How Times Have Changed

I’ve been on this planet for 31 years so it wasn’t that long ago that I escaped from high school. But in that short period of time things have certainly changed. Zero tolerance policies, which were just starting to be mentioned when I was finishing up my high school sentence, are now the norm and they are leading to increasingly idiotic outcomes. Alyssa Drescher is a high school student who brought a pocket knife to school. For her infraction she’s looking at expulsion for one year:

Seventeen-year-old Alyssa Drescher is facing expulsion after Wells police reportedly found a pocket knife in her purse during a random drug search Tuesday morning.

Her father, Rick Drescher, said he bought the knife for his daughter a few months earlier at Menard’s. The knife was in her purse after a day of cutting hay bales at her boyfriend’s home a few days prior, and Alyssa forgot to take it out, Rick said.

[…]

The father said school officials could have given her a three- to five-day suspension, and initially said they believed that she mistakenly brought the knife to school. Now, however, Jensen is seeking to expel her for 12 months at an expulsion hearing before the USC school board at 5:30 p.m. Thursday.

I took a lot of shop classes in high school. Like most other shops students I carried a pocket knife and used it every day. The only policy my school had about pocket knifes at that time, at least that I’m aware of, was that the blade had to be under a certain length. But even that rule wasn’t enforced, at least by the shop teachers. So long as you weren’t acting in a violent or irresponsible nature nobody really cared that you had a pocket knife as it was recognized as a legitimate tool.

Now pocket knifes are treated as weaponry and students who mistakenly bring them to school face increasingly severe punishments. It’s no stretch of the imagination to say that zero tolerance polices are ruining academic careers of students who have made absolutely trivial mistakes. In fact this is a reflection of our society in general. At one time a person who committed a crime and suffered his cage sentence was released with a relatively clean slate. Now anybody who has served time in a cage, regardless of how minor their infraction was, is dogged with that history for the remainder of their lives.

Our society is becoming one where mistakes are not forgiven. If you forget to remove a pocket knife from your purse you may forfeit the entire school year and be forced to redo it all over again. Smoking a little weed when you’re in college can lead to a cage sentence that will harm your chances of gaining employment after you finish college (if you’re even allowed to finish college). Nothing good can come from our increasingly intolerant society.

Update: 2014-04-27: 20:52: The school board unanimously voted to expel her:

WELLS — The United South Central school board voted unanimously Thursday to expel the 17-year-old girl who claims she mistakenly brought a pocket knife to school last week. The expulsion will last through the end of the school year.

Another academic career ruined by our retarded zero tolerance society.

Bringing Serfdom Back

I’ve expended a lot of electrons on discussing the lord-serf relationship that exists between the government and the people. But until today the analogy hasn’t been completely literal. In an apparent attempt to prove my analogy the government has begun reviving the ancient practice of inherited debt:

Holding children responsible for the debt incurred by their parents is a feature of historical feudalism and a few modern third-world shitholes.

Developed countries, by and large, assume that a debt dies with the person who willingly incurred it, or at least stops with his or her estate. “By and large,” I write, because the U.S. government has broken with centuries of tradition holding individuals responsible for their choices, opting to withhold tax refunds from children whose parents incurred vague and often ill-documented obligations to the feds.

I’m sure this practice will only continue to grow. Soon we will see the government’s courts arguing that private debt incurred by parents is inherited by their children. This practice will also change another dynamic. We hear a lot of complaining from “progressives” about inherited wealth creating perpetually powerful families. Inherited debt will accomplish the exact opposite: perpetually powerless families. With that said this would also be the likely death knell of the United States as times of perpetual powerlessness have traditionally lead to uprisings by the downtrodden.

Possession of Lead Now Illegal in Washington DC

The amount of stupidity that occurred in Mark Witaschek’s trial is hard to describe. For those who don’t know Mr. Witaschek was facing charges for illegally possessing ammunition in Washington DC. He was found guilty but when you look at the details you will notice how desperate the prosecution was to nail this man to the wall:

Until the final hours of the trial, both the defense and government focused the case on whether the single 12 gauge shotgun shell that was found in Mr. Witaschek’s D.C. home was operable. The judge, however, never ruled on it.

In the afternoon on Wednesday, Judge Morin shook the plastic shell and tried to listen to something inside. He said he could not hear any gunpowder. He then asked the lawyers to open the shell to see if there was powder inside.

(This seemed like a bizarre request since the lack of primer — not gunpowder — would be relevant to the interoperability of the misfired shell.)

Assistant Attorney General Peter Saba said that the government wanted to open the shell but that, “It is dangerous to do outside a lab.”

The prosecutors and police officers left the courtroom to try to find a lab that was open in the afternoon to bring the judge to cut the plastic off the section that holds the pellets. When that proved not possible in the same day, the judge decided to just rule on the bullets.

Opening a 12 gauge shell is not dangerous to do outside of a lab, unless my reloading room qualifies as a lab. Uncrimp the top, down the shot out, wiggle the wad out, and dump the powder. Since the prosecution was looking to see if power was inside of the shell the method I just described would have sufficed. But since the shell couldn’t be dissected the day of the trial the prosecution moved to its backup plan:

The 25 conical-shaped, .45 caliber bullets, made by Knight out of lead and copper, sat on the judge’s desk. They do not have primer or gunpowder so cannot be propelled. The matching .50 caliber plastic sabots were also in the box.

Mr. Witaschek was found guilty because he was in possession of lead that happened to be shaped in a conical form. It appears that the simple possession of lead is now an offense in Washington DC.

This trial was purely vindictive. The prosecution wanted to send a message to the people of Washington DC and that message is “Shut the fuck up slaves. We are your masters.” It’s no secret that the overlords of Washington DC don’t want their serfs possessing firearms. When one dares to do so the police are sent out, with guns of course, to kidnap the unruly serf so he or she can be put in front of a judge. Since it’s rare for the police to actually find somebody illegally possessing a firearm (because those people are generally smart enough to hide their firearms) the overlords have to take what they get. If that means prosecuting somebody for possessing a shotgun shell and some pieces of lead so be it.

Equal Time

Back in the day the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) established the Fairness Doctrine, which stuck with us until 1987. The Fairness Doctrine mandated that television and radio broadcasters give balanced coverage to opposing viewpoints on a topic. While the doctrine is gone the attitude many hold that broadcasters must give balanced coverage remains. Recently a group of creationists have taken offense to the way life on this planet was presented on the show Cosmos (a new show that many of my friends swear is the most important show on Earth but I decided not to watch). In reaction to this offense there has been come murmur about requiring Cosmos to provide airtime to the theory of creationism:

Creationists held a pity party for themselves Thursday because “Cosmos” isn’t being fair and balanced to their beliefs.

“Creationists aren’t even on the radar screen for them, they wouldn’t even consider us plausible at all,” said Danny Falkner, of Answers In Genesis, which has previously complained about the show.

Falkner appeared Thursday on “The Janet Mefford Show” to complain the Fox television series and its host, Neil deGrasse Tyson, had marginalized those with dissenting views on accepted scientific truths, reported Right Wing Watch.

“I don’t recall seeing any interviews with people – that may yet come – but it’s based upon the narration from the host and then various types of little video clips of various things, cartoons and things like that,” Falkner said.

Mefferd said the show should at least offer viewers a false compromise.

I don’t care about this particular pissing match but it has provided me an convenient platform to discuss the idea of balanced coverage. When people think of balanced coverage they often believe that it requires all views to be given equal coverage or at least a mention. In practice this is not how balanced coverage works.

People often mistakenly believe that there are only two points of view on any issue. They see the issue as “us versus them”. That is to say one side of the issue, specifically the side they agree with, is correct while the other side is wrong. This leads people to believe balanced coverage involves providing the Republican and Democratic views of an issue, Christian creationism and evolution, Christianity and Atheism, etc. But binary options don’t cover all sides of an issue.

I’m guessing both Mefferd and Tyson would agree that the origin of life stories from Norse mythology shouldn’t be given airtime. In this case I would argue that such a viewpoint held by Tyson would be consistent since he is arguing in favor of providing scientific theories on his science show. But Mefferd, who is arguing that Christian creationism should be given equal time as evolution on Cosmos, would be making an inconsistent argument by claiming equal time should be given to her views without it also being given to other points of view.

The argument over the origins of life on this planet are the only occurrences of issues that are mistakenly treated as binary by the general public. Politics is rife with binary choices. We generally get viewpoints from Democrats and Republicans. Left out of the debate are libertarians, communists, socialists, anarchists, etc. Many people who argue in favor of balanced coverage between Republicans and Democrats would argue that third-parties or apolitical viewpoints shouldn’t receive any coverage.

This is where the idea of balanced coverage begins to look a little ridiculous. How can you offer balanced coverage to thousands of different theories and beliefs? Many religions have differing accounts on the creation of life on Earth. There are almost as many political views as there are people on this planet. Each of us is a unique individual so there is the potential of roughly seven billion points of view on any given issue. Mandating balanced coverage of all viewpoints of an issue is unmanageable. But offering binary choices and calling it balanced is dishonest. Either way mandating balanced coverage is idiotic.

Rules Are For Thee, Not For Me: Part XXII

It must be nice being a police officer. In addition to a snazzy costume that causes people to kneel before their feet on sight (so they don’t get beaten) they are also allowed to break the very laws they’re tasked with enforcing. Hawaii has to have one of the funniest legal exceptions for police officers though and, unsurprisingly, the police are fighting the potential repeal of this exception:

Honolulu police officers have urged lawmakers to keep an exemption in state law that allows undercover officers to have sex with prostitutes during investigations, touching off a heated debate over the provision.

Authorities say they need the legal protection to catch lawbreakers. Critics, including human trafficking experts and other police, say it’s unnecessary and can further victimize sex workers, many of whom have been forced into the trade.

This exemption is necessary. After all police officers have such a difficult job and they deserve a way to unwind. Isn’t that the standard go to excuse given by police apologists?

How Much Water Does the NSA Use

How much water does the National Security Agency (NSA) use? That’s classified. I’m not even kidding. According to the NSA the amount of water its new data center in Utah uses is a matter of national security:

The National Security Agency has many secrets, but here’s a new one: the agency is refusing to say how much water it’s pumping into the brand new data center it operates in Bluffdale, Utah. According to the NSA, its water usage is a matter of national security.

The agency made the argument in a letter sent to officials in Utah, who are considering whether or not to release the data to the Salt Lake Tribune. Back in May, Tribune reporter Nate Carlisle asked for local records relating to the data center, but when he got his files a few months later, the water usage data was redacted.

We live in an era where practically everything the government does is labeled classified, which makes the label meaningless. Furthermore labeling everything as classified makes oversight of any government agency impossible. The total lack of transparency is part of the reason elections are meaningless. How can the people know who to elect to take care of problem parts of the government if they don’t even know what those problem parts are?

Rules Are For Thee, Not For Me

If you live in Minneapolis then you know that the words “snow emergency” mean that your car will be towed faster than you can turn your head if it’s not parked on the correct side of the road. Tow companies make a fortune off of unlawfully parked automobiles, which is why their response time for towing an illegally parked vehicle seems to exceed their response time for towing a broken down vehicle that is obstructing traffic. But sometimes tow companies get overzealous and they remove an unlawfully parked car owned by members of the oligarchy. When that happens tow company owners get to spend some time in a cage:

An ongoing federal lawsuit in Portland, Oregon accuses police officers of arresting two tow truck company employees after they towed unmarked police cars parked illegally on a private lot.

The five cars belonged to police officers and a DEA agent who were working on a nearby sting. A business owner at the lot says the cars were parked there over a span of two days. The owner first put a note on the windshields of the cars asking them to be moved. The next day, he spoke with one of the officers.

The officer allegedly “responded with expletives” to the note and insisted the cars would not be moved. The business owner then called the property’s trustee, who called a towing company. The cars were towed.

Later, several police officers showed up at the tow company’s office to get their cars back. Per protocol, employees of the company asked for proof of ownership of the vehicles. The officers were unable to display any information proving they owned the cars. They left and said they would return later.

Soon after, a group of cops both in uniforms and street clothes returned to the office. Then, according to the lawsuit, Sgt. Andrew Roberts showed his badge to the tow company employees and insisted that was all he needed to retrieve the cars. When the employees didn’t comply, they were arrested.

When a man in a funny looking costume that includes a badge and a gun walks into your business or home and makes demands you either company or get beaten and/or kidnapped. The tow company in this story made two mistakes. First, they towed vehicles that belonged to the oligarchs’ enforcers. Second, they didn’t do exactly as they were told when the costume-clad psychopaths with badges showed up. Because of those two mistakes the tow company employees spent time in a cage and now have to beg the oligarchs’ court system to be lenient and transfer some tax money from the city that employs the police to the employees of the tow company. Whether the courts will grant such a gift or not is up in the air.

But this story further demonstrates that rules are for us little people, not for those in charge. When we park unlawfully we will face parking finds and impound fees. But when the police park unlawfully they will arrest the tow company employees and take their vehicles back without paying the impound fee.

Mark Dayton Sending Mixed Messages

For those of you living outside of the thawing tundra of Minnesota one of our current political battles is cannabis legalization. This battle hasn’t been going well for proponents because higher ups in the state, namely Mark Dayton, are basing their decision on that of the law enforcement lobby. The law enforcement lobby, predictably, opposes cannabis legalization because property stolen from suspected violators of the prohibition is a major income source for police departments.

Not satisfied with being a coward hiding behind a major lobby Dayton decided to open is mouth again. This time he acknowledged that cannabis may be beneficial for people suffering certain ailments, mentioned the fact that cannabis can be purchased in almost any city, and then reminded people that his will still order law enforcement agents to aggress against individuals buying cannabis for medical reasons:

ST. PAUL — Minnesotans who want marijuana to ease pain and deal with other medical conditions already can get it, Gov. Mark Dayton said Thursday.
Advertisement

However, he quickly added, buying pot on the street is illegal, and he does not endorse it. In a conference call with reporters, he said that possessing a small amount of the drug could bring a fine about the same cost as a traffic ticket.

“I am not advocating anybody do whatever it is that they do,” Dayton said. “I am just trying to point out reality.”

Dayton added: “The fact is that you can go out in any city in Minnesota, I am told, and purchase marijuana.”

In other words those of you suffering from chronic pain, glaucoma, epilepsy, or other ailments that can be improved with cannabis can buy it but doing so will put you at risk of the only thing known to kill cannabis users: police aggression. While possession of small amounts of cannabis only officially results in a fine the fact of the matter is it also results in interaction with police officers, which is often very harmful to one’s physical well-being.

It’s funny watching Mark Dayton try to appease both advocates of cannabis legalization and law enforcement agents that profit greatly from cannabis prohibition. Either side could cost him the next election and that seems to be making him rather nervous (and that would be a good thing if he wouldn’t simply be replaced by a different psychopath).

Surveillance is For Thee Not For Me

Dianne Feinstein isn’t just an unpleasant congress critter (but I repeat myself) when it comes to guns. The crone is also unpleasant when it comes to the police state. Since she’s part of the oligarchy she’s all for mass surveillance… unless her and her compatriots are the ones being spied on:

WASHINGTON — Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a staunch defender of government surveillance of ordinary citizens, took to the Senate floor Tuesday with the stunning accusation that the Central Intelligence Agency may have violated federal law to spy on Congress.

Feinstein, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, railed against the CIA for compromising the legislative branch’s oversight role — a theme echoed by many of her Senate colleagues throughout the day. The outrage was palpable among lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, and some suggested CIA Director John Brennan should resign if the allegations are true. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who has stuck up for intelligence agencies in the past, declared a potential war.

“This is Richard Nixon stuff,” Graham told reporters. “This is dangerous to the democracy. Heads should roll, people should go to jail if it’s true. If it is, the legislative branch should declare war on the CIA.”

Her hypocrisy, and the hypocrisy of all those who advocated for government surveillance, is palpable at this point. But I’m not surprised to see this kind of double standard from Feinstein. After all she is the same woman who supports any law that restricts the ability of individuals not employed by the government to own firearms while also enjoying the protection that accompanies her armed body guards. I stopped paying attention to what that dingbat says long ago and I think you should to.

The Debate Over Whether the Cops Can Steal Your Stuff

Here in Minnesota there is a rather heated political debate brewing. No, I’m not talking about the debate over whether or not cannabis should be legalized but this other debate does tie into it. The big debate is whether or not the cops have to find your guilty before keeping your stuff:

A move that would bar cops from keeping property and cash seized in drug cases when there is no criminal conviction is the flash point of a debate between law enforcement and civil liberties advocates that is ­heading to the Legislature as soon as next week.

Backers say the state’s civil forfeiture laws are long overdue for a little due process. The laws have become a growing source of cash for law enforcement agencies and were famously abused by the now-defunct Metro Gang Strike Force, which paid out $840,000 in settlements to ­victims who had their property illegally seized.

Under current law, police or sheriffs can keep property, vehicles and cash seized in drug cases or drive-by shootings — regardless of the outcome of the criminal case.

I find it funny that this is even a debate. The fact that the police are opposing reforms to civil forfeiture laws is telling. If the job of the police was to uphold law and order they would be all for reforms that prevent the state from stealing property from the innocent. But the police want to keep the laws as is because their primary duty isn’t to uphold law and order; it’s to expropriate wealth from the people for the state. The police really are a gang of thieves as evident by their opposition to require due process before property is stolen.

Civil forfeiture laws are one of the reasons I laugh whenever somebody says that the United States is a nation of laws and our legal system is based on due process. Perhaps that was true at one time but it certainly isn’t true today. The war on unpatentable drugs has made sure whatever due process that may have existed in the United States legal system is now dead and buried.