The Eclectic One

…Because labels are a poor substitute for thinking

Archive for the ‘Law & Order’ Category

Because They’re More Important Than Us…

Posted by Bill Nance on April 21, 2010

I just saw this in the local paper:

LOWELL — Police have cited a 26-year-old Nashua woman for a series of driving violations that led to a crash with a police cruiser on Gorham Street Tuesday.

An investigation conducted by a Lowell Police Department Accident Reconstruction team found that Phannarouth Prak failed to stop at a stop sign, did not use a directional when turning and failed to yield for an emergency vehicle.

Police officer Narin Ma was responding to a call for medical help in car 10 when Prak pulled out of Spencer Street onto Corbett, and collided with the cruiser on Gorham, according to police reports.

Nothing unusual there except that this is not normal practice at the department. If you commit a series of driving violations that lead to a crash with Joe Civilian, you don’t get cited unless you’re drunk. So when you do something incredibly stupid like hmmm…ram into the back of someone’s car who is stopped at a red light that hasn’t been anything but red for a couple of minutes…nothing happens. This has happened to me twice in Lowell where the accident was so bad the cops had to come out. Car totaled, injuries, the works. But the two dumbasses who rear-ended me were never cited even though I requested the cop do so. I mean they rear-ended me. That’s case closed as far as who’s at fault. But no ticket unless you hit a cop. Then you get the tickets.

It’s just one more way in which our paid public servants rub our noses in the fact that they think they’re more important than the rest of us, who exist merely pay the taxes that go to their salaries. -Salaries that increasingly are better than what any non-governmental worker could hope to get doing the same job for a private company.

There are two levels of citizen in this country: At the top there are those in public employ, and then there’s everyone else. -And people wonder why voters get so pissed off at government.

Posted in Creeping Fascism watch, Law & Order, Rants | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Merchant Ship Guards Kill First Pirate. Predictably the Pacifists Have a Hissy

Posted by Bill Nance on March 31, 2010

Private security guards shot and killed a Somali pirate during an attack on a merchant ship off the coast of East Africa in what is believed to be the first such killing by armed contractors, the EU Naval Force spokesman said Wednesday.

The death comes amid fears that increasingly aggressive pirates and the growing use of armed private security contractors onboard vessels could fuel increased violence on the high seas. The handling of the case may have legal implications beyond the individuals involved in Tuesday’s shooting.

The guards were onboard the MV Almezaan when a pirate group approached it twice, said EU Naval Force spokesman Cmdr. John Harbour. During the second approach on the Panamanian-flagged cargo ship which is United Arab Emirates owned, there was an exchange of fire between the guards and the pirates.

An EU Naval Force frigate was dispatched to the scene and launched a helicopter that located the pirates. Seven pirates were found, including one who had died from small caliber gunshot wounds, indicating he had been shot by the contractors, said Harbour. The six remaining pirates were taken into custody.

Crews are becoming increasingly adept at repelling attacks by pirates in the dangerous waters of the Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden. But pirates are becoming more aggressive in response, shooting bullets and rocket-propelled grenades at ships to try to intimidate captains into stopping.

Several organizations, including the International Maritime Bureau, have expressed fears that the use of armed security contractors could encourage pirates to be more violent when taking a ship. Sailors have been hurt or killed before but this generally happens by accident or through poor health. There has only been one known execution of a hostage despite dozens of pirate hijackings.

You have GOT to be joking.

The last sentence of that article is a simple falsehood. In fact, entire ships have disappeared, crews and all, never to be heard from again. In another case I’m aware of, the entire crew was executed. Granted these cases occurred in Indonesia, but the idea that if you offer no resistance to a boarding of your vessel by pirates you are SAFER is simply astonishing in it’s naivete.

This is gun control writ large. And out on the high seas, apparently International Maritime Bureau is just like Martha Coakley: they discourage self help.  According to these geniuses, just give up, pay the ransom and you will be allowed to live with only minimal risk. So if one of these qat-chewing goatherders

blows you in half with an AK because he’s you know, a criminal who’s a cat-chewing goatherder with an AK, I guess you were just the unlucky one.

It might occur to some of you that when ships offer no resistance and warships can’t protect them, and where the ship owners will pay large ransoms every time, you have an environment which only encourages more attacks.  But that doesn’t matter as long as no one picks up a weapon to defend themselves.

This is the ugly face of modern neo-pacifism. It’s the same kind of face that goes white as a sheet at the thought of a person having a gun on them for defensive purposes.  They’re not real pacifists of course. They’re perfectly happy to let the police or military kill people. But god forbid an individual or group of individuals should protect themselves. No, they should just have the decency to die quietly.

Pacifism is unethical.  “Turn the other cheek ” is not saintly, it merely assists in tyranny.  When I refuse to defend myself or anyone else, I merely empower others to exert their will over me and others. If more than a tiny fraction of people acted like this we wouldn’t even have a country, much less a free world.

The far-left and yes, even the less than far-left, loves the idea of pacifism. The more you get toward the center, the more they’re willing to let hired killers do their dirty work (as though soldiers and police doing the killing somehow evades moral culpability on the part of those who support them). But the notion of honest people taking up arms to defend their lives from criminals horrifies them. And it’s that latter sentiment which should disgust everyone.

As pernicious as the idea of pacifism may be, the hypocrisy rampant in these neo-pacifists is particularly disturbing. There are not nor will there ever be enough soldiers/police to keep you safe from bad guys at all times. That is a fact that no rational person can even argue against. And the neo-pacifists aren’t even morally opposed to killing bad guys. So their stated goal of keeping merchant ships disarmed, or on a more personal note, keeping law abiding citizens from owning or carrying guns for self-defense, is outright evil.  They may as well come out and say it.

“Our demonstrably failed ideology is more important than your life.”

Posted in Crime, firearms, gun control, International, Law & Order, Rants | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Permanent Second-Class Citizenship

Posted by Bill Nance on August 30, 2009

SayUncle has a tidbit that I enjoyed reading, especially the comments on the post because they pose some interesting questions that go to the heart of our criminal Justice system.

The Juice:

The North Carolina Supreme Court says a 2004 law that bars convicted felons from having a gun, even within their own home or business, is unconstitutional.

Good. Civil rights should be restored once your debt to society is paid.

I often disagree with posts on this blog but here I think he nails it.

Historically the concept of “criminal records” are a fairly new thing. Once upon a time if you committed a crime, went to prison and got out, you could move to a new town or state and start all over again. Now, once you commit any crime anywhere, that record stays with you forever.

The problem with this is that when we release someone who has served their sentence, they enter into a lifetime of second-class citizenship. They can’t vote, they can’t own a firearm for self defense and they are barred from many many jobs where “being a felon” instantly puts them out of the running, even if their crime had nothing to do with the job. With the advent of $20 internet-based criminal record searches that absolutely anyone can run you can’t even lie about your past and have any hope of it not coming up.

A felony record, or for that matter even a misdemeanor conviction can keep you from obtaining anything more than menial employment at minimum wage forever. Is that the price we want to impose for owning an eagle feather? Yes, that’s a felony. As are countless other victimless crimes.

Think about that for a minute. An 18-year-old fool does something incredibly stupid, like taking a joy-ride in a stolen car, gets caught, does a couple of years in prison (which is hardly a trivial price to pay for an hour’s stupidity that didn’t hurt anyone) and forever more is consigned to wear a scarlet letter of FELON, no matter where he goes or how he lives his life no matter how virtuous.

And people wonder why we have high recidivism rates?

What’s the purpose of a criminal justice system anyway? Would not most people agree that it’s primarily to keep people safe from people who would prey on them, serve as an example to other would-be criminals and give the public some sense that justice is being done? Beyond that I suppose you could add rehabilitation, but experience shows prison is a lousy place for that. To deter people from re-offending you ghave to offer some hope for a future. Our current system does not. Quite the opposite.

I’m not talking about being soft on perpetrators. If you commit a serious crime the penalties should be stiff. If you attempt murder I’m quite content with locking your ass up for a very, very long time, possibly forever. If you break into a house you should do years, not months. I could go on down the list, but hey, committing a serious crime and getting caught should hurt. A lot.

But keeping people who have served every day of their sentences as second class citizens forever is just plain counter-productive. If you’re still dangerous, you shouldn’t be getting out of prison. If you’re not, then it’s time to wipe the slate clean, at least as far as the general public will ever know, and letting you start out fresh with the ability to make a new life. After all, it’s not like starting out fresh at age 30 after a ten-year prison sentence is a walk in the park under any circumstances, record or no record.

I’m fine with the courts keeping records. And I’m fine with the concept of throwing away the key on repeat serious offenders. But what we’re doing with the current system is throwing away the key on people who have made one serious mistake. And think about it for a moment: If you’re to be consigned to a life of minimum wage jobs and sucking up to the boss in fear he’ll fire you and you won’t get another just as crappy job, why the Hell would you not go back into crime? We’re asking people to make entirely irrational choices and then we’re surprised when they give us the finger.

Let them do their time. Eliminate parole. But once they’re out, restore their rights. All of them. Anything else is just tyranny to no purpose an makes even rehabilitated folks want to go back to breaking the law. What the Hell, at least that has some dignity to it, risk or no risk.

Posted in Crime, firearms, Law & Order, Prison and Justice | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Personal Responsibility? …Nah!

Posted by Bill Nance on August 14, 2009

This one is a beaut:

LOGAN, Utah – The parents of a Utah State University freshman who died from alcohol poisoning at a fraternity activity have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the school.

Attorneys for George and Jane Starks say in the lawsuit filed Tuesday that the university’s “benign neglect” contributed to the Nov. 21 death of Michael Starks.

Police said the 18-year-old’s blood alcohol content was higher than 0.35, more than four times the legal limit to drive an automobile.

It’s always tragic when a young person dies, but not all young deaths are victimization.  This kid was 18 years old. That’s well over the legal age to drink in most countries in the world and is the age of consent in the United States. Starks was old enough to vote, join the military, enter into contracts and every other activity allowed to adults except the stupid over-21 drinking age, which is only a remnant of prohibition and the previous 21-year-old voting age anyway.

In other words, this adult person made a really stupid decision and sadly died as a result of his own stupidity.

The parents should be told to go to Hell in no uncertain terms. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes; Darwin is not merciful.

For what it’s worth, it’s extremely rare for a person to die from alcohol poisoning at a BAC of 0.35. It’s getting likely once you go over 0.4 and nearly certain once you get near 0.5.

Posted in education, Law & Order | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Abortion Doctor Is Murdered. Yes Randall Terry, You ARE At Fault.

Posted by Bill Nance on May 31, 2009

I’m not a zealot on abortion in any sense of the word. I view abortion as at best, a conflict of rights, and sometimes, morally reprehensible.

But I also think the idea of giving a 6-week-old fetus co-equal rights with a woman who must spend the next 8 months pregnant and give birth to it is just silly. One person is here and has rights which cannot be argued. The other is at best, a potential human being.

At some point the choice becomes significantly more morally daunting. For me this is the third trimester. This is because a preemie born at seven months has a pretty good chance of survival, even without heroic life-saving measures. And let’s face it, if you haven’t been able to make up your mind after 6 months, asking you to wait another couple isn’t the end of the world.

There are exceptions to this.

1. The life or long-term health of the mother.  This is an inviolable rule. A potential human being does not have the right to kill, permanently sterilize or otherwise wreck the health of a person already here.

2. In the case where only late-term tests can tell about the viability/health of a fetus. For all you zealots out there arguing this point, Either show me your adopted Downs Syndrome, Autistic or Crohn’s disease children or STFU.  No one should be forced to go through with a pregnancy, usually a very much wanted one, when the child will be horribly disabled.

Enter the latest case of abortion doctor murders, Dr. George Tiller.

Tiller was gunned down in his church, in front of his wife today. No doubt in connection with his work as a physician who provides late-term abortions.

Perhaps Dr. Tiller was not a nice man. I don’t know. What I do know is that he operated within the law and was one of the few doctors in the country who performed late-term abortions. Something as I’ve already said I have mixed feelings about, but also something that in some cases is clearly a moral choice. -Unless you’re a religious fanatic like Randall Terry, Godfather of the nut-job organization Operation Rescue.

This organization has been calling doctors who perform abortions of any kind at any stage of development murderers for over 20 years.  Of course they never bother to mention in their disgusting literature that fetuses are spontaneously aborted (miscarried) in about 40% of all early pregnancies. Most women never even know they are pregnant when this happens. So their God is the biggest abortionist of all, but that doesn’t count I guess.

Here is Terry’s Statement on the murder of Doctor Tiller:

George Tiller was a mass-murderer. We grieve for him that he did not have time to properly prepare his soul to face God. I am more concerned that the Obama Administration will use Tiller’s killing to intimidate pro-lifers into surrendering our most effective rhetoric and actions. Abortion is still murder. And we still must call abortion by its proper name; murder.

Those men and women who slaughter the unborn are murderers according to the Law of God. We must continue to expose them in our communities and peacefully protest them at their offices and homes, and yes, even their churches.

When you repeatedly call someone a mass murderer and inject God into the mix, people will take you at your word. They will say to themselves: “Hey, this is a mass-murderer for Gosh sake!  Killing him will be saving thousands of lives!” And do the deed. Terry knows this very well. And he doesn’t even bother to express sorrow that the doctor was murdered. Merely that “We grieve for him that he did not have time to properly prepare his soul to face God.”

If you want to know why I’ve com to truly despise the right wing-crazies in this country, look not further than Terry’s statement. What a dirtbag. He’s an unindicted co-conspirator to multiple murders. We can’t prosecute his speech, but we can sure as Hell call it what it is: Incitement to murder.

Posted in Crime, Law & Order, Politics, Right-Wing Nut-jobery, Theocrat Watch | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

Hey Dick…

Posted by Bill Nance on May 27, 2009

Posted in International, Law & Order, National Security | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Exposing The False Analogies Of The Torture Apologists

Posted by Bill Nance on May 8, 2009

David Harsanyi has written a piece in Reason Magazine defending the Bush Administration’s use of torture with the pathetic canard that Harry Truman’s decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also war crimes.

To quote Harsanyi:

In fact, if Barack Obama believes, as he recently stated, that the nation “lost its moral bearings” under his predecessor, he will have a hard time defending any presidency.
After all, if waterboarding is a war crime, the dropping of an atomic bomb on a few hundred thousand innocent civilians surely deserves some serious consideration for rebuke. At the very least, it’s a fair topic for discussion.

No, actually it’s not a fair topic.  It’s what the torture apologists have been doing for years now, which is to throw up as much distraction and excuse making as possible to somehow get away from the crimes that were actually committed.

As to Truman, the decisions taken 60 years ago about whether it was moral or not to incinerate those two cities, in the enemy territory of a belligerent power bears no relation whatsoever to the deliberate policy of torture of captive human beings by the United States government in the 21st century.

I highly recommend Oliver Kamm’s impassioned and extraordinarily well-researched articles on the subject of the bombings. Kamm has done an excellent job refuting the far-left’s attempts at revisionist history on the matter. The bombs were dropped for exactly the reasons stated by Truman and others at the time. The Japanese were making no attempts whatever to surrender under anything like the terms the allies had insisted upon for years. The alternative to the bombing was a land invasion of Japan, which would have cost many hundreds of thousands of American lives, and certainly a death toll in the millions for the Japanese people. Alternatively, a blockade would have certainly caused the death by starvation of millions of civilians. -Hardly a humane alternative.

But back to the subject at hand, I think the most patently offensive lines in Harsanyi’s article were these:

It’s fun to be idealistic in a world of moral absolutes. I know because I’m a columnist. But when we start discussing history, things always seem to get complicated.
The Daily Show‘s Jon Stewart learned this recently when debating the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ president, Cliff May, about the harsh interrogation techniques administered during the George W. Bush administration.
When May asked Stewart whether he also considers Harry Truman to have been a war criminal for dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the host answered yes. A few days later, however, Stewart apologized for his blasphemy, saying Truman’s decision was, in fact, “complicated.”
Things were indeed complicated. They are always complicated.
That’s the point.

What’s so offensive about that little quip is that the clear intention is to tell people rightfully horrified at the torture of captives that because ethical decisions in wartime are “complicated” we have no right to judge. It echoes Peggy Noonan’s disgusting comments suggesting we should simply “keep walking”  without holding people accountable for egregious crimes -A position she did not hold as I recall, when Bill Clinton was being impeached for lying about who he was fucking. Of course it also attempts to make the ludicrous excuse for ethical reasoning that because decisions may have been wrongly taken in the past, it excuses acts taken today.

What Harsanyi is really asking, and I find it difficult to grasp how he could with any honesty,  is whether a act of war taken against a hostile foreign power can somehow be equated with the treatment of helpless captives. To compare these two things is, I think deliberately obfuscatory.  The act of bombing those two cities first, lets remind everyone, caused far less death than the firebombing of Tokyo. You are no more or less dead from a nuclear bomb than you are from being asphyxiated from smoke, more more or less injured through horrendous burns from phosphorus of burning wood than from radiation burns. So you’ll forgive me I hope in giving Hiroshima and Nagasaki no more credit for suffering than Tokyo.

From an ethical standpoint, the question is whether an act which was intended not to deliberately kill people, but to stop a war, is morally equivalent to an act which by it’s very nature is intended to cause as much suffering as possible to a helpless captive. Again. The bombing of cities in the Second World War was intended to stop a war. Civilian casualties were a by-product and consequence the the actions taken towards that goal, not the intended goal in and of itself. This follows the proportionality argument of Just War theory. One can argue that it crossed the line (I do not think it did) but one cannot reasonably argue that the intent was clearly to do so.

When you torture someone in your custody, the goal itself is suffering. You cannot possibly make a plausible argument that your goal is to end a war. At best you can make the very lame argument that you are trying to further your war aims through intelligence gathering. The suffering of a non-combataant is not merely a by-product, it is the specific intent.

The goal and intent in the WWII of bombing a city was to destroy economic and military capacity, to weaken the will of the enemy to continue to wage an aggressive war and force a peace as soon as possible. The consequence was suffering. The two things are not remotely the same thing and Harsanyi should know that. This is ethics 101 stuff.

And to reiterate what so many seem to forget, waterboarding is the least of the crimes committed against helpless captives by the Bush Administration.

The report recently released by the International Committee of the Red Cross can be found here.

That report and other documents released by the Obama Administration as well as the testimony of military interrogators, FBI agents, former prisoners and lawyers gives a grim picture of the techniques used on a wholesale basis against detainees in U.S. and U.S.-controlled facilities all over the world. From Bagram AB Afghanistan, to Gitmo, Abu Ghraib and even the US Navy brig in South Carolina, these are some of the things the Bush Administration ordered:

  1. Stripped naked and shackled into a fetal position for days at a time, while the air conditioning was turned down to low as to deliberately induce hypothermia for many hours, perhaps even days at a time.
  2. Chained and shackled in stress positions for many hours at a time, inducing agonizing muscle cramps, often in hot-boxes, which heated up well over 100 degrees with no fresh air.
  3. Shackled naked in a fetal position on the floor and left to shit and pee all over themselves for weeks at a time, smeared with fake blood and subject to “grooming sessions” by guards.
  4. Deprived of all visual and sound inputs for weeks at a time

These are torture methods. They all, without exception, go back centuries and have been used by the Gestapo, the Japanese in WWII, the KGB, the Viet-Cong and the North Koreans among others. They are deliberately meant to break a human being’s spirit, producing short or long-term insanity and utter degradation of the person, not to mention excruciating pain. Compared to a long regimen of these tortures, waterboarding is trivial.

The techniques described above were used on a systematic basis not against “high value” detainees, but on literally hundreds of prisoners, exactly how many we may never know. The U.S. Military admits that over a thirty people have died from Homicide in U.S. custody as a result of their treatment at our hands. Other reports show the numbers ranging between 54 and over 100.  Let’s get that straight shall we? It is likely that at least 100 people in U.S. Custody have been tortured to death.

Enough with the apologists and obscurantists. We must have a full accounting. And at the very least, those persons who made policies need to be exposed as the war criminals they are. The rightful place of Bush, Cheney, Yoo, Bybee and any other persons involved in the setting opf this policy, no matter what political party, is in front of a jury.

Posted in Crime, Law & Order, National Security, Politics | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Say “Arrrg” NOW -Bitch

Posted by Bill Nance on April 12, 2009

(CNN) — The American captain of a cargo ship held hostage by pirates jumped overboard from the lifeboat where he was being held, and U.S. Navy SEALs shot and killed three of his four captors, according to a senior U.S. official with knowledge of the situation.

Capt. Richard Phillips was helped out of the water off the Somali coast and is uninjured and in good condition, the official said. He was taken aboard the USS Bainbridge, a nearby naval warship.

At the time of the shootings, the fourth pirate was aboard the USS Bainbridge negotiating with officials, the source said. That pirate was taken into custody.

Three words folks:  Balls That Clank

-That is all

Posted in Crime, International, Law & Order, National Security | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Mexico Is Disentigrating…It Must Be American Gun Owners’ Fault

Posted by Bill Nance on April 4, 2009

Over the last month or so, we’ve all have watched with horror the events in Mexico’s struggle with narcotics traffickers. Mass shootings, commonplace kidnapping an murders and the whole country basically devolving into a Colombianesque nightmare.

There are many factors behind this; first and foremost of course, America’s continued insane policies of drug prohibition, without which, virtually all the money the cartels make (and use to arm themselves and create chaos) would go away in an instant.

Second is Mexico’s sad, long history of official corruption, which, when combined with the sheer size of the bribes the drug traffickers can offer, thanks to prohibition in the U.S., can reach into virtually every area of Mexican officialdom. This makes enforcing laws nearly impossible, because the traffickers frankly have more money to offer in hefty payola than the government has to offer in salaries. Add to this the ever present threat of Plata O Plomo (silver or lead in Spanish, meaning take the bribe or die) and you’ve got an enormous mess on your hands in a very poor country right on our southern borders.

But, none of that has really been forthcoming form the U.S. media, and certainly not from the U.S. Government. No, this time, in an effort to find a bogeyman to distract us from our insane drug prohibition policies the government, with willing assistance form a news media too lazy to even bother checking its facts, is blaming U.S. exported guns.

But the math doesn’t work out, as this excellent article details.

Money quote:

A big part of the argument being made by the U.S. and Mexican governments with respect to the source of guns in the possession of Mexican narco-trafficking groups is based on statistics related to so-called gun traces conducted by the ATF.

But if you follow the media narrative on this, as well as the U.S. government’s own proclamations, you soon discover that the math being practiced is right out of Alice in Wonderland, via the Mock Turtle: Reeling and Writhing, of course, to begin with, and then the different branches of arithmetic — Ambition, Distraction, Uglification, and Derision.

By all means read the article. It’s well researched and has plenty of solid factual links, as opposed to the piss-poor reportage the MSM has done on these frankly ludicrous claims of a steady stream of American firearms to Mexico.

But let’s take the issue on here just for an exercise in common sense.

  1. It is a major felony to export arms from the U.S. without an arms export license
  2. The ATF already audits gun shops routinely and checks their records of sales, that background checks were run on all gun-buyers and that serial numbers on guns were kept. Violation of these regulations can wind up getting a gun dealer thrown in jail on federal charges.
  3. Straw sales, that is sales to one person who intends to give the gun to another person not legally allowed to own a gun (like illegal aliens and other non citizens in most cases) is another serious federal crime.
  4. It is illegal under Mexican law to import arms into the country except under express circumstances.
  5. Mexico has some of the most stringent gun control laws in the Western Hemisphere.

Given the fact that the cartels are doing business literally in the billions of dollars, does it make the slightest bit of sense that even if the border wall were up and 100% foolproof as far as guns go, they would somehow be disarmed?  A fully automatic AK-47 (illegal in the U.S. since the 1930s under the National Firearms Act) is available on the black market in any third world country for well under $200.  That’s a great deal cheaper than $900-$1,700 a semi-auto American manufactured long gun costs here in the U.S., even a used one.

Bottom line is that the weapons found in Mexico which are from the U.S. are without a doubt stolen in the vast majority of cases. I suspect the rest, not linked to U.S. legal purchases came from the Mexican government in return for some hefty bribes and from other international sources.  The continued hoopla raised by the Obama administration clearly has two goals:

  1. Ratchet up the anti-gun rhetoric
  2. Whatever they do, DO NOT actually deal with the fact that the only reason Mexico is having this problem is because of the insane policies of drug prohibition in the United States.

After all, we wouldn’t want to spoil the narrative with facts now, would we.



Posted in Barack Obama, Creeping Fascism watch, firearms, Guns Dammit!, Hillary Clinton, International, Law & Order, Politics | Tagged: , , , , | 5 Comments »

Wile E. Criminal…Suuuper Idiot.

Posted by Bill Nance on April 3, 2009

Here’s a hint to all you would-be bank robbers out there:

When you rob a bank, have a better getaway plan than hailing a cab.

(Click on video to right of the page linked for a video of the full story).

Posted in Crime, Law & Order, Le Snark | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »