Now if we could go back to some legitimate standards in quality I could see a decent argument being made to let women in as officers, but only so long as they could keep up and fulfill those standards. Of course I’ve also got the same problem with our military, especially with front line solders in the army. Women get away with doing less exercises, less weight and running slower.

I’ve read (and if anyone has studies supporting or contradicting, please post) that female officers tend to be more sucessful at deescalation in the first place: i.e. the situation never comes to require force in the first place. That in itself might be a sexist position, I don’t know. If true though, the problems with physically smaller female officers may be balanced by their other capabilities.

The Crazy Train Polka is also excellent.

I just remember his asst grilling my bro in District Court and his needing three shots of straight Scotch afterwards. No legal violation on his part.

I know I could be dead wrong, but it seems like the same woman police officer who couldn’t hang physcally in sports with her male colleagues is expected to equal their physical prowess when subduing suspects and so forth. It would be criminal if a police officer had to go for their gun, because they’re not strong enough to effectively use non-lethal force. In my crusty ol’ opinion another failure of “equality at any cost” thinking.

I have no sympathy for either the city or the neighboring businesses. They cornholed a business owner, he’s just returning the favor. And the city attorney is going to find himself cornholed over 1st amendment issues unless I miss my guess.

Fact is, police reporting is very dirty fingers, time-intensive work. You need to pay somebody to do it; they won’t do it on their own time, hence the need for newspapers to do it.

This is where J sub D, above at #23 is quite correct in his analysis of why people stop buying local papers. If I want to know what happened in Ottawa or Washington or Paris, no problem, I can get that on the net; the big-picture stuff is always covered. It’s the dirty-fingers local stuff that is what people want in their paper, and it’s what they are first to lose when the newspapers decide what’s “necessary” or “profitable”. I don’t subscribe to my local paper because it’s next-to-fucking useless at this sort of thing. If it wasn’t I’d have it delivered every day and would go through it cover-to-cover before breakfast.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090302/ap_on_re_us/states_rights_stimulus

Could it be not everyone is a zombie?

http://www.policelink.com/news/articles/97253-officer-challenges-officer-involved-shooting-policy?page=3&utm_content=artmini&utm_source=policelink.com

Two incidents… One in 2005, one in 2009.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/blog/2009/02/withholding_names_of_police_wh.html

2005: in a traffic stop, she jumps into the suspect’s car after he shoves her partner into an oncoming car. She then struggles with him in the car, he takes her gun and tosses it out the window. Gun never recovered. All charges against the suspect are later dropped amidst allegations that the police altered incident reports and the other officer involved, Jack Odom, was arrested for assaulting a man outside a Federal Hill pizza shop.
http://www.policeone.com/officer-misconduct-internal-affairs/articles/122862/

That incident report is entirely unbelievable, who jumps into the passenger seat of a fleeing suspect’s car? Yeah, these ain’t dirty cops.

Then the 2009 incident:
Tracey responds to a domestic dispute and is somehow overpowered by a 61 year old man (A little guy, too!) Backup arrives and our brave forces of blue blow the perp away in a hail of gunfire. The weird part? No details of any kind. No statements by witnesses as to what happened. So… where’s the other half of the domestic dispute? Can’t have a domestic dispute with yourself.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-identity0219,0,1887887.story?track=rss

Awesome report, huh? No names. No accountability, no transparancy. Good job, Baltimore! … NOT!

Ah… more details:
“Police said the 45-year-old stepped on Officer Traci L. McKissick’s hand at the direction of his uncle in an attempt to disarm her. The younger Forrest was arrested at the scene and charged with assault and disarming a law enforcement officer. He remains jailed without bond.”
(The ’45 year old’ is a relative of the man killed…)

and:
“A police source with knowledge of the investigation said detectives believe the backup officer’s shot was made at close range and was ultimately the fatal shot. They also believe McKissick fired all of her shots into one of Forrest’s legs, in rapid succession, while she was still engaged with the man.”

These statements are mutually exclusive. What, did McKissick use her Jedi skills to rearm herself? Who fired first?

What really happened?

Ah, fuckitalltohell, you all get the joke anyway.

X(squared) X(to the third power),

and so on. An example:

Where X represents 400 citizens and Y represents 89 citizens, Y > X within this political and social mathematic because “decent” people are worth more than “perverts”, and “perverts” means “anybody who isn’t totally freaked out by their own sexuality or that of others”.

Wouldn’t it be, by community standards, not obscene if the shop is doing well and locals are patronizing it?

Matt, you are forgetting the essential mathematics of American morality laws and enforcement. Permit me to demonstrate:

Where:
* the number of citizens who do not wish to be subject to outdated morality laws or enforcement thereof is represented by X; and
* the number of citizens who are in favour of such laws and enforcement to ensure that their own religious or socio-neurotic views are imposed on the rest of the population is represented by Y, then
Y > X, irrespective of the actual numbers involved. For example:

X2 X3,

and so on.

Anyone can opine. Collecting the basic facts to make those opinions valuable is boring and expensive and is why we need reporters more than editorialists. Unfortunately, everyone likes editorializing more.

“As far as I’m concerned, that corner will always be an eyesore,” Zarlenga said. “That’s a little slice of revenge.” ”

Fitting!

Alexandria Commonwealth’s Attorney S. Randolph Sengel said his office has received enough complaints about the store that he is looking at legal options. Virginia law allows for courts to declare sexual material obscene and to ban its sale, he said.

—Wouldn’t it be, by community standards, not obscene if the shop is doing well and locals are patronizing it?