Groaker’s Techdirt Profile

groaker

About GroakerTechdirt Insider




Groaker’s Comments comment rss

  • Dec 4th, 2016 @ 12:12pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ahem..

    OK, you have done a whole lot of nay saying, but I have yet to hear you come up with any kind of alternative.

    Any stronger statement by the the ACLU would likely lead to the attention of Mr Hang_Them_Without_A_Trial. Lower level politicians would also make hay of their opponents being weak on crime. Even though the crime rate is at a low.

    While I agree with jury nullification in principle, it is a double edge sword. The cop I mentioned earlier who murdered a citizen who asked to see a nonexistent search warrant was nobilled by nullification in one of the more egregious abuses of the police state.

    Between 2003 and 2014 years some 53 US citizens were killed in terrorist incidents. That number includes the perpetrators (https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_AmericanTerrorismDeaths_FactSheet_Oct2015.pdf)

    2016 is the first year that numbers of citizens killed are being counted. Many innocent of any violation, misdemeanor or crime, far more killed for no more reason than disobeying a cop. The number of citizens killed is expected to total around 1600. Large numbers of others have been beaten, mutilated, falsely charged and convicted. Yet the authorities and citizens refuse to make police responsible for their crimes.

    Yet citizens are terrified of Muslims, but trusting of police. What kind of an answer do you have for this Ahem?

  • Dec 3rd, 2016 @ 1:11pm

    Re: Re: Re: Ahem..

    weruious was a typo, but your anger is making you wearisome.
    It is making you blind to the need for these and stronger jury instructions. That the juror is in the box to determine not only the behavior of the defendant, but the appropriateness of the law. As well as the behavior of the State.

    You claim that the jury system is there to protect the citizen from the state, then complain when there are attempts to re-balance the levels of power that currently are overweighted in favor of the state.

    Some jury instructions (yes, even for a grand jury) might have led to a better result than what happened. In the following case:

    "A North Carolina grand jury chose not to indict a sheriff’s deputy who shot and killed a man after he demanded to see a warrant to search his home last year.

    Harnett County sheriff’s deputies banged on John Livingston’s door last November, searching for an assault suspect who was not at the home.

    Livingston demanded to see a search warrant, but the deputies had none, so Livingston shut the door in their face.

    That prompted deputies to kick in the door where they dragged him out on his porch, placed him facedown, and began beating, tasering and pepper spraying him."

    http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2016/04/12/north-carolina-deputy-justified-in-killing-man-asking-f or-search-warrant/

  • Dec 3rd, 2016 @ 9:48am

    Re: Ahem..

    You might consider putting a /sarcasm on the end of your amusing satire. Otherwise a few readers might think that you were werious.

  • Dec 3rd, 2016 @ 9:43am

    (untitled comment)

    I have often wondered about criminality in our nation. A democratic republic, or whatever appellation you wish to provide, is reputed to be the best of all governmental types.

    Yet with 5% of the worlds population, we have 25% of the worlds prisoners. And one of the highest recidivism rates.

    What is wrong with this picture?

  • Dec 3rd, 2016 @ 5:52am

    (untitled comment)

    I strongly believe that the ACLU's jury instructions are insufficient. If cameras are a part of the uniform of the day and missing or nonfunctional, or if the recording has been altered, the suspect is free to go, and the officer should be fired and have their peace officer license permanently lifted.

    Such behavior on the part of the police is malfeasance, obstruction of justice and criminal.

    Police should not have the ability to turn off a camera at any time while they are armed.

  • Dec 2nd, 2016 @ 5:16pm

    Re: Re: Re: Huh?

    I consider myself a strict constructionist. But there were/are some major difficulties with some parts of the Constitution that needed/need addressing.

    Slavery, women's suffrage, the truly screwed up language of the 2nd Amendment. The failure to provide real protection for citizens from governmental atrocities, or significant punishment for governmental authorities who do commit crimes. A failure of providing a mechanism for addressing grievances in a reasonable time.

    These are but a very few of the failures of the Constitution. There are parts of it which embody some of the most wonderful concepts ever conceived of by man. But what value are they when they are unenforceable?

  • Dec 1st, 2016 @ 4:51pm

    (untitled comment)

    Unfortunately this technique, and others like it are nothing new. You will see more and them exercised more frequently in the coming months. This is quite possibly Comey's *quid pro quo* for the meaningless emails.

    It solves the problem of the FBI committing multiple reprehensible crimes, because there is a new generic defense *ante ex post facto*. One (typically a member of upper government) may not be prosecuted for breaking a law that is currently no longer a law, no matter how heinous and blatant the crimes were.

  • Dec 1st, 2016 @ 3:34pm

    (untitled comment)

    The numbers are clearly incorrect. The reputed under report is ridiculous. Only three? A hundred would be more far more likely.

    Add to that the number of taps that are sealed under gag orders, or made without the knowledge of any one except other LEOs.

  • Nov 28th, 2016 @ 7:29am

    Re: Re:

    You really need to shake the idea that this is a Democratic v Republican issue. The first massive data collection effort that I know of (outside of IRS and the census) was the 1987 sale of bundles of pen data to governments large and small by a leading communications company. That was as I recall a Republican administration.

    This data gathering is a characteristic of parties in power, not their brand.

    And no, I am neither D nor R, but rather a strict constructionist. The Constitution and the Amendments mean what they say they mean, not some asinine interpretation to fit some power hungry despots self serving twisted exegesis.

  • Nov 28th, 2016 @ 6:12am

    (untitled comment)

    Past behavior is a good predictor of future behavior. The DOJ, FBI, et al, will abuse this to the point where nothing is private. Almost all notebooks have cameras and microphones, as do many desktops. Your computer is the panopticon of the future, if not the present.

  • Nov 25th, 2016 @ 5:30pm

    re Snowden, pardon

    And you really believe that elitism, prevarication and secrets are the within the unique purvey of the Democrats. I can't decide whether you are funny or sad. That either party gives a damn about your or your existence is just so amusing.

  • Nov 25th, 2016 @ 11:37am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Yes, there is a lot to read. But the net is full of TL;DR opinions. It is my opinion that that it is important to read the entire site No, it is not mine, nor do I have any affiliation with ther than reading it, and making the occasional donation.

    Clean, honest and accurate voting is key to the survival of a democratic republic. An understanding of just what is happening is vital to the preservation of our form of government. And that can only be gained through slogging through the history.

    Fifty years ago I didn't have the time (or the willingnes to accept the 1.2% risk of death) as I was forced to take a step forward and accept a two year induction to an absolutely meaningless war that served no purpose other than to kill almost 60,000 Americans and severely damage another 600-900,000. This was to no purpose. Never mind the deaths of two million or so Vietnamese. It also cost me the graduate school and studies of my choice. This was painful to me. yet others suffered so much incredibly more. This was for one of the most ridiculous wars under the face of the sun.

    Yet Americans, when asked to read the history of how their voting rights were stolen, have little to say other than TL;DR

  • Nov 25th, 2016 @ 7:33am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

    Thank you for your rational comment.

    May I also add that applies to State, Municipal and local elections as well.

    It is probably a reasonable assumption that most who read and comment on Techdirt are above average in education, intelligence and perception of the world around them.

    This scares the hell out of me.

  • Nov 25th, 2016 @ 7:25am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If the EFF ever needed to put "Broken by Design" stickers on something...

    Just in case you haven't noticed, this is not a debate. Further, in debates, refutation is the primary mechanism for winning.

    I am not interested in a debate, but rather trying to provide information. To provide a single court decision, or a single quote is meaningless on the net. It is the closest we have come to the "million monkeys" meme.

    Perhaps I have an advantage in that I was not taught things so much, as how to find things. With the net you have the ability to look up a practically unending stream of information. Further one has the ability to follow threads of interest that lead to information previously unknown.

    A reference to an extremely obscure subject that is not search-able MIGHT call for a URL. for example: "When did Dr Smith remediate the error in the computation of the relaxation time of a loaded sphere?"

    But for topics that are abundant, multiple searches are both educating and mandatory for determining truth (or as close to it as we are likely to get.)

    Perhaps you read "some political daily," and believe every word in it. But especially for those topics that appear to suffer from prevarication, I will read not only those articles that are aligned with my political thought, but also those opposed. If appropriate I will read multiple foreign papers as well.

    Spoon fed information is rather meaningless. Especially in this day and age when alternate views are so easily obtained.

  • Nov 25th, 2016 @ 6:56am

    (untitled comment)

    Your favorite hobby must be putting words in other peoples mouths.

    I never claimed that this election was decided for any candidate by rigged voting. My issue is computerized voting. It is impossible to to have any assurance that the vote is valid. That the vote is private. "Voting" is now nothing more than an anodyne that provides an appearance of a democratic republic.

    Yes, there were problems with the old mechanical machines. A favorite tactic was to "vote" in the oppositions territory, hold down a candidates lever, and pull the main sweep lever. That would disable the machine and make the lines even longer. But that was small potatoes.

    One thing that I find truly amusing is that those who are reputedly on the left call me a rightist. Those on the right call me a leftist. My belief is that we need honest elections, and the electorate will have to live with their choice for four years.

    Left and right are no more than pejoratives to be thrown about meaninglessly. Anyone who proudly declares themselves to be completely aligned with the platform of one party or the other is incapable of thought, and merely a dog on a leash.

  • Nov 24th, 2016 @ 9:15am

    Re:

    Then you haven't been paying attention.

  • Nov 23rd, 2016 @ 7:23pm

    Re: Needs proof

    Just what would you consider proof?

    We know that the US government can not control the security of their computers because they have admitted it. At least 21 million individuals (I was one of them) had their dossiers, job applications, security checks and so on stolen by someone. Today it was admitted that about 130,000 sailors on active duty had their data stolen by someone. Many others inbetween these two incidents.

    How can anyone believe that a soda pop can of a voting computer is not hacked?

    Is that proof? No. Does it demonstrate an incredibly high probability of occurrence? Yes.

    If you want as much proof as you can get over the 'net, try

    BlackBoxVoting.org.

  • Nov 23rd, 2016 @ 6:58pm

    Re: Enough

    You can't even use a handle, never mind an RL name. What a hypocrite.

  • Nov 23rd, 2016 @ 1:08pm

    (untitled comment)

    There is a portion of the population which believes that the FBI will behave with absolute morality. In full alignment with all legal requirements.

    At least a portion of the FBI has a belief it will find top level agents and terrorists communicating through twitter and the like.

    The two groups are intellectually congruent.

  • Nov 23rd, 2016 @ 12:58pm

    (untitled comment)

    E-Voting machines have been demonstrably hacked in front of those who were responsible for purchasing them, and the purchasing agents went ahead and bought them anyway.

    Has everyone forgotten the video of Baxter the Chimp which showed him reversing cast votes from within the voting booth?

    E-Voting machines are the most Stalinesque votoing device devised by man. And are taken advantage of by at least both major parties. This has been testified to under oath, but nobody seems to care. One of the worst cases of denial I have ever encountered.

More comments from Groaker >>