Tyre Nichols just the Latest

Again America is made Famous by Violence

The horrible death of Tyre Nichols pulls the cover off the true America once again. This is Rodney King 32 years later. The country has a learning problem - a disability at the national level. Too bad there are no therapists for countries. America would need couch time with all of them.

There are very interesting contrasts between these two incidents.

In the King case four white officers beat the crap out of a black man. In the Nichols case five black officers beat the crap out of black man. King survived. Nichols died. King was charged with "felony evading", but later the charge was dropped. Rodney King - Wikipedia. Nichols was alleged the be driving recklessly, unsubstantiated. The King incident was videoed by a third party or we likely would not have seen it. Nichols was videoed by police cameras and others. Otherwise we likely would not have seen it. According to the same Wikipedia article the four officers who beat King were charged with excessive force and 3 got off. The jury was hung on the 4th. Later federal charges were brought for violating King's rights. Two served time. In the Nichols case all 5 officers were quickly charged with second-degree murder and kidnapping plus other serious charges. We will see the outcome. After the King incident there was massive rioting, injury, and death. It took the Army, the Marine Corps, and the California Army Nation Guard to restore order. So far this has not happened with Nichols.

The quick action against the officers this time and the reality that almost everything is now being captured on a camera somewhere is a good thing in my opinion. Not everyone agrees. The bad thing is that police brutality has not improved.

If you talk to many cops they will maintain that many of the young people who are the typical "gang bangers" are people of colour. They justify the need for caution in traffic and other stops on the possible use of guns. Sometimes cops are surprised and killed. What we saw which ultimately killed Tyre was not caution. We saw what many are describing as terrorism - against non-white victims. We saw bullies.

Guns were not a even a factor with King or Nichols. Where was the risk of being shot to these five police officers? They had him on the ground - similar to King; similar to Floyd and other cases. The beating continued. Why? Some of the comments from those bullies tell us why. It was what they do.

Therein lies the biggest problem I see here. Is there something about a career as a police officer that attracts bullies? Let me recognize that the majority of police officers are NOT of this mentality and serve the public for the right reasons. They never fire their gun and never beat up on people in custody. However too many are getting in who do not belong. Are some jurisdictions so desperate that they will pay big bucks for anybody to take the job? Look at it the other way around. If you are a bully by nature, what an occupation! Great pay and all the action you want!

Are these the same genes that cause some men to lose it when rebuffed by a woman, especially sexually? Do they beat the crap out of their wives when she says "No?" Do these genes make men go berserk when someone doesn't stop; tries to flee; mouths off? Are these insults to their cop ego?

This is a big problem for police forces everywhere. The military has a similar problem but following orders and protocol are both drilled into enlisted people as are the negative consequences of disobeying. Perhaps police forces could learn from this. How about police boot camp?

In summary this is a very similar problem to America's second big challenge: how do you keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them? I don't have any solution but perhaps the next big push in genealogy research should be to identify the bully gene. It's in those spiral molecules somewhere beating up the other genes.

Imagine how many lives would be saved!

#thebrewsterblock

(Please leave suggestions/comments below. Click  "No Comments".)

The Supreme court: The Thorn in America's Side - make that Heart

Is the Highest Court in America High on Itself or Something Else?

It is time to make some changes to the American democratic "system", in this case The Supreme Court. Just like diagnosing a car, if you could plug into an American government "chip" I'm sure The Supreme Court would be flagged with a code indicating that repair was needed.

Rumours abound that there is internal squabbling. I'm sure this is not new but the differences are never supposed to be based upon politics. To the public it appears that is exactly what is happenng. Look at the fate of great sports teams when the squabbling gets nasty. Their performance falls apart.

What do you expect when Presidents - most recently Trump but many others before him - try to stack the deck in their party's favour? It is supposed to be the last impartial pillar on which the American three part system can rely. Can they do so any longer? That is questionable.

I have suggested before that the court needs to change. It will not be easy but the American system was designed without easy in mind. It should be difficult but doable. Who will take on the challenge?

Here is this author's suggestions as one who has never been a professional politician and who is not American. They apply to the appointment process and the term served by a judge. The objectives are to limit the term any one judge can serve and to attempt to maintain an even split of party appointments. The same should apply to any other Supreme Court appointments in the land:

1. There must always be an odd number of judges. Today there are 9.
2. Just as there is today there will be one Chief Justice to break any split decisions.
3. Judges continue to be appointed but not for life. They will serve for a minimum of 4 years but a maximum of 8 net years. After four years a judge can be replaced by the President. (If a judge is off for 6 months that will not count against their total.)
4. Each new President gets to appoint a maximum of 4 Supreme Court judges (currently) or 50% of the court, excluding the Chief Justice. However if no judge has served their minimum 4 years, no appointments will be permitted until that time.
5. The only exceptions would be if a judge retires, dies, or is incapacitated.
6. If a President wins a 2nd 4 year term and they want to appoint new judges, they will have to replace judges who have served their minimum four years and who were appointed by their own party.
7. During the approval process for a new judge, only a fixed number of rejections (to be determined) of individuals will be permitted. Once the maximum is reached, the President is free to make the appointment.

This would be far from perfect. The transition would take several years. Those who already sit thought they had an esteemed position with great pay for life. If removed they will likely have to be paid out.

It should work towards balancing out the numbers of red and blue judges and could be extended to any additional parties in the future. It should also make existing judges thinks twice about politically motivated decisions.

This will not please everyone but it deserves its day in court! If you object please leave constructive comments below.

#thebrewsterblock

The Climate Warming Warning Light is ON.

Giuliani for Mayer of Renewable Energy!!

I just posted a Tweet that is worth repeating:

"I am reading an article that says this January has had the highest temperatures on record in many European countries. Still we do nothing but talk. This is like ignoring the Check Engine Light on your car or removing the fuse for its warning indicator panel."

Are we all deaf, blind, selfish, or just stupid? The answer is probably all of those adjectives. If I have to pick one it is SELFISH. It won't become a disaster in our lifetimes so we will enjoy our lives while we can. Then it is somebody else's problem - like our kids'.

2023 Nomination for Speaker of The House

The System is Rigged - against the Riggers

You have to laugh. Kevin McCarthy is now suffering a major crisis in his own party during the nomination for a new Speaker of The House. He thought he was a shoe in - just like Trump. Now the fix is really in - against HIM. No Democrats needed.

Looks good on him after condemning Trump and then kissing his "ring". Nancy must really be enjoying the show. That's EXACTLY what it has become - a show. a B-grade movie. No need for cartoons - the whole thing is a cartoon.

Did you hear some of the nominators giving their little speech before naming their nominee? Jim Jordan ranting about how people in the current administration who were never elected are running the show and exercising too much power. Excuse me? The brains behind the entire Trump administration were all unelected. ("Behind" -  reminds me of where The Donald's own gray matter often  resides.) Several of his team were close family members. Are we forgetting Kelly Anne Conway; Roger Stone; Rudy Giuliani; Steve Bannon; John Bolton; Ivanka Trump to name a few. Every President has a cabinet of about 15 people as advisors. None are elected. This is nothing new.

Then there was Jordan's recommitment to investigate everyone in a blue outfit, just to get back at "the other side". He wants a hearing on Dr. Anthony Fauci. Why not subpoena The Pope or any of the current evangelists in his own country? This guy is nuttier than a fruitcake.