Beat the Press

October 18, 2010 3:22 PM

Private security guards working for Alaska Tea Party candidate Joe Miller detained and handcuffed a blogger who was asking questions at a public campaign event in a public school Sunday. Here is remarkable video from the Anchorage Daily News of the security guards trying to strongarm other reporters at the same event. Miller told CNN the blogger was "hounding" him.

Miller told reporters last week that he would no longer answer questions about his background or his personal life, after he was hit with questions about why he lost his job as a government lawyer. Miller currently is polling even with incumbent candidate Lisa Murkowski, whom he beat in the Republican primary and who is running as a write in. The Dem trails in third place.

posted by CunningLinguist (209 comments total)

Joe Miller also enjoys East German Immigration Control.
posted by hackly_fracture at 3:25 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

Oh, it's the Senate race. I knew I forgot something.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:26 PM on October 18, 2010

If I just read that correctly, they arrested him for "trespass of a public event." Further, isn't that a false arrest and a good case for sue the bastards?
posted by Mister Fabulous at 3:26 PM on October 18, 2010 [6 favorites]

Freedom is a powerful thing. Americans value freedom incredibly highly, including the freedom not to be free.
posted by The Whelk at 3:28 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

He's got a future in the new Reich, that one.
posted by Artw at 3:29 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Well, fortunately, Alaska voters have real good heads on their shoulders, and would never elect a dim, under-qualified thug with a history of using public office and public goods for personal and political gain.

Oh wait.
posted by dersins at 3:30 PM on October 18, 2010 [39 favorites]

Alaskan Tea Partiers sure love their cartoonishly thuggish private security, especially when they're interfering with the people trying to document them.
posted by Rhaomi at 3:34 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

To be fair to Mr. Miller - it wasn't his idea to have security. He has been quoted several times explaining that this security was required by contract. He can make all this go away by showing the relevant graphs of the contract. I'm sure this will happen soon.

Sadly, so far no on has found an Alaska Dem who has seen a similar contract so they can't show the boilerplate.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 3:34 PM on October 18, 2010

It’s because of our children. It’s because of where we’re at as a state, where we’re at as a nation. I’m concerned that the rumors and innuendo, the other matters that have come to light, are things that will end up distracting some and it is our perspective that much of this has come out of, I think, impropriety — journalistic impropriety.

Tea party? I'm going to assume he was fired for witchcraft. Come out of the broom closet, Joe.
posted by fleetmouse at 3:35 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

There's an awfully fine line between "private security guards" and "hired goons."
posted by Faint of Butt at 3:36 PM on October 18, 2010 [6 favorites]

Can private security guards "arrest" you? Isn't that just "kidnapping"?
posted by heathkit at 3:36 PM on October 18, 2010 [31 favorites]

Alaska Race May Make for Long Election Night
posted by Artw at 3:43 PM on October 18, 2010

What is it about Canada and law enforcement these days?
posted by rhizome at 3:45 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

> Now I’ll admit, and I’ve said this before, I’m a man of flaws — there’s no question about it. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon. Haven’t been born wealthy, you know we’ve struggled, my wife and I, we built our life together, I married Kathleen with two children, it was a struggle for both of us. Went to law school. Got of the military, went to law school. I still got student loans from my law school. Big surprise. We are like you. We are like Alaskans.

What, he doesn't have a dog he could throw into the speech for even more Regular Guy Cred? "I'm a man of flaws, but frankly it's better for me if you don't know about them."
posted by The Card Cheat at 3:46 PM on October 18, 2010 [4 favorites]

There's an awfully fine line between "private security guards" and "hired goons."

There's a line?

Private troops are mercenaries. Private police are hired goons. Adding layers of bureaucracy and contracts only makes the process more reprehensible for trying to hide the truth behind Orwellian distortions.
posted by notion at 3:49 PM on October 18, 2010 [9 favorites]

Miller's campaign says: "The Miller campaign was required by the facility to provide security at the event."


I have covered dozens of congressional and presidential campaign events at schools, usually in a smelly gym, and I have never, ever seen private security guards.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:51 PM on October 18, 2010 [11 favorites]

Miller News Conference -- "You can ask me about background, you can ask about personal issues — I’m not going to answer."


I love people who want public office but eschew transparency.
posted by bearwife at 3:52 PM on October 18, 2010 [4 favorites]

Total derail, but I love how Nixon's photo makes him look like he's punching someone in the gut.
posted by The Card Cheat at 3:56 PM on October 18, 2010 [2 favorites]

Countdown to the discovery Miller's exotic horse brothel in 3 ....2. .....1
posted by The Whelk at 3:57 PM on October 18, 2010 [12 favorites]

Well, Alaska, there you go - a guy so terrified to talk about his past that he hires armed guards to protect him from... questions.

Heckuva job, there, Alaska.
posted by FormlessOne at 4:00 PM on October 18, 2010 [6 favorites]

I have covered dozens of congressional and presidential campaign events at schools, usually in a smelly gym, and I have never, ever seen private security guards.

if it's true that it was required for all of those places to hire security (and I'm not saying it is), then it's possible that the ones you have been to just hired professional security guards instead of some goons. I'm thinking the real, professional security would stay out of sight until needed, and the hired goons are just there as a show of force to intimidate people into non-action.
posted by ArgentCorvid at 4:05 PM on October 18, 2010

I may be fuzzy on the legality here, but on what authority are these private security personnel allowed to handcuff and detain someone?

Irrespective of any claims of public or private event/property, how is it ok that they handcuffed him and held him against his will?
posted by Brockles at 4:05 PM on October 18, 2010

"One of the guards grabbed Hopfinger's video camera. Later, Hopfinger said that when he got the camera back, the segment covering the span of the arrest was missing."

Wow, you'd think a security company that claims they did nothing wrong and were acting lawfully would want video proof that supports their claim.
posted by sharkfu at 4:07 PM on October 18, 2010 [4 favorites]

I'm with the guy in the background.
posted by Nabubrush at 4:11 PM on October 18, 2010 [40 favorites]

I'm thinking the real, professional security would stay out of sight until needed

No, professional security tends to be visible, if not overt. The Secret Service, for example, is usually very discreet but you know they are there. That's part of the point. These skinhead dipshits were there to provide intimidation, not security.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:11 PM on October 18, 2010 [2 favorites]

The facial expressions of the real policeman throughout the video are priceless. He's (quite intelligently) avoiding to look into the camera, but you can see he's thinking: "Oh dear, they let the kids out of kindergarten early today."
posted by Skeptic at 4:21 PM on October 18, 2010

C'mon, the guys bought the dark suits and even have the plastic ear pieces (even though they probably aren't connected to anything.) They're itching to be the Blackwater Jr. version of Homeland Security.
posted by gallois at 4:25 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

The security guards were probably trained/brainwashed by Blackwater or whatever it's calling itself these days.
posted by mareli at 4:29 PM on October 18, 2010

how is it ok that they handcuffed him and held him against his will?

I don't think it is - seems like a ready-made lawsuit unless Alaskan laws are very different from those of the lower 48. They might have been within their rights to eject the guy from the event, but not to detain him.
posted by anigbrowl at 4:31 PM on October 18, 2010

Guards! Seize him!!
posted by theodolite at 4:33 PM on October 18, 2010 [23 favorites]

Hmm. Let us put aside who was not on the video, and what they believe in or represent. Let's just look at the video.

There is a fellow in handcuffs. Now, the fellow seems nice enough, I'll give you, and certainly isn't causing any fuss at the moment of the video. I think it would be fair to assume he was handcuffed by the security (which we will call them for convenience) since no one in the video seems to debate that. We don't know exactly why he was handcuffed, but clearly he has not been badly mistreated (as opposed to just mistreated).

The other reporters are having a very mild confrontation with the security guards. The security is calm and non-hysterical. The reporters are not quite as calm, but still pretty reasonable. If I were to pick a side as to who was attempting to escalate it, I would tend to pin it on the reporters, but it would be a very weak accusation.

The reporters were told it was a private event and, thus, property for the purpose at the time. If this was true, it was trespassing. They were free to exit the building, gain purchase on public property and observe (and possibly shout questions) from there, like reporters the world over do all the time. They most certainly did not need to be in the hallway and in the hall to observe, nor had any right to do so under these circumstances unless they could show that imminent harm (or at least illegal activity) was going on inside. If they refused to comply, the security certainly has the legal (and, I'd argue, moral) right to have them arrested for trespassing.

I'll allow that, on the face of it, the handcuffs seem excessive (the police could be called without the cuffs and I'd bet the guy would still be there) but the rest seemed perfectly reasonable to me.

I'd bet if it were Obama in there and these were hard-core righty reporters, most here would be speaking differently. That shouldn't matter, the law, and rights, apply to both those we approve of and those we don't. Just because the candidate is a douchebag doesn't mean he isn't entitled to private events.
posted by Bovine Love at 4:34 PM on October 18, 2010 [4 favorites]

Can we not do "I'll bet if it was the other side of the aisle . . ."? There's no way to prove it one way or another, and it's sort of insulting.
posted by Nabubrush at 4:35 PM on October 18, 2010 [17 favorites]

"The Miller campaign was required by the facility to provide security at the event."

I see the confusion. "The Facility" is Alaska's equivalent of New Jersey's "The Situation." The Facility always requires a crew.
posted by ryoshu at 4:38 PM on October 18, 2010 [7 favorites]

Can we not do "I'll bet if it was the other side of the aisle . . ."? There's no way to prove it one way or another, and it's sort of insulting.

Modern American politics is little more than infantile historical ad hominem.
posted by notion at 4:40 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

I'll allow that, on the face of it, the handcuffs seem excessive (the police could be called without the cuffs and I'd bet the guy would still be there) but the rest seemed perfectly reasonable to me.

Yes, a private security force detaining and handcuffing a reporter is perfectly reasonable, although the handcuff thing was just a smidgen, well, excessive. Right.
posted by blucevalo at 4:43 PM on October 18, 2010 [5 favorites]

Nabubrush, fine, I'd mark it out if I could. It isn't material to my argument. It just smelled to me to be a reaction to the politics, not the situation; the situation seems pretty tame.

On preview: notion, isn't that essentially ad hominem?
posted by Bovine Love at 4:44 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Doesn't anyone have the right to detain someone breaking the law? Do you have evidence that the handcuffing was extreme or particularly violent? We don't have any of that on video.

I'm not saying the handcuffing was right, but I am saying the the hyperbole in the reaction isn't in line with the evidence.
posted by Bovine Love at 4:46 PM on October 18, 2010

Bovine Love - You fail to take a lot of things into account here. This "private event" was publically advertised as a bring all rally. There was no guest list or registration or price to enter the rally. The rally was held on public property. All these things strongly indicate that the event is public. In fact the only people that really allege it's private are a bunch of security guards who refuse to give names or affiliations but threaten seizure. They have no legal right to do this, and to claim they have a moral right is outrageous.

Later I'll look up Alaskan laws on citizen seizure, but I'm betting the reporter won't press charges.
posted by cyphill at 4:48 PM on October 18, 2010 [12 favorites]

Nobody got hurt and most people are blowing this out of proportion.

Still that was stupid of Miller.
posted by Allan Gordon at 4:50 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Were you there?
posted by blucevalo at 4:52 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

I think the main question is: was it a public or a private event? It sounds like it was a public event, held in a public school. Were there signs posted to the contrary?

Hiring goons to stifle dissent is so last century... but seems to be back in style.
posted by Catblack at 4:52 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Still that was stupid of Miller.

And paranoid.
posted by Brian B. at 4:53 PM on October 18, 2010

I may be fuzzy on the legality here, but on what authority are these private security personnel allowed to handcuff and detain someone?

They are not.

Irrespective of any claims of public or private event/property, how is it ok that they handcuffed him and held him against his will?

It isn't, and if te reporter sues he stands a very good chance of winning. Don't know that it really counts as "kidnapping" though.

Can we not do "I'll bet if it was the other side of the aisle . . ."? There's no way to prove it one way or another, and it's sort of insulting.

Actually, I recall pretty well my reactions to the kid being tased at the John Kerry event, and my liberal politics didn't mute my outrage over it at all.
posted by Navelgazer at 4:53 PM on October 18, 2010 [9 favorites]

I'm just going to start drinking heavily. Senators Miller, Buck, Rand Paul. WTF America. I get that there is a two party system, blah blah blah primary/ tea party activism. But the fact that these guys are polling out of the low 20s give me pause. These guys are not just supremely unqualified, they actually don't even credibly support the cause. I mean maybe nihilists don't have an ethos, but at least they are up front about it.
posted by humanfont at 4:54 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

the rest seemed perfectly reasonable to me.

I'd bet if it were Obama in there and these were hard-core righty reporters, most here would be speaking differently.


Absolutely not. This is a public campaign town hall, advertized as an event in which the public can come and ask a candidate for public office questions. You know, democracy. It was held in a public school, paid for by taxpayers. There is nothing private about this, and those goons have absolutely no authority to accuse reporters of trespassing. This is fundamental shit right here.
They pushed the reporters and interfered with them doing their jobs. Not to mention the man they cuffed. They most certainly escalated the situation.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:55 PM on October 18, 2010 [14 favorites]

Bovine Love: "I'd bet if it were Obama in there and these were hard-core righty reporters, most here would be speaking differently."

Indeed. For one thing, we'd be talking about Secret Service agents who would presumably have the discipline to only detain people who posed a threat to his person instead of to his credibility.
posted by Rhaomi at 4:56 PM on October 18, 2010 [21 favorites]

> Now I’ll admit, and I’ve said this before, I’m a man of flaws — there’s no question about it. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon. Haven’t been born wealthy, you know we’ve struggled, my wife and I, we built our life together, I married Kathleen with two children, it was a struggle for both of us. Went to law school. Got of the military, went to law school. I still got student loans from my law school. Big surprise. We are like you. We are like Alaskans.

I like that "wasn't born with a silver spoon" and "haven't been born wealthy" and "has struggled" and "has loans" are, in his mind, flaws. Personal failings. That's the tea party, there.
posted by kafziel at 4:57 PM on October 18, 2010 [9 favorites]

From would I could overhear of his statement to the (real) cop, Hopfinger seems forgiving - almost dismissive - of the physical treatment he was given by the hired security: "there was no assault, you know, he threw me in the (garble garble etc)". Strange. Would've liked to hear more.

Oh yeah, shit reporting by Mauser+Burke. The story was "Hopfinger In Cuffs" or maybe "Hopfinger Makes Statement to Police". It shouldn't have been "Brave Journalists Argue with Hired Goons". They took their eyes off the ball.
posted by klarck at 5:02 PM on October 18, 2010

Later I'll look up Alaskan laws on citizen seizure, but I'm betting the reporter won't press charges.

In Alaska, as in some other states, a citizen's arrest may be performed in cases of a person witnessing a crime actively being committed or attempted, whether a felony or misdemeanor. Here is the Alaska statute:

Sec. 12.25.030. Grounds for arrest by private person or peace officer without warrant.

(a) A private person or a peace officer without a warrant may arrest a person

(1) for a crime committed or attempted in the presence of the person making the arrest;

(2) when the person has committed a felony, although not in the presence of the person making the arrest;

(3) when a felony has in fact been committed, and the person making the arrest has reasonable cause for believing the person to have committed it.

That said, it's quite questionable whether any crime was actually being committed or attempted.
posted by jedicus at 5:07 PM on October 18, 2010

I'd bet if it were Obama in there and these were hard-core righty reporters, most here would be speaking differently.

Play the slots a lot, do you?

In other words, sounds like you're always up for a losing bet.
posted by Jimmy Havok at 5:08 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

"What's your name?" they asked.

"Ken Krayeske," I responded. And the cuffs went on.

_______________________________________________________________________

JESSE JACKSON: Don't you give up now.

_______________________________________________________________________

He had a .45 caliber pistol slung on his hip.

“I call myself a Republican because it’s the lesser of two evils,”
_______________________________________________________________________
the last makes sense to me.
there really is no need for private security.

andy jacksons big stick is the theme for my holiday season which starts with halloween then election day, etc.
posted by clavdivs at 5:09 PM on October 18, 2010

Miller's Democratic opponent, Sitka, Alaska Mayor Scott McAdams, has some fun with Miller on Twitter:

@JoeMiller - in case you were unaware, the Constitution also applies to reporters. #Ak #AkSen

posted by ericb at 5:11 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

That said, it's quite questionable whether any crime was actually being committed or attempted.

In Flint, we do not ask such questions.
wtf that do wit anytin clav
posted by clavdivs at 5:12 PM on October 18, 2010

In related news: Palin Says GOP is 'Through' if it Doesn't Get Tea Party Message.
posted by ericb at 5:13 PM on October 18, 2010

Reporter Speaks Out After Being Arrested By GOP Candidate's Private Guards.
posted by ericb at 5:16 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

Tony Hopfinger who was detained by Miller's hired thugs is the editor of the website Alaska Dispatch. You can follow their coverage of the inident at their website.
posted by ericb at 5:19 PM on October 18, 2010

I hope he presses charges. The Tea Party thinks it can just disappear people, otherwise.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:21 PM on October 18, 2010

Miller's Democratic opponent Scott McAdams -- The Freedom to Question:

“For those who may be hearing for the first time, it appears that ‘security guards’ working for my opponent, Joe Miller, manhandled and handcuffed a member of the press at a town hall, held in a public school, when the reporter/editor had the gall to attempt to ask Joe questions.

This behavior displays a disdain for the First Amendment and the Fourth Estate. A free press is the hallmark of a functioning democracy. While Joe Miller isn’t the government (much to his dismay), a candidate for public office has an obligation to answer press questions and not intimidate those who try to better inform the public. This extreme behavior is a reflection of the extreme views of the Tea Party Express, an organization that seeks to avoid the important questions about the America their strange theories would create. Fear and intimidation have no place in this or any other campaign.

Shutting the media out of a political campaign is un-American.

It is normal for candidates seeking public office to get tired or frustrated with the political coverage during the campaign. But it is entirely abnormal and unacceptable to run from or to intimidate the press. Those who seek political office must be accountable to the voters, which means answering questions posed to us.

I’ve held five town halls in this campaign, but as a big guy from a small town, I didn’t think I needed a security squad. As mayor, my ‘entourage’ normally includes one of my three kids. I guess I don’t have the personality for hired muscle with Secret Service-like earpieces! Candidates need to be accessible to voters, not hiding behind a wall of bodyguards.

Alaska cannot afford to elect Joe Miller. His truly bizarre theories of the constitution and what America should look like in the 21st century would be disastrous in the United States Senate. While last night’s Town Hall was overshadowed by the dustup between Mr. Miller’s bodyguards and a reporter, something disturbing emerged in his answers to the friendly crowd.

When asked about immigration and border security, Mr. Miller held out East Germany as a great example of how border security should be done. That’s right, the communist East Germany of Berlin Wall fame.

Apparently, Mr. Miller was asleep not only during the days that the First Amendment was covered at Yale Law, but also during the days that communism and the Berlin Airlift were covered at West Point. I guess Joe isn’t a fan of Ronald Reagan and his demand: ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.’”

posted by ericb at 5:25 PM on October 18, 2010 [16 favorites]

Don't know that it really counts as "kidnapping" though.

unlawful detention at the very least.
posted by Max Power at 5:30 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

I hope he presses charges.

“A spokesman for the Anchorage municipal prosecutor’s office, Al Patterson, said the police are still transitioning paperwork and a decision on whether to press charges [against blogger/journalist Tony Hopfinger] is not expected until later this week. Patterson said that likely charges – if the prosecutor’s office ultimately files any – could be assault, trespassing or disorderly conduct.

Meanwhile, it appears Miller’s hired bodyguards are in the clear. A spokesman with the Anchorage Police Department, Lt. Dave Parker, said the ‘citizen’s arrest’ was done in accordance with private security procedures and that police officers arrived quickly at the scene after Hopfinger was put in handcuffs.

‘It’s totally legal for everywhere that I know of,’ Parker said. ‘How do you suppose people who are working a security detail in Macy’s make an arrest?’

Meanwhile, an attorney for Alaska Dispatch, John McKay, said that Hopfinger would likely not pursue any charges of his own against the security guards.

‘I think his inclination, at this point, is not to pursue any criminal charges although I think they illegally detained him,’ said McKay. ‘I don’t think he’s inclined to pursue that.’”*

posted by ericb at 5:31 PM on October 18, 2010

From would I could overhear of his statement to the (real) cop, Hopfinger seems forgiving - almost dismissive - of the physical treatment he was given by the hired security: "there was no assault, you know, he threw me in the (garble garble etc)". Strange. Would've liked to hear more.

I took it as the reporter stating that he did not assault the security personnel, that he just pushed them away as they were going after him and that they pushed him into lockers.
posted by 1000monkeys at 5:33 PM on October 18, 2010

We don't know exactly why he was handcuffed, but clearly he has not been badly mistreated (as opposed to just mistreated).

Seems to me that because the handcuffers were not police officers in the first place, the act of handcuffing this person in and of itself was a mistreatment. It was illegal. And those rent-a-cops better have a good team of lawyers because they're gonna get slammed with a lawsuit in 3, 2, 1...

I'm not saying the handcuffing was right, but I am saying the the hyperbole in the reaction isn't in line with the evidence.

Bovine Love, to me, the act of handcuffing itself is the issue here. To put in another way, if we meet in a public place and I decide to detain you because of oh, just reasons of my own, is that ok? Would I be legally justified in whipping out my cuffs and slapping them on you? Because that's essentially what happened here.
posted by zardoz at 5:36 PM on October 18, 2010 [4 favorites]

Also, Bovine Love, Obama is the President. Joe Miller is a private citizen who happens to be running for office.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 5:42 PM on October 18, 2010

The reporters were told it was a private event and, thus, property for the purpose at the time. If this was true, it was trespassing.

It wasn't true. They were straight out lying. Asserting that a public event is a private one doesn't make it true. You can't invite the general public to an event, and then suddenly decide that it's private.

From would I could overhear of his statement to the (real) cop, Hopfinger seems forgiving - almost dismissive

This is why Hopfinger was being so apologetic ...

After Miller walked away, Hopfinger said, he was surrounded by Miller supporters and security guards and felt threatened, so he pushed one of them away.

And sadly, there you have the out for the goons private security guards. Hopfinger assaulted one of the guards. By his own admission, he has no case for false imprisonment. He was arrested for assault. Now, this doesn't get Miller or his thugs off the hook for their club-swinging approach to politics; nor does it justify their attempt to suddenly re-classify a public event into a private one when they become unhappy with the public, as Bovine Love so erroneously asserts, above. However, Hopfinger's assault of a security guard will allow that lying no-neck POS William Fulton to keep his company. Too bad.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 5:42 PM on October 18, 2010 [5 favorites]

Joe Miller also enjoys East German Immigration Control.

Do I sense a schism in the Tea Party ranks? Here's Miller, recommending that we move closer to an East German system of government; but only weeks ago, Newt Gingrich came down firmly in favor of Saudi-inflected reforms. A big tent, indeed...
posted by steambadger at 5:46 PM on October 18, 2010 [2 favorites]

You can't invite the general public to an event, and then suddenly decide that it's private.

Chief Wiggum: Sideshow Bob can't get in without me knowing -- and once a man is in your home anything you do to him is nice and legal.

Homer: Is that so? Oh, Flanders! Won't you join me in my kitchen?

Chief Wiggum: Uh, it doesn't work if you invite them in.
posted by steambadger at 5:56 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Nobody got hurt
posted by Allan Gordon

Yeah, except for some founding principles.

Every Alaskan I know (granted they are all Native folks) is planning to write in Murkowski.
posted by fourcheesemac at 6:01 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Joe Miller also enjoys East German Immigration Control.


"Do I sense a schism..."

i think so but in the framework of the analogy. why not say roman forts, castle walls. simple, they do not resonate the political 'language' of this era, Miller says he served at Fulda Gap that has meaning, Millers mistake (and most likely his election) was equating that with what america could do. And that is political "crrrkk-crrkk". (throat cutting gesticulation)
posted by clavdivs at 6:02 PM on October 18, 2010

You can't invite the general public to an event, and then suddenly decide that it's private

Well, you can disinvite someone if it was actually private property. Example: most stores are "open to the public", but they can throw you out.

(If reality were cooler it'd work like on True Blood and you'd get supernaturally thrown out of the building or something)

Of course, it appears this was public property so that doesn't apply.
posted by wildcrdj at 6:03 PM on October 18, 2010

so his having edgy guys edgy at nothing that is why the cop is most likely thinking (man what a farce)
posted by clavdivs at 6:03 PM on October 18, 2010

Are you suggesting that once I invite someone into my home, I am no longer entitled to ask them to leave later? Or that a bar, or any other venue, is not entitled to ask people to leave?

I think the term public event might be part of the problem. I think, legally (and sensibly in my above example), simply having an event where you permit people to freely enter, even on invitation, does not make it public. Since the space was rented, it was private, thus making it a private event and allowing the "owner" (however temporary) to revoke the invitation at any time. A public event is one in a public space, where you have the right to be there if no other factor overrides it (security, etc). For a private space where someone is asked to leave, assuming the person who is asked to leave is given sufficient time to leave in an orderly fashion, I would suggest it is within the rights of the "owner" (I am lacking a better term...) to have them charged with trespassing if they refuse.
posted by Bovine Love at 6:03 PM on October 18, 2010

Ugh, I should have previewed. The cop mentions that he 'believes' (IIRC) the whole school is rented, making it all private property.
posted by Bovine Love at 6:04 PM on October 18, 2010

He was arrested for assault.

For clarification: he has not yet been arrested or charged with any offence by the police.
posted by ericb at 6:05 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

Well as pointed out a store is private property, whereas a school is not. Further, when legitimately requesting that someone leave, you must give them the opportunity to do so. You can't tell someone to leave, detain them, and then have them charged with trespassing.

Prediction, no charges to anyone will result from this; unless the person who was shoved makes a big deal about it. ( It seems that it was private person, not a security guard, BTW, to correct my error above. )
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 6:10 PM on October 18, 2010

I think the term public event might be part of the problem.

WTF are you on about? It was PUBLIC. Miller advertised the event on his own website, inviting the PUBLIC to attend with no invitation or pre-conditions.

Town Hall Anchorage

Why: Because your friends, colleges, family, acquaintances, neighbors, need to be informed and hear Joe Miller speak for himself. Don't let the media skew your views. Make the decision for yourself. Help send Joe to DC!

When: Sun Oct 17 3pm – 4:30pm Alaska Time

Where: 1405 E Street Central Middle School

No where do I see any claims that pressmedia, Democrats, Gays or Vegans are not allowed to attend the PUBLIC event in the PUBLIC school.
posted by ericb at 6:18 PM on October 18, 2010 [6 favorites]

For clarification: he has not yet been arrested

The police are not the only ones capable of arrest. When the security guards detained Hopfinger, they arrested him. Therefore they will be unable to now charge him with trespass, as they would surely love to have been able to do. Such a charge would not have stood up anyway, as there is ample testimony that this was a public event, taking place on public property, and ads sere placed inviting the general public to attend, without restriction; all the lies from these fascist scum to the contrary notwithstanding.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 6:19 PM on October 18, 2010 [2 favorites]

Ugh, I should have previewed. The cop mentions that he 'believes' (IIRC) the whole school is rented, making it all private property.

Um, no.
posted by ericb at 6:19 PM on October 18, 2010

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that "Central Middle School" in Anchorage, Alaska is indeed an active, tax-payer created (owned?) school. Considering they have a principal and staff, oh and kids: http://www.asdk12.org/schools/central/pages/Central/Home.html

Pretty much anything that happens at that school falls under public scrutiny. And where it doesn't, FOIA or the Open Meetings Act will come into play.

In summary, anything that happens on public school property, be it grade school, middle school, high school, college or a University makes whatever it is that's happening, public. I think your dormitories may be offered a bit more protection, but anything outside of those students' rooms. Period. Even if the event took place at "the *former* Central Middle School" until the land is sold off, it is still owned by the city/state/taxpayers. Therefore, these private security guards are entirely out of line.

-fin
posted by mrzer0 at 6:20 PM on October 18, 2010

correct, the guards at the school had only limited powers of detention.
posted by clavdivs at 6:23 PM on October 18, 2010

"William Fulton from Dropzone Security Services said Hopfinger should have known from the 'Joe Miller for Senate' signs outside Central Junior High School that the town hall meeting -- to which Miller invited citizens on the internet sites Facebook and Twitter -- was a private event.

... Fulton said that as a security guard he is familiar with state law, and he believes he has the legal authority to police 'private events' no matter where might take place. He refused to answer how exactly a member of the public attending Miller's town hall meeting at a public school was supposed to know it was a private event, but said the Joe Miller sign outside was the giveaway.

The meeting was open to the public. There were no names taken at the door. Reporters were not asked to apply for credentials.

'This is a simple trespassing issue,' Fulton insisted, but no one else trespassing in the hallway with Hopfinger was detained. Fulton said Hopfinger was special because he showed those signs of 'violence.'

... Fulton agreed with Hopfinger that there were a lot of people in the hallway. Some of them might have been other reporters, he said.

... Fulton said he felt no obligation to explain to Hopfinger how a reporter doing his job -- asking questions of a political candidate -- could be trespassing at a public school during a public event.

'I don't educate the public,' he said.

Fulton said he told Hopfinger to leave. Hopfinger didn't leave. So he banged him into a wall and cuffed him. End of story"*

posted by ericb at 6:28 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

If I ever become a politician I'm having my hired goons dress up as The Security of the First World.
posted by Artw at 6:29 PM on October 18, 2010 [4 favorites]

When the security guards detained Hopfinger, they arrested him.

can the guards take they guy down and book him. NO. Detaining and arrest are different categories in most local, state and federal law. IF the guard is a L/S/F officer then perhaps he can arrest them even in a private capacity but im not sure there. You are using only the first verbal definition for the word arrest...

'to seize (a person) by legal authority or warrant; take into custody: The police arrested the burglar.

they cannot afix
posted by clavdivs at 6:36 PM on October 18, 2010

always wanted to say that
posted by clavdivs at 6:36 PM on October 18, 2010

Superpages: Drop Security: Reviews -- 2 out of 5 stars.
posted by ericb at 6:37 PM on October 18, 2010

goons with ties...see...heh...the ties...
GODWIN
posted by clavdivs at 6:38 PM on October 18, 2010

Again, the simple act of allowing (or even inviting) the public into a space does not make the space public. A mall lets (invites!) you in, without invitation. They may also ask you to leave and if you refuse, may have you charged. Their private security may also detain you if you are committing a crime. Same for bars, restaurants, etc. Open invitation, but not public. You may be asked to leave at any time for [almost] any reason.

Ah, the school is public property you say! Well, not if it is rented out.
posted by Bovine Love at 6:41 PM on October 18, 2010

It would be interesting to see if a public school could, legally, be made into private space (i.e by renting it out to a private group/individual for a private event) since it is paid for fully with public funds.
posted by 1000monkeys at 6:51 PM on October 18, 2010

That thar's the actions of a man who wants to take yer guns away ya dummies.
posted by fuq at 6:52 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

"[T]he business license for 'Dropzone Security Services,' 3701 SPENARD ROAD, ANCHORAGE AK 99503, owned by William F. Fulton expired on 31/12/2009 and was NOT renewed!

The company belonging to Mr. Fulton, who was pictured in the above clips [1, 2] is currently not licensed for providing security services. Joe Miller therefore employed the services of a 'rogue' security company, so to speak.

'Dropzone Security Services' has an expired business license with the following details: [Line of Business: Support, Waste Management, and Remediation Services].

[T]his company has nothing to do with security services. It is a license for a trade company!

[The current business license is] "for 'Sporting goods stores'.

[Mr. Fulton] owns a shop for military surplus.

Mr. Fulton received the trade license TODAY!

This trade company lacks the necessary license for a security company, and he hasn't had one since 01/01/2010. Mr. Fulton owns no security company under another name, as the records show.

It is therefore proven that Joe Miller employed a security firm which is unlicensed.

We do hope that the IRS will now take a closer look at Joe Miller's dark-shirt friends from Spenard Road."*

posted by ericb at 6:54 PM on October 18, 2010 [14 favorites]

No where do I see any claims that pressmedia, Democrats, Gays or Vegans are not allowed to attend the PUBLIC event in the PUBLIC school.

Those aspects are irrelevant. You can open your private property to the public, and a private concern can sublet public property (and invite the public onto it, without obviating private property rights they may have as the legitimate tenants).

But as was pointed out, that would have given them grounds to eject the reporter if they felt he was making a nuisance of himself (or indeed, on a whim). Not to infringe upon his liberty interests by detaining & handcuffing him, for which they had no legal grounds since there are no indications that he had committed a crime. That makes them guilty of a tort, at the least.
posted by anigbrowl at 6:54 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

You are using only the first verbal definition for the word arrest...

Um ... precisely. What's your point? They arrested him. I can arrest the motion of a ping-pong ball. This means it stops moving, it's not in danger of going to jail. Those guards arrested Hopfinger, they detained him and deprived him his freedom of movement. See also citizen's arrest.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 6:54 PM on October 18, 2010

Again, the simple act of allowing (or even inviting) the public into a space does not make the space public. A mall lets (invites!) you in, without invitation.

Malls are owned by private corporations. Public schools are owned by the PUBLIC!
posted by ericb at 6:55 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

"Drop Zone, is a Survivalist/Security/Tactical Assault/Tea Party/Military Surplus type store in Anchorage ... The Gadsden flag is a nice touch ... Obama as Joker/Fascist/Communist Poster in front window." (with photographs).
posted by ericb at 7:04 PM on October 18, 2010

Can I just say hooray for the actual police in Anchorage here?

They came in, figured out this was just an absurd situation, let the reporter go, and even offered to take the videocam in to a lab to see if it had been tampered with in any way to erase the video footage Hopfinger said he had taken. Thanks to the local guys for having some common sense.

Stupidity brownie points awarded to:

Private security personnel who take themselves too seriously, get power-drunk and go around handcuffing people.

Hopfinger himself, who did shove someone against a locker by his own admission, which was probably not a big deal but did give the private security the excuse they were looking for to break out those handcuffs.

Extra-bonus douchebag points awarded to:

Miller, whose website, before you see anything about his politics or where he stands on the issues, brings you to a campaign contribution page, complete with credit card info submission form. Just ick.
posted by misha at 7:07 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

Reviews of the Drop Zone store:

" (1) Dont waste your money on these losers‎ Although these guys have one of the better military selections in town they are a bunch of has been's and want to be's. You feel incredibly unwelcome and have to beg for help. When you do get help its usually pretty lackluster. Prices seem to come off the top of the head. This shady business is cash only too...so forget the card. Go spend your money at one of the other places in town and forget these wanna be GI JOE militia crackpots.

(2)) Decent surplus store, but could be better‎ The sign on the door said enough for me, and nearly wanted to make me leave right then and there. Flat out said if you were there to look around, you just needed to go the F... somewhere else because they weren't a museum. Anti-government signs abound in and out. Inside, it's dark and very tight and nothing seems to have prices on it. It's just thrown on a shelf somewhere. I was there looking for some equipment (im in the military) and had my two boys with me. I couldn't even get the young guy working that day to acknowledge me. I will say they had more stuff then some of the other surplus stores in town, but there is no need to be so anti consumer and government like that. It just makes me not want to shop there regardless of my views on the current government. I came to shop and spend money, not dig around in the dark being ignored and feel like I was at some anti-government rally.

(3) Response from the owner: Wow sorry you didnt get the help you needed This is the first I've heard of this please feel free to call us if you have an issue. We are a wholey disabled veteran owned and operated company, most of our staff comes from combat arms MOS's. We are military focused and while we do sell to the general public our priority is our military client's. Prices vary greatly even with the same item depending on your rank, job (ie discounts for military, law enforcement, fire fighters etc) what we paid that day for it how long its been in inventory and customers attitude. As for our cash only policy, we do provide an ATM for our customers that wish to use a card. We refuse to pay credit card fees to a company that we have nothing to do with that does nothing for us (credit card fees only increase the price of goods for every customer)."

posted by ericb at 7:09 PM on October 18, 2010 [2 favorites]

It would be interesting to see if a public school could, legally, be made into private space (i.e by renting it out to a private group/individual for a private event) since it is paid for fully with public funds.

For the length of the rental, sure. It doesn't matter who pays for it, as long as the administrator of that resource is authorized to rent it out. The rent goes back into the public purse so it's not really any different from a private rental.
posted by anigbrowl at 7:09 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Again, the simple act of allowing (or even inviting) the public into a space does not make the space public.

Your fetishization of private property is blinding you to the point of this episode.

RealClearPolitics: The Miller campaign defended the security guards' actions, accusing Hopfinger of being an "irrational blogger" who was trying to create a "publicity stunt."

Fulton said that his company was contracted to provide security for Sunday's event, not to guard Miller himself.

"He was contractually required to have us there," Fulton said. "In their contract with the school district, they're required to have security."

But spokespeople for Murkowski and Democrat Scott McAdams each told RealClearPolitics that they had held several events at Anchorage public schools and have never had to provide their own security guards.
posted by blucevalo at 7:11 PM on October 18, 2010

Thanks for the links, ericb. Just reviewed them. "Not qualified to guard a lemonade stand" was in there.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 7:14 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

That makes them guilty of a tort, at the least.

intentional tort at that
posted by clavdivs at 7:16 PM on October 18, 2010

wholey disabled veteran owned and operated company

Huh? He doesn't look disabled to me when he's standing around and shoving reporters while working as a security guard. What kind of scam is he pulling?
posted by MegoSteve at 7:26 PM on October 18, 2010

Um ... precisely. What's your point?
that you cannot differentiate arrest and detention in a legal manner, both confine.

if these guards said "I am arresting you for the crime of" then they are subject to intentional tort and most likely criminal charges.
posted by clavdivs at 7:26 PM on October 18, 2010

Prices vary greatly even with the same item depending on your rank, job (ie discounts for military, law enforcement, fire fighters etc) what we paid that day for it how long its been in inventory and customers attitude.

Well, I'd like to invite him to buy something from my company then, because (based on his attitude) it's gonna be REALLY frikken expensive. Price depends on your rank in organization you are a member of? WTF?! How would that even begin to work?

"Yeah , I'd like to buy this knife. How much?"

"Who do you work for?"

"What does that matter?"

"Well if you're a dirty socialistic hippy, wanting to use it for cutting leather, it's $119.95"

"I'm not a hippy. I'm a Marine and Libertarian."

"Well for Libertarains it starts at $49.95 for a PFC. What's your rank?"

"I'm a Warrant Officer, but my wife is a Chief Warrant Officer"

"For you, $39.95; but if she come's in and buys it , it'll be $34.95"

"It's a present for here father"

"Here, take the knife, this scabbard, and $10 out of the till. Tell all your friends"

... etc.


He clearly has no concept whatsoever about how an effective business operates, but this is hardly surprising, given his complete disregard for the niceties of proper qualification and licensing of his businesses.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 7:43 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

I realize there's not a lot of 90 year old Germans on Metafilter to confirm this, but I have to imagine this is what the rise of the Nazi party looked like: a lot of total misfits using an economic disaster to try to seize hold of a powerful country.
I'm not being overly alarmist here - the Tea Party still is fringe and will probably only get a few candidates elected, but this group is pure Adenoid Hynkel.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 7:46 PM on October 18, 2010 [6 favorites]

BTW -- the only person who is claiming that the event was a PRIVATE event is the owner of the (unlicensed) 'security firm,' William F. Fulton of Drop Zone Security.

Public records will show whether the PUBLIC school was 'rented' and deemed to be a private, 'by-invitation-only', and pre-screened media event. My guess -- NO. Especially as a result of the public invitation to the Town Hall on the candidate's own website, Facebook and Twitter.

The excuse/rationalization is all bullshit from a guy who owns/operates "a Survivalist/Security/Tactical Assault/Tea Party/Military Surplus type store.

After all, "[t]he meeting was open to the public. There were no names taken at the door. Reporters were not asked to apply for credentials."

SEE: Smokescreen, CYA (aka 'Cover Your Ass'), Obfuscation and Liberal Media Bias).
posted by ericb at 7:51 PM on October 18, 2010 [3 favorites]

You would be surprised at the premiums people are willing to pay if they believe they have access to something exclusive, and that they are (or may in the future) get a better deal by being an 'insider.' Suppose, in your knife example, the cost of the item is $15; that's a 150% markup if you buy it at $39.95.

Having said that, of course, it sounds very much as if the store is little more than a front for a weapons swap meet. But then it's Alaska, where everyone knows everyone else and not having a permit probably comes with consequences no more severe than the minor embarrassment of having to call in that favor you did for someone's family member last year.
posted by anigbrowl at 7:55 PM on October 18, 2010

As a small business owner, I heartily enjoyed this bit:

Prices vary greatly even with the same item depending on your rank, job (ie discounts for military, law enforcement, fire fighters etc) what we paid that day for it how long its been in inventory and customers attitude.

Ah. The American Dream! Best of luck with that business acumen!
posted by Ron Thanagar at 8:06 PM on October 18, 2010

You would be surprised at the premiums people are willing to pay if they believe they have access to something exclusive,

Oh, I was a retail manager for 17 years, so I am fully aware of the psychology of tiered price structuring. That said, no model I've ever seen that actually worked was based on non-disclosure in such a manner. Typically, such a scenario involves a MSRP or "regular" price; and a series of discounts from that.

No one ever pays the "regular price" under such a scenario, naturally ...

"So ... what do you do?"

"An Arborist you say? Fabulous! That gets you 20% off!"

So yeah, I can see that your guess that there might be something else going on there is probably not far off the mark. Or else, let's not discount the possibility that he's just really frikken dumb.

Also, I wrecked my lame joke. Should have read ... " It's for her father ... he's a General."
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 8:13 PM on October 18, 2010

It would be interesting to see if this guy ever gets audited and how much income he claims from his business, since he (allegedly) only operates on a cash-basis.

Also, I'm kind of surprised that he can just adjust his prices based on customer attitude, or whatever whim--I mean, I can understand a formal pricing structure with a formal discount, but what's stopping him from being totally discriminatory ("That scope is $100." Looks up, "Oh, sorry, didn't see you were black--that'll be $300").
posted by 1000monkeys at 8:16 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Public records will show whether the PUBLIC school was 'rented' and deemed to be a private, 'by-invitation-only', and pre-screened media event. My guess -- NO. Especially as a result of the public invitation to the Town Hall on the candidate's own website, Facebook and Twitter.

You know ericb, while I agree that the whole thing is likely ass-covering by this skeevy-sounding SA-wannabe, you're not doing yourself any favors with this use of ALL CAPS in place of an argument.

Public entities, such as school districts can own property, such as schools; and like any other legal entity, they can rent it out. For practical purposes, a lease of property is like a tenancy, even if it is only 4 hours long. While the lease is running, absent any special conditions, it's as if the property belongs to the tenant. They can hold entirely private events there. Or they can hold events that are open to the the public. And they can also ask people to leave at their discretion, though probably not detain them as happened here.

Now whether they actually have a suitable lease, I have no idea. But there's no fundamental reason that they couldn't as you seem to imagine. Lots of city and county governments own property and sublet it to private tenants, who legitimately treat it as if it were their own for the duration.

As for the military surplus store, all I can say is - forget it Jake, it's Bartertown.
posted by anigbrowl at 8:19 PM on October 18, 2010

I'm checking around with friends who have worked campaign advance, but I'd be surprised if schools charge candidates money to hold events. I think that guy is full of shit.
posted by CunningLinguist at 8:21 PM on October 18, 2010

In Hopfinger's response, above, it is mentioned that he is not a blogger. Miller's campaign mentions that it is a blogger, the press repeats this, then suddenly everyone thinks he is.

The power of words--CunningLinguist, you should know better than to fall for it too.
posted by eye of newt at 8:23 PM on October 18, 2010

He doesn't work for a newspaper or TV station but for a website.
posted by CunningLinguist at 8:27 PM on October 18, 2010

A few responses. Hopefully it's not too wall-of-texty for anyone using a low screen resolution.

Bovine Love wrote: "I'll allow that, on the face of it, the handcuffs seem excessive (the police could be called without the cuffs and I'd bet the guy would still be there) but the rest seemed perfectly reasonable to me."

Unless he was asked to leave and refused, he had committed no crime. A conviction for trespassing requires either a posted sign or notice. If he was initially allowed on the property, any posted sign was invalidated and he was legally on the property until such time as he was asked to leave and provided an opportunity to do so.

Navelgazer wrote: "Don't know that it really counts as "kidnapping" though."

Much to my amazement, I found out the other day that, at least in some states, kidnapping does not require a person be moved to another place, only that they be restrained. One can "kidnap" a person by tying them up in their home in the course of a robbery, for example.

jedicus wrote: "In Alaska, as in some other states, a citizen's arrest may be performed in cases of a person witnessing a crime actively being committed or attempted, whether a felony or misdemeanor. Here is the Alaska statute:"

I dislike that. I'm OK with citizen's arrest statutes that allow anyone to arrest another for a felony committed in their presence, but for a misdemeanor? Not seen by the person arresting? Some states don't even allow police to do that without a warrant.
posted by wierdo at 8:32 PM on October 18, 2010

It's a news website with Pulitzer-winning journalists.
posted by zerbinetta at 8:33 PM on October 18, 2010

Well, as much as it undermines my outrage here, I have to agree with what anigbrowl says above about the rental of public facilities. As it happens, the business that I am now in involves the use of rented school facilities, often after hours, on a constant basis. As a coincidence, I have this one coming up, and I really should be working on that, instead of discussing this cack with you dips.

Recognizing that this applies in B.C. only though , I can say this. Private security is almost always contractually required by the School (or District) providing the facilities. This mitigates the liability exposure to the lessor, and diminishes the possibility of theft between set-up and tear-down. So, to me, the arguments of other candidates that they weren't required to contract security services seem a bit suspect to me.

I bet we will discover that security was, in fact, a requirement for securing the lease for the event. That said though, I bet we will also discover that the wording of the contract requires that said security be "duly licensed"; so I really doubt that ericb is beating a dead horse here. In fact, I think that this might be one of the most salient points raised. If Drop Dead Security was unlicensed, then the lease was likely invalid, and they are potentially all in deep shit.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 8:42 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

I realize there's not a lot of 90 year old Germans on Metafilter to confirm this


The trick there is
would you believe them.
posted by clavdivs at 9:07 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

If Drop Dead Security was unlicensed, then the lease was likely invalid, and they are potentially all in deep shit.

god.
what... what are the ramifications of in an invaid lease because of an unlicensed security firm? a fine?

you got the shit part right.
posted by clavdivs at 9:10 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Somewhere in the Washington, D.C., area, Clarence Thomas revels in the thought that he might not be Yale Law's biggest mistake.
posted by one more dead town's last parade at 9:12 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

Jesus, what a bunch of wusses these reporters are.
I've seen 15 year old skaters stand up to rent-a-cops better than this.

Why are you backing up? Make them move you, you're a reporter not a cow to be herded.
For that matter, who the hell would let mall security put handcuffs on them to begin with? Let alone sit around in a school hallway after they do it?

A sad commentary on the milquetoasts that pass for reporters these days.
posted by madajb at 9:34 PM on October 18, 2010 [6 favorites]

In case it hasn't been posted here the local blog The Mudflats and the ADN's Alaska Ear are the place to go for inside information on the carnival that is Alaska politics. Don't miss the letter to the Mayor of Anchorage from his own employees or Millers campaign manager's wife threatening to bury a college republican! And do something unspecified to his balls!

Also Why Lisa Murkowski Can't Win (although I'm not convinced Ted Stevens can't still win from beyond the grave).
posted by fshgrl at 10:14 PM on October 18, 2010

god. what... what are the ramifications of in an invaid lease because of an unlicensed security firm? a fine?

Um no. It means that the lease was invalid, therefore the claim that they were the legal lessor of the premises becomes invalid, which means that your idiotic juvenile two-bit faithless argument that no arrest occurred because it the wouldn't fit some arbitraryly self-selected and narrowly-defined definition of the word would mitigate the specious argument you'd invented. In short, the lease would have no validity; thereby rendering the actions of those unlicensed and lawbreaking kidnappers illegal.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 10:16 PM on October 18, 2010

instead of discussing this cack with you dips.

perhaps your right, by your link ,what you are doing is very worthy. for what its worth, that is what 'it' is all about not mere typing.
but dont think you can leave...
:)

posted by clavdivs at 10:30 PM on October 18, 2010

How many people arguing the legality or lack thereof are lawyers, and how many are arguing based on their GED in law?

Regardless of technical legality, this action showcases the thuggish, anti-American nature of the right-wing extremists that have taken over the Republican party of late. That anyone actually justifies this shows how far down the path towards totalitarianism our country has gone.
posted by dirigibleman at 11:32 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

This was a rally to increase support for Miller. He wanted new people there to change their minds; he wanted journalists there to record the event to reach new people who weren't there. The only reason why you would call such an event private is so you can justify ejecting the journalists who ask you questions you refuse to answer, like questions about your background and character, that make you look bad on the nightly news.
posted by Foam Pants at 11:36 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

"the school district said there was no such [security] requirement made of Miller" the hall where the incident took place wasn't part of the rental agreement and some of the security guys? US Army soldiers. With no formal permission to be there. The Plot Thickens

In case anyone was wondering the ADN dislikes Miller. A lot.
posted by fshgrl at 11:48 PM on October 18, 2010 [1 favorite]

In short, the lease would have no validity; thereby rendering the actions of those unlicensed and lawbreaking kidnappers illegal

Yeah...that's not how it actually works. The practical rules of citizens arrest go something like this:

1) There's probably a law that says you can arrest someone who has committed a crime, or is about to. Such laws were not written with the expectation they will be used on a regular basis.

2) In fact, it is very risky to do so. Unlike the cops, who can arrest anyone, anywhere, just 'cause they're feeling it, a private citizen arresting another has to be Absolutely Right. If that kidnapper you 'arrested' turns out to be the kid's parent, you might end up facing that charge instead. Or worse, depending on how things turn out. So you need to weigh the the other fellow's supposed crime against the possible crimes you could be charged with. Tackling shoplifters and taggers isn't a good plan.

3) On the other hand, because kidnapping is such a serious crime, it's very unlikely you will be charged with it. Criminal codes cover a great many misdemeanors and felonies broadly applicable to the act of capturing and holding another. But I think kidnapping and other very dire charges are quite unlikely except in a couple cases:
a) You did not immediately summon the police, but instead held your captive for several hours.
b) You've made a hobby of it and the gov't sees a need to clamp down on your bullshit. (Think Minute Men.)
c) Something went terribly wrong and the other party suffered significant injury. If they have a heart attack while wearing your cuffs, you're probably looking at some sort of manslaughter charge.

4) By taking physical control of another person, you become very much responsible for their well being. If something goes wrong, it's entirely your fault. You don't have the immunities of a law enforcement officer and you don't have the affirmative rights of a victim acting in self-defense. Instead, you've voluntarily inserted yourself into a situation by choice. So the various leniencies often granted to scared, angry, or injured person are likely out of your reach. The assumption will be that whatever you got yourself into, you were looking for.

5) The harsh judgement of the previous section is greatly attenuated in the case of shopkeepers, bouncers, private security guards, and similarly employed persons. When they get involved, it is because they are just doing their job, not because eager to bust heads (even if they are). Normal people more or less have an obligation to retreat from dangerous situations (with various allowances made for defending one's family and home). Security guards, on the other hand, are expected to wade in and deal with it. So the legal system, in practice, gives them a lot more leeway than a normal citizen gets.

6) When everything goes smoothly, and the suspect doesn't have a heart attack, doesn't shoot you, is well-known to the police, and is carrying a slim-jim and a couple car stereos at the time of his arrest... well the cops show up, crack a few jokes, and haul his ass downtown. No questions asked, unless you wanted to be a witness at the trial. That was my experience, anyway.

TL;DR - feign a heart attack

(and don't steal stereos at 11am on a Saturday, dumbass)
posted by ryanrs at 1:07 AM on October 19, 2010 [4 favorites]

Whenever I see the words "Private Security" I reach for my gun. I mean camera.
posted by Decani at 4:21 AM on October 19, 2010

Private security guards: I guess his plan for privatizing services extends to the Brownshirts.

Also, what dances_with_sneetches said.
posted by lordrunningclam at 5:29 AM on October 19, 2010

Some of you must be terribly embarrassed about being more or less completely wrong about every facet of this story.

Moo.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:26 AM on October 19, 2010 [1 favorite]

Witness: Reporter was rude but not a threat

"'I would say Tony was aggressive, and I would say he was rude because he interrupted me, but he didn't do anything wrong and he wasn't posing a threat to Miller,' Symbol said.

She said Miller tried to get away from the reporter and in doing so put his hand on her arm and pushed her aside. Her 8-year-old son, Vincent Mahoney, was standing right behind her, and Miller bowled him over in his attempt to get away. 'I don't know if [Miller] didn't see him or didn't care, but he didn't say "excuse me" or "I'm sorry". He didn't even turn his head,' Symbol said. 'He simply did not care at all.'

... Other reporters also were physically prevented from moving down the hallway where Hopfinger was being kept. A video shot by Anchorage Daily News reporter Rich Mauer and posted on the newspaper's website shows three guards blocking Mauer and Dispatch reporter Jill Burke from approaching Hopfinger. In the video, Burke repeatedly asks a guard to takes his hands off her.

... 'I do not believe that he did anything wrong,' she said. 'He was rude and he was aggressive but that's just what the press does. Legally he did not do anything wrong that deserved to be put in cuffs.'

'The whole thing just made me sick,' she said.'I was a big supporter of Joe Miller, I really was. But not anymore.'"

posted by ericb at 7:31 AM on October 19, 2010

Last night a debate for the U.S. senate seat in Alaska was held. Lisa Murkowski and Scott McAdam participated. Of course, Joe Miller did not.
posted by ericb at 7:35 AM on October 19, 2010 [2 favorites]

In related news: In reversal, Miller admits ethics violation.
posted by ericb at 7:39 AM on October 19, 2010 [2 favorites]

Joe Miller's Bodyguards Cuff Blogger, Spark Backlash in Alaska

"A reporters' rights group blasted the campaign of Alaska Republican senate candidate Joe Miller on Monday after a liberal blogger was handcuffed by the candidate's private security guards before being set free by police.

'It strikes me as virtually incomprehensible that anyone would have to rough up and handcuff a reporter who's just trying to do a story,' said Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press.

'It seems to me that they didn't like this guy, so they just decided to take him out,' Dalglish said of Tony Hopfinger, editor of the Alaska Dispatch website."

posted by ericb at 7:44 AM on October 19, 2010 [1 favorite]

Joe Miller really doesn't like Hopfinger and the 'Alaska Dispatch' which has broken news about the candidate's past:

“Miller accused Hopfinger of using the town hall for a ‘publicity stunt.’ Miller also has claimed the online news site has focused its attention on negative stories about him.

Hopfinger didn't respond to requests for comment from The Associated Press, but he said on MSNBC's ‘The Last Word’ Monday night that the guards weren't clearly marked as security.

His attorney, John McKay, called the incident ‘bizarre’ and said Hopfinger committed no offence.

‘Do I think Tony was right, editorially? Absolutely,’ Rogoff said.

Miller is locked in a race with U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, whom he upset in the Republican Party primary and who is now running as a write-in candidate, and Democrat Scott McAdams.

Last week, Miller declared he would no longer answer questions about his past, following what he alleged was a leak to members of the media of his personnel file from his time as an attorney with the Fairbanks North Star Borough.

Miller has had to respond to a number of disclosures that he or his family had received the types of government benefits — farm subsidies, Medicaid, unemployment — that he now rails against or has questioned the constitutionality of.

In acknowledging this, saying that for a time he struggled like many others have, he said he no longer gets benefits and that it has no relevance to the current race. Miller also said his campaign would continue to be as transparent and honest as possible.

But during a news conference in which he declared his personal life off-limits, he singled out the Dispatch, saying its ‘so-called journalistic objective is anything negative about Joe. ... It doesn't matter whether the sources are anonymous or not. They'll publish it on their blog.’

The Dispatch was first to report that Miller, a fiscal conservative who has called for an end to the ‘welfare state,’ accepted farm subsidies in the 1990s. It's also among the news organizations suing for access to Miller's personnel file from the time he worked at the Fairbanks North Star Borough.

A former borough mayor claims Miller was nearly fired in 2008 for using government computers in a failed effort to overthrow the state Republican chairman. The Dispatch had reported allegations related to this before the mayor publicly spoke, citing unidentified sources.

Miller on Monday acknowledged to CNN he was disciplined over the matter but said he was never threatened with termination.

Rogoff said Hopfinger was ‘doggedly’ pursuing an answer to Miller's employment question when he was shoved by a member of the security detail. Miller has called her a ‘max donor’ to Murkowski, though [Alaska Dispatch publisher Alice] Rogoff said she hasn't made a political contribution since buying the Dispatch last year.”

posted by ericb at 7:56 AM on October 19, 2010

The school district says that they did not require hired security, for what it's worth (they do require users to have a security plan and state use expectations to any users of the property). Community groups rent Anchorage School District schools all the time after school hours, and they do pay to do it.
posted by charmedimsure at 8:55 AM on October 19, 2010

In acknowledging this, saying that for a time he struggled like many others have, he said he no longer gets benefits and that it has no relevance to the current race

In other words, "I may have benefited from help in the past, but I got mine now, so fuck y'all."
posted by quin at 9:03 AM on October 19, 2010 [4 favorites]

But the school district said there was no such requirement made of Miller -- he only had to provide a hall and parking lot monitor, and advise participants of school district courtesy and food rules.

Well, that settles it then. They were hall monitors advising journalists not to bring food items into the gym. Just think of the damage that might have occurred had these guys been made crossing guards!
posted by leftcoastbob at 9:04 AM on October 19, 2010

(I also saw somewhere in the many, many Anchorage Daily News and Alaska Dispatch stories about this that the rental permit was from 2-4, and that the incident took place at 4:10, but can't find the source for that at this very second)
posted by charmedimsure at 9:04 AM on October 19, 2010

Edward Luce, Washington bureau chief for London's Financial Times:

"Although fueled by dislike for taxes, hatred of the 'liberal media' - including virtually all channels, barring Fox News, and most print publications - is a central tenet of the Tea Party's world view. ...

Like most US elections, this year's midterm race is chiefly a contest between the Democratic and Republican parties. But not far behind is the strange tussle between the Tea Party movement and the media.

Tea Partiers see the media as an arm of the bicoastal liberal elites. The media, on the other hand, see the colourful biographies of people such as Christine O'Donnell, the Republican candidate in Delaware, or Sharron Angle, the Republican Senate candidate in Nevada, as unmissable stories."

posted by ericb at 1:04 PM on October 19, 2010

Joe Miller's private "guards" were active-duty military
posted by homunculus at 1:26 PM on October 19, 2010 [1 favorite]

The Tea Party Will Be Watching You: Republican groups and tea party activists unite to block Democrats…err, voter fraud, at the polls.
posted by homunculus at 1:31 PM on October 19, 2010

"Some locations are not in very safe areas, so this is not for the timid," warns a notice on the NE Tarrant Tea Party message board.

Code Brown! Code Brown!
posted by Artw at 1:40 PM on October 19, 2010

Joe Miller's private "guards" were active-duty military

Very interesting update from that article:

DoD Directive 1344.10 -- governing "Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces on Active Duty" -- provides: "A member on AD [active duty] shall not: . . .[p]articipate in partisan political management, campaigns, or conventions." The legality is the least of the concerns here. That Directive exists because it's dangerous and un-democratic to have active-duty soldiers taking an active role in partisan campaigns; having them handcuff journalists on behalf of candidates is so far over that line that it's hard to believe it happened. The real issue, though, is Joe Miller: the fact that he did this and then emphatically defended it reveals the deep authoritarianism of many of these "small-government, pro-Constitution" right-wing candidates. Any American of minimal decency should be repelled by this incident.

posted by ericb at 1:44 PM on October 19, 2010 [3 favorites]

Alaskans can be a little nuts, and they are very conservative and mostly pretty Christian. But one thing they really fetishize is liberty, and Miller has just made a series of serious errors that prove he is an outsider to the state. Whether his goons broke the law, this is going to hurt him with some of his core supporters for its blatant fascist overtones, which he very helpfully emphasized in his actual speech.

On the other hand, Alaskans genuinely seem to like Lisa Murkowski, who is a classic Alaska republican in her steady focus on economic development issues.

I will say it here: Lisa Murkowski will be the first write-in winner of a senatorial race in modern history. Every single Alaskan I know is practicing writing her name.

And most of the despise Sarah Palin -- you'll note she is barely involved with Miller and has had a number of public spats with him, probably at his request so he could distance himself from her.
posted by fourcheesemac at 1:53 PM on October 19, 2010

Was Lieberman not a write-in?
posted by Artw at 1:54 PM on October 19, 2010

Was Lieberman not a write-in?
No, he appeared on the ballot.
posted by Floydd at 1:59 PM on October 19, 2010

No Charges Against Alaska Dispatch Editor

“Anchorage's municipal prosecutor said no charges will be filed against Alaska Dispatch editor and co-founder Tony Hopfinger, who was handcuffed and detained by Joe Miller's private security detail at a public event Sunday afternoon.

‘Basically, nothing's going to happen,’ said Al Patterson, chief municipal prosecutor. Patterson sent out the following press release early Tuesday afternoon:

After careful review by the Municipal Prosecutors office of witness statements, police reports, and other materials relating to this incident, it has been determined that no criminal charges will be filed against any party.

The chief guard of the detail, which included active-duty soldiers, said he placed Hopfinger under a private person's arrest. Anchorage Police Department spokesman Lt. Dave Parker told the Anchorage Daily News that someone making a private person's arrest has a right to restrain the subject, but only if the arrest is legal in the first place.

In a press release, Miller had said Hopfinger ‘physically assaulted another individual and made threatening gestures and movements towards the candidate.’

When asked if any charges would be filed against Drop Zone, the security firm that detained Hopfinger, Patterson said not by his office.

‘That most likely rolls over to the civil side,’ Patterson said. ‘That would depend on whether Tony wants to do anything with it.’”

posted by ericb at 2:03 PM on October 19, 2010

"An extremely frustrated Fulton also confirmed that DropZone has faced some questions over its license with the Alaska Division of Corporations, Businesses, and Professional Licensing, which the Alaska Commerce website shows expired at the end of 2009.

Fulton claims they 'just got a renewal the first of the month, that should be done within 30 days,' and that the revelations were 'bad timing' in light of the Hopfinger incident. But he said, the state licensing department 'never got mad at me.'

A representative in the Alaska Division of Corporations, Businesses, and Professional Licensing told TPM that the license had never been renewed."*

posted by ericb at 2:09 PM on October 19, 2010 [1 favorite]

On the other hand, Alaskans genuinely seem to like Lisa Murkowski...

NPR: Alaska's Joe Miller May Be Lisa Murkowski's Secret Weapon.
posted by ericb at 2:10 PM on October 19, 2010

I work in the native communities of the North Slope. Photos of Lisa Murkowski smiling with members of various Iñupiaq families are so ubiquitous on walls and mantles that they rival pictures of Jesus. Everyone has met her, everyone has relied on her excellent constituent service operation, and everyone knows where she stands on the issue (that is, oil -- there is no other issue at the federal level that matters nearly as much).

My facebook feed is peppered with "vote for Lisa" messages from Alaskan friends. They ticked up sharply today.

Miller may have actually fucked himself good this time.
posted by fourcheesemac at 2:14 PM on October 19, 2010

Michael Keegan argues today in Huffpost:

[W]ith the rise of the Tea Party and in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United, right-wing candidates have been promoting a curious inversion of the right of free speech in a democracy. While they refuse to be held accountable by an independent press corps, they enthusiastically defend the newly declared right of corporate special interests to spend extraordinary sums of money from vast treasuries to help them get elected -- all while avoiding accountability from the public.

We're living in a world where candidates don't speak, but corporations do.
posted by bearwife at 2:19 PM on October 19, 2010 [3 favorites]

Fulton claims they "just got a renewal the first of the month, that should be done within 30 days," and that the revelations were "bad timing" in light of the Hopfinger incident. But he said, the state licensing department "never got mad at me."

State licensing departments don't get mad; they get even.
posted by leftcoastbob at 2:28 PM on October 19, 2010

From the NPR link:

"The facts appear to be that while Miller worked as a lawyer for the Fairbanks North Star Borough in 2008, he used government computers in a government office to engage in politicking.
Specifically, he used the computers of fellow workers to vote in an on-line poll in which he hoped to oust the head of the Alaska Republican Party, replacing him with himself.
In an attempt to cover his tracks, he cleared the browser caches of his co-workers' computers but later admitted to what he did when people noticed the changes on their computers."


The Alaska GOP elects its head via online poll?
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:34 PM on October 19, 2010 [2 favorites]

Excellent video put out by the McAdams campaign featuring Native Alaskans speaking on his views on Native issues. This is a remarkable campaign ad, not at all a familiar genre to me.

I really hope he can capitalize on this, but I'll settle for Murkowski, who will also be interested in getting even with the far right. She's running half to spite Palin.
posted by fourcheesemac at 2:37 PM on October 19, 2010

There isn't a lot of effective difference between murkowski* and mcadams to Alaskans on quite a lot of issues which worries me. I can see them splitting the sentient vote while the snowbillies out in the Valley are busy electing Miller.

*other than her increasing big business leanings and that (giant) southeast land grab.

Mcadams will take southeast and hippie outposts like Talkeetna and south addition. Lisa will get the Bush, east anchorage and a chunk of Palmer. Miller will take Wasilla, Solddotna and probably spenard. It might come down to the military and urban Republicans spelling murkowski correctly. Or, please God, Adams could actually win and Alaska could stop being the laughingstock it is
posted by fshgrl at 4:15 PM on October 19, 2010

"Tea Partier Joe Miller acknowledged on CNN last night that he was disciplined for ethics violations while working at the Fairbanks North Star Borough in 2008."

"The event in question is something that happened during my time off. So it was during my lunch hour," he said.

His LUNCH HOUR? His excuse is that ethics violations committed on your lunch hour don't matter? Ahaha haha ha!!
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 5:29 PM on October 19, 2010 [1 favorite]

whistles
posted by clavdivs at 5:44 PM on October 19, 2010

Um no. It means that the lease was invalid, therefore the claim that they were the legal lessor of the premises becomes invalid, which means that your idiotic juvenile two-bit faithless argument that no arrest occurred because it the wouldn't fit some It means that the lease was invalid, therefore the claim that they were the legal lessor of the premises becomes invalid. In short, the lease would have no validity; thereby rendering the actions of those unlicensed and lawbreaking kidnappers illegal.

wow, your a world class idiot.
It means that the lease was invalid, therefore the claim that they were the legal lessor of the premises becomes invalid

really, well lets fine Joe on that and see what happens.

Look, your laws are differnent then American law, so quick researched lessee/ lessor language will not save you.

No arrest occured because a lawful officer did not arrest this blogger and yes these little language quibbles is what saves people from fools like you.
he unlawfully detained (from what i see) not unlawfully arrested.

i have crayons...

and if you care to examine this thread, muscle boy, i never said ANYTHING about lessor or lessee.
you have some nerve sir and you know what i mean
posted by clavdivs at 6:06 PM on October 19, 2010

thereby rendering the actions of those unlicensed and lawbreaking kidnappers illegal.

'here', for 9 years i have held the distinguished yet secret illliterate monkey crown, i almost gave it to you.

what if they were licensed and non-law breaking kiddnappers would it have been legal?
what event 'rendered' the kidnappers action suddenly illegal?

before the Illegal rendering took place, things do appear to be unlicensed, hence the law is broke, illegality takes place, kidnapping ensues.

WTF kidnapping?
i will stop now
i suggest you lie down too.
posted by clavdivs at 6:22 PM on October 19, 2010

What just happened?
posted by 1000monkeys at 6:41 PM on October 19, 2010

That was the joyful contusion of a clavdivs rant. I am absolutely delighted that he has returned to us.
posted by five fresh fish at 6:54 PM on October 19, 2010 [2 favorites]

I have never, ever, done this before; but .... here goes. LOL.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 7:06 PM on October 19, 2010

....fade into laugh track....yesssszzz. Its only a website.

pareidolit...boy: could you, for the class, define kidnapping in a legal manner.
(if you cant try www.google.com)
posted by clavdivs at 8:31 PM on October 19, 2010

i think that was the thread killer and i have 100s.
and i always laugh last always.

love ya fishy.
posted by clavdivs at 11:13 PM on October 19, 2010

So your theory is that this security guard is guilty of kidnapping because his employer's business license wasn't current? Or because of the language in a rental contract he wasn't even party to?

The fact that your bizarre legal theories lead to such an obviously insane conclusion should give you pause.
posted by ryanrs at 4:36 AM on October 20, 2010

clavdivs wrote: "No arrest occured because a lawful officer did not arrest this blogger and yes these little language quibbles is what saves people from fools like you. he unlawfully detained (from what i see) not unlawfully arrested."

So under what theory of law is that not kidnapping? Citizens may arrest for a crime, but may they detain?
posted by wierdo at 5:59 AM on October 20, 2010

And to finish the thought (too early in the morning): The legality does not hinge on the rental being valid or anything else but on whether or not the security guard had the right to make a citizen's arrest for trespassing or some other crime.
posted by wierdo at 6:02 AM on October 20, 2010

Well, apparently they are allowed to detain someone under a private person's arrest, so assuming that the private arrest was legit (and I don't know if it was or not, but I'm assuming so otherwise charges would have been made against the security team), then they did what they were allowed to do--not that I agree with what they did at all, and if any of those moronic Tea Partiers actually cared about their rights and the Constitution at all, then they wouldn't want to vote for that jackass Miller, but like many religions, people will follow the leader without actually thinking for themselves because that's what they've always done.
posted by 1000monkeys at 8:18 AM on October 20, 2010

The fact that your bizarre legal theories lead to such an obviously insane conclusion should give you pause.

the fact that you cannot read a complete post (make da bwain hurt!) is my pause.
the fact you cannot seperate humor and legality gives me pause as to your motive.

So under what theory of law is that not kidnapping? Citizens may arrest for a crime, but may they detain?

yeah, finish your crack-0-flake brew then come back with something i can work with because i have NO idea what that means. here are some crayons you and palio..boy and hash out the word
kidnapping

(www.google.com)

i leave the mantle of thread killer to 1000monkeys. no way miller win now.
see, the bigger picture here is a bloggers actions and the Reactions of others most likely killed millers political career.

anyone else?
posted by clavdivs at 8:50 AM on October 20, 2010

Dunno how it works in Alaska, but in Toronto a grocer is being prosecuted for duct-taping a repeat shoplifter for the cops to come pick up.

I doubt very much that citizens are allowed to handcuff others to chairs, even in Alaska.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:18 AM on October 20, 2010

Kidnapping, at least where I am, does not require that someone be moved, only that they be bound without authority. Handcuffs are as binding as a rope or duct tape. You can call me crazy if you like, but it just makes you look like a fool when I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion about what the law actually is, rather than what a prosecutor feels like prosecuting.

It doesn't surprise me no charges were filed against the security guards, as the environment is politically charged at the moment and it would be seen as an attack on Miller, rather than enforcement of the law.
posted by wierdo at 10:21 AM on October 20, 2010

Can Murkowski Make History? Polls Show a Toss-Up in Alaska Senate Race.
posted by ericb at 10:35 AM on October 20, 2010

National Republican dollars flow into Alaska.
posted by ericb at 10:37 AM on October 20, 2010

Ex-boss: "We were relieved" when Joe Miller left -- "Another clue about the Tea Party-backed Senate candidate's past emerges -- but there's still plenty we don't know."
posted by ericb at 10:39 AM on October 20, 2010

i leave the mantle of thread killer to 1000monkeys

Heh, it's kinda true--I do tend to be a thread killer, according to my posting history :)
posted by 1000monkeys at 10:46 AM on October 20, 2010

Dunno how it works in Alaska, but in Toronto a grocer is being prosecuted for duct-taping a repeat shoplifter for the cops to come pick up.

I doubt very much that citizens are allowed to handcuff others to chairs, even in Alaska.

Uh, Alaska is a US state, not a Canadian territory.
posted by 1000monkeys at 10:49 AM on October 20, 2010

In related news: NAACP Takes On The Tea Parties: Report Charges Movement Has Ongoing Ties To Anti-Semites, Racists And Bigots.
posted by ericb at 12:26 PM on October 20, 2010

Karl Rove: Tea Party Is 'Not Sophisticated'.
posted by ericb at 12:34 PM on October 20, 2010

You can call me crazy if you like
your crazy.

'Generally, kidnapping occurs when a person, without lawful authority, physically asports (i.e., moves) another person without that other person's consent, with the intent to use the abduction in connection with some other nefarious objective. Under the Model Penal Code (a set of exemplary criminal rules fashioned by the American Law Institute), kidnapping occurs when any person is unlawfully and non-consensually asported and held for certain purposes. These purposes include gaining a ransom or reward; facilitating the commission of a felony or a flight after the commission of a felony; terrorizing or inflicting bodily injury on the victim or a third person; and interfering with a governmental or political function (Model Penal Code § 212.1).


did the guards have nefarious objectives? Was he detained for the use of his camera because it interfered with a governmental function?

The strange thing is, what I just cited could give you insight into your postion whatever that was.

'what the law actually is..'.what nonsense, you have little interest in law... And you answered your one question by pointing out the vageries of the term from state to state.

anyone else
posted by clavdivs at 1:55 AM on October 22, 2010

Revealed: Joe Miller hired security company whose owner is local commander and supplier of extreme Alaska militia.

How Close Is Joe Miller's Town Hall Security Chief To The Alaska Citizens Militia?
posted by ericb at 8:23 AM on October 22, 2010 [1 favorite]

"[Alaska Department of Public Safety] spokeswoman Megan Peters released a statement via email Tuesday, two days after Hopfinger’s arrest at an event Miller hosted at Central Middle School.

'After DPS received multiple inquiries from reporters regarding the security detail at the Joe Miller town hall meeting a quick review of the statutes regarding security agencies, personal and bodyguards was done,' Peters wrote. 'It has been decided that an investigation into the matter is prudent. With that being said, I can not give you details regarding the case until the investigation is completed.'

... Peters would not provide any details about the state’s licensing procedure, citing the investigation, but she did provide a citation to the state law that requires licensing." *

posted by ericb at 8:30 AM on October 22, 2010 [1 favorite]

clavdivs wrote: "'what the law actually is..'.what nonsense, you have little interest in law"

I think you have me confused with someone else. All I've said is that courts have lately not been giving a narrow meaning to the word "kidnapping." That he was handcuffed and moved down the hall is enough in many states. I've never claimed to know how Alaskan law reads on the subject.
posted by wierdo at 10:05 AM on October 22, 2010

that is a point.
the political aspect to the defintion is what gave me pause...The fact that no charges were filed leds to the assumption that the police had enough to arrest both parties, and both parties agreed to drop respective charges.
true, the definition is less narrow, IMO, it is due to parental kidnapping.

I retract why 'dont care' comment, it is evident you do.
(keep em coming ecrib)
posted by clavdivs at 10:41 AM on October 22, 2010

why=me.
heh.
posted by clavdivs at 10:43 AM on October 22, 2010

Police Say Joe Miller Security Team Couldn't Identify Victim Allegedly Assaulted By Journalist

“According to a report by the Anchorage Police Department, the head of Joe Miller's security team for his town hall last Sunday couldn't identify who Alaska Dispatch editor Tony Hopfinger allegedly assaulted before the private security guards handcuffed and detained him.

William Fulton, head of DropZone security, had alleged that he detained Hopfinger after the journalist pushed someone up against a locker. Hopfinger had been trying to question and videotape the Republican Senate nominee when the security team asked him to stop. Hopfinger says he was then pushed, and began to push back before he was detained.

But, according to the Dispatch, the APD report says that neither the police, several witnesses interviewed by the police, nor even Fulton himself could identify the victim of Hopfinger's alleged pushing. Sgt. Mark Rein, who wrote the report, said: ‘Fulton then said that he wanted to make an arrest for assault because Hopfinger pushed a man into a locker. I asked him to let me talk to this person. Fulton said that he didn't know who it was, but that he would find him. I gave Fulton 10 minutes to find the unknown assault victim, but none was forthcoming.’

Rein also writes that Fulton asked that Hopfinger be arrested for ‘trespassing,’ and ‘told me that he needed me to complete the arrest for his insurance. I told him that I would not be taking action based on insurance.’”

posted by ericb at 12:25 PM on October 22, 2010 [1 favorite]

Thugs on the right.
posted by ericb at 12:28 PM on October 22, 2010

I told him that I would not be taking action based on insurance.

It basically resounds my sentiment through this whole affair. More to task, that reason has prevailed upon the real authority, the police. Some (here) have gone from assault to kidnapping straight to the third reich, and i posit that the range of accusations astounds even me. Even if the polity of American politics was turning "nazi" then courage would be the first casulity. The officer did his job and duty to prevent some other guy from imposing his demands/requests concerning the bloggers actions. it even shows the cowardly nature of the security co. owner who wants to cover his insurance with an Illegal act.
posted by clavdivs at 2:27 PM on October 22, 2010

I told him that I would not be taking action based on insurance.

Point being: Fulton knows he has an open liability due to his actions and decisions in this encounter.
posted by rhizome at 2:43 PM on October 22, 2010

Judge OKs Joe Miller records release.

"In yet another blow to Alaska Republican Joe Miller's Senate campaign, a judge ordered Saturday that his contentious employment records be released later this week.

Judge Winston Burbank ruled in favor of a local news outlet's lawsuit to unseal Miller's employment records at 4 p.m. Tuesday unless the Republican appeals his case to the state Supreme Court — a decision that was still in question Saturday night.

Miller's employment records when he was a part-time attorney at the Fairbanks North Star Borough have been a controversial issue in the Alaska Senate race, which has become a competitive three-way contest. Polls show Miller and Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who is running a vigorous write-in campaign, in a dead heat — with Democrat Scott McAdams trailing them by a few points.

Depending on what the employment records reveal, their release could come as yet another hit to Miller after a rough couple of weeks on the campaign trail — much of which has been at the hands of online reporting outlet Alaska Dispatch, which sued for release of his employment records.

... It's unclear yet whether Miller will appeal the judge's ruling: His spokesman, Randy DeSoto, told POLITICO in a statement, 'Joe is going to confer with his attorney to see if an appeal is even necessary.' But unless Miller’s attorneys make a move, the records will be released Tuesday afternoon."

posted by ericb at 11:27 AM on October 24, 2010

In related news: Months-Long Survey Finds The Tea Party Is Small, Doing 'Surprisingly Little'.
posted by ericb at 8:47 AM on October 25, 2010

Ben Stein Calls Joe Miller A 'Stupid' Thug In Paper Whose Editor Was Handcuffed By Candidate's Security.
posted by ericb at 8:52 AM on October 25, 2010

What, you mean the tea party is the shark attack craze of 2010? ;)
posted by wierdo at 9:16 AM on October 25, 2010

Rand Paul Supporter Stomps Head Of Female MoveOn Member Outside KY Debate
posted by Artw at 9:19 AM on October 26, 2010 [1 favorite]

Ok no one flip out and drive to Kentucky and defend the republic against the brown shirts or anything. I'm sure we can deal with this in a calm and collected manner.
posted by humanfont at 9:29 AM on October 26, 2010

Republicans enjoy record 'enthusiasm' edge

Them: Stomping heads
Dems: Ooh noo, defeat is not quite ensured enough, what can we do to make sure we have more to complain about?
posted by Artw at 9:31 AM on October 26, 2010

Artw: "Rand Paul Supporter Stomps Head Of Female MoveOn Member Outside KY Debate"

First time in a long time I've reacted to something online with a visceral, out-loud "What the fuck."
posted by Rhaomi at 11:36 AM on October 26, 2010

Paul Condemns Kentucky Attack, Suggests He Knows Stomper's Identity
posted by homunculus at 12:15 PM on October 26, 2010

One week out:

"How do we know we're one week out from Election Day? Because everyone is going crazy right now. Before last night's final Jack Conway-vs.-Rand Paul debate, a Paul supporter stomped on a MoveOn activist. In Florida, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Alex Sink was accused of cheating at last night's debate (her makeup artist reportedly passed her a note from the campaign during the debate). As we noted yesterday, the Democratic gubernatorial in Rhode Island told President Obama to 'shove it' for remaining neutral in the race. And we learned that Mississippi Congressman Gene Taylor (D) said he didn't vote for Obama in 2008 (so he voted for Nancy Pelosi for speaker, but not Obama in '08?). October's campaign phrases that pay: 'Shove It' and 'Man Up.' Can you tell it's a week out? It's a fitting conclusion to a nutty campaign year."

posted by ericb at 12:28 PM on October 26, 2010

This Is Your Tea Party On Thugs.
posted by ericb at 12:29 PM on October 26, 2010

In related news: Democrat Arrested At Eric Cantor’s Campaign Event.
posted by ericb at 11:19 AM on October 27, 2010

Right-wing Violence -- Campaign 2010.
posted by ericb at 11:20 AM on October 27, 2010

Poll: Miller falls to last place‎.
posted by ericb at 6:37 AM on October 28, 2010

O'Donnell, unhappy at how she came off in an interview with a conservative radio station, threatens to "crush" station is the tape isn't destroyed, later apologizes.
posted by CunningLinguist at 8:54 AM on October 28, 2010

They're a right bunch of little Palins, aren't they?

Behold your future overlords, America: Petty little tyrants.
posted by Artw at 2:23 PM on October 28, 2010

Can Sarah Palin's Support Boost Joe Miller to Victory?

Could Palin Help Elect A Democrat In Alaska?
posted by ericb at 2:27 PM on October 28, 2010

The Incredible Shrinking Joe Miller.
posted by ericb at 2:30 PM on October 28, 2010

Ad of the day: Miller says Murkowski's 'not a witch'.
posted by ericb at 2:32 PM on October 28, 2010

An even better ad: The Rand Paul Stomp



The spot will only air after 10 p.m. in order to avoid scaring kids, the party confirms
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:35 PM on October 28, 2010 [2 favorites]

One of the security guards didn't have permission to moonlight.
posted by rhizome at 5:41 PM on November 1, 2010