Police Abuse

McKinney Officer Who Brandished Gun at Black Teens Resigns

Don't assume all minority teenagers are up to no good.

|

Youtube

Eric Casebolt, the McKinney, Texas, police officer who tackled a bikini-clad teenager and drew his gun on two others, has resigned, according to WFAA TV.

Earlier today, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the decision to place him on leave had been "prudent." Casebolt's actions were detrimental to relations between law enforcement "and the communities they serve," according to the White House.

As I wrote earlier, Casebolt's actions were clearly inappropriate, regardless of what the teens were doing:

I'm not claiming that the teenagers behaved perfectly. Of course they didn't. They're teenagers. Should they have complied with the demands the officers made, regardless of how ridiculous they were? Sure. But whose actions were more reprehensible: the black teenagers who responded imperfectly to unfair demands, or the cop who lost his cool, abused a teenage girl, and introduced a gun to the situation? Perhaps we should expect better behavior from the kids, but we should demandbetter behavior from the people who are paid to keep us safe.

And so should conservatives.

Hopefully, Casebolt's resignation sends a message that it's not okay for police to assume that all minority teenagers are up to no good.

Advertisement

NEXT: The Government Wants You to Get Its Permission Before Discussing Gunmaking Information on the Internet (or Anywhere)

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. Sgt. Tacklberry has a name.

    1. Tackleberry is dead, dude.

      1. Holy crap. I didn’t realize that. 2001?!

        Wow. I gotta somehow worked that in on my next tour with potential clients of the daycare.

        1. Why? Did Tacklberry attend there?

        2. There’s a photo of him in Stockholm, Sweden…

          ..in his @#*($@ Tackleberry uniform

          There’s something sort of dark and sad about it. Like its an avante garde European film…. La Tristesse Des Gendarmes

          1. La Tristesse de Tackleberry?

            1. Je Suis Tackleberry

              1. Tristan et Tackleberry.

                1. J’accuse Tackleberry.

        1. I would have pegged you more as a Fackler guy.

          1. I would have pegged you

            We don’t need to hear about your fantasies, Epi.

            1. BUT I DO!!!

    2. Tackleberry was such a great character. And even such a loon didn’t harass unarmed teens in the movies. just cardboard cutouts were abused.

  2. Probably the overall best result. Casebolt’s actions were clearly a bridge too far and an indication that he may not be well-suited as a beat cop, but in light of things we have seen other cops do, this actually seemed for the most part relatively innocuous.

    The sad part is knowing that he’ll apply for a position on the force right down the street and get it without much issue.

    1. This is pretty much why bad cops resign ahead of the pink slip, so they can keep their POST certificate intact.

    2. Probably the overall best result.

      Probably, but not without cost. The race baiters are strengthened, and everyone learns media hype is better than reason. Meanwhile the cops learn the wrong lesson: that one particular circumstance must be avoided.

    3. And he is (was) the McKinney PD union vice-president.

      Such a weaselly, useless little shit…even his own leadership threw him under the bus immediately. Good for the McKinney PD…in the rest of the video, the other officers actually seemed to be doing their job competently without roughing people up. Half of their running around seemed designed to stop Casebolt from causing any more trouble than he already did.

  3. Damn it, I was coming here to post this and Robby Soave beat me to it!

    1. And penned a punchy write-up before you could even get the link tag typed out. Soave is the man.

      1. Soave has the advantage of having the news service wires…

        1. And Cosmotarian magic.

          1. And a snazzy cocktail dress that impresses the crowd.

  4. I believe they were an over-reaction and the fact that you can see the 2 cops make an effort to check him seems to validate that they did too.

  5. Casebolt’s actions were detrimental to relations between law enforcement “and the communities they serve,” according to the White House.

    You know who else’s actions etc.?

    1. Gavrilo Princip?

      1. Imagine the horror if Gavrilo Princip had a wood chipper!

        1. TRIGGERED.

          ?New York DA

        2. Threat assessments can be made retro-active.

        3. Maybe he would have hit Potiorek instead of Duchess Sophia?
          Then again, that would have harmed the Serbian cause in WWI…

  6. So I’ve been away from Reason for a few weeks so can anyone shed some light on what-the-everloving-fuck is up with this? Do we need to set up a legal defense fund for the commentariat or what?

      1. Lovely.

        1. You’re on the list. Double secret probation for you.

          1. We shall not speak of that which shall not be named, or else the jacket will have his vengeance on us.

        2. That link contains entirely too much information. Please Keep The Comments In Bounds

      2. Reason can always rebrand.

        7:01 Magazine. Because free speech does have feelings when it dies.

        1. All this time I thought the jokes about Getting On A List were just that. How naive I was.

          1. Why would you think it was only a joke?

            All joking aside, you can bet your happy ass every regular here is on more than one list.

            My guess is that this is a trial balloon. If it flies, expect more. Much more.

        2. I’m still lost on this 7:01 thing. God damn it.

          1. https://reason.com/blog/2015/06…..commenters

            DO YOU WANT US TO DRAW STICK PEOPLE TOO?

            1. If you wouldn’t mind illustrating the event for us with stick people, wood chippers, and Satan, that would be great.

              But thank you. I probably should have done some more investigating into the infamous 7:01.

            2. I mean, if they were fucking… yes.

              Or stick people doing any wood chipper related activities. Like making mulch, clearing orchards- that sort of thing. Maybe even reenacting scenes from popular movies.

          2. 7:01 is our 9:11.

            1. HEY I SAID THAT EARLIER.

              HAT TIP.

              1. Well then you and I think alike. I truly came up with it independently, but even if I hadn’t, it doesn’t matter, I’d never give a Canadian credit for anything.

            2. 7:01 wAS an iNSide jOB!

    1. We’re not supposed to talk about it. Suffice to say we are all (mostly) properly abashed.

      1. The Lucy Treatment.

        1. DON’T TALK ABOUT [subject redacted]

        2. DON’T TALK ABOUT… well… anything.

          1. Come on, we can still talk about what a competent job our government betters are doing taking care of us. Everything they do is for our own good!

          2. DON’T TALK ABOUT THE PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE.

            1. DON’T TALK ABOUT TEMPORALITY AND THE INEXORABLE MARCH OF TIME.

          3. We can talk about the weather. That’s why we have the First Amendment. To protect our right to talk about the weather.

            1. There is a special place reserved in hell for Canadian winters.

            2. Wrong. If we talk about the weather, then we’re damned denialists. Now talking about what models say is the weathe,r that’s fine and fully protected by the First.

    2. I think this is the second time some of those people named there have gotten Reason into legal problems.

      I also like the thought of the judge scrolling online reading the joyful press clippings of her moral preening, all happy like a pig in shit, until she stumbled on this place. The articles horrified her sensibilities, but then she took a look at the comments…

    3. “whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery.”
      Clever writing…ha ha ha
      Peanut gallery comment is spot on, we are all nuts.

  7. So how much do you think he got in a buyout? No way he resigned without some severance pay, right?

    1. No buyout. He wants to get hired somewhere else, and you can’t do that if you get fired for cause.

  8. “Casebolt’s resignation sends a message that it’s not okay “

    This comes as a great shock to me

  9. How would a civilian who brandished a weapon in a crowded public place under similar circumstances be treated?
    Hmmmm?
    “Aw, don’t worry about it, dude. Everybody gets a little flustered, now and then. Here’s your pistol back. Try not to wave it around so much.”

    1. Try not to wave it around so much on camera.

  10. Oh dear, the ‘tough on crime’ conservatives are annnnngreeee!

    “Casebolt’s resignation sends a message that it’s not okay for police to assume that all minority teenagers are up to no good.

    Conservatives disagree. Because Ferguson.

    1. That poor cop could have been shanked!

      /conservative too stupid to be real.

      1. Aggressive stance! Aggressive stance!!!

        1. Conservatives know a thing or two about aggressive stances….

          wait, never mind, that’s wide stances.

          1. They must be losing it at PoliceOne and Twitchy right about…now.

            1. Yeah, the whiff of accountability will make the P1’ers piss down their legs, at least until he gets hired by the next town over with prior experience counting toward his pension.

              1. What piss? They relieved themselves after the last run-in with a toy poodle.

            2. Everytime I catch myself thinking conservatives can’t be that bad I go read the comments at Twitchy to clear myself up.

        2. Hahah, the dumbest meme I’ve seen floating on the Faceplace is that of one of the kids adopting a “shooting stance”, and thus the reason for the cop drawing his firearm. *facepalm

    2. This is the true Ferguson Effect.

  11. I said this in the links a couple days ago, and this skinny-fat little bitch proves it.

    https://reason.com/blog/2015/06…..nt_5348675

    Weak, frightened and vicious.

  12. Why the fuck is the White House making statements about a non-lethal (thank Jeebus), mostly not violent situation in some Texas town that’s already being handled locally?

    “Mr. President, look! A potentially racially charged situation that we can all insert ourselves into to distract from your abysmal presidency!”

    “Awesome, make a statement.”

    1. There’s no sugar coating it. His work is done. The seas have receded, everything is transparent, the economy is flying because stock markets, foreign policy is rebooted and on cruise control. So he has time for the little things.

      1. Reason commenters has apparently made the list.

        1. *have.

          I need to re-read what I write before I submit it. At least that website that will not be named that broke the not to be named story regarding Reason commenters who will remain nameless has an edit button.

          1. We’re never getting our EDIT BUTTON now.

            Between the twitter convos by the staff hating on the commentariat and this, well, I’m thinking the love is gone. I’m in some kind of a spiral, here.

            1. ” the twitter convos by the staff hating on the commentariat”

              Citation needed

            2. Yeah. Wha?

              1. I’m mostly overreacting to the pissing and moaning about randoms here bitching at Soave for being cosmo. And for calling PB Weigel. Etc.

                Example.

                Example 2.

                etc.

                I’m also probably still hurt by Ken at The Blog Who Won’t Be Named being mean to us. THIS IS OUR VICTIM MOMENT GOD DAMN IT.

                1. oh,*that*.

                  ppppptt. if you write for Reason and you get upset when people call you a cosmo sellout, you need to find another line of work.

                  And for god’s sake, Robby is sipping a glass of wine in his twitter pic. *wine*. (spits)

                  1. Millennials like wine

                    best line:

                    fully 44 percent of drinkers between the ages of 21 and 27 had never tried a Bud. Not once. Not ever.

                    It is his generation.

                    1. oh, so what. like the rest of “American* beer” is any different. thats just snotty posturing about anti-corporatism or something

                      (*they never knew ye, American Bud = you are Belgizilan now)

                    2. fully 44 percent of drinkers between the ages of 21 and 27 had never tried a Bud. Not once. Not ever.

                      This gives me hope. Beer is gross.

                    3. *crack*

                      This one’s for you.

                    4. *crack*

                      This one’s for you.

                    5. See? batting 1.000

                    6. Do you think I can actually EXCEED 1.000?

                2. You are getting close to the edge with that comment. Please Keep The Comments In Bounds

      2. “he has time for the little things.”

        Well, only the important things, like pool parties, which reflect the face of White Rage in America

      3. For some of us, what the police do here is more relevant than some stupid war in the middle east. Who cares about the hypothetical threats some barbarians are to us when there are real threats to a certain population locally. I am tough on crime and detest the canadian justice system which lets killers off lightly in a bunch of cases. I surely don’t want that here. But at the same time, being tough on real violent criminals has to be balanced by good judgement and temperment by the cops so most of us can support them when they lose it a little when having to deal with some monstrous criminals.

        1. Looks like we won’t get that balance with this Harper bunch.

          Karla Homolka walks free.

          Can you believe that shit?

          1. But hey at least we’re still putting people in jail and farcically imposing an anti-John law that is ignored in every major city of the country except Manitoba, and will surely get thrown out by the SCC. Harper loves getting his teeth kicked in at the courts almost as much as he loves imposing a surveillance state on Canadians.

    2. It’s funny that he never makes any kind of follow-up statements as new facts come to light.

      1. He is the one that brings the light, ergo he needs not comment on the new facts that arise after his light has been brought.

        lightbringer

      2. You are aware that there are also many other unjust cases against blacks that the President never comments on. If you are going to nitpick on something, just keep in mind, he is actually being restrained on the racial injustice. Just google cases like ROBBIE TOLAN which got a mention on Real Sports on HBO but nary any mention on the news talk shows. Yeah, if the President wants to keep commenting, he can go on and on. If more white politicians actually started saying stuff against such cases, there will be no need for a showboater like Al Sharpton or for the President to have to make announcements. For a black citizen, what the president says on this is more relevant than what he says on the middle east because a black person has a greater chance to have a bad interaction with a white person than a terrorist from outside the country.. Should Presidents also stop giving press releases about terrorists if he shpouldnt be allowed to comment on these cases.

        1. For a black citizen, what the president says on this is more relevant than what he says on the middle east because a black person has a greater chance to have a bad interaction with a white person US Government Agent than a terrorist from outside the country..

          FTFY

        2. This is sub-Tony.

        3. I’m not bothered, by itself, by the president speaking on these sort of situations. I’m bothered by the political grandstanding – he has no problem making these sort of statements, but through his actions has directly contributed to and enabled police abuse, misconduct, and militarization. His words in light of that seem empty and hypocritical.

        4. Don’t you have some neighborhoods with people minding their own business to go limp out at?

          1. Aaah yes, the true colors of some people who come to Reason when they should be at freerepublic. Can’t even have a discussion without making some irrelevant personal attack.

            1. Aaaah yes, the true colors of some people who come to Reason when they should be at Daily Kos. The whining about Obama being criticized pretty much gives it away.

        5. Bloody fucking hell. A white person in the US has a better chaunce of having an aversive runin with a white person than he does with one of our terroristical brown brothers from overseas. It nae has dick to do with being black.

    3. I was thinking something similar. He always sticks his nose where it doesn’t belong, and never where it does. War on drugs? Oh, that’s for congress to deal with. Pardons? Crickets.

      1. Over in the PM links, Andrew S. advised that Virginia Postrel just posted a story on Bloomberg View about, um, a certain topic. The only comment to date has been made by someone using your handle (I think I can guess who).

        1. Mary has been using his handle over at the wired article about the incident we will not mention too.

        2. What topic?

          Say it.

          1. Nuh-uh. When The Jacket speaks, I listen.

            1. Dude, We’re libertarians. Since when do we do what what anybody tells us ?

              The Reason defense will be something like: “Well, we told the commenters not to discuss the issue. Who could have possibly predicted they would ignore us ? It’s unthinkable !”

              1. Well, he did ask nicely.

                1. I thought it was reverse psychology to make everyone talk about it.

                  1. You should be nice and not talk about it: Please Keep The Comments In Bounds

          2. The first rule of Reason Club is…

        3. Thanks, I just got a few emails about that.

          It’s nice to be winning. Who does that sort of thing? A loser, that’s who. And I’m glad everyone knows it.

      2. He is the President of the US. What he talked about is more relevant to some of us than the 100th press conference about a middle eastern war that has little relevance to us if we just let those barbarians fight among each other.

        Now if you want him to talk about other injustices, sure, go ahead. but where do you get off saying he is sticking his nose where it doesn’t belong;. Some of you act like a president should only talk about bad things that happen overseas. There are mental patients of all races that are being treated stupidly by cops during encounters. I don’t mind if someone says the President needs to talk about those incidents too. But when you go to the other extreme by saying he should NOT talk about these incidents, but he has to talk; about others, you are losing credibility.

        1. Except its wholly outside his fucking purview, unless, of course, he were making reference to various federal policies he has propitiated which encourage police brutishness.

    4. Why the fuck is the White House making statements about a non-lethal (thank Jeebus), mostly not violent situation in some Texas town that’s already being handled locally?

      Because if Obama had a son….?

      1. Obama doesn’t even know what Obama is doing.

        1. He’ll read about it in a newspaper..

    5. Remember, I don’t know all of the facts but it is clear the police acted stupidly.

      Also, never let a crisis go to waste. If you don’t have one, create one.

      Obumbles was never presidential material and it couldn’t have been clearer.

      Thanks to all the shitwits that voted for him. Thanks very fucking much.

  13. Earlier today, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said

    Wait, what? Really? REALLY?

    Our culture is pathetic.

  14. “Piss off Police” is not a crime anywhere. Obstruction requires physical resistance to a legal command. There was none here. No one has to respect either the man or the badge. Obey PROPER orders, yes. Respect, no. Obviously this “officer of the year” must be part of a barrelful of rotten apples. He brought violence to the scene, he esculated it, he overreacted, and his words and actions (harassing no White person) made everything worse.

    1. Cosmotarian logic: National borders aren’t property lines. Also property lines aren’t property when we need to score points with liberal elites. But then they become important again because I should be able to hire anyone I want to mow my yard even if I theoretically don’t know that he exists and haven’t technically offered him a job. Also babies are trespassing in their moms womb so shoving scissors into there skulls is ok, but trespassing is ok again when we need to score points against the pigs.

      1. You’re getting a bit one-note with this, Tulpa. Maybe you should just create another new handle instead. Oh wait, you already have.

        1. And why isn’t there a White History Month?!?

          1. Because it wouldn’t show up. Black on white is easiest to read.

      2. Show us on the doll where the dark-skinned person touched you.

    2. I don’t know the law of every state, but in Montana at least obstruction consists simply in failing to obey, and whether the orders are proper or legal or not is explicitly discounted as a basis for whether one is required to obey. And i’ve known a number of cases where people were convicted of obstruction not for disobeying any specific command but for exhibitting a generally disrespectful attitude. Furthermore, refusing to answer whatever questions a peace officer happens to put to a person is considered “obstruction”, and the peace officer never has to put forth any purpose for why he was giving out orders or demanding answers in the first place. As such, it’s a perfect means for harrassing any citizen the agents of control have taken a disliking to. You can rationalise it all you want, but there is no way that a community that requires its members to obey without question any random “orders” from any random agent of the state, to answer without reservation any questions posed by such agents, under pain of imprisonment is not a community that stands as an enemy to freedom.

      1. Obviously, that last phrase were meant to be “is a community that stands as an enemy to freedom”. I felt in my bones that I’d got something wrong there, but when I went and reread it I somehow missed it. I blame repression.

        1. And guess what. I got it wrong there. The original was right, but I reread it after posting and somehow saw a nonexistent error. I blame repression.

  15. Serious question. I know we joke but in LIEU of what’s happened, is it that unreasonable to believe Reason commenters are already on some sort of list or monitored as we speak?

    Might be time for me to switch to Canadian.

    1. I LOVE BIG BROTHER.

    2. Eh?

    3. Never go full Canadian Rufus.

    4. Everybody is on the list. That big complex near Bluffdale, Utah is not going to be a well air conditioned shopping mall, you know

    5. Of course we are.

    6. Yes. Do you really need to ask?

      1. What the fuck did you guys get me into?

        1. My real name is Hillary Clinton.

          1. Yer not ugly enough.

    7. Long time lurker, first time poster. I figured I’m already on the list, might as well register now and make it official. Express some solidarity and whatnot.

      1. Valar Morghulis

        1. Valar dohaeris?

          1. We do what we must because we can.

            1. At least they will be letting us have cake.

              1. The Cake is a Lie!

      2. Nice name. Welcome to Katherine Forrest’s shit list.

      3. /raises fist.

      4. One of us. One of us. One of us.

      5. Let me be the first to compliment you on high quality of your handle, sir.

        *tips duck*

    8. If I wasn’t on the list before, I am now. I’m the first poster on the thread-that-cannot-be-named. Obviously, Fist was setting me up for the fall.

      1. Hoe’s before bro’s….

        /drunk teenage boy

      2. You have also been quoted in Postrel’s article over at Bloomberg.

        1. and she replied to it. Top-hat tip, my Lady.

    9. I pretty sure most of you was on that list before you ever posted nething here. Think about it. The kind of person to want to say something here is the kind of person who gets on that list. I know I am.

    10. I’ve been dead sure I was on a List or Lists since I hit 1000 posts at Anti-State.com starting back in the 90’s. If anyone currently here was also there, a quick question. Is it just me or does Agile Cyborg not sound amazingly like Lithium Von Chloride?

  16. Earlier today, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the decision to place him on leave had been “prudent.”

    This incident happened in Texas. Who gives a flying fuck what the White House says about it?

    1. Dude, it’s the Twitter Administration. They have a 160 character statement about everything. With lots of pound signs.

      1. How do they feel about Jon Bernthal as the Punisher?

    2. And Soave has an opinion why by that logic. There are definitely Sagebrush Rebellion and Alex Jones/ Ron Paul type libertarians in Texas but Reasonoid cosmotarianism is non-existent thank god. If remoteness from the issue at hand is disqualifying then Soave might want to pipe down.

      1. Suave is a member of a small niche media that reports on police abuse and accountability issues. That’s his beat.

      2. Did anyone tell you you’re chalk full of wisdom?

          1. Ha, that was my John-moment.

            1. It’s one of Tulpa’s socks, just so you know.

              1. Dayum, Epi…. No luv, brah?

                1. Oh, not you. At least I hope not. I was referring to Sam Haysom.

                  1. No, not me. At least, I doubt I know anyone who’s ever posted (or, hell, even visited) HyR.

                    Good to know about the various socks. Plus, I did kinda laugh when I thought you were meaning me.

              2. I don’t know, Epi. May be Tulpa, but Sam is a special kind of yokel.

      3. Robby is a journalist for a magazine that covers police abuse, of which this is a pretty clear example. So his opinion/coverage is merited regardless of what any toothless inbred redneck nativist yokeltarian might think.

        The Obama Administration, otoh, has no direct authority over the McKinney PD, so his opinion doesn’t mean dick.

        1. toothless inbred redneck nativist yokeltarian might think.

          Sir, can I get you another cocktail?

          1. HURR DURR HE DONT EVEN HAVE NO PICKUP

          2. (psst, Paul: Hugh is being sarcastically hyperbolic as a joke on when people get all bunged up about “cosmotarians”.)

            1. I took it as him playing along, dork.

              1. YOU’RE THE DORK, YOU TOWEL

              2. *looks around*

                I thought I was playing along, too.

                I DON’T KNOW WHAT ANYONE REALLY BELIEVES!

            2. there does seem to be a slight divide between those who think this pissy pandering to the mainstream narrative of “Racist America Strikes Again” is just unacceptable bullshit for Reason to be perpetuating…

              (see: ‘Free Society’ et al… Winston?)

              … and those who think criticizing Reason for knuckling under to PC pressure is only conducted by mouthbreathing TEAM RED kulturwarriorswho want to jump in their pickup trucks and rescue REAL AMERICA from the faggy book lernin’ types , and and if the idea of liberty becomes wedded to this kind of asinine and vaguely sinister anti-intellectualism, it’s doomed.

              I consider myself somewhere in the middle

              1. I don’t expect anyone to bat 1.000-not even myself-but that was awfully foolish of Warty.

                1. “not even myself”

                  but you’re the *only one* who actually does bat 1.000….

                  ….at an entirely different game

                  and I only quote warty (and its actually a composite of 2comments he made) because that is just some *bomb-ass, epic-hyperbole* that deserves to be preserved for posterity

                  1. at an entirely different game

                    Maybe you’re all playing checkers while I play chess? AND SOMEHOW BAT 1.000 AT CHESS. AM I NOT HYPOTHETICALLY AMAZING?

              2. if the idea of liberty becomes wedded to this kind of asinine and vaguely sinister anti-intellectualism, it’s doomed.

                Well that’s true. In God’s Thesaurus “populism” is the antonym of “liberty”.

                1. i would think the “populist” argument would be the one that represents the dominant, mainstream view.

                  and ive never figured out what was supposed to be “anti-intellectual” about suggesting that knee-jerk accusations of ‘racism‘ and ‘bigotry‘ sometimes border on the absurd, and that more sober minds would hesitate before ringing the “OMFG SOMEOME IS OFFENDED!” alarm with such vigor

                  1. i would think the “populist” argument would be the one that represents the dominant, mainstream view.

                    Not necessarily. I’ve cited the Pew polls before that I argue reveal the majority of people are technocratic centrists, if anything.

                    ive never figured out what was supposed to be “anti-intellectual” about suggesting that knee-jerk accusations of ‘racism’ and ‘bigotry’ sometimes border on the absurd, and that more sober minds would hesitate before ringing the “OMFG SOMEOME IS OFFENDED!” alarm with such vigor

                    I was referring more to the almost antibody-like reaction against anything that even hints the Wikipedia “cult of the amateur” might be wrong.

                    1. “the almost antibody-like reaction against anything that even hints the Wikipedia “cult of the amateur” might be wrong.”

                      Do you have an example of the above for reference? I’m not even sure what that means in the context of Reason articles.

                      The accusation of “yokeltarian” as far as i could grasp seems to be over “”people who seem ‘too willing and enthusiastic’ to take contrary sides in teh Kulturwar””… not some broad anti-intellectual trend that rejects the very existence of the Academy in its entirety

  17. I don’t mean to bring up conspiracy theories, but in my opinion, he resigned not because of the charged situation with minorities and drawing a gun etc., but because his fellow officers made ruthless fun of him after seeing the T.J. Hooker-style body roll he did at the start of the video. The thin blue line is only so thick.

        1. BAD BOYS BAD BOYS

          WHATCHA GONNA DO

    1. I never watched any part of the video past that. I just watched it on an endless loop for about 40 minutes.

  18. I wonder if the White House will make a formal statement the day a police officer is surrounded by “exuberant teenagers”, has his gun taken away from, and is shot in the head with it. I’ll look forward to hearing what they have to say then.

    1. 75 percent of the commenters on reason would celebrate that outcome. Keep in mind Soave’s last sentence is offered up even though he knows that teens in question were in fact trespassing. So the presumption of innocent should be afforded even to active law breakers. Don’t break up that sexual assault officer there could be a perfectly harmless explanation.

      1. Yeah, better to go in guns blazing and leave nothing left alive, and then maybe try to figure out what’s going on.

      2. Tulpa, you really need to get a new copsucking shtick. This one is exhausted.

      3. I find it really odd that other countries somehow manage to have much more reasonable policing without becoming crime riddled slums.

    2. What abou thos eteens in that footage gave you that idea. Did you see those kids who were scared sittingon the ground. The two boys sittingon the ground were polite to the cop and he was cussing them out. Then the two guys who approached the cop only did so because the cop created a situation needlessly. Until that point, you had a bunch of girls griping and walking away. He escalated that situation and was handling her in a way that would cause concern with anyone with common decency. The cop created that situation where he alarmed the onlookers except for that fat white adult by th eway he was dragging that girl. He never bothered to ask any of those kids if they were part of the community. He just assumed they were gangbangers with the way he was reacting to them assuming they could kill him just by approaching . If he is that scared, despte having multiple cops serving as backup, he has no business being a cop. I have been in worse situations where actual hostile people surrounded me and my buddies and we never felt “oh damn, I wish I had a gun”. When did men stop being men.

      1. I have been in worse situations where actual hostile people surrounded me and my buddies and we never felt “oh damn, I wish I had a gun”.

        shitthatneverhappened.txt

    3. Yeah, it’s not like there were adults putting themselves between the kids and the officer or anything.

  19. Interesting link with a number of HOA documents:

    http://theconservativetreehous…..bdivision/

    1. They really went out of their way to get the most flattering photos of the main characters

      1. Well, considering that the posters felt they were the most flattering selfies they could take…

    2. My god, the comments. And people say THIS place is vile?

      1. I suspect the characterization of the Reason comments section as a “hive of scum and villainy” in some parts of the media is a reflection of the utter terror that the Marcotte/Gawker types have of engaging libertarian arguments directly. They just go, “Ugh! Locker room boys!” and pretend that they’re too highbrow for a place like this.

        I think Ken’s recent diss was more hyperbolic exaggeration appealing to that popular view in order to make a point about the absurdity of the …thing we’re not talking about.

    3. Spoiler alert: Conservative copsuckers can’t actually justify anything the cop did; instead blathers on with insipid/irrelevant details. SHOOTING STANCE

      1. There are some images at RAHeinlan’s link of an alleged shooting stance, it was an adult who scared the cop into drawing, rightly or wrongly.

        Here’s the link, its worth looking at for another view of the events.

        http://theconservativetreehous…..bdivision/

        1. Bender says:
          June 9, 2015 at 1:18 pm

          “This seems like a pretty good justification for the overzealous police response. So many red herrings you could have a fish fry”

          He nails it. Again, the conservative blogosphere reveals itself to be a piece of shit.

          1. As I said, lots of ways not to do it, what’s the correct way?

            1. Not drawing your gun or throwing the bikini-clad girl to the ground is the start. If necessary start putting those kids in Zip-Tie handcuffs. If they get worse, pepper spray.

          2. Actually, the Conservative Treehouse did excellent work on the Michael Brown case. The editor and commenters there put together a massive amount of evidence and analysis and came to pretty much the same conclusions the grand jury did, months earlier. If someone from the MSM had done that work and published it on a “respectable” website, they’d have been nominated for awards. So your sneers are unwarranted in this case.

            1. You really are a marvel. Even when you get something right, you still manage to fuck it up.

              Even assuming they got the Brown case right (I am doubtful) that doesn’t make their ‘expose’ on the pool party anything but a bucket of red herrings. If it were anybody but you I would be amazed that I have to explain this.

              1. Classic Cytotoxic: bald assertions backed up by personal insults.

                1. Sadly true, Homple, sadly true. Like many zealots, Cytotoxic has trouble with nuance. To a zealot, you’re either on his side or you’re the Enemy. Zealots love to seize on news items as Textbook Cases of What They Are Always Complaining About. And there can only be one side that’s right. Extenuating factors, ambiguous evidence, waiting for the whole truth to come out? Pshaw! Why consider those things? It’s more fun to jump to conclusions and hurl abuse at the heretics.

                  1. +1 if they don’t immigrate to the United States, bomb the fuck out of them

  20. So it’s okay to trespass, now? Because that’s what was the case here. People who weren’t invited and who refused to leave.

    How do you remove trespassers? Force. And yes, that ultimately can result in firearms being drawn and used. But the real lesson is they shouldn’t be there in the first place.

    1. I’m not sure trespassing, particularly given the fact that the trespassers were unarmed teenagers, merits potentially deadly force.

    2. It’s almost as though, somewhere in between letting trespassers go unmolested and waving a gun around like a maniac, there’s a middle ground which might conceivably not involve either circumstance.

      1. I also don’t think it’s necessary to tackle a girl in a bikini when she’s already walking away from you, but the bitch was trespassing, so apparently anything goes.

        Someone trespasses and it’s like a Mad Max movie – cars exploding, cops doing barrel rolls, guns being drawn on virtually no provocation…I’ve never seen a teenager trespassing in a pool area without that example of trespassing making evident the futility and violence of human existence.

        1. “The chain in those handcuffs is high-tensile steel. It’d take you ten minutes to hack through it with this. Now, if you’re lucky, you could hack through your ankle in five minutes. Go.”

          (cop throws hacksaw at bikini girl’s feet, walks away)

          1. I trespassed once. I can still hear the screams.

            1. Just in case people were unaware, the guy who plays Toecutter in the first Mad Max movie is the guy who plays Immortan Joe in Fury Road, you just never see his face.

              I have to say I was disappointed that Bruce Spence (the Gyropilot from Road Warrior and Thunderdome) was not in Fury Road.

              1. What about Grown-Up Feral Boy?

                1. Emil Minty is also not in Fury Road. But that surprises me less.

                  1. Didn’t he become a florist? Pretty sure I read that.

                    1. Nope-a jeweller. Good on him!

                2. What about Grown-Up Feral Boy?

                  One theory about this movie is that “Max” is grown-up Feral Boy.

            2. I was once arrested for trying to break into Hodgepodge Lodge (this shows my age). Intoxicants were involved. No guns were drawn though, this was in the Bad Old Days before the Total Police State.

        2. The thing is the teen was not even trespassing as she was an invited guest. The only thing I am not clear about was if she was a resident or not. But like we all know, it was irrelevant to the incident.

          1. Supposedly the HOA rules are that pool parties must be authorized, and can have only 20 guests. This one was apparently not authorized, and far more than 20 people showed up, so I’m not sure she counts as an “invited guest.”

            1. Are the guests supposed to know if the host followed all the rules of the HOA before they show up to the party?

        3. There has been too much violence. Too much pain. But I have an honorable compromise. Just walk away. Give me your pool, the beer, the sun block, and the all your naked selfies, and I’ll spare your lives. Just walk away and we’ll give you a safe passageway in the wastelands. Just walk away and there will be an end to the horror.

      2. What is the libertarianly correct way for private property owners to remove teenaged crashers from a party that’s gotten out of hand?

        I know there are many ways not to do it, but would be the right manner of proceeding?

        1. One way not to do it: wood chippers and/or damning them to hell

          1. Oooh…Better believe that’s a paddlin’.

        2. I said get the fuck out I need to get some sleep. There was some nonsensical arguments thrown out. Somebody tried a staring contest, and a girl said, “I don’t want to get in the middle of this!” I said you’re all in the middle of it right now and the only way it’s going to get better is if you do the right thing. After a minute of silence, they all gathered up and left, everybody keeping as friendly as you like, except for the silent starer. Him I just ignored and went to bed. I know it’s one in a million, but it is possible in certain rare conformations for a person to interact with drunken younxters without resorting to gunplay or police dogs. It’s amazing to me how often I am able to dumfound seemingly intelligent adult persons by doing the unthinkable and simply approaching someone or other who is causing a nuisance and actually speaking to him directly. It’s more amazing how often someone describes a problem with somebody, I suggest speaking to the person about it, and my suggestion is summarily dismissed as though it’s the dumbest or crasiest idea ever.

  21. And now on to the Rangers.

  22. I’ll take “puerile” as a compliment.

    Best Damn Editor Ever

    1. huh…

      7:01… NEVER FORGET!

        1. The timestamp on Nick’s post not-so-subtley directing readers to Popehat if they want to read about current events at America’s Leading Journal of Cosmotarianism.

        2. Mary’s abusing your nomme de commentaire all over the internets

          1. That’s been going on for several months. It’s the smell of me winning.

            1. Ah, I thought you’d just had Taco Bell for lunch.

    2. I’ll take “puerile” as a compliment.

      I said something similar in a different thread. At least it is accurate.

      1. I wonder if Virginia even knows where that word comes from. She seems pretty well educated, but not that many people know Latin.

          1. Great. That took me to chinese wikipedia. Now im I’m on another list.

          2. Ever have lappet thoke (Burmese tea leaf salad)? It’s great. I never thought I’d enjoy eating fermented tea leaves.

    3. Given her grasp of the situation and the kinds of characters we are dealing with here it is surprising to me that Virginia fails to see the value in the asshattery that we in this hive of villainy and scum engage in.

      I am pleasantly surprised at how universally we are reviled here at H&R. I think it is the Ayn Rand effect. We don’t pull punches. We call it like it is. We don’t walk-on eggshells. People hate that. they hate when you unmask them. They hate when you stand tall, look them in the eye and unapologetically call things what they are.

      We should definitely keep it up.

      1. That, plus a few people who go ballistic when you politely disagree with them on anything….

  23. Hopefully, Casebolt’s resignation sends a message that it’s not okay for police to assume that all minority teenagers are up to no good.

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/r…..tereotyped

    Although psychologists have been studying stereotypes for nearly 100 years, I have yet to identify a single empirical study that has identified a single person who holds a belief of the form “All of THEM are X” — and you can fill in any THEM you like (race, sex, class, age, occupation, and many more) and any X you like (criminal, warm, intelligent, etc.). I have been laying this challenge down for over 20 years at conferences, in talks, and in print: “If you can identify a single study identifying a single such person, please let me know. And if you cannot, then please stop making these outrageous claims.” In all that time, not a single person — layperson or scientist — has come forward to answer this challenge.

    1. I agree with the paleos here that the media needs to lay off the racial identification. It’s gratuitous. For every “white cop/black victim,” there is a “white cop/white victim.”

      The state targets whoever it can, black, white, or whatever.

      1. I don’t think there’s any problem with the media talking about race stuff (well, anymore than all the other stuff they’re retarded about). I think they should go about gathering all the facts first, and when they don’t, have the common decency to apologize for the riots.

      2. Or black cop/black victim.

  24. I’m not claiming that the black teenagers behaved perfectly. Of course they didn’t. They’re black teenagers. Should they have complied with the demands the white officers made, regardless of how ridiculous they were? Sure. But whose actions were more reprehensible: the black teenagers who responded imperfectly to unfair demands, or the white cop who lost his cool, abused a black teenage girl, and introduced a black gun to the situation? Perhaps we should expect better behavior from the black kids, but we should demand better behavior from the white people who are paid to keep us safe.

  25. Even better: McKinney police chief says the cop was not following protocols and was “out of control from the start.”

    Awwwww. The sound you hear are a thousand conservative hearts breaking as the petty rationalizations they erected for this man’s conduct suddenly fall to pieces.

    1. You know what, though? I’ll bet the cop was following protocol, and the chief is lying.

      1. Hwo come the 11 other cops didn’t behave the same way as that fool. I didn’t read a single complaint from any of the black teens about the other cops. In fact, the host said the other cops behaved fine.

        1. I think you misunderstand. My comment implies my cynicism toward police protocol in general, i.e., the cop was acting just like the higher-ups expected him to act; the chief is trying to avoid responsibility by pinning the incident on a “rogue” cop, when really there is nothing “rogue” or “maverick” about the way the average police officer behaves today.

          It’s an institutional problem, not a couple of bad apples.

          1. Generalizations (or, more accurately in this instance, stereotypes) are a weak tool for dissecting this situation.

            The officer in question was the only one out of 12 on site who gathered complaints, he was the only one on videotape seen behaving inappropriately, he was placed under investigation immediately (and resigned shortly after because he likely knew he’d be fired) and the mayor and chief of police immediately came out and condemned his behavior. In this instance, there’s no evidence that it was anything other than one bad apple at the McKinney PD.

            McKinney isn’t New York or L.A….so it deserves to be judged by the how the officers in McKinney perform, not judged by prejudices formed by officers’ behavior in other cities.

    2. Extenuating circumstances always exist if you’re on a team. The tool witnesses the right rallied behind would’ve supported the cops nuking the pool. Never can be too safe!

    3. That’s a pretty decent response. I’m impressed.

    4. They taught gymnastics at the academy, and by george he was going to put that training to good use!

    5. Irish, did you read the comments?

      What a sniveling bunch of miscreants they are.

  26. Just want to thank everyone for their completely off topic and pointless advice about my murderous dog in the PM links. You’re all useless (when it comes to pet training).

    1. Virginia quoted you in her excellent Bloomberg View piece.

      1. Whaaaa?????

        Link, please.

        Was it, “The substance of style, bitches!!11”?

        1. She wishes your eloquent and lady-like response was characteristic of the entire commentariat.

          Instead we’re mostly just drunk teenagers trying to one-up each other in vulgarities.

          1. All this from one, one post, where I posited her drawl might…might find its origins in vodka.

          2. Well, she got me on a good day; most days I sound like a drunk teenager trying to one-up someone. And by “one-up” I mean digitally probe.

            The whole characterization is inaccurate. There are many, many thoughtful and careful comments here, not you, Serious Man, but others.

            1. You shut your whore mouth, LB, and take your compliment from Postrel.

              It’s the only nice thing she will ever say about us and I will NOT have you ruining it with your bullshit humility.

              1. Yeah, well, now I’ve got to explain to my husband why I was quoted at Bloomberg View.

                He doesn’t read my Amex bills but he reads Bloomberg View. Shit.

                1. Does he know your “name”?

                2. Lady Bertrum|6.9.15 @ 8:06PM|#
                  “Yeah, well, now I’ve got to explain to my husband why I was quoted at Bloomberg View.”

                  Hey, at least you’re not hanging out with a bunch of drunken teenagers!

            2. Well the narrative is “harmless assholes being investigated by Feds”. Facts don’t matter anymore, as the initial reporting will be copy-pasted endlessly.

              It could be worse though. An alternate universe has the following headlines:

              – Homegrown libertarian terrorist ring busted by Feds.
              – Do we need a woodchipper registry?
              – Police shooting of anonymous terrorist “Rhywun” ruled justified, officer “feared for his life”.

          3. And we’re the reason libertarianism is so unpopular.

            1. Well, we are all Epi’s socks. So really Epi is to blame here.

            2. No, MJ, it’s just you. And NutraSweet. And Hugh. And…oh shit you’re right. Especially about Nicole.

    2. I didn’t read the PM links, but if I did, I would have posted this.

      1. I’M FUCKEN HOWLING.

        Quite possibly your best link ever.

        1. It bit you down there too?

          1. And then some.

      2. Wait, is that Triumph the Insult Comic Dog and his owner?

    3. You bet.

    4. My advice was totally on topic. It was about dogs and everything

  27. Puerile they undoubtedly are, but Reason commenters are also harmless (unless you care about reasoned political discourse or the image of libertarians).

    Lah dee fucking dah.
    Have another champagne cocktail, Ms Postrel. Perhaps it will mask the taste of the Total State’s ass.

    1. It’s like she has never visited any of the comment sections at other news outlets.

      1. The Washington Post has comments that are more casually racist or sexist than most of what happens on this site, and it is supposed to be important.

        I think in the future sites are going to be like ricochet.com, where they have a membership fee to comment.

        1. Deadspin had a tryout system I thought was pretty good before Gawker arrived to destroy that site.

  28. OT: This is why the ‘conservative blogosphere’ is shit. It’s because of conservative’s: they really are scientifically illiterate and casually racist.

    http://takimag.com/article/evo…..qus_thread

    1. The question I have for conservatives who make the claim that blacks are less intelligent because of evolution is this: Why is it that black people living in Britain are much closer to the average British person in terms of income and aptitude than the average black American is to the average white American? It seems to me that the answer is pretty obvious – black British people never formed a subculture completely separate from white British people, there was far more integration, and black Brits ended up pretty much equal to white Brits due to that integration. Also, slavery was never a major institution in Britain and was ended earlier and there was comparatively less discrimination against blacks which stopped some of the problems afflicting American black people from developing in Britain.

      Black British people living in London are richer and better educated than white British people living in the north of England, so by the same logic deployed by racist conservatives, white people in northern England must, for some inexplicable reason, be genetically inferior to black people living only 100 miles to their south.

      1. Well, there’s the occasional claim that slavery caused a selection pressure against intelligence (because you’d be the first one to try and rebel/flee).

        Of course that claim isn’t used much because:

        – The time frame is so short that it’s not likely to have much of an impact, even assuming that such pressure existed.
        – It brings slavery back into the discussion, which people who harp on the “genetically inferior” are usually avoiding in the first place.

        1. Plus, Masters probably had less than total control over which of their slaves had babies together – particularly the smarter ones.

          1. The usual story is the runaways/rebels get killed, which ignores how valuable slaves were (there’s a reason they chased down fugitives).

            It’s basically bullshit. Slightly more sophisticated, and deliberately trying to avoid the issue raised by Irish, but no evidence supporting it.

            I just heard it because some semi-famous Quebec psychologist (and up until then media darling) pushed that theory for a bit.

      2. Links for asserted facts?

        One thing you have to keep in mind when trying to explain IQ gaps is that the gap increases with g loading. (e.g. whites and blacks do about the same at remembering a string of numbers but there’s a big gap in reciting backwards) This is why “culture” doesn’t really work and Flynn was so hopeful that nutrition was an explanation

        1. I’m going to go out on a limb and call this out as quack pseudo-science.

            1. Where are the statistics? Or the other numbers? I see a standard deviation but nothing beyond that to establish that the difference is actually significant.

              1. google.com

      3. Black British people living in London are richer and better educated than white British people living in the north of England

        Place premium and selective immigration easily explain both. I’m not sure what your point is.

        1. That would imply that most of the blacks in Britain are there because of selective immigration. Don’t actually know if that is true.

          1. London, not all of Britain

            1. Still don’t know that.

              1. How could one of the most expensive cities in the world not attract above-average residents?

                1. How could one of the most expensive cities in the world not attract above-average residents?

                  I’m not sure that was true when the majority of London’s Black population arrived. From 1945 or so, to 1962, Afro-Caribbeans, could settle in the UK as Commonwealth citizens with virtually no restrictions as they had the same freedom of movement that citizens of the US have between states. Now, I do concede that there is some self-selection that went on as you had to have had enough money for the boat or plane ride…however, of what I’ve read about that time, most of these immigrants were quite poor and they filled up what would become London’s post-war slums.

                  The same story is behind London’s Pakistani population, as well, for what it’s worth.

                  1. [I’m not sure what data Irish is referring to, or that it even exists. This seems kinda pointless without that.]

                    I’m just positing that London proper is a really expensive place to live. (My personal knowledge of London consists of mostly erased drunk memories from my 40 hours there a decade ago.) There could be a huge slum situation within London proper that I’m not aware of. But just generally speaking, it’s not a good idea to speak of residents of San Francisco or Manhattan or Aspen as if they’re representative of the general population.

      4. And what do “conservatives” have to with this? The most prominent hereditarian is Arthur Jensen, a mainstream liberal.

        1. You clearly didn’t read what I linked to.

          1. Jim Goad and Taki’s are much closer to alt-right than mainstream conservatism.
            And I was responding to Irish.

            1. “Alt-right” seems to where the energy of the idiot populist masses on the right are today.

              1. Fringe intellectual movements attract smart weirdos, not dummies. See: here

        2. The most prominent hereditarian is Arthur Jensen

          Was. Been dead for about 3 years.

          1. Language guy, I need a ruling on this. I was conflicted. I mean, he is the most prominent hereditarian. OTOH he was.

            1. Well, there is ambiguity, I admit. I get that, yes, you use the simple present tense for general truths. However, if you know that Jensen passed away, it just sounds awkward. I’d have to problem with the phrase “Jensen is one of the most prominently-known hereditarians,” as the context makes it clear the verb refers to the general fact of the matter. That is, it’s still presently true that Jensen is well-known.

              Just my 0.02.

              1. *I’d have no problem with the phrase

              2. thanks!

      5. Black British people living in London are richer and better educated than white British people living in the north of England

        This is incorrect. The correct sentence is–

        Some black British people living in London are richer and better educated than some white British people living in the north of England

  29. Oh my God, the comments to that Twitchy post I put up above…unbelievable:

    “Sorry – the cop was initially ALONE and surrounded by an unruly MOB, with punks who were taunting him…he did NOTHING wrong.”

    “The down side, this just means more cops will back off, and the unruly youths, or criminals, or thugs, have more power. More crime.”

    “No the black thugs were out of control, and the cops were vastly outnumbered and had little or no resources at their disposal to control an unruly mob. There were 7.5 disobedient “youths” for every officer on the scene, if they won’t cooperate what are you supposed to do?

    By throwing this officer under the bus, the police are appeasing the black sense of entitlement. The lil homies have been emboldened by this “victory” and will intensify their criminal activity in the hopes of instigating more confrontations with police. They set up the cops by deliberately antagonizing them & resisting arrest on purpose, all the while co-conspirators (“activists”) knock them down by calling for the head of any officer that “overreacts.” The perfect stratagem. Deliberately provoke cops and then ruin their lives when they take the bait. They’re going to repeat this formula all across the country until all local police departments are rendered ineffectual and unresponsive, all so they can prey upon whites and law-abiding citizens with no resistance.”

    At least none of them used the phrase “feral blacks,” though lil homies is only moderately less racist.

    1. But *we’re* the bunch of assholes here. Thanks, Virginia, but you can shove your condescending defense.

    2. It’s the .5 disobedient youth that you really need to look out for.

  30. I have to say Soave’s fixation on the blackness of the teenagers is getting real stupid.

    1. Shut up Cyto, because even though we both just had posts criticizing actual racists, if we don’t pretend that the race of the people involved in this situation is of the utmost importance, that means we’re out of touch whites barely distinguishable from Klansmen.

      This is what progressives have taught me.

      1. the race of the people involved in this situation is of the utmost importance

        Another point of agreement between the progs and the people you quoted. Funny how statists converge.

      2. Face it. We’re still basically Klansmen. Just polite Klansmen.

        1. Dude, I have holes in my sheets for reasons that are entirely unrelated to race.

          1. I didn’t know that not only were you a member of the tribe, but that you were so frum.

            1. Nah. Cigarettes, friction and laziness.

    2. You know who else was fixated on black teenagers?

      1. DOJ

      2. Robert DeNiro?

      3. My web history that I have to delete whenever my mom comes over?

        1. I don’t know who’s creepier in that scenario, you or your mom for checking

      4. NBA scouts?

        1. Winner. The other acceptable answer was “The WB”.

          1. Yay! I did briefly consider The WB, but Dawson’s Creek and 7th Heaven? They’re like tv wite-out.

            1. That was just to hide the fact that The WB stood for “The Wayans Brothers”.

  31. Holy fucking shit, those conservative tree house comments. Even worse than Twitchy:

    “Agree!!! Tired of black thugs,we as whites need to stand behind this officer,this phony black lives matter crud has got out of hand,on social media they (blacks) talk war,bring it on we’ve had enough!”

    Wait, ‘we as whites?’ That sure sounds like a pretty gross sentiment.

    “Can you imagine if someone did walk up to some random black woman during the riot and say “why don’t you take care of your kids?” It would certainly be used as “evidence of racism” if they did. “Why you assume they my kids, racist!””

    Why you assume all blacks be talkin’ like this, homie?

    And then there’s this asshole:

    “A good read for all of you?
    http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Mak…..1508585024

    and how is that diversity working for ya!”

    Yup…that book is called “Don’t make black kids angry.” I’m sure it’s a very incisive and in no sense racially biased piece of work.

    1. I was listening to a local (DFW) radio guy on the way to work this morning, and i had to turn it off because it was embarrassing. There was a heaping helping of “if you’re a thug you deserve what’s coming” along with “cops’ shit don’t stink.”

      It’s all identity politics. Black teenagers == BAD, Officer Friendly == GOOD. Well, yeah, the teenagers were being stupid and doing illegal shit, but that doesn’t mean Officer Friendly gets to play “wack-a-negro.”

      1. Exactly. I came here to see both sides of the story. If people want to say some of the partiers were out of control and the host did a crappy job by putting it on social media, that’s fine. If the cops did their job professionally, they would have had a chance to see of the host;s mother was willing to work with them and take responsibility to get the party under HOA regulations and it is up to the HOA to fine the mother if she broke rules. . But the mother did not get that opportunity to show the cops that she was willing to work with them. I still haven’t seen an account by a single white resident who said they went to the mother and asked her for an explanation in a neighborly tone. now if the mother reacted badly, then that’s on the host’s mother and I would not hesitate to condemn her. It’s only fair to condemn bad behavior regardless of who engages in it. But the cops are a bigger story because they are in a position of power with deadly weapons and their actions are documented while we are left with only conflicting stories of what happened prior to the video.

        1. How was the “host’s” mother involved in the neighborhood? The only thing I’ve read is that they were outsiders (both mother and daughter) using the pool on their own. If the mother was a homeowner in the area, there has really been some crappy reporting on the situation.

          1. From my understanding, none of the pool partygoers were residents (thus were all trespassing). Still doesn’t justify shoving some girl to the ground, but it means there’s no good guy in this story (like most of these publicized police brutality stories).

            1. Right, that’s what I heard too.

              There have been a few people who’ve asked for comments on, “If this were Libertopia, how should this have been handled?”, and I’m curious if anyone wants to pitch in their $.02 on that.

              I think the HOA should have done more to ensure that their rules/covenants were enforced, given the nature of a pool that open to some, but not others. I’m not sure that I would go so far as to blame the HOA, but if I were paying for private access, I would expect the HOA to be able to reasonably ensure that their rules were enforced.

              1. I think that having a security guard on duty was plenty. Frankly, in libertopia, the kids probably would have been shot when they tried to scale the fence after being rejected by the security guard (assuming no police to call to subdue them). It would be roughly analogous to what happens when somebody tries to crash a party at your house. They get one chance to leave when told, or they’re a threat and liable to be shot.

                (DISCLAIMER: although I talk about shooting in this post, I do not condone shooting anybody, nor am I threatening to shoot anybody. This post contains mere speculation about the actions of lawfully sanctioned security officers in a hypothetical situation)

                1. trshmnster, can you email me?

                  1. done

                  2. Thanks iCarl, got your email.

                2. I tend to agree with your observation, but I have to say that, for whatever reason, having the security wasn’t enough to adequately prevent the initial party/”mob” in this situation.

                  I would imagine that it probably didn’t occur to whomever is responsible for the pool that someone might organize a pool party completely outside of the proper channels, but it appears that’s what happened.

                  And let me add, that I am all for self-defense (D-FENS!), and defense of property, up to, and including, using deadly force. I do not condone murder, negligent homicide, manslaughter, or other crimes against persons.

    2. But don’t you dare suggest that many conservatives are racist and this racism animates their (shooting) stance on immigration. Because if you do, they will get REALLY butthurt. Conservatives love their whine.

      1. It’s very difficult at this point to pretend that both conservatives and progressives aren’t seriously motivated by racism. For progressives it’s hatred of whites (and, in many instances, other successful racial groups like Asians who progressives royally fuck through affirmative action), but there are also a ton of conservatives who really do not like black people and their comments in this instance make that pretty obvious.

        I think collectivism is natural to a lot of people and racism is just a particularly noxious form of collectivism.

        1. “It’s very difficult at this point to pretend that both conservatives and progressives aren’t seriously motivated by racism.”

          Conservatives – some, certainly.

          re: Progs… i think its just *power*. my comment from the earlier “institutional racism in policing” article =

          “Accusing people of racism is instant moral-superiority. And posturing for moral advantage is the sine-qua-non of contemporary ‘cultural’ journalism. The nanny-voice that almost every millenial writer adopts…where they’re providing a stern-but-friendly lecture about why *Good People Should Feel Bad Being White*… is ubiquitous. Everything is “problematic” (*for others, natch)… and they are constantly sneering about “Most Americans”, the invisible masses, who are all obese, ‘uneducated’, Faux News, passive-racists.

          Its not mainly because progs are “afraid of Blacks” and have hidden racist feelings. *(though i think there’s a lot of this at Salon in particular)

          …its that they want to hold this “I’m better than you, therefore right” moral posture that gives them a false sense of self-esteem.”

          1. Ayn Rand (PBUH) pointed out that the guilty are easy to control. ‘White guilt’ and ‘rape culture’ are weapons to make a large number of people guilty and more easily controlled.

          2. Oh and to be fair the area peacenazis are not that different from the ‘white guilt’ progs ex BROWN BABIEZ

            1. And “peace Nazis” calling pro-war people racists for blowing up brown babies are different from you calling people nativists for disapproving of total open borders…why exactly? You do the exact same thing in every immigration discussion.

              1. I call those people nativists because inevitably-EVERY TIME-their underlying motivation is at least partly pants-pissing over outsiders corrupting our wholesome cultural paragon. Ex “You can import all those Hondurans without turning America into Honduras”. The fact is modern immigration hysteria is indistinguishable from the hysteria of the 1920s in most respects. It’s nativism whether or not that huffs your chuffs.

                1. And you never quite get around to refuting their point. There are now little girls suffering genital mutilation in Sweden because Sweden imported hundreds of thousands of Somalians who surprisingly continued all of their former cultural practices in their new country.

                  You now have clannish bloc voting in largely Muslim parts of Britain where patriarchs tell everyone how to vote and then use mail voting to insure that everyone votes how they were ordered. This is well-documented and both of those problems are caused by immigrants bringing their country’s bad cultural practices into their new home.

                  When people worry about mass immigration bringing in all the cultural problems those immigrants suffer in their homeland, that’s a legitimate issue that shows up everywhere there is mass immigration. If you think it’s an okay trade off, and many do, then make that argument, but don’t wave away rational points as being innately ‘nativistic.’

                  1. There are now little girls suffering genital mutilation in Sweden because Sweden imported hundreds of thousands of Somalians who surprisingly continued all of their former cultural practices in their new country.

                    So what? They’re not taking over Sweden.

                    You now have clannish bloc voting in largely Muslim parts of Britain where patriarchs tell everyone how to vote and then use mail voting to insure that everyone votes how they were ordered.

                    That’s a problem of mail-in voting, which is a bad idea anyways.

                    And you never quite get around to refuting their point.

                    Yes I do I have this thing called ‘history’ on my side.

        2. “It’s very difficult at this point to pretend that both conservatives and progressives aren’t seriously motivated by racism. ”

          For what it’s worth, this has been my experience (having lived and worked in both very blue and very red environments). There are different flavors of racism on each side of the aisle, but I wouldn’t say that the average American is racist. Progressives and limousine liberals are condescendingly racist. Regular liberals are not. Union members are classically racist, and they’re usually Democrat but they can be conservative too. Regular conservatives are not racist. Country club Republicans are snobby racist.

          My guess is that the racist comments about this story are coming from mostly coming from union members and sympathizers. To me it’s more plausible than the idea that cop stories just mysteriously bring out conservative’s secret racist sides. Unions have long been racist. There’s no mystery there.

          1. You missed hillbilly racist on the republican side. There is certainly a contingent of them.

            1. OK that’s probably true. I haven’t known any hillbilly racists personally, so that’s why I didn’t mention it.

    3. Yup…that book is called “Don’t make black kids angry.” I’m sure it’s a very incisive and in no sense racially biased piece of work.

      Irish, I’ve found you reasonable and fair-minded, but I think that is unfair. Pointing to uncomfortable facts and statistical realities about different ethnicities is not necessarily racist. It certainly can be, and of course racists (like anyone) will quote facts to support their view, but not necessarily.

      All political opinions have their share of idiots, but even stopped clocks….

  32. Per CEI someone filed a subpoena “within hours” of something.

    1. First Lady B, now Ken? I have to step up my commenting game in order to get mentioned on another blog.

      Thanks for sharing; it was an interesting read.

      1. Thats good stuff.

    2. Yet, while the comments identified in the subpoena are undeniably vile, they’re also protected by the First Amendment, and rightly so.

      Vile comments inspired by a vile act of political grandstanding. I want to say more but this likely isn’t the venue.

    3. In short, even if the six Reason users are indicted on federal criminal charges, the First Amendment means the government is all but guaranteed to lose

      The government doesn’t lose, you silly prat. The government doesn’t have to win. The feds can punish merely by bringing suit. Whether or not they win the case or if it even goes to trial are trivial details. A ruinously expensive, time-consuming, personally humiliating criminal charge is more than enough to punish insulting the defendant’s political betters.

      1. You can beat the wrap, but you can’t beat the ride.

      2. Speech has already been chilled.

    4. Another link from the CEI site – also lists additional coverage at the end.

      https://cei.org/blog/when-everything-deemed-threat

  33. So I guess after our recent troubles that will not be discussed, we are definitely not getting late night links? Because damn I could go for a new article to discuss in the comment section deep dish pizza, circumcision, and abortion.

    1. Nick’s holding another after-hours conference call on whether or not to institute comment moderation, and then they’ll be drawing straws on who’s going to do the moderatin’.

      So far, it’s between the two newcomers: ENB and Rico Suave.

  34. Another orchestrated black lives matter event, none of them blacks even lived in that area of town, I smell George Soros….

    1. Go away

    2. Where’s Buttplug when there’s actually a person using Soros as a boogeyman?

      FOR ONCE, he’d be correct to call someone out for that.

  35. Kiss my horses hole.

    1. Hey leave us out of your clop fantasy ya fucking Brony (NTTAWWT).

    2. You gotta pay the troll toll if you wanna kiss that horses hole.

      1. “I’m going for gasps. Wait till you see dude. Gasps at where its at.”

    1. Go away. This isn’t Breittard that won’t fly here.

    2. The notion that black men have a strong propensity to rape women is not some out-of-left-field racial stereotype, but is a truth that comports with the real world.

      Fuck off, asshole.

      1. And, he quoted from a former cop’s blog!

        1. HAHAHHAAHAHA! That racist scumbag is a former cop? Way to prove to black people that cops aren’t a bunch of white racists who are out to get them, you fucking genius.

          1. Clearly my view of cops as stupid mouthbreathers unfit for polite society and useless in normal jobs has been turned upside down.

          2. Oh my God, this is too good to be true. The racist blog that he posted actually had this to say about the McKinney incident:

            http://www.ambrosekane.com/201…..arrassing/

            “There’s no way to justify the conduct of this Corporal of the McKinney Police Department (TX) when he responded to a call complaining of too many black kids who arrived for a pool party.

            The Corporal, apparently, thought something needed to be done, but it soon became obvious that he really had no clue what to do. After he had tumbled to the ground, chased kids around, handcuffed a couple of them for God knows what, and pulled out his gun, you’d think one of the officers would have pulled him aside and told him to ‘cool it.’ But that never happened.”

            Even the racist former cop thinks this guy was an idiot! The fact that there are conservatives defending him is amazing.

            1. TEAM dynamics at play.

              Side note: Holy shit I learned a couple dozen new epithets for black people from reading that stuff. Kind of sad how intensely vitriolic those comments are. Maybe someone needs to send that site a subpoena? 😛

  36. It is not the gun that is a problem to me. If you watch the video, and mentally reverse it, you see the dude screaming at the cop, them reaching behind his back. I am sure the cop was afraid he was reaching for a gun. But it never should have gotten that far. The cop took down this girl because she dared to talk back to a cop. She was leaving, she was just mouthy about it. That is not grounds for forcing her to the ground.

    1. SHOOTING STANCE

        1. REACHING FOR HER WAISTBAND!!!

          1. COMING RIGHT AT ME!

    2. It is not the gun that is a problem to me. If you watch the video, and mentally reverse it, you see the dude screaming at the cop, them reaching behind his back. I am sure the cop was afraid he was reaching for a gun. But it never should have gotten that far.

      THIS^^

      The cop took down this girl because she dared to talk back to a cop. She was leaving, she was just mouthy about it. That is not grounds for forcing her to the ground.

      THIS, TOO^^^

      A cop getting mobbed and drawing his gun is rather forgettable. A cop shoving a girl to the ground for being sassy is something most 6 year olds have grown out of.

  37. THIS SHIT IS ON DRUDGE NOW.

    The DOJ has sorely miscalculated.

    1. That’s a whoopsie.

      /Department of Tyranny

        1. I don’t mean to youthsplain this to you, but they get over 2 million unique views a day. That’s a lot of eyeballs.

          1. No apology req’d; I doubt I’ve been there in years and would never find it:

            “[…]but a representative told Motherboard that “the US Marshal Service goal is ensure the safe and secure operation of the federal judiciary.”
            “We do not discuss in detail our specific security measures or investigative procedures,” the representative said in an email. “However, we constantly assess our security posture and are ready to respond and actively investigate all threats and inappropriate communications.”[…]”

            “Our security posture”? Is that the one with the head jammed firmly up ass? That “posture”?

          2. Drudge is where the internet comes from.

          3. I feel old every I go to Drudge and think “now that’s what the internet’s supposed to look like.”

            From vice: “representatives from the Reason.com”

            And now I feel young again.

          4. If you’re posting links to Drudge, you’re not youthsplaining, you’re Yokelsplaining. Or Peanutsplaining.

            Sometimes you really disappoint me, Playa.

        2. BTW, Gilmore mentioned up-thread about the constant ‘vile comments’ trope. He figures it’s a bank-shot off the old ‘I don’t watch TV’ snobbishness, and I’m pretty sure he’s got at least 50% of the issue defined.
          But for all those who find the comments ‘vile’, they sure seem to spend a lot of time making sure they know it is vile; think there may be another motive involved?
          Oh, and know them in a biblical sense (is that better Ms. Postrel?)

          1. i wish i knew what you were talking about.

            I do think that the breathless-denunciation people like Postrel, Ken White, others make of H&R commenters seems…. well, downright silly in the context of either, say…

            – any generic “major news”-site’s commentary, which is riddled with TEAM RED v TEAM BLUE illiterate poop-throwing… between SoCon idiots with Flag-Avatars denouncing the moral degeneracy of the nation…. and “Faux-News”-deriding liberals reiterating the latest factless-talking-points in circulation

            – or any other more-narrowly politically-oriented website; which tend to be cloistered echo-chambers of outgroup hatred and vituperation…

            …basically, “twice the hate!, none of the fun!” of H&R

            which, by contrast is a) far more open to substantive, detailed debate about political topics, and b) far more interested in the stuff Nick sometimes refers to as “spheres outside the political” – or something to that effect. Basically, more free-form ‘play’… something you’d think they’d celebrate as an example of the thing they pay lip-service to.

            in short – i have no idea what their basis for judgement is. in comparison to other slums of the internet, this place is an oasis of enlightened discourse.

            1. Sorry if I misunderstood your comment:
              “I suspect the characterization of the Reason comments section as a “hive of scum and villainy” in some parts of the media is a reflection of the utter terror that the Marcotte/Gawker types have of engaging libertarian arguments directly. They just go, “Ugh! Locker room boys!” and pretend that they’re too highbrow for a place like this.”

              1. oh, yeah.

                I didn’t get the “i don’t watch TV” reference.

                I do think the poo-pooing of the comments section is often just self-congratulatory elitism for the (effeminate)Cocktail-Sipping set. Maybe that’s the same thing?

                *(real cocktails get a bad rap. A sazerac/old fashioned is a beautiful thing. some here have expressed similar fondness for negronis, but i’ve never gotten into ’em)

                1. Oh, you’re still here. Mind if I reply to your questions above tomorrow when my brain is fresher? I had to step away in the middle of our convo to attend to some family stuff. Now, just winding until my eyelids are too heavy to open.

                  1. No sweat, you didn’t leave me hanging homie. The dude abides.

                  2. Somebody has been sampling the grape

                    1. Playa,
                      I’ve been trying the .orgs that get my dough for some help here and got nothing yet. You got any ideas?

                    2. Wait and see. I have some info that I can’t post. Reason is doing the right thing; they just can’t talk about it.

            2. Again, no one should take it personally. And more importantly, it should be taken in context. The closest analogy is a bunch of people in a gated community with strict covenants on what color you can paint your house, materials for your roof, lawn height, shrubbery allowances, # of vehicles allowed in the driveway, are sniffy about the architecture and late night parties going on in an open neighborhood that doesn’t have a homeowners association.

              Specifically, popehat is moderated. Now, I’m not saying that there’s something wrong with a moderated site, but it’s important to know why it’s moderated. It’s moderated because if it wasn’t, it too would be the commenting bazaar that Reason is. And for good reasons or bad, Popehat (and many other sites) have made the conscious decision that they don’t want a bazaar, they want a gated community with Gladys running the homeowners association.

              The part that I do get annoyed by, is they believe that their brand of commenter is somehow superior, more intelligent and just downright better.

              They’re not. They’ve just filtered out and overruled all the housepaint options that don’t fit into the brochure.

              1. They’re not. They’ve just filtered out and overruled all the housepaint options that don’t fit into the brochure.

                Even without the filtering, the comments there are worse. I’m not a libertarian and their comments are less libertarian than here, so I should like that. But Fuck No. That place is a fucking cesspool and Ken has no right to talk shit.

                1. That place is a fucking cesspool and Ken has no right to talk shit.

                  I dare say the shit-talking is beginning to smack of social signaling.

                  “I’m all for freedom of speech but…” then put in some platitudes about respect for religion, punching down.

                  Although, in fairness, both cases– Ken and Postrel– did defend Reason and the specific comments in general. I just think the extended tut-tutting about the tone and tenor of Reason comment section is somewhat eye roll-inducing.

                  1. I just think the extended tut-tutting about the tone and tenor of Reason comment section is somewhat eye roll-inducing.

                    You hate books and support folk medicine.

                  2. Even *with* the filtering …

                    “I’m all for freedom of speech but…” then put in some platitudes about respect for religion, punching down.

                    This shit drives me nuts. He’s a “free-speech absolutist” in the sense of the First Amendment. But he’s incapable, congenitally it seems, of understanding that there’s a cultural component to this. Shaming, doxxing, and boycotting are all perfectly legitimate as long as the government isn’t involved. I agree with Ken and other libertarians on the general principle of the thing, but that shit is still terrible and anti-intellectual and a surefire way to a worse world. And decent people should tell the Puritans to restrict their church-business to their church.

    2. “Time to send Drudge a subpoena!” – Some prosecutor.

  38. I’ve been reduced to watching DVR’ed “Classic Tractor Fever” episodes to cheer me up. No TRAKTUR PULLZ!!1!! Just old, almost-invariably white farmers puttering around on magnificently-restored everything. From Oliver to Harris to Massey to International to Deere to Ford to Minne-Moline, and everything in between.

    Magnificent perfection from – as I refer to them – My People?. (since I grew up in farmville, though the farming in my family stopped with my dad, who escaped it for Middle Class, Suburban ‘murca).

    So cool. I want a Ford 8N really bad. Then I need to get a place big enough to make it worth using over my Deere lawn tractor…..

    Ya’ll have a nice evening, ya hear? Except the Feds – fuck all of you assholes, right up yer Popehat.

    1. Hey, you should email me, too.

    2. “..to International McCormick Farmall (you philistine) to Deere to..”

      No love for Allis Chalmers?

  39. [redacted]? Are we not doing phrasing?

  40. A gift for all my fellow readers and commenters: the funniest thing you will see all day. Poor Joyce Carol Oates. How embarrassing. I guess she’s so busy cranking out books that she pays no attention to trivial topics like Hollywood blockbusters and paleontology.

    1. Paging Gilmore:
      Ad: Guy’s wearing a rust-colored sport coat at least three sizes too small, what looks like creased white jeans, and a plaid vest!

    2. “Poor Joyce Carol Oates.”
      I dunno. It’s close to over the edge; think she might be playing along?

      1. The way it’s written made it sound to me like she’ll totally sincere.

    3. That’s gotta be a joke or a parody, right?

      1. Tilly was clearly being funny. I suspect Oates was not.

        (Tilly & Oates, coming up on Country Music Television!)

  41. I really can’t conceive of any justification for what the cop did to the girl. That was clearly wrong, but there was nothing wrong w/anything else that he did. He forcibly made a couple of kids get down on the ground who were not complying w/his orders — that’s nothing. & he pulled a gun on 2 male teens who were coming up on him from behind in an aggressive manner while his back was partially to them & he was dealing w/the girl & the other people who were surrounding him. Anyone stupid enough to rush at a cop in that manner under ANY circumstances, let alone under those or worse, should expect to have a gun pulled at minimum. So knock of the hyperbole & rein in the “don’t assume all minority teenagers are up to no good” talk when there were clearly minority teenagers up to no good. Piss poor piece — decidedly lacking in “Reason”.

    1. decidedly lacking in “Reason”.

      *drink*

      I really can’t conceive of any justification for what the cop did to the girl. That was clearly wrong, but there was nothing wrong w/anything else that he did. He forcibly made a couple of kids get down on the ground who were not complying w/his orders — that’s nothing. & he pulled a gun on 2 male teens who were coming up on him from behind in an aggressive manner while his back was partially to them & he was dealing w/the girl & the other people who were surrounding him.

      Agreed. How this became a national story, I’ll never know. Besides being rough with the girl, he didn’t do anything wrong.

      1. It’s a national story because one of the Narratives being pushed by both the left and libertarians is racist white police oppressing blacks. Not that it doesn’t happen, but because it’s a Narrative every possible case is highlighted, even muddled edge cases and molehills like this one, not to mention the outright false alarms (or hoaxes) like Michael Brown.

        1. The sad thing is that McKinney is not a racist town. It is a fabulous city to live in, and is well integrated racially.

          The trespassers were primarily from other cities. That they happened to be all black is because that is who the party organizer, Tatyana Rhodes tweeted to.

          Even the officer that lost his cool was treating all the misbehaving teens alike, the fact that more were black and the ones on the video were black ignores the bigger picture.

          The officer shouldn’t have pushed that bratty girl, but she does deserve a good spanking and grounding for the rest of the summer.

          It is not an issue of race. It is an issue of an officer losing his cool and parents who fail to teach their kids how to respect.

  42. I really can’t conceive of any justification for what the cop did to the girl. That was clearly wrong, but there was nothing wrong w/anything else that he did. He forcibly made a couple of kids get down on the ground who were not complying w/his orders — that’s nothing. & he pulled a gun on 2 male teens who were coming up on him from behind in an aggressive manner while his back was partially to them & he was dealing w/the girl & the other people who were surrounding him. Anyone stupid enough to rush at a cop in that manner under ANY circumstances, let alone under those or worse, should expect to have a gun pulled at minimum. So knock of the hyperbole & rein in the “don’t assume all minority teenagers are up to no good” talk when there were clearly minority teenagers up to no good. Piss poor piece — decidedly lacking in “Reason”.

    1. He needed to solve the “problem” all by himself? A noise and fighting complaint?

      1. There were over 100 teenagers and young adults there, many who were criminally trespassing.

        That is a situation that got out of hand, that many unruly young people can cause all kinds of injury and property damage.

        It is entirely the responsibility of Tatyana Rhodes, who organized the party. She is the root cause of this mess and deserves the blame.

  43. Haven’t commented much recently (or ever), but just wanted to say that I’m in for anything the commentariat is arranging/has arranged.

    Disclaimer: [this field intentionally left blank]

    1. x4rqcks3f v2.0|6.10.15 @ 12:12AM|#
      “Haven’t commented much recently (or ever), but just wanted to say that I’m in for anything the commentariat is arranging/has arranged.”

      It might also be worth checking with those you know who might be able to help. If you donate to an org, now’s the time to call in some chits; no luck yet on my part.
      But agreed if there’s a site where we can help and get info.

  44. Please Keep The Comments In Bounds.

    I see a LOT of willful disobedience of orders around here.

    1. You know who else was against willful disobedience of orders?

      1. My football coach?

      2. Sergeant 1st Class Orville P. Snorkel?

  45. OT:
    Beware Greeks bearing excuses:

    “Greek PM to meet Merkel as bailout deal nears”
    […]
    But he ( Valdis Dombrovskis, the EU’s vice president for the euro ) urged the Greeks to show “less tactical manoeuvring and more work on substance” to seal a deal.”
    http://news.yahoo.com/greek-pm…..08660.html

    He wants lefties to deal with reality? The horror!

    1. They keep using the word “austerity”. I call it not spending other people’s money you don’t have.

      1. I think you mean “not spending other people’s money that the other people don’t really have either.”

    2. Kick that can!

  46. More to this story than we have been to believe , I for one like all the facts not just the ones that support someones agenda: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=567_1433897480

    1. You’re disrupting the Narrative, dude.

  47. Good to see that Obama has ended America’s odious racial discourse.

    And good to see him Unilaterally Extending Overtime Pay. Rule by fiat can’t go wrong! And I thought the Dems had finally seen sense? It’s not like Bernie Sanders has been complaining about how we don’t need so many kinds of deodorant and that Hillary is a crook who tried “healthcare reform”?

  48. How far are we off from commenters being jailed by a secret police for being members of something like Reason?

  49. So: libertarian moment. Is it on the level of “First Brown then Red” or is the DOJ going Waldemar Koch on us?

  50. For what it’s worth, I’ve added a post to my long mothballed blog where you guys can throw in comments, discuss, and suggest ways to help our fellow commenters.

    http://thewidenet.blogspot.com…..e-for.html

    1. Thanks Paul

    2. Thanks Paul

  51. 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.netcash5.com

  52. I dont think Slapo Sammy is going to like that.

    http://www.Total-Anon.tk

  53. What a joke…..
    Thug cops vs a demographic of drama queens that lives their lives steeped in hostility and anger.

  54. Sometimes the dispatcher’s message, in tone and selection of words commits the officer to a state of mind that is ‘over the top’ for the situation he is called to defuse.

    Just sayin’

  55. 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.worktoday7.com

  56. Obviously, the author of this piece chose to ignore the comments of local residents and failed to watch any of the COMPLETE video coverage. No, not all black teenagers are troublemakers, but some are, just as some white teenagers are.

  57. 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.netcash5.com

  58. I live in McKinney. This has NOTHING to do with race.

    Officer Casebolt over reacted and was largely out of line. But not when he pulled the gun.

    At that instant, two teenage males were rushing him, one was reaching towards his back pocket. Did he have a gun? Did he have a knife? Were they going to tackle the officer and grab his gun? What those two boys did was stupid and dangerous. Drawing his gun may be the only appropriate reaction Casebolt made that evening.

    He kept the gun under control and holstered it when the threat was removed. But there was a threat. Those boys were not armed, but no one knew that at the time. What would have happened if they did grab the officer’s gun? Instead of discussing the transgression of shoving some bratty girl, we might be discussing dead kids.

  59. “Don’t assume all minority teenagers are up to no good.”

    In this case the teenagers were up to no good. They had invaded a community pool, started fights, and were swarming the cop when he pulled his gun.

    BTW, those innocent teenagers returned to the neighborhood the next day. They broke into homes, robbed, vandalized and assaulted residents.

    Don’t assume all cops are up to no good. That should be the sub title.

  60. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go? to tech tab for work detail,,,,,,,

    ????????????? http://www.pay-buzz.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.