U.S cops can now legally shoot anyone for anything*

Back on November 25th 2015 officer Patrick Feaster of the Paradise police department in USA, California, shot an unarmed man in the neck as he was climbing out of his crashed vehicle. 

Andrew Thomas had allegedly been drink driving and crashed his vehicle after a small police chase. His wife, who was in the car with him, was thrown from the vehicle and died at the scene. Thomas in this regard is not an innocent man. 

However, the police are there to protect and serve and you would expect the police officer to attempt to detain the driver initially after assessing the threat level or indeed helping the man from his overturned crashed vehicle. After all, this was only a drink driver he was dealing with. You would not expect a police officer to pull his weapon within a moment of exiting his police vehicle and shooting the driver as he clambered from the wreck. Thomas may be paralysed from his injuries. 

Incredibly just a couple of days ago prosecutors have said that officer Feaster will not face criminal charges. Stating;

“…(Feaster) did not intentionally fire his pistol” and that “he was in shock at the scene and not certain his weapon had actually discharged.”

He faces an internal investigation. 

It’s interesting that the prosecutors can decide that the officer did not “intentionally fire his pistol”. Shouldn’t that be for a jury to decide? 

And “not certain his weapon had actually discharged”. That is incredible, how could you possibly not know? 

The fact that the officer even withdrew his weapon should be serious cause for concern in the first place. To then pull the trigger and not know you pulled the trigger has to scream incredible incompetence or it is just an outright lie. 

Questions have to be asked of police protocol and training. Time and again we see these reactions from officers and even if it is legal to withdraw the firearm in these circumstances then that legality needs to be looked at again because once again we see another citizen needlessly shot. 

What the prosecutors have done in this case is essentially given all police officers a defence that will allow them to shoot anyone at anytime with impunity. So long as they use the excuse that they “didn’t intentionally fire the pistol”  because you can’t prove intent can you? But should the intent matter? Surely all it would need is a charge of criminal negligence? 

Either way, this is the message that it sends out. Claim your ‘intention’ wasn’t to shoot the suspect and you may just get away with it. 

CBS report

Advertisements

Work. Why is it no fun?

When did the fun stop? 

My 4 year old bounced with joy when he saw the bin men and gleefully said “I want to be a bin man and collect all the bins”

I thought ‘at what point do we as humans stop thinking everything is fun and start realising that actually these things are not fun’
Work is never fun, not unless you happen to be doing the one job in the world that you actually really want to do. For most people that’s just not a reality. 

If you doubt that sentiment, ask yourself, would you be doing the job you have now exactly as it is, for no pay? If you answered no, then you are not doing the job because you enjoy it. You’re doing it out of need. You have no other way to survive without one. This is why workers can be seen as slaves. Even well paid ones. 

So when does the fun stop and the life sentence begin? From a practical view point it’s the moment you can legally pay taxes. From a theoretical point of view it’s the moment you have to do something when you’re told to do it, how they want it done and you’re told how much your time is worth. 

This is the moment your true freedom stops.

The reality is it probably never even started. Most people these days live at home with mum and dad into their twenties and even if you think you have had freedom for some years living at home, what about prior to your 18th birthday? Was there really that much freedom before then? Most people will not experience freedom until their retirement and even then they will be relying on the system for everything. Some of us may not even make it to retirement with the ever increasing retirement age.

Some will ask “well, what can we do about it”. The answer is not much. Unless the overthrow of Capitalism happens. Which is unlikely any time soon. 

But there are things we can do to change the future. 

• Campaign for schools to put ever more emphasis on teaching children self sufficiency in DIY and Agriculture in schools from a young age. 

• Teach your children these skills in the mean time. 

• Promote more skilled labour instead of meaningless desk work

• Practice bartering with your own products or skills. Work for food instead of money? After all, you will only spend the money on food anyway. 

These are just a few of many examples. 

One day when enough people realise that we don’t need the system we have, as we know it, then one day people will never have to work a day in their life again. Not in the true sense of ‘work’. 

Hounding Lucy Allan is right and just. 

Lucy Allan, Conservative MP, has made a comeback video on her Facebook Page that has come into criticism for failing to accept responsibility for faking a death threat. You can view the video here. (Update: This video has since been taken down by Lucy Allan but can be found here instead )

She originally suspended both her Facebook and Twitter accounts. 

The story broke after she posted what she claimed was text an email and states it was from one certain individual. At the bottom a death threat (of sorts) was made. The person who sent the email called her out on Facebook claiming the death threat was added by her and that he had proof. 

Lucy Allan later stated that the death threat had been added as part of wider content she had received from other people.. If you had seen what she posted, it’s hard to imagine that could be the case. 

Her video (here if you want to see it now) (Update: This video has since been taken down by Lucy Allan but can be found here instead) essentially says that she won’t let Labour Activists wind her up and that she will continue on as normal as if nothing has happened. No apology. No recognition. It’s the “activists” fault. 

On the comments there are a few supporters and many people venting their displeasure. The supporters accusing the displeased of bullying. That’s good coming from a Conservative party in the midst of a bullying scandal and this latest claim of racial bullying involving a video of Sadiq Khan, Mayoral candidate for London

The question though, is it right? Is it right that an MP should be hounded and made an example of? Is it right that an MP be made to feel uncomfortable? 

Yes. Up to a point. Clear actual death threats or physical threats of any kind should always be condemned but hounding, barracking, messaging in simple form should not necessarily be seen as bullying nor unacceptable and here we take a brief moment to explain why. 

An MP is almost in an untouchable position. Say too much to an MP and you can expect to have the police knocking on your door. Same the same thing to anyone else on line and you’re dealt with just as another troll whom everyone ignores or happily but stupidly argues with. 

If an MP does a wrong, makes a big mistake, or tries to deceive the public deliberately then that MP should be held to account either by way of apology, being reprimanded or in the worst cases sacked or jailed. At the very least they should be expected to give an explanation. But when there is no logic to the explanation given then surely the MP can not just be allowed to saunter off as if nothing ever happened. 

When that happens what come back is there for the electorate? If you or I did that in our jobs we would probably expect to be disciplined or sacked and we never see that same justice carried out in the role as an MP.

We have seen time and again in the right wing press moments where Labour MP’s usually alligned to Jeremy Corbyn are brought to task and hounded by the media or even other Labour MP’s and they always manage to come back with an answer where even if you don’t agree, there is always logic behind what they are saying or in the case of Ken Livingstone an actual apology. 

When is this same expectation given to Conservative MP’s? 

So, in the interests of fairness and justice, if you are an MP on either side of the house, if you mess up, the least we should expect is an apology and if we can’t even get that and there is no sense of justice for the people who expect you to lead the country without fear nor favour, then you should expect to be hounded. You should expect a verbal onslaught and you should expect to be held to account. 

As an MP you are not just another member of public. You are part of an elite group of people who run the country. Who make choices in regards to war and peace, you make decisions that effect the disabled and sick, the unemployed and the workers of the country. We trust you to do a good job even if we don’t all support you as a party. 

If you can’t be trusted to tell the truth then you should expect the public to decide your fate in politics if you are not going to be held to account by the people that should hold you to account in the first instance. 

They work for us. Not the other way around.