Prosecutors said the victim can be seen hunched over in a chair sleeping in the Emergency Room’s waiting area, where he was scheduled to see a doctor later that day. The video shows Lewelling approaching the victim as he is starting to wake up. When the man attempts to walk away, the deputy grabs the back of his collar, pulls him back into the seat and knocks his cane away.
“A few seconds later, he appears to grab the victim’s throat and begins to choke him. The battery continued, and the victim was then placed under arrest,” prosecutors said.
“The victim never raised his cane in a threatening manner,” they added.
To me one of the most hypocritical aspects of some gun control meansures and their proponents has been how non gun yet still effective tools of self defense are also proscribed almost anywhere but the home. Often with more severe penalties like guns.
For instance if I got caught carrying a pistol absent any confrontation or other law violation I would face a misdemeanor. However if I’m out walking with a good strong cane and a policeman asks me why I carry the cane it’s a trap. If I say “bad knees” I’m fine. If I say bad neighborhood I just incriminated myself with a felony weapon possession charge and likely conviction.
Hat tip to gunssavelives.net for publishing the following important decion that quite logically concludes the second amendment is not just about firearms. It’s about arming oneself against a criminal attacker. “Bear arms” means defensive weapons of various kinds.
That site is a CCW/2nd Amendment advocacy site and may have little some of you would agree with. It might even anger you. Apologies in advance.
Stipulated this might not be a source you like but this particular nugget of legal thinking is worth the effort. So maybe skip those guys and just read the decision.
This widespread acceptance of batons within the law enforcement community also supports the conclusion that they are not so dangerous or unusual as to fall outside the purview of the second amendment. To this end, the fact that police batons are inherently less lethal, and therefore less dangerous and less intrinsically harmful, than handguns, which clearly constitute “arms” within the meaning of the second amendment, provides further reason to conclude that they are entitled to constitutional protection. Cf. People v. Yanna, supra, 297 Mich. App. 145 (“[T]he prosecution also argues that Tasers and stun guns are so dangerous that they are not protected by the [s]econd [a]mendment.
However, it is difficult to see how this is so since Heller concluded that handguns are not sufficiently dangerous to be banned. Tasers and stun guns, while plainly dangerous, are substantially less dangerous than handguns. Therefore, [T]asers and stun guns do not constitute dangerous weapons for purposes of [s]econd [a]mendment inquiries.”); D. Kopel et al., supra, 47 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 184 (“[K]nives are far less dangerous than guns. Any public safety justification for knife regulation is necessarily less persuasive than the public safety justification for firearms regulation.”).
Indeed, expandable batons are intermediate force devices that, when used as intended, are unlikely to cause death or permanent bodily injury. For these reasons, we are persuaded that the police baton that the defendant had in his vehicle is the kind of weapon traditionally used by the state for public safety purposes and is neither so dangerous nor so unusual as to fall outside the purview of the second amendment’s right to keep and bear arms.
[T]he prohibition against transporting a dirk knife and a police baton to a new home constitutes a significant restriction on the right to possess those weapons in that new home. Indeed, aside from an outright ban on possessing those weapons, it is difficult to conceive of a greater abridgement of that right than a restriction that bars the use of a vehicle to transport either of those weapons from one home to another.
Moreover, under § 29-38, it is unlawful for an ordinary citizen, like the defendant, to transport those weapons from the place of purchase to the purchaser’s home. As a consequence, the statute’s complete proscription against using a vehicle to transport the two protected weapons deprives their owner of any realistic opportunity either to bring them home after they have been purchased or to move them from one home to another. In fact, at oral argument before this court, the state acknowledged that, in light of that statutory prohibition, there may be no lawful means of doing either….
Nebraska’s Legislature is supposedly unicameral & non-partisan, but looking at their Wiki page (which provides party affiliation “for informational purposes only”) it seems to be very red, This move to put a nativity scene in the Capitol Rotunda strikes me as very right-wing. It strikes me as such not only because of the religious aspect, but also because of the involvement of its very anti-choice stance. You can read more about them on Wikipedia, but visiting their website (donotlink.com) will give you a much better idea of just how far right they are.
Nebraska is not alone in this display—a nativity scene is also displayed in the Illinois Capitol Rotunda and has been since 2008 (the Thomas More Society was also involved in that one). That year, the nativity scene there was also joined by a menorah, a Festivus pole, and a sign containing an atheist message (which was stolen). I didn’t look into what has happened in the intervening years. The Illinois State Legislature is bicameral and has a Democratic majority.
Apparently, this has been framed as a free speech issue and there are several other states that allow it. A quick Google search indicates that Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin (where the FSM made an appearance) have followed suit—there may very well be others that I missed.
Naturally, the tolerance for free speech quickly evaporates when the requesting groups aren’t Christian or Jewish (I’m not going to say Judeo-Christian because given the history of antisemitism that term is misleading at best). For example: Last year, after Hindus, Satanists, and animal rights groups requested permission to add their displays, Oklahoma suddenly decided it had enough and stopped taking requests for more.
I don’t know how things panned out in Oklahoma, but last year Florida rejected a Satanic display as “grossly offensive.” Apparently, they failed to grasp the irony in that: free speech protections are in our Constitution precisely because some points of view are unpopular.
This year, when the Satanists brought along their lawyers, Florida relented. Last month, Slate published quite the snarky (but true) article about the kerfuffles, the title & subtitle of which caused me to LOL:
Thanks to conservative Supreme Court rulings, the government must support the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Satanic Temple.
By the way, the Michigan State Capitol will also be getting a Satanist display, presumably after having taken note of what happened in Florida. It looks like there might be a fight brewing in Texas (this is the first year they approved a display).
Anyway, back to Nebraska now, added emphasis mine:
Nebraska State Capitol DomeThe Chicago-based Thomas More Society has received permission to set up a Nativity scene in the Capitol Rotunda in Lincoln.
The display in the seat of state government represents constitutionally protected free speech and expression of religious faith by private citizens in a public forum, Tom Brejcha, Thomas More Society president and chief attorney, said in a press release. […]
Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers said the display was one of the worst things he has seen happen while a member of the Legislature. It is especially abhorrent because lawyers are doing it, he said. Not one of them could give a cogent argument justifying the placing of a Christian icon in the Rotunda, he said.
“Except for the fact that I am a man who believes in using legal processes to address inappropriate use of state facilities, I would dismantle it and remove it myself,” he said. […]
There is also a question of whether it will open the door to other religious displays in the building.
Um, NO. There is no question that it will open the doors to other religious displays. Precedent has already been set—it’s too late to close the barn door.
The religious right really needs to think things through more carefully. They should also stop wrapping themselves in the flag and claiming to be patriotic defenders of the First Amendment, then putting their hypocritical intolerance on display for all to see—freedom for me, but not for thee is not how it works.
We also prosecuted Japanese Military officials for war crimes for waterboarding, which was known as “The Water Cure” during that period.
Decades before it started waterboarding terrorism suspects, the US government had dramatically different standards for what it considered torture, particularly when it was being done to our soldiers in World War II. Recently released documents detail how the the United States charged hundreds of Japanese military officials and prison guards with war crimes for abuses against American prisoners of war, including waterboarding.
“What the US was calling torture, what it was prosecuting as war crimes [during World War II] were not even close to what has come out in the torture report,” says Shanti Sattler, assistant director at the War Crimes Project at the Center for International Studies and Diplomacy at SOAS, University of London, who fought to have the trove of documents made public.
The torture indictments are documented in the archives of the United Nations War Crimes Commission, which was created in 1943 to classify and identify Axis war crimes and to assist in the prosecution of war criminals. Unlike the Nuremburg and Tokyo Tribunals, which prosecuted major figures from Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan after the war, the UNWCC was set up to help investigate “minor criminals,” and did not have prosecutorial powers. In all, the UNWCC investigated more than 30,000 cases that lead to more than 2,000 criminal trials brought by its member states, including the United States. (The Nuremburg and Tokyo Tribunals collectively held 49 trials.)
Kudos, a thousand kudos.
Mayor Eric Garcetti announced that the initial contract will be for 800 Axon cameras, which cost $399 each and are made by Taser. These initial cameras will be deployed in places with high police activity.
$1.5 million in private money has been raised so far to get this camera program rolling. Garcetti also says that his budget next year will include funding for 7,000 cameras in order to provide one for every single officer walking the streets of LA.
“Out on the street, things aren’t always clear cut. These cameras will help law enforcement and the public alike find the truth — and truth is essential to the trust between the LAPD and the community, which has been a key factor in lowering crime to record lows,” Garcetti says.
The article is very short, so I couldn’t borrow much. It’s… sickening.
Stinney’s trial lasted about 3 hours. According to reports, the defense presented no witnesses, no physical evidence, and did not file an appeal. It took a jury of 12 white men 10 minutes to decide Stinney’s fate.
There’s a good bit more info on his Wiki page.
In a statement Tuesday, Executive Director Kenneth A. Kent said, “At this time of uncertainty, the Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers have been advised by the association to follow the advice of our legal counsel and not issue same-sex marriage licenses until a binding order is issued by a court of proper jurisdiction.”
“I think they’re dead wrong,” said Elizabeth White, one of the Jacksonville lawyers representing Stephen Schlairet and Ozzie Russ, a same-sex Washington County couple who, along with several others, convinced U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle in Tallahassee to overturn Florida’s ban on same-sex marriage in August.
He imposed a stay, however, to give the state time to appeal. Two weeks ago, when the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the state’s request to extend the stay beyond Jan. 5, gay-rights activists began planning celebrations for what many believe will be a flood of same-sex-marriage applications Jan. 6.
I see the Kennesaw City Council unanimously changed their votes and then went slinking out the back door. Such bravery! Emphasis added is mine:
With a unanimous 5-0 vote Monday, the Kennesaw City Council approved a permit allowing an Islamic prayer center to open in a retail center, reversing its decision earlier this month to deny the request.
The controversial vote came despite protests from a crowd of about 20 people outside City Hall holding signs with the words “Ban Islam” and “No Mosque” and waving American flags before and after the meeting. […]
When Mayor Mark Mathews adjourned the meeting, all the council members left the room quickly through a back door. Mathews remained but said none of the other council members would comment on the change of vote. […]
Councilwoman Debra Williams said in a statement to the MDJ after the meeting that all she could say about changing her vote on the issue was “RLUIPA trumps.” […]
And here are some of the comments from the protesters, the Real Americans™, those patriotic protectors of the Constitution. Their naked bigotry and ignorance—not only about Islam & Muslims, but about the Constitution they claim to honor & protect—is appalling:
Karen Untz, a protester from Cumming, said she was scared of what would happen to the community now that the mosque was allowed in and predicted it would bring Sharia law with it.
“They get a bunch of people in an area, and then they institute Sharia law, and then they beat their wives, et cetera, et cetera. I don’t want to go into all the other terrible things they do,” Untz said. “This is going to start happening all over the state.” […]
Umm, what? Which state did that happen in?
Chris Hill, a protestor from McDonough, said he also thinks the mosque will lead to Sharia law in Kennesaw. […]
Gloria Williamson, a protester from Jasper, called Islam a cult and said it should not be given the freedom religions such as Christianity enjoy.
“It’s a cult. It’s not a religion because they teach hate toward Americans,” Williamson said. […]
So…. as an American Muslim I’m taught to hate myself, not to mention my family members & friends who aren’t Muslim? That’s the first I’ve heard of that—it’s definitely gonna be a problem. The stupid, it burns.
Note in the source article that the captions under the 3rd & 4th photos indicate that the protesters in them are Three Percenters. This hatefulness and outright bigotry is the sort of unregenerate filth that the GOP has willingly allowed into it’s ranks. It’s the same drooling, knuckle-dragging crowd that people like Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer play (and feed their rancid red meat) to. They’re thoroughly revolting, the lot of them.
For anyone who isn’t aware of it, the Three Percenters share “values” with the Oathkeepers. Here’s an article on them by the ADL from back in 2009. There’s another over at the SPLC about a co-founder of the Three Percenters, Michael Brian Vanderboegh. And yet another, this one from 2013 regarding police in Jersey City who had the chutzpah to actually wear patches advertising their allegiance. Yes, that Jersey City, the one right in the middle of the (supposed) East Coast bastion of liberalism, sitting right across the Hudson River from NYC.
If that doesn’t convince you, then listen to the Oathkeepers themselves praise & defend their Three Percenter brethren: donotlink.com
Keep in mind that the antigoverment “Patriot” movement consists of all manner of conspiracy theorists and bigots including, but certainly not limited to, the sovereign citizens movement which is “rooted in racism and anti-Semitism.”
The U.S. Department of Justice should back off its request for Microsoft to turn over a suspect’s digital documents stored on a server in Ireland, or be prepared for other governments demanding documents stored on U.S. servers, the company’s general counsel said.
The DOJ’s ongoing search warrant for email and other documents stored at a Dublin server farm risks exposing U.S. records to foreign law enforcement agencies and foments distrust around the world in U.S. tech companies, Microsoft Brad Smith and a group of allies in the Irish search warrant fight argued.
“Everybody wants to have their rights protected by their own law,” Smith said at a Microsoft-sponsored event in New York City Monday. “Try telling an American that their rights are no longer going to be protected by the Constitution, they’re no longer going to be protected by U.S. law; they’re going to be protected by Irish law or Chinese law or Brazilian law.”
Smith called on the U.S. Congress to pass rules protecting the privacy of email stored in the cloud. The U.S. government and technology companies can find a workable solution to a significant legal issue that pits criminal investigations against personal privacy, he said.
So I guess what you should do if a so called Officer Of The Law pulls you over is drop to your knees and beg for mercy. This is a thug. A shield wearing thug. He has no business being armed yet alone wearing a badge. Out Of Control.
A Texas cop is under investigation after using a stun gun on an elderly man he had stopped for an inspection sticker issue that the officer himself apparently didn’t understand.
Dashcam video from the incident posted by Raw Story, above, shows officer Nathanial Robinson, 23, pull over Pete Vasquez, 76, at Adam’s Auto Mart in Victoria, Texas, as “Under Ground Kings” by Drake blares from the cruiser’s radio.
Vasquez gets out of the car, walks behind it and gestures toward the license plate and to the office of the dealer, where he works. He later told the Victoria Advocate newspaper that he was explaining that the dealer tags on the car make it exempt from inspection.
Victoria Police Chief Jeffrey “J.J.” Craig confirmed to the paper that the car was exempt.
On the video, however, Robinson appears to try to snatch a piece of paper from Vasquez without success. Then, he grabs Vasquez’s arm, twists it behind him and pushes him against the hood of the cruiser. After a brief scuffle, the cop reaches for both of Vasquez’s arms and drags him the ground, out of camera range.
When the cop is next seen in frame, he’s yelling and holding up a stun gun.
Armed and dangerous and getting more so every day. I guess that 76 year old gangbanger was lucky he wasn’t shot. Under investigation. How reassuring.