http://www.gazette.com/articles/department-18502-complaints-officers.html

Does that apply to illegal arrests, or only wrongful ones? A cop who reasonably believes probable cause exists to believe that someone committed some particular act which is, in fact, illegal may legitimately arrest the person; the arrest is lawful whether or not the person actually committed the crime. On the other hand, a cop who does not reasonably believe such probable cause exists may not legitimately arrest a person. Do states impose a duty to submit to such unlawful kidnapping?

Put a big caption: Forget Waldo! Where’s Corbin?

I think that’s way cool.

I’m already in tears over the taxes I pay.

;P

the concern shown here for the poor in regards to the unfair (theoretical) taxes on fortified wine is heartwarming. Where will they get their health benefits from if they cannot afford to consume Mad Dog (in moderation of course)?

The day Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Code Pink) “actually has a pretty good ide” is the day winged primates emerge from my rectum.

The only option is outlaw having a good time because that is in the interest of the greater goods’ productivity. It’s greed of the employee really, and people’s greed causes them to do short sighted things to harm others in the long run.

Wow, so this is the reasoning people use to justify pushing their morals on everyone. Thanks Li, you have enlightened me.

You know, the derivatives/credit/confidence crisis, perhaps you should look into that.

“Spatt replied that as strong as the First Amendment protections are, they are not absolute.

They’re only strong if the courts uphold them.

For example, I rarely drink, so the tax does not effect me to any meaningful degree. However, if history repeats itself, such a tax will create a lot more robberies. That should be fun. I think J sub D is right when he says this will effect the poor far more than the rich. Shoplifting and liquor store robberies will skyrocket!

In addition, people opting to home brew their liquor will go up as well. Moonshining will become popular again. The black market for tax free liquor will mean people not only make it for themselves but they are selling it. It will be the new weed!

Only now, we will have Apache helicopters just lobbing missiles at stills from the air!

Jumpin’ Jesus! We will have the government giving Apache helicopters to local police departments! This is going to be great.

And I will get to watch it all from my couch. At least until a SWAT team busts in and kills my wife and I because they came to Cranberry Street instead of Cranberry Circle. But that’s okay. It will be deemed an honest mistake in which all the cops acted within departmental guidelines and a good American is willing to die so the government can get all their liquor taxes anyway.

America, F*ck Yeah!

As for the alcohol thing, this is not as settled as that NY Times article would have you believe. (http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/101/5/282). There are many errors in these studies, and it’s incomprehensibly difficult to control for the relevant factors. Lastly, as Matt argues, this wouldn’t hit moderate drinkers very hard. It would hit heavy drinkers, and everyone agrees that heavy drinking is bad for you. As for the regressive nature of it, all consumption taxes are regressive. Tax revenue has to come from somewhere and this seems reasonable if the health effect of alcohol are negative (the short term effects certainly are, by the way. It is the long term effects of a very narrow use of the drug that are in doubt here); we can’t oppose EVERY form of tax collection.