Tag Archives: Shooting

We Need A Fair Search Engine!

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Hot Air posted an article about Google and Google searches. Searching for a politically conservative link on Google is like looking for ice cubes in the Sahara Desert.

The article reports:

When we first learned that Google’s autocomplete function in its search engine appeared to be blocking suggestions about Donald Trump’s attempted assassination (or even his name), the company assured us that those results were simply “an anomaly” in the code. But the House Judiciary Committee has been digging into the question more deeply and asked parent company Alphabet’s legal counsel to explain further. The answers the committee received weren’t exactly definitive, but they may provide a bit of additional clarity. First of all, the search engine absolutely was blocking autofill from pointing users to articles about the assassination attempt. But was it out of some bias against Trump? According to them, the system was performing as designed, but the design was overly broad. We’ll look into it a bit further here this evening. (National Review)

The article concludes that the blocking may not have been intentional politics, but a filter to prevent malfeasance.

The article concludes:

As to the far more damning searches for information about the assassination attempt, it was easy enough to note that the shooting created an iconic moment for President Trump and his approval ratings and donations were surging. A liberal outlet could easily be tempted to suppress such search results. But in reality, anyone searching for information related to trying to assassinate a President would no doubt raise red flags across the board. The FBI would (or at least should) be interested in any persons conducting such a search. Would it be that surprising that their default filters would prevent the autocomplete, typeahead function from refusing to fill in questions such as “How could I ass**ate President D*****”?” ( I won’t even type it out here or we will be blocked as well.)

The code underlying the search engines is smart, but it’s not “human smart.” I believe that they had such a filter in place to cover all such eventualities. And after the flaw was discovered, they had to go in and manually revise it to allow for searches dealing with news of the events in Butler, Pennsylvania. I’m generally not shy about criticizing Google and Alphabet, but in this case I believe I’m going to give them a pass.

That’s the word from someone who deals with search engines every day.

Public Pressure May Actually Tone Down The Rhetoric

Posted on by

On Sunday, The New York Post reported that public outrage actually caused Forbes to remove an article from its website. Maybe we are making progress.

The article reports:

A controversial Forbes column with a headline that questioned if former President Donald Trump surviving Saturday’s assassination attempt would draw more black voters was yanked from its website amid social media backlash.

The piece, “Will Surviving Gunfire Be Donald Trump’s Next Appeal To Black Voters,” by scholar and self-described DEI expert Shaun Harper was posted Sunday morning and quickly called out by critics on X.

The column described how black Americans face “inexcusably” high levels of gun violence, including in many urban centers, which Harper wrote Trump could address through legislation and financial investments in urban black communities.

The article concludes:

Attempts to reach the online story resulted in a 404 error, which was diverted back to the homepage.

The column was published after Trump was struck by a bullet during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania, but was able to walk off the stage on his own. Three others were hit, including a 50-year-old father of two who was killed.

The would-be assassin was shot and killed by the Secret Service.

When reached by The Post, Harper said his column has been widely misinterpreted.

The Post sought comment from Forbes Sunday night.

Aside from being a new level of stupid, this article is grossly inappropriate.

Shaken

Posted on by

When I was checking one of my news sites to get ideas for articles, I saw the alert about the shooting at the Trump rally. I turned on the news (a combination of NewsMax and One America News) and watched the commentary. What I saw was eerily reminiscent of my memories of the weekend after John F. Kennedy was shot. I was in high school at the time, mostly unaware of politics. I loved Jackie Kennedy’s style and generally thought John Kennedy was a good image for America. I really didn’t know anything about his policies (I am not sure he was in office long enough to leave a large footprint.). The assassination of John Kennedy was a shock to America—we didn’t believe things like that happened here. Last night’s sniper shot at President Trump was a shock to me–it shouldn’t have been, based on the rhetoric, but it was.

I am not going to review the rhetoric–it doesn’t deserve to be repeated, but it is time for everyone to settle down. President Trump is not Hitler. President Trump is not a threat to democracy (we are not a democracy–we are a representative republic). President Trump will not put his political enemies in jail (in some circles that is already happening and is treated as acceptable). President Trump will not become a dictator who will ignore the checks and balances put in place by Congress and the Supreme Court (student loans?).

If President Trump is elected, there will be riots–there were riots when he took office in 2017. There were comments made about burning down the White House. There was illegal surveillance of the Trump campaign and the Presidency. Because President Trump was trying to play nice with his opposition, no one was held accountable for their law breaking (threats on a President are illegal, the surveillance was illegal, rioting and destroying property are illegal). If President Trump is elected again, I think he has to hold people accountable for what they say and what they do. Protesting is legal–rioting is not. Free speech is protected–threats against a President are not. Using the Justice Department as a political weapon is not acceptable. All of the people who break the law need to be held accountable. Not in a partisan way, but in accordance with the concept of equal justice for everyone.

Some Common-Sense Analysis

Posted on by

On Saturday night, after the assassination attempt on President Trump, Jonathan Turley posted an article at The Hill that sums up what a lot of Americans are thinking.

The article notes:

The assassination attempt of former President Donald Trump left a nation stunned. But the most shocking aspect was that it was not nearly as surprising as it should have been. For months, politicians, the press and pundits have escalated reckless rhetoric in this campaign on both sides. That includes claims that Trump was set to kill democracy, unleash “death squads” and make homosexuals and reporters “disappear.”

President Biden has stoked this rage rhetoric. In 2022, Biden held his controversial speech before Independence Hall where he denounced Trump supporters as enemies of the people. Biden recently referenced the speech and has embraced the claims that this could be our last democratic election.

…Some of us have been saying for years that this rage rhetoric is a dangerous political pitch for the nation. While most people reject the hyperbolic claims, others take them as true. They believe that homosexuals are going to be “disappeared” as claimed on ABC’s “The View” or that the Trump “death squads” are now green lighted by a conservative Supreme Court, as claimed by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

Rage is addictive and contagious. It is also liberating. It allows people a sense of license to take actions that would ordinarily be viewed as repulsive. 

As soon as Trump was elected, unhinged rage became the norm as with Kathy Griffin featuring herself holding the bloody severed head of Trump. 

Just recently, another celebrity, actress Lea DeLaria, begged Biden to “blow [Trump] up” after the recent presidential immunity decision. DeLaria explained that “this is a **** war. This is a war now, and we are fighting for our **** country. And these a**holes are going to take it away. They’re going to take it away.”

For months, people have heard politicians and press call Trump “Hitler” and the GOP a Nazi movement. Some compared stopping Trump to stopping Hitler in 1933. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) declared Trump “is not only unfit, he is destructive to our democracy and he has to be eliminated.” He later apologized.

Please follow the link to read the rest of the article. We need to tone it down and realize that this is an important presidential election, but we need to respect both campaigns.

This Entire Scenario Could (And Should) Have Been Avoided

Posted on by

On Sunday, Power Line Blog posted an article about the shooting of Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport Executive Director Bryan Malinowski. Evidently there were some questions regarding paperwork surrounding the fact that Malinowski was a gun collector who occasionally sold his guns.

The article reports:

“An Arkansas prosecutor on Friday said a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent was justified when he fatally shot the Little Rock airport director during a raid in March,” CBS News reports. “Pulaski County Prosecutor Will Jones said in a letter to ATF that no charges in the shooting would be filed after reviewing the Arkansas State Police investigation of the shooting of Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport Executive Director Bryan Malinowski.” On the other hand, a group of Arkansas legislators had some questions.

“Were they wearing required body cameras?” wondered Rep. Matt Duffield. “If not, why not? And where the hell is the footage? . . . Why the pre-dawn raid? ATF knew where he lived. They knew where he worked. They knew his and his wife’s routines.” Arkansas attorney general Tim Griffin, who had called for release of ATF body-cam footage, suddenly fell silent.

This was not a violent criminal–this was a family man living peacefully at home. When the ATF conducted a SWAT raid on his house, he had no idea who they were and attempted to defend himself and his family.

The article concludes:

The killing of Malinowski, who according to reports was shot in the head

. . . can be blamed on ATF’s leaders who are obsessed with flexing their SWAT teams and have never once cared about the sanctity of human life. Unfortunately, these leaders have demonstrated they are incapable of learning from past mistakes – Ruby Ridge, Waco, Fast & Furious and now Little Rock, to name a few.

Last August, an FBI SWAT team gunned down Craig Robertson, a 75-year-old-woodworker, for threats to Biden he had allegedly posted online. In similar style, the ATF now shoots first and avoids questions later. Like Lon Horiuchi, the FBI sniper who shot dead Vicki Weaver as she held her infant child, it’s a sure bet that nothing will happen to the ATF gunman who took down Malinowski.

Embattled Americans might contrast a famous case from 2020. When repeat criminal George Floyd died in police custody, Minnesota filed murder and manslaughter charges against Minneapolis policeman Derek Chauvin, who was convicted and sentenced to 21 years in prison, after which the Justice Department piled on with federal civil rights charges. Officers Thomas Lane and J. Alexander Kueng, involved in the restraining of Floyd, drew prison sentences of two-and-a half and three-and-a-half years, respectively. Officer Tou Thao, who held back a crowd of onlookers, was sentenced to four years and nine months in prison for aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter.

As we said in the 1960s, no justice no peace.

What are you supposed to do when a bunch of unidentified people break into your house early in the morning?

A Very Odd Story Out Of North Carolina

Posted on by

This story is just now making the news.

According to WRAL News posted May 23:

A Fort Liberty soldier shot and killed a utility worker he believed was trespassing outside his home in Moore County, authorities say.

According to the Moore County Sheriff’s Office, around 8:15 p.m. on May 3, deputies were called to a home on Dowd Road in Carthage.

For those who may not know, Fort Liberty was formerly Fort Bragg. There are a few very weird details about this story.

Red Voice Media reports on May 25:

According to reports, two individuals identified as Chechen men were discovered near the soldier’s residence. The family alleges that one of the suspects, 35-year-old Ramzan Daraev from Chicago, was taking unauthorized photographs of their children. As the family confronted the intruders in a wooded area of the property near a power line, a violent altercation ensued, resulting in Daraev being shot multiple times at close range. Another man, identified as Dzhankutov Adsalan, was found in a vehicle at a distance from the incident and was subsequently questioned and released. The investigation is being led by the Moore County Sheriff’s Office.

Fox News reported on May 23:

Sheriff Ronnie Fields said Daraev was working as a subcontractor for Utilities One, a company based in New Jersey, at the time of his death. Investigators are still working to verify his official employment and immigration status.

At the time of the incident, Daraev was not in possession of any utility equipment, utility clothing, or identification. The incident has been reported to the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Sources tell Fox News that “power company employment is often a cover for status/action” that U.S. intelligence agents use for surveillance of foreign targets overseas.

Another Fox News report stated that the network had unsuccessfully tried to reach the ‘power company’ through telephone calls and emails but had gotten no response.

 

 

This Is Very Concerning

Posted on by

CBS News reported on Tuesday that Jennifer Crumbley, the mother of the Oxford High School shooter, has been found guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter.

The article reports:

Jury deliberations, which lasted 11 hours, began Monday after a week-long trial to determine if the mother bears any responsibility for the Oxford High School shooting, where her son killed four students, Justin Shilling, Madisyn Baldwin, Tate Myre, and Hana St. Juliana, and injured seven other people on Nov. 30, 2021.

The jury foreperson told CBS News Detroit’s Andres Gutierrez that one factor that the jury focused on was that Jennifer Crumbley was the last adult with the gun before her son used it in the mass shooting. 

Jennifer Crumbley is the first parent in the United States to go on trial in a mass school shooting carried out by their child. 

Mrs. Crumbley bought the gun for her son. That was really stupid, but was it any more stupid than a parent who buys a sports car for their high school child who secretly drinks? The school knew the child was troubled. The school asked that the child be taken to therapy (obviously too late). What is the school’s responsibility? Does the school have a responsibility to monitor a troubled child and keep him away from other students?

I really think this is a bad decision. Buying the child a gun was really stupid, but that really wasn’t the problem. Would the child have gotten hold of a different weapon and done the same thing? This will set a very bad precedent.

 

 

 

A Sad Tale Of A Once Wonderful American City

Posted on by

On Saturday, Just the News posted the following headline:

Half of all Chicagoans will witness a shooting by age 40, study finds

The article reports:

Researchers found the numbers are even more stark when broken down along racial barriers, with over half of all Black and Latino study participants by that age having already witnessed such an occurrence, compared to one-fourth of all white participants.

“We expected levels of exposure to gun violence to be high, but not this high,” study author Charles Lanfear, an assistant professor at the University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology, told Fox32Chicago.com. “Our findings are frankly startling and disturbing. A substantial portion of Chicago’s population could be living with trauma as a result of witnessing shootings and homicides, often at a very young age.”

Researchers said the average age for witnessing a shooting was 14 years old, with women only slightly less likely than men to have undergone such a dark experience. Data also shows men were much more likely to be gunshot victims.

In May 2022, The Chicago Tribune reported the following:

In its 2021 annual report on state gun laws, the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence gave Illinois an A-, making it eighth in the nation for the strength of its gun laws. California, New York, Connecticut and New Jersey were among states that ranked higher.

While the nonprofit applauded Illinois’ universal background checks, waiting periods and domestic violence gun laws, it calls for the state to ban the manufacture or sale of untraceable DIY ghost guns and impose restrictions on assault weapons, large-capacity magazines and bulk firearm purchases.

In August, Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed into law a measure requiring background checks for private gun sales or transfers beginning in 2024.

The state law, introduced in the wake of a February 2019 warehouse shooting in suburban Aurora that left five dead and six wounded, also charges an Illinois State Police task force with taking guns from people who’ve had their FOID cards revoked but haven’t turned over their weapons, and streamlines the process for renewing FOID cards and concealed carry licenses.

The article at The Chicago Tribune notes how successful the State Police program was:

A 2019 Tribune investigation found that as many as 30,000 guns were potentially in the hands of people who’d had their FOID cards revoked in the previous four years. A follow-up review last year found improved compliance but also an increase in the number of firearms that were unaccounted for.

Since criminals are not known for following laws, why do people think more gun laws are the answer? We need a moral revolution in America. We need parents who take the time to raise moral children, and we need morality emphasized as a good thing in our schools. That will solve the murder problem in cities like Chicago.

An Heroic Policewoman

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Wire posted an article about the shooting in New York City’s Times Square on Saturday.

The article reports:

Footage of the Times Square shooting on Saturday, when three innocent bystanders were shot, including a four-year-old girl, shows a heroic female member of the NYPD running through the chaos that erupted, carrying the little girl in her arms to safety.

NYPD Deputy Commissioner John Miller tweeted, “Whether [officers are] rushing toward the danger to help save a little girl or rushing home to family after their tour this #MothersDay — the dedication of NY’s Finest knows no bounds.”

Please follow the link to the article to see the video of the policewoman’s actions.

The article notes:

“Police did not recover a gun at the scene, but three shell casings from a .25 caliber were found on West 45th Street,” PIX 11 reported. NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea, deeply upset, ripped New York City’s softened criminal justice policy, including ending cash bail, ending “broken windows” policing, and various police reforms, snapping, “How many kids have to be shot before we take this seriously?” Fox News reported.

The New York Post reported on Sunday that a suspect has been identified in the shooting and that he was reportedly attempting to shoot his brother when the three bystanders were shot. “Farrakhan Muhammad, a 31-year-old CD peddler, was identified as the alleged shooter in Saturday’s horror,” the Post reported, adding, “Two sergeants with the Manhattan South Detective Bureau were then working a fatal overnight stabbing at a West 31st Street single-room-occupancy hotel when they spotted a man who looked almost identical to the alleged shooter, even down to his clothes, hanging around, sources said.”

When the police queried the man, he claimed that his brother had aimed for him. “The suspect has been busted before, including last year for allegedly assaulting a random passerby who tried to intervene when Muhammad started hassling a couple on the street, sources said,” the Post noted.

All of us need to remember that our police are there to help and do a good job of keeping order and helping people. It’s time we weeded out the bad apples in the profession and praised the heroes who are policemen who go to work every day to maintain law and order.

Insert Poison Pill To Block Common Sense Legislation

Posted on by

Yesterday The Epoch Times reported that Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) blocked a resolution that condemns “mob violence.” That sounds like a common sense resolution that should easily pass the Senate, but it was blocked.

The article notes:

Lee (Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) ) took to the Senate floor in Washington Thursday to announce his belief that it was important for the Senate to go on record “condemning the rising tide of mob violence we see across the country and the increasingly prevalent mob mentality that’s fueling it.”

Lee cited several recent instances, including the shooting by a protester in Utah, the assault of a Wisconsin state senator by a group that tore down two statues, and the berating of law enforcement officers for standing at their posts.

While some Americans have organized peaceful protests, other events have devolved into rioting, looting, and violence, Lee noted.

The article continues:

Menendez said he objected, arguing that the resolution made no mention “of America’s original sin, which is slavery.”

Many New Jersey residents don’t believe the United States is morally committed to justice, he argued, which would clash with the third paragraph of the resolution. That paragraph states: “The United States is a diverse nation committed to cultivating respect, friendship, and justice across all such differences, and protecting the God-given equal rights of all Americans under the law.”

“I would consider not objecting to the senator’s request if he also recognized and added to his resolution the fact that we have a president of the United States who ultimately provokes—provokes insightful language and violence,” Menendez added, noting that President Donald Trump recently shared a video that included a man saying “white power.”

Lee was willing to accept the proposed revisions except for the part about Trump, saying lawmakers shouldn’t point to one specific individual.

So Senator Menendez was not willing to condemn violence unless the resolution specifically attacked President Trump. Wow. It’s interesting that the Senator blames President Trump for provoking the violence when the violence is generally committed by people who oppose him. That’s like accusing France of starting World War II because they responded when Germany attacked them. Every rioter is responsible for his/her own actions. They can blame no one but themselves. When they are arrested, they will be held responsible. How dumb does Senator Menendez think the American people are?

The Voice Of Common Sense (Which Probably Will Not Be Heard)

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Wire posted an article about the investigation into the shooting of Rayshard Brooks.

The article reports:

“Atlanta PD detective (Al Hogan) assigned to the [Rayshard Brooks] investigation says he would have charged Brooks — not Rolfe — with 10 counts, including multiple felonies,” posted Philip Holloway, a legal analyst for WSB Radio (post below). Captioning a screenshot of Hogan’s letter, Holloway noted: “Usually law enforcement are witnesses for the state but this is from a defense filing.” 

This is a list of seven things that Detective Hogan would have charged Brooks with:

  1. DUI/DUI Less Safe, a violation of OCGA 40-6-391 
  2. Felony Obstruction, Two counts, a violation of OCGA 16-10-24
  3. Aggravated Assault against a Police Officer, Two Counts, a violation of OCGA 16-5-21
  4. Battery against a Police Officer, Two counts, a violation of OCGA 16-5-23.1
  5. Theft by Taking, a violation of OCGA 16-8-2
  6. Removal of Weapon from a Public Official, a violation of 16-10-33
  7. Robbery, a violation of OCGA 16-8-40.1

The article continues:

As reported by AJC, attorneys for the former officer, Noah Pines and Bill Thomas, have filed a motion seeking reasonable bond for their client. Pines and Thomas maintain in the motion that if Rolfe had reason to believe Brooks committed a crime involving the “infliction” or “threatened infliction” of “serious physical harm,” he was justified in using deadly force.

“In his struggle to evade arrest and revocation 0f his probation, Mr. Brooks concussed Officer Brosnan, stole his Taser, shot him with the Taser, fled with the Taser and then pointed and fired the Taser at Officer Rolfe,” the motion states.

When you attack a police officer, bad things happen to you. I don’t care what color you are. The fact that the police officer has been charged rather than the criminal in this case illustrates how off base mob rule can be. This is one of many examples of why America is a representative republic and not a democracy. A democracy results in mob rule. Mob rule would convict the police officer, despite the evidence. Hopefully, cooler heads will eventually prevail.

Protests Are Legal; Riots And Shooting Are Not

Posted on by

One America News reported yesterday that the suspect who allegedly opened fire at a Kentucky protest has been arrested. On Sunday, Louisville police confirmed the suspect is in custody and has been hospitalized.

ABC News reported the following yesterday:

The suspect behind Saturday’s fatal shooting in Louisville, Kentucky, has been arrested.

Steven Nelson Lopez was taken into custody by police after being caught on surveillance video opening fire in Jefferson Square Park during a protest against Breonna Taylor’s death.

Lopez will be charged with murder, according to authorities.

On Saturday night, Lopez shot into the crowd of protesters and fatally injured a photographer, Tyler Gerth, 27, who died at the scene despite paramedics’ help.

Another protester was also injured, and Lopez was taken to a local hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

One America News reports:

According to authorities, the suspect had already been arrested multiple times in recent weeks for his behavior.

“We are conferring with the attorney’s office on appropriate charges to be filed. This man had been participating in the protests since they began. He had been arrested a couple of times over the past several weeks. He had been repeatedly asked by other members in the park to leave due to his disruptive behavior.” – Chief Robert Schroeder, Louisville Police Department

Protesting is legal. Looting and rioting are not.

What In The World Is Going On In Atlanta?

Posted on by

When the news reports something that contradicts common sense, there is usually a story behind it that is not being reported. Evidently there is a story behind the decision of the District Attorney in Atlanta to charge police officer Garrett Wolfe for the shooting death of Rayshard Brooks. The video of the shooting has been widely posted, and many Americans have seen it. The video clearly shows Mr. Brooks resisting arrest and attacking the policemen who were attempting to arrest him. Somehow in the press conference announcing the charge, Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Paul Howard Jr., only focused on the beginning footage of the Officer Wolfe’s body camera where Mr. Brooks was cooperative. He chose to overlook what happened next. So what is this actually about? The Conservative Treehouse posted an article yesterday that provides some clues.

The article notes:

Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Paul Howard Jr., held a press conference earlier this afternoon to announce eleven charges against police officer Garrett Wolfe for the shooting death of Rayshard Brooks.  The shooting took place at a local Atlanta Wendys.

In what appears to be a decision heavily influenced by local politics, DA Howard is charging officer Garrett Wolfe with felony murder; an unlawful killing with malice, forethought and specific intent.  It looks like Howard is purposefully making a mess.

…There is something rather unusual about the way DA Paul Howard framed the encounter between the police and Rayshard Brooks, because CCTV video and body-cam footage do not support the district attorney’s version of events. Obviously in a courtroom the defense is going to replay the DA statements while they run simultaneous footage of Mr. Rayshard Brooks resisting arrest, fighting with police and ultimately taking one of the officers’ tasers to use as a weapon.

The article explains a possible motive for the District Attorney’s actions:

There’s something very sketchy going on in the political background…. and I cannot help but wonder if Paul Howard Jr. is planning to be defeated in the next election (he seems in trouble) and is, as an intentional and self-centered plan, trying to set-up his political successor with a lose/lose scenario.

The eleven charges which include felony murder seem positioned from a district attorney who knows he won’t be around to deal with the case details.  Howard can present himself as the community hero today and force his successor into the role of legal villain. That scenario is exactly what this looks like.

The article at The Conservative Treehouse includes a screenshot of something the Georgia Bureau of Investigation posted on their Facebook page:

The article concludes with the following statement along with videos of the press conference and of the arrest:

It is brutally obvious DA Paul Howard Jr. is setting a political trap for the next Fulton County District Attorney.   The weird press conference and charges are ridiculous.

Regardless of internal Atlanta politics, the message to police is chilling.  I would not want to be living anywhere around Fulton county, Georgia; because I suspect there is going to be a massive drop in law enforcement.  Crime will likely rise, violence will likely escalate, and the suffering community will be the same black neighborhoods who might currently be thanking DA Howard without realizing what consequences are looming.

Chaos may be coming to Atlanta, courtesy of a politically-motivated District Attorney.

Another Step Toward Justice For Ahmaud Arbery

Posted on by

What happened to Ahmaud Arbery was a disgrace to the State of Georgia and to America. No one has the right to deny a person their right to a trail and a verdict. I hope all of the men involved spend some serious time in prison to consider what they did. I don’t know if Ahmaud Arbery was guilty of anything–that is not the point–the three men involved had no right to take the law into their own hands.

Just the News is reporting today that William “Roddie” Bryan Jr has been arrested an charged with felony murder and criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment. Bryan was the man that filmed the video of the attack on Ahmaud Arbery.

The article reports:

A father and son have already been arrested in the case but media reports indicate Bryan is the individual who filmed the footage that appears to show the moments leading up to Arbery’s death. Authorities on May 7 arrested 64-year-old Gregory McMichael and the 34-year-old Travis McMichael. The McMichaels are white while Arbery was black.

In the video two men appear to be engaged in a struggle and shots can be heard—one man is eventually seen collapsing.

Arbery’s mother believes that her son was out jogging. The elder McMichael said to police that he suspected Arbery of being a burglar and that Arbery attacked his son prior to getting shot.

In the state of Georgia “a person can be charged with felony murder for committing any felony that causes the death of someone else,” according to the Associated Press. “It does not require intent to kill and carries an automatic life sentence.”

The penalty for this crime needs to be severe, and there need to be penalties for anyone who blocked the investigation into the shooting. I don’t know if this was a racial killing, but it sure looks that way, and there should be no room for racism in America.

A Unique, But Logical, Approach To Gun Violence

Posted on by

Yesterday PJ Media posted an article with the following headline, “To Reduce Gun Violence, Arm All Americans.” That is probably the only real solution.

The article reports:

So there was another shooting in Texas. At last count, including the perpetrator, there are seven dead and around 20 injured. We don’t really know anything much about the perpetrator except that he’s been identified as white. Apparently, what prompted the shooting was the perpetrator was stopped by the police, shot his way out, and then raced off, shooting other people until he was finally cornered and shot dead. (Prediction: we’ll find out he had a long criminal record and active arrest warrants for major crimes.)

Now because I’m sure some rental commenter is just waiting to start typing, yes I think it’s awful that people got shot and killed. On the other hand, five people have been killed and 42 injured in Chicago already this weekend. Just this weekend. And I can’t help but wonder why the extremely high murder rates in places like Chicago and Baltimore don’t seem to be news stories.

I’ll leave that for another rant, however, and point out that when you consider murder rates there is a very very high correlation between really stringent gun laws and really high gun violence.

Or put that another way: research shows that very high gun ownership rates correlate with low gun violence. This is true on a local level, and it’s true nationwide where gun ownership has grown dramatically while nationwide gun violence has dropped about 25 percent.

It’s also true that beyond a simple statistical observation, most of the specific recommendations or approaches that people have suggested have no effect. The famous assault weapons ban from the Clinton administration showed no particular effect, and when it expired there is no particular effect. When, after the Heller decision, gun ownership in D.C. went up, gun crime went down.

The only thing that we know is effective to reduce gun violence is to increase gun ownership.

That makes sense–criminals (who generally obtain their guns illegally) are less likely to attack a population that may be armed. A soft target, such as a school, restaurant, or movie theater is much more likely to be attacked. If the criminal knows that a restaurant or theater allows concealed carry, he is likely to pick another target.

We need to accept the fact that there are people who live among us that do bad things. Disarming law-abiding citizens does not stop people who want to do bad things from doing bad things. Law-abiding citizens with guns cause people who do bad things to think twice about doing them.

When Imagination Overtakes Truth

Posted on by

I think I have found one part of the source of the division in America. Breitbart posted the transcript of an interview on MSNBC’s Hardball. Chris Matthews interviewed national security analyst Malcolm Nance.

This is the transcript:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Malcolm, your feelings and thoughts on the last couple days? I haven’t talked to you since these [shootings] have happened.

MALCOLM NANCE: I think that we’re finally in for a great societal change where we’re finally addressing this issue. I wrote a book last year called The Plot to Destroy Democracy, and one of the chapters, I led off with the massacre of 68 children in Norway by the original white supremacist terrorist who created the concept of this terrorist manifesto — Anders Behring Breivik. And he did that because he thought “The Great Replacement” was underway in Norway and that the government was allowing unbridled immigration into that country. So in his trial, he said he massacred those children because he wanted to eliminate the next generation of liberal leadership from Norway as a warning. This country has had several of these mass incidents, but I think we’re overdue for a Breivik-style real massacre of a political nature…

These people feel that they are the foot soldiers and executors of what the disenfranchisement that the white race is feeling, and Donald Trump is giving them subliminal orders in their head. They are no different than the mobilized, self-starting, self-radicalized terrorists of ISIS here in the United States and Europe, who take cars and drive down streets. It’s just that they have a permissive environment in which they can get firearms and go out and attack their perceived enemies.

“Donald Trump is giving them Subliminal orders in their  head”? This passes as news reporting? Anyone who watched this travesty came away with a very distorted view of America and our President. These remarks are incendiary. These remarks will only encourage more unbalanced people to decide to take matters in their own hands. MSNBC should be put on trial for murdering journalism.

 

Exactly Who Is Responsible?

Posted on by

Yesterday The National Review posted an article about the lawsuit suing Remington for the shooting deaths at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

I love the first line of the article:

Rule No. 1 of tort law: The bad guy is the one with the most money to pay you.

Unfortunately that (and politics) seem to be what is driving this lawsuit.

The article notes:

On December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza murdered 26 people, 20 of them schoolchildren ages six and seven.

Lanza killed himself, too. Can’t sue him.

Lanza had a history of mental illness — a long one. He’d been treated under the New Hampshire “Birth to Three” program and later by the Yale Child Study Center. But it would be hard to make a case against those institutions, which enjoy a great deal more sympathy than gun manufacturers do. The schools couldn’t handle Lanza, either, and he was left to the care of his mother, Nancy, who seems to have been a bit of an oddball herself and an enabler. But he murdered her, too, so she’s not around to sue.

…The lawsuit against Remington alleges that the company’s marketing practices contributed to the Sandy Hook massacre. “Remington may never have known Adam Lanza, but they had been courting him for years,” a lawyer for the plaintiffs said. But it is not clear that Remington courted Lanza at all — and it is quite clear that the company never courted him successfully, inasmuch as he stole the Bushmaster rifle he used in the crimes from his mother, whom he murdered. Connecticut has a law against “unfair trade practices,” which is a very odd way of looking at a mass murder.

The article concludes with some specific comments on the opinion of the state supreme court:

This is another way of saying that Remington’s owners are being sued for failing to concur with the substantive political views of gun-control advocates, i.e. that the weapon in question is “ill-suited for legitimate civilian purposes such as self-defense or recreation,” a claim that, it is worth noting, is false on its face inasmuch as semiautomatic rifles are proven instruments of self-defense and by far the most popular recreational firearms in the United States.

The use of commercial litigation and regulatory law to achieve progressive political goals is by now familiar: If an oil company opposes global-warming initiatives, that isn’t politics but “securities fraud,” as far as Democrats are concerned; if conservative activists want to show a film critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the lead-up to a presidential election, that isn’t politics but a “campaign-finance violation,” as far as Democrats are concerned.

Our legal system has become politicized. Hopefully there is no way this decision will stand.

I Suppose This Isn’t A Surprise

Posted on by

In early November, a Maryland man was killed as police tried to confiscate his guns under a ‘red flag’ order (story here). Obviously the man’s response to the police was unwise, but when you boil the whole story down, the man was killed because he resisted when police came to take his guns. That is chilling.

Today The Daily Caller posted an article about recent statement by Democratic California Representative Eric Swalwell.

The article reports:

Democratic California Rep. Eric Swalwell suggested on Friday that the U.S. government could use nuclear weapons on its own citizens if they fight back against firearm confiscation.

Right-wing internet personality Joe Biggs tweeted at Swalwell in response to a May report that Swalwell wants to ban “military-style semiautomatic assault weapons” and prosecute gun owners who did not turn in their newly-banned weapons.

Biggs promised any such legislation would provoke a “war” between gun owners and the government, writing, “You’re outta your f*****g mind if you think I’ll give up my rights and give the gov [sic] all the power.”

…Swalwell replied to Biggs that any such war between the government and gun owners would be “short” because the government has “nukes,” implying that the government would use nuclear weapons against its own citizens.

He further threatened that the nukes are “legit.”

The last sentence in the article states:

Swalwell said in August that he would consider a 2020 presidential run after the 2018 midterm elections.

This is what a threat to the Second Amendment looks like.

Eventually Justice Shows Up

Posted on by

Most of us remember the stand-off between ranchers and the federal government in Oregon in 2016. Robert LaVoy Finicum was killed during the protests surrounding these events. Yesterday The Wall Street Journal posted an article about W. Joseph Astarita, who was part of the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team deployed out of Quantico, Va., to assist other state and federal law-enforcement officers during the standoff. Mr. Astarita is now on trial in U.S. District Court in Portland, Ore., on charges of making false statements and obstruction of justice related to the 2016 fatal shooting of Robert LaVoy Finicum.

The article reports:

The trial will bring to a head the tensions between Western ranchers and the government that had been at the heart of the 2016 standoffs. Mr. Bundy’s armed occupation was fueled by the federal prosecution of Oregon rancher Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven, for arson. The duo, who were sentenced to five years in prison, received a presidential pardon earlier this month.

Mr. Bundy was acquitted for his role in the occupation, along with six followers.

The death of Mr. Finicum has spurred outrage among friends and family. They have long accused the government of carrying out a deadly vendetta. While federal investigators determined the rancher was reaching in his coat for a gun when he was shot, supporters said he was surrendering.

“Someone needs to be charged with murder,” said Angie Bundy, wife of Mr. Bundy’s brother, Ryan.

Local law-enforcement authorities also have criticized the Justice Department for Mr. Astarita’s alleged actions. When the indictments of Mr. Astarita were announced last summer, Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson said they “damage the integrity of the entire law-enforcement profession, which makes me both disappointed and angry.”

The original disagreement between the Bundy family and the federal government had to do with federal regulation of grazing lands.

The Second Amendment Saves Lives

Status

The New York Post posted a story yesterday about a shooting in a restaurant in Oklahoma City. A man walked into the restaurant and began shooting, injuring two people. A person in the restaurant who had a gun shot the gunman, killing him. The two people shot by the gunman are in the hospital recovering.

How long would it have taken for the police to respond to the incident? Would anyone have had a chance to call the police before being shot? How many people would have been shot before the police got there?

This is an example of the basic fact that the quickest way to stop an evil person with a gun is to have a good person with a gun at the scene. I am not supporting creating ‘the wild west,’ but there have been a few shootings recently where having an armed person at the scene saved lives.

We have the resources to put trained people in our schools with guns. There are a number of ways this can be done without breaking the budgets of the schools. One suggestion I have heard is to ask retired policemen or retired military personnel to stand guard a few days a week in return for tax breaks on their local taxes. There are other ways to do this, but that is one suggestion.

The bottom line is simple–having a well-trained, armed person at the scene of a shooting saves lives.

One Answer To School Shootings

Posted on by

Gun control hasn’t worked real well. Most of the mass shootings that have occurred in this country in recent years have been in gun–free zones. For some reason, gun-free signs don’t seem to stop criminals. The theater in Colorado that was shot up was chosen because it was gun-free–the killer know that he would not meet opposition there. The shooting at Arapahoe High School recently ended quickly because there was someone there who had a gun and knew how to use it.

Yesterday Breitbart.com posted the story:

On December 15th Breitbart News reported that an armed guard saved students’ lives when Karl Halverson Pierson began firing his shotgun inside Arapahoe High School.

As more details emerge, it has become evident that the guard — a county deputy resource officer — did this by running toward the shooter in a way that ended the entire incident in 80 seconds.

…On the way into the library the officer directed students to “get down” and let everyone know he was a “county deputy sheriff.”

Said Robinson, “We know for a fact that the shooter knew that the deputy was in the immediate area and while the deputy was containing the shooter, the shooter took his own life.”  

This incident lasted 80 seconds. At Sandy Hook Elementary, where there was no armed guard, Adam Lanza had approximately four unimpeded minutes to carry out his evil intent.

I hate the idea that it is necessary to have armed people in our schools. However, I hate the idea of innocent young people being shot for no reason even more. I don’t like this solution, but I haven’t seen a better one that is as successful.

Enhanced by Zemanta