Aurora cinema shooting: Judge approves ‘truth serum’ interrogation
RT
May 13, 2013James Holmes, the student accused of the ‘Batman’ movie massacre in a Colorado cinema, could be given a truth serum as part of a narcoanalytic interview to determine whether he is insane, as a judge enters a not guilty plea on his behalf.
James Holmes, 25, a former neuroscience PhD student, is accused of killing 12 people and injuring 70 others during a shooting rampage during a ‘Batman’ movie premiere at a cinema in Aurora, Colorado, last July.
Holmes faces a total of 166 different counts relating to the shootings.
His defense team had initially said he was not ready to enter a plea, so the judge entered a not guilty plea on is behalf. Judge William Blair Sylvester said Holmes could change his plea to not guilty by reason of insanity later, if he chooses to.
His defense lawyers had indicated that he may plead not guilty by reason of insanity. If he does enter an insanity plea, the judge has ruled that he may have to undergo an interview under the influence of drugs –dubbed a ‘truth serum’ – in order to evaluate his mental state.
The process is designed to lower a patient’s inhibition, and is decades old. Judge Sylvester has also ruled that he may be given a lie detector test.
Prosecutors have said they will announce whether they will seek the death sentence on April 1. If they do seek the death penalty following a not guilty by reasons of insanity plea, then legal complications are likely to develop, as the defense will have to submit incriminating evidence to prove Holmes’s insanity.
This evidence may then be later used against him by the prosecution, which under US law would breach his constitutional right not to incriminate himself.
“Was he suffering from a mental disease or defect that rendered him incapable from distinguishing right from wrong? If the defense had to prove that, that would be one thing, but here in Colorado the prosecution has to disprove it. To prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt with James Holmes could be tough,” Craig Silverman, deputy district attorney for Denver, told Sky News.
Colorado is unusual in putting the burden of proof on the prosecution when a plea of insanity has been entered.
Silverman added that he was expecting the case to be beset by delays: “Delay is the natural ally of any death penalty defendant. The longer the case drags out the longer the client is assured to stay alive.”
The case is one of the worst in US history in terms of the number of people killed. Like similar mass shootings that have occurred in America in recent years, it has prompted a debate about US gun laws. Politicians in Colorado have introduced new restrictions on gun ownership, while national efforts at gun control appear to have stalled.
On Monday, a package put together by Colorado Democrats went through the state senate. They include a limit on the kind of high-capacity magazine Holmes is accused of using in the shooting, expanded background checks, and a new ban on owning a gun for people facing charges of domestic violence.
While the measures have not yet been enacted, the house is under Democratic control and will likely approve the proposals.
News to Me: Colorado's New Law On Private Firearms Transfer, By Attorney Timothy J. Priebe
On March 10, 2013, the Governor of Colorado signed into law three new statutes that pertain to gun and magazine owners throughout the state. In this post, I will address the addition of C.R.S. 18-12-112, having to do with “Private Firearms Transfer”. No reader should consider this post to be legal advice for themselves or anyone else. My intent is to educate you on the law and for you to make your own decisions.
On and after July 1, 2013, a person who is not a licensed gun dealer, before they transfer or attempt to transfer possession of a firearm to a transferee, they must:
1. Require that a background check be conducted of the prospective transferee;
2. Obtain approval of a transfer from CBI after a background check has been requested by a licensed gun dealer.
In order to understand the law you must start with the definitions. A “Transferee” means a person who desires to receive or acquire a firearm from the “Transferor”. A “Transferor” is the person who either owns or has possession of the firearm for a number of reasons.
BACKGROUND CHECK
If you are not a licensed gun dealer and you want to transfer possession of a firearm to a transferee, you will have to utilize the services of a licensed gun dealer for the purpose of having them provide you a background check of the transferee. The licensed gun dealer will provide the same background check and fill out the same paperwork as if they were selling the transferee the firearm themselves. For this service, the licensed gun dealer may not charge more than ten dollars.
Once the licensed gun dealer completes the background check of the transferee, they shall provide the transferor a copy of the results of the background check, including CBI’s approval or disapproval of the transfer. The approval will be valid for 30 days and valid only for the transferor and transferee.
The licensed gun dealer will be required to record the transfer and retain the records as they would on any retail gun purchase.
VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW
A person who violates this statute shall be guilty of a Class 1 Misdemeanor. This is the highest level of Misdemeanor and is punishable by six months to eighteen months imprisonment and/or aFive hundred dollars and up to a Five thousand dollar fine or both. There is an additional punishment associated with a violation of this statute. The violator shall also be prohibited from possessing a firearm for two years, beginning on the date of his or her conviction. If convicted, the State Court Administrator will report the conviction to National Instant Criminal Background Check System. You will not be able to legally possess a firearm in Colorado during the prohibition time. What is not clear is how other states will view this restriction. Will they too also determine that you are not to carry in their state?
Remember prohibition time period starts at the time of your conviction. That means if you go to trial on the matter, it could be anywhere from six months to a year before your conviction actually occurs.
Additionally, if you violate this statute you MAY be jointly and severally liable for any civil damages proximately caused by the transferee’s subsequent use of the firearm. I will expound on this below.
EXCEPTIONS TO THE LAW
There are numerous exceptions within this statute. The background requirement does not apply to the following:
1. The transfer of an antique firearm; [JWR Adds: See my FAQ page on antique guns. I predict that pre-1899 antiques will become increasingly important, as gun laws expand in some states in coming years.]
2. A bona fide gift or loan between immediate family members;
3. A transfer that occurs by operation of law or because of the death of a person for whom the transferor is an executor of a will or trust;
4. A transfer that is temporary and occurs while in the home of the unlicensed transferee if, the transferee is not prohibited from possessing firearms and the unlicensed transferee reasonably believes that the possession of the firearm is necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily injury to the unlicensed transferee;
5. A temporary transfer of possession without transfer of ownership or a title to ownership occurs at:
a. At a shooting range;
b. At a target firearm shooting competition;
c. While hunting, fishing, target shooting or trapping if:
1. All hunting, fishing, target shooting or trapping is legal in all places where the unlicensed transferee is possessing the firearm; and
2. The unlicensed transferee holds any license or permit that is required
d. Any temporary transfer occurs while in the continuous presence of the owner of the firearm;
e. A temporary transfer cannot be for more than 72 hours. Should the transferee use your firearm unlawfully, you may be jointly and severally liable for damages proximately caused by the transferee’s use.
f. A transfer that is made to facilitate the repair or maintenance of the firearm.
g. A transfer from a person who is serving in the Armed Forces of the US who will be deploying within 30 days and the transfer go to an immediate family member.
MY THOUGHTS
All I have heard over and over from the politicians in Colorado is that this is not a gun registry. Yet, now all private guns sales will be recorded in the books of licensed gun dealers. These records are required to be kept for twenty (20) years after the transfer occurs and the records are open for inspection at any time by the ATF. Additionally, should the licensed gun dealer go out of business or decides to retire, he/she is required to forward all of their gun records to the ATF. Knowing this, please tell me how this is not a gun registry.
The punishment for the violation of this statute is severe. A Class 1 misdemeanor can include jail time if the Judge chooses to sentence you with such and the monetary fine can range from five hundred to five thousand dollars. But the addition of the loss of possession of ANY firearm for two years is well beyond what I would consider to be fair punishment.
As with the Large Capacity Magazine law, it appears that the goal of these laws are to disarm and remove guns from citizens as opposed to punishing them for not completing paperwork. I would like to see the true statistics relating to how many criminals are buying guns from private citizens before committing their crimes. Using common sense, we know that is not how they are arming themselves. The criminals are acting as criminals by stealing the guns and then using them in the commission of crimes. This law does nothing more than regulate (control) law abiding citizens when selling their own private property.
Another punishment for violation of this statute is the attachment of joint and several liability for any civil damages proximately caused by the transferee’s subsequent use of the firearm. Joint and several liability means that if three people were involved in the matter and all three were found to be liable, the damaged party could pursue all three people or just one to recover the whole amount. Given this, the person with the deepest pocket looses.
Read alongside the Large Capacity Magazine law, this law will allow firearms that utilize Large Capacity Magazines to be transferred but just without the Large Capacity Magazines. Again, just a coincidence or the grand plan all along?
Currently, 40 out of 62 Sheriffs in Colorado will be filing suit against the state of Colorado to determine whether this law and the large capacity magazine law are constitutional. While this is good, it will be a long and expensive route to take in order to get a resolution.
I will continue to update my blog as more information about this statute becomes available. Visit www.legal-tactics.com and leave me your questions.
Colorado Gun Bill Could Ban Standard Shotguns
CBS Denver
March 2, 2013A popular hunting shotgun could be banned under one of the bills moving through the state Capitol.
A pump or semi-automatic shotgun is the gun most hunters in Colorado use. It’s a gun state Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, says could be banned under a bill that’s already passed the House and Gov. John Hickenlooper says he’ll sign.
“They’re coming after the standard shotgun,” Brophy told CBS4 Political Specialist Shaun Boyd.
Magpul May Flood Colorado Market Before Leaving
Adan Salazar
Infowars.com
February 28, 2013A few weeks ago, the Magpul Industries Corporation, based out of Erie, Colorado, announced it was ready to make a huge gesture in favor of the Second Amendment by relocating their company headquarters if the state goes ahead with proposed gun control legislation.
Now the company is going one step further by offering Colorado residents the opportunity to purchase “up to ten (10) standard capacity AR/M4 magazines directly from Magpul” before a ban goes into effect. The orders will be shipped at a flat-rate fee of $5.
The following appeared on the company’s Facebook page Tuesday:
We are proud to announce that within a matter of days we will be going live with a new program. Due to a bill currently moving through the Colorado legislature, there is the possibility that Colorado residents’ ability to purchase standard capacity magazines will soon be infringed. Before that happens, and Magpul is forced to leave the state in order to keep to our principles, we will be doing our best to get standard capacity PMAGs into the hands of any Colorado resident that wants them.
Verified Colorado residents will be able to purchase up to ten (10) standard capacity AR/M4 magazines directly from Magpul, and will be given immediate flat-rate $5 shipping, bypassing our current order queue.
Our customers outside of Colorado, please know that our PMAG production will continue at an ever-increasing rate until we do relocate, shipments to our distributors in other states will continue, and that we do not expect relocation to significantly impact PMAG production. We are also aware that Colorado is not the only state with existing or pending magazine capacity restrictions; we are working on programs for other affected states as well.
Full details and instructions will be announced when we are able to go live; please watch here for the coming announcement.
The Casper, Wyoming Star Tribune reports that Magpul is making good on its threat and has been conducting talks with Wyoming lawmakers to move to the Cowboy State if magazine legislation is passed.
Magpul’s departure would have a somewhat devastating effect on jobs and state revenue as it employs more than 600 employees and subcontractors and says it planned to spend more than $85 million in the state over the next year.
Another Colorado manufacturer, Alfred Manufacturing Co. based in North Denver, has mirrored Magpul’s threat to leave Colorado should the laws pass, saying the manufacturing companies are “in this together.”
“If House Bill 1224 passes, we will relocate part or all of our operations out of state,” Alfred Manufacturing chief executive Greg Alfred told the Governor and members of the state legislature.
The Colorado House has passed four gun control bills now slated for a Senate vote. The bills would:
• Limit gun magazines to 15 rounds.
• Require background checks for all gun transactions.
• Ban concealed weapons on college campuses.
• Impose a fee for gun buyers to cover the cost of their background checks.
One of the bills, House Bill 1224, has been amended in an attempt to convince manufacturers to stay put by letting them still make high-capacity magazines for out-of-state buyers, however both companies seem little swayed by this.
“If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here,” Doug Smith, Magpul’s chief operating officer told the Denver Post. “Staying here would hurt our business.”
It’s also encouraging to see that several other companies throughout the country have come out in defense of the Second Amendment.
Firearm manufacturer Beretta USA recently announced its intent to leave Maryland if the state enacts a gun control measure known as the Firearm Safety Act. “Enact such measures at your own risk,” the company told lawmakers, according to Bizpac Review.
“In a letter to lawmakers, Beretta’s Jeff Reh said legislation proposed by Gov. Martin O’Malley will ‘treat as dangerous millions of people who lawfully and safely own semi-automatic rifles and the tens of millions of people who lawfully and safely own magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. It tells those people that you can protect your life, your family or your business, even against multiple assailants, as long as you can get do so in 10 rounds or less. It tells all of these people that in Maryland there is a limit on the extent to which you can exercise your 2nd Amendment rights, a limit that does not apply, by the way, to police officers who buy these products for the same protective reasons that are desired by the general public,’” Kurt Nimmo wrote earlier in the week.
Last week, we also wrote about a Virginia Pizza shop that is offering a 15% discount for customers who carry openly or present their concealed weapons permit. Pizza shop owner Jay Laze, speaking of the success of his deal, told The Virginian-Pilot that about 80 percent of his clientele had been taking advantage of the deal and that “it’s been awesome.”
Infowars: Reaping the Whirlwind: the Colorado Model and Gun Control
Bob Adelmann
New American
February 21, 2013On February 18, the Democrat-controlled Colorado House of Representatives passed all four gun control bills over an out-numbered Republican minority’s noisy and occasionally emotional protests.
[…] These four bills are headed to the Senate where Democrats hold a 20-15 advantage over Republicans. And Governor John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, is expected to sign at least three if not all four of the bills, making them laws of the state.
In covering the bills for the Associated Press, Ivan Moreno noted that “the vote [on] Monday in Colorado’s gun control debate is part of the shift in the region’s politics to the left.”
FUN FACT: Five worst American mass shootings were all Democrats
The five worst mass killings, where a firearm was used, have a common thread. Hint #1: They didn’t belong to the NRA. They don’t fit the stereotype of the “red-neck” gun owner.
Check it out …
Ft Hood: Registered Democrat/Muslim.
Columbine: Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals.
Virginia Tech: Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff; Registered Democrat.
Colorado Theater: Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign; Occupy Wall Street participant; progressive liberal.
Connecticut School Shooter: Registered Democrat; hated Christians.
Common thread is that all of these shooters were progressive liberal Democrats.
Aurora police stopped dozens of cars and pulled out their drivers at gunpoint looking for a bank robbery suspect Saturday afternoon.
DENVER — Aurora police stopped dozens of cars and pulled out their drivers at gunpoint looking for a bank robbery suspect Saturday afternoon.
Police said an armed man robbed a Wells Fargo bank on E. Hampden Avenue and S. Chambers Road and fled.Police tracked the robber to the intersection of E. Iliff Avenue and S. Buckley Road.
Responding officers barricaded the area, trapping about 25 cars near the intersection. Then police went car by car and pulled out each occupant at gunpoint and handcuffed them.”Cops came in from every direction and just threw their car in front of my car,” said Sonya Romero, who was one of the drivers handcuffed. “We all got cuffed until they figured out who did what.”Ben Barker watched the ordeal and told 7NEWS police were armed with shot guns and rifles.”We didn’t know if we were in the line of fire or what the hell was happening,” Romero said.Eventually police came to a white Ford Expedition and arrested the driver. Police have not released the suspect’s name.The other drivers were then released. The whole ordeal lasted about two hours.
Let’s assume this tactic worked, do you really wanted to be treated like a thief and a criminal because someone in your vicinity broke the law? And that’s not even addressing the fact that the cops pointed guns at people and arrested and detained innocent citizens, which is a blatant violation of their civil rights. The department should be sued out the wazoo.
Denver police beat a peaceful man literally to death (revived by EMT's), with witnesses, slap him with fake felony charges and ruin his whole life. 4 years later, no disciplinary action for the officers and PD still stalling the legal process.
“I always thought police were nothing but good and were there to protect people,” testifies Elizabeth Polak, a registered nurse from Phoenix. Her view of the State’s enforcement caste changed dramatically as a result of what she witnessed in Denver on the evening of March 25, 2008.
Polak, returning to her apartment following her daily jog, saw a man and a woman having an unremarkable conversation near the entrance to the building. Two police officers appeared – a development always pregnant with trouble – and approached the couple. From a distance of about 100 feet, Polak saw the officers stride purposefully toward the man, who was later identified as James Moore.
“The officers did not stop and have a conversation with Mr. Moore,” she later recounted in a sworn affidavit. “The officers walked up to him and instantaneously punched Mr. Moore. Prior to being punched, there was no resistance or non-cooperation on his part. Mr. Moore was not given the chance to comply with any orders, if any were given. It appeared that the police were on a mission to walk up to Mr. Moore and punch him.”
Shocked and terrified by the assault on Moore, the woman – his girlfriend, Julie Gomez – repeatedly exclaimed: “You have the wrong people!” Moore, who had been knocked to the ground, did what he could to avoid or deflect the blows directed at him by the assailants.
The attack on Moore “appeared to be completely unprovoked and at no time was Mr. Moore fighting back,” Polak – who has never spoken with the victim – related in her affidavit. “At no time did Mr. Moore try to attack an officer. At no time did Mr. Moore try to reach for an officer’s weapon. Mr. Moore was surprisingly calm.”
“I did try to stay calm,” Moore, a Special Forces combat veteran, recalled to Pro Libertate. “I just tried to assure myself that the beating would eventually stop, and I just had to endure it patiently. But it didn’t stop.”
Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water
As long as people remain unaware and uninformed about important issues, the government will continue to chip away at the freedoms we enjoy. The only reason these water restrictions are finally starting to change for the better is because people started to notice and they worked to do something to reverse the law.
Even though these laws restricting water collection have been on the books for more than 100 years in some cases, they’re slowly being reversed thanks to efforts by citizens who have decided that enough is enough.
Because if we can’t even freely collect the rain that falls all around us, then what, exactly, can we freely do? The rainwater issue highlights a serious overall problem in America today: diminishing freedom and increased government control.
Colorado Legislature Clamps Down on Campaign Finance Laws
The Colorado House of Representatives passed Senate Bill 12-014, mandating biweekly campaign finance disclosures leading up to Colorado’s primary election in June, with bipartisan support on Monday. After being signed late Monday, by Governor John Hickenlooper, it became the first signed bill of the new legislative session.
The new law addresses loopholes created in Colorado’s biweekly reporting requirement, as well as attempts to remove the requirement entirely, after the state moved its primary election up from August to May last year. Previously, candidates in Colorado had to begin filing biweekly campaign disclosures during the July previous to the primary. However, with primaries now scheduled earlier in the year(May 2011, June 2012), the law would have required campaigns to begin biweekly reports nearly a year in advance of the primaries.
After claiming that the new rules created an unnecessary burden on campaigns, Secretary of State Scott Gessler implemented a new rule which completely removed the biweekly reporting requirement. A rule which the Colorado legislature clearly did not agree with.
from The Colorado Independent:
Since quarterly reports had been required in the off-years, the SOS office said under current law, candidates would have to file both quarterly and biweekly reports, which the office said was absurd.
At a hearing last summer then-Deputy Secretary of State William Hobbs agreed that it is up to the Legislature to change or clarify the requirements for this year. In the meantime, though, he said the SOS wanted the new rule be adopted on an emergency basis.
That rule, which was adopted by the Secretary of State’s office, eliminated biweekly filing altogether, with quarterly reports filed in the year prior to the election, and then monthly reports being filed during election years.
Attorney Mark Grueskin, representing Citizens for Integrity, said at the time that that would mean a candidate could receive huge amounts of money in the month prior to the primary without having to report it until after the election.
This is not Gessler’s first, or second or third, run in with another branch of the government or government watchdog group. Colorado’s secretary of state has made a name for himself, both locally and nationally, for his continued attempts at dismantling Colorado’s longstanding campaign finance laws. While his office has yet to comment on the new bill, it’s hard to imagine that Secretary of State Gessler isn’t already thinking of ways to challenge or eradicate the new law.
Read More at The Colorado Independent
(image courtesy of Viva Colorado)
| Follow Manic, Chill | | Subscribe to Manic, Chill(RSS) | | Subscribe via Email |
Collecting Rainwater now Illegal in many States: Government owns our Water
Collecting Rainwater now Illegal in many States: Government owns our Water
Many of the freedoms we enjoy here in the U.S. are quickly eroding as the nation transforms from the land of the free into the land of the enslaved, but what I’m about to share with you takes the assault on our freedoms to a whole new level. You may not be aware of this, but many Western states, including Utah, Washington and Colorado, have long outlawed individuals from collecting rainwater on their own properties because, according to officials, that rain belongs to someone else.
As bizarre as it sounds, laws restricting property owners from “diverting” water that falls on their own homes and land have been on the books for quite some time in many Western states. Only recently, as droughts and renewed interest in water conservation methods have become more common, have individuals and business owners started butting heads with law enforcement over the practice of collecting rainwater for personal use.
Check out this YouTube video of a news report out of Salt Lake City, Utah, about the issue. It’s illegal in Utah to divert rainwater without a valid water right, and Mark Miller of Mark Miller Toyota, found this out the hard way.
After constructing a large rainwater collection system at his new dealership to use for washing new cars, Miller found out that the project was actually an “unlawful diversion of rainwater.” Even though it makes logical conservation sense to collect rainwater for this type of use since rain is scarce in Utah, it’s still considered a violation of water rights which apparently belong exclusively to Utah’s various government bodies.
“Utah’s the second driest state in the nation. Our laws probably ought to catch up with that,” explained Miller in response to the state’s ridiculous rainwater collection ban.
Salt Lake City officials worked out a compromise with Miller and are now permitting him to use “their” rainwater, but the fact that individuals like Miller don’t actually own the rainwater that falls on their property is a true indicator of what little freedom we actually have here in the U.S. (Access to the rainwater that falls on your own property seems to be a basic right, wouldn’t you agree?)
(via aghoulistmike)
![materialworld:
Families & Homes The Moral Underground: How Ordinary Americans Subvert an Unfair Economy…
Andrew, a manager in a large food business in the Midwest, told me about the moral dilemma of employing people who can’t take care of their families even though they are working hard. This was something that he couldn’t pretend was okay. He came to the decision to “do what [he] can” even at the risk of being accused of stealing. “I pad their paychecks because you can’t live on what they make. I punch them out after they have left for a doctor’s appointment or to take care of someone … And I give them food to take home….” He described how it changed his job, tainted it, to be supervising people who couldn’t get by on what he paid them….
Today, one in four U.S. workers earns less than $9 an hour—about $19,000 per year. Thirty-nine percent of the nation’s children live in low-income households. And African-American and Latino families are much more likely to be poor or low-income and are less likely to have assets or home equity to offset low wages.
… when I spoke with Jonathan, a middle-aged “top manager” in a chain of grocery stores in the Midwest. I was asking him about the stresses of running a business that employed lots of low-wage parents. He acknowledged there were plenty. I was getting toward the end of the interview and he seemed to sense that, so he stopped me and asked, “Don’t you want to know what this is doing to me, too?” …
He spoke of parents whom he got to know pretty well, who headed home each week with less than they needed to feed their families. Yes, he said, it is the “going wage”—America’s “market wage”—that doesn’t cover the market cost of basic human needs. Still, it didn’t seem right to Jonathan. He described how it changed his job, tainted it, to be supervising people who couldn’t get by on what he paid them.
via The Moral Underground: How Ordinary Americans Subvert an Unfair Economy by Lisa Dodson](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwnmzwSae91qzoz4do1_250.jpg)
Families & Homes The Moral Underground: How Ordinary Americans Subvert an Unfair Economy…
Andrew, a manager in a large food business in the Midwest, told me about the moral dilemma of employing people who can’t take care of their families even though they are working hard. This was something that he couldn’t pretend was okay. He came to the decision to “do what [he] can” even at the risk of being accused of stealing. “I pad their paychecks because you can’t live on what they make. I punch them out after they have left for a doctor’s appointment or to take care of someone … And I give them food to take home….” He described how it changed his job, tainted it, to be supervising people who couldn’t get by on what he paid them….
Today, one in four U.S. workers earns less than $9 an hour—about $19,000 per year. Thirty-nine percent of the nation’s children live in low-income households. And African-American and Latino families are much more likely to be poor or low-income and are less likely to have assets or home equity to offset low wages.
… when I spoke with Jonathan, a middle-aged “top manager” in a chain of grocery stores in the Midwest. I was asking him about the stresses of running a business that employed lots of low-wage parents. He acknowledged there were plenty. I was getting toward the end of the interview and he seemed to sense that, so he stopped me and asked, “Don’t you want to know what this is doing to me, too?” …
He spoke of parents whom he got to know pretty well, who headed home each week with less than they needed to feed their families. Yes, he said, it is the “going wage”—America’s “market wage”—that doesn’t cover the market cost of basic human needs. Still, it didn’t seem right to Jonathan. He described how it changed his job, tainted it, to be supervising people who couldn’t get by on what he paid them.
via The Moral Underground: How Ordinary Americans Subvert an Unfair Economy by Lisa Dodson
Abuse of words has been the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery, of party, faction, and division of society.
