Americans And Jeff Sessions Want 'Open Season' on Cops
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Full-Text Search & Archives

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.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

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 sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means 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, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

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.

2017-12-30 09:23 by Karl Denninger
in Editorial , 2240 references Ignore this thread
Americans And Jeff Sessions Want 'Open Season' on Cops
[Comments enabled]

No, this is not a call to do any such thing.

It is a recognition that this is exactly what is going to happen if there are not major changes made in public policy, right ****ing now, and the only way those will happen is if the people of this nation stand up and demand them, enforcing that demand with whatever actions are both necessary and possible.

Just the other day:

A 25-year-old California man was arrested in connection to an online quarrel between two “Call of Duty” gamers that prompted a hoax call and led to a man being killed by police in Kansas.

Los Angeles police on Friday arrested Tyler Barriss, who law enforcement claimed is the “prankster” who called 911 and made up a story about a kidnapping in Wichita, ABC 7 reported.

Barriss reportedly gave police the address he believed the other gamer lived.

In the audio of the 911 call, the caller claimed his father had been shot in the head and that he was holding his mother and a sibling at gunpoint. The caller added that he poured gasoline inside the home and "might just set it on fire."

Now let's put context on this.

The police got a phone call.  They had zero evidence to back up the veracity of that call.  Whether the call had spoofed caller ID or not (which is insanely easy to do and in fact our government has refused to crack down on that crap and demand the carriers put a stop to it which is why you get spoofed and illegal sales calls all the time) is immaterial.  The facts are that the call came from well over 1,000 miles away from the allegedly-reported "address" and the cops performed exactly zero due diligence -- which they had a legal duty to engage in -- before acting on the false report.

That caller ID is trivially spoofed is a known fact; ergo, there is no probable cause in an alleged caller ID readout standing alone.

The cops in Wichita showed up at the house and shot an unarmed man who came to answer the door.  The police, of course, claim that he "moved a hand toward the area of his waistband" as justification for shooting him.

So what if he did?

Let me remind you that:

1. He was on his own property, in his own home.

2. He had no knowledge of the "Swatting" phone call and thus no reason to expect the police to show up nor any reason to believe that anyone claiming to be "police" really were.

3. He had done nothing illegal.  While it has now been reported he was unarmed so what if he was armed?  If he had been that changes nothing.  He was in his own home and had every right to be armed, including answering the door armed as it is well-established that gang bangers can and do impersonate cops.

4. There was no probable cause or justification to shoot him -- period.

The ****ing pig who fired must be charged with Murder 2 -- homicide without premeditation but through grave, outrageously reckless and intentional conduct -- and go to prison.  Now.

The only way this crap will stop is when alleged cops who play trigger-happy *******, acting as if they have been given a hunting license to shoot humans, are treated as gang-bangers and thrown in prison each and every time they pull this crap.

They have neither legal or logical justification for their actions.

Second, the ******* who called 911 has been arrested and must be charged as an accessory before the fact to said homicide and go to prison as equally responsible for the shooting, exactly as you would be if you knowingly drove a bank robber to the bank and then that person shot a teller.  That's what the law says and it must be enforced -- period.

Finally, since this crime crossed state lines in that it was initiated in California this is a federal matter including but not limited to 18 USC 241 which proscribes a life sentence or federal death penalty if someone dies as a consequence of deprivation of their rights under color of law or authority.  Therefore both the caller and the cop must face prosecution in federal court under this statute irrespective of any state prosecution.

Until all of these things happen then it is perfectly reasonable for anyone who encounters a police officer to believe that they will be shot without any probable cause, say much less any evidence that grave risk to said officer exists because nobody can predict if someone has made a false 911 call on purpose.  It's not possible to know if you are not a party to whatever dispute leads to said call in the first place that such might happen.

Therefore until and unless the thug gang-banger who shot this innocent man on purpose and without probable cause and the person who made the false call are both held fully responsible under existing federal law for this homicide it is entirely reasonable for anyone who encounters a police officer to assume that person is an immediate and lethal threat to their continued existence and thus to act exactly as one would expect under those exact circumstances.

Should someone decide to do that, survive and be arrested, and I sit on their jury, my vote, unless these two are both prosecuted right ****ing now, has been firmly establishedNOT GUILTY.

Your move Jeff Sessions.

Ed: Updated 12/31 to correct the 18 USC reference - it's 241, not 242.  242 contains a racial requirement; 241 does not.  My apologies for the typo.

View with responses (opens new window)