1. Thank goodness Hanukkah is over. Seven pounds of latkes?
2. Princess Caroline speaks a lot like Uncle Ted. Another version.
3. If even half of this is true, that's one great father who's one tough mutha.
4. Carjack-ee to carjacker: "I'm gonna blow your balls off!" (Warning: turn down sound before clicking; video starts right away.) (via HotAir)
5. Pillage Idiot ranked 10th most politically influential blog (conservative) in Maryland? Hmmm. "Influential" would not be in the first 50 words I'd use to describe Pillage Idiot.
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label crime. Show all posts
January 01, 2009
New Year's linkfest
December 09, 2008
Blagojevich holds an auction
ABC News story. HotAir: "Obama: I never talked to Blagojevich about the Senate seat; Axelrod: Yes, he did."
November 25, 2008
Post-modernism meets the Nigerian email scam
Tonight, I received a typical scam email from Nigeria, and specifically from a Dr. Mrs. Veronica Amadi, KTT UNIT CBN -- the CBN apparently being the Central Bank of Nigeria. Mrs. Amadi says: "I am taking this bold step because of my belief as a Christian." The bold step, of course, is getting me a heap 'o dollars if I open an account elsewhere, blah blah blah.
But I also received my post-modernist, self-referential email scam today, what you might call a second-order scam. It was from a Mr. Johnson Ibe, Accountant General of the CBN.
Good dayIt goes on from there in poorly typed almost-English, but you get the point. I'm entitled to $7 million to compensate me as a victim of a Nigerian scam, so I should just go about doing whatever victims of such a scam do in order to get that money.
We wish to nofity you that the present Government of Nigeria in conjunction with the Central Bank of Nigeria has conducted a financial investigations through all the commercial banks in nigeria,which we discovered that alot of banks here has been invlvoling in all kinds of fraudlent transaction with beneficiaries abroad,thereby bringing bad image to this nation,in that view the government has taken adquate measure against such banks,and the good news is that the federal government has approved a total sum of US$ 91,000,000.00 (NINETY ONE MILLION UNITED STATES DOLLARS ONLY) to compensate all beneficiaries who has been a victim of scam in the past from this country.
We have a good news for you,your name has been short-listed among the victims (beneficiaries) of such scam,therefore you are entitled to receive a payment of US$7,000,000.00 (SEVEN MILLION UNITED STATES DOLLARS ONLY) as a part of your payment and as well a compensation from the federal Government of Nigeria,this exercise is to redeem the good image of this country abroad " MUCH KUDOS TO THIS PRESENT GOVERNMENT OF PRESIDENT UMARU YAR'ADUA".
I'm going to take a pass. Feel free to respond to Mr. Ibe yourself.
November 02, 2008
FedEx West Africa has a check for you
Get your $800,000 check from FedEx West Africa now. What could possibly go wrong? The message was scanned for viruses, after all.
October 29, 2008
When corruption meets underwear
Not news: Massachusetts legislator Dianne Wilkerson takes a bribe.
News: Massachusetts legislator Dianne Wilkerson takes a bribe and stuffs the money in her bra.
Pillage Idiot: Massachusetts legislator Dianne Wilkerson takes a bribe, stuffs the money in her bra, and discovers that the money has been stored in Congressman William Jefferson's freezer.
(hat tip: fee simple)
.
October 11, 2008
Saturday evening linkfest
If you've been wondering whether I've been taken into the Witness Protection Program -- kind of like those shirts sold by Chinese vendors on the streets of Washington ("You Don't Know Me") -- the answer is YES! I've been taken into the Witness Protection Program.
But I've just been kicked out.
This has been the busiest period for me at work in over three years, and I've been in total panic mode. Until Friday, I didn't think I would be able to handle it, and now I think there's a least a slim chance. So things are looking up.
In honor of this, I'd like to give you a short linkfest. I should have some original stupidity up relatively soon.
1. The Jewish Community Center of Greater Washington is having a book festival, and one of the books featured (see page 5 of the PDF brochure here) is Louis Ferrante's Unlocked: A Journey from Prison to Proust, which the brochure describes this way:
Louis Ferrante, former Mafia associate in the Gambino crime family, was taken down by federal agents and sentenced to over twelve years in prison. In prison, he began a dramatic journey towards redemption and rehabilitation – culminating in the surprising and unexpected discovery of an innate passion for literature, writing and Orthodox Judaism. This is a Mafia memoir unlike any other!I mention this solely to repeat my son's quip: "An aufruf you can't refuse."
2. Public Service Announcement: If you feel the need to urinate on your neighbor's porch, don't dress in a cow suit.
3. Your web browser hates you. (scary hat tip: fee simple)
4. Your wedding guests hate you.
5. Sarah Palin hates you.
Na, I'm just kidding. Actually, Sarah Palin used a PR consultant in Alaska. (via HotAir) And speaking of Sarah Palin, I did a post about six weeks ago called "Sarah Palin is evil." The post attracted numerous internet bottom-dwelling scum-suckers and has my largest number of comments for any post. My total for visitors who arrived on searches for "Sarah Palin is evil" or an equivalent is now up to 1650. The total who arrived on searches for "Sarah Palin is an idiot" or an equivalent is well over 1000.
September 24, 2008
The high price of (passing) gas
If flatulence can make it all the way to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, then, surely, it can make its way to the local courts in Charleston, West Virginia. (via HotAir)
When police were trying to get fingerprints, police say [Jose] Cruz moved closer to the officer and passed gas on him. The investigating officer remarked in the criminal complaint that the odor was very strong.The moral of the story seems to be: "Don't pass gas on a police officer who's booking you for DUI."
Cruz is now charged with battery on a police officer, as well as DUI and obstruction.
Take a look of the photo. It doesn't look anything like the baseball player, Jose Cruz, Jr., and I'm positive it wasn't. That is, I'm not endorsing the subversive theory that it was; as Andrew Sullivan would say, I'm just airing it. And it has a strong odor.
Now that that labored joke is finished, my lawyers advise me to repeat that it really wasn't the ballplayer.
If you follow the link to the original news story, you'll find a video. The local TV station interviewed a bunch of locals about flatulence and whether it should be a crime. The key phrase was "law and odor." That's their joke, not mine.
You'll also find a copy of the criminal complaint sworn out against Mr. Cruz. Here is the relevant allegation:
PTLM. PARSONS WAS IN A CHAIR APPROX 4-5 FEET AWAY FROM THE FINGERPRINTING STATION. THE DEFENDANT SCOOTED THE 4 FEET TO PTLM PARSONS, AWAY FROM OFFICER COOK, AND LIFTED HIS LEG AND PASSED GAS LOUDLY ON PTLM. PARSONS. THE DEFENDANT THEN FANNED THE AIR WITH HIS HAND IN FRONT OF HIS REAR ONTO PTLM. PAR[S]ONS[.] THE GAS WAS VERY ODOROUS AND CREATED A CONTACT OF AN INSULTING OR PROVOKING NATURE WITH PTLM. PARSONS.I'm not authorized to practice law in West Virginia, but I have to wonder whether contact from gas can be a battery without a physical touching. If it could, you would think Cruz could have been charged if he had stayed four feet way when he passed gas, rather than doing so next to the officer. Gas, after all, diffuses throughout its container (here, the room).
I also wonder whether this could be an illegal search and seizure, unless you accept the "plain smell" exception to the search warrant requirement. (Note for any lawyers reading this: It's a joke, son.)
Finally, according to the video I mentioned, local lawyers think this case stinks. That's my joke, not theirs. So we'll just have to see.
Or smell.
September 17, 2008
Wednesday linkfest
After I do a long photo comic, like the one I posted on Monday (Bill Clinton agrees to campaign for Obama), it's hard to get back to normal posts. Unlike most of the garbage I post here, photo comics take a long time, and the hardest part is working out the text, not doing the voice bubbles, which can be done in an hour or two.
So I'm going to coast a little longer by giving you some links I've been accumulating for the past several weeks.
1. This is actually not a link, but I'm including it, anyway. The son of our friends, a good friend of my son, is in Taiwan, where he applied for a scooter license. Among the questions on the exam were these:
1. When a motorcyclist is not happy, usually he/she: (1) is emotionless (2) is not compassionate (3) is angry.Then, there were a bunch of signs with Chinese on them, and he had to guess what they meant.
2. Time for honking, each time is: (1) within 2 seconds (2) within 1 second (3) within half a second.
3. Motorcyclist's clothing: (1) is free (2) slippers are ok (3) must be clean.
2. No linkfest would be complete without a link to a post about an incinerating toilet. Be sure to watch the video at the company's website. No butt hair was singed in the preparation of the video. Bonus: Also at InventorSpot: Russian scientist solves problem of smelly feet.
3. We all hate grammar ignoramuses, and some of us are annoyed by typos, but few of us engage in vandalism over them. (via How Appealing)
4. A reader at Instapundit creates a political ad about the meltdown at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
5. We'll have to take Obama's criticism of a McCain ad on comprehensive sex education for kindergarteners with a grain of salt.
6. Is Obama too tight with his teleprompter? (hat tip: fee simple)
7. A follow-up by Steven Plaut related to Soccer Dad's post below on Michelle Obama's "rabbi" relative.
8. A columnist at Haaretz is scared to death of Sarah Palin. But the Republican Jewish Coalition flips Congressman Robert Wexler's idiotic linking of Palin with Pat Buchanan and shows that Buchanan's views on Israel are like Obama's.
9. "Tryst turns into $50K robbery for RNC delegate." Plus, quotation of the day: "'As a single man, I was flattered by the attention of a beautiful woman who introduced herself to me. I used poor judgment. If there is any good that can come from this humiliation, it is to caution others that date rape happens to men, too,' he said."
August 10, 2008
Up in Canada
I spent Wednesday through Sunday in Toronto hunting grizzly bears in front of Union Station. I bagged two, which is OK in Toronto as long as you put their various parts in the correct recycling bins. And I want to bring you up to date on the happenings occurring in our northern neighbor.
First, this morning, a few miles north of our hotel, there was a major series of explosions at a propane plant, causing quite a spectacle. You can get a few details here. Watch out for those outdoor grills you guys have on your decks. If you'd like to see some photos, check out this post at photojunkie.ca.
Second, you remember the incident on a Greyhound bus in Canada, when one passenger beheaded another? Well, here's an article in the Globe and Mail, in which an intrepid reporter risks life, limb, and neck to ride a similar bus and interview the passengers. Quotation of the day:
Bus etiquette is sorted out nightly on a semi-feudal basis among seatmates. One point of contention, without fail, is a reclined chair that interferes with someone else's legroom. Mr. Lehmann and Ms. Dickey moved up front after another passenger confronted them about their reclining habits. That's where you will find them now, her head resting on his shoulder, both asleep.Third, a black bear invaded a basement apartment in a town in British Columbia. Fortunately, Brian Fortune, the resident of the apartment, was not present for the invasion. However, I'm sorry (pronounced "SAWR-ee," as the Canadians do) to report that this story is a metaphor for modern-day Canada. Mr. Fortune is apparently a liberal. How do I know that? Here's how: "Mr. Fortune said he sympathized with the animal. 'It's unfortunate that the bears are resorting to that, coming into our area,' he said. 'Although we did infringe on their area first.'" Also, the RCMP had to step in to resolve the impasse. Consider how that one turned out:
“You're not really supposed to change seats,” comments Oli Hall, 20, a British backpacker. “And you're definitely not supposed to stab people, decapitate them, then dance around with it.”
"Because of the aggressive behaviour displayed by the bear by entering a house, a shot was taken from the Coquitlam RCMP," Constable Leung said.So let's review the bidding. The RCMP shoots the bear -- and barely stuns it. The bear stays in a tree mocking the RCMP, shouting obscenities at passers-by, and whistling at the women until the animal control officers shoots it -- with a sedative. The RCMP then steps forward to finish the task that the animal control officer started. Sheesh, is that embarrassing, or what?
The shot struck the bear in the shoulder but failed to immobilize it. The animal climbed up a nearby tree, where it remained until conservation officer Peter Busink arrived 15 minutes later.
Mr. Busink fired a tranquilizer dart that soon sent the bear tumbling to the ground. But as RCMP officers approached, they realized the animal was not completely subdued. Coquitlam RCMP then used a shotgun to kill the bear.
Oh, and it reminds me of the famous Woody Allen nightclub routine about shooting a moose.
Finally, on a more serious note, I've always found it hard to prepare mentally for Rosh Hashanah. I have some trouble with the theology, and the fact that it was Tisha B'Av today didn't help. But in Toronto, whenever the subway doors close, there's a chime that slowly plays the 5-3-1 of the major scale (out of tune, but never mind). Those notes are the same notes that begin the aleynu prayer in the tune used on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. So at every stop on every trip I took on the subway, I was singing or thinking about the Rosh Hashanah aleynu. Maybe I'll return to Toronto just before the holidays.
July 02, 2008
Headline of the day
"Suspected gang member arrested for stealing girl's trike"
The gang member was arrested while "joyriding down Orem Boulevard on the trike."
(via Fark)
June 04, 2008
On my 100th
You know, it's always a little traumatic to have a major birthday, and by major, I mean one that makes you suddenly a lot older than you were just a few days earlier.
The first major birthday I had was what we called the "QC" -- or quarter century. I was in law school at the time, and it didn't really bother me, because I had a few other things to worry about.
I've had one or two major birthdays since then, but I want you to know that when I turn 100 and Mrs. Attila is 99, my goal is to drive the wrong way down the highway, with her sitting next to me, because I've never done that before. As I always say, trying new things keeps you young. (Incidentally, the story says that the couple will "probably" be asked to turn in their licenses. Probably?)
And just to clarify my goal for a minute: I want to drive the wrong way down the highway after mooning someone in a restaurant so hard that I broke the glass and injured the part of my anatomy that rhymes with it. (In the story it was a 21-year-old, but anything he can do, I can do better.)
And in case you were wondering: My goal is to drive the wrong way down the highway after mooning someone in a restaurant on my get-away flight after robbing a convenience store while wearing thong underwear. Wearing it not on my "glass," mind you, but on my face. To disguise me.
Why is this my goal?
Because whenever the press talks to a centenarian, they always ask this question: To what do you attribute your long life? And I'm going to borrow a line from Admiral Hargrade, known as "the Admiral" on Get Smart.
When they ask me that question, I'm going to state firmly and without a second's hesitation: "Prunes!"
May 08, 2008
Bad karma
Public service announcement: If you're a motorcycle rider and you crash into a police car, it's wise not to have just (a) flipped the bird at a police cruiser and (b) popped a wheelie before speeding off, especially when your (c) motorcycle is unlicensed.
For beginners, we recommend no more than two out of three.
April 17, 2008
Throwing open the prison doors
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. had a theory that history occurs in 30-year cycles. That seemed intriguing to me at first, but I stopped believing in it when we failed to have massive turmoil on campus during the 1990s.
Still, there's a slight element of truth to it, especially if you read Marie Gottschalk's op-ed piece in Tuesday's Washington Post, which is called "Two Separate Societies: One in Prison, One Not." The piece ostensibly is about the civil-rights crisis we now face, because we have so many people in prison. But the real goal of the article is to turn the clock back 30 years to the 1970s, when we had a lax attitude about punishment for crime and (not coincidentally) a high crime rate.
Laying the foundation for her argument about two societies, Gottschalk starts out by quoting the report of the Kerner Commission.
Forty years ago, the Kerner Commission concluded in its landmark study of the causes of racial disturbances in the United States in the 1960s: "Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white -- separate and unequal." Today we are still moving toward two societies: one incarcerated and one not.The Kerner Commission report's outrageous statement about 1960s America was not even correct when the report was released in February 1968; our nation, which had recently seen the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, not to mention the Fair Housing Act soon thereafter in 1968, was then moving with determination toward eliminating the two separate socities, which already existed. There was strong support then among white Americans for that goal, or else it could not have been achieved. And in the years since 1968, the report has proved to be a lot of alarmist nonsense.
This is what Gottschalk uses to make her rhetorical point about prisons.
She has two main arguments. First, she claims we have too many people in the criminal-justice system. Gottschalk is alarmed by the fact that 7 million people are "either incarcerated, on parole or probation or under some other form of state or local supervision." Here are the actual data, from the Bureau of Justice Statistics: as of the end of 2006, roughly 2.25 million people in federal or state prison or jail (about 1.5 million of whom have been sentenced) and a little over 5 million people on federal or state parole or probation. When she uses the figure 7 million, it's a trick, because parole and probation, which account for about 70 percent of the total, are far less intrusive kinds of supervision than prison and jail. It's not 7 million people in prison.
But how many is too many people, anyway? If people are committing crimes, shouldn't they be punished? Can we possibly be better off when criminals are not in prison?
(Let's agree to leave aside for now the debate over punishment for drug offenses. About 20 percent of state prisoners are there for drug offenses, which is well below what the anti-drug-war rhetoric would suggest.)
In the 1960s and 1970s, when policy-makers tried to accomplish Gottschalk's goal of reducing the prison population, the results were not pretty. Based on the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, the rate of reported violent crime per 100,000 population in America rose from 160.9 in 1960 to 363.5 in 1970 to 596.5 in 1980. I would argue that this was largely the result of a decrease in the use of prison to punish criminals during that period. For purposes of comparison, with 2.25 million people in prison today, the violent crime rate nationally was 473.5 per 100,000 in 2006. The reported violent crime rate is lower than in 1980. Prison, anyone?
Second, Gottschalk tries to turn this into a racial issue.
Many of today's crime control policies fundamentally impede the economic, political and social advancement of the most disadvantaged blacks and members of other minority groups. Prison leaves them less likely to find gainful employment, vote, participate in other civic activities and maintain ties with their families and communities.She also claims that "one in nine young black men is behind bars." I don't have the data on this, but let's assume the statement is true. If it's true, then what? Let them out?
In 2005, nearly three-quarters of single-victim/single-offender violent crimes against black Americans were committed by other blacks. (Source here, Table 42) This is the lowest figure I've ever seen; traditionally, it's hovered around 85%. But no matter the precise figure, it's clear that the vast majority of violent crime against blacks is committed by other blacks.
Is it somehow politically incorrect to mention this? I would say definitely not. Here's why: When you invoke race in order to reduce the black population in prison, you are consigning law-abiding blacks to an increase in violent crime.
Let me rephrase this even more bluntly. If you care about furthering the success of black Americans, you can take the side of the unfortunately significant number of criminals or you can take the side of the innocent, law-abiding black Americans who are their victims. For me, the right policy -- the only moral one -- is to help rid urban areas in which large concentrations of blacks live and work of violent crime, even if the criminals happen to be black. That is the only way to help black Americans flourish.
Gottschalk's plea for more of the same policies that we tried in the 60s and 70s -- the same policies that failed us in the past -- is the true racial outrage.
[Note: I'm away for the weekend. Any response to further comments will have to wait till I return.]
April 09, 2008
Wednesday linkfest
This is the place where I drop links that I've been collecting but haven't had time to write about while I've been trying to figure out my mother's taxes.
1. From the distaff side of the moronosphere, S.Weasel has a delightful tribute to Charlton Heston. Well, to his buttocks, anyway.
2. Speaking of the moronosphere, check doubleplusundead regularly for his daily roundups, called "around the moronosphere in 80 iq points." I think the Moron-in-Chief was responsible for that name.
3. Since it's tax time, I'd like to bring you this: "Woman Apologizes for Pitbull Attack on IRS Employee." (via TaxProf Blog)
4. Here's the barbecue guy who loves the NoKos. The FBI already knows about him, thanks to his dad. Really. Will there be a place for him as Secretary of State in the Obama Administration? And this: A coincidence?
5. Will you be more in love with your wife if she learns to play poker? This article says you will. It sounds totally asinine to me, because you play poker precisely to be alone with the boys, but there are some other tips for women that sound a little better than that.
6. If you live in Minnesota, your tax dollars are funding what may be a madrassa.
7. Ace writes about a post by a user at Obama's site attacking the Jews. A commenter finds the cached link after the post is taken down.
8. From the Department of Old: "Woman's Lawsuit Claims Bra Injured Her / Victoria's Secret Denies Claims." (via Ace's headlines last week)
9. From the Department of Not So New: Starbucks won't let you customize your card with "Laissez Faire" but will let you use "People Not Profits"? (via Volokh)
10. Child "maths" genius-ette becomes a call girl (with probably NSFW photo) (via Fark)
11. Get your ice cold Mets motivational poster, courtesy of Baseball Crank. Not that I've already given up on them -- that'll take another few days like yesterday.
March 17, 2008
Letting it all hang out
I used to run an occasional feature called "Naked News," in which I'd link to stories involving naked people who were doing strange things, given their state of undress. I always said that I was doing this in a shameless effort to increase site traffic. For quite a while, I've been trying to go straight, but this news story from Amish country, Lancaster, PA, just couldn't be passed up.
It turns out some naked dude went berserk at the Willow Valley Resort in West Lampeter Township on Friday. Someone called the police to report a "naked male tearing up the hallways and lounge at the hotel." But the rampage continued for over a half hour after the call came in.
Before the end of the rampage by the unclothed man, identified by police as Nicholas Hadzick, 28, of Freeland, some office space at the resort would be trashed and a forklift would be driven into an interior wall, damaging some overhead sewer pipe as well. Hadzick would then cross the street to run amok at Darrenkamp's in the Willow Valley Shopping Center, causing more destruction.The timeline is a little unclear to me. The story says that the police learned of this at 10:52 p.m., but the rampage continued until Hadzick drove a forklift, naked, into a wall and set off a smoke alarm. Even then, he was able to cross the street, naked, to trash a store called Darrenkamp's at a shopping center. Apparently, in Eastern Pennsylvania, a naked guy crossing a commercial street on a Friday night attracts little attention.
"He was under the influence of something," said Blaise Holzbauer, Willow Valley executive vice president and general manager. Holzbauer said Hadzick was a guest at the resort, and apparently went on his spree after attending an off-property party before returning to his room, falling asleep, and waking up.
Hadzick's rampage "really went undetected," Holzbauer said, until the forklift striking the wall set off a smoke alarm, which alerted security. The forklift was on the premises as part of an ongoing renovation at the resort, Holzbauer said. Police said at least one witness saw Hadzick gain access to a maintenance garage under some guest rooms to get the forklift.
Hazdick wasn't arrested until after 11:30.
But as police searched Willow Valley for Hadzick, it quickly became apparent the incident wasn't over. Units were dispatched to Darrenkamp's for reports of Hadzick causing damage in that store.There's actually a security video you can watch. I would give you a content warning, except that the video uses an ovoid shape to cover the man's ovoid shapes, so you can be pretty sure you won't accidentally be confronted with any thingie-dingies. (There's also a short news video here.)
After apparently gaining access through a rear loading dock door, he accomplished a lot in a short time, said Joe Darrenkamp, company president, who was called into the store around 11:30 p.m. The store is open 24 hours.
"He wasn't in the store long," Darrenkamp said. However, "he was on a mission."
Darrenkamp said Hadzick threw chairs in the market's cafe area, tossed a 300-pound pizza oven to the floor, as well as three scales, valued at about $7,000 each. "One was totaled," Darrenkamp said. Also damaged was a $90,000 meat-wrapping machine, Darrenkamp said, several soda coolers and the windshield of a delivery truck.
Meanwhile, I have to highlight two amusing aspects of this story. First, the female aspect.
Becky Bednar, front-end supervisor at Darrenkamp's said she didn't see Hadzick at first from her office, but saw chairs flying across the floor. "That's when I called 911," she said. Bednar said customers remained calm, moving out of line when Hadzick told them. She added that staff remained calm as well, knowing not to agitate him. As for her own recollection of the incident, Bednar joked, "It was more fun than a girl should have."Second, the journalist aspect.
Telephone messages left at three separate listings for a Nicholas Hadzick in the Freeland area were not returned by press time.In other words, the editors felt it was important to note that at least two totally innocent Nicholas Hadzicks in the area (and the third was possibly innocent, too) didn't return some dopey reporter's phone calls, as if this proves that the actual naked dude was given a chance to respond to the story. Really. The reporter would have been a lot better off contacting the naked dude's lawyer. He would have been the guy in a three-piece birthday suit carrying a litigation bag.
Marginally related: On a grimmer note, a naked dude with a knife threatens some folks in Camden, NJ. The results aren't good: "Camden cop shot, nude man dead." (hat tip: Soccer Dad) There's a news video at the link, too. How is it that people on the street who are interviewed always manage to say things like, "I don't know what transpired prior to that," which is an actual quotation from the news video? They probably watch too many cop shows on TV.
February 25, 2008
Monday evening linkfest
I've been collecting items that don't necessarily warrant their own post, and I'm going to dump them all here. Don't thank me. It's for your own good.
1. Have you ever thought to yourself, "Sure, Barack Obama is a well groomed and articulate young Negro, but what has the gentleman done for me?" Think no longer. Barack Obama is your new bicycle. Don't forget to keep clicking once you get there. (via Ace)
2. I'll tell you, though, what Barack Obama's done for a little townhouse in Greenwich Village that disappeared one day in 1970. Undoubtedly out of compassion for their loss, Obama has befriended some of the folks in the Weathermen unit with the guys who blew it up.
3. Speaking of Obama, an Obama supporter was choking his Hillary-supporting brother-in-law, who responded by stabbing the Obama supporter. Did you understand that? No? Well, read this, then. (via JammieWearingFool, via HotAir) And here's the punch line from the article: "On a side note: Voter registration records reveal that Ortiz, who supports Clinton, is registered Republican." Although that doesn't mean a heck of a lot these days.
4. Nobody but nobody gives Governor O'Malley credit for dealing with the crime problem other than the superannuated WaPo columnist David Broder. Maryland Conservatarian has got the goods.
5. Martin Kramer has great news for you if you enjoy being majorly depressed about the state of academics at certain Ivy League universities located in Morningside Heights. Amnon Rubinstein, a visiting Israeli professor has written a column about his time at Columbia. In Kramer's words: "Rubinstein discovered that the only truly active friends of Israel on campus were orthodox Jewish students. For him, a self-avowed secular humanist, it came as crushing disappointment that like-minded Israelis weren't standing up." Disappointment, yes; surprise, no. As Kramer points out, a professorship of Israel studies was set up in 2005, but the search committee included two notoriously anti-Israel professors. The result is that an Israeli was hired who "isn't a hard-left post-Zionist, but [is] far enough left to have signed a May 2002 open letter by some Israeli faculty" supporting Israelis who refused to serve as soldiers in the West Bank and Gaza.
6. On the lighter side, if The Graduate were being produced today by the U.N., it would not be "plastic" but rather "bugs." The headline says it all: "U.N. Conference Promotes Insect-Eating for Everyone From Famine Victims to Astronauts." (via Fark)
7. For those of you who are afraid to undergo a colonoscopy, please read this important public service announcement. From Dave Barry. (also via Fark) This will ease the fear, or at least keep you laughing about it. Regarding the "prep" -- that stuff you're supposed to drink to clean out your colon -- Barry writes: "The instructions for MoviPrep, clearly written by somebody with a great sense of humor, state that after you drink it, 'a loose watery bowel movement may result.' This is kind of like saying that after you jump off your roof, you may experience contact with the ground."
8. How do you know if your newspaper is on life support? One answer is: The entire 8-page sports section has two quarter-page ads, and they're both for non-medical remedies for erectile dysfunction. And I use the word "remedies" loosely. (via Ace)
9. Related: How do you know if your country is on life support? Answer: Your hospitals buy unisex underwear for the patients: "Male and female patients admitted to Swedish hospitals will soon be required to wear the same underwear." But there's a silver lining to these underwear. Now, some moron on MTV can ask Hillary this question: "Boxers or briefs?"
February 20, 2008
Sin and the city
Perhaps they ought to add stupidity to the list of deadly sins, because this is a truly stupid article.
Forbes looks at proxies to determine the top ten cities suffering from each of the vices. Avarice? Check the cities with the most individual fortunes per capita. Lust? Try condom and contraceptive purchases at grocery and drug stores.
You get the idea.
Even one that makes sense -- wrath, based on the cities' murder rates -- is trivial. Why not just say we're running an article about the cities with high murder rates?
January 30, 2008
Always in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Attack me once, shame on me. Attack me ten times, it's time to move out of the area.
"Woman Grabbed From Behind In Tenth Attack in Five Months"
Or, maybe, it's just time for the Post to hire better headline writers.
January 16, 2008
Wednesday linkfest
Some of this is old news, but I've been kind of busy and haven't had a chance to do anything with it. Hence, a linkfest.
1. I know that some people go into public service because they think they do some good. Others go into public service so they can be sued by their alma mater when they leave the government. Some are "fortunate" enough to do both. (via Instapundit)
John Yoo can be forgiven if he's having second thoughts about his career choice. A Yale Law School graduate, the Berkeley professor of law went on to serve his country at the Justice Department. Yet last week he was sued by convicted terrorist Jose Padilla and his mother, who are represented by none other than lawyers at Yale. Perhaps if Mr. Yoo had decided to pursue a life of terrorism, he too could be represented by his alma mater.Another reason for you alumni to donate a dollar to Yale so you can tell them you'll never contribute another dollar after this.
2. You're angry with your boyfriend. Do you (a) have a "talk" with him; (b) make him sleep in the living room; (c) set his car on fire? The correct answer is (c). And then you return to your boyfriend, "telling him that he 'might want to get some marshmallows.'" (via Fark)
3. John McCain goes to a funeral home and makes the oldest joke in the book. But he says his mother is older. (via HotAir)
4. If they tried to keep away from the guy, why are they complaining? "Lawsuit says protesters kept away from Bush during N.M. visit"
5. Fill in your own joke; the commenters at HotAir certainly did: "Kokomo police say a man accidentally shot himself in the groin as he was robbing a convenience store. * * * A short time later, police found 25-year-old Derrick Kosch at a home with a gunshot wound to his right testicle and lower left leg. He was expected to have surgery at a hospital."
January 10, 2008
Another look at crime in Baltimore
I've written before about Baltimore's crime problems, usually giving credit to Gov. O'Malley, former mayor of Charm City.
But it's time to broach the subject again, because the FBI has released preliminary violent crime figures this week covering the first half of 2007, and the general trend for cities has been a decrease. Even Baltimore saw a significant drop in violent crime.
Well, except with respect to murders. Baltimore's first-half 2007 murders were 155, up 16.5% from the 133 murders in the first half of 2006.
Now, getting the first-half figures for murder at this date is a little like finding out the halftime score in a football game after the game is already over. We basically know the final totals already: "The city recorded 282 homicides in 2007, a slight increase over the previous year and the highest total since 1999, when 305 people were slain."
This means that the murder rate in Baltimore was about 44.3 per 100,000. I don't have the final figures for Washington, D.C. yet -- the total was 181 murders as of late December 31, up slightly from 2006. That would translate to 31.1 murders per 100,000 in Washington. Go, Baltimore!
Consider this: "New York's and Chicago's 2007 homicide totals were the lowest in more than 40 years, and in Philadelphia, slayings dipped slightly after reaching a nine-year high in 2006. But murders increased in several other big cities, including Atlanta, Miami and Dallas."
So am I being unfair in tarring Gov. O'Malley with this orgy of murder? Probably, although I'm a lot less unfair than the "Democratic lawmakers and police groups" referred to in the Washington Post:
If the pattern holds true for all of 2007, the overall drop would end a two-year increase in violent crime that provoked criticism of the Bush administration. Democratic lawmakers and police groups seized on the increase to highlight cuts in resources dedicated to law enforcement.The Bush administration is responsible for violent crime? I'll give these folks the benefit of the doubt and assume they're being disingenuous rather than stupid.
Anyway, what to do?
How about increasing penalties for those convicted of gun crimes? Not bad. How about enhancing the ability to prosecute gang members? Not bad.
How about making it a misdemeanor to fail to report a missing firearm to police within three days? Surely, they're joking.
The justification for this policy is this: "'All too often we trace guns used in horrible crimes back to owners who claim their guns were stolen,' [Mayor] Dixon said." One would think that a person who knowingly or recklessly lent his gun for use in a crime could be prosecuted as an accessory. Now, I suppose prosecutors could say that it's too hard to prove intent, and that a failure to report might provide evidence of intent. At worst, the failure to report would justify some charge against the wrongdoer.
But it seems that this is more likely:
"The problem is that the people they are targeting, the people who would purposely allow it to get into the wrong hands are not going to care one way or another," Schneider said. "They're not going to report it anyway. There could be a situation where a law-abiding citizen who fails to report the gun is charged while the street hood who used the gun is never caught."Meanwhile, Baltimore State's Attorney Patricia Jessamy, who previously abolished the death penalty in Baltimore through prosecutorial discretion, wants to lessen penalties for illegal possession of a firearm by a felon or drug offender so she can get them to plead guilty and reduce the backlog of cases pending trial.
I'll bet that if I spoke to Jessamy, she'd give me some very practical reasons for her proposal -- difficulty of convicting in Baltimore, inadequate staffing at all levels of the criminal justice system, limited prison space, etc. And I might be sympathetic.
But it all boils down to one of the central reasons that government exists: to protect people from each other. If the government can't even do that, then the answer is obvious: Vote the politicians into higher office.
January 01, 2008
Looking for the first runner-up
So you're an ambitious young woman, and you work out a promising career path:
* Compete in Miss Arizona pageant -- CHECK!
* Go to law school -- CHECK!
* Get a job with a federal district judge -- CHECK!
* Pose for a calendar in a bikini holding an impressive firearm -- CHECK!
* Kidnap and torture your ex-boyfriend -- er, CHECK!
ABC News describes it this way:
Kumari Fulbright, 25, is accused, along with three other men, of tying up her 24-year-old ex-boyfriend with plastic cable and duct tape, and holding him captive for hours in two different Tucson homes, the Arizona Daily Star reported, citing indictment documents in Pima County Superior Court.According to the Tuscon Citizen, court documents allege that she "bit his ears, hands and forearm." Not quite Bobbittesque but still pretty bizarre.
Fulbright, who participated in the Miss Arizona pageant as Miss Pima County in 2005, and Miss Desert Sun in 2006, also reportedly serves as a law clerk for U.S. District Judge Raner Collins. She is listed as a second-year writer on the editorial board of the Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law at the University of Arizona.* * * * *
Prosecutors cite Fulbright in the documents. "[Fulbright] specifically bit him several times while he was bound, stuck a butcher knife in his ear ... said she was going to kill him, [and] pointed a pistol at him."
As we all know, of course, people are innocent until proven guilty, so let's let the criminal process take its course. Blah, blah, blah.
OK, if you haven't clicked on the first link, you're probably still wondering about that photo in the bikini with a gun. Click here and tell me whether this helps or hurts her at trial.
UPDATE: Stumbled on this post with an amusing title: "Looks Like Judge Collins is Going to Need a New Clerk." The blogger speculates that this woman was planning to bump the guy off: "The really scary part of this story is that she was obviously planning to kill him. You can't kidnap, rob, assault and torture someone who KNOWS YOUR NAME and then release him."
December 29, 2007
Spinning crime figures in Prince George's
If I lived in Prince George's County, I'd be livid about this.
This report in The Examiner says that the number of murders in the county increased by 4.5% from last year from 134 in 2006 to 140 in 2007 (through yesterday).
And this is how the county police have reacted:
Police downplayed the increase.We're supposed to believe that the numbers are "down" because they're not as far up as those in Baltimore and Washington. That's totally nuts. The numbers aren't down at all; they're up. Sure, things are worse in Washington, and much, much worse in Baltimore, but apparently you folks who live in Prince George's -- you taxpayers who fund the county police -- shouldn't worry because your murder total is up only 4.5%.
"Our numbers are still down compared to the District and Baltimore, though," said Officer Henry Tippett, a spokesman for the Prince George's Police Department. "We haven't seen a significant increase."
Great. And I thought things were bad in Montgomery County.
December 12, 2007
Wednesday mini-linkfest
1. Headline of the day: "Police say woman pinned boyfriend to wall with buttocks" (via BOTWT)
2. Everything you always wanted to know about "natural" breast enhancement but were afraid to open those spam emails to read about. This is a real article from a real site (featured at MSN). The article is actually written by some chick named Martica Heaner, who claims to have some degrees at something or other. To give her some cred, I'll tell you she is quite a bit less than 100% behind the various techniques. And there are more of them, by the way, than I had ever realized. Exit question: Why did the husband write to Ms. Heaner, instead of the wife, if it's the wife who allegedly wanted enhanced breasts?
3. If you play baseball, you might actually be interested in a cup that will "protect your boys" which, in case you're wondering, does not mean your sons. But even if you don't play baseball, you might just be interested in watching some dude who used to be a pitcher in the majors take a fastball in the nuts (to demonstrate the toughness of the cup he sells). I got the video at HotAir, where I'm sending you to see it. Also, after you watch the video, don't forget to click through to the Nutty Buddy website (which speaks of protecting the boys) and to the Fox News video at the "Update" link.
December 09, 2007
Looking around for a bargain, perhaps?
The Baltimore Sun headline says it: "Wife shopped around for killer, court papers say." (via Fark)
This took place in Kevin Dayhoff's neck of the woods -- Westminster, Maryland.
For weeks, Kevin Gates lived with the fear that his wife was trying to have him killed.The odd thing is that he was still living with the woman, but at least he had a good sense of the person.
But he feigned ignorance.
"I did my very best to make her think I had no clue, because I wanted to catch her in this," said Gates, 43, of Westminster. "Any fear that I would have had was just [overridden] by anger."
The pretense ended Tuesday, when state police arrested Mary L. Gates, 46, saying she offered to pay an undercover trooper $6,000 to kill her husband.
She had provided a photograph of Kevin Gates, as well as a handwritten note with the UPS deliveryman's schedule and route to work, according to court documents.
Although he hadn't anticipated she would go so far, Kevin Gates said, he wasn't "extremely surprised" by his wife's alleged plotting.Here's my marriage tip of the day: If it wouldn't surprise you that your wife was considering hiring a hit man to bump you off, you may be married to Ruthann Aron.
"She's greedy, she's very self-centered, and when she doesn't get her way, she becomes very vindictive," he said. "She's like a little spoiled child."
Only kidding. But you have to admit that the guy's got a really large issue in his marriage that counseling probably wouldn't help.
Now, I hope you'll click through to the article, because it begins with a large photo of a large and very scary woman.
And the L. in her name stands for Lucretia, which is perhaps a very apt middle name.
November 19, 2007
More on death and deterrence
For reasons known only to the New York Times, that paper has run major articles on the death penalty for the past two days.
Yesterday, a front-page article explained that "[a]ccording to roughly a dozen recent studies, executions save lives. For each inmate put to death, the studies say, 3 to 18 murders are prevented." This is a remarkable thing to read in the Times. Sure, people contest these studies, saying they're based on "faulty premises, insufficient data and flawed methodologies." But, there they are.
Today, an article discussed efforts in the New Jersey legislature to abolish the death penalty, which one may fairly characterize as moribund, the state having not executed anyone since 1963. The move is symbolic for supporters of abolition, who have a good deal of backing for the measure (including that of Gov. Corzine). Yet, there are those studies again: "But supporters of the death penalty have as ammunition a number of recent academic studies backing one of their principal arguments: that executions do have a deterrent effect on the murder rate."
Yesterday's article quoted an opponent who seems to have been moved by the studies:
"The evidence on whether it has a significant deterrent effect seems sufficiently plausible that the moral issue becomes a difficult one, said Cass R. Sunstein, a law professor at the University of Chicago who has frequently taken liberal positions. "I did shift from being against the death penalty to thinking that if it has a significant deterrent effect it's probably justified."What makes this pair of articles very strange to me is that I remember writing about this same topic back in June: "Death and deterrence." And everything here is already there in my post, including good old Prof. Sunstein. Just scroll down. (The abolition proposal in New Jersey is new, but I think that's it.) I used my post in June to distinguish between moralists and practicalists on both sides of the death-penalty debate. I argued that moralists on both sides would be largely unmoved by studies on deterrence, no matter what the results.
I'm not sure what's revved up the Times' death-penalty engines, but I'm glad to see the studies on deterrence may be having an effect on others, even if, as a moralist, I don't consider them very relevant to me.
October 24, 2007
Another Wednesday linkfest
Some days are good days for drive-by links. Some days are bad days. Today was a good day.
1. If you really want to become a millionaire, don't bother following these rules. You'll become a millionaire in about 40 years, which doesn't really count if you adjust for inflation. Better advice: To become a millionaire, start with $2 million.
2. Why Heidi Klum fell for Seal. (via HotAir, with lots of comments) Hmmm, I wear bike shorts when I ride, and this never happens to me. Back at my high-school reunion, some people were talking about padded bras -- you know, the usual topic of conversation at high-school reunions -- and the gay "partner" of a classmate of mine explained to me that gay men often pad the areas that others are interested in. Not that this explains the Heidi Klum situation.
3. The math of teenage sex: "If you do the math—worthy of an SAT prep course, with fractions and large numbers—you'll find that early sex plus the Pill equals sexually transmitted disease and maybe even pregnancy."
4. There's something peculiarly Japanese about this: "Cell phone message warns train gropers." Huh? Well, read this: "The application flashes increasingly threatening messages in bold print on the phone's screen to show to the offender: 'Excuse me, did you just grope me?' 'Groping is a crime,' and finally, 'Shall we head to the police?'" The only thing more Japanese would be robots.
5. Does this campaign photo of the month remind you of this one -- I mean, the evil grin? (via HotAir, where Allah says, "Mitt should fire his advance team")
6. With the World Series finally underway, we have this year's best baseball injuries from Ken Levine (via Ace). Line of the day: "Somehow in June Washington reliever, Jesus Colome suffered an 'abscess on his right buttock'. The team's General Manager, Jim Bowden is quoted in the Washington Post as saying, 'We pray for his buttocks and his family.'" There's no link to the Post, but I've verified the Bowden quotation here. My own personal favorite baseball injury story was related in Lindsey Nelson's book from the mid-60s called "Backstage at the Mets." Grover Powell, a young left-handed pitcher who'd made a great splash for the abysmal Mets, injured his pitching arm while combing his hair. Casey Stengel quipped: "Greasy kid stuff."
7. If you're a kid who lives in Boston, they want to teach you how to duck to protect yourself against gunfire. (via Fark)
8. You might not want to meet this Australian barmaid in a dark alley, although rumor has it that she's very entertaining in the bar. (via about a million sites)
9. Yiddish makes a comeback in Lithuania, as demonstrated by this syntax: "I feel a very rich person by knowing this language." (via Fark)
10. I just had my 100,000th visitor at Pillage Idiot this evening. Needless to say, it was someone who had been searching for images of the Thai transvestite pageant, which I wrote about two years ago. Somehow that seems appropriate.
September 18, 2007
Naked before God (dyslexic version)
There's a very old joke about the dyslexic agnostic who stayed up late at nights unsure about the existence of dog.
I tell you this because I regaled you last month with the tale of "Naked before God," a convention of religious nudists meeting in Tennessee. Today, I want to tell about "Naked before Dog," which has to do with a naked dog-walker.
This headline actually sounds like a "Help Wanted" ad: "Police look for nude man walking dogs." (via Fark)
LITCHFIELD, Conn. - Police say they are on the lookout for a nude man who was spotted taking a stroll with two dogs on Monday. Police say the man was seen by a female jogger in the woods of the White Memorial Foundation.According to the Litchfield Republican-American, which obviously you can't trust, because it's probably sitting in a public toilet tapping its foot, the naked dog-walker "went au natural in the woods of the White Memorial Foundation Monday, stunning a female jogger and forcing high school cross country teams to take or consider taking precautions." The use of the word "stunned" is interesting. Was she stunned by the man's, uh, natural beauty, or was she stunned in any of the following senses of the word:
Mary stolle, athletic director at nearby Wamogo Regional High School, said the school's cross country teams were diverted from the woods where they had been training into White Memorial's museum as a precaution.
The suspect is a tall white man with thin hair who is believed to be in his 50s.
1. To daze or render senseless, by or as if by a blow.Personally, I suspect she was horrified, not stunned, but that's only because I should know. It won't be too long before I fit the description of the dog-walker, at least when he has his clothes on.
2. To overwhelm or daze with a loud noise.
3. To stupefy, as with the emotional impact of an experience; astound.
The other interesting facet of the story is why the cross-country teams were diverted from the woods "as a precaution." As a precaution against what? Were the dogs dangerous? Or was it a precaution against being stunned by a naked middle-aged dude who had a couple of dogs with him?
One final thought: This clearly wouldn't have happened in California, where they actually have "Naked Dog Walks" in a place called, oddly enough, "Los Gatos" (which means "the cats" in some metric language or other). If you think I'm kidding about naked dog walks, see this announcement and this one.
And it's a damn good thing they specify "naked" dog walks, because otherwise people might dress their dogs up in those silly little sweater things.
September 16, 2007
O.J. Simpson goes to Starbucks
Starbucks barista: Good morning, sir. What can I get for you today?
O.J. Simpson: Get me French roast, or else you be toast.
Starbucks barista: OK, sir, what size French roast would you like?
O.J. Simpson: Just gimme what I said, or you gonna taste lead.
Starbucks barista: Will that be all, sir?
O.J. Simpson: If that coffee ain't hot, you gonna get shot.
Starbucks barista: Would you like room for cream, sir?
O.J. Simpson: If you don't fill, I'm gonna kill.
Starbucks barista: That'll be $1.94, sir.
O.J. Simpson: If this happened in L.A., you'd be dead yesterday.
Starbucks barista: Is this a robbery, sir?
O.J. Simpson: I'm O.J. Simpson. How am I going to think that I'm going to rob somebody and get away with it? You've got to understand, this ain't somebody going to steal somebody's drugs or something like that. This is somebody going to get his private s--- back. That's it. That's not robbery.
June 28, 2007
World's most trivial con man
I was about to walk into the Metro this morning, when a 20-ish man standing near the pay phones approached me and asked, "Do you have four quarters for a dollar?" Sometimes in these situations, I just ignore the request and keep walking, but I had a lot of change in my pocket, and I figured I could help the guy out.
I pulled out my change and found four quarters. The man seemed happy and showed me a coin. Without waiting for my surprise to register, he said, "It's a dollar coin." My first thought was, "Oh, great! I hate dollar coins. It never pays to be nice." But then, I looked at the coin, which he was still holding, and it looked suspiciously like one of those quarters with states on the back.
The man pointed to the word "DOLLAR" on the back. Now, you probably won't be surprised to learn that just to the left of the word "DOLLAR" was the word "QUARTER." I said, "That's a quarter." He insisted, "It's a dollar." I walked off.
The amazing thing is that for about five seconds after that, I thought to myself, "This man is not very bright." And then, it dawned on me that he was trying to con me out of 75 cents. Which made him still not very bright -- and the author of one of the most trivial cons around. Thirty years ago, a guy would at least have tried to con you out of five bucks. This twerp couldn't even keep up with inflation.
June 21, 2007
Newsik you can oosik
I have good news tonight: All of us can sleep better knowing that a horrible criminal has copped a plea with the feds.
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - An Alaska man has pleaded guilty to selling more than 100 fur seal "oosiks" -- or penises -- to a local gift shop that intended to sell the items as an aphrodisiac.Sometime when I have nothing else to do, I'll look up the statute, but for now, let me quote that fastidious news source, The Register:
Michael Richard Zacharof, an Aleut and former tribal president from the Bering Sea village of St. Paul, pleaded guilty this week to one count of violating the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Federal law forbids the sale of any raw marine mammal parts unless they have been crafted into pieces of Alaska Native artwork.
The first person to make a quip about how Zacharof could have circumvented the Marine Mammal Protection Act by simply carving the oosiks into novelty Aleut candlestick holders will be banned from reading El Reg for a year and fined $20,000.Now, I know what you're thinking right about now. "What kind of moron tries to sell a seal penis?" Also this: "What exactly does a seal penis look like?"
I can't answer the first question, but I'm glad you asked the second one. Because here's a picture I snagged with a Google Image search:
"Aha," you say, "but I have one further question: What does a walrus oosik look like, assuming they have one?" Ask and you shall receive. Here it is:
Remarkably, this is not all there is to this story. The Boston Globe reports:
A prosecutor said the investigation started in Massachusetts in 2004 and 2005 when bear gall bladders and seal oosiks were discovered in a Boston suburb and traced to a shop in Anchorage.I didn't even realize that bears had gall bladders, but I have heard of bear ballings, which have some industrial uses.
Now, here's what I'm thinking: Are bear gall bladders aphrodisiacs, also? I think the answer is yes. In any event, this hideous thing is thought to be:
An AP article says about the thing:
It slimes its enemies, has rows of teeth on its tongue, and feeds on the innards of rotting fish by penetrating any orifice. But cooked and served on a plate, it is considered an aphrodisiac in South Korea.Hmmm . . . slimes its enemies . . . has rows of teeth on its tongue . . . penetrating any orifice . . . it's Chuck Schumer! Sorry, my mistake. It's actually a hagfish, and you'd hate to meet one of these in a dark alley.
I'm going to leave you with this thought: Mr. Zacharof lives on a remote island in Alaska and had to participate in the court proceeding by telephone. Did you realize they had telephones on remote islands in Alaska? Well, the AP tried to find out whether there were telephones there, and the Globe's article says this: "A call by The Associated Press to his home on St. Paul Island was not immediately returned."
It turns out that the bear that delivers messages to the residents of the island was incapacitated with gall bladder pains.
June 17, 2007
De minimis non curat lex?
(Note: Thanks, Allah, for the link at HotAir. Ace, too.)
The New York tabloids are having a field day with a settlement between an East Village artist and the City over her arrest for going out topless on the street.
- New York Post: "'Bust'ed Gal Payoff."
- New York Daily News: "Bra-vo! $29G in topless suit"
In case you think I'm making that decision up, it really exists. I found a copy of the decision at a
The majority per curiam opinion tries to avoid the constitutional issue by making an analogy to a different statute that was intended to address the problem of topless waitresses (and I know many of you don't think that's a "problem" at all). So it holds that ordinary toplessness by ordinary women is not covered by the statute. Did I just say "not covered"?
The concurring opinion proceeds to get all funky.
Appellants and the five other women who were arrested with them were prosecuted for doing something that would have been permissible, or at least not punishable under the penal laws, if they had been men--they removed their tops in a public park, exposing their breasts in a manner that all agree was neither lewd nor intended to annoy or harass. As a result of this conduct, which was apparently part of an effort to dramatize their opposition to the law, appellants were prosecuted under Penal Law § 245.01, which provides that a person is guilty of the petty offense of "exposure" when he or she "appears in a public place in such a manner that the private or intimate parts of his [or her] body are unclothed or exposed." The statute goes on to state that, for purposes of this prohibition, "the private or intimate parts of a female person shall include that portion of the breast which is below the top of the areola."1 The statute thus creates a clear gender-based classification, triggering scrutiny under equal protection principles (see, Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190, 97 S.Ct. 451, 50 L.Ed.2d 397).OK, now comes the fun part. The concurrence says that "the State has the burden of showing that the classification is substantially related to the achievement of an important governmental objective," which probably isn't too hard to meet if you accept the idea that women and men have different "intimate parts," but if you're a lawyer, that's way too simple. And it didn't help that the State failed to mount any defense of the statute.
So here's the concurrence:
Although protecting public sensibilities is a generally legitimate goal for legislation (see, e.g., People v. Hollman, supra), it is a tenuous basis for justifying a legislative classification that is based on gender, race or any other grouping that is associated with a history of social prejudice (see, Mississippi Univ. for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718, 725 102 S.Ct. 3331, 3336, 73 L.Ed.2d 1090 ["(c)are must be taken in ascertaining whether the statutory objective itself reflects archaic and stereotypic notions"]). Indeed, the concept of "public sensibility" itself, when used in these contexts, may be nothing more than a reflection of commonly-held preconceptions and biases.This is totally hilarious. Treating biological differences between men and women differently is a reflection of bias? I have a friend who took an employment discrimination class with the famous Catherine MacKinnon, who was insisting that all distinctions between men and women were socially constructed. At the break, he asked her whether this applied to male voice changes after puberty. Her response was that we are acculturated (I can't remember the exact word she used) to believe that post-pubescent males have lower voices.
So according to the concurrence in the New York Court of Appeals, the fact that female breasts are significantly different from male breasts (vive la difference!) bears no relationship to whether it's permissible to require them to be covered.
Next question for the Court of Appeals: Does a law requiring that male and female genitalia be covered violate equal protection because women aren't required to cover their penises and men their pudenda?
And as long as we're raising questions, why did the New York Post, which obviously thought it was just great for Phoenix Feeley to go out topless on the streets of Manhattan, show a photo of her with her hair covering her breasts? Paging Daniel Henninger.
June 11, 2007
Death and deterrence
It's a little bit of an oversimplification, but most proponents and opponents of capital punishment fall into one of two categories: the moralists or the practicalists. In fact, I'd venture that the people who care most about the issue -- on both sides -- fall predominantly within the moralist category.
For death-penalty opponents, this means they are opposed because it's always wrong to kill (which is a moralist argument whether offered by the religious or the non-religious); or because the power to kill should not be given to the government (this is a libertarian view that I used to hold); or because there is a risk of error, and any risk of error is too much in capital punishment; or because the system might be racially biased. All of these are moralist arguments, including the risk of error argument, which sounds like a practical argument but necessarily makes the moral judgment that, whatever the justification for death may be in the run of cases, we cannot risk the possibility that an innocent person will be executed.
For death-penalty proponents, the moralist arguments focus on the penological goal of retribution. They include arguments that murder is evil and must be eradicated; and that society has an obligation to affirm the value of innocent life by imposing a unique punishment, depriving those who deny the value of innocent life of their own lives. There are others, though they tend to sound like the two I've mentioned.
The practicalists on both sides, in contrast, wonder about general and specific deterrence. They wonder whether an alternative of life without parole is an adequate substitute for death. They wonder what happens if a murderer is confined to prison and murders again, either in prison or after early release.
So the practicalists may be very interested to learn that "a series of academic studies over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument -- whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes."
More specifically:
Among the conclusions:The article I've quoted notes that the studies are not without their critics, but I suspect that this is always true, regardless whether the studies support the pro or the con.
-- Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14).
Among the conclusions:
-- The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston.
-- Speeding up executions would strengthen the deterrent effect. For every 2.75 years cut from time spent on death row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.
The question is what effect these conclusions, assuming they are shown to be correct, have on the moralists. I suspect that opponents would see little to change their views. If it's always wrong to kill, the utilitarian argument that killing a murderer prevents other deaths doesn't persuade. On the other hand, if the argument is that there is too much risk of error, one might end up conceding the possibility that these studies could be relevant.
The studies' conclusions drew a philosophical response from a well-known liberal law professor, University of Chicago's Cass Sunstein. A critic of the death penalty, in 2005 he co-authored a paper titled "Is capital punishment morally required?"And what of the moralist proponents of capital punishment (of whom I'm an example)? The answer is that we would welcome the refutation of practical arguments against the death penalty, but we would still think deterrence (at least general deterrence, which is, after all, the focus of these studies) is largely irrelevant. I've never really thought of the general deterrence argument as much a justification for capital punishement, so proof of a deterrent effect wouldn't bolster my views, just as the proof of no deterrent effect wouldn't make me doubt the benefit of capital punishment.
"If it's the case that executing murderers prevents the execution of innocents by murderers, then the moral evaluation is not simple," he told The Associated Press. "Abolitionists or others, like me, who are skeptical about the death penalty haven't given adequate consideration to the possibility that innocent life is saved by the death penalty."
So let a thousand academic studies bloom. Proving a deterrent effect may help the politics from my perspective by undermining the opponents withthe general public, and I don't want to minimize that, but otherwise it doesn't really mean a lot to me, and I suspect (Cass Sunstein notwithstanding) that it doesn't mean a lot to the moralists among the opponents, either.
June 08, 2007
Never mind!
Here's the checklist for the Annapolis Police's raid, conducted on an apartment by 12 to 15 masked and armed officers:
- Break down door? CHECK!
- Set off percussion grenade? CHECK!
- Kick occupant in the groin? CHECK!
- Make sure you have the right apartment? Hmmmm, wait a minute...
In a classic understatement, the Baltimore Sun described the Salvadoran couple in the apartment as "startled" when police broke in. Rivaling the Sun's understatement is this one from the mayor of Annapolis:
"I do know there was a mistake. That is not good," said Annapolis Mayor Ellen O. Moyer.Unfortunately, these botched raids really do happen, and often it's through innocent mistakes. But it certainly wasn't a good day to be the spokesman for the Annapolis Police.
"We don't know how the mistake was made," said Officer Hal Dalton, city police spokesman.Dalton said that the warrant "was factually correct," but since the address where the raid took place was wrong, I have to assume this means that either the police misread the correct address on the warrant, or they simply went into the wrong building.
"Something went wrong in the briefing before the operation.
Regrettably it happens, not very often to us, but it happens."
I'm not quite sure which is stranger: the fact that the Sun article is accompanied by a photo of the broken-down door or the fact that it's graced by an ad for Ryan Homes.
UPDATE (6/10): For some reason, this made an impression on me when I read about it 20 years ago in an article by Lyle Denniston.
The Supreme Court decided a case called Maryland v. Garrison, in 1987, in which Baltimore police had obtained a warrant to search the third floor apartment at a particular address for marijuana. When they arrived, they found out that there were two apartments on the third floor, and realized they were searching the wrong one. But while they were there, they had discovered marijuana in the apartment. The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed the conviction of the resident of the wrong apartment on the ground that the search was illegal.
At oral argument in the Supreme Court, defense counsel was answering a series of questions about why it was necessary to throw out the conviction in a case like this. The justice asking the questions is not identified in the transcript, but my recollection, having read about the argument way back when, is that it was Justice Scalia, and the context supports that.
Defense counsel, a rather brash sort, did something I wouldn't recommend to appellate advocates. Read this excerpt from the transcript:
MR. KROOP: That is true. I am not arguing the facts. I am not saying that the police didn't act reasonably. I think they did, as far as what was in front of them.I'm sure he thought he was being funny with that last quip, but I'm also sure it fell completely flat.
QUESTION: Mr. Kroop, it is no big deal in this case. I mean, we are just talking about a little bit of marijuana, right, but --
MR. KROOP: Well, no.
QUESTION: -- your argument would be the same had they found -- had they found in walking into the wrong apartment, which they thought was the right one, they are behaving properly, and they find a murderer there, the same thing would be the case. You have to let the fellow go.
MR. KROOP: Absolutely.
QUESTION: You don't want to reward them for their mistake.
MR. KROOP: That's correct.
QUESTION: And therefore you have to turn the murderer loose.
MR. KROOP: That's correct. The Court of Appeals --
QUESTION: Because otherwise you would be rewarding them for their mistake.
MR. KROOP: No, because we want to look out to the future to protect the other people. Sure, one murderer may go free.
QUESTION: You are not protecting anybody. These people are doing all that they possibly could. What are you protecting them from?
MR. KROOP: I don't agree with that. I don't think the police did all they could in this case.
QUESTION: Well, now you are arguing whether it was reasonable or not, but we are assuming it was reasonable.
MR. KROOP: I am saying assuming arguendo it was, I still believe without any equivocation --
QUESTION: Who are you protecting then? They are going to make the same mistake in the future.
MR. KROOP: I am protecting you when you go into your chambers so when the police walk in for a warrant for Chief Justice Rehnquist they don't bungle into yours by mistake.
May 10, 2007
Her father's yahrzeit?
Here's what not to do on the 15th anniversary of your father's death: Murder your mother. It's even worse if your father died because you helped to murder him.
This faux pas is not mitigated by the following amusing fact: "When [the father] disappeared, no one reported him missing."
(via Fark)
Would you believe a sex-offender program?
A reader who works at the Justice Department (yeah, they're monitoring your blog, too) wrote to tell me about a sex-offender program DOJ runs called "SMART." You can see a description here.
He was amused to learn that the email address for the program is GetSMART -at- usdoj -dot- gov. When he asked, he was told by someone affiliated with the program that the email address was indeed an allusion to a certain TV show.
I don't remember a single episode of Get Smart having to do with sex offenders, but I can tell you this: If you've ever seen the Justice Department building, in the Federal Triangle area of D.C., you'll know how distinctive its entrances are, and I'm sure that one episode of Get Smart actually opens with Max walking into that building. Not the famous introduction with Max dropping down through the phone booth. I'm talking about the show itself.
April 29, 2007
Recent data on contacts with police
I've been on the mailing list for the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a bureau within the Justice Department, for about the past 15 years. Sometimes I don't give BJS reports the attention they deserve, but I noticed this one. BJS has just released a report on contacts between police and the public in 2005. The full text is here.
There are several interesting findings in this report.
First, in 2005, about 41% of contacts with police were driver stops. In these stops, police stopped white, black, and hispanic drivers at essentially the same rates, between 8% and 9%. (See chart below.)
Second, if you look at the same chart, blacks and hispanics were subjected to searches at higher rates than whites. The report doesn't offer reasons; it just gives the data. This is certainly a disparity, but most of the accusations of racial profiling center on the stop itself, and these data suggest that there's no disparity at the point of the stop itself.
Third, among drivers stopped by police, 91.7% of whites, 83.7% of blacks, and 87.5% of hispanics felt the police acted properly during their contact. (See chart below.)
Although the percentage of blacks who said the police acted properly is lower than for the other groups, it is still surprisingly high. Five out of every six black drivers stopped by the police reported that the police acted properly during that stop.
None of this will satisfy people who think there's racial profiling going on, but this certainly suggests that the any profiling that may exist is not as prevalent it's often made out to be.
UPDATE: Right on time, the complainers weigh in. Including the ACLU.
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
