http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/05/video-of-swat-raid-on-missouri
Thrill to a home invasion by SWAT troops, where they find enough pot for a *misdemeanor** charge. Enjoy the sound of a single gunshot followed by the screams of pain of a *dog,* which lasts for 15 seconds until three more shots ring out to silence it.
And glory in the knowledge that this was done in full view of the seven year old.
Sigh.
A guy can comfortably hold two seemingly contradictory views that:
1) Smoking pot is a silly, unwise thing to do
2) Making pot illegal goes far beyond silly and unwise.
What people do with and to themselves is their own damned business. If you storm someone’s home and shoot their pets, you’d better have one *hell* of a story to back it up. And finding a baggie of a *weed* somewhere on the property just ain’t sufficient, Officer.
The inevitable result of making illegal things that hurt nobody and people have enjoyed for millenia… is this sort of thing. A bunch of whiny leftists are rioting and screaming about Arizona’s law that has cops ask criminal suspects if they are here legally, when they should be after *this.* But since the best way to curb the abuse of police power is to curb the size and scope of government… I guess they’re just not interested.
10 Responses to “Done in your name”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I’m sorry,but I have to go with some of the conspiracy theorists and
think that we are already in a police state.Why? because just recently
I was pulled over by a cop who told the judge that I did not have a seat belt on when I did,in fact called me a liar and told the judge I used profanity which
I did not because I was just mad at why he accused me of not having a
seat belt on and then the judge went right along with him and now I have
to pay the seat belt fine including the court cost as well which they had
everybody do anyway but I remember when I was younger they did not make you pay the court fee if you wanted to fight a ticket. I personally think that the system is getting more warped all the time. Let’s rewrite
the preamble “For the government,by the government”
Also too the government keeps track of what you look at on Google if
you haven’t already heard that one too. Isn’t that nice?
I forgot to mention that I had to unclasp the belt to get to my insurance
cards in the glove compartment but still had the belt over my shoulder when he came to the car.
Stuff like this is why California is looking to legalize MJ, not to mention of course the rather large sums that will come from taxiation 🙂
Prohabition has NEVER worked in any form and we REALLY should have learned that by now.
Randy
Speaking of police state, did anyone catch how Obama called in a SWAT team… oh, excuse me, cops in riot gear… on a Tea Party in Quincy, IL
This article is extremely disparaging of the Tea Partiers, but even it agrees on the facts
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/04/the_myth_of_the_anti-tea_party.html
The actual video of the police is quite a bit more disturbing, simply because a) they are actually present and b) they clearly do not have to be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltjni1LoC30&feature=related
Will Internal Affairs investigate the use of Lethal Force that resulted in the mortal wounding of the dog? A SWAT officer is armored so how can the SWAT officer justify that he felt his life was in danger from the dog?
‘Oh, it’s just a dog, who cares.’
Let’s see, the DoJ and FBI have shown direct linkages between the intentional wounding and killing of pets and animals that are no threat to you and those who go on to commit everything from assault up to serial killings. So how did this kind of person pass the psychological exam to not only be a police officer but further tests to go on to SWAT?
Obvious, to be a police officer and a SWAT member one must be able to kill pets. Killing pets is a great way to intimidate.
> A SWAT officer is armored so how can the SWAT officer justify that he felt his life was in danger from the dog?
One of the dogs was a *corgi.* Them things are killers.
This is why when my government asks for tax increases for the police I always vote “No”. Minimum Oversight + Maximum Authority = Abuse.
I’m sorry officers but the Internet now makes it easy to document for the World your screw-ups and allows others to comment on them: http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/14/more-militarized-than-the-mili