• edge commented on the blog post Four Ways to Make Law Enforcement Less Adversarial

    2014-08-20 11:35:37View | Delete

    Techdirt highlighted UK’s 9 instructions that they’ve given every police officer since 1829:

    ( https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140819/08393128253/revolutionary-document-that-is-uks-184-year-old-idea-policing-consent.shtml )

    We should give the same instructions to US officers (pay particular attention to #7,8 & 9):


    1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.

    2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.

    3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.

    4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.

    5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.

    6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.

    7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

    8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.

    9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

  • edge commented on the blog post Four Ways to Make Law Enforcement Less Adversarial

    2014-08-20 11:30:41View | Delete

    Techdirt highlighted UK’s 9 instructions that they’ve given every police officer since 1829:

    ( https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140819/08393128253/revolutionary-document-that-is-uks-184-year-old-idea-policing-consent.shtml )

    We should give the same instructions to US officers (pay particular attention to #4, 7,8 & 9):


    1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.

    2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.

    3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.

    4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.

    5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.

    6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.

    7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

    8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.

    9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

  • Actually, I take that back. I suspect there may be a good number of democrats who would like to deliver on that. Unfortunately, America’s fine tradition of following your party’s President (even when he follows the example of the opposing party’s past President) overrides their good intentions.

  • Republicans at least have the message that taking the Senate will let them further put the brakes on President Obama. It is not the best message but it is something easy to understand and something they could be expected to deliver on.

    I propose the democrats use the same message.

    However, I personally don’t expect that either party really wants to deliver on that goal.

  • If he really felt it was wrong, he would pardon John Kiriakou instead of calling torturers “real patriots”.

  • Wow. I’m speechless.

    It’s scary to think that that conscienceless DOJ lawyers that put forth these arguments could live among us in our neighborhoods. Do they not put any thought in to the type of nation they’re helping to shape?

  • edge commented on the blog post Voters Feel Some 2012 Buyer’s Remorse

    2014-07-28 08:49:40View | Delete

    (disclaimer – sarcasm below)
    It makes sense. The people are learning that Presidents will perform the exact opposite of what they promise as candidates. Therefore, in reality, Romney would have stopped the wars, taxed the rich and softened the US deportation policies.

  • edge commented on the blog post Israel Kills 15 At UN School As Protests Rock West Bank

    2014-07-25 12:08:52View | Delete

    Your question regarding the effect of MSM may be visible if you click through on the poll link. It points out that the more closely people claim to be following the conflict, the more justified they feel Israel is.

    I found a couple other parts of the survey curious. The more education a person receives, the more likely they are to support the actions of Israel. The same survey also asked people if they thought Hamas’s actions were mostly justified (Results: 70% unjustified, 11% justified). I wish they broke that answer down by demographic. Regardless, I speculate that the numbers would be more tilted against Israel if Hamas didn’t have such a huge PR problem.

  • I wish there was someone who actively enforced agency adherence to the constitution and laws. Someone who actively sought out whistleblowers and have them immunity in exchange for their help prosecuting agency misconduct. Then whistleblowers would feel safer sharing what they know.
    We could call this officer an ‘Inspector General’. Oh wait… I guess we’re already supposed to have those. Our IGs need to be fired for their complicity. They should be leading this charge.

  • The administration isn’t worried about Tye. He’s got no docs and his accusations aren’t specific enough to be worth denying.
    It reminds me of Wyden’s past vague warnings. Us choir members get worked up, but unless they are allowed to give specifics or evidence, the government can just dismiss it as if it’s nothing.

  • I am in complete agreement with you. I think the only point I made was the need to get the officers some 1st aid training.
    My questions regarding the cause of death was part morbid curiosity and partly speculating if they were too rough, even without the choke hold. I hope this case helps police need to understand that just because a citizen is big, it doesn’t mean he’s not physically fragile.

    I had no intentions of being argumentative. Although I reserve the right to be argumentative at a later date :).

  • I’m confused how he died. The choke hold looks like it lasted about 10 seconds and the victim is clearly talking 10 seconds after the choke hold is released. So it doesn’t appear that they suffocated the man. His “I can’t breath” comments perhaps indicated painful shortness of breath. Maybe the choking plus the exertion of being wrestled down gave him a heart attack? I’m glad the choker is getting disciplined but I’d also like to see the rest of the officers get some serious first aid education. They look like they’re pretty clueless on how to help the man they just took down.

    The rifling through pockets doesn’t bother me. I’ve witnessed ER doctors ask police officers to make sure there are no weapons on a person before the doctor goes in to treat someone. If the victim would have survived (and woken), checking their pockets may have sped up getting help.

  • edge commented on the diary post Death Row Prisoner Challenges Lethal Injection Secrecy Based on 1st Amendment by Jose Cornejo.

    2014-07-16 11:10:00View | Delete

    1st amendment? I can see him arguing why he needs the info to make a valid challenge on eighth amendment grounds, but I’m not seeing the 1st amendment argument. Can someone help fill me in?

  • I find their standing argument about Verizon Wireless not being the same as Verizon Business Network nauseating. If they are not collecting Verizon Wireless, then what is the harm in being asked to delete records they never had? If you are – then admit these men have standing.

    If for ‘secret national security reasons’ you can’t reveal whether they have standing, then how about the court grant a sort-of hypothetical standing? Let the court decide whether the records (provided they exist) should be deleted, without having to rule on whether they exist. (I understand that a real lawyer may object to this idea on the grounds that it contains too much common sense.)

  • Sure would be nice if the Justice department, for once, defended the Constitution rather than attacked it.

  • edge commented on the diary post Summer Signs Confirmed by Deena Stryker.

    2014-07-13 08:16:19View | Delete

    About 20% of Israel’s voting population are Palestinian citizens of Israel. They have representation in parliament and Israel’s Supreme Court.

    Granted, those in the occupied territories don’t have a vote. But then again, even in the Israeli government’s eyes, those areas are not technically part of Israel.

  • edge commented on the blog post Facebook And BuzzFeed Violating User Privacy

    2014-06-30 14:25:38View | Delete

    While the buzzfeed story terrifies me, I’m more fascinated than upset by the facebook experiment. I’m not a fan of facebook, but I’m glad they did this study.
    Every news source, including FDL, is (hopefully unintentionally) affecting my emotions. Being aware of how that’s happening will me be more mindful about how I treat others after a week of bad news.
    It reminds me of how people are better able to not get scared by movies after they learn how the background music affects their mood.

  • edge commented on the blog post Robert Gibbs To Lead National Campaign Against Teachers Unions

    2014-06-26 13:00:21View | Delete

    My father was once on a school board (in CA) and he gave me his take on tenure. He said that tenure isn’t what the fear-mongers make it out to be. You can still fire a tenured teacher who’s doing a bad job. You just needed to make sure you have all your paperwork and justifications in order. What tenure does, in his opinion, is protect teachers from budgeters who want to lay off senior educators with higher pay first.

  • He’s made some remarkably good patent and copyright rulings in the past.

  • edge commented on the blog post ISIS Heads For Baghdad As Iraqi Army Collapses, Kurds Take Kirkuk

    2014-06-13 09:47:52View | Delete

    (Just trying on a tin-foil hat for fun)

    If this is really the mess it looks like, I’m wondering why Obama hasn’t performed air attacks already. The political cost of a war-weary nation sending air support to Iraq is got to be smaller than the cost of losing Iraq completely. The Repubs will have a field day if Iraq falls to AQ under a Dem president (I’m not really sure what AQ is anymore. Is this really a connected franchise?). US presidents in the past have gotten away with pretending that air attacks aren’t really war. I’m asking myself – are there benefits that the US gets from allowing this revolution to proceed?

    - Iran gets instability on its West (as well as the chaos we’ve instigated in (afghan/pak)istan on its East.
    - Our Saudi masters could be pleased with Sunni victories.
    - I’m not sure that we were exactly pleased with Shias leading Iraq either, but perhaps found it difficult to marginalize the majority.
    - Oil prices shoot up (enriching our Oligarchs and greasing the wheels of local energy projects)
    - Granting AQ this victory allows our gov the ability to still use the previously diminishing bogeyman as an excuse to further strip civil rights here.
    - Any Other reasons you can think of?

  • Load More