially given his $249,555 annual salary.
The utter lack of support and funding by right-thinking Americans must be really hurting that putrid organization right about now.
(Bobbi via Tam)
"Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence (Brady Center) does not meet the following 6 Standards for Charity Accountability." (Emphasis ours)
Their overall score was a shaky 14 out of 20 for charity accountability. One would think their leader Paul Helmke would do a slightly better job of running this leaky boat, especially given his $249,555 annual salary.
The utter lack of support and funding by right-thinking Americans must be really hurting that putrid organization right about now.
(Bobbi via Tam)
The Jack-Booted Thug of the Week...
... is Osceola County, Iowa Sheriff Douglas L. Weber, for abusing his office's discretion by summarily yanking and refusing to reissue the handgun carry permit of resident Paul Dorr solely because the peasant dared to participate in the First Amendment-protected activities of passing out leaflets and writing letters to the editor of the local paper that were critical of the thin-skinned law-enforcement officer.
Fortunately for Mr. Dorr, Federal Judge Mark W. Bennett on Wednesday not only ordered Weber to immediately give Dorr back his permit but also imposed a unique (and apparently very necessary) sanction on the "sheriff":
"Bennett required Weber take a class that must be a college-level course on the United States Constitution, 'including -- at least in part -- a discussion of the First Amendment.' And Bennett said, Weber must obtain approval from the court before participating in the class. Upon completion of the class, Weber must also file an affidavit with the clerk of court showing successful completion with a passing grade."
Outstanding, Judge Bennett. You should make sure that passing grade is at least a B, by the way.
Situations like these are exactly why Iowa recently changed its carry law to "shall-issue" instead of "may-issue", in which the local law enforcement head enjoys (and often blatantly abuses) complete discretion in deciding who receives such a permit, which all-too-often resulted in only celebrities, politicians and friends and supporters of the local Roscoe P. Coltrane or Sheriff Lobo-type cop getting them. The number of states that have such unfair and backward laws is getting smaller all the time, however, to the eternal consternation of the Violence Policy Center and Brady Campaign hacks.
Welcome to the club, Iowans.
Fortunately for Mr. Dorr, Federal Judge Mark W. Bennett on Wednesday not only ordered Weber to immediately give Dorr back his permit but also imposed a unique (and apparently very necessary) sanction on the "sheriff":
"Bennett required Weber take a class that must be a college-level course on the United States Constitution, 'including -- at least in part -- a discussion of the First Amendment.' And Bennett said, Weber must obtain approval from the court before participating in the class. Upon completion of the class, Weber must also file an affidavit with the clerk of court showing successful completion with a passing grade."
Outstanding, Judge Bennett. You should make sure that passing grade is at least a B, by the way.
Situations like these are exactly why Iowa recently changed its carry law to "shall-issue" instead of "may-issue", in which the local law enforcement head enjoys (and often blatantly abuses) complete discretion in deciding who receives such a permit, which all-too-often resulted in only celebrities, politicians and friends and supporters of the local Roscoe P. Coltrane or Sheriff Lobo-type cop getting them. The number of states that have such unfair and backward laws is getting smaller all the time, however, to the eternal consternation of the Violence Policy Center and Brady Campaign hacks.
Welcome to the club, Iowans.
Thursday, July 08, 2010
Down to the heart of the matter
My old net.mate (I'm honored to borrow his term) Billy Beck asks a couple of very reasonable questions:
"Try to understand: you people routinely elect morons, when it comes to the crucial life and death that they deal in every day of your only-ever lives. They are no smarter than you just because they get to stand up there on their podiums and do their lying viddie stand-ups, with the American flag in the background while they mouth their stoopid platitudes in the name of "TheAmericanPeeple". (You have to say that in machine-gun cadences.)
Why in the world do you let them drive you like cattle? What's wrong with you?"
Do you have an answer?
"Try to understand: you people routinely elect morons, when it comes to the crucial life and death that they deal in every day of your only-ever lives. They are no smarter than you just because they get to stand up there on their podiums and do their lying viddie stand-ups, with the American flag in the background while they mouth their stoopid platitudes in the name of "TheAmericanPeeple". (You have to say that in machine-gun cadences.)
Why in the world do you let them drive you like cattle? What's wrong with you?"
Do you have an answer?
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Health care rationing has arrived
"[The] decision is not whether or not we will ration care -- the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing it blindly."
Donald Berwick, the man Dear Leader just unilaterally installed (in a recess appointment, since not just Republicans but even many Senate Democrats like Max Baucus had major issues with Berwick and his nomination was in deep trouble) as the head of Medicare and Medicaid.
Baucus, the influential chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, is incensed (as everyone should be over this appointment) over today's developments, since his committee was robbed of the chance to question Berwick about his controversial views since, you know, the good doctor is now going to be lording over a significant portion of the American economy:
"'Senate confirmation of presidential appointees is an essential process prescribed by the Constitution that serves as a check on executive power and protects Montanans and all Americans by ensuring that crucial questions are asked of the nominee — and answered,' Baucus said in a statement."
But... making Berwick undergo public scrutiny about his background (he hasn't practiced patient medicine for some years and most of his professorships are "honorary", according to the above Washington Times article) and radical opinions on rationing health care would simply be honoring the vow of... transparency, would it not?
Yet another broken Obama promise, and this time at least one powerful member of his own party is upset with him to boot.
Welcome to socialized medicine, the very policy that's currently out of money and badly failing everywhere in the world it exists. Take a number please, the line starts to the right.
Donald Berwick, the man Dear Leader just unilaterally installed (in a recess appointment, since not just Republicans but even many Senate Democrats like Max Baucus had major issues with Berwick and his nomination was in deep trouble) as the head of Medicare and Medicaid.
Baucus, the influential chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, is incensed (as everyone should be over this appointment) over today's developments, since his committee was robbed of the chance to question Berwick about his controversial views since, you know, the good doctor is now going to be lording over a significant portion of the American economy:
"'Senate confirmation of presidential appointees is an essential process prescribed by the Constitution that serves as a check on executive power and protects Montanans and all Americans by ensuring that crucial questions are asked of the nominee — and answered,' Baucus said in a statement."
But... making Berwick undergo public scrutiny about his background (he hasn't practiced patient medicine for some years and most of his professorships are "honorary", according to the above Washington Times article) and radical opinions on rationing health care would simply be honoring the vow of... transparency, would it not?
Yet another broken Obama promise, and this time at least one powerful member of his own party is upset with him to boot.
Welcome to socialized medicine, the very policy that's currently out of money and badly failing everywhere in the world it exists. Take a number please, the line starts to the right.
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
An obviously politically-motivated lawsuit
The Obama Justice Department, led by Attorney General Eric "Neutral, leaning towards favorable" Holder, has decided (no surprise here; it was a foregone conclusion) to sue the state of Arizona over S.B. 1070 (which makes illegal immigration a state crime), even though the statute mirrors the Federal legislation already in place:
"The government contends that the Arizona law violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution, a legal theory that says federal laws override state laws."
It's quite enlightening that the Feds are so quick to assert their "supremacy" in this area while simultaneously deliberately ignoring the many other parts of the Constitution that severely limit their powers everywhere else (Tenth Amendment, anyone?).
Arizona has done nothing wrong here, and in any event certainly hasn't committed anything like the blatantly unconstitutional acts the national government regularly imposes on the peasantry.
Let the court battle begin. We're confident Arizona will ultimately prevail.
"The government contends that the Arizona law violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution, a legal theory that says federal laws override state laws."
It's quite enlightening that the Feds are so quick to assert their "supremacy" in this area while simultaneously deliberately ignoring the many other parts of the Constitution that severely limit their powers everywhere else (Tenth Amendment, anyone?).
Arizona has done nothing wrong here, and in any event certainly hasn't committed anything like the blatantly unconstitutional acts the national government regularly imposes on the peasantry.
Let the court battle begin. We're confident Arizona will ultimately prevail.
Monday, July 05, 2010
From the Department of Glaringly Obvious Headlines
"OMB, GSA hope fourth time is a charm for USA.gov"
The two agencies (Office of Management and Budget and the General Services Administration) last Friday happily announced the fourth iteration of the USA.gov website in an attempt to convince the peasantry that they really are competent at using tax dollars to create and maintain something that actually works. Except that they really aren't:
"After multiple attempts to improve the search capabilities of the government's Web entry point over the last 10 years, GSA bought the use of Microsoft's Bing search engine and improved upon it."
Sounds like the Feds should have outsourced their technology modernization efforts in the first place. Maybe they should now leave well enough alone and not try to "improve" something that already ably serves its intended purpose.
We can't wait to see how many years and dollars it's going to take for the Feds to realize that the same theory holds true for the health care industry as well.
The two agencies (Office of Management and Budget and the General Services Administration) last Friday happily announced the fourth iteration of the USA.gov website in an attempt to convince the peasantry that they really are competent at using tax dollars to create and maintain something that actually works. Except that they really aren't:
"After multiple attempts to improve the search capabilities of the government's Web entry point over the last 10 years, GSA bought the use of Microsoft's Bing search engine and improved upon it."
Sounds like the Feds should have outsourced their technology modernization efforts in the first place. Maybe they should now leave well enough alone and not try to "improve" something that already ably serves its intended purpose.
We can't wait to see how many years and dollars it's going to take for the Feds to realize that the same theory holds true for the health care industry as well.
Saturday, July 03, 2010
Rewriting history live on C-SPAN
Slick Willie eulogizes the ol' country Klansman:
So it's perfectly justified to sign up with a blatantly racist group if getting elected to higher office is the end result, according to Mr. Clinton. Byrd was just going along to get along, you see. He simply had to appear as backwards and crude as the peasants themselves in order to gain their approval and vote instead of, you know, maybe setting an example for the unwashed yokels.
By the way, Byrd by his own admission joined the Klan in 1942. In 1944, he wrote the following to Mississippi Senator Theodore Bilbo regarding the forced integration of the Armed Forces:
"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."
Two years after he first signed up for the cowardly Sheet Squad. Not a lot of joiner's regret at that point, we'd argue.
In 1946 or 1947, according to Colbert King of the Washington Post, Byrd wrote the following to a "Grand Wizard" in the Klan:
"The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation.".
In 1952, while running for the House of Representatives, Byrd claimed that he first joined the Klan because it was "anti-communist", even though in 1942 the Soviet Union was in fact our fierce ally against Germany, Japan and Italy and no Red Scare existed whatsoever at that point in time.
Finally, in 1964 Byrd saw fit to filibuster the Civil Rights Act.
All of these acts and statements over decades on the part of Byrd certainly prove that he was no friend of minorities, to say the least, until it was politically expedient for him to do so. Clinton, ever-fond of stretching the truth, comes through once again by dismissively labeling Byrd's clearly lengthy racist past as "fleeting".
We wouldn't expect anything less from the Wizard of "Is".
So it's perfectly justified to sign up with a blatantly racist group if getting elected to higher office is the end result, according to Mr. Clinton. Byrd was just going along to get along, you see. He simply had to appear as backwards and crude as the peasants themselves in order to gain their approval and vote instead of, you know, maybe setting an example for the unwashed yokels.
By the way, Byrd by his own admission joined the Klan in 1942. In 1944, he wrote the following to Mississippi Senator Theodore Bilbo regarding the forced integration of the Armed Forces:
"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."
Two years after he first signed up for the cowardly Sheet Squad. Not a lot of joiner's regret at that point, we'd argue.
In 1946 or 1947, according to Colbert King of the Washington Post, Byrd wrote the following to a "Grand Wizard" in the Klan:
"The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation.".
In 1952, while running for the House of Representatives, Byrd claimed that he first joined the Klan because it was "anti-communist", even though in 1942 the Soviet Union was in fact our fierce ally against Germany, Japan and Italy and no Red Scare existed whatsoever at that point in time.
Finally, in 1964 Byrd saw fit to filibuster the Civil Rights Act.
All of these acts and statements over decades on the part of Byrd certainly prove that he was no friend of minorities, to say the least, until it was politically expedient for him to do so. Clinton, ever-fond of stretching the truth, comes through once again by dismissively labeling Byrd's clearly lengthy racist past as "fleeting".
We wouldn't expect anything less from the Wizard of "Is".
Different strokes for liberal folks
"Harriet Miers has had a distinguished career as a lawyer, but since her experience does not include serving as a judge, we have yet to know her views on many of the critical constitutional issues facing our country today."
- Then-Senator Barack Obama, correctly pointing out President George W. Bush's aborted Supreme Court nominee's judicial shortcomings back in 2005.
Dear Leader has, of course, now appointed Elena Kagan to the Court, despite her having the exact same non-credentials as Miers.
Please explain why Ms. Kagan rates being treated completely differently than Ms. Miers besides the obvious fact (which is not supposed to be taken into consideration in any event) that you approve of the former's politics, Mr. President.
- Then-Senator Barack Obama, correctly pointing out President George W. Bush's aborted Supreme Court nominee's judicial shortcomings back in 2005.
Dear Leader has, of course, now appointed Elena Kagan to the Court, despite her having the exact same non-credentials as Miers.
Please explain why Ms. Kagan rates being treated completely differently than Ms. Miers besides the obvious fact (which is not supposed to be taken into consideration in any event) that you approve of the former's politics, Mr. President.
Friday, July 02, 2010
A harbinger of things to come
We just returned from a sojourn to the post office, where a 40-minute wait and surly clerks are the norm no matter what time of day we go or how minor of an errand needs to be completed. Meanwhile, we've never had to wait more than two or three minutes to be served at any UPS Store or FedEx/Kinko's outlet.
How nice and efficiently health care will be run, just like the U.S. Post Office (!), should the Federal government be allowed to unconstitutionally monopolize that industry as well, seeing that the easily foreseen problems with that course of action have already started to occur less than four months after Dear Leader signed his "legacy" into law. Here's but a small sampling:
"Health overhaul may mean longer ER waits, crowding"
"Health law risks turning away sick"
"Doctors limit new Medicare patients"
We'll have to remember to bring several long and interesting books to our next doctor's appointment.
How nice and efficiently health care will be run, just like the U.S. Post Office (!), should the Federal government be allowed to unconstitutionally monopolize that industry as well, seeing that the easily foreseen problems with that course of action have already started to occur less than four months after Dear Leader signed his "legacy" into law. Here's but a small sampling:
"Health overhaul may mean longer ER waits, crowding"
"Health law risks turning away sick"
"Doctors limit new Medicare patients"
We'll have to remember to bring several long and interesting books to our next doctor's appointment.
Thursday, July 01, 2010
Why I carry a handgun for protection, Vol. 31
So that if our home is invaded by two feral youths (ages 16 and 17) intent on robbing and assaulting us (or worse), we will be able to immediately and successfully fight them off, just like this brave 15-year-old boy in Houston, Texas did on Tuesday afternoon.
The hero teen defended himself and his 12-year-old sister by using his father's (Harris County Deputy Constable Vince Guerra. Bravo to this officer for teaching his son how to responsibly use a firearm and making sure it was available to his kid once that level of skill was ascertained. Guerra, of all people, is fully aware of the kind of criminals that roam free in public) rifle to shoot both thugs. Both are in custody; the 17-year-old is in the hospital, and it's unsure whether or not he'll survive.
There had been several recent burglaries in the area, but it's currently unclear whether this pair are suspected of committing the others. Either way, we wager that's the last occupied house those particular criminals will ever break into.
Police have ruled the shooting justified, and the father won't face any other possible charges for allowing his underage son unsupervised access to a firearm:
"There were some questions about whether [Constable Guerra would be] liable for the shooting since his son had easy access to the weapon, but ABC13's legal expert says that the 15-year-old's right to protect his home and sister trumps all child firearm access laws."
Absolutely. A home-defense firearm is of little use if it is kept unloaded and locked up away from the people that are trained and able to effectively use it, regardless of how old they are. Responsibility and maturity are mindsets, not age-related functions.
The hero teen defended himself and his 12-year-old sister by using his father's (Harris County Deputy Constable Vince Guerra. Bravo to this officer for teaching his son how to responsibly use a firearm and making sure it was available to his kid once that level of skill was ascertained. Guerra, of all people, is fully aware of the kind of criminals that roam free in public) rifle to shoot both thugs. Both are in custody; the 17-year-old is in the hospital, and it's unsure whether or not he'll survive.
There had been several recent burglaries in the area, but it's currently unclear whether this pair are suspected of committing the others. Either way, we wager that's the last occupied house those particular criminals will ever break into.
Police have ruled the shooting justified, and the father won't face any other possible charges for allowing his underage son unsupervised access to a firearm:
"There were some questions about whether [Constable Guerra would be] liable for the shooting since his son had easy access to the weapon, but ABC13's legal expert says that the 15-year-old's right to protect his home and sister trumps all child firearm access laws."
Absolutely. A home-defense firearm is of little use if it is kept unloaded and locked up away from the people that are trained and able to effectively use it, regardless of how old they are. Responsibility and maturity are mindsets, not age-related functions.
It's just not that difficult
Another top-level staffer in the Obama administration, this time a union hack detailed over from the SEIU, just couldn't seem to properly disclose his leftover compensation from his former employer, and is now shamefully having to make a few corrections:
"Patrick Gaspard, who served as the political director for the Service Employees International Union local 1199, received $37,071.46 in “carried over leave and vacation” from the union in 2009, but he did not disclose the agreement to receive the payment on his financial disclosure forms filed with the White House.
In a section on his financial disclosure where agreements or arrangements for payment by a former employer must be disclosed, Gaspard checked a box indicating that he had nothing to report.
"Patrick Gaspard, who served as the political director for the Service Employees International Union local 1199, received $37,071.46 in “carried over leave and vacation” from the union in 2009, but he did not disclose the agreement to receive the payment on his financial disclosure forms filed with the White House.
In a section on his financial disclosure where agreements or arrangements for payment by a former employer must be disclosed, Gaspard checked a box indicating that he had nothing to report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
