The “Sagebrush Rebels” Aren’t Going Away…

The Loon Lake Takeover is over (for the moment), but I’m still reading JJMcNab’s twitter feed on a daily basis. She’s a very useful source for links to all the latest (frequently laughable, sometimes horrifying) would-be domestic terrorists — grammar fails, logic deficits, and raw ugliness.

But also, excellent writers doing good journalism. Such as Hal Herring, “Can we make sense of the Malheur mess?”:

… I am isolated by a culture that is as inscrutable to me as any in the mountains of Afghanistan. For loving wilderness and empty lands and birdsong rather than teeming cities, I risk being called a xenophobe, a noxious nativist. For viewing guns as constitutionally protected, essential tools of self-defense and, if need be, liberation, I’m told that I defend the massacres of innocents in mass shootings. When I came to Montana at age twenty-five, I found in this vast landscape, especially in the public lands where I hunted and camped and worked, the freedom that was evaporating in the South, where I grew up. I got happily lost in the space and the history. For a nature-obsessed, gun-soaked malcontent like me, it was home, and when Ammon Bundy and his men took over the Malheur refuge, on a cold night in January, I thought I should go visit my neighbors…

I am doing my best here to be respectful of people with whom, it turned out, I disagree strongly, even violently. I could focus upon the essential nuttiness of the occupation, the lack of a plan for an outcome, the exhaustion of being assailed with pocket Constitutions any time one presents an argument that cannot be easily countered. Crackpots are drawn to such an open event like moths to a halogen light (and, no, I do not automatically exempt myself from the category). I wanted to find occupiers who could argue for what they were doing, but what is there to say when people take up arms inspired by, say, a belief that the President is the front for an Islamic takeover of the nation, or that the Chinese are already committed to buying the uranium that lies underneath the Hammond ranch.

I went to Malheur to ask questions and to listen, to learn and report. But what can be reported when your source is convinced of plots and powers that do not exist? When I asked whether they were endangering the Second Amendment by brandishing AR-15s, the answer was that an occupation like this was the entire purpose of the Second Amendment. When I asked whether, since the county was the highest level of government recognized, the occupiers would stand down if the sheriff asked them to (Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward, of course, already had), they said no, because Sheriff Ward was a tool of the oppressors. And when I asked whether they would stand down if the Oregon National Guard came and asked them to, they said it was too late for that. And so on…

The American West has the highest suicide rates in the nation, and has since frontier days. The current epidemic of suicide among white males in the US is part of the story here – in a recent article at Salon, Robert Hennelly wrote, “According to federal morbidity stats in 1999, 9,599 white men killed themselves. By 2010 that number was 14,379. In 2013 the U.S. recorded 41,149 suicides, 70 percent of which were white men, who mostly shot themselves. The most heavily affected demographic is middle-aged white men in the 45 to 64 age cohort…

Or this, from the Washington Post: “The year of ‘enormous rage’: Number of hate groups rose by 14 percent in 2015″.

Open Thread: ‘Militia’, Go Home


As reported by the Washington Post:

“The protesters have no claim to this land. It belongs to the native people who continue to live here,” Burns Paiute tribal chair Charlotte Rodrique said at a press conference Wednesday.

The occupation of the refuge, now in its fourth day, has been part demand for local control over public land and part protest over how the federal government manages the Western landscape. Bundy, an Idaho rancher and the son of Cliven Bundy, and his followers stake claim on vast stretches of federal land in the West and have vowed to occupy the refuge until a complete investigation into historical land deeds and ownership rights yields a transfer of land control to local interests. Bundy supporter and refuge occupier LaVoy Finicum, who lives near Bundy’s father in Arizona, said that a paper trail would reveal an illegal transfer of sale from private ownership to the government and that an investigation into historical Western real estate sales would unwind federal control of the lands.

But Sara J. Hawley, a member of the local Paiute tribe, said the land has never belonged to anybody but the Paiute.

“The Burns Paiute Tribe has not ceded any of its rights in the tribe’s ancestral territory,” added Rodrique, pointing to a treaty — never ratified in Washington — that means many Westerners are technically squatting on Paiute land.

“They wanted us to give up our land,” Rodrique said. “We never did it.”

In 1868, the Burns Paiute Tribe entered into a treaty with the federal government that among other things, guaranteed the protection and safety of the Paiute people and their cultural resources. Six tribe band leaders signed the treaty but the U.S. Senate never ratified it. Without ratification, the agreement was voided and a legal transfer of land never occurred, Rodrique said.

“We never gave up our aboriginal rights,” she said. “We did have a treaty but it wasn’t ratified, so therefore it was a contract that was never completed. And so we as a tribe view that this is still our land.”…

“They say they don’t want to bother the community, but you know what? Our kids are sitting at home right now when they should be at school. They’re jeopardizing, they’re scaring our people around here,” [Burns Paiute tribal councilman Jarvis] Kennedy said…

The NYTimes says the non-Paiute locals mostly aren’t much enamored of Bundy and his VanillaISIS cult, either:

BURNS, Ore. — Hundreds of residents crammed into a building at the Harney County Fairgrounds here on Wednesday night, far surpassing the capacity of the rows of brown metal folding chairs set up on a concrete floor, to talk in often deeply emotional terms about their community — and just who should be in charge of its destiny…

“You don’t get to come here and tell us how we get to live our lives,” said Sheriff Dave Ward of Harney County, who led the meeting, and the crowd erupted into applause and cheers. “I’m here to ask those folks to go home and let us go back to our lives in Harney County,” he added, again to huge applause… Read more

Is Anita Alvarez doing it again?

In 2012 an off duty Chicago police officer named Dante Servin stopped his car in front of front of a group of unarmed black people, pulled out his handgun and fired multiple times into the crowd, hitting one man in the hand and killing Rekia Boyd, 22.

State Prosecutor Anita Alvarez would have no doubt preferred to do nothing; her cozy relationship with law enforcement was legendary even by prosecutor standards. However the egregious details of this case forced her to do something. So a year and a half later she charged Servin with involuntary manslaughter. This is almost literally the least she could do, short of issuing Servin a parking ticket, and her decision put the trial Judge Dennis J. Porter in a bind. You can hardly call it involuntary when someone points a semi-automatic handgun at a group of people and pulls the trigger over and over again. Porter did not have the option to decide what kind of crime Dante Servin committed. Either he committed involuntary manslaughter or he didn’t. Since the killing was pretty clearly not involuntary, Porter let him go. It is hard to argue with people who feel that Alvarez used her prosecutorial discretion to keep Dante Servin free.

So Anita Alvarez decided to charge Chicago officer Jason Van Dyke with murder for shooting Laquan McDonald. Great! You saw the video. Even (some) other cops agree this guy should be locked up. But do you think Anita Alvarez went a little over the top charging Van Dyke with first degree murder? Sure he did something terrible. But I suggest people resist the temptation to see the charge and fast forward to the part where Van Dyke gets old in jail. Think for a moment about the standard the state has to meet to convict him. It won’t be enough to show that Van Dyke acted recklessly or even got caught up in the heat of the moment and killed McDonald because he was scared or thought it would be fun.

First-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or “lying in wait” for the victim.

The defense only has to prove that Jason Van Dyke did not plan this in advance and lie in wait for the opportunity to kill Laquan McDonald. Van Dyke was a cop, responding to a dangerous situation. Everyone agrees he did not need to shoot that young man. In fact his record shows that Jason Van Dyke had no business being a cop at all. But his defense does not need to worry about that. They only need to show the he did not commit premeditated murder. That seems like an awfully high bar to set, don’t you think?

Late Night Horrorshow: Beware the ‘Gentle Loner’…

From that NYTimes article, “To Stop Violence, Start at Home“:

… A recent study found that more than half of the 110 mass shootings in the United States between January 2009 and July 2014 included the murder of a current or former spouse, an intimate partner or a family member. Everytown for Gun Safety, the group that released the study, found a “noteworthy connection between mass-shooting incidents and domestic or family violence.”

This connection is not limited to mass shootings. An analysis of the criminal justice history of hundreds of thousands of offenders in Washington State suggests that a felony domestic violence conviction is the single greatest predictor of future violent crime among men…

Men who commit violence rehearse and perfect it against their families first. Women and children are target practice, and the home is the training ground for these men’s later actions….

Men commit violence because they can, because it’s “tradition”, because the society they move in gives them permission to commit violence. The South Carolina Post and Courier, reporting on former local Robert Dear:

The man accused of opening fire Friday in a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood was charged with rape in North Charleston more than 20 years ago, according to police reports…

A woman who worked at Citadel Mall reported to North Charleston police that Dear had asked her out numerous times and she always refused, saying that she was married, according to a police report. Dear allegedly continued to call her at work and home about two to three times per day telling her that he wanted to see her.

On Nov. 29, 1992, Dear showed up at the woman’s house while she attempted to take out the trash, according to the police report.

“The suspect then allegedly put a knife to the victim’s neck and forced her back inside her residence,” the report states. “The suspect then allegedly forced the victim down into the couch, struck her in the mouth with his fist, and then sexually assaulted her.” …

Dear has a history of arrests in South Carolina out of Colleton and Beaufort counties, records show. A background search completed by The Post and Courier found that Dear was arrested in 2003 on a cruelty to animals charge but was found not guilty in 2004. He was charged under the state’s Peeping Tom law in 2002 but that charge, too, was later dismissed, according to a background search. Read more

Call It What It Is: Terrorism

From the Washington Post:

COLORADO SPRINGS — The gunman suspected of storming a Planned Parenthood clinic and killing a police officer and two others used the phrase “no more baby parts’’ to explain his actions, according to a law enforcement official, a comment likely to further inflame the heated rhetoric surrounding abortion.

The attack on the clinic, allegedly by Robert Lewis Dear Jr., was “definitely politically motivated,’’ said the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is still underway. NBC News, which first reported the comment, said that Dear also mentioned President Obama in a range of statements to investigators that left his precise motivation unclear.

Yet even as authorities released few details about Friday’s shootings, the politics of the highly charged abortion issue seemed to outstrip their efforts to be methodical. Antiabortion activists denied any knowledge of Dear and said he is not affiliated with their movement, but abortion rights advocates countered that comments by conservatives against Planned Parenthood had precipitated the violence…

“Everybody’s entitled to their own opinion. And their own arsenal, as well.”

Dr. Jennifer Conti, at Slate, “Anti-Abortion Terrorism Must Be Stopped“:

We can speculate long and hard about the gunman’s motives or targets, but what is more significant—what keeps me up at night as an OB/GYN physician—is the concern that we as a nation have become complacent. Was it truly a shock that something so horrific emerged only weeks after anti–Planned Parenthood rhetoric dominated the presidential candidate debates? What was all of this manipulative campaigning if not an invitation to incite hate? And now this.

A few people were injured and only a few people died, some headlines will say. That’s not so many compared to the recent acts of terrorism in Paris. But here’s the irony: This is a homegrown terrorist, one that no amount of passport authentication or refugee rejection could have stopped. We spend all this effort agonizing over external threats, all the while overlooking the extremism, bigotry, and hatred that lives down the street. And now this.

This is a sign of crisis. When women are too scared to seek medical care for fear of being shot on the way to clinic, we are in crisis mode. This is beyond bullying and this is no longer simply a politicizing issue. This is a runaway train on which nobody is pulling the brakes. How far does this have to play out before we can stop pretending that abortion care is not real health care? Since 1977, there have been eight murders, 17 attempted murders, 42 bombings, 186 arsons, and thousands of incidents of criminal activity associated with U.S. abortion clinics. These numbers do not include what happened in Colorado Springs… Read more

Friday Afternoon Open Thread

I’m not the praying type (there’s the disbelief in gods thing), but if I were, I’d send one up for Mexico right about now:

hurricane patricia

Hurricane Patricia is forecast to make landfall pretty soon as the strongest hurricane in history. Here’s hoping people got the hell out of the way while they still could. As usual, the people who can least afford it will likely bear the brunt. They will need our help.

Open thread.

A Modest Reparations Proposal

Theodore R. Johnson, “career naval officer, former White House fellow and doctoral candidate in law and policy at Northeastern University” suggests, in the Washington Post, “We used to count black Americans as 3/5 of a person. For reparations, give them 5/3 of a vote“:

If you want to shut down a conversation about race, just say the word “reparations.” Even black Americans are divided over the idea that money can compensate for the vestiges of an evil institution that ended 150 years ago; only 60 percent think the government should make cash payments to descendants of slaves. White Americans, on the other hand, have reached a consensus: In a YouGov poll taken shortly after the Atlantic published Ta-Nehisi Coates’s viral feature, “The Case for Reparations,” 94 percent were opposed.

Yet a year of protests over disparate law enforcement practices, a decade of particularly sharp income inequality and centuries of imparity in America show that racial reconciliation is impossible without some kind of broad-based, systemic reparations. Recognizing the original sin is simply not enough; we must also make moral and material amends for our nation’s treatment of African American citizens. But if a pecuniary answer can’t fix the structural disadvantage — and it can’t — what can?

Weighted voting.

…[R]eparations should be apportioned in the exercise of a civic right (a duty, even) long denied to the descendants of the enslaved. A five-thirds compromise would imbue African Americans with a larger political voice that could be used to fight the structural discrimination expressed in housing, education, criminal justice and employment. Allowing black votes to count for 167 percent of everyone else’s would mean that 30 million African American votes would count as 50 million, substituting super-votes for the implausible idea of cash payments…

Sure, there’s plenty of arguments against this proposal — and not much chance of it getting traction, especially in the areas that need it most — but hell, I’d vote for it.

Your thoughts?