If she had let him get an operation to cut off his dick, she would have been fine, but letting a 10 year old get a tattoo is just going too far.
Criminals
Say What?
The vice principal of a Cleveland high school let three ski mask wearing, armed gunmen into the locked school with students inside, because he saw that police were chasing them and was afraid the police would shoot them.
A school security officer called 911 while watching teens with masks and guns. They had pulled up in three stolen cars and walked up to the school. The school went into lockdown. The police pursued the three, and one of them was able to escape.
The vice principal made a statement to police: “I confirmed the interior doors were locked and instructed the four suspects to come to the vestibule because it was unsafe to be outside because I saw police officers.”
The school district defended them by saying that the principal made sure that the doors to classrooms were locked, so the gunmen were not able to threaten students. Here is the official statement from the school district:
As one of the witness statements indicates, the males entered a controlled, secured area that is specifically designed to prevent access to the rest of the building. Cleveland police had already arrived on the scene and were able to make arrests. The staff member made a split-second decision that the individual thought was the best way to keep students and staff safe.
At the very least, the two vice principals are guilty of aiding a fugitive, or perhaps accessory after the fact. After all, he made an official statement that his purpose was in helping three masked gunmen avoid the police.
The police union had the best quote:
administrators at Garrett Morgan HS allowed MASKED GUNMEN to enter the school in order to protect the gunmen from wait for it police officers outside. They risked the lives of CHILDREN to show how woke they are. Can’t make it up.
Parents need to be down there at the next school board meeting and demanding some answers.
Uncategorized
CISG
Larry Correia introduced us to the common Internet Shit Gibbon. I will allow his description to speak for itself.
You ever post something on social media, and then have some random stranger blunder in screaming at you for wrongthink? You might have attracted a Common Internet Shit Gibbon. You can tell when you are dealing with a Common Internet Shit Gibbon by the following clues:
– They start out by being total dicks to everyone, attack, attack, attack, but when responded to in kind, demand civility and whine about “tone”.
– They just make shit up and throw it at the wall to see what sticks.– They are really pathetic, but oblivious to it. In fact, they think they’re brilliant, even while being super dumb.
– When you waste you time refuting any of their bullshit, they immediately create new bullshit. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.
Their bullshit is endless. Your time is not. So when you discover that you’ve got a CISG infestation, the best bet is to just mock them until you get bored, and then block them.
Last night, I had to drive to Miami. While there, the wife and I had date night. When I returned to the hotel, I found a list of comments, some taking me to task, demanding that I post his comments, and all of them calling me names.
Apparently, Cassandra missed the part where this blog is my property. It’s also apparent that I have a CISG infestation. I was looking forward to a discussion of the merits of my hypothesis on the issue that so offended him, but I just don’t think he is capable. He has become tiresome, I have wasted enough time with his nonsense, and frankly he has pissed me off. So I will drop the fifth ban in this blog’s history on his ass.
So Cassandra, just go away. My property, my rules. You apparently have no argument and are deliberately trying to appear picked on so you can claim the cachet of being the victim. So begone, asshole, and in case you were wondering, THAT is an insult NOT an ad hominem. An ad hominem is a personal insult used to discredit an idea. I don’t give a shit about your ideas, I just want to insult you.
That also isn’t hypocrisy, because the ‘no personal attacks’ rule is for comments, not for me. See, I own the place and can do as I please.
Now piss off.
Uncategorized
Turnabout
Entire neighborhoods and towns were wiped out by hurricane Ian. The governor today expanded voting rules in the three counties hit hardest.
Democrats are pissed because he didn’t do the same for Orange county, which had flooding.
Uncategorized
A Fisking
So I REALLY don’t want this to be a page that slams on the black race. I wasn’t going to post anything about black crime for awhile, but Cassandra came into comments and decided to show his ass.
In no particular order, I will address his claims. First, his claim that I am a hypocrite for prohibiting ad hominem attacks while engaging in them. Since he apparently doesn’t know what ad hominem means, we can start with a definition:
Ad hominem is a Latin word that means “against the man.” As the name suggests, it is a literary term that involves commenting on or against an opponent, to undermine him instead of his arguments.
Literarydevices.net, retrieved 10/14/2022
So now that we know what an ad hominem is, let’s look at what I said and see if it was an ad hominem. What I said was this:
But hey, Cassandra, these two just happen to be two more of what you call “a small subset of violent black males that disproportionately commit violent crimes.”
Cassandra in comments claims that this is a small subset of blacks, yet has not yet provided one shred of evidence to support that claim. I wouldn’t call one third being a “small subset.” He might as well claim that there is one black male committing every crime, for all of the evidence he has provided. That man’s name is Sum Dood.
Nope. Neither one of those quotes were attacking you, they were attacking your claims that most black men don’t commit crimes and pointing out that you were making unsupported claims. Had I been engaging in ad hominem attacks, I would have said that you are an ignorant little troll with delusions of adequacy, but I didn’t do that. I hope you can see the difference.
You also accused me of editing the title of my post, but not the content. You apparently missed the part where the post said:
Because of an attack in comments, I am adding the following:
I have never, not once, altered the content of a post on this site without making the changes transparent.
Now that we have passed the attacks on my character and integrity, let’s get to your weak argument. You spent the first part of your comment claiming that my sources weren’t sufficient to your exacting standards, so let’s look at what the US Department of Justice has to say. I will quote directly from their study on the topic: Lifetime Likelihood of Going to State or Federal Prison (Retrieved 10/14/2022) (pdf alert)
Blacks in the U.S. resident population (16.2%), regardless of their sex, are nearly twice as likely as Hispanics (9.4%) and 6 times more likely than whites (2.5%) to be admitted to prison during their lives.
Among men, more than 1 in 4 blacks and 1 in 6 Hispanics, compared to 1 in 23 whites, will enter prison at least once if current incarceration rates do not change. An estimated 28.5% of black men, 16.0% of Hispanic men, and 4.4% of white men are expected to serve a State or Federal prison sentence.
You do quote the Washington Post in claiming that the 1 in 3 chance of black men being incarcerated is a ‘stale statistic’ which is actually a pretty good argument, the only one you actually made. Sadly, it is incorrect, doesn’t attack the original premise (see below) and completely overshadowed by your juvenile attempts at character assassination.
Then you spend the rest of your comment setting up a strawman argument that you then tear down- attacking a statement that I never made.
Accounting for the 37% decrease in imprisonment rate for black men, and that about half are jailed for violent crimes, the lifetime likelihood for black men to be jailed for violent crimes is much closer to 10% than the 1/3 you incorrectly claimed. Yes, that’s still too high, and far higher than the rate for white men, but it refutes your 1 in 3 claim conclusively. I guess “Sum Dood” hasn’t been as busy as you thought he was.
Nowhere did I make the claim that one in three blacks were in prison for being violent. The claim that I made, one that you still have not addressed, still stands:
Isn’t it time that we admit that blacks are largely a race of criminals who have a pathological inability to live in civilized society? It’s well documented that more than half of all homicides and nearly half of all violent crimes, are committed by blacks.
The one in three statement that you latched onto was this:
The Sentencing Project estimated in 2001 that the likelihood of a Black man spending time behind bars in their lifetime was 1 in 3.
You still are not providing any evidence to support your own position. You are merely attempting to attack me by calling me a hypocrite, and are attacking selected strawman arguments where you have taken a statement that I have made, twisted into something else, and then attacked that. Your attempts at discussion are sadly poor, and lacking in any real substance. I have given failing grades to better papers than yours, and seen better arguments from 14 year old children.
I have spent enough of my limited time on your childish attempts to argue a position without a bit of evidence.
And before you engage in any more accusations of me being a hypocrite, let me spell out the rule of this blog:
This is my blog. It is a website paid for by me, on a server leased and paid for by me. I invite argument and disagreement, and actually welcome healthy debate. What I am not going to do is permit ad hominem attacks against the person who pays the bills here, namely me. It’s the same as being in my house- you can disagree with me while you are a guest within my walls, and we can have a healthy discussion. What I won’t allow or tolerate is for a guest on my property to insult or attack me personally. I also don’t allow people on here to attack each other. You have been repeatedly told this. This is your last warning. If you don’t like that, you are free to use your own funds and start your own blog. Heck, I will even rent you the server space with which to do it. The rate is $25 per month.
Until then, I decide. One more personal attack, and I will drop the ban hammer on your ass. In the nearly two years this blog has been here, I have banned only four people. Don’t become the fifth.
Silence the opposition
Real Goal of the Alex Jones Judgement
Alex Jones has to pay $1 billion. He says he will fight, delay, and appeal for years. In any case, he is likely done. Still, the reason for what was done to him is apparent to anyone paying attention. Just look at this article from the Guardian: Only proper online regulation can stop poisonous conspiracists like Alex Jones and by Alex Jones, they mean anyone on the right, including and especially Donald Trump. I quote:
Jones, like QAnon, Donald Trump and others, can navigate fake news sites and social media to reach millions…No one seriously believes free speech is an absolute right. The British government is now making desperate attempts to define such concepts as “causing offence” and “legal but harmful”. More ruthless efforts at control are emerging from authoritarian regimes in Russia, China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. The EU, too, is pondering regulation. But this realm of government is patently in its infancy.
The freedom of speech which to John Milton was “above all liberties” is not that simple today.
You get that? They consider censorship like Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the EU, and the UK are preferable to the freedom to say what you think. That is the lesson of Alex Jones: shut up, peasant. Silencing the opposition, it’s what every communist revolution needs to do.
Crime
My Thoughts on the Parkland Shooter
In the interest of full disclosure, I will start this post by saying that I am opposed to the death penalty. Not in principle, mind you. After all, there is only one way that is 100% certain to make sure that a killer doesn’t repeat his crime. No, I am opposed to the death penalty because I don’t trust the government officials in charge of the criminal “justice” system. Ask the Duke Lacrosse players, or any of the thousands of people exonerated by the Innocence Project. To put even one person to death who didn’t deserve it is a travesty of justice that makes all of us culpable in that innocent death.
Now that we have that out of the way, I will also say that if there ever was anyone who deserves the death penalty is the guy who carried out that shooting. He was upset because no girl wanted a piece of him, so he admitted that he planned the shooting for Valentine’s Day so none of the students would ever celebrate that holiday again. He admitted to planning out his attack for five years. He simply waited until he was old enough to buy guns with which to carry out his massacre. He is an evil son of a bitch who deserves to fry in Florida’s chair, but the jury decided that they will give him life in prison, instead.
Sharing in his guilt are all of the people along the way who knew that this monster was unhinged, yet failed to take action. The FBI, who received numerous calls to their “see something, say something, we do nothing” line. The school counselors who failed to report his statements and behavior. His foster parents who were scared enough to lock up his guns, but not call the cops.
Most of all? The voters of Broward county. They reliably vote for this shit, they vote Democrat, the reelect coward public officials, they tolerate this. They are getting the government that they vote for. It’s just too bad that their mental issues have an effect on the rest of us in this state.
Tranny Insanity
We Always Knew They Were Going Here
Virginia Democrats introduce legislation that would criminally prosecute parents who don’t affirm their child’s “gender identity.” The bill expands the state’s definition of child abuse and neglect to include parents who do not affirm their child’s gender identity or sexual orientation.
This would require people mandated by virtue of their jobs to report the parents to authorities if a child tells them that the parent doesn’t support or affirm the child’s decision to be a tranny. So nurses, teachers, paramedics, and police would be required to report you for refusing to buy your son a dress when he tells you that he wants to be a girl now.
Depending on how the law gets written, it could be a felony to not use a child’s chosen pronouns, and it may not be just parents who are susceptible to the new law. Some bearded 17 year old fruitcake in a dress demands that you use ‘zir’ or ‘zem’ could report you and have you arrested for child abuse when you laugh at his crazy ass.
You could be the next person getting pepper sprayed and being chucked in jail.
To those who claim this violates your religious freedom, Democrats have this to say:
“The Bible says to accept everyone for who they are. So that’s what I tell them when they asked me that question, and that’s what I will continue to tell people. You know, we all have a commitment to God And for those believers out there, we know that there’s life after life, and there is going to be a conversation between that person and God and that’s what we’re after — to go by what the Bible says. It is not my job to judge anyone. It is my job to help people.”
Now Democrat government officials, who constantly bleat about separating church and state, feel qualified to interpret the Bible for you and tell you what you are supposed to believe.