Ban it in the United States.  Definitely.

Playing the Victim

Real Police Reforms

There are internal units in police departments that review all cases of fatalities and any incidents involving inappropriate use of force by a policeman.  I think this is where you could have real reforms that make a difference.

If it is a three-panel review committee, have two of the three people doing the review as ordinary citizens, not policemen.  This would ensure there is no conflict of interest and the judgments were rational and fair, as opposed to the current system where the internal units with nothing but police personnel have in inbred tendency for the police to protect themselves — an obvious conflict of interest.  Having two out of three members of that review committee being non-police would eliminate this obvious conflict of interest.

Also, the findings and final judgments of these internal committees have to be made public so there is transparency in their proceedings and adjudications.  Right now, much of this is considered protected information and shielded from the public.  That has to change.  Otherwise, the public will continue to have no faith in these secretive internal reviews so subject to obvious conflict of interest.

Chicago and Police

Freedom of Speech

What separates the so-called liberals of today and the liberals of the 1960s is the issue of freedom of speech.  The 1960s liberals were unqualified supporters of that freedom.  But today’s liberal wants to suppress any and all “hate speech” — that is, whatever speech he happens to disagree with

Today’s liberal doesn’t realize that suppressing what he considers to be disagreeable opens the door to suppressing any speech, so that today the liberal suppresses what he considers to be hate speech, but tomorrow it is his speech that gets suppressed as out of sync with the times.

You either have complete freedom of speech or you don’t have any is the point.

Cheat By Mail