Wednesday Open Thread

Our last open thread is full, here's a new one. All topics welcome.

On James Foley's kidnappers: Before "the Beatles", there were the Belgians. Lots of dots to connect.

The latest victim of police "walking while black" syndrome: Hollywood producer Charles Belk, who was stopped while walking from a Beverly Hills restaurant to his car to feed the parking meter. He was stopped by police who thought he might be a bank robber, arrested and held for 6 hours. After viewing the robbery tape, police determined he looked nothing like the robber and released him, with a half-hearted apology. In his own words, on FB.

< Potential New Audio of Michael Brown Shooting
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Girl, 9, kills shooting instructor. (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 07:49:23 AM EST
    Saw this (none / 0) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:02:40 AM EST
    So sad.  Not the child's fault.  

    What kind of parents (5.00 / 5) (#6)
    by jbindc on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:06:08 AM EST
    Think it's OK for a 9 year old to be trained on an Uzi?

    Gun nuts (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:13:49 AM EST
    What kind of shooting range owner and instructor (5.00 / 5) (#12)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:21:47 AM EST
    would think a novice 9 year-old capable of firing an Uzi?  

    More (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by jbindc on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:42:50 AM EST

    Ronald Scott, a Phoenix-based firearms safety expert, said most shooting ranges have an age limit and strict safety rules when teaching children to shoot. He said instructors usually have their hands on guns when children are firing high-powered weapons.

    "You can't give a 9-year-old an Uzi and expect her to control it," Scott said.

    Sounds like the instructor may have been negligent here too.


    That he was negligent is extremely obvious. (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:52:47 AM EST
    Duh.  Idiots with guns.

    A shooting range instructor (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Zorba on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:38:17 PM EST
    who is a prime candidate for the Darwin Award.  Think of it as evolution in action.
    The saddest thing is that the girl will most likely be scarred psychologically for life.
    Idiot instructor.  Idiot parents.

    I wondered the same (4.50 / 6) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:25:07 AM EST
    The irony is the perents were so proud of how cute she looked with her Uzi they were videoing when she shot and kill the instructor.  They should be forced to watch it every day for the rest of their lives.  IMO.

    And (4.25 / 4) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:29:31 AM EST
    She should be removed from their care permanently.
    But it's to late.  She's fvcked.

    Probably for life. Can you imagine? (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:52:50 AM EST
    Not completely; she's alive. (none / 0) (#55)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:25:38 PM EST
    And there's one less idiot on earth.

    While my sympathy (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:39:54 PM EST
    For the guy is somewhat limited, clearly he did not follow procedure, he was just a guy.  Probably not the devil.  
    I do wonder if in the process of making the, she's so cute with the Uzi, video he was perhaps asked by the parents to let the child handel it. Because it's, you know, so cute.

    Jackie (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:35:30 PM EST
    You seem to have a problem with my train of thought.  2 questions.  Do you think the parents bear any blame for the death of the man an the trauma to the child and second do you not believe the 9 yo who blew a mans head off 3 inches from her own is now most likely fvcked for life?

    Tea party (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:22:15 AM EST
    types and these open carry nuts.

    While we are on the subject (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:08:58 AM EST
    After fatal shooting of panhandler in wheelchair, driver leads police on I-95 chase

    A driver pulled up to a ramp onto Interstate 95, got out, pumped several bullets into a popular panhandler in a wheelchair, then sped away -- leading police on a 20-minute chase on residential streets and Interstate 95 before he was captured.

    Miami-Dade police took the shooter into custody before noon Tuesday, but did not release the victim's name or give a motive for the killing, which took place at the southbound ramp from Northwest 95th Street to I-95.
    The victim, though not identified by police, was well known to those who lived in the area and those who use the exit ramp. Some who gathered at the shooting site said the panhandler would go about his business, not particularly bothering anyone. He spent most days wheeling his way up and down the street just off the sidewalk, smiling, holding out his cup and asking for loose change.

    Very Popular Place (none / 0) (#36)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:01:47 AM EST
    Ranked #1 of 575 Attractions in Las Vegas

    The girl fired the weapon at the outdoor range that caters to heavy tourism traffic along U.S. Highway 93 between Las Vegas and the Grand Canyon Skywalk.

    Highway signage and Internet advertising beckons visitors to stop in, fire a machine gun and enjoy a meal at the Bullets and Burgers enterprise at the Last Stop, about 25 miles south of Las Vegas.

    The Bullets and Burgers website markets a unique shooting experience for customers.

    "Our guests have the opportunity to fire a wide range of fully automatic machine guns and specialty weapons," the website states. "At our range, you can shoot FULL auto on our machine guns.

    "Let `em Rip!"

    Las Vegas Review Journal


    Joshua says an Uzi in a video game (none / 0) (#102)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:01:27 PM EST
    Kicks too and can get out of control.  He has never fired a real Uzi, nor will he as a minor.

    Very sad story, even sadder now.  I could ask what all the adults in this situation were thinking, but where this country currently is in the gun debate it's fecking pointless and a waste of energy to ask anybody anything.


    F' A$$holes (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 08:24:08 AM EST
    The LAPD morons who arrested (and humiliated) Charles Belk should be fired. It took them 6 hours to look at the video of a bank robber who looked nothing like Mr Belk, save for he was black.

    Arresting someone for walking while black should be a crime.

    Maybe not a crime. But an excellent (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:00:55 AM EST
    Federal civil rights claim for money damages. (And the city will be paying plaintiff's attorney fees.)

    When civilians... (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by kdog on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:06:10 AM EST
    break crimes all we hear about is deterrent...we must set an example!  We must deter others!

    Where's the deterrent when the law breaks the law and the victim's only recourse is to sue the lawbreaker's employer, who pays off with other people's money?  

    Equality under the law would seem to demand that either all victims only recourse is to sue, or all lawbreakers face criminal justice.


    Yes That too! (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:05:59 AM EST
    Eyewitness (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by vicndabx on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:10:32 AM EST
    A witness then positively identified Belk as the second suspect, according to the news release.



    Eyewitness Testimony is Unreliable (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:44:09 AM EST
    Which would also apply (3.00 / 3) (#34)
    by jbindc on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:53:36 AM EST
    to the people in Ferguson....

    Seriously? (3.60 / 5) (#41)
    by sj on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:57:12 AM EST
    That's your "conclusion"? Relating one's view of an event is a completely different thing from positively identifying the actors in those events.



    Um, (3.00 / 3) (#46)
    by jbindc on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 01:16:12 PM EST
    I know you have reading comprehension abilities, although apparently you aren't using them today.

    As Squeaky so nicely pointed out, and linked to Jerlayn's many comments, eyewitnesses are inherently unreliable.  

    That DOES include the people in Fegruson.  Not because they mis-identified the actors (as you seem to think) - but because they may not be totally accurate in their accounting of the events.

    Seems you got a little bit of squeaky-brain freeze on you.


    No disagreement from me (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by sj on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 01:33:33 PM EST
    About eyewitness misidentification being a big problem. But it is a MUCH larger problem when related to identification of people/individuals rather than events.

    What should happen to get a fuller picture of an event is to get the perceptions of as many people as possible (e.g. the elephant's ear, the elephant's trunk, the elephant's leg...  you get the picture) and then, from all those data, build a comprehensive picture. Can you see how that doesn't work when ID'ing a suspect? Can you see how those are completely two different things with two completely different sets of problems?

    I don't see a single person here who has declared that a witness exists who knows exactly what happened that day. Nor has a witness come forward who says he or she has the total picture.

    Your trying to impeach everybody's story because no one can believe their lying eyes is actually kind of reprehensible.


    Remembering Faces (4.25 / 4) (#47)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 01:24:09 PM EST
    Remembering a face and remembering that someone was shooting at you are entirely different things.

    The former, shaky and proven to be unreliable.

    The later, unmistakably etched in sometimes mind.

    To conflate the Police arrest of Charles Belk by the LAPD and minimize it by saying Police make mistakes... big deal.

    to challenge the eyewitness accounts of the shooting of Michael Brown by PO Wilson by suggesting that people are bad at remembering faces is a load of BS.


    But then you have the widely-disparate (none / 0) (#81)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:23:31 PM EST
    "Ear-witness" accounts in the apistorious trial.

    Try Reading Before Making Stupid Comments (3.00 / 2) (#39)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:10:53 AM EST
    In your ongoing quest to defend the police you have once again misrepresented a fact.

    Eyewitness testimony relates to the fact that Identifying the suspect by eyewitness is not dependable.

    First link:

    Columnist Ronnie Polaneczky writes about three men in the Philadelphia area who were arrested on the basis of mistaken identifications.

    Second link:

    Columnist Ronnie Polaneczky writes about three men in the Philadelphia area who were arrested on the basis of mistaken identifications.

    Third link:

    Eyewitness identification procedures often cause victims to believe with certainty that their mistaken identifications are correct.

    Fourth link:

    Problem is, confidence in the accuracy of an identification doesn't correlate with actual accuracy

    Belk (5.00 / 5) (#9)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:13:18 AM EST
    'The Beverly Hills Police Department regrets the inconvenience to Mr. Belk, but was under obligation to thoroughly verify that he was not the suspect before releasing him,' the statement from the police read.

    Hows about doing that before he is arrested, fingerprinted and thrown in a cell.

    However, referring to the continuing troubles nationwide, Belk said that the 'time has come for a change in the way OUR (sic) law enforcement officers 'serve and protect' us.

    Yep -- it's long overdue -- and should not be limited to blacks but include kids that answer the door with wifi controllers, girlfriends of cops, kids carrying toy guns, people with wrong addresses swatted in their homes ... and dogs.

    The Belk Arrest

    When people start buying guns (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:19:47 AM EST
    To protect themselves from the police instead of the "gubment" (and if this continues they will) I wonder if the 2nd amendment lunatics will be as excited about "protection"

    Huh? (none / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:26:55 AM EST
    When people start buying guns To protect themselves from the police instead of the "gubment" (and if this continues they will) I wonder if the 2nd amendment lunatics will be as excited about "protection"

    Isn't that why people buy guns? Isn't the Police and the government the same entity?

    I, for one, have never seen a difference.


    Well, it would be interesting to see (4.67 / 3) (#51)
    by scribe on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 01:56:15 PM EST
    The thing is, a couple weeks ago the people of Missouri passed perhaps the most aggressively pro-gun version of the 2nd Amendment as an amendment to the then-existing version in their state Constitution.  Under just about any reading of that provision, as adopted, the people of Ferguson would have been perfectly within their rights to have been carrying just about any legally-ownable gun, openly or concealed, in the streets during their protests.  A fortiori, they would have been well within their rights to sit on their front porches with a shotgun or AR on their lap.

    Now, what do you think would have happened if they had actually exercised those rights?


    I inadvertently hit send too soon (5.00 / 3) (#53)
    by scribe on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:07:17 PM EST
    And left out part of my comment.

    There is a deeply held, sincere belief held by many people - white and black and otherwise - that the government is not worthy of trust and looks for any pretext to grab power and curtail rights.  This is not only in the context of "Obama's gonna grab your guns" but also in seeing how the government uses the rest of the Constitution as so much toilet paper.  The main differences between those people and the people in the streets in Ferguson are (a) the majority of the people not out in the streets still believe they have something to lose if they were to go, (b) the majority of police and local governments are not as thoroughly corrupt as Ferguson and St. Louis County are showing themselves, (c) the majority of people have not yet been disabused of the notion that their government employees, especially cops, are not their oppressors but rather believe that with a little talking their good faith will make it all right, and (d) they don't have any idea of what to do to fix it, other than throw up there hands.  To be sure, there are a smaller number of racists, greater and lesser in their degree of venom, but they make noise far out of proportion to their numbers.

    Still, there is a reason there is still (since Sandy Hook) an ongoing shortage of some types of ammunition in the civilian market nationwide even though the ammunition plants are going full-tilt.  It is easing, but not over - you can't get .22 for love or money in a lot of places.  They don't believe their government's protestations of good intentions and do believe the worst about it.


    Well events in Ohio clearly show that (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:37:10 PM EST
    open carry is only for white people.

    Earlier this month, police gunned down John Crawford III, an African-American man, inside an Ohio Walmart. Allegedly, Crawford was waving a gun around - but a lawsuit claims differently.

    The weapon turned out to be a pellet gun that Crawford seemed to plan to purchase from the store. link

    Ohio is an open carry state. White men can walk around with their AK47s in open carry states without any problem. Black man cannot walk through a Walmart with a toy gun without being killed by police. But of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with race.


    Really? (none / 0) (#60)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:55:32 PM EST
    Yes, really (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:27:39 PM EST
    A man carrying a gun began stalking a children's baseball game in Forsyth County, Ga, this past Tuesday night. It's reported that at least twenty-two 911 calls were made mostly by parents fearing for the safety of their children. The game was halted, but the sheriff said they could do nothing - the man was within his legal limits.

    HOUSTON -- A small meeting of a group seeking tougher gun laws was interrupted Saturday at a suburban Dallas restaurant when the woman who helped organize it saw something outside that startled her: at least two dozen men and women in the parking lot with shotguns, hunting rifles, AR-15s and AK-47s.
    Gun rights advocates have been gathering in public places with their firearms to try to convince people that the carrying of unconcealed guns in broad daylight should be no cause for alarm. But such displays do indeed frighten many, even in a gun-friendly state like Texas, and the so-called open-carry gatherings have grown bigger, bolder and more problematic for the police and city officials.

    On Wednesday, the social media-savvy Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America began sharing images of men carrying semi-automatic rifles inside Target stores, including in Texas, where the group Open Carry Texas held a recent demonstration to point up the right under state law to display such guns in public.

    In August, guns rights groups celebrated a "Starbucks Appreciation Day" by flashing their guns in Starbucks stores that allowed firearms.

    Chipotle is asking customers not to bring firearms into its restaurants after gun-rights advocates brought assault-style weapons into a downtown Dallas store during the weekend.
    "We had all different types of long-guns, some people had shot guns. I personally carry an AK-47," Clark says. "There were a few AR-15′s there. The rifles were loaded. There's no reason to carry an unloaded weapon -- it wouldn't do any good.

    Well, I guess if Crawford (none / 0) (#69)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:36:35 PM EST
    was doing the open carry demonstration things you describe here, and was shot for it, I guess I'd see your point.

    But he wasn't, just like the guy I linked to.

    In fact, if you are saying black people can't do open carry in Ohio, but white people can, how do you explain this guy? Or this guy?


    C'mon Sarc (5.00 / 2) (#77)
    by vicndabx on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:16:53 PM EST
    Did you read the two stories? One guy is shot buying a toy gun, the other, your story, shot after being pulled over in a car with a license plate problem.

    The only similarity here is the amount of force used.

    You surely aren't making a literal point that white people get shot too? Methinks MO's point had a little more nuance than that.


    I don't think that is being said (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:47:13 PM EST
    In any case what I would say is that when they do they are going to get a very different reaction.  From the public and police.  alarmed white people called the police in Walmart and I somehow suspect when those people were wandering in and out of restaurants with assault weapons the reaction, if they were black and scary, would have been more than annoyance.

    From Mo Blue's first quote. (none / 0) (#73)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:54:00 PM EST
    A man carrying a gun began stalking a children's baseball game in Forsyth County, Ga, this past Tuesday night. It's reported that at least twenty-two 911 calls calls were made mostly by parents
    22 is a lot of calls. The photos of him show a white dude.

    Maybe, at this point, MO Blue could say something like "OK, I overreached." That would be the reasonable thing to do, imo.


    Didn't overreach at all (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:21:36 PM EST
    Those photos show him as a white dude that was still alive because the police refused to take any action based on the 22 complaints.

    If the man stalking a children's baseball game with gun in hand was AA, those  22 911 calls would have resulted in an altercation with the police since he would have been viewed as a threat to the children. The threat of black man with gun would have justified the use of deadly force if he even tried to argue his right to keep his gun.


    Well events in Ohio clearly show that (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:37:10 AM PST
    open carry is only for white people.
    I linked to two photos of black men openly carrying on Ohio's Open Carry FB page.

    They clearly show that open carry is NOT only for white people.

    And, here's a white dude in Texas that got his guns taken away from him while trying to open carry.

    But, whatever, if you can't be reasonable enough to reconsider your claim that's no skin off my nose.


    Wow (5.00 / 2) (#94)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:50:49 PM EST
    Hard to imagine that you actually are arguing that Black people are treated exactly the same way as white people in the US, and by the police no less.

    All I can say is you must have a blessed life to be so blind to the daily injustice that goes on every day for people of color living in the USA.


    Way to make things up. (none / 0) (#96)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:53:47 PM EST
    Make Things Up? (none / 0) (#101)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:59:23 PM EST
    Well what are you arguing then?

    You appear to be arguing that the police treat Black and White people the same regarding open carry laws.

    Or is it that the case by case examples that have come up here are bad examples?



    Duh? (none / 0) (#107)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:21:53 PM EST
    I finally get it...  How could I have been so dense.

    All the people who are arguing that PO Wilson was justified to kill Michael Brown know that Black people are treated unfairly by the police on a routine basis in the US. And that racism is commonplace in America.

    It is just that in this particular case the police acted fairly and without prejudice.


    Two sides to every story: (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:51:16 PM EST
    I found this link and this link, both of which report that the guy was considered a threat, and that's why he had his gun confiscated.  

    You're kidding, right? (none / 0) (#98)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:56:38 PM EST
    A white guy was decided to be a threat, and his open carry guns were taken away and he's being charged.

    I thought white guys could open carry?


    You can open carry if you follow the laws. (none / 0) (#103)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:02:51 PM EST
    Apparently this guy was perceived as a threat.

    Apparently so was Crawford. (none / 0) (#106)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:18:20 PM EST
    Wow a personal tale on a person's Facebook (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:57:23 PM EST
    page. I am really impressed with what you consider proof.  Not even a picture of the cop taking his weapon. Just a picture of him with a gun.

    If you can't be honest enough to post the detail that the cop claimed the white man pointed his gun at him or fail to state that's the only proof you are providing is someone's personal account on Facebook,it goes to your credibility, not mine.


    Angel posted links to news reports (1.00 / 1) (#105)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:12:14 PM EST
    corroborating the guy's story.

    The cop claimed the white guy pointed the BB gun at him, the cops in the Crawford case claim he didn't drop the air rifle when instructed to do so.

    How dare you be so dishonest as to not post that detail.


    No, my links did not corroborate his story (none / 0) (#112)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:38:51 PM EST
    entirely.  He used this language on his FB post:  

    if someone is offended more or less

    Not quite the same thing as this, which is what was reported by others:  

    The sergeant said authorities received calls from shoppers who said they were "very afraid" and "terrified" at the sight of the weapon.

    Enough with the nonsense.


    He's a white dude. If he had been black he (none / 0) (#74)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:58:13 PM EST
    more than likely would have been shot.

    BTW you seemed to forget one rather (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:31:11 PM EST
    Important detail.

    The officer claimed that the man pointed the gun at him out the window of his car after being pulled over during a traffic stop.


    Common Thread? (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:34:44 PM EST
    Well there may be a common thread after all.

    In both cases the Police version was essentially that the guy was waving a gun around.

    But we do not have a video of the guy with the BB gun, so it is hard to tell if the Police were lying about that one too.


    Exactly. (none / 0) (#92)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:47:55 PM EST
    A black dude and a white dude both have absurdly non-lethal air powered "toy" guns ("Careful, you'll put your eye out.") and both get shot to death by the police.

    There is video of the white guy getting shot, his daughter said he was trying to give the BB gun to the officer.


    Oops, he was 64. Not middle aged. (none / 0) (#61)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:14:23 PM EST
    The new middle-age. (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:29:46 PM EST
    No similarity to the Michael Brown situation. (none / 0) (#62)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:17:27 PM EST
    At all.

    Meant to say the John Crawford case. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:23:56 PM EST
    Well, it was meant to be a response (none / 0) (#64)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:25:39 PM EST
    to the comment it is in response to.

    You do get that, right?


    Of course I do. And I know what MO Blue (none / 0) (#67)
    by Angel on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:29:33 PM EST
    meant as well.  But do you?

    Tanks.... (none / 0) (#52)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:04:22 PM EST
    Or More tanks..

    This is a good thing..

    We should get the NRA down to Ferguson.


    Ask Cliven Bundy (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:33:54 AM EST
    If there is a difference between the police - who he repeatedly deferred to - and the gunpbment.

    Yes in the minds of the right there is a difference between the local police who are likely to defer to them and the gubment who does not.


    I believe Bundy made some distinction (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by scribe on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 01:44:46 PM EST
    between local cops (who his ilk deem to be OK - the county and the sheriff are the highest legitimate form of government and law enforcement, yadda yadda) and the feds (not OK).

    I don't believe that argument has ever held up when tested in court but, like believing the earth is flat, some people continue to buy it.


    What Loons.. (none / 0) (#17)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:35:45 AM EST
    Another incompressible position from the wingnut central.

    I asu e everyone saw this (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 12:03:24 PM EST
    Huey P. Newton Gun Club leads open-carry rally in South Dallas

    When people start arming themselves for protection from the insanely over militarized police and their exploitation I wonder if the coddled white gun nuts will as excited about the second amendment.


    Indeed (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:39:08 AM EST
    If armed resistance to the militarized police occurs it will not be the Cliven Bundys of the world.

    Shades of Professor Louis Gates. (none / 0) (#82)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:28:38 PM EST
    Although I do not recall a witness identifying him. No need. Police arrived while he was in his house!

    Context (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 09:37:20 AM EST
    To understand some of the distrust of police that has fueled protests in Ferguson, Mo., consider this: In 2013, the municipal court in Ferguson -- a city of 21,135 people -- issued 32,975 arrest warrants for nonviolent offenses, mostly driving violations.

    A new report released the week after 18-year old Michael Brown was shot and killed in Ferguson helps explain why. ArchCity Defenders, a St. Louis-area public defender group, says in its report that more than half the courts in St. Louis County engage in the "illegal and harmful practices" of charging high court fines and fees on nonviolent offenses like traffic violations -- and then arresting people when they don't pay. The report singles out courts in three communities, including Ferguson.

    Just like around the U.S., these municipal court fines in Ferguson are for low-level offenses, usually traffic violations. Harvey calls these "poverty crimes." Typically, he says, someone gets stopped for a rolling stop at a stop sign, or for a broken tail light. Then police find other problems.


    Blacks make up 67 percent of the city's population, but are 86 percent of motorists stopped by police. Whites make up 29 percent of the population, but 12.7 percent of vehicle stops.

    "However, this data seems at odds with the fact that searches of black individuals result in discovery of contraband only 21.7 percent of the time, while similar searches of whites produce contraband 34 percent of the time," the ArchCity Defenders report notes.


    Yes (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:06:08 AM EST
    And given the honesty (not) of police in general, particularly when they have a mandate, quota or whatever is driving them, chances are that many of these charges are bogus.

    These are a population group that cannot afford a lawyer to defend themselves.


    No worries (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:17:15 AM EST
    They arrange payment plans

    Black Panther (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:02:25 AM EST
    photographed less than 20 miles from my house


    Oddly nowhere near a polling place

    Wonder What The Panther's Diet Is? (none / 0) (#22)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:07:04 AM EST
    Golden retrievers?

    Wolves go for the golden retrievers (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by scribe on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 01:50:10 PM EST
    I used to go to a fishing lodge in a small town in Canada where people kept their dogs inside at night.  There had been incidents of the local wolves coming into back yards and killing pets in their doghouses/kennels.  And sometimes eating them.

    Where I live now, when people put up posters to advise that their mop-dog Fluffy or their cat Cuddles has suddenly gone missing from the yard, the usual response, sotto voce, is that they are now Coyote Chow.


    I am the worlds sappiest dog lover (none / 0) (#76)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:12:36 PM EST
    Ask anyone.  But nature is out if balance here.  Deer and feral pigs (who can also be dangerous) are over running the woodlands.   The wolves and cats coming back is mother natures way if fixing that.  I don't think a wolf could get into my back yard.  And even if they could I don't think they would.  No reason.  I don't leave food out or give them any other reason to.   And I would bet my eye teeth that a big cat would come no where near.  Now this may be different in places where habitat is limited.  It is not limited here.
    But IMO if we as pet owners need to adjust our lives a bit to help bring some balance back to nature and protect our beloved pets, I can live with that.

    It Was A Joke (none / 0) (#78)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:19:01 PM EST
    Because I know you have goldens...  but were s/he free to roam, I would fear for his or her life..

    My friend in Spain lost two dogs to predators..  they had a great life, free to run and roam for 30 miles or so..  

    the predators were farmers.. they do not like dogs, particularly black dogs (the devil) and they put out poisoned meat to kill them.


    I was really responding to scribe (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:33:41 PM EST
    That was a true comment.  

    And no, I have never and would never allow dogs to roam free.  And not because of big cats or wolves but because people here kill them too.  Sometimes on purpose sometimes not with poison meant for other vermin.

    Very few places in the lower 48 these days where you are far enough away from other people to let a dog roam free IMO.
    But that's just me.  I love my kids too much.  

    There is a hunting cabin I sometimes go to here that fits that bill.   The dogs absolutely love it which is why I go there.  I don't hunt.  Well I love it too.   And even there I would never ever leave them out over night.


    Where we live, (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by Zorba on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:50:08 PM EST
    up on the mountain, there are far too many people who allow their dogs to run free.
    We don't have big cats here, or wolves.  We do have black bears and the occasional coyote.
    Not to mention the idiots who drive up this country road, with a speed limit of 30 mph, at speeds that far exceed this.
    North of here, there is a family who allows their two chihuahuas to run around.  Really?  All it takes is one clueless speeder, or an older person with cataracts who may not see so well, and these dogs will be dead meat.  
    Not to mention that we have hawks, eagles, and owls who would have no problem swooping down and picking up these tiny dogs for dinner.

    My stupid brother in law (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:55:54 PM EST
    Refuses to get a fence.  They always have two or three dogs.  I say two or three because they go through dogs like I used to go through boyfriends.  Almost always lost to speeders.  
    In fact I lived next door to them seven years ago when I saw a beautiful white husky rolled up by a truck and left for dead.  He's sitting next to me.

    I just do not get (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Zorba on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:30:35 PM EST
    this mentality.
    Too many people who seem to think that dogs are disposable.
    There is a guy north of here whose dog is constantly barking.  All day, every day.
    He apparently has this poor dog fenced or chained (maybe chained, given the area I live in, but who knows?).  And he also apparently never brings his dog inside.
    Poor dog!  I haven't been able to identify where the owner lives.  We have lots of houses that are way, way back in the woods.  I don't know what I would do if I could identify him.  
    Well, at least this poor dog isn't allowed to run free.
    But if you're going to own a dog, why would you have it outside all the time?
    The dog may be a hunting dog, and there are people up this way with hunting dogs who leave them outside all the time.
    Still no excuse.  
    I feel sorry for the dog.

    Dogs are wonderful... (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by magster on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:38:43 PM EST
    but they are a lot of work (at least one walk per day, affection, discipline, training, affection). If you can't do it, don't get a dog.

    Sad and true (none / 0) (#91)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:42:44 PM EST
    Just a few days ago I got an email from a dear friend who lives as in the middle of nowhere as you can possibly imagine, you can't even get to her house in a sedan, to tell me that this beautiful boy Elvis, who I had given her 13 years ago had died.
    He was poisoned.

    Oh, that makes me so sad (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by sj on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:57:10 PM EST
    He really was a beautiful boy.

    I had some neighbors who moved to Italy taking their dog. They were very careful dog owners but he (their dog) got hold of poisoned meat while they were taking a nature walk and he was on leash.

    Blessed be, Elvis. And Scopa.


    Probably rabbits (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:08:32 AM EST
    There zillions of them.  Must be the mild wet summer

    Deer, mostly, then wild pig, etc. (none / 0) (#30)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:44:26 AM EST
    That works too (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:50:59 AM EST
    All over populated.  Wolves have also returned.

    Would add (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:05:24 AM EST
    All the result of wiping out the predators.  Good for Mother Nature.  

    one, unfortunately.

    Quick story.

    A few years ago I was running with my dog on a trail in a state park near my house and noticed the dog had found something at the edge of a clearing near some trees by a stream bed and was acting weird so I investigated.

    He had found a deer's foreleg and all the grass in the area was completely stomped down to the ground.

    A few days later I ran into a park ranger and told him what happened, and he said "Did you look up into the tree branches?" I said "No, why?" and he said, "'cuz that is likely where the mountain lion was." "Usually they eat their fill, cover the remains with leaves, and then climb a nearby tree to watch over and protect their meal."

    A little unnerving.


    Last summer (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 12:05:52 PM EST
    The dogs and I were out in the yard after dark and heard the freakiest scream.
    We were all like, WTF.
    We went inside.

    Good decision. (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 12:10:26 PM EST
    Palestinians shouldn't try legal means? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by CityLife on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:14:34 AM EST
    Look at the State Department spokeswoman saying that if Palestinians seek justice by joining the International Criminal Court (ICC) it would "badly damage the atmosphere" with Israel "whom they ultimately need to make peace." Another perverse excuse from the U.S. to hinder efforts to hold Israel accountable for war crimes!
    (I think she is reading a prepared statement, I don't think she thought up this perverse excuse on the spot.)

    Well, the United States is not a member (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by caseyOR on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:10:34 AM EST
    of the ICC. If we joined the ICC we would have to either stop killing at will around the globe, or spend a whole lot of time trying to defend ourselves at the Hague. Our indiscriminate use of drones, for example,  would generate quite a bit of court action.

    We do make use of the ICC when it suits our purposes. Keep in mind, our purposes are never suited by being held accountable for our own actions. And I doubt that our purposes would be suited by having Israel held accountable, as would certainly happen if the Palestinians joined the court.


    Jon Stewart, national treasure (5.00 / 3) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 10:53:43 AM EST
    "Fit The Description" (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:11:19 AM EST
    Reminds me of all the mistaken identities that occurred last year when Christopher Dorner, a black male, was running around killing people on So Cal.

    First the cops riddled a pickup truck with over 100 bullets which was driven by two Hispanic females delivering newspapers, and then they rammed a different pickup truck and fired multiple times at its driver through its window, this truck was driven by a white male who was on his way to the beach to go surfing.

    Neither of the two pickup trucks matched the color nor make/model description of Dorner's truck, and of course none of the people inside the trucks matched Dorner's description.


    Any idea (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:09:54 PM EST
    what sort of settlements the two women and the surfer received from the people of California?

    Says google.

    Discrimination as to the surfer? (none / 0) (#88)
    by oculus on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:36:34 PM EST
    How not to improve relations between (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by Anne on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:31:20 PM EST
    police and the community:

    Pace purchased some tea lights for the family, and around 7 p.m. she joined Brown's mother, Lesley McSpadden, and others as they placed the candles and sprinkled flowers on the ground where Brown had died. "They spelled out his initials with rose petals over the bloodstains," Pace recalled.

    By then, police had prohibited all vehicles from entering Canfield Drive except for their own. Soon the candles and flowers had been smashed, after police drove over them.

    "That made people in the crowd mad," Pace said, "and it made me mad." Some residents began walking in front of police vehicles at the end of the block to prevent them from driving in.

    Where ISIS Gets its Playbook (none / 0) (#57)
    by RickyJim on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 02:28:53 PM EST
    According to this article, they are trying to imitate the behavior of the founders of Wahhabism, Abd al-Wahhab and Ibn Saud in the period 1741-1818.  This form of political Islam has undergone changes in Saudi Arabia as that country courted the West after the discovery of oil  However ISIS wants a return to the original vision.  This explains why there is a division in the Saudi world among those you support and are fearful of ISIS.

    Imitate? Trying? (none / 0) (#75)
    by squeaky on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 03:59:56 PM EST
    They are not imitation anything..  quite the real thing.

    And yes the Saudi's who have been pouring money into their movement have reason to fear that the monster that they helped create will cut of their heads.


    Michael Sam (none / 0) (#80)
    by magster on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:23:09 PM EST
    Per ESPN:  
    Through three preseason games, Sam -- the first openly gay active player in NFL history -- has five tackles and three sacks. Rams coaches' film review also credits the rookie defensive end with two quarterback pressures and a quarterback hit.

    Has there ever been a player with those pre-season stats who hasn't made an NFL roster? Seems like he should be a lock to make the roster.

    Let's hope you are right (none / 0) (#86)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:34:12 PM EST
    Given your screen name, are you a Rams' fan? (none / 0) (#90)
    by magster on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 04:41:23 PM EST
    What is the sense there?

    And if you are a Chiefs fan instead of a Rams fan, well then, may God have mercy on your soul.


    Evidently I was confused by your comment (none / 0) (#104)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:12:05 PM EST
    Last I heard Sam had not been cut. I thought you were rooting for him to become part of the active team.

    I was rooting for him make the active roaster also. From greater St. Louis area, so definitely not a Chiefs fan.

    But then again, I guess I'm more a fan of Sam then a Rams fan. One hopes that truth and brave acts are rewarded.


    You misunderstood me.... (none / 0) (#108)
    by magster on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:22:49 PM EST
    I was just asking if, as a Rams' fan, if the sense was that he's a lock even before this last preseason game.

    And THEN, I did my best to insult KC fans.


    I don't get a sense that he is a lock (none / 0) (#110)
    by MO Blue on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 05:37:38 PM EST
    Don't claim that I have been following the situation closely but
    some sport writers are betting on Westbrooks for active roster and Sams being kept on the practice squad.

    They are not putting Sam's performance down just claiming that he is caught in a situation were there is just too much talent competing.