Best general constitutional law books according to redditors

We found 908 Reddit comments discussing the best general constitutional law books. We ranked the 281 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Subcategories:

Civil rights law books
Constitutional law books
Discrimination law books
Human rights law books

Top Reddit comments about Constitutional Law:

u/Don_Antwan · 370 pointsr/pics

There's also a book - "I am Nujood, age 10 and divorced." It's a hard read, but eye opening. Almost as good as Kristof's "Half the sky." Almost.

http://www.amazon.com/Am-Nujood-Age-10-Divorced/dp/0307589676

http://www.amazon.com/Half-Sky-Oppression-Opportunity-Worldwide/dp/0307387097

u/coldnever · 339 pointsr/worldnews

Most have no clue what's really going on in the world... the elites are afraid of political awakening.

This (mass surveillance) by the NSA and abuse by law enforcement is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ttv6n7PFniY

Science on reasoning, reason doesn't work the way we thought it did:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ

Brezinski at a press conference

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kmUS--QCYY

The real news:

http://therealnews.com/t2/

http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Incorporated-Managed-Inverted-Totalitarianism/dp/069114589X/

http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Government-Surveillance-Security-Single-Superpower/dp/1608463656/r

http://www.amazon.com/National-Security-Government-Michael-Glennon/dp/0190206446/

Look at the following graphs:

IMGUR link - http://imgur.com/a/FShfb

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Actual_estimated_ideal_wealth_distribution.gif
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/images/wealth/Net_worth_and_financial_wealth.gif
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

And then...

WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap

http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-haiti-minimum-wage-the-nation-2011-6

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnkNKipiiiM

Free markets?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY#t=349

http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Illusion-Literacy-Triumph-Spectacle/dp/1568586132/

"We now live in two Americas. One—now the minority—functions in a print-based, literate world that can cope with complexity and can separate illusion from truth. The other—the majority—is retreating from a reality-based world into one of false certainty and magic. To this majority—which crosses social class lines, though the poor are overwhelmingly affected—presidential debate and political rhetoric is pitched at a sixth-grade reading level. In this “other America,” serious film and theater, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of society.

In the tradition of Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism and Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges navigates this culture—attending WWF contests, the Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas, and Ivy League graduation ceremonies—to expose an age of terrifying decline and heightened self-delusion."

Important history:

http://williamblum.org/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcA1v2n7WW4

u/mattman59 · 145 pointsr/todayilearned

>if you're going to raid a house with multiple people and rifles, how the fuck could you get the address wrong?

http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610392116

Halfway through this and had to put it down multiple times after reading stories of cops doing stuff like this and then the courts ruling that they acted appropriately. Juries in America by in large are fucking retarded.

u/Terr_ · 110 pointsr/worldnews

Why do you sound so surprised? It's similar in America. Once you stop talking about "the little people" (i.e. at least 99% of us reading this) it happens frequently.

It's just easier to see it going wrong somewhere else, because all the flag-waving and "for the good of the nation" crap is more transparently-absurd when it isn't your own flag and nation.

  • Here in the US, we have politicians who admit (in interviews and memoirs) to behavior which are federal felonies... and also war-crimes (under multiple ratified treaties), yet our political class always just says "It's time to look forward, not back"[2] and sweeps it all under the rug. Virtually every US presidency in the last four decades (including the current one) has vigorously protected the members of the previous one from investigations or prosecutions, anything on the scale from outright pardons to refusal to prosecute to back-room (but still documented) lobbying efforts.

  • Even outside political offices... A wealthy hedge fund manager slams into a bicyclist with his car, and flees the scene, eventually stopping to call for a tow-truck from a Pizza Hut parking lot so that he can get his car secretly repaired. The cyclist, on the other hand, ends up being rushed to the hospital with internal bleeding, spinal injuries that need surgery, and eventually plastic surgery for the scars to his face and body. The manager, meanwhile gets caught by the police, but gets off with a misdemeanor[1] because, in the words of the prosecutor, "felony convictions have some pretty serious job implications for someone in [his] profession".

  • Example: Conversely, while that rich guy gets off light (because prosecuting him might interfere with Rich People's Money) there's an unarmed homeless man, who non-violently robbed a bank (with his hand in his pocket to suggest a gun) and who refused to take more than a single $100 bill, giving the rest back to the cashier. He turns himself in the next day and confesses to stealing so he could stay at the detox center, and gets a minimum of 15 years (!) of prison. He'll probably die in there from old age before he gets out, because mandatory minimum sentencing laws prevents the courts from doing much else.

    And that's not even touching what the US does to whistle-blowers who try to expose possible criminality within the government.

    For a more in-depth investigation of recent examples (and who benefitted from pardoning who, who was punished for whistleblowing,etc.) try: With Liberty and Justice for Some.

    ___

    [1] For those unfamiliar with US law, most crimes are separated into either misdemeanors (minor crimes of misbehavior, like littering or parking your car where you shouldn't) versus felonies (things which are either "evil" or at least incredibly reckless, like stealing or killing). The distinction between the categories can matter quite a lot in certain situations.

    [2] Another variation is "We're not here to seek revenge, we need to focus on keeping it from happening again... like we said last time... and the time before that... and the time before that...."
u/Phuqued · 58 pointsr/politics

I'd recommend checking this thread.

u/AppropriateAlias · 57 pointsr/PoliticalDiscussion

[Glenn Greenwald (the main reporter of Snowden docs & person who showed Clapper was lying) actually wrote a book on how, under the US justice system, there are 2 tiers -- one for elites (who don't get punished) and one for everyone else.] (http://www.amazon.com/With-Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality/dp/1250013836/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1395250203&sr=8-3&keywords=greenwald)

u/brocket66 · 47 pointsr/news

Radley Balko -- once a reporter at libertarian website Reason, now at the Washington Post -- has owned this beat for over a decade now. Read Rise of the Warrior Cop if you're interested in learning more.

u/kyleg5 · 41 pointsr/dataisbeautiful

While that can be true, Cato does have more intellectual honesty than, for instance, the Heritage foundation. They have a libertarian agenda, but as long as you bear that in mind, there can still be good analysis found.

More importantly, Radley Balko is a phenomenal reporter who has basically been leading the charge on the militarization of police. He also writes for WaPo, and I would say is much less interested in being an ideologue than just aggressively exposing this single issue. I cannot recommend Rise of the Warrior Cop enough.

u/grandballoon · 38 pointsr/todayilearned

Nicolas Kristof's book Half the Sky deals with this. He spoke at my high school about how, if you count all these instances of gender-fueled violence as a single entity, it's the largest loss of human life in history. I'm paraphrasing, because that doesn't sound quite right, but it was something along those lines.

u/Philipp · 35 pointsr/Documentaries

It's not quite unregulated. It's actually heavily regulated, but the regulations are just stacked against normal citizens.

Take "A corporation is a person". That's a legal concept that is maintained by the government.

Take "I can copyright something". That's a monopoly on ideas which is defended by the government.

Take "You can't photograph my mass farming". Another heavy regulation.

Or take, of course, the bail-outs themselves -- that's a perfect example of government not letting capitalism go its way, but rather, stepping in.

(An interesting book on the subject: The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer. On a related note, by Glenn Greenwald: With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful.)

u/Midnight_in_Seattle · 35 pointsr/TrueReddit

This story has two important points: 1. Texas justice is completely fucked up and 2. Police and prosecutors often act in ways that callously disregard the rights of others, yet they are rarely held accountable for their own criminal acts. The numerous videos of innocent people being shot by cops that've surfaced in the last several years demonstrate the problems in police departments.

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces is good further reading on these topics. So is Three Felonies a Day. Almost no one is safe—not even victims.

u/OJ_287 · 34 pointsr/politics

Ultimately that is probably what it will take. Family members or friends of the deceased taking matters into their own hands and taking out murdering cops and corrupt DAs. The bottom line is that stuff like this will never stop if cops do not fear repercussions. It's the same reason why the establishment elite continue doing what they do, they have no fear of being held accountable.

The state of the "rule of law" and American "justice" is a complete joke. "The law" is for the little guy - the powerless. For those who haven't read it, I highly recommend With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful by Glenn Greenwald.

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality-Powerful/dp/0805092056

u/TheIceCreamPirate · 34 pointsr/news


>Now, it is highly unlike that the DoJ would prosecute a 17-year-old for using Google, even if they have violated Google's TOS by doing so. Instead, the Justice Department wants to have the option to threaten people with prosecution under CFAA if they so choose, usually as part of a bigger case.

Our government has created a system where anyone and everyone can be considered a criminal if the government wants you to be. It's really, really dangerous. This can easily be turned on anyone who the government doesn't like.

I would recommend everyone read this book, it's eye opening:

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594032556

u/whorfinjohn · 29 pointsr/CAguns

He wrote a follow up book on this subject that basically says you can’t just not talk to police. You have to request a lawyer and only talk to police once your lawyer is present. If I remember correctly in the book he explains there have been some rulings that let them consider complete silence as admission of guilt. Been a while since I read it though so I’m sure I’m missing the nuance.

Edited to add the book https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393/ref=nodl_

u/Buelldozer · 29 pointsr/TrueReddit

Also read Balko's "Rise of the Warrior Cop."

Edit: Adding link to the book - https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B00B3M3UFQ/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

u/BathtubJim · 26 pointsr/NeutralPolitics

I would also highly recommend Radley Balko's deep dive into this very issue:
Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces https://www.amazon.com/dp/1610394577/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_tai_S6kPzbMMRCNJM
It's a great read.

u/CallMyNameOrWalkOnBy · 25 pointsr/AmIFreeToGo

More than once on this sub, I've cited the book Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police. It's a bit lengthy, and covers the historical foundation of the Bill of Rights (great read if you're an American history student).

But the real takeaway is that SWAT teams bring their own exigency with them. "Exigency" is just a fancy word for urgent and unexpected circumstances that allow SWAT teams to improvise and shoot dogs and kick in doors and operate without a judge's oversight. But the book makes a compelling argument that SWAT teams create exigency, they create violence where none existed before, they create dangerous situations where none existed before.

What if there are hostages inside a bank during a botched robbery? Sure, send in SWAT. But a house where no one is in any danger? Or a house where no one is threatening anyone? Hey, what if someone is suspected of cock fighting? Just have a celebrity drive a SWAT tank into their house. WCGW?

u/nsarwark · 24 pointsr/IAmA

> Would you have signed the Civil Rights Act?

I would have signed the provisions restricting government mandated discrimination like segregation in public schools, etc. I think that there are more effective ways to deal with private discrimination (see Jonathan Rauch's "Kindly Inquisitors" for a long treatment of the subject) than with government regulation.

Since a law is presented as a package and there was not a line-item veto, I probably would have signed it at the time and in the historical context.

u/homer_j_simpsoy · 23 pointsr/benzodiazepines

Dont tell the cops ANYTHING. It doesn't matter how fat he is, they're all trained the same way. Don't tell them where you're coming from or where you're going to, it is none of their business and they are looking for reasonable suspicion to search you. These people are not your friend, they exist to throw you in jail and they have been trained to manipulate you into making confessions, especially ones that are false. The same cops that are trying to elicite a confession are the same ones who tell their own family not to talk to the police and there is a reason for this.

Instead, exercise your fifth amendment right: "I wish to use my fifth amendment right to remain silent" "I don't answer questions" "I want to speak to a lawyer", "Am I free to go?" "No, I do not consent to a patdown or to being searched". If they do find something it will be a lot easier to have the charges dropped. If you don't have anything, don't put the ball in their court and ramble because they will find something in what you said to use against you. In some states you dont even have to provide your drivers license/identification unless you are pulled over while driving. This book is short and it is well worth reading because it tells you not only why you shouldn't talk to them but it also includes story after story of what happened to people who talked because they felt they "had nothing to hide". If a police officer asks if you have something to hide, say "No, I have nothing to prove to you. Am I free to go?"

If you can not find the book or afford it, this video will work as a valid substitute.

Last thing: It is legal for the police to lie to you but it is not legal for you to lie to them, this is from a supreme court ruling. The best course of action is again, say nothing other than here is my license and registration. He was trained to ask you about drugs and medication and that it what was used against you, you gave him probable cause to conduct a field sobriety test because he elicted a confession from you. He would have not been able to do this if you refused any questions. Now you see why it is not in your best interest to talk to them. Even though you were innocent and had nothing to hide, you still got busted.

u/Blythyvxr · 23 pointsr/Showerthoughts

Well if the police do happen to speak to you, only say “I want a lawyer” https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1503933393/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_SNTXzb7V6S4T8

u/MLNYC · 22 pointsr/worldnews

Depends on your definition of a real thing. When a country has laws that incorporate their treaties into their own law, that's pretty real, in terms of the letter of the law.

It's just that we allow our leaders (or they allow themselves) to break the law, in general, when it suits them. (See With Liberty and Justice for Some by Glenn Greenwald [2011]).

u/69bit · 19 pointsr/videos

James Duane's Book on this topic, You Have the Right to Remain Innocent, is also a very good short read.

https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393

u/PepperoniFire · 18 pointsr/LawSchool

> Is there any secondary source I could be pointed to that might make the whole con law concept easier to grasp?

The answer to this question is always Chemerinsky's hornbook. I outlined this instead of my textbook and it worked out very well.

u/spectyr · 18 pointsr/PoliticalDiscussion

This, absolutely. Heck, there's even a book about this very problem called Three Felonies a Day.

u/kwassa1 · 17 pointsr/law
  1. Don't go to law school.

  2. If you insist, anything by Chemerinsky is good for an overview of constitutional law. Dworkin is also interesting and pretty accessible. For an overview of the types of theory you'll learn in torts, check out Coase's The Nature of the Firm (pdf).
u/DitkasMoustache · 17 pointsr/AskReddit

Good for you! Except if you're living in the US you're already likely commiting three felonies a day.

u/EvilNalu · 16 pointsr/changemyview

There are some massive reasons why you need to care: proliferation of arcane criminal laws and prosecutorial discretion. In combination with extensive surveillance of everyone, these form an unholy trinity that allows those in power to squash anyone they want to. How does it work? Let me start at the beginning.

What is the criminal justice system? In many people's minds, it is the way that we stop the bad guys. The good guys figure out what the bad guys are doing, catch them at it, and put them in jail, right? That's the story we tell to children and many people never understand it any better than that. But it's all wrong.

What the criminal justice system really is is the machine we have built to apply legitimate civil force. It's a weapon: in every arrest, after every trial, is the barrel of a gun pointed at someone and metal cages to restrict their movement. But at whom is it pointed? And who's in the cages? That depends on how you build the machine and who is operating it.

So how have we built the machine? We've built it so that there are so many crimes you cannot avoid committing one. There are literally tens of thousands of crimes at the federal level alone. One legal analyst wrote a book arguing that just about everyone commits three federal felonies every day. Though that claim may be exaggerated for effect, the basic proposition that federal criminal law is so comprehensive and vague that nearly anyone could be prosecuted is, if we are honest, hardly debatable. But surely the prosecutors only go after the bad guys, right?

Enter the federal prosecutor and prosecutorial discretion. What this means is that a prosecutor has complete control over who to charge with a crime. Bring him a clearly guilty friend, and he could decline to charge him. Bring him an innocent enemy, and he could charge him. But wait, you say, he's innocent! Sorry, see above. No one is innocent.

Many dismiss it as a silly conspiracy theory, but let's listen to someone who really knows what he is talking about, then Attorney General of the U.S. and future Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, speaking to the U.S. Attorneys serving under him in 1940:

>If the prosecutor is obliged to choose his cases, it follows that he can choose his defendants. Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor: that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than pick cases that need to be prosecuted. With the law books filled with a great assortment of crimes, a prosecutor stands a fair chance of finding at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone.


And of course thousands of criminal laws have been passed since 1940. The odds of a prosecutor being able to find "at least a technical violation of some act on the part of almost anyone" have only increased. Nevertheless, one might argue that Jackson has only identified a potential problem; surely there are safeguards in place and simple politically motivated prosecutions are not a problem in the 21st century.

If you are one of those people, would it surprise you to learn that from 2001-2007, the Bush DOJ investigated seven times as many democratic officials as it did republican ones?

Alternately, how would you view the story of Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, who was convicted of bribery amidst claims that the prosecution was politically motivated? I can tell you what 44 attorneys general thought about the prosecution - they were concerned that the case "may have had sufficient irregularities as to call into question the basic fairness that is the linchpin of our system of justice."

Now this was already a problem well before the whole NSA thing came about. But when you enable those people in control of the system to access a vast wealth of information about the activities of every person in the country, all barriers to prosecution are removed. Criminal prosecutions could easily be brought against all enemies, whether personal or political. A significant but manageable problem turns into a rampaging beast that tramples everyone in its path, and people like you sit on the sidelines and cheer on the destruction, confident that you will not find yourself being trampled. So you say only criminals need to be concerned? I suppose you're technically right, but the problem is that we live in an age where we are all criminals.

u/eco_was_taken · 16 pointsr/NoStupidQuestions

Courts are still deciding this (and as other say, jurisdiction is important). There are several cases that have happened where a cop was shot entering a house and the shooter was found not guilty or released after time served.

Cory Maye shot and killed an officer when he entered Cory's half of a duplex (the wrong half). Police were doing a no-knock raid and entered the wrong house. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to the death penalty. His conviction was overturned after attention to the many problems with the case were raised in the media by journalist Radley Balko. Radley Balko is probably the leading journalist covering police raids, medical examiner abuse, and police militarization so if this stuff interests you I recommend following his work.

Adrian Perryman was recently found not guilty after shooting and injuring a cop during a no-knock raid.

Matthew Stewart, a veteran with PTSD, was woken up by having his home raided by police on a tip for an ex-girlfriend that he was growing marijuana. They say they announced themselves, he said he never heard them. They were dressed in hoodies and t-shirts (one was wearing a Cheech and Chong shirt). Several of the police officers had to run back to their vehicles after shots began to get the bullet proof vests they should have been wearing which had POLICE written on them.

Stewart shot 6 officers, killing one of them. After he was apprehended and placed in jail the police began a smear campaign saying that they found photos of him dressed up as a taliban suicide bomber, that they found a bomb in his closet, and that they found child porn on his computer. The taliban outfit was a halloween costume. An ATF agent refuted that the device found was a bomb. Stewart committed suicide in jail by hanging himself. Months later the police called his family to tell them they never actually found any child pornography on his computer.

Edit: Just to clarify a little, knowingly shooting a cop is never lawful. The cases above are because the person shooting did not know who they were shooting at were police. In some of these cases when the police finally announce they are police the person thinks that the police just happened to show up to stop the people who are invading their home. They often don't even realize they had been shooting at the police until after they are arrested.

u/frapperboo · 15 pointsr/politics

Two terrific books on the subject:

u/optionallycrazy · 15 pointsr/news

http://www.nbc12.com/story/26065815/portsmouth-man-charged-for-firing-on-cops-who-entered-wrong-home <-- this man was found innoncent after all said and done

http://rt.com/usa/181100-baby-swat-grenade-medical/ <-- this one is made famous where a stun grenade injured the wrong child

Those are a couple of examples of it. There are 100s if not 1000s of other articles out there but at the time I cannot possible pull them all up for you.

For some good read, read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas-ebook/dp/B00B3M3UFQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1408385419&sr=1-1&keywords=rise+of+the+warrior+cop

It goes into details of exactly what is wrong. Again nobody is arguing that the police should be armed or that they should gain access to equipment, but the problem is how they are using it as oppose to anything else.

u/ATXENG · 14 pointsr/churning

fyi....just passing along something I've read:
https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393

You should NEVER talk to the police, especially federal agents.

You should not claim your right to remain silent, but instead exercise your right to a lawyer.

Demand gov't to provide written questions and only answer gov't in written statements

u/sstelmaschuk · 14 pointsr/CanadaPolitics

Compassion is one part of it for sure. There's a wonderful book, Rise of the Warrior Cop, that details a lot about the mentality of police in the US over the last couple of decades.

And I think that's an issue that we do need to address, in addition to compassion, is that more and more cops are being trained to act like military staff. Which gives rise to 'us vs them' mentality that tends to lead to situations like the one that occurred in Toronto.

u/Zetaghostmale · 14 pointsr/MGTOW

Feminism does not care about women but about their privileges. And the most important of all is to maintain control of sexuality. That is why they oppose sexual dolls and any alternative to a relationship where the woman marks the sexual pattern.

The feminist lie (book):
https://www.amazon.com/Feminist-Lie-Never-About-Equality-ebook/dp/B071SG95CN

Postscript:
When a feminist tells you that you are reifying the female body for having a sex doll, tell her to throw her dildo in the trash.

u/seospider · 13 pointsr/HistoryWhatIf

Glenn Greenwald, who reported the Edward Snowden revelations, argues that this decision set the precedent for the powerful in the U.S. publicly and unapologetically declaring that the law applies differently to them then it does to the masses.
http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality-Powerful/dp/1250013836

u/SernyRanders · 13 pointsr/SandersForPresident

A book recommendation on a sad day for democracy:
>With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful

>- Glenn Greenwald

https://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality-Powerful/dp/1250013836

u/gronke · 13 pointsr/videos

Feel free to find a recent video of a German police stop that went anything like that.

Meanwhile, I can find about three hundred US stops that went like that.

It's not the gun ownership or the armed populace. It's the Rise of the Warrior Cop.

u/Kpwn88 · 13 pointsr/TheRedPill

The Feminist Lie by Bob Lewis is pretty good. It exposes it for the fraud it is in pretty good detail, as well as laying out the method and tactics feminists use to silence opposition and how to counter them. Well worth the read.

u/dravik · 12 pointsr/Economics

Here is a rather lengthy article in The Atlantic covering this and many other "mismatch" points. The Atlantic is covering high points from the Mismatch book. I've got a source which focuses on this specific point in one of these folders, shuffling papers, somewhere.

Edit: Here it is, it's a PDF. Page 7 specifically shows the statistics from Prop 209. Despite minority apllication, acceptance, and enrollment drops; graduation rates significantly increased. Actual numbers graduating also increased by a small amount.

u/robotfuel · 12 pointsr/worldnews

>giving Glenn Greenwald a megaphone to spout his baseless venom however, is wildly unprofessional.

What specifically do you mean by 'baseless venom'?

I've watched his lectures at colleges, his debates on TV amongst the different news stations across the globe and read With Liberty and Justice for Some and not once have I ever thought his arguments were 'baseless' because he provides facts and empirical evidence that can be looked up and verified.

More recently the message he usually conveys is that he wants to shed light on what powerful people are doing in the dark. i.e. The NSA constructing a world wide, indiscriminate spy network that can be used against anyone at the whim of those who control it. Something that was considered wild conspiracy theory only 4 months ago.

How is this a bad thing? To want to inform the public of what powerful people are doing in the dark? To promote the ideal that investigative journalism is one of the main checks to power that we have?

Additionally his book "With Liberty and Justice for Some" gives quite a few examples about how there is a very real two tiered justice system dominant in the US. On one side you have the very rich who do not suffer for their crimes against humanity (Cheney/Bush & their false Iraq War, HSBC Laundering Billions for Drug Cartles, etc) and the full weight of the law coming down on petty drug offenses.

I can, however, understand how one would consider the words coming from Greenwald's mouth 'venemous'. His penchant for the truth and his debate skill usually cuts to the bone. Not once have I ever seen him lose a debate. Not once. And while that in and of itself is no indicator of the truthfulness of one's words ( this scene from Thank You For Smoking comes to mind ) it does merit a degree of respect. Especially when you do look up the things he has to say and find out they are rooted in truth.

Compare that with say, someone like Rush Limbaugh or Bill'O'Reily, who seem like divisive demagouges that appear to truly spout baseless venom. Many times when you look up what they have to say it's often half-truth or an outright lie. Twisted words for twisted people with twisted agendas.

Rush and Bill seem to feed off of and appeal to the very worst in humanity - fear, xenophobia, selfishness, greed - I don't see Glenn Greenwald doing the same kinds of things.

u/AlarmedAntique · 12 pointsr/JusticeServed

>The whole "ask for a lawyer" business is kind of overstated. The only thing a lawyer will advise you is to not say another word to the police. That's the entirety of the benefit of calling a lawyer. (Also, in circumstances where it's not clear that you've been detained/arrested, the lawyer will instruct you to ask the police if you can leave, and if offered the chance, to do so).
>
>Edit: you should still call a lawyer, because you're always better off with advice tailored to your situation than without it. I'm just pointing out it won't stop the police from asking the questions.

James Duane of the famous Don't Talk to the Police video recommends in his book You Have the Right to Remain Innocent that you should explicitly ask for a lawyer instead of pleading the fifth. He cites a supreme court decision that makes it so the fifth amendment no longer has the protections it used to have. Explicitly stating you want a lawyer and then remaining silent is your best option.

u/northshore12 · 12 pointsr/FloridaMan

>He acts like he’s invading Fallujah every time he does a traffic stop. He has a notorious reputation.

This behavior seems to be increasing dramatically over the past few decades, and the trend shows no sign of slowing down.

u/PingPoopa · 12 pointsr/politics

The book I'm reading right now: http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas-ebook/dp/B00B3M3UFQ

There's been a huge proliferation of military equipment, which is used in no-knock SWAT raids against suspected drug dealers, or sometimes even doctors suspected of over-prescribing painkillers, sometimes based on bad tips or sometimes simply at the wrong address.

Sadly, until very recently Obama hadn't really done anything to stifle this, and it's arguable that he actually advanced it. Joe Biden has been doing so for longer than he's been vice president.

u/andgiveayeLL · 11 pointsr/news

Chemerinsky's book is the only reason I got a good grade in con law in law school

Anyone who wants to learn more about constitutional law should check this out. It is massive but utterly readable as far as law books go

u/oldaccount29 · 11 pointsr/atheism

It isn't just Fox news. Let me take you on a little journey:

video of the CIA testifying in front of congress, about "Operation Mockingbird".
U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News to Americans

CNNs "Courageous" Advertorial Mill.

Alwaleed is a Saudi who partially owns/owned FOX. Does he believe he helps control the message? Yes he does:
>http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/is-saudi-prince-steering-news-corp-coverage/
Alwaleed said he got the Fox News crawl reporting “Muslim riots” in France changed to “civil riots.” This didn’t make the “Muslim” riots go away, but Alwaleed managed to fog our perception of them.. with a phone call.
One powerful dude makes a phone call and "fogs perception". That's REAL world persuasion. And it's admitted. No conspiracy. Now the FACT that he can do it and brag about it PROVES how malleable the news is. He's just a 5% owner. Rupert Murdock can say the sky is Magenta and they'll color correct the sky to magenta. Or they will lose their posh job. What would you do?

George Bush Admits the News are Using Fake Stories

Micheal Hastings (The one redeeming quality about BuzzFeed until his murder) on the CIA and propaganda

The U.S. Army's Psychological Operations unit placed interns at CNN and NPR in 1998 and 1999. The placements at CNN were reported in the European press in February of this year and the program was terminated.


Media giant Clear Channel sponsored pro-war rallies.

Embedded Reporting


NY article about "should the newspaper fact check and call politicians on lies or not?" You definitely want to read it, then scroll to the comments section and see all the people pissed off at the NYT. BTW this article is by the Public Editor, not just some random writer in Opinion or something.


How the Media Manipulates the World into War - Some good info in here, but you will have to do your own fact checking.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_F5GxCwizc&ab_channel=LastWeekTonight

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/14367

A list of Media Documentaries

4 Examples of Media Fabricating News

The Hasbara Project: 1 2

Media Consolidation - I have no knowledge of this sites trustworthiness, only this specific article (I've seen it on other sites but am too lazy to search for it)

Great article on media censorship




---------------------------------
Some relevant quotes:


If we had met five years ago, you wouldn't have found a more staunch defender of the newspaper industry than me ... And then I wrote some stories that made me realize how sadly misplaced my bliss had been. The reason I'd enjoyed such smooth sailing for so long hadn't been, as I'd assumed, because I was careful and diligent and good at my job ... The truth was that, in all those years, I hadn't written anything important enough to suppress ...
^Gary ^Webb

http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php
"There is quite an incredible spread of relationships. You don’t need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are [Central Intelligence] Agency people at the management level."
--William B. Bader, former CIA intelligence officer, briefing members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, The CIA and the Media, by Carl Bernstein

"The Agency's relationship with [The New York] Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy ... to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible."
--The CIA and the Media, by Carl Bernstein

“For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the government…. I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations.”
–former President Harry Truman, 22 December 1963, op-ed section of the Washington Post, early edition



“I ate breakfast last week with the president of a network news division and he told me that during non-election years, 70% of the advertising revenues for his news division come from pharmaceutical ads. And if you go on TV any night and watch the network news, you’ll see they become just a vehicle for selling pharmaceuticals. He also told me that he would fire a host who brought onto his station a guest who lost him a pharmaceutical account,” Robert F Kennedy, Jr,


Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr-says-70-of-news-advertising-revenue-comes-from-big-pharma/

Read "Into The Buzzsaw: LEADING JOURNALISTS EXPOSE THE MYTH OF A FREE PRESS". It's written by award winning journalists. These journalists have all had major story shut down by Corporate or Gov't pressure. Most were fired.
http://www.amazon.com/Into-Buzzsaw-LEADING-JOURNALISTS-EXPOSE/dp/1591022304

u/sounddude · 11 pointsr/Libertarian

If any of you haven't read this book I HIGHLY recommend it. Especially if you like to get your blood pressure up to unsafe levels.

Rise of The Warrior Cop

u/ModusPwnins · 11 pointsr/HuntsvilleAlabama

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces by Radley Balko may be interesting reading for you.

u/SmuckersMarionBerry · 11 pointsr/news

>[Citation needed.] That sounds like a huge generalization, across a country with hundreds, if not thousands of diverse departments.

http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577

>Honor for whom? De Blasio, with his anti-police rhetoric and white guilt appeasement, has thrown police under the bus and blames them for actions outside of polices' control.

Honor for the the democratically elected civilian official who oversees them. I don't give a fuck what you think of Obama, but a soldier should not turn his back on the President of the United States. We're a republic, not a junta.

u/OrtizDupri · 11 pointsr/rva

Also /u/thisisATHENS, I'd recommend taking a look at Rise of the Warrior Cop - https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B00B3M3UFQ/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 - written by a libertarian dude, so it's not some left-wing look at the police, but it is a fairly comprehensive look at the history of policing in America as well as the rise in militarization and tactics (as well as why those don't work). I certainly don't take it as gospel but it is well researched, well written, and hopefully something that both right and left folks can agree is an issue that should be addressed.

u/AFLoneWolf · 11 pointsr/justlegbeardthings

It's even available on Amazon. From their own description:

> A wave of sexual misconduct allegations about powerful men have exploded recently in the media (e.g., the news, Twitter #MeToo, etc.). A bold social movement has begun with brave women coming forward and being applauded for speaking out and sharing their stories of abuse, discrimination, and harassment. As a result, accused men like Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose, and dozens more have been removed from power and are suffering the consequences.


> In How to Destroy A Man Now (DAMN), Dr. Angela Confidential (a business psychologist, consultant, and human resource professional) empowers women with a step-by-step guide for destroying a man’s reputation and removing him from power.


> In easy to understand terms, the handbook reveals and explains the fundamental dynamics between allegations, the media, and authority as they relate to male misconduct in today’s society. It also unveils and details practical real-world methods for leveraging allegations, media, and authorities to dethrone a man from power.

I'm torn. I really want to maintain the integrity of book reviews left by people who have actually read the book. But on the other hand, should anyone read shit like this?

Conversely: The Manipulated Man and The Feminist Lie: It Was Never About Equality. The first seems like it's worth a read. The second looks almost as toxic as DAMN.

u/Ethyl_Mercaptan · 10 pointsr/conspiracy

https://www.amazon.com/Devils-Chessboard-Dulles-Americas-Government/dp/0062276174

https://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-Died-Matters/dp/1439193886/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

https://www.amazon.com/Family-Secrets-Americas-Invisible-Government/dp/1608190064

https://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/0452287081

https://www.amazon.com/National-Security-Government-Michael-Glennon/dp/0190206446


Those are the books that you should read.

Here are also some good resources:

Paul Craig Roberts worked in the Reagan administration: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

This is a good multi-part article excerpted from one of the books above: http://whowhatwhy.org/2013/09/16/part-1-mr-george-bush-of-the-central-intelligence-agency/

Michael Glennon’s abstract about his book: http://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Glennon-Final.pdf

A PDF of the “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” book if you don’t want to buy it: http://resistir.info/livros/john_perkins_confessions_of_an_economic_hit_man.pdf

This is when the reporter asked Bill Clinton about Mena: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDMktUYvC7k

Article on the coup attempt in France: http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/10/20/jfk-assassination-plot-mirrored-in-1961-france-part-1/

All of whowhatwhy.org is very good. There is probably a lot of good information there most haven’t heard of. The main guy, Russ Baker, is a Pulitzer prize winning journalist.

Bet you didn’t know that Bob Woodward was a state intelligence asset/disinformationist? https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/710466456941686784

All part of the record…. Enjoy.

u/markth_wi · 10 pointsr/booksuggestions

I can think of a few

u/Sdffcnt · 10 pointsr/Firearms

Read the book Three Felonies a Day and say that again.

u/ClarkNeily · 10 pointsr/IAmA

Great, great, GREAT question BorgesFan. Thank you!

First, I don’t find marijuana legalization esoteric at all. We lock up a disgraceful number of people for the utterly harmless “crime” of marijuana possession and sale, and as a result of our political leaders’ foolish commitment to prosecuting the unwinnable drug war, America has the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world. Disgraceful! Also, local police are turning into quasi-military outfits, and it’s getting really scary. Please read my friend Radley Balko’s book, [The Rise of the Warrior Cop] (http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610392116) to learn more.

How do we make the argument for liberty more accessible? By telling the personal stories of those who have suffered at the hands of overweening government: [Susette Kelo and her neighbors in New London, CT] (http://www.ij.org/kelo-v-new-london), where eminent domain was used to take their homes and businesses by force. [Sandy Meadows, who couldn’t support herself because Louisiana said she had to have a license to arrange flowers] (http://www.ij.org/meadows-v-odom).

The most important tip I can offer is to have empathy for your listener. This means a few things:

-Don’t treat someone like they’re a bad person or an idiot just because they disagree with you about a particular policy. They probably want many of the same results you do—a free, prosperous, and just society—and just disagree about how to get there.
-Prioritize your outrage. Some government abuses are truly appalling (e.g., the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII) while others are petty indignities (e.g., being forced to subsidize public television shows you disagree with through your tax dollars). If you equate the latter with the former, people won’t take your message seriously.
-Figure out what your listeners care about and then make your argument in their terms. For example, a social liberal might not be moved by arguments about the “nanny state,” but they may be moved by evidence that a particular policy harms the very people it is intended to help.
-Simplify, simplify, simplify. If you can’t explain your position to someone who isn’t a policy wonk, it’s not going to persuade people.
-Put a human face on the issues. It’s one thing to say that a policy is unjust; it’s another thing to show how it harms real people.

These principles are common sense, but you would be surprised at how many people ignore them.

Finally, I spent the last 15 months or so trying to distill all of this into an intelligent, accessible, and emotionally compelling package. The result is my new book, [Terms of Engagement: How Our Courts Should Enforce the Constitution’s Promise of Limited Government] (http://www.amazon.com/Terms-Engagement-Enforce-Constitutions-Government/dp/1594036969/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1375210642&sr=1-1&keywords=terms+of+engagement+constitution). Hope some of you will check it out and tell me what you think!

u/dansdata · 10 pointsr/news

OK, look, I must come clean with you:

While I was writing the comment to which you replied, I was sort of psychomagnetically attracted to writing American-style, leaving only that one giveaway "calibre" to hint that I actually am... Australian.

I'm obviously not going to start the Internet's ten-zillionth pointless gun-control argument here, we'd both be better off jamming our thumbs in our eyes... but, for further full-disclosure, I have previously said, while appearing sincere, "Look, you've got to respect their culture. Americans just love shooting each other!" :-)

Right.

Down here, normal Australian cops all have pistols.

But if one of our cops shoots someone, and the shot-person dies, then that will be front-page news nationwide. (Probably even if everyone's still alive.)

Meanwhile in the USA, most, but not all, police departments will disclose how many people their officers have shot in the last year.

I can totally see how better firearms are just better tools for police. I mean, the basic Glock-pistol concept is that it's an automatic that handles like a revolver but is even safer and has more ammo, right? OK, no problem. Or, at least, no new problem. Replacing a cop's truncheon with an expandable baton similarly just gives that cop a handier thing to whack people with, not (generally...) a higher inclination to whack them.

But... a semi-auto 5.56?! Just generally sitting around, for whoever's assigned to this car tonight? In case that weapon seems... necessary?

Are we certain that the threat we're giving these guys a "black gun" to fight is more probable that the chance that a flesh-covered robot from the future will will recover one of the AR-15s and use it to extinguish the progenitors of the human race?

Sorry. No actual argument intended.

This just looks like a big quivering pile of mall-ninjas to me. Yes, police have to deal with incredible bullshit (even super-corrupt police probably have to!), and if I were a cop I'd probably fantasise about just mowing all of those fuckin' morons down with a crew-served weapon which besides me is served by Playboy Bunnies. But I'd still have three-fifths of bugger-all chance of ever being better off, actually, because I carried a pistol and AR-whatever, versus carrying a pistol and a juice box.

I think Radley Balko has his shit together regarding this, but I'm not certain.

u/jedichric · 10 pointsr/progun

Read this. I just finished it and it is eye-opening.

The gist of it is that there are federal grants handed to localities to purchase these types of things. Why not take the government's money and buy a cool as hell toy like this?

u/buu2 · 8 pointsr/Drexel

Here's how I understand it, also a senior econ major who spends too much time on /truereddit and no time watching tv news.

The bottom 99%: Many of the protestors are recent college graduates who have spent the last few years trying and failing to get jobs in their majors. There are many people who have graduated with decent grades and decent resumes, taken out tens of thousands of dollars of student loans and now have to take retail jobs because there just aren't enough jobs in the market. Read around at http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/ to get a better idea of people's individual situations. Large factions in government (particularly the growing far-right voice in republicanism) have been cutting unemployment insurance, anything meaningful in the healthcare bill, and money toward non-profits.

The Top 1%: Meanwhile, the top 1% are taking ever more for themselves. These graphs show the growing disparity better than I could. Meanwhile, they've heavily lobbied congress, changed regulations to give more freedom to large corporations and make entering markets more difficult, have avoided any criminal prosecutions despite numerous acknowledged accounts of theft, lying to consumers about risk, and lying to regulatory bodies about what they were doing. C-level executives breaking the law, affecting millions of dollars and lives, face no criminal penalties but 4% of Americans have been imprisoned, mostly for petty crimes and drug use. And now that corporations have personhood, as upheld by the supreme court case Citizens United Vs. FEC, corporations are donating massive amounts to influence elections and elected representatives. This has caused both parties to give more weight to corporate interests than ever before in American history while simultaneously cutting benefits and safety nets for the bottom 46%.

Issues with Obama: Obama ran on a campaign for change of corporate interest in politics and stronger enforcement of equality under the law. But under him, the banks had record profits after a misguided bailout, regulation continued to be uprooted, no criminal charges were filed, and almost all the major relief programs had their budgets cut. People felt betrayed.

The OWS campers: So back to OWS - the people camping out are the front lines. Many are unemployed, some are homeless, some are just really grumpy. They are not the voice of the movement, but the base of it. The media has mostly gotten their kicks by playing this "neutral" reporting angle, where they interview the front liners and decide that everyone is just complaining and uneducated. The people at the front lines do a have a wide range of complaints - they believe the political system is broken. Issues include corporate personhood, lobbyist influence, block party voting, lack of interest in citizen issues (online voting questions), the never ending wars, legalization of marijuana, student loans, healthcare, gun control laws, and everything in between. At the front lines, people are just disgruntled. But as a whole movement, the first few are representative of the main requests for change.

What OWS wants: To date, the movement hasn't asked for anything direct or specific action. That enables the mainstream media to simplify the movement. But no law by entrenched politicians can change a culture of listening to CEO interests over worker interests, of accepting huge donations in return for lowered regulations. Right now, OWS is trying to raise awareness of this disparity of wealth and interests - it's difficult for anyone not directly impacted to really feel.

Tl;dr Most Americans have seen their benefits and job opportunities cut while the government has allocated more and more to the top 1%. The people camping out and protesting are the base of the movement, but they aren't a very eloquent voice for it. The biggest issues that OWS is seeking to change are overturning corporate personhood and equality under the law between rich and poor.


Further viewing:
Book: Glenn Greenwald’s With Liberty and Justice for Some - How Rule of Law no longer applies – the political and financial elite aren’t criminally liable for their actions, and poor drug users are more likely to face crippling criminal penalties than ever before.
Video: Inside the Accountants Handbook – a 3 minute video of how corporations don’t pay taxes

u/dbe · 8 pointsr/worldnews

>criminalizing basically the entire Internet will follow

That's the point. They make sure the framework is illegal so they can selectively crack down on anyone they want, any time they want.

Driving works this way too. Speed limits are artificially low so that everyone speeds, and they can pull over whoever they want to fuck with.

Here's a neat book that explains how every single person in America is a wanted criminal, that way the government can pick and choose who they target, any time they want.

u/AnythingApplied · 8 pointsr/comics

Right, and I didn't understand how much resistance you need to give in order for it to be entrapment. Ultimately even if your case ends up being text book entrapment (whatever that is) you still have to convince a courtroom that it is entrapment, so you're still at the mercy of the courts, so your best bet is to avoid all illegal activity (which is practically impossible).

u/coolcrosby · 8 pointsr/Bad_Cop_No_Donut

See, Rise of the Warrior Cop by Radley Balko at:http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610392116

For confirmation of your position

u/waffle_ss · 8 pointsr/MilitaryPorn

And why is that, you don't think it's a thing? You think people can just write bestselling books about the phenomenon using a lot of hot air? I admit some parts of the book are so over the top I have a hard time believing them myself:

> In all, thirteen California counties were invaded by choppers, some of them blaring Wagner’s "Ride of the Valkyries" as they dropped Guardsmen and law enforcement officers armed with automatic weapons, sandviks, and machetes into the fields of California.

But then I read articles like this one published today all about the overuse of flashbangs by police. One of the vignettes was about a lady who got no-knock raided for selling "a plate of food and six cans of beer without a license." Sounds like a good use of deadly force, a SWAT team and taxpayer dollars to me. /s And of course the article repeated that sickening story about the baby who was badly maimed - almost died - from a flashbang going off in its crib during a raid where the perp wasn't even there. Little guy had to be put in a medically-induced coma for over a month, has already racked up over $1M in medical bills, and will have to have reconstructive surgery every 2 years until he turns 20.

Of course those are just a couple anecdotes. Look into the stats for yourself on the rise and overuse of SWAT units and no-knock raids and see that its a systemic problem. Fact is there is a sizable segment of modern police who like to dress up and play soldier, and the federal gov't subsidizing surplus weapons of war does not help the situation.

u/Get_Erkt · 8 pointsr/ShitAmericansSay

https://www.amazon.com/Negroes-Guns-Robert-F-Williams/dp/1614274118

I always link liberals and social democrats to this book, but they never read it. It's unfortunate but significant they reject out of hand without independent investigation anything that contradicts their ideas. Gun prohibition would go over as well as drug prohibition--an excuse for the racist, classist police to terrorize the poor, especially poor people of color, in the interests of "public safety."

They want the feeling of intellectual and moral superiority over the Right and Left, without doing the good faith and thorough going study and on-the-ground organizing required for any kind of confidence, because no one can be superior to anyone else. They just want to watch the Daily Show and nod sagely, but as ahistorical and ideologically rigid as reactionaries.

Unfortunately, and i say this without malice or to feel superior, liberals and social democrats follow a kind of politics that cares more about aesthetics and performance than historical materialism.

u/snarkinator · 7 pointsr/TumblrInAction

If you adopt the definition of fundamentalist in Kindly Inquisitors (highly recommended), these are people incapable of admitting they might be wrong.

u/mario_meowingham · 7 pointsr/politics

Chemerinsky literally writes textbooks on constitutional law.

https://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Law-Principles-Policies-Treatise/dp/0735598975

u/xLittleP · 7 pointsr/politics

Those of you concerned about the Sheriff's stance on this legal mattermay be interested in Glenn Greenwald's new book, With Liberty and Justice for Some.

u/sotheysaidthen · 7 pointsr/worldnews

It's more like the girlfriend who kept cheating on you over the years with different people is now being caught doing an orgy on webcam.

History repeats itself if we don't prosecute criminals.

u/SatAnCapv3 · 7 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393

They'll never allow books like that in there.

u/bready · 7 pointsr/AskReddit

So you think. I'm certain you've committed more felonies than you know.

u/goonsack · 7 pointsr/Cyberpunk

This photo is on the cover of Radley Balko's new book.

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces

u/maxtothose · 7 pointsr/slatestarcodex

> Do you have a counterpoint example of "thoughtful social justice advocacy" to help me understand the movement better?

No, I really don't. I don't think I understand the movement myself. That's why I find it plausible that there may be stronger arguments for it that we're all missing.

I may take Nathan up on his offer and read one of those books. Eventually. I've been reading too much nonfiction lately, I'm due for a break. :)

But for a very grey-tribe friendly book that does touch on some social justice issues, check out https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577. I liked that book a lot when I read it. However, it's not really a leftist perspective (like, at all.)

u/heystoopid · 6 pointsr/promos

A sad little isolated world one faithful reader must live in.

u/PrestonPicus2016 · 6 pointsr/SandersForPresident

We have to make the government's actions public and keep our private lives private. It's terrifying to see what Glenn Greenwald uncovered: http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality-Powerful/dp/1250013836

Patriot Act goes too far, FISA courts have no real oversight capacity, the whole thing is a mess.

We have to start by applying the law. If you do something illegal, as the NSA did, as many of these agencies did, there have to be consequences. This is the problem with so much of our system: no consequences. Illegally spy on Americans? No consequence. Illegally kidnap and torture innocent people because you thought they were terrorists? No consequences.

Heck, even Dick Cheney, who was wrong about almost every single thing he did as VP, still gets to go on TV and sell himself as some kind of expert. It's amazing.

When these organizations break the law, someone besides the whistleblower has to go to jail.

u/hererinchina · 6 pointsr/worldnews

Companies made up of criminals, in this case. Who else do you think actually commits the crimes?

Of course, the Obama administration also directly grants immunity to single criminals:

"In court papers filed today ... the United States Department of Justice requested that George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and Paul Wolfowitz be granted procedural immunity in a case alleging that they planned and waged the Iraq War in violation of international law."
http://www.globalresearch.ca/obama-doj-asks-court-to-grant-immunity-to-george-w-bush-for-iraq-war/5346637

These aren't singular "looking forward in a spirit of forgiveness" cases, as politicians like to present them. These are actions which help future crimes, as everyone gets the message that with a high enough standing, no court can hurt you. This follows a pattern going back to not just the pardoned Nixon. Glenn Greenwald, who works with whistleblower Snowden, wrote an excellent book on the subject.

u/thepoeticedda · 6 pointsr/QContent

No I don't, bootlicker. And I'll tell you why

The prison industrial complex has been the topic of music for decades. It's been in documentaries, and television and books and more books and scandals and more scandals and if you think all this shouting is new then know we're translating it back into jukebox and old lady's language, because at the end of the day we all know. We bullshit or we ignore it or we bullshit again as we hang on to our "I voted" stickers and tell us that if we all just stay calm and debate it out then next year it'll be different, year after year, literal decade after decade.

But one day the ghetto next door will run out of little black boys. You'll watch as a neighbor gets snatched, as well meaning college kids get beat by those protecting "law and order," and maybe someone you know gets hashtagged, and finally you understand that it's "civility" itself thats the problem. And when you're there we'll be there with you, at your side, making sure the bootlickers who stood by and let the happen don't get to plug their ears on us.

u/insecuritytheater · 6 pointsr/news

Radley Balko's book Rise of the Warrior Cop briefly touches on how rarely judges turn down search warrants. Rather depressing. Don't have a citation for which pages, sorry.

u/SerPuissance · 6 pointsr/news

[I'm not sure about that mate.] (http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas-ebook/dp/B00B3M3UFQ) American PD's look more to me like standing armies every day.

u/Gazzellebeats · 5 pointsr/LetsGetLaid

>I don’t regret having one, just extremely ashamed of being sexual and communicating it to girls and also showing it to the world. Attracting girls’ attention and whatnot isn’t very hard but progressing things to dating, holding hands and eventually sex is impossible. I can’t even call them or message them on Facebook or Whatsapp because I just feel like an idiot for doing so. Making a move in clubs and bars is also difficult although I once got close to leaving with a girl but she didn't want to. I got made fun of a lot growing up for not having a girlfriend and this made me feel like i do not deserve one. It doesn't matter if I've got the green light to go ahead I just feel really ashamed do it. Even something like looking at a fit girl wearing a short skirt makes me feel bad for checking her out and that I shouldn’t be doing it.


I know what you mean. I've been there myself, but even when I was there I was entirely self-aware of my shame and I was skeptical of the validity of my emotional reactions; I realized they were ingrained. Being aware of your emotional reactions allows you to be emotionally proactive. Your sex-negative problem is mostly an emotional issue, and not much else, right? I've been there. I wouldn't doubt that you are also decent looking and have both latent and actualized social skills. Most intelligent introverts have a lot of potential to be who they want to be because they know themselves more deeply than others. You must use your introverted nature to your advantage and recognize the differences in others and yourself. In all honesty, there are an infinite number of unwritten rules; everyone's abstract/emotional logic is different. Many of them are foundational and predictable, however; including yours and mine. Like anything else, being emotionally predictable is not a black/white issue. It is a grey area, and you have to balance your reliability with creativity.


Being made fun of for not having a girlfriend is just as sexist as being made fun of for not having a boyfriend; gender equal too. Were you ever shamed for not having a boyfriend? It's clearly a matter of groupthink and extroverted style; not for everyone. Dating relationships, for extroverts especially, are often attention-getting and showy. They wear their relationships like trophies won. Usually introverts prefer a more private relationship because they have less social desire and are often shamed because of it. Introverts are “themselves” more often in private. Extroverts are “themselves” more often in public. There is no shame deserved either way, regardless of popular opinion. Both styles have their strengths and weaknesses, and you should try to introject some of the traits that you enjoy in others; regardless of type. That is how you become balanced.


>I’m receiving counselling from a pastor who advocates the whole “no sex before marriage” thing and believes that people should only date to get married and sex is only for making kids which is stupid IMO because I do not plan on getting married anytime soon.


Counseling from a Catholic pastor? Watch out, that is one of the most notorious sex-negative societies out there. They own the abstinence-only charade while they parade horribles. Marriage is not the answer to anything; it is an institution of the state. Anything else attached is sentimental.


If you haven't already, I recommend doing an in-depth study of animal sexual behaviors; especially the most intelligent animals. All animals have sex for pleasure, but some animals are only driven to have sex at certain times of the year; humans are on a 24/7 system.


>I’ve tried the no fap route and gotten very high days counts but that hasn’t really helped me at all.


Sexual frustration doesn't help anyone. If you are mindful, then you can use your libido to further your goals, but it is not an all-cure.


>Got any sources to help overcome sex-negative perspectives? I’m interested in recreational sex not baby making sex.


Absolutely. I recommend starting with actual sex science and learning about male and female psychology and neurology. Then work your way into reading about sex culture. You should also study developmental psychology as you will probably need the clinical context in order to objectively self-evaluate your childhood influences; it is necessary for self-therapy. The best therapy will always be self-therapy; no one will ever know you better than yourself.


Evolutionary Science and Morals Philosophy:

The Selfish Gene

The Moral Landscape

The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined

Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do?


Sex Psychology, Science, and Neurology:

Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex

The Female Brain

The Male Brain

Why Men Want Sex and Women Need Love

What Do Women Want

Why Women Have Sex: Understanding Sexual Motivations from Adventure to Revenge (and Everything in Between)

Sex: The world's favorite pastime fully revealed


Behavioral Psychology and Abstract Economics:

How Pleasure Works

Freakonomics

Quiet: The Power of Introverts In A World That Can't Stop Talking

Thinking Fast And Slow

We Are All Weird


Developmental Psychology:

Nurture Shock

Hauntings: Dispelling The Ghosts That Run Our Lives


Empathy Building:


Half The Sky

The House On Mango Street

Me Before You

The Fault In Our Stars

Also check out James Hollis' Understanding The Psychology of Men lecture if you can find it.



Movies: XXY, Tom Boy, Dogtooth, Shame, Secretary, Nymphomaniac, Juno, Beautiful Creatures, and The Man From Earth.



All of these things are related, but it is up to you to make the connections; pick and choose which material suits your interests best. These are the things that came to mind first, and they have all influenced my perspectives.

u/howardson1 · 5 pointsr/politics

i believe in libertarianism on a case by case basis, not as a dogmatic principle that must be followed.

For example, our foreign policy [should clearly be restrained] (http://www.amazon.com/Blowback-Second-Edition-Consequences-American/dp/0805075593)

[Affirmative action harms blacks] (http://www.amazon.com/Mismatch-Affirmative-Students-%C2%92s-Universities/dp/0465029965/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407799886&sr=1-1&keywords=mismatch)

Drug legalization would clearly not result in a society filled with addicts

Farm subsidies are useless and increase income inequality

Taxi licensing harms the poor

[Untolled highways make our country dependent on oil and harm those who cannot afford cars] (http://www.amazon.com/Asphalt-Nation-Automobile-Took-America/dp/0520216202/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407799997&sr=1-1&keywords=asphalt+nation)

[Student loans inflate college tuition] (http://www.amazon.com/Going-Broke-Degree-College-Costs/dp/0844741973)

And so on and so forth. Each government program should be attacked on its merits.

I was attracted to libertarianism because it challenged the assumption that every problem can be solved at the moment if we put enough effort. Poverty and greed are elements of the human condition that will always be present, not things that can be solved by legislation.


Most problems is this country nowadays (sprawl, high rents, unemployment, mass incarceration, student loan debt, income inequality) are either wholly caused or exacerbated by government.

u/real_nice_guy · 5 pointsr/LawSchool

>That is, I don't plan on practicing law, but rather I'd look to study civil rights law and constitutional history so as to improve my prospects as a professor of political theory

Go buy this book, read it cover to cover, and save yourself the 150k of debt you'd need to go into just to take a semester/year long class in Con law.

Getting a JD will do nothing at all for your career prospects after your PhD unless you want to become an actual attorney.

u/rdancer · 5 pointsr/HillaryForPrison

The two parties are the product of the voting system. The corruption is a separate issue, having to do with elite immunity.

u/ugottabe · 5 pointsr/politics

> authorized a variety of actions that had no pretense of law

Retroactive immunity? Check.
Pardoning of lawbreakers? Check.
Widening of laws to make legal what wasn't? Check.
Criminializing those who talk about this? Check.

Now guess which country I'm talking about...

u/Mysterions · 5 pointsr/TrueReddit

Not really. The promotion of "health" is explicitly stated within the definition of police power. You should read Chemerinsky he'll really explain Con Law to you.

But that's interesting that you are making an appeal to morality considering that you are morally OK with the government murdering people so that you can have a few cents cheaper gas, but you're aren't OK with the government using its explicit powers of taxation and police powers to provide adequate healthcare to the public. I get that utilitarianism is perhaps too coldly rational for you, but that doesn't even comport to deontology. Even Kant would be like, "Na bruh, that doesn't make any sense". It sounds to me that you are trying to twist objectivism into a moral framework, but objectivism is rejected as infantile by basically all schools moral thought, and even beyond that objectivism is premised on "ethical egoism" the logical conclusion of which leads most kindly to amoralism, but in practice to immoralism. So it's hard to argue objectivism is a moral philosophy beyond the term "moral" being a catchall for all schools of thought that deal with the interactions between people.

u/briankupp · 5 pointsr/LawSchool

Buy Erwin Chemerinsky's supplement and don't look back. I used it during law school and during bar prep.

https://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Law-Principles-Policies-Treatise/dp/1454849479/ref=dp_ob_title_bk

u/CaptInappropriate · 5 pointsr/videos

Did you watch the video? I watch it about twice a year, and i have his follow-up book on my phone’s kindle app.

https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393

The book’s big takeaway is you should assert your 6TH amendment rights, vice pleading the fifth, because the 6th gets you your lawyer before the cops can ask you questions, and your lawyer tells you to shutup. Too many people have it in their mind that asserting your fifth amendment rights against self incrimination is something that only a guilty person would do, and saying the sixth doesnt have that widespread perception (yet).



If you didnt watch the video. Watch it.

Imagine you had an ex who lived in the next neighborhood over, and they died. The cops talk to you because the ex is always the one who did it, but you didnt, so you answer their questions to clear your name. When they ask if you were in that neighborhood, you say “i’ve not been their for YEARS!” but the cops already have a witness who says they saw someone who looks like you with a car like yours creepin around that neighborhood on the day of the murder. You get hauled in front of a jury, and a cop and a witness say you were there, and you look like a dirty liar and risk going to jail, whereas if you HADNT said anything, the cops would have a random witness and nothing about you being a dirty liar.

Worth watching the full thing.

u/cassander · 5 pointsr/books

In a similar vein is Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent. haven't read it, but it comes highly recommended.

u/FracturedAss · 5 pointsr/australia
u/MRH2 · 4 pointsr/GenderCritical

Reminds me of "Half The Sky"

u/thaway314156 · 4 pointsr/politics

"Sorry, I had affluenza!"

Glenn Greenwald wrote a book about the whole equal laws bullshit before he was the NSA Leaks guy:

http://www.amazon.com/With-Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality/dp/1250013836

u/TimeTravlnDEMON · 4 pointsr/CFB

The guy in that video wrote a book about not talking to police as well. It's not very long and it's pretty good.

u/movings · 4 pointsr/AskALiberal

The idea of people losing privileges, being removed from the world permanently, etc. is a relatively recent idea. We should meet it with skepticism. I'm certainly not the first to propose this, and prison-default thinking is outdated.

u/MyCatHasTourettes · 4 pointsr/politics

Here are a couple of books for you: Three Felonies a Day and Go Directly to Jail

u/hga_another · 4 pointsr/KotakuInAction

> Right, but Trump was supposed to be that drastic change, he was the supposed flamethrower ready burn this pestilence from the field.

In who's minds???

> However, we have gravely underestimated the seriousness of the situation.

Says someone who hasn't bought an Evil Black Rifle and lots of ammo for it???

> Call me conspiracy theorist all you like, but it doesn't take much to see an aggressive attempt on passing legislation that is vague enough to throw anybody in jail.

Errr, we've long been there. See e.g. Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent See also Arrest-Proof Yourself for the local version, and how to make yourself an unattractive enough target they'll move on to easier prey. The Feds openly operate a (Left Wing) Death Squad, the FBI Hostage "Rescue" Team, most recently shooting at the only guy killed in the Oregon standoff.

> Like Hate Speech laws and media narratives, that can condemn anyone for "disturbing the peace".

Best we hope the Supremes continue with their 5 member majority in favor of free speech (Citizens United was where the Left really showed its hand, banning core political speech).

> Nowadays, mass bans and blacklisting is more common than ever, and the people in these categories are taking the full brunt of it.

Hard to underestimate the evil and major effects of the mostly Bay Area totalitarian tech Left.

> In short, this is much bigger than video game industry or American politics, this is far worse and it may just have been too late at this point.

"Despair is a sin" as Jerry Pournelle liked to say, and it's hardly over. Heck, the counter-revolution is just beginning, and we hold a great number of high cards. We can, at the extreme of a worst case extreme civil war, liquidate the vast majority of our enemies in the US and almost all their current voting based political power by killing the exquisitely fragile big Blue cities they live in.

> The Soviets got the last laugh in the end.

Indeed, they'd essentially won by the end of the 1930s, through their willing accomplices.

u/shelbygt5252 · 4 pointsr/Kanye

The militarization of the police force in the United States has been an ongoing issue for years, not really sure how you can pin that on Trump. If you are curious, Radley Balko released a book about this in 2014 (Amazon).

u/Boshasaurus_Rex · 4 pointsr/news

I love me some Radley Balko. I highly recommend his book.

u/LittleHelperRobot · 4 pointsr/conspiracy

Non-mobile: Rise of the Warrior Cop

^That's ^why ^I'm ^here, ^I ^don't ^judge ^you. ^PM ^/u/xl0 ^if ^I'm ^causing ^any ^trouble. ^WUT?

u/Duke_Newcombe · 4 pointsr/Blackfellas

After reading the reviews like this one, and excerpts from the book, if you wanted to have a more informative historical reflection on black and firearms in this nation, and less of a polemic, knee-bending, white-centered view of social conflict and the gun, avoid this book.

Negroes with Guns does it much better, with about 75% less political tilt and lecturing to black folks.

u/-another- · 4 pointsr/anotherarchive

would you like to know more?

TIL that a woman, hired by Dyncorp to crackdown on forced prostitution on behalf of the UN, discovered that the UN police were the main perpetrators of forced prostitution and was later fired.

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/15r2j4/til_that_a_woman_hired_by_dyncorp_to_crackdown_on/

WikiLeaks Reveals That Military Contractors Have Not Lost Their Taste For Child Prostitutes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/wikileaks-reveals-that-mi_n_793816.html

The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman's Fight for Justice

http://www.amazon.com/The-Whistleblower-Trafficking-Military-Contractors/dp/B005CDUBC2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1331445269&sr=8-4

Sounds like Blackwater founder Erik Prince was operating a child prostitution service in Iraq

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6249748

1989 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5OJPeHCmhA

1989 #2 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU-k-tfiPfs

1989 story about Bush Sr. Whitehouse call Boy sex ring

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/02/06/15709461.php

Nixon Tape Discusses Homosexuals at Bohemian Grove

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPb-PN9F2Pc

Charges refiled against former Pittsburgh cop accused of running prostitution ring

http://triblive.com/news/2222380-74/johns-police-criminal-charges-pittsburgh-prostitution-allegheny-charged-counts-county#axzz2Qc0wAaBg

Former TSA employee fined $500 for running prostitution ring

Man confronted by police in Silver Spring hotel in February

http://www.gazette.net/article/20120611/NEWS/706119952/1007/former-tsa-employee-fined-500-for-running-prostitution-ring&template=gazette

School board member convicted of running prostitution ring in California

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/08/16904911-school-board-member-convicted-of-running-prostitution-ring-in-california?lite

FBI dad’s spyware experiment accidentally exposes pedophile principal

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/146xzt/fbi_dads_spyware_experiment_accidentally_exposes/

The Franklin Cover-Up - John DeCamp - Full film

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcWrrBceuP4

The Franklin Cover-up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska

http://www.amazon.com/The-Franklin-Cover-up-Satanism-Nebraska/dp/0963215809/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366098964&sr=8-1&keywords=franklin+coverup

Pentagon Child Porn Scandal: Security Agencies Were Left At Risk, Investigators Say

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/pentagon-child-porn-scand_n_656839.html

Secret Service Prostitution Scandal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/secret-service-prostitution-scandal

A Party under Fire: A Scandal-Scarred GOP Asks, ‘What Next?’

Explicit e-mails with under-age male pages. Criminal lobbyists. Being on client lists for prostitution rings. FBI corruption investigations. And, now, soliciting sex in an airport bathroom. People are beginning to wonder: how low can Republican lawmakers go?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/a-party-under-fire-a-scandal-scarred-gop-asks-what-next-a-502653.html

Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-spitzer.html

The D.C. Madam Case, All Sordid Out

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-04-11/opinions/36798466_1_deborah-jeane-palfrey-prosecutors-shock-and-awe

Mike Horner Prostitution Scandal: GOP State Rep. Resigns After Name Reportedly Surfaces On Client List

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/mike-horner-sex-prostitution-scandal_n_1910647.html

Another One: Top Federal Judge Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452917&page=1#.UW0JY0pcnn4

‘Comfort Women’ Controversy Comes to New York

http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/comfort-women-controversy-comes-to-new-york/

Sex scandal rocks Vatican: Papal usher, chorister linked to gay prostitution ring

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/sex-scandal-rocks-vatican-papal-usher-chorister-linked-gay-prostitution-ring-article-1.172149

BBC News - Catholic Church loses child abuse liability appeal

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/wfq5e/bbc_news_catholic_church_loses_child_abuse/

Ireland admits involvement in Catholic laundry slavery

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57567706/ireland-admits-involvement-in-catholic-laundry-slavery/

Cover-up claims revive sex scandal

Belgian establishment accused of closing ranks to block investigation

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/apr/21/stephenbates

Belgium Pedophilia Scandal /Did Authorities Cover Up Its Scope?: Book Revives Fear of Grand Conspiracy

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/16/news/16iht-brussels.2.t.html?pagewanted=all

Portugal's elite linked to paedophile ring

Abuse was reportedly going on at Lisbon orphanage for 20 years

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/27/childprotection.uk



FBI Ran Pedophile Ring to Nab Pedophiles



As late as last year, the FBI ran a child pornography operation in an attempt to nab its customers. The service ran for two weeks "while attempting to identify more than 5,000 customers, according to a Seattle FBI agent's statements to the court."



http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/05/30/FBI-Ran-Pedophile-Ring-to-Nab-Pedophiles

u/bonked_or_maybe_not · 4 pointsr/Libertarian
u/Lubdan · 4 pointsr/MGTOW

For anybody who doesn't know who this is, but kind of remembers the voice, it's DDJ from Turd flinging monkey's channel. He's been doing mgtow content for a long time, just not on his own channel until recently. He wrote a book and you can pick it up here

https://www.amazon.com/Feminist-Lie-Never-About-Equality-ebook/dp/B071SG95CN

btw the author name is obviously a pen-name for anyone wondering.

u/undercurrents · 3 pointsr/femmit

I think the book Half the Sky and then the subsequent documentaries are what really brought the issue to the forefront of serious women's issues that need to be addressed. Because it's essentially been eliminated in America, not to mention the obvious taboo of talking openly about vaginal tearing and leaking feces through the vagina, it's an issue that a majority of people are completely unfamiliar with. I've even seen several TIL's about it in terms of how gross it is and the comments on the posts would belong in /r/imgoingtohellforthis if they had any idea just how deadly, miserable, and prevalent this condition really is.

Louis CK also donated profits from his self-funded album to the Fistula Foundation, bringing even more awareness.

u/Jooana · 3 pointsr/PoliticalDiscussion

As others have said, tertiary education is already over-subsidized and that has lead to a price inflation. Individuals make more reasonable and well reasoned decisions when it comes to educational choices when they have to face the costs of those choices. The labor market earnings premium for high-education in the US is high enough to establish a lending market.

The US already have the most progressive taxation system in the world. Those high-income households pay for most of the government funding and at a higher proportion than in other developed countries. If the fiscal system isn't more progressive overall is because most of the funding is then spent in subsidizing the middle class, especially old people. Your proposal would just add to that, except it'd benefit the grandchildren. Not everybody goes to university; and those who go tend to come from better-off families and they'll reap immense individual benefits - hence they should pay for it.

The worst part of your proposal is the cap though. Have you heard about what's happening in Venezuela with the toilet paper shortage? That's what would happen with high-level superior education in the US if you institute a price control system. The US universities are the envy of the world (unlike, by the way, the almost fully subsidized and "free" primary and secondary schools), no good reason to put an end to that.

I don't agree with a standardized admissions system. Universities are diverse -in size, selectivity, pedagogic methods and mission- and they know better than anyone what are the better predictors of academic success for their own students.

Still, my comment isn't totally negative: I fully agree with ending affirmative action. Not because of fairness concerns, but simply because it isn't working and it hurts minorities more than it helps. In a perfect world, this book -Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It's Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won't Admit It - would be a bestseller.

> Tell me whether you agree, the changes you'd make to the plan, or how these are the naive, unrealistic ideas of a young OWS poo-flinger.

Not sure if they're naive, but they're dangerous and counterproductive to your stated goals.

Where the government resources should be applied is to make sure that poverty doesn't stop people from going to university. Income-contingent loans and scholarships. And, essentially, strengthening pre-university education. That's the real drama: many schools in poorer areas completely fail to bring their students to university entrance standard. Those who get there via affirmative action, end up dropping out to less demanding majors (and less rewarding in the professional market, inhibiting their upwards social mobility) or entirely out of college. If you're worried with social mobility, keep in mind that the US problem is the mostly the upward social mobility from the lowest quintile. Your plan would do nothing to help that youth, especially when standardized tests have such a high correlation with family background and high-school education. If you truly want to help the poor, subsidizing those who currently aren't even in conditions of going to university is better than subsidizing the tuition fees of those of better-off backgrounds who already do.

u/blargleblargleblarg · 3 pointsr/LawSchool

Buy Chemerinsky's con law treatise. Seriously. It got me an A in con law, and it's succinct and well-written.
http://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Law-Principles-Policies-Treatise/dp/0735598975/ref=pd_sim_b_3

u/fidelitypdx · 3 pointsr/NeutralPolitics

> You can't say Trump doing it is okay because Bush did.

Don't put words in mouth that aren't there: it isn't good for an elected official to have conflicts of interest. I think both candidates in 2016 offered differing conflicts of interest, but that's a different story.

> I think maybe a better question is when did this sort of behavior become acceptable?

Glenn Greenwald argues in his book "With Liberty and Justice for Some" that American Democracy and government fundamentally changed when Richard Nixon was pardoned. I think that's part of the answer - since that event we've really viewed the elected officials as a ruling class; thus exempt from moral and ethical conditions we apply to ourselves.

But there's also an ideological root to all the acceptance of this; core to the belief of Ayn Rand and some libertarians is that business leaders should make the best public leaders. So, if you've been successful in private business you ought to have influence in public policy as well.

With the rise of H.W. Bush (Sr.) as Vice President of Ronald Reagan, this ideology had become fully embraced by the Republicans. H.W. Bush was known as an oil tycoon, and it was expected that he could level out the oil prices through his inside knowledge.

----

But then we also need to backup and realize that this isn't a problem exclusive to the White House; the "revolving door" of public appointments and private business has been documented for about 100 years. This isn't a new thing, and in some ways it makes sense to have people familiar with the industry making decisions about an industry. That's a whole other topic though. Anyways, we shouldn't pretend that Trump is an unprecedented nefarious evil about to doom America because he has some business interests. The reality is that a fuckton of politicians at all levels have business interests - many would argue that's not a bad thing.

u/that-freakin-guy · 3 pointsr/LawSchool

Chereminsky's Con Law supplement.

It will explain the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and the Constitutional amendments excluding amendments 4 and 6 as those are covered in Con Crim Pro. It will talk about the 5th Amendment however which covers the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. But it just explains the law and how the courts apply it, it will not teach you how to think like a lawyer. It will just demystify the confusion regarding Constitutional law and you would have to apply the current facts from the situation at hand to figure things out on your own.

u/aletoledo · 3 pointsr/Anarcho_Capitalism

You have a right to remain innocent. This is a very quick and easy read. I generally hate lawyers and this guy puts disclaimers into the beginning that praise government, but i can't help but think he understands anarchy.

u/EntheoGiant · 3 pointsr/Drugs

TIP:


Watch Law Professor James Duane's lecture on Never Talking to The Police.

Then, go buy his book.

Yes, that's a LAW PROFESSOR telling LAW STUDENTS why you shouldn't speak to the police.

The live demonstrations alone are worth the lecture.

u/sebso · 3 pointsr/technology

This is probably the most important video in the world, and more people need to see it. James Duane, the guy giving the talk, also wrote a book on the subject, which I can highly recommend:

https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393/

u/jfoust2 · 3 pointsr/AdviceAnimals

Prof. James Duane wrote a book now, too - "You Have the Right to Remain Innocent".

Excellent read. Updated and expanded compared to the video.

The biggest problem is that as you read it, you hear him talking in that rapid-fire voice.

u/snarblarg · 3 pointsr/politics

Prison "reform" is an oxymoron. This article doesn't describe ANY of the measures Webb will supposedly introduce. The point is that modern prisons have served an important purpose since the 1960s --- when economic crises and lobbying forced the government to drastically reduce/abandon corporate taxation, there was no longer a tax base for Great Society and New Deal programs used to support/co-opt marginalized impoverished groups like minority single mothers. Historically, however, these groups are prone to cause problems and revolt, and this also became an issue in the 1960s (the Watts riots were the first BLACK-instigated race riot). So what does the United States do with its surplus humans? This increasingly becomes a problem as globalization forces jobs oversees and creates more people with no place in US society? Solution: Lock em up --- you can even boost local economies with prison-building contracts and by hiring guards and other contractors. Two birds with one stone! The US will never seriously tackle the prison issue. I believe in prison abolitionism --- incarceration has NOT always been the way society has dealt with marginalized groups and 'criminals'... Prison abolitionism is about finding alternatives (better education, [mental] healthcare, decriminalization of drugs) to vastly reduce the number of incarcerated and actually challenge the government and corporate interests that make up what many call the contemporary 'prison industrial complex.'

For a great summary of the critique of the contemporary US prison system and an outline of prison abolitionism, check out Angela Davis' 100-page "Are Prisons Obsolete?"
http://www.amazon.com/Are-Prisons-Obsolete-Angela-Davis/dp/1583225811/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230610533&sr=8-1

u/leap_barb · 3 pointsr/Anthropology

Are Prisons Obsolete? by Angela Davis. Good place to get a start and to get a great source.

Can't go wrong with Foucoult either.

u/vakeraj · 3 pointsr/Libertarian

>There is no governmental department deciding how many leather boots will be made this month.

You've obviously never spent a day reading the language government bills, laws, or regulation. There are hundreds of thousands of pages of federal code alone (not even delving into state and local regulations) that govern every conceivable facet of human life. No matter what you do in a given day, you're probably breaking some government rule.

And you're going to sit there and tell me that they don't micromanage the way we live or run our businesses?

u/Flarelocke · 3 pointsr/Libertarian

Three Felonies a Day, an account by a former FBI agent about how they exaggerate things until they fit the definition of vaguely defined felonies.

u/SecretJuly · 3 pointsr/Conservative

https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594032556

Good book I’m in the process of reading...Talks about how our laws are so complex,vague, and convoluted that the average professional commits 3 felonies a day without their knowledge.

u/trudann · 3 pointsr/AdviceAnimals

Response to active shooters has generally changed to immediate neutralization after Columbine: there are usually no negotiations and police go in ASAP to apprehend the target. In many areas I think the crazed gunman would have to initiate the negotiations. Often times the first response is not SWAT (they take longer to mobilize), but whoever arrives first that has a weapon.

As far as SWAT teams go, for the most part I think there are far too many in America. Even smaller communities have a SWAT team, though the chance of their need is very low. I mean.. how many incidences can a town with a population of 10,000 really have that would require a SWAT team?

As a result the teams are often under trained and to justify the expense of having one staffed and equipped the rate of no-knock raids increases. IMO no-knocks are most certainly dangerous, unnecessary and serve only to habituate violence. But unfortunately a man with a hammer sees every problem as a nail.

All that said in this particular situation I would say that Brown was looking for trouble that day and found it, but that not enough evidence has been released yet to determine if the actions of the officer were justified. I'm not sure there will be enough evidence to really ever know. I certainly wouldn't trust the testimony that his friend/accomplice in strong arm robbery would give. More video or other eyewitness accounts would be needed.

Ultimately I think communities across America need to reconsider the militarization of their police. What's far more worrisome than any of the police response to protesters and rioters so far are no-knock raids on the wrong houses. And how regular warrants are starting to be served in ways that look more and more like no-knock warrants.

A decent read on the subject of police militarization and the use of SWAT teams:
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610392116

u/Firsmith · 3 pointsr/TrueReddit

This book is a great read on the subject. rise of the warrior cop

u/GrayghOst123 · 3 pointsr/news

There is a book I am currently reading that is pertinent to the subject of police policy overreach. It is called Rise of the Warrior Cop I would recommend it to anyone wondering how SWAT started as a purely anti-terrorist force to becoming used for just about everything today.

u/WaterIce215 · 3 pointsr/news

Great book on the subject of militarized police called Rise of the Warrior Cop by Ridley Balko, who did an AMA on the subject.

u/sticky-bit · 3 pointsr/amateurradio

The vast majority of police communications really need to be broadcast in the clear, live:

>"There is a tanker trailer full of flammable liquid, on fire and overturned just south of exit 9 southbound, I-95"

There are a small amount of communications that still need to be broadcast, but for officer safety need a few minutes of delay:

>"We're going to try to get to the sniper atop The Tower at the University of Texas by going through an underground tunnel"

^(Please note that the information that there is an active shooter on the top of the tower needs to be broadcast far and wide to help prevent loss of life. The tactical stuff only should go on delay. If all the comms are scrambled, they're keeping vital information from the public.)

There's a only a very few bits of information that never should be broadcast in the clear, but still need to be available by discovery under the supervision of a judge, should a lawsuit occur.

>"The rape victim's name is "

Unfortunately, the way we're moving in this country ("Burn that fucking house down!", secret interrogation rooms for the Chicago police department, Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces) is entirely the wrong direction.

u/aethelberga · 3 pointsr/conspiracy
u/genesissequence · 3 pointsr/conspiracy

According to Radley Balko most of the surplus comes from the war on drugs.

u/Zeighesh · 3 pointsr/motorcycles

If we're handing out book recommendations, Radley Balko's reporting and books The Rise of the Warrior Cop and Overkill would probably broaden your perspective.

u/IQBoosterShot · 3 pointsr/politics

I highly recommend reading "Rise Of The Warrior Cop: The Militarization Of America's Police Forces" by Radley Balko. I'm in the middle of it and already I feel like I'm understanding a process which had its genesis in the sixties.

u/liamemsa · 3 pointsr/news

> How the fuck is it okay for police to go in there with assault rifles and treating them like that? Even if it were weed, that shouldn't be acceptable...

After 2001, the military got a shitload of hardware. Now that the "war on terror" is dialing down, they need to get rid of this hardware. Through a government program, local police departments are able to procure military hardware at discount.

This means that small towns, who would normally have nothing but blue uniformed patrolmen walking the streets, are suddenly able to get MRAPs, military style uniforms, armor, and weapons.

And, as the old adage goes, When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

If they have an armored personnel carrier sitting in their bay, they're going to want an excuse to use it. What's a better reason than "Fighting the War on Drugs," am I right? So, all the cop guys who play Modern Warfare in their off-hours suddenly get to armor up, grab an automatic rifle, and do it for real. How fun is that, right?

It's becoming more and more difficult to distinguish between police and military.

For more reading, check out this book.

u/Orlando1701 · 3 pointsr/Libertarian

There is a study out there somewhere, I’ll try and find it and link it, which shows the cops are generally reluctant to actually use SWAT against armed or aggressive persons but prefer to wait them out. Rather SWAT is disproportionately used when it is an established fact that the target is likely to offer minimal resistance.

*Edit - I couldn’t find the original source I used in my paper years ago but it is referenced in this book which admittedly isn’t the most balanced source.

u/badmagis · 3 pointsr/madisonwi

You guys got a nice back-and-forth going here, but I'd just like to interject with a book recommendation on the history of police: Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces by Radley Balko (https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577).

It's a well researched and footnoted book - the author explains that police as we know them are a surprisingly recent development. Mostly affirming the info in the links shared by u/Gilgong0. What I found interesting is 1) we as people only started having police when people started living close to strangers in larger cities (because before that your family and church members just shamed you and/or physically dealt with you if needed) and 2) there is not technically a constitutional basis for police (but no one is making a serious argument they shouldn't exist)

u/Javik2186 · 3 pointsr/conspiracy

Ever read the book, "Rise of the Warrior Cop" by Radley Balko?


It is a good book to read. I recommened it.
Rise of the Warrior Cop

u/LetsHackReality · 3 pointsr/conspiracy

tl;dr: They're the Bad Guys.

Still just scratching the surface...:

EXCLUSIVE: Secret service infiltrated paedophile group to 'blackmail establishment'
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/485529/Special-Branch-funded-Paedophile-Information-Exchange-says-Home-Office-whistleblower[1]

'More than 10' politicians on list held by police investigating Westminster 'paedophile ring'
Whistleblower who prompted Operation Fernbridge says up to 40 MPs and peers knew about or took part in child abuse
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10947561/More-than-10-politicians-on-list-held-by-police-investigating-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html[2]

Nearly everyone on UK paedophile ring list is a Freemason says abuse victim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m-5BUNXfNU[3]

Margaret Thatcher 'personally covered up' child abuse allegations against senior ministers: The Tory Prime Minister is said to have held a meeting with a rising star, who was tipped for promotion, and told him: “You have to clean up your sexual act”
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/2akwze/margaret_thatcher_personally_covered_up_child/[4]

Children's homes were 'supply line' for paedophiles, says ex-minister
Lord Warner says an inquiry he conducted in 1992 showed how children's homes were targeted by powerful people
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/08/children-homes-supply-line-paedophiles-lord-warner[5]

Westminster paedophile ring allegations: timeline
Here are the key events in the claims around an alleged VIP paedophile ring in Westminster
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10950127/Westminster-paedophile-ring-allegations-timeline.html[6]

Canadian Sex Worker kicked out of Senate hearings on controversial prostitution law after threatening to reveal list of Canadian federal politicians who use prostitution.
http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/2g3ch2/canadian_sex_worker_kicked_out_of_senate_hearings/[7]

Jehovah's Witnesses destroyed documents showing child abuse allegations, court told in cover-up case
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/29f9wp/jehovahs_witnesses_destroyed_documents_showing/[8]

Salvation Army 'rented out' boys at Sydney children’s home in Sydney to paedophiles
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10606458/Salvation-Army-rented-out-boys-at-Sydney-childrens-home-in-Sydney-to-paedophiles.html[9]

TIL that a woman, hired by Dyncorp to crackdown on forced prostitution on behalf of the UN, discovered that the UN police were the main perpetrators of forced prostitution and was later fired.
http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/15r2j4/til_that_a_woman_hired_by_dyncorp_to_crackdown_on/[10]

WikiLeaks Reveals That Military Contractors Have Not Lost Their Taste For Child Prostitutes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/wikileaks-reveals-that-mi_n_793816.html[11]

The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman's Fight for Justice
http://www.amazon.com/The-Whistleblower-Trafficking-Military-Contractors/dp/B005CDUBC2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1331445269&sr=8-4[12]

Sounds like Blackwater founder Erik Prince was operating a child prostitution service in Iraq
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6249748[13]

1989 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5OJPeHCmhA[14]

1989 #2 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU-k-tfiPfs[15]

1989 story about Bush Sr. Whitehouse call Boy sex ring
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/02/06/15709461.php[16]

Nixon Tape Discusses Homosexuals at Bohemian Grove
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPb-PN9F2Pc[17]

Charges refiled against former Pittsburgh cop accused of running prostitution ring
http://triblive.com/news/2222380-74/johns-police-criminal-charges-pittsburgh-prostitution-allegheny-charged-counts-county#axzz2Qc0wAaBg[18]

Former TSA employee fined $500 for running prostitution ring
Man confronted by police in Silver Spring hotel in February
http://www.gazette.net/article/20120611/NEWS/706119952/1007/former-tsa-employee-fined-500-for-running-prostitution-ring&template=gazette[19]

School board member convicted of running prostitution ring in California
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/08/16904911-school-board-member-convicted-of-running-prostitution-ring-in-california?lite[20]

FBI dad’s spyware experiment accidentally exposes pedophile principal
http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/146xzt/fbi_dads_spyware_experiment_accidentally_exposes/[21]

The Franklin Cover-Up - John DeCamp - Full film
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcWrrBceuP4[22]

The Franklin Cover-up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska
http://www.amazon.com/The-Franklin-Cover-up-Satanism-Nebraska/dp/0963215809/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366098964&sr=8-1&keywords=franklin+coverup[23]

Pentagon Child Porn Scandal: Security Agencies Were Left At Risk, Investigators Say
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/pentagon-child-porn-scand_n_656839.html[24]

Secret Service Prostitution Scandal
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/secret-service-prostitution-scandal[25]

A Party under Fire: A Scandal-Scarred GOP Asks, ‘What Next?’
Explicit e-mails with under-age male pages. Criminal lobbyists. Being on client lists for prostitution rings. FBI corruption investigations. And, now, soliciting sex in an airport bathroom. People are beginning to wonder: how low can Republican lawmakers go?
http://www.spiegel.de/international/a-party-under-fire-a-scandal-scarred-gop-asks-what-next-a-502653.html[26]

Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-spitzer.html[27]

The D.C. Madam Case, All Sordid Out
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-04-11/opinions/36798466_1_deborah-jeane-palfrey-prosecutors-shock-and-awe[28]

Mike Horner Prostitution Scandal: GOP State Rep. Resigns After Name Reportedly Surfaces On Client List
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/mike-horner-sex-prostitution-scandal_n_1910647.html[29]

Another One: Top Federal Judge Linked to Prostitution Ring
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452917&page=1#.UW0JY0pcnn4[30]

‘Comfort Women’ Controversy Comes to New York
http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/comfort-women-controversy-comes-to-new-york/[31]

Pope Francis: 'About 2%' of Catholic clergy paedophiles
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28282050[32]

Pope begs forgiveness for 'sacrilegious cult' of Church sexual abuse
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/07/us-pope-abuse-idUSKBN0FC15J20140707[33]

Vatican arrests former archbishop on paedophilia charges
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/23/us-vaitican-abuse-arrest-idUSKCN0HI28T20140923[34]

Sex scandal rocks Vatican: Papal usher, chorister linked to gay prostitution ring
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/sex-scandal-rocks-vatican-papal-usher-chorister-linked-gay-prostitution-ring-article-1.172149[35]

BBC News - Catholic Church loses child abuse liability appeal
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/wfq5e/bbc_news_catholic_church_loses_child_abuse/[36]

Ireland admits involvement in Catholic laundry slavery
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57567706/ireland-admits-involvement-in-catholic-laundry-slavery/[37]

Cover-up claims revive sex scandal
Belgian establishment accused of closing ranks to block investigation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/apr/21/stephenbates[38]

Belgium Pedophilia Scandal /Did Authorities Cover Up Its Scope?: Book Revives Fear of Grand Conspiracy
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/16/news/16iht-brussels.2.t.html?pagewanted=all[39]

Portugal's elite linked to paedophile ring
Abuse was reportedly going on at Lisbon orphanage for 20 years
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/27/childprotection.uk[40]

FBI Ran Pedophile Ring to Nab Pedophiles
As late as last year, the FBI ran a child pornography operation in an attempt to nab its customers. The service ran for two weeks "while attempting to identify more than 5,000 customers, according to a Seattle FBI agent's statements to the court."
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/05/30/FBI-Ran-Pedophile-Ring-to-Nab-Pedophiles[41]

Boy Scouts helped alleged molesters cover tracks, files show
When volunteers and employees were suspected of sexually abusing children, Boy Scout officials often didn't tell police, files from 1970-91 reveal. In many cases they sought to hide the situation.
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-boy-scouts-files-20120916,0,1641796.story#axzz2xIsUM5rH[42]

Child Sex Case Adds Outrage To Scandals Rocking Belgium
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-10-27/news/9610270253_1_marc-dutroux-minister-willy-claes-jean-marc-connerotte[43]

Theme park employees caught in child porn arrests
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/14/us/theme-park-employees-child-sex-stings/[44]

Former acting HHS cybersecurity director convicted on child porn charges
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/26/former-acting-hhs-cybersecurity-director-convicted-on-child-porn-charges/[45]

Hundreds held over Canada child porn
Police in Canada say 348 people have been arrested and nearly 400 children rescued during a three-year investigation into child pornography.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24944358[46]

Los Angeles Deputy City Attorney Arrested on Child Porn Charges
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Los-Angeles-Deputy-City-Attorney-arrested-on-child-porn-charges-the-City-Attorneys-Office-said-274174791.html

u/caferrell · 3 pointsr/DescentIntoTyranny

Besides this book, I would highly suggest that everyone read "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces" by Radly Balko. Read Balkow's book to see how American police have evolved into the occupying army that they are now thanks to bad legislation and too much power

u/sonyka · 3 pointsr/ShitRedditSays

> The police force in this town has tripled in the last dozen years. They have also transformed from the approachable servants they are supposed to be into highly militarized and aggressive shitbags.

Somehow this bothers me the most.

Like, honey, the police force in every town in America has tripled in the last dozen years.
They have all become highly militarized and [even more] aggressive.
This has been going on for
quite
some
time.

Where the fuck were you?

u/HerpDerpingVII · 3 pointsr/TrueOffMyChest

I don't hate SJWs. I think they are stupid, and use their philosophy and their support group to justify doing some really nasty shit, convinced that they are right. But I don't hate them. I judge individuals by their words and actions. If I meet a SJW that can't even defend (or often define) the positions they take, then I think they are an ignorant idiot. When I meet someone who tries to justify judging all people of a group together, and then claim that it isn't racism (or my favorite; racism is good) then I will judge that individual to be an ignorant bigot.

All social "privilege" is contextual. All of it. Be a white guy in Sudan, and see how much advantage it gets you.

Even more relevant, SJWs do not want to discuss the privileges that matter most. Which are money and a good family. In any situation, being raised by an educated family and having a trust fund is worth more privilege points than the colour of your skin.

As for the historical treatment of women? I think that you are getting the wrong end of the stick there. Women were never property in a way that men were not. Not in any English speaking nation. Not in Europe, at large.

You had serfs, but they were not chattel, and men were serfs too. There were chattel slaves but, again, as many men were enslaved as women.

If you actually want to learn something of the history you could watch this video.

If you want a short book to read with exhaustive citations you could read this book.

Or, you know, you could continue to excuse people who hate men for being born men. Whatever makes you happy.

u/TopBloke99 · 3 pointsr/KotakuInAction

Get yourself a copy of the book The Feminist Lie, which is written specifically to counter feminist talking points with an exhaustive number of citations.

u/newlawyer2014 · 2 pointsr/LawSchool

I totally concur with OP, supplements are supplements, not replacements. Read the case book, then read the relevant chapter from the supplement to ensure you got everything you were supposed to get out of it. Once you are getting everything out of the casebook in the first pass, you can discard supplements entirely if you like.

Best supplements, in my opinion:

u/_Sheva_ · 2 pointsr/politics

He already wrote that book.

'With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law is Used To Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful'


I am sure Dick Cheney is mentioned once or twice. He was already well aware of the Dick's crimes when he wrote it.

u/sjmdiablo · 2 pointsr/politics

I read Glen Greenwald's With Liberty and Justice for Some and Matt Taibii's The Divide back-to-back this year. The raison d'être of the law has changed from ideas and needs springing from the philosophy of justice into a weapon to maintain the status quo, something cruel and indifferent.

u/boxcutter729 · 2 pointsr/Anarcho_Capitalism

I see GMO labeling as in the same category standardizing weights and measures, public libraries, laws against fraud. I'd rather that the state cease to function and has nothing to do with these things, but eliminating them before that isn't a priority.

Our food supply is not a free market. The vast majority of food commonly available makes me feel like shit, and I don't want my ability to obtain untainted food to be further restricted. GMO is a taint being spread to essentially anything that contains staple crops.

If you aren't concerned about GMO's, start by looking up the Seralini studies, and look into the lengths that Monsanto and the US state department go to in order to spread the taint to other countries. Another factor you may not be aware of is the damage to the intestinal lining caused by the typical modern diet, allowing all sorts of odd foreign proteins to make it into the blood. Ingesting large amounts of microbial proteins that would not have been present otherwise doesn't seem like a good idea. These things have made me decided to eliminate them from my diet for the time being, and I would like to be able to make that choice.

That GMO monoculture is more efficient or that "organic can't feed the world" is a simple lie. Organic produce only seems expensive because it's sold at specialty stores that charge a high premium, and because only a very small proportion of agriculture (less than 5% I believe) is organic. The modifications being made are typically for things like resistance to toxic herbicides made by the same companies that sell the GMO's (Glyphosate is especially insidious, as it diffuses throughout plant tissue and can't be washed off), or controlling the food supply through crops that produce no seeds and can't be replanted.

GMO cross-contamination through pollination is a private property issue, as would be a factory next door to you blowing toxic fumes.

GMO's are not equivalent to breeding (though breeding is entirely capable of producing toxic foods, certain grains and fructose-laden fruits being examples). Evolution, even human-directed evolution, has constraints. There are traits that it is not possible to breed for, genes that would never exist in a plant absent manual copying and pasting from unrelated organisms.

The arguments for GMO's I see being made in this thread reveal a lot of the standard flaws with libertarian thinking.

The first is the reflexive defense of economic/corporate activity in our society, as though it were a free market. It isn't. All market activity is currently tainted by massive coercion at every level, but especially where large firms and captured regulatory agencies are involved.

Another is naive scientism/technophilia. Industrialization and technology has rather obviously allowed states to grow far beyond the limits of size, reach, and power that constrained them in centuries past. You live in a time when states have the ability to extend force completely to their borders as drawn on maps, where there are almost no wild areas left to run to when they become overbearing. When states have powers of surveillance approaching totality. When states have the capability to render the planet uninhabitable.

It makes very little sense for anarchists in this time to be indiscriminate technophiles. Taking a step back and looking at the an-cap movement, it arose and still largely exists as a heretical movement within a particular highly industrialized and technological nation-state (the U.S.). It's still largely a byproduct of that state. Hence you see a vision of anarchy that assumes compatibility with all kinds of hierarchy, and features familiar scenes from that empire built on a particular historically unprecedented mix of statism, technology and cheap oil.

If your vision of anarchy includes things like globalism, large firms, dense populations, heavy industry, and suburbs complete with shopping malls and "private" police, you should probably spend a little more couch time. Stop being such a fucking American. The 90's aren't coming back. Perhaps this is more the kind of "reform" that would be palatable to you. http://www.amazon.com/The-Liberty-Amendments-Restoring-American/dp/1451606273

u/AlloftheEethp · 2 pointsr/politics

Yes, and I was responding to your idiotic post--the fact that I replied to it should have clued you in to the fact. I know the internet can be confusing and scary, but do try to keep up.

You're as good at basic logic as you are historical analysis, and as good at that as you are competent in constitutional law, which is to say not at all.

In fact, in general, [this might help] (https://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Law-Principles-Policies-Treatise/dp/1454849479/ref=pd_sbs_14_img_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=S176159B2ZPNW43TYMT2), although on second thought [this] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFroMQlKiag) might be more on your level.

u/Mike_Dicta · 2 pointsr/LawSchool

https://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Law-Principles-Policies-Treatise/dp/1454849479

Chapters 6, 9, 10, and 12. These will help you more than bickering with folks here.

u/m1ldsauce · 2 pointsr/LawSchool

This 100%. As for it being expensive, I rented on Amazon and it was really cheap:

LINK

u/jigglupuf · 2 pointsr/LawSchool
u/gymtanlibrary · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1454849479/ref=dp_ob_neva_mobile

Not for lawyers, but for law students. So it's perfect for self learning. Chemerinsky is considered a top con law scholar.

u/bign00b · 2 pointsr/canada

This is a good video I watched a while back:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

It's obviously for American law, but interesting.
While googling for it I found this article by vice: https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/law-professor-police-interrogation-law-constitution-survival

The guy has apparently also written a book: https://www.amazon.ca/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393

Any Canadian lawyers know if this is mostly applicable to Canadian law?

u/Lee_Ars · 2 pointsr/politics

> Wouldn't that defeat the entire point of the fifth?

"The Department of Justice has now served official notice that it believes the courts should allow a prosecutor to argue under any circumstances that your willingness to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege can and should be used against you as evidence of your guilt." That's from James Duane's book. He's the "never talk to the police" attorney.

Further, Salinas V. Texas really fucked things up for everyone by establishing that "...the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause does not protect a defendant's refusal to answer questions asked by law enforcement before he has been arrested or read his Miranda rights."

So, yes, unfortunately, taking the 5th can indeed be used as evidence of your guilt—especially in civil matters, or in a deposition where you haven't been arrested and Mirandized.

u/SpikeSpike · 2 pointsr/politics

Angela Davis wrote a really interesting book on this Are Prisons Obsolete. Lots of discussion punishment vs. rehab and how the current system came about essentially to continue to oppress people and ignore the social systems that cause crime.

Her autobiography on how she was on the run from the FBI for her connection to the killing of a judge and her prison experience is also a really good read.

u/UptightSodomite · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

One theory is that we should get rid of prisons altogether.

http://www.amazon.com/Are-Prisons-Obsolete-Angela-Davis/dp/1583225811

My opinion is that improvements to the prison system will come from improvements to our legal system. End the drug war and reduce sentencing for non-violent, non-fraudulent offenses. When there are fewer prisoners, our penitentiaries will be better off.

Also, in terms of policy, disenfranchising those who serve time only ensures that the people who experience prison will not be able to give feedback on it. Everyone deserves the right to vote, no matter what they've done.

Secondly, prisons should not be run by private companies. Imprisoning people should not be profitable. If the state wants to enact policies that require the imprisonment of its citizens, then it should be prepared to handle the cost of doling out that punishment. Then maybe laws would more accurately reflect the reasonableness of sentences to their crimes.

u/GnarlinBrando · 2 pointsr/politics

Upvotes for good history and gov teachers. I had one of each. They got me to read Chomsky and Into the Buzzsaw.

u/MHOLMES · 2 pointsr/MMA

You should read "Three Felonies A Day".

u/KLafayette · 2 pointsr/Anarcho_Capitalism

This had me rolling my eyes so hard it must've looked like a seizure. Now, are you trolling or just ignorant? Because I can guarantee you, (yes, you), have committed criminal actions, felonies even, and most likely had nary a clue. Perhaps this will give you some much-needed perspective: http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594032556

Frankly it saddens me that you, and those who argue similarly stupid shit, are free to post on Reddit while countless poor bastards rot in cages for victimless crimes, some for so long they wouldn't know how to use the device you're posting from.

Or maybe you're kidding and I missed the joke, in which case I apologize. Unfortunately I can't tell, because there are plenty of people out there who genuinely believe this bullshit, and who deserve to have their eyes opened to the consequences of living in a functional police state where such petty things as what you consume, whom you consensually bang, and what pictures you look at online can land you in prison.

u/preventDefault · 2 pointsr/politics

To me, it seems like these restrictions are in place so healthy organs aren't wasted on unhealthy people. For instance, you don't want to give someone a fresh liver when they are going to die of lung cancer a few years later. To now discriminate not on the basis of health, but one's ability to follow laws (that didn't exist for most of our country's existence) seems wrong.

If these restrictions are based on health concerns, I think people who consume unhealthy foods should be put at the end of the list.

Because if we're doing this the legal way, no one would be eligible for organ transplants. Hell, you probably committed three felonies today.

u/foobarr · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

Eh, there's a nice hill on the way to work. Last week I technically ran a couple miles an hour over the speed limit after not perfectly timing my breaks/downshifting. Ok ok, I was really just jamming to music and missed it.

Anyway, I'm pretty damned sure everybody's broken some law and on a regular basis. Books have even been written on that subject.

If you mean people who try to mind the law and fail, there's lots of us.

u/thebrightsideoflife · 2 pointsr/worldnews

Wait.. you don't? Maybe you haven't read this book

u/Lamechv2 · 2 pointsr/TwoXChromosomes

Have you read three felonies a day? The person has probably broken numerous laws, and her being a criminal is something the defense would want to bring up. Hence, pleading the fifth is probably a valid option. Yes, if the prosecution wants he can get an order to testify, but it might scare him/her off. Regardless, there is no reason to be nice to someone forcing you to testify.

u/nickb64 · 2 pointsr/ProtectAndServe

There's a book about it.

u/oneofmanyshills · 2 pointsr/politics

It's as hard as getting your friends to install Snapchat or Skype.

If they want privacy, it literally couldn't be any easier. Regardless, if you love big brother and want them collecting your selfies or sexts, be my guest.

www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/27/gchq-nsa-webcam-images-internet-yahoo

I'm not giving up my rights and data when such free and simple solutions are readily available.

Even if the book title is hyperbole, government overstepping their bounds, parallel construction and tacking on charges has been well documented time and time again, which is also what the cited book goes into detail about.

www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1594032556/

u/WiseCynic · 2 pointsr/progressive

For the answer to this and other important questions about American police, please see the book titled "Rise of the Warrior Cop" by Radley Balko.

The paperback should be out soon.

u/tacoman359 · 2 pointsr/news

There's a major communication issue regarding people and institutions/systems, especially on liberal forums such as reddit.

The system of the police force in this country has a culture. It is not a culture that is on the whole reasonable or helpful for the ordinary citizen. The same problems exist in the legislative system, judicial, executive, and our government in general. The culture in law enforcement exists primarily to maintain the status quo, and make money. They make money by busting people for drugs (this is the top focus of nearly every police department), and they maintain the status quo by inciting fear in the citizens (particularly the lower classes, who have the most incentive to fight for change). At the individual level, I doubt very many cops think they are "inciting fear", but that's why we need to get a lot smarter about the way in which we think about systems. Systems have properties that individuals do not (this is known as emergence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence)

It's not that only bad people go into these jobs, or that these jobs always turn people into bad people. But these two factors play a huge role in defining police culture and political culture in America (and many places around the world, and throughout history).

When we blame the individuals (all this "police are scumbags" talk) for the issues, we get nowhere, because culture goes much deeper than individuals (though many times, police are scumbags, and expressing that emotional response is perfectly valid on some level). The whole way that we look at law enforcement in this country (especially starting with the militarization of the police force in the '80s) is terrifying. People are viewed as subjects who need to be controlled, rather than citizens who are a part of this country and have a say in it's direction forward (this is looking more and more like idealistic bullshit, but we're supposed to be a democracy after all).
Here's one source, but you'll find many others with a quick google search: http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610392116

Tldr; I rambled, and tried to touch on too many different things without saying any one thing in a concrete manner. But it's not only about these particular officers, and it's not only about police officers in general. It's about police culture, and there are clear trends in the way we are being policed that we should be very concerned about.

u/gonucksgo · 2 pointsr/magicTCG
u/mack-the-knife · 2 pointsr/WTF

I highly recommend anyone who want to more about this to read "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces"

It does a good job explaining how it has come to this

u/conn2005 · 2 pointsr/Libertarian

I wish there was more big (L)ibertarian cops. Might result in a drop of taser abuse, shooting peoples pets, militarization of cops, arresting people for victim-less crimes, ect.

u/n00bsauce1987 · 2 pointsr/progun

Also I have to say not in terms of race relations, but in general, America has supported the militarization of our police. Below is some reading that if you want to learn more about this phenomenon, it's here to consume. Such a pro-active response which includes the use of military force from our local police is not necessary as /u/Llanita suggested.

Column: The militarization of U.S. police forces via Yahoo News

At SWAT team expo, protesters decry police militarization via Al Jazaeera America

Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America via CATO Institute

How Cops Became Soldiers: An Interview with Police Militarization Expert Radley Balko via Vice

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces via Amazon

u/hexag1 · 2 pointsr/politics

Check out Radley Balko's new book on this very subject:

Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1610392116/

u/FionaFiddlesticks · 2 pointsr/politics

It's actually an excerpt from a book! Check it out here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1610392116

u/blackhawk61 · 2 pointsr/police
u/Lebo77 · 2 pointsr/videos

Check out the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces" by Radley Balko. The no-knock raid is a HUGE departure from how warrants have been served for hundreds of years. In fact, the British used similar tactics briefly and it was seen as such an infringement on rights that it was cited as a cause for the American Revolution.
https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577

u/squidkiosk · 2 pointsr/news

I recently started reading Radley Balko's "Rise of the warrior cop". If you haven't read it yet I really suggest it: https://www.amazon.ca/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577

It's a really in-depth look at how our Police forces became so Militarized over the last few decades.
I think head shots at protestors is a garbage move on their part, even if it is their training. that just bullying mentality paired with firepower.

u/joedonut · 2 pointsr/newjersey

Use of SWAT for situations that don't require it, and are a mere excuse to keep the 'team'? Balko wrote a book about exactly that.

u/nsjersey · 2 pointsr/newjersey

You guys should read this Radley Balko book from 2013.

u/climbandmaintain · 2 pointsr/beholdthemasterrace

That doesn’t work. And it didn’t work during the Black Freedom Struggle either, definitely not in the Deep South.

Armed, violent resistance was necessary.

u/Satanforce · 2 pointsr/Blackfellas

Eat the meat, spit out the bones. Once you realize the authors ideological position, it should be easy to work around that and find the truth. But since there is a new edition of Negroes with Guns out, I'll have to recommend that instead of this.

What I really wanted to make aware with this series of posts was that there is a black gun culture, and that the civil rights movement wasn' all about singing "Kumbahyah."

u/-moose- · 2 pointsr/moosearchive

would you like to know more?

TIL that a woman, hired by Dyncorp to crackdown on forced prostitution on behalf of the UN, discovered that the UN police were the main perpetrators of forced prostitution and was later fired.

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/15r2j4/til_that_a_woman_hired_by_dyncorp_to_crackdown_on/

WikiLeaks Reveals That Military Contractors Have Not Lost Their Taste For Child Prostitutes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/wikileaks-reveals-that-mi_n_793816.html

The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman's Fight for Justice

http://www.amazon.com/The-Whistleblower-Trafficking-Military-Contractors/dp/B005CDUBC2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1331445269&sr=8-4

Sounds like Blackwater founder Erik Prince was operating a child prostitution service in Iraq

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6249748

1989 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5OJPeHCmhA

1989 #2 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU-k-tfiPfs

1989 story about Bush Sr. Whitehouse call Boy sex ring

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/02/06/15709461.php

Nixon Tape Discusses Homosexuals at Bohemian Grove

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPb-PN9F2Pc

Charges refiled against former Pittsburgh cop accused of running prostitution ring

http://triblive.com/news/2222380-74/johns-police-criminal-charges-pittsburgh-prostitution-allegheny-charged-counts-county#axzz2Qc0wAaBg

Former TSA employee fined $500 for running prostitution ring

Man confronted by police in Silver Spring hotel in February

http://www.gazette.net/article/20120611/NEWS/706119952/1007/former-tsa-employee-fined-500-for-running-prostitution-ring&template=gazette

School board member convicted of running prostitution ring in California

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/08/16904911-school-board-member-convicted-of-running-prostitution-ring-in-california?lite

FBI dad’s spyware experiment accidentally exposes pedophile principal

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/146xzt/fbi_dads_spyware_experiment_accidentally_exposes/

The Franklin Cover-Up - John DeCamp - Full film

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcWrrBceuP4

The Franklin Cover-up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska

http://www.amazon.com/The-Franklin-Cover-up-Satanism-Nebraska/dp/0963215809/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366098964&sr=8-1&keywords=franklin+coverup

Pentagon Child Porn Scandal: Security Agencies Were Left At Risk, Investigators Say

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/pentagon-child-porn-scand_n_656839.html

Secret Service Prostitution Scandal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/secret-service-prostitution-scandal

A Party under Fire: A Scandal-Scarred GOP Asks, ‘What Next?’

Explicit e-mails with under-age male pages. Criminal lobbyists. Being on client lists for prostitution rings. FBI corruption investigations. And, now, soliciting sex in an airport bathroom. People are beginning to wonder: how low can Republican lawmakers go?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/a-party-under-fire-a-scandal-scarred-gop-asks-what-next-a-502653.html

Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-spitzer.html

The D.C. Madam Case, All Sordid Out

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-04-11/opinions/36798466_1_deborah-jeane-palfrey-prosecutors-shock-and-awe

Mike Horner Prostitution Scandal: GOP State Rep. Resigns After Name Reportedly Surfaces On Client List

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/mike-horner-sex-prostitution-scandal_n_1910647.html

Another One: Top Federal Judge Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452917&page=1#.UW0JY0pcnn4

‘Comfort Women’ Controversy Comes to New York

http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/comfort-women-controversy-comes-to-new-york/

Sex scandal rocks Vatican: Papal usher, chorister linked to gay prostitution ring

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/sex-scandal-rocks-vatican-papal-usher-chorister-linked-gay-prostitution-ring-article-1.172149

BBC News - Catholic Church loses child abuse liability appeal

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/wfq5e/bbc_news_catholic_church_loses_child_abuse/

Ireland admits involvement in Catholic laundry slavery

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57567706/ireland-admits-involvement-in-catholic-laundry-slavery/

Cover-up claims revive sex scandal

Belgian establishment accused of closing ranks to block investigation

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/apr/21/stephenbates

Belgium Pedophilia Scandal /Did Authorities Cover Up Its Scope?: Book Revives Fear of Grand Conspiracy

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/16/news/16iht-brussels.2.t.html?pagewanted=all

Portugal's elite linked to paedophile ring

Abuse was reportedly going on at Lisbon orphanage for 20 years

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/27/childprotection.uk

FBI Ran Pedophile Ring to Nab Pedophiles

As late as last year, the FBI ran a child pornography operation in an attempt to nab its customers. The service ran for two weeks "while attempting to identify more than 5,000 customers, according to a Seattle FBI agent's statements to the court."

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/05/30/FBI-Ran-Pedophile-Ring-to-Nab-Pedophiles

u/Dissonanticism · 2 pointsr/JusticeServed

> the same problem still exists

Well, we can agree on this. The whole Payday loan market is for suckers who need to take high-risk. On a bigger scale, the scam is how democracy and capitalism actually works in the US (hint: it's an oligarchy, not a real democracy). I feel like Scott Tucker isn't even the biggest fish to fry, but the biggest fish have so much money & power, they're above the law.

u/mnemosyne-0002 · 2 pointsr/KotakuInAction

Archives for this post:

u/w00denspoon · 2 pointsr/KotakuInAction

https://www.amazon.com/Feminist-Lie-Never-About-Equality-ebook/dp/B071SG95CN
didn't take gamergate, the consequences of feminism alone push people to make the case against them.
The consequences of feminism becoming toxic are readily apparent all around us. From mattress girl to the barren feminist women of merkels europe opening the door to invasion for rather sick reasons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXrjaOLqH2g
Its become a problem impossible to ignore, its no longer just annoying, its becoming destructive to western civilization.

u/souldust · 1 pointr/occupywallstreet

This article needs to back up its sources. Or we should just read the book http://www.amazon.com/National-Security-Government-Michael-Glennon/dp/0190206446 and scrutinize these details.

Otherwise please don't succumb to hyperbolic language and sites

u/Leisureguy · 1 pointr/wicked_edge

Oops. Now fixed---but here it is again.

Yeah, I like a squared end to my sideburns, and I have no trouble getting that with a slant.

u/vortexcubed · 1 pointr/pcgaming

> Yeah, it's counter-intuitive. Why would you go against consumers this way?

You're not seeing the larger picture.... this isn't about consumers, this is about control of world markets. You're missing the larger historical context, the NSA is all about control and management of information for corporate profits.

Most have no clue what's really going on in the world... the elites are afraid of political awakening.

This (mass surveillance) by the NSA and abuse by law enforcement is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ttv6n7PFniY

Science on reasoning, reason doesn't work the way we thought it did:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ

Brezinski at a press conference

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kmUS--QCYY

The real news:

http://therealnews.com/t2/

http://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Incorporated-Managed-Inverted-Totalitarianism/dp/069114589X/

http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Government-Surveillance-Security-Single-Superpower/dp/1608463656/r

http://www.amazon.com/National-Security-Government-Michael-Glennon/dp/0190206446/

Look at the following graphs:

IMGUR link - http://imgur.com/a/FShfb

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

And then...

WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap

http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-haiti-minimum-wage-the-nation-2011-6

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnkNKipiiiM

Free markets?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHj2GaPuEhY#t=349

http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Illusion-Literacy-Triumph-Spectacle/dp/1568586132/

"We now live in two Americas. One—now the minority—functions in a print-based, literate world that can cope with complexity and can separate illusion from truth. The other—the majority—is retreating from a reality-based world into one of false certainty and magic. To this majority—which crosses social class lines, though the poor are overwhelmingly affected—presidential debate and political rhetoric is pitched at a sixth-grade reading level. In this “other America,” serious film and theater, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of society.

In the tradition of Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism and Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death, Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges navigates this culture—attending WWF contests, the Adult Video News Awards in Las Vegas, and Ivy League graduation ceremonies—to expose an age of terrifying decline and heightened self-delusion."

Important history:

http://williamblum.org/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcA1v2n7WW4

u/asaltycaptain · 1 pointr/politics

I don't know how gerrymandering causes the hyperpolarisation so I can't speak to that, but the first bullet point worries me a great deal.

I think it partially falls on the failure of the Fourth Estate. Lots of people talk about media bias, however, I think it's total media failure that is the bigger concern.

The other part is of course a government shrouded in secrecy. This book was a really interesting read. If it wasn't written by a political insider and didn't have glowing reviews by well respected professors and journalists you would call it crazy. The book has over 800 citations though and is a fascinating perspective.

u/chipoatley · 1 pointr/technology

And for those reasons that Big Security apparatus that does not get voted in or not therefore does not care about your vote. But it does want to know everything about you. Because it can.

National Security and Double Government (2014), by Michael J. Glennon

u/5MinutePlan · 1 pointr/SneerClub

Kindly Inquisitors by Jonathan Rauch described markets as a type of liberal game (decentralized competitive systems for resolving conflict and legitimizing the outcome).

He draws an analogy between liberal games and the theory of evolution. I don't have the book to hand, and I can't remember the exact quote.

But the idea is that a liberal game creates a niche that selects for some things and against others.

So markets select for things that the market values, and against things that the market doesn't value.

Most of the book is focused on liberal science, which he defines as the pursuit of truth (not just things that use the scientific method). So the niche in liberal science is supposed to select for truth and against falsehood.

u/thorsmjollnir · 1 pointr/news
u/VuDuBaBy · 1 pointr/television

Women, from the time they are born, are often at the complete mercy of men. Their fathers, uncles, brothers, grandfathers, cousins etc are usually the abusers of defenseless children. They can't fight back and might not be able to tell anyone, and worst of all they are often mind fucked into thinking it's ok. Women are viewed as objects by many men and many men grow up with the objective to obtain a woman via job, car, dating or if that doesn't work, raping, to have sex. Sex and control is the end game for rapists, if a woman doesn't go willingly then they'll take what they want. If a woman, and there are some, had this motivation, it would typically be a much harder task to over power a man and rape him, though it does happen, everybody can get drugged too. Anyway. What I'm getting at is the obvious physical overpowering factor, but also the idea that women aren't motivated to have sex for the same reasons as men and therefore go about things differently, mainly because women find empathy easier than men IMO. As far as empathy for rapists, most were abused themselves as children and grew up in terrible situations that they had no control over. When someone with massive trauma has no control over something in their life it can be extremely frustrating. For men, this often results in massive rage response and violent behavior brought on by festering thoughts and sick ideas that went unchallenged because literally no one ever cared about them enough to help them. They then go on to rape often because of a need to take control of their sex needs from women who, in their view, have denied them of sex they deserved so they control a person to feel powerful or whatever; that or they are just sick sadistic fucks. NO excuse for abusing anyone but hopefully this sheds some light on why. My gf and I worked in social work for years and dealt with both sides. But this is human history we are talking about here. If you're really interested I'd really recommend this book:

Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide https://www.amazon.com/dp/0307387097/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_N25JAb756M1PQ

u/Rentun · 1 pointr/TumblrInAction

I've been trying to hunt down the source for the claim.

Apparently it's from this book.

I don't have a copy of the book so I can't read the quote in context, but from everything I've found online, she's talking about deaths during child births? Or something?

>“More girls were killed in the last 50 years, precisely because they were girls, than men killed in all the wars in the 20th century. More girls are killed in this routine gendercide in any one decade than people were slaughtered in all the genocides of the 20th century.

>The equivalent of 5 jumbo jets worth of women die in labor each day... life time risk of maternal death is 1,000x higher in a poor country than in the west. That should be an international scandal.”

this is the quote from goodreads.

u/duckmagnumduck · 1 pointr/Feminism

Great infothing.

Recommended reading: "Half the Sky" http://www.amazon.com/Half-Sky-Oppression-Opportunity-Worldwide/dp/0307387097

u/notacrackhead · 1 pointr/IAmA

looks like I was barely awake when I posted that, hah.

http://www.amazon.com/Half-Sky-Oppression-Opportunity-Worldwide/dp/0307387097/

u/pizzaface12 · 1 pointr/worldnews

You can do something about it by donating to charities that support girls' education in Afghanistan. Last week I gave $25 to The Asia Foundation's Afghan Girls' Education Fund. National Geographic is matching donations at this time :)

Afghanistan has one of the lowest literacy rates in the world and one of the largest disparities in literacy between men and women (source)

Girl's education reduces child mortality rates, increases womens' independence, increases equality, leads to increased women's rights, and increases the probability that her children are educated (Reference - PDF)

I recommend these related books:

Half the Sky

Three Cups of Tea

Stones Into Schools

u/NMCLink · 1 pointr/books
u/asianclassical · 1 pointr/AsianMasculinity

I'm obviously a Trump supporter. You can look at my post history and see that easily. I don't know what you think there is no evidence for, but your understanding of the facts on the ground is incorrect.

AA admits don't benefit from attending schools they are not qualified to attend:
https://www.amazon.com/Mismatch-Affirmative-Students-%C2%92s-Universities/dp/0465029965?
What prompted this study is the authors noticed that although the admission rate of URMs fell in California after Prop 209, the graduation rate after four years did not. The same number of black and Latino kids were actually completing their degrees--because that is what standardized tests tell you: how prepared you are for a college education.

Non-Jewish whites v. Whites? Here you go. In the Ivy League white enrollment is around 40-50%, despite the fact that white people are still 60% of the US population. But what you never see is the breakdown of Jewish and non-Jewish white. Jews make up on average a little less than half of the white demographic at those schools, despite being less than 2% of the US population. This of course makes sense when something like 80% of the presidents of the Ivy League and innumerable administrators, including admissions officers, are Jewish. You never see those numbers:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

u/fishingarden · 1 pointr/news

My agenda.... You definitely can tell I am a first generation immigrant from my writing. What kind of politician will hire me? You can compare my comments and yours to see who is more like professional propagandist!

Check out this book and see what you guys did to the minority.

https://www.amazon.com/Mismatch-Affirmative-Students-’s-Universities/dp/0465029965

u/JackGetsIt · 1 pointr/JoeRogan

Most of the studies are just reviews of the colleges own admissions and performance data.

This book goes into in a lot of detail

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465029965?tag=natioaffai-20

You also don't even need to do a study.

Here's an article about it

https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-sad-irony-of-affirmative-action

Here's an excerpt from that article so you don't have to read the whole book.

>For example, according to data released by the University of Texas in connection with Fisher, the mean SAT scores (out of 2400) and mean high-school grade-point averages (on a 4.0 scale) varied widely by race for the entering class of 2009. For Asians, the numbers were 1991 and 3.07; whites were at 1914 and 3.04; Hispanics at 1794 and 2.83; and African-Americans at 1524 and 2.57. The SAT scores for the Asian students placed them in the 93rd percentile of 2009 SAT-takers nationwide; the African-American students, meanwhile, were at the 52nd percentile.

> This has the predictable effect of lowering the college or professional-school grades the average minority student earns. And the reason is simple: While some students will outperform their entering credentials, just as some students will underperform theirs, most students perform in the range that their entering credentials suggest.

u/corne11 · 1 pointr/Cornell

For anybody who wants to educate themselves on the matter, I highly recommend reading Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won’t Admit It

u/temp_bigot · 1 pointr/CoonTown

I wasn't claiming it was. Although I'm skeptical about whether any of the stated background is true.

My interest is in exactly what I asked: to try to determine if he would have been accepted into Harvard without racial discrimination in his favor. Because being admitted to Harvard is conventionally seen as a major academic and intellectual achievement, but college admissions in general tend to be very highly skewed racially under the current system. Mismatch is an excellent book on the topic.

u/KIllTheNiggerUrgent · 1 pointr/AdviceAnimals
  1. It is true.

    > The disparity in the measured levels of academic accomplishment across racial lines was very high at these schools; median SAT scores for African-Americans at these campuses were, for example, more than two hundred points lower than median SAT scores for whites and Asians.

    http://www.seaphe.org/pdf/uclaadmissions.pdf

    >There's a reason his peers found these findings too specious to include in even the most unread of the UC system's law reviews

    What is that reason?


  2. The author of the paper is the author of this book. Plenty of evidence inside. Please write to him about your criticism.

    http://www.amazon.com/Mismatch-Affirmative-Students-Intended-Universities/dp/0465029965
u/Bented · 1 pointr/AskMen

http://law.lclark.edu/courses/catalog/law_007.php

Please note that this is not the school I attended. I have no desire to post that information. I cannot condense three years of information, or even two semesters of Con Law into a citation for you. It is not possible. Books are available on this topic. Large ones with all the illuminating case cites you desire.

http://www.amazon.com/Constitutional-Law-Principles-Policies-Treatise/dp/0735598975/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1422199742&sr=1-1&pebp=1422199756757&peasin=735598975 Chemerinsky is always a good choice.

u/jd_edc · 1 pointr/atheism

> people who would not be prosecuted if not for speech implicating them in a conspiracy are prosecuted because of said speech

So your argument is that criminalizing more speech is ok because sometimes some speech=evidence of criminality?

I assumed you were at least passingly familiar with the volumes of scholarship and precedent surrounding this area when I made my statement. If not, this is a great place to start. Core speech, i.e. political speech, wasn't criminalized during the Ratification era 'when the ink was fresh', if you want to take an original/textualist bent, nor was that the stated intent/purpose of dozens of founding statesmen and founding-era jurists, but only after the Alien and Sedition Acts, which again, was argued as unconstitutional by many of the same.

Or, something something Federalist normative nonsense.

u/CaptJax · 1 pointr/LawSchool
u/radiantwave · 1 pointr/politics

Because the laws they make are designed to protect the elite, not the people. There was an interesting article I read that talks about how The US is becoming a country with two separate sets of laws, one for the common people and one for the elite.

Glen Greenwald wrote a book on this...

With Liberty and Justice for some

u/white_discussion · 1 pointr/todayilearned

And sometimes it isn't "murder" if there are mitigating circumstances. We have many different charges based on lots of different factors and scenarios. He could be screwed up mentally and not been properly evaluated. I think it is obvious he had incredibly shitty legal representation. I didn't say him killing them was the correct thing to do or that he shouldn't answer for that in some way. All I said was that I, personally, would refuse to convict him of murder given that he had suffered years of abuse and might face the death penalty.

And, I'm sorry, but you are a fool if you think we have even a passable "justice system." Our "justice system" is nothing of the kind. It is a two tiered system of injustice.

You might benefit from reading this book.

http://www.amazon.com/With-Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality/dp/0805092056

u/bames53 · 1 pointr/Anarcho_Capitalism

> In the state of nature we have the right to do so, wouldn't you agree?

No. Certainly you can define a concept of rights and justice which holds that to be true, but there are alternative conceptions which hold that it is not just or right for one person to murder another. You've simply assumed that a 'social contract' is the only way to avoid the problems created by the conception of rights you're using.

Here's one alternative some people use: Justice and rights are defined in terms of who may use or exclude others from what rivalrous goods. Those definitions are called 'property rights'. These definitions don't say anything about what kind of society will develop or how disputes would be resolved in practice. It's only a standard for determining what is or isn't 'just'.

Under this conception of justice what is or isn't just is invariant and does not change based on some collectively decided 'social contract.' What social institutions evolve and whether they promote or retard justice is irrelevant to the basic definition of justice.

---

> You know that is how it would be structured; it is like an insurance plan. You pay for certain coverage. The more money you have, the more coverage you can get. By that definition, the homeless could just be outright murdered in the street without repercussion. Jails would not exist.

You might be interested in reading some materials on historical examples of how well various things have worked. For example The not so Wild, Wild West, and David Friedman's Legal Systems Very Different From Ours (Draft) (It's not about a bunch of libertarian systems, but it provides a bit of perspective on different systems).

> My dystopia would be one where different laws apply do different people, and your ability to receive protection depends on your ability to pay.

With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful

u/iStandWithBrad · 1 pointr/IAmA

>Would this also bring up the case as to. Wether or not we have two different systems of justice in the United States: one for the regular common folk and another for the wealthy elite.

Award-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald actually recently published a book on this subject, titled With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful.

u/signtoin · 1 pointr/politics

It's not complex, it's very simple: the powerful and rich have gotten away with crimes for the past decades (to just cover recent history). Here's a great read on the subject.

u/supperslurp · 1 pointr/explainlikeimfive

That's it in a nutshell. Some more general background is in this great book.

u/manisnotabird · 1 pointr/politics

Glenn Greenwald's 2011 book With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful is a very good history of how elites have increasingly escaped the justice reservered for the rest of us.

u/Malizulu · 1 pointr/technology

Prove me wrong.


Or perhaps read a book. Or watch a lecture.

u/Osterstriker · 1 pointr/Libertarian

Glenn Greenwald examined this problem very extensively in his latest book, With Liberty and Justice for Some. Basically, he traces this modern-day erosion of the rule of law and two-tier justice system to when Ford pardoned Nixon.

He also outlined the major insights of his book in a 2011 interview with Harper's.

u/noodlez222 · 1 pointr/Libertarian
u/reiduh · 1 pointr/bayarea

This woman makes me livid... my blood boils, once more.

I wonder which wrist they'll slap

> "Nadia recognizes her error, and she intends to take all appropriate action to regain her health."

Bullshit. Wasn't that from last time's?

u/zArtLaffer · 1 pointr/politics

This guy has thought some of it through. I generally don't agree with the author, but it wasn't a bad book:

u/buckybone · 1 pointr/AdviceAnimals

Congress has a 9% approval rating, but the member who "represents" your district is never the problem...

The average length of service in the House was under 4 years until the Progressive Era kicked off. It's about time to send it back there.

u/dervy · 1 pointr/LawSchool

What classes specifically? Here are a few that I remember being helpful last semester:

u/jessmeesh14 · 1 pointr/LawSchool

Here's Chemerinsky, but it's not short.

There's a bunch of useful outlines/flowcharts that have been posted here and on /r/LawSchoolOutlines. If you use the search feature you'll find them.

u/BlackJackShellac · 1 pointr/Drugs

This guy has a book now by the way, with specific advice and case studies. I recommend it for any illegal drug user.

https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393

u/pacificdreams · 1 pointr/news

I do agree with you, but there is another reasoning for punishment that is widely held by many people, and that is the concept of vengence/retribution/revenge. Eye for an eye, even though I do not, a lot of people do believe in this. We need to figure out a justice system that compassionately and constructively rehabilitates, AND satisfies society's need for retribution.

There is actually a movement to abolish prisons entirely.

This is a really good introductory read to the topic, Are Prisons Obsolete by Angela Davis. It is only like 130pgs or so, and it reads fast.

u/brzzad · 1 pointr/politics

The War On Drugs: The Prison Industrial Complex - a documentary about the many ways people profit off of the U.S. prison system

"Are Prisons Obsolete?" by Angela Davis

  • a book which poses very interesting ideas about abolishing the prison system completely
u/redditacct · 1 pointr/technology

Jesus, they can fucking make us liable for everything under the sun - try reading 3 Felonies a Day http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594032556

It is to make a point, like the Alabama immigration law, they bitch and bitch and bitch about illegals and now they are crying in their PBR about the crops rotting in the fields.

Companies bitch about people "stealing" content - here's an idea, focus your bitching/suing on the companies making money off the fact that someone posted copyrighted content - djstinkbug69 is not making money off posting Lil' Wayne's "I Feel Like Dying". youtube is making the money, so it is fine for them to take the profit from "illegal" content but not the responsibility - wow, that sounds familiar.

I say let the media companies fight it out in court or via lobbying or in the ring with the distribution companies; instead of the media companies abusing the court system to fight essentially defenseless individuals.

u/nomnommoi · 1 pointr/sex

> Exactly as you say, it's all up to the judge wether or not you have committed a federal crime if you mail USPS. Have you violated "community standards"?

A postal inspector, then a prosecutor, then a judge, then a jury. And since the jury's answer is so likely to be "no", everyone prior to them is not even going to try it.

> If you mail it FedEx, no judges involved, no possibility of a crime committed.

No crime under §1461. Unfortunately, under §1462, using a common carrier like FexEx to transport obscene matter is also a crime.

§1462 also covers computer systems.

Three felonies a day, baby. Three felonies a day.

u/stemgang · 1 pointr/Libertarian

Your friend is out of compliance and blissfully ignorant. He is probably committing Three Felonies a Day. Once he hires his first employee, his tax and regulatory burden will skyrocket.

u/CitizenCain · 1 pointr/WTF

>That's my point, though. It's a news story that a congressman wants to use his power to lock someone up for their opinion. In a country like China, it just happens.

It just happens here too. If you really think you have freedom of speech, try mouthing off to a cop and see how many misdemeanors you get slapped with.

>edit- I just looked at your link and your comments are kinda disingenuous. I mean, did you even read the complaint? He wants her prosecuted for breaking a federal law in regards to forming fund raising committees for federal politicians.

No, he sees a prominent online critic, and wants her silenced. Freedom of speech, but he doesn't like the speech. So what does he do? He digs into the federal legal code, which is tens of thousands of "codes" long (thousands of pages), in dense legalese that highly paid lawyers have trouble navigating and finds something to pin on her. All because she put up a website he doesn't like. It's got nothing to do with fraud.

Read Three Felonies a Day. It'll be a nifty education for ya. You're a federal felon, and you probably don't even know it.

>I honestly don't see anything wrong with him wanting this action taken, considering all the shit she did. I didn't even know about this story until your link but actually reading it makes me side with him almost 100%.

Good for you. I'll be sure not to speak up for you when some politician or prosecutor decides to railroad you for violating an unconstitutional law you didn't even know existed.

u/munificent · 1 pointr/NoStupidQuestions

> if you're a good person, you've got nothing to hide

There are a number of detailed arguments to refute that. I'll just do some one-liners:

  1. There is a difference between privacy and hiding things. I don't hide the fact that I take a shit, but that doesn't mean I'm comfortable with people watching me do it either.

  2. Being "on" like you are when you're in a social situation is tiring. Even the most outgoing person still needs time away from people to decompress and let down their guard. If you are always being watched, you are always on. That tension isn't healthy.

  3. "Good person" according to who's definition?

  4. How do you know you aren't breaking a law? Do you know the entire US code? See Three Felonies A Day.

  5. How can you be sure they won't lie about what they saw you doing? If the NSA says they saw you communicating with terrorists, what are you going to do about it?
u/d_c_d_ · 1 pointr/EDC

This.

Notice I said unwittingly, most people don't realize they have broken some obscure, ridiculous laws during the course of their day.

u/bop_ad · 1 pointr/AskReddit

I live in the US, which has an absurd percentage of its citizens in jail. Thus the overpopulation.

You have probably committed a felony at some point in your life. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1594032556/

u/LS6 · 1 pointr/washingtondc

Just how government works. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

u/GeauxMik · 1 pointr/Libertarian
u/bkenobi · 1 pointr/news

if you want to know more history on the subject, read "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces" it talks about all this stuff

http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610392116

u/Bbaily · 1 pointr/conspiracy

read this: "Rise of the warrior cop" it's not a bashing session it's very well written and researched documentary on how and why we have "police state lite" soon to be far worse.

u/kewlfocus · 1 pointr/WTF
u/AllWrong74 · 1 pointr/Libertarian

We've been ranting about a police state for far longer than the deal in Ferguson. Radley Balko literally wrote the book on police militarization, and has been preaching against it for far longer than the book has been in print, for instance.

u/vitamalz · 1 pointr/WTF
u/alexa-blue · 1 pointr/bestofthefray

On my reading list. Do you think this is getting more publicity? I mostly get the sense that the media is a mouthpiece for the official story line. Don't disagree with you, TK, bite, except that I don't think overstating the facts serves any good. An alternative (to me) take here.

u/dazhealy · 1 pointr/ireland

Its over reccommended on reddit at the moment but Rise of the Warrior Cop gives a great account of the problems with American police forces.

One thing I can say about the Gardaí is that I wouldn't swap them for any armed police force in the world.

u/Zalwol · 1 pointr/politics

If you haven't yet purchased Radley's book, do it now.

u/Tom_Bombadilesq · 1 pointr/news

I was offering the link simply as a means to link to the text itself; and not as an endorsement of the reviews on GoodReads (which I know nothing of their authenticity)

I prefer to read books myself rather than leave it to someone else to decide for me if I ought to read a book or what opinion I ought to have on a particular book

If you prefer I different link to the text that you may find more palatable (or not)
https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577

u/tacosforbreakfastt · 1 pointr/Conservative

"police have a financial incentive to focus on drugs. Federal grant programs, such as the Edward J. Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program, reward local and state police for the number of people they arrest."

http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/thousands-rapists-are-not-behind-bars-because-cops-focus-marijuana-users


You are severely misinformed. You are citing anecdotal evidence from 'court in a big city.' AND the statistics you provided only show one crime, the problem is much larger, as I said.

Pick up a copy of this book from conservative writer Radley Balko and you will quickly change your stance. I promise.

http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577

u/brzcory · 1 pointr/todayilearned

I'd be okay with it being banned, but I wouldn't really support it.

Banning something that's not really a problem goes against my personal views. It's like banning assault weapons to stop gun crime, in spite of the fact that killings involving rifles are less than 1% of gun crime. Just stupid feel-good legislation that doesn't do anything to actually combat the problem.

But I'm all for police being on (mostly) the same ground as your average citizen. Much like they are in Britain. Sure, they've got a bunch of buddies, radios, and high-viz vests, but you're not seeing British police shoot black kids all day for wearing a hoodie.

And it really goes back to a mindset. Police in America are in this stupid war-on-cops mindset that they're going to be shot at sometime during their service and need to be on the lookout all the time for the lone gunman who's going to shoot them. That's a completely false narrative that leads to thousands of needless civilian casualties every year. More police die on-the-job of heart attacks and traffic accidents than of violence.

If you ever get bored, this is a pretty good read. Really opens your eyes to what police are nowadays, versus what they're intended to be.

u/brbEightball · 1 pointr/GlobalOffensive

It's true, you can find wiki articles cataloguing hundreds, perhaps thousands of officer-involve shootings.

Radley Balko has written a few books on this subject, they're worth checking out: http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577/ref=sr_1_cc_1?s=aps&ie=UTF8&qid=1411913115&sr=1-1-catcorr

Without revealing too much, I have had a death in my family as a result of such an incident...

u/illimitable1 · 1 pointr/nashville

I don't believe that incarcerating people as we do actually achieves a safer or better society. I think the war on drugs is a costly sham that infringes on everyone's ability to live in a free country. White lawbreakers, especially drug users, get away with more in my experience than do nonwhites. These are the three arguments that rang true for me in her book, despite blathering on for pages and pages about details that I have no way to verify the truth of, like federal sentencing laws about powdered cocaine versus crack.

We lock up so many damn people. It's not because US people are born more criminal than people elsewhere, I don't think. Something about the "land of the free" having the highest per-capita incarceration rate in the world is fucked up: I'm pretty sure you and I would come to an agreement about that, even if nothing else.

What did you think of Rise of the Warrior Cop, which came out at about the same time?

u/YawnsMcGee · 1 pointr/news

There is an incredibly good book that answers that question and gives a full background on the reasoning. It's called Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces. I highly recommend it.

u/the_ancient1 · 1 pointr/news

ROFL, that is funny right there...

I always love when people assume another person is young or unwise simply because their world view differs from there own.

No I do not have "alot of growing up to do"

My libertarian position has evolved over many many years of research and personal reflection, while it is still evolving and will always until I die, my views on modern policing will not evolve to support the current state of affirs where the police can detonate a bomb in the face of a child with no terminations or criminal charges, where police can murder a person legally carrying a firearm and not be found guilty of murder, where police can raid a home with fully automatic weapons in a military style assault because the occupants toss out some loose leaf tea in their garbage and no one is fired or charged with a crime.

No it sounds like you need to do some more research into the state of Modern Policing, I recommend starting with Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces

u/boobies23 · 1 pointr/news
u/gotblues · 1 pointr/nyc

We are living a trend of police militarization. Here's a good popular book about it.

u/I-_I · 1 pointr/moosearchive_restored


would you like to know more?

EXCLUSIVE: Secret service infiltrated paedophile group to 'blackmail establishment'

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/485529/Special-Branch-funded-Paedophile-Information-Exchange-says-Home-Office-whistleblower

'More than 10' politicians on list held by police investigating Westminster 'paedophile ring'

Whistleblower who prompted Operation Fernbridge says up to 40 MPs and peers knew about or took part in child abuse

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10947561/More-than-10-politicians-on-list-held-by-police-investigating-Westminster-paedophile-ring.html

Nearly everyone on UK paedophile ring list is a Freemason says abuse victim

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m-5BUNXfNU

Margaret Thatcher 'personally covered up' child abuse allegations against senior ministers: The Tory Prime Minister is said to have held a meeting with a rising star, who was tipped for promotion, and told him: “You have to clean up your sexual act”

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/2akwze/margaret_thatcher_personally_covered_up_child/

Children's homes were 'supply line' for paedophiles, says ex-minister

Lord Warner says an inquiry he conducted in 1992 showed how children's homes were targeted by powerful people

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/08/children-homes-supply-line-paedophiles-lord-warner

Westminster paedophile ring allegations: timeline

Here are the key events in the claims around an alleged VIP paedophile ring in Westminster

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10950127/Westminster-paedophile-ring-allegations-timeline.html

Canadian Sex Worker kicked out of Senate hearings on controversial prostitution law after threatening to reveal list of Canadian federal politicians who use prostitution.

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/2g3ch2/canadian_sex_worker_kicked_out_of_senate_hearings/

Jehovah's Witnesses destroyed documents showing child abuse allegations, court told in cover-up case

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/29f9wp/jehovahs_witnesses_destroyed_documents_showing/


Salvation Army 'rented out' boys at Sydney children’s home in Sydney to paedophiles

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10606458/Salvation-Army-rented-out-boys-at-Sydney-childrens-home-in-Sydney-to-paedophiles.html

TIL that a woman, hired by Dyncorp to crackdown on forced prostitution on behalf of the UN, discovered that the UN police were the main perpetrators of forced prostitution and was later fired.

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/15r2j4/til_that_a_woman_hired_by_dyncorp_to_crackdown_on/

WikiLeaks Reveals That Military Contractors Have Not Lost Their Taste For Child Prostitutes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/wikileaks-reveals-that-mi_n_793816.html

The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman's Fight for Justice

http://www.amazon.com/The-Whistleblower-Trafficking-Military-Contractors/dp/B005CDUBC2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1331445269&sr=8-4

Sounds like Blackwater founder Erik Prince was operating a child prostitution service in Iraq

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6249748

1989 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5OJPeHCmhA

1989 #2 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU-k-tfiPfs

1989 story about Bush Sr. Whitehouse call Boy sex ring

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/02/06/15709461.php

Nixon Tape Discusses Homosexuals at Bohemian Grove

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPb-PN9F2Pc

Charges refiled against former Pittsburgh cop accused of running prostitution ring

http://triblive.com/news/2222380-74/johns-police-criminal-charges-pittsburgh-prostitution-allegheny-charged-counts-county#axzz2Qc0wAaBg

Former TSA employee fined $500 for running prostitution ring

Man confronted by police in Silver Spring hotel in February

http://www.gazette.net/article/20120611/NEWS/706119952/1007/former-tsa-employee-fined-500-for-running-prostitution-ring&template=gazette

School board member convicted of running prostitution ring in California

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/08/16904911-school-board-member-convicted-of-running-prostitution-ring-in-california?lite

FBI dad’s spyware experiment accidentally exposes pedophile principal

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/146xzt/fbi_dads_spyware_experiment_accidentally_exposes/

The Franklin Cover-Up - John DeCamp - Full film

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcWrrBceuP4

The Franklin Cover-up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska

http://www.amazon.com/The-Franklin-Cover-up-Satanism-Nebraska/dp/0963215809/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366098964&sr=8-1&keywords=franklin+coverup

Pentagon Child Porn Scandal: Security Agencies Were Left At Risk, Investigators Say

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/pentagon-child-porn-scand_n_656839.html

Secret Service Prostitution Scandal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/secret-service-prostitution-scandal

A Party under Fire: A Scandal-Scarred GOP Asks, ‘What Next?’

Explicit e-mails with under-age male pages. Criminal lobbyists. Being on client lists for prostitution rings. FBI corruption investigations. And, now, soliciting sex in an airport bathroom. People are beginning to wonder: how low can Republican lawmakers go?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/a-party-under-fire-a-scandal-scarred-gop-asks-what-next-a-502653.html

Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-spitzer.html

The D.C. Madam Case, All Sordid Out

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-04-11/opinions/36798466_1_deborah-jeane-palfrey-prosecutors-shock-and-awe

Mike Horner Prostitution Scandal: GOP State Rep. Resigns After Name Reportedly Surfaces On Client List

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/mike-horner-sex-prostitution-scandal_n_1910647.html

Another One: Top Federal Judge Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452917&page=1#.UW0JY0pcnn4

‘Comfort Women’ Controversy Comes to New York

http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/comfort-women-controversy-comes-to-new-york/



Pope Francis: 'About 2%' of Catholic clergy paedophiles

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28282050

Pope begs forgiveness for 'sacrilegious cult' of Church sexual abuse

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/07/us-pope-abuse-idUSKBN0FC15J20140707

Vatican arrests former archbishop on paedophilia charges

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/23/us-vaitican-abuse-arrest-idUSKCN0HI28T20140923

Sex scandal rocks Vatican: Papal usher, chorister linked to gay prostitution ring

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/sex-scandal-rocks-vatican-papal-usher-chorister-linked-gay-prostitution-ring-article-1.172149

BBC News - Catholic Church loses child abuse liability appeal

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/wfq5e/bbc_news_catholic_church_loses_child_abuse/

Ireland admits involvement in Catholic laundry slavery

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57567706/ireland-admits-involvement-in-catholic-laundry-slavery/

Cover-up claims revive sex scandal

Belgian establishment accused of closing ranks to block investigation

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/apr/21/stephenbates

Belgium Pedophilia Scandal /Did Authorities Cover Up Its Scope?: Book Revives Fear of Grand Conspiracy

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/16/news/16iht-brussels.2.t.html?pagewanted=all

Portugal's elite linked to paedophile ring

Abuse was reportedly going on at Lisbon orphanage for 20 years

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/27/childprotection.uk

FBI Ran Pedophile Ring to Nab Pedophiles

As late as last year, the FBI ran a child pornography operation in an attempt to nab its customers. The service ran for two weeks "while attempting to identify more than 5,000 customers, according to a Seattle FBI agent's statements to the court."

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/05/30/FBI-Ran-Pedophile-Ring-to-Nab-Pedophiles

Boy Scouts helped alleged molesters cover tracks, files show

When volunteers and employees were suspected of sexually abusing children, Boy Scout officials often didn't tell police, files from 1970-91 reveal. In many cases they sought to hide the situation.

http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-boy-scouts-files-20120916,0,1641796.story#axzz2xIsUM5rH

Child Sex Case Adds Outrage To Scandals Rocking Belgium

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-10-27/news/9610270253_1_marc-dutroux-minister-willy-claes-jean-marc-connerotte

Theme park employees caught in child porn arrests

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/14/us/theme-park-employees-child-sex-stings/

Former acting HHS cybersecurity director convicted on child porn charges

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/26/former-acting-hhs-cybersecurity-director-convicted-on-child-porn-charges/

Hundreds held over Canada child porn

Police in Canada say 348 people have been arrested and nearly 400 children rescued during a three-year investigation into child pornography.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24944358

Los Angeles Deputy City Attorney Arrested on Child Porn Charges

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Los-Angeles-Deputy-City-Attorney-arrested-on-child-porn-charges-the-City-Attorneys-Office-said-274174791.html

u/flyyyyyyyyy · 1 pointr/conspiracy

would you like to know more?

TIL that a woman, hired by Dyncorp to crackdown on forced prostitution on behalf of the UN, discovered that the UN police were the main perpetrators of forced prostitution and was later fired.

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/15r2j4/til_that_a_woman_hired_by_dyncorp_to_crackdown_on/

WikiLeaks Reveals That Military Contractors Have Not Lost Their Taste For Child Prostitutes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/wikileaks-reveals-that-mi_n_793816.html

The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman's Fight for Justice

http://www.amazon.com/The-Whistleblower-Trafficking-Military-Contractors/dp/B005CDUBC2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1331445269&sr=8-4

Sounds like Blackwater founder Erik Prince was operating a child prostitution service in Iraq

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6249748

1989 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5OJPeHCmhA

1989 #2 News: Call boys in Bush Sr's Whitehouse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU-k-tfiPfs

1989 story about Bush Sr. Whitehouse call Boy sex ring

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2003/02/06/15709461.php

Nixon Tape Discusses Homosexuals at Bohemian Grove

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPb-PN9F2Pc

Charges refiled against former Pittsburgh cop accused of running prostitution ring

http://triblive.com/news/2222380-74/johns-police-criminal-charges-pittsburgh-prostitution-allegheny-charged-counts-county#axzz2Qc0wAaBg

Former TSA employee fined $500 for running prostitution ring

Man confronted by police in Silver Spring hotel in February

http://www.gazette.net/article/20120611/NEWS/706119952/1007/former-tsa-employee-fined-500-for-running-prostitution-ring&template=gazette

School board member convicted of running prostitution ring in California

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/08/16904911-school-board-member-convicted-of-running-prostitution-ring-in-california?lite

FBI dad’s spyware experiment accidentally exposes pedophile principal

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/146xzt/fbi_dads_spyware_experiment_accidentally_exposes/

The Franklin Cover-Up - John DeCamp - Full film

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcWrrBceuP4

The Franklin Cover-up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska

http://www.amazon.com/The-Franklin-Cover-up-Satanism-Nebraska/dp/0963215809/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366098964&sr=8-1&keywords=franklin+coverup

Pentagon Child Porn Scandal: Security Agencies Were Left At Risk, Investigators Say

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/pentagon-child-porn-scand_n_656839.html

Secret Service Prostitution Scandal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/secret-service-prostitution-scandal

A Party under Fire: A Scandal-Scarred GOP Asks, ‘What Next?’

Explicit e-mails with under-age male pages. Criminal lobbyists. Being on client lists for prostitution rings. FBI corruption investigations. And, now, soliciting sex in an airport bathroom. People are beginning to wonder: how low can Republican lawmakers go?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/a-party-under-fire-a-scandal-scarred-gop-asks-what-next-a-502653.html

Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/10/nyregion/10cnd-spitzer.html

The D.C. Madam Case, All Sordid Out

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-04-11/opinions/36798466_1_deborah-jeane-palfrey-prosecutors-shock-and-awe

Mike Horner Prostitution Scandal: GOP State Rep. Resigns After Name Reportedly Surfaces On Client List

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/mike-horner-sex-prostitution-scandal_n_1910647.html

Another One: Top Federal Judge Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4452917&page=1#.UW0JY0pcnn4

‘Comfort Women’ Controversy Comes to New York

http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/comfort-women-controversy-comes-to-new-york/

Sex scandal rocks Vatican: Papal usher, chorister linked to gay prostitution ring

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/sex-scandal-rocks-vatican-papal-usher-chorister-linked-gay-prostitution-ring-article-1.172149

BBC News - Catholic Church loses child abuse liability appeal

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/wfq5e/bbc_news_catholic_church_loses_child_abuse/

Ireland admits involvement in Catholic laundry slavery

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57567706/ireland-admits-involvement-in-catholic-laundry-slavery/

Cover-up claims revive sex scandal

Belgian establishment accused of closing ranks to block investigation

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1999/apr/21/stephenbates

Belgium Pedophilia Scandal /Did Authorities Cover Up Its Scope?: Book Revives Fear of Grand Conspiracy

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/16/news/16iht-brussels.2.t.html?pagewanted=all

Portugal's elite linked to paedophile ring

Abuse was reportedly going on at Lisbon orphanage for 20 years

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/27/childprotection.uk

FBI Ran Pedophile Ring to Nab Pedophiles

As late as last year, the FBI ran a child pornography operation in an attempt to nab its customers. The service ran for two weeks "while attempting to identify more than 5,000 customers, according to a Seattle FBI agent's statements to the court."

http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/05/30/FBI-Ran-Pedophile-Ring-to-Nab-Pedophiles

u/smokey_bear · 1 pointr/remembermoose


more

Canadian Sex Worker kicked out of Senate hearings on controversial prostitution law after threatening to reveal list of Canadian federal politicians who use prostitution.

http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/2g3ch2/canadian_sex_worker_kicked_out_of_senate_hearings/

Jehovah's Witnesses destroyed documents showing child abuse allegations, court told in cover-up case

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/29f9wp/jehovahs_witnesses_destroyed_documents_showing/


Salvation Army 'rented out' boys at Sydney children’s home in Sydney to paedophiles

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/10606458/Salvation-Army-rented-out-boys-at-Sydney-childrens-home-in-Sydney-to-paedophiles.html

TIL that a woman, hired by Dyncorp to crackdown on forced prostitution on behalf of the UN, discovered that the UN police were the main perpetrators of forced prostitution and was later fired.

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/15r2j4/til_that_a_woman_hired_by_dyncorp_to_crackdown_on/

WikiLeaks Reveals That Military Contractors Have Not Lost Their Taste For Child Prostitutes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/08/wikileaks-reveals-that-mi_n_793816.html

The Whistleblower: Sex Trafficking, Military Contractors, and One Woman's Fight for Justice

http://www.amazon.com/The-Whistleblower-Trafficking-Military-Contractors/dp/B005CDUBC2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1331445269&sr=8-4

Sounds like Blackwater founder Erik Prince was operating a child prostitution service in Iraq

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6249748

u/wonder_er · 1 pointr/Libertarian

using something "society" wants as enough impetuous to force everyone to pay for it is dangerous.

For example, the USA seems to be at war all over the world, for very bad reasons.

I wish I could opt out of paying for the military. If the government had no funds to make payroll, we'd make very different foreign policy decisions, very quickly.

Re: the justice system - it DOES serve those with money already. Just instead of paying for the courts directly, people with money pay a lawyer who can usually get them a tolerable outcome.

If you don't have money (and sometimes if you do) you still get ground under the heavy hand of "justice".

Very, very little criminal justice activity is regular small-crimes prosecution (like robbery). It's not lucrative enough to justify the police spending their time on it.

I recommend Three Felonies A Day for a better dig into courts.

Another good read is Rise of the Warrior Cop.

Also, full disclosure, the way the courts should function is great! I love what their goal is. But the way they do function is often such a gross perversion of justice it makes me think that a private courts system would do it better, if no other reason then it couldn't be so over-the-top predatory.

If you want an even stranger read, check out Market for Liberty. The authors sketch out what a private courts and police system might look like.

u/noclevername · 1 pointr/whatisthisthing

Surplus military hardware that is sold to local police. Here's an interesting book on the subject.

u/buckyVanBuren · 1 pointr/todayilearned

Probably Radley Balko. He keeps a close eye out on cases like this and has just released a book, Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces, concerning this subject.

I am currently reading it and it is enlightening.

Amazon link
http://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-ebook/dp/B00B3M3UFQ/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1374411799&sr=1-1

u/SnapshillBot · 1 pointr/MGTOW

Archived for your convenience

Snapshots:

  1. This Post - archive.org, [megalodon.jp*](http://megalodon.jp/?url=https://www.amazon.com/Feminist-Lie-Never-About-Equality-ebook/dp/B071SG95CN/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1495960018&sr=8-1&keywords=the+feminist+lie "could not auto-archive; click to resubmit it!"), [archive.is*](https://archive.is/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FFeminist-Lie-Never-About-Equality-ebook%2Fdp%2FB071SG95CN%2Fref%3Dsr_1_1%3Fie%3DUTF8%26qid%3D1495960018%26sr%3D8-1%26keywords%3Dthe%2Bfeminist%2Blie&run=1 "could not auto-archive; click to resubmit it!")

    ^(I am a bot.) ^([Info](/r/SnapshillBot) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=\/r\/SnapshillBot))
u/theotherothergame · 0 pointsr/self

If you haven't run into the Buzzsaw, you haven't been doing real journalism. Sorry.

u/TheRealPariah · 0 pointsr/guns

If the felons are so dangerous that they cannot be trusted with a firearm, why would they be let out of prison in the first place?

Furthermore, if they have shown that they do not respect laws placed on them in the first place, why would they do so with bans on possessions of firearms? You do understand that you have probably committed a few hundred felonies in your lifetime. Should you be trusted with a firearm? Afterall, you have probably committed multiple felonies in the last week.

If the felons are going to commit a crime (and break the law), why would writing another law stop them from getting guns and using them against people (why you are concerned about them owning them in the first place)? It doesn't. It's an overinclusive rule which renders large groups of American citizens helpless. Many of these people live in very bad areas and you would throw them into cages because they have the audacity to arm themselves so they can defend themselves and their families.

>Non-citizens.... It's just my belief that if you are not a citizen, as defined by the 14th amendment, you are not protected by our constitution.

Humans have rights. The Constitution does not grant these rights, the Constitution prohibits the government from infringing on pre-existing rights. You didn't really provide an answer to why they shouldn't be allowed to own firearms legally, you dodged the question by saying non-citizens are not protected by the Constitution (which isn't true).

So again, why should non-citizens not have the right to own a firearm?

u/SockGnome · 0 pointsr/news

I'm starting to think you're trolling. I find it troubling to believe someone has such an absolutist view point.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1594032556/ref=mw_dp_mdsc?dsc=1

u/mariox19 · 0 pointsr/Economics

> I think that's an extreme and unrealistic premise.

Try this on for size: "We're All Felons, Now."

> Congress has been adding about 55 new crimes to the federal criminal code each year since the 1980s. There are now about 4,500 separate federal crimes. And that doesn't include federal regulations, which are increasingly being enforced with criminal, not administrative, penalties. It also doesn't include the increasing leeway with which prosecutors can enforce broadly written federal conspiracy, racketeering, and money laundering laws. And this is before we even get to the states' criminal codes.
>
> In his new book, the Boston-based civil liberties advocate and occasional Reason contributor Harvey Silverglate estimates that in 2009, the average American commits about three federal felonies per day.

u/scottwuzhear · 0 pointsr/Charlotte

Cops do not work to make sure you are safe. They are under no obligation to protect you, they only execute the law. Cops are nigh untouchable and invincible nowadays. They can be filmed assaulting, harassing, or killing someone and get off with nothing more than a paid vacation. Our police forces are being militarized, walking the streets with assault rifles, patrolling the streets with military vehicles and anti-landmine vehicles. I suggest you read Rise of the Warrior Cop.

u/libertariangranola · 0 pointsr/Bitcoin

Far more relevant are the militarized police forces around the country and all of the gangs fuelled by the War on (some) Drugs.

u/datenschwanz · 0 pointsr/todayilearned

You can read much more of the formation of the first swat teams in Radley Balko's "Rise of the Warrior Cop". Highly suggested reading.

https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Warrior-Cop-Militarization-Americas/dp/1610394577/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1494734957&sr=8-1&keywords=rise+of+the+warrior+cop

u/theinsanity · -1 pointsr/asianamerican

You think universities actually care about any of the things you listed in your argument? If they did, they'd address the phenomenon of Mismatch (Basically, affirmative action admits can't compete with anyone else, so they drop out). Affirmative action is just a fearful reaction to race riots.

u/redketh · -1 pointsr/news

Yet you cannot seem to form even a minimally cogent legal argument on why that would be unconstitutional. I'm talking to a wall here, and am seriously getting tired of going in circles with you. I won't be continuing this thread further, but will leave you with a referral to a book that was helpful for me in understanding Constitutional law.

u/timesyours · -1 pointsr/LawSchool

Imagining you don't have time to read full books amidst your other 1L reading, try Wikipedia (seriously). Obviously, be wary of the source, but for an article as researched and clicked-on as the "United States Constitution," you'd be hard-pressed to find any fundamental errors.

Also try Wikipedia pages like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_(1776–89)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_(1789–1849)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison

Also, most, if not all, of the cases you will read in ConLaw will have Wikipedia pages, since we are talking about some of the landmark cases of all time. Most of the pages are well-researched, and it is usually easy to tell when they are not (by lack of citation, grammatical/spelling errors, etc). Before reading a case, go to Wikipedia to get background information that will put everything in context. It will make the cases easier to remember, they will make more sense from a legal standpoint, and you will know more than most of your classmates. (But I am a history buff, so maybe other people don't care).

For a supplement, I cannot recommend Chemerinsky's "Principles and Policies" enough. It will be invaluable throughout law school and beyond. At over 1400 pages, it is not meant to be a beginning-to-end page turner, but rather is an immensely helpful resource on individual topics as you go along.

u/Old_LandCruiser · -1 pointsr/CCW

That type of statement makes you look suspicious and uncooperative.

Nobody should talk to the police. If you do have to, give a very brief statement. Something like "that guy was doing X(reason you killed him), I had to protect myself and my family. I'll be happy to cooperate further after I speak to my lawyer, but I won't answer anymore questions right now"

Quite frankly, everyone should respectfully invoke their 5th Amendment right any time the police want to question you more than about what you're doing right here, right now, and who you are. Other than that, you should have a lawyer. Even if you didnt just shoot someone in self defense. You never know what a detective will try to pin on you after twisting your words or asking leading questions.

EDIT: Everyone should also read this book. Whether you carry a gun or not:
https://www.amazon.com/You-Have-Right-Remain-Innocent/dp/1503933393

u/clowncar · -1 pointsr/news

I don't want to hold myself up to ridicule, but I will admit here -- I have read about conspiracies within the United States government, its bureaucracies and intelligence agencies -- that I am a wide open to believing the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax. With that said, I have yet to read anything that convinces me of this.

For myself, I am uninterested in "theories". I am interested in anomalies and inconsistencies in official narratives. Some are obviously human error, others are not. I have been reading conspiracy research for 25 years and I have never had any time or stomach for theories. I am interested in reading about the facts that don't match up.

Theories involving "disaster/crisis" actors -- a small, bizarre coterie of people who seemingly earn their living populating national tragedies -- is one of the dumbest theories I've ever come across. Few theories are so lacking in logic and proof. A few grainy photos of people who look alike? Absolutely and utterly ridiculous.

To be fair-minded, I have started reading the PDF book, Nobody Died At Sandy Hook. It's absolute garbage. I'm annotating my copy and may send it to the author.

So, the idea of hounding parents to prove their children existed, to provide death certificates, shows me the pitifully low-level some areas of conspiracy research have fallen to.

I am the audience for this kind of thing and I think this theory is utter bullshit.

EDIT: Books that have convinced me of conspiracies:

u/OscarZAcosta · -1 pointsr/legaladvice

>You're referring to civil forfeiture of crime-related assets. That can only happen when a crime has occurred.

Rather than catalogue the hundreds of thousands of times assets have been seized and forfeited on mere suspicion of connection to drug activity, I'll just refer you to these articles and one Radley Balko who has made his living, in part, by detailing the massive amounts of money stolen through civil asset forfeiture.

Balko began writing on forfeiture when he worked at Reason, continued when he moved to HuffPo, and wrote a little book on why, exactly, it is in the best interest of police departments to steal, via civil asset forfeiture. You might have heard of it...it's gotten massive international attention for the last year or so.

tl;dr: Anyone who thinks civil asset forfeiture can only happen when a crime occurs has been living under a rock for the last 50 years.

u/encore_une_fois · -2 pointsr/todayilearned

Affirmative action in colleges biases the incoming class so that black students, on average, have lower qualifications (gpa & test scores) compared to the caucasian and asian populations. In turn, this lower preparedness results in worse outcomes at these schools, putting black students, on average, towards the bottom of their classes. Rather than "helping them" by admitting them into schools they aren't qualified for, and graduating towards the bottom of the class, they would be better off with an admissions process that wasn't explicitly racially biased, where they might go to a slightly "lower-tier" school, but have a greater chance to end up at the top of their class. It is more beneficial to excel at your school than to be at the very "best" school.

(Source on the above: Mismatch )

Not to mention the bullshit of Affirmative Action in government hiring programs, where scoring is done on a very precise basis without much room for human discretion, where the bonuses for being black, or being female, are enough to swamp, I don't know, actual qualifications. But yeah, I'm sure the fact that my dad has been openly discriminated against on the basis of race and gender during his entire career in government civil has nothing to do with the fact that he has never gotten a management position despite a Ph.D., years of experience, prior experience running his own company, etc., etc.

So yeah, I do think removing racism would make systems less racist. Shocker, I know.

And yeah, so shockingly privileged and racist for me to have any opinions on anything, I know. I should just go back to self-flagellation and admitting how I bear original sin for my skin color, etc. But the idea that all we need is to admit less-qualified blacks, and magically racism will go away is shockingly retarded. "Oh, I know how to fix racism! Moooore racism!"

Edit: Same thing with regards to gender. In fields which have fewer women, the solution isn't to lower standards and to act like we just need more female bodies. Without changing the initial sources of the differences, just throwing more people in of a given body type is not beneficial and in fact is detrimental to equality, common sense, and the well-being of the field.

My sister is in physics. Her gpa and test scores make it clear she needed no form of special privilege in order to make it in her field. She gets disgusted and annoyed at how, in turn, they want to make her a poster child because of her gender, rather than her work. And she gets annoyed at the underqualified women who shouldn't be in the damn field, but, well, we need more women! But, you know, if we just let men be a higher proportion, then people might think women can't handle it! So better admit some more underqualified women so that we can reinforce those stereotypes with their failure, right?

Edit2: And first downvote, of, I'm sure, many to come. /shockedface Feel free to actually, you know, comment, but I'm sure that'd be beneath y'all, me being such a shitlord and all.

Edit3: Aw, no further downvoting or commenting. I guess I'm too late to the party.

u/RuprectGern · -2 pointsr/JusticePorn

[Glenn Greenwald - With liberty and justice for some. ] (http://www.amazon.com/With-Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality/dp/0805092056)

u/Stewpid · -2 pointsr/politics

Levin's amendments include:

  1. Term limits, including for justices.
  2. Repealing Amendment 17 and returning the election of senators to state legislatures
  3. A congressional super-majority to override Supreme Court decisions (overruling what could be a stacked court)
  4. Spending limit based on GDP
  5. Taxation capped at 15%
  6. Limiting the commerce clause, and strengthening private property rights
  7. Power of states to override a federal statute by a three-fifths vote.




    http://www.amazon.com/The-Liberty-Amendments-Restoring-American/dp/1451606273
u/dude187 · -2 pointsr/guns

> Don't worry about it, I'll just chalk it up to bullshit.

I have thousands of posts, now you are just being an asshole. How about you try finding a comment of yours you made 6 months ago and tell me how easy reddit makes it. A quick Google search turned up a whole fucking book.

Do your own research before you advocate for the removal of my rights.

u/Gracchi2016 · -2 pointsr/Documentaries

>I'm not sure if we are there now, but it feels like we have gotten to the point where law and opportunity are not equal for all.

We are there, this book by Glenn Greenwald provides some pretty good concrete examples.

u/HotSnaxx · -4 pointsr/BestOfOutrageCulture

Actually, Leftists (not to be confused with progressive liberals. I'm sorry, but yall are left of hardcore reactionaries, but not "the Left") have often been vocal supporters of the right to self defense, because police torture and murder "undesirables" has been pretty much the main reason modern policing exists. It's not an aberration that police execute an African American every 28 hours, and gun control will do nothing to stop police militarization or brutality. And that is a far bigger source of violence than the AK sitting in my locked chest.

https://www.amazon.com/Negroes-Guns-Robert-F-Williams/dp/1614274118

y'all really need to learn some people's history. I know this'll fall on deaf ears, because American politics is about performance and aesthetics, fueled by denial--see how the anti-war movement that elected Obama became very copacetic with his administration's expansion of mass murder oversees. As long as it's not a Republican doing it, it's not a serious issue, apparently, which is why y'all support the war criminal Hillary Clinton (along with the bankers that tanked the economy and turned millions out onto their asses).

But in the vain hope that someone here will maybe reconnect with our once-proud and independent Left tradition, I leave a link.

u/TominatorXX · -5 pointsr/law

Yes, when it involves very rich people or people who work in or own large banks. What's the saying: The easiest way to rob a bank is to own one?

Here are two books which should look good in your paper:

  1. Matt Taibi:
    http://www.amazon.com/Divide-American-Injustice-Age-Wealth/dp/081299342X/ref=la_B001JRUQ4S_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1411418868&sr=1-1

  2. Glenn Greenwald:

    http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Justice-Some-Equality-Powerful/dp/1250013836/ref=sr_1_sc_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1411418918&sr=1-2-spell&keywords=glenn+greendwald

    Both books deal with how prosecutions these days are not being done if you are rich enough and powerful enough. My favorite statistic is the number of bankers that liberal Ronald Reagan's DOJ put in jail during the S and L crisis of the 80s' (thouands? 1,800?) versus Barak's prosecution of NOBODY, basically, in the large banks. And, worse, DOJ admitting, yeah, we're not prosecuting them. HSBC money launders for Al Queda and drug lords. No problem. Civil or criminal fine is enough. No jailtime for anyone.

    DOJ had a press conference and Holder admitted, yeah, we're not going to prosecute big banks because they're too big, we'd worry about the impact. Huh what? That's something truly new and worthy of your attention. More sources:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/06/eric-holder-banks-too-big_n_2821741.html

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/gangster-bankers-too-big-to-jail-20130214
u/crazyfoxxx · -6 pointsr/ApplyingToCollege

Don't feel jealous, Actually feel bad for her. She will land up at the bottom on her cohort, will be forced to major in gender studies or some such dumb major and work as a barrista at Star bucks. This is a massive mismatch because that GPA means nothing if she went to a urban or ghetto school. She is going to struggle if she is foolish enough to go there to help UCB look good on it's diversity numbers. She's going to be roadkill so that UCB administrators can feel good about themselves

Read about the UC system in this book

https://www.amazon.com/Mismatch-Affirmative-Students-%C2%92s-Universities/dp/0465029965

u/SHEAHOFOSHO · -6 pointsr/politics

I had to pay $200,000 for my law degree. Not educating you for free. If you're honestly interested in con law, here is a good starting point. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0735598975?pc_redir=1396454528&robot_redir=1

u/EuphoricSuccotash2 · -7 pointsr/worldnews

^ This guy thinks law strictly means legislation. The cringe hurts my eyes.

Here you go boss

And here

Annnnnnd here

Happy learning!

u/droppingadeuce · -7 pointsr/legaladvice

I'm curious about your background, for the purpose of understanding your perspective. I'm a limited license prosecutor, and even the prosecutors in my conservative, rural county aren't nearly the police apologist you seem to be. Are you in law enforcement yourself?

/u/genuinerysk's comment is a legitimate statement. You might be interested in learning more.

u/DashingLeech · -10 pointsr/politics

> “It could have been Dr. Seuss or the Berenstain Bears on the ballot and I would have voted for them if they were a Democrat,” he said. “I might do more analyses in other years. But in this case, no. No one else gets any consideration because what’s going on with the Republicans—I’m talking about Trump and his cast of characters—is stupid, stupid, stupid. I can’t say stupid enough times.”

The authors here agree with that sentiment, both with "Count us in, Mr. Beasley" and the title, "If conservatives want to save the GOP from itself, they need to vote mindlessly and mechanically against its nominees."

To me, this kind of thinking is the problem. It's definitely not the solution. The problem is mindless ingroup/outgroup tribalist psychology.

Yes, there are plenty of reasons to vote against Trump or a bunch of Republican nominees. I can't imagine voting for Trump or just about any Republican. But, this is a one-sided analysis. It doesn't look at Democrats and whether they've gone off the deep edge either. And doing that is what makes Republicans mindlessly vote for Republicans, for those who mindless vote.

If you actually listen to Republican supporters, many of them say the exact same things as this article, but against the Democrats. For example, the point out that Clinton tried to claim repeatedly that being a woman was an important merit ("played the woman card") rather than the liberal position that it is wrong to discriminate based on gender. or Sally Boyton Brown running for DNC Chair saying, "My job is to shut other white people down when they want to interrupt." (If you listen to the whole thing, she's judging everybody based on race and wants people's speech to be controlled based on what skin colour they have. That's incredibly racist and a human rights violation, if carried out, and people are cheering her. If you actually read the Democratic Party policy for the 2016 election, it literally contains absurd Marxist views, such as claiming that differences in statistical outcomes by different identity groups are due to systemic racism (with no evidence to demonstrate that claim) and describes ending racism in the U.S. by being selectively discriminatory based on race, which is a contradiction and quite racist by liberal principles, and actually increases racial hatred according to ingroup/outgroup psychology, understanding of the psychological prcoess, empirical history, moral philosophy, and legislated human rights, including the Civil Rights Act and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In other words, if the Democrats want to reduce racism, they are doing the exactly wrong thing.

Now, I don't necessarily agree with all of that, but they make a fair point. Left-wing extremism has seeped far up the chain of the Democratic Party and they are at least paying lip service opportunistically to some very bad policies that have caused mass suffering and hatred in the past. These policies certainly have the potential to be dangerously harmful and divisive to the very people they are supposed to help. I'm not convinced that most Democrats would support the absurd parts of these policies, of course.

Nor do I necessarily believe the Democrats are worse than Republicans. But, if you are going to do one-sided analysis against the absurdity of "them", you need to listen to the same analysis that Republicans do to Democrats, and why voters should blindly vote against Democrats.

The problem itself is mindless tribalism. We actually need to sit down and debate each policy and each candidate one at a time on their own merits. Not along party lines. Not along ideological lines, but what is the evidence for the policy or that the candidate is qualified for the job, or that they are not holding extreme views or promoting extreme policies.

Both parties have this problem. I am surprised to see Jonathan Rauch as an author on this article because he is an incredibly strong free speech advocate and Kindly Inquisitors is a great book that goes into great detail about why the open debate and analysis of ideas is incredibly important rather than blind faith in ideological leanings, which goes against what he writes in this article as well as the Democratic Party policies above. It might be a blind spot for him.

I think simply playing into blind tribalism will make matters worse and intensify the polar partisanship even more. It's already at the point of physical violence. Expect more of that.

I think a much better approach is for members of both parties to challenge their party ideologies and policies and bring them toward center in policy, but also in demonizing the other party. Centrism and deep debate of ideas is the solution, not blind tribalism. Rauch should know this.