By Jeff Balke
Houston Press
October 12, 2015
At times, driving in Houston is taking your life in your hands. This is particularly true if you are one of those rare birds who follows every driving law regardless of what others around you are doing. And this doesn't mean sensible things like speed limits (most of the time), staying in your lane, texting while driving and just plain recklessness. People often ignore these laws too, even though most of us realize those laws make actual sense.
Then there are the laws that seem almost antiquated simply because very few people pay attention to them, and sometimes even protest if you abide by them.
Less Than Obvious School Zones
School zones are really, really important. And this is not to advocate against them in the slightest. However, it might be time to require they be upgraded. Maybe a giant sign or police and crossing guards at all of them. Get out the little orange cones or, at the very least, make sure they all have flashing lights. Frankly, it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if they put a giant scary clown in the middle of the road demanding you stop. Of course, the kids would be scarred for life. But they wouldn't be dead.
No Right on Red
People, without a doubt, see these signs. It is assumed they chuckle to themselves before turning right on red anyway. Truthfully, it is hard to tell exactly why and where these signs exist. At times, they appear almost arbitrary. As a result, no one takes them seriously and they go largely ignored.
Signal When Changing Lanes
The only time anyone does this is when they are trying to squeeze into traffic and provide some passive aggressive proof of what they are doing to other drivers. It is also the universal sign for, "If you don't let me in, I am free to flip you off when you pass by." Turn signals are great when used properly, but when was the last time you saw someone driving at a normal rate of speed down a relatively quiet street signal before moving over to the adjacent lane? Here's when: never.
Left Lane, Fast Lane
Perhaps the bane of every fast driver's existence is the slow driver in the left lane. In Europe, they flash their lights and honk their horns at you if you don't move. We are apparently too polite, so we pass on the right side, which is apparently also illegal in many situations. When the freeway often feels like that scene Matrix: Revolutions and all you want is Neo to fly out of the sky and rescue you from an exploding semi trailer, the lane becomes inconsequential. At that point, it is survival of the fittest.
Yield
Not only does no one even understand the concept of yielding, the word sounds like something you'd hear a dude in a fake British accent say to you outside the jousting arena at the Renaissance Festival. The very idea of pausing politely is counter intuitive to most drivers anyway, particularly when driving along a freeway access road. The next time you see someone slow down on the feeder to allow traffic to exit the freeway safely, you let us know. We guess most people see that upside down triangle and think it is either an ad for a really lame superhero movie or the symbol of the illuminati.
EDITOR’S NOTE: What Jeff forgot to mention was that if in Houston you give these traffic violators a dirty look or honk at them, you’re liable to get shot.
I might also mention that on many occasions I have observed school bus drivers ignoring the school zone speed limits. And when I called the school district to notify them of this, together with the bus ID numbers, I always got a ho hum reaction.
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Monday, October 12, 2015
FRIEND BLAMES TEEN’S SUICIDE ON OHIO SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
16-year-old Hayden Long committed suicide after he and five other Geneva High School students were pulled out at a homecoming dance for reeking of marijuana and told by school administrators that their lives were ruined
Hayden Long, 16, was an honor student and sophomore quarterback at his high school in Geneva, Ohio. At a homecoming dance on October 3, Hayden, his friend Hank Sigel and four other Geneva High School students were pulled aside as they arrived at their school’s homecoming dance because they reeked of marijuana. They admitted smoking pot and some were in possession of drug paraphernalia.
School administrators gave the teens a two-week suspension and kicked them off the school’s athletic teams. They also face possible criminal charges and loss of their driver’s licenses.
On Monday, Hayden committed suicide at his home.
Sigel claims Long was singled out by school administrators and told he had ruined his life. An incensed Sigel blamed the school administrators for his friend’s death. He and his mother posted the following open letter online:
Today our family of Geneva has lost a loved one. Hayden was a great student in class, a determined athlete and a wonderful friendly human being. He was a faithful friend and someone who everyone enjoyed being around. We must never forget the type of person he was and character he possessed. We must remember that everyone's lives matter. Even a joyful, loving kid can be in a dark menal place.
I am a student at Geneva high school and I was involved with the same disciplinary issue as Hayden at Homecoming. A group of kids were accused of smelling of marijuana at the dance. This group of kids was made up of six honor students, who were all involved in sports, and great members of our community. What followed was a two week suspension from school, possible criminal charges, suspension from all sports, and a loss of driver's license.
I was exposed to some things I would never want to see again when I was in the room where we were taken. We were questioned without our parents, and they forcibly took my keys and searched my car. When I stood up for myself and asked if they had the right to do this, I was told, "It's cute you think you know your rights."
Hayden was looked in the eyes and verbally attacked by Mr. Wetherhold, Mr Markijohn, and Officer Gonzales. He was directly told he had ruined his life by our school administrators. The students were told they would fail their classes, had ruined their academic careers, and had made the biggest mistake of their life. A minor issue was turned into a life changing catastrophe by these negligent and vicious men. As a family we know that our lives matter, but in my opinion they do not to Mr. Wetherhold, Mr. Markijon, and Officer Gonzalez. These are repeate offenders, and have been antagonizing and trying to bring our students down for years. We must open our eyes. These men must not be part of our famly any longer.
Hank Sigel
As Hank's mother I would like to apologize to Hayden's family if this letter hurts anyone. There but for the grace of God go I. I remember him a sweet boy from bitty ball with a beautiful smile.
The administration needs to accept responsibility for this tragedy. Impressionable teenagers should not be treated like hardened ciminals.
Heather Sigel
Hayden’s mother Emily was upset with the letter and absolved the school administrators of any blame for her son’s death. She asked the school administration to release the following statement:
The Long family has asked that the district post this message to help eliminate any negative publicity, Emily and Michael in no way blame the school system and are offended that some others are speaking for them. The family of Hayden Long would like to thank the support of the Geneva community, especially the Geneva Area City Schools for their support during this difficult time. We ask that you respect our privacy as we spend quality time with our close family and friends.
Here is my take on this tragedy. I feel bad for Hayden’s parents, but their son should have known that breaking the law can have some serious consequences. By posting his open letter, Hank was trying to cover up the fact that by admittedly smoking pot together with his buddy Hayden, he was a major contributor to this tragedy.
Hayden Long, 16, was an honor student and sophomore quarterback at his high school in Geneva, Ohio. At a homecoming dance on October 3, Hayden, his friend Hank Sigel and four other Geneva High School students were pulled aside as they arrived at their school’s homecoming dance because they reeked of marijuana. They admitted smoking pot and some were in possession of drug paraphernalia.
School administrators gave the teens a two-week suspension and kicked them off the school’s athletic teams. They also face possible criminal charges and loss of their driver’s licenses.
On Monday, Hayden committed suicide at his home.
Sigel claims Long was singled out by school administrators and told he had ruined his life. An incensed Sigel blamed the school administrators for his friend’s death. He and his mother posted the following open letter online:
Today our family of Geneva has lost a loved one. Hayden was a great student in class, a determined athlete and a wonderful friendly human being. He was a faithful friend and someone who everyone enjoyed being around. We must never forget the type of person he was and character he possessed. We must remember that everyone's lives matter. Even a joyful, loving kid can be in a dark menal place.
I am a student at Geneva high school and I was involved with the same disciplinary issue as Hayden at Homecoming. A group of kids were accused of smelling of marijuana at the dance. This group of kids was made up of six honor students, who were all involved in sports, and great members of our community. What followed was a two week suspension from school, possible criminal charges, suspension from all sports, and a loss of driver's license.
I was exposed to some things I would never want to see again when I was in the room where we were taken. We were questioned without our parents, and they forcibly took my keys and searched my car. When I stood up for myself and asked if they had the right to do this, I was told, "It's cute you think you know your rights."
Hayden was looked in the eyes and verbally attacked by Mr. Wetherhold, Mr Markijohn, and Officer Gonzales. He was directly told he had ruined his life by our school administrators. The students were told they would fail their classes, had ruined their academic careers, and had made the biggest mistake of their life. A minor issue was turned into a life changing catastrophe by these negligent and vicious men. As a family we know that our lives matter, but in my opinion they do not to Mr. Wetherhold, Mr. Markijon, and Officer Gonzalez. These are repeate offenders, and have been antagonizing and trying to bring our students down for years. We must open our eyes. These men must not be part of our famly any longer.
Hank Sigel
As Hank's mother I would like to apologize to Hayden's family if this letter hurts anyone. There but for the grace of God go I. I remember him a sweet boy from bitty ball with a beautiful smile.
The administration needs to accept responsibility for this tragedy. Impressionable teenagers should not be treated like hardened ciminals.
Heather Sigel
Hayden’s mother Emily was upset with the letter and absolved the school administrators of any blame for her son’s death. She asked the school administration to release the following statement:
The Long family has asked that the district post this message to help eliminate any negative publicity, Emily and Michael in no way blame the school system and are offended that some others are speaking for them. The family of Hayden Long would like to thank the support of the Geneva community, especially the Geneva Area City Schools for their support during this difficult time. We ask that you respect our privacy as we spend quality time with our close family and friends.
Here is my take on this tragedy. I feel bad for Hayden’s parents, but their son should have known that breaking the law can have some serious consequences. By posting his open letter, Hank was trying to cover up the fact that by admittedly smoking pot together with his buddy Hayden, he was a major contributor to this tragedy.
EXPERTS SAY THE POLICE SHOOTING OF 12-YEAR-OLD BOY WITH PELLET GUN WAS JUSTIFIED
The shooting of 12-year-old Tamir Rice by a Cleveland, Ohio cop was justified according to two independent experts brought in by the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
On November 22, 2014, two Cleveland, Ohio cops received a call about a man waving a gun in a city park and pointing it at people. They pulled their patrol car right up in front of the ‘man’. As rookie officer Timothy Loehmann got out of the car, he observed the suspect reaching for a gun in his waist band. Loehmann reacted by shooting the ‘man’ dead. The suspect turned out to be 12-year-old Tamir Rice and the gun was a non-lethal pellet gun. Rice was black and Loehmann is white.
The shooting of a young black boy by a white police officer had the makings of, a perfect shitstorm, but surprisingly the protests that followed were relatively mild. That may not be the case if and when a grand jury fails to indict Loehmann.
The Cuyahoga County Prosecutor called on two independent experts to evaluate the shooting. Their findings were released Saturday night.
According to the Associated Press, retired FBI agent Kimberly A. Crawford concluded that:
Loehmann's use of force did not violate Tamir's constitutional rights, the only facts relevant to such a determination are those the patrolman had at the time he fired his weapon.
Considering Officer Loehmann’s close proximity to Rice and lack of cover, the need to react quickly was imperative. Delaying the use of force until Officer Loehmann could confirm Rice’s intentions would not be considered a safe alternative under the circumstances
Loehmann, she wrote, "had no information to suggest the weapon was anything but a real handgun, and the speed with which the confrontation progressed would not give the officer time to focus on the weapon."
“Even if Officer Loehmann was aware of Rice’s age, it would not have made his use of force unreasonable. A 12-year-old with a gun, unquestionably old enough to pull a trigger, poses a threat equal to that of a full-grown adult in a similar situation.”
"It is my conclusion that Officer Loehmann's use of deadly force falls within the realm of reasonableness under the dictates of the Fourth Amendment," Crawford wrote, though she noted she was not issuing an opinion as to whether Loehmann violated Ohio law or department policy.
The AP reported that Lamar Sims, the chief deputy district attorney in Denver, also concluded that:
Loehmann's actions were reasonable based on statements from witnesses and a reconstruction of what happened that day.
Sims said the officers had no idea if the pellet gun was a real gun when they arrived, and that Loehmann was in a position of great peril because he was within feet of Tamir as the boy approached the cruiser and reached toward his waistband.
"The officers did not create the violent situation," Sims wrote in his review. "They were responding to a situation fraught with the potential for violence to citizens."
Subodh Chandra, a lawyer for the Rice family, disputed the findings and accused the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor of trying to whitewash the unlawful shooting of Tamir.
It should be noted that Loehmann, in his previous job as an Independence, Ohio cop, had been evaluated as an emotionally unstable recruit and unfit for duty. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that another cop wouldn’t have shot the boy under the same circumstances.
In my opinion, Loehmann was justified in shooting Tamir, but tactically speaking, his partner should not have pulled their patrol car right in front of the boy.
On November 22, 2014, two Cleveland, Ohio cops received a call about a man waving a gun in a city park and pointing it at people. They pulled their patrol car right up in front of the ‘man’. As rookie officer Timothy Loehmann got out of the car, he observed the suspect reaching for a gun in his waist band. Loehmann reacted by shooting the ‘man’ dead. The suspect turned out to be 12-year-old Tamir Rice and the gun was a non-lethal pellet gun. Rice was black and Loehmann is white.
The shooting of a young black boy by a white police officer had the makings of, a perfect shitstorm, but surprisingly the protests that followed were relatively mild. That may not be the case if and when a grand jury fails to indict Loehmann.
The Cuyahoga County Prosecutor called on two independent experts to evaluate the shooting. Their findings were released Saturday night.
According to the Associated Press, retired FBI agent Kimberly A. Crawford concluded that:
Loehmann's use of force did not violate Tamir's constitutional rights, the only facts relevant to such a determination are those the patrolman had at the time he fired his weapon.
Considering Officer Loehmann’s close proximity to Rice and lack of cover, the need to react quickly was imperative. Delaying the use of force until Officer Loehmann could confirm Rice’s intentions would not be considered a safe alternative under the circumstances
Loehmann, she wrote, "had no information to suggest the weapon was anything but a real handgun, and the speed with which the confrontation progressed would not give the officer time to focus on the weapon."
“Even if Officer Loehmann was aware of Rice’s age, it would not have made his use of force unreasonable. A 12-year-old with a gun, unquestionably old enough to pull a trigger, poses a threat equal to that of a full-grown adult in a similar situation.”
"It is my conclusion that Officer Loehmann's use of deadly force falls within the realm of reasonableness under the dictates of the Fourth Amendment," Crawford wrote, though she noted she was not issuing an opinion as to whether Loehmann violated Ohio law or department policy.
The AP reported that Lamar Sims, the chief deputy district attorney in Denver, also concluded that:
Loehmann's actions were reasonable based on statements from witnesses and a reconstruction of what happened that day.
Sims said the officers had no idea if the pellet gun was a real gun when they arrived, and that Loehmann was in a position of great peril because he was within feet of Tamir as the boy approached the cruiser and reached toward his waistband.
"The officers did not create the violent situation," Sims wrote in his review. "They were responding to a situation fraught with the potential for violence to citizens."
Subodh Chandra, a lawyer for the Rice family, disputed the findings and accused the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor of trying to whitewash the unlawful shooting of Tamir.
It should be noted that Loehmann, in his previous job as an Independence, Ohio cop, had been evaluated as an emotionally unstable recruit and unfit for duty. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that another cop wouldn’t have shot the boy under the same circumstances.
In my opinion, Loehmann was justified in shooting Tamir, but tactically speaking, his partner should not have pulled their patrol car right in front of the boy.
Sunday, October 11, 2015
BOAT LOAD OF CUBANS INTERCEPTED BY COAST GUARD
After the skipper announced it would be another week before they would return to their base in Miami, 17 Coast Guard cutter crew members were seriously injured scrambling to help these Cubans aboard their vessel.
BOWE BERGDAHL SHOULD NOT GO TO PRISON, U.S. ARMY HEARING OFFICER SAYS
Reuters
October 10, 2015
SAN ANTONIO -- The U.S. military officer who headed a hearing in the case of accused deserter Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl recommended that the man held captive by the Taliban in Afghanistan should not be sent to a military prison, Bergdahl's lawyers said.
In a memorandum issued on Friday, Lieutenant Colonel Mark Visger, the presiding officer at the so-called Article 32 hearing last month in San Antonio, recommended "non-judicial punishment" for Bergdahl, the lawyers said.
Military officials were not immediately available for comment.
U.S. military prosecutors told the two-day hearing in September that Bergdahl had intended to desert his post. They said his actions fundamentally altered American operations in Afghanistan and called for him to be held accountable.
Bergdahl, 29, was charged earlier this year with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. He faces up to life in prison if convicted of the more serious offense of misbehavior.
Visger's recommendations of a punishment under Article 15, without a punitive discharge, have not been publicly released, lawyers for Bergdahl said.
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 15 punishments include reduction of one grade in rank or a requirement that the soldier perform additional duties.
Visger will recommend the course of action for resolving Bergdahl's case, such as whether it should proceed to a court-martial or be handled in some other manner. The final decision will be made by the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Forces Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Major General Kenneth Dahl, who led the military's investigation into Bergdahl's disappearance and capture, told last month's hearing Bergdahl should not be imprisoned, saying he was not a Taliban sympathizer.
Dahl characterized Bergdahl as an unrealistically idealistic soldier who left his post to report concerns about his unit's leadership to a general at another base. He added that none of the soldiers sent to look for Bergdahl had been killed.
Bergdahl disappeared on June 30, 2009, from Combat Outpost Mest-Lalak in Paktika Province, Afghanistan, and was captured by the Taliban, where he suffered years of abuse and torture.
He was freed five years later in a prisoner swap that sent five Taliban leaders who were being held at Guantanamo to Qatar.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I strongly disagree! Bergdahl should be sentenced to a long prison term.
October 10, 2015
SAN ANTONIO -- The U.S. military officer who headed a hearing in the case of accused deserter Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl recommended that the man held captive by the Taliban in Afghanistan should not be sent to a military prison, Bergdahl's lawyers said.
In a memorandum issued on Friday, Lieutenant Colonel Mark Visger, the presiding officer at the so-called Article 32 hearing last month in San Antonio, recommended "non-judicial punishment" for Bergdahl, the lawyers said.
Military officials were not immediately available for comment.
U.S. military prosecutors told the two-day hearing in September that Bergdahl had intended to desert his post. They said his actions fundamentally altered American operations in Afghanistan and called for him to be held accountable.
Bergdahl, 29, was charged earlier this year with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. He faces up to life in prison if convicted of the more serious offense of misbehavior.
Visger's recommendations of a punishment under Article 15, without a punitive discharge, have not been publicly released, lawyers for Bergdahl said.
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Article 15 punishments include reduction of one grade in rank or a requirement that the soldier perform additional duties.
Visger will recommend the course of action for resolving Bergdahl's case, such as whether it should proceed to a court-martial or be handled in some other manner. The final decision will be made by the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Forces Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Major General Kenneth Dahl, who led the military's investigation into Bergdahl's disappearance and capture, told last month's hearing Bergdahl should not be imprisoned, saying he was not a Taliban sympathizer.
Dahl characterized Bergdahl as an unrealistically idealistic soldier who left his post to report concerns about his unit's leadership to a general at another base. He added that none of the soldiers sent to look for Bergdahl had been killed.
Bergdahl disappeared on June 30, 2009, from Combat Outpost Mest-Lalak in Paktika Province, Afghanistan, and was captured by the Taliban, where he suffered years of abuse and torture.
He was freed five years later in a prisoner swap that sent five Taliban leaders who were being held at Guantanamo to Qatar.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I strongly disagree! Bergdahl should be sentenced to a long prison term.
RELATIVES HAVE ‘PROOF’ ALCATRAZ ESCAPEES ARE STILL ALIVE
By Tim Donnelly
New York Post
October 10, 2015
In June 1962, three inmates shimmied through a hole they’d chiseled into the walls of Alcatraz prison and climbed up to the roof. To mask their escape, they’d placed in their bunks realistic-looking dummy heads they’d made out of papier-mâché and human hair from the prison barber shop. The three men — brothers John and Clarence Anglin and fellow inmate Frank Morris — grabbed makeshift paddles and plunged an escape raft they made of stolen raincoats into the dark waters of San Francisco Bay.
Alcatraz officials have long stated that the men drowned, maintaining the prison’s bragging rights of no escapees. But now, more than 50 years later, new leads are being presented by the Anglin family, who are cooperating with authorities for the first time.
They claim that not only did the brothers survive the escape, they were alive and well up through at least the mid-1970s — and may still be alive today.
The evidence is offered up by the Anglins’ nephews David, 48, and Ken Widner, 54, who are featured in “Alcatraz: Search for the Truth,” a History Channel special airing Monday. The evidence has pumped life into the cold case, and has investigators lining up new interviews and planning to search South America for signs of America’s most notorious escapees.
“This is absolutely the best actionable lead we’ve had,” Art Roderick, the retired US marshal who was lead investigator on the case for 20 years, tells The Post.
The Anglin family sat on those leads for years because, they say, they were spied on and harassed by the FBI for years. But a desire to see the case solved before Marie Anglin Widner — the Widners’ mother and the escapees’ sister — passed away, combined with the cockiness of Alcatraz officials, inspired them to come forward.
“[Alcatraz officials] were not willing to . . . say, ‘Maybe [the escapees] did make it,’ ” David Widner says. “That gave me the motive to prove them wrong.”
First there were the Christmas cards, signed with Clarence and John Anglin’s names, that were delivered to their mother during the three years after the escape. They arrived without postage.
In the History Channel special, the nephews take the cards and other evidence to Roderick, who retired in 2008 but is still working on the case. Though the handwriting matched, the investigators were unable to pinpoint the exact date of the cards.
But the nephews also came forward with a photo — which will be revealed on the show — that proves the Anglins may have been alive in the 1970s. That really caught Roderick’s attention.
“When you work these types of cases there’s a feeling you get when stuff starts to fall into place,” he says. “I’m getting this feeling now.”
The next big piece of evidence was buried — about six feet in the ground. The family finally let investigators dig up the remains of the Anglins’ other brother, Alfred, who was electrocuted during his own escape attempt from an Alabama prison. They needed his DNA: Authorities had discovered a set of bones that washed ashore north of San Francisco in 1963, which they said may have belonged to one of the escapees.
But the DNA proved to not be a match, bolstering the Anglin family’s claims that the two may indeed still be alive. (The bones could still belong to Morris, though; he has no living relatives to test.)
David Widner says he’s working on a book that will contain more evidence not included in the TV show. That includes a surprise guest star: Boston crime boss Whitey Bulger, who met the future escapees in Alcatraz. Bulger, in a 2014 letter to Ken Widner, said he instructed John and Clarence on how to navigate bay currents, and dropped a key piece of advice about being a fugitive.
“He taught them that when you disappear, you have to cut all ties,” Ken says. “He told me in a letter, ‘This is the mistake that I made.’ He told me, ‘These brothers undoubtedly had done exactly what I told them to do.’ ”
The nephews hope the special rewrites the history of Alcatraz, and cements their uncles and Morris as the only people to successfully escape the island, out of the 36 who tried.
Roderick has lined up 10 new interviews since seeing the evidence, and is talking to US Marshals about investigating in Brazil, where the Anglins may have ended up. If they are still alive (both would be in their mid-80s by now), international laws may not even allow extradition to the US.
Nonetheless, Roderick would want to sit down with them to figure out how they did it.
If they died and their bodies can be found, however, Ken and David want to bring the Anglin brothers back to the family plot in Ruskin, Fla.
Says David, “We should get ’em a place ready.”
New York Post
October 10, 2015
In June 1962, three inmates shimmied through a hole they’d chiseled into the walls of Alcatraz prison and climbed up to the roof. To mask their escape, they’d placed in their bunks realistic-looking dummy heads they’d made out of papier-mâché and human hair from the prison barber shop. The three men — brothers John and Clarence Anglin and fellow inmate Frank Morris — grabbed makeshift paddles and plunged an escape raft they made of stolen raincoats into the dark waters of San Francisco Bay.
Alcatraz officials have long stated that the men drowned, maintaining the prison’s bragging rights of no escapees. But now, more than 50 years later, new leads are being presented by the Anglin family, who are cooperating with authorities for the first time.
They claim that not only did the brothers survive the escape, they were alive and well up through at least the mid-1970s — and may still be alive today.
The evidence is offered up by the Anglins’ nephews David, 48, and Ken Widner, 54, who are featured in “Alcatraz: Search for the Truth,” a History Channel special airing Monday. The evidence has pumped life into the cold case, and has investigators lining up new interviews and planning to search South America for signs of America’s most notorious escapees.
“This is absolutely the best actionable lead we’ve had,” Art Roderick, the retired US marshal who was lead investigator on the case for 20 years, tells The Post.
The Anglin family sat on those leads for years because, they say, they were spied on and harassed by the FBI for years. But a desire to see the case solved before Marie Anglin Widner — the Widners’ mother and the escapees’ sister — passed away, combined with the cockiness of Alcatraz officials, inspired them to come forward.
“[Alcatraz officials] were not willing to . . . say, ‘Maybe [the escapees] did make it,’ ” David Widner says. “That gave me the motive to prove them wrong.”
First there were the Christmas cards, signed with Clarence and John Anglin’s names, that were delivered to their mother during the three years after the escape. They arrived without postage.
In the History Channel special, the nephews take the cards and other evidence to Roderick, who retired in 2008 but is still working on the case. Though the handwriting matched, the investigators were unable to pinpoint the exact date of the cards.
But the nephews also came forward with a photo — which will be revealed on the show — that proves the Anglins may have been alive in the 1970s. That really caught Roderick’s attention.
“When you work these types of cases there’s a feeling you get when stuff starts to fall into place,” he says. “I’m getting this feeling now.”
The next big piece of evidence was buried — about six feet in the ground. The family finally let investigators dig up the remains of the Anglins’ other brother, Alfred, who was electrocuted during his own escape attempt from an Alabama prison. They needed his DNA: Authorities had discovered a set of bones that washed ashore north of San Francisco in 1963, which they said may have belonged to one of the escapees.
But the DNA proved to not be a match, bolstering the Anglin family’s claims that the two may indeed still be alive. (The bones could still belong to Morris, though; he has no living relatives to test.)
David Widner says he’s working on a book that will contain more evidence not included in the TV show. That includes a surprise guest star: Boston crime boss Whitey Bulger, who met the future escapees in Alcatraz. Bulger, in a 2014 letter to Ken Widner, said he instructed John and Clarence on how to navigate bay currents, and dropped a key piece of advice about being a fugitive.
“He taught them that when you disappear, you have to cut all ties,” Ken says. “He told me in a letter, ‘This is the mistake that I made.’ He told me, ‘These brothers undoubtedly had done exactly what I told them to do.’ ”
The nephews hope the special rewrites the history of Alcatraz, and cements their uncles and Morris as the only people to successfully escape the island, out of the 36 who tried.
Roderick has lined up 10 new interviews since seeing the evidence, and is talking to US Marshals about investigating in Brazil, where the Anglins may have ended up. If they are still alive (both would be in their mid-80s by now), international laws may not even allow extradition to the US.
Nonetheless, Roderick would want to sit down with them to figure out how they did it.
If they died and their bodies can be found, however, Ken and David want to bring the Anglin brothers back to the family plot in Ruskin, Fla.
Says David, “We should get ’em a place ready.”
Saturday, October 10, 2015
MAN WHO SURVIVED SHOT IN HEAD BY LAPD OFFICER IN LOS FELIZ SPEAKS OUT
A man who survived being shot in the head by an LAPD officer, speaks exclusively with Eyewitness News about his road to recovery and what he remembers of the shooting
By Miriam Hernandez
KABC
October 8, 2015
DOWNEY, Calif. -- Walter DeLeon survived a gunshot wound to the head by a Los Angeles police officer and now speaks exclusively with Eyewitness News about his road to recovery and a special message he has for the Los Angeles Police Department.
DeLeon is alive after being in a two-week coma and undergoing four surgeries. Now he has a permanent disability. His mother wants the public to see images of her son's disturbing head wounds, but what he wants exposed is a message.
"It's that my words are not said in vain. That something does happen. That there is some type of change in the police force," he said.
DeLeon now has a team mounting a legal challenge. Lawyers and the LAPD are at polar opposites over what exactly triggered the gunfire on June 19. The 49-year-old handyman was out for a walk along Los Feliz Boulevard. Officers said he looked like he was hiding a gun.
"Our initial statement was that Mr. DeLeon approached the police car in an aggressive manner with his hands, or hand, wrapped in a piece of cloth," LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith said.
"How threatening can I be toward them with a bottle of water and a towel?" DeLeon said.
Whatever the action was, the officer responded and exited the vehicle. He ordered DeLeon to drop his gun, but DeLeon did not have a gun.
"He was nowhere near these cops. He was not doing anything provocative," DeLeon's lawyer Mark Geragos said.
Both sides say they have supporting witnesses, but neither side has a complete picture. For the LAPD and the inspector general, there are three months of investigation ahead.
In the middle of it all is DeLeon, the rare survivor of an officer-involved shooting. His family said he remembers very little of the incident.
"And then during that time, I needed help and I was going to ask the police something and I had the towel to dry my forehead," he said.
But one of the questions is why did DeLeon need help? Could his signals have appeared as aggression? The only thing he remembers is that he had the towel close to a water bottle he had.
DeLeon believes more officer training could have spared him from brain damage. The former handyman lost one eye and his hearing in one ear is gone. At the family apartment, it's a struggle for his mother and sister to take care of him.
"He can't go to the restroom by himself. He can't feed himself. He can't dress himself," his sister Yovanna DeLeon said.
To add to their struggle, they are now facing eviction.
At the Rancho Los Amigos Rehabilitation Center, DeLeon said he believes he knows what happened that day.
"It's like, wait a minute, it's like shoot first and then ask questions later. Oh, he's dead, he is not going to say anything. That is the model? That's what they call 'to protect and serve?' Come on," he said.
Again, he ponders the judgement calls that day and his tone changes.
"I wouldn't want to be an officer. It's tough. On the spot decision, and it's got to be the right one. But anyways, you get training and if you don't have it, then you ask for it," he said.
Both officers involved in the shooting are assigned to administrative duties pending the outcome of the investigation. DeLeon's lawyers said they plan on filing a notice of civil rights claim against the LAPD next week, which is a precursor to a civil lawsuit.
By Miriam Hernandez
KABC
October 8, 2015
DOWNEY, Calif. -- Walter DeLeon survived a gunshot wound to the head by a Los Angeles police officer and now speaks exclusively with Eyewitness News about his road to recovery and a special message he has for the Los Angeles Police Department.
DeLeon is alive after being in a two-week coma and undergoing four surgeries. Now he has a permanent disability. His mother wants the public to see images of her son's disturbing head wounds, but what he wants exposed is a message.
"It's that my words are not said in vain. That something does happen. That there is some type of change in the police force," he said.
DeLeon now has a team mounting a legal challenge. Lawyers and the LAPD are at polar opposites over what exactly triggered the gunfire on June 19. The 49-year-old handyman was out for a walk along Los Feliz Boulevard. Officers said he looked like he was hiding a gun.
"Our initial statement was that Mr. DeLeon approached the police car in an aggressive manner with his hands, or hand, wrapped in a piece of cloth," LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith said.
"How threatening can I be toward them with a bottle of water and a towel?" DeLeon said.
Whatever the action was, the officer responded and exited the vehicle. He ordered DeLeon to drop his gun, but DeLeon did not have a gun.
"He was nowhere near these cops. He was not doing anything provocative," DeLeon's lawyer Mark Geragos said.
Both sides say they have supporting witnesses, but neither side has a complete picture. For the LAPD and the inspector general, there are three months of investigation ahead.
In the middle of it all is DeLeon, the rare survivor of an officer-involved shooting. His family said he remembers very little of the incident.
"And then during that time, I needed help and I was going to ask the police something and I had the towel to dry my forehead," he said.
But one of the questions is why did DeLeon need help? Could his signals have appeared as aggression? The only thing he remembers is that he had the towel close to a water bottle he had.
DeLeon believes more officer training could have spared him from brain damage. The former handyman lost one eye and his hearing in one ear is gone. At the family apartment, it's a struggle for his mother and sister to take care of him.
"He can't go to the restroom by himself. He can't feed himself. He can't dress himself," his sister Yovanna DeLeon said.
To add to their struggle, they are now facing eviction.
At the Rancho Los Amigos Rehabilitation Center, DeLeon said he believes he knows what happened that day.
"It's like, wait a minute, it's like shoot first and then ask questions later. Oh, he's dead, he is not going to say anything. That is the model? That's what they call 'to protect and serve?' Come on," he said.
Again, he ponders the judgement calls that day and his tone changes.
"I wouldn't want to be an officer. It's tough. On the spot decision, and it's got to be the right one. But anyways, you get training and if you don't have it, then you ask for it," he said.
Both officers involved in the shooting are assigned to administrative duties pending the outcome of the investigation. DeLeon's lawyers said they plan on filing a notice of civil rights claim against the LAPD next week, which is a precursor to a civil lawsuit.
YOU AND I HELPED EL CHAPO TO ESCAPE
With every bribe, with every illegal act, we all become accomplices
By Luis Elizalde
Mexico News Daily
August 28, 2015
I helped El Chapo escape. And you, who is reading this, and you, and you. Yes, this is going to be a radical post, but what do you want? That’s me.
The first time I helped El Chapo was, perhaps, in February 1986 when I finally got my first fake ID and used it to get into the News, a popular disco in El Pedregal, and get blissfully drunk.
The second time was in ’87 when I got my “no-test” driver’s license by paying 300 pesos more, for which, obviously, I received no receipt.
The third was the first time I ran a light and fell back on the proverbial “How can we fix this, officer?” The fourth, when Messrs. Johnnie and Walker helped me pass a remedial geography course with a gift for my dipsomaniac teacher.
And I could continue with countless episodes in which a bribe took place.
The last time I helped him was with his tunnel two weeks ago when a cop pulled me over because my car’s emissions test had expired. I preferred to resolve the matter in a pleasant and friendly manner with two Sor Juanas (200-peso notes), instead of paying the ticket, allowing my car to be towed away and dealing with all the fucking hassle.
You have helped, too, when you double-park “very quickly because you’re only just going close by,” or when you buy pirated movies, or when you bribe the alcohol inspectors because your restaurant’s license has expired and renewing it is a fuss, or you who voted for the PRI, or you who didn’t vote.
It’s a radical point of view, as I said, but I consider it as real as El Chapo’s escape.
My father-in-law used to say that “nobody can get through the three honests:”
You ask someone, “Are you honest?”
And they answer, “Yes.”
You ask again: “Honest, honest?”
And they answer again: “Yes, yes.”
You ask once again: ““Honest, honest, honest?”
And then the person being asked will always say, “Weeelll, I mean, define honest, because, you see . . . .”
And, yeah. Nobody can endure the three honests. It sounds like a joke, but it isn’t. We live in a country in which we are told from childhood that “if you don’t cheat, you don’t get ahead.”
That seems to be the motto. That’s how “the system” works. Alas, it is sometimes cheaper to bribe someone and get things done than become “misterthreehonests,” because in many cases if you want to resolve a bureaucratic procedure, you must bribe someone.
Is it Mexican genetics?
Not at all, and you simply have to cross from Tijuana to Chula Vista to find out. The Mexicans who run lights and leave litter in Baja California are the same as those in California who stop at stop signs, and for whom the idea of spitting chewing gum on the sidewalk never even crosses their minds.
Why? Because they know that if they do that in the United States they’re in deep shit.
And it’s not like our northern neighbors aren’t corrupt, it’s that their corruption doesn’t affect ordinary citizens so directly.
I lived for two years in Texas, and at first I felt like a hot shot and insulted everyone because of the oppressivedamngringos, they call it the land of the free but won’t let you do anything, etc.
I quickly realized that everything there works like clockwork. It’s im-pres-sive. As an example, if you run a light and get pulled over by a cop, don’t even think about asking “What’s up, officer, is there a way to fix this problem outside the court?” because you’ll probably end up in jail instead of court.
Tax collection there does have an impact on public health and schools, on colleges, roads, streetlights and many more services.
So no, we aren’t born like this nor is it ingrained in our DNA. We just know that here in our home, for better or worse, we can do whatever the hell we want, and we can solve anything with threats, influence, a little (or large) bribe, or just by playing the fool.
Because the institutions don’t work.
There’s too many people who don’t pay taxes. Can we blame them? Have you had something taken care of at the Seguro Social? You’ll bleed to death before someone even admits you.
Do your kids attend a public school? God-for-bid. Are the roads and streetlights in your cities terrific? Are you fucking kidding me?
No, no and no. The list could go on with thousands of no’s.
Even if you want to be well-behaved and do stuff without cheating, you’ll realize sooner rather than later that “the system” works better if you take the easier road. As in: the illegal one.
Sad. Very sad.
So if you are one of those who paid off your ex’s lawyer to get a better deal out of the divorce, or don’t pay taxes, or got an innocent joint from someone at the office to have a good time, or benefited from your government’s contractors and built yourself an eight-million-dollar mansion with public funds, you too helped El Chapo build that tunnel.
A tunnel that we know nobody used to escape. We all know that El Chapo left by walking out through the front door, whistling Raphael’s “today is a special day for me, cause I’ll go out at night.”
He managed to do this while unloading cartloads of cash left and right. And nobody was surprised he escaped. It was logical. It’s Mexico.
A Mexico built by you and me.
This, of course, doesn’t make me proud. This is simply a very brief chronicle of this sick country in which we live.
__________
Luis Elizalde is executive vice-president and chief creative officer at the communications and advertising agency, Saatchi & Saatchi México.
By Luis Elizalde
Mexico News Daily
August 28, 2015
I helped El Chapo escape. And you, who is reading this, and you, and you. Yes, this is going to be a radical post, but what do you want? That’s me.
The first time I helped El Chapo was, perhaps, in February 1986 when I finally got my first fake ID and used it to get into the News, a popular disco in El Pedregal, and get blissfully drunk.
The second time was in ’87 when I got my “no-test” driver’s license by paying 300 pesos more, for which, obviously, I received no receipt.
The third was the first time I ran a light and fell back on the proverbial “How can we fix this, officer?” The fourth, when Messrs. Johnnie and Walker helped me pass a remedial geography course with a gift for my dipsomaniac teacher.
And I could continue with countless episodes in which a bribe took place.
The last time I helped him was with his tunnel two weeks ago when a cop pulled me over because my car’s emissions test had expired. I preferred to resolve the matter in a pleasant and friendly manner with two Sor Juanas (200-peso notes), instead of paying the ticket, allowing my car to be towed away and dealing with all the fucking hassle.
You have helped, too, when you double-park “very quickly because you’re only just going close by,” or when you buy pirated movies, or when you bribe the alcohol inspectors because your restaurant’s license has expired and renewing it is a fuss, or you who voted for the PRI, or you who didn’t vote.
It’s a radical point of view, as I said, but I consider it as real as El Chapo’s escape.
My father-in-law used to say that “nobody can get through the three honests:”
You ask someone, “Are you honest?”
And they answer, “Yes.”
You ask again: “Honest, honest?”
And they answer again: “Yes, yes.”
You ask once again: ““Honest, honest, honest?”
And then the person being asked will always say, “Weeelll, I mean, define honest, because, you see . . . .”
And, yeah. Nobody can endure the three honests. It sounds like a joke, but it isn’t. We live in a country in which we are told from childhood that “if you don’t cheat, you don’t get ahead.”
That seems to be the motto. That’s how “the system” works. Alas, it is sometimes cheaper to bribe someone and get things done than become “misterthreehonests,” because in many cases if you want to resolve a bureaucratic procedure, you must bribe someone.
Is it Mexican genetics?
Not at all, and you simply have to cross from Tijuana to Chula Vista to find out. The Mexicans who run lights and leave litter in Baja California are the same as those in California who stop at stop signs, and for whom the idea of spitting chewing gum on the sidewalk never even crosses their minds.
Why? Because they know that if they do that in the United States they’re in deep shit.
And it’s not like our northern neighbors aren’t corrupt, it’s that their corruption doesn’t affect ordinary citizens so directly.
I lived for two years in Texas, and at first I felt like a hot shot and insulted everyone because of the oppressivedamngringos, they call it the land of the free but won’t let you do anything, etc.
I quickly realized that everything there works like clockwork. It’s im-pres-sive. As an example, if you run a light and get pulled over by a cop, don’t even think about asking “What’s up, officer, is there a way to fix this problem outside the court?” because you’ll probably end up in jail instead of court.
Tax collection there does have an impact on public health and schools, on colleges, roads, streetlights and many more services.
So no, we aren’t born like this nor is it ingrained in our DNA. We just know that here in our home, for better or worse, we can do whatever the hell we want, and we can solve anything with threats, influence, a little (or large) bribe, or just by playing the fool.
Because the institutions don’t work.
There’s too many people who don’t pay taxes. Can we blame them? Have you had something taken care of at the Seguro Social? You’ll bleed to death before someone even admits you.
Do your kids attend a public school? God-for-bid. Are the roads and streetlights in your cities terrific? Are you fucking kidding me?
No, no and no. The list could go on with thousands of no’s.
Even if you want to be well-behaved and do stuff without cheating, you’ll realize sooner rather than later that “the system” works better if you take the easier road. As in: the illegal one.
Sad. Very sad.
So if you are one of those who paid off your ex’s lawyer to get a better deal out of the divorce, or don’t pay taxes, or got an innocent joint from someone at the office to have a good time, or benefited from your government’s contractors and built yourself an eight-million-dollar mansion with public funds, you too helped El Chapo build that tunnel.
A tunnel that we know nobody used to escape. We all know that El Chapo left by walking out through the front door, whistling Raphael’s “today is a special day for me, cause I’ll go out at night.”
He managed to do this while unloading cartloads of cash left and right. And nobody was surprised he escaped. It was logical. It’s Mexico.
A Mexico built by you and me.
This, of course, doesn’t make me proud. This is simply a very brief chronicle of this sick country in which we live.
__________
Luis Elizalde is executive vice-president and chief creative officer at the communications and advertising agency, Saatchi & Saatchi México.
WAVE OF STABBINGS SHAKE ISRAEL AND WEST BANK
By Sarah Benhaida and Delphine Mathieussent
AFP
October 9, 2015
Jerusalem -- A fresh wave of stabbings shook Israel and the West Bank on Friday, including a suspected revenge attack by a Jewish suspect that wounded two Palestinians and two Arab Israelis.
Attacks also continued against Israelis and Jews, with a Palestinian stabbing a policeman near a West Bank settlement before being shot dead by the victim, who was lightly wounded.
A Jewish 16-year-old was lightly wounded in a new stabbing in Jerusalem by an 18-year-old Palestinian suspect, who was arrested.
In the assault by a Jew, the assailant aged about 20 was arrested and told police he carried out the attack in the southern Israeli city of Dimona because "all Arabs are terrorists".
The victims suffered light to moderate wounds.
It marked the first such attack against Palestinians after at least 11 stabbings that have targeted Israelis or Jews since Saturday, killing two of them.
Later, a woman was shot after a stabbing attempt in northern Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly condemned the stabbings by the Jewish suspect, a sign of concerns it could trigger further violence.
Palestinians have also rioted in annexed east Jerusalem and the West Bank in recent days, with the unrest raising fears of a wider uprising or even a third intifada.
Hundreds of right-wing Jewish protesters marched in Jerusalem on Thursday night, including some chanting "Death to Arabs" and "No Arabs, No Attacks".
Arab Israelis are the descendants of Palestinians who remained after the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and hold Israeli citizenship.
Tens of thousands of Palestinians also work in Israel, particularly in construction.
Friday's stabbing came as Israeli security forces sought to prevent the further spread of Palestinian unrest, with Netanyahu on Thursday night saying the country faced a mostly unorganised "wave of terror".
"These actions are mostly not organised, but they are all the result of wild and untruthful incitement from Hamas, from the Palestinian Authority, from several neighbouring counties and, no less, from the Islamic Movement in Israel," he said.
Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas has spoken out against violence and in favour of "peaceful, popular resistance," but many youths are frustrated with his leadership as well as Israel's government.
Old City tensions
Jerusalem's Old City was the site of tensions on Friday as Muslims filed toward the sensitive Al-Aqsa mosque compound for the main weekly prayers.
Scuffles broke out as a group of about 50 Jews wearing skullcaps or draped in the Israeli flag walked through the mainly Muslim eastern portion of the Old City toward the Western Wall.
Jews shouted "long live the Israeli people" and some of the women made obscene gestures at Muslims, who responded with shouts of "Allahu Akbar".
Clashes between Israeli police and Palestinian youths have repeatedly erupted at the Al-Aqsa compound in recent weeks, and police were prohibiting men under 45 from entering the site on Friday.
Such measures are often put into effect when tensions flare.
The compound is the third-holiest site in Islam and the most sacred to Jews, who refer to it as the Temple Mount. It is located in east Jerusalem, occupied by Israel in 1967 and later annexed in a move never recognised by the international community.
Stabbing attacks targeting Jews began on Saturday in the Old City, when two Israelis were killed there, prompting a security crackdown.
Security measures were further tightened Thursday, with six metal detectors set up in the Old City and police stationed on rooftops.
The Jerusalem mayor went as far as to encourage residents who own guns to carry them around with them, even carrying one himself earlier this week while visiting a Palestinian area of the city where clashes have erupted.
Aqsa visits banned
In one step intended to calm tensions, Netanyahu has barred members of parliament and ministers from visiting the Al-Aqsa compound.
Provocative visits by Israel's Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel as well as by Israeli Arab lawmakers have added to the volatility.
Arab lawmakers have vowed to defy the order and plan to make a joint visit to the compound, which will test enforcement of the order.
Muslims fear Israel will seek to change the longstanding rules governing the site, which allow Jews to visit but not pray to avoid provoking tensions.
Netanyahu has said repeatedly he is committed to the status quo.
An increase in visits by Jews during a series of Jewish holidays in recent weeks has added to tensions.
AFP
October 9, 2015
Jerusalem -- A fresh wave of stabbings shook Israel and the West Bank on Friday, including a suspected revenge attack by a Jewish suspect that wounded two Palestinians and two Arab Israelis.
Attacks also continued against Israelis and Jews, with a Palestinian stabbing a policeman near a West Bank settlement before being shot dead by the victim, who was lightly wounded.
A Jewish 16-year-old was lightly wounded in a new stabbing in Jerusalem by an 18-year-old Palestinian suspect, who was arrested.
In the assault by a Jew, the assailant aged about 20 was arrested and told police he carried out the attack in the southern Israeli city of Dimona because "all Arabs are terrorists".
The victims suffered light to moderate wounds.
It marked the first such attack against Palestinians after at least 11 stabbings that have targeted Israelis or Jews since Saturday, killing two of them.
Later, a woman was shot after a stabbing attempt in northern Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly condemned the stabbings by the Jewish suspect, a sign of concerns it could trigger further violence.
Palestinians have also rioted in annexed east Jerusalem and the West Bank in recent days, with the unrest raising fears of a wider uprising or even a third intifada.
Hundreds of right-wing Jewish protesters marched in Jerusalem on Thursday night, including some chanting "Death to Arabs" and "No Arabs, No Attacks".
Arab Israelis are the descendants of Palestinians who remained after the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and hold Israeli citizenship.
Tens of thousands of Palestinians also work in Israel, particularly in construction.
Friday's stabbing came as Israeli security forces sought to prevent the further spread of Palestinian unrest, with Netanyahu on Thursday night saying the country faced a mostly unorganised "wave of terror".
"These actions are mostly not organised, but they are all the result of wild and untruthful incitement from Hamas, from the Palestinian Authority, from several neighbouring counties and, no less, from the Islamic Movement in Israel," he said.
Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas has spoken out against violence and in favour of "peaceful, popular resistance," but many youths are frustrated with his leadership as well as Israel's government.
Old City tensions
Jerusalem's Old City was the site of tensions on Friday as Muslims filed toward the sensitive Al-Aqsa mosque compound for the main weekly prayers.
Scuffles broke out as a group of about 50 Jews wearing skullcaps or draped in the Israeli flag walked through the mainly Muslim eastern portion of the Old City toward the Western Wall.
Jews shouted "long live the Israeli people" and some of the women made obscene gestures at Muslims, who responded with shouts of "Allahu Akbar".
Clashes between Israeli police and Palestinian youths have repeatedly erupted at the Al-Aqsa compound in recent weeks, and police were prohibiting men under 45 from entering the site on Friday.
Such measures are often put into effect when tensions flare.
The compound is the third-holiest site in Islam and the most sacred to Jews, who refer to it as the Temple Mount. It is located in east Jerusalem, occupied by Israel in 1967 and later annexed in a move never recognised by the international community.
Stabbing attacks targeting Jews began on Saturday in the Old City, when two Israelis were killed there, prompting a security crackdown.
Security measures were further tightened Thursday, with six metal detectors set up in the Old City and police stationed on rooftops.
The Jerusalem mayor went as far as to encourage residents who own guns to carry them around with them, even carrying one himself earlier this week while visiting a Palestinian area of the city where clashes have erupted.
Aqsa visits banned
In one step intended to calm tensions, Netanyahu has barred members of parliament and ministers from visiting the Al-Aqsa compound.
Provocative visits by Israel's Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel as well as by Israeli Arab lawmakers have added to the volatility.
Arab lawmakers have vowed to defy the order and plan to make a joint visit to the compound, which will test enforcement of the order.
Muslims fear Israel will seek to change the longstanding rules governing the site, which allow Jews to visit but not pray to avoid provoking tensions.
Netanyahu has said repeatedly he is committed to the status quo.
An increase in visits by Jews during a series of Jewish holidays in recent weeks has added to tensions.
Friday, October 09, 2015
BEN CARSON IS OUT OF HIS EVER LOVING MIND
Dr. Carson believes that if Germany’s Jews had only been armed, they could have prevented the Holocaust
Everyone laughs at Vice President Joe Biden’s gaffes. Well, Ben Carson has made a few gaffes himself on the presidential campaign trail. In the latest one he blew his cork.
While discussing his gun views on CNN Thursday, Carson was asked, “But just to clarify, if there had been no gun control laws in Europe at that time, would 6 million Jews have been slaughtered?” Carson answered:
“I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals [of exterminating the Jews] would have been greatly diminished if the people [Jews] had been armed. I’m telling you there is a reason these dictatorial people take guns first.”
That was about as ridiculous a statement one could have made. There’s no way armed Jews could have prevented the Holocaust. I think I know a little more about Nazi Germany and the Holocaust than Dr. Carson does.
When Hitler came to power in 1933 there were some 533,000 Jews living in Germany. By 1939, before the start of the Holocaust, about 304,000 Jews had left Germany in order to escape the persecution by the Nazis. My parents and I left in 1936. How can anyone in their right mind even fathom that 218,000 Jewish men, women and children armed with handguns and hunting rifles could have fought off the armed forces of the Nazis?
Let’s take a look at what happened when armed Jews resisted German efforts to transport Polish Jews to Nazi death camps. On the 19th of April, 1943, armed Jews in the Warsaw ghetto began an uprising against the SS police which had been removing Jews from the ghetto for shipment to the death camps. The Jews were armed with revolvers, rifles, light machine guns and hand grenades. At first the Jewish fighters were able to stop the German SS police units, but when the Germans called in the Waffen SS, it took only a few days put down the revolt which ended on the 16 th of May with 13,000 Jewish fighters killed. And how many Germans were killed during the month long uprising? About 20.
Carson’s argument reminds me of the ridiculous claims made by many pro-gunners that the only reason Japan did not invade the U.S. after Pearl Harbor is because the Japanese High Command knew that American citizens were armed. The truth is that logistically it was impossible for Japanese ground forces to invade our shores. Their army was tied up in China and Southeast Asia. Even had they had the manpower to invade us, they would not have been able to adequately supply such an operation. And that is why Japan did not invade the U.S. Our armed citizenry had nothing to do with it.
As for Hitler disarming the German people, Carson got that all wrong too. Actually strict gun controls were put into effect well before Hitler came to power. The truth is that in 1938 Hitler completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition, and the legal age of purchase was lowered from 20 to 18. However, Jews were banned from possessing firearms.
I suggest that Dr. Carson return to doing what he is really good at, neurosurgery. Presidential material he just ain’t!
Everyone laughs at Vice President Joe Biden’s gaffes. Well, Ben Carson has made a few gaffes himself on the presidential campaign trail. In the latest one he blew his cork.
While discussing his gun views on CNN Thursday, Carson was asked, “But just to clarify, if there had been no gun control laws in Europe at that time, would 6 million Jews have been slaughtered?” Carson answered:
“I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals [of exterminating the Jews] would have been greatly diminished if the people [Jews] had been armed. I’m telling you there is a reason these dictatorial people take guns first.”
That was about as ridiculous a statement one could have made. There’s no way armed Jews could have prevented the Holocaust. I think I know a little more about Nazi Germany and the Holocaust than Dr. Carson does.
When Hitler came to power in 1933 there were some 533,000 Jews living in Germany. By 1939, before the start of the Holocaust, about 304,000 Jews had left Germany in order to escape the persecution by the Nazis. My parents and I left in 1936. How can anyone in their right mind even fathom that 218,000 Jewish men, women and children armed with handguns and hunting rifles could have fought off the armed forces of the Nazis?
Let’s take a look at what happened when armed Jews resisted German efforts to transport Polish Jews to Nazi death camps. On the 19th of April, 1943, armed Jews in the Warsaw ghetto began an uprising against the SS police which had been removing Jews from the ghetto for shipment to the death camps. The Jews were armed with revolvers, rifles, light machine guns and hand grenades. At first the Jewish fighters were able to stop the German SS police units, but when the Germans called in the Waffen SS, it took only a few days put down the revolt which ended on the 16 th of May with 13,000 Jewish fighters killed. And how many Germans were killed during the month long uprising? About 20.
Carson’s argument reminds me of the ridiculous claims made by many pro-gunners that the only reason Japan did not invade the U.S. after Pearl Harbor is because the Japanese High Command knew that American citizens were armed. The truth is that logistically it was impossible for Japanese ground forces to invade our shores. Their army was tied up in China and Southeast Asia. Even had they had the manpower to invade us, they would not have been able to adequately supply such an operation. And that is why Japan did not invade the U.S. Our armed citizenry had nothing to do with it.
As for Hitler disarming the German people, Carson got that all wrong too. Actually strict gun controls were put into effect well before Hitler came to power. The truth is that in 1938 Hitler completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition, and the legal age of purchase was lowered from 20 to 18. However, Jews were banned from possessing firearms.
I suggest that Dr. Carson return to doing what he is really good at, neurosurgery. Presidential material he just ain’t!
HOUSTON MAYOR SLAMS BASEBALL GREAT FOR AMTI-HERO TV AD
Mayor Anise Parker became furious when Lance Berkman came out in a TV ad against her pet project, an equal rights ordinance which allows transgenders to use women’s public restrooms
Houston Mayor Anise Parker is a lesbian who has a pet project she hopes will be approved by the voters next month. Parker’s proposed city ordinance, known as the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO), prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and includes the federal laws prohibiting discrimination based on sex, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, religion, disability, pregnancy and genetic information, as well as family, marital or military status.
HERO applies to businesses that serve the public, private employers, housing, city employment and city contracting. Religious institutions would be exempt. Violators could be fined up to $5,000.
Lance Berkman is a former Houston Astros baseball great. Last month Berkman appeared in a TV ad in opposition to HERO because the proposed ordinance would allow transgenders access to women’s public restrooms. Here is what Lance said:
“My wife and I have four daughters. Proposition One, the 'bathroom ordinance,' would allow troubled men to enter women's public bathrooms, showers and locker rooms. This would violate their privacy and put them in harm's way. That's just wrong.”
The mayor was furious. How dare he attack her pet project. Parker responded by attacking Berkman in a series of tweets:
Lance Berkman played in St. Louis. Guess his girls didn't go to his games! SL has a non-discrimination ordinance.-A http://www.slpl.lib.mo.us/cco/ords/data/ord8715.htm …
When Lance Berkman went from NYC to STL to play ball did he do it to escape NYCs scary nondiscrimination law?-A
Then Lance Berkman went to Dallas. Oops. Dallas amended its Charter to clarify gender identity protections. Can you spell hypocrite?-A
Then Parker attacked Berkman on her Facebook page:
"For me, this fight is about how much I love this city. I don't want anyone to ever disparage Houston. That someone who made his name in our city would inject himself into this debate by taking to the airwaves to discredit an effort to ban discrimination in all forms did upset me. This ordinance protects all Houstonians and his remarks diminished it to something trivial."
Talk about a hypocrite. Parker and her “how much I love this city” and that disparaging of Houston crap is itself the height of hypocrisy. By that I don’t mean that Parker does not love Houston. I’m sure she does. But this ordinance is not so much about discrimination as it is about Parker pushing her personal GLBT agenda.
My family has been a victim of discrimination, both in Germany and the U.S., and for that reason I strongly support laws banning discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion and sex. I have several gay friends and I have a beloved cousin who is gay. I have never wanted gays and lesbians to be discriminated against.
But I do draw the line when it comes to transgenders. I do not want any of them to be in the same restroom with any female members of my family! If these weirdo misfits have a dick, they should be banned from women’s restrooms, and if they have a crack, they should be banned from men’s restrooms. It’s the transgender part of HERO that turns me off.
I’m with Lance Berkman on this one and am voting against HERO for that reason.
Houston Mayor Anise Parker is a lesbian who has a pet project she hopes will be approved by the voters next month. Parker’s proposed city ordinance, known as the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO), prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and includes the federal laws prohibiting discrimination based on sex, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, religion, disability, pregnancy and genetic information, as well as family, marital or military status.
HERO applies to businesses that serve the public, private employers, housing, city employment and city contracting. Religious institutions would be exempt. Violators could be fined up to $5,000.
Lance Berkman is a former Houston Astros baseball great. Last month Berkman appeared in a TV ad in opposition to HERO because the proposed ordinance would allow transgenders access to women’s public restrooms. Here is what Lance said:
“My wife and I have four daughters. Proposition One, the 'bathroom ordinance,' would allow troubled men to enter women's public bathrooms, showers and locker rooms. This would violate their privacy and put them in harm's way. That's just wrong.”
The mayor was furious. How dare he attack her pet project. Parker responded by attacking Berkman in a series of tweets:
Lance Berkman played in St. Louis. Guess his girls didn't go to his games! SL has a non-discrimination ordinance.-A http://www.slpl.lib.mo.us/cco/ords/data/ord8715.htm …
When Lance Berkman went from NYC to STL to play ball did he do it to escape NYCs scary nondiscrimination law?-A
Then Lance Berkman went to Dallas. Oops. Dallas amended its Charter to clarify gender identity protections. Can you spell hypocrite?-A
Then Parker attacked Berkman on her Facebook page:
"For me, this fight is about how much I love this city. I don't want anyone to ever disparage Houston. That someone who made his name in our city would inject himself into this debate by taking to the airwaves to discredit an effort to ban discrimination in all forms did upset me. This ordinance protects all Houstonians and his remarks diminished it to something trivial."
Talk about a hypocrite. Parker and her “how much I love this city” and that disparaging of Houston crap is itself the height of hypocrisy. By that I don’t mean that Parker does not love Houston. I’m sure she does. But this ordinance is not so much about discrimination as it is about Parker pushing her personal GLBT agenda.
My family has been a victim of discrimination, both in Germany and the U.S., and for that reason I strongly support laws banning discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion and sex. I have several gay friends and I have a beloved cousin who is gay. I have never wanted gays and lesbians to be discriminated against.
But I do draw the line when it comes to transgenders. I do not want any of them to be in the same restroom with any female members of my family! If these weirdo misfits have a dick, they should be banned from women’s restrooms, and if they have a crack, they should be banned from men’s restrooms. It’s the transgender part of HERO that turns me off.
I’m with Lance Berkman on this one and am voting against HERO for that reason.
Thursday, October 08, 2015
EXECUTION BRINGS VICTIMS TO TEARS
The widow and daughter of Hugo Solano sobbed when Juan Martin Garcia apologized while strapped down in the Texas death chamber
Hugo Solano, a Christian missionary from Guadalajara, Mexico, had immigrated to Houston in September 1998 so his children would be educated in the U.S. Two weeks later, Solano, 36, was shot dead during a robbery by Juan Martin Garcia, two of Garcia’s cousins and another man. When Solano refused to hand over his money, Garcia shot him four times in the head and neck. The robbery netted the four thugs $8.
Garcia, 18 at the time of the murder, has steadfastly claimed that he did not intend to shoot Solano, but when the man started punching him, he began to fear for his life. That sounds rather ridiculous considering Solano was shot four times while outnumbered 4-1 and not armed.
Juan Garcia was linked to at least eight armed robberies and two attempted murders before and after he killed Solano. He was sentenced to death while his three companions received long prison terms.
Garcia, 35, was executed Tuesday with a single dose of pentobarbital that was probably compounded by a Texas Department of Criminal Justice pharmacist. The execution went off flawlessly. As the injection started, Garcia winced, raised his head and shook it, then gurgled and snored once before lying still. He was pronounced dead 12 minutes after the injection began.
As he lay strapped on the gurney, Garcia apologized in Spanish to Solano’s widow Ana and her daughter who were there to witness the execution. “The harm that I did to your dad and husband … I hope this brings you closure,” he said. “I never wanted to hurt any of you all.”
Upon hearing the apology, Mrs. Solano and her daughter began to sob and told Garcia they loved him. After the execution, Ana Solano said she wished the execution had not taken place. “It’s about God,” she said. “It’s about Jesus.”
Garcia found himself in the death chamber because of a simple traffic stop. A couple of weeks after Solano’s death, cops pulled Garcia over for a broken headlight. A gun fell to the ground as he got out of his car. He was not arrested at the time, but the gun was seized. Juan’s luck ran out when ballistic tests determined the gun was used to kill Solano.
Texas has executed 529 murderers since 1976. Garcia was the eleventh one executed so far this year. Licho Escamilla is scheduled to be executed next week for the 2001 murder of a Dallas police officer.
Hugo Solano, a Christian missionary from Guadalajara, Mexico, had immigrated to Houston in September 1998 so his children would be educated in the U.S. Two weeks later, Solano, 36, was shot dead during a robbery by Juan Martin Garcia, two of Garcia’s cousins and another man. When Solano refused to hand over his money, Garcia shot him four times in the head and neck. The robbery netted the four thugs $8.
Garcia, 18 at the time of the murder, has steadfastly claimed that he did not intend to shoot Solano, but when the man started punching him, he began to fear for his life. That sounds rather ridiculous considering Solano was shot four times while outnumbered 4-1 and not armed.
Juan Garcia was linked to at least eight armed robberies and two attempted murders before and after he killed Solano. He was sentenced to death while his three companions received long prison terms.
Garcia, 35, was executed Tuesday with a single dose of pentobarbital that was probably compounded by a Texas Department of Criminal Justice pharmacist. The execution went off flawlessly. As the injection started, Garcia winced, raised his head and shook it, then gurgled and snored once before lying still. He was pronounced dead 12 minutes after the injection began.
As he lay strapped on the gurney, Garcia apologized in Spanish to Solano’s widow Ana and her daughter who were there to witness the execution. “The harm that I did to your dad and husband … I hope this brings you closure,” he said. “I never wanted to hurt any of you all.”
Upon hearing the apology, Mrs. Solano and her daughter began to sob and told Garcia they loved him. After the execution, Ana Solano said she wished the execution had not taken place. “It’s about God,” she said. “It’s about Jesus.”
Garcia found himself in the death chamber because of a simple traffic stop. A couple of weeks after Solano’s death, cops pulled Garcia over for a broken headlight. A gun fell to the ground as he got out of his car. He was not arrested at the time, but the gun was seized. Juan’s luck ran out when ballistic tests determined the gun was used to kill Solano.
Texas has executed 529 murderers since 1976. Garcia was the eleventh one executed so far this year. Licho Escamilla is scheduled to be executed next week for the 2001 murder of a Dallas police officer.
THIS SHOOTING AIN’T GONNA FLY WITH THE ANTI-POLICE GROUPS
Los Angeles cops kill a man who threw a beer bottle at their patrol car
I can understand why the two cops believed they were under gunfire when the 40 oz. beer bottle shattered the rear window of their patrol car. But, since the bottle thrower was unarmed, his shooting ain’t gonna fly with the anti-police groups. And if the bullet riddled man turns out to be black, watch for ‘Black Lives Matter’ to erupt like a volcano.
MAN KILLED BY LAPD HAD THROWN BEER BOTTLE THROUGH POLICE CAR WINDOW, CHIEF SAYS
LAPD fatally shot a man in Van Nays after he threw a beer bottle at their patrol car
By Kate Mather and Nicole Santa Cruz
Los Angeles Times
October 5, 2015
Two Los Angeles police officers were stopped at a red light in Van Nuys when the back window of their patrol car shattered.
Fearing they were under fire, the officers bailed out of the cruiser and fired their own guns at a nearby man they believed was responsible, killing him, LAPD officials said.
When investigators searched his body and the nearby scene, they didn't find a gun or any other weapon, police said Monday. Instead, they determined that he had shattered the patrol car's window by throwing a 40-ounce beer bottle.
LAPD Chief Charlie Beck offered new details Monday about the latest shooting by his officers, the 18th time this year that police have shot and killed someone. The man's name had not been released as of Monday evening, coroner's officials said, because they were still trying to notify his family.
Beck stressed that the investigation into Saturday night's deadly encounter was still in its early stages.
“The primary thing to look at here is: Were the officers' perceptions reasonable?” he said. “Not were they correct, but were they reasonable?”
Police officers are authorized to use deadly force to protect themselves or others if they reasonably believe they are in danger of death or serious injury.
As in all LAPD shootings, the civilian Police Commission will judge the two officers based on three issues: the officers' use of deadly force, their decision to draw their weapons and the tactics used throughout the encounter.
Seth Stoughton, a former police officer who teaches law at the University of South Carolina, said the officers could have reasonably mistaken the bottle going through their window for gunfire. But, he said, more information was needed to evaluate whether they reasonably thought the man was threatening enough to shoot him.
Stoughton said that determination could depend on how close the officers were to the man when they got out of the car and whether he made any movements they might have considered threatening.
“Until we know more information about what actually happened, we can't tell whether the officers' misperceptions were reasonable or not,” he said.
The shooting at Sepulveda and Victory boulevards will also be reviewed by the district attorney's office and the Police Commission's inspector general.
Cmdr. Andrew Smith, an LAPD spokesman, described the two officers as veterans. He said the department would release their names after what the LAPD calls a 72-hour briefing, when top command staff are notified about the initial investigation into a shooting.
Smith said the officers were not wearing body cameras — their division has not yet received the devices under the LAPD's departmentwide rollout of the new devices. Their patrol car also did not have a camera, he said.
The 18 people killed by the LAPD this year — out of 32 who have been shot by officers — marks the same number of people fatally shot by the LAPD in all of 2014. Fourteen people were fatally shot by officers in 2013, 17 the year before and 26 in 2011.
Beck said this year's number was “far more than we would like” but was consistent with the department's recent average.
Mayor Eric Garcetti noted that the department this summer provided officers with so-called de-escalation training: five hours of lectures designed to help find ways to reduce tensions and potentially avoid using force during encounters with the public.
“Any time that we can de-escalate and preserve a life, that's a good day,” Garcetti said. “That's not always possible in policing, but it's something that we're continuing to push very strongly toward.”
Some residents and local activists have criticized the LAPD for the number of shootings this year, as well as the circumstances leading up to some of those shootings. Peter Bibring, a senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union's Southern California chapter, said the concern over police killings would continue.
“This is not a problem that's going away,” Bibring said. “Part of the problem here is that police, not only in L.A. but across the country, are using force in situations where a significant amount of the public don't think it's appropriate. Standards for use of force are out of step with public expectations.”
“They should be certain that they're under a deadly threat before they pull the trigger.”
Stoughton, the law professor, said officers will sometimes make mistakes.
“That may include mistaking a window that is broken by a hurled beer bottle for a window that
was broken by a gunshot,” he said. “Had they known it was just a bottle going through, I would expect them to have responded very differently.”
I can understand why the two cops believed they were under gunfire when the 40 oz. beer bottle shattered the rear window of their patrol car. But, since the bottle thrower was unarmed, his shooting ain’t gonna fly with the anti-police groups. And if the bullet riddled man turns out to be black, watch for ‘Black Lives Matter’ to erupt like a volcano.
MAN KILLED BY LAPD HAD THROWN BEER BOTTLE THROUGH POLICE CAR WINDOW, CHIEF SAYS
LAPD fatally shot a man in Van Nays after he threw a beer bottle at their patrol car
By Kate Mather and Nicole Santa Cruz
Los Angeles Times
October 5, 2015
Two Los Angeles police officers were stopped at a red light in Van Nuys when the back window of their patrol car shattered.
Fearing they were under fire, the officers bailed out of the cruiser and fired their own guns at a nearby man they believed was responsible, killing him, LAPD officials said.
When investigators searched his body and the nearby scene, they didn't find a gun or any other weapon, police said Monday. Instead, they determined that he had shattered the patrol car's window by throwing a 40-ounce beer bottle.
LAPD Chief Charlie Beck offered new details Monday about the latest shooting by his officers, the 18th time this year that police have shot and killed someone. The man's name had not been released as of Monday evening, coroner's officials said, because they were still trying to notify his family.
Beck stressed that the investigation into Saturday night's deadly encounter was still in its early stages.
“The primary thing to look at here is: Were the officers' perceptions reasonable?” he said. “Not were they correct, but were they reasonable?”
Police officers are authorized to use deadly force to protect themselves or others if they reasonably believe they are in danger of death or serious injury.
As in all LAPD shootings, the civilian Police Commission will judge the two officers based on three issues: the officers' use of deadly force, their decision to draw their weapons and the tactics used throughout the encounter.
Seth Stoughton, a former police officer who teaches law at the University of South Carolina, said the officers could have reasonably mistaken the bottle going through their window for gunfire. But, he said, more information was needed to evaluate whether they reasonably thought the man was threatening enough to shoot him.
Stoughton said that determination could depend on how close the officers were to the man when they got out of the car and whether he made any movements they might have considered threatening.
“Until we know more information about what actually happened, we can't tell whether the officers' misperceptions were reasonable or not,” he said.
The shooting at Sepulveda and Victory boulevards will also be reviewed by the district attorney's office and the Police Commission's inspector general.
Cmdr. Andrew Smith, an LAPD spokesman, described the two officers as veterans. He said the department would release their names after what the LAPD calls a 72-hour briefing, when top command staff are notified about the initial investigation into a shooting.
Smith said the officers were not wearing body cameras — their division has not yet received the devices under the LAPD's departmentwide rollout of the new devices. Their patrol car also did not have a camera, he said.
The 18 people killed by the LAPD this year — out of 32 who have been shot by officers — marks the same number of people fatally shot by the LAPD in all of 2014. Fourteen people were fatally shot by officers in 2013, 17 the year before and 26 in 2011.
Beck said this year's number was “far more than we would like” but was consistent with the department's recent average.
Mayor Eric Garcetti noted that the department this summer provided officers with so-called de-escalation training: five hours of lectures designed to help find ways to reduce tensions and potentially avoid using force during encounters with the public.
“Any time that we can de-escalate and preserve a life, that's a good day,” Garcetti said. “That's not always possible in policing, but it's something that we're continuing to push very strongly toward.”
Some residents and local activists have criticized the LAPD for the number of shootings this year, as well as the circumstances leading up to some of those shootings. Peter Bibring, a senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union's Southern California chapter, said the concern over police killings would continue.
“This is not a problem that's going away,” Bibring said. “Part of the problem here is that police, not only in L.A. but across the country, are using force in situations where a significant amount of the public don't think it's appropriate. Standards for use of force are out of step with public expectations.”
“They should be certain that they're under a deadly threat before they pull the trigger.”
Stoughton, the law professor, said officers will sometimes make mistakes.
“That may include mistaking a window that is broken by a hurled beer bottle for a window that
was broken by a gunshot,” he said. “Had they known it was just a bottle going through, I would expect them to have responded very differently.”
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
GUN CONTROL THAT MAKES SENSE
Mandatory psychological exams for all gun purchasers and concealed carry applicants
Every time we have a mass shooting I hear the same talk on the need for stricter gun control. President Obama is right when he says that his talks following mass shootings have become routine. He and most Democrats believe stricter gun controls will prevent the frequency of mass shootings.
Pro-gunners and most Republicans oppose any more gun control measures. Donald Trump says there is nothing we can do about the problem of nutjobs getting their hands on guns because there are always going to be people who “slip though the cracks.” Jeb Bush said “stuff happens.”
Then there is the mother of 16-year-old Cheyeanne Fitzgerald, a nursing student who got shot in the back and is recovering in a hospital. Cheyeanne’s mom said she wished her daughter had been armed.
Instead of passing more restrictive gun legislation, I have a gun control proposal which I think makes more sense. I propose that in addition to the current background checks, all gun purchasers must pass a psychological examination before being allowed to buy a gun. The same for concealed carry applicants – they should pass a psychological examination before obtaining a license to carry a gun.
For gun buyers who pass the psych exams, those results should remain in effect for three years. After three years, the gun buyer will have to pass another exam.
Every three years, the concealed carry license holders should have to take another psych exam in order to maintain their licenses and each time they renew those licenses they should take another exam as well.
I realize that a psychologist's examination might cost more than a hundred bucks, but someone who is willing to plunk down $600 to well above $1,000 for a gun should be able to afford this added cost. Those who cannot afford expensive firearms will just have to save up the psych screening costs before purchasing a gun.
Will my proposal stop mass shootings like the Oregon and Sandy Hook massacres? Of course not. There are already millions of guns in circulation and some of those guns are now in the hands of nutjobs like Chris Harper-Mercer, the Oregon shooter. But my proposal would weed out nutjobs and prevent them from purchasing guns. And that will prevent some future mass shootings.
As for the concealed carry applicants, if we require police applicants to take a psychological examination in order to see whether or not they are mentally fit to be cops, we can certainly require a concealed carry applicant to take a psych exam in order to see whether or not he is mentally fit to carry a concealed firearm. I’ll bet that George Zimmerman would not have passed the psych exam.
The regulations requiring a psych exam should stipulate that gun buyers and concealed carry applicants must use the same psychologists local law enforcement agencies use to weed out their mentally unfit applicants.
Even though psychologists can be fooled, it seems to me that my proposal is far better than the alternative of more restrictive gun control legislation.
I admit that those psych exams will restrict the purchase of guns, but that restriction will only apply to persons who, as the result of a psych exam, are found to be mentally unfit to possess a gun.
Every time we have a mass shooting I hear the same talk on the need for stricter gun control. President Obama is right when he says that his talks following mass shootings have become routine. He and most Democrats believe stricter gun controls will prevent the frequency of mass shootings.
Pro-gunners and most Republicans oppose any more gun control measures. Donald Trump says there is nothing we can do about the problem of nutjobs getting their hands on guns because there are always going to be people who “slip though the cracks.” Jeb Bush said “stuff happens.”
Then there is the mother of 16-year-old Cheyeanne Fitzgerald, a nursing student who got shot in the back and is recovering in a hospital. Cheyeanne’s mom said she wished her daughter had been armed.
Instead of passing more restrictive gun legislation, I have a gun control proposal which I think makes more sense. I propose that in addition to the current background checks, all gun purchasers must pass a psychological examination before being allowed to buy a gun. The same for concealed carry applicants – they should pass a psychological examination before obtaining a license to carry a gun.
For gun buyers who pass the psych exams, those results should remain in effect for three years. After three years, the gun buyer will have to pass another exam.
Every three years, the concealed carry license holders should have to take another psych exam in order to maintain their licenses and each time they renew those licenses they should take another exam as well.
I realize that a psychologist's examination might cost more than a hundred bucks, but someone who is willing to plunk down $600 to well above $1,000 for a gun should be able to afford this added cost. Those who cannot afford expensive firearms will just have to save up the psych screening costs before purchasing a gun.
Will my proposal stop mass shootings like the Oregon and Sandy Hook massacres? Of course not. There are already millions of guns in circulation and some of those guns are now in the hands of nutjobs like Chris Harper-Mercer, the Oregon shooter. But my proposal would weed out nutjobs and prevent them from purchasing guns. And that will prevent some future mass shootings.
As for the concealed carry applicants, if we require police applicants to take a psychological examination in order to see whether or not they are mentally fit to be cops, we can certainly require a concealed carry applicant to take a psych exam in order to see whether or not he is mentally fit to carry a concealed firearm. I’ll bet that George Zimmerman would not have passed the psych exam.
The regulations requiring a psych exam should stipulate that gun buyers and concealed carry applicants must use the same psychologists local law enforcement agencies use to weed out their mentally unfit applicants.
Even though psychologists can be fooled, it seems to me that my proposal is far better than the alternative of more restrictive gun control legislation.
I admit that those psych exams will restrict the purchase of guns, but that restriction will only apply to persons who, as the result of a psych exam, are found to be mentally unfit to possess a gun.
UMPAQUA COLLEGE SHOOTING VICTIMS STILL AGAINST GUN CONTROL
Cheyeanne Fitzgerald and her family and the family of Quinn Cooper continue to be staunch opponents of gun control
With all the hysterical calls for more gun controls in the wake of the Umpaque Community College massacre, it is most refreshing to see that some of the very victims of that shooting tragedy are expressing their opposition to more gun controls.
16-year-old Cheyeanne Fitzgerald was shot in the back, lost a kidney and remains hospitalized in very serious condition. Cheyeanne’s brother Jesse spoke to DailyMail.com outside the hospital and said the family had discussed the issue of gun ownership and said that all, including Cheyeanne, remain opposed to controls.
Here is what Jesse Fitzgerald said.
“We’re pro second amendment, pro guns. My sister, my mother, my whole family are all in favor. We were talking about it in the hospital and none of us have changed our minds.”
“We should have teachers trained in non-lethal ways to take people down. There is surely a way to defend kids at school. Armed guards on campus maybe.”
Shortly after the shootings, Cheyeanne’s mother Bonnie Schaal told reporters that she wished her daughter had been armed.
18-year-old Quinn Cooper was shot dead during the campus massacre. His grieving family released a statement Friday in which they said their lives were shattered beyond repair but that Quinn’s death should not be used to advance arguments in favor of gun controls.
The Cooper family statement said:
“We are hearing so many people talk about gun control and taking people's guns away. If the public couldn't have guns it wouldn't help since sick people like this will always be able to get their hands on a gun.”
“We need to be able to protect ourselves as a community and as a nation. Please don't let this horrible act of insanity become about who should or shouldn't have a gun.”
President Obama and Hillary Clinton, please take note. And to Piers Morgan and all the other hysterical media jerks that have had a field day condemning America’s ‘gun culture’, Cheyeanne Fitzgerald and her family and the family of Quinn Cooper have told you to shove it up where the sun don’t shine!
With all the hysterical calls for more gun controls in the wake of the Umpaque Community College massacre, it is most refreshing to see that some of the very victims of that shooting tragedy are expressing their opposition to more gun controls.
16-year-old Cheyeanne Fitzgerald was shot in the back, lost a kidney and remains hospitalized in very serious condition. Cheyeanne’s brother Jesse spoke to DailyMail.com outside the hospital and said the family had discussed the issue of gun ownership and said that all, including Cheyeanne, remain opposed to controls.
Here is what Jesse Fitzgerald said.
“We’re pro second amendment, pro guns. My sister, my mother, my whole family are all in favor. We were talking about it in the hospital and none of us have changed our minds.”
“We should have teachers trained in non-lethal ways to take people down. There is surely a way to defend kids at school. Armed guards on campus maybe.”
Shortly after the shootings, Cheyeanne’s mother Bonnie Schaal told reporters that she wished her daughter had been armed.
18-year-old Quinn Cooper was shot dead during the campus massacre. His grieving family released a statement Friday in which they said their lives were shattered beyond repair but that Quinn’s death should not be used to advance arguments in favor of gun controls.
The Cooper family statement said:
“We are hearing so many people talk about gun control and taking people's guns away. If the public couldn't have guns it wouldn't help since sick people like this will always be able to get their hands on a gun.”
“We need to be able to protect ourselves as a community and as a nation. Please don't let this horrible act of insanity become about who should or shouldn't have a gun.”
President Obama and Hillary Clinton, please take note. And to Piers Morgan and all the other hysterical media jerks that have had a field day condemning America’s ‘gun culture’, Cheyeanne Fitzgerald and her family and the family of Quinn Cooper have told you to shove it up where the sun don’t shine!
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS (PART 2)
Tennessee Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey calls on all Christians to carry handguns
When I posted 'Onward Christian Soldiers' on BarkGrowlBite, txlt44 responded by saying that Texans are already well armed and he ventured that 90 percent of Texas concealed carry license holders are Christians.
txlt44 made the following points:
Most of these folks already have the pistols. They just leave them at home. The gun market may rise a little, but Tennessee, like Texas, is already well armed.
I'd venture to say 90% of the concealed carry folks in Texas are Christians. In fact, in Texas you can keep a firearm in your vehicle and not even hold a concealed carry permit if you are not a convicted felon.
I'll wager that the majority of Christian homes contain multiple firearms. Let's not dismiss that bunch of Texas good old boys and girls who are hunters and who probably own several rifles, shotguns and pistols.
I did not believe that a majority of Texas Christians were armed. But then I looked at some stats. Texas has a population of about 27 million. There are almost 23 million guns owned in Texas. That proves txlt44 to be right and me wrong. However, while txlt44 believes that 90 percent of concealed carry license holders in Texas are Christians, I think the number is more like 99 percent.
Florida, with a population of 20 million, had nearly 1.4 million concealed carry permit holders as of March 2015, while Texas had 825,957 as of December 2014. I could not find the number of guns owned by Floridians, but since the number of concealed carry license holders does not account for the total number of guns owned in Florida, one would have to conclude that like Texans, most Floridians are armed. And the vast majority of those Florida gun owners are Christians.
Txlt44 was wrong though when he said Texas was well armed. Texas is not well armed – like Florida, Texas is armed to the teeth.
Don’t mess with Texas Christians or its soldiers will shoot you dead.
When I posted 'Onward Christian Soldiers' on BarkGrowlBite, txlt44 responded by saying that Texans are already well armed and he ventured that 90 percent of Texas concealed carry license holders are Christians.
txlt44 made the following points:
Most of these folks already have the pistols. They just leave them at home. The gun market may rise a little, but Tennessee, like Texas, is already well armed.
I'd venture to say 90% of the concealed carry folks in Texas are Christians. In fact, in Texas you can keep a firearm in your vehicle and not even hold a concealed carry permit if you are not a convicted felon.
I'll wager that the majority of Christian homes contain multiple firearms. Let's not dismiss that bunch of Texas good old boys and girls who are hunters and who probably own several rifles, shotguns and pistols.
I did not believe that a majority of Texas Christians were armed. But then I looked at some stats. Texas has a population of about 27 million. There are almost 23 million guns owned in Texas. That proves txlt44 to be right and me wrong. However, while txlt44 believes that 90 percent of concealed carry license holders in Texas are Christians, I think the number is more like 99 percent.
Florida, with a population of 20 million, had nearly 1.4 million concealed carry permit holders as of March 2015, while Texas had 825,957 as of December 2014. I could not find the number of guns owned by Floridians, but since the number of concealed carry license holders does not account for the total number of guns owned in Florida, one would have to conclude that like Texans, most Floridians are armed. And the vast majority of those Florida gun owners are Christians.
Txlt44 was wrong though when he said Texas was well armed. Texas is not well armed – like Florida, Texas is armed to the teeth.
Don’t mess with Texas Christians or its soldiers will shoot you dead.
‘CYBER BANGING’ DRIVES NEW GENERATION OF GANG VIOLENCE
By Sandy Banks
Los Angeles Times
October 3, 2015
Crime in the city continues to rise and gang violence in South Los Angeles accounts for much of that.
The LAPD has been trying to settle things down, but flooding the area with officers hasn't worked. Neither has relying on veteran gang members to manage rivalries. Or pleading with residents to report what they know or see.
Until recently, those tactics helped drive crime down to a 20-year low. But gangbangers have become bolder, and the violence is less predictable. Residents fear gangs more than they trust the police.
The surge in shootings over the last few months reveals how little we know about what drives crime — and suggests the limits of our holy grail, community policing.
Half of the city's August homicides occurred in South Los Angeles, and 70% of those are believed to be gang-related. For many residents, that feels like a return to the bad old days.
Mayor Eric Garcetti insists Los Angeles' crime-fighting plan is sound. He places a lot of stock in gang intervention teams:
"These are folks who can actually go to the shot callers and say: 'Hey, can we put gang truces out there, can we look at what's happening and make sure that whatever retribution is going back and forth, we stop it in its tracks?' " Garcetti said at a news conference last month.
Really Mr. Mayor? That's the conversation you think is happening in the streets?
That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.
If only the bargain were that easy and the process that civil.
These days, even gang intervention workers have targets on their backs.
"These youngsters are not listening … anymore. They have their own agenda," an LAPD detective told me.
Some view interventionists as sellouts who are aligned with law enforcement. Gang counselors are paid by the city, but their histories and rap sheets confer a sense of credibility, giving them what's known in the streets as a "license to operate."
In some ways, the program has been hobbled by its success.
After summer intervention programs led to dramatic drops in crimes, teams were stripped from some neighborhoods to staff others; new workers have been hired but not yet trained.
A bigger problem, however, is that gangs have evolved in ways that make them harder to rein in — and the aging corps of gang workers hasn't kept pace.
"Interventionists have been extraordinarily helpful," said Deputy Chief Bob Green, who headed the LAPD's South Bureau for 10 years. "Some of these guys had lived in the same neighborhood for 20 or 30 years — except for the time they spent in prison. They gave us the ability to get into places not impacted by community leaders but influenced by the guys in the streets."
But things have changed since those "OGs" were running things.
Gangs are less hierarchical and more impulsive. They're not as likely to feud over turf or look to "shot callers" for orders. And the spats that lead to shootings more often are linked to insults exchanged on social media than to the wrong color shoes or stare-downs at the park.
"The millennials are having an impact on crime, just as they are in other walks of life: politics, business, media, art," Councilman Marqueece Harris-Dawson said. "Their sense of alliance [and] response to authority is different.… Something generational is happening, and we haven't quite caught on."
When Harris-Dawson, 45, was growing up in the South Los Angeles district he now represents, someone died in a gang-related crime almost every day. Now crime is near historic lows, despite the recent rise. But the flurry of shootings— 19 last weekend, when five people died — has residents on edge.
"It's a spike, and it's fast, and there's no rhyme or reason," Harris-Dawson said. "Before, we knew people were fighting over space to sell crack.… Or they were at a party or a park and somebody got mad, left and came back with a gun."
Many of the people who were shot this summer seem like inexplicable targets, neither robbery victims nor gang-involved. "Somebody just drives to where the person is, walks up, shoots them, gets back in the car and drives off," Harris-Dawson said.
"We're used to people beefing in public," he said. "Now the whole conflict is happening on social media. And all of us — interventionists, police, the community — are in over our heads on that."
LAPD Deputy Chief Bill Scott doesn't disagree.
"We're dealing with a different generation and we're going to have to evolve," said Scott, who commands the five divisions in South Los Angeles.
"By the time police learn about something happening on social media, it's already after the fact," he said. "We're the last ones to know."
His team has coined a term for the violence: "cyber banging." And they're trying to recruit new intervention crews of streetwise, online sleuths who can scour posts and decipher signs of trouble.
Crime-fighting tactics aside, the department has some bridge-building to do.
Fear is threatening to steamroll the progress that had been made. At community meetings, vigils and rallies against violence, residents say they feel under siege by gangs and unprotected by police — even though the actual number of violent crimes hasn't budged that much.
That may be a function of social media too.
"Even people that don't watch the TV news or read the paper are getting exposed to levels of violence they're not accustomed to," Scott said. Their cellphones deliver photos of dead bodies, viral threats and rumors of killing rampages.
So residents pledge in public to take back the streets, yet witnesses are too frightened to talk privately to the police.
I can't say I blame them.
After a mentally disabled young man was shot at a carwash this summer because he was wearing red shoes, his mother fingered the suspects and held a news conference. A man considered a local hero — even by some young gang members — denounced violence.
Not long afterward, his car was riddled with bullets as he drove down a neighborhood street in the middle of the day. It took three weeks for his family to raise enough money to bury him.
Los Angeles Times
October 3, 2015
Crime in the city continues to rise and gang violence in South Los Angeles accounts for much of that.
The LAPD has been trying to settle things down, but flooding the area with officers hasn't worked. Neither has relying on veteran gang members to manage rivalries. Or pleading with residents to report what they know or see.
Until recently, those tactics helped drive crime down to a 20-year low. But gangbangers have become bolder, and the violence is less predictable. Residents fear gangs more than they trust the police.
The surge in shootings over the last few months reveals how little we know about what drives crime — and suggests the limits of our holy grail, community policing.
Half of the city's August homicides occurred in South Los Angeles, and 70% of those are believed to be gang-related. For many residents, that feels like a return to the bad old days.
Mayor Eric Garcetti insists Los Angeles' crime-fighting plan is sound. He places a lot of stock in gang intervention teams:
"These are folks who can actually go to the shot callers and say: 'Hey, can we put gang truces out there, can we look at what's happening and make sure that whatever retribution is going back and forth, we stop it in its tracks?' " Garcetti said at a news conference last month.
Really Mr. Mayor? That's the conversation you think is happening in the streets?
That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works.
If only the bargain were that easy and the process that civil.
These days, even gang intervention workers have targets on their backs.
"These youngsters are not listening … anymore. They have their own agenda," an LAPD detective told me.
Some view interventionists as sellouts who are aligned with law enforcement. Gang counselors are paid by the city, but their histories and rap sheets confer a sense of credibility, giving them what's known in the streets as a "license to operate."
In some ways, the program has been hobbled by its success.
After summer intervention programs led to dramatic drops in crimes, teams were stripped from some neighborhoods to staff others; new workers have been hired but not yet trained.
A bigger problem, however, is that gangs have evolved in ways that make them harder to rein in — and the aging corps of gang workers hasn't kept pace.
"Interventionists have been extraordinarily helpful," said Deputy Chief Bob Green, who headed the LAPD's South Bureau for 10 years. "Some of these guys had lived in the same neighborhood for 20 or 30 years — except for the time they spent in prison. They gave us the ability to get into places not impacted by community leaders but influenced by the guys in the streets."
But things have changed since those "OGs" were running things.
Gangs are less hierarchical and more impulsive. They're not as likely to feud over turf or look to "shot callers" for orders. And the spats that lead to shootings more often are linked to insults exchanged on social media than to the wrong color shoes or stare-downs at the park.
"The millennials are having an impact on crime, just as they are in other walks of life: politics, business, media, art," Councilman Marqueece Harris-Dawson said. "Their sense of alliance [and] response to authority is different.… Something generational is happening, and we haven't quite caught on."
When Harris-Dawson, 45, was growing up in the South Los Angeles district he now represents, someone died in a gang-related crime almost every day. Now crime is near historic lows, despite the recent rise. But the flurry of shootings— 19 last weekend, when five people died — has residents on edge.
"It's a spike, and it's fast, and there's no rhyme or reason," Harris-Dawson said. "Before, we knew people were fighting over space to sell crack.… Or they were at a party or a park and somebody got mad, left and came back with a gun."
Many of the people who were shot this summer seem like inexplicable targets, neither robbery victims nor gang-involved. "Somebody just drives to where the person is, walks up, shoots them, gets back in the car and drives off," Harris-Dawson said.
"We're used to people beefing in public," he said. "Now the whole conflict is happening on social media. And all of us — interventionists, police, the community — are in over our heads on that."
LAPD Deputy Chief Bill Scott doesn't disagree.
"We're dealing with a different generation and we're going to have to evolve," said Scott, who commands the five divisions in South Los Angeles.
"By the time police learn about something happening on social media, it's already after the fact," he said. "We're the last ones to know."
His team has coined a term for the violence: "cyber banging." And they're trying to recruit new intervention crews of streetwise, online sleuths who can scour posts and decipher signs of trouble.
Crime-fighting tactics aside, the department has some bridge-building to do.
Fear is threatening to steamroll the progress that had been made. At community meetings, vigils and rallies against violence, residents say they feel under siege by gangs and unprotected by police — even though the actual number of violent crimes hasn't budged that much.
That may be a function of social media too.
"Even people that don't watch the TV news or read the paper are getting exposed to levels of violence they're not accustomed to," Scott said. Their cellphones deliver photos of dead bodies, viral threats and rumors of killing rampages.
So residents pledge in public to take back the streets, yet witnesses are too frightened to talk privately to the police.
I can't say I blame them.
After a mentally disabled young man was shot at a carwash this summer because he was wearing red shoes, his mother fingered the suspects and held a news conference. A man considered a local hero — even by some young gang members — denounced violence.
Not long afterward, his car was riddled with bullets as he drove down a neighborhood street in the middle of the day. It took three weeks for his family to raise enough money to bury him.
Monday, October 05, 2015
ALTIPLANO PRISON: HIGH PROFILE EXTRADITIONS AND TRANSFERS WERE DUE TO SECURITY RISKS
39 highly dangerous prisoners were transferred to federal prisons in Jalisco, Tamaulipas, Nayarit, and Durango
LaRazon / Borderland Beat
October 3, 2015
Not taking chances of another embarrassment, many high risk prisoners are been moved from Altiplano prison. Since Altiplano has the reputation of the most efficient and secure max prison in Mexico, what are the chances of additional high profile escapes? Before the escape of El Chapo, Altiplano was the only prison in Mexico without a successful prison escape.
The National Safety Commission reported that in cells at Altiplano Prison, the prison El Chapo escaped from, guards found many prohibited items.
The finding of prohibited items in their cells, along with an attempt to disrupt meal time a week ago and groups that had formed inside the prison of Altiplano, were some of the reasons why the National Security Committee (CNS) conducted the transfer of 39 prisoners, highly dangerous criminals to other prisons around the country.
According to information from the CNS, in recent days a group of inmates tried to sabotage the breakfast time, after refusing to eat. They took their trays, rose and began to beat them as if they were drums.
They explained that this action undertaken as a "protest" to an operation that prison authorities made days before and where they seized prohibited items found in their cells, including watches and other devices.
Apparently the prison previously had ignored the regulations which states they are not permitted.
After an investigation into prisoners who were forming and leading small groups within the prison, the CNS decided to make the move to depressurize the prison.
These are the reasons that Abigael González Valencia, El Cuini; Miguel Ángel Treviño Morales, El Z40; Rubén Oseguera González, El Menchito; Teodoro García Simental, El Teo, and Omar Treviño Morales, El Z42, among others were transferred on Wednesday to various prisons around the country.
The prisoners were sent to federal prisons in the states of Jalisco, Tamaulipas, Nayarit and Durango.
According to the federal agency reports, following the transfer of these 39 inmates who are considered highly dangerous prisoners, as well as the extradition of another 13 to the United States, also on Wednesday, the current population at Altiplano is now at 900.
Even before the escape of Joaquin El Chapo Guzman, which occurred the night of July 11, the maximum security facility, located in Almoloya de Juarez, State of Mexico, had a population of 1106 prisoners, which exceeded its capacity of 836.
EDITOR’S NOE: I would think that transferring 39 highly dangerous criminals from Mexico’s super-max prison to less secure prisons would make these prisoners an even greater security risk.
LaRazon / Borderland Beat
October 3, 2015
Not taking chances of another embarrassment, many high risk prisoners are been moved from Altiplano prison. Since Altiplano has the reputation of the most efficient and secure max prison in Mexico, what are the chances of additional high profile escapes? Before the escape of El Chapo, Altiplano was the only prison in Mexico without a successful prison escape.
The National Safety Commission reported that in cells at Altiplano Prison, the prison El Chapo escaped from, guards found many prohibited items.
The finding of prohibited items in their cells, along with an attempt to disrupt meal time a week ago and groups that had formed inside the prison of Altiplano, were some of the reasons why the National Security Committee (CNS) conducted the transfer of 39 prisoners, highly dangerous criminals to other prisons around the country.
According to information from the CNS, in recent days a group of inmates tried to sabotage the breakfast time, after refusing to eat. They took their trays, rose and began to beat them as if they were drums.
They explained that this action undertaken as a "protest" to an operation that prison authorities made days before and where they seized prohibited items found in their cells, including watches and other devices.
Apparently the prison previously had ignored the regulations which states they are not permitted.
After an investigation into prisoners who were forming and leading small groups within the prison, the CNS decided to make the move to depressurize the prison.
These are the reasons that Abigael González Valencia, El Cuini; Miguel Ángel Treviño Morales, El Z40; Rubén Oseguera González, El Menchito; Teodoro García Simental, El Teo, and Omar Treviño Morales, El Z42, among others were transferred on Wednesday to various prisons around the country.
The prisoners were sent to federal prisons in the states of Jalisco, Tamaulipas, Nayarit and Durango.
According to the federal agency reports, following the transfer of these 39 inmates who are considered highly dangerous prisoners, as well as the extradition of another 13 to the United States, also on Wednesday, the current population at Altiplano is now at 900.
Even before the escape of Joaquin El Chapo Guzman, which occurred the night of July 11, the maximum security facility, located in Almoloya de Juarez, State of Mexico, had a population of 1106 prisoners, which exceeded its capacity of 836.
EDITOR’S NOE: I would think that transferring 39 highly dangerous criminals from Mexico’s super-max prison to less secure prisons would make these prisoners an even greater security risk.
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY’S GROTESQUE RESPONSE TO JERUSALEM ATTACKS
Israel Today
October 4, 2015
Jerusalem, or at least the area around the Old City, has become something of a war zone over the past few days.
In at least two separate attacks, two Israelis have been knifed to death, a Jewish toddler has been stabbed, and several more people have been wounded for no other reason than walking in certain areas while being Jewish.
And how have Israel’s peace partners in the Palestinian Authority responded? By blaming Israel, naturally.
When a 19-year-old Palestinian man mercilessly killed two Israeli men, critically wounded the wife of one of the victims and stabbed their helpless 2-year-old child near Lions’ Gate on Saturday, he was shot and killed by soldiers responding to the scene.
Similarly, when another knife-wielding terrorist stabbed and seriously injured a 15-year-old Israeli near Damascus Gate on Sunday, he, too, was gunned down to prevent any further bloodshed.
The statement released by the Palestinian Authority in the wake of these attacks insisted that the “killing of two young men in occupied Jerusalem” was part and parcel of Israel’s “policy of escalation.” The regime of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas urgently called upon the international community to intervene against Israel.
Nowhere in the statement did Abbas acknowledge that the two slain Palestinian men had only been shot because they had first perpetrated murderous attacks against passing Jews. In fact, the statement didn’t mention the Jewish victims at all.
Tellingly, some foreign media followed Abbas’ lead, headlining the story in a way that sought to disconnect the deaths of the Palestinian men and their Jewish victims, and to blame Israel for the former.
For example, the BBC first headlined the story of the Lions’ Gate attack “Palestinian shot dead after Jerusalem attack kills two.” A more fitting and accurate headline would have noted that two ISRAELIS had been killed and their attacker eliminated.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Mahmoud Abbas, the “moderate” Palestinian darling of the Europeans, the Obama Administration and the Western media, is actually an unabashed supporter of terrorism. Anyone who says that the killing of two murderous Palestinians was part of Israel’s “policy of escalation” is worthy of a Joseph Goebbels.
October 4, 2015
Jerusalem, or at least the area around the Old City, has become something of a war zone over the past few days.
In at least two separate attacks, two Israelis have been knifed to death, a Jewish toddler has been stabbed, and several more people have been wounded for no other reason than walking in certain areas while being Jewish.
And how have Israel’s peace partners in the Palestinian Authority responded? By blaming Israel, naturally.
When a 19-year-old Palestinian man mercilessly killed two Israeli men, critically wounded the wife of one of the victims and stabbed their helpless 2-year-old child near Lions’ Gate on Saturday, he was shot and killed by soldiers responding to the scene.
Similarly, when another knife-wielding terrorist stabbed and seriously injured a 15-year-old Israeli near Damascus Gate on Sunday, he, too, was gunned down to prevent any further bloodshed.
The statement released by the Palestinian Authority in the wake of these attacks insisted that the “killing of two young men in occupied Jerusalem” was part and parcel of Israel’s “policy of escalation.” The regime of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas urgently called upon the international community to intervene against Israel.
Nowhere in the statement did Abbas acknowledge that the two slain Palestinian men had only been shot because they had first perpetrated murderous attacks against passing Jews. In fact, the statement didn’t mention the Jewish victims at all.
Tellingly, some foreign media followed Abbas’ lead, headlining the story in a way that sought to disconnect the deaths of the Palestinian men and their Jewish victims, and to blame Israel for the former.
For example, the BBC first headlined the story of the Lions’ Gate attack “Palestinian shot dead after Jerusalem attack kills two.” A more fitting and accurate headline would have noted that two ISRAELIS had been killed and their attacker eliminated.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Mahmoud Abbas, the “moderate” Palestinian darling of the Europeans, the Obama Administration and the Western media, is actually an unabashed supporter of terrorism. Anyone who says that the killing of two murderous Palestinians was part of Israel’s “policy of escalation” is worthy of a Joseph Goebbels.
Sunday, October 04, 2015
THIS WAR IS TAKING OUR BEST
By Tsvi Sadan
Israel Today
October 4, 2015
Rabbi Eitam and Naama Henkin from Neriyah were killed last week by the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, the military arm of Fatah, the "moderate" faction of "moderate" Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.
But this well-planned killing of Jews was not a crime. Eitam and Naama were not murdered by savage, blood-thirsty sub-humans. This pre-meditated attack was carried out by people who are at war against Israel's very existence, a fact that is well masked by what is presented as a legitimate "fight for freedom" against the Israeli occupation of the "Palestinian state" whose flag now flies at UN Headquarters.
This attack was carried out just hours after Abbas' "speech of lies" at the UN, where he once again wrapped his hate for Israel in rhetoric palatable for the gullible West. The support of the countries of the world, he said, is needed for the sake of truth, freedom and lawfulness. A Palestinian state, he continued, will be "the greatest contribution to peacemaking in the Holy Land."
It is for good reason that following this speech, Islam expert Mordechai Kedar labeled Abbas a soldier in a "'political Jihad' whose goal is the establishment of Muslim State No. 58 on the ruins of the one and only Jewish State." The doctrine of Islamic Jihad, continued Kedar in stating the obvious, "mandates the inclusion of an element of deceit, and Mahmoud Abbas is a master of deception."
The disheartening part of it all is that almost every Israeli, from President Rivlin to the fish merchant at Ben Yehuda market, continues to use terms taken from the criminal vocabulary, and Israel continues to fight this jihad as if it were some sort of criminal activity.
It is notable that the first to arrive at the scene of the killing of Rabbi Eitam and his wife was the forensic unit of the Israeli police. Similarly, Israeli media continues to describe murderous rock and Molotov cocktail attackers as "youths," "activists," "militants" or "human animals."
But the killing of a young rabbi destined for greatness and of his lovely wife is a chilling reminder that Israel is at war, a war that for some reason tends to consume her very best. In a moving Facebook post Aharon Rose mourns his friend: "We lose our very best; the greatest among the next generation leadership of religious Zionism was murdered." A man of "great genius of noble spirit" he calls him. A gaze at Eitam's blog shows just how accurate this description is, and how urgent it is for us Israelis to wake up to the fact that the Henkins are casualties of war, and not victims of heinous crime.
Israel Today
October 4, 2015
Rabbi Eitam and Naama Henkin from Neriyah were killed last week by the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, the military arm of Fatah, the "moderate" faction of "moderate" Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.
But this well-planned killing of Jews was not a crime. Eitam and Naama were not murdered by savage, blood-thirsty sub-humans. This pre-meditated attack was carried out by people who are at war against Israel's very existence, a fact that is well masked by what is presented as a legitimate "fight for freedom" against the Israeli occupation of the "Palestinian state" whose flag now flies at UN Headquarters.
This attack was carried out just hours after Abbas' "speech of lies" at the UN, where he once again wrapped his hate for Israel in rhetoric palatable for the gullible West. The support of the countries of the world, he said, is needed for the sake of truth, freedom and lawfulness. A Palestinian state, he continued, will be "the greatest contribution to peacemaking in the Holy Land."
It is for good reason that following this speech, Islam expert Mordechai Kedar labeled Abbas a soldier in a "'political Jihad' whose goal is the establishment of Muslim State No. 58 on the ruins of the one and only Jewish State." The doctrine of Islamic Jihad, continued Kedar in stating the obvious, "mandates the inclusion of an element of deceit, and Mahmoud Abbas is a master of deception."
The disheartening part of it all is that almost every Israeli, from President Rivlin to the fish merchant at Ben Yehuda market, continues to use terms taken from the criminal vocabulary, and Israel continues to fight this jihad as if it were some sort of criminal activity.
It is notable that the first to arrive at the scene of the killing of Rabbi Eitam and his wife was the forensic unit of the Israeli police. Similarly, Israeli media continues to describe murderous rock and Molotov cocktail attackers as "youths," "activists," "militants" or "human animals."
But the killing of a young rabbi destined for greatness and of his lovely wife is a chilling reminder that Israel is at war, a war that for some reason tends to consume her very best. In a moving Facebook post Aharon Rose mourns his friend: "We lose our very best; the greatest among the next generation leadership of religious Zionism was murdered." A man of "great genius of noble spirit" he calls him. A gaze at Eitam's blog shows just how accurate this description is, and how urgent it is for us Israelis to wake up to the fact that the Henkins are casualties of war, and not victims of heinous crime.
ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS
Tennessee Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey calls on all Christians to carry handguns
The community college massacre in Oregon has led President Obama to call for stricter gun control, but the Lt. Governor of Tennessee took an entirely different approach. Because the shooter asked his victims if they were Christians, Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey called on all Christians to carry handguns.
Here is what Ramsey, a Republican, posted on Facebook:
As I scroll through the news this morning I am saddened to read the details of the horrible tragedy in Oregon. My heart goes out to the citizens of Roseburg — especially the families and loved ones of those murdered.
The recent spike in mass shootings across the nation is truly troubling. Whether the perpetrators are motivated by aggressive secularism, jihadist extremism or racial supremacy, their targets remain the same: Christians and defenders of the West.
While this is not the time for widespread panic, it is a time to prepare. I would encourage my fellow Christians who are serious about their faith to think about getting a handgun carry permit. I have always believed that it is better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.
Our enemies are armed. We must do likewise.
State Rep. John Ray Clemmons accused Ramsey of choosing “the road most traveled by the radical right” and said the Lt. Governor’s remarks “reek of fear-mongering and religious crusading.” Clemmons, a Democrat from Nashville, recently introduced legislation to ban guns from concerts.
So what’s it going to be – onward Christian soldiers or more gun control? If all Christians plan to answer Ramsey’s call to carry handguns, the firearms manufacturers will be hard pressed to meet the demand for guns, the prices for which will skyrocket.
The community college massacre in Oregon has led President Obama to call for stricter gun control, but the Lt. Governor of Tennessee took an entirely different approach. Because the shooter asked his victims if they were Christians, Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey called on all Christians to carry handguns.
Here is what Ramsey, a Republican, posted on Facebook:
As I scroll through the news this morning I am saddened to read the details of the horrible tragedy in Oregon. My heart goes out to the citizens of Roseburg — especially the families and loved ones of those murdered.
The recent spike in mass shootings across the nation is truly troubling. Whether the perpetrators are motivated by aggressive secularism, jihadist extremism or racial supremacy, their targets remain the same: Christians and defenders of the West.
While this is not the time for widespread panic, it is a time to prepare. I would encourage my fellow Christians who are serious about their faith to think about getting a handgun carry permit. I have always believed that it is better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.
Our enemies are armed. We must do likewise.
State Rep. John Ray Clemmons accused Ramsey of choosing “the road most traveled by the radical right” and said the Lt. Governor’s remarks “reek of fear-mongering and religious crusading.” Clemmons, a Democrat from Nashville, recently introduced legislation to ban guns from concerts.
So what’s it going to be – onward Christian soldiers or more gun control? If all Christians plan to answer Ramsey’s call to carry handguns, the firearms manufacturers will be hard pressed to meet the demand for guns, the prices for which will skyrocket.
ORTHODOX JEWISH WOMAN SAYS GYM THREATENED TO ARREST HER FOR WORKING OUT IN A SKIRT
By Frank Rosario and Bruce Golding
New York Post
October 2, 2015
An Orthodox Jewish woman is suing the Lucille Roberts health-club chain for allegedly pitching a holy fit when she insisted on wearing a skirt during her workouts in Brooklyn.
Yosefa Jalal, of Crown Heights, claims in court papers to be filed Friday that she was repeatedly harassed, threatened with arrest and ultimately had her membership revoked for following religious dictates regarding female modesty.
“I think it’s wrong what they did to me. I should be able to work out in a skirt,” said Jalal, 25.
“Just because I’m an observant Jew doesn’t mean that I should be treated like a criminal and shouldn’t be allowed to work out. It’s just not fair.”
Jalal’s Manhattan federal suit accuses the women’s-only fitness company of religious discrimination in violation of federal, state and city statutes.
The suit seeks unspecified damages, along with a court order forcing Lucille Roberts to reinstate her membership and prohibiting it “from discriminating on the basis of religion, and in particular, discriminating against observant-Jewish women.”
Jalal “observes the Jewish rules of modesty” and in public always “wears skirts and tights to cover her legs, and shirts that cover her elbows and come to her neck.”
After joining the gym in 2011, Jalal wore a skirt while working out at various branches where she used an elliptical machine and took weight-lifting, kickboxing and Zumba classes, the suit says.
Her workout attire first became an issue at a Kings Highway location, where she was told in 2013 and again the next year that she couldn’t wear her skirt.
Instead, she started going to a Lucille Roberts on Flatbush Avenue regularly until June 26 of this year, when a manager accused her of “ ‘trespassing’ because she was not wearing appropriate attire,” the suit alleges.
Jalal left to avoid trouble and later went to the local police station house, where she says a cop told her that going to the gym in a skirt was not trespassing.
But when she returned on July 1 for a kickboxing class, a staffer interrupted the lesson and spoke to the instructor, who “stopped the music and told everyone they had to stop class until Ms. Jalal took off the skirt,” her suit says.
When the other women began screaming at her, she switched to an elliptical machine and was told that her membership had been revoked and warned that “the police are on their way.”
Jalal’s lawyer called it “completely indefensible.”
“We don’t have different health clubs for Christians, for Muslims, for Hindus and for Jews,” said Ilann Maazel, of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady. “Health clubs in New York City should be for everybody, whether you wear a cross, a Star of David or a skirt.”
A lawyer for Lucille Roberts declined to comment.
New York Post
October 2, 2015
An Orthodox Jewish woman is suing the Lucille Roberts health-club chain for allegedly pitching a holy fit when she insisted on wearing a skirt during her workouts in Brooklyn.
Yosefa Jalal, of Crown Heights, claims in court papers to be filed Friday that she was repeatedly harassed, threatened with arrest and ultimately had her membership revoked for following religious dictates regarding female modesty.
“I think it’s wrong what they did to me. I should be able to work out in a skirt,” said Jalal, 25.
“Just because I’m an observant Jew doesn’t mean that I should be treated like a criminal and shouldn’t be allowed to work out. It’s just not fair.”
Jalal’s Manhattan federal suit accuses the women’s-only fitness company of religious discrimination in violation of federal, state and city statutes.
The suit seeks unspecified damages, along with a court order forcing Lucille Roberts to reinstate her membership and prohibiting it “from discriminating on the basis of religion, and in particular, discriminating against observant-Jewish women.”
Jalal “observes the Jewish rules of modesty” and in public always “wears skirts and tights to cover her legs, and shirts that cover her elbows and come to her neck.”
After joining the gym in 2011, Jalal wore a skirt while working out at various branches where she used an elliptical machine and took weight-lifting, kickboxing and Zumba classes, the suit says.
Her workout attire first became an issue at a Kings Highway location, where she was told in 2013 and again the next year that she couldn’t wear her skirt.
Instead, she started going to a Lucille Roberts on Flatbush Avenue regularly until June 26 of this year, when a manager accused her of “ ‘trespassing’ because she was not wearing appropriate attire,” the suit alleges.
Jalal left to avoid trouble and later went to the local police station house, where she says a cop told her that going to the gym in a skirt was not trespassing.
But when she returned on July 1 for a kickboxing class, a staffer interrupted the lesson and spoke to the instructor, who “stopped the music and told everyone they had to stop class until Ms. Jalal took off the skirt,” her suit says.
When the other women began screaming at her, she switched to an elliptical machine and was told that her membership had been revoked and warned that “the police are on their way.”
Jalal’s lawyer called it “completely indefensible.”
“We don’t have different health clubs for Christians, for Muslims, for Hindus and for Jews,” said Ilann Maazel, of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady. “Health clubs in New York City should be for everybody, whether you wear a cross, a Star of David or a skirt.”
A lawyer for Lucille Roberts declined to comment.
Saturday, October 03, 2015
EXECUTIONS: OKLAHOMA CAN’T GET ITS ACT TOGETHER
Hours before Richard Glossip’s scheduled execution, Oklahoma prison officials discovered that a pharmacist sent them potassium acetate because he could not get his hands on potassium chloride
Last April, Oklahoma botched the execution of Clayton Lockett who began breathing heavily, writhing, clenching his teeth and straining to lift his head off the pillow three minutes after the injection of midazolam followed by vecuronium bromide and potassium chloride, forcing a halt to his execution. Lockett died later of a heart attack.
One would think that Oklahoma would have stopped using a three-dose lethal drug cocktail and switched to a single dose of pentobarbital, which Texas and Georgia have used to carry out flawless executions. But no, Oklahoma is going to do it the Okie way and stick to its three-dose cocktail. That almost led them to botch the execution of Richard Glossip who was scheduled to be topped Wednesday evening.
Hours before Glossip’s scheduled execution, prison officials discovered that a pharmacist had sent them potassium acetate instead of potassium chloride. The pharmacist substituted the potassium acetate because he could not get his hands on potassium chloride. And he failed to notify prison authorities of the substitution.
Chalk this up as one big SNAFU. Gov. Mary Fallin was forced to order a 37-day stay of execution so the state could review its execution process. Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt got pissed off at prison officials and asked the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to issue indefinite stays of execution for Richard Glossip, Benjamin Cole and John Grant.
The court granted Pruitt’s request and ordered the state to provide status reports every 30 days, "including any proposed adjustments to the execution protocol."
Maybe now Oklahoma will get its act together and switch its execution protocol from a three-dose drug cocktail to a single dose of pentobarbital.
Last April, Oklahoma botched the execution of Clayton Lockett who began breathing heavily, writhing, clenching his teeth and straining to lift his head off the pillow three minutes after the injection of midazolam followed by vecuronium bromide and potassium chloride, forcing a halt to his execution. Lockett died later of a heart attack.
One would think that Oklahoma would have stopped using a three-dose lethal drug cocktail and switched to a single dose of pentobarbital, which Texas and Georgia have used to carry out flawless executions. But no, Oklahoma is going to do it the Okie way and stick to its three-dose cocktail. That almost led them to botch the execution of Richard Glossip who was scheduled to be topped Wednesday evening.
Hours before Glossip’s scheduled execution, prison officials discovered that a pharmacist had sent them potassium acetate instead of potassium chloride. The pharmacist substituted the potassium acetate because he could not get his hands on potassium chloride. And he failed to notify prison authorities of the substitution.
Chalk this up as one big SNAFU. Gov. Mary Fallin was forced to order a 37-day stay of execution so the state could review its execution process. Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt got pissed off at prison officials and asked the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to issue indefinite stays of execution for Richard Glossip, Benjamin Cole and John Grant.
The court granted Pruitt’s request and ordered the state to provide status reports every 30 days, "including any proposed adjustments to the execution protocol."
Maybe now Oklahoma will get its act together and switch its execution protocol from a three-dose drug cocktail to a single dose of pentobarbital.
SENATE CANDIDATE’S GOAT SACRIFICE, TALK OF WAR WITH GOVERNMENT DISRUPTS FLORIDA LIBERTARIANS
U.S. Senate candidate Augustus Sol Invictus journeyed to the Mojave Desert to participate in a Pagan ritual during which he killed a goat and drank its blood
By Brendan Farrington
Associated Press
October 2, 2015
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Two years ago, Augustus Sol Invictus walked from central Florida to the Mojave Desert and spent a week fasting and praying, at times thinking he wouldn't survive. In a pagan ritual to give thanks when he returned home, he killed a goat and drank its blood.
Now that he's a candidate for U.S. Senate, the story is coming back to bite him.
The chairman of the Libertarian Party of Florida has resigned to call attention to Invictus' candidacy in hopes that other party leaders will denounce him. Adrian Wyllie, who was the Libertarian candidate for governor last year, says Invictus wants to lead a civil war, is trying to recruit neo-Nazis to the party and brutally and sadistically dismembered a goat.
It's an awkward situation for the small party that's trying to gain clout.
"He is the absolute exact opposite of a Libertarian. He's a self-proclaimed fascist. He's promoting a second civil war," Wyllie said. "It's absolute insanity. We must explain to people this is the opposite of Libertarians. This guy has no place in the Libertarian Party."
Invictus, a 32-year-old lawyer who changed his given name — which he declines to reveal — to a Latin phrase that means "majestic unconquered sun," says Wyllie is just running a smear campaign and is twisting his words into lies. No, he says, he's not a white supremacist, pointing out his four children are Hispanic — though he acknowledges that some white supremacists support his campaign. No, he says he isn't trying to start a civil war, but he says the government already is at war with its citizens and that it's certain to escalate.
"The only question is when are the citizens going to start fighting back?" he said in a phone interview Friday. "I don't think I'm the only person who sees a cataclysm coming, but I think I'm the only person saying it, and I think that scares people."
Sacrifice? Yes. Brutal and sadistic? Not according to Invictus.
"I did sacrifice a goat. I know that's probably a quibble in the mind of most Americans," he said. "I sacrificed an animal to the god of the wilderness ... Yes, I drank the goat's blood."
He admits he's been investigated by the FBI, the U.S. Marshals and other law enforcement. He is confident they're still watching him, in part for a series of YouTube videos and other writings in which he discusses government. He renounced his citizenship in one paper, and in another he prophesied a great war, saying he would wander into the wilderness and return bearing revolution.
"I guess it makes me feel flattered that they think I am a threat to the stability of the system. It makes me think one man can make a difference," Invictus said.
He insists, though, that he doesn't advocate violence.
"You do not initiate force," he said. "If the government is waging war on citizens, we as citizens have the right to self-defense on government."
Invictus knows running as a Libertarian is a longshot — Wyllie was easily Florida's most well-received Libertarian candidate and he only received 3.8 percent of the vote — and he acknowledges that being a pagan will hurt him with an electorate that tends to support Christians. But he said he is running with the hope of speaking on the Senate floor.
"If not elected, I still think there is a purpose for all of this and that is to get a message out there, waking them up," he said. "They are the ones that control the government and not the other way around."
By Brendan Farrington
Associated Press
October 2, 2015
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Two years ago, Augustus Sol Invictus walked from central Florida to the Mojave Desert and spent a week fasting and praying, at times thinking he wouldn't survive. In a pagan ritual to give thanks when he returned home, he killed a goat and drank its blood.
Now that he's a candidate for U.S. Senate, the story is coming back to bite him.
The chairman of the Libertarian Party of Florida has resigned to call attention to Invictus' candidacy in hopes that other party leaders will denounce him. Adrian Wyllie, who was the Libertarian candidate for governor last year, says Invictus wants to lead a civil war, is trying to recruit neo-Nazis to the party and brutally and sadistically dismembered a goat.
It's an awkward situation for the small party that's trying to gain clout.
"He is the absolute exact opposite of a Libertarian. He's a self-proclaimed fascist. He's promoting a second civil war," Wyllie said. "It's absolute insanity. We must explain to people this is the opposite of Libertarians. This guy has no place in the Libertarian Party."
Invictus, a 32-year-old lawyer who changed his given name — which he declines to reveal — to a Latin phrase that means "majestic unconquered sun," says Wyllie is just running a smear campaign and is twisting his words into lies. No, he says, he's not a white supremacist, pointing out his four children are Hispanic — though he acknowledges that some white supremacists support his campaign. No, he says he isn't trying to start a civil war, but he says the government already is at war with its citizens and that it's certain to escalate.
"The only question is when are the citizens going to start fighting back?" he said in a phone interview Friday. "I don't think I'm the only person who sees a cataclysm coming, but I think I'm the only person saying it, and I think that scares people."
Sacrifice? Yes. Brutal and sadistic? Not according to Invictus.
"I did sacrifice a goat. I know that's probably a quibble in the mind of most Americans," he said. "I sacrificed an animal to the god of the wilderness ... Yes, I drank the goat's blood."
He admits he's been investigated by the FBI, the U.S. Marshals and other law enforcement. He is confident they're still watching him, in part for a series of YouTube videos and other writings in which he discusses government. He renounced his citizenship in one paper, and in another he prophesied a great war, saying he would wander into the wilderness and return bearing revolution.
"I guess it makes me feel flattered that they think I am a threat to the stability of the system. It makes me think one man can make a difference," Invictus said.
He insists, though, that he doesn't advocate violence.
"You do not initiate force," he said. "If the government is waging war on citizens, we as citizens have the right to self-defense on government."
Invictus knows running as a Libertarian is a longshot — Wyllie was easily Florida's most well-received Libertarian candidate and he only received 3.8 percent of the vote — and he acknowledges that being a pagan will hurt him with an electorate that tends to support Christians. But he said he is running with the hope of speaking on the Senate floor.
"If not elected, I still think there is a purpose for all of this and that is to get a message out there, waking them up," he said. "They are the ones that control the government and not the other way around."
REPORT: INCREASE IN GUN SALES TO BE MOST CONCRETE RESULT OF OBAMA’S PRO-GUN-CONTROL SPEECH
The Onion
October 3, 2015
WASHINGTON—Researchers at the Urban Institute published a study Friday confirming that a sharp increase in gun sales nationwide would be the most concrete result of the impassioned pro-gun-control speech that President Obama delivered following yesterday’s mass shooting in Oregon.
“According to our analysis, by far the most tangible impact of the president emotionally urging the nation to consider how their votes can prevent mass shootings like this will be a 17 percent spike in revenue for firearm vendors across the U.S.,” said report co-author Kyle Bieler, who found a direct link between the estimated $58 million uptick in gun sales over the next month and Obama’s use of the phrases “common-sense legislation,” “only advanced country,” and “not enough.”
“The portion of the president’s remarks in which he asked for support from state legislatures and governors will, based on our projections, nearly double the number of sidearm purchases this year. Beyond that, the only other material change that is likely to result from Obama calling on elected officials and everyday citizens to work together to reduce gun violence will be the purchase of roughly 100 million rounds of ammunition.”
Bieler noted that the president’s support for responsible gun ownership will likely have no impact on sales, as Americans would have likely already walked out of their front door, started their car, and driven to their nearest gun store long before that point in the speech.
October 3, 2015
WASHINGTON—Researchers at the Urban Institute published a study Friday confirming that a sharp increase in gun sales nationwide would be the most concrete result of the impassioned pro-gun-control speech that President Obama delivered following yesterday’s mass shooting in Oregon.
“According to our analysis, by far the most tangible impact of the president emotionally urging the nation to consider how their votes can prevent mass shootings like this will be a 17 percent spike in revenue for firearm vendors across the U.S.,” said report co-author Kyle Bieler, who found a direct link between the estimated $58 million uptick in gun sales over the next month and Obama’s use of the phrases “common-sense legislation,” “only advanced country,” and “not enough.”
“The portion of the president’s remarks in which he asked for support from state legislatures and governors will, based on our projections, nearly double the number of sidearm purchases this year. Beyond that, the only other material change that is likely to result from Obama calling on elected officials and everyday citizens to work together to reduce gun violence will be the purchase of roughly 100 million rounds of ammunition.”
Bieler noted that the president’s support for responsible gun ownership will likely have no impact on sales, as Americans would have likely already walked out of their front door, started their car, and driven to their nearest gun store long before that point in the speech.
A MAN WITH NO ENEMIES
The Unconventional Gazette
October 3, 2015
Toward the end of the Sunday service, the Minister asked, "How many of you have forgiven your enemies?"
80% held up their hands. The Minister then repeated his question. All responded this time, except one man, Walter Barnes.
"Mr Barnes, are you not willing to forgive your enemies?"
"I don't have any," he replied gruffly.
"Mr Barnes, that is very unusual. How old are you?"
"Ninety-eight," he replied. The congregation stood up and clapped their hands.
"Oh, Mr Barnes, would you please come down in front and tell us all how a person can live ninety-eight years and not have an enemy in the world?"
The old man tottered down the aisle, stopped in front of the pulpit, turned around, faced the congregation, and said simply, "I outlived all the pricks" - and he calmly returned to his seat.
October 3, 2015
Toward the end of the Sunday service, the Minister asked, "How many of you have forgiven your enemies?"
80% held up their hands. The Minister then repeated his question. All responded this time, except one man, Walter Barnes.
"Mr Barnes, are you not willing to forgive your enemies?"
"I don't have any," he replied gruffly.
"Mr Barnes, that is very unusual. How old are you?"
"Ninety-eight," he replied. The congregation stood up and clapped their hands.
"Oh, Mr Barnes, would you please come down in front and tell us all how a person can live ninety-eight years and not have an enemy in the world?"
The old man tottered down the aisle, stopped in front of the pulpit, turned around, faced the congregation, and said simply, "I outlived all the pricks" - and he calmly returned to his seat.
Friday, October 02, 2015
PUBLIC LIMELIGHT APPARENTLY THE MOTIVE OF OREGON MASS SHOOTER
In an August social media post, Chris Harper-Mercer wrote about how much he admired shooters who were unknown loners, but became ‘known by everyone’
Everyone is wondering what Chris Harper-Mercer’s motive was for his shooting spree on the Umpaqua Community College campus in Roseburg, Oregon. Well here’s a good clue:
“On an interesting note, I have noticed that so many people like him [Vester Flanagan who killed a newscaster and her cameraman] are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are. A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight.”
That’s what the nutjob posted on social media last August. Apparently, like other unknown loners, he wanted to be in the public limelight and be known by everyone. Harper-Mercer got his wish and is now known throughout the world, albeit posthumously.
Everyone is wondering what Chris Harper-Mercer’s motive was for his shooting spree on the Umpaqua Community College campus in Roseburg, Oregon. Well here’s a good clue:
“On an interesting note, I have noticed that so many people like him [Vester Flanagan who killed a newscaster and her cameraman] are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are. A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone. His face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you're in the limelight.”
That’s what the nutjob posted on social media last August. Apparently, like other unknown loners, he wanted to be in the public limelight and be known by everyone. Harper-Mercer got his wish and is now known throughout the world, albeit posthumously.
STUPID REPUBLICAN LEADER IS AS STUPID REPUBLICAN LEADER DOES
Kevin McCarthy, John Boehner’s apparent heir as Speaker of the House, brags about setting up the Select Committee on Benghazi in order to damage Hillary Clinton
“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would’ve known any of that had happened had we not fought and made that happen.”
Thus bragged Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday night during an appearance on Fox News with Sean Hannity. In one fell swoop McCarthy managed to destroy the credibility of the Benghazi committee while handing Hillary the perfect means with which to jackhammer her critics.
McCarthy, R-Kookfornia, is the current House Majority Leader and is expected to succeed John Boehner as Speaker of the House, that is before he pulled this boner. If he represents the leadership of the Republicans, the GOP is in serious trouble.
McCarthy’s bragging confirmed what many voters suspected and what Hillary and Bill have claimed – that the Benghazi hearings and the attendant uproar over her cellphone were much to do about nothing and their only purpose is to damage Hillary’s presidential ambitions.
Stupid Republican leader is as stupid Republican leader does. McCarthy just elected Hillary as our next president.
“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would’ve known any of that had happened had we not fought and made that happen.”
Thus bragged Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday night during an appearance on Fox News with Sean Hannity. In one fell swoop McCarthy managed to destroy the credibility of the Benghazi committee while handing Hillary the perfect means with which to jackhammer her critics.
McCarthy, R-Kookfornia, is the current House Majority Leader and is expected to succeed John Boehner as Speaker of the House, that is before he pulled this boner. If he represents the leadership of the Republicans, the GOP is in serious trouble.
McCarthy’s bragging confirmed what many voters suspected and what Hillary and Bill have claimed – that the Benghazi hearings and the attendant uproar over her cellphone were much to do about nothing and their only purpose is to damage Hillary’s presidential ambitions.
Stupid Republican leader is as stupid Republican leader does. McCarthy just elected Hillary as our next president.
SAN DIEGO DOCTOR WINS CALIFORNIA PLEA BARGAIN LOTTERY
A California judge sentenced an ill doctor who pled guilty to eight counts of sexual penetration of an unconscious person, three counts of sexual battery, and one count of possession of child pornography involving pictures of an 8-year-old girl to only one-year of home confinement
By Richard Krupp, PhD
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
October 1, 2015
For several years, the people of California have been spending billions of taxpayer dollars to provide premium health care to criminals who make it into prison.
In addition to in-prison health care, many inmates receive treatment in community hospitals through various contract arrangements.
However, even top notch health care is not good enough for some inmates, according to Judge Laura Halgren’s acceptance of a perverted plea deal in San Diego County, California. Welcome to California justice.
Evidently at least one sex offender will be staying home instead of spending 25 years in prison because prison health care is not up to the judge’s standards.
Here are some highlights from a recent Los Angeles Times article:
El Cajon doctor given house arrest for assaulting female patients
A 68-year-old doctor was sentenced Friday to a year of house arrest after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting a dozen female patients during examinations.
San Diego County Superior Court Judge Laura Halgren sentenced Jeffrey Joel Abrams to 25 years in prison but stayed the sentence and instead imposed the house arrest because of Abrams’ medical condition. Abrams requires continuous care due to complications following surgery to remove a cancerous kidney, according to a probation report. He could not receive appropriate care in prison, the report said.
Abrams pleaded guilty to inappropriately touching and photographing female patients at the Volunteers in Medicine clinic in El Cajon. The clinic provides care for low-income patients.
Along with the house arrest, Abrams will serve five years’ probation, register as a sex offender, serve 200 hours of community service and surrender his medical license. Deputy Dist. Atty. Kerry Conway said Abrams’ victims were satisfied with the plea bargain, deciding it was preferable to having to go to trial.
“This plea agreement ensures they won’t have to relive the crime in court and keeps the defendant away from any potential future victims,” Conway said. Abrams pleaded guilty to eight counts of sexual penetration of an unconscious person, three counts of sexual battery, and one count of possession of child pornography involving pictures of an 8-year-old girl. (for full story read http://tinyurl.com/p2tab7l.)
Evidently the elderly pervert doctor will be able to get continuous care in the comfort of his own home. Prison medical care must not be appropriate for sex offenders recovering from surgery.
Does that mean all inmates should be sent home following kidney surgery? I wonder if the judge discussed the prison medical care shortcomings with the federal receiver?
Is the court supposed to be more interested in the welfare of the criminal offender than his victims? Was this the best offer the San Diego District Attorney’s Office could demand in plea bargaining with a serial molester, who used his position as a doctor to abuse poor women? Was this bargain really done in the public interest, in the best interests of the victims—or was it in Mr. Abrams best interest to simply avoid prison as a convicted molester?
I’m sure Judge Halgren has all of the answers.
If Abrams’ residence is a good place for continuous care might there be room for a few more inmates? Maybe Abrams can provide medical care for some additional prison inmates himself. He was helping low-income patients in San Diego County, while he was pleasuring himself.
I don’t know Judge Halgren, but at this point I am not impressed with her judgment let alone the wisdom of the San Diego DA’s Office.
If this pervert had one kidney removed doesn’t he still have one intact? What kind of medical care can he get at home that he can’t get in a prison hospital? How does keeping him at home keep him away from any future victims? Just because he won’t be playing as a doctor, doesn’t mean he won’t prey on poor women.
Perhaps Judge Halgren is not as wise as the calling of her office demands.
Doctor Abrams on the other hand may be thinking that it could have/should have been worse than he will ever know.
By Richard Krupp, PhD
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
October 1, 2015
For several years, the people of California have been spending billions of taxpayer dollars to provide premium health care to criminals who make it into prison.
In addition to in-prison health care, many inmates receive treatment in community hospitals through various contract arrangements.
However, even top notch health care is not good enough for some inmates, according to Judge Laura Halgren’s acceptance of a perverted plea deal in San Diego County, California. Welcome to California justice.
Evidently at least one sex offender will be staying home instead of spending 25 years in prison because prison health care is not up to the judge’s standards.
Here are some highlights from a recent Los Angeles Times article:
El Cajon doctor given house arrest for assaulting female patients
A 68-year-old doctor was sentenced Friday to a year of house arrest after pleading guilty to sexually assaulting a dozen female patients during examinations.
San Diego County Superior Court Judge Laura Halgren sentenced Jeffrey Joel Abrams to 25 years in prison but stayed the sentence and instead imposed the house arrest because of Abrams’ medical condition. Abrams requires continuous care due to complications following surgery to remove a cancerous kidney, according to a probation report. He could not receive appropriate care in prison, the report said.
Abrams pleaded guilty to inappropriately touching and photographing female patients at the Volunteers in Medicine clinic in El Cajon. The clinic provides care for low-income patients.
Along with the house arrest, Abrams will serve five years’ probation, register as a sex offender, serve 200 hours of community service and surrender his medical license. Deputy Dist. Atty. Kerry Conway said Abrams’ victims were satisfied with the plea bargain, deciding it was preferable to having to go to trial.
“This plea agreement ensures they won’t have to relive the crime in court and keeps the defendant away from any potential future victims,” Conway said. Abrams pleaded guilty to eight counts of sexual penetration of an unconscious person, three counts of sexual battery, and one count of possession of child pornography involving pictures of an 8-year-old girl. (for full story read http://tinyurl.com/p2tab7l.)
Evidently the elderly pervert doctor will be able to get continuous care in the comfort of his own home. Prison medical care must not be appropriate for sex offenders recovering from surgery.
Does that mean all inmates should be sent home following kidney surgery? I wonder if the judge discussed the prison medical care shortcomings with the federal receiver?
Is the court supposed to be more interested in the welfare of the criminal offender than his victims? Was this the best offer the San Diego District Attorney’s Office could demand in plea bargaining with a serial molester, who used his position as a doctor to abuse poor women? Was this bargain really done in the public interest, in the best interests of the victims—or was it in Mr. Abrams best interest to simply avoid prison as a convicted molester?
I’m sure Judge Halgren has all of the answers.
If Abrams’ residence is a good place for continuous care might there be room for a few more inmates? Maybe Abrams can provide medical care for some additional prison inmates himself. He was helping low-income patients in San Diego County, while he was pleasuring himself.
I don’t know Judge Halgren, but at this point I am not impressed with her judgment let alone the wisdom of the San Diego DA’s Office.
If this pervert had one kidney removed doesn’t he still have one intact? What kind of medical care can he get at home that he can’t get in a prison hospital? How does keeping him at home keep him away from any future victims? Just because he won’t be playing as a doctor, doesn’t mean he won’t prey on poor women.
Perhaps Judge Halgren is not as wise as the calling of her office demands.
Doctor Abrams on the other hand may be thinking that it could have/should have been worse than he will ever know.
Thursday, October 01, 2015
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DEADLY SHOOTING OF OFFICER GREG ALIA
What was the rookie cop doing during the deadly struggle between his training officer and a thug, and why didn’t the other responding officers shoot his killer?
Forest Acres is a city of fewer than 11,000 citizens that is located near Columbia, South Carolina. 32-year-old Greg Alia was an officer of the Forest Acres police force. After graduating from the University of South Carolina, Greg realized his lifelong dream of becoming a police officer. The seven-year veteran cop was also the happily married father of a six-month-old son.
Shortly before 8 a.m. Wednesday, Alia and his partner received a call of a suspicious person inside a car at the Richland Mall. His partner was a rookie officer whom Alia was training. They spotted 34-year-old Jarvis Hall in the parking lot. When they approached Hall to question him, he ran off into the mall. Alia caught up to Hall by the Barnes and Noble bookstore. Alia and Hall got into a physical struggle during which the officer was shot dead.
Other officers arriving at the scene took Hall into custody. Hall was in possession of a gun reported stolen from Lexington County on or about September 2. He was charged with murder and possession of a weapon during a violent crime.
Hall’s criminal record shows a number of arrests, mostly misdemeanor charges such as unlawful carrying of a weapon, failure to comply, and solicitation. Hall was arrested by the Columbia police in August for failure to comply.
This tragic shooting of a good police officer brings to mind two questions. What was the rookie cop doing during the deadly struggle between his training officer and Hall? One would think he would at least have shot the bastard.
In addition to officers from Forest Acres, officers with the Richland County Sheriff's Department, Columbia Police Department and other agencies also responded to the shooting. Why didn’t any of those officers shoot Hall? Back in my day, had Hall been caught at or near the scene of the shooting with a gun, there would have been no sweet-talking him into giving up. That thug would have been perforated like a Swiss cheese by a volley of police gunshots.
Now, instead of being toes up, Jarvis Hall will benefit from years of litigation which will be a painful experience for Greg Alia's widow and son. It won’t surprise me at all if Hall’s lawyers will argue that the black man was merely defending himself against the brutality of a white racist cop.
Forest Acres is a city of fewer than 11,000 citizens that is located near Columbia, South Carolina. 32-year-old Greg Alia was an officer of the Forest Acres police force. After graduating from the University of South Carolina, Greg realized his lifelong dream of becoming a police officer. The seven-year veteran cop was also the happily married father of a six-month-old son.
Shortly before 8 a.m. Wednesday, Alia and his partner received a call of a suspicious person inside a car at the Richland Mall. His partner was a rookie officer whom Alia was training. They spotted 34-year-old Jarvis Hall in the parking lot. When they approached Hall to question him, he ran off into the mall. Alia caught up to Hall by the Barnes and Noble bookstore. Alia and Hall got into a physical struggle during which the officer was shot dead.
Other officers arriving at the scene took Hall into custody. Hall was in possession of a gun reported stolen from Lexington County on or about September 2. He was charged with murder and possession of a weapon during a violent crime.
Hall’s criminal record shows a number of arrests, mostly misdemeanor charges such as unlawful carrying of a weapon, failure to comply, and solicitation. Hall was arrested by the Columbia police in August for failure to comply.
This tragic shooting of a good police officer brings to mind two questions. What was the rookie cop doing during the deadly struggle between his training officer and Hall? One would think he would at least have shot the bastard.
In addition to officers from Forest Acres, officers with the Richland County Sheriff's Department, Columbia Police Department and other agencies also responded to the shooting. Why didn’t any of those officers shoot Hall? Back in my day, had Hall been caught at or near the scene of the shooting with a gun, there would have been no sweet-talking him into giving up. That thug would have been perforated like a Swiss cheese by a volley of police gunshots.
Now, instead of being toes up, Jarvis Hall will benefit from years of litigation which will be a painful experience for Greg Alia's widow and son. It won’t surprise me at all if Hall’s lawyers will argue that the black man was merely defending himself against the brutality of a white racist cop.
THE WAR ON DRUGS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FPR MASS INCARCERATION
Only 17 percent of state prison inmates are serving time for a drug-related offense
I have always supported the ‘War on Drugs’ and, contrary to its critics, I do not believe that it has been a failure. The nation’s drug problem would be much more serious were it not for the war on drugs.
Finally, New York Times columnist David Brooks shows us that the war on drugs is not responsible for the prison problem of mass incarceration. Only 17 percent of state prison inmates are serving time for a drug-related offense. The percentage in federal prisons is probably higher, but those doing federal time for drug offenses were big-time drug traffickers. Let the war go on!
THE PRISON PROBLEM
By David Brooks
The New York Times
September 29, 2015
Pretty much everybody from Barack Obama to Carly Fiorina seems to agree that far too many Americans are stuck behind bars. And pretty much everybody seems to have the same explanation for how this destructive era of mass incarceration came about.
First, the war on drugs got out of control, meaning that many nonviolent people wound up in prison. Second, mandatory-minimum sentencing laws led to a throw-away-the-key culture, with long, cruel and pointlessly destructive prison terms.
It’s true that mass incarceration is a horrific problem. Back in the 1970s the increase in incarceration did help reduce the crime rate, maybe accounting for a third of the drop. But today’s incarceration levels do little to deter crime while they do much to rip up families, increase racial disparities and destroy lives.
The popular explanation for how we got here, however, seems to be largely wrong, and most of the policy responses flowing from it may therefore be inappropriate.
The drug war is not even close to being the primary driver behind the sharp rise in incarceration. About 90 percent of America’s prisoners are held in state institutions. Only 17 percent of these inmates are in for a drug-related offense, or less than one in five.
Moreover, the share of people imprisoned for drug offenses is dropping sharply, down by 22 percent between 2006 and 2011. Writing in Slate, Leon Neyfakh emphasized that if you released every drug offender from state prison today, you’d reduce the population only to 1.2 million from 1.5 million.
The war on drugs does not explain the rocketing rates of incarceration, and ending that war, wise or not, will not solve this problem.
The mandatory-minimum theory is also problematic. Experts differ on this, but some of the most sophisticated work with the best data sets has been done by John Pfaff of Fordham Law School. When I spoke with Pfaff on Monday I found him to be wonderfully objective, nonideological and data-driven.
His research suggests that while it’s true that lawmakers passed a lot of measures calling for long prison sentences, if you look at how much time inmates actually served, not much has changed over the past few decades. Roughly half of all prisoners have prison terms in the range of two to three years, and only 10 percent serve more than seven years. The laws look punitive, but the time served hasn’t increased, and so harsh laws are not the main driver behind mass incarceration, either.
So what does explain it? Pfaff’s theory is that it’s the prosecutors. District attorneys and their assistants have gotten a lot more aggressive in bringing felony charges. Twenty years ago they brought felony charges against about one in three arrestees. Now it’s something like two in three. That produces a lot more plea bargains and a lot more prison terms.
I asked Pfaff why prosecutors are more aggressive. He’s heard theories. Maybe they are more political and they want to show toughness to raise their profile to impress voters if they run for future office. Maybe the police are bringing stronger cases. Additionally, prosecutors are usually paid by the county but prisons by the state, so prosecutors tend not to have to worry about the financial costs of what they do.
Pfaff says there’s little evidence so far to prove any of these theories, since the prosecutorial world is largely a black box. He also points out that we have a radically decentralized array of prosecutors, with some elected and some appointed. Changing their behavior cannot be done with one quick fix.
Some politicians and activists suggest that solving this problem will be easy — just release the pot smokers and the low-level dealers. In reality, reducing mass incarceration means releasing a lot of once-violent offenders. That may be the right thing to do in individual cases, but it’s a knotty problem.
Two final points. Everybody is railing against the political establishment and experts and experienced politicians. But social problems are invariably more complex than they look. The obvious explanation for most problems is often wrong. It takes experience and craftsmanship to design policies that grapple with the true complexity of reality.
Finally, recategorizing a problem doesn’t solve it. In the 1970s, we let a lot of people out of mental institutions. Over the next decades we put a lot of people into prisons. But the share of people kept out of circulation has been strangely continuous. In the real world, crime, lack of education, mental health issues, family breakdown and economic hopelessness are all intertwined.
Changing prosecutor behavior might be a start. Lifting the spirits of inmates, as described in the outstanding Atlantic online video “Angola for Life,” can also help. But the fundamental situation won’t be altered without a comprehensive surge, unless we flood the zone with economic, familial, psychological and social repair.
I have always supported the ‘War on Drugs’ and, contrary to its critics, I do not believe that it has been a failure. The nation’s drug problem would be much more serious were it not for the war on drugs.
Finally, New York Times columnist David Brooks shows us that the war on drugs is not responsible for the prison problem of mass incarceration. Only 17 percent of state prison inmates are serving time for a drug-related offense. The percentage in federal prisons is probably higher, but those doing federal time for drug offenses were big-time drug traffickers. Let the war go on!
THE PRISON PROBLEM
By David Brooks
The New York Times
September 29, 2015
Pretty much everybody from Barack Obama to Carly Fiorina seems to agree that far too many Americans are stuck behind bars. And pretty much everybody seems to have the same explanation for how this destructive era of mass incarceration came about.
First, the war on drugs got out of control, meaning that many nonviolent people wound up in prison. Second, mandatory-minimum sentencing laws led to a throw-away-the-key culture, with long, cruel and pointlessly destructive prison terms.
It’s true that mass incarceration is a horrific problem. Back in the 1970s the increase in incarceration did help reduce the crime rate, maybe accounting for a third of the drop. But today’s incarceration levels do little to deter crime while they do much to rip up families, increase racial disparities and destroy lives.
The popular explanation for how we got here, however, seems to be largely wrong, and most of the policy responses flowing from it may therefore be inappropriate.
The drug war is not even close to being the primary driver behind the sharp rise in incarceration. About 90 percent of America’s prisoners are held in state institutions. Only 17 percent of these inmates are in for a drug-related offense, or less than one in five.
Moreover, the share of people imprisoned for drug offenses is dropping sharply, down by 22 percent between 2006 and 2011. Writing in Slate, Leon Neyfakh emphasized that if you released every drug offender from state prison today, you’d reduce the population only to 1.2 million from 1.5 million.
The war on drugs does not explain the rocketing rates of incarceration, and ending that war, wise or not, will not solve this problem.
The mandatory-minimum theory is also problematic. Experts differ on this, but some of the most sophisticated work with the best data sets has been done by John Pfaff of Fordham Law School. When I spoke with Pfaff on Monday I found him to be wonderfully objective, nonideological and data-driven.
His research suggests that while it’s true that lawmakers passed a lot of measures calling for long prison sentences, if you look at how much time inmates actually served, not much has changed over the past few decades. Roughly half of all prisoners have prison terms in the range of two to three years, and only 10 percent serve more than seven years. The laws look punitive, but the time served hasn’t increased, and so harsh laws are not the main driver behind mass incarceration, either.
So what does explain it? Pfaff’s theory is that it’s the prosecutors. District attorneys and their assistants have gotten a lot more aggressive in bringing felony charges. Twenty years ago they brought felony charges against about one in three arrestees. Now it’s something like two in three. That produces a lot more plea bargains and a lot more prison terms.
I asked Pfaff why prosecutors are more aggressive. He’s heard theories. Maybe they are more political and they want to show toughness to raise their profile to impress voters if they run for future office. Maybe the police are bringing stronger cases. Additionally, prosecutors are usually paid by the county but prisons by the state, so prosecutors tend not to have to worry about the financial costs of what they do.
Pfaff says there’s little evidence so far to prove any of these theories, since the prosecutorial world is largely a black box. He also points out that we have a radically decentralized array of prosecutors, with some elected and some appointed. Changing their behavior cannot be done with one quick fix.
Some politicians and activists suggest that solving this problem will be easy — just release the pot smokers and the low-level dealers. In reality, reducing mass incarceration means releasing a lot of once-violent offenders. That may be the right thing to do in individual cases, but it’s a knotty problem.
Two final points. Everybody is railing against the political establishment and experts and experienced politicians. But social problems are invariably more complex than they look. The obvious explanation for most problems is often wrong. It takes experience and craftsmanship to design policies that grapple with the true complexity of reality.
Finally, recategorizing a problem doesn’t solve it. In the 1970s, we let a lot of people out of mental institutions. Over the next decades we put a lot of people into prisons. But the share of people kept out of circulation has been strangely continuous. In the real world, crime, lack of education, mental health issues, family breakdown and economic hopelessness are all intertwined.
Changing prosecutor behavior might be a start. Lifting the spirits of inmates, as described in the outstanding Atlantic online video “Angola for Life,” can also help. But the fundamental situation won’t be altered without a comprehensive surge, unless we flood the zone with economic, familial, psychological and social repair.
UTTER SEXUAL EXHAUSTION NO EXCUSE FOR MISSING FINAL EXAM
The Unconventional Gazette
October 1, 2015
A college teacher reminds her class of tomorrow's final exam. 'Now class, I won't tolerate any excuses for you not being here tomorrow. I might consider a nuclear attack or a serious personal injury, illness, or a death in your immediate family, but that's it, no other excuses whatsoever!'
A smart-ass student in the back of the room raised his hand and asked, 'What would you say if tomorrow I said I was suffering from complete and utter sexual exhaustion?'
The entire class is reduced to laughter and snickering. When silence was restored, the teacher smiled knowingly at the student, shook her head and sweetly said, 'Well, I guess you'd have to write the exam with your other hand.'
October 1, 2015
A college teacher reminds her class of tomorrow's final exam. 'Now class, I won't tolerate any excuses for you not being here tomorrow. I might consider a nuclear attack or a serious personal injury, illness, or a death in your immediate family, but that's it, no other excuses whatsoever!'
A smart-ass student in the back of the room raised his hand and asked, 'What would you say if tomorrow I said I was suffering from complete and utter sexual exhaustion?'
The entire class is reduced to laughter and snickering. When silence was restored, the teacher smiled knowingly at the student, shook her head and sweetly said, 'Well, I guess you'd have to write the exam with your other hand.'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)