Monday, July 23, 2007

Kids Used to Be Able to Be Kids, Now They May Be Sex Offenders

Radley Balko notes another example of blundering idiocy in the schools in a post titled Childhood Now a Sex Crime. From the story linked by Radley.

The two boys tore down the hall of Patton Middle School after lunch, swatting the bottoms of girls as they ran—what some kids later said was a common form of greeting.

But bottom-slapping is against policy in McMinnville Public Schools. So a teacher’s aide sent the gawky seventh-graders to the office, where the vice principal and a police officer stationed at the school soon interrogated them.

After hours of interviews with students the day of the February incident, the officer read the boys their Miranda rights and hauled them off in handcuffs to juvenile jail, where they spent the next five days.

Now, Cory Mashburn and Ryan Cornelison, both 13, face the prospect of 10 years in juvenile detention and a lifetime on the sex offender registry in a case that poses a fundamental question: When is horseplay a crime?

Bradley Berry, the McMinnville district attorney, said his office “aggressively” pursues sex crimes that involve children. “These cases are devastating to children,” he said. “They are life-altering cases."

Radley states,

Honestly, the prosecutors who keep bringing ridiculous charges like these need to be disciplined.

Disciplined?!  Prosecutors, such as Radley references above, need to be driven from their offices, never to practice law again.  The teacher’s aide, the school’s vice principal, and the cop who interrogated the kids should also be driven from their respective positions.

Unruly schoolboys or sex offenders?

Posted by John Venlet on 07/23 at 11:17 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Monday Quote

Fifty-one percent of a nation can establish a totalitarian regime, suppress minorities and still remain democratic.

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

Posted by John Venlet on 07/23 at 05:45 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Tax Free Labor?

A Louisiana attorney, Tommy Cryer, has been acquitted of federal income tax charges.

A Shreveport attorney who has challenged the government for years on the legality of filing federal income taxes has been acquitted on charges he failed to file returns.

A federal jury unanimously found Tommy Cryer not guilty this week on two misdemeanor counts of failure to file..."The court could not find a law that makes me liable or makes my revenues taxable,” Cryer said. “The Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot impose an income tax on anything but the profits and gains. When you work for someone you give your service and labor in exchange for money, so everything you make is not profit or gain. You put something into it."

Does this development provide all Americans with the ability to claim that their daily labor should also be free from taxation?

Local attorney acquitted on federal income tax charges - Cryer stopped filing income taxes more than 10 years ago

Via Mises Economics Blog.

Posted by John Venlet on 07/22 at 10:29 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Dog Gone Crazy

Can’t individuals figure out anything for themselves any longer?

A law for when love ends but dogs linger - Wisconsin bill would set custody rules for pets in divorce battles

Posted by John Venlet on 07/22 at 06:40 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

First They Came for the Sudafed

I mentioned the hysteria capitalized on by the federal government regarding crystal meth just the other day in a post titled Mething With You, wherein I noted that the state will be tracking how much, and how often, individuals purchase Sudafed, just in case, you know, you’re taking the Sudafed home and cooking it up on your stove in order to make crystal meth.

Now the feds are coming after the iodine.

This rulemaking changes the regulation of the listed chemical iodine under the chemical regulatory provisions of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) believes that this action is necessary to remove deficiencies in the existing regulatory controls, which have been exploited by drug traffickers who divert iodine (in the form of iodine crystals and iodine tincture) for the illicit production of methamphetamine in clandestine drug laboratories. This rulemaking moves iodine from List II to List I; reduces the iodine threshold from 0.4 kilograms to zero kilograms; adds import and export regulatory controls; and controls chemical mixtures containing greater than 2.2 percent iodine.

FR Doc E7-12736 [Federal Register: July 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 126)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 35920-35931] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02jy07-6]

What’s next?

Via triticale - the wheat/rye guy, who also notes,

The really scary aspect of the crackdown on iodine is that it is legislation without representation. The public had no input; our soi-desant representatives had no input beyond having created the agency and authorized the war in which this reduction of freedom is an action.

Posted by John Venlet on 07/22 at 05:26 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Saturday, July 21, 2007

Joint Wrong Arguments

The farmers of South Dakota desire to grow hemp.  Though the South Dakota state legislature has given the farmers “permission” to grow hemp, the federal government’s strong arm, the DEA, is trumping individual and state rights by saying no, the farmers cannot grow hemp.

The New York Times has a an article online regarding this issue titled Sober North Dakotans Hope to Legalize Hemp, a headline, I guess, which is meant to imply that the South Dakota farmers are not stoned out of their minds in their quest for economic freedom.

In reading the article, I found the following arguments, presented by both sides, simply ill conceived.  Let’s hear from the farmers first.

Look at me — do I look shady?” Mr. Monson, 56, asked, as he stood in work boots and a ball cap in the rocky, black dirt that spans mile after mile of North Dakota’s nearly empty northern edge. “This is not any subversive thing like trying to legalize marijuana or whatever. This is just practical agriculture. We’re desperate for something that can make us some money.”

This argument is simply foolish, with its implication that any individual who would consider growing hemp, though Mr. Monson means marijuana meant to be enjoyed, is naturally some type of criminal bent on corruption.  I know some very respectable individuals who cultivate.  They neither look “shady,” nor are they “subversive.”

Now let’s hear from the DEA.

“Basically hemp is considered the same as marijuana,” said Steve Robertson, a special agent for the D.E.A. at its Washington headquarters. “We’re an enforcement agency. We’re sworn to uphold the law.”

This argument also displays simple foolishness.  The hemp the South Dakotan farmers are interested in growing is not the same as cultivated marijuana meant to be enjoyed, though I suppose if you rolled a joint of hemp the size of a newspaper you might be able to catch a tiny buzz.  And the assertions by Robertson that “we’re an enforcement agency,” and “we’re sworn to uphold the law,” simply shows the law is an ass and that the enforcers of the “law” are unable to distinguish an ass from actual reality.

The DEA also puts up this ridiculous argument.

What about the worries of drug enforcement officials, who say someone might sneak into a farmer’s field of harmless hemp and plant a batch of (similar-looking) marijuana?

While I suppose that might be possible, I think it is rather improbable, considering that the cross pollination effects of the hemp, on quality marijuana, would probably yield some poor quality marijuana, which was noted by Mr. Monson.

Naturally, one North Dakota state representative, Blair Thoreson plays the crystal meth card, an argument which should just be dismissed out of hand.

Everyone here knows everyone,” Mr. Thoreson said, “and yet we’ve had a huge problem here with homegrown methamphetamine labs, too.”

The DEA should mind their own business, and the farmers of North Dakota should till their fields, and plant their crops unmolested.

Posted by John Venlet on 07/21 at 08:11 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Beatles, Love, and Dirty Diapers

The Beatles produced some good music, and some treacly music.  One of the Beatles more treacly tunes, which was embraced in those days of beads, bangles, crash pads and Hare Krishna, was All You Need Is Love.

The song morphed into somewhat of an anti-war mantra in the sixties, and even today, individuals who wax nostalgic for those days eyes may glaze over in blissful remembrance of those supposedly halcyon days of the past when the tune is heard over the airwaves.

Well, the memories associated with that tune may very well change.

Help! Some Beatles fans are feeling down about the latest use of a Fab Four song in a commercial — the 1967 peace anthem “All You Need Is Love” highlights a new disposable diaper campaign.

Yes, the Beatles tune All You Need is Love is going to utilized to hawk Luvs Diapers.

Here’s what seems to be one of the biggest complaints regarding this.

But the “All You Need...” campaign, launched this month for Procter & Gamble Co.’s Luvs diapers, struck a particularly sour note for some fans, who heated up online forums about it. Among the objections is that the idealistic song, popular in the counterculture “Summer of Love” era and among Vietnam War opponents, is being used at the time of another war, in Iraq, to evoke soiled diapers.

Soiled diapers, the Beatles, and Luvs.  There’s a new idealism to rattle round your brain.

Summer of Luvs? Beatles heard in diaper ads

Posted by John Venlet on 07/21 at 04:38 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Friday, July 20, 2007

Got a Light?

The state is well known for knee jerk reacting to every little thing when it comes to possible airline terrorist threats.  Typically by throwing gobs of money at the supposed threat, or, by banning the carry on of nail clippers, lighters, bottles of water, or whatever happens to be the possible carry on threat of the day.

Surprisingly enough, sometimes the state actually comes to its senses.

Airline passengers will be able to bring many types of cigarette lighters on board again starting next month after authorities found that a ban on the devices did little to make flying safer, a newspaper reported Friday.

Starting Aug. 4, air travelers will be allowed to carry on disposable butane lighters, such as Bics, and refillable lighters, including Zippos, according to The New York Times. A prohibition on torch-style lighters, which have hotter flames, will continue.

Report: Ban on flying with lighters to be lifted

Posted by John Venlet on 07/20 at 06:18 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Worshipping a Wooden Altar with Psalms of Hot Air

On the day it was announced that Michigan leads the nation in unemployment, the photogenic one, Michigan’s governor, Jennifer Granholm, announced the following.

Granholm announces first ethanol-wood factory

And what, exactly, did this big announcment inform Michiganders of?  Nothing.

Other details including the site, number of jobs and tax incentives to aid the company have not been finalized.

To be fair, the announcement does provide the information that the factory will supposedly be built by Mascoma Corporation, headquartered in Massachusetts, which recently announced that former Senator Tom Daschle (pdf file) has joined Mascoma’s Board of Directors, which basically means Daschle will be Mascoma’s lead government shakedown artist aka lobbyist, and that the fantasy factory will be built either in Northern Michigan, or Michigan’s U.P., because that’s where the wood is.

This announcement is simply hot air, stoked by an industry which only exists via the artificiality of government mandated legislation and subsidies.  Stay in Masschusetts, Mascoma, and fleece your own state’s individuals.

Posted by John Venlet on 07/20 at 05:19 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Peering Behind the Curtain of Deliberative Democracy

Democracy, is a mockery.

Politicos jabber on and on about how good it is, and lobby for a more deliberative democracy (links galore), wherein the supposed ideal is as follows.

Deliberative democracy strengthens citizen voices in governance by including people of all races, classes, ages and geographies in deliberations that directly affect public decisions. As a result, citizens influence--and can see the result of their influence on--the policy and resource decisions that impact their daily lives and their future.

James Bovard has cast his eye on deliberative democracy in a piece titled “Deliberative Democracy” Dementia, which was made available online by the The Foundation for Economic Education, which is a must read.  From Bovard’s piece.

If government were simply a matter of paperwork or moral calisthenics, then mere deliberations might solve political problems. But the chance to vent at public meetings is scant consolation for the havoc wreaked by government policies. The number of government agencies that can accost, prohibit, penalize, tax, impound, impede, detain, subpoena, confiscate, search, indict, fine, audit, interrogate, levy, wiretap, sanction, and otherwise harass and subjugate the citizen and/or his property has skyrocketed. Few, if any, of the advocates of Deliberative Democracy seem aware that government fires real ammunition into the lives of innocent citizens—from speed traps, to seatbelt checkpoints, to bogus child-abuse investigations, to arresting almost a million marijuana smokers a year.

It is absurd to expect that discussions will resolve differences between people who wish to live as they please and others who demand the power to bring them to their knees. The more power government possesses, the more fruitless deliberations become between aggressors and victims. And yet Deliberative-Democracy sessions are supposed to assume that people who advocate government action are disinterested—as if such issues were the equivalent of choosing among possibilities for a Boy Scout troop project. According to the professors, citizens are obliged to act as if those who want to confiscate their guns or raze their houses are merely misguided—not malicious. Suppose the teachers union takes over the local school board (as has happened in many local school-board elections). What if the school board decrees that parents who homeschool their kids are criminals and should be jailed?

Via Claire Wolfe.

Posted by John Venlet on 07/20 at 04:52 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Thursday, July 19, 2007

A Congressional Confession

If Congress confesses to illegal activities, can we disband Congress?

"We legally steal,” argued Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.),...

From a The Crypt’s Blog post wherein we are treated to a Republican catfight over educational dollars earmarked for Alaska and Hawaii.  Read the whole thing, it’s a hoot.

North to Alaska

Posted by John Venlet on 07/19 at 10:17 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Michael Vick and Dogfighting

Individuals who raise and train dogs to fight and kill each other are scum.  Period.  It appears that Michael Vick, who was an exciting quarterback to watch on the field, may fall into this category.

Mike Silverman’s post regarding Vick’s involvement in this deplorable activity is titled Barely better then child molesters and within Mike’s post he states the following.

If guilty (and it sure looks like he is), Vick deserves a very long stretch in jail.

Well I think a much more suitable punishment for Vick would be a total loss of income, starting with being unceremoniously tossed from the Atlanta Falcons team, followed by a total loss of endorsement income, which appears may very well happen.

NFL megastar Vick’s endorsements in danger

I hope that Vick can’t even afford a dog house to live in.  Bastard.

Posted by John Venlet on 07/19 at 05:31 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

New York Still After That $500 Million

The last editorial I read in the New York Times, regarding the scheming going on in the state to get their hands on $500 million dollars of federal monies, fleeced from each and everyone of us, the editors stated that this $500 million was “free money.” In response to this, I stated There is No Such Thing as Free Money.

Today, the NYT editors are once again shilling for the $500 million, but now they are recommending brown nosing as the means of procuring these ill gotten gains.  I’m uncertain how the brown nosing competition will be judged.

Make Nice, Win Up to $500 Million

Posted by John Venlet on 07/19 at 05:07 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Virginia's "Civil Remedial Fines" Saga Continues

I first mentioned the State of Virginia’s newest taxpayer threshing machine legislation here, and then followed that up with this post, and now this morning, in the New York Times, I read this.

“You have no idea how angry people are,” said Delegate Robert G. Marshall, Republican of Prince William County, who did not vote for the bill that included the new fines and is leading the call for a special session.

C’mon, Mr. Marshall, I’m pleased to see you did not vote for this legislation, but you cannot seriously state that Virginia delegates had “no idea” individuals living in Virginia would be angered by this legislation.

Though I’m incredulous of Mr. Marshall’s statement, above, I will give him a passing grade for stating the following.

“Criminal and civil penalties shouldn’t be created for raising money,” Mr. Marshall said,...“You don’t want to turn our police into gun-toting tax collectors. They’re supposed to be officers of the peace, nothing else.”

Of course, we cannot leave David B. Albo (R-Fairfax), one of the main proponents of this egregious legislation, and potential private profiter from this legislation, out of this post, as he always is spouting off some ridiculous statement, or inadvertantly highlighting a reason why political groups are so dangerous to us all as individuals.

Delegate David B. Albo, Republican of Fairfax County, a main proponent of the high fines, said that a one-cent increase in the gasoline tax would generate about $50 million a year, but that replacing the fines with a higher gasoline tax would undermine the transportation financing bill that was passed.

“It took two years to get all the different groups, from Realtors, to developers, to citizens groups, on board,” Mr. Albo said. “If you take away one of the fees from one group, every other group is going to start saying they want the entire transportation bill reconsidered.”

Do you fully grasp the implications in that last statement?  I do, and I stated the following in a recent unrelated post.

When individuals deal with one another on strictly an individual to individual basis, in most cases peaceful transactions result.  Yes, this is not true when an individual robs another individual, whether at gunpoint or via dishonest actions, but in the main, individual to individual transactions yield peaceful results.  It is only when individuals group up, and cast aside their individuality in favor of group think, that conflict occurs.

Good luck, Virginians.

High Fines for Speeding Anger Virginians

Posted by John Venlet on 07/19 at 04:34 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Mething With You

So, you walk into your local CVS drugstore to purchase some cold medicine, say a box of Sudafed, and the clerk ringing up your purchase requests to see your ID card, because, ya know, the war on drugs, and specifically crystal meth, mandates that the box of Sudafed cannot be sold to you unless you’re at least 18 years old, and, the state wants to track how much Sudafed you actually purchase, just in case you may be taking your Sudafed home and cooking it up, like Mickey Rourke’s character, The Cook, in the movie Spun.

You’re not feeling real well, because of your cold, and you find this a bit intrusive, and think about giving the poor CVS clerk a piece of your mind regarding this stupid intrusion, while the clerk dutifully swipes your ID with its handy magnetic strip into the CVS computer system, but you don’t, because you don’t feel up to it, so you pay for your purchase and head home, doctor yourself up and throw yourself back down on the couch.

After lying on the couch for 15 minutes or so, you’re starting to feel a bit of relief from your congestion, thanks to those good ol’ Sudafed, and you’re just about to doze off, and, bam, your door is broken down and the local swat team cops are pounding round your house searching for the meth lab that isn’t there.

Do you think that this could not happen?  Then read this.

Detective Brian Lewis returns to his desk after lunch, scanning e-mails he missed.

One catches his eye: It says a suspected member of a methamphetamine ring bought a box of Sudafed at 1:34 p.m. at a CVS pharmacy.

Minutes later, Lewis is in his truck, circling the parking lot, searching for the woman.

And this.

Tracking systems like the one in use in Kentucky, MethCheck, automatically collect the buyer’s name, address and age with a swipe of a driver’s license or state-issued ID card.

Then the system notifies detectives via e-mail when a customer has exceeded the purchase limit. It also allows law enforcement to quickly spot suspicious patterns — for example, someone who might be trying to skirt the purchase limits by going from pharmacy to pharmacy and buying a few packages at a time.

An updated version of MethCheck eventually will enable law enforcement to track purchases by neighborhood or street. That could help detectives spot instances in which a meth chemist enlists others in the neighborhood to buy pseudoephedrine for him, Lewis said.

It’ll happen, just you watch.

Buying cold meds? Meth cops may get e-mail

Posted by John Venlet on 07/19 at 03:47 AM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Page 6 of 142 pages « First  <  4 5 6 7 8 >  Last »