Legalectric

The threads are being taken down, but many have screenshots.  Interesting that some of the comments on the City Pages article have disappeared, names were named in those disappearing threads, at least one showed up in comments, and surprise, and at least one has disappeared as well.

UPDATE: Saigamarine released, to others arrested.  Here’s the “connect the dots” piece: REVEALED: Accused Minneapolis shooters fascinated with guns, militia groups and the Confederacy.

UPDATE: Two arrests so far… 23 y.o. white male in Bloomington, and 32 y.o. Hispanic male in south Mpls.

For several nights running there have been white supremacists coming to the 4th Precinct, their online stated intent to shake things up and hurt people.

Here’s advice from one of them:

One shot from any gun of any kind that only wounded one protester would set of the spark that will open the season on Dindus. If you get away with it.

Points for using a bow and arrow with expanding razor blade head.

Cut the bar code off the arrow if you bought it at the store. Keep gloves on when you handle your arrows and make purchases in cash.

Don’t buy equipment in front of a video camera and then go Dindu Hunting before the data gets erased. (You probably have no way of knowing how long it is kept, if it was erased or even recorded.) It will be used against you.

Wait a few weeks, have patience, don’t get greedy. One Testimony (slain Dindu) that can’t be traced beats 50 that got you killed/captured and tortured. It makes the Dindus think that the “enemy” is everywhere. That causes them to lash out at the wrong people.

Consider a shotgun slug or 00 buckshot for short range. 30-06 or similar for long range.

Remember. LE’s will kill you for trying. So will Dindus. Unlike what the Dindus say, LE’s are not on the side of Vigilantes.

If you can run with the best of them, you could use a small pistol and disguise and flee to a car or bicycle that you have placed in a concealed area.

Here’s Minnesota’s criminal statute regarding terroristic threats:

609.713 THREATS OF VIOLENCE.

Subdivision 1.Threaten violence; intent to terrorize.

Whoever threatens, directly or indirectly, to commit any crime of violence with purpose to terrorize another or to cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly, vehicle or facility of public transportation or otherwise to cause serious public inconvenience, or in a reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. As used in this subdivision, “crime of violence” has the meaning given “violent crime” in section 609.1095, subdivision 1, paragraph (d).

I gots me a chuckbox!!!

Citizens trying to quietly and respectfully address the police problems in Minneapolis to the City Council were tossed out of the room, no public comment allowed!

I’ve known Jan Nye forever, she’s the third one here speaking to the Minneapolis City Council, and was hauled out, as were the others.  Before her was her partner Dave Bicking, who was also hauled out of the room.  Bicking was a member of the Civilian Review Board, which was disbanded by the City.  Since then, there have been many, many complaints regarding police behavior, and only 0.1% result in any discipline.  There’s a problem in Minneapolis, and it needs to be addressed.

 
HERE’S A LINK to the one video so far after the killing of Jamar Clark.

Here’s a “response” to the Letter to the Editor that I wrote last month — check the flawed logic and ad hominem jab:

And, what I find completely reprehensible, is that an officer of the court will give tacit acquiesce to this kind of activity based on some abstract concept of “cultural injustice.”

Yup, he really said that… and more… and it took him so many more words to do it (I wonder who wrote it for him):

Letter: The issue is more than ‘cultural injustice’

By George W. Snyder, Red Wing from Red Wing on Nov 17, 2015 at 1:32 p.m.

Recently in this space there was a reference made of “animosity towards Black Lives Matter.” I submit that it is not animosity to Black Lives Matter protest so much as frustration and sadness. Let me explain.

Here’s the Letter to the Editor I wrote after the Red Wing City Council voted UNANIMOUSLY to reconsider Resolution 6873:

Letter: Thanks, City Council, for reconsideration

By Carol A. Overland from Red Wing on Oct 18, 2015 at 11:00 a.m.

To the Editor:

Monday evening, the Red Wing City Council decided that resolution 6873, promoted by the National Fraternal Order of Police, needed further discussion, and forwarded it to the Human Rights Commission for a public dialog and forum. The council did the right thing.

It’s more than “five words.” The resolution cover sheet states “The United States has seen an increase of hostility toward law enforcement over the past two years” and “law enforcement is the target of criticism and violent attacks,” and the resolution claims a “violent surge against police.” 

However, statistics show a decrease in police deaths by gunfire.

The resolution language elicits an are-you-for-the-police-or-against-them twist, and serves as a distraction from the legitimate constitutional, civil, and human rights issues at the root of hostility and criticism of police. Animosity expressed toward #blacklivesmatter shows a failure to acknowledge cultural injustice.

As an attorney, an officer of the court, sworn to uphold the Constitution, I find this offensive, because the “increase of hostility” and “criticism” is a demand for accountability, observation of fundamental rights, and prosecution of crimes committed by police. We must address this systemic problem.

It’s incumbent on myself and other whites to acknowledge racial and class inequity and crimes against others, and work toward change. Each of us bears responsibility, and I’m glad to see the City Council display some understanding of the nuances of this resolution and the need for community discussion. In the words of Congressman Luis Gutierrez, “We’re not going back to the ’50s.” 

The best outcome might be for the Red Wing Police Department to continue its proactive training and quality policing, and for the City Council and Human Rights Commission to begin our community discussion of how we can achieve equality and “liberty and justice for all.”

Carol A. Overland

Red Wing

 

Tomorrow, the Chapter 7829 Rulemaking is going to the Commission, for approval of the FINAL rules.  This rulemaking has been going on formally for over two years now in Docket 13-24 (go to NEW SEARCH and search for this docket).

Overland 7829 Comment Nov 18 2015

PUC Staff BriefingPapers_201511-115619-01

FINAL_Rules 7829_201511-115691-01

And some history…   I’ve been concerned about this chapter for a long while, and submitted a Petition for Rulemaking over FOUR YEARS ago.  Apparently that was filed in the trash:

Overland Petition for Rulemaking-7829

And prior posts: