Ken Nelson

I regularly compete with three policemen that are excellent shots.  Three out of about 300 in our county (including city, county, and state and federal personnel).

On occasion I see other police shooting, most recently at an all police match.  And it wasn’t pretty. They were better than the public, but not as good as they need to be considering they tote a gun every day.

A couple of days ago police in San Francisco opened up on a person with a weapon, missing him and shooting two by-standers.

Now, I’m sure San Francisco gives their officers minimal training in accurate shooting and gunfight decision making.  And I’m sure they don’t hire with marksmanship as an important, or even considered, criteria (race and sex probably being foremost concerns).  And it is also true that most police officers never fire their gun in the line of duty.

But they carry a pistol every day. Some departments even require they carry off duty.  And should they need to use it, they need to be able to use it effectively and safely for those walking about innocently.

If you are a police officer and you aren’t happy with the training you’ve gotten from your department, it is incumbent on YOU to improve yourself.  It may cost some money, but hey, maybe your weapons sergeant can kick you some ammo.  And you should train and compete.  USPSA, IDPA, PPC, whatever. Get your heart rate up, and try to shoot and make decisions under pressure.  Someday your family, or an innocent by-stander might thank you.

Update: There have been 29 ‘unplanned’ shootings since 2005 at the SFPD.

Hooking up a guy for messing around? Silly. It isn’t something I’d do, but it shouldn’t be a crime.

Canada is “liberal” but only in pretend.  Ask Mark Steyn.

Source: Internet

Stories like this one: (via Instapundit)

In Michigan, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a complaint alleging that Michigan State Police officers used forensic cellphone analyzers to snoop in drivers’ cellphones during routine traffic stops.

make me wonder if police have become a bigger threat than the crimes they enforce?

Add their pension costs and political clout to the equation and it seems pretty risky to normal folk to have this many police, with this many laws to choose from when harrassing us.

On my recent drive to NC my van was stopped by an Arkansas State Trooper. He had no reason to stop us, he didn’t claim we were speeding. He just wanted to see if “we were ok”.  He then proceeded to separate the adults, question us, and without permission inspect the interior of our van, asking about guns and other items we might be carrying.

I’ll assume you are a law abiding citizen. Do police help you? Or prey on you?  When you were a victim of crime, did they solve it, prevent it, or simply take a report on it?   When you see a police car in the mirror, do you feel heartened or alarmed that they will use you as the city, county or states personal checkbook?

As I drove home from the dump two days back a local police car got in behind me. I could see he was looking for reasons to pull me over. Me, with a new, and nice truck, a nicely walled in trailer, a model of a hard working honest citizen….. but to him I was just a target, something to hunt. He moved on, nothing to get here, but I’m sure he ruined a few days before he was done with his shift.

My brother will say that is a St. George thing. But I hit it in Arkansas.  And the link above is from Michigan.  Perhaps his department doesn’t do this, but it seems they are way out of the norm. And in actuality they do, as we’ve both seen his departments traffic units running amok on honest citizens.

We need less laws, less police, less spending on police, and a less militarized police.

But most of all our police need to be aimed at criminals, not at us.

I suspect most Americans, at least those who aren’t Volvo driving NPR listeners that haven’t been a crime victim, rebel against the idea of a resort prison like the video above shows.

And I do think it a bit far to include a chainsaw ax murderer in “the fun” -  and even to give him a chainsaw.

But I know that prison, in the US,  really is a school for criminals. They forge their criminality for years, and set it, usually for life.

My main concerns about prisons in the US are ( in no particular order):

• too many of them
• prison guard expense and pensions
• criminal havens
• inmates commit crimes when released

I’ve been a victim of crime in recent years, my truck, trailer and ATVs were stolen.  They perpetrators were never caught.  Nor were any attempts to catch them made. It seems likely that they were caught on some other offense and imprisoned a short while and released to break the law again.

So what would I do to reduce crime? 

I assume that an “enlightened” approach as in the video wouldn’t work here generally. We have too many different kinds of people in this country, and too hardened a criminal base. We have freedoms to abuse, and I’d make the abuse of them very expensive.

The first thing is to reduce the number of laws. Particularly drug laws. It should not be a crime to harm yourself, which is what drug users do.  I know there are societal effects from drug use, but it seems clear  we suffer from those now AND from a police state built around trying to enforce drug laws few seem to obey.

Next, I would punish property crimes very severely. Car theft, home burglary, what we might now call “petty” crime, but which imposes a heavy burden on us with locks, alarm systems and other “taxes”.  I’d punish these about like murder now.  Lock you up, see you.  The prisons for non-violent offenders might be like the one in the video, or similar. It might be an island. Or a Joe Arpaio style stockade.  They could earn their way out of it by showing responsibility and learning a skill in a few years.

If they fail, they go to lockup for a LONG time.   Model it like many religions use earth.  Live, be tested, pay for eternity.

Finally, I would kill a lot of people. For instance, aggravated rape and sexual assaults, murderer, molestation, and similar crimes would receive death.  Quickly.

Could or would this be abused?  Of course, so we would need a control super-majority control over what kind of crime could receive death. For instance, I know many NPR listeners would make sting video reporting punishable by death.  As a useful guideline, I’d suggest if it wasn’t illegal 100 years ago, it isn’t a good candidate.

My hope is to reduce the number of prisons, and the number of prison guards, but mostly the number of worthless citizens that prey on us.

What we are doing now doesn’t work and costs a lot. It’s time to re-consider our ENTIRE approach to law and order in this country.

=   

South Carolina views drivers as portable wallets they can pick as they choose.

I don’t know why people put up with this crap.  I guess because they isolate you and have guns. 

Our police department, in St. George, UT, spends an inordinate amount of effort on raising money through traffic enforcement.

And an inordinately small amount of time actually preventing crime.

They are led by an uncreative chief who never met a politically correct police technique he didn’t want to try.   They prey on a compliant population that is naïve enough to believe it when the cops tell them they are ticketing all these people for safety reasons.

Yet, as I’ve shown in the past, although our population changes significantly in the summer versus winter, our police ticket issuance hangs right in there, no matter how many drivers are about:

May 1235
June 1201
July 1168
Aug 1163

No…. I don’t think it is about safety. It’s all about the greenbacks.

What list?  The list of things people put up with that I can’t understand why…

NYPD stopped and FRISKED 600,000 people LAST YEAR.

The Gawker highlights that only 7% were actually guilty of something (carrying a weapon or drugs or some other illegal thing).  But it could have been 100% and I’d still be troubled…  when we can’t move around without being subject to search, how free are we?

Remember… once they can frisk you for no reason, they will just make more things illegal until they own your time.

For any reason. What the hell is up with this country?

Commenter DE pointed out a video that I think is pretty handy in the comment threads on my last post on this. I’m bumping it up higher.

The important thing to take away is that when police ask if they can search for something they ARE NOT THERE TO HELP YOU.

Hint: He’s not there to help you

My brother, a cop for 20+ years, offers advice on how to talk to cops that have stopped you for  a traffic violation:

They are going to ask you several questions designed to get you to make incriminating statements. These are trick questions. Your complete and total honesty will be used against you if you decide to fight the ticket. For example, they will walk up and ask you “ Do you know why I stopped you?” Your instinct will be to admit what you think you might have done, in the hopes your acknowledging it will lead him to let you off with a warning. Remember, these are trick questions. if you say “Well, I might have been going over the speed limit.”, he will note your admission. When you fight it in court he will quickly let the judge know that you admitted at the time that you were speeding.

Read the whole thing. It could save you money and aggravation.

I find the whole theme depressing though… it pains me that we put up with what amounts to roadway extortion from our police.  I don’t think traffic stops save lives and do anything other than raise money for government.

Given local and state finances, I expect them to look to cops to become fund raisers even more going forward.

Report your neighbors!

Obama’s lawyers say it is okay for the government to put a GPS tracker on my car and track my travels without a warrant. They claim I have no privacy in public:

The administration, in urging the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to reverse a three-judge panel’s August ruling from the same court, said Monday that Americans should expect no privacy while in public.

So, again, I’m confused about this “Constitution” thing. I have the “right” to kill a baby. But I have no right to most of my paycheck. And being tracked constantly by the government is perfectly fine. These liberals sure are weird thinking.

I don’t mind if a government agent looks at me in public and make fun of my clothes. But tracking my travels isn’t “public” that is scrutiny and it shouldn’t be legal without a warrant with probable cause.

But Ken… wouldn’t you support tracking Muslims? Well, sure, if they aren’t citizens, or if citizens then they have given a judge good reason to authorize such tracking.

This is another example of where the War on Drugs is really a War on our Rights. Time to end both.

 
Guns should be well concealed and secure.
Read Gun Digest book of Concealed Carry by Massood Ayoob for tips

Erik Scott, a 38 year old concealed weapon holder was killed by police in Las Vegas outside a Costco.  He had been seen carrying a gun in Costco. Was asked to leave. Refused. Costco called the police, who confronted him as he left. Reports vary at that point, but police claim he reached for his pistol. And he was shot and killed.

By all accounts Mr. Scott was a great American. His unfortunate death does highlight the risk of taking on the responsibility of carrying a weapon.

I hold a CCW permit and carry every day. Until Nevada stopped accepting Utah licenses, I carried in Las Vegas frequently.

My thoughts on this unfortunate event:

a) Costco handled this wrong
b) the police handled this wrong
c) but mostly, Mr. Scott handled this wrong.

Of the three, I’d say Mr. Scott is mostly to blame. As much as I want to support a fellow gun owner, fellow former Army officer, and by all accounts a great guy, he just did not handle the responsibility of gun carrying well on that day.

At least not based on the reports I’ve read.

He should have carried his gun in a more concealable fashion. He should have left when Costco asked him too – after all they have property rights.  And he should have followed police instructions precisely.

Now maybe they shot him with his arms up. Maybe the police are lying. That does happen (a lot).  But maybe they aren’t. We don’t know yet.  But what we do know is this…  he should have just left when instructed. It never should have gotten to the point where a line of police were aiming guns at him.   He had that responsibility, to himself, to his family, to the police, the public, and to fellow CCW holders.

I’ve got plenty to be irritated at police about, but them being jumpy about a guy with a gun not following their instructions is low on that list. If he had behaved responsibly, it wouldn’t have escalated.

I carry every day, and nobody knows it as I walk around. I keep it that way. But if a property owner does notice, and they ask me to leave, I will.  That’s just the way it is. I have my rights, they have theirs. We honor and support both.

The real problem

You wouldn’t know it from the main stream press, but the United States doesn’t supply 90% of the guns Mexicans use in crimes. It supplies 90% of the guns they can TRACK the origins of:

OF COURSE AMERICA IS THE ONLY ONE WHO APPEARS IN THE PAPERWORK YOU BOURGEOIS BOOB! We’re the only ones who keep paperwork! Mexican gangs get their guns from South Korea, China, Spain, Israel, Russia, South America, Guatemala and yes, The Mexican Army. Good luck tracing anything back to any of those groups. When all the untraceable guns are factored into the total, America’s input goes down to a whopping 17%.

My source for the above is an interesting article on the drug war in Taki’s Magazine.  The author describes two ways to end the violence in the Mexican drug trade – legalize drugs or just let them fight it out.  He says we will accept the default of let them fight it out.  I suspect he is right.  But there is another way that he hasn’t considered,  probably because he doesn’t mind drug use.

We could punish drug users. They are, after all, the ones causing the problem. The dealers are just servicing a market, not making it.

For instance, we could require drug testing for a drivers license, including random checks throughout the 5 year validity for the license. We could require drug testing before any benefit from the government.

There are lots of things we could do to not have to fight a drug war. I favor legalization generally, but would gladly accept a mix of legalization of marijuana and aggressive testing for more dangerous drugs.

The default, of continuing to create American police forces that look and act like military forces, and the continuing erosion of rights is something I’d prefer to avoid.

The DEA needs 9 Ebonics translators to help them translate wiretaps of southeastern African American drug criminals.

Some worry this somehow legitimizes Ebonics, but it doesn’t.

When I was last in Atlanta I encountered Ebonics. A helpful rental car employee gave us instructions but I had NO IDEA what he said. I claimed I couldn’t hear him due to a car going by and asked him to repeat. After three times I sorted out I should head “that way”, but knew none of the details.  He was trying to be helpful, but alas I wasn’t “hip” enough to understand him. I’m usually better with actual foreigners because they are actually trying to speak English, but poorly. Ebonics is English minus the understandable parts.

 
Poster child for urban decay
Image via www.builtstlouis.com an interesting site worthy of a visit

East St. Louis is in the news these days because they are laying off 19 police officers (out of 62).

Drudge responds with:

But why would criminals run wild?  Police don’t usually prevent crime, they respond to it. Arrests can prevent crime, if the criminals are kept locked up.   But just having police out and about in relatively small numbers (sector car for instance), doesn’t.  If St. George didn’t have police on the streets pentyanty money raising traffic tickets would drop but crime would’t rise.

So what is different in East St. Louis?  Primarily culture and government.

One big difference…the town has mostly black residents. St. George is mostly white. For some reason, black folks seem to commit more crime than white folks do, especially when congregated together. Facts are facts.  There are lots of theories on root causes of black crime rates.  But large populations of blacks didn’t have higher crime rates always. The trend seems to be related to the “war on drugs” and the decline of black males as involved Dads.  It is related to culture not race. A failed culture, I’d submit, that has high percentages of its men in prison, and higher percentages of its woman bearing children without male involvement or support.

What else is different?  Democrats run the East St. Louis. Republicans run St. George.  East St. Louis. Googling East St. Louis corruption finds plenty of hits. St. George, none (except for hits on application page for the police force banning corruption).

Those same Democrats also banned handguns in East St. Louis.  So that now that they have run the city’s finances into the ground and severely hampered police coverage, they’ve also left their citizens defenseless.

I’m sure there are other issues, such as St. George treats business well (except for brazenly high electricity rates), and East St. Louis views them as things to plunder.   But at the core, I think culture and governance sums up how East St. Louis has gone astray.

Well done East St. Louis!   You’ve provided a model of WHAT NOT TO DO.  Alas, I fear many cities with similar cultural demographics and management will be in the news for similar reasons in months to come.

Please send money

RedLight cameras…. about the money honey.

Shah’s analyzed Illinois Department of Transportation data obtained by the Chicago Tribune which showed that although accidents dropped seven percent at intersections citywide, fifty camera-monitored intersections saw a five-percent increase in accidents. The city used its own, much narrower dataset to claim a significant decrease in accidents. The city only had ten usable intersections and defined "accident" in a way that limits reporting of rear end collisions that take place farther from the intersection. Shah recrunched the numbers and found a net safety benefit of just 1.5 percent.

The other lesson… you can’t trust politician delivered statistics.