Month: August 2014

Should selling a cigarette be a capital offense?

by digby

Quinnipiac polled New Yorkers on the question of policing for low level crimes. Apparently, most people are in favor of cops rousting people for small offenses. For instance:

If someone is selling loose cigarettes illegally on a street corner in their neighborhood, 50 percent of voters want police to stop that activity, even if it means making an arrest, while 41 percent say police should ignore this activity. Hispanic voters say 53 – 43 percent that police should act. White voters are divided as 48 percent want police to act and 44 percent say ignore. Among black voters, 47 percent say police should act and 40 percent say police should ignore it.

“It’s different where you live from what you see in the media. Overall, black New Yorkers are negative about cops citywide. White voters are positive. But looking at cops in their own neighborhood, the support turns positive among black voters and heavily positive among whites,” said Quinnipiac University Poll Assistant Director Maurice Carroll.

“Does it improve the quality of life in your neighborhood when police arrest someone for a low-level offense, or does it increase neighborhood tensions? New Yorkers decide for quality of life,” Carroll added.

If a person tells police he/she is not going to allow police to arrest him/her, 58 percent of New York City voters, including 45 percent of black voters, say police should use whatever force is necessary to arrest that person, while 16 percent of voters, including 23 percent of black voters, say police should walk away.

“Hardly anyone thinks the cops should back off if someone resists arrest. Use whatever force is necessary to make the arrest, voters say, echoing what Mayor Bill de Blasio and Police Commissioner William Bratton both have emphasized,” Carroll said. Eric Garner Case

There is no excuse for how police acted in the death of Eric Garner, 68 percent of voters say, while 24 percent say police action was understandable. Seeing no excuse are 52 percent of white voters, 90 percent of black voters and 71 percent of Hispanic voters.

If they believe that the police should have arrested him for suspicion of selling loose cigarettes and he resisted that arrest, I wonder what they think the cops should have done differently? Obviously, they believe the police officer shouldn’t have used an illegal choke-hold. But how would they have had the cops take this man into custody?

I would guess most people think he should have been tasered. I wonder how many of them know that tasers routinely kill people too?. (On the other hand, tasers are so much funnier than choke holds they’re probably worth it…)

The question has to be asked: is it ever worth it to kill someone over misdemeanor crimes like the sale of loose cigarettes? Or jaywalking? That’s what’s happening with this “broken windows” policy. It sounds great in theory — until you ask yourself how it’s going to be enforced. At best, a whole lot of people are going to wind up being harassed by police and wind up in the criminal justice system over small bore offenses. (And I think you know which groups are more likely to be targeted.) At worst, you’ll have police using torture devices and/or deadly force to do it.

There are other approaches that can work.

Bullets, burgers and batshit crazy


by digby

You undoubtedly already heard about this, but I just have to register my horror:

An instructor who was shot by a 9-year-old girl who fired an Uzi at a northwestern Arizona shooting range died Monday night at University Medical Center in Las Vegas. 

The girl fired the weapon at the outdoor range that caters to heavy tourism traffic along U.S. Highway 93 between Las Vegas and the Grand Canyon Skywalk. 

Highway signage and Internet advertising beckons visitors to stop in, fire a machine gun and enjoy a meal at the Bullets and Burgers enterprise at the Last Stop, about 25 miles south of Las Vegas. 

The Mohave County Sheriff’s Office said the accidental shooting occurred about 10 a.m. 

Spokeswoman Trish Carter said the girl, who was vacationing from New Jersey with her parents, was standing next to the instructor at the time. 

Mohave County Sheriff Jim McCabe described a video taken of the accident as “ghastly.” His office released a short video of the girl taking her first few shots. 

He said the girl safely and successfully fired the 9 mm weapon several times when it was set in the “single-shot” mode. 

He said the weapon was put into the “fully-automatic” mode before the girl fired again with the instructor standing off to her left. The weapon recoiled and drifted left as the girl squeezed off an undetermined number of rounds as she maintained possession but lost control of the Uzi as it raised up above her head. 

“The guy just dropped,” McCabe said of shooting instructor Charles Vacca, 39, of Lake Havasu City, who suffered at least one gunshot to the head.

What on earth would possess anyone to put an Uzi in the hands of a 9 year old? It’s beyond comprehension that we are so far down the gun fetish rabbit hole that people actually go someplace to eat burgers and watch their little children shoot automatic weapons as a form of entertainment.

Check out the Facebook page.

This country has gone completely, fucking nuts.

.

When austerity bites

by digby

In case you were wondering what went down in France that resulted in a dissolution of the government, this article should clear it up for you. Let’s just say that it’s a mess, mostly because the German government’s continued insistence on austerity policies is destroying Europe’s economy. The current discontent in France is, unsurprisingly, coming from the left — as it should:

A beleaguered François Hollande may now be hoping for a tangible gesture of support from Merkel for having been such a staunch supporter of German austerity policy. Merkel may be too distracted by the troubles in Ukraine to help out in France, however. But it is hard to see how the open split in the French left can do anything but increase the pressure on Merkel to recognize that austerity has not achieved the desired results and may now be exerting a substantial drag on Germany’s hitherto unstoppable economic engine: German GDP declined by 0.2 percent last quarter. France’s parochial troubles may then be merely the latest indication that a deep-seated European crisis continues to simmer and may boil over at any moment.

It seems as though everything may boil over at any moment.

But hey, the rich are doing very well so it’s all good, amirite?

.

Political malpractice at the top of the heap

by digby

Did you know that the head of the Democratic National Committee is against medical marijuana even though over 80% of her constituents, even the elderly (who could truly benefit), are for it? And did you know that when medical marijuana is on the ballot it’s estimated that it can raise turnout by several percentage points which, in a midterm, is vital? It’s all true.

Medical marijuana is on the ballot in Florida this November, largely backed by major Democrats who would like to see it legalized but also are trying to stop the psychotic weirdo Rick Scott from having another term to further wreck the state. And Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is opposed to it.

This is the equivalent of the head of the RNC coming out in favor of Obamacare in 2010.

Anyway, I wrote a lot more about it in Salon yesterday if you’d care to get into the gory details….

An even bigger alarm bell sounds on climate change

by David Atkins

It’s almost as if it’s really f’ing serious:

Humans risk causing irreversible and widespread damage to the planet unless there’s faster action to limit the fossil fuel emissions that cause climate change, according to a leaked draft United Nations report.

Global warming already is impacting “all continents and across the oceans,” and further pollution from heat-trapping gases will raise the likelihood of “severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts for people and ecosystems,” according to the document obtained by Bloomberg.

“Without additional mitigation, and even with adaptation, warming by the end of the 21st century will lead to high to very high risk of severe, widespread, and irreversible impacts globally,” the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in the draft.

The study is the most important document produced by the UN about global warming, summarizing hundreds of papers. It’s designed to present the best scientific and economic analysis to government leaders and policymakers worldwide. It feeds into the UN-led effort drawing in more than 190 nations for an agreement on limiting emissions.

Inequality and climate are the two defining issues of the 21st century, and they’re related. Eventually everyone reading this will be dead. The ones who come after will judge us on how we handled, above all, these two issues.

So far we’re not looking very impressive as a species.

.

Fighting over scraps

by digby

What suckers:

Even KKK members summer in the Hamptons.

The Ku Klux Klan has been leaving recruitment pamphlets next to mailboxes and in driveways in Hampton Bays over the past few weeks.

The hate-filled leaflets include racist cartoons and caution recipients to “beware” of people looking to steal their jobs in the Suffolk County community, said the Southampton Town Police Department.
The flyers promote the Loyal White Knights, a North Carolina-based Klan group, which has recruited in other states, according to reports.

The Suffolk County hate crime unit has been notified, but distributing such leaflets is legal.
Robert Jones, grand dragon of the Loyal White Knights, said he didn’t know anything about the New York recruitment — but had an idea what it was about.

“Everybody’s fed up with immigration,” Jones told Newsday. “That’s why we have so many people from New York calling right now.”

The KKK knows what it’s doing. Hampton Bays isn’t filled with billionaires, Real Housewives and Kardashians. It’s more of a working class town. And it’s 25% Hispanic.

The racists apparently want to dominate the low-paid servant market. How perfect.

.

All pregnant women are fair game now

by digby

The anti-choice zealots Alabama have an interesting new protest strategy.  They are now harassing pregnant women who are going to the doctor simply for pre-natal care.  That’s right, women who have chosen to bear children. Apparently, this is being done to protest a doctor who had something to do with a clinic at one time that maybe performed abortions but no longer is. Or something:

When Judge Myron Thompson issued an opinion that overturned Alabama’s TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) law one week ago, his description of the struggles of abortion providers in Alabama’s hostile climate seemed like a rebuttal to the Supreme Court’s recent decision striking down sidewalk “buffer zones.” For example, the opinion relates one doctor’s experience with the “non-violent” tactics of anti-choice activists:

Although she was not performing abortions herself, protestors came to her private practice and began to confront her pregnant patients, just as they had Dr. Palmer’s. Again, they held signs depicting third-trimester abortions. The local leader of the pro-life movement told Johnson that he would protest Dr. H1′s practice for as long as Dr. H1 continued to serve as covering physician for the clinic. Dr. H1 removed her children from their Catholic school due to the publicity surrounding her affiliation with the abortion clinic. She “had a mass exodus of patients from his practice.”

Here’s that local leader of the pro-life movement:

He’s quite the man of God. This is from an article about how a public school had to fence off its driveway to prevent these crazy loons from protesting a clinic across the street on its property. A clinic that doesn’t perform abortions:

Prochoice activists became concerned when they noticed that their counterparts were blocking and annoying parents who were trying to pick up and drop off their children at the school. After reaching out to the city council, police, school board, zoning board, and finally the community outreach officers, a response arrived in the form of three orange plastic nets used to keep the school’s entrances clear of protesters.

“While we have no proof abortions are being done at (the AWWC),” writes Alabama Christian Coalition president James Henderson, ” we do have reason to believe one of their doctors has been doing abortions at various locations, including in Huntsville.” That is completely false: the doctor in question used to provide abortion services at the Madison Street clinic when it was open, but has not provided one abortion since it shut down.

The Alabama Women’s Center for Reproductive Alternatives (AWCRA) shut down a few months ago and has plans to reopen at the AWWC location, but has been waiting on a decision of the zoning board before moving forward. This Summer, Henderson began accusing the city of “not playing fair” towards his efforts to shut down the doctor’s business and prevent AWCRA from reopening.

Shameless, Henderson has made his group’s activities a primary justification for not allowing the clinic to open again in the new location.

This losing fight has apparently inspired Henderson to double-down on defamation. In recent months, he has begun making baseless accusations of violence against volunteer clinic escorts. He is also very proud of his group’s “success” at putting doctors out of business by harassing patients and staff, but none of his sermons or lectures ever express concern for the well-being of pregnant women who are trying to see their doctors and would just like to be left alone, thank you.

Creepy.

.

Americans don’t seem to be as eager for war as some of their leaders are

by digby

Now you can see why so many of the hawks are hysterical about ISIS:

Most Americans felt the United States should intervene somehow in Iraq, although overwhelming numbers oppose any U.S. troops on the ground in support of the Baghdad government.

There was little disparity in the overall response among Democrats, Republicans and independents.

Just 29 percent of adults felt the country should not get involved, even by sending humanitarian aid or weapons.

Thirty-one percent said the United States should provide humanitarian aid to refugees from the conflict areas and 21 percent said Washington should launch air strikes to support Iraqi government forces.

But just 12 percent said Washington should fund and support a multi-national intervention, 11 percent said the United States should send Special Forces troops to support Baghdad, 10 percent said it should provide weapons to Iraqi troops and just 7 percent said U.S. troops should be sent.

McCain and Huckleberry have their work cut out for them. But in the end, if the decision is made it won’t matter what the American people think. It never does … (And, frankly, once the decision is made the American people will probably come around. They always do. For a while, anyway.)

There was also this:

Nearly two out of three Americans say governments should not pay ransom to terrorists in exchange for hostages, despite the posting of an Islamic State video last week depicting the beheading of a U.S. journalist, a Reuters-IPSOS Poll showed on Tuesday.

Sixty-two percent of adults surveyed said they agreed with U.S. and British policy of refusing to pay ransom, in response to a question about the killing of American journalist James Foley and the multimillion dollar ransom demanded by Islamic State militants for his release.

I get it. But I’m increasingly torn about whether or not this is a reasonable approach. This article headlined, “Did America’s policy on ransom contribute to James Foley’s killing?” by David Rohde, the New York Times reporter who escaped from the Taliban, is very disturbing. He discusses the fact that abductions have become big business for Islamic extremists as European governments have been paying big ransoms over the past few years. He also discusses how disheartening it is for Americans knowing that their government will not help them:

In the days and weeks ahead, the Foley family will speak for themselves about their ordeal. But the payment of ransoms and abduction of foreigners must emerge from the shadows. It must be publicly debated. American and European policymakers should be forced to answer for their actions.

Foley believed that his government would help him, according to his family. In a message that was not made public, Foley said that he believed so strongly that Washington would help that he refused to allow his fellow American captives to not believe in their government.

A consistent response to kidnapping by the U.S. and Europe is desperately needed. The current haphazard approach is failing.

That breaks my heart.

I don’t know the answer to this. It’s entirely possible that paying would encourage even more kidnapping and brutality. It’s also possible that it would save lives — lots of them if it kept us from military action in response to the horrors of executions such as James Foley’s. And then there’s the money — obviously financing terrorists is never a good idea. On the other hand, helping recruit more terrorists isn’t either.

It’s a tough problem and I don’t think Americans have fully thought it through. Rohde says the whole system is full of holes with some private interests stepping in from time to time and the Europeans serving as pass-through entities, all of which says that this is a police in need of review as Rohde says.

.

They’re killing us

by digby

Conservative climate change deniers the world over are doing everything they can to destroy the planet. In Australia, they’re shutting down the environmental NGOs:

Twelve months into the Abbott government, conservative forces, both in government and outside, are mounting a new push. It is the same ideology as before and it affects the whole NGO sector. But it is also more focused on silencing climate change debate and protecting corporations that are responsible for emissions and unsustainable practices.

Tracking the campaign against NGOs

The attacks on NGOs have intensified in recent months. Their timing suggests they are not random events.

The Liberal Party federal council in June unanimously recommends stripping NGOs of their ability to receive tax-deductible donations. Tasmanian MP Andrew Nikolic names the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Bob Brown Foundation and the Environmental Defenders’ Offices, accusing them of “untruthful, destructive attacks on legitimate business” and “political activism”.

In June, Coalition MP George Christensen, the member for Dawson in north Queensland, calls for a “cleansing” of the Department of Environment’s list of those organisations eligible to receive tax-deductible gifts. He singles out the Mackay Conservation Group, which is trying to protect the Great Barrier Reef. The group is challenging environment minister Greg Hunt’s approval of dredging at Abbot Point for a coal port.

At the end of the financial year, a number of reports emerge from the environment movement of NGOs being audited by the Tax Office and questioned by the Department of Environment about their right to receive tax-deductible donations.

In April, a review of competition law has the parliamentary secretary for agriculture, Richard Colbeck, talking about repeal of Section 45DD of the Competition and Consumer Act. He wants to take away environmental NGO exemptions from its secondary boycott clauses. Its repeal would stop NGOs from campaigning against the environmental behaviour of companies. Colbeck says: “I think there is an appetite in the government for changing these laws”. He claims that the backbench rural committee and “quite a number of the ministry” want the competition review to take away the exemption. Later, some submissions (from the Australian Forest Products Association, for example) echo this proposed change. The review’s draft report is due in September.

In June, the Minerals Council of Australia releases a paper by IPA senior fellow Sinclair Davidson, entitled A Critique of the Coal Divestment Campaign. Davidson welcomes the Abbott government’s “announced plans” to remove the Section 45DD exemption “to provide a level playing field and hold environmental groups to the same standard as business”.

Davidson in his paper also claims that NGOs are breaking Section 1041E of the Corporations Act by encouraging individuals and organisations to stop investing in fossil fuel companies and their financiers.

In December, attorney-general George Brandis removes funding from the national legal network of Environmental Defenders Offices.

While not an environmental NGO, the national network of community legal centres is collateral damage and has also been targeted by Brandis. The centres’ service agreements are changed to prevent them publicly suggesting legal reforms.

The May budget abolishes Grants to Voluntary Environment, Sustainability and Heritage Organisations. This grants scheme has been helping state conservation councils and their member groups, as well as hundreds of grassroots groups throughout the country, since 1973.

The Coalition moves to abolish the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. The NGO sector had hoped this relatively new body would improve accountability, as well as reduce government red tape. Its abolition would change the regulation of NGOs – a worrying prospect when the government is trying to silence their voices.

What in the world are these people thinking?

A large swathe of eastern Australia, including coastal regions from Coffs Harbour to Bundaberg, is in the midst of its driest year since the Federation Drought more than a century ago, according to the Bureau of Meteorology. 

The average rainfall over this entire region – stretching inland to Roma and St George – for the past 12 months has only been recorded lower once, in 1901-02, and the outlook continues to favour below-average rainfall until at least October.

Here’s a reminder of the consequences — which are happening with more and more frequency:

How Many Tanks Can We Take Back Before The Next Ferguson? 

by Spocko
 
I recently suggested that we noodle on some methods to de-militarize the police. I wanted to figure out methods that would actually have people look at publicly available communities’ inventory of equipment and demand they get rid of unnecessary items and equipment that is not designed for a police force, but an occupying army.

D.C. national politicians finally weighed in on the topic and before you can say, “Rocket launchers for cops” the national media talked to all the usual players to explain why any effort for change will be blocked, shouted down, ignored or tabled-until the next event.

The New York Times’ piece, In Washington, Second Thoughts on Arming Police, points out the problem and the standard D.C. “solution” in one paragraph.

Though violent crime is at its lowest level in a generation and terrorism, despite fears and continuing global threats, remains exceedingly rare on American soil, any effort to significantly cut police funding would be met with sharp opposition from local and state officials and many in Congress. Even if the political will to review the policies exists now, it is not clear whether it will remain when lawmakers return from vacation next month and see the midterm elections on the horizon.

Of course state and local officials will complain about losing government funding. (Maybe we should tell Republicans it’s for ObamaCare so they reject it.) But since in many cases they aren’t spending their own money, the Federal government has control over what they offer and the strings attached to the gear it gives them. The locals might complain, but if their level of funding for gear stays the same, they are likely to grouse less even if they don’t get that tank they had their eye on.

Today I got a note from the Blue America PAC who told the story of how five weeks ago Alan Grayson tried to get an amendment passed to stop funding the extreme militarization of local police department. It told the sad story of how “45 Democrats voted with the GOP against a bill that would halt using federal taxpayer dollars to arm local police with rocket launchers, tanks, guided missiles, mines, torpedoes, ballistic missiles, toxicological agents, grenade launchers and even nuclear weapons!”

Now Georgia Rep. Hank Johnson is trying to put out a new bill to demilitarize local police in September. It will be watered down or forgotten, especially if the lobbyists spread the money around to Democrats and Republicans evenly. Plus, last time there was no pressure from the people “below” just pressure from the lobbyists “above.” (I use the quotes to remind me that “the money” always believes their needs are above the people’s. )

The right wants to slow things down and “get all the facts in” not because they want all the facts. They are happy to rush to judgement with fact-like rumors like the “orbital eye socket fracture” of the police officer. They need time to get the lobbyists in place while the fire in the community dies down. (BTW, when that is proved false can I call up the MSM and get the names of the two anonymous sources who lied to them? Don’t you burn sources that lie to you?)

Between now and when the Johnson bill comes up in September what can we do?

1. Identifying which current military “assets” are potentially toxic liabilities, will bring bad PR and are lawsuits waiting to happen. (Start here at Muckrock)
2. Get that information to the congress people. Remind them, “Your city could be the next Ferguson. Maybe ask for different gear this time or a trade for less military equipment.”

I had relatives who were in the business of selling heavy equipment to police departments. The whole process was filled with huge egos and politics but at the time they bought what they felt was needed to serve the community. That changed after 9/11. From the same NY Times article:

But the rush to arm America’s police departments made oversight difficult. Grant programs overlapped. Money often flowed to state governments first before arriving in local police departments, making it hard to track. In 2009, auditors cited examples of state governments that could not verify what equipment local authorities had bought.

This was “free” money! It was a race to the government trough to get the coolest equipment. I know these people and their attitudes, especially those in the Midwest. They wanted their fair share of the terrorist fighting gear. Otherwise they felt cheated. “Why should the people in states that have actual terrorist threats get all the gear? We have needs too!”

What they won’t admit is it was also about not wanting to tax their own community, especially since their tax base might have been hit by loss of manufacturing jobs or tax giveaways to big box stores.

They didn’t want to “leave money on the table” so they made up crazy requests from the military equipment buffet list. When I was a child piling food on my plate my aunt would say, “Your eyes are bigger than your stomach.” Nobody told them just because they could get a tank didn’t mean they should.  The also knew that if they got crazy military toys the government wasn’t going to repossess them.

We will find we can’t just take their tanks and rocket launchers away, even if we find the silliest of reasons they got them in the first place. But we should try, if only to hear the overreaching justifications and excuses.  By questioning them and forcing them to justify their gear, they will know the easy ride is over.

If the people start questioning the needs and the military stops offering the tanks for free, the days of asking for a tank when, you really need a truck are over.

These police forces won’t want to lose face on losing equipment, so we suggest they trade them in for items to protect and serve the people, not to project force and shoot the people.

With pressure from the people “below” and a reworking of what is available from “above” we might get some change.

Train Train Train, Train the Fools

The federal government also did not typically insist that local authorities be trained on how and when to use its new equipment. In recent days, retired military officers have bristled at the sight of police officers in Missouri walking the streets with guns drawn, pointed at protesters.

Training is something everyone usually agrees on, so we use that as a common starting point. But I don’t want tanks at all, doesn’t having well trained cops with tanks make it seem okay? The problem is existing gear is still out there to deal with that we link the ability to get new gear to training for existing gear.

If they worry about losing an old toy or, getting a cut in funding for an old toy or not getting any new toys at all they will at submit to training. A huge part of that training is best practices like, “Don’t use your tanks to run over protesters.”

In the short term here is what I want them them to say, “We are happy to get trained on this, especially since the Federal government is paying. We don’t want to be the next Ferguson or Oakland. Send us to class! Bring someone out to teach us!”

Finally, we demand policing training from people who know how to control crowds of citizens, not people used to suppressing potential terrorists.

Photo by enigmabadger Creative Commons license
Photo by Dane Erland Creative Commons license