Book Review 51: The Traveler

In the eighteenth century the British philosopher Jeremy Bentham designed the Panopticon: a model prison where one observer could monitor hundreds of prisoners while remaining unseen. The Brethren used the Panopticon prison design as a theoretical basis for their ideas. They believed that it would be possible to control the entire world as soon as the Travelers were exterminated.

Page 92

Remember the Panopticon? The model works perfectly if all humanity lives inside the building. It doesn't work if one individual can open a door and stand outside the system.

Page 236

The Traveler by John Twelve Hawks is a compelling book that I couldn't put down. I constantly wanted to know what was going to happen next. It succeeds based on powerful story telling, if not fantastic writing.

By that I mean the writing style is not the strongest. The author's style comes across as immature at times and too heavy handed with his message. At the same time, for every moment I rolled my eyes, thinking, "He did not just write that, did he?" there were 5 or more moments when I was excited to keep reading.

An impressive website also supports the book. Fans of The Traveler will who want to explore the world of the book and the issues it raises can spend time at th website and dive into the six different realms.

Characters in The Traveler fall into several groups -- Travelers, Harlequins, Pathfinders, Brethren (or Tabula), Citizens, and Drones, among others.

Travelers are people a that can let their spirit (or "Light") break free from their bodies and this world, and travel to other realms (based on Tibethian Buddhist mythology). All great prophets, or agents of change, have been Travelers. Their passion and alternate world views are inspired by their experiences in other realms.

Harlequins are an ancient order of warriors who are sworn to protect the Travelers and keep them safe from the Brethren. They are raised as fighters from the time they are small children. While they have tremendous discipline, they thrive in an atmosphere of chaos. In goal, philosophy, and tactics, they are the opposite of the Brethren.

At the bus stop, Maya was presented with more choices. She could walk to her hotel or wave down a cruising taxi. The legendary Japanese Harlequin, Sparrow, once wrote that true warriors should cultivate randomness." In a few words, he had suggested an entire philosophy. A Harlequin rejected mindless routines and comfortable habits. You lived a life of discipline, but you weren't afraid of disorder.

Page 10


"She accepts the possibility of death and it doesn't seem to frighten her. That's a big advantage for a warrior."

Page 202

When offered two options, Harlequins may often to a coin flip, or use a random number generator, to make the decisions for them.

Pathfinders teach Travelers how to travel.

The Brethren are "the man." They seek order and control of the populace above all else. They are the established order -- the vast machine we all live in. They aim to stamp out the unexpected.

It annoyed Boone that people still refused to recognize the truth. There was no need to worry about religion or philosophy; the truth was determined by whoever was in power.

Page 180

Citizens and Drones are the general populace.

"Drones are people who are so overwhelmed by the challenge of surviving that they're unaware of anything outside of their day-to-day lives."

''You mean poor people?"

"They can be poor or trapped in the Third World, but they're still capable of transforming themselves. Father used to say, 'Citizens ignore the truth. Drones are just too tired.' "

Page 9

The book is about the choices people make. Do they choose to go on auto-pilot and become mindless consumers of culture and products? Or do they choose to question the rules of civilization and make deliberate choices about what they want to do and to choose their own destinies?

Vicki sat in the front seat of the van and looked out at the parking lot while Maya searched for another Harlequin. Citizens came out of the warehouse store with extra-large shopping baskets piled high with food, clothing, and electronic equipment. The baskets were heavy with all these things, and the citizens had to lean forward to push them to their cars. Vicki remembered reading in high school about Sisyphus, the Greek king doomed forever to push a stone up a mountain.

Page 164

Hollis paused and stared at the students sitting in front of him. He seemed to be evaluating their strengths and weaknesses. "In New Babylon, many of the people you know think they're being deliberate when they're just on automatic. Like a bunch of robots, they drive their car down the freeway, go to work, get a paycheck in exchange for sweat and pain and humiliation, then drive back home to listen to fake laughter coming from the television set. They're already dead. Or dying. But they don't know it.

"Then there's another group of people—the party boys and girls. Smoke some weed. Drink some malt liquor. Try to hook up for a little quick sex. They think they're connecting with their instincts, their natural power, but you know what? They're on automatic, too.

"The warrior is different. The warrior uses the power of the brain to be deliberate and the power of the heart to be instinctive. Warriors are never automatic except when they're brushing their teeth."

Hoilis paused and spread his hands. "Try to think. Feel. Be real." He clapped his hands together "That's all for today."

page 167 - 168

This all happens against the back drop of our own modern culture, and the author uses the story as a cautionary tale about the increasing surveilance we are already under in real life. From data mining to credit card transactions to security cameras popping up all over the place, the world the author writes about really is our world.

Panopticon is the Brethren's approach to controlling the world. It's based on a prison design by Jeremy Bentham. The prison was designed in such a way that inmates could not see one another, the inmates could not see the guard, and that from one place, a single guard could watch hundreds of inmates.

It's a concept Matt Ruff also used in his book, "Bad Monkees."

Since the inmates could not see they guards, they could never be sure exactly when they were being watched. Essentially, the guards did not even have to be there the whole time, since the inmates would never know when the were unguarded. It was a model of efficiency.

The Brethren embrace panopticon to monitor the citizenry. They can use electronics, police, guards, airport security, and suspicious neighbors to monitor people. The all-seeing system gives them power.

Even in Las Vegas.

For most people Las Vegas was a happy destination, where you could drink too much and gamble and watch strange women take off their clothes. But this city of pleasure was a three-dimensional illusion. Surveillance cameras watched constantly, computers monitored the gambling, and a legion of security guards with American flags sewn on the sleeves of their uniforms made sure nothing truly unusual would ever occur. This was the goal of the Tabula: the appearance of freedom with the reality of control.

Page 356-357

The author himself lives of the grid. John Twelve Hawks is a name he adopted for himself, and he does his best to live in relative anonymity.

The "Realty of Control" the Brethren wants is really only possible with the consent, or, rather, lack of dissent from those being controlled. Like the prisoners in Benthem's design, once people reject the "appearance" of being guarded, and choose to look at things differently,then they can begin reclaiming their freedom.

"Everything got worse after that. There were hundreds of police officers at the Washington airport because of some kind of special alert. I got searched twice passing through security and then I saw a man have a heart attack in the waiting lounge. My plane was delayed six hours. I spent my time drinking and staring at a television in the airport bar. More death and destruction. Crime. Pollution. All the news stories were telling me to be frightened. All the commercials were telling me to buy things that I didn't need. The message was that people could only be passive victims or consumers.

Page 306

The story itself follows the path of two brothers -- potential Travelers as they choose their paths in this world. Maya, the Harlequin, is dispatched to LA to protect them, if they are, indeed, able to Travel to the different realms. She is there to protect them from the Brethren, which wants the potential Travelers for their own purposes.

Each side elicits allies and fights for its cause. We hear about the current battles, and we hear about the battles that played out over the decades.

At time the book is brutally violent.

Interestingly enough, the orderly, controlled group -- the Brethren -- is the most chaotically violent. They use all sorts of tools to fight viciously -- from private armies to gangsters to rape to genetically engineered animals, bred to eat defenseless or defeated victims alive.

The Harlequins -- the force of randomness -- fight with strict discipline. They aren't afraid to kill their enemies, but they are not killing them gleefully. It's about efficiently protecting themselves and their charges.

The aspects of life that the Harlequins and the Brethren are most afraid of, are embodied in their own fighting styles.

After all this, the book is really about choice. It's about people finally having the opportunity to make a deliberate decision about what they want to do with their lives. And when presented with question -- that fundamental decision that defines who they are as a person, what decisions do they make?

"Every new experience is unusual. The rest of life is just sleep and committee meetings. Now come along and shut the door behind you."

Page 34

"I've organized sweat lodge weekends for divorced men and women. After two days of sweating and pounding a drum, people decide they don't hate their ex-spouse anymore." Thomas smiled and gestured with his hands. "It's not a big thing, but it helps the world. All of us fight a battle every day, but we just don't know it. Love tries to defeat hatred. Bravery destroys fear.

Page 151


Vicki stood between her mother and the Harlequin. So much of her life had seemed hazy and vague until that moment, like an out-of-focus photograph in which blurry figures ran away from the camera. But now, right now, she had a real choice in her life. Walking is easy, said the Prophet. But it requires faith to find the right path.

Page 162

The Traveler is definitely one I suggest reading. It raises important questions that it might not be too late to answer. Besides the subtext, the story itself is fantastic. And, while the writing appears juvenile at time, the author's story telling skills make this an excellent read.

You can find more of my Book Reviews here.

CA Supreme Court gets is right

As I wrapped up my work day, I heard the helicopters hovering over my building. They were there to cover the pro-gay marriage protests in downtown Seattle. More than 200 protesters showed up to express their, quite understandable, anger with the California Supreme Court.

However, it seems the court in CA did the right thing.

First, let me say that I do favor equal marriage/civil union rights for same sex and opposite sex couples (actually, I favor civil unions for both, and getting the state out of the marriage business, but that's another post altogether).

Of course, I am not a lawyer, so there may be something escaping me here, but this was not a ruling on gay marriage. This ruling answered the question, "Can a state constitutional amendment be unconstitutional under the state constitution?" And the answer is no.

The role of the state supreme court is essentially to decide whether or not a law or amendment is allowed by the constitution. When you change the constitution, you end up with a new set of rules to apply. And that's what happened with Proposition 8.

Essentially, if you follow the proper procedure to change the state constitution, that new amendment is by virtue of its nature constitutional.

The problem here is that it was too easy to change the state constitution.

A constitution is such an important document that changes to it should require an extremely high burden, to help insulate it from political fads. When a state governs by Citizens' Initiative as California does, you are going to have all sort of problems.

The US Constitution is much harder to amend, and that's important. It takes the approval of 3/4 of the states, among other requirements, to make changes. California didn't require approval of 3/4 of its counties; it required just a popular vote of 50% + 1 vote. And that's the problem.

Some have argued, "Does that mean the state can amend the constitution to ban Mormons or ban interracial marriage?"

The answer is yes. The state can do that -- in theory.

The difference here is that those changes would conflict with the US Constitution. And the US Constitution would trump the changes to the CA state constitution.

At this point, the US Constitution is silent on the matter of gay marriage. And that's why the people of CA can legally enshrine this discriminatory policy in the highest law of the state of CA.

Some people are making arguments that the equal protection clause of the US Constitution may be used to over turn CA Proposition 8. It will be interesting to see how that argument develops.

In the mean time, it seems the best avenue available to advocates of marriage equality in CA is to get another amendment on the ballot to overturn the Proposition 8 amendment. And then someone, please, fix this amendment/initiative process.

And when you're done fixing the initiative process in CA, how about helping us fix it in WA, too?

Probable cause? We don't need no steenkin' probable cause.

What happens if you buy grow lamps and use them in Odessa, TX? Apparently the police will raid your house.

Activists protesting the behavior of the Odessa police department did just that. The bought grow lights and began growing Christmas trees. In 24 hours, police raided the house.

So using perfectly legal equipment in the manner exactly for which it was intended, is reason enough for the police to raid your house.

The site where the story originally appeared is currently off line due to high traffic; it may be accessible later one. It's here. You can also read about it on Reason.Com here.

Keep in mind, this sort of thing doesn't just happen when someone sets up a sting. It happened in Pullman, WA, too.

The Presidency has limits

On Thursday morning, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in BOUMEDIENE ET AL. v. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL. and in doing so restored one of them most precious rights to the country.

Petitioners are aliens detained at Guantanamo after being captured in Afghanistan or elsewhere abroad and designated enemy combatants by CSRTs. Denying membership in the al Qaeda terrorist network that carried out the September 11 attacks and the Tali-ban regime that supported al Qaeda, each petitioner sought a writ of habeas corpus in the District Court, which ordered the cases dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because Guantanamo is outside sovereign U. S. territory. The D. C. Circuit affirmed, but this Court reversed,holding that 28 U. S. C. §2241 extended statutory habeas jurisdiction to Guantanamo.

This is good news for all of us, not just those out to harm the US as some commentators claim. The decision essentially over turns key parts of the Military Commissions act of 2006, which said in part:

(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.

What sometimes gets lost with the phrase Habeas Corpus and assorted Latin terms is what this actually means. Essentially the right of Habeas Corpus means that someone who is arrested gets to go before a judge to challenge that arrest.

Without that right, the President can imprison anyone forever -- not trial, no testimony, no evidence. It's entirely at the executive's whim.

Now many will say that wasn't true. In fact the act above says it only applies to an enemy combatant.

The problem is there was no review.

So say for example, an natural born US citizen says something the President doesn't like. Maybe that person tells jokes on TV or perhaps just blogs occasionally about politics. Or maybe they painted their house an offensive color. It doesn't really matter what they did.

If the President got upset, he could have declared that person a non-citizen enemy combatant and locked them up in Guantanamo. Before this new ruling, that person would be there until the administration changed it's mind.

Some might say this is impossible because the person clearly is not an enemy combatant and is absolutely a US citizen. They can't be detained.

The problem is that without Habeas Corpus, there is no way for that citizen to make that argument. They can't go to court to challenge that detention. They are detained because the President said so and there is no way to object to that. Without Habeas Corpus there is no way to challenge an error by the administration or to challenge wrong doing by the administration.

This is why the ruling was so critical. Independent judicial review is essential to the survival of our country. The long history of separation of powers is what keeps us from turning into Zimbabwe. Our President shouldn't be allowed to arbitrarily detain anyone he chooses without independent review.

I'm not saying that President Bush used this power in an aritrary way like the examples is used above. What is terribly frightening is that he could have. He could have thrown Scott McClellan, Cindy Sheehan, Nancy Pelosi, Al Franken, or anyone else in prison with no judicial review.

That is a a power no President should ever have.

Cops on camera

Three former Seattle police officers are developing a small video camera that can record interactions between police and the public. It's the size of a pager and can easily be worn on the uniform.

Keeping an eye on cops

As leaders in Seattle and elsewhere call for stronger police accountability, three former Seattle officers hope to cash in on that movement with an action cam for police.

...

The camera is lightweight, about the size of a pager, and waterproof -- the latter feature being something that officers on Seattle's rainy beat know is paramount, said Chris Myers, who ended his 18-year police career in January to join VIEVU.

The PVR-LE easily clips onto an officer's lapel or belt. The 4-gigabyte hard drive records up to four hours of video.

If someone accuses an officer of wrongdoing, the camera should reveal the truth. Or, maybe it could help bolster a case if it records a drunken driver slurring through obscenities, its developers say.

...

As patrol car cameras became more common in 2004, the International Association of Chiefs of Police sponsored a study that found 93 percent of police-misconduct cases in which video is available result in the officer's exoneration.

Cameras also serve as a deterrent. Fifty-one percent of residents acknowledged that they would be more watchful of their own behavior if an officer warned them in advance that they were being recorded.

"People act differently on camera. If a police officer comes up to you and says, 'This is being recorded,' you're likely to be much more congenial," Ward said.

...More

This is a great great tool. It should help the public feel more comfortable that their police are acting professionally, make it easier to get rid of the few bad police officers that are out there, and make it easier to resolve questions of excessive force.

The interesting thing about the device is that there is nothing inherently police-y about it. It's a simple 4GB video camera that apparently can run for quite a while. I see no reason why civilians couldn't wear these as well.

And that's where things get really fascinating. Besides the Borg implications (it's not actually part of our biology -- yet) the documentary possibilities are endless.

Right now the decision to put security cameras up around NYC is controversial. Imagine what happens when a significant number of people start sporting their own security cameras as they walk around the town.

All it takes is a simple wireless connection to a cell phone and all of someone's activities can stream live on to the internet.

With this new product, we are not far from that point.

You can be arrested for bad thoughts

An Oak Creek High School teacher has been arrested after authorities said he posted comments online in a debate about teacher salaries, saying the Columbine High School shooters were heroes.

James Buss, 46, of Cudahy, was arrested Thursday by West Bend police and released after posting $300 bail. He has been suspended from his job. He could face criminal charges.

...More

Could face criminal charges for posting offensive comments? Do we arrest people now just because they might at some point have to face criminal charges?

And those criminal charges would be related to offensive comments?

Outrages like this are becoming more common. While Buss's comments may have been inappropriate, arresting someone for praising criminals is fundamentally wrong and is more offensive than his praise of the Columbine killers.

We have to protect offensive speech. That's why we have the first amendment. Those protections were added to our most important national document to protect the unpopular and offensive. Popular and politically correct speech doesn't need protection. The unpopular statements need to be protected.

Buss deserves a large settlement from the department that had him arrested. Elected officials who approve the arrest of people who simply post their thoughts on line need to be recalled or voted out of office.

I'm afraid it won't be long before something like this would be considered subversive and arrestable:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Marriage Vs Civil Unions

This article popped up on Fark today:

The church had long welcomed members of all sexual orientations—they had even bucked local Lutheran leadership and ordained a lesbian pastor. But McGowan, a straight man, nonetheless saw a subtle form of discrimination. If the church couldn't legally marry gay couples, he argued, it shouldn't marry straight ones either.

...More

Basically, some churches are refusing to perform civil marriage ceremonies for heterosexual couples because they aren't allowed to perform civil marriage ceremonies for homosexual couples. They will still hold the wedding ceremony for either type of couple, but if a couple wants their marriage recognized by the state, then they have to go to the judge or whomever, and get married there, too.

This is a good idea. And it makes sense to reinforce the separation of church and state in this manner.

I support civil unions. Some may argue this is still discriminatory against homosexual couples because it's not the same as an actual marriage -- it's marriage lite.

But the state shouldn't be marrying heterosexuals either. A civil union is a more appropriate realm for state involvement regardless of the genders involved.

A state issued civil union should have all the legal trappings of traditional state recognized marriage:

• Tax consequences
• Hospital visitation rights
• Insurance access
• Inheritance privileges
• etc.

A civil union allows two people to choose their own relative for important decisions like this. And people should be allowed to choose their designated partner for these legal issues.

Marriage, however, should be different. If marriage is about two souls coming together as one, or about the embodiment of a loving commitment, or about the sanctification of a relationship, that's great. But it's none of the state's business.

The sanctification and blessing of the relationship has spiritual and religious significance. The elevation or salvation of the soul is the proper role for the church. It is not the proper role for the state.

Religious organizations should have the freedom to define for themselves who they will allow to marry, just as they have the freedom to define their other creeds.

It's time to recognize that civil unions and marriage are two separate things with different meanings.

Civil unions are the proper province of the state. And the state should not restrict who can partner with whom. Many couples who form civil unions will also have an actual church sanctioned wedding and marriage. But many will not.

Marriage is the province of the church. And a chruch marriage should be a different process from a civil union. While the vast majority of people who get married by their church will also form a civil union, it's important to keep the process distinct.

In short, the state shouldn't ban or allow gay marriage. It shouldn't ban or allow heterosexual marriage. The state should allow any two people to form a civil union, and should stay out of the sanctification and blessing business altogether.

Copyrighting a skyline?

The Marina Towers are those two iconic round building on Chicago's riverfront. The Marina Towers Condominium Association apparently thinks copyright law means no one can sell a picture of its building without the association's consent.

This author, a photographer, explains how it is very wrong.

There are also links on the page to updates and legal responses concerning the issue.

While these initiatives are unlikely to be held up in court, they are frightening. The ability to take pictures in public, of things and people in public, is vital to the protection of our civil liberties.

While pictures of these two buildings may not matter much, the principle does.

This is just disgusting

Oct. 15 (Bloomberg) -- Three of the largest U.S. telephone companies declined to answer lawmakers' questions about Bush administration efforts to spy on Americans' phone calls and e- mails, saying the government forbade them from doing so.

...More

If You See and Adult Holding a Child's Hand...

...he must be a pedophile.

At least in Virginia. And you should report him to the authorities.

That seems to be the message behind this recent ad campaign to raise awarenes.

You can read more about this campaign here.

And you can read one Blogger's view on this here.

There is also an extensive Fark discussion here.

Remember how that smoking ban was going to force all those bars and restaurants out of business?

Yeah. Not so much.

Eateries, bars doing fine after smoking ban

P-I NEWS SERVICES

OLYMPIA -- Gambling declined while beer and food sales rose slightly in bars, restaurants and gambling establishments across Washington last year, the first full year under a smoking ban, state figures indicate.

Alcohol and food sales were 3.6 percent higher in 2006, compared to a 2.1 percent average annual growth rate in 2002-05. Gross income at non-tribal gambling businesses was down by 9.8 percent in 2006, according to Revenue Department figures issued Monday.

"The numbers suggest that bars and taverns may have lost some smokers but gained customers drawn to a smoke-free environment," department spokesman Mike Gowrylow said.

... More

Amero to get New Trial

Back in January, I posted the story about Julie Amero, a substitute teacher and novice computer user who was being railroaded into a potential 40 year prison sentence by the state of CT over some pornographic images that appeared on her classroom computer.

Her conviction and sentence appeared to have more to do with a school district trying to cover up its own technological incompetence and officials determined to appear tough on pedophiles, regardless of whether or not there are any actual pedophiles involved in the case.

It looks like cooler heads have prevailed in swell of fierce push back from the Internet community and the public at large.

From the Seattle PI:

Teacher gets new trial on classroom porn
By STEPHANIE REITZ
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

NEW LONDON, Conn. -- A judge granted a new trial Wednesday for a former substitute teacher convicted of allowing students to view pornography on a classroom computer.

Prosecutors did not oppose the defense motion for a new trial for Julie Amero, 40, who had faced up to 40 years in prison after her January conviction. Prosecutors had argued that Amero visited the sites, then failed to shield children from seeing the images.

The computer was sent to a state laboratory after the trial, and the judge said Wednesday that those findings may contradict evidence presented by the state computer expert.

"The jury may have relied, at least in part, on that faulty information," said Judge Hillary B. Strackbein, who granted the request for a new trial.

... More

Based on what I've read of this case, the prosecutor should just drop the ridiculous charges altogether. But for now, not opposing the new trial is at least a start.

The Gender Pay Gap

Steve Chapman writes an intersting article about the gender gap in pay.

New Year's Day is called that because it begins a new year, and Thanksgiving has that name because it's an occasion for expressing gratitude. But Equal Pay Day, observed this year on April 24, is named for something that, we are told, doesn't exist -- equal pay for men and women.

The National Committee on Pay Equity used the occasion to announce that among full-time workers, women make only 77 cents for every dollar paid to men. The three leading Democratic presidential candidates have all endorsed legislation to fix the problem.

...
In reality, that's not clear at all. What we know from an array of evidence, including this report, is that most if not all of the discrepancy can be traced to factors other than sexism. When it comes to pay equity, we really have come a long way.

...more

Link originally found on Fark.com.

Remember When the Constitution Meant Something? No?

A crime in progress?

Did you know that owning a grow light now means the police can come into your home?

Friday, April 6, 2007 · Last updated 12:45 p.m. PT

Police bust tomato grow operation in Pullman apartment
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

PULLMAN, Wash. -- A Pullman landlord notified police about a grow lamp in a closet, and police got a search warrant for a drug raid.

Eight officers with guns drawn surprised three roommates in the apartment last weekend and discovered they were growing tomatoes.

Commander Chris Tennant says it's the department's duty to investigate all credible complaints regarding marijuana growing operations in Pullman.

(From Rory Curtiss, KRPL)

There is so much wrong with what happened here.

Unless the landlord was repairing something in the closet, he has no business going in the closet.

The landlord reported the tenants have a grow light and a plant, and that was enough for a judge to issue a search warrant? Why even bother with judicial review of search warrants if this is all it takes.

They sent 8 cops into the apartment with guns drawn. There are roughly 27 patrol members employed by the Pullman police department. Now, assuming they have 1/3 of the officers on the clock at any given time, that means there were probably 9 officers covering the city the day of this raid. 8 were assigned to this ridiculous raid.

Nearly every cop on patrol was sent to this apartment, with their guns drawn, because someone reported a grow light.

Unfortunately, the article doesn't say whether or not this was a no-knock warrant. I hope they weren't stupid enough to do that, considering there was no evidence of a crime. Unless owning a grow light is now illegal.

Because these tenants grew a tomato plant.

And while Tennant may feel it's his duty to investigate credible complaints, there is a beg difference between investigating an accusation that someone owns legal equipment and busting into an apartment with weapons drawn.

I hope the Seattle Police Department is more sensible. I'm sure there is already a file on me. Since I grow Basil, Oregano, Chives, Parsley, Sage, Thyme, Rosemary, Mint, and assorted house plants indoors, I have 6-8 grow lights running in my apartment. Of course they are in a big window. And you can see my grow lights and herbs from several blocks away, so there's would be no reason to bust down my door.

Hopefully the craziness that infected the Pullman police department isn't infectious.