Afternoon Links

Tuesday, March 27th, 2012

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

47 Responses to “Afternoon Links”

  1. #1 |  Cynical in New York | 

    RE: Deputy



    Why am I not surprised that they try this bullshit? They do realize that lot of Libertarians believe that the police screwed up the investigation right? I think the Golden Rule of politics has fully taken affect

    RE: Candidate Obama

    At the time he sounded quasi-sane but as most of us knew at the time he was full of bs.

  2. #2 |  Highway | 

    One of the few cops who can pull off mowing in briefs and a tight t-shirt, and they fire him? Probably cause the other cops were jealous of his figure…

  3. #3 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    The more I read about Trayvon Martin, the more it seems to me that for the Left, at least at first, this was the case they had been waiting for to undermine the spread of Must Issue laws. They’ve always claimed that the arming of America would lead to racist killings, and now they had a case. Of course, it had taken since 1987, which wasn’t exactly the Dodge City atmosphere they had expected, but nevermind. IT HAD FINALLY HAPPENED! Some knuckle dragging southern cracker had shot an innocent brown boy, and it was time to crucify the bastard!

    Now they find themselves fighting a rearguard action against infuriating facts. Zimmerman may be as guilty as a cat in a goldfish bowl, from a legal standpoint. He may be a trigger happy swine. But he isn’t a Cracker. Trayvon Martin wasn’t a choirboy. and if concealed carry has anything to do with the situation, it took too long to blame it in Must Issue, and the Left should have realized that there were elements of that narrative that wouldn’t work anymore.

  4. #4 |  picachu | 

    I thought Buffet WANTED to pay more taxes? Or was it just that he want us to pay more taxes?

  5. #5 |  TFG | 

    Man wasn’t charged for shooting burglar, man was charged for unlawful use of a weapon because he had prior weapons convictions.

  6. #6 |  qwints | 

    He wasn’t charged for shooting the burglar – he was charged for using a gun despite being barred from owning one due to prior convictions.

  7. #7 |  Charlie O | 

    I have come to the conclusion that in LE parlance any activity, other than dropping to your knees and sucking cock, is “aggressive.”

  8. #8 |  Aresen | 

    Puppycide. Includes video of the vicious beast wagging its tail as the cop shoots it.

    Uh. I don’t think I’ll click on that.

  9. #9 |  Mattocracy | 

    Just think, the general election might very well be between the guy who supports the individual mandate now but not in the past, vs the guy who supported the mandate in the past but not right now.


  10. #10 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    1980-2008 will be the prison equivalent of the Baby Boomer surge.
    I hope they have a surplus of walking canes, reading glasses, and dentures in the prison supply room. Things are gonna get interesting.
    And expensive.

  11. #11 |  EBL | 

    I would not be popping the champagne off yet…

    But if Toobin is right this will be a very big F’n deal!

  12. #12 |  EBL | 

    You are right Radley, I would not have believed you. So mowing the lawn in your underwear gets you fired, but committing all sorts of police misconduct (at best) gets you a paid leave.

  13. #13 |  cdg | 

    Obama had a genuine policy disagreement re: the mandate in 2008. He never called it totalitarian, stalinist, unconstitutional or the end-of-civilization as we know it. Maybe he thinks his version is more affordable due to Medicaid expansion and subsidies. Maybe he thinks tacking on a fee without penalty for non-payment (unlike Mr. Ryan) is different from docking someone’s paycheck. Who knows what he thinks.

    I do think one can make a change in policy stance as circumstances change. It’s much harder to go from devising, proposing, or implementing a mandate to suddenly finding it the 2nd coming of Lenin.

  14. #14 |  Pablo | 

    Does anyone have any firm statistics on what proportion of prison inmates are locked up for a long time (eg decades, or life) who have no history of violence? Yes Im libertarian, and yes I believe all consensual activity and transactions between adults should be legal. But I’m wondering if it’s not a libertarian myth that there really are huge numbers of non violent people serving long sentences. And non violent offenses (theft, fraud) can still cause a lot of misery for the rest of us.

    I also think that continually dropping crime rates are related, at least to some degree, to the fact that so many people inclined to commit crimes against others are now behind bars.

  15. #15 |  overgoverned | 

    I’m always infuriated by stories about cops shooting dogs inside their homes and yards, but I can’t be as outraged when the police shoot a dog that’s running free. Your dog is your responsibility. If you don’t control your dog, your standing to complain about the outcome is surely reduced a bit. None of that means that it’s not at least a questionable decision to shoot a dog like that, but this is one of those “liberty with responsibility” questions. A dog running free can bite other people who are minding their own business, so I’m ambivalent about today’s puppycide example.

  16. #16 |  nigmalg | 


    Usually the charge is within the realm of unlawful possession, not use. Unless of course you’re no longer able to defend yourself with a firearm once convicted of a crime. Possessing it is fine though :p

  17. #17 |  overgoverned | 

    Put it this way: Your home is your castle. The street is not your castle. Neither is your neighbor’s yard.

  18. #18 |  Difster | 

    There is no way that shooting that dog was justified. No dog that was on his guard would be standing sideways to the threat and wagging his tail. It can’t happen.

  19. #19 |  nigmalg | 


    I’m under the impression this city doesn’t have an animal control department. They have this newfangled device that lets you snare animals for control at a safe distance without having to kill it…

  20. #20 |  EH | 

    For the lawnmower story, I think it’s just that police are no longer allowed to appear human.

  21. #21 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    C.S.P., I tend to read leftish sources, and I’m not seeing a major attack on Shall Issue laws. The focus seems to be on black men and boys being too often seen as dangerous– something which can be extremely dangerous for *them*– and the Sanford’s police failure to investigate the killing and to arrest Zimmerman.

  22. #22 |  Leon Wolfeson | 

    @14 – Except the problem with that theory is that the same fall in crime has been seen across the Western world, including in countries with FAR lower incarceration rates.

  23. #23 |  Russ 2000 | 

    Man wasn’t charged for shooting burglar, man was charged for unlawful use of a weapon because he had prior weapons convictions.

    So if you’re going to rob someone, look to rob someone with prior weapons convictions.

  24. #24 |  Mike | 

    “Because of prior weapons convictions”

    That’s a pretty important part of why a man might be charged for unlawful use of a weapon in his own house.

  25. #25 |  Davis | 

    I thought Buffet WANTED to pay more taxes? Or was it just that he want us to pay more taxes?

    Regardless of Buffet’s personal beliefs, corporate officers have a fiduciary duty to the stockholders; not fighting the IRS on this tax would very likely be a breach of that duty (and could render the officers liable to the stockholders for a large sum of money).

  26. #26 |  picachu | 

    Mattocracy “Just think, the general election might very well be between the guy who supports the individual mandate now but not in the past, vs the guy who supported the mandate in the past but not right now.



  27. #27 |  Steve | 

    The Buffett story is completely in line with his past.

    Buffett’s line has always been: It is a travesty that I’m paying less of a percentage of my income in taxes than my secretary but until they change those stupid laws, I’ll pay what I owe.

    That’s consistency and the thing about the jets is in line with that.

  28. #28 |  Jay | 

    So a guy who chases down a teenager who hadn’t done anything wrong and ends up shooting him, that’s fine. But an old man shoots a dude breaking into his house, that’s not fine?

    I give you: the American Justice System.

  29. #29 |  Steve Verdon | 

    From the puppycide link:

    “They (officers) felt they could not get near the dog to snare him because of the way the dog was running around,” Roslonowski said. “Knowing one person was in the hospital, they could not take a chance.”

    Roslonowski should be summarily fired. The reason somebody was in the hospital was not the dog that was shot. A dog wagging its tail running around was may very well think it was playing a game. Officers became frustrated so they shot the dog.

    Think about that…out of frustration they draw their weapon and use it. The officers should be fired too.

    Roslonowski said that tail wagging can mean a dog is happy, but it can also mean it is “aggressively waiting.”

    Aggressively waiting….bullshit.

    Tail wagging can be a sign of aggression, but it is pretty distinct. And a happy/playful pit bull will have a very distinct tail movement as well. Side to side, so much so that the tip of the tail may touch the dog’s sides and the whole body will be moving as it wags its tail.

    If the dog is erect and rigid in his stance and the tail wagging is very short and abrupt side-to-side then the dog is displaying a sign of aggression. I can’t see the video, but those of you who can, can make your own call.

    Again if the tail is held about level with the body and whipping back and forth nearly touching the dog’s sides and its sides are moving with the wagging as well, that is a happy playful dog.

    Roslonowski sounds to me like a guy doing some CYA.

  30. #30 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 


    Assuming, for the sake of argument, that both of the cases in question are exactly as you describe; this is the kind of thinking that ends us up with Dead Person’s Name Laws, Zero Tolerance stupidity, and so forth. Justice administered by humans will be flawed. And efforts to change that are almost always in the direction of “We can’t let another swine like (favorite unpunished jackass name here) get away again”, which somehow always ends up punishing a bunch of people who are either innocent or at least don’t deserve to be landed on with cleats.

    Please chill. Draconian ‘Justice’ is seldom good.

  31. #31 |  Mannie | 

    #16 | nigmalg | March 27th, 2012 at 4:29 pm

    Usually the charge is within the realm of unlawful possession, not use.

    In Illinois, possession falls under Unlawful Use of a Weapon.

  32. #32 |  Mannie | 

    I watched the video. The dog was not displaying any aggressive behaviuour.

  33. #33 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Candidate Obama explains why we don’t need an individual health insurance mandate.

    Another reason why it should be illegal to record agents of the state.

    Zimmerman … isn’t a Cracker.

    So…I guess C. S. P. Schofield is also nee FEE from an earlier thread. Or, he’s spreading the same nonsense. Don’t know which is worse.

    …violent people

    @ Pablo #14
    It depends on what you call a “violent crime”. If you want to completely discount the effect of making everyone guilty of something while also outlawing a long list of things people want, you won’t get any answer rooted in reality. Yes, prisons are full of violent people. That doesn’t mean they had to turn out that way.

  34. #34 |  Jim Collins | 

    I wonder what opinion would be if the man who shot the burgler in Chicago was White and if Zimmerman were Black and Martin was White?

  35. #35 |  EBL | 

    Lord of the Mandates…

  36. #36 |  Cyto | 

    Dog looked for all the world to me exactly like a dog that is staking his turf by barking at intruders at the edge of his territory. Pretty much exactly like every dog would behave if an uninvited stranger encroached on his turf.

    Not aggressive. Not lunging at anyone. Barking – saying “stay off my lawn”.

    In most of the country, lawns aren’t fenced. Dogs run free outside. And attacks are rare. And nobody shoots dogs that bark at them. As a kid I dealt with large dogs like this all the time, without ever shooting one.

  37. #37 |  Windy | 

    Quite a bit of difference between father and son:
    “The bitter truth is this: that for 30 years we have been marched towards collectivism despite occasional repulses by conservative forces.

    Why has this happened? For freedom-loving Americans the answer to this question transcends all other issues. The answer is not hard to discover once we recognize two political realities:

    (1) Despite a sizable dissenting element, the Democratic Party has a definite political faith. That faith is collectivism—the Welfare State. Every measure that Party promotes is designed to give the government more power and contrary-wise to shrink the area of individual freedom.

    (2) Since the ’thirties the Republican Party has had no coherent or recognizable political faith. When out of power it has occasionally brilliantly resisted the collectivist drive. But mostly it has collaborated with the Democrats in diminishing individual freedom, calling such action bi-partisan.”
    — Howard Buffett, An Opportunity for the Republican Party (1962)

  38. #38 |  a_random_guy | 

    I want to know

    (a) what prudish idiot complained about a guy wearing boxer shorts in his own yard? These aren’t any more revealing that a lot of swimsuits, or bicycling shorts.

    (b) what law is this supposed to violate? Who sets the dress code for my back yard? If it’s not illegal, what basis do they have for firing the guy?

  39. #39 |  a_random_guy | 

    So a guy who chases down a teenager who hadn’t done anything wrong

    We don’t yet have all the facts, and it looks like we aren’t going to get them until the case goes to court.

    Do note that there had been several breakins in the area. Also, according to one store, this very same teenager was allegedly caught a few weeks earlier with a sack full of stolen jewelry.

    In short: it’s a complex story, and we would be unwise to pass judgement before knowing more…

  40. #40 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    C.S.P., here’s an example– Ta-Nehisi Coates on NPR’s On The Media— he thinks that Stand Your Ground laws might not survive the Trayvon Martin case, but he doesn’t mention anything about gun ownership.

    a_random_guy– that doesn’t sound likely. A sack full of stolen jewelry, and the teenager isn’t in prison?

  41. #41 |  SamK | 

    Nancy, I tend to think of myself as the token socialist around here, so try to keep my perspective in mind when I say that I’ve felt a similar focus to what CSP is mentioning. The case is being used to push a political agenda…this is fairly normal and I’m not particularly disturbed about it except when lies are told. Unfortunately, lying about the details for political purposes is fairly uniform and, also unfortunately, it’s starting to sound likely that Martin reacted defensively to Zimmerman and attacked him, successfully, and this is why he was shot. I’ve read the story about the jewelry. He was at school and busted for something I don’t recall and they found a bag of women’s jewelry and a screwdriver. Nothing tied it to actually robberies, but it’s damned suspicious. I personally think he was popping lockers and grabbing the crap teenage girls leave at school. Not particularly valuable and not likely to be reported if a piece or two disappears in the disaster area that is a teenager’s locker.

  42. #42 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    SamK, thanks for the information. There are a lot of leftwing information sources, and it’s plausible that you and I are reading different places.

  43. #43 |  JOR | 

    “Justice administered by humans will be flawed.”

    Yes, and? This works just as well as an excuse for mercilessly railroading someone (I hear it all the time from cops and prosecutors) as for letting them off. It’s just a fancier way of saying “Nobody’s perfect!” Well, yeah. So? Any precedent will be abused and mistakes will be made in any system. The big picture will average itself out without anyone having to worry about it. Justice, if there is such a thing, is only relevant or meaningful case-by-case.

  44. #44 |  Steve Verdon | 

    Sound would be nice, but in the dog video that dog did not look aggressive to me. Alert and assertive, but no aggressive–i.e. lunging or charging.

  45. #45 |  Mike Magnus | 

    Police Chief commenting on the video of the cop shooting the dog “Their actions should be judged by what they knew to be true at the exact moment in time, not what was learned later,” Uhm, what the fuck?

    They said the dog was out of control, dangerous and that it charged the officer. Clearly, that’s a lie. But it doesn’t matter? We should judge the officer based on what he said, not what we later found out?

    Somehow I’m not surprised a police Chief would cough up something so ridiculous…

  46. #46 |  Leon Wolfeson | 

    @43 – Sure, if you ignore the entire basis of precedent in law.

    You’re a radical.

  47. #47 |  phlinn | 

    On an tangential note, that article about the deputy losing his job had a link about a copy who had a woman arrested for taping him, got suspended, and then had his suspension increased after fighting it.

    I was so happy to see that he had a reasonable supervisor who knew that he couldn’t actually make a woman stop recording him.