Currently Browsing: Crime
Dec 4, 2013
I think they gave away the answer right here:
Police are unarmed, too. The only officers permitted to carry firearms are on a special force called the Viking Squad, and they are seldom called out.
When you name your armed police force “The Viking Squad,” I think it pretty much stands to reason you won’t have to call them out much.
Nov 26, 2013
I meant to post this yesterday, but forgot. For anyone who hasn’t yet heard about the video of the Monticello, NY Mayors Against Illegal Guns member who was arrested recently, well, you should go check out some of the video at Miguel’s blog.
However, for those of you who don’t have the time to run a video that runs about an hour and a half, I watched it for you. Here are the extra special highlights:
When the first officer comes in, Mayor Gordon Jenkins (who identifies himself several times in the video) reminds the officer that he got the officer his job in the first place and that he knows his family. It’s not really a coherent attempt at intimidation since the Mayor, to me, comes off as quite belligerent at this point.
Then, it gets really weird. He goes on about how he doesn’t care if he dies tomorrow before issuing a warning to the officer: “Be careful how you f***in f*** with people…just be careful how you f***in f*** with people.” That still falls into the belligerent territory in my opinion. However, when it starts getting into what people might interpret as real threats is where it gets interesting: “Down the road, you’re going to say, ‘Why did I do that to that man?’ and you’re going to pay for it.”
After ranting about the time he might serve in jail, he says this about his plans for his release: “Mayor or dog catcher, I’m going to be on your ass.”
The Mayor is held for a long time because they wanted to notify the Police Chief about his arrest so he could handle it. Unfortunate, the Chief was out hunting. When the Mayor is informed that the Chief is unavailable at that very moment, the Mayor’s response is this: “The chief’s got to pay for this.”
After a bit more time talking about how the officers “got to pay for this,” an officer finally asked him if he was issuing a threat. The Mayor claims he was not issuing a threat. However, the next major action in the video is the Mayor getting up out of his chair and using his free arm to rip a clock off the wall and throw it rather violently toward the front desk just outside of the room he’s held in. Seconds later, he kicks the chair he was sitting in across the room. According to an officer who came in to check on him, the clock was broken during the Mayor’s fit.
Keep in mind that this Mayor is actually due in court soon for his 2012 arrest for hitting and injuring a local police officer in an altercation outside of his beauty supply store. And, yet, MAIG still proudly boasts him as an ally as of today on their website.
Then again, this is apparently what Mayor Gordon Jenkins thinks about the importance of his public service as an elected official: “The f***in’ mayorship don’t mean nothing.”
Nov 18, 2013
Summarized by the Weapons Man blog:
He reviews a lot of literature and finds that killers, like the mass shooters that bedevil us from time to time, are not “insane” as that’s clinically defined: they don’t generally hear voices, hallucinate, or act in illogical fashion (once you grasp their ends, which are illogical to the rest of us). Instead, they are personality-disordered, but quite logical and even methodical in their actions. This has several consequences (which we understand not just from Schulman’s excellent article, but also from previous study of personality disordered individuals) that include …
Read the whole thing, as they say. He notes that there’s no background check that could plausibly detect these kinds of people, and notes that multiple spree killers managed to pass background checks, some of them quite extensive. I agree with the Weapon Man the solution likely lies in not offering these killers the publicity and notoriety they seek. It’s why you’ll seldom see me mention the names of spree killers on this blog.
Sep 16, 2013
The media proceeded, per usual, to get nearly everything wrong. First there was a shooter, then two shooters, then three, then maybe just two. There was an AR, then a double barreled shotgun. Then maybe a double barreled AR? (OK, I didn’t see that one to be fair). But in the end, it seems like it’s just one crazy dude. What’s interesting about this case is that it looks like he was charged with malicious mischief, which if of the second or third degree (which I think would qualify here) is a felony and would amount of a disabling offense for the purposes of firearms ownership. So did Seattle authorities follow through with charges? Or did they plea him down to third degree malicious mischief, which would not be disabling?
Aug 16, 2013
Here’s a case of dueling cops and robbers, only they are duking it out in the court of law – and not against one another. Instead, they are each targeting law-abiding citizens.
In New Mexico, the wife of an armed robber is suing the man who shot her husband because she claims that her husband, after pulling a gun on the victim, didn’t really intend to kill him. The innocent victim was apparently supposed to somehow know this and just turn over the cash he had and assume all would be well. The widow’s attorney claims that regardless of the fact there were two robbers against one victim, and robbers pulled a gun first, the victim has no right to assume his life might be in jeopardy.
The widow is not only suing the victim who had the nerve to defend himself, she’s also suing the victim’s boss because he apparently never should have allowed the victim to work since he owned a gun. She is also suing the city, claiming that she was held against her will for the act of being questioned the crimes her husband committed. The city has taxpayers to pay legal fees to get the lawsuit thrown out. The man whose life was threatened has to pay his own legal fees against this baseless lawsuit.
Meanwhile, in Texas, a deputy is suing the family of a man he shot and killed because they called 911 for help. He believes the widow owes him $200,000 because he suffered minor injuries in the scuffle and mental anguish for doing his job.
So, in New Mexico, you’ll be sued for not calling the police fast enough when a gun is being held to your head, and the cops in Texas will sue you for calling the police to help deal with a perceived threat. I guess that just being a law-abiding citizen is the only way to lose these days.
Jul 16, 2013
And now the Marissa Alexander case rears up again in the media. I covered her case more than a year ago at this point, when the narrative first hit the media. Alexander is a poster child against mandatory minimum sentences, not against stand your ground laws. A big problem we’re having is that journalists, when they don’t outright have an agenda, which is often, don’t really understand our laws or legal system. Stand Your Ground laws honestly don’t change a whole lot when it comes to self-defense cases. It still comes down to credibility, and that was the difference between Alexander and Zimmerman.
UPDATE: More here, at WTBGU.
UPDATE: Also at Ace of Spades.
Jul 10, 2013
… please try to avoid the trap of getting busted for having controlled substances while possessing a firearm. I tend to think most people will frown on possessing a firearm with hallucinogenic substances, and it kind of destroys the whole being a sympathetic character for pulling off effective civil disobedience. Rosa Parks didn’t have pot in her purse when she got arrested.
But I will note this:
“Numerous police vehicles, including a light armored vehicle and two low-flying helicopters barricaded Adam’s street,” the news release says. “More than 20 armored SWAT team members surrounded the house, as well as a number of detectives, and plainclothes officers.”
Two helicopters and an armored vehicle? To take down one guy who only kinda, maybe might decide it’s better to shoot it out than get taken in? I can get using a tactical team, given you just don’t know, maybe he’d rather shoot it out, but what’s so hard about waiting for him to leave the house and jumping him with 5 or so officers? Why invade the whole neighborhood? The problem is, you give the guys the toys, and it gets hard to resist taking them out to play.
Jun 11, 2013
Jim Geraghty made this remark in light of the NSA spying leaks: “Of course, you can do the right thing and still break the law.”
Meanwhile, Sesame Street debuts an education kit for helping kids deal with an incarcerated parent.
Clearly, there’s not such an epidemic of questionable spying document dumping in this country that these two things are directly related, but I don’t think they are completely unrelated, either. It’s a sad day when we pretty much joke about how practically everyone is a criminal these days because they’ve probably cross some regulation they never even knew existed.
It reminds me of a Kindle book my mom bought me that I really need to read soon: Trapped: When Acting Ethically is Against the Law
Unfortunately, since the answers to these issues don’t fit into a soundbite, don’t expect any serious discussions about the topic from our political leaders.
Jun 7, 2013
I found it interesting that the couple at the center of investigation into the ricin letters were blaming each other. The wife called authorities and reported it was her husband, but the husband told authorities who showed up that she set him up to take the fall.
Interestingly, it appears as though investigators believe him since they just arrested his wife.
I’m curious if she’s off her rocker and then figured she’d try to blame her husband for the letters once she realized they would really investigate or if the entire plot was designed to set her husband up for massive legal troubles. If it’s the latter, then it would be interesting to know why she decided to make the issue all about guns and gun control–whether she doesn’t like gun owners or if that was just picked out as the headline of the day.
I don’t believe there’s nearly enough issue to actually assign an obvious political motivation, so don’t assume it’s part of some larger plot. It seems the only thing we know is that there’s a woman who is either nuts and wants her husband to pay the consequences for for it, or there’s a woman who wants her husband to suffer and will resort to insane tactics rather than dealing with it like an adult.
May 29, 2013
Committing acts of terrorism against the anti-gun folks is a pretty sure way to help their cause and harm ours, and at the end of the day it’s some poor staffer who will be the ones opening the letters. You an expect them to play this up to the hilt, and paint themselves as the victims, and gun owners as a bunch of ricin mailing terrorists. Ridiculous that someone would do this.