Death, prayers and hypocrisy

After every school shooting the Republicans, the wingnuts and gun freaks yell from the tops of the tallest buildings that now is not the time for politics. They tell us that we should wait until the grieving parents have buried their children before we begin any policy discussions. They will argue about the definition of an assault rifle. They will ask what specific new law do you propose. They will argue that we don't need new laws, we just need to enforce the laws that are already on the books.

Then the politicians offer their worthless thoughts and prayers before cashing the latest check they received from the NRA.

Then something else hits the news cycle and everyone moves on to the next crisis.

After every mass shooting the Republicans, the wingnuts and the gun freaks yell from the tops of the tallest buildings that now is not the time for politics. They tell us we should wait until the grieving families have buried their loved ones before we can begin any policy discussions. They will argue about the definition of an assault rifle. They will ask what specific new law do you propose. They will argue that we don't need new laws, we just need to enforce the laws that are already on the books.

Then the politicians offer their worthless thoughts and prayers before cashing the latest check they received from the NRA.

And nothing ever happens because we, as a nation, have said that we're okay with mass shootings and that the deaths of school children are no big deal because we really, really, really want to be able to play with our guns.

But after a white middle-class girl from Iowa is found dead and a person here without our government's possession confesses to the murder, now is the time for the Republicans, the wingnuts and racists of all stripes to use this girl's murder to score political points in efforts to restrict immigration from non-white non-Europeans.

Now is the time to wave the bloody flag of a white girl killed by a dark-skinned man to incite hatred and fear in support of a president's racist policies.

Let's forget that the vast majority of murders and other violent crimes are committed by people who were born in this country. Let's forget about the fact that the government long turned a blind eye on illegal immigration because industries needed a cheap work force that would do jobs that citizens didn't want.

I find it utterly repulsive that the same folks who put off talking about gun issues while the bodies are still warm have no problem using the death of Mollie Tibbetts for political purposes. By now, however, hypocrisy on the right shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

Boobies are worse than school shootings

On February 21, 2018, students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School traveled to the state capitol in Tallahassee, Florida demanding action on guns.

The legislative session began with a prayer for the victims and survivors of the shooting. This should have served as foreshadowing of what was to happen.

Rep. Kionne McGhee, a Democrat, introduced a bill to ban assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines. The bill was brought to the floor for debate on Wednesday.

However, by a vote of 71-36, legislators voted not to debate the bill and it wasn't considered. So, even though there was a majority who would vote the bill down, those opposed to the bill didn't want to risk a public debate on the merits of it. And they had the gall to do it when the students who survived the shooting were in attendance.

But, not to despair, the legislature did vote for a bill to declare pornography a public health risk.

That's Florida for you. Where boobies are bad but guns are good. In other words, in Florida, the 2nd Amendment trumps all.

The Gun Show

WNYC began producing a podcast entitled More Perfect in 2016. It is an exploration into the Supreme Court.

Last October they did an episode called "The Gun Show" about the history of 2nd amendment jurisprudence. I recommend it highly.

You will find that our modern day interpretation of the 2nd amendment is a fairly recent phenomenon.

Afterwards, ask yourself why the 2nd amendment is treated as sacrosanct while the 4th amendment is treated as an inconvenience.

Why is two greater than four?

Why are we so concerned about the possibility that the Second Amendment might be restricted by legislation but we show no concern when the Nine (now Eight) Wearing Robes carve out restrictions to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments?

This topic is nothing new to readers of this blog but, given the massacre in Orlando, it's timely once again.

Now the first thing we can do is forget about these ideas floating around that if you are on the government's "No Fly" list you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. There are no concrete criteria for being placed on that list. No one notifies you if you are placed on that list. There is no criteria for removing yourself from that list. Sure, "No fly, no buy" has a nice ring to it - but it's a nonstarter.

Besides, how many of the folks who carried out mass shootings in this country over the last decade were suspected terrorists? Would such a measure have stopped any one of those shootings? Highly doubtful. But it would allow politicians to say they did something in response to Orlando.

As I have said before, what we really need to do is address the gun culture in this country. And we can't do that without addressing racism. As the old white guard have found their numbers decreasing (and their influence over politics receding), the worship of the Second Amendment has become louder.

I suspect the reason such a stink is made over the Second Amendment is because those who held sway for so long because of the color of their skin know that the days of white power in the United States are coming to an end. They have some delusion that by holding onto their guns they can forestall the inevitable. 

They like to trot out the trope that an unarmed populace is at the mercy of its government. Let's look at that for a second. The US government has nuclear weapons, "smart bombs," jets, helicopters, ships and an arsenal of deadly machine guns and other arms at its disposal. Do you really think your shotguns, semi-automatic rifles and .45s stand a chance? Stop being deluded by Red Dawn.

You say you're worried about the slippery slope that gun regulation might bring about? What about the shredding of the Fourth Amendment? Or are you not worried about that because it only protects "them." 

And that's what this is really all about. 

One day you will wake up to find the Fourth Amendment is gone. But then we'll still have the Second Amendment. Some comfort that will be.

It's a wonderful day in the neighborhood

My wife pointed out the following post on some local community website for our neighborhood. Now first I have to set the table for what you're about to read.

We live in a part of Houston called Spring Branch. It's on the westside of town between the Loop and the Beltway. Inside the area are a series of bedroom communities filled with rich white folk who would swear up and down they aren't racist but they want to make sure their kids go to the white "right" schools. We live in an older area with some wealthy teabaggers, "middle class" families and working class folks. As Spring Branch has gotten "less white" over the past 30 years, those on the right end of the political spectrum have move further to the right in their futile attempt to return the area to some mythic state in the past.

Having said that, I like the area. It's a mix of industrial, business and residential. You can find just about any kind of cuisine you want and there's is still green space around.

Now you can read the post:

The Kerrwood Watch got another one yesterday. Spring Valley police chased a vehicle until it t-boned another vehicle on Hammerly. 

Black male driver then eluded police on foot in an apartment complex by the lake, hopped the fence along McKean, crossed the ditch, and made a VERY wrong turn down Kerrwood.  

His mistake was solidified by walking across yards with "No Tresspassing" signs. Kerrwood's telephone tree was activated and neighbors came out with guns. 

Bad guy runs across a back yard, hops another fence and tries hiding under a truck. 
When police learned that neighbors armed with guns were after their suspect, the police presence went from 2 to 15 in a matter of minutes. Police then took over. 
The bad guy resisted police, was Tasered, and hauled off. 

It's nice living on a crime-free street. Chalk up another Kerrwood success in keeping it that way!

For the uninitiated, Spring Valley is one of these bedroom communities I mentioned before. If you've been reading this blog for a while you would have come across a couple of posts I've written about how the Spring Valley police and courts operate. If you want a good laugh, go to a court session and ask for a show of hands of anyone who's a resident of Spring Valley. It's a good bet you won't see many hands.

Spring Valley is located (mostly) between I-10 and Westview (the first major east-west thoroughfare in Spring Branch north of the freeway. We live a good couple of miles from the boundary. So my first question is why a Spring Valley police officer was chasing a motorist so far from home? The police from Spring Valley have no business being on Hammerly - they certainly have no business engaging in a chase.

I have no idea why the motorist didn't stop in Spring Valley. I'm sure he stood out while driving - as do most of the non-white defendants you will see in municipal court. The accident wouldn't have occurred had someone's testosterone not gotten the better of him. But I suppose that's just a little detail our storyteller decided to overlook.

Of course the writer must make a point of the driver in question being black. What better way to conjure up fear in the locals than tell them a black man was running down their street.

Then we get the formation of the posse. George Zimmerman must have been proud. Nothing like a bunch of scared white folks running around with guns looking for a black man. I don't know if they were wearing their hoods or not.

And of course the police descended en masse. With a bunch of lunatics carrying guns chasing someone (with no evidence that the "bad guy" had even done anything wrong), there needed to be some voice of sanity - and I suppose this time it was HPD who provided that voice. And, if you've lived in Houston for a while, you know that's a scary thought.

These gun-loving vigilantes are the same folks who sit on our jury panels and decide whether our clients' liberty should be infringed upon. Don't even kid yourself about their acceptance of the notion that a defendant is innocent unless proven otherwise - your client is guilty the minute they see him sitting next to you at the table.

Yep, these are my neighbors.

A gun in every house, a chicken in every pot

The enlightened city council members of Nelson, Georgia decided the other day to require the heads of all households to own a gun. How's that for limited government?

Nelson, Georgia is not what we would call a liberal hotbed. It's a small rural community of about 1300 an hour or so outside Atlanta. If I were to hazard a guess I'd say that Mitt Romney carried the town fairly handily back in November.

It's truly ironic that the same folks who want to repeal the Affordable Healthcare Act because it requires folks to purchase health insurance would promote a city ordinance that requires folks to go out and purchase a firearm.

To be fair, though, the ordinance does exempt convicted felons, citizens with mental or physical disabilities and those who have a moral objection to guns. Under the new law, there is no sanction for not possessing a firearm.

According to one council member the ordinance will not be enforced - no one will receive a citation for not having a gun in the house - so it's no big deal. He said the existence of the ordinance will act as a deterrent to crime in the community.

Now let's see, those on the right don't like the government telling them they have to do something and they don't like unnecessary laws on the books. And here we have both in one nice little package.



H/T Democracy Now!

Rick Perry's praying for you

“As a free people, let us choose what kind of people we will be. Laws, the only redoubt of secularism, will not suffice. Let us all return to our places of worship and pray for help. Above all, let us pray for our children.” -- Texas Gov. Rick Perry

Gov. Rick Perry is upset. He's mighty upset that President Obama has proposed restrictions on the ability of anyone to buy a gun.

According to Mr. Perry, the actions announced by the White House the other day are a direct assault on the Second Amendment. And we certainly can't have that now, can we.

“In fact, the piling on by the political left, and their cohorts in the media, to use the massacre of little children to advance a pre-existing political agenda that would not have saved those children, disgusts me, personally,” the governor said. “The Second Amendment to the Constitution is a basic right of free people and cannot be nor will it be abridged by the executive power of this or any other president.”

But where is out great defender of the Bill of Rights when it comes to shredding the Fourth Amendment? Where was Rick Perry when local jurisdictions decided to impose "No Refusal Weekends" on the driving public? Where was Rick Perry when motorists were threatened with forcible blood draws if they refused to blow into the breath test machine? Where was he when judges began accepting officers' sworn statements over the phone?

It's quite ironic that the gun lobby screams to the high heavens that any restriction on the ability of anyone to buy any weapon is a direct assault on the Second Amendment, but no on bats an eye as the courts and the legislature continue to eviscerate our protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Restrictions on gun sales or mandatory background checks won't affect all of us but weakening the Fourth Amendment makes it harder for us to exercise our right to be left alone.

Rick Perry is a buffoon. Anyone who witnessed his performance during his aborted Presidential run knows that. The idea that we're going to solve our addiction to violence by getting down on our knees and praying is absurd. Doesn't Rick Perry know that more people have been killed in the name of religion than for any other reason?

But then it's easier to exhort folks to prayer and to throw firebombs at political adversaries than it is to come up with a proposed solution of your own. Now I'm not naive. The measures proposed by President Obama won't prevent another massacre from happening. Enforcing the gun laws we already have on the books won't  do it either. Even with stricter gun laws, there will be guns available for those who want them.

The answer to the problem of too many guns on the streets is not to put more guns out on the streets. That will only lead to more bloodshed, more death and more grieving families.

In the meantime more politicians will grandstand about how they will refuse to allow the White House to destroy the Second Amendment by restricting gun sales but very few will stand up to defend the Fourth Amendment.

And without the Fourth Amendment, your right to keep and bear arms will be nothing but an empty promise.

Two for Texas

Hey, make no mistake about it, I love living in the Lone Star State. I've lived here all my life and have no intentions of going anyplace else. But, let's be brutally honest, Texas has more than its fair share of stupid ideas.

The latest comes from our esteemed Lt. Governor David Dewhurst. As best as I can tell, Mr. Dewhurst was dead serious when he proposed that the state fund specialized weapons training for teachers and administrators selected to carry guns on campus. Under his proposal districts could decide whether they wanted to designate one teacher and one administrator on each campus to pack heat. The state would then provide the funds to train them in how to use a gun correctly and how to handle a situation in which a gunman starts firing inside a school.

Just let that sink in for a minute.

Apparently Mr. Dewhurst is still licking his wounds from getting beaten by that tea-baggin' wingnut Ted Cruz who two-stepped into the U.S. Senate promising to introduce legislation to repeal Obamacare. Somewhere along the line he felt the need to dial up the wingnut tendencies to appease the far right.

I know the NRA seems to think the solution to gun violence is to put more guns out on the street. And if that notion seems absurd - the notion of more guns on school campuses seems downright obscene.

And, just to prove that Mr. Dewhurst's latest brainstorm isn't a fluke - over in Pearland (a suburb of Houston), an 11-year-old was arrested for threatening to bring a gun to school. He wasn't sent to the office and placed in an in-school suspension program. He wasn't placed in an alternative school. He was arrested.

Someone please enlighten me as to what good it does to place handcuffs on a 5th grader and cart him off to the police station. As a rule, kids that age don't appreciate the consequences of their actions. They live in a bubble and have a hard time understanding that the things they do may affect others.

Now, instead of learning math and science and grammar, this young boy is learning all about the criminal (in)justice system. What an education he will receive. Instead of reaching out and trying to help this young boy, the folks entrusted to educate him threw up their hands and passed him off to law enforcement.

Sure, they were probably a bit skittish after what happened last month in Connecticut. I get that. But the kid is only eleven.

Farming out discipline problems to the courts is a losing proposition but it sure is a hell of a lot easier than dealing with the problem yourself. The administrators responsible for this incident should be ashamed of themselves and might want to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror. There is no excuse for putting an 11-year-old in handcuffs.

Worth the paper it's printed on

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. -- 2nd Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. -- 4th Amendment

For the most ardent gun rights advocates out there, the language of the 2nd Amendment is sacrosanct. Of course the qualifying clause before the comma is often brushed off as if it didn't exist.

We look back now at the Constitution and Bill of Rights as the great blueprints of our nation. At the time the Constitution was adopted, however, there were a multitude of voices arguing that the plan laid out in that document would only serve to enslave farmers and other agrarian interests. That's why we have two house of Congress - one represented the voice of the people and other represented the voice of the states. It's the reason the Electoral College was created - to ensure that the voters of just a few of the larger states could dictate who served as president. (The irony, of course, is that we have just the opposite situation today where the voters of a few states hold the rest of the nation hostage on Election Day.)

The agrarian interests were not in favor of a strong centralized government. They believed that only favored the monied interests in the larger states. One thing they really feared was the creation of a federal army. The 2nd Amendment was designed to sway those critics by leaving the defense of the republic to the state militias.

And, in order to have state militias capable of defending the republic against an expected attack from the English, folks needed to have guns.

Now that we have a professional army, the original rationale for the 2nd Amendment no longer exists.

If one wants to argue that the words of the 2nd Amendment are absolute, I can only show you the words in the 4th Amendment as proof that nothing in the Bill of Rights is absolute.

The 4th Amendment, despite its clear prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure and the warrant requirement has been honored far more in the breach than in the observance over the history of the republic. Most of the "reinterpretation" of the 4th Amendment has been the result of judges seeing cases in which someone either did something bad or had something bad and, but for a warrantless search, would have gotten away. Supreme Court justices, instead of reading the 4th Amendment and applying its words, adopted a results-oriented approach and looked for ways to get around the warrant requirement.

Over the years the Court has redefined "persons, houses, papers and effects" and created a mythical "reasonable expectation of privacy" test out of whole cloth. Courts have redefined "searches" and "seizures" in such a way that a person can be handcuffed in the back of a police car and not be considered seized and a pat down for weapons isn't considered a search. The word "unreasonable" has apparently been deleted from the English language and probable cause has become so watered down that stops are justified because an officer thinks someone may have violated the law.

Once upon a time we had a right to be left alone by the state, today you can get tased if you don't stop to answer questions. 

Maybe it helps that gun holders and makers have a very powerful lobby behind them with lots of money to throw around while victims of warrantless searches tend to be convicted criminals without a lot of cash.

What's to blame for our addiction to guns?

Researchers at the University of California at San Francisco released a study earlier this year stating that portrayals of smoking in the movies in 2011 were up 7% over 2010. That reversed a five-year trend downward.

Public health officials wanted the studios to cut down on the number of portrayals out of fear that young people would see their favorite actors and actresses lighting up on the big screen and would go home and do the same.

But no one has such compunction regarding the portrayal of gun violence on screen. In the wake of the school shootings in Newtown, the premieres of Django Unchained and Jack Reacher, two violent films starring Jamie Foxx and Tom Cruise were either cancelled or closed to the public. I must point out, though, that the producers of Django claim that the cancellation of the public premiere of the movie had nothing to do with the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary.

However, on Christmas Day the viewing public will get to see Quentin Tarantino's latest ode to a bucket of blood when the film opens nationally. Mr. Tarantino's films have been marked by gratuitous violence and lots and lots and lots of blood. Alongide Django will be plenty of other action-adventure, suspense and thrillers featuring scores of dead bodies.

What does it say about our society that we are more obsessed with keeping smoking out of the movies than we are about gun violence?

There is approximately one gun in circulation in this country for every citizen of the United States. Gun sales have continued to rise while violent crime rates have continued to decline. Most cities in the US are safer now than they've ever been (at least in recent history) but still we are stocking up weapons like there's no tomorrow.

I suspect part of the reason is the mass marketing of fear. The other reason has to do with something that Bill O'Reilly said on Election Night. While his comment that President Obama won re-election because he was giving "stuff" to various interest groups neglects the fact that Mitt Romney's entire campaign was dedicated to him pledging to give lots of "stuff" to the rich and to corporate interest, his comment about the end of the "White Establishment" was right on target.

For most of this nation's history older white males have dominated positions of power and white voters vastly outnumbered everyone else. That has changed. There are more and more urban areas in this country where whites are in the minority. That's scary to some people. I think there's a reason that most of the doomsday "preppers" are white. They are trying desperately to hang on to a past that no longer exists and it scares the shit out of them.

Over the last week I have heard colleagues whom I believe to to be rational and intelligent say some of the dumbest things I can remember. Now we may disagree on what measures we can take to address the rising level of gun violence in this country. I know we need to do something because the course we've been taking isn't working, but I don't know what. While we're talking about how to get a handle on guns, we also need to get to the bottom of why there are so many guns on our streets.

I have colleagues who have proposed that we arm teachers and administrators. I have colleagues who believe we need to implement school security measures than simulate airport security measures. I have colleagues who believe the answer is to post armed guards at schools. They then veer into the slippery slope argument about banning any particular type of weapons.

We don't need draconian security measures at our schools. Such measures will only indoctrinate students into the view that whatever the government wants to do in the name of protecting us is okay. Our children will be turned into lapdogs who don't question authority. Is that what you really want?

And we don't need more guns at schools. We need fewer. As a society we don't need more guns on the street. We need fewer. And we need to address our addiction to guns. We need to diagnosis our illness and find a way to heal ourselves. Because if we don't, there will just be more bodies that need to be buried.

If not now, when?

Aurora, Colorado.

Portland, Oregon.

Newtown, Connecticut.

After each one of these mass shootings, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters that now was not the time to discuss gun control. And we know who pulls the strings in Mr. Carney's back.

Okay, President Obama, when is the time for that discussion?

The purpose of a gun is to kill.

You point the weapon. You squeeze the trigger. The target falls down.

For the gun nuts out there who believe that their cache of weapons will protect them against the onslaught of a government gone bad - a gun is no match against a helicopter gunship, a tank, a missile or a nuclear weapon. If the government wants to turn its weapons on you, you won't stand a chance.

The time for the debate on gun control is here. And it's time that President Obama discover his backbone and stand up to the gun lobby. The election's over, Mr. President. Now's the time to create your legacy. How many more mass killings are we going to hear about in movie theaters, shopping malls and schools? We can't sit here and keep telling ourselves that everything's okay.

It's not okay. There are far too many weapons out on the streets. It's time we did something about it.

Yesterday 20 children were murdered. Those families have been torn apart. Those families will never be the same. Now, instead of planning for the holidays, these families will be planning funerals. And they will be planning those funerals because someone was able to purchase a weapon legally.

Now there's nothing wrong with hunting. I don't want to take away the rifles and shotguns hunters pull out of their closets every hunting season. But there is no legitimate use for assault rifles or semi-automatic rifles.

Now is the time for that debate. Now is the time for that discussion.

Anytime proponents of expanding the police state want a new draconian law on the books, they tell us that it's about the children.

Well, Mr. President, now it really is about the children.

There are twenty dead children. Twenty children who would be alive today were it not for a man with a gun.

It's time to put politics aside. It's time to do what's right. It's time to stop the madness.

Let's put an end to the gun violence, Mr. President. Do it for the children.

Ex-Super Bowl hero to be grounded for 2 years

Former New York Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress, who made the game-winning catch against the then-unbeaten New England Patriots in the 2008 Super Bowl, today pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of attempted criminal possession of a handgun in Manhattan. Mr. Burress will be sentenced to 2 years in prison when he appears again before the judge on September 22, 2009.

If you'll recall, Mr. Burress was charged with criminal possession of a weapon shortly after shooting himself in the leg at a Manhattan nightclub in December 2008. (See also "Doctor who treated Plaxico Burress suspended."

While it's likely that Mr. Burress' celebrity played a role in the severity of the sentence, celebrity-hood works both ways. Head west and you will come to a land where juries will suspend belief if the person at the defense table is a movie star, athlete or musician.

Doctor who treated Plaxico Burress suspended

Dr. Josyann Abisaab, the doctor who treated Plaxico Burress for his allegedly self-inflicted gunshot wound, failed to report the incident to the police and signed off on documents identifying Mr. Burress by a phony name, has had her privileges at New York-Cornell Hospital suspended.

Dr. Abisaab was summoned in the middle of the night by an as-of-yet unidentified person (who may have been the Giants VP of medical services, Ronnie Barnes.

Dr. Abisaab may face charges for her failure to report the incident.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

Dumb and dumber

At the Latin Quarter nightclub in Manhattan, in the early morning hours Saturday, New York Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress accidentally shot himself in the leg. At least that's what we're supposed to believe.

Mr. Burress had a Florida-issued concealed weapons permit (that expired last May). New York does not recognize any other state's concealed weapons permits.

For some reason Mr. Burress felt he needed to carry a loaded handgun in his waistband when he went out that evening - to a posh Manhattan nightclub. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realize that alcohol and loaded handguns are a bad idea.

At some point the gun (allegedly) slipped from Mr. Burress' waistband and he claims that when he tried to grab it through his pants the gun fired and the bullet passed through his right leg. Apparently no one heard the gun go off because no one came to his aid.

Mr. Burress' teammate, linebacker Antonio Pierce, decided to take the gun and hide it in New Jersey. Mr. Burress declined an ambulance ride to the hospital and relied, instead, on private transportation.

Ironically enough, Plaxico Burress was not scheduled to play for the Giants this past weekend due to a leg injury.

It will be interesting to find out what really happened that evening. Why was Mr. Burress carrying a loaded handgun to a nightclub? If it was for protection, maybe he should think twice about where he goes or with whom he goes. Why would his teammate take the handgun and hide it? If Mr. Burress was shot accidentally there would no reason to hide the weapon. How did Mr. Burress get the handgun past the metal detector?

Mr. Burress is now facing a weapon possession charge and has turned himself in to police.