Government

George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020

The Biden administration introduced legislation that redefines deadly force to include “multiple discharges of an electronic control weapon.” That’s right- more than one discharge of a Taser is the same as a gunshot. It goes on to prohibit police from investigating other cops for use of deadly force. It grants to the US government the power to set universal standards that all US police agencies must adhere to- including standards on use of force, traffic and pedestrian stop policies, and even controls hiring and recruitment, dictating that police departments must engage in the “hiring and recruitment of diverse law enforcement officers who are representative of the communities they serve.”

That same law prohibits arrests in schools, dictating “restorative justice” practices instead of arrests. This will make our schools even worse than they already are.

The law defines “less lethal force” to include even pointing a gun at someone, and then prohibits the use of that force unless all reasonable alternatives have been exhausted.

The law goes on to prohibit the Federal government from giving firearms, ammo, silencers, vehicles, acoustic equipment, aircraft, drones, and other equipment to police.

It spells out that people must be notified when a body camera is recording and they then have the right to refuse being recorded.

The law goes on and on. In other words, the police will be effectively neutered.

Except that the law does not apply to Military Police, the US Army Criminal Investigation Command, or to Federal Protective Details. Go figure.

By Divemedic, ago

Lynch mobs

Andrew Branca talks about the intimidation of the jury in the Chauvin trial, and he made some points that struck a chord with me. First, let me start with the relevant quote from the esteemed Mr. Branca:

If it cannot be expected that Chauvin can get any fairer a trial elsewhere in Minnesota than he can in the rage-mob surrounded Hennepin County Courthouse, the solution consistent with the “justice” any of us would want for ourselves or anyone we care about is not to compel him to endure an unfair trial where he is.

That is the point- if a person who is accused of a crime cannot receive a fair and impartial trial under the law, then the law has become nothing more than a codified lynch mob, and we can forget about calling our legal system a “justice system” because there will be no justice of any kind to be had.

The whole point of a trial is that the evidence is heard- both for and against- and then a jury decides whether or not the person is guilty of a crime. If we are to decide that a person is to be punished before the trial is even held, thereby making the trial a mere formality, then why bother with the trial at all?

Is that really what people, especially black people, in this country want? Are we to return to the days of lynch mobs? I fear for the times, the trials, and the tribulations to come. We are truly seeing the end of this republic, of very civilization itself, at least on the North American continent.

What comes next will be horrific.

By Divemedic, ago

Killing the rental market

There is a nationwide eviction moratorium. There is a push to eliminate security deposits. It sounds great, but now the landlord has to file a claim for any damages done to the property by the tenant. This increases costs and risk to the landlord.

Now the newest thing is laws that prohibit credit checks, using a prospective tenant’s rental and credit history in making application decisions, and makes the risks of being a landlord too great for most small businesses.

I know that my wife and I have decided that if this sort of thing comes to pass, the amount that we would have to increase rent to compensate for the added risk would price our rental out of the market. This means that we would no longer be making enough money to make up for the higher risk that this would entail. For that reason, we would likely not renew tenants’ leases, clean the properties up, and then sell them. I don’t think that we would be alone in that.

It’s like the left is deliberately destroying the country.

By Divemedic, ago

Destroying the police

The left has to destroy local and state police so that they can replace them with Federal police. They need centralized control so that they can consolidate power into one location.

So they advocate for “fixing toxic police” and “unbundling” police departments. The more they do that, the more crime and lawlessness. Once that happens, people will clamor for the Federal government to step in and “fix” the problem.

By Divemedic, ago

China Building Supercarrier

China’s new aircraft carrier will be as large as the Ford class, will have electromagnetic catapults, and will thus be able to operate large, first class aircraft and AEW aircraft.

This ship is for power projection, and China will have four aircraft carriers by the end of next year. The US Navy only has 5 carriers in the Pacific fleet.

The USA is busy focusing on using the military against its own citizens and in diversity. The Russians and Chinese are about to make the US irrelevant.

By Divemedic, ago

Federalizing the police

Try to find any information about the number of National Guard troops currently deployed in Washington, DC to guard the capitol. The information was there yesterday. It doesn’t seem to be available today. Almost like we are not permitted to know. The last I saw, it was 2,500 troops authorized until at least May 23. The Capitol is fenced off like this:

Nancy Pelosi has selected the commanding General of the Washington, DC National Guard as the Sergeant at Arms, or head of security for the Capitol. The Military is now in charge of Capitol Security. (Of course, Pelosi is claiming that she would have fought off the attackers in hand to hand combat. Big talk from a woman who fled with her armed secret service detail.) The Capitol will be a walled fortress, staffed by armed troops, just like this famous building:

I also would like to know how the Vice-President was giving orders to the Army, seeing as how he isn’t in their chain of command. Doesn’t seem to me that his orders would be lawful ones.

The National Guard troops in the Capitol have formed a QRF, which they recently deployed. Note in the picture below that the QRF has no firearms, and there are no armor panels in their plate carriers. At least three of the eight members of this squad have mags in the ammo pouches. Does this mean that they are only armed with riot gear for this specific mission, but have the option of firearms?

Meanwhile, the US military is busy purging itself of anyone who is remotely Republican or has Conservative leanings. This, coupled with a push to call all police forces tools of racist oppression, makes me believe that we are seeing the pieces being put in place for a national police force. This is typical of communist takeovers- the personnel for the national police force comes from pro-Communist forces. That’s right- BLM and Antifa will likely be the core of this new police force, if history is any guide. In fact, documents leaked in 2016 show that George Soros was planning exactly that, and has been funding BLM to achieve this goal. Barak Obama himself advocated for the Federalization of the nation’s police in 2011.

The Hill has been calling for that since last July– the Federalization of all local police. The Republic would have finally become the Empire.

By Divemedic, ago

SNL and Chauvin

If you watch the SNL open about the Chauvin trial, they are setting the stage for riots to follow the acquittal of Chauvin. They are already laying the groundwork to permit the riots that we all know would follow a not guilty verdict.

You see, all right thinking people are supposed to know that Chauvin is guilty, and the only reason for an acquittal is that the entire system is corrupt. It couldn’t be because the jury saw all of the evidence and decided that the state had not met its burden of proof. Nope, it has to be racism.

Make no mistake- Chauvin will eventually go to jail, even if the Feds have to get him for some charge that dodges double jeopardy, but that will be after the politicians get the riots that they are looking for.

By Divemedic, ago

I disagree

It seems that a cop in Minnesota couldn’t tell the difference between her Taser and a pistol. Says CNBC contributor and attorney David Henderson: “I think that if officers can’t tell the difference between firearms and tasers, we need to re-evaluate whether or not they need to be carrying tasers.”

I disagree. If police officers can’t tell the difference between firearms and tasers, I don’t think that they should carry firearms. They are supposed to know the difference. Perhaps we could try Sheriff Taylor’s solution:

By Divemedic, ago