Comments

Episode-1479- Listener Feedback or 12-8-14 — 38 Comments

  1. Jack, I have to disagree that charges couldn’t/shouldn’t be brought against the officer in the Eric Garner case. You talked about the difference in holds that are allowed, but how the NYPD defines the difference between a vascular hold and a choke hold is the placement of crux of the elbow. The allowable vascular hold by definition places the crux of the elbow in front of the larynx restricting the blood flow to the brain without restricting oxygen flow. If you look at the video or any of the still shots from the video you plainly see the officers forearm is on his larynx (even if he didn’t “crush” it). Also, according to the medical examiner’s report Eric died from compression of his neck and chest. The officer by definition did NOT use a vascular hold.

    • Nope sorry and you know I WANT TO BE WRONG ABOUT THIS RIGHT?

      1. The corner’s report showed no as in zero trauma to the wind pipe.

      2. The grand jury is NOT charged with judging protocol and procedure strictly with was a crime committed.

      You can’t just look at that video and say, oh he had compression on the throat. The fact that Eric can be heard saying “I can’t breathe” actually proves he didn’t.

      You can debate what should be all you want here but under NY Law, there was no crime committed. Trust me when I say, I tried in every way to logically prove otherwise and upon review of the entirety of the evidence, could not.

    • Yeah I’d love to get some info here as well.

      Don’t have anyone to travel with. Looking to find some TSP friends.

  2. Response for the Prepper Scenario:
    Since the perp is still alive, I would keep my gun trained on him and would not render aid since I am alone and don’t know if he may have a hidden weapon, etc.
    Once I am on the phone with 911, I would state that I was in fear for my life and shot an intruder. He is still alive and needs immediate medical attention. I would alert the operator that I still hd my gun, what I looked like and where I was and if possible to put me through to the responding officer so I do not get shot when they arrive.
    After the officers arrive, I will tell them that the intruder broke into my house (and show them where) then came after me and I was afraid for my life so I attempted to stop him. I will point out relevant evidence such as bullet casings, a weapon if the perp had one, etc and state that I will sign a complaint and give a full statement in 24 hours once I’ve had a chance to speak to my lawyer.

  3. I’ve always been one that you shoot until your gun is empty and then run to the neighbors house. Hammer on the door in the best panic you have (it’s likely authentic) and ask to call the police. Tell the police everything, making it clear you were scared to death and was sure he was gonna kill you. (Luckily I live in a state with the castle doctrine so it will likely be academic.)

  4. Prepper scenario: First, I’d be sure the criminal didn’t have an accomplice before I let my guard down. I’d likely have noticed that because I would have known him/they were breaking in, but if I did not reliably observe the entry I’d want to be sure no other bad guy lurked. I’d also make sure no weapon lay by the criminal in case he’s still capable of making a last ditch effort to use it.

    Then, I call 911 and explain a man broke in knowing I was here yelling at him to not enter, that he came at me to harm me, I was in fear of my life and fired to stop the threat. While on the phone (handset has a speaker), I’d be putting my gun back into the locked pistol safe I keep it in. (I’m sure the police would want to retrieve this but I’d rather not be holding it at the time. They can retrieve it themselves.) I’d also snap a couple pictures of the evidence using my tablet’s camera and maybe run the bambuser app to do a quick record of what’s there directly to the cloud storage.

    Assuming it was night, I’d turn on the outside floodlights and main entryway lights so police can see me properly, then stand out on the porch and await them. (It shouldn’t be long; they are 1 mile away.) And my procedure when I exit the house is always have wallet, keys, phone and tablet with me so I’d have that with me too. (Depending on what happens, the police may not let me back to get anything, so I want stuff with me.) When they arrive, I’d be as nonthreatening looking as possible as well as looking like I’m the one expecting them because I called them. I’d tell them just a little, that the criminal did what he did and I was convinced he was going to kill me (mentioning whatever weapon the criminal may have had), would not stop when I told him to stop and I had to fire in fear of my life. I’d say I’m all shook up and prefer not to say anything else without contacting my lawyer. But I would point them to the forced entry point, the route taken to reach me, the body, and the pistol safe.

    It’s also worth noting that I have security cameras all over the place, including one covering the whole front yard. It is not possible to drive up without getting it on video. I do not record audio because it is illegal here to record a criminal who has already broken into your house. This’d confirm the timing of everything and might even capture the shooting depending on what room it happened in. But it also means my story must remain consistent since it could be disproven with the video if I make even the slightest mistake with what I remember. I would not mention the video evidence to them but would retrieve that later once I’ve talked to a lawyer. I’m not sure if the police would notice the existence of cameras on their own or know what to do with it; most people don’t notice even when standing directly in front of a hanging camera under the overhanging porch roof.

  5. Re: Eric Garner autopsy report. I am wondering what your sources are for your conclusions. Also, didn’t the autopsy report conclude it was a homicide.
    Now as to your observations about the grand jury decision – I actually work in criminal defense and I can tell you that grand juries indict all the time (I mean like 100%) on the flimsiest of evidence and even when the elements of the crime are completely missing. The grand juries are basically a rubber stamp for the DA …. unless, it seems, the alleged perpetrator is a cop. So, yes, maybe the Garner grand jury made a correct decision but I promise you, grand juries are never so cautious about the legal details, despite their mandate.
    I want to say one other thing that relates back to some of your comments on Friday. You mentioned in the comment section that you have experienced some slack from police officers as a kid after committing an act or two that had you been arrested, could have ruined your life. I think that is exactly the point the minorities (at least the ones living in poor neighborhoods) are making. They will get busted for the most minor of offenses, with no slack-offenses that others might just get warned about- and it becomes a vicious life-ruining cycle.
    (It is true what Matt Taibbi says: the poor minorities in New York suffer constant harassment and arrest for trifling offenses while the wealthier (not necessarily wealthy) get their coke and mj delivered with their Chinese food with no worries about getting busted. That is not hyperbole – you can order “take out” drugs for delivery in NYC – I know, I’ve done it.)

  6. As an addendum to my previous comment, I will say I totally understand and agree with your point as the bigger picture, i.e., Eric Garner would not be dead if it were not for law making the selling of loosies illegal. But the details are important too. Let’s say a person, who is not a police officer, in self-defense tackled Mr. Garner in the same way the officer . (That is in legitimate self-defense against some aggression by Mr. Garner.) Legal right? I can almost 100% guarantee you that the grand jury would indict in such a scenario.

    • No, no they would not. You first determine was contact reasonable.

      For me or you there would have to be grounds beyond the selling of cigarettes. For the cop the simple order to place him under arrest by a superior was sufficient. So if he assaulted me, then I would have the same reasonable grounds.

      Now the video footage shows that he was restrained for 13 seconds, you do realize that right? I can’t choke you out (wind pipe) in 13 seconds. I am not responsible for your undying health conditions and neither are the police.

      If I sat on the grand jury and a citizen was defending themselves this way I would never vote to try them. If someone is restricting your air pipe you can’t say “I can’t breathe” that is a fact. If you are being placed in vascular restriction you are unconscious in 2-3 seconds, also a fact. Also I bet Lisa you have never experienced a vascular restriction? Let me tell you from experience, that NO you are not talking at all during this.

      The officer had what I would best call a chin lock here. He was not restricting air flow or blood flow.

      Next yes it was ruled a homicide but that was never in dispute. Did the actions of the officer cause Eric Garner’s death? Absolutely, no one dispute that, including the officer. Under NY law that is a “homicide”. If you break in my home and I shoot you that is also ruled a “homicide”. Any death caused by the actions of another human in New York and most any state is a homicide that doesn’t make it a crime.

      I also DO NOT agree that minorities are never the beneficiaries of selective enforcement. Cops do it all the time with every race, sex, religion or creed.

      But let me tell you, when approached and caught if you give an officer shit, you are getting busted, white, black, etc. it doesn’t matter. One of my things as a kid was being caught by the local cop with a six pack of beer under my jacket. I was 17 and I and some friends were going to sit by the local pond and drink some beer in the dark. 4 kids, six beers, not exactly a big deal and typical of the coal region.

      HOWEVER if busted, I would have lost my license to drive. That would have been a huge hardship as I was pretty poor, living alone and paying my own bills and needed a car to work.

      I would honestly smack any man in the face who said, “that man let you go cause you was white”. No he let me go because he wasn’t a dick and neither was I. He said, give me the beer, I said I don’t have any beer, he responded with we can do this the easy way or the hard way, give me the beer and do not make me get out of my car. I said yes sir and gave him the beer. When we were told to “go the fuck home” (exact quote) we said yes sir and while we didn’t go home we did leave his area.

      If I had popped off, refused to give him the beer, etc. I would have been arrested. Period. Black, arrested, white, arrested, hispanic, arrested.

      The truth is black parents especially need to stop teaching their kids to be uncooperative with police in reasonable situations.

      Lastly and this is simply the fact. Once an officer says, you are under arrest and says you are required to submit, you are, end of the story. If you don’t force by law is JUSTIFIED, again BY LAW, not policy, LAW.

      The infraction doesn’t matter. Next when you resist there is a new charge the second you do so. Now resisting is used OFTEN as a trumped up charge but that DID NOT occur here, we saw Garner resit. Resisting with force is considered a serious offense and an officer is considered to be under phyical threat the minute it occurs. And if you did the job for a few weeks you’d understand why.

    • @Lisa this just landed in my in box I was told by the sender that Stefan and I must think a lot alike. I have not seen this yet but I will be Stefan makes a better case for the same conclusion then I do. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jO4YXFz5_ac

      As for your rubber stamp for the DA comment, perhaps because DAs don’t generally take cases like this unless they are political. What I mean is your claim that if this guy would have died in a conflict with me I would be indicted. Likely I would not have even went before a grand jury if the same video existed. A DA would look at that and go, no, not going to get a conviction, I don’t want this on my desk, get rid of it.

      This again assumes I had legal reason for the contact, such as he attacked me. Garner didn’t have to attack the officer though, simply by resisting he gave cause for the use of force.

      Is this tragic? Yes.
      Does it show the state has too much power? Yes.
      Is it a crime under current law? No.

    • “The truth is black parents especially need to stop teaching their kids to be uncooperative with police in reasonable situations. ”

      This is an overly broad statement. There are classes and communities of black Americans in which it is a tradition to gather the families with pre-teen and teenage children and teach them how to interact with the police to reduce their likelihood of arrest and/or physical harm. Plenty of people who don’t take such a formal route give their kids talks about what to do.

      • Yea it isn’t overly broad. It is factual and accurate and states black families in particular which means NOT JUST them. Percentage wise though it is a bigger problem in black communities, anyone denying this is in denial of reality.

  7. I agree on Jack’s distinction between the arrest and subdual of Eric Garner being ‘legal’ yet still not ‘right’. To go off on a bit of a tangent though, I’m re-examining the relative safety of the carotid restraint hold. For the longest time I’ve been accustomed to having the carotid restraint as one of the go-to tools in my self-defense toolbox, as my martial arts instructor told us it’s one of the safer methods of ending a fight PROVIDED you don’t maintain the hold once the person loses consciousness. At least safer in the relative sense, compared to most of the alternatives. So I’m wondering, is this still true? My hunch says that the answer is still ‘yes’, and that unless the officer applied it too hard for too long (seems unlikely at first glance since Garner was still conscious through the hold) or applied it incorrectly, Garner would have still been alive if it weren’t for his pre-existing health issues. But I admit I’ve never had to use the restraint outside of training, so I’m not extremely confident in that assessment.

    One thing that leaves me scratching my head is the NYC Medical Examiner stating the official cause of death to be a result of compression to the neck, compression to the body, and prone positioning, along with asthma, heart disease and obesity as “contributing factors”. This description seems to be at odds with Garner’s bad health being a major factor in his death, in which case shouldn’t it be the other way around with the cardiac arrest being the primary cause and the restraint and compression be the contributing factors? So I ask, is the Medical Examiner’s statement wrong and/or badly worded (whether by accident or intention), or is there something that the police officer was doing in addition to the restraint that was endangering Garner’s health? I SUSPECT the former as they describe him going into cardiac arrest while being transported to the hospital, but that’s just my educated guess.

    • @Nickbert

      First I don’t think there was carotid restraint. In training I have submitted to it just to understand it (along with things about myself), it doesn’t last 13 seconds and you are not talking while it happens.

      I see this as more of a chin lock, looking at the video the crook of the arm is on the chin, pulling upwards. This was a hold, not a choke out.

      As to the cause of death, “the official cause of death to be a result of compression to the neck, compression to the body, and prone positioning, along with asthma, heart disease and obesity as “contributing factors”.”

      That actually makes perfect sense, when someone locks onto your neck, you get some compression. When three people climb on your back you get lots of compression in lots of areas.

      Key is if 99 of 100 people were taken down the way Garner was, they’d not have died and in fact would not even of required medical treatment. I worked briefly as a bouncer in a club right after the army. I had to a few times control really amped up assholes. You do what you have to do if they won’t leave. We used far more force many times to gain control. No one ever needed medical help from it.

      Once they gave up and went out the door they all walked away.

  8. Once the scene is secure (what ever your procedure for that scenario is), call 911. Report there was a burglary and a subsequent shooting. Provide no further information until you have obtained legal counsel. No more no less. Cooperate with the responding officers, but provide nothing that does not pertain to officer safety until you have legal counsel.

  9. If parents decide education for their children, aren’t the children of irresponsible parents going to suffer? I missed out on a lot of opportunities because my parent was not a good resource in terms of educational opportunities. Being a child, I didn’t know better. I can’t imagine that being a good thing on a large scale.

    • I think your picturing a situation that is probably not going to happen. More than likely schooling will legally require a certain amount of credits, and these credits can be fulfilled in certain ways, this will probably extend more and more as we go on, but there will probably still be requirements(this will differ from state to state though). So you can do your math and science in public school, pay a private school for whatever your taking for your humanities and arts credits, then do self study for a computer course, and maybe do a state or certified body issued test or “project” to fulfill your credits.

      I didn’t grow up in the US, though I had a brief experience with a US community college, I feel that the failures of modern education are universal, as many of the things I hear Jack and many others complain about are things I also felt disadvantaged me during my education.

    • See first you are

      1. Worried about people that are not you. Trying to control others.
      2. Assuming the children of irresponsible parents do not already “suffer”
      3. Assuming just because a child goes to a public school they get a good education

      In the end it is a simple question. Do children belong to their parents or do they belong to the state?

      • Additionally if you judged public ed only on graduation rates here are some facts.

        20% of students fail to graduate nation wide.

        Then add this, for kids under the poverty rate only about 66% graduate, that is a 34% failure rate.

        Now let me tell you there are a lot of high school grads that well, I don’t think they should have gotten into high school let alone though it.

        The state doesn’t guarantee a good education, it only guarantees a state education.

  10. I think the prepper scenario was covered pretty decently by everyone else.

    1. Call 911, tell them where you are, what happened, describe yourself and where you are, and tell them the suspect requires medical attention.

    2. Secure the suspect, just make sure he doesn’t have a gun lying around him, do not search his person, as this increases the risk of him attacking you. Just kick any nearby guns or weapons away. You might want to do this before calling 911. It might also be a good idea to take a few pictures of the crime scene, just so that you can make sure everything the police and emergency services use as evidence is not evidence after a disturbance of the crime scene.

    3. When the police and emergency services arrive, it would be best to have your gun holstered, show them were the suspect broke in, where you shot him and where you were standing, and then tell them you’d be happy to answer with them after conferring with legal council, which you might have already contacted(a good idea to have the number of a suitable lawyer saved in your phone or somewhere).

  11. IMO one of your best podcasts ever!
    People are going to continue to voice their opinion about the “black/white” and “death” part of this event but over look that is it just another method of controlling us. This is a great example of what Gov’t does…
    use specific words to distract from the underlying cause.

  12. As for the prepper scenario…
    Once the intrude is shot, move to a door opening form additional protection with your weapon still aimed.
    Call 911 to report “an intruder has broken into my home and gun shots have been fired”.

    Remain in the door way for protection from the intruder and any accomplices until police arrive at the front door.
    At which time holster your weapon and respond to the police office at the door.

    Immediately, inform the office you will not answer any questions until legal counsel arrives.

    Allow police to secure the outside and remaining property.
    Continue to refuse to answer questions until legal counsel arrives on the scene no matter how beligerant they become asking you questions.

    NEVER SAY YOU SHOT ANYONE nor say you fired your weapon.

  13. I would like to clarify some of the comments on social security.

    SSA does not pay an extra “fee” to attorneys. The attorneys are allowed to charge claimants 25% up to $6,000 of their backpay. So if you file a claim and are approved, SSA will calculate your backpay based on when you became eligible. So if you were do 3 back checks totaling $4,000 then the attorney is entitled to $1,000. It’s not based on a total “award,” just 25% of the backpay. Most representative payments are not for the full $6,000.

    The rates of people filing for disability have been going up steadily for various reasons. According to most of the reports, the main reason is that the baby boomers are hitting their most disability prone years and the economy tanked so many of those that lost jobs filed for disability when they couldn’t find work.

    The increase in claims plus the decrease in staffing have caused the SSA’s processing time to increase. Increased processing times mean more people are likely to get an attorney and a larger back payment due when approved, therefore more attorney payments for larger amounts.

    Now I do not dispute that attorney’s and non-attorney reps are scalping claimants. They screen all claimants and only take the claims they are 90% sure would win anyway, they then sign all those folks up knowing they are going to win over 90% of the time. It’s a booming business. Many times they sign up marginal claimants that are early in the process where not much is needed on their part and then drop the claimant when it comes time to go before the administrative law judge because that takes more work.

    On the non-attorney rep thing. Jack’s explanation is a little bit off. He’s right that these attorneys can hire cheap help to sign folks up and submit tons of claims under the attorney’s name but this has always been the case. The non-attorney rep issue that the article refers to is SSA made the decision to let anyone who passes their test to represent claimants before SSA without being under an attorney at all. In other words, if you decide you want to get into the business of representing SSA claimants today, all you need to do is complete the paperwork, pass the test and boom, you are a rep. No lawyer needed. So now you have both big law firms and growing non-attorney firms making tons of money as the number of people filing for disability has increased.

    One other thing, SSI is not the same as social security retirement or disability payments. SSI in the realm of social security stands for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) which is a totally different can of worms. SSI is a needs based program that while administered by SSA is not based on social security taxes. The funds for that program come out of the general tax payer fund. I don’t mean to nitpick, but anyone who has dealt with SSA can find it a bit confusing when you state “SSI taxes.”

    Great show Jack! Some of the above may seem like meaningless details but thought I would attempt to clarify a few of the points I know a little something about. Keep up the good work!

  14. At the risk of starting a flame war..

    It seems to me, that the current ‘bad police’ propaganda/meme is a deflection.

    What the heck I mean:
    The police are the ‘gun’ of the state. The state is KILLING PEOPLE and blaming the gun.

    Now, if we keep the metaphor.. there are some ‘bad guns’, with hair triggers, that occasionally fire into the crowd causing unintended (by the state) damage.

    So.. the focus on the ‘gun’.. a distraction.

    For comparison, the SS LEGALLY murdered Jews, Gypsies, the insane, homosexuals.. etc.

    If during the public round up of the victims headed to the camps, people had noticed them kicking their victims in the face, and had protested this ‘brutality’.. what would have been the state propaganda machines response?

    ‘Oh, there are a few ‘bad apples’ in every group. It is not our policy to kick people in the face we are collecting for reeducation.’

    The GUN is doing what it is instructed/created/trained to do. The focus needs to be on the will behind the gun (the state).

    You can protest.. they’re not inanimate objects, they are men, with wills.. and this is true.

    An animate gun can REFUSE to fire.. but it is a gun, firing is its nature and purpose.

    • as an addition..

      You can protest ‘but the police SHOULD NOT BE a gun’.. I agree, but they are.

      ‘Protect and Serve’ is no longer on the door of every police car. The police have morphed from a SHEEP DOG into an ATTACK DOG.. and we, the people, are not holding their chains.

    • Cops today are teacups with guns. Like fear biting dogs, at the least amount of tribulation rather than deal with the circumstances they bite. They don’t have the temperament to be sheep dogs. There is nothing more dangerous than a scared man with a gun in a position of power. Their training has replaced common sense and it has become their shield against culpability.

      • This is actually do agree with. I’ve had police officers at my college tell us that they see everyone as a potential threat and whenever anybody comes up to them they’re looking at how they can take them down. Like wow. What are we in Southern Afghanistan?

        I think that situation is two fold. Like Insidious says, that’s how they’re trained and beaten into their head (literally and figuratively). And I think it’s our culture/society in general.

        I know its not cool to think it, but I’m of the opinion government, in all its faces, is the product of the people, regardless of whether we think it is or not.

      • I’m just reading comments here and haven’t listened to the podcast, but I’ll have to mostly agree with you.

        I grew up in a small town that had way more cops than it needed and being the long-haired kid that I was, I was always being watched. In fact, while I worked for the county supervising a prison work gang, I was accused of robbing a house along with some inmates. I was in a line up before I knew what was happening and the lady making the claim changed her stories about four times in one day, from saying we were mexicans, then we were black, then we were white and that it was a solid color van, then it was a two-tone van. My boss stood behind me but a little douchebag rookie that I went to school with kept watch on my house at night and tried to push his head in my apartment while doing some “follow-up.” He now works for the FBI. Should I assume he’s changed all that much?

        I was also accused of sneaking drugs into the prison. I still can’t figure out why the guy that accused me of that did it?

        I moved to dallas and I couldn’t drive through Richardson without getting pulled over in my crappy car. It was, of course, the way that I looked. And the way my car looked.

        Something that a lot of people that look conventional white guy, or like a normal good old boy, don’t understand is that the way they’re treated and talked to by the cops is pretty different than the way people that don’t look like that, are treated. I almost always got attitude from the get go. Don’t tell me its my imagination, I’ve experienced and witnessed it too many times.

        This uproar isn’t just about these recent cases. It’s about too many cops being douchebags and thinking that they’re a special class. There are too many stupid laws and too many stupid people with power enforcing them. If you think that law enforcement isn’t out of control then look at all the videos on youtube of cops shooting dogs for no reason. They just have a little outburst or are just too prissy about dogs and out comes the gun to be pointed at a dog wagging its tail or just doing its job protecting its property. I would personally love to have about 5 minutes alone with some of those little …..okay, you get the idea.

        Most cops are probably good guys, but there are too damn many out there that are either stupid, crooked, or both. And their brothers need to fix that shit before the public does it for them.

  15. Great podcast, Jack! It hurt me to hear your conclusions, but I was slowly coming to the same conclusions myself. When the media covers things like this the way they are doing now, it always seems to be a distraction and not what meets the eye at all. Sensationalization like this makes me take a step back and think about the “other side” of the argument. I wonder if the public would have been better educated about all this if it would have went to a public trial. I don’t agree that the officer should be indicted based on the facts you outlined in this podcast, but I also don’t agree that death was the proper punishment for selling loose cigarettes. Eric Garner should have submitted to the arrest and then pushed for a trial. It is there that the jury should have nullified the law and acquitted that man. It’s sad to me to see all the sheeple protesting and blocking traffic and holding up signs for nothing really. If they all understood the tyranny we live under and actually do something on that level, things would be different.

    Rand Paul wrote a great article on this and people accused him of playing both sides of the fence. He said that he feels sympathy for Eric Garner and his family, but he ultimately blames the politicians who pass these type of loose cigarette laws. We put our police in horrible positions when we pass these stupid, stupid laws. A law is a law in a country that follows the rule of law. We have to protest to repeal these crazy laws, not protest how cops should enforce each and every crime. A silly crime to one cop could be a serious offense to another thus ensuring even more discrimination when dealing with the public.

    It also bugs me to hear the protests of “black lives matter”. ALL lives matter – black, white, illegal immigrant, Iraqi, Syrian, Israeli, Palestinian, etc. No one seems to care that Obama orders drones to drop bombs on weddings and funerals, but when someone doesn’t submit to a cop and they get killed, all hell breaks loose. The only reason cops have any authority is, like you said Jack, because they are allowed to kill people if they don’t submit. Otherwise, no one would fear them.

    Great podcast and great food for thought! I love these types of podcasts that make me ruminate and think about things. I wish so many others could hear this instead of CNN’s take or Fox News’ take. This country would be a much better place if we had informed citizenry. At least you can say you are doing your part to make it happen 🙂

  16. When our department first got dash cams I felt like I wasn’t trusted. We were required to approach a stop and say “I’m Officer Howd and this is being recorded, I’ve stopped you because XXXX”

    Honestly, people behaved better when they knew they were on camera/audio.
    I knew how to kill the camera, how to obscure it and I could have forgotten the mic. I also knew that my camera was on for 8-12 hours depending on the day. It’s intent was to prove I did the right thing, not to keep me honest; I already did that by myself.

    When it comes to discretionary stops.. you take the joint, crush it and send people home. Nobody watched the camera because there wasn’t a complaint. In under 10 years I had lots of pot pipes and about pounds of seizure with arrests for assault and vandalism and yes I hit them for pot also. But never for pot alone.

    I got in more trouble for logging in pot without a case number than anything else. My wife was the evidence officer.

    The Chief finally left me alone when I told him “Discretion is a Bitch”, he said carry on and I did for 8 more years.

  17. I liked your assessment of the Garner case. I agree that there are too many laws and I like the idea of asking yourself the question of would I be willing to kill someone to enforce a law. When I worked with inmates, I saw a bunch that had done some serious stuff, but most of them were serving excessive sentences for drugs, or a first offenses, like stealing a television. And believe me, if they weren’t true criminals going it, they damn sure were coming out. Not defending everyone, cause there were a lot of stupid people in prison, but I worked with quite a few that just simply screwed up, they knew it, and they wanted to get their life back in order. The real criminals are those that make all this legislation and then reap the rewards.