TheAgitator.com
Saturday Links
Saturday, July 10th, 2010- Another arrest for recording police, this time in New Hampshire. The charges were dropped soon after. This is the second such arrest I’ve seen in New Hampshire. A Nashua man named Michael Gannon was arrested in 2006 for recording police who had come into his own home. Those charges were later dropped, too.
- The miracle of orthodontia.
- Here’s a surprising headline. Remember Radley’s axiom: libertarianism tends to happen to people.
- Why journalists shouldn’t be fired for revealing their personal opinions.
- More federal drug raids in Obama’s post-federal-drug raid America. In San Diego and Saginaw.
- Download the Reason iPhone ap. It’s your chance to put me, Matt Welch, and Nick Gillespie in your pocket. And it’s free!
- William Grigg on a couple of disturbing “new professionalism” moments.
There are few people whose facile support can do more harm to the legitimacy of libertarianism than Lindsay Lohan. So when is Cato’s Tim Lynch inviting her to lunch?
“The miracle of orthodontia.”
Good god! Those teeth looked like the back of a Stegosaurus!
Steve Buscemi should look into that!
In truth I find reporters being sacked like this funny and ,in away,just.Government and media tyes go out of their way to tell us what other’s think and how many are ‘out of the mainstream’.I’m sure that applies to many who post here.They take glee when a private conversation of someone else becomes public then spend days or weeks explaining what this relly means about the person in question.Here’s some advice,if your in office or the media don’t hide your true thoughts for your own personal gain.If fact on of the reasons I read The Agitator is the fact Radley has no problem saying exactly what he thinks.I don’t always agree but I love the honesty.
With friends like Lindsay Lohan and the Cato Institute, who needs enemies?
D’oh, let the neg karm begin …
Re: Will Grigg’s articles
The one in Texas doesn’t count. Most of Texas is a 3rd-world country.
starting at the top, the nh article states, ‘…the charge is likely to be dismissed and/or replaced with another charge, possibly disorderly conduct or obstructing government administration…’
these bureaucrats are just fishing through their files to find something that fits… this is the beauty of having plenty of laws, I guess. the other thing that stands out to me- most of these ‘minors’ are actually adults- they’re victims of a bullshit drinking age.
first article, and I’m already getting agitated!
I’m printing up my ‘free lindsay’ t-shirts and thongs next week.
ironically, she’ll probably pull a robt downey, jr and resurrect her sagging career because of the publicity from this bullshit intrusion into her jerry springer world…
I have met the two men mentioned in the TX article. The younger is an ex-con that did time after stabbing someone, the elder almost stabbed me once because I had caught a turtle fishing near his propery. He took his knife out and stabbed the turtle while it was in my hands (turtles are pests in the area). I would have brought 4 deputies too. The police have responded to that address numerous times. There are two sides to every story.
Will Grigg’s story is INFURIATING. ‘According to the story told by the assailants, it was necessary to subdue the 80-year-old victim forcefully because at one point during the encounter “Threadgill postured as if he were going to strike the deputies.”
besides clubbing this man’s son unconscious, these assholes have probably ruined this man’s quality of life for the rest of his life. elderly people suffering severe injuries don’t typically recover. hip fractures lead to death within 6 months for most people over 80. major shoulder injuries in young people take 6 months to 2 years for recovery.
per witnesses, this appeared to be ‘unprovoked’. the deputies’ reports cited ‘profanity’ with his defensive posture.
I was always taught that societies are judged by how they treat their weakest members- the sick and weak, the young, and the old. I can find nothing (in US history) close to the barbarity displayed by cops the last 10 years. doors are being smashed, kids killed or tazed or taken from their parents, pets killed, grandparents killed or beaten. all for MINOR infractions. trespassing. drugs. profanity.
I’m stunned.
Welcome to the party, Marty. If you’re that upset, remove your support from the system. Try not voting for starters.
if the party has cold beer and people not being total dipshits, I’m in!
I’ve been writing ‘I don’t like any of these assholes’ on my ballots, but I’ll probably stop even doing that much.
as a parent, I’m trying to imagine what I’d do if my kid was slapped and tazed by some asshole cop. as a son of an avid fisherman who doesn’t suffer assholes interfering with his life, I can imagine dad being in the same predicament the guy in texas was in… unbelievable.
Off topic but still worth checking out: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ nephew tasered by hospital security staff while having epileptic seizure.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/clarence-thomass-nephew-tasered-for.html
good link, steamed. horrible treatment of his nephew- i read it to mean that he had a seizure AFTER being beaten and tazed. It’ll be interesting to find out if he has a prior history of seizures.
the link in the blog helps confirm Clarence’s ‘piece of shit’ ranking. I particularly liked the blurb about how he hung a confederate flag in his office when he worked in the AG’s office in Missouri. he’s what people are talking about when they say ‘uncle tom’.
Why the hate for Lohan (not from you, Radley, but the commenters)? She has every reason to detest the system, starting with being gay (bisexual, whatever) and having to deal with endless shit from the government.
Just because she’s a famous dipshit doesn’t mean she deserves to go to jail.
I hate celebrity trials stories and usually ignore them because this is where Americans are at their self righteous worst. The obvious delight everyone takes in the failures or mistakes or just bad luck of others is the real story. It’s like the whole country becomes the angry stupid mob from a south park episode or something.
#8 | Dan- I’d love to hear the other side of this one. ‘felon’ doesn’t mean much to me and sometimes people who are in contact with the govt a lot are just trying to exercise their freedoms.
maybe he is that big of a douchebag, but… at 80 years old, I’m thinking there had to be another way.
8- Are you suggesting the story was misleading/didn’t give the whole story? Or are you justifying the cops’ actions because those guys are ex-cons and were violent to you once? I mean, assuming you’re right about the two, they sound like dangerous idiots, but unless the article misrepresented the story, that has no bearing on how awful the cops were.
Why the hate for Lohan (not from you, Radley, but the commenters)? She has every reason to detest the system, starting with being gay (bisexual, whatever) and having to deal with endless shit from the government.
Just because she’s a famous dipshit doesn’t mean she deserves to go to jail.
Some people like to be picky about allies. Sometimes it has its place, but usually it just winnows the pack down to a handful of ineffectual true believers.
LMNOP, where you been, dude? Not working the night shift at the B&B any more?
I’ve been around. My compy was toast for a few months, and then I got it fixed and went back to Reason H&R to find the comments section…well, not up to its former quality, let’s say. I still lurk occasionally, but lately I’ve been hanging out more at Volokh, Yglesias, and Unreasonable Faith, and waiting out the Obama derangement syndrome.
Oh yeah, and the fucking roof blew off of my apartment building. That was fun. Puts a crimp in the posting.
I’m just saying that the article it making it sound as though these two guys were just hapless joes that were at the wrong place at the wrong time and took severe beating for no reason by the local SO. But these guys may not have been A: as innocent as they are being portrayed B: Not beaten to the degree the article states. If the local deputies acted as awful as that link reported, then yeah they deserve to be punished severely. I hope they are fired, sued, etc. if this all turns out to be completely true events. Here is the link from the local online paper. http://www.newstreamz.com/2010/07/07/two-men-hospitalized-after-theyre-arrested-by-hcso/
The Texas Rangers have been asked (by the sheriff) to begin an investigation, so if the story turns out as reported we will see it when it comes out.
So, yes I am saying there is a chance the whole story wasn’t reported or the events have been exaggerated (injuries, baton used, etc), and we will hopefully know once the outside investigation is concluded.
Just because she’s a famous dipshit doesn’t mean she deserves to go to jail.
I think people who are repeatedly arrested for driving under the influence might deserve to go to jail. Of course, that’s conditional and there are lots of ways of dealing with serial DUI offenders, but it’s not like she’s going to jail just for using drugs or alcohol.
How the fuck did the roof blow off your building?!?
While you may not find H&R to be what it was, I for one would like to see you come back. Maybe you could help raise the discourse there. Also, you are a pervert and a weirdo if you can go without your computer for a few months. I mean, really, what did you do? Read books? Spend time with real people? (shakes head)
Dan, are you connected with the resort next door? Were you on the condominium property when you caught the turtle?
Did you happen to notice that the “underlying offense” was cussing? Are you aware that the eye witness to this, unrelated to the Threadgills, has stated that the deputies came over to the condo property from the resort property and immediately put hands on Mr. Threadgill, based on a report from ONE witness. How many times have you seen police arrest someone on a Class C misdemeanor unwitnessed by the peace officer? Moreover, class C misdemeanor’s are generally handled by citations, not arrest. Even then, the officer issues only when they witness the offense.
As far as that news story is concerned, it’s merely a press release for the Sheriff’s department.
Insofar as your claim that Robert Threadgill is a convicted felon, that’s interesting considering that he was once a Hays County reserve deputy.
The Sheriff didn’t do jack until local activists got involved. Now he is in CYA mode.
I think that we are going to find out that the resort hires these deputies for events and that they have become its bully boys.
How the fuck did the roof blow off your building?!?
Negligence of the landlord. There was a fifty-odd year old roof sealant job that had cracked in several places (and had leaked a few times in storms), that he just kept patching. Then we had a freak thunderstorm that ripped the whole roof (down to the ceiling insulation) right off with a gust of wind, such that it landed in the front parking lot. It happened at 3 AM, too, for maximum fun. Better yet, the landlord didn’t comp a hotel room or even really respond to the situation until three days later, by which time the apartment was completely unlivable, and the water had seeped down from my apartment to the second floor apartment and the antique and rare bookstore on the first.
The upside was that we were lucky enough to find a new apartment in a lower income neighborhood for nearly 200 less a month that was nicer and had better access to local shops (including a kickass Italian bakery).
While you may not find H&R to be what it was, I for one would like to see you come back. Maybe you could help raise the discourse there.
Eh, I appreciate that. :) I probably will come back eventually. it’s just that other topics (like religion and atheism) have been capturing more of my interest/attention lately.
Also, you are a pervert and a weirdo if you can go without your computer for a few months. I mean, really, what did you do? Read books? Spend time with real people? (shakes head)
Hell, I still don’t have a cell phone. Yeah, I read a helluva lot during the offline months.
Oh, and another thing, are you sure that the son who was present is a convicted felon? If you know so much about this family, tell me how many sons there are.
I think people who are repeatedly arrested for driving under the influence might deserve to go to jail.
There’s nothing criminal (in the libertarian sense of the word) about driving with a particular blood alcohol level. Who is the victim?
There’s nothing criminal (in the libertarian sense of the word) about driving with a particular blood alcohol level. Who is the victim?
Because the correlation between a particular BAC (albeit one significantly higher than the .08 standard) and fatal car accidents is pretty remarkably strong; it’s reasonable from a policy point of view to regulate something that so reliably harms others, even if in any given individual case it is possible that no harm will transpire. Harm to others is a foreseeable, fairly direct consequence of the behavior.
For a similar example, do you think it should be illegal to fire a firearm randomly into the air? If not, why not?
Firing a firearm into the air is reckless because it is utterly random; one’s skill with a firearm has no effect on the harm it can cause. However, different people have different capacities to drive safely while intoxicated, which is why a standard BAC is ridiculous.
The punishment meted out for driving while intoxicated is radically disproportionate to the harm caused (i.e., none, normally), as well. Studies have shown that talking on a cell phone causes a lack of attention on a similar level to moderate intoxication. Why then does driving with a .085 BAC get your license revoked for 6 months and forces you to go before a judge, while talking on a cell phone gets you a citation? Oh, I know why: it’s all revenue generation, but demonizing “drunk drivers” is popular and no one squeals (except them) when you put the screws to them.
the link in the blog helps confirm Clarence’s ‘piece of shit’ ranking. I particularly liked the blurb about how he hung a confederate flag in his office when he worked in the AG’s office in Missouri. he’s what people are talking about when they say ‘uncle tom’.
Hey Marty, before you start calling people pieces of shit you might want to get your facts straight. Thomas never hung a confederate flag in his office. How many Thomas opinions have you read anyway? Check out his concurrence in the recent McDonald decision and then come back to me with some actual evidence of him being an Uncle Tom.
‘dui’ has become a catchall, kinda like ‘resisting arrest’. they issue dui’s for guys on riding mowers… the effects alcohol has on people is never the same. I’ve seen people walk with .40, which would probably leave me dead. to me, there has to be a concrete violation- driving erratic, speeding, running a stop sign, etc.
the firearms analogy doesn’t work for me because people can’t drive their cars ‘randomly’…
the firearms analogy doesn’t work for me because people can’t drive their cars ‘randomly’…
They do when they’re sloshed…
different people have different capacities to drive safely while intoxicated, which is why a standard BAC is ridiculous.
I agree, but I don’t see a reasonable policy alternative. A person’s tolerance to alcohol and intoxication’s objective effects on skill-competence varies wildly over time and different conditions, so it can’t really be calibrated to each individual’s actual capacities.
The punishment meted out for driving while intoxicated is radically disproportionate to the harm caused (i.e., none, normally), as well. Studies have shown that talking on a cell phone causes a lack of attention on a similar level to moderate intoxication. Why then does driving with a .085 BAC get your license revoked for 6 months and forces you to go before a judge, while talking on a cell phone gets you a citation?
I agree.
Oh, I know why: it’s all revenue generation, but demonizing “drunk drivers” is popular and no one squeals (except them) when you put the screws to them.
It’s easy to paint a demon over an actual demon. MADD and various shrill nannies aside, I think that most people by-and-large would nonetheless come to agreement that drunk driving is dangerous enough to be penalized by law.
There’s nothing criminal (in the libertarian sense of the word) about driving with a particular blood alcohol level.
Oh, I completely agree, that’s why my comment was so heavily qualified. I believe Ms. Lohan was in a few accidents while DUI, making jail in her case somewhat more justified.
I think that most people by-and-large would nonetheless come to agreement that drunk driving is dangerous enough to be penalized by law.
I makes me uncomfortable penalizing people for “potential harm”. And my discomfort is borne out by the extent to which any quasi-crime charge is immediately and extremely abused by the police. Penalize people if they cause harm. If you want to pull over someone who is driving erratically and then require them to get a ride home, but not arrest them (with arrest possible if they then continue to drive), that wouldn’t be bad. But DUI violates so many principles–presumption of innocence, quotas for police, dubious measurement devices, and so on–that it is, and has become, merely a vehicle for revenue and harassment.
clubmedsux-
I checked out the McDonald decision and it is impressive. I haven’t read a full opinion from any justice since college. To me, Thomas has almost always been aligned with Scalia (and Renquist when he served), was a drug warrior, increased police and presidential power, and has generally disappointed. He is not my least favorite justice, but he’s not making me proud. his refusal to file class action suits while in the eeoc was admirable, but he allowed many legitimate cases to lapse due to refusing the file them in a timely manner, which was his job. the sexual harassment allegations raise a flag, also.
Thanks for the clarification on the confederate flag, I regret posting that misinformation. this, the naacp opposition to his nomination, and his bullshit racism complaints during the anita hill hearings were the basis for my ‘uncle tom’ comment. I’ll look back on this tomorrow.
I stand by ‘piece of shit’. but he’s not lonely, that’s for sure.
#32 | Elemenope
there’s a HUGE difference between dui and dwi. if someone’s driving their car ‘sloshed’ they’re breaking some laws- weaving, speeding, etc. you must be in control of your car.
‘I agree, but I don’t see a reasonable policy alternative.’ the reasonable alternative is to look for people breaking traffic laws and pull them over, not set artificially low bac levels and set up alcohol and drug checkpoints.
restrictive alcohol laws (increasing drinking ages, lowering bac levels, dui checkpoints) haven’t made us safer, but they sure have contributed to an erosion in our rights.
Jerri Lynn Ward,
No, Im not with the lodge-I hope they go under, and yes I was on the condo property when I caught the turtle (not sure relevance there).
I called some friends who live at Marina Circle, and they basically said yes the cops came out and beat the crap out of the Threadgills. The version was not exactly the same as Grigg’s but pretty close and in the end the cops beat on an 80 year old man and his son for really no reason other than the lodge next door doesn’t like Robert. So, I hope the Texas Rangers do a thorough job investigating the case and the deputies are held accountable. Hays CSO deputies are very professional every time I personally deal with them, so I hope these are just bad apples that get fired and not indicative of a new trend with that department.
Also, my apologies to Stephen regarding the ex-felon comment. I had him confused with his brother bobby that move away. I have never met Stephen.
We need a Reason Android App!
Dan, thank you for the information. I do agree that Robert should not have stabbed the turtle in your hand, but some of the information we have obtained deals with frequent trespassing on condo property by guests at the Lodge, and I was reacting to that.
Your friends confirm some of our suspicions. I don’t know if we have talked to them yet. If not, we would like to do so.
Marty- I used to think the way you did, but I think Thomas has really distanced himself from Scalia. You mention Thomas being a drug warrior, but he dissented in Raich (unlike that gutless supposed states’ rights champion Scalia, who penned the majority opinion). Anyway, I just get really uncomfortable with the term “Uncle Tom” because it seems to mean “doesn’t comport with the majority view of how blacks are supposed to protect their own interests.” You can obviously disagree with decisions he’s made, but if you’re a fan of individual liberty Thomas is the greatest champion we have on the bench (though he’s certainly not perfect by any means). And many folks ’round these parts–myself included–happen to believe that expanding civil and economic liberties are the best means of creating equal opportunities for minorities. We’ve tried government meddling since the emancipation and we’ve seen how well that turned out.
Libertarianism happens to me every time I read The Agitator.
I think there’s a genuinely hard problem underlying the dui/dwi argument, involving doing stuff that puts others at some risk they didn’t agree to. This is especially hard in the case of judgement-proof people–when I own nothing but the explosives I’m mixing up in my apartment for fun, it’s going to be hard to sue my estate for damages after I blow up the building.
It’s pretty clear to me that some kinds of potential harm/imposing risk pretty much have to be made illegal. (What if your hobby is dueling with machine guns in crowded malls?)
The question is where to draw the line between imposing risk on others as a criminal matter (I guess stuff like reckless endangerment) vs. just letting your victims sue you for whatever harm you do. Some of the stuff we come down hardest on (DWI/DUI, for example) is both an imposition of risk on people who don’t want it, and also an opportunity to campaign against a related social evil (public drunkenness, the demon rum, smoky bars with loud music, whatever).
But I don’t think we can entirely get rid of that kind of law, even in a libertarian society. Letting people decide what risks to take for themselves is *very* different from letting them decide what risks to take for me.