Archive for the ‘First Responders’ Category

73,740 Rabid Gun Nuts

Tuesday, April 17th, 2012

Ambulance Driver (aka Kelly Grayson) attends Occupy St. Louisthe NRA Convention.

73,740 Rabid Gun Nuts Descend Upon St. Louis…

… and nobody gets shot.

No fisticuffs ensue.

Nobody craps on a cop car.

Nobody gets arrested.

Nobody calls for overthrow of the government, other than at the ballot box.

There are no drunken brawls, no ambulances called, no… nothing.

Nothing, that is, except close to 74,000 men, women and children gathered to celebrate the amendment that guarantees their personal freedom.

And see Lawdog’s comments in the same vein post before last.

[Update: forgot the link to AD's original article.]

Breaking the Narrative

Sunday, April 15th, 2012

Lawdog gives us an excellent example of how badly the politically correct narrative of the traditional media is breaking down.

Robert Heinlein is often quoted as saying, “An armed society is a polite society.”

In my experience nowhere has this been as apparent as this convention. Everyone, from the NRA Media staff to 99% of the vendors to the people wandering the aisles, has been as courteous and accomodating as they can be.

Well, for the most part. Several bloggers — friends both old and new — have taken over a table in the corner of the Media Room as base camp for our perambulations throughout the convention, and as I sit here, I can look over to the long table occupied by traditional media … and the disdain of not only the traditional media, but the traditonal gun media, for us lowly, plebian bloggers is palpable.

LD goes on to give a couple of examples of how exhibitors changed, very much for the better, when they learned that LD’s “Media” pass meant “blogger”.

I would love to see video of pro-gun media, I mean bloggers, attempting to interview the moribund media.

Not Fools

Sunday, April 1st, 2012

So, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources has decided that come April First, a particular kind of pig is an invasive species, that the pigs must be destroyed. That’s fine for actual, feral pigs. And the original order says,

Wild boar, wild hog, wild swine, feral pig, feral hog, feral swine, Old world swine, razorback, eurasian wild boar, Russian wild boar (Sus scrofa Linnaeus). This subsection does not and is not intended to affect sus domestica involved in domestic hog production.

[My emphasis.]

Problem is, not only is there is no real difference between sus domestica and sus scrofa, but any variety of pig that goes feral acquires unpleasant characteristics. It’s not the species or sub-species, it’s whether or not the animals are the subjects of husbandry.

My favorite part of the DNR regulation linked to above?

Other characteristics not currently known to the MDNR that are identified by the scientific community.
[/blockquote]
AKA, “Any pig shit rule our tame whitecoats come up with.” And:

Possession of the following live species, including a hybrid or genetic variant of the species, an egg or offspring of the species or of a hybrid or genetically engineered variant, is prohibited….

In sum, Michigan DNR can come onto your farm anytime it wants, look at your pigs, under criteria that aren’t even known to it yet, and if it decides your livestock is in non-compliance, they get to destroy. Oh, and you won’t be compensated:

Indemnification cannot be paid to prohibited swine that are destroyed. Indemnification in statute is for livestock and invasive species are not livestock, and are therefore, not eligible for indemnification.

In fact, not only will you not be compensated, you will be stuck with the costs of destroying your livelihood.

The cost for enforcement of the order will depend on the level of compliance with the Order by April 1, 2012

Apparently, DNR has forgotten that farmers tend to be more than a little…independent.

I’m gonna bet that, with farmers saying openly that if DNR shows up with guns to destroy the pigs, the farmers will shoot back, DNR is going to back down, hard and fast.

I hope so.

Because if not, this may well be casus belli for the Second Civil War.

And across the state of Michigan, Department agents will discover that DNR also means, “Do Not Resuscitate.”

I Predict: EPA Doesn’t Care

Thursday, March 22nd, 2012

So, the Supreme Court gave the EPA an epic smackdown of their attempt to prevent the Sacketts from building their house on land zoned for residential use, despite proper permits and improvements (such as utilities) already in place.

In a sane world, the EPA would turn tail and never again darken the Sackett’s door. In a just world, the EPA bureaucrats who pursued this egregiously abusive case would be personally on the hook for the Sackett’s legal costs. They should also be up on criminal charges. (Ha! I’m dreaming, I know.)

Instead, I predict the EPA will effectively ignore the Supreme Court, in much the same way Chicago and Washington D.C. have ignored the Court in Second Amendment cases. Both cities have continued to place enormous burdens on citizens wishing to exercise their human right to keep and bear arms.

That’s what’s going to happen here. The EPA will make token changes in their demands, issue a raft of new regulations establishing courses of flaming hoops the Sacketts must jump through to obtain “variances” and “exemptions”, and continue to act as if the Sacketts want to manufacture nerve gas in the kitchen and enrich uranium in the garage.

Arm up, Mike and Chantell. The Reavers are still at your door, mark my words.

[update]

Oh, hey, never mind. “Epic Smackdown”? I should have glanced at the decision before posting.

From the slip opinion (10-1062):

Held: The Sacketts may bring a civil action under the APA to challenge the issuance of the EPA’s order.

Further:

Today we consider only whether the dispute may be brought to court by challenging the compliance order—we do not resolve the dispute on the merits.

That’s it. The Court didn’t tell EPA to eat Sackett shit and die. It didn’t void the $37,000 per day fines the Sacketts are racking up for non-compliance.

It just says the Sacketts can spend even more money they don’t have to defend their property in court. Up till now, their fight has been only and solely to get permission to be heard at all.

Go ahead, please. Try to explain to me why I should vote this fall. The more I see of shit like this, the more I understand: Voting isn’t a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. It isn’t even about choosing your next slave master.

The entire Federal government is illegitimate. All three branches, top to bottom, it’s rotten.

I will not accord it the respect of voting for its public faces.

Let’s review the Five Boxes, shall we?

Soap Box: Public exposure in the news did not stop the EPA.

Ballot Box: How are the Sacketts supposed to influence elections to the point where they receive justice? Which elections should they influence?

Jury Box and Witness Box: the Sacketts just won a long and exhausting fight to avail themselves of these Boxes. What do they have left to actually use them?

Hint: I’ve only accounted for four Boxes.

The Three Rules on Blue Bloods

Monday, February 6th, 2012

Friday night, I watched in astonishment as Donnie Reagan has The Talk with son Jack:

Oh, I’m sure we can come up with quibbles. (“Irresponsible bastards! There’s four rules, everybody knows that!” “He’s an Only One!” “Kid should have had the talk as soon as he could walk!” “If they had any balls, they’d've had Danny say bugger hook/bang switch. Blue bloods? Blue noses, is more like it.”)

I do not care.

A great many folks in the audience have likely never, ever heard The Talk or anything like it. Get this: a child handles a gun, for the first time, under the watchful eye of his father. This is presented not just as a good thing, a safety thing, but a healing thing. And the father, known as the Reagan family hot head, calmly and patiently explains to his angry, disapproving wife why he is doing this — and she has no answer to him.

This is a huge shift. I’m astonished, and not a little disappointed, that we gun folk have not praised this to high heaven.

It does not matter that we might do The Talk differently with our children. It doesn’t even matter that the show does not (yet) acknowledge that Donnie committed a NYC felony by handing his gun to a child, or that most law abiding New Yorkers don’t even own a gun with which to have The Talk.

What’s important is that the ice is breaking. Giving a gun to your child to hold is shown as a Good Thing.

I can’t help but wonder if this came about, in part, due to Tom Selleck’s influence. It may even have been inspired by the notorious incident where Selleck scolded another actor on the set for unsafe gunhandling. (Although that action was not universally lauded.)

But really, none of that matters.

What matters is that on prime time TV, millions of viewers watched as a man defended his family with a gun, and gave his son The Talk to calm his anxiety after witnessing a shooting, and having a bullet pass by him in a gunfight.

We’re winning.

[Watch the full episode here.]


Thanks to John Venlet at Improved Clinch for the link.

I never had the The Gun Talk with my Dad (and, yes, I meant that phrase to resonate with “The Sex Talk”), but John did, and I’m pleased that this scene reminded him of that, apparently favorably.

And, yeah, maybe we’re not “winning”, exactly, but we’re at the very least not losing as fast.

“There It Is”

Tuesday, November 22nd, 2011


From KISP.

Says Uncle:

The first generation of kids who grew up using hand sanitizer every 30 seconds and everyone gets a trophy is currently Occupying Whatever.

Truculent Sexual Assault

Thursday, September 8th, 2011

There are some things that simply must be posted far and wide, not to spread the news, necessarily, but as a show of support.

Amy Alkon, who writes the Advice Goddess blog, refused to go through the scanner. Good for her.

Because this annoyed Thedala Magee the Totally Stupid Agent working Alkon’s line, Magee groped Alkon, forcing the edge of her hand into Alkon’s labia four times.

Alkon accused Magee of rape, right there in line, loudly for the other passengers to hear.

Good for her.

Magee responded by suing Alkon for, basically, hurting her feelings.

Hey, Magee?

You are an oath breaker, a thug, a rapist. I look for the day when you and your fellow oath breaking thugs are hung at dawn as the traitors you are. “Domestic enemy,” you filth. That would be you. You are the reason we have a Second Amendment, and a Fourth, and a Fifth, and a first.

Here’s the legal response from Alkon’s lawyer, Marc Randazza, to Thugala Magee’s lawer, Vicki Roberts. It is a thing of vicious beauty, right down to the salutation: “Best regards”. I love that. “Best regards.”

We believe that Ms. Alkon was within her rights to act violently in self-defense. Instead, she defended herself with mere words. Her reaction to Ms. Magee’s crime is so tame on the scale of legally and morally justified responses that Ms. Magee should be thankful that words of protest are all she received. We must all “tolerate insulting, and even outrageous, speech in order to provide adequate ‘breathing space’ to the freedoms protected by the First Amendment.”
Snyder v. Phelps, ___ U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 1207, 1219 (2011), citing
Boos v. Barry, 485 U.S. 312, 322 (1988).

There is no competing requirement that we tolerate being sexually abused as retaliation for believing in the Fourth Amendment.

[My bold.]

Beautiful.

===

Popehat has a good summary.

Justice or Gang Intimidation?

Wednesday, September 7th, 2011

First I heard of the Kenneth Green story was at Second City Cop, a pro-Second Amendment Chicago police blog I trust for insider news of top-down corruption.

SCC points to this article by Chuck Goudie of the Daily Herald.

The most dangerous place for a Chicago police officer is:

a. Face-to-face with a heavily armed drug gang.
b. Trapped by gangbangers at the end of a dark alley in Englewood.
c. Cornered by some lifers carrying shivs at Stateville prison.
d. Sitting in a Cook County courtroom.

The correct answer is d.

Or at least it was last Friday.

That is when the man in the mug shot was allowed to go home, after being found not guilty of shooting and trying to kill two Chicago police officers.

You didn’t hear anything about the trial, maybe because the cops were just wounded and survived the July 2009 shooting. It probably attracted little attention because the case should have been a lock for prosecutors.

The guy’s name is Kenneth Green. He was 21 years old at the time and living in an apartment near 112th Street and Michigan Avenue in Roseland.

A special Chicago police team raided his place with a search warrant for drugs. Imagine one of those scenes on the copper TV shows: doors fly open, guns out, lots of yelling. They are among the riskiest moments in any police officer’s life.

On that day two years ago, veteran officers Scott McKenna and Danny O’Toole were on the warrant team doing what they had done many times. The police team bursts in and spreads out, clearing the apartment room by room to make sure the search for drugs can safely begin.

Rarely do these “jobs,” as the police refer to them, go as planned. It takes incredible awareness, split-second reactions and extraordinary judgment. The wrong decision can mean people end up dead.

I strongly urge you to read the whole thing.

Indeed, this “job” did not go according to plan. Fortunately, in this case no one died, but two officers were shot in their legs.

The problem with the trial, according to Goudie and SCC, is that the courtroom was packed with Green’s fellow gang members, whose presence “intimidated” the jury into finding Green not guilty.

I’m sorry, SCC, but something about this bothered me at the time, although I didn’t know what. As is often the case, however, I thought I detected a whiff of cops versus everybody else, where “everybody else” means “ungrateful perps, most of whom haven’t been arrested or convicted yet.”

Finally, via Pete Guither at Drug WarRant, I hear the other side of the story.

A criminal defense attorney in Chicago represented a client who was involved in a situation we’ve seen far too often in this destructive war: SWAT-style serving of a search warrant with no investigation or knowledge of who or what is in the house. In this case, a resident managed to get off four shots aimed low through his bedroom door at what he thought were violent criminal intruders, and he (as well as six children in the house) managed to avoid being killed by the 37 shots fired by police. Naturally, he was charged with attempted first degree murder and aggravated battery.

Here is the closing argument. Simple, powerful, effective.

I’m not even going to quote defense attorney Marcus L. Schantz’s closing argument. Read the whole thing.

SCC makes this comment:

Goudie outlines the case against the shooter, the blatant disregard for human life exhibited by the shooters, the amazing restraint by the officers.

“Blatant disregard for human life”, SCC? Green fired four shots, aiming low, at violent intruders who, more or less blindly fired 37 shots into a house they knew had children in it, intruders who turned out to be police officers showing “amazing restraint”.

SCC, want to know why The People are showing growing distrust and resentment against The Police? This is why. We’re just as intimidated by you as we are by any other gang. Sure, they can pack a courtroom, but we know the courtroom exists, along with the entire weight of the criminal justice system. We see your cars, your uniforms, your badges. We watch you on TV. We read about you in the papers.

When you follow us on the streets, you think we’re not intimidated?

I can see no reason why a SWAT style dynamic entry was needed in this case. Your colleagues weren’t rescuing a hostage, they were serving a drug warrant. Fine. Bust the guy as he leaves his house. Might evidence get flushed down the toilet? You know what, if it was, the amount was so small that it could be flushed away, it does not represent a significant threat to the community that justifies the risk to either cops or the occupants.

You often complain, SCC, of how there aren’t enough cops on the street to do the job you are asked to do.

This kind of action is not the job we citizens want you to do. We don’t believe in the War on Drugs. We certainly don’t believe a flushable quantity of crack is worth risking your lives, or ours, in a dynamic entry.

You’ve been an advocate of the Second Amendment, SCC, for which I admire and applaud you. However, you seem to think armed citizens will only shoot at bad guys. Guess what, though? If you and your fellow cops act like arrogant gangsters, we’ll shoot at you, too, and increasingly, you’re going to find that when that happens, the rest of us will acquit the shooter at trial.

We fear gangs, SCC. We are intimidated.

But, again, not just by packed court rooms; increasingly, by the courtrooms themselves, by a justice system that seems not concerned with justice, and not on our side.

We want you on our side, SCC. We want to see you as our allies, as our fellow citizens. “The police are the people, and the people are the police,” says Peel, and I believe that.

But you have got to stop busting through our bedroom doors, guns blazing, over a few grams of contraband. That is not “a duty incumbent on every citizen”.

One more point: The defense attorney’s closing argument is dense with fact. It raises prosecution points one after another, often using the testimony of the police themselves, and counters them.

Goudie’s Herald article does not “outline the facts”; it’s is almost nothing but sensationalism, starting with the little pop quiz identifying the courtroom as more dangerous to cops than the street. It doesn’t even try to present the defense case. The police say Green’s a bad guy doing bad things, we should trust them and convict him of whatever the prosecution chooses to charge him with. Case closed.

Um, no. Green’s case is closed, and not in favor of the police, the prosecutor, or the courts. However, the case against the Drug War, the war on the people, the war on the Second, Fourth, and Fifth amendments, is still being made.

The New Outlaws

Saturday, March 12th, 2011

Jim Palmer, Director of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, at 608.273.3840, has just declared himself to be a union goon, and against the rule of law.

As you undoubtedly know, Governor Walker recently proposed a “budget adjustment bill” to eviscerate public employees’ right to collectively bargain in Wisconsin…

As you also know, Scott Walker did not campaign on this issue when he ran for office. If he had, we are confident that you would not be listed among his largest contributors. As such, we are contacting you now to request your support.

The undersigned groups would like your company to publicly oppose Governor Walker’s efforts to virtually eliminate collective bargaining for public employees in Wisconsin. While we appreciate that you may need some time to consider this request, we ask for your response by March 17. In the event that you do not respond to this request by that date, we will assume that you stand with Governor Walker and against the teachers, nurses, police officers, fire fighters and other dedicated public employees who serve our communities.

In the event that you cannot support this effort to save collective bargaining, please be advised that the undersigned will publicly and formally boycott the goods and services provided by your company. However, if you join us, we will do everything in our power to publicly celebrate your partnership in the fight to preserve the right of public employees to be heard at the bargaining table.

Wisconsin’s public employee unions serve to protect and promote equality and fairness in the workplace. We hope you will stand with us and publicly share that ideal.

In the event you would like to discuss this matter further, please contact the Director of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, Jim Palmer, at 608.273.3840.

Co-signed by Mahlon Mitchell, President, Professional Fire Fighters of Wisconsin; Joe Conway, President, International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 311; John Matthews, Executive Director, Madison Teachers, Inc.; Keith Patt, Executive Director, Green Bay Education Association; Bob Richardson, President, Dane County Deputy Sheriff’s Association; Dan Frei, President, Madison Professional Police Officers Association.

Thugs, goons, poltroons, wallowers in the public trough, the whole lot of them. They do not care for public safety or children. I do not think they even care about police officers, firefighters, or teachers.

They care for lining their own pockets, and for power. Pure and simple.

Billy Beck: “”All politics in this country now is just dress rehearsal for civil war.”

That war is now moving beyond rehearsal into the skirmish stage, and it’s not tea partiers in Texas, or gun toting crazies in Arizona, lighting the fuse.

It’s Wisconsin Democrats, liberals, and unions.

QotD: “People Should Believe That If They’re Going to Rob a Business, the Business Owner Is Gonna Have… Protection”

Sunday, December 19th, 2010

Quote of the Day from Ken Nealy, of the Houston Police Robbery Division:

Most knowledgeable, or reasonable, people should believe that if they’re going to rob a business, the business owner is gonna have some type of protection to protect themselves, their property and their employees, so that should be considered food for thought.

OK, not the most elegant statement ever made on the topic. ["Knowledgeable or reasonable" robbers, Ken? How many of those have you run across in your investigations?] And I’d love to see this coming from our police chief, and our Mayor.

But clearly the tide is turning.

The clearest indicator, in fact, is that this quote comes from a local TV station, KHOU Channel 11.

This is in the context of recent incidents in which a jewelry store owner shot and killed three robbers, and a grocery store owner shot two robbers and killed one of them.

The reports are straightforward, and do not decry shop owners defending themselves. Local black and Hispanic leaders are not quoted as blaming the robbers’ actions on society. Most important, the comments at KHOU’s website are overwhelmingly in favor of the self-defenders.

KHOU was to my knowledge the soul TV presence at the Houston Teaparty event, and their coverage of that was also favorable, or at least neutral. I think they’re getting a clue.

Update:

I wanted to praise Investigator Nealy on his remark, but could find no contact email (understandably, I guess). Instead, I emailed Officer McCoy, who runs the HPD Recruiting Blog:

I was pleased, even a bit stunned, to see KHOU’s recent report on the trend among shop owners to arm themselves against robbery. This report featured a clip of your own Ken Nealy of the Robbery Division saying, “Most knowledgeable, or reasonable, people should believe that if they’re going to rob a business, the business owner is gonna have some type of protection to protect themselves, their property and their employees, so that should be considered food for thought.”

The concept of “knowledgeable or reasonable” armed robbers aside, this is an outstanding position for a police official to take. I can think of no greater deterrent to crime than the wide-spread knowledge among even unreasonable would-be robbers that they risk far more than yet another trip through the revolving court system door.

Investigator Nealy exemplifies Sir Robert Peel’s Seventh Principle of Policing: “Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”

This attitude will go far to engender mutual respect between all citizens who lawfully defend their communities and themselves, in uniform and out, and to breaking down the us-and-them wall that weakens our resolve, our security, and our liberty.

Please, if you can, forward my appreciation to Investigator Nealy. I encourage his superiors to support his statement, loudly and publicly. (Including Captain Holloway, Asst. Chief Montalvo, Chief McClelland, and Mayor Parker. And not neglecting Captain Slinkard and Deputy Director Woolfolk.)

Update: Aw, dang it! Officer McCoy is ignoring his email until after Christmas, and he’s about the only online HPD contact I could find.