Blog For Arizona

Border bust: Barking dog earns her kibble (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

When my dogs race out the doggie door at night and start barking at passers-by, I figure they're just doing their job--warning ne'er-do-wells to move along and not linger by my gate. After all, there are plenty of seedy characters wandering the dimly-lit streets of midtown and downtown Tucson at night. If you live near the US-Mexico border, the seedy characters your barking dog encounters could be much more dangerous than drunken students, hookers, or small-time dope dealers.

After the jump, watch what this Bisbee dog found outside of her fence.

Life and death on the border (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Loneprotestor has done it again. Check out her poignant video about recent deaths along the US/Mexico-- in honor of the Day of the Dead.

Eight days after Border Patrol agent Nicholas Ivie was killed by friendly fire on the U.S.- Mexican border, a sixteen year-old boy was shot seven times through the border fence by a Border Patrol agent. Yet - in spite of involving the murder of a child across international lines - one incident received national attention for weeks, but the other was largely unknown except in the town where it happened. On November 2, the Mexican Dia de los Muertos, both sides of the border in Nogales, Arizona, walked to honor Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez and the sixteen others killed by Border Patrol in the last three years, and called for an end to Border Patrol immunity.

Video after the jump.

Prosecuting Abortion

By Michael Bryan

I have had a few thoughts about the idea and practicality of criminalizing and prosecuting abortion, as the GOP seems intent on doing recently. But, wow, this prosecutor discusses it more thoroughly and passionately than I could. Go read it. Here's a few samples:

This is what happens when we start second-guessing reproductive health decisions being made by pregnant girls and women. We wade into a thicket where, suddenly, lawyers and judges and police officers are making decisions that we are so incredibly ill-equipped to make. Where people like me end up telling pregnant women, “hey, what happened to you wasn’t horrifying enough for ME to allow YOU to terminate this pregnancy. Sorry. But remember, this is all part of God’s plan for you.”

...

So, personhood for a cluster of cells means that abortion could equal aggravated murder. Really, do Republicans want us prosecuting girls and women for the aggravated homicide of their zygotes? Is that the plan here? Do they actually want to impose the death penalty, or will life in prison be sufficient to satisfy their pathological need to punish women for the crime of being sexually active? Of course, if the woman is guilty, so is the man who facilitates her in procuring an abortion – boys, if you take your girlfriend to Planned Parenthood for an abortion, we’re going to imprison you both for murder. It’s called a “conspiracy.” In case you were wondering.

...

And all of this chatter and talk is offensive, it is demeaning, it is patronizing, and it is unconscionable. As someone who has worked with rape victims – including some who were pregnant, some who were children, and some who were pregnant children – for over a decade, I would strongly suggest that you all think a little harder about what you really want here and about what you are really proposing.



Amen.

I would just add one comment on the subject. The State should not be in the business of prosecuting people based on religious law. There is no secular consensus about the ethical or medical status of a foetus prior to viability outside of the mother's womb. Abortion activists want to shape the civil law to fit their purely religious conviction (which is of fairly recent vintage, btw) that a foetus, even a zygote, is a full human being with a 'soul', deserving of the same rights and protections as any other person.

Conservatives have a buzz-word for the practice of enforcing religious dogma by the state: Sharia Law. 'Personhood' laws, anti-abortion laws, and contraceptive bans are Christian Sharia Law, plain and simple. The religious right doesn't like Sharia Law because they don't like Islam. I don't like Sharia Law (of any religion) because I believe America is established as a purely secular state. In America, no religion gets to enforce it's dogma through the coersive power of the state.

I find it offensive and unacceptable, and down-right un-American, to prosecute someone criminally for violating someone else's religious convictions. Such use of civil law violates the establishment clause, in my view. The State cannot criminalize abortion or other reproductive technologies, in my view, without establishing de facto a particular religious conviction as the official state religion.

Only after a foetus is viable does the State have any rational, secular interest in relgulating or restricting abortion - that is fundamental holding of Roe v. Wade. There is no rational basis for the abortion and contraceptive laws conservatives want to enforce, other than enforcing their own narrow religious dogma on the rest of us.

Tucson Progressive Film Festival: 6 films: 3 days: $15

Progressive Democrats of America Tucson Chapter is teaming up with Tucson MoveOn.org and The Screening Room to host a weekend of progressive films, this weekend, October 26-28.

Six films on wide-ranging topics from the Koch Brothers to urban farming will be aired. You can come to one film or buy a weekend pass for only $15-- cheaper than Net Flix!

Prices: $8/film, $10/ individual day pass, $15/entire festival. You can buy tickets at the box office before the shows or buy day passes and festival passes via Pay Pal by going to the PDA Tucson website and clicking the "Buy Now" link in the right column. Be sure to bring your Pay Pal receipt to The Screen Room as your ticket for admission.

http://pdatucson.blogspot.com/

Friday, Oct. 26, 6:30 
Former State Senator and PDA Tucson Chair Phil Lopes will introduce the Festival and welcome everyone

Friday, 7 p.m.
Heist: Who Stole the American Dream 
followed by a discussion led by filmmaker Frances Causey
http://www.heist-themovie.com/index.html

Saturday, October 27, 3 p.m. 
Urban Roots (the Greening of Detroit)
followed by a discussion led by Tucson urban gardeners and a representative from the Community Food Bank

Saturday, 7 p.m. 
Koch Brothers Exposed, 
http://www.kochbrothersexposed.com/

Sunday, Oct. 28, 1:30 p.m. 
Cyanide Beach
followed by a discussion led by filmmaker John Dougherty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPuxQkHzMJ0

Sunday, 2:45 p.m.
Vote
followed by a discussion led by State Senator Paula Aboud

Sunday, 4 p.m.
Laramie Inside Out
followed by discussion led by filmmaker Beverly Seckinger
http://laramieinsideout.com/

Maricopa County election fraud: Two official documents give Spanish speakers wrong election date (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Those pesky typos! (Yeah, right.)

The Maricopa County Elections Department has admitted to a second instance of voter suppression... er... poor proofreading. You'll remember that last week ABC 15 and Blog for Arizona reported that Spanish speaking voters were given the wrong date for the election on a document that was included with new voter registration cards.

This week, the elections department says that a bookmark with election details gives English speakers the correct date for the election (Nov. 6) but gives Spanish speakers Nov. 8 as election day.

Giving groups that you don't want to vote the wrong date is a tried and true voter suppression tactic. I didn't believe the first instance was a mistake; giving Latinos the wrong date twice is definitely not a typo oopsy. Seriously, how dumb could they be? Or how dumb do they think the rest of us are?

The Maricopa County Elections Department should be investigated by the feds-- now.

Here's the story from ABC Channel 15...

PHOENIX - A spokesperson for the Maricopa County Elections Department admits they once again gave voters the wrong date of next month's election.

Yvonne Reed confirms to ABC15 that bookmarks distributed by the elections department incorrectly listed the date of the general election in Spanish as November 8.

The flip side of the bookmark correctly lists the date in English as November 6.

Reed tells ABC15 the bookmarks were distributed at the three election counters throughout Maricopa County and that the department has no way of knowing exactly how many people received the bookmarks.

Randy Parraz, President of Citizens For A Better Arizona, says the blame lies squarely with Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell.

"It shows she's incompetent and not qualified," said Parraz.

For the rest of the story, go to ABC 15 here.

What's really tragic about this suppression of Spanish speaking voters is that there have been gargantuan efforts to get out the Latino vote. This is an important election for all of us, but for Latinos in Maricopa County, it is there best chance in years to oust renegade Sheriff Joe Arpaio. 

Check out the Adios Arpaio video by Phoenix videographer Dennis Gilman after the jump.

Arpaio's deputy shoots and kills unarmed 19-year-old (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Unarmed teenager Trevon Martin is shot and killed in Florida, and the story goes around the world. 

On September 14, 2012, unarmed, 19-year-old Joel Smith is shot and killed in Guadalupe, Arizona by a Maricopa County sheriff's deputy, and the news doesn't even reach Tucson. WTF?

The Maricopa County Sheriff's Department is beyond corrupt. It will be a national disgrace that Sheriff Joe Arpaio is re-elected. How long will Maricopa County voters support a racist octogenarian who sweeps through neighborhoods and arrests brown people; who forces prisoners to live in the blasting heat in the Tent City Jail; who wastes taxpayer money pretending to be the border patrol while ignoring criminal cases; who allows his guards to torture and even kill prisoners? The sheriff's department should uphold the law, not break it with impunity.   

Wake up and do the right thing, Maricopa County.

Watch a video about the Joel Smith shooting by Dennis Gilman after the jump.

Saturday... Well... Weekend? Editorial August 11th, 2012

By Michael Bryan

I'd like to let you all know that Drinking Liberally will be meeting this week at the regular time and place (Wednesday, 6pm at The Shanty). This week our guest is... Me! I will be presenting the Propositions that will appear on this November's ballot (and a few that might not be...). We'll discuss the pros and cons (where such exists) and a have a few beers. For a preview, or if you can't make it, you can take a look at my 2012 Ballot Prop Guide.

I personally read almost every news source in Arizona - and keep up with national reaction to our politics, as well. I do it to bring you readers of BlogForArizona the Arizona Donkey Feed, which appears on our right-hand sidebar every day (you may also have the Feed emailed to you daily). Sometimes the avalanche of information available in our 24/7 news cycle can be overwhelming. I do generally succeed in keeping the Feed topically restricted to Arizona politics. But it is a lot of noise to sort through, so, I decided I might like to sit down once a week and take some time to look around, and try to get some perspective on the news.

This week, I chose to present an extended rumination on the Jared Loughner plea and the Arpaio trial. I sense some connections that might not be entirely obvious.

Read more after the click...

Code enforcement crackdown past due: Slumlord millionaires, part deux

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Exactly one month ago, I wrote a blog post trying to shame lazy landlords and trashy tenants and trying to push the City of Tucson into holding property owners accountable for illegal dumping. Apparently, slumlords are shameless bunch... but I perservere.

Instead of uploading another collection of trashy photos, I decided to focus on a case study-- the midtown property owned by Alice Reynolds-Jordan and Gregory Jordan, 4160 Old York Rd., Monkton, MD. Why the Jordans? Because their collection of duplexes in midtown were in my July 2 code violation article (photo below), and a month later, the trash pile not only still sits in the curb lawn, it's gotten bigger.

Alghough there have been several complaints to the city about this property, the original mattress is not only still there, but a couch and other pieces of furniture are now piled on top of and around the original couch (photo above). Also, often than not, there is junk furniture or just junk dumped illegally in the curb lawn in front of this property. My question to the city is: Why does it take SOOOOO LOOOONG to crackdown on repeat offenders like this?

The city has a graffiti reporting app to aid in rapid the reporting, clean-up, and tracking of graffiti. Why not a code enforcement app to report, clean-up and track illegal dumping? It could work the same way: concerned citizen snaps a digital photo and poof sends it to the city with the address and complaint.

Why don't we have this app? The only reason I can think of is that the graffiti app potentially catches "criminals" while the code enforcement app would catch businessmen who are relying on the inefficiency and glacial speed of the city to aid them in breaking the law. (The plot thickens.)

More after the jump.

Pearce Sets a New Bar for Offensiveness Among Arizona Politicians

By Michael Bryan

Pearce and his friend the mass murderer

Russell Pearce is a terrible human being. He should be condemned, and then shunned and ignored in our political life. If only he would shut the hell up, I would pleased to never have to mention him again.

In response to the horrific slaughter of innocents in Aurora, CO, Pearce shared the following insipid statement on his Facebook page:

"Lives were lost because of a bad man, not because he had a weapon, but because noone was prepared to stop it."

In Pearce's worldview, the problem Aurora highlights is not that a mad man had access to assault weapons and used them on his fellow citizens, but that those citizens weren't sufficiently armed and ready to meet the threat.

Yes, the killer was a bad man, but he had far more than just 'a weapon'. He had a fucking armoury. He had four guns with hundreds of rounds of ready ammunition. He had body armour from head to toe. His home was full of IEDs that required the evacuation of surrounding apartment buildings and are still being disarmed.

Consider how that night might have been different if that bad, mad man had not been able to arm and armour himself to the degree that he posed a lethal threat to the lives and safety of his fellow citizens - including the police. If he had not been able to legally aquire the assault weapons that allowed this unstable monster to mow down dozens of his fellow human beings in moments? If he had not been able to armour himself to a degree that he was effectively immune to any civilian weapon?

If this bad man had not been able to transform himself into a walking terminator, then perhaps Pearce would have a point, albeit an insensitive and boorish one. But to place the burden of self-protection on every citizen, when any mad man has the means and legal right to purchase equipment more suited to a war zone than a suburban movie theater, is to stack the deck against peaceful citizens and ensure that more innocents will be gunned down by ferociously armed-to-the-teeth mad murderers.

For Pearce to claim that this tragedy was not a result of the uniquely loose nature of America's gun laws, but to lack of weapons among those in the theater is absurd, stupid, and insulting - much like the man himself.

I do believe that responsible citizens should have the right to own and carry guns for hunting, sport, and self defense. But no American outside the armed forces or police has any need - nor should one have the legal right - to arm himself with the sort of equipment that makes one such a dire threat to public safety. 

Assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition systems have no place in the armoury of any citizen merely interested in defense of themselves and others, sport, or hunting. No private person going about their daily lives has a need for the sort of combat weapons to which this monster had legal access.

Allowing the sale of such equipment is an unacceptable threat to public safety, because the only possible use of such weaponry is the sort of mass slaughter we've far too frequently in our nation.

Or political terrorism. Or armed insurrection.

Given the proclivities and history of the reactionary right in this country, maybe that explains the real motive of the right-wing paranoids who would block any legislation that would protect our citizens from such weapons of slaughter.

News flash: Drugs declared winner in War on Drugs

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Pot-smoking hippie anti-war activists like the Chicago 7 and LSD-popping elitist Harvard medical school researchers like Timothy Leary gave poor, paranoid President Richard Nixon a hard time back in the late 1960s. As they sipped their highballs, the moral majority-- Nixon's base-- decried the nation's drug abuse.

What's a president to do? Nixon declared drug abuse "public enemy #1" and instituted a blue ribbon commission to investigate the country's obsession with mood-altering drugs-- particularly "marihuana" (sic)-- and make recommendations. Unfortunately, US National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse's recommendations were not what Nixon expected or wanted. From the Arizona Daily Star...

A year later, the commission released its recommendation: Congress should amend federal law to decriminalize the personal use and possession of cannabis and the casual distribution of small amounts for no or insignificant remuneration, and state legislatures should do the same.

They also found that marijuana didn't meet the criteria of a Schedule I controlled substance, which would make it, like heroin, an illegal substance lacking any medicinal value.

The commission concluded: "criminal law is too harsh a tool to apply to personal possession even in an effort to discourage use. … The actual and potential harm of use of the drug is not great enough to justify intrusion by the criminal law into private behavior." [Emphasis added.]

What?! I don't remember this. Oh, here's why... the commission's report was buried.

Since the report ran counter to his personal beliefs, Nixon refused to read it, shelved it, categorized marijuana as a Schedule I substance and declared an "all out war" on drugs. [Kinda sounds like what happened to the MAS evaluation report that Huppenthal didn't like.]

Since then, some 21.5 million Americans have been arrested and prosecuted for violation of laws against marijuana. More than 80 percent of those arrested were charged only with possession, not sale. The cost of Nixon's "war on drugs," which intensified under Reagan and continues to this day, now exceeds $1 trillion.

The war on drugs has failed. It has had no significant effect on the use and availability of drugs. [Emphasis added.]

For more on failed War on Drugs, how it came about, and how drug policy has evolved in the last 40 years, check out this eye-opening guest commentary in today's Arizona Daily Star.

Guest Column: Time is long past to acknowledge US has lost the war on drugs

When will we adopt the Shafer Commission's recommendations and end the War on Drugs?

City of Tucson should hold slumlord millionaires responsible for code violations

by Pamela Powers Hannley

I live in one of midtown Tucson's many mixed use, multi-generational, multi-income neighborhoods. Cute, old adobes from the 1930s are mixed together with urban in-fill duplexes from the 1950s and newer. 

Many of the brightly colored abodes have been restored and are every bit as unique and architecturally important as those in the better known historic neighborhoods. Unfortunately, the homes in my neighborhood are worth much less than comparable homes in Sam Hughes or West University because of the seedy rentals owned by slumlord millionaires, who don't care about anything except making money.

Much to her credit, my neighborhood president is ever-vigilant when it comes to code violations-- particularly junk furniture in the easement and high weeds/grass. Although she and others work tirelessly to keep the neighborhood clean and safe, it's an uphill battle because there are many repeat offenders-- absentee slumlords who allow weeds to grow uncontrolled and pile up couches, mattresses, and junk in the curb lawn (as pictured here) until the city-- at the request of the neighbors-- gets after them.

The drill is...

1. Citizen makes a formal complaint to the Code Enforcement Department.
2. Eventually they send someone out to verify there is indeed a couch in the right of way.
3. The city sends the property owner a letter saying they have 30 days to get rid of the couch. (This letter may go out anywhere from a week to a month after the initial citizen complaint.)
4. Two months or more after the complaint-- or the next bulky pick-up-- the couch disappears-- often because the city comes and picks it up.

The City of Tucson should stop babying these business owners and start holding them accountable for the state of their property. The rental in the top picture is on East Pima Street. When my intrepid neighborhood president wrote to Cynthia Gandy from Tierra Antigua Realty, this was the response.

Those properties have been vacant for many months My client purchased it as a foresclose and there was no furniture left behind He actually paid to have surrounding area cleaned Im sorry that someone is using it as a dumping area but it has nothing to do with us We don not even have a renter yet as my client has decided to do adt improvements prior to renting

Cynthia Gandy

Tierra Antigua Realty

520 544-2335 cell 520 870-9844

In others words, buzz off. Slumlords should be fined for these violations; I think $1000 would be a good starting point. Every time the city has to remove old furniture or junk (when it's not bulky pick-up time), the property owner should be billed-- and jailed if they don't pay the fine. Renting property is a business. Maintenance of the property is a legitimate business expense. Landlords routinely charge tenants a cleaning fee. There is no excuse for landlords to allow crap to pile up and leave it for the city to remove. Furthermore, I know for a fact that some Tucson slumlords hire undocumented workers to clean out, paint, and repair rentals. What a creative business model: charge tenants a cleaning fee, pay undocumented works sh*t wages to clean up the mess and drag the old furniture to the curb, and let the city carry away the trash for free. Hmmm...

It's time to hold slumlords accountable for the blight they have created.

Slumlord names after the jump.

Close down the Tent City Jail: Part Deux (video)

On Saturday, June 23, 2012, thousands of protesters from Puente Arizona, the Unitarian Universalist General Assembly, the United Church of Christ, and left-leaning activist groups held a rally and vigil at the infamous Maricopa County Tent City Jail-- while Phoenix Tea Party and militiamen held a counter rally.

Immigrant rights protesters, bathed in candle light, sang and listened to speeches about standing up to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his forces of hate-- while militiamen dressed in camouflage uniforms brandished their weapons and shouted angrily about their rights.  

Predictably, amateur videos and photos were uploaded as the scene unfolded, but for a more in-depth view of the demonstration, check out this video by Phoenix independent videographer Dennis Gillman, after the jump.

Mitt Romney Enjoyed Impersonating a Police Officer When Young

by Michael Bryan

OK. This is disturbingly weird. National Memo reports that Mitt Romney used to enjoy impersonating a police officer, with a full uniform provided by his daddy the Governor, to pull folks over and prank people. [hat tip to Donna at Democratic Diva]

See the video segment from MSNBC's Lawrence O’Donnell, which Donna refers to.

"So, what?" you might ask. Well, just consider for a moment how this story would play out if it were Barack Obama who enjoyed this particular brand of entertainment. As Donna pointed out in her post, the GOP would have a field day portraying Obama as some sort of dangerous, freakish menace to society. Obama would be indicted by now - statutes of limitation be damned.

What Romney was doing was a crime, and a serious one. One which is done to enable other serious crimes like robery, home invasion, rape, and even terrorism (Anders Breivik got himself and his weapons to the crime scene by impersonating an officer).

Now, there's no evidence that Romney was out victimizing people criminally with his little stunts, but we know he did pull off a really mean prank using his fake cop routine. And that's just what has come to light so far. How much longer before people in Wisconsin start remembering those bizzare incidents back in the mid-60s when they were pulled over by a handsome, oddly young-looking, officer in a white Rambler?

What really interests me about this behavior, however, is what it reveals of Romney's psychology. Dr. Naftali Berrill, a psychologist who runs the New York Center for Neuropsychology and Forensic Behavioral Science, says of police impersonators, "They feel a certain sense of powerlessness. They fantasize they'd have power and be respected if they were a cop, or they have the fantasy of being a hero."

Could Romney's fantasy role-playing be an eloborate power fantasy? What power fantasy could be more compelling for a young man who feels his own powerlessness acutely in the shadow of a very powerful father?

Romney is not the first Presidential wanna-be that struggled with the legacy of a powerful and accomplished father. George W. Bush comes to mind. Romney's father was a CEO of AMC, Governor of Wisconsin, and, before his odd comments about being "brain-washed" by the command staff in Vietnam, the leading contender for the GOP nomination for President in 1968 (coincidentally[?] around the time of Romney's police fantasies).

Was Romney's desire to feel the esteem and respect accorded an officer of the law so extreme he was willing to commit the crime of impersonating an officer to experience it? Is Romney so driven by the need to bolster his self-esteem that it has led him to out-do his father's accomplishments by succeeding wildly in business, become a Governor himself, actually capture the GOP nomination for President, and possibly the Presidency itself?

Could we avoid all of this just by getting Romney a uniform with a POTUS seal on the sleeves, giving him some sort of ginned up POTUS badge, and letting him go around impersonating a President?

 

Stand Your Ground in Arizona

By Michael Bryan

If you aren't living under a rock, you are familiar with the killing of Treyvon Martin by George Zimmerman, and the controversy over Zimmerman's arrest and prosecution for the killing due to Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law.

You may not be aware that the geniuses of the Arizona legislature also created a "Stand Your Ground" law here in Arizona in 2006:

13-418. Justification; use of force in defense of residential structure or occupied vehicles; definitions

A. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, a person is justified in threatening to use or using physical force or deadly physical force against another person if the person reasonably believes himself or another person to be in imminent peril of death or serious physical injury and the person against whom the physical force or deadly physical force is threatened or used was in the process of unlawfully or forcefully entering, or had unlawfully or forcefully entered, a residential structure or occupied vehicle, or had removed or was attempting to remove another person against the other person's will from the residential structure or occupied vehicle.

B. A person has no duty to retreat before threatening or using physical force or deadly physical force pursuant to this section.

C. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Residential structure" has the same meaning prescribed in section 13-1501.

2. "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, that is designed to transport persons or property.

Brilliant stuff. It is, however, marginally more sane - and certainly more limited - than Florida's law. At least Arizona's law only eliminates a duty to retreat in the context of a residence or an occupied vehicle. Florida's law does not limit the circumstances, except a person needs to believe they are in danger of death or great bodily harm.

Just because our law is less stupid doesn't mean that Arizona's law hasn't caused tragedy. For at least one Arizona family, it already has.

On April 3rd of this year (more coverage, and TV news report on YouTube), a mentally disabled man, Daniel Atkins, Jr., was walking his dog in Phoenix when he was shot dead at the drive-thru window of a Taco Bell by Cordell Jude, who was in his vehicle with his pregnant girlfriend.

This the story from Jude's statements and the police report:

Jude had to brake fast in order to avoid hitting Adkins, he told police.

"Watch it!" he said Adkins yelled and added an obscenity. Adkins then moved to the driver's side door and swung an object that Jude describes in the police report as a bat or pipe. Jude's girlfriend also told police that Adkins swung what looked like a bat or a pipe . Nothing hit Jude or the car, the report says.

Jude then pulled his Smith and Wesson .40-caliber handgun from where he carried it — inside his sweatpants on his right hip, the police report says.

"Holding the gun in his right hand, with the barrel pointed toward Adkins, Jude racked the slide of the gun, loading a round into its chamber," the report says. "Jude stated that as Adkins raised an arm as if to swing at him again, Jude shot him once in the torso."

Adkins died, holding his dog's colorful green leash, in his right hand. The officers who responded to the scene found the dog still at his side. They did not find a pipe, bat or other weapon.

Jude said he didn't drive away from the confrontation because the dog was in the way. He told police he feared for his life and the lives of his girlfriend and their unborn baby. In response to a follow-up question by investigators, Jude said he did not think Adkins would have killed them, but he thought Adkins was trying to hurt him.

Jude has not been charged in the case, but the police report suggests that 2nd degree murder charges would be warranted. The case remains under investigation.

Without the Arizona "Stand Your Ground" law, there would be no question that Jude's shooting of Adkins was unjustifiable as self-defense. Because Jude was in his vehicle, however, he had no duty to retreat before what he percieved as serious force. Ultimately, he may be changed, and he may be found not to have been justified in shooting Adkins, but that is small comfort to the parents of Dan Adkins, whose son was shot dead holding nothing but a dog leash by a trigger-happy motorist protected by an absurd Arizona statute, who remains free.