Posts Tagged ‘abuse of power’

“[T]he gun lobby’s campaign against Murthy isn’t really about his record, or him at all,”

Zoë Carpenter of The Nation told her “progressive” readers last March, meaning Opposite Day warnings should have been in full effect. She was passing along citizen disarmament lobby talking points about why Obama’s nominee for Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, was being opposed by the mean old National Rifle Association.”

“He has … expressed support for limited gun safety measures like a ban on assault weapons, mandatory safety training and limits on ammunition.”

“You know, “reasonable” stuff. What happens when millions of gun owners reply “Hell no” and salivating citizen disarmament zealots let slip the dogs of war to bend us “ammosexual gun-humpers” to their will is left unstated, but the results would no doubt represent the pinnacle of “progressive common sense,” not to mention be a “progressive public health model” triumph – keeping that Opposite Day truism in mind, of course.”

http://www.examiner.com/article/chicago-pol-paves-way-for-surgeon-general-murthy-to-break-phony-pledge-on-guns?CID=examiner_alerts_article

The “gun violence” is a disease,and must be addressed by .gov inc. via the CDC horsepucky to follow soon-because “if it only saves one child” and “it’s for the children”.

Meanwhile-Blomberg,Shannon Watts,his moms and everytown for gun confiscation continue their state by state efforts to get “reasonable gun control” on state ballots,so draconian civil disarmament laws,disguised as “gun control” may be enacted in state after state.

Currently,Blooberg et-al are the biggest threat-congress an somewhat control Murthy for now.

Editor’s note; Over the last four weeks, reporter Rachael Van Horn has been doing research into why some local physicians offices and hospitals now include a question about gun ownership. The questions is included between questions related to health history. The question is generally asked, if it is asked at all, while the patient is in the exam room and typically by a nurse who is inputting health history information into the patient’s personal health information file or on a computer. It is not asked at all physicians offices here.

Van Horn has been searching for the origin of the question, why it is being asked and since this information is being collected and most times by physicians who care for Medicaid and Medicare patients, what is being done with the information once it is collected.

The story is protracted and will be a continuing series as more information becomes available. We want to offer readers some answers about just why this question is almost always now, routinely included on programs created by healthcare information software companies who market worldwide to healthcare facilities and physician’s offices.

By Rachael Van Horn

Staff Writer

Like many people over the last several weeks, Angela Squibb of Woodward caught a small case of the flu and when her symptoms didn’t subside, she went to the doctor.

“But what surprised me, was that while they were taking my medical history, right after they asked me if any of my family had a history of cancer, diabetes etc . . . then they asked me if I had guns in my home,” Squibb said.

According to Squibb, the question made her uncomfortable.

“I felt like if I refused to answer the question, they would just make the assumption I had guns and so I just said no. I felt it wasn’t any of their business and I didn’t see how it applied to me having a cold,” she said.

http://www.woodwardnews.net/news/the-gun-question-why-is-gun-ownership-inquiry-showing-up/article_c09ec42c-a43e-11e4-9e69-9b5cea2a1f08.html

ht/wirecutter / wisco Dave

Michigan is routinely classified as an open carry state; however, it’s  discretionary if you are not white. If you are not white and the police officer (Detroit Police Officer James Taylor in this case) decides that non whites shouldn’t have guns, then you get arrested for concealed carry and the prosecutor and judge can play along and even bar the attorney’s from mentioning that open carry is legal during the trial.

No, this case was not argued in the Central Court of North Korea in Pyongyang, this case was argued in Detroit, Michigan. Although it is hard to tell the difference after hearing about this case.

Fortunately,  two attorney’s came to the victim’s defense. Here is the synopsis from one of the attorneys.

Synopsis by Jim Makowski, Esq.

PEOPLE v. WOODY AAR

On September 13, 2014, Elijah Woody, Jr., a 24 y.o., African-American male, was hanging out chatting with 4-5 friends on the sidewalk of an inner city neighborhood in Detroit. WOODY was open carrying a Glock 23 in a Blackhawk SERPA OWB holster and wearing jeans, a t-shirt, and a light jacket buttoned all the way up.

At approximately 7:50p, a car containing three officers from the Detroit Police Department’s Tactical Response Unit, rounded the corner and approached the group. The TRU officers dress in BDUs and typically act in a paramilitary fashion.

As everyone in Detroit knows but most of us from the suburbs do not, it is common for DPD officers to stop, frisk, demand identification and conduct illegal, unconstitutional searches of any group of black males on public property. If they find anything illegal or questionable they will then lie as to how they learned of the offense.

True to form, the officers stopped the car, jumped out and demanded everyone produce ID. Officer James Taylor went straight to WOODY and asked him “you got some bullshit on you there,” referring to the Glock. WOODY is immediately disarmed, cuffed and placed in the back of the squad car. The officers did not inquire whether he had a CPL until after transporting him to the Detroit Detention Facility, and charging him with the five-year felony of Carrying a Concealed Weapon.

When the police wrote their report they had to come up with a story to justify their encounter with WOODY. The officers claimed they observed the group drinking from red Solo cups and, as they drove up they “smelled the strong odor of burning marijuana” from a moving car about 15’ away (must be some bloodhound genes there). Officer Taylor claimed that when WOODY noticed their approach he “bladed” his body to limit their ability to see his right hip and started “backpedaling.” Taylor claimed that WOODY then turned full face on, lifted the right side of his jacket and exposed the Glock hidden under his jacket, stating he was “open carrying.”

Shortly after the arrest I was contacted and advised about this gross abuse of WOODY’s rights. I reached out to my good friend Terry Johnson, a fellow 2A defense lawyer, to see if he was interested in jointly defending WOODY. He agreed so we took the case.

http://www.miopencarry.org/new/2015/01/michigan-is-an-open-carry-state-if-you-are-white

Two U.S. senators are questioning whether the FBI has granted itself too much leeway on when it can use decoy cellphone towers to scoop up data on the identities and locations of cellphone users. The lawmakers say the agency now says it doesn’t need a search warrant when gathering data about people milling around in public spaces.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the chairman and ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee respectively, have written a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder and Department of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson about the use of the surveillance technology called an IMSI catcher, though also referred to by the trade name “Stingray.”

Cell tower simulators work by mimicking the legitimate cell towers used by companies like Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint. They catch the signals emitted from cellphones and other mobile devices and extract insight into who owns the phone, his or her location, and other details. That’s a bit like someone setting up a big blue box, posting a United States Postal Service logo on the side, copying information from the letters fooled users deposit in it, and then soon after dumping the accumulated mail into a real mail box. No one need be the wiser.

The hitch of, course, is that spoofing the U.S. Postal Service would be illegal. What Leahy and Grassley are wondering is whether what the FBI is doing crosses a legal line.

What has particularly prompted their concerns, they say, is a meeting between their Senate staffs and the FBI. In that discussion, the agency representatives, they say, indicated that FBI policy requires obtaining a search warrant before using a cell-tower simulator to go after a target. But, say the senators, FBI officials revealed that along with the carve-outs for search warrants for cell-tower spoofing that follow regular law enforcement practice — where the public is in immediate danger or where it is a fugitive being tracked — the FBI has recently granted itself an exception for “cases in which the technology is used in public places or other locations at which the FBI deems there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.”

That would seem to suggest that the FBI has determined that simply making a call while walking down a city street is enough to free federal law enforcement from its internal restrictions on digging into your phone data. The senators have given the departments until Jan. 30 to respond. The FBI did not respond to a request for comment.

Read more @

http://tablet.washingtonpost.com/politics/senators-question-legality-of-fbis-new-policy-on-cellphone-tracking/2015/01/03/a12b6aec2287b69b9cddc8c30a75ef4f_story.html

Barack-Obama-Laughing-Reuters-ce07db880a87a410VgnVCM100000d7c1a8c0____

The Obama administration is cramming like a college student trying to study for a final exam, publishing more than 1,200 new regulations in the last 15 days alone, according to data from Regulations.gov.

Energy and environment rules are the biggest category, with 139 published by the federal government in the last 15 days, according to Regulations.gov

One of the most contentious new regulations is the EPA’s coal ash rule. The rule has been criticized by the coal industry and environmental groups — though for entirely different reasons — and has a price tag of up to $20.3 billion. The rule was finalized last Friday.

Before that, the Obama administration finalized a new ozone standard that could become the costliest rule ever proposed by the EPA. The EPA released the rule while millions of Americans were getting ready to eat some turkey and pie for Thanksgiving.

Regulations listed on Regulations.gov include “Notices from the Federal Register; Proposed Rules; Final Rules.” The government website shows that 309 rules were proposed or finalized in the last 15 days and 892 notices from the federal register were received — some of which could lead to new rulemakings.

So far this year, the Obama administration has proposed or finalized more than $200 billion in regulations when the coal ash rule’s costs are factored in, according to the American Action Forum.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/23/obama-admin-crams-over-1200-new-regulations-just-before-new-year/


U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (L) and Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta (R) listen as U.S. Attorney Steve Dettlebach speaks at a press conference on December 4, 2014 in Cleveland, Ohio. (Photo by Angelo Merendino/Getty Images)

The Department of Justice has released a report of its investigation into the Cleveland Police Department. My Post colleague Emily Badger beat me to the punch on this, but the findings are staggering.

Our investigation concluded that there is reasonable cause to believe that CDP engages in a pattern or practice of using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment. That
pattern manifested in a range of ways, including:

  • The unnecessary and excessive use of deadly force, including shootings and head strikes with impact weapons;
  • The unnecessary, excessive or retaliatory use of less lethal force including tasers, chemical spray and fists;
  • Excessive force against persons who are mentally ill or in crisis, including in cases where the officers were called exclusively for a welfare check; and
  • The employment of poor and dangerous tactics that place officers in situations where avoidable force becomes inevitable and places officers and civilians at unnecessary risk.

In other words, the department fails in just about every possible measurable way. And it goes on like that:

 . . . we found incidents of CDP officers firing their guns at people who do not pose an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury to officers or others and using guns in a careless and dangerous manner, including hitting people on the head with their guns, in circumstances where deadly force is not justified. Officers also use less lethal force that is significantly out of proportion to the resistance encountered and officers too often escalate incidents with citizens instead of using effective and accepted tactics to de-escalate tension. We reviewed incidents where officers used Tasers,3 oleoresin capsicum spray (“OC Spray”), or punched people who were already subdued, including people in handcuffs. Many of these people could have been controlled with a lesser application of force. At times, this force appears to have been applied as punishment for the person’s earlier verbal or physical resistance to an officer’s command, and is not based on a current threat posed by the person. This retaliatory use of force is not legally justified. Our review also revealed that officers use excessive force against individuals who are in mental health crisis or who may be unable to understand or comply with officers’ commands, including when the individual is not suspected of having committed any crime at all.

In addition to the pattern or practice of excessive force, we found that CDP officers commit tactical errors that endanger both themselves and others in the Cleveland community and, in some instances, may result in constitutional violations. They too often fire their weapons in a manner and in circumstances that place innocent bystanders in danger; and accidentally fire them, sometimes fortuitously hitting nothing and other times shooting people and seriously injuring them. CDP officers too often use dangerous and poor tactics to try to gain control of suspects, which results in the application of additional force or places others in danger. Critically, officers do not make effective use of de-escalation techniques, too often instead escalating encounters and employing force when it may not be needed and could be avoided. While these tactical errors may not always result in constitutional violations, they place officers, suspects, and other members of the Cleveland community at risk.

The department also fails at holding cops accountable after the fact.

Read the rest @

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/12/05/the-dojs-jaw-dropping-report-about-the-cleveland-police-department/

I guarantee that the charges/accusations are warranted,most Cleveland cops are assholes.

Back when I was young and dumb-I had all of the unnecessary force applied to me by the CPD-multiple times. Once,a captain told the officers running the 4th district jail that they couldn’t take me and a friend to court looking the way we did-we looked the way we did because they beat the shit out of both of us-we both had had bloody noses and black eyes,along with lumps on our heads,cuts from the cuffs being ratcheted down so tight,bruises on our faces and upper arms,from being beaten then dragged into the cells by the one arm and the cuffs-which meant our faces were dragged across the floor.

These douchenozzles will drag guys out of cars and pistol whip them,hit people with their batons,pull people’s arms up behind their backs so far they have dislocated shoulders,and on and on and on.

But hey-they all go home safe at the end of their shifts right?

officer-safety-pew-pew-pew-complete-power