The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Social Issues]

This is what passes for a "professional" police force.

Police received a report that morning that a woman was threatening to kill her family with an Uzi assault weapon, San Jose Police spokeswoman Heather Randol said in a news release.

When they arrived at the family's home, they saw the woman outside, holding what they thought was a weapon, Randol said.

Officers asked her to drop it, but she did not, pointing it at them instead, Randol said. One of the officers, Wakana Okuma, shot the woman, who was taken to a local hospital and pronounced dead.

It was a cordless drill.

Now how a cordless drill (black or not) looks like an Uzi -- or any other sort of real gun -- escapes my imagination.

Of course the cop claims she "feared for her safety and the safety of the public" because cordless drills, you see, are dangerous weapons and someone holding one is about to commit murder and mayhem and thus must be shot dead.

Help and trust the police?

Given their level of discernment and testosterone-laden actions without consequence.... I think not.

Now here's the test: If you or I made a similar mistake with a personal weapon this would be referred to a Grand Jury.  In fact, we'd almost certainly be tried for at least Manslaugher, and perhaps second degree Murder.  Indeed, a man who believed his home was broken into and shot a woman through the door (who wasn't actually breaking in) was just convicted.

Magic Blue Costumes or Peace Officers?

Let's see which it is.

PS: Who made the original call?

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

It's time to illustrate what the media cannot get straight on its own -- which is a big part of the problem we have in this country in terms of justice across the board, whether it be in robosigned foreclosures or simple jackbooted violence.  Lies are easily communicated both by omission and commission, as is demonstrated here.

Police in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, Mo. used tear gas and smoke bombs Wednesday to disperse protesters, some of whom threw Molotov cocktails and other objects at assaulted officers, as a fifth night of demonstrations over the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager by a police officer turned violent. 

Protesters faced heavily armed police who occasionally trained automatic weapons on committed felony assault with a deadly weapon against them from an armored truck. After nightfall, the situation deteriorated, with police ordering demonstrators to go home before assaulting them using smoke bombs and later tear gas. There were no immediate reports of injuries.


Earlier in the evening, two reporters were arrested and briefly held kidnapped with the aggravating circumstance of the unlawful use of firearms as a means of coercion after police officers attempted to clear a McDonald's restaurant where they were working. Wesley Lowery of The Washington Post and Ryan Reilly of The Huffington Post said they were handcuffed and put into a police van assaulted, kidnapped and, battered through the unlawful display of firearms as the effective means of coercion.The Post reported that Lowery said he was slammed against a soda machine unlawfully assaulted, battered and plastic cuffs were put on his wrists kidnapped. The reporters were subsequently released without any charges.

Martin Baron, the Post's executive editor, issued a statement saying "there was absolutely no justification" for Lowery's arrest felonious assault and kidnapping and said the organization was appalled by the officers' conduct believed that the officers involved should face possible life in prison for their felonies.

Ryan Grim, Washington, D.C., bureau chief for The Huffington Post, said in a statement that "compared to some others who have come into contact with the police department, they came out relatively unscathed, but that in no way excuses the false arrest or the militant aggression felony assault and kidnapping committed against toward these journalists."

Assuming the acts stated actually happened, this is an accurate edit of the newsspeak that was spouted off by everyone involved thus far.  An unlawful detainment committed through the use of firearms as the means of coercion (and yes, the presence of such a weapon in most states counts as its use even if you never unholster it) is factually kidnapping.  Pointing a gun at someone when you are not legally authorized at that instant to shoot them is felony assault with a deadly weapon.

It doesn't matter if the people doing it are cops or not.  Cops do not get magical new powers because they have a blue suit on.  They are only empowered to act and use force when a law is being violated.  The journalists were violating no law and a person peacefully protesting isn't either.  Pointing a weapon at such a person or kidnapping them are both felonies.

"Unfortunately, an undertow (of racial unrest) has bubbled to the surface," said Jackson. "Race relations is the top priority right now."

Really?  It sounds like the top priority should be to stop the felonies - by everyone involved who commits them, including the police force that appears to have committed far more of them at this point than the demonstrators (zero) and rioters (plenty) have.

Of course they'll try to find and prosecute all of the citizens who committed those felonies, but I'll bet not one of the officer-committed felonies, including those outlined in this news story, will be sent before a Grand Jury nor will charges be laid.

Yes, I think it's fair to say that a good percentage (if not all!) of the rioters were looking for a good excuse to get involved in some mayhem.  But they found that excuse in the example set forth by the so-called "law enforcement" community that demonstrated, and continues to demonstrate, that it believes it is above the law itself.

One cannot expect the people to obey a law that the police refuse to honor, and when that refusal reaches felony behavior that would land anyone else in the slammer for decades there should be no surprise when those with few scruples (if any) take advantage of the example they are set by so-called "law enforcement" to commit some mayhem of their own.

Further, race relations is an outright scam as it is code for a refusal to discuss what's actually happening in our cities and towns and has been for decades -- and it's not just among black people either.  It all ties into the same thing: Entitlement.

Some people believe they're entitled to free food, water, waste disposal and money.  Others believe they're entitled to commit felony assaults and kidnapping.  Still others believe they're entitled to gang-bang any time they want to.  

And finally others still (Bloomberg-cough-Rahm-cough-Obama-cough-cough!) believe that nobody is entitled to resist such felonies and must put up with them, whether the crime involved is theft (by coercion and redistribution or simple common thievery), felony assault (whether by common thugs or alleged "officers") or even murder.

Witness the utter lack of reporting of and focus on the fact that black-on-black murder and mayhem are a daily occurrence across this country.  An annual back-to-school parade in Chicago featured two teens shot; the video and images from the event show all black people, so it is reasonable to assume the shooter was black although that person wasn't identified (we know the victims were.)  That's double the number of people shot and killed in Ferguson that set off the riots, incidentally.

A very large number of black people aren't rioters and thugs just like a very large number of white people don't go around pointing machine guns at people and kidnapping them.  The common thread among all of those who don't do the nasty things is that they're not criminals, and have an inherent civil right to resist violence attempted against their person -- a right that is constantly under assault by those who do commit the evil acts, whether they happen to have magical blue suits on or not.

Then there are the race-baiters such as Sharpton and Jackson, who have made a living shaking people down using their skin color as a primary weapon while at the same time claiming that there's a "race" problem in this country.  Gee, you think, when you use your own race as a weapon in your "crusade", never mind those who attempt to silence any criticism of our President because of the color of his skin?

You want to solve the problems in our cities that are allegedly related to "race"?  Start by dealing with the entitlement game and putting a stop to it, otherwise and more-properly known as theft, fraud, coercion and assault across the board -- including by those who claim to be "better" or "smarter" than everyone else (cough-Rahm-cough-Bloomberg-cough-Banksters-cough-cough-cough!)

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

This is quite amusing, really....

Now that Facebook will no longer let you send messages through its main mobile app, users are being forced to download and install Facebook Messenger — and they’re not happy about it.

It's really kinda simple -- Zuckerburgler wants access to your contacts, he wants to know what you're doing, and he wants to be able to push notifications any time he'd like -- which might in the (near) future include advertisements.

But before you say "Oh Denninger, you're just being stupid about that security thing again" let me point out something you ought to think about -- why you are all over so-called "social media" in the first place.

I'll tell you why I use it -- there are some groups of people who I hang out with in real life and we use it to coordinate various things.  If I want to know where the hash is this weekend, for example, I can look there for it.  Ok, fair enough.

But here's an interesting point -- I recently had a whole bunch of people wish me "Happy Birthday" via Facebook.  There's only one problem -- it wasn't really my birthday.

You don't think I'm dumb enough to put my real date (as in month and day) of birth into a public web site, do you, where anyone can see it?  Exactly how crazy do you have to be, inviting outright identity theft, to do that?

Now here's the point -- anyone who knows me well knows what my real birthday is, because we've spent enough time around one another that it's come up in conversation or I've decided to spend that particular day out of the year with them in the past.  In other words, they're part of that (small) "inner circle" that actually knows me pretty well.

The rest are people I'm acquainted with.  Oh sure, they're nice folks (or they wouldn't be on my "friends" list) on Facebook but they don't know me very well, and in fact more than a few of them haven't spent an hour where we're in each other's presence in years -- and some literally never have.

So here's the question, when you get down to it -- why not use SMS?  Or Groupme?  Or, for that matter, pick up the damn phone?  What is it about Facebook that pushes your buttons with all of your so-called "friends".

"Friend" is a grossly-overused word in today's world and it has become devalued beyond belief.  I have many acquaintances but very few actual friends.  The latter are people who actually know me because they've taken the time and put in the effort to learn, and so have I.  It's a mutual, reciprocal thing, and there's no possible way anyone can actually count dozens or hundreds of people within that group.  It's simply impossible.

Stoking your ego is what Facebook is all about, in point of fact.  Not 1/10th of what's there would be but for this; it would depreciate immediately into little more than an advertising medium.  As it is, with the forcible split of messenger and the outrageous list of permissions and capabilities it demands, perhaps, just perhaps, the userbase is waking up to this fact.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Someone needs to get hit with a 42 USC 1983 lawsuit on this one and lose everything they have:

PORT ST. LUCIE, Fla. (AP) — A Florida woman who let her 7-year-old son walk alone to a park has been charged with felony child neglect.

Thirty-four-year old Nicole Gainey's son was en route Saturday to a park about a half-mile from his home when he stopped and sat at a nearby pool, according to an arrest affidavit. Lifeguards said they had seen the boy five previous times and one approached him to ask where his mother was.

I rode my bicycle on a somewhat-regular basis (on nice days) to school when I was 7 -- a distance of about three miles, or six times what this kid walked to the park.

What's the problem with him going once or twice a week "unsupervised", provided the park and area are reasonably safe?

We're not talking about a kid being abused; hell, I suspect it was his idea to go to said park.  There were various wooded areas (not formally "parks" but close enough) at roughly that distance, including a canal near my home, where I used to go fishing all the time unsupervised at that age.  So what?

Felony child neglect with the kid on summer vacation and wanting to go to a park that's a few city blocks from his house?


View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Get Adobe Flash player
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.