Megyn’s last day is tomorrow.

hehe–funny..

you know–after she had that child–she has become a little more ‘liberal’ in her ways..
maybe she rethought her radicalization for pay at fox…maybe she also wants a better, brighter and less violent world for her child? with clean air and water?
i guess we can only speculate what has melted that frosty casing around her heart…

Those students didn’t look very threatening sitting there with their arms locked. Also, if pepper spray is a food product does it count as a vegetable?

Pepper spray goes good on tacos.

MS. MARTEL,

Respectfully, the headline and the story did not coincide.  I’ll leave it at that.

Purveyor

You’ve said that about everyone at Fox. Btw, when the police tell you to move or else, you move. It’s the law.

“O’Reilly countered her apparent sympathy for the protesters by
suggesting, “we don’t have a right to Monday morning quarterback the
police,”

This is true.  The police are our lord and masters and we never have a right to question them after the fact.

You live in an amazingly shallow world, wrapped in paranoia and media driven idiocy.

There’s not a human being alive who likes dirty air or water.

And exactly how have ”liberals” made the world less violent? Explain cogently, please. Your hyperbolic leftwing idiocy is not appreciated outside your kostard meetings.  

Not really. If you’re on your own property, for instance, you can tell them to f-off.

““I know the tape looks bad,” she told O’Reilly, “but from a legal standpoint, the cops didn’t do anything wrong.””

lol…tell that to the two pigs who going to get fired.

“There’s not a human being alive who likes dirty air or water.”

ur kiddin rite?

There are many people who prefer profit over a pristine environment.

“it’s a food product, essentially,”

Good point.
The police could have thrown boiling Clam Chowder on them.

It’s a food product, essentially.

You try it then. If a policeman has reason to be on your property telling you to move you better move, I have known of people getting shot for less. Yes they better be there legally but then this is about a legal move by the cops so the comparison stands.

by acceptance…

you know like Jesus…

It’s not her fault.  The editors chose the titles and they consistently do a shitty job; preferring to write something sensational rather than something that conveys the text of the story.  Been that way since Mediaite started.

I’m not so sure that they are going to be fired, first they probably belong to a union that will make sure that they are not just simply used as scape-goats, secondly if they were directed to clear the area blocked by the protesters then I think that they were simply doing as they were instructed to do by their superiors.  If that is indeed the case, a review of their training protocols would answer the question more fairly as to whether or not they should be terminated…  I would think it more likely that the Chancellor faces a larger problem than do these two officers.  

It appears that a better, brighter and less violent world would not be a move toward liberalism. The OWS protesters have taught us that.

jason–please post he conservative platform to keep our air and water clean please..

and please no lies and cheap conservative ‘hyperbolic’ idiocy…
talk is cheap..where are the conservative programs to keep our water and air clean, streets and bridges and infrastructure up to date—and where is the conservative plan to give all of Americans affordable health care?
where is the plan to make it possible for farmers and shop owners to compete with multinational corporations?
i would really like to know–because i really miss the downtowns of America..i miss the small shops and small businesses..
i miss meeting friends and family at downtown shops…
so please tell me–where is this plan?

“beside to point”  .. didn’t you mean “beside the point” ?

The fox big eyed blonde is wrong but what else is new.. she’s a fox blonde-quota-made-4-the-hee-haw-crowd.

Yeh it’s a food product but ah.. “How Bad Is Pepper Spray? About 5 million points hotter than your taco hot sauce”

Fox News is not only making people more stupid. It makes them more misanthropic.
On the other hand, choosing to spend your evening watching Fox News means that you already have solid a-hole foundation. So, in a sense, Fox only accelerates the process.

BIG FUCKIN DEAL,

Whose civil liberties are more important, a person walking to class on the sidewalk, or, the people impeding the way?

Is blocking the sidewalk “protected speech,” under the first amendment?  

Is blocking an intersection, protected speech? Is burning a cross on a sidewalk?  

What about a group of NAZI’s blocking the sidewalk?  Is that protected speech?

Or, does it really depend on whose Ox, is being gored?  (As long as it’s not yours?)

Purveyor

your ignorance is becoming

Hey hey, ho ho, Mediaite has got to go!
Hey hey, ho ho, Mediaite has got to go!
We are the 99 3/8′s%

Conscience or oxytocin?

They won’t get fired, dummie.

nice scumbag maybe they can get some solyndra money to get them by

Let me know how that works for you when you do that, einstein.

1st of all, apparently you never saw movies like Norma Raw.. apparently you don’t know the legacy of Three Mile Island, apparently you don’t understand at all what the Koch Bros are all about.. apparently you’re ignorantly blind to the numerous factories in this country who have covered up illegal pollution in our rivers, lakes, illegal dumping, etc etc etc..     Stunning how truly ignorant cons are.

2nd of all, get the f’k out of my town, don’t need dumb hillbillies here…

Gray Davis, anyone?

these corps are rich, they don’t live anywhere near where they pollute.

I believe, considering my usual proclivity for confrontation, that I tempered my criticism appropriately and “RESPECTFULLY.”

I would have preferred a more substantive response from you, or whomever?  ”I’ll leave it at that.”

Purveyor

Did someone say you have to look threatening to block others from getting where they need to go. We have the right to protest as long as we don’t infringe on the rights of others to do what they are doing. These protesters were infringing on the rights of others. Police were ordered to clear them out. Prescribed method is pepper spray. Protesters got what they wanted.

Very clever, LOL

I truly could not decide if SUNSET was obtuse, or condescending.  Either way, I was attempting to be less combative this evening.  Apparently, you thought she “tossed the gauntlet,” so to speak?  Ouch!

Purveyor

The very essense of protest is to question authority or to seek address for percieved grievance.  Do so at present, and risk a dousing with aerosol capsaicin, possibly worse.  Sometimes it’s pudent to lose a battle in order to win the war, despite the satisfaction of speaking your mind. 

“SUNSET LAMENT,”

A somewhat obscure, but talented guitar player?  Must have made an impression on you?

Or, was I thinking of a poem by Rimbaud?

Mic check!

Whose Mediaite? Our Mediaite!
Whose Mediaite? Our Mediaite!

We Demand!
We Demand!

That Mediaite stop misinforming it’s readers with propaganda!
That Mediaite stop misinforming it’s readers with propaganda!

And we demand that Mediaite stop banning people who criticize Mediaite!
And we demand that Mediaite stop banning people who criticize Mediaite!

We demand that Mediate stop taking away our free speech!
We demand that Mediate stop taking away our free speech!

You’re wrong: I like to live on the edge and like dirty air and water. I’m flying to Tahrir Square and hope I get tasered right in the eye.

I’m actually agreeing with you.  The title does not convey the story.  I’m simply informing you that you are blaming the wrong person.  Martel didn’t write or choose the headline.

“O’Reilly countered…by
suggesting, ‘we don’t have a right to Monday morning quarterback the
police,’”

Excuse me?!? Since when do the public NOT have the right to scrutinize, investigate & criticize the actions of the police? We have EVERY right to do so whenever we feel something needs to be analyzed. Where does O’Reilly get off saying that?

Nah, this is all part of Roger’s plan; it’s the way Ailes can say to his cocktail party buds, Look what nice reasonable folk we are, all fair & balanced. It’s a horse shit presentation, derived from the fact the universal condemnations were already in; this is to set up a show a day or two down the line where BillOld says, Enough already, we SHOWED symapthy, get off our lawns or we shoot for real!

I’m surprised wingers don’t see how easily Ailes moves them around. 

Man oh man, are you ever betraying a great historical avatar name.

What crap. Fox is Never Never Land, where Roger “Peter Pan” Ailses rules. You actually take their narratives SERIOUSLY? 

Oh, sorry joe; didn’t realize it was you; always leaving our brain back in cold storage for the Rapture, right joe?

 As a cop who has been involved in similar but not exactly the same situations I will tell ya this. Whether or not it may or may not have been protocol doesn’t matter. Its how it looks plain and simple. The cops job is in jeopardy. I know a little about crowd control and there are about 10 other ways of moving these people that doesnt look nearly as bad, but still gets the job done. However looking at the big picture as bad as it may look in the long run it is an effective and relatively harmless( yet very uncomfortable) way of getting the crowd to move. A very hard call, but the cops knew they were being filmed they should have been smarter and done it another way. One thing I would ask of all of you is to understand the political and monetary pressure that these depts are put under to resolve these situations in a manner that does not seriously hurts anyone yet allows business to go on as usual. It is immense and the decisions are not made easily. Being a police officer is not fun and none of us relish the idea of doing these things. I hope everyone can at least try and look at the picture from our side as well.

That was such a con job; Ahnold is now, of course, officially the worst and most hated governor in US history. Gray Davis called it like he saw it: Enron was a criminal organization.

And we drink their sewage.

FED UP,  (Been awhile?)

This entire OWS, conundrum, has its roots back in a 1943 Supreme Court case.  Justice Bob Jackson determined that “Expressive speech,” or “symbolic speech,” contains a “communicative content,” thus is “protected speech” under the 1st amendment.  Seemed to make sense at the time?Thus was lost the civility handed down to us by the Founders.  ”Peaceably assemble” became ridiculously subjective…Perhaps, Ms. Kelley could have used this topic to enlighten the viewers, to the dangers of adjudicating beyond the text of the Constitution.  Oh well?Purveyor

Are they part of a union? If so, they won’t be fired. Just re-assigned.

 This is a fallacy that annoys the hell out of me. Cops get fired all the time. Before I was a cop I believed that they don’t get fired either. But I have been one now for 14 years and have seen many lose their jobs for many different reasons.

Hmm, sounds like the “Nuremberg Defense?”  Ouch

Anyway, I glad you clarified such, my apologies.

Still, consider that there is a hint of the “abrogation of responsibility.”  I suspect Ms. Martel could have insinuated herself into the choosing of the headline?  I would have!

Purveyor

I think it’s dependent on the situation. However, if there is reason for legit firing, then yes, the person will be fired. However, if there is any phrasing in a manual that even .00001% allows him the right to pepper spray, he’s in the “clear”.

 Any manuel or SOP is not written in stone. Believe me they tend to be interpreted in different ways depending on the situation and the context. Much like the Bible:)

INSIDE,

Very simply, America has perverted the meaning of the 1st amendment and “freedom of speech.”  By way of a variety of Supreme Court decisions, some pertaining to speech, some not, the 1st amendment has been expanded to include: “EXPRESSIVE” speech.  All of which opened the proverbial “can-o-worms.”

I have been preaching “neutral principle,” far and wide, do you see the flag burning case, Texas v. Johnson, lurking within the OWS dilemma?  ”Protected, expressive speech.”

It’s in there!

By the way, you made an excellent Post based on personal observation.  Well done!

from a former seattle police chief, featured in the Nation:

“[T]he police response to the Occupy movement, most disturbingly visible in Oakland—where scenes resembled a war zone and where a marine remains in serious condition from a police projectile—brings into sharp relief the acute and chronic problems of American law enforcement. Seattle might have served as a cautionary tale, but instead, US police forces have become increasingly militarized, and it’s showing in cities everywhere: the NYPD “white shirt” coating innocent people with pepper spray, the arrests of two student journalists at Occupy Atlanta, the declaration of public property as off-limits and the arrests of protesters for “trespassing.”
The paramilitary bureaucracy and the culture it engenders—a black-and-white world in which police unions serve above all to protect the brotherhood—is worse today than it was in the 1990s. Such agencies inevitably view protesters as the enemy. And young people, poor people and people of color will forever experience the institution as an abusive, militaristic force—not just during demonstrations but every day, in neighborhoods across the country.Much of the problem is rooted in a rigid command-and-control hierarchy based on the military model. American police forces are beholden to archaic internal systems of authority whose rules emphasize bureaucratic regulations over conduct on the streets. An officer’s hair length, the shine on his shoes and the condition of his car are more important than whether he treats a burglary victim or a sex worker with dignity and respect. In the interest of “discipline,” too many police bosses treat their frontline officers as dependent children, which helps explain why many of them behave more like juvenile delinquents than mature, competent professionals. It also helps to explain why persistent, patterned misconduct, including racism, sexism, homophobia, brutality, perjury and corruption, do not go away, no matter how many blue-ribbon panels are commissioned or how much training is provided.”

from Scientific American:

”
As the North Carolina researchers point out, any compound that can influence nerve function is, by definition, risky. Research tells us that pepper spray acts as a potent inflammatory agent. It amplifies allergic sensitivities, it irritates and damages eyes, membranes, bronchial airways, the stomach lining – basically what it touches. It works by causing pain – and, as we know, pain is the body warning us of an injury.In general, these are short term effects. Pepper spray, for instance, induces a burning sensation in the eyes in part by damaging cells in the outer layer of the cornea. Usually, the body repairs this kind of injury fairly neatly. But with repeated exposures, studies find, there can be permanent damage to the cornea.The more worrisome effects have to do with inhalation – and by some reports, California university police officers deliberately put OC spray down protestors throats. Capsaicins inflame the airways, causing swelling and restriction. And this means that pepper sprays pose a genuine risk to people with asthma and other respiratory conditions.
“

 Thanks man. I will throw this in as well. Im not taking sides on this incident or these incidents in general involving the OWS. I have been a cop long enough to understand that in general we are always the ones who look bad. Its the nature of the job. I accept that. There are occasions in history that we have looked good I suppose when it involves crowd control. Protecting black children in the south while they were going to school comes to mind after integration. But when in general when it comes to crowd control its a lose,lose situation. There is no good way to break up a crowd. Correction there are many effective ways to do so but none of them look good. What people have to understand and I think most do is that in the end the police are agents of the government. When they are told to do something by a politician or the sheriff or the chief, they have to get it done period. Police departments then try and get a handle on the situation in the safest most efficient way possible. However these are very fluid and dynamic incidents that are very different than putting a car together on an assembly line. The only thing that is predictable is that they will be unpredictable. Mistakes are made, but also many things are done correctly. The general public does not care what has been done right only what they view has been done wrong.

 With all due respect Darladoon I have read many of your post and we agree on many things. But I ask you not to stereotype police officers in such a manner because I am not like any of these things that are described above. I do not and will not stereotype the OWS protesters in any such manner. This chief has his opinion but thats all it is. I will listen to his opinion and agree to disagree, because he is using a very broad brush to paint a picture that is not only inaccurate of most police agencies and their officers but unfair.  

it’s a quotation.  nothing more, nothing less.

 Yup I understand that:)

O’Reilly and Megan are sell outs to American people and and American constitution. I agree with Michael Moore, why isn’t the law enforcement arresting the real criminals instead torturing and arresting the protesters???? Some things is wrong with this sort of Democracy….

****
I believe the protestors should have the right to protect themselves and
fight back when they are beaten by the Police for peacefully
protesting…
******

FoxNews is full of SHIT…

no deer[sic] you are thinking of child rapist  in BIG money institutions…

100% in agreement

You have been exposed to my philosophy long enough to know that neutral principle defends the substance of any person or groups message or beliefs. That is neutral principle and equal protection.

But, as I said in my previous comment, it is the methodology of message that American’s have allowed to be perverted. The OWS methods, were NOT what Thomas Jefferson had in mind. And 200 plus years makes NO difference!

As a Police Officer, you should NEVER have to resort to strong arm tactics during an assembly or protest. Free speech doesn’t mean anyone can do anything and call it “free speech!” Free speech assumes civility and decorum, or, its nothing more than riot!

When I attend Tea Party Rally’s, we go, we gather, we talk, we listen and then we go home. Look what we have accomplished without behaving as the vulgar children of OWS? The Tea Party is now a legitimate organization that started out as a handful of local Rally’s
In fact, in Denver there was only a handful of Cops as they knew we wouldn’t riot! LOL

As a COP, you should never have to babysit people who claim to be protected by free speech.

As you know by now, I have studied these issues and work them through very reasonably, logically and legally.

Stay safe

They were not in any danger. Going with your reasoning Rodney King should’ve been beat up by the police.  

My, my, you certainly are the articulate intellectual?

I bet you get all the chicks, as women really dig smart guys?  

do you dispute the claim that fox news is full of shit?

recent polls show that the vast majority of fox viewers are full of shit, so……

These guys are all puppets..Mankind is led by zombies

You know what I love about Mediaite above any other feature? The predictions, whether from the folks on teh clips, or from the Mediaite folks putting up those clips, or from readers, and particularly readers who claim some ‘inside knowledge’ or ‘special expertise’. And this thread is FULL of that sort of crap.

Start with Megyn Kelly. The excuse for her going on BillOld’s show is that she’s supposed to be some sort of ‘legal expert’. Nnnnnot so much; she attended a law school, and passed, and got a law degree. That makes here a lawyer, but not an expert at anything in particular, among the hundreds of specialties & areas of expertise. This particular clip involves a discussion about the UC Davis pepper-spraying incident by officer Casual F. Sprayer, and the SUBJECT of Ms. Kelly’s ‘advice’ is whether he was entitled or whether he’s in trouble. She tells BillOld it’s close, but by the book.

Bull. Shit. This behavior was the subject of a definitive legal opinion by the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals from an incident in the 1990s, with the opinion rendered in 2001:

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2011/11/16/211132/23

There’s a link to the opinion and the court ruling in that case, and that ruling is BINDING AUTHORITY on all of California. As you read the facts in that case, think of what differences there are between that case and this one. You’re going to find yourself thinking, Gee, I don’t … see any, really; not any big differences, not any that matter. 

Bingo. That case cost the state of California a bunch of money, because every single one of the protesters pepper-sprayed in that case sued and won.

Did you here Megyn Kelly raise that case? Did she discuss it? Did she try to ‘distinguish’ it, which is lawyer-ese for, it’s not the same? No; she did not. Why not? Didn’t she know about it? Probably not; she’s not practising law, she’s a talking head on Fox, and she never did practise in California, or in criminal law practice. She spent something like 9 years with a law firm in Chicago, in CORPORATE law, and her only known publication is something called a “review” article on the corporate responsibilities of company directors. So, she’s really in no better position to comment on this than BillOld is – leaving aside whether they were actually involved in a serious discussion on the issues or pretending to. To me, they were mostly pretending, throwing out crap opinions no different than get thrown around in a bar.

Now on to Frances Martel. Oh, Frances, Frances, Frances … oh dear.

This is how Frances ends this post: “Kelly’s conclusion, however, was a bleak one for the protesters– no matter how it looks, pepper spray is a permitted way to control unruly crowds.”

Bleak one … for the PROTESTERS? So far Officer Casual F. Sprayer and one other officer leading this foray have been suspended, put on leave pending preparation of a report for the Board of Governors of UC Davis, and THEIR boss has been suspended pending disciplinary action. This isn’t breaking news: this all came up IN THE CLIP. 

But besides that, Frances just Causally F. Accepts that Kelly know’s what she’s talking about – when she knows FULL WELL this is Fox we’re watching here, and Frances as the same Internet search tools you and I and everyone else here has, and so KNOWS or OUGHT TO KNOW Megyn Kelly is bull shitting here. And look again at the link to the key precedent: that’s on a popular website, not even a specialist law website. And I found it on page 1 of an ordinary garden variety Google search.

Now on to the readers. I see we have at least one claiming to be a cop, and that reader too fails to look at what the LAW says, and so fails to deal with it or even TRY to distinguish the Lundrgren V Humboldt case from this incident we’ve all seen on YouTube from UC Davis.

And that reader isn’t the ONLY one claiming some sort of definitive opinion on all this.

Look, folks: citizenship is hard – you have to be able to think, to reason and to read intelligently. Anyone looking at the full YouTube clip of this incident can see easily for themselves what happened, while this campus cop John Pike is now set to go thru the rest of his life as an Internet meme, officer Casually F. Spraying. That guy can kiss his campus cop career good-bye. The chief of the campus cops is going to have a nearly impossible time avoiding censure and maybe dismissal. The chancellor is soon to be gone to. Why? Because these protesters are going to sue and they are going to win, and the UC Davis Board of Governors are going to get the same sort of cautious, risk-averse advice from the UC Davis lawyers as Penn State got in the Sandusky case: if you don’t fire them NOW, then YOU as directors are opening yourselves up to personal liability for these lawsuits that are coming from these protesters.

“Infringing on the rights of someone else” could be an argument against the protesters if they were doing something along the lines of stopping students from going to classes that they have paid for.  However, police defiance is a classic protest method–those students all knew the risk involved and were that passionate about their cause to put their reputations on the line by pushing legality.  They were willing to be arrested in order to stand up and speak out for their beliefs.

It’s when police (whom these students are paying to keep their campus safe with their tuition) put people at risk by not only directly harming them, but instigating violence (that could have easily escalated into a riot, might I add–way to go aggies) that I have a problem.

NO COMMENT

Well Done.

Are you seriously trying to compare a line of students who are non-violently impeding a police force in a  protest with a specific message to hate crimes such as burning a cross?

For the record, if a group of Nazis happened to non-threateningly assemble for a purpose, I hope that they wouldn’t be maced in the face either.

Check it:

http://studentactivism.net/2011/11/20/ten-things-you-should-know-about-fridays-uc-davis-police-violence/

Specifically, number 5.  Thoughts now?

‘Abrasive And Intrusive’  – and those N. Vietnamese were simply rude to our prisoners during the war.  And how inappropriate was the Inquisition – simply appalling.  The Egyptian police broke all rules of etiquette as did those simply primitive Syrians. 

Is a Falafel a vegetable?

 ”So anyway I’d be rubbing your big boobs and getting your nipples really hard, kinda’ kissing your neck from behind…and then I would take the other hand with the falafel thing and I’d just put it on your p***y but you’d have to do it really light, just kind of a tease business…” –as quoted in a sexual harassment suit filed against Bill O’Reilly by a Fox News producer, 

“I saw movies! I know stuff!”

Funny stuff, GoneRouge.

What did the ‘protesters’ want to win in this case?

Worked for Raygun. He thought everything he ever saw in a movie was real. And, you guys worshiped his graven image. Still do.

Yes, and the police were quite right to use pepper spray and to be thoroughly sadistic in it, right?

If there’s no warrant, they have no right to be there. It’s THE LAW!

What the students did was noble. What the police did was sadistic. What the chancellor did or didn’t do was a breach of duty.

If he/she doesn’t have a warrant, f them.

I blame it all on that Serpico guy. I saw the movie.

Where? The Anthropology Department? They’re Kampus Kops.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/crtc-ditches-bid-to-allow-fake-news/article1921489/

No lies allowed thus no Fixed allowed.

Yes, everything everyone on Fox says is directed by Roger Ailes. No one has any opinions of their own. In fact, they all have radio chips in their heads, and Ailes transmits what he wants them to say from his lair.

Idiot.

REX,
QUOTE: “As you read the facts of that case [Lundberg v. County of Humboldt] think of what differences there are between that case and this one.  You’re going to find yourself thinking, Gee, I don’t… see any, really; not any big differences, not any that matter.

“Respectfully, In “Humboldt,” the Police used Q-tips to directly apply the irritant to eyes, while in the subsequent OWS protests, etc., the Police were/are using various types of spray dispensers.  

Even someone as Patriotic, Nationalistic and Anti-Socialist as myself, can easily see the distinction/difference.  Moreover, the “victory” of the plaintiffs, (protesters) over Humboldt County can best be described as “pyrrhic?”  

Furthermore, there are a number of procedural and substantive differences between “Humboldt” and OWS; the most salient, perhaps, is the “Humboldt” case was under the jurisdiction of the Federal 9th circuit which is notoriously hermeneutical, in Judicial philosophy?

Indulge me with one final comment:  You obviously put some time into your above comment, why fill it with colloquialism and innuendo?  Hence, is difficult to read along with diminished credibility.  Somewhat like watching MSNBC, or reading the New York Times…

The Purveyor of Rhetoric

They were stopping the police from making arrests. That’s why they were blocking the walkway. Duh.

Been busy doing holiday stuff, stunning to come back to the computer and see how much worse the radicals have become….off…the…deep…end crazy. 

No, they’re not going to be fired. They acted according to their guidelines.

And, clean, don’t forget clean.  They have just taught us that, to them, filth is ok.

Whether or not it may or may not have been protocol doesn’t matter. Its how it looks plain and simple.

Whether they adhered to protocol is all that matters. They can’t be disciplined for following the rules they’ve been given, which they were.

This is why they’re now talking about reviewing those guidelines at all UC campuses. They’re going to need to decide whether the administration runs the campus or whether any large enough group of students that feels like doing it controls the campus.

The legend in his own mind speaks. lol

I have been a cop long enough to understand that in general we are always the ones who look bad.

Of course, all of this is intended to make the cops look bad. That’s what they want, to be victims of the evil police, the army of the 1%!!!!

I’ve heard several reports from cops at Zucotti, and here’s how the game works: Someone shoves a cop. The cop goes to make the arrest. Numerous other protestors then try to stop the cop from making the arrest. Then, when the force begins to be applied, the cameras come on and the Occupod starts writhing on the ground crying “OW! OW! OW! POLICE BRUTALITY!!” Then you see 15 seconds of video of the evil police beating on poor innocent protestors who never did nuthin’ to anybody.

It’s a set up, and it isn’t a new game.

Occupy Oakland Protester admits bottles were thrown at Police BEFORE police responded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHlHiNEZ1wA

It’s bottles and rocks, actually.

You don’t have to be in danger to use compliance techniques. Pepper spray isn’t lethal force.

What, exactly, is she wrong about?

As the North Carolina researchers point out, any compound that can influence nerve function is, by definition, risky.

So, water is risky. Ice, especially. Uh huh.

The excuse for her going on BillOld’s show is that she’s supposed to be
some sort of ‘legal expert’. Nnnnnot so much; she attended a law school,
and passed, and got a law degree. That makes here a lawyer, but not an
expert at anything in particular, among the hundreds of specialties
& areas of expertise.

She was a litigator for 9 years. Jones Day doesn’t hire chumps.

Bull. Shit. This behavior was the subject of a definitive legal opinion
by the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals from an incident in the
1990s, with the opinion rendered in 2001:

Do you know that the Ninth Circus is the most overturned court in America? This case is no exception. And that decision that you’re OUTRAGED that Kelly didn’t mention? It was reversed. http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2001-10-02/article/7187

Once you’ve got those two strikes, the rest is tl;dr.

One has to be unusually warped to buy into that argument. Big Petty and Nutsofast don’t awaken until much later. Bidet has finally gone to bed. Michelle-in-Utah has apparently been banned again. I don’t think your core constituency is in place to nod mindlessly and drool. 

Actually, the use of the military grade pepper spray in such proximity is prohibited.

How come abortion clinic protesters don’t get pepper-sprayed on a regular basis?

Did your cat tell you this, Kook?

So, you’ve never heard of probable cause?

No, one needs to watch the whole video.

How the hell do you think it’s made to be used, Kook? Crop dusters?

They don’t set up camp and refuse to leave.

Is that a fact? You know that they regularly get asked to leave and always comply?

so are you Pablo we do not want your opinion you fat lier, go back

LPPOTTER,

I commend you, seriously.  You have the basics of understanding a rather arcane, legal philosophy called “neutral principle.”

To answer your question regarding the dichotomy of NAZI’s and OWS protesters:  YES!  Whether by Judicial fiat or legislation, a law grants protesters broad free speech protections, principle(s) are established.  The 5th and 14th amendment guarantee citizens “equal protection”

Ergo, the substance of the message is not an issue as, (due to the political/legal ‘zeitgeist’) anyone or group, can construe just about anything, as free speech.  (flag burning or cross burning, what’s the difference?)

Regarding “procedural considerations:  A type of “strict scrutiny,” based on case law(s) should be applied when the “State” abridges freedom of speech.  That “scrutiny” must take into consideration “time, place and manner” of the speech and whether said speech can be legitimately accommodated without “abridging” other person’s civil liberties.  Meaning, the State must weigh a person’s right to walk unhindered to class, vs. the liberty of the group to protest?  (equal protection)

The above paragraph is where the Nation has gone awry by neglecting “equal protection.”  The protestors could have assembled on the grass, along a wall or stay on one side of the sidewalk?  The protesters could still talk to passers by, hand out leaflets, etc. but stayed off the sidewalk and on the grass, ergo, problem solved. (Civility coupled with law)  However, that wouldn’t be as dramatic, would it?  

In conclusion:  ”Hate Crimes” are the law of the land, at present.  Effectively, hate crimes are “thought crimes.”  I suggest America erred with the creation of such.  Hate crimes might seem just fine, until your thoughts are put under scrutiny.  (re-read 1984)

I took some time writing this letter to you as I am pleased with your insight.  Keep thinking and asking questions, connect the dots, so to speak, that many others here in Mediaite, seem to be incapable of. 

Purveyor 

we should block you, every time I read your stupidity, I have lo laugh for 5 minutes, you angry comedian

No, DIngbat. Military Grade Pepper Spray is to be used no closer than 15′ from the intended victim of its use. The sadistic Kampus Kop was closer than 2′ from his victims’ faces.

Are you spending your evenings watching FOX to know this?  How else have you become quite the FOX-o-phobe?  Are you “running to the roar” to quell your fears of the big, powerful, FOX news network?

One would think that, being as though all FOX viewers are being made “more stupid,” Congress and the democrats and you(in a debate situation), would be walking all over them.  I haven’t noticed that being the case.

As far as a “a-hole foundation,” your qualification is obvious;  judging from your comment, you must be a FOX viewer

Have you seen this?

Fox News Viewers Know Less Than People Who Don’t Watch Any News: Study

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/

Or the Westboro Baptist church?

Fox News Viewers Know Less Than People Who Don’t Watch Any News: Study

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/

Indeed, they do, much like Paulie’s good friends at Westboro Baptist Church.

This headline might bring MEDIAITE some page views

Fox News Viewers Know Less Than People Who Don’t Watch Any News: Study

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-less-informed-people-fairleigh-dickinson_n_1106305.html

In fairness to the WBC, all they’re doing is providing vital hell-based information for grieving relatives. If they ever step over the line and start protesting Wall St corruption or out of control college fees then I endorse the full use of nucelar weapons

Polling is based on opinions, Darla.  The same uneducated opinions that are voiced daily in this blog.  Studies purporting that hackery have been found to be flawed, some purposely.

IMHO, purveyor1 responds with “NO COMMENT” to comments he deems ignorant. lol

I don’t want your opinion, troy. Go eat a turd. And learn to punctuate.

Where’d you get that idea, Kook?

PAULIE SHRIEKS:

“Where’d you get that idea, Kook? ”

TO WHICH RRE RESPONDS:

The Spec Sheet. Read it.

Rogers TV, Ontario. Fox News is Channel 197. http://your.rogers.com/store/cable/digitaltvcontent/digitalchannels.asp?province=ON

Shaw also carries it. http://www.shaw.ca/Television/Channel-Listings/Full-Channel-List/

Stop lying, Bill.

You ever seen one pitch a tent?

I’ve never met a Gore delegate I’ve liked, Kook. Fred and Family are yours.

They don’t camp out. Camping is not protesting.

Right. Occupations are not protests. The students at UC Davis were not protesting and continue to not protest. Surely a better way of not protesting would be to just stay at home?

Based on 4 questions? That’s just stupid, especially when one of the in whether the Occupod is Republican of Democrat. I’ve been told right here that they’re neither. Another is whether the protestors in Egypt have brought down the regime. Farleigh Dickenson seems to think, like NPR listeners, that the answer is yes. I hate to break this to you but they’re still living under a military dictatorship. Mubarak may be out, but his regime is still in charge.

I’m pretty sure that the WBC don’t get erections but I’ll certainly keep an eye out next time. Thanks for the tip!

POTTER,
http://tinyurl.com/6t3ntv7  (I think?)  This site contains information that somewhat tempers what is said in item #5 in your comment.  I got this information from PABLO and confirmed it on other sites.  Hence, the “approved” Police training manual allows for pepper spray.

Regardless, this is not about police crowd control methods, rather this really about a proper, consistent and historical reading of the Constitution.  American’s of every persuasion need to know the price of civil disobedience.

I am a man who prides himself on his civility and manners, thus, I find civil disobedience offends my sensibilities.  I suggest that part of what separates America from the worlds chaff, is our Nation has committed itself to using communication as opposed to obstreperous, annoying behavior.

In fact, our Constitution urges, compels the citizen to rise above undisciplined conflict and resolve issues with disciplined reason.  We don’t always succeed,  (The Civil War?) however, so far we have been the world’s paragon since 1776.

Purveyor

KOOK SCREAMS, SCREECHES, BLEATS, WAILS, MOANS AND CRIES:
“The Spec Sheet. Read it.”

PABLO RESPONDS: Link it.

Meanwhile, from the Ninth Circus opinion in HEADWATERS FOREST v HUMBOLDT COUNTY:

“Pepper spray is designed to inflict intense pain, disorientation, and panic. Manufacturer’s instructions discouraged spraying the agent from less than three feet.”

http://www.northcoastjournal.com/051100/pepperspray0511.html

Could you be a little more specific as to what constitutes “the worlds chaff” please?

“we don’t have a right to Monday morning quarterback the police” -Bill, if that’s the case, then there should never be an investigation into ANYTHING because you can only really investigate something after it’s over.

That, AND YOUR ANNOYING NECKFLAP

FARNSWORTH,

For the past 200 or so years, “chaff” could have meant just about every Nation or Culture on Earth, except America, of course.  Unfortunately, America seems to be walking the path of the average, or, even below average, lately.

I attribute this diminution of the American paragon, to claims and belief that Capitalism does not lead to high personal and public aspirations.  Furthermore, the re-emergence of “Socialism,” in America is a historic cause for National degeneration.  Marx and his spawn contain a core philosophy espousing the pursuit of mediocrity and the average, where achievement is viewed with suspicion.

Thus, FARNSWORTH, thanks to you and your compatriots,  My Nation is perilously closer to becoming “chaff.”

You asked…   

The protesters were “camping”… were they getting ready to sing songs and roast marshmallows around the campfire right before they were pepper sprayed??

Lol!! Megyn Kelly likes to pretend that she’s righteous and on the side of the victim… that’s unless it’s a woman being beaten… in which case, Megyn thinks the woman deserved it!!

thank you for the informed commentary and POV.

there’s two things at play here – rules/legality and Court of Public Opinion

and the smug look of Office Pike, face shield up, spraying, spraying and then that final spraying is what the true problem is.  other officers did not participate in the use of pepper spray. 

thus, when all is said and done, both Chancellor Katehi, UCD Police Chief and Lt. Pike have a tarnish on their name.  and that is going to be difficult to rub off.

Who are my compatriots? And you still have not answered my original question. Contemporaneously, what specific countries would you refer to as “chaff”? And would you countenance the argument that it is exactly your branch of chronically self-unaware egomania that has contributed to America’s demise?

For $5 million congress might declare pepper spray to be a vegetable, therefore the cops were helping the students by serving them their vegetables.

I believe “Norma Raw” and “Love Canal” were pornos starring Linda Lovelace.  Megyn should be pleased by the comparison.

ha ha  ha neither do we so shut the hell  up go back to Cuba

wow you do not like rednecks ha?  imbecil

They were protesting tuition increases which would make state schools more expensive than private ones.

If you get the tip, thank Fred. I really don’t want to hear about it.

No, several of them were being arrested when several others decided to sit down and block the police from making the arrests.

Sounds incredibly dangerous. Lucky for them that they had pepper spray.

Mother Theresa was a liberal, as was Ghandi.

Then they could transfer I guess.

FARNSWORTH,

An American citizen with even a minimal awareness of our Nation’s place in history, should be able to fathom my comments/replies to you.  Ergo, stop being coy and pretentious by wasting time attempting to prove your intellect, or limits thereof.

Since the American Revolution, the rest of the world has been little more than “chaff,” because of the strength and goodness of “American exceptionalism.”  Anyway, all I have done is repeat myself, I will no longer indulge your feigned confusion and insecurity. 

In conclusion, FARNSWORTH, I suspect you are a man who cheats at cards, kicks his dog and would sleep with his friend’s wife… 

Purveyor of Rhetoric 

Pepper spray wasn’t necessary, and whoever gave that order to USE it should be FIRED. That crowd sitting down and protesting, WHERE was the UNRULYNESS anyway? They were like DEFENSELESS people just huddlikng there arm in arm, so WHERE was the danger to the police? It wasn’t necessary, and it wasn’t a DECISION that took too much thought. Whoever is running the campus security should be OUSTED now.

Mother Theresa was pro-life.. therefor, she’s not a “liberal” in the context you’re using the word.  How the hell do you know what Ghandi was?

Jeebus?

Who’s that?

Make that “Union pigs”. No doubt they’re Democrats too.

Man you are such a goofball. You blather on as if ‘American Exceptionalism’ is anything but a meaningless platitude. It’s the language of children and jingoists. 

NO COMMENT

That figures

taking examples to the extreme is an effective angle,(very republican but unneccessary) Did those students really look like they took over the campus, I mean their were like twenty or thirty of them SITTING w/arms locked together, so dangerous.  Do you really think or do you just follow the crowd; I ask because when you write things like “whether they adhered to protocol is all that matters”  you sound like a corporate drone doing as little as required to cover your ass in case of litigation   

Quote: “That figures.”

YES, it most certainly does.  Considering the substance of your post, or, the lack thereof, did you really expect me engage you in dialogue?

Koch Bros for heaven’s sake?  Don’t you mean George Soros?

And you are suckered into believing everything that comes out of Hollywood.  You should study history.  When much of that “dumping” was done, it was NOT illegal nor was it known to cause harm to anyone.  We the people learned a lot over the years and we have worked to clean up our waterways and landfills at great expense, paid for by those “nasty” corporations, even though most of them were not the original cause of the pollution, which had been done many years past.  They were just Deep Pockets and happened to be on the land at the time the pollution was discovered.  Lots of that illegal dumping was done by small town guys like yourself, and not just big bad corporations.

Of course that is not true in all instances, but you make it sound like a great conspiracy existed to poison us all.  Meantime, the EPA and looney Environmentalists have gone overboard in a phony effort to save the snail darter, causing the logging industry in the Northwest to go bankrupt and those jobs sent to Japan and Asia.  Then the regulations against drilling for oil, gas and coal here in the US causing tremendous costs and adding to the country’s debt, loss of millions of jobs, and a dependence upon our enemies in the Middle East.  90% of the energy used in the US comes from fossil fuels and that IS NOT going to change for a long, long time.

I’m not against cleaning up our local environment and water or recycling our waste, but the loonies have gone way overboard and suckers like you believe their every word.  All to the detriment of our society and life as we knew it.

[Sigh]….Why don’t you start here?

Environment:
http://www.rep.org/

Jobs:
http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/02/22/where-is-the-republican-health

Health Care:
http://www.gop.gov/pledge/healthcare
or
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/02/24/still-on-the-table.html
or
http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/HealthCare.htm

Gee, I too miss the small Five and Ten Cents Stores and local Ice Cream Parlor and Hardware Store, and I also miss the Father Knows Best and Leave it To Beaver society in which those stores flourished.  But I’m afraid they are gone forever and much of that can be blamed on Hollywood and TV, the Teachers Unions, SEIU and not just the Big Bad Corporations.

Now there is the question at hand is it not? My response was to the person who did not seem to grasp the issue and declared the students should not have been sprayed because they were so peaceful looking. You can look quite peaceful and be quite peaceful and still be breaking the law. They deserved to be sprayed because they were breaking the law and were instructed to desist and were warned of the consequences. But the issue is how the police did it. The claim being investigated is the police enjoying it and that infers the police may not have done all they could to avoid it. This investigation is warranted. That cop let his temper get the best of him from what I could see.

Right.  I think one of the biggest issues I’m seeing here is a fundamental difference in our opinions on what is an acceptable form of protest.  What I’m getting from a couple of your posts in particular is that people getting a loud message across via breaking the law is fundamentally wrong, and is at least somewhat invalidated because of this method (please correct me if I’m wrong).  While I understand where you’re coming from (if that is where you’re coming from!), I am of the opinion that it is sometimes acceptable (and potentially necessary!) to push legal boundaries, especially if it is the very system that you are protesting in the first place.

With that being said, I’m not arguing the legality of what the protesters were doing.  I’m saying that non-violent and non-threatening disobedience shouldn’t be met with the same tactics used in crowd/riot control.  At the risk of sounding pun-ny, Pepper Spray shouldn’t have even been on the table.  The police had the authority in the beginning of this situation–but instead of exercising it in a responsible manner, they abused it.

If civil disobedience is going to happen in protests no matter what, I’d rather have people feel safe in their non-violence than threatened by and more likely to lash out at the folks trying to keep order.

Hey,

First of all, thank you for the response!  These couple of posts are actually my first time putting myself out there in any way on these types of news-blog-things…  Although (looking at some of your other posts) I think we will disagree on many points, I am so happy that my first rumblings are met with this level of respect and thoughtfulness.  Please know that my response’s intended tone is in kind!

In this specific case (on UCD campus), I know that the students were on the “quad”, a central thoroughfare/meeting place that is often impeded by various tabling, concerts and other activities.  I can’t imagine that other students, who absolutely have the right to go to the classes they are paying for unimpeded, would have been inconvenienced to the point where this right was utterly taken away.  However, thanks for bringing up this point; a lot of anti-Occupy arguments make more sense with this balancing of liberties as a fundamental idea.

I wonder, if Occupy started going about things more legally, how people’s opinions of the movement would change.

I’m also curious as to your definition of “hate crime”.  What I imagine when I use the term is a violent display of hatred for a specific person/group of persons that makes he/she/them feel threatened.  I also imagine that there would not really be a legitimate solution proposed without the target of the “protest” changing something fundamental about themselves.  Examples of “hate misdemeanors”, which are definitely a-OK with free speech, but that I don’t personally like range from signs/chants at protests saying “F*** the Police” to sandwich-board preachers urging these horrible sinners to repent.  Where it becomes a “crime” in my mind is when you add actual violence (e.g. burning ANYTHING).

Is that what you envision when you say that hate crimes are “the law of the land”?  If not, what DO you mean by that?

Linda Katehi makes $400,000 a year and receives a $8,916 yearly car allowance, as well.  Her salary was a 27% increase over her predecessors,  which is pretty remarkable considering todays economy.  The UC Davis Chancellor recieves free on campus housing. http://articles.sfgate.com/200…http://www.ucwatch.org/account...

Ok, UC Davis is a huge university. It requires someone qualified to lead and no one qualified is going to take the job without legitimate compensation.

Could you be more specific on where that site approves the use of pepper spray in situations like this?  The only instance I could see of its approval (which Pike had the forethought not to take advantage of) was decidedly within the realm of “…chemical agents are weapons used to minimize the potential for injury to officers, offenders, or other persons. They should only be used in situations where such force reasonably appears justified and necessary.”  I don’t see these students being as dangerous as a hospital patient wielding scissors against an officer with scissors, or a real threat to anyone at all.  Should pepper spray have been in the equation at all on Friday?

I think one of the main reasons for civil disobedience is to get the ideas/concepts/issues out there and up for the thoughtful discussions that you’re so proud of America for.  Legally renting a space to hold lectures/talks is a great way get some amazing communication going between like-minded people.  However, do you think it would have gotten you and I (two individuals on nearly opposite ends of the political spectrum) talking about touchy subjects?  To be honest, I’m not going to readily seek out the intimate dealings of a group of people I don’t agree with.  It’s controversial events like this that hit all sides of an argument through the media that have a greater potential of bringing the varying people of our country together for debate.

While I can see where you’re coming from in disliking “undisciplined conflict”, what I see when I watch this video is a group of students who DO know the “price of civil disobedience”.  I see what they are doing as a self-sacrifice (willingness to be arrested) to get the issues they are so passionate about on the table for discussion.

The chief of police and head of security at UC Davis is Annette Spicuzza.  She is on administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation into allegations of excessive force to disperse student protestors as of this last Monday.

http://www.securitydirectornews.com/?p=article&id=sd201111sHnaQm

What a pleasant surprise?

Years ago I organized a 3 credit, open forum class I called “The Dead Philosopher’s Society.”  A very select group of students met for 2-3 hrs, once a week and applied the teachings of the great legal philosophers to contemporary issues.  (Plato, Locke, Rousseau, Cicero, Mill, etc.)  We focused on the origin of Law and whether reason, or, emotion, (moral inclination) make for better Law?

I believe, judging from your sincerity, you would have been welcome and a fine addition to our little conspiracy?  LOL

I do not have the capacity to address your questions and observations, now, however, I will respond by tomorrow. 

Purveyor

MEZZO,

Suppose the “College Republican’s” arranged to have a guest speaker at a small campus auditorium.  The speaker has just begun the presentation and the “College Democrats” barge in and shout down the program and generally disrupt the evening.

Has “free speech” been preserved?  Would the Founding Fathers be proud of the scenario exhibited by their progeny?

How would you resolve the problem?  Would you want the campus police to end the evening’s performance in total?  Would you ask the College Democrats to leave?  What if they said no and starting yelling louder?

Are the College Democrats using the mantra of free speech, as guise to prevent the Republican’s free speech?

Solve the problem…

Broadcast Barbie needs some mace to the face.

I cannot (and don’t) support constant anarchy.  To be effective they must draw public scrutiny to their grievances.  In this regard, I think they’ve done a great deal.  Perhaps, more than they know.   I don’t abhor civil- disobedience but I greatly fear it devolving into destructive violence. We keep getting glimpses of that and have narrowly, and quite luckily avoided the worst. My honest thought on protesting is that it can only be effective for a limited amount of time.  Especially,  when a seige mentality is being employed.

I think the concept of setting up tents in crowded urban areas is of limited usefullness.  It draws attention to a cause.  Once that’s done, there is little of use to be gained from it.  That’s the point we seem to be upon.

As far as the scenario you’ve created.  I believe the protestors have the right to voice their displeasure but certainly not at the expense of all else.  I would ask the dissenters to leave and call upon the law for help in doing so.  As long as people protesting the guest speaker or event stayed outside, peacefully and allowed entrance and egress from the hall both could be accomodated.  I’ve seen some evidence, that certain protestors will negotiate.  In fact, I’d be highly motivated to negotiate as opposed to being sprayed with aerosol capsaicin or the business end of a truncheon.  I understand that in Atlanta the police worked with the OWS group and came to an agreement to move their encampment elsewhere.  No riot gear or arrests (and the expense they entale) were required.

I am not so naive as to think talk and moderation will always work.  However, if force must be employed I would so much prefer detainees were carried out rather than spray with chemical irritants.  Someones with asthma or simple hypersensitivity to the agent is going to make themselves conspicuous by being dead.  If we much employ such ghastly devices, for the sake of reason, could we employ less drastic means on first attempt?

As Stan Marsh, (South Park) would say:  ”That seems completely reasonable.”  If you have been reading any of my comments, you and I are saying very much the same thing.

“As far as the scenario [I've] created,” I hope it provoked you to connect dots, so to speak.  Dots that the Media and Government are not connecting; those entities have NOT made it clear that my civil liberties are just as important as yours, and so on.

As for “civil disobedience,” you mentioned pepper spray, (ghastly devices) should only be used as a last resort?  Of course I agree with you, however, and conversely, civil disobedience extraneous of the legal and legitimate rally or protest, also should be a last resort.  I got the impression that the OWS protests were all about “disobedience” and trying to provoke the Police?

In conclusion, worst of all and most dangerous, is the nascent concept that “free speech” means: Anything, any place, any time.  Moreover, the powers that be have grown timid about demanding civility from various protests.  (The chicken or the egg?  No disobedience, no Cops)  I’ve been to Tea Parties, the only need for the Police was for interlopers!

As I recall, you and I grew up around the Great Lakes?  I have always been considerate of other people’s space.  Maybe it’s the water?  LOL

Purveyor

POTTER,

Sorry for the delayed response, your observations/questions, I preferred to put more time into, but, let’s start here?

You and many others (myself included, but?) are concerned about the pepper spray, whereas I am concerned with the overall conduct of the protest, and protester’s which could have been a positive event instead what it became?

That being said. IF, you believe that pepper spray should be a last resort, so too, should “civil disobedience?” Had the necessity,or, onus for blocking the thoroughfare (civil disobedience) been reached? Wasn’t the gathering on the green doing enough within the parameters of free speech? Couldn’t the subversives, have passed out leaflets and vocalized their position, rather than infringe on the liberty of others?

IMPORTANT!
(Question: Is “civil disobedience,” the tactic, the intent of the rally, thus meant to embarrass and stress society particularly the Police and Civil Government? Is there really any message meant to be conveyed other than “civil disobedience,” in and of itself? That’s what Lenin would have done. Is society being played by modern Socialists, using 100 year old tactics?)

In modern society there is plethora of ways to convey a message. Unfortunately, being considerate and well mannered seems to be missing from the equation! In your 3rd paragraph, on your own, you seem to come to this conclusion also, well done!
Note: This one portion of your Comments we could talk about for hours: The history, philosophy and legal considerations, but, we’ve made a dent in a big subject…

Regarding “Hate Crimes,” I suggest that hate crimes risk punishing crimes of conscience or thought, hence, are very dangerous. HC creates a higher tier of criminal activity which, coincidentally, creates a LOWER tier. Is that a good idea?

Murder is murder and crime deserves punishment. When society professes to know what was in the mind of the actor, particular the intangible, the amorphous devoid of factual evidence, we risk being on the proverbial “slippery slope?”

Therefore, if murder is heinous then punish everyone accordingly, while considering the Constitutional need for “equal protection.” There are few examples demonstrably worse regarding a violation of “equal protection” than the STATE claiming to know the perpetrator had “hate” in their heart when committing a crime, thus increasing the punishment!

Moreover, doesn’t “hate, in this context risk being another word for “political?”

POTTER, I will address more of your thoughts soon. In the mean time, I hope you comment on my positions.

The “Dead Philosopher’s Society” was fun, as we could dig more deeply into such issues? The writing we do here, I enjoy immensely, but, I always feel time and space limits? You seem to have the capacity to “cogitate,” and question, thus LEARN!

Stay in touch

Purveyor