Sign of the times…

I am a staunch law and order person. Very conservative. I believe the U.S. criminal justice system is a farce. Our courts are a travesty, shameful. Crime ramps up. Criminals become more emboldened. And leniency is what is offered up in the face of this tsunami of horrific crime covering the land.

I believe more prisons need built, no matter the outcry from those refusing to have them built within 50 miles of where they live [think on this, do you really believe that should any break out of that prison they are going to want to linger, remain, settle down near that prison? Or are they going to want to get as far away as possible? Like about 50 miles or more, where there is no prison?] and those sentences need to be much more severe. Fewer plea deals. And that prisons ought not be a form of spa, health club, resort and entertainment center.

I also believe and know there are those who commit crimes and end up in a jail, a prison can become truly reformed. More than reformed. Renewed of the spirit of their mind and take up their cross and become true disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. But we don’t need to turn prisons into Club Med in order to bring this about.

Not that it matters to anyone reading this, or anyone anywhere really, but I am a staunch rule of law, let’s know and understand and abide by our excellent foundational document’s person. When the foundation is allowed to be removed? All that stands above it rots, falls down and is destroyed.

To allow illegal search and seizure, to not hold those in law enforcement who do not respect the law, abide by the law, perhaps even know the law, and think themselves a law unto themselves bypasses our Constitution, our foundation, and then that person is excused? Exempted from the law because they are a law enforcement agent?

Do you see the problem in this?

Those who ought to know, respect, follow, be an example of, maintain law and order can break the law and get away with breaking the law. Because of their position.

Can you see where this not only can lead to, but over the past few decades where this has led? What this opens the door to? And once a door is opened and that pushing on it is permitted entrance there is no going back. No removing it and closing the door on it. Once it’s in? It’s in. And then it can continue to grow and invite other heinous and foundational destroying elements in.

We are lax. We are soft. We are self-indulgent. Otherwise occupied. We have been indoctrinated in 20th and 21st century philosophies making us weaker by the day and over a period of weeks, months and years? Is anyone paying attention? Does the constant erosion not at some point get anyone’s attention!?

A nation of children. Raised with leniency. Spoiled. Fed lies and believing those lies and refusing any discipline. Refusing to take the time to gain solid knowledge, history, what is right and what is wrong.

Is it any wonder what is taking place in America, and this also applies to every Western nation since every Western nation has taken the same errant course —is it any wonder things are as they are? And that they are only going to get worse? A whole lot worse…

Yes, we need strong law enforcement. We need law officers doing their job. That’s DOING THEIR JOB —which is to catch the bad people, stop terrible things from happening if they’re able, and to uphold the law. That even includes themselves. Believe it or not.

We have the rule of law, the foundational documents we have for a reason.

They are not to be tampered with. Ignored, Rewritten. Discarded and t make false claims they no longer are relevant because of modern times.

What a load of dung and all those pushing those piles of dung around expecting us to ingest it and ask for more know it’s a heaping pile of dung.

When the law keepers imagine themselves outside the law? Exempt from the law?

Despots, tyrants, dictators, wickedness, corruption, and evil only increase.

No excuses. No exceptions.

Ben, Johnny, Tommy, Alex and the gang put the 4th amendment in the Constitution for a reason. All the words are there for a reason. Not to fill out the parchment and make it look nice. But because in their wisdom they knew the hearts of men. They knew the hearts of men are filled with evil all the day long. To those in authority, those in power no less than the tyrant, the despot, the monarch, the head of a nation, and the criminal. And that human nature, that inherent evil needed a solid foundation to keep it in check, to provide balances against such.

And now we want to act as if all that is meaningless. That we somehow know better?

Think again.

Ken Pullen

Tuesday, March 1st, 2022

ACP — A Crooked Path

The Supreme Court could make it very easy for federal law enforcement to violate the Constitution

Tuesday, March 1, 2022

By Ian Millhiser

Reprinted from Vox

Robert Boule owns a bed and breakfast along the border between Washington State and Canada, which is cheekily named the “Smuggler’s Inn.” It’s a business that has a fairly shady reputation.

Boule admits that some of his guests used his property to illegally cross the border into Canada. In 2018, Canada charged Boule with multiple criminal violations “for his alleged involvement in helping foreign nationals enter Canada illegally between April 2016 and September 2017.”

Those charges were later dismissed by a Canadian court on constitutional grounds. But now, Boule’s somewhat sketchy inn is the subject of a Supreme Court case that could grant federal law enforcement officers sweeping immunity from lawsuits alleging that they violated the Constitution — even when those officers target people who are entirely innocent.

Egbert v. Boule could radically expand federal officers’ legal immunity

In March of 2014 Boule welcomed a guest who had recently arrived in the United States from Turkey. Although the guest was lawfully present in the United States, federal border patrol agent Erik Egbert decided to confront this guest when he arrived at Boule’s inn.

When the guest arrived, Egbert drove onto Boule’s property and approached the car containing the guest. After Boule asked Egbert to leave, and Egbert refused, Boule stepped between the border patrol agent and his guest. Egbert then allegedly shoved Boule against the car, grabbed him, and pushed him to the ground.

Then, after Boule complained to Egbert’s supervisor about this treatment, Egbert allegedly retaliated against him by contacting the Internal Revenue Service and asking that agency to investigate Boule’s tax statute.

Boule, in other words, alleges that Agent Egbert violated his constitutional rights. The Fourth Amendment forbids “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and if Egbert did, indeed, assault Boule, that could form the basis for a valid Fourth Amendment lawsuit. Boule also claims he had a First Amendment right to complain to Egbert’s supervisor without facing retaliation.

And yet, in Egbert v. Boule, a case being argued in front of the Supreme Court this Wednesday, the Court is likely to cut off Boule’s lawsuit against Egbert before it even gets off the ground. In the process, the Court could gut a seminal precedent from the early 1970s establishing that federal law enforcement officers can be held personally responsible when they violate the Constitution.

The primary issue in Boule is the continued viability of Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971), which permits federal lawsuits against federal officials who allegedly violated the Constitution. Although the Court has not yet overruled Bivens, it has already stripped that case of much of its force. The Supreme Court’s most recent case applying Bivens, for example, said that a border patrol agent — who allegedly shot and killed a Mexican child, from across the US-Mexico border, and in cold blood — could not be sued.

So the most likely outcome in the Boule case is that Agent Egbert receives lawsuit immunity. The more difficult question is whether any meaningful part of Bivens will remain in effect after Boule is decided.