Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

McKinney Apologizes

Tim Cavanaugh | 4.6.2006 12:10 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) just made an apology on the House floor for her run-in with a Capitol Police officer last week, and said she'll be voting for some bill to praise the professionalism and dedication of the Capitol cops.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: "Fishapod" Confounds Creationists

Tim Cavanaugh
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (35)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. violent_k   19 years ago

    Shit. This was going to be fun to watch.

  2. Captain Holly   19 years ago

    Looks like the Bigwigs at the DNC finally talked some sense into her.

    Either that, or her poll numbers are dropping.

  3. Scoop-a-doop-doop   19 years ago

    Hahahahahaha. Aren't you supposed to make a beeping sound when you back up that suddenly?

  4. kwais   19 years ago

    I would like her to vote for some bill praising the people who talked sense into her.

  5. David McElroy   19 years ago

    Based on my reading of this early news story about her "apology," it wasn't an apology at all. It was a statement that she's sorry it happened and that there shouldn't have been ANY touching. Since the officer touched her first (and then she punched him), she seems to be weaseling out of making any real apology for HER specific actions.

    http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/06/D8GQK0UO0.html

  6. Phil   19 years ago

    I would like my Congress not to waste their -- and my -- time and their salaries (i.e. my taxes) on "some bill to praise the professionalism and dedication of the Capitol cops." Isn't there anything IMPORTANT you assholes could be dealing with?

  7. jason   19 years ago

    Daivid:

    She ended her statement with, "I apologize."

  8. joe   19 years ago

    "Since the officer touched her first (and then she punched him)"

    I keep seeing people use formulations like this. "He put his hand on her, and she slugged him..." or "He stopped her, and she punched him."

    I still haven't seen any evidence whatsoever regarding how hard either of them touched the other, but I see a lot of people spouting off confidently that she landed a Tyson-esque body blow.

  9. kwais   19 years ago

    Phil,
    As per your request, they will get right back to passing annoying regulations and such.

  10. kwais   19 years ago

    and spending more of your as yet unearned money.

  11. rdkraus   19 years ago

    Phil

    The more time they spend on this, the less time they'll have to steal our money.

  12. Larry   19 years ago

    Question: Can McKinney's apology be used as evidence against her either at the Grand Jury or at trial? I'm not a lawyer. Does the "Speech or Debate" clause protect her?

  13. Scott   19 years ago

    Why do some people feel that a cop can grab,touch or hit you anytime they feel it is necessary? Once the cop physically assaulted her, I feel that she was well within her rights to defend herself given the fact that she had done nothing wrong. I have yet to see any rational argument for giving police the power to use physical force anytime they want.

  14. jb   19 years ago

    Scott: This particular cop was authorized to use physical force to detain unauthorized entrants. McKinney did not authorize, or stop, therefore the cop was justified.

    He wasn't using force anytime he wanted, but as part of his duties when telling her to stop didn't work. How else do you suggest he carry out his job of keeping the capitol safe if he can't grab people he doesn't recognize who barge in without identification and refuse verbal commands to stop?

  15. D.A. Ridgely   19 years ago

    If only we could find a way to forceably stop the remaining Members of Congress from coming to work as well.

  16. D.A. Ridgely   19 years ago

    ... and before I get arrested, the above is a joke. Seriously, though, as much as I find McKinney's behavior, as reported, objectionable, it amazes me that anyone thinks this is newsworthy.

  17. Tom DeLay   19 years ago

    Should've tasered the hoe.

  18. Scott   19 years ago

    So anytime a police officer demands ID or papers you are forced to comply under the threat of physical force? She is a member of Congress and is allowed to bypass security and enter the building. The fact that the officer did not recognize her does not change the fact that he assaulted a person that had done nothing wrong. Are you advocating preemptive assaults by police officers based only on the mere suspicion of a crime? Are you also OK with the criminalization of any attempt to defend yourself against the unlawful actions of the police?

  19. Evan   19 years ago

    Scott:

    At the same time, if you're such an oversensitive twat that a police officer touching you on the shoulder constitutes "assault", then, well, I have very little sympathy.

    Meanwhile, crooked Mayberry-cops-cum-paramilitary-SWAT-teamers break into houses and shoot people all the time (and kill their poor pups)...for little more than possessing minute amounts of a particular herb. So excuse me if I don't get all worked into a lather because a cop touched someone's motherfucking shoulder without permission. If that's the worst thing this fucker did, then, we should consider ourselves lucky.

    Meanwhile, if some random CIVILIAN came up to you and put their hand on your shoulder, would you instinctively put a roundhouse on the dude? Or would you investigate further before resorting to physical response?

  20. bob   19 years ago

    Well put Evan. I'm all for ending police abuses but stopping someone who isnt' immediately recognized at a security checkpoint doesn't rank high on my list of abuses to correct. I'm sure that the elite who work in that building have a lot to do with the security procedures in place. If they think it's too stringent, relax it, if not, they might occasionally be mistaken for one us serfs.

  21. bob   19 years ago

    Almost forgot, I saw the "apology" on the news this morning. "I regret that any touching occurred". Very Clintonian. I'm starting to wonder if Mckinney had sex with the cop?:)

  22. Guy   19 years ago

    Scott:
    It was a freaking security checkpoint. Cops stop people at security checkpoints. You do not hit cops when they stop you at security checkpoints, even if they make a mistake in stopping you. Enforcing a security checkpoint at a capitol, one that was assaulted 7 years ago by a deranged gunman who managed to kill 2 of these Capitol Police officers, is certainly a legitimate function of government.

    My understanding is that Congresscritters may bypass these security checkpoints. My understanding is that they are supposed to wear little medallions/pins whatever that act as their security badge to bypass these checkpoints. My understanding is that Rep McKinney was not wearing hers. This leads me to the conclusion that the cop was justified in using reasonable force to stop her, and McKinney is truly a wacka-doo for making an issue out of this when she was clearly wrong.

  23. bubba   19 years ago

    If you want the congressional privilege of skipping the security line, you should wear your frickin' ID. How hard is this? Why must you make it more difficult for the cops to do their jobs?

    If your fashion sense doesn't allow you to wear the congressional pin, then the least you can do is announce your presence to the cops as you go past the detector.

    Unidentified people who blow through security should be tasered.

  24. SY   19 years ago

    Why do I keep flashing back to Seinfeld?

    "You gotta wear the ribbon!"

  25. John DeWitt   19 years ago

    I suggest a compromise. From now on, cops can touch any non-congressional citizen's shoulder any time he wants for any reason. In return, any politician of any kind who commits any infraction of any kind, however small or innocuous, is tasered to the floor and then torn to small bloody shreds by police dogs specially trained to go into a frenzy at the smell of politician blood.

  26. Chuck Norris   19 years ago

    "Meanwhile, if some random CIVILIAN came up to you and put their hand on your shoulder, would you instinctively put a roundhouse on the dude?"

    Of course I would; what else would a real man do?

  27. Greg   19 years ago

    When cops can stop from passing through a security checkpoint without ID, the terrorists have won.

  28. John DeWitt   19 years ago

    When cops can stop from passing through a security checkpoint without ID, the terrorists have won.

    Actually, when people are rendered so helpless against aggression that there are security checkpoints everywhere, the terrorists have won.

    It's just an interesting question who the terrorists are.

  29. Greg   19 years ago

    Actually, when people are rendered so helpless against aggression that there are security checkpoints everywhere, the terrorists have won.

    It's just an interesting question who the terrorists are.

    I agree completely. So, is the entrance to the Capitol building of the US an inappropriate location for a security checkpoint? I think we can agree that we haven't quite reached that point yet.

  30. Alan Vanneman   19 years ago

    How come Jim Trafficant could act like an idiot and be colorful, while Cynthia is treated like a disgrace and a threat to the Republic. There couldn't be different rules for white men and black women, could there?

  31. Viking Moose   19 years ago

    what would that be, Alan, one is in jail, the other in congress?

  32. Captain Holly   19 years ago

    Of course I would; what else would a real man do?

    Chuck Norris, 2:58 PM

    Chuck Norris doesn't roundhouse people. People mash their faces into Chuck Norris' fist.

  33. Douglas Fletcher   19 years ago

    Jim Trafficant

    So is he still doing that in-depth research into the federal prison system?

  34. futilitarian   19 years ago

    "How come Jim Trafficant could act like an idiot and be colorful, while Cynthia is treated like a disgrace and a threat to the Republic. There couldn't be different rules for white men and black women, could there?"

    Good point! They should have tasered that hoe, and then put her ass in the slammer in the cell next to Trafficant.

  35. bill   19 years ago

    Kids can't get into school without a picture I.D. on display. Is that too much to ask for people trying to bypass security at a government building??

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

In Defense of the Tourist Trap: Why Following the Crowd Might Be the Smartest Way To Travel

Christian Britschgi | From the August/September 2025 issue

69 Percent of Americans Say American Dream Is Not Dead

Autumn Billings | 7.4.2025 8:30 AM

With Environmental Regulatory Reform, California Gov. Gavin Newsom Finally Does Something Substantial

Steven Greenhut | 7.4.2025 7:30 AM

Celebrate Independence Day by Insulting a Politician

J.D. Tuccille | 7.4.2025 7:00 AM

Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice

Billy Binion | 7.4.2025 6:30 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!