Saturday, February 2, 2013

Jimmy Lee Dykes - The Alabama Abductor

Yahoo News reports

After four anxious days, only the slimmest of details has come to light in a police standoff with an Alabama man who is accused of holding a 5-year-old boy hostage in a bunker, a sign of just how delicate the negotiations are.

Police have used a ventilation pipe to the underground bunker to talk to the man and deliver the boy medication for his emotional disorders, but they have not revealed how often they are in touch or what the conversations have been about. And authorities waited until Friday — four days after the siege began — to confirm what was widely known in this age of instant communication: The man accused of killing a school bus driver and abducting the boy Tuesday was 65-year-old Jimmy Lee Dykes, a Vietnam-era veteran who was known to neighbors as a menacing figure.


  1. Remember, the United States Government was complicit in allowing Mr. Dykes to obtain a firearm.

    The current system illustrates the backwards notion that individuals (as opposed to the collective State) are (somehow) endowed with "rights" (such as the right to hate, the right to evade law enforcement, the right to own killing machines, and the like) and that, upon the formation of a collective society, and a State to rule over such, subjects grant necessary power to the State in order for such to fulfill specific duties.

    Such a concept is ridiculous, in addition to being inherently dangerous, as the common subject has no rights in a civilized society. When a government is formed, all rights previously retained by individuals are collectivized, and left to the discretion of the State.

    We need to rethink our concept of "crime" before such "crime" consumes us all. Therefore the role of the State's legal codes ought to be re-evaluated to allow certain actions, as opposed to prohibiting certain actions.

    Government ought to tell the people what they can lawfully do, instead of what they can't.

    If the U.S. Government fails to protect the rights of it's subjects by implementing and enforcing Gun Control, then it will be deemed necessary to enact the ATT, and revoke the United States ability to decide it's own arms regulations.

    1. E.N., you are consistently bizarre, but do try to think, rather than spout, for a moment. The line about a rifleman behind every blade of grass is apocryphal, no matter who is supposed to have said it, but it does state a basic truth about America. We're heavily armed. Do you seriously imagine that the United Nations would be able to do anything effective in changing our gun laws or rate of ownership? For now, talk about targeting blue helmets is limited to nut jobs and jokers. It's best for your side that we leave it that way.

      But let's analyze your other argument. You say that individuals had rights in the state of nature. You claim that we surrendered those rights when the state was formed. That may be what the founding documents of tyrannies present, but with regard to America, I can find no such statement. We give our government specific and limited powers in exchange for the opportunity to express our rights more fully.

      There is no state without individuals to create and sustain and participate in it. The state exists for the purpose of opening opportunity. We wouldn't accept the power of the state if its only function were to limit our activities. What would be the value in that? Your view is entirely negative and denying. Mine is creative.

  2. Another NRA member behaving as NRA members tend to do...

    1. Goldilocks, do you even try to find evidence, or do you just make shit up? There's nothing in the article saying that this man is an NRA member. What is more, there are more than four million members. You claim that we have a tendency to act like this one crazy person. Somehow, I've missed the news accounts of millions of similar events.