Where Are My Keys?

It's official..

Received my notification from the City and County of Denver that my application for a CCW permit was approved.  Next step is to visit the Police Department and pick up my credentials.

The process was an interesting one.  Colorado requires you take a class (instructor must be certified), pass a background check, and pay a fee ($152.50!).  Really enjoyed the class I took.  Instructor was a former Jefferson County Sherriff Deputy, and taught me a lot more than I thought I would learn.  I would highly recommend using Joe, if you plan on taking such a course.  The process at the Police station was a little challenging, as my fingers don't like being fingerprinted.

My permit is good for 5 years, at which point I pay a lower fee to get reissued. 

Nice to know that I have the option of carrying in situations that would make my family feel safer.  Ever since the shooting at the Batman movie a few years ago, the fetching Mrs. P has been uncomfortable at movie theaters.  She was actually the one who pushed for me to get my permit.

Not sure how often I'll actually carry one of my guns, but I'm glad that I live in a State that still believes in the Constitution, and respects my Second Amendment right.  I may carry frequently, I may not. 

Isn't it nice to have the option?

I don't think he understands what the word "mandate" means..

Another day, another delay (and law ignored):

The Obama administration announced Monday it would give medium-sized employers an extra year, until 2016, before they must offer health insurance to their full-time workers.

Firms with at least 100 employees will have to start offering this coverage in 2015.

By offering an unexpected grace period to businesses with between 50 and 99 employees, administration officials are hoping to defuse another potential controversy involving the 2010 health-care law, which has become central to Republicans’ campaign to make political gains in this year’s midterm election.

Even the nation’s largest employers got a significant concession: They can avoid a fine by offering coverage to 70 percent of their full-time employees in 2015 and 95 percent starting in 2016. Under an earlier proposal, employers with at least 50 employees would have been required to offer insurance, beginning 2015, to 95 percent of those who work 30 hours or more a week, along with their dependents.

The regulation finalized by the Treasury Department involves one of the biggest issues surrounding the Affordable Care Act: how the law’s employer mandate plays out in practice. The mandate has enormous ramifications for how businesses classify their employees and how much these men and women work.

Initially, these requirements — which affect firms employing 72 percent of all Americans — were supposed to take effect this year, at the same time that most individuals faced a new obligation to obtain health insurance or risk a tax penalty. Last July, the administration announced it would delay the regulation for a year after many employers and some unions complained about the law’s reporting requirements and classification system for workers.

A senior administration official, who briefed reporters on the proposal on the condition of anonymity because the rule was not yet public, said the Treasury Department decided to allow medium-sized businesses more flexibility because they “need a little more time to adjust to providing coverage.”

Businesses that fail to offer coverage face a fine of up to $2,000 for each employee that is not covered, though workers are not required to sign up for the benefits.

Laws are for the little people.

When will someone on the Hill have the guts to challenge this fraud in the White House?

A real life Jackie Brown?

2 pounds for $10,000 sounds like a good deal.  Until you get caught.

A Jet Blue flight attendant tried to smuggle heroin into Orlando International Airport, authorities said.

Customs officers said Carla Alvarado  was hiding more than 900 grams of the drug, which is about two pounds, underneath her uniform.

Officials said the heroin, which was disguised to look like chocolate, was discovered Friday.

Authorities said Alvarado admitted she was paid $10,000 to transport it on a direct flight from Colombia to Orlando.

Isn't there a law against sawed off shotguns?

If so, how could this nut have used one? 

On the morning of the shooting, he used a valid badge to gain access to the sprawling Navy Yard and Building 197, bringing with him a sawed-off shotgun on which the cryptic messages of "better off this way" and "my ELF weapon" were scrawled, according to a law enforcement document reviewed by The Associated Press. The meaning of those words wasn't immediately clear.

If I didn't know any better, it's almost as if criminals will ignore laws or something.

Gun found in Hernandez case..

Not the gun, but a different gun, from a different murder:

On July 16, 2012, Safiro Furtado and Daniel Abreu were killed in a drive-by shooting after a fight with a group that included Aaron Hernandez at a Boston nightclub. Law enforcement sources speculated that Odin Lloyd's knowledge of Hernandez's role in this shooting might have been a motive for his murder. Prosecutors are reportedly pushing for charges against Hernandez in the 2012 case.

Boston police eventually found the SUV they believe was used in the drive-by—it was located at the Bristol, Conn., home of Hernandez's uncle, where Ernest Wallace and Carlos Ortiz allegedly holed up after the murder of Lloyd. Now they've got the gun too.

What kind of "justice" system do they have in Florida?

You lost your case, move on.  Leave this guy and his family alone.

The story begins on April 20, 2012, at a bond hearing for George Zimmerman, whose bond had been revoked by Judge Kenneth Lester. Judge Lester’s bias against George Zimmerman became so blatant that the Fifth District Court of Appeals removed him from the case on August 29, 2012, a rarity. Prior to that hearing, George was incarcerated and his phone calls and other contacts with Shellie were recorded. During the April 20 hearing, Shellie — who was in hiding due to credible death threats — testified by phone.

At issue is the existence of a PayPal account that had been established as a defense fund for George Zimmerman. The account balance was to eventually increase to a little more than $200,000, an amount that was to become a drop in the bucket of legal fees and expenses that still appear to have no end. At the hearing, all parties — judge, defense and prosecution — were aware of that account and were treating it as separate from the Zimmerman’s normal finances (checking account and savings account).

Mark O’Mara had been George’s attorney for only about a week and was struggling to get up to speed with every element of the case. At previous hearings, Judge Lester stated on the record that he had no idea if he had any authority to deal with that PayPal account and would have to research the matter. It appears that he never did that. In any case, everyone involved knew about and discussed the account; there was never any attempt to hide it, and George did not testify about anything at the hearing other than to briefly take the stand to apologize to the family of Trayvon Martin for his death.

By that point, the Zimmermans were destitute. Driven from their home by death threats and a relentless media falsely depicting George as a racist murderer, living in hiding, driven from their jobs and their schools, they had no income and no way to earn it. This, too, was well-known to everyone involved.

The affidavit for the perjury charge, written and submitted by special prosecutor investigator T.C. O’Steen, is — like the affidavit submitted for the murder charge — devoid of probable cause.

In fact, it does not establish a single specific statement made by Shellie Zimmerman and explain why that specific statement was false, why it was material, how it was a matter of objective fact, or why Shellie believed it to be false as she uttered it.

Of all of the elements of the offense that must be established and proved, the state established only that Shellie was under oath and testified in a judicial proceeding.

Not only does the affidavit fail to fulfill the elements of the offense, by omission it actually lies to and misleads the court. In this case, there is no doubt that Judge Lester was biased against George, but it is most likely that the affidavit was approved because judges are generally not used to dealing with prosecutors willing to lie to them. Receiving an affidavit for a felony charge, they tend to rubber stamp it, not considering that a prosecutor, an officer of the court, would mislead them. In this case, that’s exactly what happened.

This is the relevant excerpt from the affidavit of the cross examination of Shellie by Bernie de la Rionda:

Q: And you mentioned also, in terms of the ability of your husband to make a bond amount, that you all had no money, is that correct?

A: To my knowledge, that is correct.

Q: Were you aware of the website that Mr. Zimmerman or somebody on his behalf created?

A: I’m aware of that website.

Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was –

A: Currently, I do not know.

Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?

A: I do not.

Compare it with the transcript of the same testimony. The sections of the transcript that were omitted in the affidavit are in italics:

Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was –

A: Currently, I do not know.

Q: Who would know that?

A: That would be my brother-in-law.

Q: And is he — I know he’s not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?

A: I’m sure that we could probably get him on the phone.

Q: Okay. So he’s not there now.

A: No, he is not, sir.

Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?

A: I do not.

Q. Okay. You haven’t talked to your brother-in-law in terms of just bare amount of how much money?

A. No. No, I have not.

Q. Okay. And how long has that website been in existence, ma’am?

A. I do not know. I have not been with my husband since he’s been in hiding. I do not know.

Q. Okay. So you mentioned your husband was in hiding. I understand he left the state, is that correct?

A. That’s correct.

Q. Okay. And did you continue to have contact with him while he was out? 

A. Yes, every day.

Q. And that was every day?

A. Yes.

Shellie testified that they had no money in their normal accounts and that she had no idea how much money was in the Internet account, but that her brother-in-law probably knew that information and that she could get him on the phone.

Notice that the pertinent information about the brother-in-law was completely removed from the affidavit.

In fact, as soon as de la Rionda learned about him, he immediately dropped that line of questioning and never again asked about the account and never asked Shellie to arrange for him to testify by phone. Judge Lester also showed no interest in getting that information, despite the fact that it had a direct bearing on why the hearing was being held.

The remainder of the affidavit contains brief excerpts of the recorded jail conversations between George and Shellie that indicate they spoke about transferring money on several occasions between accounts to pay bills and other living expenses. It also establishes that they had varying amounts of money in various accounts at various times. The prosecution has made much of the fact that they appear to speak in a kind of crude code, avoiding mentioning specific amounts of money. George also cautions Shellie about carrying any amount of money.

Read the whole thing.

I'm behind the Administration on this policy..

Not crazy about the implementation of it, however:

In a major shift in criminal justice policy, the Obama administration will move on Monday to ease overcrowding in federal prisons by ordering prosecutors to omit listing quantities of illegal substances in indictments for low-level drug cases, sidestepping federal laws that impose strict mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related offenses.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., in a speech at the American Bar Association’s annual meeting in San Francisco on Monday, is expected to announce the new policy as one of several steps intended to curb soaring taxpayer spending on prisons and help correct what he regards as unfairness in the justice system, according to his prepared remarks.

Saying that “too many Americans go to too many prisons for far too long and for no good law enforcement reason,” Mr. Holder is planning to justify his policy push in both moral and economic terms.

“Although incarceration has a role to play in our justice system, widespread incarceration at the federal, state and local levels is both ineffective and unsustainable,” Mr. Holder’s speech says. “It imposes a significant economic burden — totaling $80 billion in 2010 alone — and it comes with human and moral costs that are impossible to calculate.”

I agree that we have some Draconian drug laws, but use the normal channels in changing policy, don't do it by fiat.  Using Executive Orders to get your way, and bypass Congress isn't good policy, especially on something as cut and dried as this.  It also opens the door to shenanigans, as evidenced by the new criteria:

Under a policy memorandum being sent to all United States attorney offices on Monday, according to an administration official, prosecutors will be told that they may not write the specific quantity of drugs when drafting indictments for drug defendants who meet the following four criteria: their conduct did not involve violence, the use of a weapon or sales to minors; they are not leaders of a criminal organization; they have no significant ties to large-scale gangs or cartels; and they have no significant criminal history.

For example, in the case of a defendant accused of conspiring to sell five kilograms of cocaine — an amount that would set off a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence — the prosecutor would write that “the defendant conspired to distribute cocaine” without saying how much. The quantity would still factor in when prosecutors and judges consult sentencing guidelines, but depending on the circumstances, the result could be a sentence of less than the 10 years called for by the mandatory minimum law, the official said.

The ability of a local prosecutor to make their own judgements also opens the door to discrimination and variety between prosecutors.  What is the definition of violence?  Is a threat to "beat your ass" violence, or frees speech?  Who determines the "leadership" of a drug cartel?  What defines "large scale"?  What is "significant" in regards to someone's criminal history?  Is it based on number of connections to the justice system, or the severity of the offense?

One of the nice things about "zero tolerance", is that there is no room for mitigating circumstances.  Do the crime, do the time.

While I feel this new move by the Administration will free up the prisons, there will still be challenges within the system.  Again, I applaud the move, but dislike the process in which it is being implemented.

In the running for "Worst Mother Ever"..

No, not your Mom, but this one:

On July 22, 29-year-old Wechsler was arrested and charged with sexually assaulting three of the children--aged 7, 8 and 15--on multiple occasions. A fourth child -- a 3-year-old-- was not mentioned as a victim.

He confessed to sexually assaulting the children while taking care of them.

On July 26, the woman told Northampton County youth officials that she left her children with Wechsler on several occasions, despite knowing his sexual behavior towards them, police said.

She also admitted letting him spend the night on July 21 when the 7-year-old was sexually assaulted, and leaving him with the children the next day while she went to the store, the documents indicate. She also said she knew she was not to leave the children with him.

Hopefully those kids get into a family that actually cares for their well being..

Make sure your cargo is properly secured before leaving the curb..

I'm guessing the alcohol played a role with this:

A witness reported that he saw a truck making a left turn onto Garrisonville Road with a woman hanging out of it. Her lower body was restrained by a seat belt, and her head and shoulders were hitting the ground.

Napkins and other debris were coming out of the truck, Stafford County Sheriff’s spokesman Bill Kennedy said. The truck went about 100 feet before pulling into the parking lot of Cash Point Advance. The 22-year-old woman was unconscious and had numerous lacerations and abrasions.

Deputy Dimas Pinzon responded to multiple reports about the incident. He found that the driver had a heavy odor of alcohol. The driver told Dimas that he was in the truck with two women when one of them opened the passenger’s door and then closed it. The driver said he was unaware of the woman hanging out of the truck or anything else unusual, Kennedy said.

Just crank up the classic rock, and you won't hear anything while you tool around town.

More on Aaron Hernandez..

Certainly appears like someone in the car was snitching:

Aaron Hernandez's apartment was searched last week and turned up goodies like ammunition, paychecks, and the hooded sweatshirt Hernandez was allegedly wearing on the night of Odin Lloyd's murder. But here's a twist: an affidavit for the search warrant cited cocaine.

Both the Globe and the Herald have obtained documents relating to the search of an apartment in Franklin, Mass., roughly a 20-minute drive from Hernandez's North Attleborough home. Police were led to the apartment by Carlos Ortiz, one of the three men in the car with Lloyd.

In the apartment, cops found

• A white hoodie “consistent in color and type with the sweatshirt that Hernandez is observed to be wearing on surveillance cameras the night of the homicide."
• A red baseball cap worn by Hernandez to a nightclub on the Friday night before the murder. Prosecutors had previously said Hernandez's anger at Lloyd could have been sparked by an incident at that club.
• Five boxes of .45 ammunition (the caliber of the shells found on Lloyd's body), five boxes of rifle ammunition, and one box of .22-caliber ammunition.
• Keys to a brand-new Hummer registered to Hernandez.
• Paychecks from the Patriots and Puma.
• A bag from Kay Jewelers.
• A valet receipt from the W Hotel in Boston.
• A Western Union receipt.
• A Hertz car rental agreement.

According to the Herald, an affidavit filed by a Massachusetts state trooper to obtain the search warrant made references to "the sale of cocaine," but further documents make no mention of any drugs found at the apartment.