- Quickdraw McLaw
- 15 Comments
- 89 Views
- The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the decision to rescind DACA was arbitrary and capricious. [TNI]
- The Board of Pardons Commissioners voted unanimously to pardon some 15,000 misdemeanor possession convictions. [TNI]
- Bryan Scott was officially promoted to the position of City Attorney. [RJ]
- Here’s an interview with John Piro about being arrested at protests last Saturday. [TNI]
I do not agree with John Piro very often but he is right on this one. LVMPD is way out of line and acting unduly aggressively. Documenting events is what legal observers do; there is nothing antagonizing about what is on that video. Those are officers acting out of anger and not out of public safety.
Be careful what you ask for. Our home-field Raider games are right around the corner with plenty of trouble-seeking Raider fans chomping at the bit to come over here from California and stir the violent pot. Wussify our officers and say goodbye to the little bit of civility that we manage to maintain these days.
11:03,
You may be right. Nevertheless, be brave enough to feel at home in the land of the free.
11:03 obviously doesn't know anything about Raiders fans. They aren't scared of police, in fact if police start shit with them like this it could get real ugly.
The police are human, not perfect automatons. You probably could do no better. Set the scene. In a large hostile crowd, keeping in mind that someone in that crowd might put a bullet in your brain or fire bomb, you don't want anyone too get too close. Yes, the videos show some cough cough "observers" actively and intentionally provoking, it is not surprising that an officer would want to push away. You don't get a free pass just by wearing a red tee shirt.
I think there's at least some evidence that some of the legal observers crossed the line from observing to protesting, but that was further north on LV Blvd. However, based on the video released by Metro, that does not appear to be the case with John Piro and Belinda Harris. They appeared to be standing on the sidewalk when they were approached from behind and arrested. I see no justification for the officers' actions with respect to John and Belinda.
Did you all see that incident with Michele Fiore last night?
She is an embarrassment to our city and state, and has been for quite some time. How a person with her history continues to get elected to high office is a testament to her tenacity and the "only in Vegas" nature of this city.
That said, the way that speaker hooted and hollered as she left the dais was just so base, so crude and disturbing. The fact that Fiore allegedly made some racist comments does not give every Tom, Dick and Harry license to act in whatever extreme manner they see fit during a public meeting
11:36 is right on both points–the councilwoman's behavior, as well as the behavior of those attendees at the meeting.
As evidence of how polarized politics have become, people lose objectivity and evaluate a politician's behavior not based on the behavior itself, but based on whether the person judging the politician is of the same political party or not.
In this case, if one is a democrat, they view the councilwoman's behavior as rogue, whacky, irresponsible, and even racist. If one is a republican they view the councilwoman as an uncensored, tell-it-like-it -is, no b.s. conservative firebrand who protects us from the undue restrictions and controls of an over-regulated system.
An objective acknowledgment of her strengths as well as her weaknesses, is almost never found as her critics believe she has no positive attributes while her supporters believe she is their wonderful working-class hero who wants to shrink government, and can really do no wrong.
And her rabid base of voters really view her in such glowing, unquestioning terms, so none of these controversies will derail her career, as long as that base remains and continues to turn out in support of her.
So, the only way she is removed is if there is a mechanism for the council to eventually expel her, and all steps of that are pursued and followed through with, and result in her removal(highly unlikely).
But even less likely that the voters in her district will remove here. Don't expect her base support voters to view this latest behavior as really irresponsible and that they can no longer vote for her. After all, this is the kind of behavior that attracted these people in the first place, and caused them to vote for her.
If anyone could be so kind as to link the following for me, I would greatly appreciate it. I remember a few weeks back, on this Blog, someone posted a Complaint where they sued Nevada for not enforcing the PPP CARES ACT. You can save me soooooo much work, you have no idea how happy I would be. Thank you!!
I think it was filed by Brian Shapiro. Maybe look up his bar #, search all cases filed by him since January 1st, 2020, and see if you find one against the SBA.
Where is Sam Schwartz these days?
As to the phenomenon described by 12:20, there are so many examples of that.
Take climate change, for example. Both sides claim that their view is based on sound science, and that sound science is what should determine our approach.
But when you scratch the surface, we notice that almost no one, on either side, has really read any independent study or articles on climate change. Once in a while someone more on the left will have seen an Al Gore or Michael Moore film which they say influences their views, while some people on the right will reference a film on the subject financed and produced by those on the right side of the political spectrum.
Now these films all have a clear agenda, as opposed to being true objective studies, but at least a small portion of those responding on climate change questions will have at least seen one of these films.
But well over 90% of people have never seen or read anything scientific on the subject(not even a biased so-called "scientific" report wherein the conclusion was a self-fulfilling political prophecy).
Instead, most everyone just mindlessly parrots(and this includes me at times)whatever clichés and platitudes are then in vogue with the politicians of the party we belong to.
If we are democrats we insist climate change is a very real scientific reality that threatens us now and in the future. But if we are a republican, we claim it is all a hoax(a hoax perpetrated by whom and for what purpose, seems foggy at best and often a moving target).
The political polarization of which the poster speaks insists that one must take a stand one way or the other, and heaven forbid anyone suggests a view somewhere in the middle–such as it is by no means a hoax, is very real, but is not necessary the immediate prelude to pending doom in the very near future.
So, we continue to abuse this word "science" to sound intelligent, objective and non-partisan, while in actuality our views seldom concern science, but are simply driven by our political philosophies.
I actually did undertake to read some of these seemingly more independent, objective scientific studies. I got through them, but I must admit, it is hard to blame anyone for avoiding them. Real rough going for a liberal arts guy like myself.
3:57, there are surveys, studies, polling and articles which indicate that the overwhelming majority of objective scientists believe climate change is very real, to varying extents.
But then we get back to the issue of how "objective" some of these scientists really are, what political party they may belong to, how the questions are formulated, and a myriad of other concerns.
We would hope that those employed in the applied sciences would not be unduly influenced by politics and their own personal views, and would solely focus their conclusions based on the result of arduously correlating and analyzing massive amounts of data, etc. But, sadly, that is often not the case.
In other words, if you want to know the "science" of all this, it's possible that you cannot conclusively determine that even if the only ones whose viewpoints you consider are the "scientists."
Are you guys pleased that the following people won outright in the Primary by tallying more than 50% of the vote?
Judges Hardy and Israel at RJC.
Judges Voy and Ochoa at Family.
Also at Family, Hearing Master Margaret Pickard and attorney Stephanie Charter.
Do any of you perceive it as any cause for concern or reflection that these beaming wizards of jurisprudence, whose brilliance is surpassed only by their incredible work ethic, will preside over your cases for the next six years?
People need to stop voting based on endorsements. Do your research. Aren't most of these Dave Thomas' candidates?