Dog Brothers Public Forum

Stopping in a well lit parking lot is good. Turning on your dome light is also good. As Crafty did, keeping hands visible is very good, though just keeping them visible on the steering wheel is fine.

Don't frantically dig for your documents. The officer can't tell if you are digging for a weapon or trying to stash something you shouldn't have. The less stressful you make the stop for the officer, the better your chances for avoiding a summons.

There is a major difference from failing to solve the problem and rewarding those that break the law. See the "DREAM" act they are trying to ram through. Do you doubt that Obama will sign it if given the chance?

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=196

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: COSTS, CRIMES, & RELATED PROBLEMS (U.S.)

See also: Illegal Immigration: Trends, Historical Perspectives, & Related Issues (U.S.)


Illegal immigration imposes enormous costs -- monetary as well as crime-related -- on American society. As regards criminal activity, Manhattan Institute scholar Heather MacDonald describes one small slice of a much larger problem:

    * In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for homicide target illegal aliens, as do approximately two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants.
    * More  than 60 percent of the Hispanic gangs in Southern California—whose membership  is in the tens of thousands—is illegal. These gangs involved withdrug-distribution schemes, extortion, drive-by assassinations, assaults, and robberies.

In a 2006 study, Deborah Schurman-Kauflin of the Violent Crimes Institute in Atlanta estimated, conservatively, that from January 1999 through April 2006 approximately 240,000 illegal aliens had committed about 960,000 sex offenses in the United States.

The fiscal costs of illegal immigration are also very high. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, in 2002 illegal-alien households imposed, in aggregate, costs exceeding $26 billion on the federal government while they paid $16 billion in federal taxes -- thereby creating a net fiscal deficit of $10.4 billion per year at the federal level, or $2,700 per household. Among the largest components of this deficit were Medicaid ($2.5 billion); medical treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food-assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion). A major reason why illegal aliens are, on balance, such a drain on the American Treasury is because approximately 60 percent of them lack a high-school degree.

The National Academy of Sciences has estimated that the average immigrant without a high-school degree will, over the course of his or her lifetime, impose a net cost -- above and beyond any taxes he or she pays -- of nearly $100,000 on U.S. taxpayers; this cost does not include the cost of educating the immigrant’s children. Based on that figure, the estimated 6 million legal immigrants lacking a high-school diploma and residing in the U.S. today, will cost taxpayers more than a half trillion dollars over their lifetimes.
_________________________________________________________________________
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02830t.pdf

IDENTITY FRAUD
Prevalence and Links to
Alien Illegal Activities


I am pleased to be here today to discuss the significance of “identity
fraud”—a term that encompasses a broad range of illegal activities based
on fraudulent use of identifying information of a real person or of a
fictitious person. A pervasive type of identity fraud is identity theft, which
involves “stealing” another person’s personal identifying information—
such as Social Security number (SSN), date of birth, and mother’s maiden
name—and then using the information to fraudulently establish credit, run
up debt, take over existing financial accounts, or to undertake other
activities in another’s name. Also, another pervasive category is the use of
fraudulent identity documents by aliens to enter the United States illegally
to obtain employment and other benefits. The events of September 11,
2001, have heightened concerns about the contributory role that identity
fraud plays in facilitating terrorism and other serious crimes.
In this statement, I make the following points:
• The prevalence of identity theft appears to be growing. Moreover,
identity theft is not typically a stand-alone crime; rather, identity theft
is usually a component of one or more white-collar or financial crimes,
such as bank fraud, credit card or access device fraud, or the use of
counterfeit financial instruments. Since 1998, the Congress and most
states have enacted laws that criminalize identity theft. The passage of
federal and state identity theft legislation indicates that this type of
crime has been widely recognized as a serious problem across the
nation.
• According to Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) officials,
the use of fraudulent documents by aliens is extensive. At ports of
entry, INS inspectors have intercepted tens of thousands of fraudulent
documents in each of the last few years. These documents were
presented by aliens attempting to enter the United States to seek
employment or obtain other immigration benefits, such as
naturalization or permanent residency status. The types of false
documents most frequently intercepted by INS inspectors include
border crossing cards, alien registration cards, nonimmigrant visas, and
passports and citizenship documents (both U.S. and foreign). Also, INS
has reported that large-scale counterfeiting has made fraudulent
employment eligibility documents (e.g., Social Security cards) widely
available.
Page 2 GAO-02-830T
• Federal investigations have shown that some aliens use fraudulent
documents in connection with more serious illegal activities, such as
narcotics trafficking and terrorism. This is a cause for greater concern.
• Efforts to combat identity fraud in its many forms likely will command
continued attention from policymakers and law enforcement. Such
efforts will include investigating and prosecuting perpetrators, as well
as focusing on prevention measures to make key identification
documents and information less susceptible to being counterfeited or
otherwise used fraudulently.
_______________________________________________________________
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/03/hidden_cost_of_.html


Hidden cost of illegal immigration: ID theft
Posted: Friday, March 31 2006 at 07:00 am CT by Bob Sullivan

In the noisy immigration debate raging in Washington, there is one voice NOT being heard.

The voice of identity theft victims.

Behind many of the nation’s millions of undocumented workers are someone else's documents. To get a job, illegal immigrants need a Social Security number, and they often borrow one.  As victim Melody Millet is fond of saying, U.S. citizens are being forced to share their identities with undocumented immigrants to give corporate America a steady supply of cheap labor.

Got to love a state where CCW is available and self defense is readily recognized. I hope this guy recovers quickly.

Cool. I wish more had your opinion about jury duty.

The left doesn't care about what actually works to reduce crime, the gun laws make them feel good. That's what is important to them.

http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issues/articles/1747434-P1-Exclusive-Infamous-killer-cops-case-has-lessons-for-the-street-today/

Things people at IBM don't have to worry about.

http://apbweb.com/featured-articles/202-police-force-in-living-color.html

Use of force by police in this country for the past 17 years has been judged by Graham v. Connor [490 U.S. 386, 109 S.Ct. 1865 (1989)]. Very few citizens have had the opportunity to sit in judgment, whether criminal or civil, in police use of force cases. There aren't that many criminal cases brought (cops, after all, are the only ones that society gives authority to use force proactively), and the civil suits are most often settled or dismissed before trial.

When there is a trial, what jurors wrestle with are the requirements set forth by the Graham case. When police must use force, the Court says, the force must be "objectively reasonable" with respect to the facts and circumstances the officer is facing, and without 20/20 hindsight.

The court decided that, "The ‘reasonableness' of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation." Also what must be considered are the severity of the crime, the immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, whether the suspect is resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.

The list of facts to be considered is lengthy, but its highlights include: the number of suspects and officers involved; the size, age and condition of the suspect; the known or perceived fighting ability of the suspect; the duration of the action; the experience level of the officers; the distance from the officers to the suspect; and the weapons (including the officers weapons) in the immediate vicinity of the suspect.

Law enforcement officers are unique in society because they are permitted by law to use physical force to compel others to do their bidding. Officers intervene in a variety of urgent, unpredictable situations, and their mission is to keep the peace or to restore it. This awesome power must be wielded sparingly in a democratic society. The public rightly holds public administrators, including police officials, responsive to public preferences and demands. When officers use force they must do so to control a situation, not to punish an offender.

Use of force by police naturally upsets onlookers across the street as well as viewers of the six o'clock news. Conditioned by fictional media depictions of sanitized violence on one hand and fantastic "megaviolence" on the other, most people have no frame of reference other than personal emotions to evaluate an incident. The average viewer has little or no experience with real violence and the chaos that typically surrounds it.

People tend not to understand even legitimate use-of-force incident dynamics; people are repulsed when they see force applied to a fellow human being. But force is used in relatively small percentages of police confrontations, and people should not be surprised or offended that police must occasionally use force.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/2008-pdfs/may08leb.pdf

Double
Exposure
Civil Liability
and Criminal
Prosecution
in Federal
Court for
Police
Misconduct
By RICHARD G. SCHOTT, J.D.
The law enforcement
profession comes with
many risks, most of
which are knowingly accepted
by its members. As in many
other occupations, lesser known,
more subtle risks also
are inherent in law enforcement.
When officers are involved in a
physical struggle or violent confrontation,
they run the risk of
sustaining injury or even death
to accomplish their law enforcement
mission. They may be
called upon to meet force with
force, sometimes having to use
deadly force. All uses of force
by law enforcement are subject
to review; none subject to more
scrutiny than the use of deadly
force. Officers can quickly
become familiar with internal
review boards, citizen review
boards, presentations of cases to
local grand juries to determine
whether state criminal charges
are appropriate,1 and civil lawsuits
brought in state courts by
alleged victims against individual
officers (or their employing
agency) that allege wrongdoing
on the part of the officer
(or entity).2 Under federal law,
there are two additional and
distinct causes of action that
officers may find themselves
encountering —a civil civil
rights lawsuit3 and a criminal
civil rights prosecution.4 Familiarity
with these federal actions
will help officers navigate
the potential minefield of
consequences that may result
from one single action.

Garrity and additional caselaw have clarified that a law enforcement agency investigating an officer for misconduct that may be criminal in nature can interview that officer without legal representation and the officer must answer all questions truthfully or face departmental discipline, up to and including termination. A criminal investigation of the same incident cannot use the compelled statements, UNLESS the officer chooses to testify on his or her behalf in the criminal trial, then the internal investigation, including the compelled statements can be admitted into trial. There isn't much like that for those not employed by a law enforcement agency.

LAPD is hiring. After 3 years on patrol, you can put in for Internal Affairs.

Get a court order and see.

http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc23123.htm

V C Section 23123 Hand Held Wireless Telephone Prohibited Use
Hand-Held Wireless Telephone: Prohibited Use

23123.  (a) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.

(b) A violation of this section is an infraction punishable by a base fine of twenty dollars ($20) for a first offense and fifty dollars ($50) for each subsequent offense.

(c) This section does not apply to a person using a wireless telephone for emergency purposes, including, but not limited to, an emergency call to a law enforcement agency, health care provider, fire department, or other emergency services agency or entity.

(d) This section does not apply to an emergency services professional using a wireless telephone while operating an authorized emergency vehicle, as defined in Section 165, in the course and scope of his or her duties.

(e) This section does not apply to a person when using a digital two-way radio that utilizes a wireless telephone that operates by depressing a push-to-talk feature and does not require immediate proximity to the ear of the user, and the person is driving one of the following vehicles:

So, you bash cops in general because of the actions of a few? I don't know if CA's cell phone law exempts the use of cell phones for official purposes, do you?

Your whole premise is bogus. Law enforcement officers have more liability, both civil and criminal than anyone else in society. Law enforcement officers are also empowered to do things like ""running code 3" than others are not. Why are you an ignorant cop-hater?

I didn't see anything about 15 MPH as a limit for pursuits or emergency response in the PDF.

I noticed you're a cop-basher, and thus most likely a criminal. So what have you been arrested for?

Wow. That is so horrifically bad, it's hard to imagine.

I'm not a huge horror fan. I've found reality to be horrible enough without adding any imagination, however this is an awesome show. Best thing I've seen in a long time.

http://walkingdead.wikia.com/wiki/The_Walking_Dead_%28TV_Series%29

Moreover, in recent years a number of controversial, high-profile encounters have been captured on news video, showing officers using what appeared to be extraordinary force to expose downed suspects' hidden hands during capture and arrest.

"Media critics and other civilians, including jurors and force review board members, seemed unable to understand the officers' sense of urgency in some of these cases," says Lewinski, FSI's executive director. "Strikes with batons or flashlights delivered by officers trying to gain control of resistant suspects' hands were sometimes interpreted as malicious outbreaks of rage and vindictiveness.

**What? People with no training and experience trash officers out of ignorance. Who'd ever imagine such a thing?**

Grateful for those far from home, in harm's way to protect this nation.

Tapping out at the 27 min mark. Geeze, can't they at least put the Captain's bars on right?

http://children.webmd.com/news/20100203/heavy-backpacks-strain-kids-spines

Heavy Backpacks Strain Kids' Spines
Study Shows Book-Filled Backpacks May Lead to Back Pain in Children

**Snip**

Heavier backpack loads were also associated with increased curvature of the lower spine. Half of the children had a significant spinal curve even with the 18-pound backpack. Most of the children had to adjust their posture to adapt to the heaviest, 26-pound backpack load.

The amount of back pain reported by the children also increased as backpack load increased. At the heaviest load, the average pain score was nearly 5 out of 10 for the children.

Researchers say the results show heavy backpacks cause compression of the spinal discs and increased spinal curvature that are related to the back pain reported by children.

In the study, children wore the backpacks with the straps over both shoulders, but researchers say the spinal curvature could be even worse if the backpack were carried over one shoulder as many children do.

That is some outstanding investigative work. Very nice!

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/a-childs-death-in-no-mans-land/?singlepage=true

A Child’s Death in No-Man’s Land
Few parents fret over the prospect of their child getting shot in the backyard. What kind of a place must it be where they do?
November 11, 2010 - by Jack Dunphy


For a five-year old boy, there are few events in life that can bring such sublime flights of anticipation as Halloween. Yes, Christmas is up there, with the season’s lights and decorations and promise of long-wished-for presents. And birthdays, too, have their attractions. Along with the gifts comes the advantage of being an entire year older, and what five-year-old boy doesn’t dream of finally attaining the maturity and exalted status of a six-year-old.

Aaron Shannon Jr. won’t see his sixth birthday. On the afternoon of Halloween, as he counted down the minutes to nightfall and the adventure of trick-or-treating, he was shot and killed in his backyard. He was wearing his Spider-Man costume when he died.

Most parents fret over the hazards of Halloween: the strangers, the traffic, the effects of big sugar on little bellies. Few parents fret over the prospect of their child getting shot in the backyard. What kind of a place must it be where they do?

Such a place is the neighborhood around 84th Street and Central Avenue, in South Central Los Angeles, where Aaron lived and died.

A visitor to Los Angeles might arrive at LAX and drive east on Manchester Avenue for twenty minutes or so and then turn north on Central Avenue, where, miles in the distance straight ahead, he would see the gleaming steel and glass towers of downtown.  On clear afternoons, as it was on Halloween, the setting sun reflects off those buildings to create a brilliant tableau, but the visitor would note that the scenery on either side of Central is far less spectacular: drab storefronts, modest apartment buildings, and a few neighborhood churches. The visitor wouldn’t detect any significant differences between the east side of the street and the west side.

But there is a huge difference, one that is well known to all who live and work in the area. Aaron lived on the west side of Central, in a neighborhood claimed by a particular street gang. Another street gang claims the territory to the east of Central, and when members of each gang cross that great divide into the other’s turf, they almost always do so in search of trouble.

Police claim that on the afternoon of Oct. 31, two members of the gang from the east side of Central Avenue crossed that invisible boundary hoping to settle the score for an earlier shooting. They walked down the alley behind Aaron’s house looking for targets and, on seeing people in a backyard, one of them raised a pistol and opened fire. Aaron’s grandfather and uncle were struck in an arm and a leg, respectively, and survived. Aaron, little Spider-Man, was shot in the head and never had a chance. Police say no one in the family belonged to a gang.

If you don’t live in Los Angeles — and perhaps even if you do — chances are you hadn’t heard what happened to Aaron Shannon Jr. But no matter where you live, if you follow the news at all you’ve surely heard of Oscar Grant, the man shot and killed in Oakland, California, by a BART police officer in the early morning of January 1, 2009. Grant’s death sparked rioting in Oakland, as did the outcome of the prosecution of the officer who shot him. Johannes Mehserle was charged with murder but a jury convicted him of involuntary manslaughter and he was sentenced to two years in prison.

Both the verdict and the sentence were well within the law and entirely foreseeable, yet they nonetheless brought outraged cries from those quarters where such cries have come to be expected. And accompanying the outraged cries were the looting and vandalism which, alas, have also come to be expected.

On Nov. 5, the day Mehserle was sentenced, demonstrators gathered outside the Criminal Courts Building in downtown Los Angeles (the trial had been moved from Alameda County on a defense motion for a change of venue). Many held signs adorned with a simple message: “I am Oscar Grant.”

If you were to listen to those who protested on behalf of Oscar Grant, you might have the impression that the greatest threat to any black man in Oakland — or Los Angeles or any city you choose — is posed by racist cops itching for an excuse to gun him down. But about seven people are murdered each month in Oakland, nearly all of them young black men shot by other young black men. And yet as those bodies pile up no one marches, no one shouts, no one seems outraged in the least by the carnage.

On Nov. 6, a candlelight vigil was held at the LAPD’s 77th Street police station in memory of Aaron. Less than a hundred people attended, judging from the brief video report shown on the local news. There was no screaming, no hysterics, not even calls for vengeance against the two men accused of killing Aaron. And there most certainly was no mob rushing off to the nearest Foot Locker store to help themselves to the latest models from Nike. And if the two men accused of murdering Aaron somehow manage to beat the case or bargain for a reduced sentence, that too will be greeted not with outrage but rather with sad resignation.

I don’t begrudge Oscar Grant and his family the sympathy they’ve received. His death was indeed tragic and, whatever his faults, he left behind people who loved him. But of all those people demonstrating outside the L.A. courthouse in his name, I doubt a single one of them could have told you who Aaron Shannon Jr. was.

And that’s something to scream about.

“Jack Dunphy” is the pseudonym of an officer with the Los Angeles Police Department. The opinions expressed are his own and almost certainly do not reflect those of the LAPD management.

I'd go in to have a medical professional check it out. It sounds like it's resolved it's self, but you want to be sure. As someone who has suffered several back injuries in the line of duty, I can tell you that's crucial to take care of your back. I've been unable to get out of bed or reduced to using a cane while hunched over like an elderly man at times because of back injuries. Don't take your back for granted.

Note that Mumbai type attacks have been tried many times in Israel. Aside from the schoolchildren at Ma'alot, it's hasn't turned out well for the hajis.