So that if we happen to be walking down a street and are randomly attacked by a group of 15-20 feral youths (there's the clinching argument against imposing an arbitrary 10-round limit on firearm magazine capacities right there, Ms. Brady) we will be able to successfully defend ourselves, unlike the innocent Japanese doctor tourist who was the latest to find himself beaten and robbed of his belongings last Saturday on North Lake Shore Drive (not exactly what one would call a bad neighborhood) in Chicago, Illinois.
These brutal mob attacks are fast becoming a regular occurrence in the Windy City, no doubt mainly due to the fact that law-abiding citizens there are prohibited from carrying firearms for self-defense against the kinds of violent and cowardly thugs who prey on the public because they have no fear that their targets will be able to fight back against such overwhelming numbers:
"Police sources said they have been aware of large groups of teens causing trouble along North Michigan Avenue for at least the last year. One source said the fear is the attacks could become more frequent as the weather gets warmer."
The cops themselves admit they have a huge problem on their hands and are helpless to put a stop to these incidents or protect the local residents, yet the Illinois "authorities" consistently block permitting law-abiding people to exercise their constitutional right to self-protection, a policy that has resulted in a steep drop in violent crime rates in every state in which it's been implemented. No wonder those boogers of society in that town feel so empowered to take whatever they want from whomever they wish.
It's going to be a long and hot summer. Our recommendation for your own safety is to spend it anywhere except Chicago.
Showing posts with label Chicago. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chicago. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
Friday, May 06, 2011
He's got some nerve
Retiring (at last) King Emperor Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley of Chicago, a longtime vehement opponent of "allowing" law-abiding citizens to carry firearms for personal protection, seems to be waking up to the fact that he very shortly is going to lose his pampered VIP status and become just another member of the unprotected populace he so favors:
"Sneed has learned Mayor Daley is requesting a retinue of at least three — around the clock — Chicago Police bodyguards from his mayoral security detail to accompany him into the private sector!"
Tough cookies, pal. If you want 24-hour armed security then pay for it yourself, you blatant hypocrite.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
We don't care what you think
Someone named Oprah Winfrey has taken some time out from lecturing middle-aged soccer moms about the latest book they need to read or what healthy foods they should be eating (heh) to chastise the rest of us to "show [President Obama] some level of respect" because "I feel that everybody has a learning curve".
She apparently thinks the Presidency should be one of those "earn while you learn" kind of apprentice positions that are advertised in the local weekly paper.
We always knew the freshman junior senator from Illinois didn't have the most basic knowledge and experience to occupy the Oval Office, and now we know that at least one of his most fervent supporters didn't think so as well. This makes us wonder why she backed him in the first place, besides the obvious facts that they both are from Chicago and that their skin tones are quite similar.
It will be very interesting to observe if Ms. Winfrey will feel the same way about allowing people to grow into the highest office in America should someone such as, say, Sarah Palin run and win in 2012. Yeah, right.
Sorry, oh Guru to the Perimenopausal. Respect is earned by exhibiting good character and a high level of competence over a significant period of time, and it cannot simply be granted by ordering people to do so the same way you direct your audience to buy a certain product or service.
Now go back to mindlessly gushing about "Your Favorite Things" and the latest shopping trip with your BFF.
She apparently thinks the Presidency should be one of those "earn while you learn" kind of apprentice positions that are advertised in the local weekly paper.
We always knew the freshman junior senator from Illinois didn't have the most basic knowledge and experience to occupy the Oval Office, and now we know that at least one of his most fervent supporters didn't think so as well. This makes us wonder why she backed him in the first place, besides the obvious facts that they both are from Chicago and that their skin tones are quite similar.
It will be very interesting to observe if Ms. Winfrey will feel the same way about allowing people to grow into the highest office in America should someone such as, say, Sarah Palin run and win in 2012. Yeah, right.
Sorry, oh Guru to the Perimenopausal. Respect is earned by exhibiting good character and a high level of competence over a significant period of time, and it cannot simply be granted by ordering people to do so the same way you direct your audience to buy a certain product or service.
Now go back to mindlessly gushing about "Your Favorite Things" and the latest shopping trip with your BFF.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Facing decades of hard time for daring to record the cops in public
In an update to a story we commented on in 2009, the ACLU has lost a federal suit claiming an Illinois law is unconstitutional, and therefore two people in Chicago are going to have to face trials on felony eavesdropping charges for simply recording their interactions with police officers on a downtown street and in police headquarters, respectively, both public places with no expectation of privacy for anyone:
From a New York Times article on the developments:
"Mark Donahue, president of the [Chicago] Fraternal Order of Police, said his organization 'absolutely supports' the eavesdropping act as is and was relieved that the challenge had failed. Mr. Donahue added that allowing the audio recording of police officers while performing their duty 'can affect how an officer does his job on the street.'"
It sure can and usually does, mostly to the great benefit of those who are interacting with those street cops. What is it the peasants are always told when they complain about the ubiquitous government surveillance cameras popping up everywhere? "If you aren't doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about". Well, why doesn't the same standard apply as well to people who happen to wear a badge for a living?
The two defendants each face up to 15 years in prison for documenting public safety officers performing their taxpayer-funded jobs in public. Now that hardly seems right, to say the least, but then again this is Chicago, where if you aren't "connected" in some fashion to the local Democratic political machine you are completely out of luck when it comes to fair treatment from the "authorities" there.
Your elitist, cops-are-more-important-than-everyone-else attitude towards this issue sucks, Mr. Donahue, and frankly is just another check mark on the long list of reasons for freedom-loving citizens to never visit and spend their hard-earned discretionary dollars in the corrupt cesspool of the Windy City.
From a New York Times article on the developments:
"Mark Donahue, president of the [Chicago] Fraternal Order of Police, said his organization 'absolutely supports' the eavesdropping act as is and was relieved that the challenge had failed. Mr. Donahue added that allowing the audio recording of police officers while performing their duty 'can affect how an officer does his job on the street.'"
It sure can and usually does, mostly to the great benefit of those who are interacting with those street cops. What is it the peasants are always told when they complain about the ubiquitous government surveillance cameras popping up everywhere? "If you aren't doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about". Well, why doesn't the same standard apply as well to people who happen to wear a badge for a living?
The two defendants each face up to 15 years in prison for documenting public safety officers performing their taxpayer-funded jobs in public. Now that hardly seems right, to say the least, but then again this is Chicago, where if you aren't "connected" in some fashion to the local Democratic political machine you are completely out of luck when it comes to fair treatment from the "authorities" there.
Your elitist, cops-are-more-important-than-everyone-else attitude towards this issue sucks, Mr. Donahue, and frankly is just another check mark on the long list of reasons for freedom-loving citizens to never visit and spend their hard-earned discretionary dollars in the corrupt cesspool of the Windy City.
You pay and then you get permission to not play, even though you wanted the game
Three locals of the SEIU (including the one from Dear Leader's power base of Chicago), whose members wanted socialized medicine so badly the union donated 28 million dollars to Obama's 2008 campaign for president, have applied for and been granted waivers from the health care Ponzi scheme:
"In September, HHS announced it would grant waivers to employers to prevent some workers from losing their benefits if the insurer could not meet new health care law’s requirements on annual limits."
In fact, of the 222 waivers granted by the Obama Administration to date, 45 (a full 20%) have been labor organizations, according to the article.
Why should these entities qualify for an exemption? They're the ones who wanted this noxious legislation in the first place, and now they want to opt out because it's going to cost them more money, just as the opponents of Obamacare predicted? More importantly, just what have those unlucky workers been receiving all along for their union dues besides insurance coverage crappy enough to require begging for a waiver to avoid losing even those small benefits?
Tough noogies. Let those unions suffer the pocket-draining effects, just like everyone else has to, at least until this unconstitutional law is nullified by the Supreme Court.
"In September, HHS announced it would grant waivers to employers to prevent some workers from losing their benefits if the insurer could not meet new health care law’s requirements on annual limits."
In fact, of the 222 waivers granted by the Obama Administration to date, 45 (a full 20%) have been labor organizations, according to the article.
Why should these entities qualify for an exemption? They're the ones who wanted this noxious legislation in the first place, and now they want to opt out because it's going to cost them more money, just as the opponents of Obamacare predicted? More importantly, just what have those unlucky workers been receiving all along for their union dues besides insurance coverage crappy enough to require begging for a waiver to avoid losing even those small benefits?
Tough noogies. Let those unions suffer the pocket-draining effects, just like everyone else has to, at least until this unconstitutional law is nullified by the Supreme Court.
Friday, December 17, 2010
From the Department of Glaringly Obvious Headlines
"City with strictest gun control laws has most officers killed by gunfire"
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to which town is being described?
That's right, it's good old Chicago, the city where only cops, politicians and felons (categories which all too often unfortunately intersect, Venn-diagram like, into the very same group of people) regularly carry firearms for self-protection:
"In this case, it would appear more restrictions on firearms do not equal a safer community."
Indeed.
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to which town is being described?
That's right, it's good old Chicago, the city where only cops, politicians and felons (categories which all too often unfortunately intersect, Venn-diagram like, into the very same group of people) regularly carry firearms for self-protection:
"In this case, it would appear more restrictions on firearms do not equal a safer community."
Indeed.
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Just one more reason to stay well clear of the corrupt cesspool that is Chicago:
"According to the report, officers used Tasers on 683 occasions in the year ended Sept. 30, up sharply from 197 in 2009 and 163 in 2008."
The article notes that the approximately 200% increase in TASER usage is attributed to the fact that CPD is now handing them out like PEZ dispensers to pretty much every officer, despite the department's previously halting a plan to distribute them department-wide after several high-profile cases of alleged misuse.
The force has apparently also decided, according to the article, that it will no longer follow up on every incident in which a TASER is discharged, citing a backlog of other police complaints and manpower problems with its independent review board.
An enormous increase in TASER usage + no more review of that usage except in the most egregious of cases + a police agency famous for its many cases of abuse of power?
Not a comforting thought, to say the least.
"According to the report, officers used Tasers on 683 occasions in the year ended Sept. 30, up sharply from 197 in 2009 and 163 in 2008."
The article notes that the approximately 200% increase in TASER usage is attributed to the fact that CPD is now handing them out like PEZ dispensers to pretty much every officer, despite the department's previously halting a plan to distribute them department-wide after several high-profile cases of alleged misuse.
The force has apparently also decided, according to the article, that it will no longer follow up on every incident in which a TASER is discharged, citing a backlog of other police complaints and manpower problems with its independent review board.
An enormous increase in TASER usage + no more review of that usage except in the most egregious of cases + a police agency famous for its many cases of abuse of power?
Not a comforting thought, to say the least.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
From the Department of Glaringly Obvious Headlines
"Andrew Traver: Is Obama's choice for ATF chief an 'antigun zealot'?"
Based on the above article from the Christian Science Monitor, the answer would have to be an emphatic yes.
"But the idea of an ATF director who hails from Chicago, a city without gun shops, and who has conflated black market automatic weapons with legal semi-automatic "assault-style" rifles is causing Second Amendment defenders to worry that President Obama intends to blast away at gun rights by force of bureaucracy, if not law."
Who wouldn't think that Dear Leader would naturally pick a Chicago insider with an apparent hatred for the very items he's supposed to be overseeing the regulation of?
The current buzz is that Obama is going to make Mr. Traver a recess appointment, once again bypassing the Congressional oversight and approval process without even giving the legislative branch a chance to schedule a hearing on the fitness of Traver for the job.
Just more of that "Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool" mentality that we've come to expect from such socialist-leaning liberals.
We'll keep a watch on this story, and let everyone know if and when another end-run around the Constitution is attempted.
Based on the above article from the Christian Science Monitor, the answer would have to be an emphatic yes.
"But the idea of an ATF director who hails from Chicago, a city without gun shops, and who has conflated black market automatic weapons with legal semi-automatic "assault-style" rifles is causing Second Amendment defenders to worry that President Obama intends to blast away at gun rights by force of bureaucracy, if not law."
Who wouldn't think that Dear Leader would naturally pick a Chicago insider with an apparent hatred for the very items he's supposed to be overseeing the regulation of?
The current buzz is that Obama is going to make Mr. Traver a recess appointment, once again bypassing the Congressional oversight and approval process without even giving the legislative branch a chance to schedule a hearing on the fitness of Traver for the job.
Just more of that "Stroke of the pen. Law of the land. Kinda cool" mentality that we've come to expect from such socialist-leaning liberals.
We'll keep a watch on this story, and let everyone know if and when another end-run around the Constitution is attempted.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
The poster boy for liberal idiocy
Some of the recent greatest hits from Rep. Phil Hare, D-IL:
We really wish the responsible residents who live in his utterly gerrymandered district overcome that unfortunate handicap and see fit to retire his dictatorial rear end in 26 days.
We really wish the responsible residents who live in his utterly gerrymandered district overcome that unfortunate handicap and see fit to retire his dictatorial rear end in 26 days.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Nope, no need whatsoever for personal protection in that neighborhood
The most dangerous neighborhood in America, according to a website that collated the relevant Federal, state and local crime data, is United Center Park in Chicago's near West side:
"According to the info, anyone walking down Lake Street between Damen and Western has a 1 in 4 chance of being a victim of a crime."
"According to the info, anyone walking down Lake Street between Damen and Western has a 1 in 4 chance of being a victim of a crime."
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Chicago-style thug politics at its finest on public display
Congresswoman Melissa Bean D(aley wannabe)-IL, has apparently learned the thuggish political tactics of the martinets who rule the cesspool of Chicago quite well if the following video is any indication. It was shot by one of her constituents at a citizen meeting at a public library:
Bean on at least two occasions hounds the man to turn off the camera, and we soon observe why she wishes for him to do so when a large man is repeatedly dispatched to aggressively and threateningly stand directly over people who are doing nothing more than politely daring to speak up against the socialist agenda being rammed down their throats.
King Emperor Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley or "naked locker room bully" Rahm Emanuel couldn't have done a better job of intimidating voters and suppressing open debate.
Had ol' Mongo there dared to loom over us at a public meeting in such a fashion he would very quickly and forcefully have found out the legal defenses against menacing and assault apply to him as well.
Bean on at least two occasions hounds the man to turn off the camera, and we soon observe why she wishes for him to do so when a large man is repeatedly dispatched to aggressively and threateningly stand directly over people who are doing nothing more than politely daring to speak up against the socialist agenda being rammed down their throats.
King Emperor Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley or "naked locker room bully" Rahm Emanuel couldn't have done a better job of intimidating voters and suppressing open debate.
Had ol' Mongo there dared to loom over us at a public meeting in such a fashion he would very quickly and forcefully have found out the legal defenses against menacing and assault apply to him as well.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Big news day
1. The Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 that the Second Amendment does indeed apply to state and local governments as well as the Federal Leviathan, as expected. King Emperor Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley of Chicago, as that city's thirty-some year complete ban on handgun possession by law-abiding citizens prompted the lawsuit, must be throwing quite the juvenile tantrum right about now.
The biggest non-surprise here was that four justices (we haven't yet read any of the news articles, but let us hazard a guess - the retiring socialist, the ex-ACLU counsel, the Wise Latina and the other guy in that clique) somehow feel that the Amendment ranked Second in the Bill of Rights (after only free speech) shouldn't restrain the actions of local governments. Do they feel the same about the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, for example, or is the "ickiness" factor of firearms overriding their sensibilities on this one subject?
Much more analysis later on this one.
UPDATE: Right on cue, here comes Daley's petulant whining:
"Daley said the city would have in place a new ordinance aimed at making it difficult to purchase and own a gun in Chicago." (emphasis ours)
Nothing like having the so-called "leader" of a major American city openly plotting to place as many obstacles as possible in the way of allowing his constituents to enjoy the free exercise of their inalienable rights, particularly given the fact that Justice Alito notes in the McDonald decision that Chicago is just about ready to call out the National Guard to attempt to get a handle on the out-of-control crime in that burg. God forbid the martinets there let a law-abiding retiree (McDonald, the plaintiff in the case) keep a handgun in his home for self-protection, though. That would be the end of world, according to Daley's way of thinking.
In other news, since protesters and journalists who use First Amendment protections are a constant thorn in Boss Daley's side, he is expected to soon have in place "a new ordinance aimed at making it difficult to demonstrate against his administration, or for news organizations to cover those protests".
What an utter jerk.
2. Senator Robert Byrd, D-WVa, has passed away at the age of 92. Segregationalists and West Virginians who were the recipients of Federal largesse out of all proportion to their population and tax contributions will no doubt mourn the hardest.
The residents there should indeed be sad - the gravy train has come to a screeching halt for them. West Virginians can comfort themselves, however, by fondly gazing upon the hundreds of make-work structures and buildings narcissistically named after Byrd as well as offices (including a Coast Guard facility in a landlocked state that has no "coast") mysteriously relocated to the outer sticks to appreciate how lucky they were to have the wily old Klansman around for so many decades.
The biggest non-surprise here was that four justices (we haven't yet read any of the news articles, but let us hazard a guess - the retiring socialist, the ex-ACLU counsel, the Wise Latina and the other guy in that clique) somehow feel that the Amendment ranked Second in the Bill of Rights (after only free speech) shouldn't restrain the actions of local governments. Do they feel the same about the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, for example, or is the "ickiness" factor of firearms overriding their sensibilities on this one subject?
Much more analysis later on this one.
UPDATE: Right on cue, here comes Daley's petulant whining:
"Daley said the city would have in place a new ordinance aimed at making it difficult to purchase and own a gun in Chicago." (emphasis ours)
Nothing like having the so-called "leader" of a major American city openly plotting to place as many obstacles as possible in the way of allowing his constituents to enjoy the free exercise of their inalienable rights, particularly given the fact that Justice Alito notes in the McDonald decision that Chicago is just about ready to call out the National Guard to attempt to get a handle on the out-of-control crime in that burg. God forbid the martinets there let a law-abiding retiree (McDonald, the plaintiff in the case) keep a handgun in his home for self-protection, though. That would be the end of world, according to Daley's way of thinking.
In other news, since protesters and journalists who use First Amendment protections are a constant thorn in Boss Daley's side, he is expected to soon have in place "a new ordinance aimed at making it difficult to demonstrate against his administration, or for news organizations to cover those protests".
What an utter jerk.
2. Senator Robert Byrd, D-WVa, has passed away at the age of 92. Segregationalists and West Virginians who were the recipients of Federal largesse out of all proportion to their population and tax contributions will no doubt mourn the hardest.
The residents there should indeed be sad - the gravy train has come to a screeching halt for them. West Virginians can comfort themselves, however, by fondly gazing upon the hundreds of make-work structures and buildings narcissistically named after Byrd as well as offices (including a Coast Guard facility in a landlocked state that has no "coast") mysteriously relocated to the outer sticks to appreciate how lucky they were to have the wily old Klansman around for so many decades.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
How are you going to denigrate this man's actions, Boss Daley?
An 80-year-old Chicago resident who is reported to be a Korean War veteran shot and killed an armed intruder at his home early yesterday. The thug had apparently been trying to enter the back door of the home the man shares with his elderly wife when the incident occurred.
A clear case of successfully defending one's home, life and loved ones? Indubitably. Case closed.
The problem now, though, lies in the fact that the homeowner used a handgun to accomplish said trash removal, and that particular item has been outlawed for that town's residents since 1976 (although we see how much good the ordinance did in stopping the bad guy from getting his hands on one). That law is still in force, although the Supreme Court is expected to rule against that unconstitutional ban any day now.
Not to mention the fact that we really, really doubt that there are two law-abiding jurors in that town, much less 12, who would vote to convict this man of anything right about now.
Good luck defending your cherished freedom-robbing law now, regardless of how short a time it's got left to remain in effect, Mr. Daley. We hope some of your corrupt monies were used to hire a stellar PR team. You're going to need their assistance very soon.
A clear case of successfully defending one's home, life and loved ones? Indubitably. Case closed.
The problem now, though, lies in the fact that the homeowner used a handgun to accomplish said trash removal, and that particular item has been outlawed for that town's residents since 1976 (although we see how much good the ordinance did in stopping the bad guy from getting his hands on one). That law is still in force, although the Supreme Court is expected to rule against that unconstitutional ban any day now.
"Neighbors described the elderly couple, who both walk with canes, as pillars of the community in Garfield Park, where home invasions have been all too frequent."
We absolutely dare King Emperor Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley to allow his pet district attorneys to charge this man with a crime for daring to defy His Dishonor's edict on possessing a legitimate self-defense weapon, one which served the exact purpose for which it was manufactured, namely enabling a law-abiding citizen to save the two lives (including his own) which were being directly threatened by that home invader. An attorney has already offered to defend the homeowner for free:
"'Self-defense isn't just a right, it's a duty,' said attorney Joel Brodsky. 'If this man is prosecuted for saving his own life it's not just a travesty, it's justice turned inside out.'"
Good luck defending your cherished freedom-robbing law now, regardless of how short a time it's got left to remain in effect, Mr. Daley. We hope some of your corrupt monies were used to hire a stellar PR team. You're going to need their assistance very soon.
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
Chicago's trampling of the Constitution is finally on trial
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments this morning as to just why a 79-year-old law-abiding citizen is unable to possess a handgun in his home in Chicago, Illinois for the purpose of protecting his home (which has been broken into numerous times) and his person (which has been threatened more than once).
As expected, King-Emperor-Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley, who coincidentally enjoys 24-hour protection wherever he goes from an army of police officers, stepped forth to put his two cents in:
"'We have the right for health and safety to pass reasonable laws dealing with the protection and health of the people of the city of Chicago,' Daley said."
Sorry, "Boss". The individual rights enumerated by the Bill of Rights trump whatever nebulous "health and safety rights" arguments you've pulled out of thin air, especially considering that the onerous bans you've saddled your peasants with, which are completely ineffective and have actually made them more unsafe, judging by the astronomical crime and murder rate your thoroughly corrupt burg has enjoyed since the ban was enacted in 1982. By way of comparison, if you and your toadies on the City Council decided that a free-speech ban was necessary for "health and safety", would that be tolerated? Of course not, and neither should this unconstitutional law.
By the way, what's so "reasonable" about a complete ban?
"[Daley] also said the rollback of the city's handgun ban could lead to further erosion of legislation having to do with guns."
Hopefully.
Fox News is reporting that Second Amendment Foundation attorney Alan Gura, who argued the plaintiff's case today and who previously successfully argued the Heller case, received "positive reactions" from the justices. That's a very good sign.
As expected, King-Emperor-Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley, who coincidentally enjoys 24-hour protection wherever he goes from an army of police officers, stepped forth to put his two cents in:
"'We have the right for health and safety to pass reasonable laws dealing with the protection and health of the people of the city of Chicago,' Daley said."
Sorry, "Boss". The individual rights enumerated by the Bill of Rights trump whatever nebulous "health and safety rights" arguments you've pulled out of thin air, especially considering that the onerous bans you've saddled your peasants with, which are completely ineffective and have actually made them more unsafe, judging by the astronomical crime and murder rate your thoroughly corrupt burg has enjoyed since the ban was enacted in 1982. By way of comparison, if you and your toadies on the City Council decided that a free-speech ban was necessary for "health and safety", would that be tolerated? Of course not, and neither should this unconstitutional law.
By the way, what's so "reasonable" about a complete ban?
"[Daley] also said the rollback of the city's handgun ban could lead to further erosion of legislation having to do with guns."
Hopefully.
Fox News is reporting that Second Amendment Foundation attorney Alan Gura, who argued the plaintiff's case today and who previously successfully argued the Heller case, received "positive reactions" from the justices. That's a very good sign.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
Kankakee, Illinois police officer Lonnie Netzel apparently thought it would be a capital idea to TASER some junior high students who were part of a special-needs class as some kind of twisted "demonstration", as the microcephalic cop is accused of actually doing this very act on Tuesday.
Netzel has now (thankfully) been put on administrative leave (with pay, no doubt), and the parents of two of the students have today (naturally, and in this case quite rightly) filed a federal lawsuit against him, the school district and the city of Kankakee, as well as the two teachers who apparently stood by and watched Netzel perform his little experiment on their charges.
"The Netzel [sic] allegedly Tased a few students in the finger a week earlier, and allegedly has a history of intimidation."
What a "shocker". Another bully with a badge who probably should have been bounced years ago, but most likely thanks to his union and his fellow officers who overlooked his claimed "intimidating" behavior for 19 years is still around to do breathtakingly stupid stuff such as this. That's just the sort of valued "professional" who should be working as a school-resource officer, isn't it?
"In one of the more gruesome incidents detailed in the lawsuit, Netzel allegedly laid out sheets of newspaper and asked a boy to sit on it before being Tased, in case he defecated or urinated."
Oh, what a lovely spectacle. We're ill just imagining such a scene.
It's absolutely unbelievable that a two-decade veteran cop actually thought that this was a good idea, and imagined that his decision to low-level electrocute some vulnerable kids would somehow end well.
Hopefully the people of Kankakee, after having to pay out what will almost certainly be a multi-million dollar judgment against their city, police department and school district, will insist that "Officer" Netzel never again wear a badge.
Netzel has now (thankfully) been put on administrative leave (with pay, no doubt), and the parents of two of the students have today (naturally, and in this case quite rightly) filed a federal lawsuit against him, the school district and the city of Kankakee, as well as the two teachers who apparently stood by and watched Netzel perform his little experiment on their charges.
"The Netzel [sic] allegedly Tased a few students in the finger a week earlier, and allegedly has a history of intimidation."
What a "shocker". Another bully with a badge who probably should have been bounced years ago, but most likely thanks to his union and his fellow officers who overlooked his claimed "intimidating" behavior for 19 years is still around to do breathtakingly stupid stuff such as this. That's just the sort of valued "professional" who should be working as a school-resource officer, isn't it?
"In one of the more gruesome incidents detailed in the lawsuit, Netzel allegedly laid out sheets of newspaper and asked a boy to sit on it before being Tased, in case he defecated or urinated."
Oh, what a lovely spectacle. We're ill just imagining such a scene.
It's absolutely unbelievable that a two-decade veteran cop actually thought that this was a good idea, and imagined that his decision to low-level electrocute some vulnerable kids would somehow end well.
Hopefully the people of Kankakee, after having to pay out what will almost certainly be a multi-million dollar judgment against their city, police department and school district, will insist that "Officer" Netzel never again wear a badge.
Thursday, January 07, 2010
This won't end well
The Chicago Police Department, an organization whose leadership isn't exactly known worldwide for their professionalism and stellar reputation, is apparently considering dropping its entrance exam after complaints that not enough minorities are making the force.
"Dropping the exam would bolster minority hiring and avert legal battles, according to one source, while others confirm that the exam could be scrapped to open the process to as many people as possible.
However, the lack of an exam would make Chicago the lone major city without one, and experts contend that the exam is integral to eliminating unqualified applicants." (emphasis mine)
"Dropping the exam would bolster minority hiring and avert legal battles, according to one source, while others confirm that the exam could be scrapped to open the process to as many people as possible.
However, the lack of an exam would make Chicago the lone major city without one, and experts contend that the exam is integral to eliminating unqualified applicants." (emphasis mine)
Uh, yeah, that would seem to be an obvious point. The requirements and demands of the job pretty much rule out hiring anyone with two arms and two legs who walks through the door. You probably don't want to become known as the only burg in the country that doesn't do a certain step in the hiring process.
If we were qualified officers on that force, whether minority or not, we would be taking great offense at this right about now, to say nothing of starting to get real nervous about who was going to end up being our future partners.
Friday, January 01, 2010
Today's TASER Travesty
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, despite their reputation as one of the most-overruled appellate bodies in the nation, has nonetheless gotten one right, shockingly enough (pun intended), and has ruled that police officers must indeed have a valid defensive reason to deploy a TASER on a person, and that merely enforcing compliance with the cops' barked orders (whether valid or not) doesn't quite fit that criteria:
Saturday, December 05, 2009
The Jack-Booted Thug(s) of the Week...
... are the simpleton Chicago, Illinois police officers who arrested street artist Christopher Drew on a public street in front of a department store on December 2. He was charged with violating two ordinances, specifically "not having a peddler's license and peddling in a prohibited area".
Fair enough, if those are indeed the laws there.
However, and here's where they earn this week's illustrious award, the cops also saw fit to charge Drew with felony eavesdropping after a running voice recorder was found on him during their search of him subsequent to his arrest:
"Inside several pockets of the poncho officers found his items for sale and an Olympus digital voice recorder which was recording at the time of the incident without the consent of the responding officers, according to the report."
Since when is it "eavesdropping" to record one's interactions with others on a public street where no one (including city employees) has a reasonable expectation of privacy? Mr. Drew, whatever other minor infractions he's guilty of, was definitely not bugging anyone, just as taking a random picture of people on a beach naturally isn't considered "spying".
Following this type of logic, the peasants of the Windy City should able to sue the city government for installing numerous surveillance cameras to increasingly track their every movement. Turnabout is fair play, and all that.
Someone else happened to videotape Mr. Drew's encounter with the cops that day:
Fair enough, if those are indeed the laws there.
However, and here's where they earn this week's illustrious award, the cops also saw fit to charge Drew with felony eavesdropping after a running voice recorder was found on him during their search of him subsequent to his arrest:
"Inside several pockets of the poncho officers found his items for sale and an Olympus digital voice recorder which was recording at the time of the incident without the consent of the responding officers, according to the report."
Since when is it "eavesdropping" to record one's interactions with others on a public street where no one (including city employees) has a reasonable expectation of privacy? Mr. Drew, whatever other minor infractions he's guilty of, was definitely not bugging anyone, just as taking a random picture of people on a beach naturally isn't considered "spying".
Following this type of logic, the peasants of the Windy City should able to sue the city government for installing numerous surveillance cameras to increasingly track their every movement. Turnabout is fair play, and all that.
Someone else happened to videotape Mr. Drew's encounter with the cops that day:
The cops presumably didn't give their consent to be filmed by that person, either, Why wasn't the cameraman hauled off to the clink as well?
The rank-and-file members of the Chicago police are forever complaining about not having the manpower and resources to do their jobs in an effective manner. Well, if that department as a policy chooses to use what time they do have to file ridiculous, overbearing and thoroughly inappropriate, liberty-stifling charges against what is basically someone committing a nuisance crime, then they've lost whatever sympathy we had for their having to suffer under the dictatorship of King Emperor Mayor-for-Life Richard Daley.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
You go, girls!
The number of lawful firearm purchases by women for the purpose of self-protection has been rising significantly in recent months, even in such traditional anti-gun strongholds as the Chicago, Illinois metro area (not in the city proper, of course, as both the purchase and possession of a handgun in that toddlin' town have been unconstitutionally banned for decades. That irritating state of affairs will hopefully soon be relegated to history by the U.S. Supreme Court by the conclusion of this year's term):
"At Illinois Gun Works [in Elmwood Park], the owners say they've seen a 40 percent increase recently in the numbers of women looking to take classes, and that the number of women coming in to purchase guns is rising, too."
Cathy Jacobs, a Phoenix, Arizona resident, coincidentally explains in a letter to the editor in today's Arizona Republic just why she's chosen to become one of these enlightened women:
"I have a question for those who believe law-abiding citizens who carry concealed weapons almost anywhere must be paranoid and live in fear.
"At Illinois Gun Works [in Elmwood Park], the owners say they've seen a 40 percent increase recently in the numbers of women looking to take classes, and that the number of women coming in to purchase guns is rising, too."
Cathy Jacobs, a Phoenix, Arizona resident, coincidentally explains in a letter to the editor in today's Arizona Republic just why she's chosen to become one of these enlightened women:
"I have a question for those who believe law-abiding citizens who carry concealed weapons almost anywhere must be paranoid and live in fear.
Over the past 20 years, we've seen gun-carrying criminals kill people in more and more settings: churches, schools, department-store parking lots, abortion clinics, restaurants, homeowners associations . . . the list goes on and on.
The gun-grabbers will complain, "Well, we're just not safe anywhere these days! Look at all the places people are getting killed with guns!"
If you're willing to admit that no place is safe from lawbreaking, gun-carrying criminals, then why would you call us law-abiding, gun-carrying citizens paranoid and fearful for lawfully carrying our guns in those same exact places?"
Well stated, Ms. Jacobs.
It's very heartening to see ever-increasing numbers of intelligent, law-abiding females choosing to educate and train themselves to take on the responsibility for their own self-protection, instead of simply relying on official aid that may or may not ever show up when needed.
These women have come a long way, baby, and it's certainly for the better.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
From the forgotten corner to the catbird seat
Career Chicago-machine politician Senator Roland Burriss, D-Ill, apparently not being humiliated and ashamed enough to just sit quietly and keep his chair warm until his term is up in early 2011 after he was forced to admit that he did in fact attempt to raise money for disgraced ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich (presumably in a naked attempt to buy his Senatorial appointment), despite Burriss specifically denying that action while under oath, is now merrily gumming up the works for the man he replaced in that chamber, President Barack Obama:
"[Burriss] says he'll only vote for a bill to provide health care to millions more Americans as long as it allows the government to sell insurance in competition with private insurers."
The very same cleverly name-disguised "public option" (that really should be labeled "entirely-government-run-and-controlled option" for clarity) the President is currently finding out is becoming a major sticking point that's blocking the passage of his reform scheme, as a vast majority of the peasants he purports to govern want no part of such a socialistic government takeover of their health care.
"And [Burriss] says he won't compromise."
Oh, we're sure that position will be quite easy to change, as soon as the Democrats in the Senate realize that they're going to have to have his vote to reach the magic number of 60, and that they're going to be forced to offer Burriss pretty much anything he wishes in exchange for that all-important "yes" nod (most likely up to and including re-election financing and support, something that his own party was adamant about denying the disgraced politician to this point).
What's really amusing is that Burriss knows full well the leverage he now wields, and he is currently delighting in letting everyone in on how much fun he's having while doing so:
"'Yes. I'm a senator from Illinois representing 13 million people. I'm one of 100, and I speak on the floor, I preside over the Senate, I co-sponsor legislation,' he says. 'I'm very busy, I'm very challenged, and I have one problem.'
He grins.
'I enjoy what I'm doing.'"
In more ways than one, he seems to be not-so-subtly telling the Democrats, who now have to somehow find a legal way to bribe him into not causing any more trouble for them on this, the all-important issue that Obama has staked his entire Presidency on.
We would really enjoy the headache Burriss must be causing the Obama and the rest of the Democrats right about now, if the issue weren't so serious. We suppose they should have tried a little harder to keep hardball-playing Chicago thugs like Burriss out of both their caucus and our Federal government.
Oh, wait - Obama himself is also one of the merciless players who honed his attack skills in that town.
Never mind, then. This is just poetic justice at work.
"[Burriss] says he'll only vote for a bill to provide health care to millions more Americans as long as it allows the government to sell insurance in competition with private insurers."
The very same cleverly name-disguised "public option" (that really should be labeled "entirely-government-run-and-controlled option" for clarity) the President is currently finding out is becoming a major sticking point that's blocking the passage of his reform scheme, as a vast majority of the peasants he purports to govern want no part of such a socialistic government takeover of their health care.
"And [Burriss] says he won't compromise."
Oh, we're sure that position will be quite easy to change, as soon as the Democrats in the Senate realize that they're going to have to have his vote to reach the magic number of 60, and that they're going to be forced to offer Burriss pretty much anything he wishes in exchange for that all-important "yes" nod (most likely up to and including re-election financing and support, something that his own party was adamant about denying the disgraced politician to this point).
What's really amusing is that Burriss knows full well the leverage he now wields, and he is currently delighting in letting everyone in on how much fun he's having while doing so:
"'Yes. I'm a senator from Illinois representing 13 million people. I'm one of 100, and I speak on the floor, I preside over the Senate, I co-sponsor legislation,' he says. 'I'm very busy, I'm very challenged, and I have one problem.'
He grins.
'I enjoy what I'm doing.'"
In more ways than one, he seems to be not-so-subtly telling the Democrats, who now have to somehow find a legal way to bribe him into not causing any more trouble for them on this, the all-important issue that Obama has staked his entire Presidency on.
We would really enjoy the headache Burriss must be causing the Obama and the rest of the Democrats right about now, if the issue weren't so serious. We suppose they should have tried a little harder to keep hardball-playing Chicago thugs like Burriss out of both their caucus and our Federal government.
Oh, wait - Obama himself is also one of the merciless players who honed his attack skills in that town.
Never mind, then. This is just poetic justice at work.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
