Biden Tells Law Enforcement Groups Sotomayor 'Has Your Back'
The comment touches on the hot-button issue of bias in the debate over Sonia Sotomayor, whose confirmation hearings could start as early as July if Democrats have their way.

 

Vice President Joe Biden may have crossed the line when he assured national law enforcement groups Monday that Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor "has your back."

The remark quickly stirred criticism in the legal world, since Biden was making a pledge that a fair and objective justice would not necessarily be able to keep.

Biden made the remark at an assembly of eight law enforcement groups after he detailed Sotomayor's tough-on-crime record in the courtroom.

"There's a part of her record that seems to be, up to now, been flying under the radar a bit. And that's her tough stance on criminals and her unyielding commitment to finding justice for the victims of crime," Biden said.

He then repeatedly said, "She gets it," and sought to assure the law enforcement groups that she would be on their side.

"So you all are on the front lines. But as you do your job, know that Judge Sotomayor has your back as well," Biden said. "And throughout this nomination process, I know you'll have her back."

The comment touched on the hot-button issue of bias in the debate over Sotomayor, whose confirmation hearings could start as early as July if Democrats have their way.

John Wesley Hall, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said Biden didn't do himself any favors with that remark, since it's likely to generate more critical questions for Sotomayor during confirmation hearings.

"That (comment) means that she could probably care less about civil liberties and just do whatever law enforcement wants," Hall said.

Hall said Sotomayor probably doesn't sign on to Biden's remark, though.

"My take on it is that he's probably just trying to get law enforcement to support him by saying something just completely off the wall," he said.

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But of course, not firefighters who pass an exam for promotion...

 musik_knut wrote: 
Who was murdered by a radical right wing nutcase because he performed his job, which was in full compliance with the laws of the land.  What was your point again?

 bokey wrote: 
I just read that was the case. Horrible.

 arsenault wrote: 

arse,
Greetings...

The LEFT never stakes claim to a LEFT WING RADICAL, but anyone engaged in radical behavior just might be a RIGHT WINGER.
Hypocrites.
The gunmen in this case, was a radical RIGHT WING nutcase. *and George Tiller was a RADICAL LEFT WINGER*
mk

 hippiechick wrote: 
He just passed  away .

 OmegaConcern wrote: 
The lone gunman was an 88 y.o. man with a long history of white supremacist activities. Looks like he wanted to go out with a blaze. Luckily the security guards did their jobs, and took him down right at the entrance. The security guard that was shot is gravely ill in the hospital.

 hippiechick wrote: 
oh sure, rush limbaugh is a white supremist?!

and i am sure you are concerned that olbermann and the left are responsible for the nut that attacked the army recruitment place.
good grief!

 steeler wrote: 

I have to disagree with that statement.  How many armed guards, at what location(s) w/in the museum and in comparison to how many tourists?  Basically, what's the guard to unarmed civilian ratio?  On the flip side, if 50% of the people were armed (or thought to be armed) wouldn't that be more of a deterrent than knowing there were a half dozen (dozen?) guards at specific positions, rather than in every area, at every angle?  Knowing that you only have to contend with guards drops your number of variables.  Furthermore, this guy probably figured he wasn't going to make it out alive which makes this a possible mental health - not gun control - issue.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not a gun nut and am a believer in gun control.  But at the same time I'm a believer of the right to arm bears (wait...that may have come out wrong...).  There again, with those claws, do they really need guns?

 PoundPuppy wrote: 

What a terrible thing to have happen. 

 hippiechick wrote: 

American Terrorists have existed far longer than Rush has been around. . .

 hippiechick wrote: 

Hey man!  Rush is Canadian!  They're not like that (eh)!

In all seriousness, NPR glazed over it at lunch and I've got bubkis on details.

While listening to the news, it occurred to me that the White Supremist shooter might have been encouraged by the likes of Rush, and that the Right Wing is actually creating American terrorists.

D. C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier believe the suspect was acting alone when he entered the museum just before 1 p. m. , raised his rifle and began shooting. A security guard was shot, Lanier says.

Then two other security guards returned fire, striking the alleged shooter. The suspect is James Von Brunn, who is said to be affiliated with white supremacist web sites.

Von Brunn and the guard were transported to George Washington Hospital. Von Brunn is in critical condition and the guard is in grave condition.

Federal law enforcement sources tell WTOP Von Brunn is a convicted felon. He had been convicted of bringing weapons into the Federal Reserve, and served time in a federal penitentiary.

Update on the shooting (CNN is on in the other room):
 
They're looking at an 88 year old man as the suspect. Connections to white supremacist groups, and other such organizations. He's in critical condition at the hospital. Shot by security guards. The police are not confirming his identity as of yet.
 
No name on the security guard, who is also at the hospital, and was described in a press conference, just now, by the mayor as being in grave condition.
 
FBI and D.C. police are working together on a joint investigation of the incident, though it is currently believed that it was the act of a lone gunman. His residence will probably be investigated this afternoon and into the night, his residence is on the Northern shores of Maryland.
 
———————————

Just some basic info I got from watching live coverage on CNN. 

On the morning drive-in news I heard that two people on the downed plane were on a no-fly list. haven't read that anywhere else yet.

Edit. found more.

 oldslabsides wrote: 

Ah, but you see, the theory that if more law-abiding citizens had guns, people would not be so quick to commit crimes is discredited by this incident. The museum has numerous armed guards patrolling it — more than the norm, because of the nature of the museum. 

Apparently, that (and the distinct possibility of being caught, prosecuted, and imprisoned) is not a sufficient deterrence.  

 steeler wrote: 

What?  How could this have happened?  Aren't guns illegal in The District?

 steeler wrote: 
Perhaps it was more to allow all the personnel into the area in a timely manner to handle the situation?

 newwavegurly wrote: 

Yep, that's what I am hearing. Strange that they locked down other buildings.  We're on the other side of the Mall from the Holocaust Museum.