Why do conservatives hate government but blindly trust the police?

      26 Comments on Why do conservatives hate government but blindly trust the police?

I was delighted yesterday to see Glenn Reynolds linking to libertarian writer Radley Balko’s Reason article about the Cambridge kerfuffle (a.k.a. Gates-gate).

Balko shifts the focus away from race, which is really a sideshow in this particular case, to where it rightfully belongs: police abuse of power. And, while acknowledging that Gates seems to have acted boorishly, Balko criticizes Crowley for arresting him when, by all accounts, the only “crime” Gates committed is the non-crime of “contempt of cop.”

Balko also lambastes many conservatives for the “instinctively authoritarian tack” they have taken in response to this and other confrontations between cops and citizens. This is something that desperately needed to be said, and Balko says it well.

Excerpt:

[I]t now seems clear that Gates mistakenly presumed that Crowley had racially profiled him, and hurled a barrage of invective at Crowley in response. … [But] [t]he conversation we ought to be having in response to the July 16 incident and its heated aftermath isn’t about race, it’s about police arrest powers, and the right to criticize armed agents of the government.

By any account of what happened—Gates’, Crowleys’, or some version in between—Gates should never have been arrested. “Contempt of cop,” as it’s sometimes called, isn’t a crime. Or at least it shouldn’t be. It may be impolite, but mouthing off to police is protected speech, all the more so if your anger and insults are related to a perceived violation of your rights. The “disorderly conduct” charge for which Gates was arrested was intended to prevent riots, not to prevent cops from enduring insults. Crowley is owed an apology for being portrayed as a racist, but he ought to be disciplined for making a wrongful arrest.

He won’t be, of course. And that’s ultimately the scandal that will endure long after the political furor dies down. The power to forcibly detain a citizen is an extraordinary one. It’s taken far too lightly, and is too often abused. And that abuse certainly occurs against black people, but not only against black people. American cops seem to have increasingly little tolerance for people who talk back, even merely to inquire about their rights. …

If there’s a teachable moment to extract from Gates’ arrest, it’s that arrest powers should be limited to actual crimes. Instead, the emerging lesson seems to be that you should capitulate to police, all the time, right or wrong. That’s unfortunate, because there are plenty of instances where you shouldn’t.

Much more after the jump, including some well-deserved link love for Carlos Miller’s blog.

Continue reading →

Here we go loop-d-loop

      2 Comments on Here we go loop-d-loop

So, mostly just a bit of a straw poll. What do people think of modern Roundabouts?

Read this for more about such things first.

I’m inclined to think that, overall, they are good for car traffic. For cyclists, I think they pose a potential problem. Mostly though for novice cyclists I don’t think they would much phase an experienced rider. Who would more or less “act like a car” going through the thing.

For pedestrians though, I think they do pose a problem. The problem is two fold. But mostly it is vehicle drivers that pose the problem. Drivers don’t like roundabouts because they need to think to get through them and drivers like not thinking. Drivers also tend to completely ignore the legal fact that pedestrians have the right of way. So drivers don’t think about the fact that they are supposed to yield to pedestrians. Traffic signals force drivers to yield to pedestrians. Roundabouts do not, the driver must remember to do so, a thing they are legally required to do. The second “fold” is pedestrians are use to drivers not remembering they are supposed to yield to pedestrians and thus pedestrians are very very timid about taking the right of way that is theirs by law. And of course drivers are much less likely to yield to a pedestrian being timid than they are to one being assertive. Unfortunately there is a rather high potential cost to being an assertive pedestrian and a rather low potential cost to a driver failing to yield to a pedestrian. (Death versus needing to go to the car wash. Since as a country we are loath to actually hold people responsible for their actions behind the wheel. Kill someone while driving negligently (say while sending a text message) and you’ll get a ticket probably less than $200. Kill someone accidentally through negligence in almost any other way and you are going to jail for manslaughter.)

So roundabouts are good. But we need to work on more serious enforcement of all traffic laws in conjunction with things like roundabouts. Serious penalties for failing to yield with serious efforts to enforce pedestrian right of way and serious penalties for killing or injuring someone with your car or any other vehicle, be it a bike a motor scooter or a garbage truck.

So what do you think? Roundabouts yes no? General traffic safety and laws too? For some reason the less time I spend driving a car the more interesting these issues become to me.

Rickey & Nolan

      Comments Off on Rickey & Nolan

Rickey Henderson’s induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame got me thinking — as any mention of Rickey Henderson always does — of May 1, 1991, when Henderson’s record-breaking 939th stolen base was completely and utterly overshadowed a few hours later by Nolan Ryan’s incredible seventh career no-hitter.

I distinctly remember feeling, I suppose somewhat uncharitably, that Henderson deserved to have his big moment stolen in such a fashion, as karmic retribution for his blatant lack of humility in declaring that “today, I am the greatest of all time” after surpassing Lou Brock. Heh.

Anyway, here’s a video of Nolan’s no-no, including a complete replay of the entire 9th inning. The commentators make no mention of Rickey’s record earlier that day, but for me, the two events will always be inextricably linked. May 1, 1991 was definitely one of the most memorable baseball-watching days of my youth, right up there with the last day of the 1990 season, when Tom Brunansky’s diving catch clinched the AL East for the Red Sox, and the day of Game 7 of the 1992 NLCS, when we all learned the name Francisco Cabrera. (Link NSFPF — Not Safe For Pirates Fans.)

P.S. I freakin’ love Sean McDonough. “Hooking toward the corner, BRUNANSKY!!!” … “SAAAAFE!!! SAFE AT THE PLATE!!!” … Also, from the 1991 World Series, Game 3, Mark Lemke’s 12th-inning winner: “Here comes Justice… SAAFE!!! AND ATLANTA WINS IT!” … And of course, from 1993, the one everybody remembers: “Way back and… GONE!!!!!!“

One last time

      10 Comments on One last time

So long, Governor Palin. Your supporters will miss you — as will your detractors. For instance, I’ll miss having the opportunity to randomly post this graphic:

putinrearshishead

But alas! I understand: you don’t want the “title” of governor to interfere with the important work of using dishonest, propagandistic nonsense to inflame the ignorant masses. That would be “politics as usual”! After all, politicians usually view their positions as “offices,” not mere “titles,” and feel obligated to fulfill the tasks they were elected to do. Silly politicians! You’re so beyond that. The elite liberal media just doesn’t understand. Of course they don’t: they’re hell bent on tearing down our nation, don’t ya know!

But I get it. You’re a maverick!! And a maverick’s gotta do what a maverick’s gotta do. So now we must say farewell. Parting is such sweet sorrow. Have fun doing whatever it is that you’re planning on doing — passing the ball for victory, and whatnot, and also too, you betcha, and so forth. Thanks for the memories, Sarah. And please, keep an eye on Putin’s head for us!