Morning Links

Tuesday, November 29th, 2011
Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

48 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  derfel cadarn | 

    As usual the government (FDA) is involved in something that is not their business and based on poor evidence. In the interest of justice the American people should scale back police power and numbers to the levels required for public servants and peace officers. Finally we should should scale back Fedgov. power to the limits vested to it in the Constitution anything less is un-AMERICAN.

  2. #2 |  James | 

    I saw the Concord, CA ticket void story this morning over at injusticeeverywhere.com. The police captain’s argument is such “pining for the fjords” Python nonsense that I had to laugh.

    The captain should himself be in a jail cell for “the interest of justice”, but he will instead be “nailed to the perch” of his office forever.

  3. #3 |  GeneralGarbage | 

    To play contrarian to the contrarians, I don’t see any legal finding of innocence in the sex offender story. It looks like they’re just asserting it despite the rape conviction. If that’s good enough, there should be precisely no one on those lists. I understand that the girl recanted, but I also understand why the law doesn’t give a lot of weight to that.

  4. #4 |  GeneralGarbage | 

    I’ll bet money that there’s a follow up coming to the Concord PD story, as I’m certain some type of action will be taken against the cop that wrote another cop a ticket. In the interest of Justice and all.

  5. #5 |  Joey Maloney | 

    “Nutty, Tea-Party-backed senator proposes crazy-ass amendment to limit the federal government’s power.”

    Hooray for Senator Stopped Clock!

  6. #6 |  V | 

    I don’t see the craziness in wearing thermal underwear. Kind of awkward when a one night stand sees the Red Power Ranger on your thermal undies, but beyond that…

  7. #7 |  marco73 | 

    I have to admit, I am completely astounded that a beat cop wrote a traffic citation to a LT in the same department.
    Notice from the article that the beat cop got to sit down and have a warm fuzzy chat with his SGT, their LT, and the ticketed LT Robin.
    In the interest of justice, after a stern talking to, the beat cop now knows to never, never write up a fellow LEO. And LT Robin will keep her squeeky clean driving record.
    Scalia’s new professionalism in action.

  8. #8 |  bkj | 

    Senator Rand didn’t go far enough, he should have just voted against the bill. We don’t need more “national defense” laws.

  9. #9 |  Mattocracy | 

    Good Job Rand.

  10. #10 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    OK, I’m sure there must be a reason why a factually innocent person cannot win a libel suit against a State that insists on putting his name on a sex offender list. Does anyone know what it is?

  11. #11 |  SamK | 

    Well, there’s a difference between “reason” and “good reason”….

  12. #12 |  Maria | 

    @3 I agree.

    But I think one of the main points of the articles is that there isn’t a clear cut process for getting off these lists – even in clear cut cases where the guy (it’s mostly men on them) is found innocent. Let alone in messy cases.

    There have been a number of cases (I apologize. I don’t have the links right now) where even after dismissal, innocence, or records purge, a person is still found on the list. These lists can be, in effect, lifetime sentences for anyone who ends up them.

    Granted, some assholes deserve worse then a fucking list. But it’s like the fiascoes of the No Fly lists, the process to get a name removed wasn’t considered upon implementation. The admission that a government entity would need to change an action, essentially that it makes mistakes, isn’t even considered. And the criteria to get listed has become looser and more abstract over time.

    In the end, the purpose isn’t to keep society safe from true deviants and sickness, the intentions might once have been noble but the new purpose is to maintain a level of additional control of a segment of the population. And yes, I’m well aware of how that sounds.

  13. #13 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Captain David Downing…acknowledged our request for a comment, he did not answer the question.

    “Wut? Yes, I heardid you.”

  14. #14 |  Joseph Moroco | 

    Let me know who performed Rand’s lobotomy. I’ll get one from the same doctor.

  15. #15 |  a_random_guy | 

    There are all sorts of lists. Like the 130 websites that ICE took down last week – clearly they have a list, but how do you get off of it? No judicial process, no appeals procedure, just punishment without due process.

    Don’t like it? Get a lawyer, and spend years fighting an amorphous foe with unlimited funds and no reason to respond to the little guy.

  16. #16 |  Kutani | 

    A pretty interesting/fun Discordian operation to play on the sex offender registries would be to find some way to put every single person, adult and child, on them. Say, for an entire city, or even state if one were feeling ambitious.

    Then, just watch the system tear itself apart sorting it out.

  17. #17 |  Brandon | 

    Wow, two douchebags with nothing to say baselessly insulting Rand Paul already. Are some of Radley’s HuffPo readers starting to make it over here? I personally can’t see anything wrong with the Senator’s proposal to not directly contradict the Constitution and any notion of justice as discussed in this link. Is there some detail that you two luminaries have seized upon which has escaped my notice? Or is it because Rand Paul is one of those icky libertarians? Or does he just want to coddle the big bad terrorists that keep making you wet your bed every night?

  18. #18 |  Joey Maloney | 

    No, it’s because he’s wrong about nearly everything else besides this. See, a clock that’s stopped will show the right time twice a day, when it just happens to be the time that the clock’s hands stopped at. But, see, that’s not through any positive action of the clock itself, it’s just random chance.

    If you have any further need to have explained to you the literary allusions that the rest of us learned in elementary school, this douchebag stands ready to attempt to relieve your ignorance.

  19. #19 |  Henry Bowman | 

    Brandon (#16): I strong suspect that Radley’s remarks about Rand Paul were meant to be sarcastic.

  20. #20 |  Bob Mc | 

    The Concord, CA PD must be operating under a different definition of the word “justice” than the rest of us.

  21. #21 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    The predictable consequence of the “put em on all The Shit List” mentality:

    “There are nearly 500,000 registered sex offenders across the country and at any one time about 100,000 are unaccounted for.”
    http://www.politifact.com/rhode-island/statements/2011/mar/03/peter-palumbo/palumbo-says-there-are-500000-registered-sex-offen/

  22. #22 |  Pablo | 

    I think sex offender registries are useless (there is no evidence they keep anyone safer), a bad idea (if someone is dangerous then keep them locked up–if they are not a threat then they should be able to move on with their lives); and generally unconstitutional (despite what SOCTUS says they are an ex post facto punishment).

    But I’ll play devil’s advocate as well–there is nothing in that article indicating that this unfortunate kid has any legal standing to demand removal from the registry. If his case was overturned on appeal then he would have a legal right to be removed, and if the state agency responsible for maintaining the registry refused to do so then a writ of mandamus could be filed to force the agency to perform its duty. But simply saying he is innocent isn’t enough.

  23. #23 |  ric_in_or | 

    *Salt*

    There are already problems. How do you get iodine in your diet? It is added to table salt, but not Kosher, Sea or other fancy salts. As a result, more of us who are cooking like foodies, are showing a deficiency in iodine.

  24. #24 |  BamBam | 

    Rand’s proposal fixes nothing, as it is more ink on paper. We already know from thousands of years of history that ink on paper (“law”) means nothing and can do nothing. The Constitution was supposed to limit the federal government, so an amendment to do what the Constitution was supposed to do is redundant.

    The root problem is the belief in authority, that one must be ruled. Strike the Root. Destroy your belief in authority, The Most Dangerous Superstition.
    Authority/government does not grant legitimacy to immoral acts.

  25. #25 |  BamBam | 

    To add to my comment, I realize that Rand’s amendment is an amendment to a bill (yes I read the article). I worded my point poorly. My point still stands about ink on paper.

  26. #26 |  Sailor | 

    Joey, What do you think Rand Paul has been wrong on?

  27. #27 |  Radley Balko | 

    Joey Malone:

    So you’re saying Rand Paul was wrong when he spoke out against renewal of the PATRIOT Act?

  28. #28 |  DK | 

    I think y’all are being too hard on Joey. He’s saying Senator Paul is right 730 times per year.

  29. #29 |  Brandon | 

    Henry, I was talking about Joseph and Joey, not Radley. And Joey, what, specifically, has he been wrong about? His proposal to cut federal spending by $500 billion in his first year? His vote against reauthorizing the Patriot Act? His support for balanced budgets? Or you can ignore my questions again and pretend that they could be interpreted as ignorance, that’s always an effective tactic. If you have actual objections to Paul’s policies, I’d like to hear them. I do, fyi. And I can articulate them, which, per your evasive and puerile response, I doubt you can. He’s a little too much of a social conservative, he’s been evasive on the topic of drug legalization, and he’s a knee-jerk border hawk. But on balance, he’s a better proponent for individual liberty than at least 95% of the US Senate, and he’s been right more often than wrong.

  30. #30 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    #14 | Joseph Moroco
    Let me know who performed Rand’s lobotomy. I’ll get one from the same doctor.

    They won’t do two on the same patient, Joseph.

  31. #31 |  DarkEFang | 

    Personally, I don’t have a problem with Rand Paul, but I do have a problem with some of his more vocal supporters, including: 1) elderly voters who want smaller government until it impacts their government benefits; and 2) idiots who think that being a libertarian means that you can stomp hippies and get rid of all the brown people. The actual libertarians got drowned out by those two constituencies during his run for the Senate.

  32. #32 |  Raoul Duke | 

    I go to partisan liberal sites occasionally and attibute an Obama or other liberal icon’s quote to a Conservative or Republican and then watch the partisans tear it apart…Then I tell them it was President Obama or whomever. It’s great sport.

    Nice job on the Rand reference.

  33. #33 |  fwb | 

    It might be a good exercise to read Ex Parte Milligan (1866).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan

  34. #34 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    So, let’s see if I understand this properly; Girl makes accusations of rape. Boy pleads guilty because his parents are scared he’ll get tried as an adult. Bot is placed on Sex Offender registry. Girl recants, says she claimed rape because she didn’t want her parents to think it was consensual.

    a) Under these circumstances, how does the State justify NOT having a simple 5 minute hearing, and voiding the guilty pleas … aside from the usual ‘that might make the prosecutor Look Bad’?

    b) In ANY case where “Sex offender registry” status is factually inaccurate, for whatever reason, how does that NOT constitute Libel … other than the usual ‘the Law is what we say it is at any given moment’?

  35. #35 |  StrangeOne | 

    I know it may seem callous against many actual victims of rape, but can we please move beyond this whole guilt by accusation process of sex crimes? Can we have some minimum standard of evidence before allowing the state to ruin someones life? This isn’t the Crucible, its 21st century America, is that really too much to ask?

  36. #36 |  JohnJ | 

    As I understand it, striking Section 1031 of the defense bill wouldn’t limit federal power at all. The section “affirms” power that the government already has to detain civilians without trial, and the reason why it affirms it is because this bill removes the power of the President to decide who gets to be detained and who doesn’t. Everyone who gets arrested gets detained. But that’s gotta be contrasted with the current situation, which is that the President gets to decide who gets to be detained.

  37. #37 |  Robert | 

    “Under these circumstances, how does the State justify NOT having a simple 5 minute hearing, and voiding the guilty pleas … aside from the usual ‘that might make the prosecutor Look Bad’?”

    Because that would mean the State would have to admit that it was wrong. And getting anyone in authority to admit that is practically impossible.

  38. #38 |  EH | 

    CSP: If my memories of high school are correct, every single *threat* of prosecution for statutory rape is father-driven, let alone accusations. That she recants once she’s 18 speaks volumes.

  39. #39 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    Captain David Downing was asked what he meant by “in the interest of justice“, and although he acknowledged our request for a comment, he did not answer the question.

    LOL! Of course he didn’t. He can’t admit to what everyone fucking knows: The police are allowed to get away with virtually anything because they are, you know, the police. They have a stressful job and all.

    A little distracted driving now and then never hurt anyone, isn’t that right Captain Downing. This is why Downing and other police brass need to lobby their state legislatures to do away with traffic laws altogether. I mean, if the police are allowed to get away with causing accidents, speeding, running lights, driving while intoxicated, etc, then the rest of us shouldn’t be getting citations for these actions, right. That would be unfair, right Captain Downing. Umm, Captain Downing. Oh Captain Downing and that selective hearing loss of his.

  40. #40 |  FDA wants Mandatory Salt Reductions « BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades! | 

    [...] diet. After all, enjoyment of life must be eliminated for the betterment of the few. H/T: The Agitator for the [...]

  41. #41 |  freedomfan | 

    “in the interest of justice just us
    Fixed the typo.

  42. #42 |  freedomfan | 

    [Aargh. My kingdom for a preview button!]

    “in the interest of justice just us
    Fixed the typo.

  43. #43 |  Mattocracy | 

    Rand is also wrong about being against war, Gitmo, bailouts, ending the drug war, supporting property rights, opposing the patriot act, etc.

  44. #44 |  donttread | 

    Radley

    Rand Paul’s stance on this and many other issues and his Tea Party support argue against your past characterizations of Tea Party members as conventional law and order conservatives. Every movement group, especially one as decentralized as this, will show a broad range of opinions, but there is a strong anti-government streak in most Tea Party types I’ve run into.

    Hopefully you can educate the others.

  45. #45 |  Brutusettu | 

    Your last link reminded me of a TShirtHell shirt featuring some well known Austrian and asking about “What about all the good things [this Austrian) did?”

    And even Glenn Beck couldn’t say something crazy 100% of the time.

  46. #46 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    there is a strong anti-government streak in most Tea Party types I’ve run into.

    Hopefully you can educate the others.

    donttread,
    I agree. I also think RB has been consistent (and right) in advising the TP to drop certain foolish stances and denounce some “leaders” when who are clearly crazy. Personally I have rooted for the TP from the beginning and cautioned friends who are members to be on guard for crazy opportunists. I’d say the TP (and members) have been about 50% successful. So, they are doing about 300% better than Repubs/Dems.

  47. #47 |  NAME REDACTED | 

    The science says that reducing salt increases death risk. Of course the government is anti-science, though.

  48. #48 |  NAME REDACTED | 

    “b) In ANY case where “Sex offender registry” status is factually inaccurate, for whatever reason, how does that NOT constitute Libel … other than the usual ‘the Law is what we say it is at any given moment’?”

    Bingo. We don’t have rule of law.

Leave a Reply