Oakland’s police chief Anthony Batts has announced that Oakland Police will not responded to 44 different crimes if planned layoffs occur at midnight. It was useful for Batts to announce the categories in advance for criminals to chose from a criminal dim sum list of free crimes including grand theft, burglary, vehicle collision, identity theft and vandalism.
If you are the victim of burglary, you will be told to make a report online and not to expect police to respond.
Here the list of free crimes in Oakland:
burglary
theft
embezzlement
grand theft
grand theft:dog
identity theft
false information to peace officer
required to register as sex or arson offender
dump waste or offensive matter
discard appliance with lock
loud music
possess forged notes
pass fictitious check
obtain money by false voucher
fraudulent use of access cards
stolen license plate
embezzlement by an employee (over $ 400)
extortion
attempted extortion
false personification of other
injure telephone/ power line
interfere with power line
unauthorized cable tv connection
vandalism
administer/expose poison to another’s
That allows ample room for most criminals to plan a life of crime without the risk of police interference.
This is the response to the planned layoff of 80 officers. That is roughly one-tenth of the force. As we continue to gush billions in Afghanistan and Iraq, our cities are returning to a state of nature. According to the city of Oakland, each of the 776 police officers currently employed at OPD costs around $188,000 per year. The city council asked OPD officers to pay nine percent of their salary toward their pensions. However, the union would only agree if the city promised no layoffs. The city refused.
Source: NBC.
I say lets outlaw the concept of caucus.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/bachmann-forming-house-tea-party-caucus.php?ref=fpb Speaking of Michele Bachmann. After all there is a black caucus should not there be a “white” tea party caucus
I did not work in a state legislature in Texas. I worked in a state where Michele Bachmann was a state senator. There are so many crazies in those state legislatures I would continue to oppose number 9.
Pardon.
Fascist jackasses and political plants like Scalia and Roberts.
If it’s any consolation, I’m leaning toward replacing #9 with an amendment to limit SCOTUS terms from life to 20 or 25 years and/or making them elected in a post-campaign finance reform scenario. We need to address not just bad actors in elected office, but we need to be able to limit the kind of damage fascist jackasses like Scalia and Roberts can do.
Smom,
Not all states engage in the gerrymandering nonsense Texas does. And a No Confidence vote would need to be based on an arguably valid assertion or cause, not simply “we in the X party don’t like them because they are in Y party”.
Byron,
I don’t buy that. Part of the problem now is it’s too difficult to remove entrenched bad actors. That’s the precise reason I included it in the first place. I’m closer to buying Slarti’s redundancy in light of campaign finance reform than I am the payback issue.
Why?
Voters. They’d 1) have a say and 2) likely take out any pols opting for No Confidence on a publicly favored politician.
I agree with Byron on this one. The state legislatures for the most part are highly partisan and contentious. Look what they do with re-districting. I know I used to work in one.
Byron,
There is a concept in law called unjust enrichment. While it usually applies to contracts, it’s not a stretch to extend it to damage awards as it has been historically applied to restitutions other than remunerative elements of contracts, i.e. said types of tort damages. Making the families whole is one thing, but the excess cash from the penalties above and beyond that equitable distribution should rightly go to deficit reduction/general surplus (like we’ll ever see another surplus now the fascists are running things).
Buddha:
#9 has got to go, it would lead to chaos. Political payback would be the order of the day. You recalled my candidate, I am going to recall yours. It would be a never ending cycle of revenge. Decent people would not want to run for office, although I guess they don’t want to now.
There would be no stability.
Slarti:
“The money should go to deficit reduction – any increase in revenue should go to lowering the deficit (or the debt) until the debt is down to an acceptable level of GDP.”
Why? Individuals are the ones harmed not the country as a whole.
Woosty es todavía un gato,
I do like the Capital Steps and watched that very song earlier. 😉
TOM LEHRER!!!!!!!!!!!!
too funny, then you may also like the Capitol Steps;
Slarti,
In re #9: Duly noted. I want to sleep on that redundancy argument a bit. You may have sold it.
In re Lehrer: That’s just plain funny. I think I’m going to make his day and say something nasty to one of my cats.
Buddha,
in re #9:
I’m coming to the opinion that plank #9 is an ad hoc fix of problems that are more properly and effectively addressed by campaign finance reform. A friend of mine (who has a PhD in political science would argue that elections are effectively term limits (I agree with this once the overwhelming incumbency advantage is neutralized via campaign finance reform) and I think that elections are similarly the appropriate recall/no confidence mechanism. It is the civic obligation of the people to choose the person who will represent them for the next 4 years (or whatever term of office). If your electoral system is working then you don’t need anything beyond the methods of removal already in place and if it isn’t I think this would just make things worse.
in re regulation:
I agree with Mike A, too.
in re Tom Leher (from Wikipedia):
Lehrer has said of his musical career, “If, after hearing my songs, just one human being is inspired to say something nasty to a friend, or perhaps to strike a loved one, it will all have been worth the while.”[19]
“The money should go to deficit reduction – any increase in revenue should go to lowering the deficit (or the debt) until the debt is down to an acceptable level of GDP. As far as widows and orphans go, any company who’s employee dies on the job should be required to pay that person’s estate, say, twice their expected lifetime wages (an amount that is both putative to the company and sufficient to provide for the heirs). Every single company should be aware that a workers death is an unacceptable cost (financially as well as morally).”
That’s quite equitable.
Elaine posted:
Byron said,
“Elaine:
I tend to agree but how about putting the money gathered from fines into a widow and orphans type fund and set it aside for people who lose their lives rather than putting it on the general ledger?”
The money should go to deficit reduction – any increase in revenue should go to lowering the deficit (or the debt) until the debt is down to an acceptable level of GDP. As far as widows and orphans go, any company who’s employee dies on the job should be required to pay that person’s estate, say, twice their expected lifetime wages (an amount that is both putative to the company and sufficient to provide for the heirs). Every single company should be aware that a workers death is an unacceptable cost (financially as well as morally).
In re Tom Lehrer: I’m a long time fan of that smart and silly man. I blame Dr. Demento.
In re Regulation: What Mike A. said.
In re CPP Platform items: I need a break from working on the Statement of Principles, so I am most certainly open for discussion of #9 or any other plank or proposed plank.
Byron said:
“Who is watching the “watchers”? If the proposition is that men are morally corrupt and need to be controlled in order for them to do good, then all are in the same way in need of oversight. Which has been pretty much proven over the past few months with Massey Energy, BP, Bernie Madoff and others. There has been a massive failure of government oversight, what makes you think it will change?”
That we are seeing failures of regulation after 8 years of the Bush administration doing as much damage to regulatory agencies as possible is unsurprising. Eight years of the systematic destruction of regulatory systems developed over decades doesn’t immediately change with a new administration and things like Bernie Madoff, the collapse of the housing bubble, the upper big branch mine, and the Deepwater Horizon spill are the foreseeable results.
Byron, you raise some very good points regarding regulatory enforcement and private remedies for injured consumers. I have some things to do, but will follow up on your comments later.