This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Legal

  • Jared Lee Loughner; one more act of cowardice

    So the Tucson gunman who shot 19 people, killing six, Jared Lee Loughner proves his cowardice one more time and pleads guilty to avoid a death sentence according to the Washington Times;

    “He’s a different person in his appearance and his affect than the first time I laid eyes on him,” said Judge Larry A. Burns, who then accepted the plea agreement and added that he found it to be in the best interest of everyone involved.

    The outcome was welcomed by some victims, including Giffords herself, as a way to move on.

    “The pain and loss caused by the events of Jan. 8, 2011, are incalculable,” Giffords said in a joint statement with her husband, Mark Kelly. “Avoiding a trial will allow us — and we hope the whole Southern Arizona community — to continue with our recovery.”

    Of course, karma has a way of rectifying these missteps of justice, like with Jeffrey Dahmer.

  • May Issue or No Issue? A Veteran’s Path to Getting a Legal Gun in NYC

    First, I’d like to give all the credit for this idea to Emily Miller of the Washington Times, for her very well-written series “Emily Gets Her Gun,” [1][2][3][4][5], (for a start), about her attempt, as a law-abiding citizen, to get a permit and a weapon in the nation’s capitol.

    Like Emily, with rising violence and crime in the streets, I don’t feel safe. My neighborhood had a serial rapist that the police never caught, and I’ve witnessed three muggings in the last year, all from too far away to help even when I started running to get up. I had to break up a fight between two machete-wielding homeless guys on a train armed with…my words, not the best choice. (For future reference, apparently if you ask “Is there a problem here, gentlemen?” they think you’re a cop.)

    I’m an Army veteran with an honorable record. I have numerous firearms qualifications and training. I’ve never been convicted of any crimes. I was arrested once as a juvenile for being in a park past curfew: charges were dismissed. I’ve had a few tickets for speeding, which I paid. I’m a decent shot. I know gun safety. And now, I’d like to obtain a firearm for my home and to carry with me to protect myself and my family.

    Only one problem: New York City, and Mayor Bloomberg. Mayor Bloomberg has never been a fan of guns, but in the wake of the Aurora shooting he’s gotten even more nuts.

    My goalposts may move, but here are my starters, which certainly don’t seem unreasonable to me:

    Would like to acquire (but do not currently possess):
    legal permits to have one rifle and one handgun in a NYC residence,
    NYC concealed carry permit for a handgun.
    rifle: M16 or something similar – it’s what I know.
    handgun: 1911, widely acknowledged as the finest gun ever made.

    For those who are easily amused, I’m the “token lefty” on this site. I was a precinct captain for Kerry. I have only the barest familiarity with the process of obtaining a gun in this country.

    So hold onto your beer and watch this shit.

  • Equadorian Holiday for Julian?

    Looks like our good “friend” Julian Assange has tired of British food and weather, and has decided to seek out a different climate.  He’s applied for political asylum  in Ecuador.  Seems his native Australia wouldn’t lift a finger to help him out of his little European legal jam.

    Personally, I kinda hope he gets what he’s asking for – then pisses off the Ecuadorian government.  Ecuadorian laws are rather . . . different.  In Ecuador you can be sent to jail for 2 years for insulting the President, and for 3 months for insulting other government officials.  I’m thinking that it would be only a matter of time before Assange did exactly that.

    I also think a couple of years in an Ecuadorian jail would do him a world of good.  If he survived, of course.

    Well, OK – not really.  Assange is IMO such an ass he’s probably beyond help as this point.   But seeing him spend a couple of years in a South American jail would do me a world of good.  (smile)

  • Deja Vu

    After Poetrooper’s article earlier today concerning “Fast and Furious”, I’m a bit hesitant to post this.  I generally try to stay mostly away from politics unrelated to the military here at TAH.  But today I feel compelled to make an exception.

    “I don’t give a shit what happens.  I want you all to stonewall it, let them plead the Fifth Amendment, cover-up or anything else, if it’ll save it – save the plan.”

    No, the above isn’t a quote from any official of the current Administration about “Fast and Furious”.  But it sounds like it could be.

    I doubt this is news to most TAH readers, but the current Administration is now claiming “executive privilege” regarding documents relating to “Fast and Furious”.

    I’m not going to debate the merits of “Fast and Furious”, or the possible motivations (political or otherwise) which led to that DOJ operation.  Nor am I going to opine on whether “Fast and Furious” was a good idea, or was executed competently.  I’ll leave that to others.

    But the claim of executive privilege for “Fast and Furious” is, well, IMO bullshit.  And it’s also highly dangerous bullshit.

    Under certain conditions executive privilege can indeed be legitimately invoked by the POTUS.  But it’s generally limited to matters of national security or diplomacy.  It can’t be invoked to hide matters that are merely criminal or embarrassing.  No Administration should ever invoke a claim of executive privilege for such reasons.

    But the current Administration has yet to make the case why Fast and Furious qualifies for a claim of executive privilege.  And absent such justification, they’re essentially making a claim that all, regardless of political leanings, should find deeply disturbing and dangerous.  Essentially, they’re arguing for unlimited application of executive privilege – that is, they are arguing that executive privilege should be allowed whenever desired by the POTUS and/or senior Administration officials, and about matters that do not involve national security or diplomacy.  Because Fast and Furious is not a national security or diplomatic matter.  It’s a law enforcement operation gone awry.

    Allowing such unrestricted claims of executive privilege essentially places a serving POTUS above the law.  And if extended to other senior officials, it would similarly render serving senior officials above the law as well.

    In short, it would render the President a King, answerable to no one, and his senior officials untouchable nobility.  That’s not something I ever want to see in this nation.  Do you?

    And in case you’re wondering:  yes, you’ve indeed heard the above quote before.  That was Nixon – speaking to some of his senior advisors about Watergate.

    Nixon’s claim of executive privilege was a transparent attempt to obstruct investigation of Watergate.  It was absolutely wrong, and was slam-dunked by the SCOTUS.  And unless the current administration makes a far better case than it has to date, the same needs to happen today.

     

  • Brady Score – Meaningful Metric, or Misleading BS?

    This article by Jonn and the comments to same got me to thinking about the subject of gun control again.  It also reminded me of something I originally wrote a couple of years ago for a site that no longer exists and which wasn’t published before the site folded.  And  I also never got around to sending it elsewhere for publication.  So here goes.

    Fair warning:  this article is a bit longish, and there’s some math involved.  (smile)

    Introduction

    Fairly recently (late 2009/early 2010) the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (hereafter referred to the “Brady Campaign”) published its evaluation of US state firearms laws. It defined in this evaluation a measure it called the “Brady State Scorecard.”  This Brady State Scorecard yields a single numerical value for the state’s firearms laws – the state’s “Brady Score”.  The higher a state’s Brady Score, the more restrictive that state’s firearms laws.

    The Brady Campaign’s thesis is that laws restricting gun and ammunition purchase and ownership promote public safety, presumably by reducing gun-related crime.  They’ve been working to promote more restrictive firearms laws for literally decades.

    However, with the introduction of the Brady Score the Brady Campaign has allowed a test of their thesis. This article will do exactly that.

    Specifically, this article will provide a statistical test indicating whether there is reasonable evidence for a direct cause and effect relationship between restrictive gun laws and a state’s overall murder rate, a state’s  firearm murder rate, and that state’s percentage of murders committed using firearms – or, in plain terms, whether gun control works to reduce gun violence.  If there is indeed a strong a cause and effect relationship between restrictive firearms laws (as measured by the Brady Score) and lowered gun violence, that should be both apparent and obvious on examination of the data.

    The Brady Campaign – Background

    The history and mission the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is illustrative. Here is the Brady Campaign’s history: (more…)

  • “Got Your Six”, Eh?

    Everyone here’s doubtless heard about the “Got Your Six” campaign out of Hollywood.  NBC – yeah, that NBC, the same one that brings us MSNBC – is a sponsor.

    NBC also now is part owner of the Weather Channel.  I didn’t know that, but it’s also not surprising.  Media companies get bought and sold by other media companies all the time, and NBC is one of the “big dogs” in the industry.

    Well, it looks like NBC might have been caught being just a tad hypocritical.  (What a surprise.)  Seems that a former Weather Channel host, Nicole Mitchell, has brought a lawsuit against NBC her former emloyers.  She’s an officer in the USAF Reserve and a member of the USAFR’s  “Hurricane Hunters”.  And she alleges that NBC fired her as a Weather Channel host because of her military status.

    Mitchell’s allegations on the surface appear fairly damning, assuming they’re accurate.  There appears to be an escalating  pattern of discriminatory behavior, starting after NBC acquired ownership interest in the Weather Channel, culminating in a firing.  And all of it  clearly seems to be be based largely if not entirely on Mitchell’s military reserve status.

    But at this point, they’re just allegations.  They aren’t yet proven.

    The Weather Channel, predictably, has declined to comment on the pending lawsuit other than to say that they don’t discriminate, they follow the law, and that Mitchell’s allegations are “inaccurate” – without providing any specifics, of course.   Figures.  But unlike our “Best Friend” Timmy Poe, at least they seem to know when to keep their mouths shut to avoid eating more foot.

    NBC and the Weather Channel probably should hope Mitchell can’t prove her allegations.  There’s this little thing called the Uniformed Services Employment/Reemployment Rights Act on the books.  Has been since 1994.

    It’s a Federal law.  And it says, very clearly, “You can’t do that. ”

    “Got your six”, eh?  Yeah, NBC – looks like you “got her six”, alright.  But I don’t think what you seem to have done here is exactly what the term means.

    If Mitchell prevails in court, well, here’s hoping she returns the favor and “gets NBC’s seven”.  As in seven figures or more.

  • Philly former Marine convicted for self-defense

    Clint dropped off this link from the Philadelphia Inquirer about 57-year-old former Marine Jonathan Lowe who was convicted of manslaughter by a judge for defending himself with a knife despite Pennsylvania’s “Castle Doctrine”.

    “When he had his hands around my neck, I pulled out my knife and started stabbing him,” Lowe testified Wednesday.

    Stretton noted that Lowe stayed at the scene and cooperated with police, believing himself to be the victim.

    Stretton said case law barred him from introducing Manning’s 18 criminal convictions at trial because Lowe wasn’t aware of them and most of them were too old, the most recent from 2002. According to court records, Manning was awaiting trial for allegedly knocking out a woman’s teeth while robbing her two years ago Thursday.

    Yeah, I just don’t know how the judge arrived at that decision. Lowe was attacked by at least three men according to the article, and he gets slammed in court. Unless there’s something else the Inquirer isn’t reporting other than the judges’ statement that he has questions about what happened. Seems to me if he was unsure about the events, he’d have to rule in favor of the defendant.

  • Lawyers and PTSD Bullshit

    The news today in regards to SSG Robert Bales, the sergeant who apparently murdered 19 Afghans last weekend, is that he’s meeting with his shyster lawyer, according to Fox News;

    John Henry Browne flew to Kansas Sunday ahead of his first face-to-face meeting with the 10-year Army veteran, who is being held in an isolated cell at Fort Leavenworth’s military prison.

    Fort Leavenworth spokeswoman Rebecca Steed said Bales would be able to meet Browne in what is described as a privileged visit. Along with medical visits, such meetings are generally more private than others conducted in the prison.

    That expert said charges were still being decided and that the location for any trial had not yet been determined. If the suspect is brought to trial, it is possible that Afghan witnesses and victims would be flown to the United States to participate, he said.

    The Christian Science Monitor reports that the legal team is planning a defense based on Bales’ supposed PTSD;

    The details will be unique to Sgt. Bales. But inevitably they boil down to what hundreds of thousands of GIs have experienced over 10 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan: the sometimes almost unbearable stress of violent combat and the strains of military life on individuals and their families.

    In Bales’ case, according to initial reports from family members and the Seattle attorney they have engaged, that includes injuries during three previous tours in Iraq, witnessing at close hand the death and dismemberment of fellow soldiers, and financial difficulties on the home front at Joint Base Lewis McChord near Tacoma, Wash.

    Yeah, “hundreds of thousands of GIs” who haven’t killed even one civilian, beat their wives, rammed their car into a bridge, pulled the trigger on themselves [insert your own attempt at violence that you haven’t committed]. “Unique to SSG Bales” is an understatement. I’m not going to speculate on what caused Bales to go downtown and blast away at innocents, but I do know that there are many people on this blog who suffer from PTSD and there’s not one who I wouldn’t welcome into my house without bothering to lock up my gun safe. I’d like to think this blog is part of their self medication, I know it’s part of mine. That’s why I don’t try to restrain discussion here.

    But I hope this cock-holster lawyer takes into account the “hundreds of thousands of GIs” who he’ll be affecting by calling the choices his client made “PTSD”. Of course, I’m hoping against hope here, but there’s always a chance.

    And for all of you visitors here who are trying to shame us into dialing back our criticism of SSG Bales and his f*ckstick lawyer, kindly GFY. While we sympathize with his family, nothing they ever wrote on their blog has anything to do with what he did, which is why I haven’t linked to it.

    We are professional soldiers who know bullshit when we see it…and this blog is an ongoing discussion of that bullshit. Save that “innocent until proven guilty” shit for the jury. We are not bound by the constitution here. And we’re all pretty pissed off that the choices that SSG Bales made will affect the people we care most about when they’re in Afghanistan…wanna talk about fairness? The people who’ve done their duty, stuck to their own lofty principles despite repeated tours of duty in the war against terror, are the ones who will ultimately pay the price for Bales’ actions. I can’t change that, but I will push back against attempts to smear them with a broadbrush like this dickweed lawyer will try.