Police Abuse

Police Say Kidnapping Medical Marijuana Activist's 11-Year-Old Son Is for 'the Child's Well-Being'

Shona Banda's son is back in state custody as she awaits criminal charges.

|

YouTube

Yesterday Shona Banda, the Kansas medical marijuana activist whose home was searched after her 11-year-old son challenged anti-pot propaganda at school, failed to regain custody of the boy, who is now under the control of Child Protective Services (CPS). "I am not giving up," Banda said after yesterday's family court hearing. "I will get him, and I am not going to stop until I do."

The Garden City Police Department, which conducted the search of Banda's home, insists that the state-sanctioned kidnapping is in the boy's best interest. "The most important thing here is the child's well-being," said Capt. Randy Ralston. "That is why it is a priority for us, just because of the danger to the child." 

Ralston elaborated on that rationale in a press release posted yesterday. After Banda's son "reported to school officials that his mother and other adults in his residence were avid drug users," Ralston says, the officials called CPS, which in turn contacted the police. The search, based on a warrant obtained that evening, discovered "approximately 1¼ pounds of suspected marijuana," along with "a lab for manufacturing cannabis oil on the kitchen table and kitchen counters."

Banda uses cannabis oil to treat the symptoms of Crohn's disease, a fact that she openly discusses. But Kansas is not one of the 23 states that recognize marijuana as a medicine, so all use of cannabis is equally illegal there. Ralston emphasizes that "the items taken from the residence were within easy reach of the child," although he cites no evidence that the boy was actually endangered by his mother's medicine.

Banda has not been formally accused of any crimes yet. Ralston says the charges could include possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, misdemeanor or felony possession of drug paraphernalia, and child endangerment. Making cannabis oil also seems to qualify as manufacturing a controlled substance, a "drug severity level 1 felony" punishable by a prison sentence as long as 17 years.

The family court judge cited the possibility of felony charges as a reason to remove Banda's son from his home. For a while he was staying with his father, Banda's ex-husband, but CBS News reports that CPS "took the boy back into protective custody" when he "ended [up] back with his mother again." As far as I can tell, the counterintuitive notion that Banda's son is better off in state custody is based on no evidence other than his mother's use of a medicine that is legal in about two dozen states. 

Addendum: As CharlesWT notes in the comments, Banda's supporters are collecting donations for her legal defense.

NEXT: Obama Breaks Promise to Call the Armenian Genocide a 'Genocide' for 7th Year in a Row

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. This reminds me of identity politics.

    “You can’t abuse this person because they belong to such and such class.”

    Decent people would separate the issues. Baiters would use smear tactics. There are three issues at play.
    1) govt targeting anyone for political reasons
    2) govt targeting drug users for political reasons
    3) govt harassing free-range children

    What this story does is snowball pro-drug sentiment into opposing the harassment of free-range children.

    I like what the tactic is supporting, but I think its an evil practice, and will ultimately feed the ministry of truth. (normalize this as valid framing of an issue)

    If I was cynical I would also suggest this would make a great purity test to get rid of ppl like John. Force social conservative leaning libertarians to accept your ethics or wear a scarlet letter.

    1. So, basically you’re saying that you think John thinks everything in this story is ok?

      1. I read that 3 times and can’t tell what they are trying to say.

        1. I read it and thought Michael Hihn had a sock puppet.

          1. Can’t be Hihn. Not enough ~snicker~.

    2. Dude, this is way beyond any one of those three issues separately. This is government using children to punish parents for advocating drug legalization.

      It’s not about free range children. it’s not even about drug legalization. It’s about cruel and unusual punishment. It’s about government CPS agencies colluding with law enforcement to use the most twisted methods imaginable to force people into obedience.

      Think about that. What sort of government takes peoples children to punish them for speaking out against unjust laws?

      1. Look at this moron’s name. Don’t bother.

        1. Is that a Shreeky puppet? He’s the only I’ve seen that has a Greg-boner like that.

      2. Thanks Hazel you nailed it!

        My kid about a decade ago, questioned the anti-pot propaganda in Middle School (vis-a-vi medical MJ), and the LEO presenting the dog-and-pony show thanked him for it in private afterwards, and said that it made him think! Some employees of Guv Almighty do have an open mind, thank God!

        A fascist power-pig guv does stuff like this, is the obvious answer!

      3. Dude, this is way beyond any one of those three issues separately. This is government using children to punish parents for advocating drug legalization.

        I don’t think so. I think CPS, the police, and the school really believe the child is in danger and needs their protection.

        As in, “OMG! This child is thinking for himself and that’s dangerous!

        1. I think that’s exactly what’s going on. If I was the mother I would appeal it up to the federal level and cite the fact that in states where it is legalized, parents do the exact same thing she’s doing, and in some cases use it to treat their children. Obviously her son is smart enough to know not to touch it. Just like any parent who has guns. Their kids know they don’t touch them.

          1. I do not believe there are federal level appeals of child custody cases, but I could be wrong. Family court is totally fucked up everywhere in the country.

    3. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
      http://www.work-cash.com

    4. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
      http://www.work-cash.com

  2. What a bunch of luddites.

    Let’s just go back to the dark ages and get it over with. That way we don’t have to mess with all these pesky charges and stuff, the king can just have his men throw anyone into the dungeon for any reason.

    1. I don’t think a king in the Dark Ages would have imprisoned people based on what herbs they used.

      1. He would have been more like, “I thank thee, woman, for this medicine – forsooth, it doth mellow me out after a hard day’s fighting.”

        1. The point is that he could have if he wanted to. But you’re right, I seriously doubt that many would have bothered.

          But today, you have a million little Caligulas running around.

          It’s really depressing how many really evil people are running around in society, and most of them are in positions of authority.

          We should just make government one big contest of who can be the most evil. Oh wait, it already is…

          1. a million little Caligulas

            Band name.

          2. Except Caligula would have likely smoked it all and then demanded a family orgy.

      2. Worse, I don’t think a King in the Dark Ages would have considered taking people’s children as a fit punishment for selling forbidden herbs.

        They can say it’s for the child’s safety all fucking day long. But that is pure, unadulterated HORSESHIT. They know it. We know it. Everyone who is not a moron knows it.

        They are doing it to punish the parents for the sin of smoking the demon weed. That’s all.
        Because people have this crazy notion in their heads that drugs are just BAD, BAD, BAD. It’s like finding out the chick was a witch in the 1500s. Apparently authorities in Kansas see drugs an instantly go into hysterical apoplectic fits. The woman may as well have had a Satanic altar on her kitchen counter. Except that would have likely been protected religious practice.

        1. Harsheth not the lord’s buzz with these peccadillos.

      3. I don’t think a king in the Dark Ages would have imprisoned people based on what herbs they used.

        Probably correct that they wouldn’t have been imprisoned, and it probably wouldn’t have been the king. The local priest might have accused them of witchcraft, though, and had them hanged or burned.

      4. In the middle ages and beyond into the 1700’s they burned people as witches for using medicinal herbs that may have healing properties that weren’t totally understood.

  3. Stranger danger tip: Avoid strangers in uniforms.

    Shona Banda’s Legal Defense

  4. “the items taken from the residence were within easy reach of the child,”

    11 years old, 3 months old, no difference to bureaucrats.

    Per state employee/morons, you are a helpless infant until you turn 18 and then you are magically a rational adult; unless you do something they don’t like, then you’re probably an adult if you are under 18 and probably an infant if you are over 21, and both if you are between 18 and 21.

    1. I wonder how many millions of homes have beer and wine in the frig within easy reach of children.

      1. Be patient, comrade, we’re getting there. The great inquisition is nigh, when we will purge all sin and rid ourselves of deniers.

      2. You have to keep it in their reach. How else are they going to be able to fetch it for you?

      3. The logical endpoint of the way CPS operates, actually.

        Leave a pack of cigarettes lying around? UNSAFE HOME!

        Open bottle of beer? CHILD ENDANGERMENT!

        You let the kid play in the basement his own room unattended? CHILD NEGLECT!

        1. Own kitchen knives? A car? Plastic bags?

          1. The thing is, they aren’t going to take everyone’s kids who own those things. They’ll just use those things as excuses to take children away from people that dare to question them. They are fucking fascist thugs.

    2. Unless you want an abortion, in which case you’re a rational adult at age 12 (or younger). But don’t forget, of course, that the act that led to your getting pregnant was a crime of predation, even if the father was younger than you.

      1. “even if the father was younger than you.”

        Penises: evil at any age.

      2. And if you email a selfie, well, that’s worth life on the predator list.

  5. I used to wonder how these people can sleep at night. I’ve since realized they sleep very well, because they’re completely convinced that they’re in the right and they’re doing good. That’s terrifying to me.

    1. They sleep great at night knowing they got to have power over others and to exercise that power. Because that’s what they really want. The bullshit about the child’s welfare is just that. Once people like this have you in their sights, their only priority is to fuck you and show you who is boss. That’s it. And the more you fight back the harder they will try and fuck you.

      Banda has now pissed them off by resisting. They will do anything they can to destroy her, her kid’s life, it doesn’t matter. These people are disgusting sociopaths.

      1. Certainly helps having immunity from prosecution, unassailable job security, and a fat taxpayer-subsidized pension waiting for your early retirement. I’d sleep like a baby who isn’t spending nights in a stranger’s custody.

      2. I think some are really true believers. Which looks a lot like sociopathy, but has different motivations. I’m sure the power trip contributes too. It’s all a rich tapestry of nasty little shits who want to be in other people’s business.

      3. “The bullshit about the child’s welfare is just that. Once people like this have you in their sights, their only priority is to fuck you and show you who is boss. ”

        “Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.”

        ? George Orwell, 1984

        1. Exactly. These people are intentionally, self-awarely evil. The bullshit about the kid’s well-being is part of the con.

    2. “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
      C.S. Lewis on Tyranny “for the Good” of Its Victims

      1. Never saw the last bit of that quote. Too bad, because it really drives the point home.

        1. Aw, he was just some right-wing Christian fundamentalist. /prog

          1. I thought he was the progs’ favorite Christian apologist?

            1. If I had to shit in one hand and fill the other with things I don’t know, the first hand would have one of those desiccated powdery white logs like the ancient dog turds you occasionally find in the yard and I’d still be filling the other.

              1. THat was a… charming metaphor.

                1. What can I say, I’ve a way with warts.

                  1. *Adds nom de plume to No Shake list*

      2. “For the good of the children” was always going to be the motto that would lead us into tyranny.

        People justify pretty much anything by saying that it’s for the sake of children. Especially using a mother love for her children as a weapon to enforce obedience to the state.

        1. Particularly when anybody with two seconds of reflection will see that in most cases the outcome will NOT improve anything for the child in question “for the good of the children” seems to be a contemporary parallel to “arbeit macht frei”.

          1. “For the good of the children” actually means “for the furtherance of the desires of whoever said ‘for the good of the children'”. It’s really that simple.

            It’s truly, truly astounding how many people will accept words at face value without the tiniest analysis of whether those words are 1) true, 2) ever followed up on, or 3) even make any fucking sense. And a lot of charlatans, power-mongers, and other assorted scum have figured that out and use it to their advantage constantly.

        2. “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt the Younger

      3. Damn, should’ve read down further.

    3. That’s why more of them need to wake up next to a horse’s head.

    4. “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”? C.S. Lewis

  6. What I wouldn’t give for a liberty-loving state where the child and mother could seek asylum. One willing to tell Kansas to go to hell and that would put the child and mother under protection in case any other LEOs came for them.

    A man can dream…

    1. Can one state refuse to extradite to another state?

      1. Commerce Clause!

      2. I believe so, yes. Some states will not extradite for certain (lesser) crimes, for instance, as far as I know.

        1. There are also states that refuse to extradite to states that have the death penalty in cases where it might apply.

      3. Yep. Say fuck off and station armed guards around the house. Let’s see how serious Kansas is.

        I’m only being half serious because such a situation would almost certainly end up making things worse and could set a bad precedent. But at the same time, if you don’t stand up to a bully, they aren’t going to stop.

        1. It could well work out poorly, but part of me really wants to see a standoff between different states’ police or between state and federal agencies like that.

          1. I’ve seen *reservation police* (indian nations have their own sovereignty but are subordinate to the feds – like Puerto Rico) back down when state agents raid convenience stores on reservations (for cigarette tax ‘violations’) so I don’t think any state is going to stand up against another unless its to protect one of their high level politicians.

            1. Yeah, you are probably right. They are all on the same team.

              A man can dream. I’m imagining something like a state making it illegal for federal agents to arrest medical marijuana patients or providers.

    2. Well, one of these days…

    3. She can come to Colorado. Weve already told OK and NE to go to hell, our neighbor to the east can join them.
      Jesus what is this country coming to?
      Taking someones fucking KID for some oil for a DISEASE??
      I usually dont say these kinds of things, honestly, but being a parent I sincerely hope someone from a higher court will step in and give the kid back. Or at least this will begin an earnest national dialogue about cannabis medicine and cannabis for fun.
      What ever happened to the kids 1st amm. rights to talk? I swear i am never leaving Colorado.
      so much fail.

      1. Taking someones fucking KID for some oil for a DISEASE??

        They do it for any reason whatsoever, like letting your kid play outside unsupervised.

        And it’s all over the country.

        Colorado got it right on cannabis, sort of, well closer than most states. It’s a start. But CO is a long way from a libertarian paradise from what I’ve heard. If it was, I’d be there yesterday.

      2. It won’t happen. This isn’t the first case. There are too many fucktards out there who believe drugs are just evil, and think that this woman deserves everything she gets for being a “bad mother”. Honestly, it seems like when woman become mothers they go psycho and think that they have the right to judge every other mother’s parenting. I hope that doesn’t happen to me.

        1. If you don’t go psycho-judgy, you spend your time in public worrying which psycho-judge is going to call CPS on you for reprimanding your hooligans in something other than a wheedling plea voice.

        2. I’m living proof that it doesn’t have to happen to you when you have kids. I have a ten year old daughter, and I’ve only become more libertarian since she was born. But I’m a dude, so YMMV.

      3. “Taking someones fucking KID for some oil for a DISEASE??”

        That’s the rationalionalization, not the motivation.

        The motivation is what it always is – BFYTW.

        1. In this case it’s a little more specific. Because they are fucking scared shitless that marijuana is going to be legalized and their bullshit money-making WOD civil-asset-forfeiture racket is going to come crashing down around their ears.

  7. The family court judge cited the possibility of felony charges as a reason to remove Banda’s son from his home.

    Oh, FFS! Then just remove *everyone’s* children and be done with it! 8-(

    1. Don’t give them any ideas.

      (I’m so glad I’m a beta)

    2. Oh, yes, the mere existence of a felony charge endangers the child because ….. um ….. the psychological torment of knowing their parents is a possible felon? Um …. because alleged felons shouldn’t be allowed to have children ? Someone help me out here …

      1. Felonies are dangerous things. You can’t just let felons be around normal people. They commit felonies! What is her next felony going to be? Do YOU know?

        I didn’t think so.

        1. Used to be true, back when felons were someone like John Dillinger. Now the typical felon is someone like Martha Stewart.

          1. Well, like Martha Stewart but devoid of any fame nor income regardless of how productive they may have been before meeting the government face-to-face.

    3. Is that you, MHP? Oh yeah, can’t be her, she’s too busy running away from the IRS over those taxes that she so loves to pay.

  8. Anyone have recommendations for Atlanta? Im stuck here for the next week for work and the hotel has shitty food.

    1. Where ya at? If you’re downtown I can’t help you.

      If you’re near Chamblee

      http://www.urbanspoon.com/r/9/…..-Doraville

      $2 change back from your $5

    2. I don’t spend much time in the city proper, so there’s only so much I info I can offer.

      However, a few notes:
      * I haven’t had the chance to visit yet, but Antico pizza is supposed to be quite good.
      * The Varsity is, erm, an institution. Personally I think it sucks, but many people here love it and it’s one of those places that people outside of the state will occasionally ask about when they here you were in Atlanta.
      * Taco Mac (a chain, but mostly restricted to Georgia) is a decent sports bar.
      * I don’t drink so I can’t give a very informed opinion on bars and whatnot, but Manuel’s Tavern and Hudson Grille Midtown have both seemed OK when I’ve been there; the latter is a nicer building and area. They have typical bar food.
      * I was also at 5 Seasons Brewing (Prado) recently, and it’s a very nice facility/setting/location. The food was a bit “fru-fru” for my liking, but I’m a rube; if “Cornmeal Dusted Crispy Alligator” sounds good to you, you might want to check it out.

      In the thread a couple weeks ago about Georgia legislators wanting to add an extra tax on strip clubs a few commenters “outed” themselves as Atlantans; you might want to email them (if available).

      1. Thanks for the tips fellas, Im staying close to where they are building the new stadium in Cobb County. It looks like it is a traffic cluster fuck waiting to happen once it is built……

    3. Go to Duluth and get some Korean food.

      1. Yes, you can’t go 100 feet on Pleasant Hill in Duluth without hitting a Korean restaurant. If you’re in the area it may also just be fun to check out Super H Mart, Mega Mart, or Great Wall (Super H Mart is probably the best). And of course you can buy some snacks there.

        What the Pho (not Korean, obviously) is supposed to be good.

      2. This is good advice.

        1. Except you are on the wrong side of town.

          1. Old South BBQ in Smyrna was good the 2 times I ate there. $Way Lunch up in Cartersville. Knock off work and drive up 75 you can go see the Etowah Mounds while you’re there.

            1. 4Way Lunch

  9. Just once I’d like to hear that the kid was biting, clawing, and fighting like mad to be removed from parents.

    But then again, they’d probably charge him with assault if they didn’t shoot him.

    1. They’d shoot him and charge the mom with murder.

  10. Banda’s son “reported to school officials that his mother and other adults in his residence were avid drug users,”

    Too stoned to remember to teach her son not to snitch?

    1. Don’t misconstrue… the “avid drug user” line was from Captain Ralsta, not the boy.

  11. These people, the CPS, and the police who are doing this, are sick, evil, scum. I pray that they die reviled by society as the moral equivalent of Nazi death camp guards.

    I don’t believe they actually think that the mere presence of marijuana is enough to endanger a child, to such an extent that the child has to be removed from his parents custody.

    That is beyond absurd. Marijuana is not heroin. It’s less dangerous than alcohol and nobody loses their kids because they leave a bottle of booze on the kitchen counter. Nobody has their kids seized because they have beer-making equipment in the garage, not should they.

    No, because that idea is so ludicrous, the only possibility is that these people are taking this woman children simply because they hate marijuana users and wish to punish them for using this mild drug – by taking their children from them. this isn’t about the child’s safety at all. That is pure horseshit. This is about a bunch of sick sadists who just enjoy punishing innocent people because of their own sick, vile prejudices.

    1. Hyperion nailed it: they’re a legion of wannabe Caligulas, exerting the little power they’ve been alloted and turning the screws to make it hurt. They know this mother exposed her kid to nothing harmful. She did something far worse, at least by their standards: she didn’t respect their authority. She taught her son to question their propaganda. She went to the media and cast then in a bad light. Kidnapping her child is political theater dressed up as process to cover up the retributive nature of it. This isn’t about the kid, it’s about power and respect.

      1. What bothers me the most is the number of utter morons out there who will actually believe the garbage about how this is for the child’s safety, who won’t see it for what it is, as a sadistic, cruel means of punishing parents for smoking weed. Because they’ve been brainwashed with anti-drug propaganda their whole life about the dangers of marijuana. And because the rotten legions of people who enjoy seeing others suffer for their alleged “sins” is so large.

        Come on, this is Kansas. The state is full of unrepentant religious cunts who are happy to be the first to throw stones at sinners. There are legions of self-righteous bitches who think this woman deserves to be punished in this way, and enjoy watching it.

        1. Uh, let’s not collectivize everyone in Kansas. This is being done by CPS. And CPS attracts the worst possible people for the job, like any position that has unreasonable power over others. CPS in basically any state is like this.

          Let’s rephrase your second paragraph:

          “Come on, this is CPS. The agency, in any state, is full of unrepentant power-hungry cunts who are happy to be the first to throw stones at ‘sinners’ because it gives them an excuse to exercise their power. There are legions of bloodthirsty self-righteous state worshipers everywhere who think this woman deserves to be punished in this way, and enjoy watching it.”

          1. Ahh, but you are neglecting the fact that the bad people AREN’T just in CPS. There are plenty of public sympathizers and supporters who will be happy to defend the scum in CPS. Because even if they themselves don’t have power, they enjoy seeing the “sinners” punished. Every witch burning always attracts a crowd eager to throw eggs and rotten vegetables at the witch. Do not doubt that the Kansas population is full of people who will agree that those sinners should lose their children as punishment.

            1. The proglodytes have to be getting really good at the art of cognitive dissonance. I mean, sure they support this child snatching stuff 100%, but in this case, it’s a direct result of the all new Kansas crusade against evil devil’s weed, and it’s making a criminal out of the mother too, over medical MJ, which the proglodytes fully support.

              You have to wonder how these so called liberals hold onto any semblance of sanity.

              1. The thing is, the Progressive position in favor of medical marijuana is in favor of the *medical* part – and its not medical unless the state says it is and you have a doctor’s prescription.

                The idea that the state would take away the children of someone *self-medicating* is completely in line with the Progressive position of ‘nothing outside the state’.

                1. I think that it depends on the progs in question. In CA and some other states it sure looks like they are pretty happy with it as a backdoor to legalization.

                  I suppose it depends on how broadly you define “progs”.

                2. Progressives are totally in favor of the state taking away people’s children. They would probably be happiest if all children were raised in government-run facilities, or randomly assigned to appropriate progressive mothers, so they could be indoctrinated with the correct progressive values from a young age.

              2. Yeah Hyperion this is certainly the work of all those Kansas progs, possibly all four of them!

                1. I think the core of what she is addressing is the externalities justification that is so popular among progressives and moral authoritarians of all types.

              3. Anyone ever notice how trolls have zero reading comprehension?

                1. OK, I just reread it and I totally read it wrong the first time. Mea culpa.

            2. Yeah, glad there’s nobody like that in the ATF!

            3. Ahh, but you are neglecting the fact that the bad people AREN’T just in CPS. There are plenty of public sympathizers and supporters who will be happy to defend the scum in CPS.

              Who do you think calls CPS in half these situations? Shithead neighbors with too much time on their hands.

              1. Exactly. There is always some self-righteous cunt spying on the neighborhood looking for an excuse to inform on her neighbors when they do something unmutual.

          2. State laws do have some effect. In some states there is a strong bias toward keeping kids with their parents and this sort of thing is much more rare. I know people who have been arrested for weed in their apartment with their kids there and there was no suggestion of their kids being seized. Of course you still want to do everything you can to avoid letting them get their hooks into you (or your kids). And the fact that it is so arbitrary is almost scarier.

            1. It’s not state laws, it depends on whether CPS gets called first or not. In this case the school called CPS and they were the ones who called the cops. If the cops just get called, most of the time, they aren’t going to think to get CPS involved unless there’s some really bad shit going on. It’s not the first thing on the top of their minds.
              But CPS, they entire existence revolves around taking peoples kids away. They have no other reason for existing.

          3. Uh, let’s not collectivize everyone in Kansas.

            They enthusiastically voted Sam Brownback into multiple high offices.

            Any further questions?

      2. ” She did something far worse, at least by their standards: she didn’t respect their authority. ”

        Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

        This, above all else, is what gets you fucked by the thugs, because it challenges exactly what they value most – their power to fuck you.

    2. They are anamists. What they are doing is on the same level as “this leaf have bad ju-ju”. So once they believe the parent has placed a child in the proximity of the object which possess bad ju-ju the full weight of the state can be brought to bear.

      These people actually know of a number of inanimate objects which they have determined to possess bad ju-ju. Can you imagine that?

      1. Some of them are, absolutely. But others, especially the more power-hungry ones, are merely using the animism as the excuse to exercise power over others. I mean…that’s why they took the fucking job in the first place.

        1. She might have had cigarettes in the house, though

          1. DEATH PENALTY.

  12. This woman needs to come to America and get on a college campus where she’ll be anointed as a hero and get to dictate the organizations policies. Then she can join the Democratic party and run for office.

    Kill all men!

  13. CPS has to destroy the children to save them.

    1. We have to charge the mother to find out how badly we can fuck up the child.

    2. Well, the original was “we had to destroy the village to save it” and as we have been told “it takes a village to raise a child”. So this is just the natural extension of that set of thoughts.

      The reason why it takes a village to raise a child is because after that village has locked up the child’s mother for doing something the village has decreed to be taboo they will have to step in and take on that responsibility.

  14. The timeline of events here seems weird beyond the Fascist works from the CPS.

    Initially kid gets picked up by CPS, then Mom gets him back, then she sends him to her ex to take care of him, but this is the part I don’t understand……kid gets sent back to Mom by the ex?

    Why?

    I’m not in any way suggesting anything less than tar and feathers for CPS but why did the ex send him back to Mom knowing that this shit was still floating around? Something stinks about that part.

    1. My take was that the kid was released *to the father* by CPS and the father, thinking that there was nothing wrong with the mother, let the kid go back and live with her and CPS found out about *that*.

      The ex would let the kid go back because he’s well aware that there’s nothing dangerous going on and all the kid’s stuff is at mom’s house. Probably felt there was no need to disrupt the kid’s life for bullshit.

      Of course the state feels that its rulings are absolute and there’s no room for initiative from ‘non-experts’ as that ruins the state’s planning.

      1. Well, off to the gulags with the father also! And isn’t he really the guilty party after all, being a member of the patriarchy and rape culture?

        1. Let’s not muddy the issue. This may be the one case we can get feminists onboard with the notion that government is not foster daddy to their kids and a faithful husband for them.

          You know, if they can avoid making catty slights about this wom?uhhh, shit. I think I fucked up.

          1. Indeed. I know it is largely in jest, but the progressive left isn’t a monolith. The people who think everything is rape culture aren’t necessarily the same people who don’t mind destroying families “for the children”.

          2. Indeed. If real feminists were serious about standing up for ALL women’s rights they would be defending the rights of mothers to not have their children used against them as weapons. They would be against seizing children as a way of punishing parents.

    1. That was pretty good. Remind how he is pandering to the hawks?

    2. The guy asks ‘are you an interventionist or an isolationist?’

      FALSE DICHOTOMY FOR THE WIN

  15. The family court judge cited the possibility of felony charges…

    Aren’t we all felons if a Prosecutor just squints hard enough at the statutes?

    1. We’re all felons, we just haven’t been formally charged yet.

      1984 or any other dystopian fiction cannot even come close to what we’ve arrived at today.

  16. “Banda uses cannabis oil to treat the symptoms of Crohn’s disease, a fact that she openly discusses. But Kansas is not one of the 23 states that recognize marijuana as a medicine, so all use of cannabis is equally illegal there.”

    The law is an ass.

    If the welfare of the child is paramount, then the burden should be on the state to prove that the child is better served by being in foster care rather than being with his mother.

    1. What, FYTW isn’t applicable?

      1. When you’re taking children away from their mothers, no, that shit just doesn’t cut it anymore.

        Here’s a case even the progressives should get behind.

  17. So, in addition to being a pack of kidnapping thugs, they’re also LIARS? What a surprise!

    -jcr

  18. Kansas could sure use John Brown right about now.

    -jcr

  19. Also, considering the efficacy of cannabis in treating Crohn’s and the suffering that disease causes, it’s probably cruel and unusual to make people choose between relief of their symptoms and foster care for their children.

    Here’s the National Institute of Health on treating Crohn’s with THC:

    METHODS:

    We studied 21 patients (mean age, 40 ? 14 y; 13 men) with Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) scores greater than 200 who did not respond to therapy with steroids, immunomodulators, or anti-tumor necrosis factor-? agents. Patients were assigned randomly to groups given cannabis, twice daily, in the form of cigarettes containing 115 mg of ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) or placebo containing cannabis flowers from which the THC had been extracted. Disease activity and laboratory tests were assessed during 8 weeks of treatment and 2 weeks thereafter.

    RESULTS:

    Complete remission (CDAI score, 100) was observed in 10 of 11 subjects in the cannabis group (90%; from 330 ? 105 to 152 ? 109) and 4 of 10 in the placebo group (40%; from 373 ? 94 to 306 ? 143; P = .028). Three patients in the cannabis group were weaned from steroid dependency. Subjects receiving cannabis reported improved appetite and sleep, with no significant side effects.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23648372

    1. Once steroids fail, the last resort is surgery, and life without half or more of your small intestines is awful. And surgery doesn’t cure the disease; it just takes out the worst sections (for a while).

      Depriving chemo patients of cannabis is mean, but their prognosis may be about the same without it. Depriving Crohn’s disease patients of cannabis is depriving them of the only medication that may work for them–and the side effects are a hell of a lot better than steroids.

      When cannabis is perfectly legal? It’s probably morally wrong for a doctor to prescribe steroids to Crohn’s patients in non-emergency situations without prescribing cannabis first–since the side effects of steroids are so bad. They can’t keep patients on steroids indefinitely.

    2. That’s pretty amazing. Probably helps explain why they guy I know who has Crohn’s smokes weed all the time.

      1. Absolutely.

        And smoking it, in the case of Ulcerative Colitis, I know, is probably better.

        Ulcerative colitis (which is like Crohn’s only in the large intestine rather than the small) is a disease mostly confined to non-smokers of cigarettes!

        If you smoke cigarettes, you generally don’t get UC. The doctors will tell you that it’s better to have cancer of the colon (which is what you often get with UC) than cancer of the lungs–because they can take out your colon and you can survive with a colostomy bag, but they can’t take out your lungs if you get cancer from smoking.

        I don’t think it works that way with Crohn’s though. However, the small intestines are thoroughly lined with cannabinoid receptors

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm…..MC2516444/

        I’d bet dollars to doughnuts is why this lady was using an oil press to make cannabis oil. Seems like the best way to get cannabis to cannabinoid receptors in your small intestine.

        I feel so bad for this lady!

        I hope the voters in Kansas are getting nice and riled up about this.

        1. However, the small intestines are thoroughly lined with cannabinoid receptors

          I can see it now. The state will compromise by letting people use it by jamming it in the pee hole.

          1. Someone but Walter a copy of Gray’s Anatomy…

        2. Good, one less thing to worry about.

        3. Wait, really? I have UC and this is news to me. Thanks!

        4. because they can take out your colon and you can survive with a colostomy bag

          I remain unconvinced that survival with a colostomy bag is better than sweet merciful release of death. Though maybe better than lung cancer. Legalise suicide NOW!

        5. Another reason for making cannabis oil is to get consistent dosage. You make one batch of oil and you can be pretty sure the dosage is uniform throughout. So then you can either test or just adjust to that batch.

  20. I don’t usually go around invoking Orwell, but this case is pretty damn Orwellian. Using kids to get dirt on parents. A senseless bureaucracy that will fuck you no matter what you do (maybe that’s more Catch-22). And a real 2+2=5 moment. If you don’t believe the lies, they will get you.

    1. It’s particularly galling given that public support for marijuana legalization is quite high, and support for medical use is easily a majority. These people could care less about how it even looks (I don’t expect them to care about the morality).

      1. I wouldn’t be surprised if well over half of Kansans supported medical marijuana, in which case this woman’s child got taken away from her for breaking a law opposed by most of her neighbors.

        1. You’re correct:

          The annual “Kansas Speaks” poll reveals most Kansans support legalizing pot under certain conditions. The poll released Sunday by Fort Hays State University shows 59 percent support legal medicinal marijuana. Only 30 percent oppose that idea, while 10 percent say they don’t know.

          http://www.kake.com/home/headl…..63302.html

  21. Ralston emphasizes that “the items taken from the residence were within easy reach of the child,” although he cites no evidence that the boy was actually endangered by his mother’s medicine.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, didn’t they raid the house after the kid said something in his class? So the kid wasn’t home when the house was raided, right?

    If he wasn’t home, then why does it matter if the items were within easy reach of the child if he wasn’t even home when the raid was conducted? If my kid is at a friend’s house, am I somehow negligent if I put beer on a low table given that he can’t reach it as he’s fucking miles away?

    1. Dude, are you actually trying to apply reason and logic here?

      (smacks Irish’s head)

      Bad dog! Statists don’t use logic!

    2. Would that fly in court? It sounds like an ass-covering excuse on the part of CPS.

      1. It sure as hell shouldn’t fly in court if the kid wasn’t even there at the time.

        “Oh, your honor, theoretically had the child been home he would have been able to reach the marijuana. I mean, he obviously couldn’t actually reach it due to the fact that he was miles away in CPS custody at the time the raid was conducted, but really, why does that matter?”

  22. Jewish Feminists In Israel Defy Ban, Read From A Full-Size Torah At The Western Wall

    A group of Jewish women and men teamed up yesterday to defy a longstanding ban prohibiting women from worshipping with full-size Torahs at Israel’s Western Wall ? a major win for Jewish feminists that sparked violent reactions from some ultra-Orthodox men.

    http://thinkprogress.org/world…..tern-wall/

      1. In fairness, if she were in many states with Islamic law they would have stoned those women to death.

    1. Meanwhile, men who came out to support the feminist protesters were attacked by a group of ultra-Orthodox men, Haaretz reported.

      Nice try, Bo, trying to slip that ThinkProgress weasel-wording under the radar.

      Rabinowitz, however, said the activists were fueling tensions at the site. “This is a provocative step intended to ignite the Western Wall, and indeed, the women of the organization manage to provoke the anger of worshipers, and the Israel Police and employees of the Western Wall had to work hard in order to avoid bloodshed,” he told the Times of Israel.

      Stop triggering the Charedi Jews.

      Or is it only feminists who can be “triggered”?

      1. I don’t know why you’re criticizing Israeli feminists trying to get the right to pray with men by mocking American feminists. They’re two different groups of people. Just because American feminists are almost universally whiny entitled liars doesn’t make that true of feminists who live in countries that actually maintain discrimination of this kind.

        1. I think he’s mocking Bo, which may or mayn’t be one and the same.

        2. I’m not criticizing the women. My criticism is reserved for this disingenous crap from ThinkProgress, who view “triggering”, and the dismissal of personal agency that it requires, exists. But only if you’re in the correct group can you be “triggered” and thus not responsible for your reactions to other people.

          I’m not familiar with the Israeli feminists who want to read the Torah on the wall, but I do know that the wall is controlled by the Charedim and they tend to take their customs (like women not reading the Torah outloud) seriously.

          1. Has ThinkProgress or this writer in particular ever said that triggering excuses assault?

          2. “they tend to take their customs (like women not reading the Torah outloud) seriously.”

            Should the Israeli government take them seriously, and enforce them at public places?

            1. Should the Israeli government take them seriously, and enforce them at public places?

              Maybe the Israeli feminists should lobby for someone other than a Charedi rabbi to be named Rabbi of the Western Wall?

      2. It said ‘provoked violent reaction from some Orthodox men.’ That’s weasely because?

        1. It buries in the middle WHO the violent reaction was against, and as Haaretz reported, the Charedi may have attacked the men who passed the Torah over, not the women who were reading it, implying that “Men attacked women.”

          In fact, also buried in the middle, is a rabbi saying to a man who jumped the divider to get the Torah back, “You cannot touch a woman! Don’t touch a woman!” Apparently, even the Charedi women shouted at the man that he was in the wrong.

          But of course, being an L-school survivor, you should be familiar with the tactic of burying unfavorable facts in the middle of a document.

          1. So since they attacked men that dared hand a Torah to the woman trying to pray in the public place it’s all good. Nice.

          2. Are they not too touch a woman because it is offensive to the woman or because women are corruptions to a “clean” man?

            1. AC’s more concerned about not mentioning some facts until several(!) paragraphs into the article, not discriminating against women in public places and punching their male supporters when they dare help them enter that space. He knows who the real wrongdoers here are!

              1. He knows who the real wrongdoers here are!

                Yeah, sure Bo, I know, you’re more in favor of narratives than facts, and that misrepresentation doesn’t matter so long as it serves The Cause. But women reading the Torah is an ongoing dispute between Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform Jews that’s has some serious theological and cultural strains of thought. It is an argument that does not deserve to be reduced to “HURR HURR JEW PATREARKY!”

                But then, I don’t subscribe to the lame Atheist handwave that “religion is just a tool for controlling people.” That some people, crazy as it seems, actually do think that be adhering to the Torah, the Bible, the Catechism, the Dhammapada, the Vedas, the Koran, what the fuck ever else, they are living a “good” life and may be “rewarded” in this life or in another, so I actually have to address why their deeply held belief is right or wrong beyond some weak attempt at shaming them into submission.

            2. No. It’s a Charedi thing that originates in Leviticus. Unless you are related to a person or a friend, it’s generally impermissible for people of opposite sexes to touch each other, based on the rationale that while not all touching leads to sex, all sex begins with touching. And that touching, being a sensual act between members of the opposite sex should be reserved for man and wife. There are exceptions for those in certain professions (doctors, police, firefighters, barbers, hairdressers, etc.)

              So it has more to do the preservation of marital sanctity and sexuality than because women are dirty, unclean slutopotamuses.

  23. Was this covered here today?

    DEA Head Resigns, Was OK With Cartel-Funded Prostitute Parties But Not Legalized Weed

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the…..andal.html

    1. Leonhart deserves every last bit of ridicule she receives. I sincerely hope she dies after living the rest of her miserable life as a pariah.

      1. I wouldn’t go that far, but good riddance to her. May she never have any influence on our nation’s policy beyond the single vote she can cast.

        1. I’ll definitely go that far, given the misery and death she has visited upon so many with zero remorse. It takes some DEA agents screwing around to end her career when she oversaw the massacre of innocent Honduras years ago

  24. SoCon: We need to abandon fighting on religious liberty grounds and focus on attacking the Sexual Revolution

    “The truth is that the Sexual Revolution has harmed millions of people: Children of divorce, whose families were broken up and who never really felt like part of a real family again. Reluctantly divorced people, who wanted to stay married but whose spouse pulled the plug. Heartbroken middle-aged professional women, who “had it all,” except for the children they are now too old to bear. Refugees from the hook-up culture, jaded, cynical, and old before their time. I could mention many other groups of people. They need our help connecting the dots between the lies of the Sexual Revolution and the misery they are experiencing.”

    http://www.crisismagazine.com/…..nt-working

  25. I don’t know how I missed this Instapundit quote about Elizabeth Stoker Breunig, but it made me laugh.

    So to Breunig, it works like this: Left: Here’s a really, really important fact that totally proves my general point! Right: Your “fact” is a lie, and thus doesn’t support your argument at all. Left: That isn’t great reasoning, but it is very appealing on a sub-intellectual level.

    1. I’m starting to think you think she’s a cutie too, Irish.

      1. She’s growing on me, like a cancerous tumor.

        Incidentally, I also discovered a hilarious series of tweets that someone directed my attention to because it was so ridiculous.

        Someone made an argument that was really bizarre, so then this happened:

        Robert Waters ?@rawatersjr Apr 4
        @ramsincanon @HartmanAndrew @ebruenig Sorry, I’m not following your argument, which is a bit overwrought, so will avoid discussion.

        Elizabeth S. Bruenig ?@ebruenig Apr 4
        @rawatersjr @ramsincanon @HartmanAndrew read thomas nagel and other people whose publications do not appear on ancestry dot com

        I think she just insulted this guy by calling him an idiot or something. He took offense, which caused this to happen:

        Robert Waters ?@rawatersjr Apr 4
        @ebruenig @ramsincanon @HartmanAndrew Wow, haven’t read this sort of thing from a TNR writer since reseraching the Michael Straight days.

        Elizabeth S. BruenigVerified account
        ?@ebruenig
        @rawatersjr @ramsincanon @HartmanAndrew not sure who that is, people who are really into the August History of TNR are usually racists

        Chain of events: Man questions other man’s argument, ESB calls him stupid. Man mentions person who used to work for ESB’s magazine, ESB says she is ignorant of his existence but anyone who knows the history of her own employer is a racist.

        What the fuck.

        1. When you have no other argument. ..

        2. Incidentally, Michael Straight was an editor of the New Republic for 11 years who was also a Soviet spy.

          I imagine this guy was researching him because of his spying activity more than because that 11 years with the New Republic was particularly interesting, and he got called a racist for his troubles.

          1. I’ll have to bookmark that to read later

      2. It has been clear for a while that Irish is in love with her.

        1. I’m just intrigued by her writing.

          Don’t judge me.

          1. Too late

          2. Sure buddy. Sure. Not that I’m not guilty of the same thing.

            1. You’re both disgusting.

    2. When has Ms. Stoker Breunig had an argument that despite her displays of faux-erudition when stripped of its all its classical rhetorical tropes and schemes didn’t just boil down to this?

      1. Not enough ad hominem

  26. Obama Worst of the most recent seven Presidents when it comes to granting pardons

    “When it comes to the pardon power, President Obama is still more talk than action. According to the most recent Justice Department data, he has granted only one pardon for every 29 petitions that have come before him, fewer than any of the past seven presidents.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..story.html

    After all of his talk about the unfairness of the criminal justice system, disenfranchisement of African-Americans, and the high number of African-American men missing from families/communities because of imprisonment, this is outrageous to the point of being incredible. Combine it with the fact that he seems more than ready to invoke executive powers that are somewhat questionable but that he leaves this widely acknowledged power virtually unused, and that’s all one should need to conclude what a horrible President he must be.

    1. I think it speaks to him being a horrible person more so than a horrible president.

      1. Yes, I agree. But the Founders granted the power to pardon the executive because they saw it as one of his duties to ‘take care’ of.

        1. True, but it takes a special kind of asshole to not use that expansive power to help people who truly need it.

          1. It’s like a guy who just won a fleet of free cars talking to his neighbor who just lost his car and now has to walk three miles to work every day about how it’s just awful that he has to walk to work, just truly awful, something someone should really, really do something about, and then walking back into his house to eat dinner.

          2. Why bother, there’s nothing in it for him.

  27. The newly founded upon libertarian principles nation of Liberlandija. The new national motto: “Live and Let Live”

    1. Apparently Croatian border patrol / police have been blocking the road leading to it.

      And it could be a hoax, but another supposed microstate claiming the territory claims to have taken down their flag.

      I don’t have high hopes.

      1. Let’s face it, when the first successful Liberland is founded, wherever that may be, the first thing they’re going to need is not roads, energy, food, water, or anything like that. What they will need is an arsenal of nuclear warhead tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles pointed straight at Washington DC, Beijing, and Moscow.

        That will ensure that they get to the roads, energy, and food stuff.

      2. Apparently Croatian border patrol / police have been blocking the road leading to it.

        Any country accessed by a single road is probably doomed.

      3. There doesn’t seem to be enough land there to house many inhabitants at only a few square kilometers.

        It’s kind of cool seeing an international libertarian sort of victory, though.

  28. OT:

    The biggest fuck you plebes tweet of the day.

    @BillNye
    Heading down to DC to catch an #EarthDay flight on Air Force One tomorrow with the President. We’re going to #ActOnClimate.

    “We are going to argue to lower fossil fuels emissions to save the planet right after we take a three hour plane ride!”

    FUCK. THESE. PEOPLE.

    1. Bill Nye is a douchebag. But he did play a scientist on TV.

      1. Bill Nye isn’t fit to light Mr. Wizard’s bunsen burner.

        1. Or light Dr Bunsen Honeydew’s Mr Wizard, IYKWIM.

      2. A pretend scientist played by a real dork.

    2. @peasants Qu’ils mangent de la brioche! #mylastwordsin5words

    3. A self-professed Libertarian politician from the Czech Republic

      Bwahahhaahhaa!!! Everyone knows there are NO libertarians outside of the USA! Have you learned nothing around here, young weedhopper?

    4. This kind of thing strikes me as the mirror image of ‘you libertarians say you don’t like government but then you ride to work on the roadz!!!’. I don’t think that flying in planes necessarily means you can’t support other measures that would be considered ‘acting on climate change’ (note: other than maybe persuasion I’d oppose any ‘acting on climate change’, but that’s not the point).

  29. “The most important thing here is the child’s well-being,” said Capt. Randy Ralston. “That is why it is a priority for us, just because of the danger to the child.”

    Sounds like the kind of thing Pol Pot would say, or Mao Tse Tung. Does the state have a compelling interest? One side says, yes, it does. Another side says, no, it does not. We used to reject the ideology of totalitarian communism, largely because it inserted itself into every part of a person’s thought and life. Now the state’s interference in family life is routine.

    1. Justice to me would look something like this:
      Shoot Capt. Randy 3 times, once on his pecker-head, and once through each of his balls.
      “The most important thing to us is society’s well-being. Fascism needs to be prevented from reproducing. That’s why it is a priority for us, just because of the dangers to a free society.”

      1. I like your use of logic, and I approve.

        +1 statist eunuch

    2. “The most important thing here is the child’s soul,” said Grand Inquisitor Torquemada. “That is why it is a priority for us, just because of the danger to the child’s soul.”

      1. Looks like it’s unanimous.

      2. Looks like it’s unanimous.

    1. If he’s kissing her corpse it might be worth a look.

    2. 3/4ths mast. Just briefly, though.

      1. That was more revolting than crush porn.

        1. I said briefly.

  30. Did we expect the state to say anything different?

    Name once… ONCE in the history of human civilization that representatives from the state didn’t claim that 100% of their actions weren’t for the good of the people?

    1. And of course, if your taking the child because you’re angry at the parents for defying you and wish to punish them, OF COURSE you are going to find a rationalization for doing so.

    2. Just off the top of my head–King John.

      1. It’s noteworthy, however, that this opponent de Montfort slaughtered whole towns and claimed it was for their own good.

  31. http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca…..ley-globe/

    The benefits of a strong regime of property rights apply just as much to intangibles as to land and goods. We long ago worked out how to make the ownership of cars and houses and factories work, but we are not always as effective at protecting the interests of the originators of an idea, the creators of a work of art or design, or the inventors of a scientific process. Yet the benefits from clear ownership of intellectual property (IP) are every bit as clear as those flowing from the ownership of land and buildings. Those of us who watched the ease with which the private sector beat the government in mapping the human genome is but one recent example of the galvanising effect IP can have on investment in R&D.

  32. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03……html?_r=0

    a mass migration in 1980 that brought more than 125,000 Cubans to the United States. According to David Card, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, roughly 45,000 of them were of working age and moved to Miami; in four months, the city’s labor supply increased by 7 percent. Card found that for people already working in Miami, this sudden influx had no measurable impact on wages or employment. His paper was the most important of a series of revolutionary studies that transformed how economists think about immigration. Before, standard economic models held that immigrants cause long-term benefits, but at the cost of short-term pain in the form of lower wages and greater unemployment for natives. But most economists now believe that Card’s findings were correct: Immigrants bring long-term benefits at no measurable short-term cost.

    1. David Card is the co-author of the discredited bullshit Card-Krueger study that purported to find that the minimum wage doesn’t increase unemployment. It was bullshit. Now he claims that supply and demand doesn’t apply when it comes to immigration. Bullshit again.

      And, of course, Miami had some special economic circumstances in that period.

      1. My views on borders are close to Cytotoxic’s, but I’m calling bullshit when there’s a claim that an increase in a population hungry for work and income doesn’t depress current wage rates. Here’s the money quote from the link:

        “But immigrants aren’t oranges. It might seem intuitive that when there is an increase in the supply of workers, the ones who were here already will make less money or lose their jobs. Immigrants don’t just increase the supply of labor, though; they simultaneously increase demand for it, using the wages they earn to rent apartments, eat food, get haircuts, buy cellphones. That means there are more jobs building apartments, selling food, giving haircuts and dispatching the trucks that move those phones.”

        A just-so story and one that might appeal to those who favor open borders, but it sorta ignores the time dimension in the process; yes, the new-comers will, sometime in the future, rent apartments. That time will be *after* they get low paying jobs and live with their relatives or in 10-to-a-room gaggles. And that low paying job (unless min/wage has already outlawed all low-paying jobs) will now have greater competition.
        Sorry; no pass the sniff-test.

        1. It also ignores that, more so than ever, mass immigration has huge costs: welfare (especially for their kids), education (especially to accommodate non-English speakers), healthcare (especially uncompensated emergency room care), competition for housing drives up rents, etc.

          If mass immigration is so wonderful, why does California’s economy lag so badly, in pretty much every area but tech? And those iPhone apps aren’t written by Latin American peasants. The more California looks like Latin America in demographics, the more the economy looks like it, too: a class of super-rich at the top, and a huge mass of the poor at the bottom.

          1. Not gonna address all that tonight, but I can and will in the future.
            Suffice to say I disagree.

          2. Also, the innate thriftiness of the mud people.

      2. To Card-Krueger’s discredit.

        https://reason.com/archives/199…..l-evidence

  33. OT: Reading the threads from today and having spent the last couple of days reading the archives from 5-8 years ago, the quality of our trolls is shit. Half aren’t even smart. The longterm ones are at least consistent and can put sentences together that are at least on topic. As much fun as it to torture people like Hihn it seems we are starting to attract more condescending pricks like him.

    It’s been fun to read some of the long time posters and how consistent they are in their views. Even the ones I disagree with are at least intellectually honest in the views and willing to have a genuine conversation.

    1. Sorry to disappoint you…

      1. Sarc?
        I’ve yet to see you troll.

        1. I’ve seen stupid people call her a concern troll because she sometimes disagrees with the prevailing assumptions on this site.

          She’s not a concern troll though. Bo is a concern troll.

          1. “She’s not a concern troll though. Bo is a concern troll.”
            Bo is a troll simply because Bo is a dishonest piece of shit. Like Tulpa (in tupla’s many disguises) Bo refuses to argue in good faith; just flat dishonesty. It is not only stupid, but it is insulting that they think someone here believes it.
            It is unfortunate that EVERY goddam troll here does the same: Tony and that asshole commie-kid invent ‘conservative’ strawmen to beat upon; turd invents rethugs, and so forth.
            The troll level is pathetic, but I’ve never seen SM get anywhere close to that.
            Hell, I beat on Ctytotoxic regularly, since he deserves every bit of it and more. But he ain’t a troll; he’s just not real bright about certain matters.

            1. Bo is just sad.

      2. I never put you in the troll column. I don’t always agree with your point but there isn’t 100% agreement around here anyway.

    2. I, too, have noticed the decline, which I trace as beginning with the rectal era. Before rectal the trolls were stupid dullards and contrarians, but they didn’t (usually) seek to disrupt the entire conversation by performing the rhetorical equivalent of taking a shit on the floor and then screaming nonsense at the top of their lungs. Now, the vast majority of them are griefers only looking to shut down any attempt at conversation through heckler’s vetoes.

      1. You, along with the rest of the prolific commenters that have been around for many years, have made this place pretty damn educational. I don’t have the education to cite libertarian thinkers and argue the finer points of libertarianism. I came here with a vague idea of what the NAP was but I’ve always thought that everything should originate from a individual rights perspective.

        If you ignored the dates it would be hard to tell this was from 3 years ago. (I was reading stuff from after Obama was elected for fun)
        https://reason.com/blog/2012/12…..rt#comment
        And there are some threads many years older than that that are littered with some of the same names that are in this thread today.

        I fully admit to contributing to instigating some of Hihns epic temper tantrums. I get a sick enjoyment out of poking him with a stick.

        1. rectal stick poking is a favorite hobby of mine

      2. Before rectal the trolls were stupid dullards and contrarians,

        I wouldn’t call MNG a troll.

        1. “I wouldn’t call MNG a troll.”
          I would.
          MNG wasn’t here to discuss; s/he was here to sharpen his/her rhetoric skills in sophistry.
          That asshole never once argued honestly; it was one misdirection, after another tu quoque, followed by an outright lie.

          1. MNG wasn’t here to discuss; s/he was here to sharpen his/her rhetoric skills in sophistry.
            That asshole never once argued honestly; it was one misdirection, after another tu quoque, followed by an outright lie.

            That sounds eerily familiar. Perhaps I was mistaken about the Asperger’s, it’s actually something more evil?

          2. MNG wasn’t that far to the left. He was basically in agreement with libertarians on many issues, such as occupational licensing and taxi cartels IIRC. He had some sort of thing about Israel/Palestine that made him comepletely lose control of himself whenever that subject came up though.

            Come to think of it, maybe he was secretly Matthew Yglesias.

      3. The difference is that the trolls used to be liberals and progressives. Now they are retarded cartoon libertarians (Hihn) and far-right idiots (American).

  34. It’s an interesting coincidence, too, that Missouri just recently legalized canabis oil for medicinal purposes.

    http://fox2now.com/2015/02/24/…..i-legally/

  35. I wonder if the family can seek political (or medical) asylum in Washington or Colorado?

  36. like Joseph said I am startled that a person able to profit $9384 in 1 month on the computer . Get the facts…… http://www.Jobs-Fashion.Com

  37. Yahoo has picked up the case: http://news.yahoo.com/mom-lose…..56512.html

  38. Um yeah, ythanks for fucking the thread up with some off-topic bullshit, Bo.

    Because governement using people’s children to punish them just isn’t interesting enough for you, I guess.

    1. Let me guess: “SSSSOOOOOOOKKKOOOOONNNNZZZZZZ!!!11!!!!!!!!”

  39. Of course it’s “for the children.” It’s always “for the children,” either that or FYTW.

  40. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.incomejoin70.com

  41. What an abominable atrocity. This MUST cease. Yesterday.

  42. Father should have made a run for the state border with the kid as soon as he was in father’s custody. Once CPS has had their mitts on your kids, they don’t believe the kids are yours ever again.

  43. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.incomejoin70.com

  44. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  45. Regardless of whether Cannabis should be legal or not, or whether she actually needs it for medical purposes (yeah right), The bottom line is that this dumbass chose to do something that is illegal in her state and got caught for it.
    There are other (legal) drugs avaiable that fight Crohns disease far better than cannabis. There are other states to live where cannabis is legal. Breaking the law was far from her only option.
    She has no sypathy from me and anyone that writes divisive and stupid articles like the above or donates to her fund is an idiot.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.