As I have previously noted, there has been an ugly tendency since 9-11 to define terrorism so broadly that it includes not merely groups like al-Queda that seek to change American policy through threats of violence against civilians, but any kook with a weapon and a grudge. We can now add delinquent teenagers to that list:

Two Pembroke teenagers have been charged in connection with a series of playing cards that were defaced with threatening writing and left at stores in Christiansburg and Pearisburg — a gesture police said the teens admitted had been inspired by this summer’s Batman movie, “The Dark Knight.”

Justin Colby Dirico and Bryan Eugene Stafford, both 18, admitted to leaving cards that bore handwritten messages inside the Pearisburg Wal-Mart, according to police Chief J.C. Martin.

Martin would not say how they identified the suspects but said the teens admitted Tuesday during police interviews they were responsible for the cards, which they patterned after elements of “The Dark Knight.” Both were charged with conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism.

Since 2002, an act of terrorism is defined as follows in Virginia*:

“Act of terrorism” means an act of violence as defined in clause (i) of subdivision A of § 19.2-297.1 committed with the intent to (i) intimidate the civilian population at large; or (ii) influence the conduct or activities of the government of the United States, a state or locality through intimidation.

The article never describes exactly what was written on the Joker-inspired playing cards, but I would bet good money that it was something far closer to a simple threat of violence (assuming it even went that far). Suffice to say, I am strongly inclined to believe that the Commonwealth — which knows something of real terrorism — could throw the book at the these kids without invoking this clause.

Which they shouldn’t do, and not just for semantic reasons. Our government retains the right to throw American citizens arrested on American soil into military detention without charge if the president deems them an enemy combatant, i.e., a terrorist. So far — and largely thanks to the fact that, despite all his faults, George W. Bush is a fundamentally decent guy — this has only happened a twice, but the cat’s out of the bag and unlikely ever to be put back.

I’m not saying that these kids are not going to be sent to Gitmo; I’m saying that foolishly prosecuting punk kids who — as best I can gather — made a bomb threat they had neither the means nor intention to follow-through on as terrorists invites future government abuses of our freedoms. A nation of laws such as ours should not be so dependent on the benevolence of its leaders.

*NB: This is a fine definition.  My objection is its application in this case.

Tom posted this at 1:24 PM EDT on Wednesday, August 20th, 2008 as The Law Is An Ass--An Idiot, Liberty and/or Security

2 Comments »

Resolved: Murderers shouldn’t be able to eat their way out of dying. When you start thinking about the number of cockamamie things that must occur for this man to be in this situation (why is the prison feeding him so much that he got fat?), this would be too ridiculous for Joseph Heller.

But above all: Why on earth are we using an execution method that fails when someone has hardened veins? If you were to think of all the thousands of ways to kill a man, how many of them are foiled by ill health?

Apollo posted this at 10:59 PM EDT on Monday, August 4th, 2008 as Amer-I-Can!, The Law Is An Ass--An Idiot

No Comments »

Let this be a lesson to every dog with the nerve to accost an armed policeman who busts down his masters’ door after his master brazenly carries a package indoors…a package addressed to his spouse.

A police SWAT team raided the home of the mayor in the Prince George’s County town of Berwyn Heights on Tuesday, shooting and killing his two dogs, after he brought in a 32-pound package of marijuana that had been delivered to his doorstep, police said.

Mayor Cheye Calvo was not arrested in the raid, which was carried out about 7 p.m. by the Sheriff’s Office SWAT team and county police narcotics officers. Prince George’s police spokesman Henry Tippett said yesterday that all the residents of the house — Calvo, his wife and his mother-in-law — are “persons of interest” in the case.

The package was addressed to Calvo’s wife, Trinity Tomsic, said law enforcement officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is ongoing.

…Calvo described a chaotic scene, in which he — wearing only underwear and socks — and his mother-in-law were handcuffed and interrogated for hours. They were surrounded by the dogs’ carcasses and pools of the dogs’ blood, Calvo said.

Spokesmen for the Sheriff’s Office and Prince George’s police expressed regret yesterday that the mayor’s dogs were killed. But they defended the way the raid was carried out, saying it was proper for a case involving such a large amount of drugs.

Sgt. Mario Ellis, a Sheriff’s Office spokesman, said the deputies who entered Calvo’s home “apparently felt threatened” by the dogs.

I’m sure they did.

H/T: Amber

UPDATE: More seriously, some questions:

1) Who was the judge who granted the no-knock warrant and what were reasons for granting it to the SWAT team?  Did he fear the mayor would open fire on the police officers?  If so, why?

2) Considering that they had staked the place out, the police presumably knew the dogs.  Even assuming the dogs acted violently — which doesn’t appear to be the case — shouldn’t the cops have been prepared to use something less-than-lethal force on them?  This may be a snarkybastard precedent, but wouldn’t a TASER have been a better choice?

3) A quick google search turned up little of interest about Sheriff Jackson, other than to imply that he’s a stand-up guy, secure in his job, and rather involved politically (all of which is normal).  If, however, his office can’t formulate a better response to this, I hope someone runs against him in ‘10.

Tom posted this at 3:04 PM EDT on Monday, August 4th, 2008 as The Law Is An Ass--An Idiot, Liberty and/or Security

1 Comment »

Leona Helmsley donated $8 billion in her will to her foundation for the welfare of dogs. Since this was a ‘charitable’ donation, that money will not be taxed.

A guest columnist at the NYT objects, arguing that this stains the intended purpose of the charitable deduction. There’s an argument there — not a very good one, mind you — but it shines compared to this nonsense:

If this were only a matter of Leona Helmsley wasting her own money, no one would need to care. But she is wasting ours too.

The charitable deduction constitutes a subsidy from the federal government. The government, in effect, makes itself a partner in every charitable bequest. In Mrs. Helmsley’s case, given that her fortune warranted an estate tax rate of 45 percent, her $8 billion donation for dogs is really a gift of $4.4 billion from her and $3.6 billion from you and me.

To put it in perspective, our contribution to Mrs. Helmsley’s cause equals approximately half of what we spend on Head Start, a program that benefits 900,000 children.

What will we get for our $3.6 billion? An eternal monument to Leona Helmsley’s generosity toward dogs. Even the dogs will not benefit as much as one might think, because Mrs. Helmsley elected to disburse her bequests through the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust.

So when the government elects not to take a person’s money, that’s subsidization? God forbid that someone should spend their money as they see fit without the government rest of us benefiting from it!

H/T: Amber

Tom posted this at 8:29 AM EDT on Thursday, July 10th, 2008 as Excruciatingly Correct Behavior, The Law Is An Ass--An Idiot

4 Comments »

“Your resume looks good, Mr. Hudgens, but why did you leave your previous employer in such a hurry?”

Late last May, the all-male sales team was having “a rough week.” Christopherson called the men into the break room and announced, “We’re going to do an exercise.” He asked for a volunteer.

Hudgens raised his hand.

“Keep in mind,” he said, “the last time we did a team-building exercise outside, we did an egg toss.”

Prosper maintains that Christopherson explained what would happen next, and Hudgens knew what he was in for, even handing his cellphone and keys to co-workers before lying down. Hudgens insists he had no clue.

“So they held me down,” Hudgens said, “and the next thing I know, Josh has a gallon jug of water and he’s pouring it on my face. I can’t scream because the water’s going down my throat.

“And halfway through he stopped for a second. I tried to mumble the words, ‘Stop, knock it off.’ I tried to get that out and he continued to pour.”

“I’m not getting any air,” Hudgens said. “Toward the end, I’m starting to black out. I’m getting very dizzy, light-headed. The sensation that’s going through my head is, ‘I’m going to drown.’ “

Evidently this company exists in a cave:

Only later, after describing the experience to a former employer, was he told: “You’ve just been waterboarded.” “I said, ‘What’s waterboarding?’ And the only difference was, instead of lying on a board, I was lying on a grassy hill.”

Christopherson did not know the term, either, Brunt said: “He thought it had something to do with water skiing.”

This story should put any negative academic experiences in context:

He said Christopherson told the executives that he was inspired by reading about the Greek philosopher Socrates, who is said to have once held a student’s head under water, then told him he must want to learn as badly as he wanted air.

The Socrates story sounds like an urban legend; I don’t think he was that intense.

Though this could add an interesting kink to the waterboarding debate. If waterboarding an employee is merely a workers’ compensation claim, and Mr. Hudgens probably had few actual damages to compensate (dry cleaning?), then perhaps waterboarding can become a more widespread employment practice. And once we’re routinely waterboarding underperforming employees, can any international body rightly claim that we’re mistreating Gitmo prisoners when we give them a “Motivational Shower”?

Apollo posted this at 12:06 AM EDT on Tuesday, April 15th, 2008 as The Law Is An Ass--An Idiot

No Comments »

An Oklahoma jury convicted a murderer. In an otherwise disturbing story, is this bit:

Two days after the girl’s disappearance, authorities grew suspicious of Underwood after stopping him and his father at a police checkpoint near the apartment complex. After a short initial interview, he allowed investigators to search his apartment, where they found the girl’s nude body stuffed into a plastic tub inside his bedroom closet.

I’m glad the guy’s going to prison, and I hope they kill him, but the fact that he consented to a search of his apartment where he was hiding a dead body should be serious evidence for an argument that he didn’t know his rights.

Going through law school, the thing that’s impressed me most is how often criminal cases begin with someone consenting to a search, which then yields an illegal substance/weapon/dead body. It’s worth asking what percentage of those people consented because they genuinely thought the cop wouldn’t find whatever they were hiding (meaning they’re dumb), and what percentage presumed “May I have a look around” was a mere formality that they couldn’t refuse (meaning they’re ignorant).

Apollo posted this at 4:39 AM EST on Sunday, March 2nd, 2008 as The Law Is An Ass--An Idiot

2 Comments »

Yelch.

An evangelical Christian photographer was brought before the New Mexico Human Rights Commission after she declined for religious reasons to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony.

When Elaine Huguenin of Albuquerque, N.M., declined in September 2006 an e-mail request from a lesbian couple to photograph their ceremony, one of the lesbians responded by lodging a human rights complaint with the New Mexico Human Rights Division, the state agency charged with enforcing state anti-discrimination laws and sending cases to the commission to be adjudicated.

Vanessa Willock sought an injunction to prohibit Mrs. Huguenin and her business, Elane Photography, from declining any future request to photograph a same-sex ceremony. The agency agreed to hear Miss Willock’s complaint, the latest case brought before tribunals in the U.S. and Canada that free-speech advocates say threaten expression across North America.

Tom posted this at 2:17 PM EST on Tuesday, February 26th, 2008 as The Law Is An Ass--An Idiot

2 Comments »