Police officer complains of leadership issues, I give the answer.

After reading a whiny complaint from a Chicago police officer, then a followup from another one, I posted my response, I will give you the transcript below in case it gets lost to news censorship.  While the original Officer was venting what probably needed to be vented, my solution presented will likely not be well received.  

FRUSTRATEDCOP wrote:

When you have 12-13 thousand people you are going to have some issues. They could be park workers, postal workers, ,teachers, etc.. The real isssue here is the lack of leadership and direction in the CPD. The shootings are up and that is due to lack of faith that the officers in the street have in their superiors. These thugs that are taking over our streets and killing people need to be dealt with in a different way than family Joe or Jane. You will not appreciate the police until you are a victim and need them!

SAVASHIP wrote:

If the police didn't force citizens to depend on them, people would be able to defend themselves, having a naturally reducing effect on violent crime, thus reducing the stress and danger for the police. The police just don't trust normal citizens, and it shows. Why are they the "only ones" who are allowed to carry a weapon to defend themselves in an admittedly dangerous area? Is it because they're better than you? More trustworthy than you? If they're better trained to use the simple point and click interface of a modern firearm, why is that training not available to citizens? Why do the police insist that you will only appreciate them once you've been victimized? I mean, it's not like they were around to stop it. If you were attacked and had a small amount of marijuana on you, what do you think they'd be more interested in... investigating the attack, or ruining your life in their self-righteous war on drugs? Doesn't that make you twice to three times the victim?

Just remember, when seconds count, the police are just minutes away, and they would rather you be holding a phone, than a firearm... because they're the only one's enough to handle protecting you.

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/chicago-police-andrews-opine-101443474.html#ixzz0y8Og3L9l

Zion IL man sues over standard Illinois police operating procedures

A Zion man was walking by a fight that was near his residence when he felt a strong shock to his body.   The police tasered him, then arresting him to later be acquitted of all charges.   He has apparently been arrested over 10 times, but never convicted of a single crime:

Wells has been charged with several criminal misdemeanor charges, including assault, property damage, obstruction of justice and resisting a police officer since 1992. He was not convicted of any of those charges.

While I believe the lawsuit is valid, and the police are probably singling this man out, there are parts that I don't agree with.   The man claims to suffer from panic attacks, bi-polar disorder, ADD, and is using those "special needs" to raise the amount of cash owed to him.  My experience with panic attacks from people is that they are extremely narcissistic, and freak out when they can't control everything around them.   This claim leads me to cut the police only a little bit of slack, because after seeing several panic attacks in my day, they are drama filled raving lunatic sessions!

Parallels of Dogs and Guns in Illinois.

A woman from Elgin who's dogs ran to greet the Mayor Ed Schock's dog was shocked to find out that her dogs are deemed dangerous and illegal.  She was fined $2,200 for the crime of owning 2 pit bulls in Elgin, a clean, nice city where only dogs that aren't dangerous, like German Shepherds are welcome.  This was after an incident where the Mayor and his German Shepherd recieved no damage from 2 Pit Bulls that ran at him in a neighborhood.   He claimed he was so terrified of the curious dogs that he mustered all his cowardice, and kicked one square in the jaw, where it stopped being curious and whimpered.   The other dog, wagging and jumping was fended off with the end of a leash.   These dangerous hounds were then corralled by the owner who was upset this man kicked her dog in the face.   The man, who was the mayor and obviously better than her, ran an administrative meeting and concluded her "dangerous" dogs violated Elgin statutes, and she was fined $2200.

Check out these parallels for the dog owner to what gun owners face: Lugo, the owner of the pit bulls is also required to, in addition to the fine, obtain $100,000 in liability insurance, register her dogs at city hall, muzzle them when they are outside and have both dogs microchipped.

Keep in mind, Lugo's dogs did not hurt either the mayor, nor his dog, one of Lugo's "dangerous" Pit Bulls was kicked, the other was whipped by a man who's obviously no threat to any person or animal, the cowardly Mayor Ed Schock.  I might be biased because the only Pit Bulls I know of are sweet, well adjusted, kinda doofey dogs that can't even kill crickets, so read that sally-pants Ed Schock's testimony yourself, and see if you can sort it out.

Schock testified that he was walking his dog at about 9:15 p.m. when two dogs bounded off a porch along Plum Street.

Schock said he and his German Shepherd, Rako, retreated behind a tree along the city-owned parkway and he felt they were both threatened and in imminent danger.

"They were coming full speed. One of them came to a screeching halt because I kicked it right under the chin. The other I hit with a leash," he said.

Schock said a man corralled the dogs and brought them inside the home and Lugo "proceeded to berate me and curse me for kicking her dog."

 I think Ed Schock should be in the courts for Misdemeanor Criminal Damage to Property for kicking the dog... but that's just me apparently.   If the dogs had bitten, or hurt him, then I would be saying something else, but I've had too much experience to tolerate panicky human reactions to these companion creatures.  

City hall to chicago PD: write more tickets!

In a memo that was leaked to the Chicago Sun-times last week, the City is informing the Police department that ticket writing is down 25% from last year, making a budget deficit of over $10,000,000.   This is further evidence that Police are a money stream for cities, a way of pseudo-legally extorting money from citizens over minor issues, like parking in the wrong spot, or letting a silly meter timer run out.  The revenue director, Bea Reyna-Hickey has been suspended over the message because according to Chicago Aldermen this memo sends the wrong message:

Cook County Clerk David Orr and several aldermen said the memo sends the wrong message to the public. City Hall considers parking tickets a revenue-generating tool more than a public-safety tool, Orr said.

The problem that I see is that the memo sends an honest message to the public about what law-enforcement is in today's day.   This is a big deal to city hall because the people can see exactly what their overlords think of them.   What's the result of this airing of the fact city dwellers and visitors are just targeted marks?

There's no outcry... no protest... not a stir.    The subtle hatred does seem to be growing though, this hate is getting so extreme that even the police seem to be turning against Daley's hand that feeds them:

July 31, 2010 - Chicago police officers were overheard talking about both a search warrant and Mayor Daley at 9:43 p.m. tonight. The officers, whose names are unknown, did not know that one of their microphone keys was "open," or pressed down, which allowed their conversation to be overheard on police radio scanners. We overheard the conversation on frequency 460.050, which is used by CPD Zone 2, Districts 19 and 23 on the city's north side.

The female dispatcher frantically called out to all officers on that frequency to "Watch your keys, watch your keys, you're talking about a search warrant." Moments later, she said, "Watch your keys, you're talking about the mayor!"

An interesting conversation I had with an Anti-gunner

I was recently talking with a man that I didn't know owned any guns, and we got to talking about how important they were, not just for home protection, but for the protection of liberty.   It didn't take long for an aquaintence of ours who was anti-gun to hop into that conversation, here's kinda how it went down.

She claimed that no one should have a gun, because they're dangerous, and powerful.  My counter was that automobiles are dangerous and powerful, and cause more deaths per year than guns, how come we're not banning cars?   She retorted with cars having the singular purpose of transportation, killing people is not what they were designed to do.   I further postulated to her, so if I designed a hammer, that could fire a projectile, but was mainly designed to hammer nails, this would make that specific gun a useful tool by your standards?   She responded that there is a flaw in my logic, but she didn't know where, she just thinks no one should have any weapons.   Being a short, generally out of shape guy, I postulated a new question for her based off her last statement, I asked if a 275 lb 6'6" MMA trained individual should have his hands, and a few toes removed, because technically he is now a very powerful weapon, I saw one of those almost kill a man a few weeks ago at a party in one punch.  She once again hid behind there being some type of flaw in my logic that she just couldn't put her finger on.  

Since everytime I made her think, it backed her into a corner in which she couldn't logically climb out of, she turned it around to me having bad logic, I changed gears, and asked her if Police should be allowed to carry guns.   She claimed that no one, even police should be carrying guns.   I thanked her for being consistent with her view, most people who are anti-gun have an ill-concieved world view that police officers are better people than everyone else.   Next I asked if she thought the military should have weapons.  Her response was less logical than before, which was of course they should.    I asked exactly what would stop those military men from deciding the people had what they wanted, and were not capable of fighting back.   She couldn't think of anything.   I then stated that militaries throughout history have enacted control over the people, in the Roman empire, disrespecting a soldier could have someone put to death, it is the killer of all free though, and free will.   She said that she doesn't think I have my history right.   I told her to have a great day, and thanked her for the conversation.  

It was really enlightening, because every time I made a great point that made her core being agree with me, her irrational fear became exposed through a vague statement of something being wrong with me, or my logic.   This means that gun-control advocates can't be convinced of the importance of the right to keep and bear arms, which means further that gun-control, and a lot of other leftist ideals, are more of a religion to them, and less of a political theory.   They are a core belief structure, which leaves me to one scary, terrible thought to leave with:  We're not fighting for rights, we're fighting a holy war that will never end.

Praxis: castng hollowpoints

I have been casting my own handgun rounds for quite some time now.   I got really excited when I read about Lyman's Devastator mold.  Everyone should like the idea of a 180 grain non-gas check mold that is hollow point for their 1911's.   When I got the mold, I found the casting to be much different from the other rounds I've cast in the past.   After creating over 72 non-bullets, I decided to change things.    The first thing I changed was a cranked up the temperature on the lead.   This started getting me half bullets, so I knew I was on the right path.    Having the lead as hot as I'd comfortably want it, I found that unlike my other bullets, to get the lead down this mold with the hollow point spire in the middle, I needed extra pressure from above.   The easiest way to increase pressure, is to drop the lead from a higher height.   I found about 4" to be sufficient with no splashing.   Be sure to wear gloves and goggles when trying this, although splashing seemed rare, it would only take one bad drop to cause permanent damage.  If you have a melter that drops lead from the bottom, this mold has a large wood handle on the bottom, it may not fit. 

After creating a batch of 100, I tested 10 of them sized to .451 using a charge of 6.5 grains worth of Unique powder, and wolf primers, they were not as accurate as I had hoped.   My theory was that the shortness of the portion of the bullet that touches the barrel was not biting enough to spin stabilize properly.  I tested a 2nd batch at .452, and they flew straight and true.  The bullet seater also seems to round out the front of this bullet a little bit, having a desirable effect on feeding.

Loading your own cartridges and casting your own bullets takes time and practice, but it is well worth it to have the knowledge and tools to make your own bullets.

Looking for an update on Benjamin Stevens

As you may recall, back in 2008 an Illinois Lake Forest man by the name of Benjamin Stevens had his house raided, and over 85 collector firearms confiscated by the Illinois Thugs in Blue for the terrible crime of simply having them without an Illinois FOID card.   He had a .50 car mountable Machine Gun, and they (ATF was involved) apparently wanted it.    The bad thing is:  I can't find the outcome of the story, I assume he's still fighting the legal case, in Lake County it is not unlikely for the legal battle to go on 6+ years.   I am looking to see if anyone has an update on the story.

Cops will get your pot, or they'll break your face!

Give us a'your pot, or we'll break'a you face!

These apparently were the choices for Bamako Walton of Roodhouse IL.  It's hard to imagine that a little bit of a naturally growing plant could be the source of the type of beating this man went through.   What kind of out of control thugs would subject a man to such brutality, over a little bit of a plant?    

I recently sat in on an Illinois Drug and Alcohol Assessment consoling session, and I was astounded to find that these people were outright lying to the people in treatment.   These consoling sessions are court assigned, and they're letting people get lied to.  I'll have a special report on that later.   I have severe Asthma, and can't smoke much of anything, particularly pot, it has no use to me, however, I would defend to the death the fact that people have the right to smoke, drink, imbibe whatever they wish... SO LONG AS: they don't infringe upon anyone's rights while doing so or under the influence of.

That to me is what America was supposed to be... comment if you agree or disagree.

Traffic stop, don't worry, they'll find something else.

I don't do any drugs... except alcohol... and caffeine... and I suppose sugar can be considered a drug... But whatever your feelings on drugs, we can all agree that from a perspective of liberty it doesn't really matter.  We should be able to agree that however much you don't like something someone has or does, if they haven't taken anything from you, or damaged anything, or hurt/threatened you, that it's really none of our business.  

Lewayne Jones was pulled over this weekend in Alton, Illinois for failure to signal a turn at 1am.   At the stop, the officer did some snooping and managed to find 20 grams of cocaine.   This man is now being held on a $60,000 bond, and Lewayne Jones' life, is now officially over because in this country we've lost our way.   We have a select few who are given broad powers to stop you, and determine if you have something that stick-in-the-mud politicians feel only they are supposed to have.   Those are the thugs, the front lines on the attack against liberty.

What would Thomas Jefferson do if a man claiming to have authority over him stopped his carriage because he failed to slow at an intersection that no one was at, and while stopped this man told him that his personal stash of "sweet hemp" (known today as cannabis) was against the law, and that he was to be kidnapped, and held in a jail?   I don't know what you think... but I think it would be about to get ugly.

We did What?

Many thanks to those who pointed me to this graphic representation of the health care bill, complete with sources!   I believe that even those who supported a new health care entitlement program can now safely say, "This isn't quite what I had in mind".

I will spend the rest of my days attempting to create the do-it-yourself Prescription drug making program.   Just get diagnosed, make your own medicine with easy to follow directions, and Voila!!!   98% of your recurring care and treatment costs are gone.   If people over-medicate and kill themselves, Darwin would have called that "natural selection."

Heres the Link: http://www.house.gov/brady/pdf/Obamacare_Chart.pdf

Request for Open Debate to Dr. Mathis

Recently Dr. Stephen Mathis of Wheaton college in Massachusetts wrote about the 2nd Amendment's current meaning in society.   Dr. Mathis with his Master's degree frm Duke, and Ph.D from Kansas (a state that only recently allowed discussions about Darwin's theory of evolution) has used his time and effort in one attempt: To nullify the 2nd Amendment of the United states Constitution.

While I don't have the enormous credentials of Dr. Mathis, I would present this open challenge to him to debate this issue with someone like me; a common person, working what is considered an entry level position, who is an autodidact (self-taught), free from the biases laid upon one by professors and institutions as a whole.  

To begin with, Dr. Mathis claims that "the Founders were against the idea of a standing military in peacetime, because a standing military gave the president too much power, thus making citizens less free. Consequently, a citizen’s militia played the central role in national defense."  this of course would explain why The Continental Army was established by the Continental Congress on June 14th, 1775.   This was because the founders we know and love were against a standing army?   Or were they simply against the use of armed forces against the citizens?   I argue there is sufficient evidence that they were simply against the use of organized armies against its own citizens, and were not against a standing army for national defense.   The lack of evidence to support the Founders being against a standing military comes moreso after the Revolutionary war in the creation by the Congress of the Confederacy (1781-1789) of the United States Army on the 3rd of June, 1784.  The constitution was drafted in 1787, after an Army already stood, and yet there was no mention in the constition of the restriction of a standing army.  Dr. Mathis claimed our founders were against a peacetime standing army with no mention in the United States Constitution, and I have shown the exact opposite, the founders supported a standing army, they were simply cautious of their power.

Please read this portion of the preamble of the Bill of Rights, often ignored by writers like Dr. Mathis, because of the straightforward impact it makes:

"THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."

This says the people were distrustful of the government, and wanted to guarantee certain freedoms from being tampered with.  

Enter the 2nd amendment which Dr. Mathis claims to be misinterpreted, because it implies the citizens have the right to overthrow the government which for some reason strikes Dr. Mathis as illogical.  Then he tries to confuse the militia line because he can't read...    So: I will explain the logic as simply as I can, so that even a PhD can understand it:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state BUT the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed:   People is in contrast with militia, it does not read, the right of the militia to keep and bear arms, it says "people."  Our Founding Fathers just ended a war with a tyrannical state "MILITIA", and were uncertain of the future, they created a document that ensured future generations the ability to do the same thing that they did, in fact, they encouraged it!  Just listen to Thomas Jefferson, writer of declaration of independance, and major contributor to the United states Constitution:

"If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." (November 13, 1787, letter to William S. Smith)

I interpret this as a man who is a Founding Father, and supports the idea of armed rebellion against the very government he helped to create.  According to Dr. Mathis,"Theoretically, it makes no sense for a nation’s founding document to guarantee citizens the right to overthrow the government that document helps establish" But given that previous quote, it is hard to justify his claims that this was not the intention.  Dr. Mathis Continues: "if one is really committed to this understanding of the Second Amendment, one is also committed, by logical extension, to overthrowing the U.S. government altogether."

While he was throwing that line in as a sort of counterpoint to underscore how illogical the concept of overthrowing the government was, that bit of sarcasm seems to be straight in line with what Thomas Jefferson wrote.  

Since it's all too easy to make claims that Thomas Jefferson was an extremist in the Founders eyes, so let's look at some more of the primary drafters of the constitution:

"When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers." (George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention)

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" (Patrick Henry March 23, 1775)

"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms" (Samuel Adams Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts)

Dr. Mathis also claims, not incorrectly that the supreme court has redefined the 2nd amendment to be about personal protection, and not about the right to overthrow the government.   This was cleverly astute of him.   While the court did rule that individuals had the right to arms for protection, they were vague as to specify what people needed protection from.   Was it robbers, murderers and rapists?   Or is it police, judges, and PhDs?  Judges CAN be wrong, Supreme Judges doubly so.

The Supreme Court has in a number of cases, ruled against the Founders of this nation, creating gaps  mainly in the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 8th amendments of the United staes Bill of Rights.   If you want a pure test of the constitutionality of any of these rulings ask yourself this question:  what would Thomas Jefferson, or George Washington, or samual Adams do if .

for example, "What would Samual Adams do if the governement attempted to tax his brewery dispropotionaly with other goods?"   If your answer is anything other than the death of those tyrants, or armed protest of the tax, then you don't know history very well.  

Another good example:  "What would Thomas Jefferson do if a strange man in a blue uniform stopped his carriage and told him that he'd been drinking, and must now go to jail, and pay $10,000 or never drive a carriage again."  If your answer is anything other than the death of that blue uniformed tyrant, or armed protest of such actions... then you don't know history very well.

Dr. Mathis has a lot to lose if the people successfully rebelled against all this over-taxation.   He has a PhD, teaches at a college that is probably tax funded in some part, and has a job that probably pays him comfortably.   The end of overtaxation from a successful armed rebellion leaves most of the common people in a better spot, we lose our tax bills, the overpaid elite that believe they have control over people are suddenly reduced to nothing, and tyranny for the time being, is thwarted for a few years.

Injustice everywhere

The website owner of Injustice everywhere has been doing the world a fantastic service by documenting hundreds of police misconduct examples every week.  Unfortunately the economy hits us all and he is not immune.   If you would like to help a guy out who's been doing a wonderful service, please hit the donate button on the top of his page.

Thanks to Injustice Everywhere I have found a new example of Illinois cops, particularly my county overstepping their authority, but I have things to add as this is very nearby, and I know more details than are given in the paper.

Antioch Police Chief James Foerster is on paid administrative leave while officials investigate accusations he tried to attack state representative candidate Scott Pollak, village officials confirmed Tuesday.

From what I understand the only allegation here is that the Chief "yelled" at Pollock.   This seems to be an example of the police getting a bad ride based on a crazy person.   Scott Pollock is slowly lowering the credibility of the citizen by playing games, and Antioch responded by taking it seriously enough to look into it.   I hope Chief Foerster is back to work soon.

Typical of Waller in Lake County

This upsets me more because it's my county, but a man has been in prison for the last 5 years for terrible crimes he apparently didn't commit.   In 2005 Jerry Hobbs called the police, because he had just found the bodies of his own daughter, and her friend.   As if that find wasn't terrible enough, the police took him as the primary suspect.   While in police custody they allegedly coerced a false confession out of him, which is not uncommon in these parts, they put words in your mouth while you are questioned, the correct answers are to either make fun of them in the form of questions, or keep your fool mouth shut!  I usually vary tactics.  Well, as I've said before, for every innocent man we put in jail, there is equal or greater than one criminal out on the streets still.   Turns out the guy who's DNA was found on the girls, is currently in a Virginia Jail after attacking 2 women.   This man has been in Jail for 5 years, and the ONLY reason Michael Waller, lake county prosecuter, stated as to why they didn't continue was:

Prosecutors say DNA from the crime scene matches another man. That man used to live in Zion but is now in custody in Virginia after being charged in two attacks on women there.
Lake County State's Atty. Michael Waller, flanked by prosecutors and members of the Lake County major crimes task force, said the charges were dropped because "I believe at this point, we can't prove the case without reasonable doubt."

 So listen up if you live in Virgina and know the people who were attacked by the REAL criminal... you have a GREAT case against Lake County Illinois, because they stopped looking for a criminal after they weaseled a false confession out of Jerry Hobbs.   Stop here for your money... and if you can.... buy my house, I need to get outta here!

New Pre-Dating Screening: Have you recently been with a Cop?

This article sums up a terribly twisted nightmare of a story, so my only advice is... ask if a girl has ever been... or dated a cop in her life... if the answer is yes... RUN!

I will attempt to summarize in order:

Matt Kohnen met a girl, and began dating her in the city of Swansea.  The woman had previously dated a man who is a police officer named Steve Epps in nearby Caseyville.   The police officer from Caseyville drove by the Swansea house, and ran the plates of an unknown Munie Greencare Professionals truck, was dissapointed to find no personal information, so he sent a fax to the Munie Greencare corporate office alleging the driver of the truck was driving recklessly, and the officer needed the name of the employee.

The Munie HR department provided Matt with a copy of the Fax, and asked the 15 year worker there what had happened.   Not Knowing Matt called the Chief of Police at Caseyville, J.D. Roth who then tried as hard as he could to do the right thing.  He first suspended Steve Epps without pay, then  J.D. Roth opened an investigation, interviewed the girl, and Matt Kohnen, and Steve Epps.

Epps said in an interview he was just doing his job by sending the fax about the reckless driving.

Matt Kohnen:

Kohnen told Roth he was in Swansea at a woman's house -- a woman who previously had a relationship with Epps, the report stated. Roth later checked and found his department received no reckless driving complaints.

And the unnamed girlfriend:

The woman told Roth that Epps had "done things like this in the past" and she didn't doubt that he had sent the fax to Munie, according to Roth's summary of his interview with the woman.

So now you have 3 statements, the Chief sent the reports to the Illinois State Police... something something internal affairs something.. (Public Integrity Unit.) and they pushed it to local state's attorney Robert Haida, who then REFUSED TO CHARGE EPPS.

 

A warrant was requested for Steve Epps phone records to attempt to prove where he was all night, that request was denied by Assistant State's Attorney Beth Nester.  

 

After the prosecutor refused to charge Epps, the ISP closed the case... then Epps sued the village over his suspension... and guess what!?

 

Epps, who worked for Caseyville for 10 years, returned to work in May after engaging in arbitration with the village.

8 out of the 10 village police in Caseyville petitioned for the Chief's ouster... I think it's time some of those people started culling that herd.

Thanks to all their training...

Is law enforcement a necessity? That depends where you live. The purpose of law enforcement is to make you free. You can leave your land without the fear of a break-in, because police are out there watching.  Walk to the store feeling safe, because police are keeping dangerous people off the street. They don't do that... unless you consider pot-heads dangerous people.

Thanks to all their training, people like Deputy David Bowers, Lonnie Lawler, and their boss have given us horrors like this:

Bowers allegedly pushed one boy toward his bed and repeatedly shocked him with a stun gun. Bowers then held down a second boy, stunned him several times and threatened to sodomize him, ultimately causing the child to soil himself, the lawsuit claimed.


A third child complied with the deputies' demands that he sit on a couch, but Lawler handcuffed him before Bowers zapped him repeatedly, the lawsuit said.


The fourth child, a girl, pleaded with the deputies to stop but Lawler handcuffed her. Bowers lifted her off the ground, pressed her against a wall and choked her, the lawsuit alleged.


"Do you want to live or die (expletive)?" the lawsuit claimed Bowers asked the girl before she was thrown into a closet, vomiting.

The saddest thing about this incident are these two things:

No criminal charges were ever filed.

And

Bowers and fellow deputy Lonnie Lawler still work for the department

Remember what I said about normal citizens not being as good as them? Think about it real long, and real hard when you imagine what one of them would have done to you if they caught you in the act of doing this. Then think long and hard about what a judge and jury would do to you after that... if you were still alive. What would the chances that you'd EVER be able to go to work again?

When police come to your house in Illinois, you have to revere them, or cower in fear of their swift smiting.. If there were a REAL castle doctrine in Illinois, we would legitimately lose hundreds of cops overnight... beginning to question why there's not one?

Law Enforcement is STILL not entertainment

The Cop Reality show "Femme Forces" is once again making headlines for violations of citizens privacy. As you recall in June I posted on this in the entry Law Enforcement is not entertainment.

A federal judge dismissed the case with prejudice July 22, court records show, with both sides responsible for court fees and costs.

"The city is quite pleased the parties could come together in a settlement," Scarlato said, adding that city officials believe the officers acted appropriately.

The case is one of three lawsuits filed as a result of the city's participation in "Female Forces," which chronicled the day-to-day activities of female officers in Naperville's Police Department. The two others are pending and also involve plaintiffs who said they never signed releases.

Just so you understand my main point of contention, is that in Illinois, it's illegal to film anyone else without their consent, it's actually a Felony. Because this TV crew was with a bunch of Cops, who (just face it, are better than you) are immune from the felony charges that police slap on everyone else they want to. This separation and elevation of one group based on their job title is starting to cause noticable backlash in peoples' support for them. East St. Louis announced they are laying off 19 police officers, and the officers are already stating that there will be blood from it, and it'll be on the city council's hands!

"The blood is on your hands," yelled Michael Hubbard, an East St. Louis police officer.

Hubbard said he will be the lone patrolman for East St. Louis’ midnight shift when the cuts go into effect.

Face it: Cops are better than you are

This news story is a couple months old, but bear with me for the relevance.  

Prosecutors said Killackey hailed a cab about 1 a.m. on April 23, 2009, outside a bar on the Near North Side.

Clermont testified that Killackey fell asleep, so when he reached his destination, the driver tapped on the cab partition. Killackey woke up, exited the car and began to walk away, Clermont said.

Clermont said he told Killackey that he forgot to pay the $8 fare but Killackey didn't stop.

"No, I didn't forget," Clermont said Killackey told him. "I don't owe you (expletive)."

Clermont then did a U-turn to block Clermont's path and asked him again to pay the fare. Killackey pulled a gun out and pointed it at Clermont, the cabbie testified. "You choose," Clermont quoted Killackey as saying to him. "Either I don't owe you (expletive) or you get out of the car and see what happens."

Clermont said he called 911. Police found a gun and his police badge in Killackey's pockets.

What was the terrible sentence for this man robbing a cab driver, threatening a man with a gun, and posessing a firearm on the street while drunk? That's right, he was charged with misdemeanor theft and assault, and given 60 hours of community service, His gun was returned to him the same night of the incident, and HE STILL HAS HIS JOB!!!...

He has also been relieved of police powers and an internal investigation is under way, said Chicago Police News Affairs Lt. Maureen Biggane. Killackey has been put in an administrative role, she said.

Let me tell you what would have happened to you or me in this situation:
you would have been held on a bond so high, no one could afford to get you out, so you would immediately LOSE YOUR JOB.
The court would KEEP your gun as evidence, then they'd trust someone like Killackey to properly "destroy" it.. or sell it to a child on the street, whichever is easier I suppose; Keep in mind there's no publicly available records of gun destructions.

Your charges would be:
2 counts of "Aggravated unlawful use of a weapon" Class 3, and Class 1 felony
1 count of "Armed Violence" Class X felony
1 count of "Theft" Class A misdemeanor
1 count "Aggravated Assault" (with use of a firearm) Class 4 Felony

If you were found guilty as officer Killackey was, your sentence would be: a minimum of 6 years, up to a maximum of 30 years in prison:
up to $25,000 in fines.
The loss of your right to own a firearm (not that YOU ever had it here in the first place)
And of course, the inability to ever get a decent job again.

The system is unfairly biased towards police, and this simply proves that the court system is also a part of that ring of corruption and thuggery. In a funny twist, the Suntimes reported that the officer actually commented that he thought that his 60 hours of community service, and 18 months of supervision was too harsh of a sentence. They have removed that article. I would normally file this under the "blue Wall of Silence" but since a judge and court was involved, the corruption goes much, much deeper.

This Land is NOT your land

Buying property in any suburb of Illinois is very much like temporarily leasing it. There's a huge set of rules that must be followed, plus you pay a HUGE amount in "rent" in the form of Property Taxes (My rent is $600 a month for $180K worth of property). When it comes to technologies that can better not just the community, but the entire world, I would like to say that I'm shocked by this, but I'm not. Gurnee IL is starting it's first Public Hearings to attempt to determine how to "regulate" wind power. Remember, in the days of the founding fathers, if a town stated they wished to "regulate" wind power, it would mean that they wanted to insure there was enough of it, or in other words, to keep it regular. Today this means the village of Gurnee wants to grant you permission to set up wind power as long as you pay them enough money (for the permit), and jump through whatever hoops the village wants you to jump through. Remember when your land was considered YOURS, and if you wanted to put a wind turbine up, provided it didn't pose a risk to nearby structures, you were free to do so?  Yeah... I don't either.

Wind Energy Systems include, but may not be limited to, Small Wind Energy Turbines which include Building Mounted Turbines and Tower Mounted (free-standing) Turbines. The potential regulations do not currently allow Large Wind Energy Turbines (Utility scale) on any lots in the Village of Gurnee.

I have long thought of setting up a wind turbine, my approach was to build it, set it up, and when the village harassed me about code, create a media firestorm making them look like idiots.  Although, this might be some interesting insight into why we as a people aren't advancing in technology. Everything from free power, to clothing is regulated in the form of some type of tax, or process that impedes.   This is the first town to announce a public hearing about the subject, so I can only assume people have started popping them up, and the village wants their cut of these people's money.