When Patrick Swayze died I was reminded of the film, Red Dawn. I read a few comments by pro-gun folks about how great it is. Well, I finally got around to seeing it again, and although I like movies with shooting and violence, this one was terrible. That's my considered opinion, terrible. Critics must have agreed, according to the IMDB site there was only one award nomination. And they list everything under the sun for films with merit. Wikipedia had an interesting notation, "National Review Online has named the film #15 in its list of 'The Best Conservative Movies'"
What's your opinion? Did you like the movie? What did you like about it?
While watching the film last night, I could see the appeal it might have for the libertarian-minded and the ultra-patriotic viewer. If anything it reinforced my opposing stand to the gun rights movement usually embraced by those types.
I must admit though, I love the action scenes in movies, even in this one where they weren't all that convincing. For example when the girl was mortally wounded and asked for a hand grenade to kill herself so she wouldn't be captured and interrogated. Then you realize she's going to take out one of the bad guys when he comes for her. I love that stuff. But, it's a movie.
The folks who prepare for something like this by stockpiling weapons and encourage others to do the same, in my opinion, are mistaken. I believe they're operating out of some mental disorder or other, there are probably several, but they have lost touch with reality. My term for what many of them seem to have is "grandiose victimism."
Some have responded, in proper macho fashion, that they don't plan to be victims. I guess their thing would be "grandiose vindication," that's living in the fantasy of coming out on top in the "life and death" struggle for rights and survival.
The film "Red Dawn," is the classic tale of "grandiose victimism," Patrick Swayze's and Charlie Sheen's characters heroically sacrificed their lives for the cause and all they had to show for it was an anonymous plaque in their honor.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Bay Area Open Carry
Is carrying an unloaded gun on one hip and two full magazines of ammo on the other safer than carrying a loaded gun with one round in the chamber?
ABC has the video.
ABC has the video.
When I Was a Kid
As predicted by the Grand Prince, I'm posting another video as part of the "weapons of mass distraction."
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Even Better Than the Real Thing | ||||
| ||||
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Las Vegas Shootout
The Los Angeles Times reports on the headline-grabbing shootout in Las Vegas which left 2 dead.
Is this the case of just another nut or is there a growing trend of disgruntled folks who are heavily armed and are nearing "the edge?"
This man went over "the edge." It's exactly the same thing the folks in the video of the New Mexico gun rally were talking about. People commented asking what's wrong with that rally, what did I find objectionable. Well, it has to do with the subtle, and sometimes not-so-subtle, threat these people make. In essence they're saying if certain things happen, too severe gun laws, too much "socialism" from Obama, they will respond with gun violence.
Poor Mr. Wicks went over the edge about his Social Security claim which was denied, proving that people like this don't need reasonable or factual situations to justify their decision to attack. Many gun owners are precariously close to that very same edge. The glib and irresponsible pro-gun writings on the internet are more than enough to push some of them over. And just like the social security decision that Wicks found so unacceptable, an unstable gun owner doesn't need reasonable or factual ideas to lose it.
As an example, Joe Huffman frequently writes that gun-owners today are persecuted in a similar way as the Jews in 1930s and 1940s Germany. Does anyone really believe that? I don't think the gun bloggers, who for the most part are extremely well written and seemingly intelligent folks, do. But the vast majority of gun owners probably do, like the ones depicted in that video the other day.
So, my contention is the Las Vegas incident was not an anomaly but rather an example of a large and growing trend of disgruntled armed people who are going over the edge. These poor characters are aided in their insanity by well-meaning gun bloggers who are continually pushing ideas which may be debatable but which do serious harm to their own cause.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Reporting from Washington and Las Vegas - A 66-year-old retiree apparently upset over losing a lawsuit related to his Social Security benefits opened fire in a federal courthouse lobby Monday morning, killing one person and wounding another in a chaotic shootout.
The gunman, identified by law enforcement sources as Johnny Lee Wicks, died from gunshot wounds after fleeing across the street as court officers returned fire.
Is this the case of just another nut or is there a growing trend of disgruntled folks who are heavily armed and are nearing "the edge?"
In 2008, Wicks, who had moved from California to a local retirement home, filed a complaint against a regional Social Security Administration commissioner, contending that his monthly benefits had been reduced by $317 because he was black.
"It's all about race," he wrote in the complaint, although he cited no evidence. "I am no fool."
A lawyer for the Social Security Administration responded in court documents that Wicks' payments had been cut because, as a Nevada resident, he was no longer entitled to a supplement he had received while living in California.
This man went over "the edge." It's exactly the same thing the folks in the video of the New Mexico gun rally were talking about. People commented asking what's wrong with that rally, what did I find objectionable. Well, it has to do with the subtle, and sometimes not-so-subtle, threat these people make. In essence they're saying if certain things happen, too severe gun laws, too much "socialism" from Obama, they will respond with gun violence.
Poor Mr. Wicks went over the edge about his Social Security claim which was denied, proving that people like this don't need reasonable or factual situations to justify their decision to attack. Many gun owners are precariously close to that very same edge. The glib and irresponsible pro-gun writings on the internet are more than enough to push some of them over. And just like the social security decision that Wicks found so unacceptable, an unstable gun owner doesn't need reasonable or factual ideas to lose it.
As an example, Joe Huffman frequently writes that gun-owners today are persecuted in a similar way as the Jews in 1930s and 1940s Germany. Does anyone really believe that? I don't think the gun bloggers, who for the most part are extremely well written and seemingly intelligent folks, do. But the vast majority of gun owners probably do, like the ones depicted in that video the other day.
So, my contention is the Las Vegas incident was not an anomaly but rather an example of a large and growing trend of disgruntled armed people who are going over the edge. These poor characters are aided in their insanity by well-meaning gun bloggers who are continually pushing ideas which may be debatable but which do serious harm to their own cause.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Death Sentence Vacated
The News-JournalOnline.com reported on the judge's ruling which vacated a 1982 death sentence.
Well, I guess that settles the question about whether a .22 can kill someone. What it doesn't settle is why the death-penalty proponents insist on killing these pathetic criminals.
Of course it's being appealed to the State Supreme Court. If it's upheld, Ted Herring will serve a life sentence.
What's your opinion? Should we be executing people with diminished capacity? Do you believe like many hard-liners that if a person is capable of doing what Mr. Herring did, then they are capable of paying the ultimate price?
Please leave a comment.
DAYTONA BEACH -- A local judge vacated the sentence of one of Volusia County's oldest death penalty cases, finding that Ted Herring's IQ is too low for him to be executed for killing a convenience store clerk in 1981.Last month, Circuit Judge Joseph Will signed the order setting aside the death sentence, which had been handed down after Herring's trial in February 1982.
Circuit Judge S. James Foxman followed a jury's 8-4 recommendation that Herring be executed for shooting Norman Dale Hoeltzel in the left side of the head with a .22-caliber bullet.
Well, I guess that settles the question about whether a .22 can kill someone. What it doesn't settle is why the death-penalty proponents insist on killing these pathetic criminals.
"There is ample evidence in the record that throughout his life, Herring has suffered from significant limitations in adaptive functioning in multiple areas," Will wrote in the ruling.
Of course it's being appealed to the State Supreme Court. If it's upheld, Ted Herring will serve a life sentence.
What's your opinion? Should we be executing people with diminished capacity? Do you believe like many hard-liners that if a person is capable of doing what Mr. Herring did, then they are capable of paying the ultimate price?
Please leave a comment.
Mayor Booker's 3-Year Public Safety Report
The Daily Newarker posted the Public Safety Report issued by Newark Mayor Cory A. Booker and Police Director Garry F. McCarthy.
I haven't been to Newark in years, except for driving in and out of the airport. But even that, combined with what I read on the internet, makes me a bit suspicious of any report describing it as "improved."
What's your opinion? Is Newark a good example of the multiple factors which are involved in crime, gun availability being just one? What could be the explanation for the strongly fluctuating murder statistics?
Please leave a comment.
Newark officials attribute 21 percent reduction to overall crime rate
to modern technology, alliances, community engagement and anti-gun strategies;
Newark the second city in the country to Los Angeles in reducing gun violence;
Mayor highlights Newark’s prisoner reentry programs
for dropping participants’ one-year recidivism rate to 10 percent
I haven't been to Newark in years, except for driving in and out of the airport. But even that, combined with what I read on the internet, makes me a bit suspicious of any report describing it as "improved."
At the press conference, the Mayor and Police Director McCarthy displayed crime statistics for the past three years, all of which showed a steady decrease in violence crime, despite an increase in murders in 2009, which saw 77 killings, 10 more than 2008’s total of 67. A list of Police Department highlights for the past three years is attached.
“We must remember that this uptick is still lower than the 2007 figure of 99 killings in Newark, and 107 in 2006,” Director McCarthy said. “We finished 2009 with 30 fewer homicides than in 2006. So while we take pride in these figures and how they validate our efforts, they also remind us that we still have more work to do.”
What's your opinion? Is Newark a good example of the multiple factors which are involved in crime, gun availability being just one? What could be the explanation for the strongly fluctuating murder statistics?
Please leave a comment.
Bloomberg's Blueprint
The Brooklyn Daily Eagle reported on the 40-step plan of Mayor Bloomberg's to improve New York even further. Sebastian already posted about this even before its official release, expressing serious concern about the impact on gun owners.
This is one of the pro-gun crowd's concerns. The fact that no Congressional action would be required worries them, I suppose because proposals like that may be easier to implement. But, haven't the same gun folks complained that enacting new laws is wrong when we already have so many on the books? Haven't I heard frequent overtures from them that we should just enforce the laws we have?
Are the opposing sides of this argument really so different from one another? When talking about punishing violent criminals aren't we all on the same page?
What do you think about the growth of the MAIG? In spite of those attempts on the part of pro-gun people to focus attention on some of the members who'd gotten themselves in trouble, it looks like the organization as a whole is thriving. Do you think Bloomberg will take over from the Brady Campaign as the leading organization in the gun control movement?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
“Every day in our county, 32 Americans are killed by gun-wielding criminals — that’s a Virginia Tech-scale tragedy happening every single day,” said coalition co-chair and New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. “Enacting these 40 recommendations will save lives — and each can be done administratively, without action by the Congress. America’s mayors look forward to working with the Obama Administration to better enforce the laws already on the books.”
This is one of the pro-gun crowd's concerns. The fact that no Congressional action would be required worries them, I suppose because proposals like that may be easier to implement. But, haven't the same gun folks complained that enacting new laws is wrong when we already have so many on the books? Haven't I heard frequent overtures from them that we should just enforce the laws we have?
... 96 percent of NRA members and 94 percent of gun-owners surveyed agreed that “Criminals who possess, use, and traffic in illegal guns should be punished to the maximum extent of the law.” The full survey results are available on the Mayors Against Illegal Guns website.
Since its inception in April 2006, Mayors Against Illegal Guns has grown from just 15 mayors to more than 450 members.
Are the opposing sides of this argument really so different from one another? When talking about punishing violent criminals aren't we all on the same page?
What do you think about the growth of the MAIG? In spite of those attempts on the part of pro-gun people to focus attention on some of the members who'd gotten themselves in trouble, it looks like the organization as a whole is thriving. Do you think Bloomberg will take over from the Brady Campaign as the leading organization in the gun control movement?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
It's Deja Vu All Over Again
Truthout reports on the situation in Yemen and its relationship with the United States. (Thanks for the tip Laci).
This is my biggest disappointment with Obama. I was hoping he'd get us out of Iraq, wind down the business in Afghanistan and quit policing the world. I thought this was a characteristic of the Bush years. I was wrong. Now the only question seems to be, which will it be next, Iran or Yemen.
What's your opinion?
...there has been a dramatic turnaround in the fluctuating love-hate relationship between the two countries.And this week's aborted attempt to blow up a U.S. plane by a Nigerian student, with ties to a terrorist group in Yemen, has brought the political spotlight back on a country which is proud of its gun culture.
Yemen reportedly has over 60 million handguns and small arms spread over a population of some 21 million people.
Yehya al-Mutawakil, a former interior minister, was quoted as saying that everyone in Yemen is armed with handguns, while members of various tribes have gone upscale: they are armed with assault weapons, rocket launchers and submachine guns.
Between 2002 and 2008, Yemen received some 69 million dollars in U.S. military aid; and 496 Yemeni military personnel were trained under the International Military Education and Training programme (IMET).William D. Hartung, director of the Arms and Security Initiative at the New York-based New America Foundation, cites press reports to suggest that Washington will rapidly ramp up U.S. military aid to Yemen over the next 18 months.
The projected total, he said, is about 70 million dollars, or roughly the amount provided during the entire administration of former President George W. Bush.
"U.S. military aid to Yemen is a double-edged sword," Hartung told IPS.
On the one hand, the Yemeni government of President Ali Abdullah Saleh has participated in strikes against al Qaeda and al Qaeda-inspired groups within and around its borders.
On the other hand, he said, "The Yemeni government is one of the most unstable regimes in the world, and there is a danger that U.S. weapons and training could be turned against U.S. interests, if there is a change in government there."
This is my biggest disappointment with Obama. I was hoping he'd get us out of Iraq, wind down the business in Afghanistan and quit policing the world. I thought this was a characteristic of the Bush years. I was wrong. Now the only question seems to be, which will it be next, Iran or Yemen.
What's your opinion?
Happy New Year - Gun-Lover Style
CBS Atlanta reports on the stray bullet which crashed through a church roof and killed a 4-year-old.
I'm sure the gun folks will say responsible gun owners who adhere to the tenets of the 4 Rules would never do something as stupid as firing a round into the air in celebration, which is what they think this was. I agree wholeheartedly that responsible gun owners who adhere to the tenets of the 4 Rules never would. But my question is what percentage of them is that responsible. Who hasn't fired a shot or two off where they shouldn't have? Who shoots all those rural road signs?
I'll tell you who, the vast majority of gun owners. Most folks are not concerned with the rules, not to the point of becoming out-and-out criminals, but definitely to the point of doing stupid things that get innocent people hurt.
What's your opinion? Is this 4-year-old killing in Decatur Georgia just another of those rare accidents? Please leave a comment.
A 4-year-old boy who was struck by a stray bullet while at church died Friday.
The incident happened around midnight Friday during a New Year’s Eve watch service at the Covington Drive Church Of God of Prophecy in Decatur.
It was not immediately clear who fired the shot that came through the roof of the church and struck the child, who was identified as Marquel Peters.
I'm sure the gun folks will say responsible gun owners who adhere to the tenets of the 4 Rules would never do something as stupid as firing a round into the air in celebration, which is what they think this was. I agree wholeheartedly that responsible gun owners who adhere to the tenets of the 4 Rules never would. But my question is what percentage of them is that responsible. Who hasn't fired a shot or two off where they shouldn't have? Who shoots all those rural road signs?
I'll tell you who, the vast majority of gun owners. Most folks are not concerned with the rules, not to the point of becoming out-and-out criminals, but definitely to the point of doing stupid things that get innocent people hurt.
What's your opinion? Is this 4-year-old killing in Decatur Georgia just another of those rare accidents? Please leave a comment.
Your Average Gun Owners
The Las Vegas Democrat Examiner provided a wonderful article and this video, which perfectly illustrates the malleable masses of simple gun owners. These are not the ones who write pro-gun blogs. These are the ones who receive the message whether by reading it themselves or by word of mouth. I say again, it is irresponsible for pro-gun bloggers to incite their less-intellectually endowed followers with exaggerated talk of gun confiscations and persecution of gun owners. It's not the government that's pushing these people towards the edge, it's their own leaders in the gun movement.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Tighter Gun Control in Finland
China View reports on the reaction to the recent multiple murder in Finland.
That's an interesting phrase, "Finnish people have long asked for tighter gun control." I wonder if that means the majority. Could the same be said about the United States?
How about the suggestion that, "All the guns with old licenses will have to be re-registered." That sounds pretty simple. I guess with enough jack-booted federal enforcers it could be done. What do you think?
Please leave a comment.
Finnish Interior Minister Anne Holmlund said on Saturday that Finland will amend the gun law to tighten control on guns, Finnish media reported on Saturday.A 43-year-old man named Ibrahim Shkupolli, a Kosovo Albanian, shot and killed four employees at Sello shopping center in Espoo, southern Finland, as well as his ex-girlfriend at her home, who was also employed there, and finally himself on Thursday.
The shooting rampage has again aroused Finnish people's attention to the country's gun control. Finnish people have long asked for tighter gun control after two school shootings in 2007 and 2008.
Finland's rate of gun ownership ranks the third highest in the world as its 5.3 million populations own 1.6 million registered guns.
That's an interesting phrase, "Finnish people have long asked for tighter gun control." I wonder if that means the majority. Could the same be said about the United States?
Interior Minister Anne Holmlund said on Saturday that Finland will amend its gun law for tighter control on guns. Furthermore, new legislation will require safer ways of gun-keeping at home in order to reduce illicit weapons obtained through burglary. An illegal handgun was used in Thursday's shooting incident.I wonder if that's how they did the registry in Canada too, "license information has been written on a file card without the weapon's serial number." How could any system of registration be organized so badly? It almost sounds like pro-gun spies designed it to fail.According to Anne Holmlund, Finland's present gun registry is primitive. In some cases, license information has been written on a file card without the weapon's serial number or the purpose for which the permit was granted. All the guns with old licenses will have to be re-registered, she said.
She also stressed that all the licenses for people with criminal backgrounds should be revoked.
How about the suggestion that, "All the guns with old licenses will have to be re-registered." That sounds pretty simple. I guess with enough jack-booted federal enforcers it could be done. What do you think?
Please leave a comment.
The Danish Cartoonist Attacked with Axe
The Daily Record reports on the home invasion and attempted murder of the famous Danish cartoonist.
Now there's another interesting concept, "the panic room." Of course that could never work in America where people are into that old stand-yer-ground mentality.
What's your opinion? Would fortifying one of the rooms in the house and equipping it with means to communicate with he local police be a possible answer to protecting yourself and your family at home? Or would you prefer to be armed to the teeth?
What do you think about the blasphemy charges some in the Islamic world have raised against this cartoonist? Those Muslims are pretty severe judges and they definitely don't have a sense of humor. Is this the case that's raised questions of a United Nations prohibition against blasphemy?
Please leave a comment.
Those Danes know how to treat criminals. No hospital stay and rehabilitation before the court appearance for the bad guys over there.AN axe-wielding Muslim fanatic who tried to butcher a Danish cartoonist in his home was carried into court on a stretcher yesterday to be charged with attempted murder.
The 28-year-old Somali, said to have links to al-Qaeda, was also accused of trying to kill a police officer who shot and wounded him outside Kurt Westergaard's home.
Westergaard, 75, has been a target of extremists since he drew a cartoon in 2005 of the Prophet Mohammed wearing a bomb-shaped turban.
The cartoon was one of a series which outraged the Islamic world.
Westergaard was at home with his five-year-old grand-daughter in the city of Aarhus late on Friday when the attacker broke in.
The house is fortified but the man smashed a window to get in. He told Westergaard in broken English that he had come to kill him.
Westergaard fled with his granddaughter to a "panic room" in the bathroom. He said the attacker yelled "Revenge!" and "Blood!" and smashed the door with the axe.
The cartoonist pressed an alarm button to alert police. Officers arrived within two minutes and confronted the axeman outside.
Now there's another interesting concept, "the panic room." Of course that could never work in America where people are into that old stand-yer-ground mentality.
What's your opinion? Would fortifying one of the rooms in the house and equipping it with means to communicate with he local police be a possible answer to protecting yourself and your family at home? Or would you prefer to be armed to the teeth?
What do you think about the blasphemy charges some in the Islamic world have raised against this cartoonist? Those Muslims are pretty severe judges and they definitely don't have a sense of humor. Is this the case that's raised questions of a United Nations prohibition against blasphemy?
Please leave a comment.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Those Evil Toy Guns
Channel 3 News from Memphis Tennessee reports on the new Arkansas law banning toy guns.
What's your opinion? Do you think a law like this might save a few lives? Is the inconvenience of depriving children from playing with realistic-looking toy guns worth it? Is there some other "rights" issue involved in such a law? Why do I expect gun enthusiasts to oppose such legislation? Do they?
Please leave a comment.
(West Memphis, AR 01/01/2010) The New Year brings a new law that cracks down on toy guns being sold in the state of Arkansas.
The law stems from the 2007 shooting death of a 12 year old West Memphis boy, DeAunta Farrow.
DeAunta Farrow was gunned down after police say he waved a pistol at them. Police later revealed the pistol was actually a toy gun. State legislators say the new law is aimed at protecting other children and officers from similar violence.
The shooting death of 12 year old DeAunta Farrow changed a lot of things in West Memphis and now its changed law. Toy guns that look real are banned in Arkansas.
What's your opinion? Do you think a law like this might save a few lives? Is the inconvenience of depriving children from playing with realistic-looking toy guns worth it? Is there some other "rights" issue involved in such a law? Why do I expect gun enthusiasts to oppose such legislation? Do they?
Please leave a comment.
Utah Man Kills Friend
The Salt Lake Tribune reports on another tragic accidental shooting.
RuffRidr recently told me that every gun owner he knows "wouldn't put up with this" and that responsible gun owners are taught the 4 Rules when they're kids. I guess the people who are making the news every day weren't that lucky.
What's your opinion? Does it sometimes seem that the percentage of irresponsible gun owners who were not raised with the 4 Rules is a bit too high? Do you think that's just a distorted impression based on the reports that make it to the main stream media?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Guns kill people when they're in the hands of people like Ian Lewis.
A 23-year-old man was killed early New Year's Day after a bullet discharged from a gun that a friend was handling and struck him in the head.
Responding officers booked Ian Lewis, also 23, into the Salt Lake City jail for negligent homicide. According to police, Lewis had picked up a gun and was handling it when it went off and struck Steven McKinney.
Both men are from the Salt Lake City area, said Salt Lake City Sgt. Robin Snyder. She added the incident is a reminder to always treat guns as if they are loaded.
RuffRidr recently told me that every gun owner he knows "wouldn't put up with this" and that responsible gun owners are taught the 4 Rules when they're kids. I guess the people who are making the news every day weren't that lucky.
What's your opinion? Does it sometimes seem that the percentage of irresponsible gun owners who were not raised with the 4 Rules is a bit too high? Do you think that's just a distorted impression based on the reports that make it to the main stream media?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Guns kill people when they're in the hands of people like Ian Lewis.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
A Nice Clean DGU
The L.A. Times reports on a nice clean DGU which took place in Coeur d'Alene Idaho.
Now, that was a very timely Christmas present. And, apparently, Michelle Cornelson knows how to use it and how not to use it, know what I mean?
Please leave a comment.
A teen trying to rob an espresso stand in northern Idaho met his match in a gun toting barista.
Police say the 17-year-old confronted Sunshine Espresso owner Michelle Cornelson with a gun Wednesday morning, demanding all her money.
Cornelson has been hunting since she was a girl and says she remained calm as a customer pulled up to the other side of her kiosk in Coeur d'Alene (kohr duh-LAYN'), distracting the teen.
Cornelson quickly whipped out her 9 mm Kel-Tec pistol, which was a Christmas present from her husband. That scared off the teen so Cornelson could call police.
A sheriff's deputy was nearby after picking up a beverage at the stand and caught the suspect. The teen was later taken to a juvenile detention center.
Now, that was a very timely Christmas present. And, apparently, Michelle Cornelson knows how to use it and how not to use it, know what I mean?
Please leave a comment.
Police Shoot Man with Toy Gun
The San Francisco Chronicle's SF Gate reports on another case of police shooting someone with a toy gun.
Now I have to say it's become official. The number of these incidents, cops shooting toy-gun holders has surpassed reports of DGUs. I realize we're talking about the main stream media, and they generally like only DGUs by octogenarians, but still, numbers don't lie.
In all fairness, I must admit this phenomenon is probably more prevalent around Christmas when so many people receive their toy guns as gifts from Santa.
By the way is there a difference between a "replica firearm" and a toy gun? Either way, the cops are a bit out of control, don't you think?
Please leave a comment.
The man shot by Vallejo police on Wednesday while allegedly brandishing a handgun turns out not to have been involved in the robbery that brought officers to the scene in the first place, Vallejo police said.
A Vallejo police statement released Thursday also said Dennis James Merrida, 37, was carrying a replica firearm rather than a live weapon when a squad car pulled up near him at the corner of Lemon and Sheridan streets in response to a robbery call.
Merrida was shot in the upper body and transported to John Muir Medical Center in Walnut Creek, where he remains in stable condition. He is in custody for a parole violation and will be charged with brandishing a weapon and "resisting an executive officer in performance of their duties," according to the statement.
The officer who shot Merrida will be on paid administrative leave while the incident is investigated.
Now I have to say it's become official. The number of these incidents, cops shooting toy-gun holders has surpassed reports of DGUs. I realize we're talking about the main stream media, and they generally like only DGUs by octogenarians, but still, numbers don't lie.
In all fairness, I must admit this phenomenon is probably more prevalent around Christmas when so many people receive their toy guns as gifts from Santa.
By the way is there a difference between a "replica firearm" and a toy gun? Either way, the cops are a bit out of control, don't you think?
Please leave a comment.
Possible Asteroid Attack
MyStateLine.com reports on how seriously the Russians are taking the possibility of an asteroid strike.
I think I'm starting to like these comparisons. Doesn't the above story sound exactly like the gun enthusiast who insists he needs weapons for self protection?
What this means of course is it's not only meteorites (murder) but also asteroids (rape and robbery) that must be protected against. Only a fool would fail to take the necessary precautions against these dangers, not that they're so likely to occur, but because if the do the results are so devastating.
What's your opinion? Are you worried about meteorites and asteroids? Are you doing everything you can to responsibly protect yourself and your family from these terrible disasters?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
The country's top space researchers have set their sights on an asteroid called 99942 Apophis, named for the Egyptian god of destruction.
Apophis has a slim but real chance of colliding with Earth this century and that's all the incentive the Russians need to swing into action.
I think I'm starting to like these comparisons. Doesn't the above story sound exactly like the gun enthusiast who insists he needs weapons for self protection?
Apophis was discovered in 2004.
According to "The New York Times," scientists say it'll swing past Earth three times in the coming decades.
It's surest shot at impact is its second pass in 2032, when it'll have a one-in-45-thousand chance of hitting Earth.
Since it's three times the size of a 1908 meteorite that took out 80-million trees in Siberia, the Russians are understandably nervous.
The space agency says the goal is to deflect the asteroid instead of blowing it up, and there won't be any nuclear weapons used.
What this means of course is it's not only meteorites (murder) but also asteroids (rape and robbery) that must be protected against. Only a fool would fail to take the necessary precautions against these dangers, not that they're so likely to occur, but because if the do the results are so devastating.
What's your opinion? Are you worried about meteorites and asteroids? Are you doing everything you can to responsibly protect yourself and your family from these terrible disasters?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Virginia Moving Backwards on Capital Punishment
GoDanRiver.com reports on the future of Virginia.
This is a sad story. It marks the beginning of the end of Virginia's hopes to be considered a modern functioning state that plans to move ahead into the 21st century. Instead this, and you can only imagine what other backward ideas the new governor will push, will clearly place Virginia in alliance with southern and south-central neighbors.
What's your opinion? Is Governor-elect McDonnell already displaying cave-man tendencies in this matter? Do you think he and those like-minded legislators simply deny the concerns of other states, which, more enlightened, are moving away from the death penalty? Or do you think it's not necessary for them to deny anything to take this approach? Perhaps they feel like a lot of people that the death penalty cleans up the gene pool and an occasional wrongful execution is usually exacted upon someone guilty of other crimes anyway?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Death penalty expansion bills that were blocked in recent years likely will become law in Virginia under a new administration, making more people eligible for what is already the nation’s second-busiest death chamber.
Since he took office in 2006, Gov. Timothy M. Kaine has vetoed 15 bills making everyone from murder accomplices to killers of on-duty auxiliary police or fire marshals eligible for the death penalty. Legislators have overridden some of Kaine’s vetoes, and currently there are 15 crimes that are punishable by death in Virginia.
Republican Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell has said he will sign legislation to expand the death penalty, even though other states are restricting capital punishment or repealing it altogether.
This is a sad story. It marks the beginning of the end of Virginia's hopes to be considered a modern functioning state that plans to move ahead into the 21st century. Instead this, and you can only imagine what other backward ideas the new governor will push, will clearly place Virginia in alliance with southern and south-central neighbors.
What's your opinion? Is Governor-elect McDonnell already displaying cave-man tendencies in this matter? Do you think he and those like-minded legislators simply deny the concerns of other states, which, more enlightened, are moving away from the death penalty? Or do you think it's not necessary for them to deny anything to take this approach? Perhaps they feel like a lot of people that the death penalty cleans up the gene pool and an occasional wrongful execution is usually exacted upon someone guilty of other crimes anyway?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Fox News Network is Number One
Capital Hill Blue reports on the year in cable news.
Does this surprise you? It doesn't me. I think it supports those accusations that Fox isn't so much a news channel as an entertainment one. The only other way I can explain it, it to liken the widespread interest in Fox News to slowly driving past a terrible highway wreck where bloody bodies are strewn across the pavement. It's hard to turn away from something like that.
What's your opinion? Is the success of Fox News a proper gauge as to its quality? Liberal Viewer has produced over 100 videos documenting their bias. Is that what people like so much?
Please leave a comment.
Fox News Channel may drive blood pressures to record highs among liberals but the right-wing cable channel just finished its best ratings year ever and easily tops CNN and MSNBC with viewers.
The only cable channels that do better than Fox News are entertainment ones. MSNBC and CNN aren't even in the top 10.
In fact, ratings are falling for more liberal-oriented MSNBC and CNN. Even the darlings of the "progressive" community -- Keith Olbermann and Rachael Maddow -- face erosion of viewers while their favorite targets -- Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck -- watch their numbers rise.
Does this surprise you? It doesn't me. I think it supports those accusations that Fox isn't so much a news channel as an entertainment one. The only other way I can explain it, it to liken the widespread interest in Fox News to slowly driving past a terrible highway wreck where bloody bodies are strewn across the pavement. It's hard to turn away from something like that.
What's your opinion? Is the success of Fox News a proper gauge as to its quality? Liberal Viewer has produced over 100 videos documenting their bias. Is that what people like so much?
Please leave a comment.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Detroit Man Executes Trespasser
Freep.com reports on the vigilante style killing that took place in Detroit. Tigh Croff was the frustrated homeowner who took the law into his own hands.
The article reads like an apology for vigilante behavior. Several neighbors testify to the ever-increasing crime problem, how the real estate market is in the pits, and to the general frustration of everyone who lives there.
I don't suppose any of the law-and-order, stand-up-for-your-rights folks would have the nerve to condone this, but I wonder how many of them secretly cheer. Wasn't that the appeal of Charles Bronson's movies and the Clint Eastwood attitude of "make my day?" These petty criminals are barely more than insects anyway, right?
Of course, I couldn't help notice how perfectly this story supports the theory that says there are too many unfit gun owners. I don't care how frustrated or frightened you are, what this guy did is worse than what the criminals do. It's worse because up until last week he was an upstanding citizen enjoying his god-given rights protected by the 2nd Amendment. And I'm afraid he's not the only one.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Croff, a licensed gun owner, is accused of chasing Herbert Silas and fatally shooting him after finding Silas in his backyard. Croff reportedly told police that his home had been broken into three times before the shooting early Monday.
The article reads like an apology for vigilante behavior. Several neighbors testify to the ever-increasing crime problem, how the real estate market is in the pits, and to the general frustration of everyone who lives there.
Police said Silas, who was unarmed, stopped running in the 9800 block of Philip as Croff chased him. Silas turned around, put his hands up and, according to a police source, told Croff: "What are you going to do? Shoot me?"
"Absolutely," Croff told investigators he responded. Silas was hit once in the chest.
I don't suppose any of the law-and-order, stand-up-for-your-rights folks would have the nerve to condone this, but I wonder how many of them secretly cheer. Wasn't that the appeal of Charles Bronson's movies and the Clint Eastwood attitude of "make my day?" These petty criminals are barely more than insects anyway, right?
Of course, I couldn't help notice how perfectly this story supports the theory that says there are too many unfit gun owners. I don't care how frustrated or frightened you are, what this guy did is worse than what the criminals do. It's worse because up until last week he was an upstanding citizen enjoying his god-given rights protected by the 2nd Amendment. And I'm afraid he's not the only one.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Murder / Suicide in Finland - 5 Dead
The BBC reports on the tragedy which struck the Finnish city of Espoo. On the video, the Finnish spokesman described the terrible action. One of the victims, presumably the main target, was the girfriend. Dare I say it? Guns are bad news for women, even in Finland.
The Brooklyn Body Count
YourNabe.com reports on the 2009 murder statistics for the Borough of Brooklyn.
So, even in Brooklyn, where they have murders almost every day, they're patting themselves on the back. It reminds me of what Fidel Castro said a few years ago to the World Food Summit here in Rome (I couldn't find a link to it). All the speakers, Heads of State and other big shots, were proclaiming what a wonderful program they were putting in place to cut world hunger in half by 2015 or something like that. So, by that date there would only be a half-a-billion people starving instead of a whole billion. When Castro spoke he shocked everybody by telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for bragging about such feeble progress when they had the means to do so much better.
You know I hate making comparisons, but couldn't the same thing be said about the gun violence. Just because there were 6 murders a day in New York in 1990, should we be happy that there are an average of only one-and-a-half today? I don't think so. I think it's disgraceful, just like Castro said to those food bureaucrats.
What's your opinion? Should we be happy with the drop in murders? Or should we recognize the more needs to be done? Do you think the increasing numbers of guns in American society is helping to keep those numbers as high as they are? Wouldn't reducing the number of guns go a long way towards seriously improving this situation?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
While the city is touting the lowest homicide rate in over four decades, nearly half of the 461 killings that did occur took place right here in the borough of churches.
As this paper went to press, cops from the Patrol Borough Brooklyn South logged in 92 homicides. Patrol Borough Brooklyn North had 108 homicides for a grand total of 200 --— far outpacing their NYPD counterparts in the Bronx (who will round out the year with 108 killings), Queens (79 slayings) and Manhattan, where 58 homicides were investigated. Staten Island had the lowest number of homicides at 16.
Yet despite this high number, Brooklyn homicides were slightly less than in 2008, during which 207 people were murdered as of December 27, according to NYPD CompStat numbers.
So, even in Brooklyn, where they have murders almost every day, they're patting themselves on the back. It reminds me of what Fidel Castro said a few years ago to the World Food Summit here in Rome (I couldn't find a link to it). All the speakers, Heads of State and other big shots, were proclaiming what a wonderful program they were putting in place to cut world hunger in half by 2015 or something like that. So, by that date there would only be a half-a-billion people starving instead of a whole billion. When Castro spoke he shocked everybody by telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for bragging about such feeble progress when they had the means to do so much better.
You know I hate making comparisons, but couldn't the same thing be said about the gun violence. Just because there were 6 murders a day in New York in 1990, should we be happy that there are an average of only one-and-a-half today? I don't think so. I think it's disgraceful, just like Castro said to those food bureaucrats.
What's your opinion? Should we be happy with the drop in murders? Or should we recognize the more needs to be done? Do you think the increasing numbers of guns in American society is helping to keep those numbers as high as they are? Wouldn't reducing the number of guns go a long way towards seriously improving this situation?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Reefer Madness in L.A.
PJTV never fails to provide wonderful examples of the conservative mind set. In this video about the medical marijuana "problem" in Los Angeles, we have a fantastic example. Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley seems like a caricature of the stereotypical right wing character that we love to make fun of. There were times during the interview that I thought he was really a comedian poking fun.
Sadly, he was quite serious. What do you think? Is this something that law enforcement people should be concerned with? Did you hear how many times he used the word "cartels." I thought any minute there he was going to say "we estimate that 90% of the medical marijuana comes from Mexico."
No questions were asked about the taxes these dispensaries must pay to the State, but I imagine that's part of the deal. The big concern seemed to be the overwhelmingly high percentage of healthy customers. Is that a big problem, in your opinion? Isn't that a benefit, even though it wasn't the intention of the law, isn't it good if otherwise law abiding people get their pot from one of these legal outlets in stead of off the street?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Sadly, he was quite serious. What do you think? Is this something that law enforcement people should be concerned with? Did you hear how many times he used the word "cartels." I thought any minute there he was going to say "we estimate that 90% of the medical marijuana comes from Mexico."
No questions were asked about the taxes these dispensaries must pay to the State, but I imagine that's part of the deal. The big concern seemed to be the overwhelmingly high percentage of healthy customers. Is that a big problem, in your opinion? Isn't that a benefit, even though it wasn't the intention of the law, isn't it good if otherwise law abiding people get their pot from one of these legal outlets in stead of off the street?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)