Apathy Online

Brad Jardis, Epping PD offi­cer and Anti-prohibition activist was kicked out from Law Enforce­ment Against Pro­hi­bi­tion for refus­ing to obey an immoral law and arrest peo­ple who use mar­i­juana for med­ical rea­sons. Ear­lier this month, Jardis cited his oath to uphold the con­sti­tu­tion of New Hamp­shire as super­sed­ing any laws that con­tra­dict it in a post on FreeKeene.com. In a let­ter writ­ten to Jardis, Jack Cole, Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of LEAP states that Jardis, “cho­sen to vio­late the oath you took on join­ing the police depart­ment; to enforce all the laws of the fed­eral and state gov­ern­ments in which your police depart­ment has juris­dic­tion.“
Full Let­ter below & Dis­cus­sion on the Free­Keene forum:

Dear Bradley Jardis,

I have tried but am unable to reach you by telephone.

It has come to LEAP’s atten­tion from the below blog entry, that you have
cho­sen to vio­late the oath you took on join­ing the police depart­ment; to
enforce all the laws of the fed­eral and state gov­ern­ments in which your
police depart­ment has juris­dic­tion. And worse, you are call­ing on other law
enforce­ment offi­cials to vio­late their oaths of office.

This is the oppo­site of what LEAP requires of our rep­re­sen­ta­tives. We have
always said that we will in no way ask that any law enforcer decline to do
his or her duty by refus­ing to enforce the laws as they are cur­rently
recorded. That would be uneth­i­cal and wrong. What we do call on them for is
take action on their off-duty time to help us change those laws.

Because you have so bla­tantly stepped over that line, your actions have
caused peo­ple to lose respect for our orga­ni­za­tion, which leads to a loss of
our cred­i­bil­ity within the pub­lic, the media and the pol­i­cy­mak­ers; the very
peo­ple whom we are try­ing to con­vince to change these laws.

The Exec­u­tive Board of Law Enforce­ment Against Pro­hi­bi­tion was made aware of
your actions in their Jan­u­ary 22, 2010 Board meet­ing. They were unan­i­mous in
their deci­sion that you must no longer rep­re­sent Law Enforce­ment Against
Pro­hi­bi­tion while espous­ing this belief.

As Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of LEAP, I there­fore am noti­fy­ing you that,
effec­tively imme­di­ately, you are to stop refer­ring to your­self as a speaker
for or mem­ber of LEAP in your pub­li­ca­tions, inter­views, and pub­lic or
pri­vate addresses.

Sin­cerely,

Jack A. Cole
Exec­u­tive Direc­tor
Law Enforce­ment Against Pro­hi­bi­tion
121 Mys­tic Avenue, Med­ford, MA 02155
(781) 393‑6985 LEAP Office (781) 393 2964 FAX
(781) 396‑0183 Home Office (617) 792‑3877 Cell
jack­a­cole [at] leap [dot] cc www.leap.cc

Share on Facebook

The best sign was “My Chil­dren can’t afford to wait to loose another par­ent!” Bet it’s because their par­ent is a vio­lent sta­tist that they don’t like…

I bet their chil­dren had a sign “My mom cant afford to wait to for her reoc­cur­ring sta­tism to be cured.” Pub­lic Option Now! The sooner the Fed fails, the sooner peo­ples sta­tism gets cured (I hope).

It’s really ter­ri­ble that so many peo­ple, because of the state, can’t get afford­able health­care, and then advo­cate using vio­lence to obtain their med­ical care.

Share on Facebook

It was just too much, hav­ing to return to court twice on the same day to con­test yet another traf­fic ticket, and Fire Chief Don Payne didn’t hes­i­tate to tell the judge what he thought of the police and their speed traps.
The response from cops? They shot him. Right there in court.

Share on Facebook

ars tech­nica: A small-town Kansas cop e-mailed naked pic­tures of him­self to a woman he pulled over for drunk dri­ving, offer­ing a sexual rela­tion­ship in exchange for help­ing her avoid the charges. A local prob­lem became a fed­eral case after inves­ti­ga­tors found that his e-mail servers were located in other states.

Share on Facebook

The new ver­sion would allow the pres­i­dent to “declare a cyber­se­cu­rity emer­gency” relat­ing to “non–gov­ern­mental” com­puter net­works and do what’s nec­es­sary to respond to the threat. Other sec­tions of the pro­posal include a fed­eral cer­ti­fi­ca­tion pro­gram for “cyber­se­cu­rity pro­fes­sion­als,” and a require­ment that cer­tain com­puter sys­tems and net­works in the pri­vate sec­tor be man­aged by peo­ple who have been awarded that license.

Share on Facebook