Archive for the Crime/Punishment Category

Monitoring The Masses:  The Card And The Chip (January 12, 2015)

Posted in Banks and Banking System, Boycott Series, Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Crime/Punishment, Cyberactivities, First Amendment, Freedom / Liberty, Gold, Guns, Plastic, Pogo Plight, Police, Privacy, Silver, Technology, Terrorism on January 12, 2015 by e-ssay.org

. . .

X          “Failure to present The Card, even when there is no cause or provocation, will result in immediate incarceration and summary disposition.  If The Card is not physically maintained within a fathom of The Chip, The Chip will transmit a warning signal to Headquarters and trigger an unwelcome visit.”

Z          “I hear you.  Coming to a country near you.  Everyone is now familiar with a credit, a debit or an EBT card, so the transition will be unnoticed and unchallenged.  All movement, travel, purchases and sales will be monitored at all times by The Chip implanted at birth without permission.  Cash will be non-existent and free movement only a memory.  A few rebels may barter surreptitiously, yet bartering will be more than a mere failure to report income and will also result in immediate summary disposition.  Possession of any precious metals such as Fe, Pb, Au or Ag will be strictly prohibited and swiftly prosecuted.”  

X          “Plastic cards have encouraged excessive over-consumption to date, yet they could also be used to ration scarce resources in the future.  Market the idea to the public with unrelenting fear.  ‘We’ need to adopt the system to protect us from The Terrorists.” 

. . .

Bumper stickers of the week:

Today’s science fiction is tomorrow’s science fact.

Today’s science fiction is tomorrow’s political and economic fact.

Are your papers in order?  Is your plastic in order?

When the big boys make a run on the bank and demand a repatriation of their gold, should the little guys make a run on the bank and demand a return of their fiat dollars?

Nous sommes Charlie?  Is the concern freedom of expression for all or only for some?

Boycott TurboTax:  See Internet

Tea Party And Innocence Project Form ‘Liberty Alliance’ (September 9, 2013)

Posted in Civil War, Crime/Punishment, Hypocrisy, Law, Prison/Criminology, Tea Party on September 9, 2013 by e-ssay.org

. . .

C1        “The ‘Liberty Alliance’ is so natural.  A political group concerned with liberty aligns with a judicial group also concerned with liberty.”

C2        “The Tea Party and the Innocence Project concluded a Memorandum of Understanding to advance and promote liberty.”

. . .

C1       “Breaking news.  The Young Americans for Freedom voted to join the ‘Liberty Alliance’ today.”

. . .

C1        “Braking News.  Some members of the Tea Party demanded that the ‘Liberty Alliance’ seek liberty and freedom for Whites only.”

C2        “There is always a catch.”

. . .

C1        “More Heart Breaking News.  Some members of the Young Americans for Freedom demanded that the ‘Liberty Alliance’ seek liberty and freedom for Whites only.”

C2        “It’s catching but not catchy.”

. . .

This article must be revised to reflect the following correction:

Neither the Tea Party nor the Young Americans for Freedom has formed an alliance with the Innocence Project.

. . .

[See the website of the Innocence Project at http://www.innocenceproject.org/ and the article at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/us/justice-dept-seeks-to-curtail-stiff-drug-sentences.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Don’t tread on me [yes you a corrupt and expensive and inefficient and inequitable criminal justice system.]

Even if you don’t do the crime, you may do the time.

The Endless War On Women . . . By American Warriors (July 22, 2013)

Posted in Congress, Crime/Punishment, Drones, Due Process, Equal Protection, Military, O'Bama, Society on July 22, 2013 by e-ssay.org

. . .

C1        “It could not be disregarded, so the predecessor to former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates issued a statement denunciating the rape.  It could not be disregarded, so then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates issued a statement denunciating the rape.  It could not be disregarded, so then Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta issued a statement denunciating the rape.  It could not be disregarded, so Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel issues a statement denunciating the rape.  It could not be disregarded, so the successor to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel will issue a statement denunciating the rape.  It could not be disregarded, so the successor to the successor to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel will issue a statement denunciating the rape.”

C2        “Perhaps they could concoct a Department of Defense formal form denunciation and describe it as ‘Form DD 1.’”

C1        “The official DoD ‘Bedbug Letter.’  Explanations in the military are simple.  What goes on goes on because the superiors want it to go on.  What the superiors do not want to go on will not go on, with only a few rogue exceptions that can be punished swiftly and publicly.”

C2        “The Commander-In-Chief is at the top of the pile.”

C1        “So they want it to go on.  In this man’s army, however, that war would not go on.” 

. . .

[Is a “Drones Unlimited” organization akin to “Ducks Unlimited” or “Trout Unlimited” or “Cape Buffalos Unlimited” on the horizon?  http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/07/17/us/17reuters-usa-colorado-drones.html?hp&_r=0.]

Bumper sticker of the week:

Join the military; get raped       

Constitutional Remedies With An Expiration Date? Affirmative Action and Marriage Neutrality. Again. (December 10, 2012)

Posted in Constitution, Courts, Crime/Punishment, Gay Politics, Judges, Law, Less Government Regulation Series, Miscegenation, Society, Supreme Court on December 17, 2012 by e-ssay.org

. . .

A          “By my simple way of thinking, a constitutional right is either a constitutional right or it is not a constitutional right.  So you say that we treat everyone equally by not treating everyone equally for twenty-five years starting in 2003.  And then the unequal treatment in the name of equal treatment expires in 2028.”

B          “Yup.”

A          “The handiwork of Justice O’Connor.”

B          “Yup.  Not very tidy but workable.” 

A          “But when it comes to marriage neutrality, there is no public incubation period.”

B          “Nope.”

A          “In twenty-five years, no one will even pause when two guys or two gals get married.  But then there is the countervailing contention that society needs to change at its own pace and the law should follow.  Yet you maintain that the Supremes should simply state that it is the law of the land now.”

B          “Yup.  Because it is the law of the land.”

A          “And one person is now elected to make that decision in and for America.  Our friend Tony Kennedy.  The guy who could have been Bork.”

B          “Yup.  Another rich White boy who is a byproduct of one of the two most profitable law schools and an adherent of one of the two most powerful religions.  The youngster who always crayoned within the lines and then as a teenager completely penciled in the designated oval with a number 2 lead pencil is assigned to pen a decision that impacts the lives and the liberties and the pursuit of happiness of millions.”

A          “At the end of the day, the answer is simple.  You need to review the Protest Poem – The Declaration of Independence – quill penned before the Owners Manual – the Constitution.  ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’”

B          “Yup.  That will work.”

A          “And reference the Equal Protection provisions of the Constitution for good measure.”

B          “Yup.  Absent attacks such as 12/7 and 9/11 that trigger a sea change in public opinion, no public consensus has emerged as rapidly in American history.”

A          “If the vote at the Conference is 5 – 4 in favor of marriage neutrality, Kennedy will write the defining opinion of his career.”

B          “Yup.  The minority will write the Plessy v. Ferguson decision for this century.”        

A          “Some guys get all the luck.”

B          “Yup.  They are reactionary guys.  You have got to give it to them.  The polite description is to note that they are off the wall.”

A          “If Roberts sees the writing on the wall, however, he may switch to the majority and opt to write the opinion himself.”

B          “Maybe.  Roberts took some history courses in college and is shrewd enough to foresee Clio’s ultimate verdict.”

A          “By my simple way of thinking, a constitutional right is either a constitutional right or it is not a constitutional right.  Marriage neutrality is a right.”

B          “What is gestating will be revealing.” 

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled The Conservative Solution To Affirmative Action (October 15, 2012), The Supreme Court – Unrepresentative and Illegitimate: The 33.3 Percent Solution (October 1, 2012) and September 17 – Constitution Day (September 19, 2011) and the “e-ssay” titled “Strict Construction” Strictly Construed (March 14, 2005) discussing Loving v. Virginia (1967) where the Supreme Court in an unanimous opinion affirmed the right to marry as a fundamental constitutional freedom.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Marriage – the fundamental Constitutional right of every person to be miserable

Marriage = one consenting adult and one consenting adult

Marriage Neutrality – the government stays out of the picture and away from the altar

“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.  As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times.  We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

Thomas Jefferson (engraved on the Jefferson Memorial)

Women: 2; Men: 3; Boys: 4 – A winning combination

Men In Pink: Today’s Sensitive New SWAT Togs (August 20, 2012)

Posted in Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Crime/Punishment, Pogo Plight, Privacy, Society on August 20, 2012 by e-ssay.org

. . .

C1          “Conventions will soon convene in the fashion capitals of Charlotte and Tampa.  Rather than adorning the security and SWAT teams in Darth Vader storm trooper assault gear, they should sport pink outfits.”

C2          “The same level of personal protection without the swagger.  The attire is part of a negative attitude and a threat to those citizens they . . .  serve and protect.”

C1          “The Darth Vader togs are part of the in-kind payment in lieu of higher wages or more leave.”

C2          “Yet they don’t act any kinder in practice.”

C1          “The black gear does not blend into the landscape.  Look around, we are becoming a society of cops and cameras.  And while you are looking around, some camera is recording your retinal image.”

C2          “And rather than beating their breasts or ours, they can show support for those seeking a cure to breast cancer.”

. . .

C_          “Some of the police types ensconced in black Kevlar carapaces are sympathetic types just trying to get through the day.”

. . .

[C1 = Citizen 1; C2 = . . . ]

[See the “e-ssay” titled Occupy America: The “Bonus March/Chicago Police Riot/Kent State” Of 2011? (October 17, 2011).]

Bumper sticker of the week:

Fight more, smile less

Why Johnny And Roger? (April 30, 2012)

Posted in Citizens United Decision, Courts, Crime/Punishment, Judges, Perjury, Song Reference, Supreme Court on April 30, 2012 by e-ssay.org

. . .

1          “And not Jon and Lloyd.”

2          “Because the American legal system is fundamentally corrupt?  Is that the answer.”

1          “The jury selection in the Roger Clemens retrial began a fortnight ago.  Because it was in federal district court, no cameras are allowed in the court room.”

2          “Better to keep everything as hidden from the public eye as possible.”

1          “Roger may have lied under oath, but it is a noble American pursuit pursued by Supreme Court nominees who appear before the Senate.”

2          “The Supreme Court Justices who hurl balls and strikes rather than call balls and strikes.”

1          “Johnny Reid Edwards may have played some games with campaign contributions, but the Five Lobbyists on the Supreme Court basically decreed that anything goes in the campaign arena.”

2          “And Johnny is indicted and Jonny Corzine is running free.”

1          “And Lloyd Blankfein continues to inflict violence on the world.”

2          “And now we learn again that Justice Department officials who were aware that flawed forensic work may have contributed to the convictions of potentially innocent individuals fetched another cup of coffee and counted the days until their retirement.”

1          “Are courts expected to exhibit a modicum of integrity or at some point are they illegitimate.”

. . .

[See http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/convicted-defendants-left-uninformed-of-forensic-flaws-found-by-justice-dept/2012/04/16/gIQAWTcgMT_story.html]

[See the “e-ssays” titled “Perjury, The American Way (February 20, 2006),” “Balls and Strikes and Perjury: America’s Pastimes (August 23, 2010),” and “Losing Faith: MF Global and Kodak (January 9, 2012).”]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Prosecute the prosecutors; prosecute the judges

“Through this world I’ve wandered I’ve seen lots of funny men / Some rob you with a six-gun, and some with a fountain pen.”

“The Ballad of Pretty Boy Floyd” by Woody Guthrie (c) 1958 (renewed) Woody Guthrie Publications, Inc.

At War With The First Amendment (February 27, 2012)

Posted in Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Congress, Constitution, Courts, Crime/Punishment, First Amendment, Judges, Less Government Regulation Series, Military, Supreme Court on February 27, 2012 by e-ssay.org

. . .

O          “Some guys who spent their days folding diapers at Fort Dix are proclaiming that they single-handedly won World War II.”

P          “And good old Congress comes to the rescue and imposes some more government regulations.  Congress again dictated that the government must decide and provided for more buffoons to be sent to prison at my expense.  The issue is so clear and simple.  We could agree to direct the government to make bumbling efforts to criminalize the goonery or we could vest individuals with the responsibility to determine the truth.”

O          “The Stolen Valor Act of 2005 is a misnomer.  Those in the service fought valorously for the First Amendment of 1791 not some shallow rah-rah legislation.  Curious that the government and business are in business to lie, yet we want the government to come in and prosecute someone who is not telling the truth and then deny that person his or her liberty.”

P          “The government already fulfills its role without the additional legislation and imposition on our First Amendment guarantees.  Look at the Department of Defense Form DD 214 prepared at government expense that provides the actual information about a person’s military service and awards.  The Court should take notice of the fact that little is private today particularly one’s military service from his or her first day as a private.  Perhaps the government could expunge the social security numbers and publish all DD 214s upon retirement.”

O          “Most of these scoundrels and fools are insecure and desperate but not criminal.  What if the Court simply issued a two word decision:  ‘First Amendment.’”

. . .

Bumper stickers of the week:

First Amendment Rules

The Stolen Valor Act – steals honor and denies rights

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.