I’ve got a bunch more comments on the debt ceiling hike and the blame game that’s currently going on, but there’s a couple things that have to happen first.
The system is in very bad shape currently and it’s going to take some serious work to fix it. Both parties created this mess and have absolutely no interest in fixing it. I don’t care who you are, your politician is equally culpable.
It’s good to know that he’s spending a total of 16 days in jail for assaulting two people and then making a false arrest. It’s such a wonderful thing to see prosecutors, judges, and police officers working together.
In all seriousness this is extremely disturbing and disappointing. Given the maximum sentence of 7 years just for the assault charges, he basically got off. Especially when you also consider the fact he falsely arrested one of his victims. The issues though are much deeper in the department than just him.
Guess they ran it like a team. It took Ramirez a whole 6 months on the force to do something like this. On the upshot at least the prick is broke, jobless, and living with his parents. It is disconcerting that they justify the light sentence despite the fact he plead guilty to three felonies. None of them though pertain to his abuse of power as a police officer, just “falsifying business records”. The department may have fired him, but that’s mainly to save face.
State Sponsored Criminal Count: 18
Because cops are allowed to vent and what better time than on duty and what better place than a bar when you can more easily frame the victim.
The DEA admitted involvement with Operation Fast and Furious today.
We may never know how much involvement the DEA actually had. The DEA is claiming limited involvement, and that it was indirect investigative activity, and they had no decision making capacity whatsoever. My give a %!$^ meter is at –20. If anyone in your agency knew that arms were being supplied to known criminals, you share culpability. Given the DEA’s other recent activities, it is obvious their actual stance on the law. They are exempt from the law.
State Sponsored Criminal Count: 17
Because nothing goes together better than drugs, money, and guns. It’s the job of the DEA and ATF to make sure that happens despite the laws to the contrary.
H/t: Uncle.
Shooting went down in Skyway Washington tonight. A passing concealed carrier detained the individual and ceased the hostile activities while waiting for police. The whole incident was over before the police were even aware it was going down.
The “victim” in the shooting will probably survive, most definitely thanks to the actions of this individual. Current suspicion is this was a dispute over drugs, so it was goblin versus goblin violence that was stopped by a law abiding citizen.
While the Criminal Occupational Hazard Reduction movement would prefer that citizen be disarmed, to be at the mercy of the criminal, as well as to leave the victim to die. Which makes sense because he wronged another criminal right? Obviously they have to side with one of them, in this case they wanted to make sure the victim criminal was killed.
Carry your guns, you never know when something might go down.
So the government supplied protection to ensure that particular drug shipments were successful. What good is this war on nouns if they selectively enforce it? Like every other form of prohibition it has failed. It has failed so badly that cartels are figuring out how to use the war to their benefit.
The government ran guns into Mexico arming cartels, and now we discovered that we also provided them safe passage for their product back into the states. Sounds to me like some of the cartels are becoming government endorsed.
State Sponsored Criminal Count: 16
Because everyone knows you use the government to shut down your competition, and they are more than happy to oblige, securing you from punishment from your illegal crimes.
h/t: David Hardy
So back over near my old stomping ground the Renton police have as always continue their tradition of being up to no good. It seems that some cartoonist decided to make fun of the situation, except the department didn’t find it too funny.
Here’s the cartoon’s in question, all nine actually that are being used as evidence in the “cyber stalking” case against the creator.
So for grins I went and looked up RCW (9.61.260) which states:
(1) A person is guilty of cyberstalking if he or she, with intent to harass, intimidate, torment, or embarrass any other person, and under circumstances not constituting telephone harassment, makes an electronic communication to such other person or a third party:
(a) Using any lewd, lascivious, indecent, or obscene words, images, or language, or suggesting the commission of any lewd or lascivious act;
(b) Anonymously or repeatedly whether or not conversation occurs; or
(c) Threatening to inflict injury on the person or property of the person called or any member of his or her family or household.
(2) Cyberstalking is a gross misdemeanor, except as provided in subsection (3) of this section.
(3) Cyberstalking is a class C felony if either of the following applies:
(a) The perpetrator has previously been convicted of the crime of harassment, as defined in RCW 9A.46.060, with the same victim or a member of the victim’s family or household or any person specifically named in a no-contact order or no-harassment order in this or any other state; or
(b) The perpetrator engages in the behavior prohibited under subsection (1)(c) of this section by threatening to kill the person threatened or any other person.
(4) Any offense committed under this section may be deemed to have been committed either at the place from which the communication was made or at the place where the communication was received.
(5) For purposes of this section, "electronic communication" means the transmission of information by wire, radio, optical cable, electromagnetic, or other similar means. "Electronic communication" includes, but is not limited to, electronic mail, internet-based communications, pager service, and electronic text messaging.
The department is claiming that the cartoons were posted by someone within the department for the express purpose of harassing the individuals. From watching that video I can’t help but think this is nothing more than standard banter towards the police department.
Frankly I think some people need to get some thicker skin, especially if you work for the public. If you do stupid shit and someone points it out, even in a cartoon online, deal with it. If you don’t like it, stop doing stupid shit! It’s a fairly simple concept.
I was going to just give this an honorable mention but it wore and me more and more throughout the day. The harassment charge is quite thin, especially since they still have to prove that author intended to harass the specific individuals. So now we get to see yet another municipality in the Peoples Republik of Puget Sound waste tax payer money. Given they ultimately are attempting to intimidate others who would do the same it gains my seal of approval.
State Sponsored Criminal Count: 15
Because someone pointing out your idiocy shouldn’t be allowed if your work for the state.
via Phil.
Because nothing screams lawful use of deadly force like shooting someone with rifle while handcuffed in the back of a police car. Later in the article we see the real reason this individual was absolved from criminal liability as a member of the state, the section of the DA’s office responsible for investigating criminal liability of government employee’s was disbanded. It’s much easier to just clear him of liability than actually investigate and prosecute. It’s also much easier to cover up a ND as a justified shoot. Cause if it’s an ND, then the department can be held liable. It’s a win win for the state.
Also why grab your rifle if he’s handcuffed in your squad car and you suddenly feel threatened? Seems like a prime example of a moment for a TASER.
State Sponsored Criminal Count: 14
Because the police have every right to shoot you while you’re handcuffed in the back of a police car.
H/T to Uncle.
Now it seems that TSA agents have found a more subtle score: stealing $100 that was a gift to a 16-year-old honor student from his grandmother. The boy’s mother tells the Post that the theft was "disgusting and a violation of my son’s trust."
The TSA has not terminated this individual involved as it is still under investigation. Despite the claims of zero tolerance, I doubt anything is going to come from this as how can they prove he swiped 100 bucks. It’s not as if he swiped 20 grand worth of jewelry and pawned it.
A Security Theater has proven worthless and nothing more than a den for thieves and perverts.
State Sponsored Criminal Count: 13
Because nothing says free like representatives of the state stealing a kids lunch money gift from his grandmother. I mean where else have we ever seen this kind bullying before?
Raw Feed
FeedBurner Feed
Subscribe by Email