Libertarian History/Philosophy

Declaring Independents in Chi-Town: Welch & Gillespie 8/15 Podcast from WGN 720. Plus: in Seattle Now!

|

Last week, Reason's Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch traveled to Chicago to promote their new book, The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong with America.

Among their stops in the Windy City was an August 15 program with the venerable Milt Rosenberg of WGN's 720AM. Gillespie and Welch spent an hour talking libertarianism with the "slightly superannuated" (his description!) University of Chicago psychology prof and talk-radio legend.

To listen to or download the podcast, go here now.

And if you're in the Seattle area, check out Gillespie and Welch at Hempfest today and tomorrow.

And they will be part of a Reason Foundation mini-conference on drug policy reform:

On Tuesday, August 23, the Reason Foundation (the nonprofit that publishes this website) is hosting an afternoon conference on drug-policy reform. Among the speakers will be Jacob Sullum, Nick Gillespie, and Matt Welch, along with folks such as the Drug Policy Alliance's Ethan Nadelman.

The event is free and open to the public, but RSVPs are a must. Details:

Drug Policy Reform in the States

 When: Tuesday, August 23 from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

Where: Hyatt Regency Bellevue, 900 Bellevue Way NE, Bellevue

RSVP: Mary Toledo at mary.toledo@reason.org or 310-391-2245

"Drug Policy Reform in the States" will be a chance to find out how states are leading the way in drug policy reform. You'll hear from drug policy experts, including Washington State Representative Roger Goodman; the Drug Policy Alliance's Ethan Nadelmann, and Reason's own Jacob Sullum, Nick Gillespie, and Matt Welch. This "mini-conference" will take place just before the annual State Policy Network meeting kicks off, but you do not have to be registered for SPN to attend this informative free afternoon.

For more information about SPN, go here.

And what the hell, here's PiL singing "Seattle":

NEXT: Update: Now with Audio! Listen to Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch on Boston's WRKO AM 680 at 1:30 PM ET

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. And whilst you’re enjoying the wind in the Windy City, why not let it blow you over to http://ronpaul2012.com/ so you can participate in the fun and excitement of the Ron Paul Birthday Moneybomb?

    Hey, I’m getting pretty good at this.

    1. You forgot your name tag.

    1. I’m most happy about John Lydon wearing a PIL shirt in a PIL video.

  2. The always great William Russel Meade. This is just classic. So nice it needs to be posted twice.

    Many liberals want green jobs to exist so badly that they don’t fully grasp how otherworldly and ineffectual this advocacy makes the President look to unemployed meat packers and truck drivers.

    Let me put it this way. A GOP candidate might feel a need to please creationist voters and say a few nice things about intelligent design. That is politics as usual; it gins up the base and drive the opposition insane with fury and rage. No harm, really, and no foul.

    But if that same politician then proposed to base federal health policy on a hunt for the historical Garden of Eden so that we could replace Medicare by feeding old people on fruit from the Tree of Life, he would have gone from quackery-as-usual to raving incompetence. True, the Tree of Life approach polls well in GOP focus groups: no cuts to Medicare benefits, massive tax savings, no death panels, Biblical values on display. Its only flaw is that there won’t be any magic free fruit that lets us live forever, and sooner or later people will notice that and be unhappy.

    Green jobs are the Democratic equivalent of Tree of Life Medicare; they scratch every itch of every important segment of the base and if they actually existed they would be an excellent policy choice. But since they are no more available to solve our jobs problem than the Tree of Life stands ready to make health care affordable, a green jobs policy boils down to a promise to feed the masses on tasty unicorn ribs from the Great Invisible Unicorn Herd that only the greens can see.

    http://blogs.the-american-inte…..corn-ribs/

    And what makes it even more sad and funny is how shocked smug liberals would be if they realized they are less rational than the worst snake handling fundie.

    1. I’d say equally irrational, but that’s just me.

      1. That is what I meant. Just misspoke. Equally is correct. I was reading about the new EPA power rules. If they really do result in rolling blackouts, it will be the end of the environmental movement. People don’t pay attention generally and have let the greens get away with murder for years because it never directly affected that many people’s lives in really visible ways. The power going off does. Sure brain dead idiots like double asshole and Tony will think it is great or blame George Bush. And MNG and his ilk will make excuses. But the other 70% of the country are going to know who to blame. They are going to destroy their own movement with this.

        1. Murder? We know who the baby-killers are.

          Indoor Air Pollution From Coal Combustion and the Risk of Neural Tube Defects in a Rural Population in Shanxi Province, China, Am. J. Epidemiol. (2011) 174 (4): 451-458. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwr108

          In Utero DNA Damage from Environmental Pollution Is Associated with Somatic Gene Mutation in Newborns, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev October 2002 11; 1134

          Relation between Ambient Air Quality and Selected Birth Defects, Seven County Study, Texas, 1997?2000, Am. J. Epidemiol. (1 August 2005) 162 (3): 238-252. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwi189

          1. Another leading cause of death in China is the lack of quality air in the bottom of the wells people drop their kids in because of China’s inhumane one-child policy.

            1. China has been an abysmal Hellhole of Civilization from the days the emperors built the Great Wall of China.

              As Manning* notes from modern scholars, the Wall was built to keep peasant farmers in, equestrian life on the steppe being preferable to the agriculture in a hierarchical society.

              (Yeah, I know states educate their domesticate city slickers to learn the long-held theory that the Wall was built keep the Mongols out, but the Mongols were more to the west, less to the north. Duh!)

              __________
              * Manning, Richard. Against the Grain. New York, NY: North Point Press, p. 44

              1. Oh, goody. The neo-lith returns with more propaganda.
                How was that rock and lichen dinner?

                1. How are your Diseases of Civilization?

                  Diseases of Civilization
                  Tulane University
                  School of Medicine
                  http://www.tulane.edu/~bfleury…..ofciv.rtf.

                  1. The requested URL /~bfleury/darwinmed/darwinmedlectures/diseasesofciv.rtf. was not found on this server.

                    1. Sorry, take off the period at the end. My punctuational error.

                      http://www.tulane.edu/~bfleury…..sofciv.rtf

                      Or use just google Diseases of Civilization Tulane University.

                  2. Milking People|8.21.11 @ 5:37PM|#
                    “How are your Diseases of Civilization?”

                    !Kung
                    (San bushmen)
                    (Kalahari)
                    ———————————————————————
                    Life expectancy at birth 30.0
                    http://cavemanforum.com/resear…..che-hadza-!kung-etc/

                    Thirty years doesn’t give you a lot of time to get sick.

                    1. Longevity & health in ancient Paleolithic vs. Neolithic peoples Not what you may have been told
                      by Ward Nicholson

                      http://www.beyondveg.com/nicho…..4-1a.shtml

                    2. Hey, dipshit, did you read your own link?
                      “One can see from the above data that things are rarely as clear-cut as dietary purists would like them to be. For any period in time, there is good and there is bad.”
                      Yeah, like a 32 year life-span for your favored hunter-gatherers, compared to even his (false) claim of 74 or so.

    2. Moron

  3. This “mini-conference” will take place just before the annual State Policy Network meeting kicks off…

    And will consist mostly of the keynote speakers standing at the podium, intently pondering the size and shape of their hands.

  4. I wish you guys had chosen something other than Hempfest to speak at, because there’s no fucking way I’m going to the sculpture park with a bunch of stoners to listen to you. They’re already massing through Belltown and annoying me.

    1. The only time I was in downtown for Hempfest I didn’t go. I was on my way to a concert at the Key and besides, I heard it was populated by nothing but bottom feeders and undercover cops.

    2. Not a good place to be packing.

      1. Well, if “Episiarch” isn’t going, I (we) aren’t going.

    3. Drugs are fine. It is the people who use them that are the problem.

      1. I can’t imagine why epi wouldn’t want to go, what with people like this guy running around there.

        1. Maybe that is “Epi.”

          1. Maybe you should get over whatever your problem is. Holding a grudge is like setting yourself on fire hoping your enemy dies of smoke inhalation.

            1. I’M ENTITLED TO MY OPINIONS!

          2. Your spasmodic responses just keeps adding to my ignore list.

        2. Dude, you should have seen the schmucks who somehow knew someone in my building and were at my fucking pool yesterday. Tons of tattoos, Ranier and Jeremiah Weed cans, and abject stupidity, all at loud volume. I swear I’m going to complain to the management. I pay good fucking money so I don’t have to see people like that.

          And then I went to dinner at a friend’s house in Magnolia, and I had to drive up Elliott and 15th, and it was absolutely mobbed with Hempfesters. Just the hugest clusterfuck.

          1. Spending 19 years with Sugarfree (shudder!!!!!) = spending 5 mintues with Epi.

            1. TROOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYY

          2. Pot is a fun way to spend an evening giggling, watching bad TV, and thinking stupid thoughts. There is nothing wrong with that. But pot doesn’t make you profound or give you any particular insight into life. There are few people more annoying than those who think it does.

            1. The illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world. ~Carl Sagan

    4. stoners really are the biggest impediment to legalization and/or decrim.

      many are smart enough to realize that MOST mj smokers are NOT stoners, in the same way that most people who drink are not miserable, wife-abusing, alcoholics.

  5. From the angle of that picture, it looks like Marilyn just ripped a hellacious fart.

    1. Marilyn NEVER farted. I beg your pardon.

      1. Don’t tell me, Ruthless. Tell the sculptor, or the person who mounted the statue w/o putting a grate underneath.

        1. That’s a statue?

        2. Good catch. That’s like something Fist of Etiquette would comment on in the Friday “funnies”.

          1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA!

            1. Is this a spoof?

              1. It’s an acknowledgement that we each have our individual role to play with regard to Friday Funnies.

  6. CHICAGO HAS JEWS

    1. The NAZIs were socialists.

  7. OT: The Million Year Life Span, incidentally published under the name “Reason”.

    1. I thought my consciousness was automatically guaranteed immortality as a basic consequence of the Many World Interpretations, i.e. the “quantum suicide” thought experiment.

      BTW, this is by far the best-produced video I’ve ever seen explaining the concept. (My guess is that it’s not only the best video in this universe, but in all of them.)

      This one is a probably a close second. Be patient. It starts a little slow, but the payoff at the end is huge.

      1. Crap. Here’s the link for the second video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92gcnGCWPSc

        In my defense, there are an infinite number of universes where I didn’t screw up the link.

      2. Wow, that was an incredibly well-made video.

  8. You know….

    Texas is in the Central Timezone too.

    *sniff sniff*

    Seriously, it’s like you guys don’t even know a gigantic population of (somewhat) similarly minded individuals exists down here. Is it the heat? We’ve got central AC EVERYWHERE.

    You’ve got to know it exists. Jacob Sullum lives down here.

    On another note (and a whoreish one at that) Liberty on the Rocks- Fort Worth is meeting at Fuzzy Tacos in North Richland Hills on September 7th. COME HANG OUT.

    1. And maybe then Reason can finally start posting some articles about that Texas governor of yours.

      1. About how he’s a power-monger opportunist? Yeah, those I’d like to see.

    2. Fort Worth? That’s practically southern Oklahoma!

      1. WATCH IT! That’s a pretty major goddamned insult to my ears buddy! 😉

    3. when the fuck did NRH get a fuzzy’s. i saw one in either sherman or denton and its bullshit.

      the only legitimate fuzzy’s is the one on berry street by TCU.

  9. They gotta do Houston before Dallas.

      1. Houston did 500

        1. Quality over quantity every time.

  10. The link to the book is broken

    1. The book is a lie

  11. Is that picture what you meant by “supporting a social safety net”, Mr Welch?

  12. Yeah OK man that makes a lot of sense dude.

    http://www.total-anon.at.tc

  13. You know who is a big fan of Extension 720?

    1. You can say that again!!

      1. I did!

  14. You know who is a big fan of Extension 720?

  15. Are Matt and Nick selling a book?

  16. Wait, what?

    Even advanced concepts, like organized labor, show up in children’s literature. Justin Wolfers, a professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, cited “Click, Clack, Moo: Cows That Type” by Doreen Cronin and Betsy Lewin, a book about cows that withhold milk from a farmer until he provides electric blankets. Mr. Wolfers read the book to his 1-year-old daughter, Matilda, during the Wisconsin protests against Gov. Scott Walker’s attack on union rights.

    Mr. Wolfers said the book also illustrated economic efficiency. A duck, the liaison between the cows and the farmer, persuades the farmer to install a diving board in the pond. “That costs the farmer almost nothing but the ducks really value it,” Mr. Wolfers said. “The diving board is a public good.”

    Being an MBA from Wharton must a lot like being a constitutional scholar from Harvard.

    -and-

    By and large, the economic lessons in children’s books lean left of center. “I think the writers are not particularly sympathetic to or don’t understand how a market works,” said Gary S. Becker, the Nobel laureate who teaches economics at the University of Chicago. “It’s not easy to convey that to a child. It’s not always easy to convey it to grown-ups.”

    No shit.

    1. I like the story, and think it should be taught to all children. If read properly, it is an indictment on organized labor. Had the cows gone straight to management and made a compelling argument, they may have gotten their blankets. They used the ducks instead, who were paid to advocate on their behalf, yet made sure to first get a concession that immediately benefitted themselves. They even flaunted this benefit as a “public good,” even though it was useless to the cows. And while the diving board cost “almost nothing,” according to those who demanded it, there was an actual cost to the farmer rancher*, who instinctively would deduct from what he was spending on the blankets, meaning the cows would get screwed.

      So Mr Wolfers is correct in that the story illustrated economic efficiency. It perfectly states how unions and labor organizers are self serving parasites who place their welfare over those they are paid to advocate for, to the detriment of the worker and manager alike.

      *just a pet peeve of mine. Dairymen are not farmers.

      How’d I do?

      1. All dairymen are farmers, but not all farmers are dairymen.

        Farmer —> general

        dairyman —> specific

        1. I wouldn’t tell that to a dairymen. You’d likely end up In a silage pit.

          Some dairymen are farmers, but only because they also farm crops.

          1. Why can’t the farmer and the cowman be friends? Personally, I say territory folks should stick together.

          2. A better class of people?

          3. Someone once told me that a calf will suck on anything you put in front of its mouth. Produce farmers don’t have that luxury.

            1. But produce farmers have all that fruit they can cut holes in. A watermelon patch is like a huge fleshlight farm.

              1. Fucking watermelons is the shit until you run into a rhine.

      2. You forgot the part where the ducks pay off the rancher’s wife to pressure the rancher into making the consessions.

        1. By “pay off,” do you mean pressure her through intimidation and threaten her with a scorched earth policy?

          Damn, I hate ducks!

    2. Hmmm, I’d say the proper response should have been a rib eye and duck breast bar-b-que, next to the pond.

    3. cows that withhold milk from a farmer

      Which gets to the point of what capitalism and government is all about: Milking those lower in the hierarchy, while wealth flows into higher, righter and tighter hands.

      1. If the farmer let the cows hold out, eventually they would have begged him to milk them lest their milk bags explode, or their milk would dry up, making them worth about $.15/lb to a dog food maker.

        1. The Southern Plantation owners concocted a similar system of apologetics regarding their chattel slaves.

          (They also knew the Northern wage-slavers capitalist system could milk domesticated humans even more efficiently, and not have to worry about taking care of them.)

          1. Milking People|8.21.11 @ 4:47PM|#
            “The Southern Plantation owners concocted a similar system of apologetics regarding their chattel slaves.”

            Brain-deads concoct bull-shit equivalences.

            1. For southern apologists for slavery, the wage slavery of England and the northern states was worse than actual slavery because employers felt no responsibility for the welfare of their “wage slaves.”

              ~Library of Congress
              http://www.slaveryinamerica.org/

              1. Milking People|8.21.11 @ 5:17PM|#
                “For southern apologists for slavery, the wage slavery of England and the northern states was worse than actual slavery because employers felt no responsibility for the welfare of their “wage slaves.””

                “Wage slave” makes brain-dead shitheads wet their pants.

                1. Men do not do repetitive work as a matter of choice. They do it out of dire necessity. They can be driven to this sort of work only if they are deprived of access to the land. Our system of private property in land forces landless men to work for others; to work in factories, stores, and offices, whether they like it or not. wherever access to land is free, men work only to provide what they actually need or desire. Wherever the white man has come in contact with savage cultures this fact becomes apparent. There is for savages in their native state no such sharp distinction between “work” and “not working” as clocks and factory whistles have accustomed the white man to accept. They cannot be made to work regularly at repetitive tasks in which they have no direct interest except by some sort of duress. Disestablishment from land, like slavery, is a form of duress. The white man, where slavery cannot be practiced, has found that he must first disestablish the savages from their land before he can force them to work steadily for him. Once they are disestablished, they are in effect starved into working for him and into working as he directs. Only after he has made it impossible for them to support themselves as they desire, does be find it possible to drive them to work for him according to approved factory techniques, with sharp distinctions between the time devoted to productive labor and the time devoted to rest or play.

                  ~ Dr. Ralph Borsodi
                  This Ugly Civilization
                  New York | Simon and Schuster
                  1 9 2 9

                  1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                  2. Milking People|8.21.11 @ 5:47PM|#
                    “Men do not do repetitive work as a matter of choice.”

                    Yeah. A choice to live longer than 30 years.

                    1. Longevity & health in ancient Paleolithic vs. Neolithic peoples Not what you may have been told
                      by Ward Nicholson
                      http://www.beyondveg.com/nicho…..4-1a.shtml

                    2. Hey, dipshit, did you read your own link?
                      “One can see from the above data that things are rarely as clear-cut as dietary purists would like them to be. For any period in time, there is good and there is bad.”
                      Yeah, like a 32 year life-span for your favored hunter-gatherers, compared to even his (false) claim of 74 or so.

                  3. You ever keep a fire going in the wilderness, son? There’s a lot of repetitive work involved.

  17. Incoherent social justice rambling.

    If someone believes that government must be involved in providing services such as health care for older Americans, highways or schools, they see changing the tax structure for high-income people as a “necessary part of the equation,” Stretch said.

    ——–

    What about the argument that anyone can pay more in taxes by sending a check anytime they want? The Treasury Department has a site for that: tinyurl.com/ybgbfov.

    Stretch raised an interesting point: Do you then end up treating federal funding as a charity?

    Think about all the religious organizations, civic groups and artistic programs that struggle to raise enough money to cover their operations.

    Are we willing to finance the war in Afghanistan on voluntary contributions? Stretch asked.

    “The answer is I hope ‘No,’ because I have a son there,” an Air Force pilot.

    “Everybody in America must fund my kid’s idiotic murderous joyrides.”

    Fuck you.

    1. Fuck you.

      You’re not even trying.
      D-

    2. “Where is the evidence that tax cuts have created jobs?” asked Fink, who is a progressive Democrat.

      Fink said some of the jobs created when the wealthy save money on taxes are for “personal trainers, massage therapists, executive chefs.”

      “Tax cuts don’t create jobs! And the jobs they do create aren’t real jobs!”

      1. The cognitive dissonance is lulzy as fuck.

        Personal trainers, massage therapists and executive chefs don’t stimulate the economy? I guess fairies make athletic equipment, massage tables and the ingredients that are used to make meals.

        Fuck these people. They only care about creating union jobs and an increased social safety net so they can capture votes. May they all die a miserably slow death that involves fire ants and a straw.

        1. If it doesn’t give them power and influence, they hate it.

        2. By that logic, extra government spending is as good or better than tax cuts, since the people who get that money are just as stimulative of the economy as massage therapists. And tax cuts might be spent on services from foreigners, in which case the money leaves our economy.

          Tax cuts spent on stupid shit are just as bad as govt spending on stupid shit. Tax cuts are advantageous only if they tend to be spent on more efficient/needful stuff.

          1. Who are you to tell people what to spend their money on???

            1. I’m only discussing the effects of the two phenomena on the larger economy, not the moral legitimacy of taxation in general.

              1. Right, my neighbor buying a 3rd 55″ flat-screen is exactly like the gubmint buying the Goldman Sachs CEO a new yacht and house boy.

                We’ll just conveniently ignore the source and means to acquire the loot used to buy these things. That just makes things messy.

                1. Dude, the question that sparked this discussion was whether tax cuts create better jobs than govt spending does. While moral legitimacy is important in the big picture, it has nothing to do with this particular discussion.

                  1. Not being s supply-sider, I don’t consider either to be particularly “stimulative,” but in terms of the types of jobs, tax cuts rule.

                    With tax cuts, assuming they aren’t a one-time shot, you get spending with consumers that is consistent with their normal buying patterns. They might super-size a purchase, but they aren’t going to change their patterns too much, since tax cuts are fractional in terms of income to begin with. They’ll just have more disposable income to work with, in theory. They might save more, they might spend more, but the bucks stay in the private market.

                    Gubmint spending, OTOH, is purely political and whatever jobs it might create, dry up when the spending dries up. Add to that is the cut the gubmint takes as it washes the funds through the machine before it spits it out.

                    All the same, ignoring the massive moral hazard created through gubmint spending, not to mention the malinvestment created, is just silly. Let’s talk about which is faster: painting a wall with a roller or by just throwing the bucket on there, without worrying about the quality of the results.

  18. D-

    I’ll hang that on my refrigerator.

  19. I approve of Matt Welch posing with the giant Marilyn Monroe statue.

    But then, I would, since I’ve written comic stories where the villainess was a Monroe-wannabe washed-out-actress who is transformed into a 60 foot giantess.

    http://accomics.com/Merchant2/…..y_Code=OGC

    What? Don’t judge me!

    Nah, go ahead and judge me, I don’t care.

    1. make that “comic book stories” instead of “comic stories”. Although, they’ve got some humor in them, clearly…

  20. Wow

    It all comes down to this: Is there an inalienable right to self-defense? If there is, each man has indisputable, inestimable value, value that he may rightly preserve even if the life of another man is forfeit. A man may kill another in lawful self-defense even if the policy preferences of the state would prefer his death. If a right to self-defense actually exists, it is in a very real sense the highest law of the land and all lesser laws must pay it deference. It fundamentally defines the social contract, the nature of the relationship between man and the state.

    But if there is no such inalienable right, the entire nature of the social contract is changed. Each man’s worth is measured solely by his utility to the state, and as such the value of his life rides a roller coaster not unlike the stock market: dependent not only upon the preferences of the party in power but upon the whims of its political leaders and the permanent bureaucratic class. The proof of this analysis surrounds us.

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/g…..f-liberty/

    1. This ignores a key restriction on the right to self-defense: it only allows one to harm an aggressor. You do not have the right to harm innocent people to save yourself.

      In a “Saw” type scenario, where an inaccessible aggressor has ordered you to kill another person or else he will kill you, you do NOT have the right to kill that other person. Your life is forfeit due to the policy preferences of the state, ie that innocent people cannot be harmed without consequence.

      1. In a “Saw” type scenario, where an inaccessible aggressor has ordered you to kill another person or else he will kill you, you do NOT have the right to kill that other person.

        That sounds an awful lot like the government drafting people and sending them off to war.

  21. I gave in and ordered the book on Amazon. You win, Nick and Matt!

    1. Benedict Arnold bought George Washington’s book.

      1. I’m more of a Mad Anthony Wayne.

  22. Global Warming runs out of gas
    http://fullcomment.nationalpos…..ut-of-gas/


    Perhaps, finally, the unctuousness, sanctimony and sputtering righteousness of the high-profile environmentalists signal to most observers that they aren’t really as certain of all this “science” as they pretend to be. Either way this long green game has lost its fundamental energies. The celebrities will find another wristband; the politicians will find a new vague distraction.

  23. Premise Five: The property of those higher on the hierarchy is more valuable than the lives of those below. It is acceptable for those above to increase the amount of property they control?in everyday language, to make money?by destroying or taking the lives of those below. This is called production. If those below damage the property of those above, those above may kill or otherwise destroy the lives of those below. This is called justice.

    ~Derrick Jensen
    Endgame Premises
    http://www.endgamethebook.org/…..emises.htm

    1. Another one for the ignore list.

      1. “Another one for the ignore list.”

        Not going to be easy; the guy changes screen name four or five times a day.
        But all the posts are easily identifiable; they all make the claims that:
        1) People really don’t want ‘things’; it’s the rulers who make them do so.
        2) People would really be happier if they didn’t ‘work’ so much and died at age 30.
        And I’m pretty sure diptshit thinks no one here has heard this bullshit before.
        And the hypocrisy of posting the ‘noble savage’ crap on the internet seems to be lost on him.

        1. That’s OK. I can just keep adding them.

          Now, if people here would just stop feeding them….

        2. The scroll bar is immune to name changes, last I checked. Well, unless it’s dunphy posting a master’s thesis in the middle of the thread. :\

    2. Sounds like the party leaders in those worker’s paradises.

      Actually, sounds like the party leaders in our ever socializing state.

  24. AWESOME. the fact that terms and concepts I frequently use are reinforced is a + too!

    http://www.policeone.com/media…..the-media/
    About a dozen news personnel from TV, radio, and print outlets accepted the department’s invitation, some frankly surprised that the agency was eager to jump into the use-of-force shark tank with them. Of one reporter who opted to pursue other activities that day, colleagues said later: “He’ll be sorry he missed this.” Those present readily conceded to the ground rules. “We wanted to be in control so it wasn’t just a media scrum,” Bergen said.

    With the enthusiastic support of police executives, the training cadre had put together a fast-paced presentation consisting of PowerPoint lecture and live demonstrations. It was made clear that the speakers ? Sgt. Jeff Quail, P/Sgt. Ron Bilton, Cst. Adam Cheadle, and Bergen ? would not answer questions about or draw examples from any currently “unresolved investigations.” The guests could take notes, but no recording or photography was permitted.

    “Our intent,” Bergen said, “was to show that officers are highly trained and have a lot of tools available for dealing with what they encounter on the job, including various force options, but at the end of the day they are human beings. We wanted this to be the big take-away.”

    Policy Prep
    First, to put the subject in perspective, the team pointed out the statistically minute portion of police calls for service that result in use of force: barely more than one-half of one percent in Winnipeg, where more than 150,000 calls are logged per year. The perception may be that “officers are out there applying force to everybody, but the reality is they’re not,” Cheadle explained. This in itself made big headlines when some reporters wrote about the training day afterward.

    The department’s use-of-force policy was explained, so the audience understood when and how officers officially can resort to force. Canadian law was reviewed, including the fact that a reasonable perception of impending “grievous bodily harm” ? not only the fear of imminent death ? is legal justification for defensively employing lethal measures

    “A real eye-opener to some,” Bergen said of the reaction to that information. The “totality of circumstances” concept was explored and illustrated, and the control options in Winnipeg’s version of the force continuum were described, from command presence through deadly force, along with their relative intensities. Popular misconceptions like shooting to wound and shooting a weapon out of a suspect’s hand, were debunked.

    Particular attention was given to officers’ training in verbal direction, “to show that ‘tactical communication’ is a defined skill set, more than just buzz words,” Bergen said. “We discussed the basic philosophy of trying to defuse volatile situations with words, what kind of persuasive appeals and techniques officers use.

    “We wanted to reinforce that officers are not just jumping to go hands-on unless it’s absolutely necessary. They don’t want to go home to their families bruised and banged up, with more scars on their bodies.”

    The team was careful not to reveal “any tactical information related to force that might compromise officers on the street,” Bergen stresses. “Things like the formula used to determine when deadly force is justified might give a suspect the edge in manipulating a confrontation, so we avoided that kind of information.”

    TASER Demo
    Although conducted energy weapons have been a source of considerable controversy in Canada (one of Winnipeg’s knife-offender deaths occurred after a TASER deployment), the reporters seemed generally to share a common up-close unfamiliarity with the devices. So a myth-busting walk-through of the X26 model that local officers carry was given (yes, 50,000 volts, but no, not the equivalent of a near-electrocution).

    After explaining the type of resistance for which a CEW is appropriate, a TASER was fired at an inert target. “We made clear that this is not a device that officers use flippantly,” Bergen said. Research documenting the comparative safety of the weapon for officers and suspects alike (relative to baton strikes and fights, for example) was also emphasized.

    Stress Impact
    Perhaps the most humanizing aspect of the lecture portion, Bergen suggests, was a layman’s-level analysis of how high stress impacts an officer’s performance during uncertain, rapidly evolving, life-threatening situations.

    In “not too academic terms,” Quail described the neuro-anatomy of the brain and explained how stress affects vision, cognitive perception, decision-making, motor performance, and memory. For this, he drew heavily on scientific research conducted and/or reported by Dr. Bill Lewinski’s Force Science Research Center (both Quail and Bergen are certified in Force Science Analysis).

    “This knowledge is vitally important in any post-analysis of a major force event,” Bergen said. “An involved officer’s judgment, perceptions, behavior, recollections, and articulation of what happened are very real concerns, and if it’s not understood how these all are affected by a sudden stress load, his or her actions and responses may not get a fair, impartial, and accurate evaluation.

    “An incident that seems to have one explanation may in fact have been shaped by very different influences. We wanted to impress on the media that to judge any force encounter without analyzing all the factors potentially involved is a travesty.”

    Revealing Role Play
    To sample a taste of on-the-line stress and the vagaries of human reaction, the media group donned protective gear and shifted from the classroom to the academy gym to experience a training scenario first-hand. All signed liability waivers.

    One reporter volunteer was armed with a Simunitions training gun and led to a corner of the gym, where he was told he would experience a confrontation and should react as if he were an officer coming upon the scene. The other media reps were positioned at different distances and angles as “witnesses.” A video camera was set up to tape the event.

    Without warning, two role-playing trainers burst from a side room. One wielding a knife and screaming, “I’m gonna kill you!” chased the other and brought him to the floor. After “stabbing” the victim, the assailant rose, turned toward the officer with knife raised, and snarled verbal threats. The startled “officer” fired at the suspect to stop the attack.

    Instructed not to discuss the incident, the shooter and the others were immediately hustled into another room and given questionnaires to fill out regarding their observations: How far away was the attacker from the subject? ? a question that’s “always raised when knife offenders are shot,” Bergen explains. Were any weapons present, and if so, what were they? What, if anything, did the victim say? Were any shots fired, and if so, how many? And so on.

    The shooter had additional questions to answer: If you shot, did you hit the assailant, and if so, where and how many times? What was the assailant wearing? If he had a weapon, where was it? And so on…

    “These are the kind of questions officers are asked after a shooting,” the group was told when they’d finished. “Not having accurate answers can seriously impact your credibility.

    “Everybody was absolutely amazed at how inconsistent the answers were among them ? and how different they were from what they saw when we played the videotape. When we asked the ‘officer’ to explain what was going through his mind during the incident, he was stunned at the limited amount of information he could recall. And he hadn’t even been directly threatened!”

    The day ended, Bergen said, with a “good discussion” of the scenario and how the reporters’ responses tied in with the stress dynamics Quail had outlined earlier.

    Bergen thinks the media training day “absolutely” was worth the effort. Kelly Dehn, a police reporter for CTV-Winnipeg, enthusiastically agrees. The day “put you in an officer’s shoes,” he recently told PoliceOne. “You got a real sense of what an officer has to decide in a split-second, a whole new perspective on what an officer goes through. I had a much better understanding the next time I went out on a police story. What good reporter wouldn’t appreciate that?”

    Relations between the police and the media are likely always to be a bit dicey. “There are bound to be mistakes on both sides,” Bergen said, “and maybe we’ll end up getting burned somewhere downrange. But at least this shows we’re trying for more transparency, trying to lower the walls a bit.”

  25. awesome. and very in-line with the dunphy school of force analysis ™

    http://www.policeone.com/media…..the-media/

    Policy Prep
    First, to put the subject in perspective, the team pointed out the statistically minute portion of police calls for service that result in use of force: barely more than one-half of one percent in Winnipeg, where more than 150,000 calls are logged per year. The perception may be that “officers are out there applying force to everybody, but the reality is they’re not,” Cheadle explained. This in itself made big headlines when some reporters wrote about the training day afterward.

    The department’s use-of-force policy was explained, so the audience understood when and how officers officially can resort to force. Canadian law was reviewed, including the fact that a reasonable perception of impending “grievous bodily harm” ? not only the fear of imminent death ? is legal justification for defensively employing lethal measures

    “A real eye-opener to some,” Bergen said of the reaction to that information. The “totality of circumstances” concept was explored and illustrated, and the control options in Winnipeg’s version of the force continuum were described, from command presence through deadly force, along with their relative intensities. Popular misconceptions like shooting to wound and shooting a weapon out of a suspect’s hand, were debunked.

    Particular attention was given to officers’ training in verbal direction, “to show that ‘tactical communication’ is a defined skill set, more than just buzz words,” Bergen said. “We discussed the basic philosophy of trying to defuse volatile situations with words, what kind of persuasive appeals and techniques officers use.

    “We wanted to reinforce that officers are not just jumping to go hands-on unless it’s absolutely necessary. They don’t want to go home to their families bruised and banged up, with more scars on their bodies.”

    The team was careful not to reveal “any tactical information related to force that might compromise officers on the street,” Bergen stresses. “Things like the formula used to determine when deadly force is justified might give a suspect the edge in manipulating a confrontation, so we avoided that kind of information.”

    TASER Demo
    Although conducted energy weapons have been a source of considerable controversy in Canada (one of Winnipeg’s knife-offender deaths occurred after a TASER deployment), the reporters seemed generally to share a common up-close unfamiliarity with the devices. So a myth-busting walk-through of the X26 model that local officers carry was given (yes, 50,000 volts, but no, not the equivalent of a near-electrocution).

    After explaining the type of resistance for which a CEW is appropriate, a TASER was fired at an inert target. “We made clear that this is not a device that officers use flippantly,” Bergen said. Research documenting the comparative safety of the weapon for officers and suspects alike (relative to baton strikes and fights, for example) was also emphasized.

    Stress Impact
    Perhaps the most humanizing aspect of the lecture portion, Bergen suggests, was a layman’s-level analysis of how high stress impacts an officer’s performance during uncertain, rapidly evolving, life-threatening situations.

    In “not too academic terms,” Quail described the neuro-anatomy of the brain and explained how stress affects vision, cognitive perception, decision-making, motor performance, and memory. For this, he drew heavily on scientific research conducted and/or reported by Dr. Bill Lewinski’s Force Science Research Center (both Quail and Bergen are certified in Force Science Analysis).

    “This knowledge is vitally important in any post-analysis of a major force event,” Bergen said. “An involved officer’s judgment, perceptions, behavior, recollections, and articulation of what happened are very real concerns, and if it’s not understood how these all are affected by a sudden stress load, his or her actions and responses may not get a fair, impartial, and accurate evaluation.

    “An incident that seems to have one explanation may in fact have been shaped by very different influences. We wanted to impress on the media that to judge any force encounter without analyzing all the factors potentially involved is a travesty.”

    Revealing Role Play
    To sample a taste of on-the-line stress and the vagaries of human reaction, the media group donned protective gear and shifted from the classroom to the academy gym to experience a training scenario first-hand. All signed liability waivers.

    One reporter volunteer was armed with a Simunitions training gun and led to a corner of the gym, where he was told he would experience a confrontation and should react as if he were an officer coming upon the scene. The other media reps were positioned at different distances and angles as “witnesses.” A video camera was set up to tape the event.

    Without warning, two role-playing trainers burst from a side room. One wielding a knife and screaming, “I’m gonna kill you!” chased the other and brought him to the floor. After “stabbing” the victim, the assailant rose, turned toward the officer with knife raised, and snarled verbal threats. The startled “officer” fired at the suspect to stop the attack.

    Instructed not to discuss the incident, the shooter and the others were immediately hustled into another room and given questionnaires to fill out regarding their observations: How far away was the attacker from the subject? ? a question that’s “always raised when knife offenders are shot,” Bergen explains. Were any weapons present, and if so, what were they? What, if anything, did the victim say? Were any shots fired, and if so, how many? And so on.

    The shooter had additional questions to answer: If you shot, did you hit the assailant, and if so, where and how many times? What was the assailant wearing? If he had a weapon, where was it? And so on…

    “These are the kind of questions officers are asked after a shooting,” the group was told when they’d finished. “Not having accurate answers can seriously impact your credibility.

    “Everybody was absolutely amazed at how inconsistent the answers were among them ? and how different they were from what they saw when we played the videotape. When we asked the ‘officer’ to explain what was going through his mind during the incident, he was stunned at the limited amount of information he could recall. And he hadn’t even been directly threatened!”

    The day ended, Bergen said, with a “good discussion” of the scenario and how the reporters’ responses tied in with the stress dynamics Quail had outlined earlier.

    Bergen thinks the media training day “absolutely” was worth the effort. Kelly Dehn, a police reporter for CTV-Winnipeg, enthusiastically agrees. The day “put you in an officer’s shoes,” he recently told PoliceOne. “You got a real sense of what an officer has to decide in a split-second, a whole new perspective on what an officer goes through. I had a much better understanding the next time I went out on a police story. What good reporter wouldn’t appreciate that?”

    Relations between the police and the media are likely always to be a bit dicey. “There are bound to be mistakes on both sides,” Bergen said, “and maybe we’ll end up getting burned somewhere downrange. But at least this shows we’re trying for more transparency, trying to lower the walls a bit.”

  26. very dunphy’esque force analysis! bravo…

    http://www.policeone.com/media…..the-media/

    First, to put the subject in perspective, the team pointed out the statistically minute portion of police calls for service that result in use of force: barely more than one-half of one percent in Winnipeg, where more than 150,000 calls are logged per year. The perception may be that “officers are out there applying force to everybody, but the reality is they’re not,” Cheadle explained. This in itself made big headlines when some reporters wrote about the training day afterward.

    The department’s use-of-force policy was explained, so the audience understood when and how officers officially can resort to force. Canadian law was reviewed, including the fact that a reasonable perception of impending “grievous bodily harm” ? not only the fear of imminent death ? is legal justification for defensively employing lethal measures

    “A real eye-opener to some,” Bergen said of the reaction to that information. The “totality of circumstances” concept was explored and illustrated, and the control options in Winnipeg’s version of the force continuum were described, from command presence through deadly force, along with their relative intensities. Popular misconceptions like shooting to wound and shooting a weapon out of a suspect’s hand, were debunked.

    Particular attention was given to officers’ training in verbal direction, “to show that ‘tactical communication’ is a defined skill set, more than just buzz words,” Bergen said. “We discussed the basic philosophy of trying to defuse volatile situations with words, what kind of persuasive appeals and techniques officers use.

    “We wanted to reinforce that officers are not just jumping to go hands-on unless it’s absolutely necessary. They don’t want to go home to their families bruised and banged up, with more scars on their bodies.”

    The team was careful not to reveal “any tactical information related to force that might compromise officers on the street,” Bergen stresses. “Things like the formula used to determine when deadly force is justified might give a suspect the edge in manipulating a confrontation, so we avoided that kind of information.”

    TASER Demo
    Although conducted energy weapons have been a source of considerable controversy in Canada (one of Winnipeg’s knife-offender deaths occurred after a TASER deployment), the reporters seemed generally to share a common up-close unfamiliarity with the devices. So a myth-busting walk-through of the X26 model that local officers carry was given (yes, 50,000 volts, but no, not the equivalent of a near-electrocution).

  27. awesome. great analysis. makes me proud!

    http://www.policeone.com/media…..the-media/

    In two cases occurring within a short timeframe, young offenders in Winnipeg, Manitoba, died in edged-weapon confrontations with police ? in the public hullabaloo that followed each encounter the same shopworn questions reverberated in the media and among armchair critics:

    Wasn’t the use of force excessive?

    Couldn’t the cops just have shot the knife out of his hand?

    Aggravated trainers in the Officer Safety Unit at the Winnipeg Police Service training academy decided it was time to do more than just bitch about na?ve civilians’ Hollywood-based misperceptions. “We wanted to be proactive in some way that would produce more informed analysis and assessment of police actions in high-stress, dynamic situations,” said Cst. Barney Bergen, a Winnipeg use-of-force instructor.

    The upshot: a carefully-crafted crash course in force realities for representatives of the city’s media, with simple but critical ground rules.

    They had to lay aside their cameras, tape recorders, and (at least until the end of the day) their conflict-seeking questions. They had to stay for the whole six-hour presentation; no snatching just bits and pieces on the fly. And they had to listen with an open mind. In exchange, they’d learn “the realistic expectations people should have of officers’ performance under acute stress in use-of-force encounters.”

    More than a year after that “leap of faith” experiment, Bergen said, the department is still reaping benefits. “I was one of the skeptics in the beginning. In the past, some of our officers have had very negative, even traumatic, experiences with the media. But since the program, we’ve seen more balanced coverage and better interaction between news outlets and our Media Liaison Office. It has helped prevent wild spin-doctoring and out-of-context reporting.”

    As a result of such improvements, he believes, the public has an opportunity to gain a more grounded grasp of the how city’s nearly 1,400 police “go about enforcing the law” and a better comprehension that “when possible we always try to resolve encounters without having to use force.”

    To sustain the progress, Winnipeg is considering a refresher repeat of Media Training Day. Bergen and other planners would welcome hearing ideas that have worked for other departments in taming the news beast ? you can e-mail Bergen at barney.bergen@policeone.com but also consider sharing your thoughts in the comments area at the end of this article so others can benefit as well. Meanwhile, for those interested in replicating Winnipeg’s approach, here are key elements.

    Basic Playbook
    About a dozen news personnel from TV, radio, and print outlets accepted the department’s invitation, some frankly surprised that the agency was eager to jump into the use-of-force shark tank with them. Of one reporter who opted to pursue other activities that day, colleagues said later: “He’ll be sorry he missed this.” Those present readily conceded to the ground rules. “We wanted to be in control so it wasn’t just a media scrum,” Bergen said.

    With the enthusiastic support of police executives, the training cadre had put together a fast-paced presentation consisting of PowerPoint lecture and live demonstrations. It was made clear that the speakers ? Sgt. Jeff Quail, P/Sgt. Ron Bilton, Cst. Adam Cheadle, and Bergen ? would not answer questions about or draw examples from any currently “unresolved investigations.” The guests could take notes, but no recording or photography was permitted.

    “Our intent,” Bergen said, “was to show that officers are highly trained and have a lot of tools available for dealing with what they encounter on the job, including various force options, but at the end of the day they are human beings. We wanted this to be the big take-away.”

  28. awesome. great article and great approach!

    http://www.policeone.com/media…..the-media/

    How one department took an innovative approach to train members of its local press on use-of-force realities
    In two cases occurring within a short timeframe, young offenders in Winnipeg, Manitoba, died in edged-weapon confrontations with police ? in the public hullabaloo that followed each encounter the same shopworn questions reverberated in the media and among armchair critics:

    Wasn’t the use of force excessive?

    Couldn’t the cops just have shot the knife out of his hand?

    Aggravated trainers in the Officer Safety Unit at the Winnipeg Police Service training academy decided it was time to do more than just bitch about na?ve civilians’ Hollywood-based misperceptions. “We wanted to be proactive in some way that would produce more informed analysis and assessment of police actions in high-stress, dynamic situations,” said Cst. Barney Bergen, a Winnipeg use-of-force instructor.

    The upshot: a carefully-crafted crash course in force realities for representatives of the city’s media, with simple but critical ground rules.

    They had to lay aside their cameras, tape recorders, and (at least until the end of the day) their conflict-seeking questions. They had to stay for the whole six-hour presentation; no snatching just bits and pieces on the fly. And they had to listen with an open mind. In exchange, they’d learn “the realistic expectations people should have of officers’ performance under acute stress in use-of-force encounters.”

    More than a year after that “leap of faith” experiment, Bergen said, the department is still reaping benefits. “I was one of the skeptics in the beginning. In the past, some of our officers have had very negative, even traumatic, experiences with the media. But since the program, we’ve seen more balanced coverage and better interaction between news outlets and our Media Liaison Office. It has helped prevent wild spin-doctoring and out-of-context reporting.”

    As a result of such improvements, he believes, the public has an opportunity to gain a more grounded grasp of the how city’s nearly 1,400 police “go about enforcing the law” and a better comprehension that “when possible we always try to resolve encounters without having to use force.”

    To sustain the progress, Winnipeg is considering a refresher repeat of Media Training Day. Bergen and other planners would welcome hearing ideas that have worked for other departments in taming the news beast but also consider sharing your thoughts in the comments area at the end of this article so others can benefit as well. Meanwhile, for those interested in replicating Winnipeg’s approach, here are key elements.

    Basic Playbook
    About a dozen news personnel from TV, radio, and print outlets accepted the department’s invitation, some frankly surprised that the agency was eager to jump into the use-of-force shark tank with them. Of one reporter who opted to pursue other activities that day, colleagues said later: “He’ll be sorry he missed this.” Those present readily conceded to the ground rules. “We wanted to be in control so it wasn’t just a media scrum,” Bergen said.

    With the enthusiastic support of police executives, the training cadre had put together a fast-paced presentation consisting of PowerPoint lecture and live demonstrations. It was made clear that the speakers ? Sgt. Jeff Quail, P/Sgt. Ron Bilton, Cst. Adam Cheadle, and Bergen ? would not answer questions about or draw examples from any currently “unresolved investigations.” The guests could take notes, but no recording or photography was permitted.

    “Our intent,” Bergen said, “was to show that officers are highly trained and have a lot of tools available for dealing with what they encounter on the job, including various force options, but at the end of the day they are human beings. We wanted this to be the big take-away.”

    Policy Prep
    First, to put the subject in perspective, the team pointed out the statistically minute portion of police calls for service that result in use of force: barely more than one-half of one percent in Winnipeg, where more than 150,000 calls are logged per year. The perception may be that “officers are out there applying force to everybody, but the reality is they’re not,” Cheadle explained. This in itself made big headlines when some reporters wrote about the training day afterward.

    The department’s use-of-force policy was explained, so the audience understood when and how officers officially can resort to force. Canadian law was reviewed, including the fact that a reasonable perception of impending “grievous bodily harm” ? not only the fear of imminent death ? is legal justification for defensively employing lethal measures

    “A real eye-opener to some,” Bergen said of the reaction to that information. The “totality of circumstances” concept was explored and illustrated, and the control options in Winnipeg’s version of the force continuum were described, from command presence through deadly force, along with their relative intensities. Popular misconceptions like shooting to wound and shooting a weapon out of a suspect’s hand, were debunked.

    Particular attention was given to officers’ training in verbal direction, “to show that ‘tactical communication’ is a defined skill set, more than just buzz words,” Bergen said. “We discussed the basic philosophy of trying to defuse volatile situations with words, what kind of persuasive appeals and techniques officers use.

    “We wanted to reinforce that officers are not just jumping to go hands-on unless it’s absolutely necessary. They don’t want to go home to their families bruised and banged up, with more scars on their bodies.”

    The team was careful not to reveal “any tactical information related to force that might compromise officers on the street,” Bergen stresses. “Things like the formula used to determine when deadly force is justified might give a suspect the edge in manipulating a confrontation, so we avoided that kind of information.”

    TASER Demo
    Although conducted energy weapons have been a source of considerable controversy in Canada (one of Winnipeg’s knife-offender deaths occurred after a TASER deployment), the reporters seemed generally to share a common up-close unfamiliarity with the devices. So a myth-busting walk-through of the X26 model that local officers carry was given (yes, 50,000 volts, but no, not the equivalent of a near-electrocution).

    After explaining the type of resistance for which a CEW is appropriate, a TASER was fired at an inert target. “We made clear that this is not a device that officers use flippantly,” Bergen said. Research documenting the comparative safety of the weapon for officers and suspects alike (relative to baton strikes and fights, for example) was also emphasized.

    Stress Impact
    Perhaps the most humanizing aspect of the lecture portion, Bergen suggests, was a layman’s-level analysis of how high stress impacts an officer’s performance during uncertain, rapidly evolving, life-threatening situations.

    In “not too academic terms,” Quail described the neuro-anatomy of the brain and explained how stress affects vision, cognitive perception, decision-making, motor performance, and memory. For this, he drew heavily on scientific research conducted and/or reported by Dr. Bill Lewinski’s Force Science Research Center (both Quail and Bergen are certified in Force Science Analysis).

    “This knowledge is vitally important in any post-analysis of a major force event,” Bergen said. “An involved officer’s judgment, perceptions, behavior, recollections, and articulation of what happened are very real concerns, and if it’s not understood how these all are affected by a sudden stress load, his or her actions and responses may not get a fair, impartial, and accurate evaluation.

    “An incident that seems to have one explanation may in fact have been shaped by very different influences. We wanted to impress on the media that to judge any force encounter without analyzing all the factors potentially involved is a travesty.”

    Revealing Role Play
    To sample a taste of on-the-line stress and the vagaries of human reaction, the media group donned protective gear and shifted from the classroom to the academy gym to experience a training scenario first-hand. All signed liability waivers.

    One reporter volunteer was armed with a Simunitions training gun and led to a corner of the gym, where he was told he would experience a confrontation and should react as if he were an officer coming upon the scene. The other media reps were positioned at different distances and angles as “witnesses.” A video camera was set up to tape the event.

    Without warning, two role-playing trainers burst from a side room. One wielding a knife and screaming, “I’m gonna kill you!” chased the other and brought him to the floor. After “stabbing” the victim, the assailant rose, turned toward the officer with knife raised, and snarled verbal threats. The startled “officer” fired at the suspect to stop the attack.

    Instructed not to discuss the incident, the shooter and the others were immediately hustled into another room and given questionnaires to fill out regarding their observations: How far away was the attacker from the subject? ? a question that’s “always raised when knife offenders are shot,” Bergen explains. Were any weapons present, and if so, what were they? What, if anything, did the victim say? Were any shots fired, and if so, how many? And so on.

    The shooter had additional questions to answer: If you shot, did you hit the assailant, and if so, where and how many times? What was the assailant wearing? If he had a weapon, where was it? And so on…

    “These are the kind of questions officers are asked after a shooting,” the group was told when they’d finished. “Not having accurate answers can seriously impact your credibility.

    “Everybody was absolutely amazed at how inconsistent the answers were among them ? and how different they were from what they saw when we played the videotape. When we asked the ‘officer’ to explain what was going through his mind during the incident, he was stunned at the limited amount of information he could recall. And he hadn’t even been directly threatened!”

    The day ended, Bergen said, with a “good discussion” of the scenario and how the reporters’ responses tied in with the stress dynamics Quail had outlined earlier.

    Bergen thinks the media training day “absolutely” was worth the effort. Kelly Dehn, a police reporter for CTV-Winnipeg, enthusiastically agrees. The day “put you in an officer’s shoes,” he recently told PoliceOne. “You got a real sense of what an officer has to decide in a split-second, a whole new perspective on what an officer goes through. I had a much better understanding the next time I went out on a police story. What good reporter wouldn’t appreciate that?”

    Relations between the police and the media are likely always to be a bit dicey. “There are bound to be mistakes on both sides,” Bergen said, “and maybe we’ll end up getting burned somewhere downrange. But at least this shows we’re trying for more transparency, trying to lower the walls a bit.”

  29. awesome!!!

    http://www.policeone.com/media…..the-media/

    How one department took an innovative approach to train members of its local press on use-of-force realities
    In two cases occurring within a short timeframe, young offenders in Winnipeg, Manitoba, died in edged-weapon confrontations with police ? in the public hullabaloo that followed each encounter the same shopworn questions reverberated in the media and among armchair critics:

    Wasn’t the use of force excessive?

    Couldn’t the cops just have shot the knife out of his hand?

    Aggravated trainers in the Officer Safety Unit at the Winnipeg Police Service training academy decided it was time to do more than just bitch about na?ve civilians’ Hollywood-based misperceptions. “We wanted to be proactive in some way that would produce more informed analysis and assessment of police actions in high-stress, dynamic situations,” said Cst. Barney Bergen, a Winnipeg use-of-force instructor.

    The upshot: a carefully-crafted crash course in force realities for representatives of the city’s media, with simple but critical ground rules.

    They had to lay aside their cameras, tape recorders, and (at least until the end of the day) their conflict-seeking questions. They had to stay for the whole six-hour presentation; no snatching just bits and pieces on the fly. And they had to listen with an open mind. In exchange, they’d learn “the realistic expectations people should have of officers’ performance under acute stress in use-of-force encounters.”

    More than a year after that “leap of faith” experiment, Bergen said, the department is still reaping benefits. “I was one of the skeptics in the beginning. In the past, some of our officers have had very negative, even traumatic, experiences with the media. But since the program, we’ve seen more balanced coverage and better interaction between news outlets and our Media Liaison Office. It has helped prevent wild spin-doctoring and out-of-context reporting.”

    As a result of such improvements, he believes, the public has an opportunity to gain a more grounded grasp of the how city’s nearly 1,400 police “go about enforcing the law” and a better comprehension that “when possible we always try to resolve encounters without having to use force.”

  30. Aggravated trainers in the Officer Safety Unit at the Winnipeg Police Service training academy decided it was time to do more than just bitch about na?ve civilians’ Hollywood-based misperceptions. “We wanted to be proactive in some way that would produce more informed analysis and assessment of police actions in high-stress, dynamic situations,” said Cst. Barney Bergen, a Winnipeg use-of-force instructor.

    The upshot: a carefully-crafted crash course in force realities for representatives of the city’s media, with simple but critical ground rules.

    They had to lay aside their cameras, tape recorders, and (at least until the end of the day) their conflict-seeking questions. They had to stay for the whole six-hour presentation; no snatching just bits and pieces on the fly. And they had to listen with an open mind. In exchange, they’d learn “the realistic expectations people should have of officers’ performance under acute stress in use-of-force encounters.”

    More than a year after that “leap of faith” experiment, Bergen said, the department is still reaping benefits. “I was one of the skeptics in the beginning. In the past, some of our officers have had very negative, even traumatic, experiences with the media. But since the program, we’ve seen more balanced coverage and better interaction between news outlets and our Media Liaison Office. It has helped prevent wild spin-doctoring and out-of-context reporting.”

    As a result of such improvements, he believes, the public has an opportunity to gain a more grounded grasp of the how city’s nearly 1,400 police “go about enforcing the law” and a better comprehension that “when possible we always try to resolve encounters without having to use force.”

    To sustain the progress, Winnipeg is considering a refresher repeat of Media Training Day. Bergen and other planners would welcome hearing ideas that have worked for other departments in taming the news beast but also consider sharing your thoughts in the comments area at the end of this article so others can benefit as well. Meanwhile, for those interested in replicating Winnipeg’s approach, here are key elements.

    Basic Playbook
    About a dozen news personnel from TV, radio, and print outlets accepted the department’s invitation, some frankly surprised that the agency was eager to jump into the use-of-force shark tank with them. Of one reporter who opted to pursue other activities that day, colleagues said later: “He’ll be sorry he missed this.” Those present readily conceded to the ground rules. “We wanted to be in control so it wasn’t just a media scrum,” Bergen said.

    With the enthusiastic support of police executives, the training cadre had put together a fast-paced presentation consisting of PowerPoint lecture and live demonstrations. It was made clear that the speakers ? Sgt. Jeff Quail, P/Sgt. Ron Bilton, Cst. Adam Cheadle, and Bergen ? would not answer questions about or draw examples from any currently “unresolved investigations.” The guests could take notes, but no recording or photography was permitted.

    “Our intent,” Bergen said, “was to show that officers are highly trained and have a lot of tools available for dealing with what they encounter on the job, including various force options, but at the end of the day they are human beings. We wanted this to be the big take-away.”

    Policy Prep
    First, to put the subject in perspective, the team pointed out the statistically minute portion of police calls for service that result in use of force: barely more than one-half of one percent in Winnipeg, where more than 150,000 calls are logged per year. The perception may be that “officers are out there applying force to everybody, but the reality is they’re not,” Cheadle explained. This in itself made big headlines when some reporters wrote about the training day afterward.

    The department’s use-of-force policy was explained, so the audience understood when and how officers officially can resort to force. Canadian law was reviewed, including the fact that a reasonable perception of impending “grievous bodily harm” ? not only the fear of imminent death ? is legal justification for defensively employing lethal measures

    “A real eye-opener to some,” Bergen said of the reaction to that information. The “totality of circumstances” concept was explored and illustrated, and the control options in Winnipeg’s version of the force continuum were described, from command presence through deadly force, along with their relative intensities. Popular misconceptions like shooting to wound and shooting a weapon out of a suspect’s hand, were debunked.

    Particular attention was given to officers’ training in verbal direction, “to show that ‘tactical communication’ is a defined skill set, more than just buzz words,” Bergen said. “We discussed the basic philosophy of trying to defuse volatile situations with words, what kind of persuasive appeals and techniques officers use.

    “We wanted to reinforce that officers are not just jumping to go hands-on unless it’s absolutely necessary. They don’t want to go home to their families bruised and banged up, with more scars on their bodies.”

    The team was careful not to reveal “any tactical information related to force that might compromise officers on the street,” Bergen stresses. “Things like the formula used to determine when deadly force is justified might give a suspect the edge in manipulating a confrontation, so we avoided that kind of information.”

    TASER Demo
    Although conducted energy weapons have been a source of considerable controversy in Canada (one of Winnipeg’s knife-offender deaths occurred after a TASER deployment), the reporters seemed generally to share a common up-close unfamiliarity with the devices. So a myth-busting walk-through of the X26 model that local officers carry was given (yes, 50,000 volts, but no, not the equivalent of a near-electrocution).

    After explaining the type of resistance for which a CEW is appropriate, a TASER was fired at an inert target. “We made clear that this is not a device that officers use flippantly,” Bergen said. Research documenting the comparative safety of the weapon for officers and suspects alike (relative to baton strikes and fights, for example) was also emphasized.

    Stress Impact
    Perhaps the most humanizing aspect of the lecture portion, Bergen suggests, was a layman’s-level analysis of how high stress impacts an officer’s performance during uncertain, rapidly evolving, life-threatening situations.

    In “not too academic terms,” Quail described the neuro-anatomy of the brain and explained how stress affects vision, cognitive perception, decision-making, motor performance, and memory. For this, he drew heavily on scientific research conducted and/or reported by Dr. Bill Lewinski’s Force Science Research Center (both Quail and Bergen are certified in Force Science Analysis).

    “This knowledge is vitally important in any post-analysis of a major force event,” Bergen said. “An involved officer’s judgment, perceptions, behavior, recollections, and articulation of what happened are very real concerns, and if it’s not understood how these all are affected by a sudden stress load, his or her actions and responses may not get a fair, impartial, and accurate evaluation.

    “An incident that seems to have one explanation may in fact have been shaped by very different influences. We wanted to impress on the media that to judge any force encounter without analyzing all the factors potentially involved is a travesty.”

    Revealing Role Play
    To sample a taste of on-the-line stress and the vagaries of human reaction, the media group donned protective gear and shifted from the classroom to the academy gym to experience a training scenario first-hand. All signed liability waivers.

    One reporter volunteer was armed with a Simunitions training gun and led to a corner of the gym, where he was told he would experience a confrontation and should react as if he were an officer coming upon the scene. The other media reps were positioned at different distances and angles as “witnesses.” A video camera was set up to tape the event.

    Without warning, two role-playing trainers burst from a side room. One wielding a knife and screaming, “I’m gonna kill you!” chased the other and brought him to the floor. After “stabbing” the victim, the assailant rose, turned toward the officer with knife raised, and snarled verbal threats. The startled “officer” fired at the suspect to stop the attack.

    Instructed not to discuss the incident, the shooter and the others were immediately hustled into another room and given questionnaires to fill out regarding their observations: How far away was the attacker from the subject? ? a question that’s “always raised when knife offenders are shot,” Bergen explains. Were any weapons present, and if so, what were they? What, if anything, did the victim say? Were any shots fired, and if so, how many? And so on.

    The shooter had additional questions to answer: If you shot, did you hit the assailant, and if so, where and how many times? What was the assailant wearing? If he had a weapon, where was it? And so on…

    “These are the kind of questions officers are asked after a shooting,” the group was told when they’d finished. “Not having accurate answers can seriously impact your credibility.

    “Everybody was absolutely amazed at how inconsistent the answers were among them ? and how different they were from what they saw when we played the videotape. When we asked the ‘officer’ to explain what was going through his mind during the incident, he was stunned at the limited amount of information he could recall. And he hadn’t even been directly threatened!”

    The day ended, Bergen said, with a “good discussion” of the scenario and how the reporters’ responses tied in with the stress dynamics Quail had outlined earlier.

    Bergen thinks the media training day “absolutely” was worth the effort. Kelly Dehn, a police reporter for CTV-Winnipeg, enthusiastically agrees. The day “put you in an officer’s shoes,” he recently told PoliceOne. “You got a real sense of what an officer has to decide in a split-second, a whole new perspective on what an officer goes through. I had a much better understanding the next time I went out on a police story. What good reporter wouldn’t appreciate that?”

    Relations between the police and the media are likely always to be a bit dicey. “There are bound to be mistakes on both sides,” Bergen said, “and maybe we’ll end up getting burned somewhere downrange. But at least this shows we’re trying for more transparency, trying to lower the walls a bit.”

    1. The same Winnipeg Police that keep losing their Taser cartridges?
      http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/…..nipeg.html

    2. tl;dr

      dunphy, you do know how to post an URL, right?

    3. So what some reporter with no training shoots a knife-wielding perp and can’t recall all the details? I would expect an actual law-enforcement officer to have a much better handle on a similar situation, and if not, his credibility should be questioned.

      I was watching Top Shot the other day, and the second chick who got booted was army trained and in SWAT and all this, and was absolutely terrible in a high-stress situation. That frightens me.

      I will admit, though, that in One Man Army, there was a SWAT guy who beat a Marine, SEAL, and an IDF guy, although there was no live fire involved.

      1. i think the primary point (one i have made ad nauseum, with emphasis on the nausea) is that the press is woefully ignorant, as is the lay public, on how the use of force continuum works, as well as the dynamics of force incidents, etc. people REALLY DO ask “how come they didn’t shoot him in the leg?” and shit like that and they MEAN IT?

        sadly, most of the reporters who report on cop/use of force incidents, don’t UNDERSTAND UOF etc. granted, if one knows anything about any topic, one realizes the reporters usually don’t know wtf they are talking about, but still…

        it benefits everybody to have an informed public and open govt. however, one has a more informed public and a better informed public if the press that reports on the govt. actually understands wtf they are talking about.

        1. Few of the complaints here on H&R are of the “why didn’t he shoot him in the leg” or “why didn’t they shoot the tires” variety.

          1. i am thankful for that.

        2. Anecdotal evidence alert: I still see media reports of police altercations where they seem to carry the water for law enforcement more often than not. The incident has to be pretty egregious for anyone to question the assertions of police. Maybe it’s different in Winnipeg or they’ve had a couple questionable incidents that have gotten media asking those questions instead of regurgitating police reports.

          And educating officers on what it’s like to be civilian and accosted by agents with authority to do so might be just as advantageous as educating media on official use of force procedures (which officers may or may not follow in the first place). I’ve talked with too many who have been in law enforcement (and its culture) too long to recognize that not everyone they encounter is a criminal.

          They’re not all guys with knives screaming their intention to kill you. Sometimes it’s a guy with a knife crossing the street whittling a stick.

          1. the birk shooting aside, which the SPD etc. determined was UNjustified almost instantaneously…

            this post shows how we can have almost exactly opposite conclusions from the same data.

            you see the media carrying cops’ water vis a vis UOF and i see them almost uniformly ignorant of the practical realities thereof and being unduly critical of same.

            amazing the way that works

            cops are well aware that most people with knives are not intent on stabbing us, considering that the VAST majority of people we deal with with knives get disarmed and dealt with no problemo and minimal , if any , use of physical force.

            again, those don’t get reported in the media, but we deal with often violent drunk assaultive persons with knives all the frigging time and we very rarely shoot them

            1. I’m talking about preventative training. The quick acknowledgement that that shooting was outside policy is nice, but doesn’t make the guy any less shot. Too many LEO fail to understand that not every person they see needs to be confronted.

    4. They had to lay aside their cameras, tape recorders, and (at least until the end of the day) their conflict-seeking questions.

      Just like every other interaction between police an non-police, eh?

      1. not really. jesus h christ, there are a metric assload of youtube videos to rebut that as well

  31. it gave me a spam warning when i tried to post the URL and wouldn’t post it!

    1. Now that’s a stupid spam filter. Reject a short post with a url in it, but accept an foot-thick wall of text.

  32. Let’s end top/bottom attitudes by putting the northern hemisphere on the bottom of the map . Flipping iconic world maps everywhere would be a symbolic ceremony to help mankind break its old thought patterns, and act in a more ecological way.

    1. Whitey The Injun|8.21.11 @ 7:18PM|#
      “Let’s end top/bottom attitudes by putting the northern hemisphere on the bottom of the map…”

      Or, you might try to learn the difference between your head and your ass.

      1. Did you just call NA and Europe the “head,” and Africa the “ass” of the globe?

        RAAAAAAAACCCCCIIIIIISSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!

    2. I think I’ll hang something like one of these maps in each of my Outback restaurants! Thanks for the idea!

    3. I do not believe this map. You have drawn Siam way too small.

    4. Flipping iconic world maps

      , how do they work?

    5. As far as we know, South might really be up.

  33. Milt Rosenberg has always been a calm voice of reason on the Chicago airwaves. Used to listen to him while my dad drove around the city delivering pizzas for Father and Son in the 70’s. 35+ years later I will listen to his podcasts down here in Texas and enjoy just about anything that Uncle Milt dissects and discusses.

  34. It’ll probably show up in the morning links, but it’s too good to pass up on Sunday evening:

    “President Barack Obama says his low approval rating is a reflection of public unhappiness with Congress.[…]
    The president, who’s vacationing on Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., says he expects to be judged in November 2012 on whether things have improved.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/…..721D78.DTL

    I’m sure *something* must be his fault, but he hasn’t found it yet.

    1. he expects to be judged in November 2012 on whether things have improved.

      Improved compared to when? Barring a miracle things will be worse than when he took office.

      The GOP is going to be shoving that quote back in Mr Savvy’s face next year, no doubt.

      1. Actually, I should be more careful. Some things have improved since he took office. Silver is up over 400% and gold is up over 200%.

    2. He says he understands that his arguments that the country would have been worse off if he hadn’t taken certain actions don’t resonate with the millions of unemployed people.

      No, he does not understand. He merely accepts that as a cost of “doing business”.

      1. I suspect critically-thinking people are also going to have trouble with such counterfactuals.

        Lucky for him, there probably aren’t millions of them in America.

      2. The country would have been 184% worse off.

    3. And as a measure of how Mr. Smooth is treated by AP at least:
      “The president, who’s vacationing on Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.,”

      If the un-lamented W had made a similar comment while vacationing at his dessicated ranch in Texas, AP would have been after his butt.

  35. Oh, and Matt? Unless I’m vastly misunderestimating your age, Marilyn Monroe was dead several years before your birth. Upskirt fantasies about dead women don’t help the libertarian cause at all, friend.

    1. Depends. Are they dead at the time of the upskirt shot?

  36. Just wait bitches, next week I drop a revised version of my “causes of the mortgage crash” article.

  37. No Justice, No Peace

    The Rev. Jesse Jackson on Wednesday threw his support behind tens of thousands of Southern California grocery workers who are fighting proposed health care hikes proposed by major supermarket chains.

    —–

    Ralphs currently pays more than 90 percent of employee health coverage costs, Doyel said. Workers hired before 2004 pay nothing for health insurance while those hired later pay either $7 a week for single coverage or $15 a week for family coverage.

    The companies’ proposal would raise that to $9 a week for singles and $23 a week for families. That is much lower than the average cost of health care insurance in California, she said.

    Doyel said she believes the proposal is good for employees and their families and is affordable.

    Union local spokesman Mike Shimpock contended the supermarkets were attempting to shift rising health care costs onto the backs of low-paid workers at a time when the companies are reaping billions of dollars in profits.

    1. The companies’ proposal would raise that to $9 a week for singles and $23 a week for families.

      How much do cigarettes cost in Southern California?

      1. I don’t know, but they’re too damn high!

      2. In California supermarket cigs are locked up in plastic cases at the front of the store. If you want to buy a pack, the cashier has to get on the PA and announce that the customer in isle four wants a pack of Marlboro Light 100’s. It’s Marlboro Gold 100’s now, but they seem be OK with the old brand name still. There’s a public shaming that goes along with holding up the line while the grocery worker with the only key to the plastic safe perambulates to the safe and then over to the cashier.

        About $6.50 a pack, out the door, to answer your question. But supermarkets don’t sell many cigarettes. The tax revenues from cigarettes at supermarkets are not much related to the business supermarkets do.

    2. Union local spokesman Mike Shimpock said I’m a stupid shit and they handed me this script to read.
      Thanks, Mike.

  38. I gave in and ordered the book on Amazon.

    You MONSTER!

    It’s people like you who are destroying the middle class.

  39. Meanwhile, at the New York Times, we find the dreaded market failure rearing its ugly head:

    Here in the Pioneer Valley of Massachusetts, where hand-painted signs for fresh vegetables dot winding roads and eating local has long been a way of life, some farmers and market managers are uttering something once unfathomable: there are too many farmers’ markets.

  40. Kkkorporations are eating our children!

    The depth and breadth of frantic hysteria is truly impressive. I’m disappointed the Kochtopus didn’t get a shout-out.

    1. The good news is that we can ? and should ? work as citizens, through democratic channels and institutions, to bring about change.

      Or, Joel, you could just be a real dad and take your kids outside yourself. Tomorrow morning, call in sick for work, no one will miss you. You don’t have to wait for the democratic channels to give you permission.

      1. He’s got classes to teach and books to write. I hardly think he has time for ‘parenting’.

        1. Is the writing going to be better than Rowling’s Harry Shithead books?

    2. As Nelson Mandela has said, “there can be no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the way in which it treats its children.”

      How about the way it treats its political prisoners?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.