Category Archives: Crime

One Interesting Lesson from the Alex Jones – Megyn Kelly Confrontation

According to many in the alleged ‘news’ industry, reporters and news agencies are to ask hard questions and expose the unspoken view of various issues.

However, when the broad front of the corporate “news media’ – personified by NBC and Megyn Kelly – encounter someone asking hard questions and a (publicly) unspoken view, they decide to vilify the person so doing.

What is even more offensive is Megyn Kelly (of NBC) attacked Mr. Jones not by answering any of his objections or questions, but by attacking Mr. Jones by appealing to the portrayed emotional response of ‘the parents’ of the Sandy Hook victims. Not only that, but by using a third party report of the emotional response.

When the ‘media’ makes up allegations against President Trump, the President is ‘demanded’ to answer all the inane and baseless charges. Yet, when Alex Jones has some unanswered questions about Sandy Hook, he is told to shut up and not bother ‘anyone’; mainly the mainstream news media.

This is another revelation of the hypocrisy of the left based ‘news media’. The question is not about whether Sandy Hook happened or not, the question is why does Megyn Kelly and NBC believe they are the final decision on reality.

Leave a comment

Filed under Crime, journalists, Political Correctness

A Decent Human Being with a Gun

24 January 2017. Thomas Yoxall, age 43, tattooed and pierced, was driving West on Interstate 10 near Tonopah, Arizona. He saw a man (later identified as Leonard Penneles-Escobar) ‘savagely’ beating an Arizona State Trooper (Edward Andersson). Mr. Yoxall could not ignore the situation and stopped.

He called to the man beating the trooper, presumably to stop beating the trooper. The man kept beating the trooper and Mr. Yoxall fired his personally owned sidearm at the attacker, stopping the attack. While tending the trooper, Mr. Penneles resumed the attack on Trooper Andersson; Mr. Yoxall fired one more round, incapacitating Mr. Penneles permanently; Penneles died later from his wounds.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Girls and Boys; Mr. Thomas Yoxall is the sort of man to be admired and encouraged. Seeing a serious problem, he acted swiftly and surely. Victorious in the conflict, he declines the title ‘hero’ and says the aftermath of killing another human is difficult mentally and emotionally.

A telling comment, Mr. Yoxall says he was “…put there by God.” A good man clinging to his guns and his God.

Not much else to say.

Leave a comment

Filed under Civilization, Crime, Firearms and their use, God, Heroes and Heroism

The Futility of Politically Motivated Prosecutions

Once again, the politically correct and seemingly “specifically criminal law deficient” Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby failed to convict another police officer she wanted to prosecute simply because her constituency was upset at the death of Freddie Gray.

So far, of six officer charged with the negligent homicide of Mr. Gray, four of the politically motivated trials have ended with loses for the ‘state’; that is, none of the four so far tried have been shown to be culpable under criminal standards for Mr. Gray’s death. Three of those trials have been acquittals and the ‘best’ results for Marilyn Mosby and the rest of the prosecution team has been a mis-trial.

This is what happens when prosecutors indict people on the demand of protestors instead of evidence. Not to compare any of the six officer indicted with Jesus, the Christ, but the protestors and demonstrators in Jerusalem demanded Pilate to condemn Jesus to death. Jesus’ execution followed and was based on the ‘public opinion’ of demonstrators and protestors rather than on evidence – which Pilate himself admitted.

Essentially, Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby participated in a legalized form of lynch mob. So far, she has failed, happily for the State of Maryland, the United States and jurisprudence (does attorney Mosby understand the ‘prudence’ part of that word?) in general.

Leave a comment

Filed under Crime, General Idiocy, Idiot Politicians, Political Correctness, Politics

Rights? What Rights?

North Carolina has passed a state law prohibiting the use of gender specific rest room by people of a gender not identified on the bathroom.

In common terms, men may not use women’s rest rooms and vice-versa.

The Federal Government, specifically the Obama Administration and politically appointed positions of the Obama Administration, has ordered gender specific rest rooms to open to anyone who chooses to use them; regardless of who is already using the rest room.

Note this does not apply only to those persons who have had extensive surgery to remove extraneous sexual organs and features, additionally cosmetically adding the appearance of the desired sexual organs and features; but applies to anyone ‘identifying’ as a member of a sex. So a physically complete, functional female can enter a male rest room at will. Conversely, a physically complete and fully functional male can enter a female rest room at will.

According to the Obama Administration – and a group of supporters presumably and announced as members of the self-proclaimed “GBLT community” (“GBLT” is identified as Gay – Bi sexual – Lesbian – Transvestite or Trans sexual) demand this; as anything less intrudes on their ‘right’ to relieve themselves.

There are several inconsistent and somewhat incoherent thoughts in this.

One: From where does the ‘right’ to use a rest room of the other sex derive? The U. S. Constitution lists no such right along with speedy trials, possessing and carrying arms, security in property and papers, and the ability to criticize the government; probably some others I haven’t mentioned.

The Declaration of Independence – if not the structure of our nation and government as the Constitution, is the spirit of our nation and government – cites ‘inalienable rights’ ‘endowed by our Creator’ as the source of individual rights. I hear no argument nor can I cite such such ‘rights’ as endowed by the Creator. Nor has anyone else heretofore. Ever.

Two: Presuming such rights – and I do not, I speak only for sake of argument – why and how do the rights of ‘this group’ overrule the rights of ‘that group’? In common speech and thought, how does the claimed ‘right’ of a physical male who ‘self-identifies’ as a female, over rule the right of physical females who feel threatened and humiliated by the presence of a physical male in their rest room?

Why is allowing ‘other sex’ people to invade the rest rooms of ‘regular sex’ people so important?

Three: How many of those people who might be considered “LBGT” really want to use the rest room of the other sex? How many Lesbians want to use rest room facilities with men? (Either as the invader or the invadee?) (I see from my spell check I’ve invented another word.) Conversely, how many homosexually inclined men want to use rest room facilities with women? (Again, as invader or invadee?) From my own knowledge derived from the men and women I know to be homosexual, none of them have suggested – to me anyway – they really feel deprived not being allowed in the ‘other’ rest room.

Four: The incidence of homosexuality – including lesbianism – in this country (or among humans world wide) is a very slim minority. There are varying estimates on the percentage. All the scientific surveys and estimates I can find start by saying, “No one really knows” and then proceeds with their best guess. I find it not surprising that most answers tend to support the views of the parent organization or agency. (Non-gay organizations tend to be lower in estimates than gay activist organizations.) However, all groups seem to find the homosexual (male and female) incidence rates are distinct minorities. The rates range from less than four percent to approaching twenty percent.

Therefore, by any count, the number of persons supporting and expecting some form of benefit from the dictate to ‘open the rest rooms’ to any is a rather small minority. What is the desire of the Obama Administration in discomfiting the
majority for the supposed benefit of a distinct minority?

By the way, we are not suggesting – nor does the North Carolina law, nor anyone else – denial of public restrooms to anyone. There is no question of “You have to go home to go”. Unless of course, the ‘open rest room’ faction succeeds; in which case the majority of people will be forced to share facilities with those who want to embarrass and possibly harm them.

Five: President Obama is now threatening to penalize North Carolina and other local governmental agencies if they do not comply with his dictates. All schools receiving federal funds – and of course, ALL public schools have been mandated to receive federal funds – or in the common tongue, individual citizen’s tax money – and therefore, ALL public schools are subject to the extortion by command, to open all restrooms to anyone who feels like it.

What is the purpose of all this? Other than the progressive goal of destroying all morals and values, one does not know. One understands this will expose all school age children – in a very vulnerable state – to the visual review of anyone and everyone. This is desired by the progressive faction of society, but I’m not sure it is desired by many others.

One other thing: If the United States elects a Democrat, either Democrat, to the Presidency everyone may rest assured this attack will continue. The reader may vote as the reader pleases. If getting more money and ‘benefits’ is more important than your children, feel free to vote Democrat.

If one’s children are important, one must consider doing otherwise.

Leave a comment

Filed under Christianity, Civilization, Crime, Idiot Politicians, Nation, Political Correctness

There is fear, and there is fear.

Fear from ‘’: a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined; the feeling or condition of being afraid. In this condition, fear is a stimulus for ‘fright or flight’; action or activity to prevent or avoid the potential danger. Running away, shooting back, ducking, changing lanes or sometime simply holding still and concentrating on not tensing muscles during a medical injection.

Fear is the perception of danger or pain. Hopefully this is followed by some action to mitigate or remove the stimulus.

Then, from the Old Man book of experience and observation, fear is a condition gripping both the centers of thought and action (colloquially, ‘heart and brain’) resulting in a lack of action or reaction other than staying in place, voiding one’s bladder and perhaps major intestine; lastly, not avoiding the danger. Some refer to this as the “deer (or rabbit) in the headlights” syndrome.

For instance, those individuals who claim to be adherents of Islam and simultaneously feel the need to murder others to bring Islam to supremacy are known commonly as ‘terrorists’. Most members of U. S. based police agencies understand a finite but definite danger exists from those so described formerly. That is, “terrorists will kill U. S. police officers when convenient for the terrorists”.

Any questions? Good.

Good Fear
Taking steps to avoid being killed (as outlined above) is reasonable. Officers are encouraged to be vigilant, both on and off duty; to keep the mechanical means of self-defense available in all senses of the word; to exercise and keep in good physical shape; to plan ahead as far as possible. Even, in extremis to prepare documents and personal property for one’s eventual demise. (Even without terrorists, one can be T-boned by otherwise ‘innocent’ traffic or contract cancer and so forth.) (Note the attacker’s statements and reasons for attacking officer Harnett.)

Those are all activities and actions I deem proper and reasonable.

Objections? Good.

Recently, one of Philladelphia’s finest – Officer Jesse Harnett – was attacked and wounded (shot) by a man (who shall remain nameless as befits his character in this essay) using a Glock 19 pistol. Said pistol was obtained by the attacker in some fashion AFTER the pistol was stolen from the Philladelphia Police Department. (See for a full report rather than me cutting and pasting it all.)

Bad Fear

The city mayor – Jim Kenney – has stated in a press conference about the attempted murder “It has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.” (At this point, please recall the attacker’s statement.) Not only that, but Mayor Kenney once again – on cue – blames the presence of ‘guns’ for criminal activity.

Since the arm was stolen from the Philadelphia Police (from an individual officer is what is reported); and because Mayor Kenney implies the weapon caused the attacker to attempt the murder of Officer Harnett, one is forced to inquire if the same weapon caused the last officer who possessed the weapon to attempt any murders? Frankly, I don’t think so.

This is an example of the second concept of (bad) fear. Panic. In order to follow the President’s example (demand) of allowing no ill-favored news or reports about Islam, Mayor Kenney is ignoring the comments of the attacker and pretending this was just another criminal doing what criminals do. Blaming guns for criminal acts. Missing from Mayor Kenney’s comments, of course, are warnings of Global Warming and demand for tax-payer funded Abortion. No doubt he’ll be chided for those omissions.

As it happens, based on the news photographs of the attacker, is a black man. Therefore, a black criminal attempted to kill officer Harnett, not a Muslim. I’m wondering how Al Sharpton is going to respond? Also, I’m breathless to see Mayor Kenney’s response to Sharpton.

If Sharpton does not interfere, one wonders why the silence.

Leave a comment

Filed under Civilization, Crime, Idiot Politicians, Islam, Nation, Political Correctness

How Much Do Your Mayor Have in Grapes?

If you have not heard what the Major of Jerusalem did concerning the knifer a day or so ago, you live a protected life.

Check out the reports. His Honor, the Mayor (if that’s the appropriate title in Jerusalem) wrestled the knife wielding man to the ground. Yes, his bodyguard was armed and present, but the Mayor was empty handed.

He’s on the ‘free beer’ if he shows up list.

Leave a comment

Filed under Civilization, Crime, Heroes and Heroism, Nation, Political Correctness, Politics, Uncategorized

On Prayer (Part Two)

Does God answer prayer?

That’s a loaded question.

The answer is “Of course God answers prayer”. Then the argument begins.

“God didn’t answer MY prayer!” is usually the beginning of the counter-argument.

So… The concept of God answering prayer is rather misunderstood. To begin, God is not a Cosmic Genie (djinn) who is obligated to grant all requests. Far too often, this is a common assumption although not usually spoken aloud.

Consider the djinn. To obtain wishes – be it three or unlimited – one must first locate the djinn bottle or lamp. Then, one is obliged to polish or rub the lamp in order to summon the djinn. In a rather far-stretched analogy, in order to obtain some favor from God, one must first establish a relationship with Him. There’s no point in asking much of anyone unless one has open lines of communication, some sort of relationship.

A standard bit of Christian doctrine is the only prayer a non-believer can submit that will be heard and answered is that of a request for forgiveness of sins. This action includes and cannot be made without a request to God to ‘fix’ one’s life. So an opening prayer without prior communication to win the lottery is probably not going to be answered affirmatively.

In short, nonbelievers should not expect anything material from God; other than what God provides to the world at large. Forgive me if this seems rather curt and dismissive, but that’s how it works. One wouldn’t expect a gift of several thousand dollars from George Soros (who has it to give, by all accounts) without at least being on speaking terms with him. Get real.

In my observation, God gives three answers to any given prayer.

1. “Yes.”

2. “No.”

3. “Stand by, I’ve got a better idea.”

The third answer is the most common. When Christians ask The Lord for something – either knowledge or merchandise – and honestly want an answer, God is most willing to assist.

One should be aware of asking for silly things. Even if one is serious in asking for, say, attached, bird-like wings powered by one’s own muscles; humans do not as a rule have wings. All manner of ‘super powers’ can be safely included in this consideration. Also, consider that if The Lord should grant such powers, He may expect one to use those powers appropriately. Being Batman might become a burden.

As long as I’m on the subject of silliness, I’ll include this idea. Don’t expect God to cover for sloth, negligence or carelessness. A student who has ignored all lectures, homework and studying for the entire course of a class. Praying for a ‘good grade’ is not a good idea. There are all manner of ‘problems’ which are caused by human misconduct for which one cannot reasonably expect God to cover. Driving into a tree by neglect, for instance; then expecting God to fix the damage to the car. Getting liquored up stupid and then expecting God to cure the hangover. Sow wild oats all week and then pray for crop failure.
Or worse. You pick.

As I mentioned in the previous installment, prayer is a two-way communication. Not only that, but as one’s prayer life develops, one understands more of what God expects and desires. So our prayers as Christians become part of the effort to grow in knowledge of God and to serve His will and kingdom. One doesn’t ask a ‘friend’ for a favor which revolts the friend’s sensibilities or morals. One cannot seriously ask God to perform – or fail to perform – an action in total disregard of God’s nature.

Usually, when God answers “No”, there is an obvious explanation – as above – or a specific explanation. God does not, even in ‘normal’ life encourage sloth, covetousness or lack of motivation. Winning the lottery will not – by God’s design – take the place of work and thrift. Or just planning ahead.

The most common answer to prayer is “I’ve got a better idea”. Usually, when Christians pray they have thought through the perceived problem and offer their own solution for God’s action. When The Lord agrees that a problem exists, He already has a plan. Prayer will allow a Christian to understand, agree with and submit to The Lord’s will in the matter. That is part of the feed back God gives us through prayer. This qualifies as a “Yes” answer, but usually in a manner other than one thought. Which is good, when thinking about it.

This also covers things like ‘world peace’, ‘hunger’ and ‘violence’. God has already given humanity the knowledge and instructions to take care of all those issues. The problem is humans tend to ignore God and do what suits them – and usually just for the moment. God chooses not to ‘fix’ everything right now. That would entail changing everyone and they way everyone thinks against their will. That doesn’t seem to be way God operates. He wants humanity to willingly accept Him, and follow the already disclosed directions. Then all those horrid things in world history will end.

Learning to pray as a mature Christian is a learned task. And like most learned tasks, or skills, it requires practice and paying attention to why it didn’t go as one expected – the first time.

One more item. Nearly every Christian has prayed for God to reveal His will to them. He will, but only when the Christian is already doing what God wants them to be doing now. If one refuses to follow God in the simple things, He isn’t likely to trust one in the advanced things.

Leave a comment

Filed under Christianity, Crime, God, religion