Blogspot is a great place to start a blog. I've learned a lot. I finally found myself wanting to do a a little more with the site's appearance than I could do here, though, and now have a Wordpress blog called Half A Bubble at its very own domain, http://half-a-bubble.com . It's up and running and ready for guests. You'll recognize the micrometer and bubble logo when you get there. I hope you'll visit me at my new home and continue to keep your eye on the proliferation and abuse of Taser and other electroshock and even more exotic weapons worldwide.
Read the Whole Post (opens in a new tab or window)
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Moving to a New Home!
Stumble it!Monday, January 14, 2008
Britain's Prisoners to be implanted with tracking chips. American cops envious.
Viddy well, my droogies, this is how it begins. It's said that liberty is first lost in prisons and public schools. The Independent reports that Brits have taken that to heart and, in a scheme that would have Hitler's SS drooling with envy, plan to surgically implant RFID chips under the skin of thousands of offending citizens so they can be tracked like cattle. A Ministry of Justice official confirms that the department hopes to extend the range of the chips through satellite tracking similar to the system used to trace stolen vehicles. All options, and British civil liberties, are on the table.
"We have... worried about the practicalities and the ethics,” a senior minister said, “but when you look at the challenges facing the criminal justice system, it's time has come." They'll set ethics aside if it only affects their underclass. Ken Jones, president of the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) wants to use chips and GPS technology to monitor and keep sex offenders from "forbidden" zones like primary schools. This is a ploy to gain approval by first implanting only the worst of the worst. Afterwards, wider use will be less likely to outrage the public.
There are objections. Shami Chakrabarti, director of the National Council for Civil Liberties, said: "If the Home Office doesn't understand why implanting a chip is worse than an ankle bracelet, they don't need a human-rights lawyer; they need a common-sense bypass. Degrading offenders in this way will do nothing for their rehabilitation and nothing for our safety, as some will inevitably find a way round this new technology." Harry Fletcher, assistant general secretary of the National Association of Probation Officers, said the proposal would not make his members' lives easier and would degrade their clients. "The system works well enough as it is. Knowing where offenders are does not mean you know what they are doing. This is the sort of daft idea that comes up from the department every now and then, but tagging people the way we tag pets cannot be the way ahead. Treating people like pieces of meat does not represent an improvement in the system."
Who will profit? The parent company of US market leader VeriChip Corporation has sold animal radio tags for more than a decade. It claims its chips are used at more than 5,000 healthcare, security, government and industrial locations, and has sold 2,000 chips for implantation in humans.
Where else is this making inroads? In the USA, the states of Wisconsin and North Dakota have banned human-implanted ID chips, and California may soon be the third to do so. An April 2005 post on the website Prison Planet points out that the global aspect of RFID chipping isn't well known but claims it's used in Russia, Switzerland, China, Ecuador, Italy, Spain, Argentina, Canada, Paraguay, Uruguay, Brazil, Germany, Taiwan, Saudi Arabia, Africa, and South Korea. Not all of those societies are known for their stellar human rights records. Will British citizens be pleased to join their company?
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Heidi Gill Followup: triggerman cop won't appear, charges dropped, officials backpedal madly.
Heidi was seated alone in a vehicle waiting for a ride home when attacked. For this she earned taser burns and a concussion, and was charged with falsification, resisting arrest, criminal damaging and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. This is the typical official response to police misbehavior- charge the victim with anything to muddy the water, delay proceedings, and drive up legal fees. Refuse to admit wrongdoing even when it's captured by your own cruiser dash cam and splattered all over TV and the internet- watch the video here. Kovach is on a downhill roll: he was fired Dec. 6 by Warren Safety-Service Director Doug Franklin after appealing a 10-day suspension for wrongdoing during a traffic stop of another police officer’s son. Franklin fired Kovach, a 13-year veteran, for dishonesty, claiming he lied during the investigation into the Aug. 23 traffic stop of Timothy Brown II. Brown's filed a federal lawsuit naming the City of Warren, its Police Department, and Kovach both as an individual and in his official capacity, claiming his Fourth and 14th Amendment rights were violated. Kovach's actions during Gill’s arrest are under investigation by the FBI. Gill’s attorney, Mark Hanni, said he has prepared a federal lawsuit against Kovach, the Warren Police Department and the city of Warren, and plans to file the $15 million action next week. Officials are circling the wagons to protect Kovach and, failing that, to wash their hands of the incident. Warren Law Director Traci Timko Rose sought dismissal of the charges against Heidi without prejudice, meaning they can be refiled later. Ohio Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association attorney S. Randall Weltman advised that his client would not testify, and if subpoenaed, would invoke his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. OPBA lead defense attorney Dominic Vitantonio recommended Kovach not take the stand because the FBI probe is ongoing and Kovach’s firing is heading to arbitration. This case is a good example of the problems tasers create. Handguns leave large, bleeding holes that can't be concealed or litigated away, so they're unlikely to be used unless the situation truly requires it. Tasers, originally touted as a less- lethal option one step below shooting, allow cops to attack anyone for any reason without producing a corpse. This encourages misuse and allows city and police officials to dissemble and play the litigation game they know so very well.
An earlier post describes Warren policeman Richard Kovach's unwarranted, prolonged, repeated tasering of Heidi Gill on September 2nd of last year. This week the Warren (Ohio) Tribune-Chronicle and the Coshocton Tribune reported that charges against Heidi were dropped because Kovach refused to testify, and a charge against her of felony assault on a police officer was dismissed because Kovach was the subject of an internal investigation and unavailable to testify.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Who's Infringing Now? Sauce for the Goose is Sauce for the Gander.
The complaint points out that the automobile's first name (Tata) closely resembles a simple dehyphenated retrogradation of the acronym AT-AT applied to the elephantine troop carrier/gun platform appearing in the first Star Wars film, which predates the release of the smaller vehicle by more than thirty years. Unnamed co-complainants connected with the Mork and Mindy series charge that the vehicle's second name (Nano) is remarkably similar to the farewell salute uttered by the show's star at the close of virtually every episode, all of which were produced twenty to thirty years before the new car's introduction. Attorneys for the complainants insist that their case is unaffected by the recent engagement of Mork and Mindy star Robin Williams as spokesmodel for the new vehicle's television marketing push in the United States. We would have called representatives of the respondents for their comment but that's a very long-distance call, they talk funny, and it's the weekend, and you know how that goes. Besides, this is a parody.
In a surprising turnabout, Tata Motors, manufacturers of the new Nano automobile, has been named as respondent in a case before the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) by Lucasfilm and interested parties connected with the 1970s hit sitcom Mork and Mindy.
The complaint alleges that the name of the recently introduced subcompact automobile “Tata Nano” was misappropriated from properties of interest to each party. Complainants contend that they are the lawful proprietors of certain trade and service marks (only slightly altered for use by the respondent) by priority of adoption and on the basis of continuous and extensive use, and request an immediate cease-and-desist order for use of the name.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
If I can't call those tatas, is this still called a bra?
From Wikipedia (a bit dated): WIPO is an agency of the United Nations. Unlike other branches of the United Nations, WIPO has significant financial resources independent of contributions from its Member States. In 2006, over 90% of its income was expected to be generated from the collection of fees under the intellectual property application and registration systems it administers. Deep pockets. Interesting and important work. I'm not sure how this august body was convinced to use its clout to hammer a porn site. I don't know how much impact an internet domain belonging to a porn site can have on a monster international holding company. WIPO thought investors might believe that Tata Sons were somehow affiliated with, had given its blessing to, or licensed its trademark to the porn site promoter. It seems to me that very few significant investors are quite that stupid. Regardless, ICANN yanked the domain. Interesting stuff. The company adopted the name “TATA” in 1917. I suppose it was impossible to determine whether hooters (no copyright infringement intended, there) were called tatas earlier than that. Even if they were I doubt anyone thought to copyright the name, and I really don't suppose anyone tattooed any trademarks anywhere. To avoid any association with boobies or porn sites, will they call that fabric thing you can put on the front of a Tata to avoid stone chips in the paint something other than a bra? Ah, it's still a cool little car.
After publishing the last post I realized that I couldn't possibly have been the first guy to come up with that clever title, so I Googled the term “Bodacious Tatas”. Surprise! The first site on the page references the principal investment holding company of the Tata Group, the maker of the Tata Nano automobile. In 2000, Tata Sons complained to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) that someone had registered the domain name bodacious- tatas dot com, misappropriated the trademarked name Tata, and was using it in bad faith at some risk to Tata Sons.
Bodacious Tatas- Cheap, Cute, Perky. Oh, yeah.
The 33bhp 0.6-liter car will cost the equivalent of $2,500. It's been designed to make four-wheel automotive transport available to those in developing countries. Beats the ubiquitous mopeds and motorbikes hands-down. The twin-cylinder petrol engine drives the rear wheels through a four-speed manual gearbox. Standard models don't have air conditioning or power steering. Airbags are not included, belts are. There is no passenger-side mirror, and only one windscreen wiper. Wheels are pushed as far into the car´s corners as possible, to maximize interior space.
I couldn't resist. Motor Torque Magazine reports on the much awaited launch of India's Tata Nano automobile. Not having a history of ripping customers off with unnecessary options, Tata Motors chairman Raman Tata designed the car himself to fulfill a need instead of to create one. Detroit, pay attention. This thing will get its owners from point A to point B affordably and keep them dry and comfortable doing it.
Remember when you could buy an automaker's base model- a stripper- brand new, for next to nothing? You got vinyl seats, but you got them cheap. You can't buy much of a used car here in the US for this kind of money now. US consumers, automakers and regulatory agencies take note- this thing is shiny enough, roomy enough, fast enough, and safe enough to serve as a first car for many. Though it's not enough car for the highway, it's a good city car, a grocery getter. It's not overtly sexy, it's not overhyped, it's just right. Let's hope the Nano has a good start, brisk sales, and a minimum of quality problems. If it does, I predict a cult following for this new people's car. It'd be nice to see automotive Form Follow Function for a change.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Taser Toys, Mp3s - and an Opportunity!
Horace Smith, Daniel B. Wesson, or Samuel Colt would never have made pink revolvers. But then, sales were good, and they weren't in a slump driven by miserable press. Handguns are supposed to kill people- nobody whined that gunshot deaths were accidents.
Tasers are different. The law enforcement market is increasingly twitchy about the very public liabilities of electroshock weapons. They're easy to abuse, make awful news and videos, and the jury is still out on immediate and long-term medical and neurological effects, including death. In response Taser International is aggressively courting the civilian market. This is great news: police abuse of tasers makes such killer video, I can't wait to see YouTube flooded with home-made taser videos.
Taser is a regular exhibitor at CES- the Consumer Electronics Show. This year (the Globe and Mail reports), Playboy Playmates signed autographs at their booth- Miss June 2004 Hiromi Oshima, Miss October 2005 Amanda Paige, Miss October 2006 Jordan Monroe and Miss September 2007 Patrice Hollis, decked out in Taser t-shirts, signed autographs beside a sign that read: “If you love her, protect her.” No mention of the threat of privately owned tasers being turned against female victims- you know, like police tasers have been. Cheaper than roofies?
Don't Tase Me, Sis! Fox News reports that watered-down (weaker shock, shorter range) versions of the weapons are sold at parties where bored affluent white housewives fondle Lady Tasers smoothly molded in colors and sized for the petite hand. They look FABULOUS. You can carry the pink one to church and keep the leopard-print one in the nightstand. Rawrrrr, ladies.
The company also unveiled a new Taser holster equipped with a built-in 1 GB MP3 player. No. Really. I don't know if it's called the iShok, or the iShokU, or what.
I think they're missing some marketing bets, nonetheless. Here's a hint or two for free. Maybe the next version of the Grand Theft Auto video game can include tasers. Maybe Barbie and Bratz dolls can be accessorized with really cute holsters and lady tasers. Maybe Elmo needs a taser- Elmo got to stay strapped.
Here's an idea I haven't given away. Ringtones sell like hotcakes, right? Half A Bubble Off Plumb is in negotiations with several artists and music companies to market a mix tailored to the electroshock-savvy consumer who wants the hottest iShok sound, and plans to sell the mix online (as Mp3's) and at kiosks in malls across America. We'll be ready to roll out for Valentine's day. Check out our first playlist:
Hit Me With Your Best Shot- Pat Benetar
Janie's Got A Gun- Aerosmith
Earl's Got to Die- The Dixie Chicks
Shock the Monkey- Peter Gabriel
Shell Shock- Heart
Live Wire- Motley Crue
Great Balls of Fire- Jerry Lee Lewis (for those below-the-belt hits)
Electricity-Elton John- or Suede, for that matter
High Voltage- AC/DC
Take My Breath Away- Berlin
High Tension Wire- Dead Boys
Shockaholic- Kinky Machine
...and Anything by Son Volt, of course
We're looking for partners. If you have some hot favorites, or if you're a high-voltage DJ with his own mix, leave a comment. Our attorneys will contact you!
Read the Whole Post (opens in a new tab or window)Monday, January 7, 2008
Tasered? Dead? Must be Excited Delirium- yeah, that's the ticket.
News reports of post-tasering deaths sometimes claim that victims die not from the taser shot but from “Excited Delirium.” The term appears in today's article in the Columbus Dispatch describing the December, 2006 post-taser death of Briant Parks at the hands of three officers, one of whom tasered him twice. Another tasered him eight times for a period of 45 seconds. There were no drugs or alcohol in his system. He's dead.
Don't fret, the cops are OK- the police take care of their own. An investigation by the division's critical-incident response team, made up of veteran homicide detectives, found that the officers acted within division policy. Thank goodness for carefully written policies. Amazingly, a Franklin County grand jury cleared them of criminal wrongdoing.
Excited delirium is not a medical or psychological diagnosis. It's a catch-all invented by cops, coroners, and taser salesmen to refer to the state you're in when you've been terrified, chased, tackled, beat up, sat on, pepper-sprayed and/or electroshocked and die in police custody.
Both NPR and Wikipedia report this statement by Eric Balaban of the American Civil Liberties Union: "I know of no reputable medical organization — certainly not the AMA [American Medical Association] or the APA [American Psychological Association] — that recognizes excited delirium as a medical or mental-health condition." He's right. It's not recognized by professional medical associations, and you won't find it listed in the chief psychiatric reference book. Balaban charges that police use the diagnosis "as a means of white-washing what may be excessive use of force and inappropriate use of control techniques by officers during an arrest."
Excited delirium can't be found in an autopsy. It's solely an operational definition- it's the name for what you die from if you die after you've been electroshocked into submission. If there are no witnesses, only the police can describe what happened, and civil liberties groups fear the diagnosis is used to cover up police abuse and keep lawsuits from cutting into taser manufacturer's profits.
What's the moral of this story? Next time a gang of thug cops run you down and taser you over and over, remain calm. Take deep, slow breaths. Go to your Happy Place. Chant your mantra. Don't get excited, don't get delirious- you might kill yourself despite the peace officers' best efforts on your behalf.
Oh- and here's a link so I can check to see that Haloscan trackbacks work. Good site tho, LOL.
Sunday, January 6, 2008
Will Ireland's Garda and PSNI tasers at least be molded in appropriate colors?
Worldwide arms dealer Taser International has been busy exporting their lucrative brand of American craziness. Vampires haunt blood banks. TI pitches sales to troubled markets. They've scored bloody good hits in Ireland.
Today's Guardian Unlimited reports that the Police Service of Northern Ireland will be issued Tasers this week. They'll be available only to 'highly trained firearms officers' from the PSNI's Special Operations Branch during a pilot program the PSNI claims has been confirmed by the Human Rights Adviser to Northern Ireland's Policing Board as in compliance with the Human Rights Act.
The Policing Board insisted, however, that tasers should not be deployed until the completion of an Equality Impact Assessment, and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) has claimed Tasers could potentially violate Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The PSNI site lists the Use of Taser EQIA as Planned for 2007 / 2008. The assessment is not complete and the tasers are on the street. The Policing Board controls nothing, certainly not the PSNI Chief Constable Sir Hugh Ord. One wonders whether the planned statement will do anything but ensure that all citizens are equally likely to be tasered into submission at a cop's whim.
There's been discussion for some months, as you can see on the web.
In January 2007 Northern Ireland News (I'm guessing this is the “conservative” voice among news outlets there) seemed to be solidly in favor of electroshock weapons, as is evident in this aggressive paragraph:
“There will be a shock in store for those attempting to evade justice early next year as Northern Ireland gears up with controversial Taser stun guns - and there'll be no hiding place in London either.”
Weapons haven't brought justice to Northern Ireland historically, and there seems to have been too many weapons laying about there for some time. Justice doesn't come out of the barrel of a gun. Mao Tse-Tung thought Love did, but that hasn't worked out so well either.
In April 2007, across the border, Tanaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, TD, authorized the use of tasers by the Garda Emergency Response Unit (ERU). There is some hope that they will, at least at first, be restricted by policy to the upper end of the use-of-force continuum and not allowed to slip to an option of first response as they have in the US:
“Circumstances under which less lethal weapons could legitimately be used are limited to circumstances where this is necessary to avoid the use of firearms. The use of firearms is permitted only to repel serious attacks on Gardai, members of the public or property, or in the arrest or re-arrest of persons involved in serious offences. Strict conditions are laid down, including a requirement in all cases that all other means of achieving the purpose in question have been exhausted, before firearms may be used. The test which currently applies to the use of less lethal weapons, that their use is necessary to avoid the use of firearms, is therefore a high one.”
Of course, that's how they were first presented here, too. Now American police routinely taser anyone they wish- unconscious, restrained, pregnant, underage, mentally unstable, non-threatening- even when they greatly outnumber the victim and have other options. Note that the "search" function of the An Garda Siochana website doesn't work, and I can't find any mention of tasers there.
In June 2007 the Irish Times (Ireland.com) reported that the North's Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde said he was considering deploying 12 tasers in a pilot scheme even though assessments were not complete. The Policing Board in Belfast accused him of ignoring its objections. Chairman Sir Des Rea said: "This Board has not reached a view on the use of Taser. It will do so as and when the Equality Impact Assessment is complete... the decision should be left until that is completed but the chief constable has made his decision in terms of his operational responsibility."
Sinn Fein Board member Martina Anderson said the PSNI had heard from a range of groups concerned about the impact of Taser. "Many of them are telling you that issuing Tasers is inappropriate, absolutely not acceptable until an equality impact assessment is complete and its conclusions are taken into account. You are totally ignoring... the views expressed by those organisations."
In October 2007 Patricia Lewsley, Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (the organization is called NICCY) said Chief Constable Sir Hugh Ord's decision to introduce Tasers into Northern Ireland must be reversed, and that she believes he may be in breach of both advice from the Policing Board and the European Convention on Human Rights.
It's sad to see that police in Ireland behave no better than their American and Canadian counterparts, and that Irish politics responds to this threat to civil liberties no better than our own has. Having forgotten who their employers truly are, police do whatever they wish regardless of objections. Hugh Ord probably never intended to wait for or comply with the Equality Impact Assessment. Police officials North and South seem to fully understand that once tasers are issued, even on a limited basis, the foot is in the door and electroshock weapons are there to stay.
Read the Whole Post (opens in a new tab or window)Thursday, January 3, 2008
Good Press, Bad Press, and Post-Taser Deaths
Try as I may I can't find the source of the aphorism “There's no such thing as bad publicity as long as they spell your name right”. If you know who said that, please tell me- it's making me crazy. The proverb popped into my head in connection with Taser International's recent legal shot across Daily Kos' bow over the phrase “Taser Death” that appeared in a post on that blog. I know the phrase is used widely all over the news and the web; I confirmed that with this Google search. Taser International just needs some relief from recent publicity, and Kos is a high profile blog. Who else are they going to bother for using that in a headline- Google? The Globe and Mail, for heaven's sake? They have huge legal departments and might fight. Maybe it worked. Kos seems to have pulled the post.
Good publicity or bad, the pictured tee shirt appeared in Time Magazine Online's '50 Top 10 Lists of 2007'. The featured phrase, uttered by an obtrusive heckler at a John Kerry appearance, promoted the (trademarked) proper noun Taser to a popular verb in the international lexicon. You can now conjugate TI's flagship product- tase, tased, will tase, has tased, had tased, etc. You can be tased in America, Canada, England, France, Germany, Japan- the word spans languages and cultures.
What kind of publicity does that generate? They're selling tons of Tasers to law enforcement and military outfits worldwide, for good or ill (Do mercenaries buy these? Unfriendly foreign military organizations? Will American troops be tased like American citizens are?) so maybe that's great publicity among potential customers. The same thing happened, after all, with the words guillotine, garotte, sap, and napalm- all nouns, names of infamous weapons promoted to verbs- and the manufacturers of those items turned a tidy profit in their day.
On the other hand, maybe that's bad publicity among us, the public, the people who end up being the targets, the people who now and again die, post-tasering. Maybe I'm thinking of the wrong quotation after all. Maybe enough protest can nick their profits, slow domestic taser proliferation, and restrict improper use. I know another proverb about publicity, attributed to the Irishman Brendan Behan: There's no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Taser International cranky about wording of blog headlines
Two of the Canadian blogs listed in our Taser Blogroll in the right sidebar (Creative Revolution and Crimes and Corruption of the New World Order) have reported that the Editor in Chief of a third blog (Daily Kos) has received objections from Taser International regarding a November 14, 2007 post about the videotaped post-tasering death of Robert Dziekanski at the hands of the RCMP at Vancouver airport. See that post here. See my own post about it here. Intimidation doesn't work particularly well in the blogosphere. I am sure that Daily Kos' legal team will respond appropriately.
I understand that the manufacturer objects to the phrase “taser death” in the headline and considers it 'inaccurate, misleading, and... made with reckless disregard as to its truth'. They cite 'defamation, trade libel, and irreparable damage' to their company and its products.
Many reports of deaths following taser deployment claim contributing factors including drug use, pre-existing medical conditions, adrenaline rush, and the oft-cited, never explained, clinically resonant neologism “excited delirium”, which seems to me to have been invented for the occasion by taser apologists. That's why this blog always refers to such deaths as “post-tasering” events. Nothing about this implies post hoc, ergo propter hoc argument, it's merely a factual statement of timing. Temporal sequence does not imply causality. We'll leave statements of causality to medical professionals. If there haven't been enough of those to help you make up your mind, wait. The weapons are now common and we're hearing from more and more coroners and medical examiners about their effects on victims varying widely in age, sex, and reproductive and medical condition. It's not like the FDA tested and approved these things before they spread like enthusiastic bunnies. We the People are uncompensated guinea pigs for these medical trials and there'll be another post-tasering event soon enough. We'll let the data speak.
Taser International may also feel that their trademark name has been devalued by the widespread use of the word taser (lower case “t”), but success carries with it the benefit and stigma of name recognition. I don't know how many newsworthy incidents have involved other brands of electroshock weapons; certainly competitors may wish they had equally overwhelming national and international market share. You may eat gelatine, cover cuts with adhesive plasters, and use photocopies, but you almost certainly ask for Jello or a Band-Aid or make Xerox copies whether or not you are careful to check the brand. When you hear the phrase “Don't Tase Me, Bro!” you don't think of something called a stun gun or cattle prod or electric dog collar, you think of a Taser (tm), because, well, that's what it was, and the national media reported it as such.
Certainly print, television, and radio news outlets have deeper pockets than bloggers. They also have larger legal staffs; it's unlikely that CNN, CBS, or Reuters will receive letters of complaint. Nor will Mr. Dziekanski be writing letters to either the RCMP or Taser International because, you see, he died- not necessarily because of, but certainly after, he was tased.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Jesse Saenz' Raton, NM post-taser death- Different Henhouse, Same Foxes
I get comments so infrequently here! I hate to be negative about any of them. This post is in response to a thoughtful comment to my earlier post about a flawed Wake Forest University taser injury study. The responder wrote:
“Say what you wish but I would much rather be shot with a Taser than with a 9mm. The reality is that the persons being shot have predominately caused a scenario to unfold wherein they have or are about to cause bodily or deadly harm to themselves or someone else. Again, stopping the threat is the main desire and I would preferred to be stopped by a 5 second Taser hit than a possible deadly hit from a 9mm or other weapon.”
Thanks for the comment- but this is is a false dichotomy. I'd rather be shot with a taser than with a 9mm myself, but I'd much rather not be shot at all.
Taser use often has nothing to do with threats to the victim, to bystanders, or to the officers. They're increasingly used not for defense or to avoid the use of deadly force but to terrify or simply force compliance with the officers' demands. Too many are not a low-voltage five-second jab in drive-stun mode (pressing the taser against the target) but sustained and repeated shocks administered through taser darts embedded in the victim's flesh and under full control of the attacker. Case in point...
This weekend the Las Cruces Sun-News ran an AP report describing how city police officers used two tasers to shock a Raton man 23 times. Jesse Saenz died before reaching the county detention center. A witness states that there was no struggle, and that the shocks continued over a period of five minutes. The AP report says that the exact cause of his death has not been determined. The officers using the Tasers said the devices malfunctioned, of course- they're unlikely to admit that they hosed Jesse unnecessarily for an extended period of time.
Watch the KOAT (7) Albequerque video here- the victim's sister claims that he was handcuffed at the time. Watch Captain Mike Galardi Of the Raton PD state that the taser was used to force compliance, not in response to a deadly threat. Hear police claim that they tasered the victim once, and hear a witness describe watching multiple extended taser flashes and hearing Jesse scream for five minutes.
The incident has been turned over to the New Mexico State Police for investigation. Will they investigate until the truth is revealed and then report it honestly, or will they protect their brothers in law enforcement? See my earlier post about Foxes guarding the Henhouse.
Fort Worth TRE Says- Throw Jesus from the Bus
CBS 11 reports that a passenger was escorted off a Ft. Worth bus because she continued reading the bible aloud after the driver asked her to stop. She claims the TRE bus line discriminated against her religion. I disagree. TRE, like many transit companies, has a policy against loud or abusive behavior. The driver asked her politely to stop breaking their rules, and she refused. It's as simple as that. If TRE was discriminating against anything, they were discriminating against Stupidity. It's not a bit different than kicking a drunken mime off the bus before he pukes on your shoes.
If this bothers you, substitute the title of another book into the news report to clarify the issue. “Christine Lutz says she was reading her Bible (Koran, Torah, Book of Mormon, copy of Dianetics, Congressional Record, Necronomicon, Phone Directory, Zend-Avesta, Upanishads, Bhagavadgita) aloud... when the bus driver asked her to stop or get off the bus.” See the difference? If the first was OK with you, and the second isn't, you'd best examine your notion that annoying public transit riders with random phrases blurted from your favorite good book is OK. If you doubt that this twit was anything more than a self-righteous fool, watch the video.
Jamming your personal favorite version of The Ultimate Truth up other peoples' noses works in Islamic countries, not here. This is especially true in politics.
Sunday, Republican Mike Huckabee effectively sunk his candidacy when he stood by a comment he made at a 1998 Southern Baptist Convention, "I hope we answer the alarm clock and take this nation back for Christ." Christ never owned America. We've spent a great deal of thought, sweat, and blood making sure no religion ever will. The American people are unlikely to hand their country over to Christ, Allah, or Frosty the Snowman anytime soon.
I hope the electorate is bored and disgusted with religious posturing by now, whether it's Dubya's convenient christianity, Hillary's chameleon christianity, Huckabee's Southern Baptist throwback version, or Obama's crypto islamo/jesus blend. None of them believe a word of it, except as it suits their needs. All they're managing to do is confirm the prejudices of my favorite religionists, the atheists. They can point to this rampant religious vote-whoring and argue that the candidates' continued existence proves there is no god, for no self-respecting deity would fail to smite the clowns taking His Name so egregiously in vain. Smite them, or at the very least, offer them the choice of shutting up or getting off the bus.
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Huckabee stands firm; Giuliani agrees, more or less
The AP (myway) reports that Mike Huckabee, in a display of constancy, courage, and leadership uncommon in this or any other presidential campaign, refuses to back down from his 1992 stance on AIDS. "I still believe this today," he said in a broadcast interview, that "we were acting more out of political correctness" in responding to the AIDS crisis. "I don't run from it, I don't recant it," he said of his position in 1992. Huckabee stated his positions then in an AP questionnaire in which he also called homosexuality "an aberrant, unnatural, and sinful lifestyle," and this is one part of his remarks that's really stirring the pot now.
Giuliani, who appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday, said in response to a question that he did not believe homosexuality was aberrant. "The way somebody leads their life isn't sinful. It's the acts," said Giuliani, who supports gay rights and lived with an openly gay couple after separating from his second wife while mayor. "It's the various acts that people perform that are sinful, not the orientation that they have." That's a bit of careful hair-splitting. To Be or to Do? Are you homosexual, or do you “do homosexuality”?
The secular among us would stop short of the candidates' “sinful” label. Few would argue against describing homosexuality as abnormal in the statistical sense. Let's adopt Giuliani's spin and restrict this discussion to acts rather than orientation. Promiscuity, debatably more common in though not exclusive to certain homosexual lifestyles, is demonstrably more effective at spreading STDs than monogamy. If the acts involved in the expression of homosexual orientation involve using body parts for other than their intended purposes or (to avoid the pitfall of divining intent from configuration) for purposes other than those to which they are biologically and medically suited, they are contraindicated for health reasons.
Sinful? Immoral? Your call. Statistically aberrant, medically problematical, epidemiologically inadvisable? Indisputably so.
Read the Whole Post (opens in a new tab or window)
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Hucka boo boo: Candidate Makes Sense, probably Ruins Chances
Republican Mike Huckabee made a great showing in the Iowa polls. Immediately afterwards, in a howling coincidence, the AP reported his responses to questions about homosexuality and AIDS on their 1992 questionnaire. Mike Allen of POLITICO feels that this may harm his chances of a nomination. He says:
“The revelations could dampen the enthusiasm for the candidacy of Huckabee, a former Baptist minister, because the language clashes with his image as a compassionate, sunny leader... It also could cause Republican voters to reevaluate whether he would be effective at winning swing voters in a general election that looks trying for the GOP.”
He has a point. Huckabee is guilty of making sense in a race stuffed with choices like Billary (Socialist Ventriloquist and her dummy) Clinton and the O' Show team of Oprah and Obama, who either avoid the hard questions altogether or say what they think will buy your vote.
Huckabee also responded that AIDS research was receiving an unfair amount of federal money. Instead, he said celebrities should pay for the research themselves. “In light of the extraordinary funds already being given for AIDS research, it does not seem that additional federal spending can be justified... An alternative would be to request that multimillionaire celebrities, such as Elizabeth Taylor, Madonna and others who are pushing for more AIDS funding be encouraged to give out of their own personal treasuries increased amounts for AIDS research."
Put their money where their mouth is, in other words. AIDS is not a plague in the sense of anthrax, or flu, or bubonic plague, ebola or dengue fever. You don't catch it from the air, or the water, bad cold cuts, or a flea, or a sneeze. You catch it by doing something you have no business doing, or, in the sad cases of innocents, through intimate contact with someone who has. If fully-informed, potential AIDS patients won't stop putting themselves at risk through actions totally within their control, should we pay for their treatment when they don't beat the odds? According to AVERT, for data at the end of 2005:
88% of cases among men are due to avoidable behavior; sex with men, intravenous drug use, or a combination of the two. Don't want AIDS, guys? Stop doing those things.
33% of cases among women are due to avoidable behavior; intravenous drug use. 65% are exposed through heterosexual contact, and that means with men who have sex with men or are intravenous drug users. Ladies, don't want AIDS? Put down the needle.
Huckabee also spoke in favor of quarantine. "If the federal government is truly serious about doing something with the AIDS virus, we need to take steps that would isolate the carriers of this plague.... It is the first time in the history of civilization in which the carriers of a genuine plague have not been isolated from the general population, and in which this deadly disease for which there is no cure is being treated as a civil rights issue instead of the true health crisis it represents."
Making sense in America. Yep, he's done.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Sluts in Denial- not a taser post
The New Zealand Herald carried the story “Women 'want No-Strings Sex' ” on 8 December. Maybe they carried it to boost flagging circulation. It reads like nothing so much as frustrated academics examining their own navels under tight deadlines, like a schoolboy who waited to write a book report until the night before it's due. One's a Kiwi, and one's Canadian, so there are some language problems- they speak a dialect of English known as Brit-Colonial Academic Estrogenese. I've translated these excerpts for my readers. No thanks are necessary.
Two young women researchers are calling for a new form of sexual ethics that would allow women to have casual sex without feeling that they're "sluts". They want to be sluts without feeling like they are sluts. This is a particularly pathetic version of the “perception is reality” argument as applied to self-deception.
Canadian sociologist Melanie Beres, a post-doctoral researcher at Auckland University, and Auckland doctoral student Pantea Farvid (we call this “devaluing the PhD”) told a sociology conference yesterday that rape prevention efforts should stop just giving women tips to avoid harm and promote an ethic of "self-care and care for the other". We call this kind of nonsense “Doctoral Feces”.
Dr. Beres interviewed young Canadians aged 19 to 25 about their casual sex experiences, while Ms Farvid interviewed New Zealanders in the same age bracket. Nice sample, representative of nothing. The New Zealand women were more likely to have actively initiated casual sex (here we call these “self-actualized sluts”) whereas the Canadians were more likely to say it "just happened" (we call these “sluts in denial”). Drink was used by some as an excuse for their choices. Really?
Studies have shown New Zealanders start sex younger than in many countries and have high rates of teen pregnancies and STDs (These are what we call “diseased sluts”). By the age of 25, 13 per cent of women have had more than 10 sexual partners (These are what we call “high mileage sluts” or “retreads”).
Dr. Beres said some women deliberately challenged society's "double standard" that said casual sex was okay for men. It's not OK for guys either. This is a blatant attempt to ennoble sluttish behavior. It's a logical fallacy, known formally as The Noble Slut. One woman in her study took the initiative in sexual encounters (we call this “loose”) and another had decided that a serious relationship would hinder her career, so she sought casual sex to meet her physical needs. We call this “assisted wanking”.
Ms. Farvid said a more open approach to sex would move away from the legal idea that the only issue in sexual morality was consent. Shevek says that a more moral approach to life would move away from the idea that the only issue in sexual morality is libido.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Wake Forests' highly suspect taser injury study; Foxes Guarding the Henhouse.
The Winston-Salem Journal reported on 10/8 of this year that a study led by researchers at the Wake Forest University School of Medicine suggests that Tasers are safe. The study, funded by the National Institute of Justice, is said to be the first large, independent study to measure the risk of Taser injuries in real-world situations. Doctors at six jurisdictions across the country reviewed medical and police reports of everyone police used a Taser on, noting injuries ranging from mild (cuts and bruises) to serious, such as bruising to the brain caused by a fall after a man was shocked. These were, of course, police reports and initial contact medical reports without follow-up patient examinations. This is not science. This is propaganda. This is sales.
Study director Dr. William Bozeman, associate professor of emergency medicine at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, commented that despite the conclusions of the study “You cannot treat it as a magical thing that can’t hurt. You have to understand that it is a weapon. It’s very important to recognize that these devices are not 100 percent safe.” This disclaimer aside, Steve Tuttle, a spokesman for Taser International, said he was “thrilled” with the results. Of course he was.
Raj Jayadev of Indybay offered a less enthusiastic view on 10/18, pointing out that examination of the study leaves more questions than answers. Nationally recognized Taser expert Aram James of the Coalition for Justice and Accountability (CJA) says, “The study concludes, without supporting data, that Tasers reduce injuries to both police and the individuals tasered. But the authors offer no systematic data to support this conclusion.” The abstract reported 23% of 597 subjects received some sort of injury. “...hardly support for the proposition that Tasers are safe -- and when coupled with 293 taser related deaths, a statistic conveniently ignored by the authors, the conclusion that Tasers are safe is not only not true but in fact a lie of deadly proportions.”
Richard Konda, Executive Director of the Asian Law Alliance and CJA co-founder, says the study ignores the reality that some populations are at higher risk when Tased. “The study fails to mention the effect of Tasers on vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women, the elderly, the mentally ill, and those under the influence of drugs, who are far more likely to suffer serious injuries and even death as a result of being Tasered... medical remedies to prevent death are being developed because Tasers kill. In Miami emergency medical technicians are spraying a sedative in the noses of Tasers victims or inject them with iced saline solutions. These protocols lead us to only one conclusion – that Tasers are deadly weapons and must be banned.”
The study was essentially a law enforcement report, and James points to several red flags. “First, it was conducted at six law enforcement agencies across the country, interestingly enough not disclosed. Why the secrecy? Secondly, underlying police reports and any accompanying medical records were reviewed by ‘tactical physicians' closely connected to a law enforcement agenda. Finally, not mentioned anywhere in the press release is the companion piece put out by the Wake Forest Physicians Group. In a study dated September 4, 2007, the same doctors credited with the above study reported on a police officer who, after volunteering to receive a 5 second Taser exposure under very controlled circumstances... suffered a very serious and apparently permanently debilitating thoracic compression fracture. Why was this piece buried? So much for Tasers being a low risk of injury weapon. If they're unsafe for the cops they're unsafe for us.”
Academics don't work for free. To evaluate any university study, follow the money. The funding agency, the National Institute of Justice, is an arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. Their website lists grant awards, though the most recent data available is for 2006. These are a few of them:
Wake Forest University Health Sciences received a grant of more than $149,000 in the category of Less-Lethal Incapacitation to study injuries produced by Law Enforcement's use of less-lethal weapons.
The Police Executive Research Forum received more than $400,000 to evaluate the effects of less-lethal technologies on police use-of-force outcomes. PERF is a national membership organization of police executives from the largest city, county and state law enforcement agencies.
The International Association of Chiefs of Police was awarded more than $250,000 for a study of Electronic Control Weapons and Deaths in Custody.
Blackhawk Industries Products Group, a large manufacturer of tactical law enforcement gear, received $174,000.
Politics and grant monies make strange bedfellows. Given the company of the members of this list, is there any reason whatever to suspect that the Wake Forest study is independent of the influence of police agencies and weapons manufacturers? This looks to me less like rigorous peer-reviewed research than whoring science out to support foregone conclusions in the service of sales, marketing, and the casual use of excessive force.
Read the Whole Post (opens in a new tab or window)Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Idiot cops taser deaf man
Eyewitness News 12 in Wichita, Kansas reports that multiple police officers responding to an anonymous call about a shooting broke into the wrong house and tasered a naked deaf man. Donnell Williams had just gotten out of the bath tub, wearing only a towel around his waist, when he turned the corner to see guns pointing right at him.
"I ain't never been so scared," says Williams. Without his hearing aid he is basically deaf. "I kept going to my ear yelling that I was scared. I can't hear! I can't hear!" The cops, apparently deaf, blind, and stupid themselves, feared for their own safety because it appeared Williams was refusing to obey their commands to show his hands. I suppose he was holding up the towel with one hand and pointing at his ear with the other. So they tasered him.
The case is being reviewed by the Wichita Police Department. This is a lot like relying on the fox to review security measures at the henhouse. Nothing to see here, folks... move along, move along. Deputy Chief Robert Lee said, "The first few minutes getting control of the scene are very, very important. Do I wish there would have been some way they were notified in advance this gentleman was hearing impaired? I certainly do. No one is happy with the way it worked out." I imagine the tas-ee is just a little more distraught than the tas-ers. Officers repeatedly apologized, no doubt hoping to ignore a huge lawsuit.
Eyewitness News, shilling for the cops, actually published this sentence: “Police wish it never happened, but with the information they had at the time, their choices were limited.” Limited to shooting first and asking questions later?
The whole incident is one long string of mistakes for which no one will be held accountable. Eyewitness news will drop the story and never follow it up. Dispatch reported the wrong address for an untraceable shooting call. Inept cops failed to correctly evaluate the threat level of a dripping wet, naked, empty-handed man fresh out of the bathtub and decided their best option was to tase him. The excuse machine kicked into high gear and spewed twisted logic to justify the screwup; for example, I'm very sure the department has no written policy that explicitly forbids tasering naked unarmed deaf people, so the cops violated no procedures.
If this is handled like most unwarranted tasering incidents, the shooters are probably still working or on administrative leave with pay, waiting to be returned to active duty once the news storm blows over. With fresh cartridges in their tasers.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Tasering is not the same as an insulin injection.
The Dothan (Alabama) Eagle reported on Nov. 9 that Police in Ozark tasered a sober man who was having a diabetic seizure. Three police cruisers investigated a truck and trailer pulled over on the side of the road. James Bludsworth, 54, with no criminal record, was was slumped over behind the wheel. He was not responsive to police commands.
Did these Officer Friendlies help the sick man? Did they realize that this inert, possibly unconscious man was no threat to anyone? Did they call paramedics? No, this brave crew summoned their courage, overcame their terror, and tasered him three times. One now says that he smelled alcohol on Bludsworth, who blew 0.00 (stone cold sober) on a breathalyzer. Ozark Police Chief Myron Williams also claims the sick man was "combative." Maybe he was snoring too loud.
Did they take him to a hospital? No, he was booked at Dale County Jail and charged with resisting arrest (by using the force of gravity?) and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). Bludsworth has no recollection of the incident and is free on $1000 bond pending a December court date.
There must be something in the gene pool other than stagnant pond scum in Ozark, Alabama.
Ohio Sheriff sells your Fourth Amendment rights for Cash
Christmas is coming, and office parties along with it. Be very careful in Ohio. You can buy anything there for the right sum, and the citizens of Summit County, Ohio have had their Fourth Amendment rights sold out from under them for a paltry $175,000. The Akron Beacon-Journal reports that Summit County Sheriff Drew Alexander agrees that sobriety checkpoints violate the spirit of the Fourth Amendment but sold out to that state for grants of that amount. The cash is earmarked to fight drunk driving, and requires the use of sobriety checkpoints, your rights be damned.
Checkpoints are a scam. The sheriff himself considers them less effective than roving patrols. The Beacon-Journal cited Ohio statistics that show traditional patrols catch drunk drivers five times more effectively than roadblocks. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court found that 99.3 percent of drivers stopped at roadblocks were completely innocent and that it took 53 percent more manpower to effect an arrest at a roadblock than with roaming patrols.
Who, then, likes these checkpoints? Ohio State Government loves them for a few reasons. MADD loves them, for one thing, and they're a huge, self-perpetuating fund raising and media machine. Lawmakers love them because they're motherhood and apple pie, safe to champion without requiring any thought or actual work, and citizens never question their effectiveness. Most of all, the cops themselves love them. It's cushy busywork and so much easier than roving patrols. The grant money goes primarily to off-duty cops from dozens of Summit County agencies who are paid time-and-a-half for their voluntary overtime. Cops, Ohio lawmakers, and MADD don't mind selling your right to be protected from illegal, warrantless search and seizure as long as they make out on the deal. They also know that getting citizen sheep used to having their Fourth Amendment rights whittled away bit by bit for a putative good cause sets good precedent. You know-for farther down the road.
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
