blog advertising is good for you

Blogroll


Favorites


Instapundit
FrontPageMag.Com
Michelle Malkin
Ankle Biting Pundits
Little Green Footballs
Lucianne.com
The Corner
Weekend Pundit

Local Commentary


GilfordGrok
NH Insider
Pun Salad
Rob Boyce Blog
Drew Cline
New Hampshire Commentary
One Voice In Gilford
The Blogging Councilor
ConChrist (Lori Ingham)

Local News


The Citizen (Lakes Region)
The Laconia Daily Sun
The Gilford Steamer
The Union Leader
The Concord Monitor
The Nashua Telegraph

Activists


Bow Citizens Coalition
Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers
Epping Residents for Principled Government
Moultonborough Citizens Alliance
State Sunshine and Open Records
Wiki for Freedom of Information Act
Sunshine Review
BallotPedia

Sam Adams Alliance blogs

Free Market and Limited Government


Sam Adams Alliance>

RedState
Flat Creek Management
John Fund-Wall Street Journal
Face the State
Fort Hard Knox
Americans for Prosperity
American Princess
ARRA News Service
Mount Virtus
ILGOPnet
Stix
Wichita Liberty
Kansas Meadowlark
Louisiana Conservative
Maine Web Report
Mackinac Center
Outside Lansing
Gateway Pundit
Montana Politics
Muth’s Truths
Granite Grok
Mario Burgos
Thurber’s Thoughts
Oklahoma Political News Service
Tennessee Policy Institute
Leslie Carbone
Sound Politics
Real Debate Wisconsin
Haemet
Grizzly Groundswell
Sibby Online


News


BlogNetNews for NH
CNSNews
Drudge Report
WorldNetDaily
Snopes
RefDesk

Islamic World


Gates Of Vienna
Dhimmi Watch
Jihad Watch
MEMRI

Pure Politics


Our Friend Pat's Townhall columns
Liz Mair
NH Primary News Links
PolitickerNH
PorkBusters
Real Clear Politics
Red State

MilBlogs


Blackfive
Defense Tech
Sgt Stryker
OpFor
Strategy Page
Michael Yon Online Magazine
Mudville Gazette

Victory Caucus

Environmentalism (or not)


Junk Science
US Senate Comm. on Environ. - Public Works

Geeky Stuff


Geek Press
Slashdot

Education


F.I.R.E.
Joanne Jacobs
Thomas Fordham Foundation
EIA Intercepts
Core Knowledge

Blog Commentaries


Austin Bay
Babalu Blog
Belmont Club
Betsy's Page
Captain's Quarters
Conservative Grapevine
Contentions
Eye on the UN
Hugh Hewitt
Junkyard Blog
Overlawyered
Politicaldoodle
Mark Steyn
Neal Boortz
TCS Daily
Townhall.com
Power Line
Right Wing News
NewsBusters

Radio and TV Shows


Howie Carr (radio)
Political Chowder(TV)
The Rush Limbaugh Show (radio)

Design - Architecture - Stuff


Engadget
Gizmodo
Inhabitat
Uncrate

Presidential Campaign Sites

Last Man Standing


John McCain


Humor


DILBERT BLOG


Main

August 14, 2008

Masked cops? Not good...

cop wear

To protect and serve?

For many years, visitors to my former business location might have noticed a picture on the wall-- torn from a newspaper-- of a “police” checkpoint in Serbia. What captured my interest was the caption telling the reader that the picture was of a “police volunteer” manning an urban checkpoint in the early days of the gradual anarchy that was to come in that country. It always struck me that this so-called policeman, finger on trigger, had an AK47 in the nostril of some hapless guy at the wheel of his Honda Civic, and was, according to the caption, checking his identification papers.

The poor fellow in the car, aside from the fact he had the muzzle of a machine gun literally stuck in his face, looked like he could have been your average American thirty-something on his way to work at the office. In fact, the background of the photo looked like it could have been downtown Anywhere, USA, even including a uniformed police officer in the square directing traffic. Except, more striking than all of the elements of the scene, was the fact that this “policeman,” dressed entirely in black, was wearing a ski mask. “Not good,” I always thought, when looking at the picture.

That picture hung stapled to the old shop wall for years, and many conversations were held about it. When events like the Elian Gonzalez seizure and the Branch Davidian raid took place, parallels were drawn. As it turned out, most that viewed the old picture agreed, if we ever come to a point when the police here in the States were to start wearing ski masks to hide their identities during the conduct of their duties, things would be getting pretty bad. Thankfully though, we were in America, where such things could never happen, right?

According to documents filed at the U.S. District Court in Concord, NH at the end of July, a family from Grafton County is suing for a series of civil rights violations that allegedly occurred during an early morning raid of their Bristol apartment.

“On August 2, 2006, twenty (20) members of the CNHSOU”

(Central NH Special Operations Unit) and three members of

“the Bristol Police Department, executed an arrest and search warrant at 36 South Main Street, Bristol, New Hampshire. The residence was occupied by Thomas Mlodzinski, his wife Tina Mlodzinski, their 15 year old daughter JM, Tina Mlodzinski’s son, Michael Rothman, and Michael’s girlfriend Amy Furmanic and their two week old daughter.”

The filing states,

“Police were seeking to arrest Michael Rothman, who was then 17 years old, for assault and were looking for a baton (night stick) allegedly used in the assault. The warrants authorized the arrest of Michael Rothman only and the search of the residence and the person of  Michael Rothman only.”

If you’re like me, you should be wondering why it would take TWENTY-THREE law enforcement officers to arrest a seventeen year old. He must have been heavily armed or something, right? Apparently not— nor were any of those sleeping in the apartment, either.

The lawsuit details the events as they unfolded just before 4 in the morning two years ago:


 

Continue reading "Masked cops? Not good..." »


Hosting by Yahoo!

September 26, 2007

I have a question for the Left: how do these increase Freedom?

During the brouhaha over the "domestic wiretaps" and "secret spying", I often heard:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".   -Benjamin Franklin 

Those on the Left wailed that the Bush Administration was the harbinger of fascism, that the Constitution was being rent asunder by an intrusive government.  Yet, the target audience for these wiretaps were terrorists on foreign soil. So, where's the hue and cry as another President (thankfully, still a wannabe) is issuing utterances that would go FAR beyond what the wiretaps do and affect all US citizens.  And the effect is not just materially, not just financial, but in that most intangible (yet most important) right of all - freedom.

Pray tell, how would these statements, if enacted, increase my sense of freedom, for I only see decreases?

  • "We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
  • "We can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people." 
  • "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground." 
  • "I certainly think the free market has failed." 
  • "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in the entire economy, that they are being watched." 
  • "What I want to do is take those profits and apply them to alternative energy."
  • "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, for the few, and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity.

The candidate is effectively espousing socialistic, nay, communistic principles here that would make Marx and Lenin proud.   That candidate is Hillary Clinton.  She is espousing the right of government to TAKE from citizens as if it is the government's absolute right to do so.  She will abrogate one of our country's most basic rights - the right of private property.  She is all about dismantling our capitalistic system in the vein of "we know better than you; government is better than the private sector".

Worst of all...

Continue reading "I have a question for the Left: how do these increase Freedom?" »


Hosting by Yahoo!

August 13, 2006

A man's home is his castle? Not quite...(New story)

The story about the Nashua cops arresting and charging a man for taping police as they were on his porch (discussing how they might make the disabled veteran "more disabled" with a billy club) was if nothing else a cautionary reminder how fragile our private property rights really are.
.
Now comes this from the Union Leader (NH):
Manchester – Fifteen-year-old Mirage Rousseau said she came home Wednesday afternoon to find two Manchester police officers inside her home, peering into her and her older brother's bedrooms.
.
She asked them what they were doing inside her family's 317 Rimmon St. apartment. They told her someone left the door open, and they walked in to search for a 14-year-old runaway.
.
Mirage and her dad, Wilfred Rousseau, said the doors to their apartment are never left open because of their Persian cat, named "Kitty." They said the doors were definitely closed Wednesday because Kitty is in heat.
.
Rousseau said, after learning of the officers being inside his home and talking to one of them, he called Manchester police to complain. He received an apology from Lt. James Stankiewicz, the night's shift commander.
.
Stankiewicz said he did apologize for the department because Rousseau was right -- the officers should not have entered the apartment.
.
The officers, whom he refused to identify because the issue has become a personnel matter, had no warrant and no one's permission to enter the apartment, Stankiewicz said.
What about the police claims that the door was open? Was it open or just unlocked? Were the cops lying? Why? Perhaps the officers involved should re-read the 4th Amendment of our Constitution for guidance as they carry out their mission to protect and serve:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I hope that what we are seeing isn't the start of some heavy-handed trend here in NH - It certainly looks that way...
Hosting by Yahoo!

August 5, 2006

Update 4- A man's home is his castle? Not quite...

Actually, maybe there is a faint ray of hope for the notion of a man's home being his castle after all...
.
Regular readers will recall that I previously blogged a story about a Nashua NH man arrested and charged with illegally audiovideo taping police (saying some unpleasant things) as they stood on the porch of his home (in an attempt to locate his son for an unrelated matter). The man had a surveillance system, purchased at WalMart installed in his property, complete with a small sign announcing its presence.
.
It has been my belief since this story first became public that charging the homeowner with a crime of this nature represents a blatant violation of a citizen's right to private property. My guess is I wasn't alone with this sentiment. The August 5th Foster's Online reports:
Police have decided not to prosecute a man charged after he used his home security system to videotape police who came to his home.
Police Chief Timothy Hefferan said the department still believes Michael Gannon violated the state's wiretaping law. But he said he isn't sure the state would win the case at trial.
Gannon said he did nothing wrong. He was arrested after he brought his videotape to the police station. He went there to complain about the officers who came to his home investigating his 15-year-old son...
This is certainly good news for property owners everywhere. One wonders why the police concluded this the way they did. Did they (hopefully) come to their senses  and do the right thing? Was it due to the pressure publicity of the case brought to bear? Or were the police wary of further consequences?
.
On the conduct of the policemen displayed by the tape, the Foster's article notes that the police chief
will discipline one detective in the case who was not as courteous as he should have been, regardless of how provoked he felt he was at the time.
Reports indicated that the policemen were talking about how the homeowner was a disabled veteran and that they wanted to make him more disabled with a billy club... 

Hosting by Yahoo!

July 27, 2006

UPDATE3: A man's home is his castle? Not quite...

After several weeks of waiting, we finally have some news on the story (links at end of this post) about the Nashua man arrested for audiovideo taping police as they stood within that man's home. And no, at that point, they did not have a warrant- they got that later, after they found out they had been taped saying some unpleasant things. You'll recall that the man did in fact have a small sign announcing the presence of audiovideo surveillance equipment, purchased at Wal-Mart.
.
My belief since this story first became public remains unchanged: This represents a blatant violation of citizens' rights to their private properties.
.
This morning's Union Leader reports that the charged Nashua man apparently agrees with that right to his property:
Michael Gannon said he has rejected a Nashua Police Department plea deal to reduce the two felony wiretapping charges against him to a misdemeanor wiretapping charge.

Police said Gannon broke the all-party consent provision of the state's wiretapping law. Gannon has argued that the police knew they were being taped because he told them he had a surveillance system in place when they came to investigate his son.

"I'm a card player, and they (police) are trying to tell me they have all the aces when I'm staring at four aces in my hand," Gannon, 39, of 26 Morgan St., said yesterday. "They offered me the deal (before my probable cause hearing), and I know I did nothing wrong so I said, 'No way am I taking that deal.'"

I am glad that this man has chosen to fight for his rights to enjoy his property peaceably and free from unnecessary government intrusion. In the course of doing so, he is taking a stand for all of us.

Read my initial posting for more details here.

Read about what was said by the police officers here.

How confident are the police in their own case? What do the neighbors think of the police conduct in the matter? Click here.


Hosting by Yahoo!

July 2, 2006

UPDATE2: A man's home is his castle...

The story of the Nashua man's arrest for audio/videotaping police while ON HIS PRIVATE PROPERTY goes on. As details continue to come out regarding the circumstances of the story, it becomes more apparent that the police may have been concerned, not with the ACT of the taping, but with what was actually ON said tapes. Now that the story has gained widespread attention, the Nashua police have decided to get a second opinion on whether charging this case is such a good idea.The Saturday Nashua Telegraph reports police have given details of the case, including the videotapes, to the County Attorney's office for a review of how the charges might be handled. The paper quotes the Nashua police chief:
“We don’t get it right all the time. Although I am not condemning the officers . . . I don’t have all the facts. If it turns out when I do have them all that we erred, then I will be the first to admit it. We wanted to be confident, early on. . . . We wanted a prosecuting source to look at it objectively. Technically, the charge is an accurate one, but sometimes what’s technical and what’s good common sense is not necessarily mutual.”If prosecution isn’t warranted, it’s best to find out sooner rather than later."
Hmmm... sounds like the police have had a change of heart. Again from the Telegraph piece:
“I don’t want to run him through the wringer here,” Hefferan [police chief] said of Gannon [the accused]. “If it isn’t there, I want to know about it and I want to know about it early... There was some suggestion that we dismissed his complaint out of hand and merely took the tapes to keep it quiet. That is not the case at all,” Hefferan said.

 

 

Continue reading "UPDATE2: A man's home is his castle..." »


Hosting by Yahoo!

July 1, 2006

UPDATE: A man's home is his castle? Not quite...

In a June 29th posting, I discussed a Union Leader story covering the arrest of a Nashua man involving audio/video tapes he made of police while they were at his home. In the June 30th print edition of the Union Leader, I learned that police obtained and executed a warrant for the search and seizure of all tapes and recording equipment from the residence. Can you believe this?

Continue reading "UPDATE: A man's home is his castle? Not quite..." »


Hosting by Yahoo!

June 29, 2006

A man's home is his castle? Not quite...

This story from the June 29th Union Leader about a man arrested for using tapes from security cameras installed at his home offers a chilling revealation about private property rights if you think about it for a moment:
A Nashua man is facing two felony charges for allegedly using secret video cameras to tape police who had come to his home to investigate his son’s possible role in a robbery.

Nashua Police arrested Michael Gannon, 49, of 26 Morgan St., on Tuesday and charged him with two felony counts of interception and disclosure of telecommunication or oral communications. Each charge carries a maximum penalty of seven years in prison.

According to court filings, Gannon and his wife, Janet, had videocameras set up at both the front and rear entrances of their home. During an interview with police, Janet Gannon told investigators that the couple bought the cameras from Wal-Mart because there had been some criminal mischief in the parking lot in front of their home.

Nashua Police Sgt. Detective Jeff Maher said that although the cameras were not hidden and police officers were on Gannon’s property when the recording allegedly occurred, Gannon never told the police officers that he was recording their actions and conversations. That makes it a crime, he said.

“Just the fact this recording occurred, a crime was committed,” Maher said.

My friend Tom, who gets the hat-tip for sending me this article asks the following question: "Why can't a homeowner tape record what takes place on his property?" Good question, Tom. I would say this instance represents just one more piece of evidence demonstrating the fact that the notion of private-property rights is fast disappearing in this country.

Oh, and if you were wondering why this particular instance was singled out, perhaps it was what the tape revealed:

Michael Gannon came to the police station Tuesday with a videotape that he said showed the officers being “discourteous.” The tape included a recording of a conversation Gannon had with officers and a second conversation the police had when they were alone.

An additional point to ponder: Would it have been OK if it was a tape of white cops beating a black man?


Hosting by Yahoo!

PODCAST

Care and Feeding of GraniteGrok by PoliGrok, LLC

blog advertising is good for you
Powered by
Movable Type 3.35
mobile phone