Woman Arrested for Cop Killing Her Child, Google Bans Sale of Sex Pistols Merchandise, Oakland Tips Off Locals to ICE Raid Plans: A.M. Links

|

  • Pa/ZUMA Press/Newscom

    A Baton Rouge baby was killed after a local cop caused a car crash. The child's mother has since been arrested for negligent homicide—the same charge the cop who triggered the crash faces—for allegedly having failed to properly adjust the child's car seat straps for her height.

  • In a shocking and rare example of Oakland authorities doing something right, Mayor Libby Schaaf warned residents that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would be conducting raids on Tuesday night, a move which ICE has blamed for some deportees being able to elude the agency.
  • Google has stopped advertising shopping results for "pistols," which turns out to be bad news for a certain 70s punk band.
  • An Alabama whistleblower was arrested on dubious charges just a few days after criticizing Etowah County Sheriff Todd Entrekin in a news article.
  • "People who came from where I did, and who were given the thoughts I was given, should know that the future can be different from the past," writes Quinn Norton, who was recently hired and then fired from The New York Times editorial board after an internet uproar over old comments she had made online and her friendship with an infamous neo-Nazi.
  • Phoebe Maltz Bovy and Katie Herzog have an interesting chat on social-media dysfunction, cultural taboos, and "trying to be less of an asshole on Twitter":

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

NEXT: Brickbat: Missing Weapon

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. Hello.

      Trash edition.

      I smell a trap.

  1. Google has stopped advertising shopping results for “pistols,” which turns out to be bad news for a certain 70s punk band.

    Just wait until they stop returning results for sex.

    1. The internet would entirely cease to exist.

      1. I think these days, outrage traffic outperforms sex traffic.

        Wait a second…..all porn is sex traffic. Uh oh.

    2. It won’t be that long a wait. Any results might be related to trafficking, and therefore need to be suppressed.
      So if libertarians believe in corporate freedom, Google is OK to control the world through it’s own version of newspeak.
      I have a serious question; what is a realistic alternative?
      Search engine, web browser, email, word processing, spreadsheets, photo storage and display. Is there a non-progressive company out there for any or all of these?

      1. Is there a non-progressive company out there for any or all of these?

        Conservatives suck at innovation.

        I read about a conservative boycott of Google/Bing though. There is a search engine called Duckgoduck or something like that.

        1. Innovation is generally the opposite of conservation. Unless you come up with innovative ways of conserving.

        2. “Apolitical” is also “not progressive”. Interesting that you’d leap to “conservative”.

          1. Well, it’s not THAT interesting.

            1. OK smartypants, interesting in a “huh” sort of way. Because that’s what he always does.

          2. No one with a warm brain is apolitical. They may (and often are) be independent but they still have political opinions even if they are childish ones.

            Conservatives are stupid (progressives are too). why do you care?

        3. DuckDuckGo was good. It also retains no privacy information about you, which is it’s major seeking point.

          Also, Bing is the best porn search engine.

          1. On this issue in particular, BUCS’s word is bond, y’all.

        4. Conservatives suck at innovation.

          Or they’re really good but, unlike self-loathing homosexuals, are completely fine being closeted conservatives.

          Search engines and advertising are hardly the pinnacle of modern innovation.

      2. Ask Jeeves?

      3. Real answers if you’re curious:

        Startpage uses some Google results to “enhance” their listings. It is my default search engine in Firefox because I hate Google on principle. The most recent major upgrade to Firefox makes it about as responsive as Chrome, which is huge. Chrome has been leaps and bounds ahead of everyone since day one, just like Google the search engine was.

        As PB was inferring, Duckduckgo is another alternative search engine. Startpage works a little better for me. I only need to use Google once a week or so for searching obscure things.

        For a productivity suite there is Libre Office. I’ve never used it, but I did use its predecessor Open Office a lot when I was younger. Now I just use MS Office 2010. I just write shitty poetry and make spreadsheets showing how poor I am.

        Tutanota is an okay alternative for e-mail. Very private, fully-encrypted, and has an Android app. Shockingly, you’ll never find anything as good as Gmail. Android itself is developed by Google, so cell phones don’t have many alternatives AFAIK. I think there are non-smartphones and older Blackberries. Newer BBs run Android.

        Photo storage and display is not something I do, so you’ll have to research that yourself.

        1. “Shockingly, you’ll never find anything as good as Gmail.”

          Try fastmail.com It’s real good.

  2. An Alabama whistleblower was arrested on dubious charges just a few days after criticizing Etowah County Sheriff Todd Entrekin in a news article.

    Alabama Whistleblower was my nickname down at the yard.

    1. My nickname was Julio down at the schoolyard.

    2. 14 grams of marijuana plus 5 cups butter magically becomes 1037 grams of marijuana, allowing them to stick him with a felony distribution charge, and lock him up for life. Retard southern sheriffs, got to love ’em.

      1. That’s better math skills than i’d expect from a Southern sheriff.

      2. Probably can charge something extra because it’s an extract or concentrate too.

        1. Not marijuana extract — 14 grams of marijuana. So 28 doses in 5 cups of butter, ounces to grams, carry the 1, and you get … a pretty fattening way to get mildly buzzed, when you have to eat more than an ounce as a time.

          Kinda the exact opposite of a “concentrate”.

          1. I know that. But some states have laws like that, where any preparation or extract is treated as a worse thing than the herb itself. Butter is not a concentrate, but it’s certainly an extract.

  3. The child’s mother has since been arrested for negligent homicide?the same charge the cop who triggered the crash faces…

    They arrest cops in Louisiana?

    1. Actually, we ALL failed to adjust the car seat.

    2. Police said then that Manuel has been on paid administrative leave holiday since the accident. He posted $15,000 bail and was released from jail the same day he was booked.

      {sigh} Nutpunch after nutpunch. Is it Monday?

      1. I assume that immediately after release, he paid a visit to the Police Union attorneys.

        OUCH!

  4. Phoebe Maltz Bovy and Katie Herzog have an intesresting chat on social-media dysfunction,

    Have they checked out the H&R Peanut Gallery?

    1. tl;dw. Where’s the transcript?

  5. …a move which ICE has blamed for some deportees being able to elude the agency.

    Almost like it was the point.

    1. The feds are clsiming that the aliens in question were”criminal”. Presuming this is true will the mayor hold herself responsible for any future crimes committed by them or will she attribute them to to bad luck?

      1. There is a federal law for her liability now.

        The penalties go up as the illegals commit more serious crimes. An illegal committing murder could subject her to the death penalty.

        Lefties want our government to be a police state, then enforce all these rules on them that they create.

      2. The feds are clsiming that the aliens in question were”criminal”

        Of course they are. And law enforcement agencies never lie.

        1. Every illegal is a criminal. They break the law by crossing the US border without permission and break more laws by avoiding immigration authorities.

  6. An Alabama whistleblower was arrested on dubious charges just a few days after criticizing Etowah County Sheriff Todd Entrekin in a news article.

    Don’t ever change, Alabama.

    1. Hope Neil Young can remember that.

    2. Heard your plea in the courthouse
      Jurybox began to rock and rise
      Forty-nine sister states all had
      Alabama in their eyes

  7. People who came from where I did, and who were given the thoughts I was given, should know that the future can be different from the past…

    A DIRECT QUOTE FROM MEIN KAMPF.

    1. Trump should call his memoirs My Struggle.

      Nah….that is not Trump enough. He should call them I Didn’t Even Have To Struggle.

      1. Best Struggle Ever, Top Notch, Believe Me: The Donald Trump Story

        1. I Could Have Taken Out Hitler By Myself, But Nobody Asked, by Donald Trump

    2. Fun fact: The original title Hitler chose was “Four and a Half Years of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice.” His Nazi publisher knew better and shortened it to “Mein Kampf,” simply My Struggle, or My Battle.

      Also Hitler never wrote a single page of Mein Kampf. Rudolf Hess wrote down what Hitler rambled on about.

      Also, both were socialists.

      1. No, they were fake socialists and pawns of the Right, just like the fake socialists of the USSR and any other socialist country which does bad stuff.

        /prog

        1. The only true socialists are the Nordic ones with market economies that explicitly say they AREN’T socialist.

          1. Except for these Nordic government owned businesses that control the means of production:

            Swden: Akademiska Hus, Apoteket, Green Cargo, G?ta Kanalbolag; see G?ta Canal, Infranord, etc.
            Norway: Argentum Fondsinvesteringer, Central Norway Regional Health Authority, Petoro, etc.
            Finland: Alko, Altia, OHY Arsenal, CSC – Tieteellinen laskenta, Finavia, etc.

  8. Phoebe Maltz Bovy and Katie Herzog have an intesresting chat on social-media dysfunction, cultural taboos, and “trying to be less of an asshole on Twitter”:

    But not interesting enough for its own Reason post, I see.

  9. Probably bad nx also for the Revolver album, Guns & Roses, Shooting Star, Bullet W Butterfly Wings,…

    1. … Marilyn Manson, …

  10. That dudes first mistake was living in Alabama – criticizing the sheriff and having him show up at the door and fuck with him was a function of being in Alabama.

    Roll Tide

  11. Private companies doing things that reflect the preferences of their customers is another libertarian, free market solution.

    Add this to the Google example:

    “Dick’s Sporting Goods Inc. DKS -2.24% said it would stop selling assault-style rifles at all of its stores, would no longer sell guns to those under 21 years of age”

    —-WSJ

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/ dicks-raises-age-for-gun-buyers -will-stop-selling-assault- weapons-1519824569

    Nothing unconstitutional about that. It’s a free country, and you don’t have to sell to anybody you don’t want to . . . unless they’re gay.

    1. Do gay bakers have to bake me a confederate flag cake with bible verses on it?

      1. The real test is forcing gay bakers to put anti-gay stuff on the cake they must make.

        1. Because… gay marriage is anti-straight marriage? I’m not following your logic.

          1. Force a gay baker to put “fuck fags” or something similar on the cake that the bakers must make.

            They won’t do it but the fascists want to force a christian baker to add gay themed decorations to the cake the baker must make.

            1. I’m not a Christian, is gay themed decoration as insulting to a Christian as “fuck fags” is insulting to gays?

              1. It does not need to be insulting but I don’t know how insulting one is compared to the other. Probably more like apples and oranges.

                The part that is the same is the forcing a baker to create a cake and then decorate it with something that baker will refuse to do.

                The baker we are all talking about didn’t want to a gay theme decoration. A gay baker might be more open to what is on the cake but I would bet that a gay baker would refuse to decorate the cake with something like “fags die” or other outrageous statement.

                1. It’s these quibbles that make it obvious that nobody should be forced to write anything

                  1. Yup.

                2. @loveconstitution1789
                  You talking about Masterpiece Cakeshop? If Jack Phillips had said “sure, let’s design this cake” but then refused “gay themed decorations”, he’d have been just fine (see: Azucar Bakery, which did just that for an anti-gay preacher). But he refused the couple before things got that far, and was pretty explicit at the time that it was because the couple was gay.

                  Looking at other cases, you see the same story. In none of them did the conversation get as far as decorations, the customer was always refused before things got that far. Heck, even the recent Bakersfield California case didn’t get that far. The couple showed up for a taste test and the baker told them to get out.

                  In short? No. It wasn’t about “gay themed decorations”. No decorations (including having no decorations) would have made the bakers willing to bake the cake.

                  1. Jack Phillips said the gay couple could buy any ready made cake in the store but he would not decorate the cake with gay themed art that he needed to create.

                    Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission

                    Issue: Whether applying Colorado’s public accommodations law to compel the petitioner to create expression that violates his sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage violates the free speech or free exercise clauses of the First Amendment.
                    -SCOTUS blog

                  2. I don’t think anyone should be forced to service anyone else for any reason. Whether that service includes decorations or not is immaterial to me, if not the courts.

                    1. @Rhywun
                      Which is an understandable perspective. But loveconstitution1789 is still lying about the actual case.

                      @loveconstitution1789
                      Yes, his lawyers are arguing that baking any cake for them would be such an “expression”. That’s why they pushed so hard on the “the cake itself is a message regardless of details”. Because they never talked about the details.

                      Trying to make it about the “gay themed decorations” is straight-up lying.

                    2. EscherEnigma. I cited the SCOTUS blog. You can read the briefs.

                      The gay couple wanted the cake to
                      Given that understanding of his work, Phillips will
                      not design and create a custom wedding cake for a celebration
                      of a union that conflicts with his religious beliefs.
                      Id. at 287a-288a.1 He believes that to create a
                      wedding cake celebrating a marriage that directly contradicts
                      his religious convictions would be “a personal
                      endorsement and participation in [a] ceremony and relationship”
                      that he does not condone. Id. at 288a (emphasis
                      omitted). As relevant here, Phillips believes that
                      1 This brief uses the term “custom” to mean a cake created for a
                      specific event and a specific client, as opposed to a baked good available
                      for immediate purchase by the public. the Bible teaches that God intends marriage to be between
                      one man and one woman. Id. at 274a-276a. He
                      therefore refuses to create custom wedding cakes for
                      use in a same-sex wedding celebration. Id. at 284a-288a.
                      He will, however, make any other cake or baked good
                      for a same-sex couple. Id. at 288a.
                      b. In July 2012, respondents Charlie Craig and David
                      Mullins visited Masterpiece and asked Phillips to
                      “design and create a cake to celebrate their same-sex
                      wedding.”

                    3. Escher, you are the liar. Read….read…read.

                    4. Freedom of association baby!

    2. Dick’s is riding high after their shoe sales manager at the Duluth branch won the gold medal in curling. They can get away anything now.

    3. The closest Dick’s decided not to sell anything to anyone as did the Best Buy.

    4. They stopped selling MSRs (if they even ever did sell them) several years ago actually.

  12. In a shocking and rare example of Oakland authorities doing something right, Mayor Libby Schaaf warned residents that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would be conducting raids on Tuesday night, a move which ICE has blamed for some deportees being able to elude the agency.

    California Penal Code section 31:
    All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it be felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, or, not being present, have advised and encouraged its commission, and all persons counseling, advising, or encouraging children under the age of fourteen years, or persons who are mentally incapacitated, to commit any crime, or who, by fraud, contrivance, or force, occasion the drunkenness of another for the purpose of causing him to commit any crime, or who, by threats, menaces, command, or coercion, compel another to commit any crime, are principals in any crime so committed.

    PC section 32:
    Every person who, after a felony has been committed, harbors, conceals or aids a principal in such felony, with the intent that said principal may avoid or escape from arrest, trial, conviction or punishment, having knowledge that said principal has committed such felony or has been charged with such felony or convicted thereof, is an accessory to such felony.

    Who needs the Rule of Law, ammirite, ENB?

    1. ENB is not going to respond to your jive-ass shit.

      1. Of course not. She is fine with Americans ignoring California and federal law.

        You responded with nothing as usual.

    2. The law is the law is the law is the law is the law…. or something.

      1. Under our system of a Constitutional Democratic Republic, it is.

        1. Yes, and bananas are bananas. So what?

          1. Among Nanarchists.

            1. You had the perfect chance to write “bananarchists” and you squandered it.

              1. This day is bananas- b…a…n…a…n…a….s. This day is bananas!

              2. From now on I identify politically as a bananarchist. Thanks for that.

                1. You be welcome. You still have to decide- ripe or green bananarchist.

    3. “Upstaged by f—–g Oakland?!”

      /whoever the mayor of SF is

    4. Right. Libertarians are always for blind obedience to whatever laws the various legislatures have shat out, with no regard to the relation of said laws to any concept of individual liberty.

      1. Well, Libertarians are not for ignoring whatever law you don’t like this week.

        I guess your brand of “Libertarians” is fine with bloated government that has endless laws on the books and everyone gets to pick and choose which ones are okay.

        1. Because that is exactly what CX said.

          1. It is? It was clear that he thinks that anyone gets to pick what laws they obey. When he says individual liberty, he means what he considers individual liberty not what Americans have decided individual liberty means under the rule of law.

              1. True. Legislation is legislative bills that become law. Law can also be created by the courts. There is also common law.

                I rarely use Legislation because technically, it does not cover all law.

                1. Law is not determined by government. Law is determined by society.

                  Government encodes the laws of society, but it also tries to shape the laws of society. The former is the duty of the government, and the latter is just plain unjust.

                  If the government declared that murder was OK, would murder be OK?

                  1. If the government declared that murder was OK, would murder be OK?

                    Not just okay–but a right.

                    Something that, for most of human history, was murder has been declared not murder now and is defended most vehemently.

            1. It was clear that he thinks that anyone gets to pick what laws they obey.

              Probably he thinks that because it’s true. Of course, you also have to face the consequences. But that doesn’t mean we all have to celebrate the consequences.

              In an ideal state, people would respect the law. But the law needs to be respectable for that to happen. So “the law is the law” doesn’t hold water. Show me why the law is just in the application you suggest.

              1. But the law needs to be respectable for that to happen.

                Exactly. The fact that government rules are enforced with violence doesn’t make them respectable. It just means that they come with a threat of violence. That’s all.

                1. Well, under our system the law is the law does hold water. Otherwise you get to decide what law you want to obey and I get to do the same.

                  The solution is to push government to repeal most laws.

                  Its a better option since there is threat of death for not following the laws.

                  1. The solution is to push government to repeal most laws.

                    That’s a joke, right? Because government is a one-way ratchet. Laws are not repealed. It’s against the rules.

                    1. Sarcasmic: Law are rarely repealed but they are sometimes.

                      Trump’s famous EO forced bureaucrats to repeal 2 EOs for every new EO.

                      The 18th Amendment was repealed.

                      Law can be created by government. The courts create “law” all the time. There is common law which is based on societal law or custom.

                  2. Well, under our system the law is the law does hold water.

                    Welcome to jury nullification and prosecutorial discretion.

                  3. Otherwise you get to decide what law you want to obey and I get to do the same

                    We do get to do that. Obeying the law is always a choice.

                    I agree that ideally most laws would be repealed. But that’s just not what’s happening.

                    1. Why would laws need to be repealed? Everyone just gets to decide which laws they need to follow. No need to repeal laws.

                      The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.
                      -Abraham Lincoln

                      Its as they say a slippery slope and a mistake to allow government to create a bunch of laws and then selectively enforce and obey them.

                      Most corrupt nations have laws that are only enforced when the person cannot afford to pay the cops off or have enough juice to keep the government at bay.

            2. When he says individual liberty, he means what he considers individual liberty not what Americans have decided individual liberty means under the rule of law.

              Um, kettle meet pot?

              For that matter, that’s hardly a novel perspective. Most folks idea of “individual liberty” differs in some way then the law’s idea. I sincerely doubt there’s an American out there whose idea of “individual liberty” perfectly aligns with the law.

              1. There is a difference between absolute liberty and what American was founded on. Clearly because the USA was founded with slaves.

                As a Libertarian, maximum liberty while still having a small and limited government is optimum. This zone is flexible but every law should have a great reason for existing and have massive popular support while being constitutional or it should not be a law. My Libertarian opinion anyway.

        2. Yes. Your response is exactly correct, as long as you ignore both my entire history on this site and the words “individual liberty” in the post you’re responding to.

          1. I added more about your notion of individual liberty.

            1. You did a very good job of completely missing the point, too. That’s what you were going for, yes? A swing and a miss?

              1. No. I got it right on point. You said you are okay with people ignoring immigration law.

                What you want is absolute Liberty and that is only applicable under anarchy.

                Under the Constitutional Democratic Republic that is the USA, we are supposed to live under the rule of law that We the People okay our politicians to create.

                Are their too many laws under the Rule of Law- yes. The solution is to repeal most of those laws not ignore what laws you disagree with. If you ignore what laws you want to, then I get to do the same.

                1. Under this system, the People give up some Liberty for national security, to create roads, have small limited government.

                  The Constitution was supposed to provide the framework for maximum Liberty under small limited government’s rule of law. Where The People have most of the power.

                  1. Under this system, the People give up some Liberty for national security, to create roads, have small limited government.

                    Benjamin Franklin had something to say about people like you. It wasn’t very nice.

                    1. Citizen X – #6|2.28.18 @ 10:15AM|#
                      Under this system, the People give up some Liberty for national security, to create roads, have small limited government.
                      Benjamin Franklin had something to say about people like you. It wasn’t very nice.

                      He thought Libertarians like me are swell. We fight for small limited government based on the constitution in this Republic.

                      Benjy Franklin had no idea that anarchist like you would ride Classic Liberal coattails for a fantasy which is anarchy.

                  2. And the constitution has failed to maintain such a system in many ways.

                    The people are supposed to have most of the power as individuals. Not power to do whatever they want to to political minorities.

                2. You almost got it that time, but you’re still clinging to authoritarian assumptions. Let ’em go.

                  1. Well, what you call authoritarian is Libertarian rule of law under the US Constitution which sacrificed some liberty for limited power of state and federal governments.

                    You want a non-system of anarchy. Good luck with that.

                    Part of the reason the Constitution has failed to maintain such a system is because of anarchists and lefties who want to undermine said Constitutional rule of law. Its still intact but greatly weakened by a large nanny and police state with so many laws that even lawyers cannot know all the laws.

                    1. Part of the reason the Constitution has failed to maintain such a system is because of anarchists and lefties who want to undermine said Constitutional rule of law

                      Leeeeefffftttiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeesssss!

                      Its still intact but greatly weakened by a large nanny and police state with so many laws that even lawyers cannot know all the laws.

                      Exactly what those sneaky anarchists really want.

                    2. True libertarians know that Lysander Spooner was the greatest threat to freedom in the 19th century.

                    3. All good libertarians support the sanctity of the US Postal Service.

                    4. Zeb, some Libertarians are more in sync with the constitution than others. You have said that you are an anarchist.

                      Under anarchy, no government or the constitution is the goal.

                    5. Lysander Spooner- meh. Fake anarchist who joined the socialist movement.

                      Anarchy is a joke. Its why anarchists latch on to socialists and Libertarians to ride the wave of government reform and then they think “hopefully” they can make their respective utopias happen.

                      The USA started out Classically liberal (Libertarian) and has moved more authoritarian over the decades.

                    6. Poser: Sometimes efforts to team up to achieve different end goals is what people do.

                      You cannot have a socialist state or the absence of state without first destroying the classically liberal USA and its constitution.

                      Both anarchists and socialist are fine with using revolution to end the stable state.

                    7. Rule of law is just an illusion that happens when the law is such that most people agree that it is reasonable and worthy of being obeyed. Laws can’t do anything. Only people can.

                    8. Lots of things are man made creations. Money, government, laws, rules, boundaries.

      2. It’s revealing that so much of the screaming about Rule of Law! is in regards to the government enforcing its statutes against people acting non-violently. I’ve been meaning to ask this more formally, but I always understood the historical concern for the rule of law being more about constraining the power of the government and protecting due process, less so about keeping the rabble obedient. More conservative voices may be concerned with the issue of public trust and social order via the ‘rule of law,’ but generally it’s about making sure the officers of the state don’t come and rough you up without cause, demand bribes, etc. (certainly things that don’t happen in Rule of Law America)

        When people talk about wanting to live in a country with a strong rule of law, I don’t think they mean a place where the government enforces every single statute, no matter how petty. Who has ever gotten a citation for some bullshit and consoled themselves that, well, at least the rule of law is still alive?

        1. Treason is non-violent too.

          Robbery can be non-violent.

          The opposite of rule of law is no law. Rule of man is absence of rule of law. The governments operating without the citizens knowing what the law is, the rules are arbitrary, and/or the elite are excused from the law that protects and applies to all in that nation.

    5. …amoung lefties.

      1. You would know lefty.

        1. Glad to see someone finally willing to call out Stormy Juggler on his shit.

          1. something like that.

          2. Stormy Juggler and is Crusty Dragon’s sock puppet.

            1. No, I’m Tulpa.

    6. Obstruction of justice is only illegal if the president does it.

  13. “Phoebe Maltz Bovy and Katie Herzog have an interesting chat on social-media dysfunction, cultural taboos, and “trying to be less of an asshole on Twitter”

    It’s 55 minutes. Am I supposed to watch it all to figure out why I care?

    Is this, like, a game, or something?

  14. 8 USC section 1324
    (1)(A) Any person who?

    (iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;

    (v)(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
    shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).

    1. (B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs?
      (i) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both;
      (ii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv), or (v)(II), be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;
      (iii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of title 18) to, or places in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and
      (iv) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under title 18, or both.

      1. …amoung lefties.

        1. among deported illegals. Bye bye illegals.

  15. “Google has stopped advertising shopping results for “pistols,” which turns out to be bad news for a certain 70s punk band.”

    I have a feeling it will soon be impossible to go online and buy a copy of films such as “Top Gun,” “The Guns of Navarone,” and “Young Guns.” Not the mention “The Naked Gun,” which simply searching for will probably bring the authorities to your door.

    1. Only one of those movies is worth watching.

      1. Sarc likes the part where Val Kilmer snaps his teeth at Tom Cruise.

        1. You know that movie much better than me.

  16. Brittany Stephens, 20, was arrested Tuesday after police found that her daughter’s car seat was not secured

    Seems to me this is more the cause of the baby’s death than the straps being messed up. Who the fuck puts a baby in a baby seat and doesn’t lock it down or put a seat belt on it?

    1. I have seen seat belts pop out of their latches before: happened here when some thrice-drunk-dui lady ran her car into the back of a car containing a newlywed couple at some 90mph vs 30. Police tried to say couple was not strapped in for some reason, but scene-of-crime photo showed bloody torn flesh across the waist, diagonally across the chest, even though the guy was thrown from the vehicle.

      Doesn’t sound like the case here, but, fckin cops have made themselves un-believable.

      1. Having 8 people in a Nissan sedan probably didn’t help the baby’s odds either, but obviously everyone would be alive if that jackass wasn’t tooling down the road at 90+.

    2. To think, 18 months prior she could have had the baby chopped up and sucked out and she would have been applauded for her Choice. Talk about bad timing.

  17. “trying to be less of an asshole on Twitter”:

    Something for ENB to aspire to

    1. I don’t tweet. Is Betsy an asshole on Twitter?

      1. She tried to ruin some guys life and career over a sandwich joke.

        1. What kind of sandwich was it? If it was on pumpernickel she may have had a point.

          1. He called her a hoe-gee.

  18. I guess progs are partially right.

    The Founding Fathers could not foresee something like Google being hostile to liberty.

    Google is fast becoming the enemy of people (they disagree with).

    This is a huge troubling development is it not?

    1. This is a huge troubling development is it not?
      Only if you want to cling to the notion that all we need is an unregulated market and things will magically fix themselves.

      1. They will or will be as good as they can be. Lets do that.

      2. Burn that straw, Escher, burn it hard.

  19. “People who came from where I did, and who were given the thoughts I was given, should know that the future can be different from the past,”

    Nice try, Nazi asshole!

    1. This socialist Nazis are assholes.

      1. What even is the point of you?

        1. among socialists.

          1. That’s what I thought.

            1. Among useful idiots.

        2. Lc was invented by scientists so that Simple Mikey would feel smarter.

          1. Nah, he’s okay. Just having a breakdown right now.

            1. I got multiple anarchists and lefties having shit fits all over Reason.

              They be having a breakdown after I break it down for them.

          2. Citizen was just born in a pool of gasoline on a rusty piece of metal.

            We call him Jack Bauer.

            He’s not smart and it shows.

    2. That article took way too many words to say “social media is s–t”.

      1. Dude, just type out “shit.” It’s okay.

        1. It is among Nanarchists.

        2. It doesn’t feel right at the office.

          1. BOOBS!

              1. Hot, half naked guys in hammocks… you know me too well.

                1. So you see a picture of someone sleeping on the beach in a hammock and your response isn’t, “I’d like to be him,” but…a different response?

                  1. Maybe this will make my point better – the picture appeals to sloth, not lust.

                    If you’re sexually turned on by it, I don’t want to know.

                    1. Next time, maybe don’t put “arouse” in a comment linking to a picture of a hot guy at the beach…? Where the hell else do you think my mind is going to go?

                  2. OK you don’t know me after all. More like “I’d like to do him.”

                    1. Fair enough – I’d say my joke blew up on the launching pad, I hope nobody got injured too much by the debris. 🙁

                    2. My Schtick is to link to non-erotic pictures with language that hints at eroticism, like this:

                      CLICK HERE TO SEE EXPLICIT PICTURES OF INTERCOURSE!

                      See?

                    3. Had an ex who giggled every time I used “penetrate” in a normal sense.

                      Dirty mind, that one.

                    4. Good thing you weren’t in a tank crew and the shooter. You would be discussing the various “penetrators” you shot out of the 120mm canon.

  20. Google is a private company, etc., etc.

    But their action shows what the gun-banners have in mind – they want to actually ban guns, not adopt “common sense gun control.”

  21. Pigs just can’t let anything go can they.

    1. Every interaction they have they must determine why it’s not their fault

    2. Socialist pigs cannot come to grips that their fantasy has failed over and over, indeed.

      1. Go sit on a salad because you’re stale as fuck.

        1. Your plain bagel is so un-fly, its grounded.

    3. Your wife is nagging you about something?

  22. Officer Christopher Manuel was driving north on Airline Highway and crashed into the passenger side of the Nissan, which was turning left onto Florline Boulevard at a green light.

    What a convoluted way to say the cop ran a red light.

  23. What a douche.

  24. Google has stopped advertising shopping results for “pistols,”

    Rifles no longer works either. it is their choice however when you must conduct business with google to do anything these day i would say soon they will be required to let everyone sale on their system

  25. Check here and here.for what I presume is Louisiana law on negligent homicide, in case any legal eagles want to comment:

    ?32. Negligent homicide

    A. Negligent homicide is the killing of a human being by criminal negligence.

    B. The violation of a statute or ordinance shall be considered only as presumptive evidence of such negligence.

    ?12. Criminal negligence

    Criminal negligence exists when, although neither specific nor general criminal intent is present, there is such disregard of the interest of others that the offender’s conduct amounts to a gross deviation below the standard of care expected to be maintained by a reasonably careful man under like circumstances.

    1. “a reasonably careful man under like circumstances”

      As a woman, she should be fine here.

  26. Google has stopped advertising shopping results for “pistols,” which turns out to be bad news for a certain 70s punk band.

    UGH. This is a non-story, the google shopping tab is sponsored advertising results, not a general search engine tab. It’s like people are bitching about amazon not selling guns; of course they don’t! Also, this shit isn’t new in the slightest.

  27. “In a shocking and rare example of Oakland authorities doing something right, Mayor Libby Schaaf warned residents that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would be conducting raids on Tuesday night, a move which ICE has blamed for some deportees being able to elude the agency.”

    Illegal aiding and abetting of illegal aliens.
    They should be prosecuted, along with all officials responsible for outlaw city policies.

    8 U.S. Code ? 1324 – Bringing in and harboring certain aliens
    http://liicr.nl/2F9V4W3

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.