Saturday, November 27, 2004

They should be prosecuted for their criminal acts and forbidden from returning to the arena, ever.
I can usually depend on Dan for some law and order common sense, so you can be assured I was surprised when he argued that at times violence is "part of the game." I called Dan on my way up to Puyallup earlier this week to ask if I got into an argument with someone at work and popped him in the nose, what I would be charged with. Dan said, likely, simple assault. Not a felony, but not something you want to spend your afternoon sorting out either.

Our long conversation on Ron Artest, Detroit fans, the city of Detroit in general and criminal law boiled down to whether or not athletes on the field of play who take part in criminal activity (simple assault) should be charged.

Its my impression that if a ball player runs after a pitcher for throwing inside, hits him a couple times, that is criminal activity. But, the police officers that are always at Mariners' games never step in to do anything about it. If they were walking back to their cars after the game and saw a similar activity, they would pull out their cuffs.

Especially after the Pistons/Pacers brawl, the fact that professional athletes are allowed to literally get away with criminal behavior on the field baffles me. People are watching it happen dozens of times every season, and no one considers it criminal. Take away the field, the stadium and uniforms. Make it a beer league even, and you have cops, cuffs and all that.

Dan made one valid point. In the case of simple assault, a fist fight, if their isn't anyone willing to press charges, no action by the police can be taken. Now, this is a part of our law that I haven't thought about much. Its possible for someone to break a law, but not be punished, because someone who is not a police officer or public servant of any kind, rather the victim, decides that the criminal should not be hauled in.

Either way, there is no way in my mind that Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson and Jermaine O'Neal should not have been hauled away in handcuffs

Monday, November 22, 2004

Right now, I'm listening to the new U2 album on their website. After SNL, I think I may not be able to take much more of this.

Sunday, November 21, 2004

Good article on how the Puget Sound no longer centers on Seattle and how Rossi and McKenna use that to win:
At Seattle's Town Hall, Democrat Christine Gregoire would later that night buck up her supporters and urge confidence in the face — and the hope — of a recount. Town Hall, that graceful building with encircling pews, the epicenter of urban, urbane Seattle, looked like the Alamo.

Rossi and McKenna are distinctly and artfully suburban. Their political base in Sammamish and Bellevue grew in the high-growth 1990s, a decade that now appears to be the defining pivot from city to non-city life in the region.

That shift is accelerated in Snohomish and Pierce counties. It was the suburbanizing Pierce County portion of the 8th Congressional District that kept that seat Republican. It is the growing suburbanization of Kitsap County across the water that makes it less and less a ferry stop to Seattle's urban center. It was traditionally Democratic Snohomish County that pivoted away from Gregoire.

While pollsters and political consultants talked about the "suburban crescent" that would go Republican or shift Democratic, I think we are all missing the point of the departure of the suburbs from city life. It just happened here later than in Eastern metropolises. The suburban voter is more independent — not many swing voters reside in Seattle — and less abiding of the urban agenda that dominated our state.

They can go centrist Democrat as they do for Congress with Reps. Jay Inslee and Adam Smith. They can go right of center with new member of Congress Dave Reichert. They are certainly looking for voices to represent them that are neither rural nor urban.

Talking with one of the more-seasoned politicians of the Sammamish Plateau Wednesday night — a group gloriously indifferent to Seattle — there was something of a realization that Puget Sound had changed, even if Seattle has not. He spoke of highs and lows over the years, but of those who know Sammamish well and have seen it evolve in the past dozen years.

Sammamish? Nobody in Seattle knows Sammamish. They don't know its life and its troubles or why people move there with aspirations and hopes for a life in suburban America.

Saturday, November 20, 2004

Interesting post over at Pacific Views on the pro, cons and thoughts on the "takings" argument against habitat protections. I've been reading emails from the anti-CAO group up in King County for the past few weeks, and the one thing that strikes me about their argument is how is doesn't seem to address environmentalism at all.

Their argument is stuck on the track of freedom and private property rights, seemingly saying that "I have the freedom to do with my property what I want." On the surface a solid argument, which hits some potholes though when I start thinking of putting up a 7-11 on my property.

They never talk about the problem that these ordinance are supposed to deal with. When the do, they refer to it as a "problem that really isn't there" sort of thing, or shluffing off the responsibility of the problem to urban dwellers, saying that the Seattle residents created the problem, now rural residents have to come up with a solution.

Friday, November 12, 2004

Former city council candidate Alfonso Botana did not sign the back of his absentee ballot. If anyone out there knows Alfonso, tell him to call the county auditors office so his vote can count!

Maybe this is why he lost.