Category Archives: Crime and Punishment

Strike Four on police testing scandal

Just got this e-mail internally from a colleague:

Just got off the phone with an anonymous caller angered by newspaper’s coverage of police testing scandal. This man is apparently in local law enforcement….

In short: He says the newspaper has greatly overestimated the importance of the testing scandal. More of "a prank," he says. He says the test only existed to ensure that people had watched the 4-hour video online. If they went to watch the video in person, no test was required. He says that the online training was a mess, and this should have been mentioned in the report.

He says that such help to one another is natural among police, and basically goes back to the academy days as a part of police culture. Many of the recruits aren’t great test-takers, but good at solving problems.

He says that naming the officers went overboard and damaged the integrity of the whole force.

To which my response is: And if the test were a joke and unimportant, that would be yet ANOTHER thing that the city administration should have communicated clearly to the public…

Here’s a place to talk about the school shootings

36 Replies

Whenever I see regulars commenting on something in the news on a post regarding a different subject, as Herb did here:

Does anyone know what to do about the continued massacre of citizens in public places in this country? The kids that were killed yesterday–they were my kids. Oh, not literally, but every time it happens, I see my own kids, and in a real way, we are all in this together.

I suppose some people will want to arm more people with weapons to fire back as soon as the guy starts shooting, and others will want to blame socialism for the guy’s maladjustment to begin with, but I’d like to know about some workable solutions, besides turning our society into the set of a Grade B Cowboy movie (everybody armed with pistols). Can anyone help? Who is going to stop the next guy who is mad at the world from killing another dozen people? And the next kids may very well be my own.

Posted by: Herb Brasher | Feb 15, 2008 12:06:54 PM

… I realized I may have been remiss in my duty, not having posted on a subject of high interest to readers.

So consider this post an opportunity to discuss the shootings in Illinois yesterday, and other such events.

Dumb crook news

1 Reply

No this blog isn’t turning into the John Boy and Billy show, but there’s a particular kind of Schadenfreude that law-abiding folks seem to share at news of a deserved comeuppance, and I just couldn’t resist passing this one on.

It seems that the ubiquity of camera phones has lots of crooks incriminating themselves. This story in the WSJ today led with this tale:

Last year, Morgan Kipper was booked on charges of
stealing cars and reselling their parts. He declared his innocence, but
his cellphone suggested otherwise: Its screensaver pictured Mr. Kipper
behind the wheel of a stolen yellow Ferrari.
Mr. Kipper, 27, joined a growing group of camera-phone
owners who can’t seem to resist capturing themselves breaking the law.
"As a criminal defense attorney, it’s very difficult when a client
proclaims his innocence but incriminates himself by taking photos of
the stolen items," says William Korman, the Boston attorney who
represented Mr. Kipper. The snap-happy chop-shop owner, who pleaded
guilty in April, is now serving a sentence of two-and-a-half to five
years and couldn’t be reached for comment.

OK, back to serious stuff now…

The soul of discretion

14 Replies

Maybe we should get Dirk Gently to become Columbia’s new police chief. In any case, this story certainly reads more like Douglas Adams satire than anything like reality. And yet, here we are:

Nearly a month after stepping down as Columbia’s interim police chief, Harold Reaves has not returned to work for the city.
And it’s not clear whether there is a job waiting for him.
City
manager Charles Austin, who granted Reaves’ Nov. 1 request for personal
leave, told The State this week he doesn’t know how long Reaves will be
out. Austin also said he has yet to ask Reaves specifically why he
wanted time off.
“As long as he is on personal leave, I think it
would be a matter of his discretion. I’m sure when he comes back, we’ll
have some discussion what the reason was about.”
Austin earlier said Reaves requested time off for unspecified “family matters.”

Why do I think of Douglas Adams? Well, if you read So Long, And Thanks for All the Fish, you may recall that, after several years bouncing around the galaxy in his bathrobe, the hapless Arthur Dent returns to Earth, and decides he’d best give his boss a ring at work. His boss doesn’t bat an eye at his ridiculous explanation of his absence, and when he asks in an offhand manner when Arthur might return and Arthur gives a vague answer that suggests it might be months in the future (when I get home, I’ll look up the actual wording), his boss greets that with a chipper response along the lines of Right, then. Fine! Cheerio! See you when you get back!

This is apparently meant to lampoon the laxness of personnel policy at the BBC, and it’s quite funny to anyone who’s worked in a real workplace with actual accountability.

But in this, real-life, case, Mr. Austin isn’t even asking why his employee is gone, or when he’s coming back. And somehow, it’s not nearly as funny that way.

Waterboarding: Torture or not?

7 Replies

Judge Michael Mukasey seems uncertain on the point of whether "waterboarding" is torture. Others who have tried it seem a bit more decisive. (Both of the following links were brought to my attention by Samuel Tenenbaum, who in real life
thinks about lots of things besides his 55-mph proposal.)

Here’s a video of a guy undergoing the treatment. He gets through it OK — but remember, he knew the guys doing this to him were friendlies, and would eventually stop.

Here’s a written account from another who experienced it. An excerpt:

Waterboarding is slow-motion suffocation with enough time to contemplate the inevitability of blackout and expiration. Usually the person goes into hysterics on the board. For the uninitiated, it is horrifying to watch. If it goes wrong, it can lead straight to terminal hypoxia — meaning, the loss of all oxygen to the cells.
The lack of physical scarring allows the victim to recover and be threatened with its use again and again. Call it "Chinese water torture," "the barrel," or "the waterfall." It is all the same.

After reading that, and watching the video, I believe I’d agree with John McCain that this constitutes torture. (Of course, I would be loathe to argue the point in any case with the one presidential candidate who truly knows exactly what he’s talking about when it comes to torture.)

But here’s another question: If you were actually racing against the clock to prevent a terrorist attack that could kill hundreds or thousands, would you do it anyway? Or would you allow others to do it in your behalf? Or would you simply look the other way if they did?

I’ll tell you what got me thinking along those lines. It was the interview with Alan Dershowitz on the above-linked video. He didn’t seem to mind the use of the technique to stop terrorism, as long as there is "accountability." He would want the president of the United States to specifically permit it, in writing. That’s a lawyer for you. Strain at a gnat, miss the camel — or the beam, or whatever.

Personally, I wouldn’t want anybody I’d ever vote for to give permission for such a thing. Nor would I want him to give a nod and a wink, either. If some Jack Bauer-like subordinate did such a thing, without authorization, and did indeed save many lives doing so, I’d be inclined to thank him on behalf of a grateful nation, then prosecute him to the full extent of the law. Unlike Mr. Dershowitz, I think under the circumstances I could live with the inherent contradiction.

But that’s just off the top of my head.

Jury duty

Those experts are FAST, man!

1 Reply

Ordinary folks just can’t react as quickly as the experts. That’s proven time and again by the "experts" who keep responding to every policy position Barack Obama sets forth.

Today is a typical example.

At 11:48 a.m., I received an e-mail announcing that "EXPERTS PRAISE BARACK OBAMA’S PLAN TO CREATE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL."

But it wasn’t until four minutes later, at 11:52, that the plan was actually released. That’s when I got this e-mail, anyway: "Obama Outlines Plan to Address Disparities in America’s Justice System."

These experts must have ol’ Doc Brown helping them out. He’s sort of an expert, too, I guess.

Thank goodness for New Mexico

Ozmint: “I need the Legislature’s help on this; somebody’s going to get killed” at Corrections

10 Replies

S.C. Corrections chief Jon Ozmint came by Tuesday to give his perspective on the recently redirected Senate investigation of his department.

He kept saying he wanted us to take the 30,000-foot view of the situation. Well, this brief post is more like the satellite view — a few sketchy notes, a video clip, and some supplementary material his office e-mailed over when we were done. Look at it and decide what you think; I haven’t had time to digest it or dig deeper, so I have no opinion to offer at this time — beyond our usual position, which is that we’ve got to stop trying to lock up everybody and his brother and not pay what it takes to have safe prisons (that’s the view from the moon, metaphorically speaking).

In a nutshell, he said there were three problems with the way the Senate committee has gone about looking at how our prisons are run:

The Subject. He says there are plenty of legitimate areas for legislative oversight — escapes, assaults, turnover rates, contraband control, gangs — of the agency. But the Senate staff tried to get into the nitty-gritty of "individual, isolated complaints" from employees and others, and he believes there are more appropriate venues for investigating and adjudicating such matters.
The Method. He said the Senate staffers lacked the expertise to investigate, leading to compromising potentially legitimate investigations. "There was no plan." They took a bunch of hearsay, he says, with no next step such as going to Corrections for more info.
The Motive. He was cagier about this, not wanting to get into placing political blame specifically on individual senators. But he said the investigation "had been hijacked by a small group of senators and staffers."

"And I think those were the three problems that made this the disaster that it was," he said. We went on with a rambling discussion of problems at Corrections, politics at the State House, and various other matters, on and off the record — but the points above are what he mainly came to say. I urge you to watch him saying it on the video, as it helps you appreciate the passion and volatility that Mr. Ozmint brings to his job — whatever you may make of those qualities.

Oh, let me add this. Mr. Ozmint realized I was shooting video during the meeting. But near the end of the meeting, he said he didn’t realize I would publish it on my blog — even though he reads the blog (but, he said, his computer won’t play the videos). I asked him why he thought I was shooting it, and he said he supposed it was to back up my notes. But I have an audio recorder for that. He protested that he wasn’t dressed right. I told him he looked like a hard-working sort with his polo shirt with the name of the department on it. Whatever.

So, extra-point questions here:

Is it fair for me to post the video?

Does the video add any value for you, the reader (and citizen of South Carolina)?

That’s all for now.

Isn’t being Irish Catholic considered an extenuating circumstance?

2 Replies

Torn from the pages of a Caddyshack script, we have this item of sad celebrity news:

By KARL RITTER
Associated Press Writer

STOCKHOLM,
Sweden (AP) – Bill Murray could face a drunken driving charge after
cruising through downtown Stockholm in a golf cart and refusing to take
a breath test, citing U.S. law.
Police officers spotted the
"Caddyshack" star early Monday in the slow-moving vehicle and noticed
he smelled of alcohol when they pulled him over, said
Detective-Inspector Christer Holmlund of the Stockholm police.
"He
refused to blow in the (breath test) instrument, citing American
legislation," Holmlund told The Associated Press on Wednesday. "So we
applied the old method — a blood test. It will take 14 days before the
results are in."
Murray, who had been at a golf tournament in
Sweden, signed a document admitting that he was driving under the
influence, and agreed to let a police officer plead guilty for him if
the case goes to court, Holmlund said.
"Then he was let go. My guess is he went back to America," Holmlund said…

Here’s another way to test how much he’d had — if he did his character from "Caddyshack" when stopped, they should throw the book at him. I’m a huge Bill Murray fan, but that was his one bit that I never could abide.

Crystal Pink Perversion

13 Replies

Which state agency head said the following this week?

"We do not believe the Constitution grants an inmate the right to publicly gratify himself and assault female staff in the uniform color of his choice. We are bound and determined to protect our female staff from perverts who commit this sort of act, and we believe it is our duty to do anything possible to convince these perverts to reform their behavior."

OK, I know how easy it is to cheat in a world with Google. Yes, it was Jon Ozmint over at Corrections. You can read about it at this location, where it was published in the Charleston paper.

And for those of you still trying to figure out the headline, yes, it was another pop song allusion.

Why would abortion foes exempt rape?

41 Replies

Today, I got this e-mail from a reader:

I always enjoy your editorials and read them whenever I see that you are featured in the State (though I normally refer to the "State" as the "Local "since its sports bias is almost always limited to Columbia-area teams).
I enjoyed reading your editorial board interview with Sam Brownback, but am curious about something.
I read some time back that Brownback stated that a woman raped should be forced to carry the child to term. Did this or a similar comment come up in your interview?

Thanks and keep writing…

Which prompted me to break my rule and respond (actually, if I respond and then post it on my blog, it’s not really breaking the rule — since the rule is, after all, designed to get people to comment on the blog instead of via e-mail):

Not that I recall. But why would anyone who opposes abortion make exceptions in the case of rape? I’ve always had trouble understanding that. It seems to be a case of emotion overriding logic.
If we’re talking about a human life, why would it cease to be worth protecting in the case of rape? We don’t have the death penalty for rape, even in the case of the perpetrator. So why would we put the unborn result of the rape to death? It doesn’t make sense.
Yes, it’s horrible for the victim. But everything about rape is horrible. If one is truly opposed to abortion, the fact that a pregnancy resulted from rape should not negate one’s position.
I’m guessing — from your choice of words (specifically, your use of "forced") — that you object to Brownback’s position on abortion. Would you find it LESS objectionable if he said "except in cases of abortion?" If so, why? I ask this less from a pro-life perspective than from one of logical consistency. One of my colleagues who is pro-choice often says she finds pro-life people who don’t make such exceptions more worthy of respect. I think she’s right (narrowly speaking) to take that view.
What do you think?

If this exchange follows the usual pattern (and I hope it won’t), it will spin off into misunderstanding and miscommunication, but I ask once again: If you believe (as do I) that abortion ends a human life, why again would it be OK just because the horrible circumstances of a rape are involved? Logically speaking, of course.

We won’t have Thomas Ravenel to kick around any more

14 Replies

Treasurer

Well, he’s resigned. He should have done so before, but now it’s done. Appearing in the protective custody of his sisters, he read the following statement today after his court hearing:

"I would like to say I’m deeply disappointed in myself for the
circumstances surrounding my presence here today due to the personal
mistakes I’ve made in my life.

"Second most important, I want
to offer a heartfelt apology to the state of South Carolina. To the
people of South Carolina and to my family, I am deeply sorry.

"Now,
in the best interest of our state, I believe I must resign the position
of treasurer of the state of South Carolina, and I have so informed the
governor.

"Effective as of today, I do resign. Thank you."

I was struck, as you might as be, by the way this experience has changed the man, as well it might. The raw video I found on the WIS-TV site provides a marked contrast to the know-it-all persona that was his ever-present mask back during the election.

Now the jockeying for the position of Treasurer can begin in earnest. The Legislature reserved the right to come back into session to deal with such an eventuality (anything but leave such a matter in the governor’s hands, you know), although at the moment I’m not sure when that will be.

Thoughts?

Get your mind right, Luke

8 Replies

Assuming I wanted to make a movie about the S.C. prison system, even if I had a sort of magical, all-time, dead-or-alive set of actors to choose from, I don’t think I would have thought of the late Strother Martin to play Corrections chief Jon Ozmint.

But there’s an eerie similarity between what Mr. Ozmint had to say about denying food to rule-breakers…

"Our rule is simple … any inmate is allowed to decline the opportunity (to eat, exercise, shower or have visitors) by failure to comply with our reasonable requirements," Ozmint wrote in the e-mail. "Eating is a voluntary activity and any inmate may refuse to eat."

… and what the legendary character actor said as the "Captain" in "Cool Hand Luke:"

"What we’ve got here is… failure to communicate. Some men you just
can’t reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he
wants it… well, he gets it. I don’t like it any more than you men."

You see, as the Captain so clearly explained, Luke didn’t have his mind right. He could have followed the rules, but he chose to spend the night in the box and wear those chains and get whupped up ‘side the head. He chose all that when he back-sassed a free man (the Captain himself, no less) and when he kept gettin’ rabbit in his blood.

If you don’t understand that, then you don’t got your mind right, and maybe you’d best start gettin’ all of your dirt off Boss Godfrey’s yard, boy.

McAlister won’t throw stones at Ravenel

30 Replies

Bob McAlister sent me this heads-up about an entry on his blog:

Brad: I hope that my latest post on Ravenel (Leave the stones on the ground) gets passed around somehow for one reason: I want Ravenel to see it. You never know what God will do with something as innocuous
as a blog.

While I urge you to go to his blog and read it there and comment, for you slackers, here’s the full text of the post:

Leave the stones on the ground
They’re picking up the stones.
Now that The State has confirmed Thomas Ravenel is entering a drug treatment
program, bloggers and partisan alike will be aiming for his head. Count me out. I did not support him and do not know him, but I’m not fit to condemn him. Neither is anyone else.
Condemn his actions? Yes. Express outrage that he violated a public trust? Yes. But condemn a fallen man? No. Every individual is capable of doing terrible things.
If he is an addict and did what he is accused of, he should resign from office and take his punishment. But he should also understand that God’s grace and forgiveness await him if only he accepts it, and that a new life filled with infinite possibilities can be his future.
That’s my hope and prayer for him. As for the stone throwers, Jesus has a message for you (John 8:7). Look it up.

I agree. Thomas Ravenel seeks healing, and may God grant it to him. In the meantime, the criminal justice system should grind on, and should deal with him as it would with anyone.

And yes, most certainly, now that he has made this acknowledgment, he should resign so that a permanent treasurer can take his place.

Looks like Lindsey is safe

13 Replies

Check out what just broke on Thomas Ravenel:

m1078
scsc-
nbx
AP-APNEWSALERT

COLUMBIA,
S.C. (AP) – South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel has been indicted
by a federal grand jury for distribution of cocaine.

Not just possession, mind you.

Ravenel

Geddings has done worse

15 Replies

They say Kevin Geddings has done some awful stuff up in North Carolina, and that’s why they’re putting him away for four years.

But nothing for which he was indicted sounds nearly as bad to ME as what he did in South Carolina — and I’m not just talking about what John Monk wrote about in Sunday’s paper.

The worst thing he did was take one of the better members of the S.C. House, Jim Hodges — a fine, principled lawmaker who, among other things, was possibly the most articulate critic of state-sanctioned gambling in our state — and talk him into running a campaign for governor built around creating a state lottery, and financed by the video poker industry.

I still don’t know how he did that. Based on the few interactions I had with him, I don’t think Kevin Geddings could have persuaded me to have a drink of water in the middle of the Sahara — not because I’m so goody-goody, but because I found him so unpersuasive. His ability to get otherwise sensible people to do his bidding will always be a mystery to me.

To this day, a lot of people think I had some personal animus against Gov. Hodges. Not true. As I told Kevin Geddings the one time he and I had lunch:

"I only have one problem with Jim Hodges. You."

I hate it when this happens

28 Replies

Generally speaking, I don’t agree with libertarians. But occasionally, I see things that way in spite of myself.

An example is “hate crimes.” It’s just unAmerican — downright Orwellian, in fact — to punish a person for his opinions rather than for what he did.

The majority in the Congress disagrees, as we saw today.

This puts me in another awkward position — agreeing with a partisan position. I haven’t seen a breakdown of the vote yet, but so far it seems to be Republicans who are putting out releases that denounce the outcome.

As much as I detest the rhetorical excesses to which parties resort to make their points, on this one I think the dissenters had a point. A release from Rep. Joe Wilson echoed the party line when it was headlined, “Wilson Opposes Thought Crimes Legislation.”

Like I said, Orwellian.

But this is a really funky issue. Here I am agreeing for once with the libertarian, don’t-tell-me-how-to-think position, but some avowed libertarians are taking the opposite tack:

Washington, DC — The American Civil Liberties Union today cheered the House of Representatives for passing H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, with strong bipartisan support. This legislation would allow federal law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute hate crimes offenses in cases where local law enforcement lacks the resources, or in some cases the willingness to do so.

That makes me feel a little better.

Now, let me see if I can help you feel better, in case you’re one of the many very nice people who think “Hate Crime” legislation is a good idea, and that I must be a really mean person to disagree…

If a person commits a murder, it should not matter — in a society guided by the rule of law — whether that person holds opinions that we regard as utterly abhorrent. The criminal justice system should be blind to such things, concentrating on actions rather than attitudes.

If people hold offensive opinions, let’s try to change their hearts and minds. But let’s save the punitive power of the criminal justice system for when they DO something bad, rather than THINK something bad.

And yes, the legislation goes out of its way to reaffirm our rights to free speech. But why do they need reaffirming, unless the overall bill implies otherwise? Which it does.

And the fact is, something like this does have a chilling effect on speech. I hesitated to write this because it can be so easily misunderstood. (You’re sticking up for those people? Well, no I’m not; I’m sticking up for impartial law.) And in the end, what the hell? If we have yet another reason to throw the book at a murderous monster, it’s not a thing to lose sleep over, right? Except that that’s not how our system of justice is supposed to work, or so I grok.

That’s what I think, anyway. But I could easily be wrong, since I am taking the libertarian position here…

Those touchy-feely guys at GlockWorld

12 Replies

Bob’s post about guns reminded me of something I ran across last week…

Trying to figure out how on Earth that guy managed to kill 32 people and wound many others without Chopoint2
anybody stopping him (a subject I will come back to because it still puzzles me; I’ve put together some notes on it) caused me to pore through news stories in the first day or so, looking to find out what he was armed with. The fact that he did not have an automatic weapon made me all the more curious.

The Wall Street Journal told me over breakfast last Wednesday that he had some sort of Glock 9mm — the AP says it was a Glock 19 — and a Walther P22, so I looked those up on my PDA. And I gotta tell ya, I was really touched by what I found.

Of all the outpourings of sympathy from across the country, what could have been more heartwarming, more comforting, than this, posted at GlockWorld.com?

TGSCOM, Inc is appalled by the events at the Virginia Tech campus on April 16th, 2007 and we hope that you will join us in thoughts and prayers to bring some comfort to the families of the victims. We advocate the responsible and legal use of firearms and are saddened that there are some who will pick up a firearm with the intention of harming an innocent human being. A fund has been set in place at Virginia Tech to help the families of the victims of this unthinkable crime. Donate here.

How about them guys at GlockWorld.com, huh? Not only do they "buy and sell Glock (TM) and Glock (TM) accessories at some of the lowest prices on the web," but they have feelings, too. If I ever buy a Glock, Glock_19
I’m going to these fellas. By contrast, the actual, official Web site of Glock Gesellschaft mbH seems cold, unfriendly. Not to cast aspersions, but kind of Teutonic, you might say. Maybe that’s why the U.S. Army went with the Italians; I don’t know. (Some enthusiasts still advocate for Glock, while there are reports that some Defense types talk about going back to the old .45, so it’s all in flux.)

I didn’t get any warm fuzzies from Walther, either. I’m sure they make fine pistols, though. But their PR needs work.

McAlister: Forcing the issue

12 Replies

After reading the excerpt we had in Monday’s paper, I went to read this post on Bob McAlister’s blog. An excerpt:

Media forcing gun control issue into tragedy
April 17, 2007 3:50:58 PM
Just like clockwork, the national media see a political opportunity in the tragedy at Virginia Tech. All network morning shows, at least the ones I saw, raised the issue of gun control. Here’s how CBS did it. (That link’s no longer working, Bob.)
I don’t usually quote Rush Limbaugh, but he made a good point today. He said the pending liberal cry to "take the guns off the street" is as logical as conservatives saying because the shooter was South Korean, we should just shut down the borders and not let anybody in–ever.

I didn’t want to get into this thing, but ideological observations accusing other people of being ideological — on thin grounds — tend to provoke me. Here is a slightly edited (in other words, improved from when I sent it from my PDA this morning) version of the comment I posted in response:

"Forcing?" Seriously, Bob — I’m with you part of the way. I generally think efforts to find meaning or lessons in such events is pretty pointless. But it seems to be part of human nature — not mine, but plenty of other humans. And if you ARE going to grasp quickly for an answer, you don’t have to have an ulterior, ideological motive to think, "wouldn’t it be great if he just couldn’t have gotten ahold of those guns?" It may be pointless in a political environment in which such thoughts are anathema, but it’s a fairly reasonable idle thought.

And Rush might make a good point now and then — I don’t listen, so I don’t know (he’s on in the middle of
the day, and I work for a living) — but this isn’t one of them. Banning a national of people and trying to make sure crazies are not running around armed are hardly the same thing, in any rational scheme. It’s unAmerican to condemn a person’s nationality; it’s simple self-preservation to want to stop killers from having the means — if you can, which I doubt. You don’t address who people are; you address what they do. Chohammer

Think about it; which presents a greater threat to the public weal — a crazy Korean with a hammer, or a crazy Korean with a pair of semi-automatics?

I tend to take a fatalistic attitude toward gun control. With 200 million guns chasing God knows how many crazies, it’s hard to imagine further control preventing any really determined sort from getting hands on one. The problem is that 200 million guns exist, not how we keep track of them — and good luck doing anything about that.

But it’s quite natural, and not sinister, to wish something could be done about it — unless you’re just ideologically opposed even to thinking about it.

bradwarthen.com

All The News That Gives You Fits

Category Archives: Crime and Punishment

Strike Four on police testing scandal

Here’s a place to talk about the school shootings

Dumb crook news

The soul of discretion

Waterboarding: Torture or not?

Jury duty

Those experts are FAST, man!

Thank goodness for New Mexico

Ozmint: “I need the Legislature’s help on this; somebody’s going to get killed” at Corrections

Isn’t being Irish Catholic considered an extenuating circumstance?

Crystal Pink Perversion

Why would abortion foes exempt rape?

We won’t have Thomas Ravenel to kick around any more

Get your mind right, Luke

McAlister won’t throw stones at Ravenel

Looks like Lindsey is safe

Geddings has done worse

I hate it when this happens

Those touchy-feely guys at GlockWorld

McAlister: Forcing the issue