MO Gov. Arrested, Trump Announcing New Sanctions on N. Korea, and Amsterdam Bans Tourists From Gawking at Prostitutes: A.M. Links

|

  • J.B. Forbes/TNS/Newscom

    Missouri governor Eric Greitens is indicted for felony invasion of privacy. Read all the juicy background here.

  • Trump to announce new sanctions against North Korea.
  • NRA head defends gun rights in CPAC speech while the President Trump and Congressional Republicans express openness to new regulations.
  • Amsterdam bans tourists from gawking at prostitutes.
  • Trump accuses Cali cops of going soft on street gangs.

NEXT: Jacobson Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit Against Other Scientists

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. Read all the juicy background here.

    I don’t want to invade his privacy.

    1. Hello.

      So. The more we learn about the shooting the more we learn about it’s not really about guns per se but just good old fashioned incompetence and cowardice. Add other probable factors like parenting and poor socialization and voila!

      But that’s too complicated. It’s easy to focus on guns because you can see the ickiness.

      1. Why can’t everyone just boil this topic down to something ludicrously simplistic, write it down on a piece of paper, throw it in a giant hat and let Trump pick one out and we’ll do that?

        1. That sounds reasonable.

      2. It’s always easier to regulate inanimate objects than something as complex as morality. Many gun control propositions have parallels to the drug war, and I expect them to work about as well.

    2. A two sentence link? All right, what have you done with Britches, imposter?

  2. Trump accuses Cali cops of going soft on street gangs.

    Have they even tried to build a wall around them yet?

    1. You know who else went soft?

      1. Whoever it is, they nailed the alt-text.

        1. d’oh

  3. Amsterdam bans tourists from gawking at prostitutes.

    Even if they pay extra?

    1. I was baffled, too…

      For better context, here is an out-take…

      “New laws set to be put in place by local authorities will see tourists banned from staring at prostitutes through the city’s famous window brothels.

      While sex work is legal in Amsterdam, selling sex on the street is not, hence why many sex workers stand in windows to try and attract customers.”

      So then, the customers or potential customers hang around the widows all day, doing Government-Almighty-knows what, maybe whacking off and pooping in the street?

      1. maybe whacking off and pooping in the street

        I can see that in America and without the hooker windows.

        1. Dude, you need to get out of New York City.

      2. This does not compute. So, glancing at them is okay, but staring is not? Is this difference defined in the code? Does distance matter? What fraction of a second up near the glass is equivalent to a leisurely but not overlong ogle from the other side of the street? How many repeated peeks are the same as letting one’s gaze linger?

        This is the reason tourist go to the red light district in Amsterdam. If I remember, the tourists just form thickened sidewalk-blocking clots in front of the windows, and then one’s relative spends so much time trying to take a picture of the lady in the window, so awkwardly and obviously with his elderly flip phone, what we all become embarrassed on his behalf.

        1. Bingo. That is what they want to stop. The tourists were cock blocking.

    2. You cannot eindow shop?

      Should not have lookee-lous at jewelru or shoe store either.

      1. Mickey Rat needs some caffeine.

        1. He needs to quit fat-fingering his phone, is what.

          1. Too true.

    3. You can touch, but you can’t look.

  4. Trump accuses Cali cops of going soft on street gangs

    Hopefully, there’s a The Shield marathon on the tv this weekend.

  5. Trump to announce new sanctions against North Korea.

    How charming of him.

  6. NRA head defends gun rights in CPAC speech while the President Trump and Congressional Republicans express openness to new regulations.

    Bump stocks seem to be the overlap of the Venn diagram.

  7. Trump to announce new sanctions against North Korea.

    Embargo of media-charming sister exports.

  8. Missouri governor Eric Greitens is indicted for felony invasion of privacy

    Someone got him wet after midnight, sounds like.

  9. Why is Pence the one arresting Greitens?

  10. Amsterdam bans tourists from gawking at prostitutes.

    Yeah, take a picture for your citizen’s application it’ll last longer

  11. “NRA head defends gun rights in CPAC speech while the President Trump and Congressional Republicans express openness to new regulations.”

    Yeah, President Trump and congressional Republicans better listen to their voicemail.

    Remember how everything we thought we knew about Columbine turned out to be untrue?

    The more I hear about the shooting in Florida, the more it becomes apparent that if there were any way to prevent the shooting, it would have been with the tools we already have available.

    1) The FBI dropped the ball.

    They apparently had clear testimony from people close to the shooter that he was a threat to shoot up a school, and they had evidence for a prosecutor to support that by way of the shooter’s social media posts.

    2) The local police had some 29 complaints against the shooter, but somehow couldn’t find a good reason to even confront the shooter? This is what I’ve read–do I have that right?

    I worked in a lock down mental hospital for years. The stipulation for holding someone against their will is that they’re a danger to themselves or others, and I’ve seen people committed and held long term for far less than the behavior this kid exhibited.

    3) The armed police officer who was present at the school refused to confront the shooter.

    Doh!

    Put these three things altogether, and the only thing that needs to be changed–because of this last shooting–is that government employees at all levels need to start doing their jobs.

    1. 3) The armed police officer who was present at the school refused to confront the shooter.

      I missed last night’s thread about this but I bet someone raised this point:

      If cops are under no obligation to put themselves in danger in the course of their regular duties, why is it any different at this school? (I know it’s because children, but I want to hear it from the horse’s mouth.)

      1. Why else is there an armed cop there?

        1. For appearances?

        2. Harass unarmed kids.

          He was scared to harass an armed kid.

        3. To body slam sassy children into desks and floors.

        4. “”Why else is there an armed cop there?””

          Dog abatement?

      2. Rhywun,

        Two complications:

        1) The shooter apparently stopped shooting because he ran out of ammunition.

        The cop didn’t just fail to engage the shooter while he was firing. He failed to engage the shooter after he’d stopped firing.

        2) Robby (not that he’s a good source for anything but absurdity) is reporting that the same office failed to contribute to an investigation by the state of Florida into whether the shooter was a threat to himself or others–which probably would have had the kid put under observation if not committed.

        The conclusion I’m drawing from this is that, once again, for whatever reason, we’re not talking about new regulations that need to be in place. We’re talking about the government and their employees failing to use the resources it and they already had available.

        1. “The cop didn’t just fail to engage the shooter while he was firing. He failed to engage the shooter after he’d stopped firing.”

          Again, the shooter walked home.

          It was about a mile.

          It’s almost like he was trying to commit suicide by cop, but no one showed up to confront him.

        2. Yes, there is all of that.

          I’m just commenting on the hypocrisy involved. If this had taken place somewhere other than a school, nobody’d be calling for the guy’s head – nobody “official” that is. Because AFAIK cops are not in face required to do s–t. IOW, he got suspended for optics.

          1. Castle Rock v. Gonzales says it all. Even if you have a restraining order on your psychotic ex, the police can’t held liable when he murders your three children. It would be absurd. Every grieving family would shake down the cops.

            So ultimately we’re all responsible for the safety of ourselves and our families.

            But we shouldn’t have guns. A baseball bat next to the bed (locked in a safe-wouldn’t want the kids playing with it) is sufficient. Nobody needs an assault weapon.

    2. 3) The armed police officer who was present at the school refused to confront the shooter.

      I’ve been wondering about that one. I assumed there was one there, but wondered what the hell he was doing.

  12. I’m still bugged by that post from the other day where Reason staff were anguishing over whether our libertarian arguments against control are effective . . .

    As if doing nothing in the wake of the last two big mass shootings were somehow not a sufficiently libertarian outcome?

    . . . and what about the libertarian argument that government incompetence is largely to blame for two out of the last three big mass shootings? Is that getting a mention anywhere at all?

    I maintain that the FBI transforming itself into a global force in the fight against international terrorism may have shifted their focus away from doing their damn job protecting the rights of Americans from nutjobs and criminals right here in the USA. It’s amazing to me that the FBI can make headlines everyday for all the screw ups–from Pissgate to two out of the last three mass shootings–and yet is anyone calling for a top down reform of the FBI? Anyone?

    You’d think libertarians would be leading that charge.

    Instead, we’re anguishing about whether libertarian arguments against gun control are really effective?!

    Sad.

    1. Agreed, Ken, say it like it is!

      Sad to say, many of us Libertarians… Speaking for myself, at the very least… Are old and tired, and our outrage glands are running dry… What can we do, any more, that actually changes things?

      Make fun of the jerks who believe that MORE LAWS ALONE are going to change things, when we have a bunch of incompetents and posers in charge of enforcing the too-many-already existing laws. That’s a start… Beyond that? Baffles me…

      1. Hear, hear.

      2. I’m young and still tired. It’s tiring that everyone wants to talk about using the government to do something when there’s plenty the government can already do!

        Certainly the FBI, sherrif’s office, and the resource officer support new laws because otherwise it might mean that they’ve experienced a significant personal failure.

        Libertarians advocate for individual responsibility, and that’s like, really scary.

      3. Luckily the younger Libertarians, such as myself, still have incredibly moist glands.

    2. You’d think libertarians would be leading that charge.

      Well, that would be great. But I don’t think that libertarians are really in a position to lead anything. We’ll think we’re leading a charge and then look back and wonder where the hell everyone went.

    3. You know how you’re able to write three or four treatises addressing different topics in every lynx post?

      It’s like that.

    4. Agree Ken.

    5. This wasn’t an fbi issue. This was a local issue and the local cops had all the info.

      1. It was also an FBI issue.

        The FBI received a report that this kid was likely to perpetrate a mass shooting at a school, and the FBI–by its own admission–failed to refer that report to their Miami field office.

        https://www.reuters.com/article/ us-florida-shooting/ fbi-admits-failure-to-act-on-florida-school -gunman-drawing-anger-idUSKCN1G00T7

  13. President Trump on Thursday accused California law enforcement of being soft on street gangs and suggested he might pull immigration agents out of the state

    PLEASE DO. Trump is stupidly calling his own bluff on the myth of ‘crime’. Libertarians should be escstatic but we’re silent. Similarly there are renewed calls for armed guards in every classroom. But this will result in a BLOODBATH – because most of the people they hire will instigate the vulnerable kids to attack. Solution is to roll back security and embrace your local boogeyman.

    1. the real solution is : don’t put your kids in public school.

  14. Missouri governor Eric Greitens is indicted for felony invasion of privacy.

    Whoa, that’s a felony? Buncha thugs up in DC better be watching they backs.

    1. Only if someone’s nekkid.

      1. We’re all nekkid under our clothes. Except for GILMORE.

  15. All right, I gotta go check out the curling article.

    1. ‘Tis a silly post.

  16. I find it bizarre that they’re talking about bump stocks after this shooting, yet somehow no one mentions the Las Vegas shooting beyond a quick aside that it happened.

    Still no real concrete information about what happened in Las Vegas even though somehow we’re still talking about the accessories used in that shooting. The bizarre thing? We’re talking about those accessories after a shooting that didn’t involve a bump stock.

    I expect Matt Welch is scratching his head on that one still.

    1. Well, why not? It’s an extension of the old reliable political formula, currently in wide use among media outlets and swathes of the Facebook-having public:

      1. SOMETHING must be done.
      2. THIS is SOMETHING.
      3. Therefore, THIS must be done.

      1. Ah the transitive property of dumbassery.

  17. I guess that it’s not the Show Me State anymore.

  18. Trump accuses Cali cops of going soft on street gangs and hate them
    azhar.eg

  19. Still no real concrete information about what happened in Las Vegas even though somehow we’re still talking about the accessories used in that shooting. The bizarre thing? We’re talking about those accessories after a shooting that didn’t involve a bump stock.

    Teacher Update data Azhar.eg
    Employee Info Update azhar.eg

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.