He Was Assaulted by Three Teens at Work, But He’s Going to Prison for Defending Himself

Jeffrey SumpterJeffrey Sumpter, 21, was attacked by three juveniles at the Dunkin’ Donuts where he worked in Norwalk, Connecticut, last October. On Monday he was convicted and sentenced to 18 months in jail because he decided to defend himself.

Nobody seems to dispute that Sumpter is not the aggressor here, but the victim. Three juveniles entered the bakery and attacked Sumpter. The fight spilled outside and Sumpter, who had a knife, stabbed one of his attackers.

And that’s where things went wrong for Sumpter. Connecticut does allow citizens to defend themselves. But its law also includes a “duty to retreat” from attackers if it’s feasible to do so. There are several important exceptions—people don’t have to retreat from their home or from their place of work. If Sumpter had stayed in his Dunkin’ Donuts he could have been covered.

But he went outside, and so according to the letter of the law in Connecticut, what happened was first-degree felony assault. According to the Connecticut Post, Judge John Blawie even said he believed Sumpter’s version of the events and that he was defending himself. But the law is the law, the judge says. Off to jail.

As if that’s not bad enough, the judge noted that because Sumpter’s conviction was for a violent felony, he will receive longer sentences if he’s convicted of a crime in the future. That means Connecticut law essentially punishes victims in perpetuity for defending themselves.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2z9qx8Z
via IFTTT

The Debt Clock Keeps Spinning: New at Reason

In June, the Congressional Budget Office issued a grim forecast.

Federal debt now equals 78 percent of gross domestic product, the highest since we had just finished fighting World War II. The CBO says that under current policies, it can be expected to “approach 100 percent of GDP by the end of the next decade and 152 percent by 2048. That amount would be the highest in the nation’s history by far.”

The Trump administration pretends that its policies will unleash such rapid economic growth that the treasury will get a flood of new revenue. But as Steve Chapman observes, the administration’s beliefs are at odds with economic reality.

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2u9Kgzu
via IFTTT

Trump Seriously Considered Invading Venezuela: Reason Roundup

Why can’t the U.S. just invade Venezuela? That’s the question President Trump purportedly pondered last summer, according to a new account from the Associated Press (AP).

At “a meeting last August in the Oval Office to discuss sanctions on Venezuela… President Donald Trump turned to his top aides” and asked the “unsettling question,” AP reports, based on conversations with both a Trump-administration official and two officials from Columbia.

The suggestion stunned those present at the meeting, including U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, both of whom have since left the administration. This account of the previously undisclosed conversation comes from a senior administration official familiar with what was said.

In an exchange that lasted around five minutes, McMaster and others took turns explaining to Trump how military action could backfire and risk losing hard-won support among Latin American governments to punish President Nicolas Maduro for taking Venezuela down the path of dictatorship, according to the official. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions.

Trump reportedly refused to let it go, though.

The next day, Aug. 11, Trump alarmed friends and foes alike with talk of a “military option” to remove Maduro from power. The public remarks were initially dismissed in U.S. policy circles as the sort of martial bluster people have come to expect from the reality TV star turned commander in chief.

But shortly afterward, he raised the issue with Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, according to the U.S. official. Two high-ranking Colombian officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid antagonizing Trump confirmed the report.

Then in September, on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly, Trump discussed it again, this time at greater length, in a private dinner with leaders from four Latin American allies that included Santos, the same three people said and Politico reported in February.

The U.S. official said Trump was specifically briefed not to raise the issue and told it wouldn’t play well, but the first thing the president said at the dinner was, “My staff told me not to say this.” Trump then went around asking each leader if they were sure they didn’t want a military solution, according to the official, who added that each leader told Trump in clear terms they were sure.

The White House refused to comment. Meanwhile, Maduro told Venezulan troops yesterday about the AP’s report and the “supremacist and criminal vision of those who govern the U.S.”

Even discussing military action “may play into the hands” of the oppressive Venezuelan government, worries Washington Post WoldViews analyst Rick Noack.

FREE MINDS

First Amendment “little help” for prison watchdogs. “It is tempting to see the limited access as an especially Trumpian trouble, of a piece with an administration that has labored since day one to delegitimize and marginalize the press,” writes Jonathan Peters at Columbia Journalism Review. “But the problem of press access to prisons and the like…is a chronic one.”

FREE MARKETS

Chinese tariffs take effect today.

Trump tariffs on Chinese goods “are scheduled to hit $34 billion of Chinese imports on Friday,” reports The Washington Post, “and Beijing plans to swiftly respond with levies on an equal amount of goods. Border officers here could receive the order as early as midnight to slap new taxes on hundreds of American products, including pork, poultry, soybeans and corn.”

QUICK HITS

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2zffGKM
via IFTTT

Washington’s Economic Illogic Is on Display: New at Reason

The Fourth of July holiday is a time to reflect on the courage of our Founding Fathers to pursue independence from the tyrannical British government. Unfortunately, writes Veronique de Rugy, we now get to spend the other 364 days dealing with the tyrannical federal government in Washington.

You see this in our debt and increasing deficits to entitlement programs that redistribute from relatively young and poor to relatively rich and old—or in our corporate welfare programs that subsidize a handful of producers at the expense of everyone else. Or in Trump’s tariffs. You also see it in a never-ending stream of contradictory legislation and red tape at the taxpayers’ expense.

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2u1q8zA
via IFTTT

Good Riddance to Trump’s Border Bouncer: New at Reason

June will see the end of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Acting Director Tom Homan’s brief but controversial tenure heading the agency. Homan is the chief architect, among other things, of the administration’s policy of taking kids from their border-jumping parents. The main reason he is quitting is that lawmakers were planning to use his confirmation hearings to air his record, writes Shikha Dalmia.

View this article.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2u7SyIf
via IFTTT

Brickbat: Nip and Tuck

Tonsil examIn the United Kingdom, the National Health Service is looking to eliminate or reduce several different surgeries to cut costs and reduce “unnecessary or risky procedures.” The treatments NHS officials want to cut include tonsil removal and procedures for carpal tunnel syndrome, hemorrhoids, and varicose veins.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2ziV0lc
via IFTTT

Heterodox Academy Fights For Intellectual Freedom and Diversity Among Professors: Podcast

For all the student speech that’s being squashed on college campuses these days, higher education faces an even-more serious threat: intellectual conformity among professors, researchers, and scholars. Over the past 25 years, for instance, the “American academy went from leaning left to being almost entirely on the left. Similar trends and problems are occurring in the UK and Canada.”

Enter Heterodox Academy, a group of academics and scholars in the humanities, social sciences, and research sciences that has its origins in a blog started in 2015 by New York University’s Jonathan Haidt. The group currently claims over 1,800 professors and graduate students as members whose mission is “to improve the quality of research and education in universities by increasing viewpoint diversity, mutual understanding, and constructive disagreement.”

“Ideological frameworks, including political orientation, powerfully inform the assumptions scholars and professors make, the questions they ask, the outcomes they value, and the way they interpret their data and their world,” Heterodox’s founding documents argue. “When campuses don’t include ideologically diverse voices and don’t engage seriously with dissenting ideas, students and scholars miss the opportunity for their thinking to be challenged.” The group offers a wide-range of resources, ranging from a blog to a podcast to an online library of texts and videos, that are designed to help start and sustain wide-ranging, serious conversations among academics.

Headquartered in New York, Heterodox Academy recently sponsored a day-long “Open Mind” conference (you can watch the whole thing on the group’s website) featuring scholars and journalists from all over the political spectrum.

I spoke with Heterodox Academy’s Deb Mashek about her goals for the conference and the group. A Ph.D. in social-and-health psychology who was a full professor at Harvey Mudd College in California, she became Heterodox Academy’s first full-time executive director earlier this year.

Audio production by Ian Keyser.

Subscribe, rate, and review our podcast at iTunes, Google Play Music, or wherever works best for you.

Listen at SoundCloud below:

Don’t miss a single Reason Podcast! (Archive here.)

Subscribe at iTunes.

Subscribe at Google.

Follow us at SoundCloud.

Subscribe at YouTube.

Like us on Facebook.

Follow us on Twitter.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2zdfOKI
via IFTTT

Libertarian Party Rebuffs Mises Uprising

Nicholas Sarwark ||| Matt WelchThe Libertarian Party on Monday afternoon re-elected in a surprising first-ballot landslide incumbent Chair Nicholas Sarwark to an unprecedented third consecutive two-year term. In doing so, the nation’s third-largest political party swatted down what was supposed to be the most contentious challenge at its biannual national convention—to a leadership that was considered by various critics to be too operationally incremental, too ideologically tepid, and too (in the words of Ludwig von Mises Institute Senior Fellow and popular podcaster Tom Woods at a nearby New Orleans rally Saturday) “SJW-friendly.”

Instead, Sarwark’s main opponent, the Mises Caucus-endorsed Joshua Smith, stumbled badly in a defensive debate performance at the New Orleans Hyatt Regency Sunday night, and ended up Monday on the business end of a 65 percent-22 percent rout. In the vice chair race, two-term incumbent Arvin Vohra, who has become a lightning rod over the past year-plus for intentionally provocative public comments such as “Bad Idea: School Shootings. Good Idea: School Board Shootings,” was resoundingly drummed out of office, never receiving more than 11 percent of the vote in three rounds of balloting that ended Tuesday with a positivity-exuding 33-year-old finance/tech/consulting guy named Alex Merced squeaking past the 50 percent finish line.

“What I think the race shows is that if you want to change the direction of the Libertarian Party, if you have new ideas about how we can grow and reach new members, the election of Merced to vice chair shows that the delegates want that kind of change,” Sarwark told me Tuesday afternoon. “If your campaign is seen, or has themes of trying to kick people out, of trying to attack people like Gov. Weld, or… basically anyone—if your campaign was seen as trying to drive people out of the party, the delegates soundly rejected that. And I think that that is the biggest takeaway from the convention.”

Bill Weld and 2016 Gary Johnson campaign honcho Ron Nielson ||| Matt WelchWeld, the controversial-within-the-party 2016 vice presidential nominee and former moderate Republican Massachusetts governor who is laying the groundwork for a possible 2020 presidential run (and was everywhere to be seen at the convention, amiably taking on all skeptical comers), played a pivotal role in the decisive debate. Candidates had the opportunity to ask their opponents one question, and when it was Smith’s turn, a delegate in the audience shouted out, “What do you think about Bill Weld?!” (Weld-heckling was a sporadic feature throughout the three-day event.) Smith decided to make that his question.

“What I think about Bill Weld,” Sarwark started slowly, building into a feisty crescendo, “is that he is still in the Libertarian Party, while many of his opponents are not. [He’s been] raising money for and endorsing Libertarian candidates. He is fundraising for us. And the exposure of Bill Weld to the Libertarian Party has not made the Libertarian Party more like an establishment Republican, but has made Bill Weld a lot more like a Libertarian….He knows something about winning public office, and [we need to] learn how to do that from anybody who will help us, anybody who will join us. And we should not PUSH PEOPLE OUT who are willing to help!”

As New York gubernatorial candidate and popular party organizer Larry Sharpe, who had backed Smith, commented later, after that exchange it was “game over.”

Smith, an energetic and rough-hewn Washington-based activist and co-founder of the libertarian news site Think Liberty, was both magnanimous and defiant after his defeat at the hands of man he had criticized during the campaign for prioritizing “virtue signaling, identity politics, and battles for infamy.”

“Look, no one knew who I was eight months ago,” Smith told me. “We came in here and took 22 percent of the vote…from the most popular chair that we’ve ever had in 46 years. I’m not mad!”

Smith won the consolation prize of an at-large national committee berth Tuesday evening. “I like Nick, I’ve always liked Nick,” he said. But as a party, “we’re not going up. We’re just not, you know. He sits up there and talks a big game….We [have] a small budget, small membership base, and we’ve got to grow that. So I hope that me being an at-large will help us accomplish those goals, and, you know, if he wants to take credit for that, that’s fine.”

Sarwark’s resounding victory—he received more votes than he did in a far smoother race in 2016—was hailed by the L.P.’s more prominent elected officials, whose approach toward voter outreach tends to dovetail more with the Libertarian Pragamatist Caucus than, say, the Misesites or the in-your-face Audacious Caucus.

“This gives us a chance as a party to have some consistency and get to the next level,” said Calimesa, Calif. Mayor Jeff Hewitt, an L.P. star and successful policy reformer who is neck-and-neck in a two-man race to get on the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in November. “We’ve got the right guy in as chair, and it’s really going to make us grow.”

The contest between Sarwark, a careful and smooth-talking 38-year-old lawyer/car dealer who is also running for mayor of Phoenix, and the 35-year-old Navy veteran Smith was so nasty and upsetting for some delegates that vendors were hawking “I survived the Libertarian National Chair campaign 2018” T-shirts. But to the extent that it was a proxy war between the party’s new influx of elbow-throwing Tom Woods listeners and its older cohort of more patient coalition-builders, the pragmatists won in a rout.

As longtime L.P. hand and 2016 Gary Johnson right-hand man Tom Mahon sang to me right after the vote:

The Mises came over the mountain

The Mises came over the mountain

The Mises came over the mountain

and the Praggies kicked their ass

The Praggies kicked their ass

The Praggies kicked their ass

The Mises came over the moun-tain…..

and the Praggies kicked their ass

The respective leaderships of the Libertarian National Committee and the Ludwig von Mises Institute (LVMI) have been hurling insults at each other since the Unite the Right rally and subsequent riots in Charlottesville, Virginia last Aug. 11-12. Two days after protester Heather Heyer was rammed and dragged to death by an automobile driven by reported neo-Nazi James Alex Fields, Jr., Sarwark dinged Mises Institute President Jeff Deist for blaming the conflict on politicization without uttering the name “Donald Trump.” Then Sarwark took a swing at Woods for defending Murray Rothbard’s controversial “paleolibertarian” push toward the reactionary right in the late-1980s and early ’90s.

Woods responded by calling Sarwark a “pansy” with “a very low IQ;” Sarwark accused the LVMI of being “the preferred choice of actual Nazis,” and then Vohra issued a stinging denunciation of a pro-nationalism speech Deist had given two weeks before Charlottesville that had concluded with the line, “blood and soil and God and nation still matter to people. Libertarians ignore this at the risk of irrelevance.” Retorted Vohra: “‘Blood and soil’ is a central Nazi and nationalist idea….[A]t the current time, Mises Institute has been turned into a sales funnel for the White Nationalist branch of the Alt Right.”

Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict made the distancing exercise complete with an Aug. 15 press release stating, “There is no room for racists and bigots in the Libertarian Party. If there are white nationalists who — inappropriately — are members of the Libertarian Party, I ask them to submit their resignations today. We don’t want them to associate with the Libertarian Party, and we don’t want their money. I’m not expecting many resignations, because our membership already knows this well.”

Then something interesting happened: People didn’t leave. In fact, they kept coming in. The Mises Caucus has continued to be one of the fastest growing blocs within the party, even as the war of words between the L.P. and the LVMI (and Mises allies, such as the libertarian comic Dave Smith) raged on. Joshua Smith announced his candidacy for chair in September, winning an early endorsement from the caucus, and included in his critique of Sarwark “the fights with Tom Woods” and “telling people that maybe you’re not the kind of people we want in the Libertarian Party,” statements Smith characterized as “a huge ball-drop.”

Woods, not previously noted for his party-related activities, organized the day before the convention a raucous Take Human Action Bash a few blocks away, featuring a lively mix of speakers such as anti-war author Scott Horton and a piped-in Ron Paul. Unusually for both Woods and Paul, their speeches each made first-person plural references to capital-L Libertarians, and were basically pleas to make the party more like, well, Ron Paul.

“Most people change or adopt ideologies, not because they’re gently led by some stuffed shirt, but because they’re jolted by an articulate true believer,” said Woods, who spent a good deal of time eviscerating the philosophical and policy errors of Bill Weld, to an audience that occasionally broke out in “Tom Woods for president!” chants. “I mean, is the idea that we should be trying to trick people into voting Libertarian?”

Paul, too, urged the 200 or so people in the room—who he called “the libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party”—to focus on the basics of property rights, volunteerism, and being anti-war and anti-Federal Reserve. “Congratulations for being in the Mises Caucus, keep up the good work, and keep everybody honest,” he concluded.

Woods, a gifted and funny speaker with a loyal flock, painted a picture of a modern L.P. too far adrift from the non-aggression principle, too wracked by “fear of seeming unfashionable in elite circles.”

“When it comes to pot smoking and gay marriage, everybody has accepted those by now. What is the point? That horse is dead,” he said at one point. At another: “Now, I’ve heard it said that the Libertarian Party ought to avoid certain issues, because it will make it more difficult to make the party appeal to the LGBT community, [that] the party should be pro-LGBT. But, my answer to that is that Libertarians are not pro-LGBT. Libertarianism and the Libertarian Party are pro-humanity, period.”

She won. ||| Matt WelchMeanwhile, at the convention over the subsequent days, the party adopted new platform language defending sex workers, and removed old platform language that had supporting “control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property” (a change that Sarwark in particular finds significant in the current political climate). The party retained its usual support for “free market banking” and condemnation of the “use of force.”

Heading into the convention, there were two main chunks of dissatisfaction with Sarwark that translated into a widespread belief that Smith had at least a puncher’s chance to knock him out: The Mises/Charlottesville fracas, and an impatience about growing the party faster. But by the time Sarwark filleted Smith on the debate stage—and not incidentally, wielded an expert gavel during the cat-herding that passes for parliamentary procedure debates among Libertarians—the Mises Caucus just didn’t have enough bodies.

“The people who were mad about the Charlottesville and near-Charlottesville comments, that was the core of the support that on the ballot ended up voting for my competitor,” the chair said. “The people who wanted more growth, I believe that after the debate performance, and after hearing the actual numbers about how we’ve been doing, realized that we’re actually on that good trajectory for growth, and decided to stick with Nick.”

What does that trajectory look like? The 2018 L.P. convention was by far the largest of any of the party’s midterm gatherings, doubling the size of 2014. Fundraising at the convention gala possibly eclipsed even 2016—”I think we might have raised over $100,000 last night at a whack, which is amazing,” Sarwark said. There has been a post-2016 downturn in active dues-paying membership at the national level, but the party has been winning more and more local elections, getting a record number of state legislators to switch parties, and is already attracting national interest in its presidential deliberations for 2020. Most of the long-term metrics look good.

“There aren’t really words to describe how well we are doing,” Sarwark said. “The excitement we’ve had in the midterms with the number of candidates we have running and the number of Libertarians who are elected to office who are running for re-election, it has generated an energy and a buzz that I’ve never seen.”

Factionalism and bitter fights are just as prevalent in the Libertarian Party as they are in the broader lower-case-l libertarian movement, if a tad more colorfully dressed. But unlike the latter grouping, the former has a single banner under which they all manage to cooperate, with a charming and idiosyncratic affection for their occasionally vast differences. For now, the direction seems to be people coming in the tent to fight for their beliefs, rather than taking their balls and going home.

“I’m not going to leave these values, I love these values,” Hewitt said. “And no matter what person come in, I love even the crazy people in there. That won’t even become a problem once we get some wins. They’ll be whimsical then, or whatever else. People come to see that we’ll be winning, and we are that sexy party, we are that fun party. We’ve just got to start having confidence in ourselves, and taking a bit more of a patient approach to get a load of global offices.”

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2KGfRDb
via IFTTT

Intoxicated Off-Duty Cop Crashed Car and Assaulted Witness, Police Say

An off-duty officer with the New York Police Department (NYPD) was drunk when he crashed his car and punched a witness before attempting to flee the scene, police said Tuesday.

Tanvir Ahmed, a 28-year-old police officer who has been with the department for two years, was arrested Monday roughly half a mile away from where the incident occurred, according to WPIX. Even after being apprehended by police, he allegedly would not take a breathalyzer test. Ahmed faces multiple charges, including “assault, driving while intoxicated, leaving the scene of an accident and refusal to take a breath test,” the New York Post reported.

Video footage posted to Twitter on Tuesday by New York City Alerts appears to show the incident unfold. The video’s narrator follows a vehicle with an NYPD placard on its dashboard, which then crashes into another car. After being approached by a witness, the driver of the car attempts to flee the scene, but is eventually caught.

“Wow you’re a fucking cop?” the video’s narrator asks incredulously when he sees the NYPD placard. “Holy shit he’s a 67 [Precinct] cop!”

According to the New York Daily News, Ahmed was the third NYPD cop to be arrested within 24 hours. Another officer, traffic agent Jean Denard, allegedly slapped and choked his wife, while fellow traffic agent Dawn Gordon has been accused of buying drugs.

Police officers who commit offenses like these should be held accountable for their actions, but that doesn’t always happen, especially within the NYPD. In fact, internal discipline records obtained by BuzzFeed News, the contents of which were revealed to the public in March, revealed that least 319 NYPD officers remained on active duty despite being found responsible for termination-worthy misconduct.

According to those records, 38 of those officers were found guilty of excessive force, fighting, or unnecessarily firing service weapons remain on duty. Another 71 officers were found guilty of wrongfully dismissing charges as a favor (so-called “ticket fixing.”), 57 were found guilty of driving under the influence, and at least two were found guilty of sexual misdeeds.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2u66eDH
via IFTTT

L.A. Mayor’s Warning About the Dangers of Fireworks Blows Up in His Face

Screenshot via Vimeo/mysafela.orgWhen the mayor of Los Angeles used what could be mistaken for a cool science project to talk about firework safety, it quickly became clear that his warning had an unintended consequence.

City officials wanted to remind residents before the Fourth of July that the personal use of dangerous fireworks is illegal. So they posted a video to Vimeo that shows Mayor Eric Garcetti, Fire Department Chief Ralph Terrazas, Police Deputy Chief Dennis Kato, and City Attorney Mike Feuer telling residents that unauthorized fireworks are “never safe and never sane.”

Then Garcetti took the warnings a step further by tweeting a clip of a watermelon being blown up by a stick-of-gum-sized firework. Garcetti was serious, but he may have misjudged his audience:

The Los Angeles County Fire Department lists the various penalties for the sale, manufacturing, and use of fireworks per the County of Los Angeles Fire Code, Title 32, Section 5601.3. If any Angelenos do decide to engage in this traditional form of American fun, they are required to make sure they are using fireworks with the official “safe and sane” logo. Anyone possessing or using dangerous fireworks, which is a separate class of explosives reserved for larger devices, can be fined anywhere from $500 to $50,000, depending on the fireworks’ weight.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2Nmge4m
via IFTTT