Nan Aron


Image by Center for American Progress
Tortured Law: The Role of the Office of Legal Counsel and the Use of Torture

March 10, 2010, 6:30pm – 8:00pm

To watch the video, click here: www.americanprogress.org/events/2010/03/torturedlaw.html

After a five-year investigation, the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility finally concluded in a report released on February 19, 2010 that Bush administration Office of Legal Counsel officials John Yoo and Jay Bybee "exercised poor judgment" for their role in drafting the 2002 memos that authorized the use of techniques otherwise understood to constitute torture in detainee interrogations. However, a Department of Justice official overruled OPR’s recommendation and determined that the officials should not be referred to their respective bar associations for investigation of professional misconduct.

The release of the report has spurred criticism, particularly because OPR staff could not interview key witnesses or review hundreds of emails written by the lawyers. Why were critical records destroyed? Why were witnesses and materials kept from investigators? Broader questions also remain: Were these lawyers simply giving the president their best legal advice? Or was their work part of a larger conspiracy to distort the law and assisted their client in criminal or fraudulent conduct?

Please join the Center for American Progress and the Alliance for Justice for a discussion about the OPR report and next steps toward torture accountability. A screening of Alliance for Justice’s short documentary film, "Tortured Law" will proceed a panel discussion moderated by Ken Gude, Associate Director of the Center for American Progress International Rights and Responsibilities program.

Featured Speaker:

Congressman Jerrold Nadler

Panelists:

Nan Aron, President, Alliance for Justice

David Cole, Professor of Law, Georgetown University

Bruce Fein, Chairman of the American Freedom Agenda

Moderator:

Ken Gude, Associate Director, International Rights and Responsibilities, Center for American Progress

PHOTO CREDIT:
Ralph Alswang
Photographer
202-487-5025
ralph@ralphphoto.com
www.ralphphoto.com

Bruce Fein


Image by Center for American Progress
Tortured Law: The Role of the Office of Legal Counsel and the Use of Torture

March 10, 2010, 6:30pm – 8:00pm

To watch the video, click here: www.americanprogress.org/events/2010/03/torturedlaw.html

After a five-year investigation, the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility finally concluded in a report released on February 19, 2010 that Bush administration Office of Legal Counsel officials John Yoo and Jay Bybee "exercised poor judgment" for their role in drafting the 2002 memos that authorized the use of techniques otherwise understood to constitute torture in detainee interrogations. However, a Department of Justice official overruled OPR’s recommendation and determined that the officials should not be referred to their respective bar associations for investigation of professional misconduct.

The release of the report has spurred criticism, particularly because OPR staff could not interview key witnesses or review hundreds of emails written by the lawyers. Why were critical records destroyed? Why were witnesses and materials kept from investigators? Broader questions also remain: Were these lawyers simply giving the president their best legal advice? Or was their work part of a larger conspiracy to distort the law and assisted their client in criminal or fraudulent conduct?

Please join the Center for American Progress and the Alliance for Justice for a discussion about the OPR report and next steps toward torture accountability. A screening of Alliance for Justice’s short documentary film, "Tortured Law" will proceed a panel discussion moderated by Ken Gude, Associate Director of the Center for American Progress International Rights and Responsibilities program.

Featured Speaker:

Congressman Jerrold Nadler

Panelists:

Nan Aron, President, Alliance for Justice

David Cole, Professor of Law, Georgetown University

Bruce Fein, Chairman of the American Freedom Agenda

Moderator:

Ken Gude, Associate Director, International Rights and Responsibilities, Center for American Progress

PHOTO CREDIT:
Ralph Alswang
Photographer
202-487-5025
ralph@ralphphoto.com
www.ralphphoto.com

Nan Aron, David Cole, Bruce Fein and Ken Gude


Image by Center for American Progress
Tortured Law: The Role of the Office of Legal Counsel and the Use of Torture

March 10, 2010, 6:30pm – 8:00pm

To watch the video, click here: www.americanprogress.org/events/2010/03/torturedlaw.html

After a five-year investigation, the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility finally concluded in a report released on February 19, 2010 that Bush administration Office of Legal Counsel officials John Yoo and Jay Bybee "exercised poor judgment" for their role in drafting the 2002 memos that authorized the use of techniques otherwise understood to constitute torture in detainee interrogations. However, a Department of Justice official overruled OPR’s recommendation and determined that the officials should not be referred to their respective bar associations for investigation of professional misconduct.

The release of the report has spurred criticism, particularly because OPR staff could not interview key witnesses or review hundreds of emails written by the lawyers. Why were critical records destroyed? Why were witnesses and materials kept from investigators? Broader questions also remain: Were these lawyers simply giving the president their best legal advice? Or was their work part of a larger conspiracy to distort the law and assisted their client in criminal or fraudulent conduct?

Please join the Center for American Progress and the Alliance for Justice for a discussion about the OPR report and next steps toward torture accountability. A screening of Alliance for Justice’s short documentary film, "Tortured Law" will proceed a panel discussion moderated by Ken Gude, Associate Director of the Center for American Progress International Rights and Responsibilities program.

Featured Speaker:

Congressman Jerrold Nadler

Panelists:

Nan Aron, President, Alliance for Justice

David Cole, Professor of Law, Georgetown University

Bruce Fein, Chairman of the American Freedom Agenda

Moderator:

Ken Gude, Associate Director, International Rights and Responsibilities, Center for American Progress

PHOTO CREDIT:
Ralph Alswang
Photographer
202-487-5025
ralph@ralphphoto.com
www.ralphphoto.com

Harvester – infernal machine


Image by Daniel Beilinson
Attention! Our activists were attacked on this night. Few of activists were severely beaten by unknown men.
The police didn’t caught the criminals, but suspended deforestation work.
–
Today we came to the Khimki forest.

At 11:30 we came to the forest near the Klyzma river near SNT Druzhba, close to the camp of ecologists of June 23rd of 2010 (the place is on ecmo.ru).

The deputy Gudkov of the State Duma came with us.

We observed freshly cut down trees – birches with leaves and a huge harvester (a machine to cut down the trees or even to pick them out of the land) nearby.

We wanted to come closer, securities rushed and pushed Yaroslav Nikitenko. Everyone was oppressed, the deputy became furious and started to demand documents from the guards, and called the police. I was not made harm, but it was unpleasant and unlawful to touch me.

We demanded the documents. They said "none".

They said "the documents are in the office".

We called the police.

The director of the company clearing called Evgenia Chirikova.

He said "they have all the documents".

Later he said they don’t have a permission for clearing and the permission for the construction.

Greenpeace lawyer Blatova, Save Khimki Forest movement lawyer Kozlov both agreed that the required by law documents are absent.

We called the Khimki police.

Sheruimov said the following: "we called for the documents, they are on way, before they come we can’t say the works are illegal".

That is absolutely weird and it’s ununderstandable how the trees are being cut down and the police "believes" the documents exist and does nothing to stop illegal works.

N.B. In Russia the law demands the documents to be on the place of works and not "in the office".

The activists called the investigating department and started to wait.

They did’t come. Then they called the higher departments, said about the criminal undoing of the police officers. This is still happening till the late evening in Russia. We’re calling higher and higher, complaining on the officers, but no one comes to the forest.

That’s why we decided to make a camp in the forest and to stand to protect ourselves the trees.

During the presence on the first clearing, a call from the witness came that near Starbeevo, near the old pioneer camp, workers with chain-saws cut down trees.

Part of the activists and lawyers rest on the first place, and the major part led by Yaroslav Nikitenko came to investigate the second illegal felling.

When came to the spot, activists saw many trees fallen.

Big birches with the new fresh green leaves. Especially sad looked the oaks very wide, of a few hundred years old which lay down on earth split into a few chunks.

Near the fallen oak we found two bottles of dark yellow liquid, probably oil and the ribbons for the chain-saws.

We called the police and started to write the act.

Suddenly an activist Beilinson cried out: "Look! He hit him!"

We rushed to him.

A volunteer of Greenpeace Joseph Kogutko stepped a bit aside and wanted to look at the surroundings.

A guard came to him, hit his mobile out of his hands and wanted to make him more harm.

We ran closer. The guy went on me, I managed to make a photo of him from a close distance, he could’t touch me though. Instead he severely hit Alesha Belikh in face. Immediately blood flew out of his nose, that was broken.

The photos from the action, the photos of Alesha and the gangster are now in my twitter @ynikitenko.

The guy ran away into the forest. The securities just laughed at us, and the FSB which constantly spies at us just stood with the securities.

The police came soon, surprisingly. We said about the beating. The officer looked round the clearing, looked at the bottles and came back to his car. He said the operative group will come.

We stayed there to wait for the arrival of the operative group to check so that the police does it work.

Most part of people left.

Then the officer departed after some time.

We left too. It was dangerous to stay there in a small group with the gangsters.

Alesha refused to go to hospital to fix traumas, he refused to write to the police saying that is vain.

The police didn’t come anywhere, did not fix the traces of crime, did not prevent the works.

That’s why we with the remaining activists came to the first place, where they already arranged the camp, to protect the trees ourselves.

We hope more activists will come and it will be more secure, though it’s already dark.

In case something happens to us we’ll try to write to you.
Please follow us in our twitters and ecmo.ru

P.S. During writing this letter we observed a beaver swimming on the river Klyazma, one of the three planned specially protected natural areas in the Khimki forest – planned before the construction of the road Moscow to St. Petersburg through the Khimki forest was decided.

P.P.S. The securities here behave very strange. Something may happen at night. In case they start to destroy the trees, we will stop them.
–
Yaroslav Nikitenko

Attention! The activists were attacked on the night. Few of activists were severely beaten by unknown men.
The police didn’t caught the criminals, but suspended deforestation work.

See also www.change.org/petitions/save-khimki-forest-stand-with-ru… – the collection of signatures against Vinci’s participation in the project. More than 20,000 already collected!

Coalition for the forests of Moscow region!
Greenpeace Russia
WWF Russia
Social-Ecological Union
Biodiversity conservation center
Russian birds conservation union
Movement for Khimki forest protection

Follow us!
Latest news about Khimki Forest from leading media VIA ecoradar
Yevgenia Chirikova, Leader of the Khimki Forest Defenders
Yaroslav Nikitenko

We will open an international site soon: www.khimkiforest.org

Besieged Harvester


Image by Daniel Beilinson
Attention! Our activists were attacked on this night. Few of activists were severely beaten by unknown men.
The police didn’t caught the criminals, but suspended deforestation work.
–
Today we came to the Khimki forest.

At 11:30 we came to the forest near the Klyzma river near SNT Druzhba, close to the camp of ecologists of June 23rd of 2010 (the place is on ecmo.ru).

The deputy Gudkov of the State Duma came with us.

We observed freshly cut down trees – birches with leaves and a huge harvester (a machine to cut down the trees or even to pick them out of the land) nearby.

We wanted to come closer, securities rushed and pushed Yaroslav Nikitenko. Everyone was oppressed, the deputy became furious and started to demand documents from the guards, and called the police. I was not made harm, but it was unpleasant and unlawful to touch me.

We demanded the documents. They said "none".

They said "the documents are in the office".

We called the police.

The director of the company clearing called Evgenia Chirikova.

He said "they have all the documents".

Later he said they don’t have a permission for clearing and the permission for the construction.

Greenpeace lawyer Blatova, Save Khimki Forest movement lawyer Kozlov both agreed that the required by law documents are absent.

We called the Khimki police.

Sheruimov said the following: "we called for the documents, they are on way, before they come we can’t say the works are illegal".

That is absolutely weird and it’s ununderstandable how the trees are being cut down and the police "believes" the documents exist and does nothing to stop illegal works.

N.B. In Russia the law demands the documents to be on the place of works and not "in the office".

The activists called the investigating department and started to wait.

They did’t come. Then they called the higher departments, said about the criminal undoing of the police officers. This is still happening till the late evening in Russia. We’re calling higher and higher, complaining on the officers, but no one comes to the forest.

That’s why we decided to make a camp in the forest and to stand to protect ourselves the trees.

During the presence on the first clearing, a call from the witness came that near Starbeevo, near the old pioneer camp, workers with chain-saws cut down trees.

Part of the activists and lawyers rest on the first place, and the major part led by Yaroslav Nikitenko came to investigate the second illegal felling.

When came to the spot, activists saw many trees fallen.

Big birches with the new fresh green leaves. Especially sad looked the oaks very wide, of a few hundred years old which lay down on earth split into a few chunks.

Near the fallen oak we found two bottles of dark yellow liquid, probably oil and the ribbons for the chain-saws.

We called the police and started to write the act.

Suddenly an activist Beilinson cried out: "Look! He hit him!"

We rushed to him.

A volunteer of Greenpeace Joseph Kogutko stepped a bit aside and wanted to look at the surroundings.

A guard came to him, hit his mobile out of his hands and wanted to make him more harm.

We ran closer. The guy went on me, I managed to make a photo of him from a close distance, he could’t touch me though. Instead he severely hit Alesha Belikh in face. Immediately blood flew out of his nose, that was broken.

The photos from the action, the photos of Alesha and the gangster are now in my twitter @ynikitenko.

The guy ran away into the forest. The securities just laughed at us, and the FSB which constantly spies at us just stood with the securities.

The police came soon, surprisingly. We said about the beating. The officer looked round the clearing, looked at the bottles and came back to his car. He said the operative group will come.

We stayed there to wait for the arrival of the operative group to check so that the police does it work.

Most part of people left.

Then the officer departed after some time.

We left too. It was dangerous to stay there in a small group with the gangsters.

Alesha refused to go to hospital to fix traumas, he refused to write to the police saying that is vain.

The police didn’t come anywhere, did not fix the traces of crime, did not prevent the works.

That’s why we with the remaining activists came to the first place, where they already arranged the camp, to protect the trees ourselves.

We hope more activists will come and it will be more secure, though it’s already dark.

In case something happens to us we’ll try to write to you.
Please follow us in our twitters and ecmo.ru

P.S. During writing this letter we observed a beaver swimming on the river Klyazma, one of the three planned specially protected natural areas in the Khimki forest – planned before the construction of the road Moscow to St. Petersburg through the Khimki forest was decided.

P.P.S. The securities here behave very strange. Something may happen at night. In case they start to destroy the trees, we will stop them.
–
Yaroslav Nikitenko

Attention! The activists were attacked on the night. Few of activists were severely beaten by unknown men.
The police didn’t caught the criminals, but suspended deforestation work.

See also www.change.org/petitions/save-khimki-forest-stand-with-ru… – the collection of signatures against Vinci’s participation in the project. More than 20,000 already collected!

Coalition for the forests of Moscow region!
Greenpeace Russia
WWF Russia
Social-Ecological Union
Biodiversity conservation center
Russian birds conservation union
Movement for Khimki forest protection

Follow us!
Latest news about Khimki Forest from leading media VIA ecoradar
Yevgenia Chirikova, Leader of the Khimki Forest Defenders
Yaroslav Nikitenko

We will open an international site soon: www.khimkiforest.org

Former Rep. Donald Sherwood (R-PA)


Image by dbking
110 D St. SE, Unit #215…
By Bill Toland, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

TUNKHANNOCK, Pa. — In this old lumber town, part of the state’s conservative northeast, the Sherwoods are the local version of the Kennedys: wealthy, iconic and, now, because of U.S. Rep. Donald L. Sherwood, knee-deep in scandal.

Sherwood, 64, a Republican, is embroiled in a salacious, he-said, she-said affair with a Peruvian-born woman named Cynthia Ore, 29. Ore alleges that her five-year relationship with Sherwood, who is married with three grown daughters, turned violent.

News of the relationship began to dribble out of Washington, D.C., at the end of April, when a political foe sent a copy of a police report to the Times Leader of Wilkes-Barre and other papers. The report, and the newspaper story that followed, said police visited Sherwood’s Washington apartment in September after Ore called 911 to tell police that, during the course of a back rub, Sherwood had tried to choke her.

He denied that, saying he never choked her, and that she was the one who interrupted the back rub when she "jumped up" and went to the bathroom to call 911.

No criminal charges were filed, but a civil suit has been. In June, Ore sued Sherwood for .5 million, saying he bruised her, punched her and yanked her hair, and that police didn’t take her charges seriously. She stayed with him through the abuse, the suit says, because Sherwood promised to marry her. Sherwood, while saying Ore’s lawsuit, in general, and the accusations of abuse, in particular, are without merit, has admitted to the affair.

He’d kept quiet, offering only a quick apology for the "pain" he’s caused, until 10 days ago, when he filed his response to Ore’s lawsuit and issued a more in-depth statement:

"For about five years, I had an affair I deeply regret," the statement says. "Although it was intermittent and ended last year, nothing I say can diminish the pain and hurt I have caused my wife and family. While I can’t change or erase what I did, I accept full responsibility for my behavior, and I apologize to my wife, my family and to the people I represent in Congress."

He added, "I want to be absolutely clear that I never physically hurt or abused Ms. Ore. I will defend myself to the fullest extent possible against these malicious and baseless allegations." In the court papers, filed in Washington, D.C., Sherwood says he can’t remember how he met Ore, while Ore says they met at a Young Republicans meeting in 1999.

Ore’s attorney, Patrick Regan, declined to comment on Sherwood’s statement.

Around Sherwood’s rural, 13-county congressional district, people are just as likely to be suspicious as they are to be sympathetic. Sherwood’s reputation as an upstanding, family-values politician is now sullied by the scent of hypocrisy, some say.

"My problem is not with the fact that the guy decided to fool around. Guys do that," said John Braun, a retiree and registered Republican who lives 15 miles west of Tunkhannock. Braun’s problem, he said, is that he feels his intelligence has been insulted by Sherwood’s story that Ore abruptly "jumped up" and ran to the bathroom in mid-back rub, for no good reason.

"To me, that doesn’t ring like an event that could have actually occurred that way," Braun said.

But in leafy Tunkhannock, where Sherwood’s name still graces the wall of a main street car dealership, the man is more likely to be given doubt’s benefit.

"He’s human," said Paul Litwin III, a lawyer with an office on Tunkhannock’s short business strip. He noted that police had investigated Ore’s September phone call and declined to press charges. "If she’s lying about that, there’s a possibility that she’s lying about the abuse," Litwin said. He added that "any type of abuse" would be unforgiveable if Ore’s accounts were proven true.

But if they’re not true, Sherwood’s affair was private, Litwin said, and shouldn’t have played out in the papers. "Most people I speak with are more sympathetic toward the family than disgusted toward him," he said.

Many defenders in this town were reluctant to talk about Sherwood’s fortunes, protective of one of their own. The Sherwoods still keep a home and do business here, eating at in-town restaurants and buying arrangements from the local florist.

In his pre-Congress life, Sherwood lived by the all-American model of service and hard work. He went to Dartmouth College, joined the Army, opened a car dealership at age 26. When his father died, Sherwood inherited part of the family estate, worth .4 million at the time.

Sherwood’s supporters think so much of him here that a local media chain, Times Shamrock Communications, initially declined to cover the Sherwood saga, which most newspapers or TV outlets would have considered newsworthy. After the police report became public, The Scranton Times, one of three papers in the chain, criticized the Times Leader for writing about it.

"Where is the connection between the politician’s private moral life and his public performance?" Lawrence Beaupre, managing editor of The Scranton Times, wrote in a letter to his readers. The Times Leader, he said, was guilty of "sanctimonious self-righteousness" in its decision to publish a story.

Times Leader Managing Editor David Iseman answered in a column of his own, saying that the "alliance" of papers and TV stations that initially declined to report on the hubbub was neglecting its duty. He said the inter-media sparring "kind of wasted a little bit of our time."

The papers are 20 miles away from each other. The Tribune and The Citizens’ Voice of Wilkes-Barre, the two other Shamrock papers, also refused to write about Sherwood, at first.

Whether the allegations affect Sherwood’s political career is unclear. His district is heavily Republican, and no Democrat has challenged him since his second congressional race in 2000, when he defeated Pat Casey, son of the late governor and brother of state Treasurer Robert P. Casey Jr.

GOP colleagues are offering support, with U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, of Penn Hills, doing so during a recent visit to the area.

"I don’t know how that’s going to shake out," Santorum said, quoted by the Times Leader. "All I would suggest is that, again, until we know all the facts, [we] look at the job that Congressman Sherwood is doing and make decisions based on the facts."

Some Democrats are lining up to challenge Sherwood, believing that he’s weakened. And at least one Republican politician, state Rep. Jerry Birmelin, R-Wayne, said he would consider a run at the seat, but only if Sherwood stepped aside. (Sherwood has no plans to do so, saying he’s running for re-election next year.)

Tunkhannock’s parable on lust and fallibility wouldn’t be complete without a lesson in mercy. Heather Johns, who owns Reese Florist and the next-door bridal boutique, said even if Ore’s abuse charges prove to be true, Sherwood ought to be forgiven by his town. "I don’t think anybody should be judging him on one incident," she said.

exercise your rights


Image by zombieite
when i arrived in arizona, a coworker and i started discussing off-roading in all of the beautiful remote places the state had to offer. my coworker told me i needed 4 things:

1. a good pair of sunglasses
2. tinted windows
3. a wide-brimmed hat
4. a gun

i’d never even handled or fired a gun until i came to arizona. the idea of getting one both scared me and intrigued me. i’m not a "conservative" or a "republican" as those terms are used nowadays, but i’ve always believed in gun rights from a theoretical standpoint. it has always shocked me when i hear stories of mass shootings. i always wonder, why didn’t any of those innocent bystanders have a gun? the answer isn’t always "because it’s illegal" (i.e. school campuses). most people have come to believe that it’s acceptable to outsource our personal security to the police. i respect and admire the police. i have friends and relatives who are police officers. but realistically, the job of the police is to get there as soon as they can, clean up the mess, maybe do a little detective work, and every now and then, catch a bad guy (or girl).

"when seconds count, the police are minutes away." –bumper sticker

living in the "blue states" for so long might have had something to do with my inexperience with guns. the more-democratic "blue" states on the coasts are much less gun-friendly than the more-republican "red" states in the middle. our country has an important history with guns, and that’s why it’s written right into the constitution that our right to own guns "shall not be infringed". what’s been happening over the past few decades, however, has been that gun rights have been infringed–er, "regulated"–more and more, bit by bit.

nevertheless, in many places out west, it’s still perfectly legal to carry a gun on your hip, with no special permits or anything. to me, an easterner, this seems like an overtly political act. all the employees at the gun store (who are also the teachers of my gun classes) carry guns on their hips (at least when they are at work). they tell stories of being harassed by law enforcement and confronted by concerned strangers. one of my teachers said that if he’s not allowed to carry a gun into an establishment, he stops visiting that establishment. places he’s been kicked out of include the local mall and the county fair. he says he hasn’t been to either in a decade. after hearing those stories, i realized that it is a very political act to carry a gun, especially openly, and i admire them for it.

the biggest hassle of carrying a gun is dealing with all the places you’re not allowed in to. it’s absurd that a gun owner is not considered a threat outside the post office, but inside it she is (federal law). outside of lovin’ spoonfuls (a delicious vegetarian restaurant that happens to serve alcohol) she is not a threat, but inside she is (state law–even if she does not drink while in the establishment). there are so many surprising and difficult-to-abide-by gun laws that almost every gun owner inadvertently violates one or two of them occasionally. this is one reason why people often prefer to carry concealed. if you have no way to be sure you’re not violating a law without hiring a lawyer to follow you around everywhere, it’s easier to avoid scrutiny by concealing your weapon. this can be done legally here, with a permit acquired after a couple classes in safety, shooting, and the legal issues involved with gun owership and concealed-carry.

the problem with concealed-carry is that criminals are not deterred by the sight of a gun on your hip, so you may be mugged even though you’re carrying. then you have to decide what to do. that’s a tough decision to make, and it’s an even tougher one to execute properly if your plan involves actually pulling out your gun. usually, the best thing to do, carrying or not, is throw your money on the ground and run.

the advantage to concealed carry is you’ll be harassed less by people who don’t realize that guns are legal and safe when used correctly (or not used at all, which is usually the correct thing to do). it’s often the police themselves that don’t even realize it’s legal for regular citizens to carry guns on their hips, since it happens so rarely (especially in states where permits are required and nearly impossible to obtain). the best thing about concealed-carry is that it has the potential to reduce crimes committed against everyone, even those who aren’t carrying guns, since criminals cannot know who is and who isn’t carrying.

the next thing to rant a bit about is the drug war. i’ve never used or sold drugs and never will. nevertheless, i think the drug war is absurd. one of the most frightening aspects of it is that police have abandoned the "knock and announce" procedure they used to follow when serving warrants. nowadays, if you’re suspected of a drug crime, they will simply throw small bombs (flash-bang grenades, intended as a non-lethal distraction, but which occasionally permanently injure or kill) into your house and break in through windows and doors while shouting "police! search warrant!". of course, home invading criminals are quite capable of shouting "police" just as well as the police can. homes are entered this way because it is very easy to flush a large amount of drugs down a toilet in a small amount of time.

the problem with this is, what if they have the wrong house? it happens fairly often. what if they’re acting on bad information? that also happens fairly often. these situations often lead to police officers being shot and the shooters being convicted of murder when the shooters only thought they were defending their homes against invading criminals.

what a mess.

another thing i’ve come to understand is why "gun nuts" stockpile guns and ammunition.

in researching all of these arcane gun laws, i’ve discovered that one trick that is often used by gun-fearing legislators is to "chip away" at gun rights rather than take them away altogether. they will outlaw some kind of gun, but only if you don’t own a gun like that already. this angers gun owners and pro-gun legislators, but since it doesn’t require people to turn in their existing guns to the police, it is seen as less of a draconian violation of rights. automatic weapons were outlawed in the 80s (i approve of this law, since i don’t think they are necessary for self-defense), but only if you didn’t own one already. in washington dc, handguns were outlawed in the home in the 70s, but if you already had one you were exempt. this pattern is repeated time and time again.

imagine yourself as a gun owner, wanting to preserve your rights. wouldn’t it make sense to buy as many guns and as much ammunition as you could? tomorrow they might outlaw revolvers or semiautomatics. perhaps they will outlaw guns of a certain caliber. perhaps they will outlaw hollow-point ammunition (it is more likely to kill, which of course makes it more useful for both crimes and self-defense). but you can rest assured that, if you own that stuff already, you’ll be exempt.

no, i’m not stockpiling guns or ammo. and no, i’m not turning into a gun nut. if i could wish every gun off the face of the earth, i would. but since guns exist, i believe that i should be able to have one in case i need it. i see it as a tool. i have no emotional attachment to the hammer in my toolbox, and i have no emotional attachment to my gun.

"better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it." –bumper sticker

WPA-46-65507 WWII Signal Corps Photo


Image by R. Lanning
3 may 46

ichiro kiyose, tojo’s lawyer ponders over legal information with his shoes off at opening session of arraignment of 28 japanese war criminals in war ministtry building, tokyo, japan.

Photographer: Bakal

15 July 2009 05


Image by Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
International Deputy Co-Prosecutor William Smith during trial proceedings at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia on 15 July 2009.
The photo can be used freely by media provided that the photo is credited "Courtesy of Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia". More info at www.eccc.gov.kh

Image by Alkan de Beaumont Chaglar