July 2011

Third Degree Misdeamenor for Barking at a Dog?

Jul 31, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Dog barks at man, it's normal. Man barks at dog, man goes to jail? Apparently that was the case for Ryan Stephens of Mason, Ohio, who was arrested for drunkenly barking at a police dog.

The dog, named Timber, responded to the man's bark by barking back, as he is trained to do. The policeman who owns the dog then went after Mr. Stephens, who refused to stop despite his orders. He was charged with a third-degree misdemeanor offense for the incident, as well as public intoxication (which he obviously was). According to the sheriff who owns the dog, such an action is illegal according to city statutes because barking at a police dog is considered "malicious teasing" and could cause the dog harm. Mr. Stephens' lawyer says that the mere act of barking at a dog can't be considered abuse, and the statute preventing illegal barking is too vague to be properly carried out without violating the First Amendment right to free speech.

Granted, barking at a dog is unusual, and probably not something many people do unless they are as drunk as Mr. Stephens was, but making barking sounds is a first amendment right, and there is no real proof that barking at a dog, for whatever weird reason one would have for doing so, is in anyway abusing an animal. Insane laws like this are difficult to enforce, and are so broad that they invite a whole manner of potential abuses of power by law enforcement, and that’s enough to get anybody barking mad. Originally published at silverunderground.com.

Comments (4)

Washington Speak

Jul 31, 2011 at 12:20 PM

By Julie VerHage

As has become more and more apparent in recent months, only in Washington can you continue to spend more and pass it off as a budget cut. I don't know about my fellow YAL members, but if I talked to my credit card company and told them that I couldn't stop spending more than my budget, but I could slow my increase in spending, the answer would be "No, you have to pay your bills or your credit score will take a hit."

Speaker Boehner's plan is a sad excuse for the actual spending cuts our country desperately needs. An article by Chris Edwards at the CATO institute points this out with a chart of spending and a link to the letter from the Congressional Budget Office explaining that his plan in fact only cuts $850 million and not the $1.2 trillion the Speaker has claimed.

A disturbing realization is found in the following statement,

The “cuts” in the Boehner plan are only cuts from the CBO baseline, which is an assumed path of constantly rising spending. If Congress wanted to, it could require CBO to increase its “baseline” spending by, say, $5 trillion over the next decade. Then Boehner could claim that he was “cutting” spending by $5.9 trillion, even though his plan hadn’t changed. You can see that discretionary “cuts” against baselines don’t mean anything.

I wonder what the Founding Fathers would say if they were to come back and find Washington in the state it is today.

Just for some added fun, check out this video by ReasonTV.

Comments (6)

Jesus and Software Piracy

Jul 31, 2011 at 12:14 PM

By Alan Brooks

Most people are familiar with the Bible story of the time that Jesus fed 5000 people with only five loaves of bread and two fish. It is one of his best-known miracle stories. But has anyone stopped to think about what he was really doing? Copyrighted Fish

When Jesus fed the 5000 with five loaves of bread and two fish, he was pirating food. Some baker worked to make that bread and some fisherman worked to catch those fish. If Jesus hadn't copied the food over and over again then the people would have had to buy more bread from the baker and more fish from the fishermen.

If you can endlessly copy bread and fish without cost then the fish and bread industries might suffer. Jesus could buy one loaf and one fish and have plenty of food for himself and even give it away to his friends. Then no one needs to buy fish or bread anymore.

I fail to see how Jesus' actions are any different from modern-day “software piracy.” One person buys a song and copies it endlessly for free and gives it away to other people.

The argument today is that it is wrong to copy music and videos without paying the people that produced them. It seems to me that Jesus made a very clear statement about this and he doesn't seem to feel that making and sharing copies of products is immoral.

I wonder if the RIAA has ever thought about that.

Comments (12)

Hobbits and Debt Absurdity

Jul 30, 2011 at 12:25 PM

By Hans Schulzke

The world is changing. I feel it in the water, I feel it in the earth, I smell it in the air.

It began with the forging of great spending. Trillions were given to the entitlements, kindest and fairest of all. More to the big banks: lenders and craftsman of the sub-prime loans. Trillions more to the war-lords, who, above all else, desire power.

But they were, all of them, deceived. In the District of Columbia, in the fires of Capitol Hill, the Dark Lords of Congress forged a master budget, to rule all budgets, and into it they poured their stupidity, their incompetence, and their will to dominate all life.

One by one the free people of earth fell.

But there were some who resisted.

A last alliance of fiscal conservatives marched on D.C., and on the slopes of Capital Hill they fought for the freedom of Earth.

Victory was near, but the power of the Spending could not be denied.

We can all see that Lord of the Rings isn’t exactly fitted to describing the current political clime. All of us, that is, except John McCain.

Free the Vendors!

Jul 29, 2011 at 12:27 PM

By Kelsey Crockett

A major lawsuit was filed against the city of Atlanta yesterday against an unprecedented government vending monopoly. In the already trying economic climate, Atlanta is stifling economic liberty with its overreaching regulations. Best of luck to the Institute for Justice as they attempt to right this wrong through the judicial system.

To read more, visit the Institute for Justice's full report here.

The Surrendering Congress

Jul 29, 2011 at 11:33 AM

By John McKenna

We're now five days away from hitting the deadline to get a deal done to raise the debt ceiling, and things aren't looking up for anybody interested in a "grand bargain," or anything other than maintaining the status quo.

What's even more depressing is that from a couple of negotiations, there seems to be an almost bi-partisan push to surrender lawmaking authority to either the executive branch or a small group of lawmakers beholden to practically nobody. In one case, some lawmakers are considering giving the president authority to raise the debt ceiling by himself, using a vague interpretation of the 14th amendment that states that the ability of incur debt "shall not be questioned."

The other method, which is being supported by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) and Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), would allow a "Super Congress" to be formed, a 12-member body from the House and Senate that would have the exclusive power to draft legislation regarding the deficit, and the legislation couldn't be amended by either the House or Senate. It doesn't take much research to know that both of these proposals are disasters waiting to happen.

'Get your ass in line': Boehner scolds Republicans for not being Democrats

Jul 29, 2011 at 11:24 AM

By Jason Cockrell

"Get your ass in line," said Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) to a caucus of Republican legislators. The speaker has become increasingly frustrated in recent days as the fabled debt ceiling looms ever closer and many Republicans in Congress refuse to support the bills that he and President Obama have hammered out in their private talks. It's no wonder he's mad -- Boehner is clearly dealing with personal insecurities over the size of his spending cuts. Just this past Tuesday he came under fire for trying to sell the Republicans a bill that would have cut a whopping one billion dollars from the roughly four trillion-dollar 2012 proposed budget. Yes, that's around 0.025%.

But while Congressional Republicans laugh at Boehner's tiny package of cuts, one has to wonder if even they understand the full gravity of the situation. As yet another nonsense proposal heads for a vote, rhetoric abounds regarding a 'default' if the debt ceiling is not raised. This default, of course, is every bit as mythological as the deep cuts Democrats imagine Boehner has proposed. In reality, federal revenues vastly exceed the cost of servicing the outstanding debt. A failure to raise the debt ceiling will not produce a default on the existing debt; it will only mean the government cannot go even deeper into debt.

Faux economists and sensationalist journalists imagine that failure to raise the debt ceiling would lower the government's credit rating. Nothing could be further from the truth. As long as creditors know the government is going deeper and deeper into debt every day, they are sure to be skeptical of its faith and credit. If instead the government stops going deeper into debt, confidence that the existing debt will be paid off would go up, not down!

House Republicans should remember that they were elected to fix the country's fiscal situation, not sell out to the President and the left-wing Democrats who added five trillion to the national debt since Obama took office. Do not put a higher burden on future generations; do not raise the debt ceiling.

Comments (1)

'It's Bizarro'

Jul 29, 2011 at 10:31 AM

By Jack O'Brien

The tone of John McCain's recent floor speech on the debt ceiling debate was apparently meant to communicate an underlying theme: McCain is a realist amidst a sea of inexperienced ideologues and zealous demagogues.

While much commotion has been ensuing owing to McCain's mention of "Tea Party hobbits," (and whatever that is supposed to mean exactly) this obscures the more crucial point.

For one, the allusions to Tolkien's lore stem from this article, published by the Wall Street Journal, which McCain was merely quoting. Second and more important, is what the subject of McCain's speech was actually about: political gamesmanship.

While McCain was ostensibly making the case that principle should not be sacrificed in the face of political power plays, his suggestion is to...sacrifice principle in the face of poltical power play? What? It would appear that way according to this clip.

As McCain sees it, sticking to principle and advocating for a Balanced Budget Amendment, or even simply refusing to support Boehner's 'compromise' on the debt-deal, is not only "bizarro," but "worse than foolish, it is deceiving," to the American people.

We Actually Defaulted before...Three Times, in Fact

Jul 28, 2011 at 3:50 PM

By John McKenna

You've probably heard the various reasons why we need to raise the debt ceiling, including how if we don't America will slip into default, our economy will tank, our dollar will lose all value, our credit rating will suffer, the world economy will collapse, and Beelzebub himself will rise from the underworld and swallow Newfoundland whole. The most parroted consequence is the issue of default, which according to many Washington politicos, has never happened before. Ever since we became a country, we have always fulfilled our debt obligations, whatever the cost was, and this would be an unprecedented breakdown of compromise and American integrity.

Except for one thing: we have defaulted before...three times. Last night on his show Freedom Watch, Judge Andrew Napolitano talks about those chapters in American history that aren't discussed nearly as much as they should be. The Judge explains why the US had to default, what it did to the dollar, and how the only way we can hope to break the vicious debt cycle we've gotten ourselves into is to stop borrowing.

Comments (8)

Pirates, Libya, and the Constitution

Jul 28, 2011 at 3:40 PM

By Daniel Surman

Remember this line?

The Congress shall have Power ... To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations.

It is from Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution -- one of those enumerated powers contained within the document in order to clearly indicate the authority of Congress. However, an unconstitutional imbroglio may be threatening the exercise of this power. From Bloomberg:

Fighting in Libya between rebels and national leader Muammar Qaddafiis diverting naval ships from anti-piracy patrols, according to the International Marine Organization.
“One has to be pragmatic and realistic and accept and understand that ships that might be made available to support counter-piracy will be deployed to address the Libyan crisis,” Secretary-General Efthimios Mitropoulos said at a conference in London today.

American intervention in Libya lacks congressional approval, let alone a declaration of war (refer back to Section 8: Congress shall have power to ... declare War). However, that will not stop our legislators from threatening the success of a constitutional mission. With all of the foreign policy focus on Libya, it is too easy to miss the growing problem of piracy off the coast of Somalia.