Free Markets, Free People

I’ve been sort of following Ferguson

But not that much.


Because it is a re-run.  In fact, it’s a re-run of a re-run.  A re-make if you prefer.  The same-old, same-old.

It is so predictable that you could set up a timeline and be pretty sure that you’d be 90% right.

It begins like this:

Incident occurs.  In this case, black teenager, white cop (template says black/white with black the victim).  Tensions build.  Protests erupt and violence ensues.

Then the real problem occurs.

Before everything can be sorted out and calmed down, the media shows up.

Of course, as soon as the media grows enough to include national outlets, the professional race baiters are soon to follow.  Right on their heels the other opportunists arrive – the anarchists, communists, community activists, agitators and looters.  And soon the circus is in full swing.

Rumor is published as fact.  Hate rages from both sides.  Social media is inundated with trash talk, nonsense and stupidity aided and abetted by an agenda driven media. Death threats, threats of violence, racial hate and other garbage flows like a river.  Anchors from the national outlets put on their safari jackets (or now I guess it’s their protective vests and helmets) and get cameo shots near the protests to certify their “bona fides” as brave news men and women.  Irresponsibility and immaturity on all sides rules the day.

And the flames get fanned even higher.

Former CNN anchor and Fox News Channel’s “MediaBuzz” host Howie Kurtz criticized some outlets for creating “almost a lynch mob mentality” in Ferguson, MO in the wake of the shooting death of Michael Brown.

“Some liberal outlets [are] creating almost a lynch mob mentality around this, the Huffington Post today, screaming banner headline ‘Arrest Him.’ Now, the Huffington Post, nor you or I, knows exactly what happened” he said. And “when you cross that line into becoming an advocate and to demanding that somebody be prosecuted before the facts are in, while the investigation is going on, you’re grandstanding, you’re trying to keep the story alive and I really think it’s troubling.”

Kurtz also criticized CNN for showing the house of accused officer Darren Wilson, stating, “It defies my understanding how you could put his life or the life of his family in danger by even briefly showing the house or naming the street.”

When it all finally sorts itself out, we’ll likely find that the problem wasn’t necessarily about race, didn’t conform to any of the preconceived notions presented by the press (like, you know, “George Zimmerman” wasn’t white) and wasn’t any of the nonsense the “experts” opined endlessly about.

It was an unfortunate incident that needs to be addressed, but hasn’t had the chance to be addressed.  And now the DoJ has decided the Civil Rights division needs to be involved along with 40 or so FBI agents.  And the governor has sent in the National Guard.

Is there an injustice here?  Possibly, but I don’t know yet.  I’d go as far as to say probably, but again, I don’t know. I do know that it points to a growing trend of over-policing that I attribute to a seeming change in philosophy among police departments. Police, in many cases, seem to escalate a situation instead of defusing it. That needs to be reversed, in my opinion.  But I certainly don’t know if this officer would have acted any differently if the teenager had been white.  Nor do I yet know whether his actions were warranted or not (which is why we impanel juries and have evidence presented in cases like this).  And neither does anyone else.

But in the street theater all of this has become, that’s likely to be lost in the shuffle.

In other words, this is the Trayvon Martin template redux with nightly violence added for variety.

Formulaic, predictable and disgusting. But that’s how we do it in America today.


Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

110 Responses to I’ve been sort of following Ferguson

  • I think you are absolutely right. Apparently a video of the officer after the shooting has him muttering “what have I done” in shocked disbelief (at least that was a media report – if it is accurate, who knows). If so, then I suspect this was a tragic set of emotions, circumstances and uncertainties that came together in just the wrong way. But there’s no need for the media show, pontificators and the like. It is disgusting and becoming all too common.

    • No, the evidence shows a thug, born of the leftist irrationality you foment, thinking he could get away with one more, and paying the price.

      • I will give you that. The kid….I mean GROWN MAN – who was killed was a problem. Did he deserve to die? Most likely not, but you know the old saying “don’t start none, wont be none”

        • Did he deserve to die? Well, beat a cops face in and go for his gun and, YES, he “deserved” to die.

    • …“what have I done” in shocked disbelief (at least that was a media report – if it is accurate, who knows)”

      Then you are an irresponsible phuc for even mentioning it. You don’t get off for ambiguity after citing it.

      I’ll just go on the record here that NOBODY has ANY business venturing any opinion on this at this juncture. Not on “police militarization” or any other damn thing. Because, despite what you THINK you MAY know…you very likely DO NOT.

      Due process is a FLUCKING PROCESS. It is not subject to the demands of a news cycle, or anybody’s hunger for instant gratification. So just WAIT. Suspend judgment until you have real evidence. Give people credit for being people, and good people unless you have evidence to the contrary.

      • Amen man.

      • Why is police militarization off the table? That is something that needs to change, today, regardless of the facts of the Brown case. It’s creating unnecessary antagonism on the streets, right now.

        The officer should be treated just like you or I would be treated if we shot an unarmed man.

        Meanwhile, I want to see more of the local protesters who tell the Communists to get the hell out of Ferguson, as well as those who boo Jesse Jackson.

        • It’s not off the table. I think it is part and parcel of the new philosophy police operate under. I think we make a mistake, however, if we think taking all their toys away will change that … it has to start with a change of philosophy that ends up rejecting the toys.

          • Absolutely. “War on Drugs”, “War on Terror”, and all the other martial lingo, dress, equipment, and tactics don’t just reflect the underlying attitudes, but they also shape them. It’s like a feedback loop.

          • I think you aren’t thinking about this whole “militarized police” thing.

            “Toys”…??? Well, yes, we do have a problem with the extension of some of these things into Mayberry.

            But police have had armored vehicles since at least Prohibition. Fully automatic weapons, too. As a matter of fact, a lot of “toys” police are using today that look “scary” are specifically designed to be non-lethal, non-injurious means of crowd control.

            While I seldom disagree with Mark Steyn, I don’t think there is any good basis to believe looters and rioters acted out because of a left-footed fashion statement by police. That’s kind of like blaming a video for Benghazi.

            I’m sure we’ll kick this around some more.

          • Which is why I made the point that it isn’t the “equipment”, but the philosophy, for heaven sake.

          • The looting is just that. They’d be looting if the police were armed with flintlocks and sabers.

            They’re not trying to avenge Brown or find justice or emphasising the over arming of the police for crossing guard duty, they’re just doing some quick shopping.

            As for the new model police force that the modern Mayberry is deploying, it’s not even that they have all that stuff, it’s the instant instinct Barney would have to use his machine gun, MRAP and taser to bring in Otis for another night of drying out that is the problem. SPECIAL weapons should be deployed in special circumstances not just any old time someone might look crosswise at a cop.

            How often do police expect to be IED’d on ANY call in an American city. Why not attack helicopters and a heavy mortar section too?

          • The philosophy is the primary problem. But don’t downplay the equipment, which compounds the philosophy. To borrow from the military: it’s a “force multiplier”, in more ways than just tactical.

            As for armored vehicles and automatic weapons not being new, realize that Daryl Gates created SWAT, decades after alcohol prohibition. And, show me pictures from before the 90s of police wearing balaclavas and all black or cammo uniforms. Show me police departments in which every officer has a high-and-tight, from back in the day.

            Now, go do some research on the frequency of SWAT raids over time, of the number of civilians killed by police in the US compared to other countries, of the prison population of the US compared to authoritarian China or other hell-hole regimes.

            Regardless of the criminal looters and the communist interlopers, the fact remains that law enforcement abuse of power (to include the federal TLAs) is the greatest danger to freedom in this country. They are using every means to disarm people, from closing lead production, buying up tons of ammo, passing strict gun control where they can, intimidating banks into refusing to facilitate the legal sale or purchase of firearms, etc.. They’re shutting down many coal power plants just when we’re predicted to have a harsh winter. Federal debt and economic downturns put us dangerously close to catastrophic financial events.

            Those MRAPs aren’t for al Qaeda or ISIS. They’re for Americans. Why do you think they keep running simulations of “home-grown” “right wing” terrorist attacks?

            It’s not that I think there are masterminds plotting some devious martial takeover. It’s that they know that when a major problem occurs, their power is tenuous without a means to squash us.

          • OK. You’ve established you’re nuts. Fine with me.
            When was the last time you served a search warrant? An arrest warrant for a known dangerous felon?
            Is there ANY tangent you are not prepared to throw out here? I mean REGARDLESS of it having NOTHING WHAT_SO_FLUCKING_EVER to do with “militarized police psychology”.
            I mean, seriously. Tell me now so I don’t have to worry about lead smelters. Shit.


            “In the summer of 1965, a six-day frenzy of looting, burning, and sniping consumed 46 square miles of Watts neighborhood in Los Angeles. The rioters used tactics closely resembling 20th-century guerilla warfare—with people running and shooting in all directions, rather than massing in a single mob like Picket’s Charge. The chaotic situation prompted Inspector Daryl Gates, the point man for the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) during the riots, to ask the military for guidance. Gates’s consultation with the military would eventually give rise to the first American SWAT team.” —

            Further arming up was the Miami FBI shootout in 1987(?), and the LA bank robbery by the fellows armed with flak vests and fully automatic AK-47s.

            In fact, cops began loading up during the bootlegger wars during Prohibition, and in response to the “Pretty Boy Floyd” and Bonnie & Clydes of the 30s. The .357 Magnum was born of these battles IIRC.

          • You’ve established you’re nuts.

            Soviet-style attempt to discredit noted. I can cite sources all day long, though I’m sure the comment filter would choke on multiple URLs in a single comment. Are you denying the end to the production of affordable lead ammo? Are you denying the ammo shortage, in no small part caused by federal agencies buying huge quantities? Are you denying their myriad of explicit gun control laws, coupled with back door tactics to choke off sale and purchase?

            Is all of that just happening in a vacuum, you suppose?

            Al Qaeda/ISIS is not plotting to attack Mayberry. If they commit another attack, it’s going to be in a big city, high-profile target. Bearcats, MRAPs, 50-cal, etc. etc. are not going to be needed or used for foreign hostiles. Many in law enforcement probably just look at them as fun toys, a bit of dick-wagging. But the people who chose to transfer this equipment, who authorized the transfer, those are the people who are studying us, spying on us, playing out simulations, contingencies, war games, and the like. It’s what all of those supercomputers are for. A number of departments have published or leaked memos exposing the focus of their attentions.

            Most all of us have been warning the complacent, low-information voters that the runaway spending , as any long-term projection will demonstrate, cannot go on much longer, and that collapse is inevitable. Though the Democrats and RINOs dismiss such warnings, whistling past the graveyard, we know that they can read the charts, too. What goes through their minds when they picture depressions, major collapses like the mortgage crisis, the end result of “green” policies on energy prices, or some black swan events? Do you think that they are not praying to get through their career before the SHTF? Do you think they aren’t seeing the dwindling probability of that? What do they do to protect themselves?

            I’d love to hear how you picture these people, behind closed doors, discussing potential crises and unrest, and how their anti-gun agendas and police militarization are just unrelated coincidences.

            Thrill me with your acumen.

            I mean REGARDLESS of it having NOTHING WHAT_SO_FLUCKING_EVER to do with ‘militarized police psychology’.


            Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.

            Tell me now so I don’t have to worry about lead smelters.

            Lead ammo is cheaper than copper. Ammo manufactures are tooled up to produce a certain percentage of lead and a certain percentage of copper bullets. Cut off the lead and those plants producing lead ammunition sit idle while they undergo expensive refitting. The others are back-ordered like crazy. The feds have already put in their orders, so Joe on the street gets to f**k off and sit around with his firearms collections which have no utility without ammunition.

            If there ever came to pass a major crisis, widespread armed resistance against government outrages, but you’ve managed to effectively disarm about half of the gun owners, you’ve just cut down the resistance by about half.

            I hope that’s not a problem in my lifetime. I hope that major crises are dealt with before they spark violence. And, I hope that enough Americans maintain enough guns and ammo to keep would-be tyrants in check, without having to resort to any violence.

            But that’s not something you get to dismiss as just “crazy”–not if you’ve read history. It’s happening, right now, in several parts of the world. Saying it can’t happen here is Pollyannaish.

          • Sharpshooter, no one has denied these facts of history.

            Please read the work of Radley Balko and others, in which they compare the rate of the use of SWAT between past and present. The number of times per day a SWAT team is deployed, compared to three or four decades ago, is astounding.

            Also, compare and contrast the dress, haircuts, mannerisms, choice of words, public statements regarding incidents, etc. then and now.

            Speak with some retired or older cops, get their opinion on the nature of police work, then and now.

            It’s not just one or two matters, like the presences of certain types of weaponry, it’s the confluence of it all, as well as the number of such armaments in use, and the frequency with which they are deployed.

  • “In other words, this is the Trayvon Martin template redux with nightly violence added for variety.”

    There was an article Ferguson Missouri and the of Partisanship and ideology linked on HotAir today where a line struck me because this was a well thought out piece, and I still think it is. But it shows how certain actions seem to become ‘acceptable’ even to people who are being thoughtful about the situation rather than letting their judgement be inflamed by passion.

    The statement was
    “Much the same, as Erick has noted, is true of the response of the police and the community after the shooting. Rioting and looting, in my view, is never justified, at least not unless and until you have reached that point of total breach of trust with your government that would justify armed revolution (in this sense, I disagree with Leon).”

    Rioting….Looting…..never justified…at least not until…..

    No, not acceptable, even in armed revolution.
    Looting doesn’t discriminate about who needs what, who ends up with what, or who loses what. Looting is just theft, making gain from misfortune.
    A revolution is not an excuse to deliberately practice random disorder and theft.

    And a riot is a piss poor revolution. You are either going to accomplish something, or you’re out to express your anger and intend to do so by destroying things that don’t belong to you, probably at random, or steal things that don’t belong to you, also probably at random. Destruction without actual purpose.

    There are a lot of the ‘professionals’ showing up in Ferguson right now. Some are there to increase their influence and make a buck. Some are there for the riot and destruction and the chance to maybe hurt ‘the man’ from the anonymity of the crowd and some are there for the loot. This is what they do whenever they can.

    Much as I hate the ongoing militarization of police forces, burning things, and stealing things, doesn’t do jack for the dead kid, whether he was outrageously killed or whether it was justified.
    As much as you’ll see me denigrate the probable success of holding hands and singing Kumbayah in a peaceful fashion, THIS is the time for it if they are sincere about justice.
    The professional looters and rioters won’t, because they’re not after justice.
    The influence peddlers say they want justice. But that’s eventually, after they’ve gotten things stirred up a bit more so they can be saviors and increase their influence by calming them back down. Justice isn’t even a by product for them, and they’ll often claim when it’s all over that JUSTICE still was not served.

    All that’s happening now is pumping up for confrontation.
    I too didn’t follow it at first, because it is exactly what you said, a re-run.
    Unfortunately it’s also another straw on the camel.

  • Anchors from the national outlets put on their safari jackets (or now I guess it’s their protective vests and helmets) and get cameo shots near the protests to certify their “bona fides” as brave news men and women. Irresponsibility and immaturity on all sides rules the day.

    I think its a mistake to think this is a mistake or unintended consequenc. We have the old 60’s (and a little 70’s) hippies in charge now. Their generation is in seniority positions which means they have money and authority at all levels of society (especially the media) and they have their Neo-communist children (like Obama) to help. The two generations see the world through that era. The same injustices exist, etc. at the same time they jones for the civil disobedience (occupy wallstreet) and race riots of that era that gave the media the ammunition to do good works. They refuse to accept there isn’t some injustice and resulting unrest they can’t leverage for change. And if there isn’t any they’ll make it.

    About the only thing they are missing from their glory era is a liberal martyr or someone they can make such a person like a King or Malcolm X, or Kennedy. A little tin foil hat would be that Obama near the end of his presidency could serve one last useful purpose. Imagine the mileage out of that. /end tin foil.

  • Hey, Erp, ya moron, since we KNOW you are here…

    Remember your “California is booming” bullshit…??? Remember I told you it was delusional?

    “After four years of uninterrupted growth, states’ tax collections saw a decline in the first quarter of 2014. Preliminary figures for the second quarter of 2014 indicate further declines in personal income-tax collections and possibly in overall state taxes.”

    Then came the show stopper:

    “Most of the decline is attributable to a single state — California — where personal income-tax collections declined by $2 billion, or 11.1%. If we exclude California, personal income tax collections show a growth of 2.0% in personal income tax collections and a growth of 0.6% in overall state tax collections.”
    —Investor’s Business Daily

    People adapt to STUPID, stupid.

  • What has happened in Ferguson is a complete and total travesty. We are a nation of laws, but the law was not given even a smidgen of a chance to work. Conclusions were jumped to and people started reacting to those conclusions. Rioting, looting, and otherwise all-out mayhem, have ensued. And still, we do not know what really happened.

  • I listen to Armstrong & Getty. They had some really good coverage of one of the mass shootings where they explain that the media has a lot of culpability.

    As they say, the media tells the crazy kid “Yeah, we’d love to air your grievances, but we need some sort of hook, some big event, that will allow us to spend 5 days going in depth into your grievances with the world. If you could provide us with that “big event” we’d be happy to oblige your revenge fantasy”

    Then we are told that guns must be taken away. Are we so sure if we wanted to stop mass shooting maybe it isn’t the press’ 1st amendment rights that should be curtailed instead? No mention of shooter’s name, goals, etc. Keep it local. I bet mass shootings would go down.

    Now, this is different, but still, the media sure loves to stir the pot.

  • Bruce is correct here, in that this gets played out periodically. The left tries to guide the narrative only to have it blow up in their faces, ala Martin. The way of it is that the “black community” (meaning black leftists) are supposedly fighting against stereotypes, only to find out the person whose banner they’ve hoisted supposedly in the name of equality and fairness, proves to be all too stereotypical. When that happens watch, as I said elsewhere today, for the narrative to change several times an hour so as to allow them to cover their backsides.

    Trouble is, there is never any price paid for it when the left gets caught out on this stuff.
    I see Sharp ton making noises on this case. The Brawley thing is still outstanding, rather like the Kopekne thing for Teddy “Bridge” Kennedy… and yet, like Kennedy, those players like Sharp ton and Kennedy are not then in a situation where their areas disappear… allowing them to continue creating victims.


  • For those following not too closely, the summary:
    Michael Brown, a huge black man helped himself to some tobacco in a shop, then strong armed the shopkeeper rather than paying. He then walked down the street, expecting traffic to get out of his way. When a policeman told him to stop jaywalking, he attacked the policeman, forced his way into the policeman’s car, and attempted to take the cops gun. The cop shot him.
    According to heavily tattooed gang members wearing clothes intended to intimidate, after being shot, Michael Brown ran with his hands in the air, and the policeman shot Michael Brown again while he was holding his arms in the air and running.
    The autopsy showed the exact opposite. Brown was shot in the front.
    The blacks proceeded to loot and burn. The local police, facing collective criminal conduct, responded militarily, engaging in collective violence to crush collective violence – a military style response.
    This “military”, which is to say collective, violence of course horrified the press, who blamed the police, and in particular the white cop in charge. So a black cop was put in charge, and a huge round of news stories proceeded about peaceful protests and how everything was wonderful in peaceful civilized harmony, blithely ignoring events running contrary to story, blithely ignoring that the blacks were taking out one cop after another by collective violence, which the individual violence of the cops was ineffectual in preventing. And then, contrary to story, the black cop had to resort to collective military-style violence to keep his cops alive.
    This is analogous to events in Gaza. One might well believe that Israel blockades Gaza because they are evil racists, but when Egypt blockades Gaza, people of the same race and religion as themselves, it’s pretty obvious that the problem is terrorists operating out of Gaza, not Gaza’s neighbors. And, similarly, the problem in Ferguson is individual and collective black violence, which collective violence has to be met by collective violence.
    The larger story is that blacks destroyed Saint Louis, then, fleeing their own destruction of the city and each other’s violence, proceeded to move into a white suburb, which they are now in the process of destroying in turn.
    This is a reason that the cost of housing is so high. If wealthy people got to live where they chose, and poorer people got to live in the less desirable places, the inner city would be full of rich people, and poor black thugs would live in the exurbs. The city would be safe and orderly, while slums far away from the center, places that no one ever goes to or cares much about, were dangerous and disorderly. If, however, we look at where people live, it is clear that black collective violence trumps money, which forces up the cost of housing as white people bid up the small and shrinking pool of safe housing, which is usually located in places inconveniently far from the city center, forcing them to perform long commutes.
    The white man buys a house. To support his crushing mortgage he makes a long commute every day, along a highway with big walls to protect it from black people living much closer to his workplace than he does. And then some section eight women and her nine kids by nine different thugs is plonked beside his house, and while he is at work, the section eight woman terrorizes his wife, breaking one of his windows and threatening to force entry.
    This makes it hard for white men to reproduce, that white men are not able, not allowed, to protect their wives and children, in part because blacks can engage in collective violence against white people, and white people are not allowed to collectively defend themselves. To have a safe place for one’s wife and children, it has to be possible to run bad people out of that place.

    • Before getting too far into your screed, I’m still left with the question: if Michael Brown reached through the window of the police vehicle, and was shot while charging the cop, why was his body thirty five feet away from the vehicle?

      That’s one fact, agreed to by all sides, which I don’t see as fitting the narrative of the cop. And, the story of the accomplice, who claimed the cop tried to choke Brown through his vehicle window, and that Brown was just trying to get away, and then just trying to surrender, contradicts other evidence, such as the fracture to the cop’s eye area.

      So, right off the bat, I have some major doubts about the major witnesses’ statements.

      This is not a clear cut case, as far as I can tell from the available evidence.

      I’m not comfortable with all of your generalizations as, to my eye, they employ too much stereotyping.

      • Missouri law permits an officer to pursue a fleeing felon. My understanding, and this is VERY subject to amendment as more information comes in, is that Mr. Brown assaulted the LEO in the police car, a shot was fired during a struggle for control of the LEO’s weapon, this made Mr. Brown consider doing something else with his day and he ran, the LEO followed, perhaps firing. Again, Missouri law permits a LEO’s use of deadly force in the circumstances by my reading. At some point, Mr. Brown turned and attacked again and was struck fatally.

        Or none of that is accurate. We will need to see.

        • OK, that could explain the distance involved.

          Did the officer admit to shooting at Michael Brown’s back as Brown fled?

      • Thirty feet always sounds further than it is. And I’d question that estimate if it’s from a witness. Most people suck at estimating distances.

        • As an experiment I just moved my out of shape 200 lb frame from a standing start 30+ feet as fast as I cared to move barefoot on pavement.

          4.3 seconds.

          Not a lot of time for decisions.

          • Especially IF one of your eye-sockets was destroyed and you are trying to see through blood. Which could STILL be unfounded. It is a report in the press…

          • If true, his ears were probably still ringing from the fracture alone. Having been hit in the melon a time or two with sturdy objects I know that feeling first hand.

        • Thirty five feet is the figure given in the official report.

          I was assuming that the officer was next to his vehicle when he fired at Brown, but if he was in pursuit, that could explain what seemed to me to be a problem with the officer’s statement.

      • His body was thirty feet away from the vehicle because the unarmed black man, who was 6’5 and about 280 pounds, had just given the officer an orbital blowout fracture to the eye socket, then apparently reached in and grabbed the officer’s gun, discharging it and nearly shooting him in the groin, before fleeing on foot with his accomplice in the convenient store robbery — when the officer got out of his truck and pursued, the unarmed black man turned around and rushed head-on at him, as confirmed by a dozen witnesses. At that point the officer opened fire and kept on firing till the unarmed black man stopped his oncoming assault.

        • Do you have a source for the claim that Michael Brown had a hold of the gun and fired it?

          The only other accounts I’ve heard were that the shot during the struggle at the vehicle hit Brown. I’ve never seen any news story indicate the officer lost control of his pistol, ever.

        • According to your sources, did the officer fire at Brown before Brown turned to charge at him?


    Oooookay, than…

    We knew this guy was a half-witted schmuck, but golly…

    So, how does Darren Wilson get a fair trial anywhere in Missouri when the state’s highest law enforcement official taints the entire jury pool like this? I know it’s theoretically possible, but damn…

    Maybe the publicity surrounding his resignation would help. Because this dope just killed due process for this LEO.

    • The Martin brothers and Zimmerman Media circus continues.

      When does the fuel they irresponsibly add become the equivalent to shouting fire in the crowded theatre?
      Just a topic for thought on freedom of the press.

      As for the gov, maybe he should run for state Attorney General next time.
      What a collection of irresponsible media whore asshats.

    • a fair trial is only half the deal, Rags.
      assume by some miricle of fairness, he is properly aquitted.
      where does he go?

      • I’ve already seen a number of people being interviewed who have implicitly warned that not indicting, not convicting, will cause havoc–facts be damned.

        Meanwhile, Governor Nixon has called for vigorous prosecution (even before an indictment) and disgraced Attorney General Holder is promising change.

        Well, if Michael Brown assaulted the officer and broke his eye socket, and he wasn’t shot in the back, what needs to change? Not using guns on massive men inflicting potentially life-threatening bodily harm? And, if the grand jury doesn’t indict, what will Nixon do?

        • Turn it over to DOJ
          to prosecute for violation of Brown’s civil rights.
          Reality is what they say it is.

          • Had they released pictures and x-rays of the eye injury ASAP, could that have stopped the riots?

            Without the riots, would the DOJ even think about pursuing civil rights charges?

  • “SPECIAL weapons should be deployed in special circumstances not just any old time someone might look crosswise at a cop.”

    I think you’re hyperventilating a bit, my brother.

    • Yes and no. LEO branches have used them to dump unpasteurized milk.
      So I admittedly went to an extreme extreme there.
      But given that I think some of their use has been for mundane situations when a warrant and a couple officers w o Ulf have sufficed it would eve wrong to say I’m the only one going to extreme extremes. When I do it it’s….hyperbole?
      When they do it…..

      I also get the idea that sometimes you want to present your intended targets with such an overwhelming display of strength that they just raise their hands and everyone goes away without bullet holes in them. Judgement call, but they seem to presume now they are always facing Fallujah instead of Frank and Connie and Bozo the dog.

  • Another read for perspective…
    Now, do I freak out because Brinks and lots of other companies have armored vehicles on the road? Nope.
    Am I concerned that every agency in the Federal bureaucratic state has a police arm and a SWAT team? Yep.

    Do I think that East Rooster Poot, NH needs an MRAP. Nope. I doubt they need a SWAT team, either. But if their elected leaders think that’s a good place to put money, AND if the team is well trained, I don’t see the harm.

    • The human tendency to want to use the gear. Too many of us, and I include me in that, have it.

      • I hope you’ll read the pieces I’ve put up. I have a fair amount of gear I’ve never used, and REALLY hope I never will. There is a fair amount of evidence that police use force carefully, though we do see outrageous examples every day, partly due to instant information. I’m reminded of the raid on those dangerous militiamen who make Gibson guitars.
        My belief has always been that the local sheriff could have served the warrant on David Corrish in absolute peace. But Janet Reno and the ATF really wanted a snazzy video of taking down “the other”.
        Conversely, the police in Ferguson have killed or injured very few, even though they are all “militarized” and ery-thang. And I personally want a good HARD response to rioting and looting, and a quick restoration of civil society, as opposed to having police watch on the sidelines.

        • Yep, I read them. I will observe the real for sure US Army shot a bunch of draft rioters dead in New York in 1863 but I contend that no one considered it an improvement that the National Guard only shot 4 at Kent State in 1970. I commend and applaud the professionalism and restraint we see nowadays in comparison to the good old days, but just because the police perhaps used to be worse doesn’t make the excuse that any current lesser excessive violence is okay because we’re considering it in historical perspective.

          I agree with everything you said here. I also have stuff I hope never to use in anger or danger and gear I never want to have to use at all “for emergencies”.
          And honestly I’m not concerned when police show up for a riot decked out in riot gear. We can discuss the pros and cons of deploying available gear in force and ponder does it inflame or restrain a crowd of angry possibly violence prone people. But I will say armored vehicles and trench sweepers impress the sane and would tend to make me much more peaceful, “Kumbayah my lord and please don’t taze me bro”.

          It’s exactly the David Koresh style raid played out on small scale that disturbs me. I want police reconnaissance to be accurate and their responses to be measured. Unless I’m not seeing the stories, in most cases no one is going to shoot back at the cops busting in with a whoop and a bang at 02:00 or knocking at 07:00. Yet they come in like they are house clearing, kill the dog, blow up the baby in the play pen, and apprehend the guy with his 10 ounces of pot when they could probably have done that without anything I described between the words “like they are….” and the words “play pen” by knocking on the door at 7:00 AM with 3 officers, and a search warrant.

          Does the availability of the weaponry breed a desire to use it and instill a belief that it must be used in order to ensure the safety of police officers, just in case?

          • Couple of things…
            The stream here was “cops are going military KWWAAAzy”, not could they do better. They can and sure should, just as should we all.
            A little investment in better intelligence would help to prevent a tragic result like the baby in Georgia. Of course, so would not breaking the law.
            In the case of the “raid” on Gibson guitar, some government lawyers should have called their lawyers and arranged for an inspection. There was no need for any “raid” at all.
            I will rarely every say these guys are stupid, but they are stupid here. Watch and see what I mean. Also, I don’t know that Ferguson OWNS much or any of the “scary” armored stuff you’ve seen, and a lot of the cops AND their commanders were from all over St. Louis, if I’m not very much mistaken. The two reporters MAY have been given an illegal order to leave Micky-D’s, but you don’t just defy LEOs. “You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride”. A LOT of the reporting here has been pure bullshit, btw. Anyhow…

          • Random thoughts on the video link picture.

            Nice scope and tripod.

            What’s he using it for? Is he expecting to fire at things that far away? Hell, no spotter?

            maybe he should get down off the truck because he’s a hell of a target up there for some other guy with a scoped weapon.

            You’re looking down a scope, you aren’t looking at the scenery. Safely assuming it’s been properly zeroed, the barrel ALWAYS lines up with the scope.
            All for show? We’re aiming weapons at people on the street for show now?

            Ummm….his daddy should swat him for aiming guns at people.

          • And yeah, there’s a shot in the video of him at 1:03, or someone like him, aiming through the scope, so I’m not overreaching.

          • You’re sitting cross legged in that position up there in the open in front of God and everybody… means to me you’re either an idiot or you don’t SERIOUSLY expect to be shot back at.

          • Yeah, no APPARENT spotter. But he does have an ear-bud. You ASSume he has no reason to scope someone. I’m not so sure. Police have been under gunfire almost very day of this thing. Note, too, this is a county officer.
            Why the camo…??? Because, if you are a SWAT team member in St. Louis, you stand out pretty badly in a vegetated area if you are wearing all black, blue, or white. C’mon, guys…!!!
            How many people have been shot by police during this whole thing? And I don’t mean by bean-bags. And don’t get me started on “rubber bullets”…!!!
            In total, this was a stupid Trifecta.

          • I think the police have exercised the restraint I’d have anticipated. No ‘Riot Act!’ ‘fix bayonets! you have 1 minute to clear the square and return to your homes!”
            People who throw molotov cocktails at the police have no idea how much restraint is being shown – because those things can kill ya, very painfully.
            And rocks still hurt like hell. Anyone who thinks throwing rocks is sorta harmless have never been hit by a seriously thrown rock.

            I’ve heard of shootings, I find it hard to believe the police have been the target of the shot, but just sort of let it go as a passing thing because no cop got hit.
            I know I wouldn’t if I was ‘the police’.
            Trying to find someone who shot in the air, or a couple of morons banging a round off at each other where we can’t see them, hard to track down.
            So when they say there have been fire arms discharged, I believe it, but I don’t believe they meant ‘at the police’ because I don’t think they’d have let it pass any more than I would.
            For the sniper – Given that no one in the foreground is ducking or reacting in the photo where he’s aiming through the scope, I’m concluding he’s not looking for a shooter. And his spotter, that’s a supposition on my part I agree. He could be on another vehicle. Glad I don’t have to be the one to give relative positions from me to him to help him aim.

            What! You don’t use rubber bullets as ear plugs? dang man, it’s the latest cool shooter style! Those soft orange squishy rubber bullets. They’re the best, awesome ballistic properties!

          • A little investment in better intelligence would help to prevent a tragic result like the baby in Georgia. Of course, so would not breaking the law.

            The baby didn’t break the law. The parents of the baby didn’t break the law. The owner of the house didn’t break the law. The only person alleged to have broken the law, according to a very dubious source of a confidential informant, was the nephew of the homeowner who was evicted before the evil bastards blew up that kid.

            And, you have the utter temerity to blame the victims for “breaking the law” when they did no such thing?

            Oh, and to top it all off, the evil scumbags who maimed this child won’t even pay for the doctor bills.

            War on Drugs: because f**k freedom and decency.

          • Put up your sources.
            “Evil bastards…”???
            You really have your hair on fire, huh? Are you volunteering to be a LEO? If not, were do you get off imputing to these people the absolute WORST possible human behavior? How about, they were doing a hard, dangerous job according to the law?
            We can and we should review the law pretty constantly, especially the drug laws as they have evolved. But nobody involved, I think, is “evil” unless you have some proof of that kind of motive.

          • Put up your sources.

            If you are unaware of the facts, then perhaps you’d better not make comments impugning the victims.


            You really have your hair on fire, huh?

            No, that would be the innocent baby, whose innocent family had just recently lost their home in an unrelated fire and were staying with their innocent relative. You know, all those people you presume to blame for “breaking the law” (an immoral law at that!) without even knowing the bare facts of the case, like the fact that none of them broke the law.

            …they were doing a hard, dangerous job according to the law?

            I’m sure it’s a hard, dangerous job to be a bank robber.

            They engaged in a paramilitary raid on a home, throwing in grenades without caring about hurting people with them, all because some shady criminal looking to escape punishment for his bullspit charge claimed to have bought drugs from someone at some place–all on the premise that people getting high is baaaaaaad and must be met with paramilitary force in a WAR ON DRUGS. Meanwhile, the same cops go out to their cop bar and get high. The DA and the judge who charge and sentence people for getting high themselves go to bars and cocktail parties, getting high on spirits and wine. Most of them got high on illegal drugs at some point in their lives but were lucky enough not to get caught. The fact that they got high on illegal drugs didn’t ruin their lives or make them bad people.

            What makes them bad people is perpetuating the evil of prohibition, which costs people lives and countless wealth, not to mention freedom and opportunity.

            We can and we should review the law pretty constantly, especially the drug laws as they have evolved.

            Alcohol prohibition wasn’t enough to teach you the lesson? The Drug War, besides being an immoral infringement on the freedom of individuals to do with their own bodies as they choose, is a total failure. It will never be won, nor even will there be successful battles. Drugs continue to flow, drug users continue to use, money continues to go to cartels and terrorists, black markets lead to violence and unsavory exploitation. Drug prohibition is inherently evil. Taking part in that means taking part in evil deeds.

            Remove all legal prohibitions on adults trading in and responsibly using substances. Let American farmers grow pot, coca, poppies, etc.. Let American pharmaceuticals manufacture drugs. Let all the cartels, Taliban, violent underworld thugs, and those like them rot in poverty. Let the violence in Mexico and Central America fizzle out. Free about half the people in prison, free up the budgets for drug enforcement, restore sanity to the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments. Remove the disincentives for addicts to get help.

            Otherwise, law enforcement and the underworld suppliers/dealers are just going to continue to do these evil things in perpetuity.

          • “SWAT officers launched the grenade while executing a search warrant for a drug suspect, who was not found inside the home. An investigation is reportedly underway into the handling of the case.”
            Which…I dunno…sounds like due process happening. Did you want them lynched?
            “Habersham County officials are defending their decision not to pay for the child’s medical bills, saying it wouldn’t be legal to take on the costs.

            “The question before the board was whether it is legally permitted to pay these expenses,” Habersham County’s attorney told WSBTV in a statement. “After consideration of this question following advice of counsel, the board of commissioners has concluded that it would be in violation of the law for it to do so.”
            “As for Baby Bounkham, the little boy walked out of a hospital with his family after weeks of recovery. A fundraiser is planned for him in August, the station reported.”
            Do you know if any of the people you were happy to call “evil bastards” contributed? Have you sent them some money? I will if you provide the address.
            Now, before you got on your “sanctimony horse” what did I say about investing a little bit in better intelligence? What did you have against that? Hmm…???

          • …sounds like due process happening.

            You go throw a grenade in a baby crib and see if you get to walk around free, carrying a gun, knowing full well that the review will be perfunctory because, hey, throwing grenades into homes has been done hundreds or thousands of times already, and those guys were cleared.

            Just think about that. Throwing a grenade into a residence is not a crime, so long as cops claim that some crackhead, whom they have under their thumb, tells them that someone in that residence sold him a package which will make him high, much in the way that the cops get high at their bar.

            A grenade. A home. In this, the “Land of the Free”.

            If that fact doesn’t astound you and make you question the whole system, then I don’t know how to get through to you.

            Did you want them lynched?

            No, I want them charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, child abuse, and destruction of property. I want them to be convicted felons, never allowed to carry a badge or a gun, never allowed to do harm to others under color of law, and compelled to pay reparations.

            Do you know if any of the people you were happy to call ‘evil bastards’ contributed?

            If you were their attorney, would you allow them to give one thin dime to such a fund?

            …what did I say about investing a little bit in better intelligence? What did you have against that? Hmm…???

            Indeed, that was a major criticism by Balko, et al. on this story. He also reminded readers how faulty intelligence, sloppy work, seem to be a far-too-common problem and source of many tragedies.

            I would hope that a gang of bank robbers gather high-quality intelligence to avoid being put into a position in which they end up killing people if they have other ways to accomplish their ripoff. Of course, I’d rather they not rob the bank, and I’d rather the cops not use SWAT for drug raids, or to serve warrants. SWAT tactics should be limited to hostage situations, terror cells, and the like.

    • The helicopter comment, priceless.

    • …I don’t see the harm.

      You lack imagination and a knowledge of history, if you can’t see it.

      • I don’t lack either. You apparently may suffer from a surfeit of the first.

        • You and Scalia have every confidence in the “new police professionalism”, which Balko, et al., quite easily and routinely dispute on a routine basis.

          Tell me something: the gun grabbers have cows because civilians are walking around with “weapons of war”, i.e., semi-automatic rifles and pistols with modern designs, using black composite materials and cosmetic features which do nothing to change the power or rate of fire. Since 99.999% of those with these scary black rifles never do harm to anyone else, then what’s the harm in THEM having MRAPs, tanks, 50-cal guns, grenades, full-auto weaponry? Why would it be wrong for them to walk down the street in ninja masks?

          What is the point of having a “peace officer”? Is it to wage war? No, that’s the people they send overseas to risk their lives for people who hate them and who screw everything up once the US pulls out. Those are soldiers. Peace officers are not occupying armies. They are not paramilitary forces. They don’t need to blast into homes because someone might get high or might be gambling with real money or selling unpasteurized dairy.

          They need to track down bad guys, arrest them, and leave the good people alone without intimidating them or behaving with an air of privilege and entitlement.

          • Now you’re being silly again.
            ONE of the stupid things about all this kvetching about “militarized police” is the mention of them having M-16s. From the same people who argue all the time they are just a long gun. Have police had fully automatic weapons? Yuh. Before the Army did, generally. You could buy a BAR or a Tommy gun over the counter for a long time, and the cops sure had them, and USED THEM HARD. Frag grenades, too.
            You can have a full-auto weapon. You can have a .50 or BIGGER. You can have a tank, or an MRAP. You can own a freaking minigun if you can afford the care and keeping of one.
            “Ninja masks”…??? Have you noticed the Vendetta mask’s popularity? Also…

          • “Peace officers are not occupying armies. They are not paramilitary forces.”
            Well, primarily they are peace officers. Sometimes they NEED to be paramilitary forces, and we expect them to be. See York City, New.
            ONE of the several stupid things that Trifecta guys said was some along the lines of…”when you need firepower, call in the Guard”. Except bullshit. Things started going south on Saturday, the 9th in Ferguson. The Ferguson and other area police HAD to mount a response. There had to be a FORCE which countered the street violence and arson. How long before Jay Nixon called out the guard? ONLY the governor gets to do that. How long do you think you’d wait for Gov. Moonbeam to pull that pin?

          • Again, show me some pictures or film of actual police departments and individual LEOs back in the day. Find some publicity pictures of modern PDs, with all the high-and-tight haircuts, cammo/black military-style outfits, etc..

            Now, find some interviews or candid footage of LEOs discussing their jobs, then and now. Listen to the language. Note how they refer to civilians.

            It’s not that departments couldn’t have this equipment 50 years ago, it’s that they didn’t. In small towns, they had a few cars, each officer had a sidearm, maybe a shotgun in the trunk. The headquarters had some rifles locked up. They wore black dress shoes, or maybe cowboy boots in certain parts of the country. They wore basic uniforms. And, besides things like racism in the south and big city corruption (paid by the mob, for example), their attitude towards civilians were that they were neighbors who needed protection from the bad guys. Sure, they may have been bossy and there was the good ol’ boy system of letting LEOs and their friends/family get away with a few things, but it wasn’t anything like we have today.

            Balko’s research shows rates of SWAT raids, for example, over time. Daryl Gates’ invention to deal with snipers, hostage situations, terrorists, and the like was used quite sparingly back in the 80s. Today, it’s used all of the time, for ridiculous reasons.

            The claim that these operations are dangerous is a lie–they are potentially violent because paramilitary forces introduce violence into the situation. In fact, the rate of death/harm to LEOs has been steadily declining, making their jobs safer. Stop the drug war and they’ll be even safer.

            I don’t want my relatives getting hurt or killed by some meth head because they are part of a raid. I’d rather they attend to real policing and leave the meth head to slowly kill himself.

  • I hope McQ can take the time to elaborate on what philosophical changes he sees in policing. We might all agree.

    • Do you live in a bubble?

      Have you never read Radley Balko, Billy Beck, Carlos Miller, David Codrea? Do you not go to Reason, the Bastiat Institute, CopBlock, Photography is Not a Crime? Do you never read Andrew Napolitano or John Stossel?

      Do you never check out links from Drudge? Never see the trending videos on YouTube about police out of control?

      Ever hear of puppycide? Civil forfeiture? Forced anal probings, roadside vaginal probing (without changing gloves between victims)? Kathryn Johnston?

      Are you unfamiliar with paid administrative leave (i.e., paid vacation)? The thin blue line? The lack of accountability?

      Law enforcement culture in the US is abominable. I could put up a link to a new story, every hour on the hour, and not be done for months, to illustrate the myriad outrages.

      • Less a bubble than you, apparently.
        I read most of those sources. I consider some of Reason’s coverage of this event simply loopy.
        I also consider Rand Paul to have been cravenly opportunistic here.
        Are there bad cops? Sure. Are there bad people? Are cops people? I know more about this in actually experience than do you, I suspect. I know cops lie under oath. Not all. But some.
        Is it your thesis that cops are just bad? Because you need to support that.

        • …coverage of this event….

          Forget Ferguson, for a moment.

          I know more about this in actually experience than do you, I suspect.

          Three generations of law enforcement in my immediate family. Suspect all you want, but you’re probably wrong.

          I give credit to law enforcement (police officers, agents, prosecutors, judges, etc.) who do honorable work to stop and/or lock up those who hurt others. Unfortunately, I’ve seen quite a few retired cops or those nearing retirement, who acknowledge that the culture of today is insane. It’s needlessly antagonistic.

          One of the major problems is that cops who “rat” on other cops are intimidated, abused, and on a few occasions, murdered. Frequently, the whistle blower is the only one who gets punished, who loses his/her badge. The leadership covers up wrongdoing, and when they “review” the incident, even when the facts show obvious malfeasance, most of the time they conclude that there was no violation of “policy”. The leaders are afraid of losing the support of their cops, afraid that an incident of abuse of power reflects poorly on their record. Likewise with DAs, civilian oversight, judges, etc., who are loathe to risk alienating the cops who work with them most of the time.

          No, plenty of cops do not break the law or abuse civilians, but very few ever report or challenge those who do.

          It’s a really sad state of affairs.

          • “One of the major problems is that cops who “rat” on other cops are intimidated, abused, and on a few occasions, murdered. ” So, the plot from “Serpico”. How old is that old horse?
            And THAT’s been true forever. It isn’t new. My experiences…such as they are…are first hand. Yours are…what…genetic? Nice ventriloquist act you have there. But we agree. Cops are people, and people are sometimes bad. A few years (maybe decades now) ago there was a spate of affirmative action hiring in New Orleans, and there was a criminal ring in the police force there. It isn’t there now. Vigilantes didn’t break up that ring.
            There is nothing you’ve related that is “new”. Not remotely. Just as our military are generally good, conscientious people (IMNHO), so are cops. They DO make mistakes, and the DO try to learn from them.
            But I haven’t seen anything that supports a psychological or philosophic shift into “military” policing. And I’m happy to see some if someone can show it.

          • Genetic? So, you don’t ever spend time with your family? You don’t ever talk with them? You never go to their job and see how things are done?

            Are you or were you a LEO? If so, then sure, you’ve got experience I lack. But then, I’d also regard you as quite biased.

            As for the military, things have changed in many ways. Eisenhower enforced racial integration, for example. When a considerable number of troops in war were drafted, there was a lot of resentment, even to the point of near-mutiny. During the political turmoil over race in the 60s and 70s, many of these problems were exacerbated by racial animosity.

            Of course these things change over time, reflecting changes in society, changes in policy, changes in mission.

            As far as LEOs, the War on Drugs has been a huge cancer which has eroded respect for the rights of civilians. And, that shows up not just in cops dealing with junkies and dealers, but in cops dealing with normal, middle class people who do something or say something to piss off the arrogant pricks.

            YouTube has a plethora of these fine examples of piggery.

          • Bottom of the page guys – one cop threatens to go all Judge Dredd, another cop stops him.
            Like everything else, decent people and bastards take jobs.
            We hear about the bastards more because bastards are ALWAYS sure to make the news and guys and gals ‘just doin their job’ every day don’t get any press.
            What we need to discuss is the TOE and just accept that cost wise it’s NOT effective to give Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles to small to midsized city police force.
            Don’t treat the armor like the French did parceled out here and there all over the place, centralize the damn things if we’re just convinced that we MUST have them available in case Al Queda attacks.
            Geeze, our answer isn’t to secure our borders, it’s to hand armor and heavy weapons out to everyone to stop the whack jobs the border should have prevented from coming in to the country in the first place.
            How much more could we spend on the border if we weren’t paying for APCs to sit in police sheds from Brownsville to Sault Ste. Marie
            The damned things cost a bundle to maintain and operate and that’s coming out of our pockets.
            If Sheriff Andy thinks he’s up against people with mine fields, IED’s and automatic weapons, he probably ought to consider isolating them as best he can and calling in help, not mount up on the MRAP and try to blitz them with his 10 officers and 3 auxiliary crossing guards. If he can wait for backup, he can wait for the armor to show up along with some reinforcements. I kinda want to know why Andy didn’t notice the wire entanglements and all before it became a real problem. You know, like, know your city, know your constiuents? But that’s another story.
            This will prevent the damned things from being used to guard groups of 10 full combat dressed guys whose mission is dumping unpasteurized milk down the drain because it upset some dude from the FDA, and maybe make them less inclined to play dress up as soldiers to do it.

  • I watch Ferguson with a big bowl of popcorn. I mean eff everyone involved.

    The Ferguson residents are thrall to the left, who created their lousy living conditions. They love them some big government, well here’s your big govt everyone!

    Their cops are over-militarized and in this day and age, made a choice not to wear cameras which could’ve set this right immediately. If you can afford all that gear, you can buy a go pro.

    The media as always are clueless agitators. If they get arrested or detained, I can’t find it in me to care.

    Al Sharpton is an evil, race-baiting piece of trash with blood on his hands.

    Let Ferguson and everyone there burn

    • My son has been mumbling about the racial composition in Ferguson vs the politician ‘color’ mix. The police force and city government are mostly white when the town is 2/3 black.

      “Ferguson’s police chief and mayor are white. Of the six City Council members, one is black. The local school board has six white members and one Latino. Of the 53 commissioned officers on the police force, three are black, said Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson.”

      20 years in changing demographics.
      Are they preventing black folks from voting in Ferguson? Do they not have a vote? Is there some nefarious white republican scheme going on that controls the city council voting areas through districting? One that controls the vote for mayor? The answer to the last two is sort of ‘yes’ – they do a wicked wicked thing to ensure white folks win.

      See according to Huffpo, they schedule the elections when you can’t go vote for President or Senate or House at the same time. They schedule local votes! And well, it seems Ferguson residents just can’t be bothered to turn out to determine who runs their city but they can turn out to determine who runs their country. Just too busy to vote for their local politicians if they can’t vote for President. So we gotta fix that by scheduling them so people don’t have to go out of their way at all to determine their representatives in government! It’s tooooooo haaaaaaarrrrrrrrd!


      • And who has arranged all this voting stuff that has led to these inequities and improper balances?!!!!!!!

        Democrats 🙂

        What were the chances.

      • Hey, they voted in Detroit, Baltimore, Newark, St. Louis, Atlanta, Chicago, Milwaukee….. WHOOPS!

  • “Before everything can be sorted out and calmed down, the media shows up.”

    Back during the King Riots, I remember a reporter spending his entire interview with a hospital spokesman trying to get the guy to say the police were gunning people down en masse. It went something like this:

    Reporter: You’ve had a number of victims brought in with gunshot wounds?
    Spokesman: Yes.
    Reporter: So the police shot them.
    Spokesman: We don’t know who shot them. They’re not being brought in by paramedics who can give us some backstory, just dropped off by people who don’t stick around to answer questions.
    Reporter: About how many gunshot victims?
    Spokesman: (gives approximate number)
    Reporter: What percentage of those were shot by the police?
    Spokesman: We don’t know.
    Reporter: Most of them, would you say?
    Spokesman: I wouldn’t say, because we don’t know.
    Reporter: But you’ve got a lot of gunshot victims, so the police are shooting people.
    … and so on.

    Ferguson is just SSDD.

  • From Eric Holder’s “open letter” to the people of Ferguson: “And police forces should reflect the diversity of the communities they serve.”

    Hiring with an eye on race and ethnicity violates the civil-rights laws that Mr. Holder is supposedly enforcing. And such discrimination is not only unfair and divisive; it also means that the less qualified will be hired over the more qualified, which is in no one’s interest, including of course the general public being protected.
    Meh. Legal schmegal. When you are an “activist” Attorney General, laws are for the little people.

  • I still don’t get the mentality that believes “Someone wrongly killed one of my race so I will go out and destroy the place my race lives in. That’ll teach … uh … me? a lesson?”

    • This allows me to introduce Ragspierre’s First and Second Dicta…
      “A sense of victimhood tends to corrupt; an absolute sense of victimhood corrupts absolutely”.
      Substitute “entitlement” for “victimhood”, and you have the second dictum.

    • I think it’s the revenge thinking of the kind that keeps the Middle East humming. Revenge against….anyone that has something I don’t have!!!!!

      Racial affinity is just the excuse to go out on a tear.
      But since they’re looting sacking and burning establishments owned by people of the same color they are, clearly revenge for racial disparities isn’t REALLY the factor.
      It’s anger that someone has something they don’t.
      You can bet your sweet bippy if a nearby someone was about to chuck a Molotov onto THEIR hooptie, they’d reach over and suggest some other car as a target.

      • Who kills black people in America? Going away, it is other black people. If not for that, growing up as a black kid would be pretty safe.
        The guys doing the looting are, were, and will be criminals, as a sound generalization. Not because they are black, but simply because they decided to be criminals.

        • Most arrested weren’t Ferguson residents.

          • Correct. Who said otherwise? How many arrests for looting? I dunno, and that’s a genuine question.

          • I’m not sure on that – there were 47 arrests a couple night ago – but it wasn’t clear from what I read as to what they got busted for.

  • “Do you know if any of the people you were happy to call ‘evil bastards’ contributed?“

    If you were their attorney, would you allow them to give one thin dime to such a fund?
    Of course. It could be done in absolute anonymity. You are so silly sometimes.

    • OK, so you’re asserting that the perpetrators of this horrific attack which maimed an innocent child, of innocent parents, living with an innocent relative, who not refuse to pay the medical bills for the massive trauma they inflicted, could be anonymously donating money?

      Great. Well, I guess there’s no reason to even question the use of grenades in American homes, over people getting high–which, last I checked, was a non-violent, victim-less vice. Toss away boys. Set a few more homes on fire. Scorch and burn a few more kids. Kill a few more heart patients. You just have to explain that some of you might anonymously atone for such evil deeds.

      You’ve got the mentality of a Good German, Rags. You really need to quit this blind apologia.

      • That’s just stupid, Elliot. You are embarrassing yourself now. Please, just stop.
        Do you THINK you could write something on the topic? Do we need to restate it for the frothing among us?

        • Throwing grenades into residential homes, in the United States of America, the “Land of the Free”, all on the premise that some people might get high if they don’t do this, doesn’t outrage you? It doesn’t cause you to question these tactics and to reflect on the underlying premises of paramilitary raids for vice crimes?

          No no no, I must shut up and be a good citizen. Otherwise, if I object to these outrages, then some pseudonym on a website will call me stupid and say I’m embarrassing myself.

          Amazing comeback. You win. Blast away. Send Steven Segal to smash his tank into some more homes to give the Honey Boo Boo loving Section 8 dwellers some more exciting television.


          • Well, you’ve managed to reduce yourself to Erpic self-parody, and using exactly the same crap Erp uses at this point in a losing battle to justify a WRONG position. Lies and ad hominem. Well, and in your case ridiculous, frothing hyperbole.
            Way to go, I guess. What a shame.

          • Let me get this crystal clear: It is your position that the CORRECT position is to allow people to throw grenades into residential homes in the United States of America? And, it is the CORRECT position to allow this on the word of some sleazy junkie who is desperately trying to evade jail time? And, it is the CORRECT position that everyone should just STFU and not object to this? Let me know if I’ve misconstrued your position. I’d hate for you to accuse me of making it up. I only have your words above to go by.

            Whatever it is that you define as the CORRECT position, you are, above, asserting that objecting to grenade throwing into homes is the “WRONG position”. Or, did I miss something?

            “Lies?” Bullsh!t! You just made that up out of whole cloth. Nothing I said is false or deceptive. Not one thing. I’ll stand by anything above.

            Ad hominem? Well, I get pissed off when I see someone who, instead of expressing sympathy for the victims of a grenade in the baby carriage atrocity, decides to smart off about how those people (who didn’t break the law) shouldn’t have broken the law, despite the law being immoral, much in the way the Fugitive Slave Act was immoral.

            But it isn’t truly ad hominem if my justified anger and name-calling are only an aspect of my disputing you on facts and principles. It’s ad hominem only if all I do is call you names and don’t make an argument.

            You know I did so, so quit bitching about name-calling, wimp.

          • That’s a lie. You are a liar.
            People can read. Anybody interested can see my position.
            And anybody who can read knows you erected your straw man of me, and kept on with that process, erecting one after another.
            I met your arguments…some of which were risibly loopy…as head-on as I could. I break down when you saddle up on your “sanctimony horse” and go for a couple of laps around the fair-grounds with your AMAZINGLY crazy tangents. I just don’t have time for that.
            In the end, you just failed. You couldn’t support a DELTA in “militarized police psychology”. So you call me names and lie some more. Exactly like Erp.
            I’ll invite anyone here to determine the what’s-what of my position and yours. And, really, you know it too. Which is why you have to call me MORE names.

          • That’s a lie. You are a liar.

            Name one thing I wrote which was a lie. I meant everything I wrote, and anyone who pays attention to the news, who reads about police abuse, knows damned well that what I’ve pointed out above is quite relevant.

            When you falsely accuse me of lying, that makes you a liar. It’s not even funny. It’s not you being scrappy. It’s just sad.

            I guess you’re used to besting Erb that you don’t know how to handle someone who isn’t stupid and dishonest like him.

            Get out more and learn how to debate real people on the merits of arguments, rather than assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is like Scottie.

          • “Let me get this crystal clear: It is your position that the CORRECT position is to allow people to throw grenades into residential homes in the United States of America? ”
            That was a lie.
            “Great. Well, I guess there’s no reason to even question the use of grenades in American homes, over people getting high–which, last I checked, was a non-violent, victim-less vice. Toss away boys.”
            That was a lie.
            “And, it is the CORRECT position that everyone should just STFU and not object to this? Let me know if I’ve misconstrued your position. I’d hate for you to accuse me of making it up. I only have your words above to go by.”
            And that was a lie.
            And those were samples.
            You have your hair on fire over the use of flash-bang GRENADES. ZOMG…GRENADES…!!! But they were designed to be NON-lethal. And they have been remarkably so. Should they be used will-nilly? Of course not. And they aren’t. Are they used too much? A good, debatable topic. For someone who can debate, and you’ve shown…again…you can’t.
            In the Teens, Twenties, and Thirties, police used fragmentation grenades. Or they came in with shotguns and Tommy guns or just plain old .38 Specials and shot the shit out of people. And for the very human reason they didn’t particularly want to die. A flash-bang grenade is a BIG improvement. One of the things you haven’t considered is how many people they have arguably saved. ZOMG…a humane GRENADE.
            So, have you shown that police are more “militarized”. No. You’ve done a lot of screeching and waving your arms in the air. And you’ve outright lied about what I’ve said, people know it, and you know it.
            Sorry for you, Elliot.

          • Elliot:Let me get this crystal clear: It is your position that the CORRECT position is to allow people to throw grenades into residential homes in the United States of America?

            That was a lie.

            No, moron, that was a QUESTION. You said, directly that I was doing Erbian things in “a losing battle to justify a WRONG position.

            That begs the question: since my position is that throwing grenades into residences, which inevitably results in evil consequences, like blowing up a toddler, what in the world possessed you to declare that I was arguing “a WRONG position“?

            I ASKED and ASKED and ASKED for you to clarify. I take you at your word and present the most obvious interpretations, with a few variations, and ASK you to explicate, not just what is the “WRONG position“, but what you consider to be the correct one.

            Calling a question a lie is pathetic.

            But I guess that’s all I can expect from you when you get your feelings hurt.

          • GRENADES…!!! But they were designed to be NON-lethal. And they have been remarkably so.

            These grenades have killed, maimed, and started fires. Tasers have killed and caused irreversible brain damage, too. Even more frequently, they are used for torture by sadistic pigs.

            Calling grenades “flash bangs” is just a cynical ploy to hide just how violent these paramilitary jack-booted thugs are, who storm into residential homes where peaceful people, who have no weapons, who have committed no violent crimes, may or may not have some material which could get people high–other than the six packs, whiskey bottles, and wine collections which are in the homes of the SWAT members, the prosecutors, and judges.

            Stop your copsucking for a minute and just think about how preposterous that is. We’re told the line that the cops have a dangerous job (statistics show it’s getting safer) and that they “just want to go home at the end of the day”, and yet, innocent people and people who have done no harm to others also want to go home safely. They want their homes not to be trashed, their beloved pets not to be shot on sight, their freedom, their property, their name unblemished.

            Nothing risks the safety of officers more than to create a violent event, where there was no violence before, to send them into a person’s home, that person’s castle, in the middle of the night when people are most likely to not understand what is going on and most likely to reflexively act to defend themselves and their family. Cops die doing that because of mistakes. Balko got a guy off death row who was set to die for capital murder, all because he was woke from a sound sleep and shot an unknown person bursting through his door–a cop who was in the wrong residence.

            Should they be used will-nilly? Of course not. And they aren’t. Are they used too much? A good, debatable topic.

            When a grenade is thrown into a baby crib, how could you possibly claim that these weapons are not used carelessly? When grenades are throw into family homes, in the “Land of the Free”, when the only thing going on is that the residents are suspected of non-violent vice crimes, you cannot, with good conscience, suggest that their use is anything but reckless and unnecessary.

            If they are to be used against bank robbers, hostage takers, terrorist cells, or snipers, then I could be persuaded that the use was justified–assuming the team was properly trained and took steps to not harm innocents. Otherwise, grenades have no place, whatsoever, in the homeland, against civilians.

            Did the Eliot Ness types toss grenades into speakeasies, or into homes where people where suspected of having a little hooch in their cabinets?

            Furthermore, other allegedly (but not) “non-lethal” weapons like tasers should only be used when the use of deadly force is justified, as an alternative to using a gun. If you’re not justified to shoot someone, then you’re not justified to taser them. Tasers should be equipped with cameras so that every use is documented and available to defense attorneys and attorneys filing suit for excessive force. Otherwise, we get the nonsense like tasers being used to subdue children, to attack autistic people, people with diabetes, deaf people, etc. on the premise that they needed to be “controlled”.

            I’m sure you’ve seen the pictures of protesters in Ferguson with burns to their bodies as police intentionally fired tear gas at them, instead of at the ground, which is the only legal place to put it. But hey, they’re wearing black uniforms with their faces covered or obscured, so who can identify the cops who broke the law by assaulting people?

            In the Teens, Twenties, and Thirties, police used fragmentation grenades. Or they came in with shotguns and Tommy guns or just plain old .38 Specials and shot the shit out of people.

            They used them against bank robbers, violent gangsters, and they like. They didn’t use them against non-violent people–at least not by policy and not legally.

            So, have you shown that police are more ‘militarized’. No.

            You want cites? You claim to have read Balko. You want a list of sources for the damning statistics which verify that the alarm over police militarization is substantiated? I guess I’d have to make up a blog post and spend a few hours compiling just a few highlights, since I don’t want to flood the comment section here with URLs.

            This has been shown. You’re either lying about not seeing the evidence or you’re being willfully ignorant, stuffing your fingers in your ears, and decreeing that any such talk is just anti-cop lunacy, or something pitiful like that.

            And you’ve outright lied about what I’ve said, people know it, and you know it.

            I meant every gotdamned word I wrote and if you were next to me I’d knock out your teeth for saying that.

            Asking a question is not a lie. Calling it a lie is either a stupid inability to comprehend English, or an abject lie, in and of itself.

  • “And now the DoJ has decided the Civil Rights division needs to be involved along with 40 or so FBI agents. ”

    Whatever happened with Holder’s investigation of George Zimmerman? Seems it got awful quiet after Bro’ Holder shot his mouth off.

    • He got credit for his intention, regardless of of his lack of action.

      • Right, street cred. Shoot man who follows the story to the end.

        People who think Hispanic is an identifiable race are making up their own reality anyway.

  • Why do I see an outside hand in this trying to get the national base re-energized around about election time.

    Otherwise the base might take this election with the same serious intent they take the local elections in Ferguson.

    • No, actually, looker, that is a good thing showing that McCulloch is doing a good, thorough job of gathering and presenting evidence to his grand jurors. A lot of that evidence is still being gathered.
      As to an “outside influence” I have a strong desire to be a fly on the wall when the DOJ community outreachers come to town. I would LOVE to know what they really do, and what their counsels really are.

      • I’ve already made the prediction above that they’ll replay threatening the cop with Civil Right’s violations, just like they did with Zimmerman.

        I see Ericy meet with the Brown family.
        Did Holder not visit the cop? Or did the press just not cover that?
        Strikes me that when he’s hugging family members of the dead he’s not exactly staggering around wearing his blind justice uniform.

        • Oh, I agree with all that, looker. Holder is going to do what he does. In the end, did that mean a damn thing for Zimmerman? Naw.
          But there are two (at least) tracks this thing is running on. The state prosecutor is…at this point…doing what he should. I have hopes he’ll continue. The moron Nixon has his head on fire over his remarkably WRONG statements the other day, and so I expect he is backing off.
          Conversely, I have NO hope that Holder will act in any way that isn’t an affront to the law. He has already signaled that the Federal government is going to be camping in Ferguson’s chilli…and law be damned.
          Will he go after the LEO here? Dunno. Early days yet. There is no evidence supporting a civil rights prosecution at this point, but it could show up yet.

    • Well, I do understand that while we’re getting ‘news’, we’re not getting the evidence and that’s okay with me.

      We’re not sitting on the grand jury and a man’s life shouldn’t be tried in the court of Twitteratti.

  • And here’s a hell of a way to have to get the nut jobs OUT of the policing profession.
    This guy is a poster monkey for all the cop complaints above – and the quick actions of the county Sgt is an example of what we would hope to see happen.