Most Recent Posts

You probably think this is a free country, where law-abiding citizens can exercise their rights without fear of government harassment or state sanctioned theft. You’re wrong.

The reality is far different. The police are not benevolent protectors of your rights, and it amazes me that so many conservatives continue to delude themselves that only this one, single aspect of state power is exercised judiciously and almost entirely without malice, while rightfully acknowledging that the rest of the government skirts the line between incompetent and evil.

The truth is that many cops are just thugs with badges, granted license by the state to commit crime in its name.

In this latest case, a Monterey police officer took $22,000 off the driver — even though he had committed no crime.

“You live in the United States, you think you have rights — and apparently you don’t,” said George Reby.

As a professional insurance adjuster, Reby spends a lot of time traveling from state to state. But it was on a trip to a conference in Nashville last January that he got a real education in Tennessee justice.

…Reby was driving down Interstate 40, heading west through Putnam County, when he was stopped for speeding.

A Monterey police officer wanted to know if he was carrying any large amounts of cash.

“I said, ‘Around $20,000,’” he recalled. “Then, at the point, he said, ‘Do you mind if I search your vehicle?’ I said, ‘No, I don’t mind.’ I certainly didn’t feel I was doing anything wrong. It was my money.”

That’s when Officer Larry Bates confiscated the cash based on his suspicion that it was drug money.

“Why didn’t you arrest him?” we asked Bates.

“Because he hadn’t committed a criminal law,” the officer answered.

Bates said the amount of money and the way it was packed gave him reason to be suspicious.

“The safest place to put your money if it’s legitimate is in a bank account,” he explained. “He stated he had two. I would put it in a bank account. It draws interest and it’s safer.”

“But it’s not illegal to carry cash,” we noted.

“No, it’s not illegal to carry cash,” Bates said. “Again, it’s what the cash is being used for to facilitate or what it is being utilized for.”

NewsChannel 5 Investigates noted, “But you had no proof that money was being used for drug trafficking, correct? No proof?”

“And he couldn’t prove it was legitimate,” Bates insisted.

You have to prove to the state that your property is legitimate, or it will take it from you. Does that sound like a free, constitutional republic to you?

The story goes on to demonstrate how Officer Bates lied in his report, both by failing to note Reby’s explanation that he was looking to buy a car (which he actually could prove through computer records, demonstrating yet another Bates’ lie), and also in his description of where the money was located.

Reby eventually got his money back months later, no doubt only because of the negative publicity, though he was required to first waive his constitutional rights and then drive all the way back to Tennessee from New Jersey in order to get it. He received no apology.

Others are not so lucky and never see their property again. The Institute for Justice’s blockbuster 2010 report, “Policing for Profit: The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture,” finds that use of asset forfeiture is extensive at all levels of government. States pull in millions each year, while the US Department of Justice’s Assets Forfeiture Fund held more than $1 billion as of 2008.

Oh, and the same Officer Bates as tried to steal $20,000 from a law-abiding citizen by falsifying police reports was just honored by the Monterey Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 6277 as “Officer of the Year”.

Crime – it turns out – does pay, but only when you wear a badge.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

---

He is not amused:

Francois Hollande’s first official day as French president descended into farce today when he was soaked on the Champs Elysee and then his plane was hit by lightning.

The 57 year-old was inaugurated in a simple ceremony at the Elysee Palace in Paris, nine days after defeating the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy in a nationwide election.

But then everything started to go downhill for the committed Socialist who has styled himself as an ‘enemy’ of the world of finance.

During a ‘triumphant’ drive up France’s most famous avenue the heavens opened, and he was soaked in front of a live audience of millions.

Then, a few hours later, his plane was hit by lightning as he flew to Berlin for a crisis meeting about the imploding Eurozone with German chancellor Angela Merkel.

You can’t make this stuff up.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

The old joke says that blondes can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, but the government of Fort Lee, N.J. might soon be taking it seriously if their new law is anything to go by. After all, they take a rather dim view of the capabilities of their citizens:

Avid texters beware: Fort Lee, N.J. police said they will begin issuing $85 jaywalking tickets to pedestrians who are caught texting while walking.

“It’s a big distraction. Pedestrians aren’t watching where they are going and they are not aware,” said Thomas Ripoli, chief of the Fort Lee Police Department.

Ripoli said the borough, which is home to approximately 35,000 residents, has suffered three fatal pedestrian-involved accidents this year. He hopes his crackdown on people who display dangerous behavior while walking will make his town safer…

They even pulled out the big guns, grabbing some hotshot college aca-deem-ics to “study” the problem.

Two professors at Stony Brook University in New York conducted a study on walking and texting. They found texters are 60 percent more likely to veer off line than non-texters.

I’m glad they settled the important question of whether people who don’t look where they are going are more likely not to walk straight. It was keeping me up all night.

Three pedestrians got themselves killed this year. Tragic, no doubt, but not cause for legislative action. First of all, how many pedestrians normally get killed? Were those three even on their phones? Alas, there was no real journalist around to ask the question.

This sort of social micro-management is unbecoming a free society, and probably has more to do with police budget shortfalls than an earnest effort to protect people. And even if it were born of good intentions, protecting people from themselves is no business of government. It is a waste of police resources to be nagging citizens into self-awareness.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

JP Morgan Chase lost a lot of money – $2 billion, in fact. This is big news to financial markets, and JP Morgan’s customers, but in a free society you wouldn’t expect the political class to care too much about the individual ups and downs of private companies. Yet Democrats are already pouncing on the episode to push bigger government, and Representative Brad Miller was particularly blunt in his expressing his glee, posting the following to his Facebook page:

In the article he links he is quoted as saying:

“The gigantic size of megabanks, and the perception in the marketplace that they are too big for the government ever to permit to fail, gives them an unfair competitive advantage over smaller financial institutions that distorts the market and discourages competition.” said Miller. “The lack of competition in the banking industry, in turn, leads to ever-higher levels of risk in the system.”

Here’s a thought. If the problem is the perception that banks will be bailed out, then stop bailing them out. But Brad Miller and the big government interventionists can’t say no. That’s a government problem, not a banking problem.

The article also says his legislation would “set a series of caps on the size and reach of the nation’s ‘megabanks.’” Given the glee with which politicians seek to kneecap any business that stands too tall, how about “a series of caps on the size and reach of the nation’s” federal government, instead?

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

The nannies in Massachusetts are on a sugar-hating kick, picking on that most popular of targets in recent years – so-called junk food:

Bake sales, the calorie-laden standby cash-strapped classrooms, PTAs and booster clubs rely on, will be outlawed from public schools as of Aug. 1 as part of new no-nonsense nutrition standards, forcing fundraisers back to the blackboard to cook up alternative ways to raise money for kids.

At a minimum, the nosh clampdown targets so-called “competitive” foods — those sold or served during the school day in hallways, cafeterias, stores and vending machines outside the regular lunch program, including bake sales, holiday parties and treats dished out to reward academic achievement. But state officials are pushing schools to expand the ban 24/7 to include evening, weekend and community events such as banquets, door-to-door candy sales and football games.

The heavy-handed, paternalistic rules are bad enough, but what really irks me is this mentality:

State Sen. Susan Fargo (D-Lincoln), chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Public Health, said the problem of overweight children has reached “crisis” proportions.

“If we didn’t have so many kids that were obese, we could have let things go,” Fargo said.

“But,” she added, “this is a major public health problem and these kids deserve a chance at a good, long healthy life.”

No, obesity is not a “public health problem,” it is an individual health problem. Public health problems exist when one persons sickness can make me sick or unhealthy. But one person being fat has no impact whatsoever on whether or not I am fat.

There is a related problem where I am expected to bear the cost of another’s health choices, but that doesn’t make it a public health issue, that just makes inherently unfair regulations requiring some to subsidize the healthcare of others, even when the cause of the need for care is based on choice.

What State Sen. Susan Fargo (D-Lincoln), chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Public Health, is doing is using one set of boneheaded policies put in place by people like State Sen. Susan Fargo (D-Lincoln), chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Public Health, in order to justify a further collectivized society, and more power in the hands of people like State Sen. Susan Fargo (D-Lincoln), chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Public Health. Funny how that works.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

The dog whistle, that is:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wants President Barack Obama to lay off the weed.

Reacting to an ongoing crackdown on medical marijuana facilities in California, Pelosi said in a Wednesday statement, “I have strong concerns about the recent actions by the federal government that threaten the safe access of medicinal marijuana to alleviate the suffering of patients in California.”

The California Democrat said that medical marijuana is “both a medical and a states’ rights issue.

States’ rights? States’ rights? Doesn’t Nancy know that invoking states’ rights is dog-whistle racism? Or so the left tells us anytime someone on the right points at that, no, the federal government cannot just do whatever it wants and, yes, states do have sovereignty over some areas in which the federal government has no authority.

Nancy Pelosi is actually right for once; the federal government is grossly overstepping its bounds in pursuit of the “drug war.” And I should point out that “states’ rights” is actually a misnomer, as only people have rights. States have sovereignty. Regardless, since she is using the language of the racist small-government types, I am eagerly awaiting* the usual leftist uproar directed at the former Speaker.

*And by eagerly awaiting, I mean not holding my breath.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

In an otherwise very good speech where he called out the Democrats’ political gamesmanship, Speaker Boehner said that, “Nobody wants to see student loan interest rates go up.” It’s certainly true that the entire political class is united on continuing to subsidize borrowing for higher education, but last time I checked there are more people in existence than just politicians. I, for one, want to see student loan interest rates go up.

I have nothing against student loans, the students who borrow them, or the general idea of borrowing money to receive an education that is expected to provide greater future value than the costs. But the reality is that many today are borrowing more than they can afford and which isn’t justified by the value added.

The federal government is the biggest supplier of student loans, accounting for 90% of all borrowing in the 2010-2011 academic year. Because they are heavily subsidized, student loan interest rates are lower than would otherwise be offered by the market, which means students are taking out more and bigger loans than they otherwise would. This is the intended effect of the policy, but is it a good one?

One result has been skyrocketing tuition costs, as colleges simply raise tuition rates to capture any increases in government financial aid. As the below chart from Dr. Mark J. Perry shows, college tuition growth has considerably outpaced medical care and home prices over the last 30 years.

While the costs of obtaining a degree have ballooned, their value has plummeted. As degrees become increasingly common, their usefulness in signaling diminishes. Degree-holders just aren’t as special anymore, and having a degree no longer conveys the same kind of information to potential employers as it used to.

Meanwhile, the actual educational benefit of obtaining a degree are also decreasing. Colleges are increasingly failing to teach the most basic knowledge and skills, opting instead for obscure courses focusing on identity politics and which have little to no practical value in the real world.

All the trends point toward a massive higher-ed bubble, and with an ever growing number not paying off their loans it’s likely to blow up in taxpayers’ faces.

What exactly the necessary steps are to reverse these trends, I do not know. Part of it is political, and involves removing federal distortions from the lending market. But part of it is cultural. Many see college attendance not as a time to take in as much knowledge as possible, but a rite of social passage that requires doing in excess all manner of social activities. It would be a good start if society – whether it be parents, teachers, politicians or popular culture – stops mindlessly repeating the trope that everyone must go to college. Universities were not designed for everyone, and not everyone will benefit meaningfully from the experience. Some would be better off in trade school, others in the work force gaining an extra 4 years of experience on their peers, while some are simply ready to strike out on their own. But whatever it takes to resolve the issue, this is a major problem that is only going to become increasingly salient for both society and the political class.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

Los Lunas shows how to waste police resources in spectacular fashion (Hat-tip: Reason):

 

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

Too bad his solution was to keep the economy so bad that even the Mexicans don’t see better opportunities in America:

The largest wave of immigration in history from a single country to the United States has come to a standstill. After four decades that brought 12 million current immigrants—more than half of whom came illegally—the net migration flow from Mexico to the United States has stopped—and may have reversed, according to a new analysis by the Pew Hispanic Center of multiple government data sets from both countries.

I heard on a radio news report some official in Maryland calling this a good sign. While I take issue with illegal immigration, recognizing as Jonah Goldberg states that “it’s simply unsustainable to have a libertarian immigration policy and a liberal welfare state,” this is not in fact a good sign.

The problem with illegal immigration was never that people were immigrating at all, at least not for me and I suspect the vast majority of others opposed to illegal immigration, but that they were not doing so in the proper legal manner. Controlling the nature of immigration allows for total numbers to be limited at a level that society can absorb without created hardship for existing citizens, and for some selectivity to match skill sets with needs (why should we not discriminate toward those who offer the most economic productivity?).

Part of the cause of the illegal immigration problem was no doubt the complicated and inefficient bureaucrat process involved with becoming a citizen (I understand not making it entirely easy, as you want to ensure such decisions are made deliberately, but it goes well beyond that), combined with long periods of lax enforcement. Enforcement has in fact increased in recent years, including under Obama, but not to a degree necessary to convince me it is even largely responsible for this reversal. Nor has the bureaucratic process undergone a reformation. No, the reason people are no longer coming is because America is no longer attracting them. Our opportunities are being smothered by big government and its onerous regulations and economic burdens. Just starting a business in America can take massive investments of time and money filling out paperwork and securing permits from a myriad of controlling authorities. As opportunities dwindle, and the costs of taking advantage of those few remaining skyrockets, we can expect more and more to ask, “why bother?”

P.S. South Park, as is often the case, got to this phenomenon first:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---

While nannies like Michael Bloomberg continue to wage war on the Second Amendment, guns are saving lives (Hat-tip: All American Blogger):

A man stabbed two people at the Smith’s Marketplace grocery store in downtown Salt Lake City before being subdued by a bystander.

…According to a witness, it appears one man was stabbed in the side of the head and another was stabbed in the stomach. The exact condition of the victims is unknown, but police believe the injuries are very serious and possibly critical.

…Police say a bystander with a concealed carry permit witnessed the attack and stepped in to keep it from escalating.

“(The bystander) was suspicious of what might be going on, and when he saw the stabbing, he just drew his pistol and challenged the individual,” which caused the alleged attacker to lie down on the ground, said Salt Lake City police officer Brian Purvis.

How many more victims there would have been if not for this gun-toting bystander, we can never know. But one thing I know for certain is that you won’t see this story get any significant play at the national level, as it doesn’t fit the narrative.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

---