The Urban Grind

After the tragic Newtown shootings, and the emotional cries for more gun control, the gun grabbers invariably ask “Why does anyone need a 30-Round magazine?” Or “Why do ordinary citizens need AR-15′s/semi-automatics, etc.”

First off, Senator Dianne Feinstein came out with another ban of semi-automatic weapons.

Not to be outdone by Feinstein, Congresswoman Diana DeGette has also introduced a bill to ban large gun magazines.

Senator Dianne Feinstein’s latest divide-and-conquer attack on the Second Amendment has made even Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) a sucker for the argument that private citizens do not need high-capacity magazines. These include not only 30-round rifle magazines, but 17-round magazines for handguns like the Glock.
Why does anybody need a high capacity magazine? If Senator Manchin were to educate himself by, for example, attending Front Sight’s four-day defensive handgun class, he would learn the two primary answers:

(1) Failure to stop the aggressor, and
(2) Multiple aggressors

Failure to Stop
The classic .38 caliber revolver, with a capacity of six rounds, was the standard sidearm of the United States Army during the Moro insurrection in the Philippines. The Army found at least one dead Army officer with an empty sidearm, and his head split open by a machete or similar weapon. They also found the soldier’s killer, who had finally bled to death. Six rounds of .38 were therefore not enough to convince even one determined attacker.
Police instructor Masaad Ayoob’s The Truth About Self Protection adds an incident in which a female police officer saw a crazed gunman murder a woman, who then shot her as well before she could do anything. “She lay helpless as she watched a neighbor empty a .22 rifle into the killer; the neighbor then had to club the madman down with the empty rifle, again and again, before he succumbed.”

Ayoob does not report the size of the .22′s magazine, but the Moro insurrection exemplifies why even a 30-round rifle clip might not be enough to stop a crazed and determined attacker, such as one hopped up on a drug like PCP. “He had 32 Krag balls through him and was only stopped by the 33rd bullet — a Colt .45 slug through both ears.” The Krag-Jorgensen’s 30-caliber cartridge was far more powerful than the .22 in Ayoob’s example, but not sufficiently powerful to civilize this particular attacker even when fired in mass.
Colonel Jeff Cooper’s To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth adds the case of a man who was prosecuted for shooting his attacker eight times with a .380 automatic pistol. The prosecutor admitted that the dead man had been the aggressor, but argued that the shooter had taken the law into his own hands by continuing to shoot an adversary who had “obviously” been disabled. Cooper, whom the defense called as an expert witness, cited a suicide in which “the deceased shot himself amidships four times with a .380 Webley. Presumably the first three hits did not convince him.”

{snip}

Gang Bangers and the Knockout Game

Front Sight’s 4-day defensive handgun class included scenarios with multiple aggressors, including four gang bangers on a street and five or more in a house (along with innocent bystanders). Front Sight’s standard doctrine is to fire a controlled pair into an aggressor’s thoracic cavity and, in the event of failure to stop, another into his cranio-ocular cavity to take out his central nervous system.

In the street gang situation, though, one shot is fired into each gang member due to the need to economize on both time and ammunition; only those that don’t go down (or flee) then get “seconds.” You might conceivably stop four gang members with seven or eight rounds of .45 ACP; that is what the cartridge was designed to do. A small man or woman who can handle only a 9 mm comfortably might not be able to end the incident even with 15 or 17 rounds, unless he or she can make the far more difficult head shots. It is particularly telling that most police officers carry either .45s or high-capacity 9 mm sidearms.

Then there is the knockout game, in which a street gang selects a victim at random, knocks him or her down, and then maybe beats him or her to a pulp. Here is an example that involved six individuals; only one struck a blow, but the others seemed to approve. Although the Web page and the book it promotes focuses on black racial violence, there is similar Caucasian-on-black crime, such as that perpetrated by the Ku Klux Klan. In any event, if there are six (or more) bad guys, you are obviously going to need far more than six bullets. Note: Since Barack Obama took office, quite a few “urban youths” have been getting together in flash mobs to play this knockout game (and to seriously injure their defenseless victims. You can read all about it here, here, here, and here. And let’s not forget how the Korean shopkeepers bravely defended themselves in the L.A. Riots of 1992.

The anti-Second Amendment camp may argue that the teacher who was assaulted in this video would not have had time to defend himself with a firearm or anything else, because his attacker hit him by surprise. (While use of a firearm in response to a fist might normally be considered excessive force, multiple aggressors, even unarmed ones, create a disparity of force situation that might indeed justify a lethal response. The same applies if a single unarmed aggressor is much younger, bigger, and/or stronger than the victim, e.g. a teenage punk against a senior citizen or woman.) This is where the five conditions of mental awareness, as taught by Front Sight, come into play.

Hat tip: Ron L Via Facebook

After the Sandy Hook shootings, most people will be quick to hop on the gun control bandwagon. But it’s not that simple. As it is now, Connecticut’s gun laws are some of the strictest in the country. Obviously, that didn’t stop Adam Lanza.

Thanks to the deinstitutionalization laws put into effect in the 1960′s, schizophrenics and other mentally ill individuals were moved out of state mental hospitals.

In the 1960s, the United States embarked on an innovative approach to caring for its mentally ill: deinstitutionalization. The intentions were quite humane: move patients from long-term commitment in state mental hospitals into community-based mental health treatment. Contrary to popular perception, California Governor Ronald Reagan’s signing of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act of 196712 was only one small part of a broad-based movement, starting in the late 1950s.13 The Kennedy Administration optimistically described how the days of long-term treatment were now past; newly-developed drugs such as chlorpromazine meant that two-thirds of the mentally ill “could be treated and released within 6 months.”14

At about the same time, two different ideas came to the forefront of American progressive thinking: that there was a right to mental health treatment, and a right to a more substantive form of due process for those who were to be committed to a mental hospital. If there was a right to mental health treatment, then judges could use the threat of releasing patients as a way to force reluctant legislatures to increase funding for treatment.15

The notion of due process for the mentally ill was not radical. American courts have been wrestling with this question from the 1840s onward.16 While perhaps not up to the exacting standards of the American Civil Liberties Union, by the end of the nineteenth century, there was something recognizably like due process before the mentally ill were committed.17 What changed in the 1960s was the result of ACLU attorneys such as Bruce J. Ennis, who claimed that less than 5 percent of mental hospital patients “are dangerous to themselves or to others” and that the rest were improperly locked up “because they are useless, unproductive, ‘odd,’ or ‘different.’”18

Until the 1960s, courts used a medical model when considering commitment: the government’s actions were part of “the historic parens patriae power, including the duty to protect ‘persons under legal disabilities to act for themselves.’ . . . The classic example of this role is when a State undertakes to act as ‘the general guardian of all infants, idiots, and lunatics.’”19 Instead, public safety alone became the legitimate basis for commitment, and with it, a more exacting standard, a bit less than is required for convicting criminal defendants.20

Neither a right to treatment nor a more demanding application of due process alone was particularly destructive, but in combination they made hundreds of thousands of seriously mentally ill people homeless,21 where many died of exposure22 and violence.23 They fell through the cracks, living shorter, more miserable lives, and often greatly degrading the quality of urban life for everyone else.24 A fraction became something quite a bit more unsettling than the mentally ill person begging on the street or disrupting the public library: they became the mad mass murderers of the modern age.

My friend Brian summed it up best about the Left:

Yes, you are right. At a minimum they are at fault through their inaction. They are on this constant jihad against guns and against any form of deterrent like the death penalty (or even life in prison/in a mental institution), but they are constantly trying to shove compassion and mercy towards scum of the earth down our throats. Then, when one of their darling monsters goes berzerk, it’s the “right-wing”‘s fault for being “intolerant” and supporting the Second Amendment. It’s a win-win situation for them.

Of course the only thing that might deter these creatures would be a universally carrying public, but the left would rather kill their own mothers (no pun intended in this case) than agree to such a thing.

Via CNN

Good for Zimmerman! It’s about time someone fought the biased mainstream media rather than just pointing out their distortions.

(CNN) — George Zimmerman, charged in the shooting death of a 17-year-old Florida boy, is suing NBC Universal for using “the oldest form of yellow journalism” by editing an audio tape of his 911 call to make him sound racist, the lawsuit says.

Zimmerman is seeking “damages in excess of the jurisdictional limit” in Seminole County Circuit Court in Florida, where the lawsuit was filed Thursday.

“NBC saw the death of Trayvon Martin not as a tragedy but as an opportunity to increase ratings, and so set about to create the myth that George Zimmerman was a racist and predatory villain,” the lawsuit says.

“Because of NBC’s deceptive and exploitative manipulations, the public wrongly believes that Zimmerman ‘use(d) a racial epithet’ while describing Martin during the call to the dispatcher on that fateful night,” the suit says.

NBC Universal disputed the accusations Friday.

“There was no intent to portray Mr. Zimmerman unfairly,” the company said in a prepared statement. “We intend to vigorously defend our position in court.”

The defamation lawsuit accuses the network of sensationalizing and manipulating a potential “racial powder keg that would result in months, if not years, of topics for their failing news program, particularly the plummeting ratings for their ailing Today Show.”

The edited recordings included multiple deletions, removed intervening dialogue between Zimmerman and the dispatcher, and juxtaposed unrelated content “to make it appear that Zimmerman was a racist, and that he was racially profiling Trayvon Martin,” the lawsuit says.

NBC aired various edited versions of the 911 call on March 19, 20, 22 and 27, the suit says.

The suit accuses the network of malice, highlighting correspondent Ron Allen’s segment on “The Today Show” on March 27.

“Allen’s broadcast removed a critical aspect of the dialogue between Zimmerman and the dispatcher, bringing the ‘up to no good’ and ‘he looks black’ statements even closer together, to further the false and defamatory implication that Zimmerman had said he believed Martin was ‘up to no good’ because ‘he looks black,’” the suit says.

The lawsuit accuses NBC of falsely claiming that Zimmerman said “f—— coons” on the February 26 call.

“The truth, as known to the defendants, was that Zimmerman said ‘f—— punks’ and there was no evidence, or reason to believe, that Zimmerman uttered a racial epithet during the call,” the suit says.

Zimmerman mentioned Martin’s race only when prompted by the dispatcher, the suit says.

NBC never aired an “earnest” retraction and never apologized to Zimmerman, who has since experienced death threats, a bounty on his head and a genuine fear for his life, the suit says. He now lives in hiding, court documents say.

NBC News President Steve Capus “made a bogus non-apology that claimed the doctoring was merely a ‘mistake,’” the suit says.

Because of the death threats, Zimmerman wears a bulletproof vest and was even dismissed from his college because it felt fellow students could be endangered, the lawsuit says. At the time of the incident with Martin, Zimmerman was living in a community known as The Retreat at Twin Lakes in Sanford, Florida, court papers say.

“Due to the defendants’ journalistic crimes, Zimmerman has been transformed into one of the most hated men in America,” the suit says.

Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, told “In Session’s” Jean Casarez that NBC tried “to get ahead of the curve coverage thinking that they had themselves a person who was a racist, and they were wrong.”

The suit also names as defendants Lilia Rodriguez Luciano of Dade County, Florida, who was reporting directly from Sanford. Her employment was terminated by NBC as a result of her reporting, the suit says.

Also named as a defendant is Jeffrey Burnside of Dade County, another journalist who was reporting from Sanford to his station, NBC-owned WTVJ in Miami, the suit says. Burnside was also fired by NBC, the suit said.

Now just as a reminder, NBC has yet to identify the producer who purposely edited Zimmerman’s 911 call to make him look like a white supremacist, even though he/she was fired. And to top it off one Brian Stelter of the New York Times has tweeted that the fired individual’s fellow producers and reporters are outraged that their friend got fired for his/her lying. Go figure!

If the media had done its job properly four years ago, we wouldn’t have gotten stuck with this Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson clone.

Anyway, here’s a 2002 video of Barack Obama speaking at the University of Chicago where he derided non-violence as something only for rich people who “got what they want.”

Here’s another video from the same speech where he played the race card by bemoaning the “prison industrial complex.”

In case you’re wondering what it was that set off these monsters, it was simply because the 63 year old man asked them to quiet down.

A wolf pack of drunken young women “acting stupid” on the downtown No. 6 train after an all-night party stabbed a 63-year-old man yesterday — for having had the nerve to ask them to pipe down, police said.

The man was on his way to work as a vendor near the World Trade Center at about 6:15 a.m., a law-enforcement source told The Post.
“The eight females were acting stupid. He just told them, ‘Relax. Calm down,’ ” the source said.
Instead, one stabbed the man, Ralph Carnegary, in the shoulder. He was in stable condition at Bellevue.

The women were busted on the street near at the 23rd Street station.
A city bus driver who witnessed the arrests said the women, beers in hand, were screaming, “We didn’t do anything.’’
Seven of them, ages 17 to 20, were charged with gang assault, disorderly conduct, rioting, criminal possession of a weapon, menacing and felony assault.
Cops added that they recovered a knife.

The suspects later shouted and cursed at reporters and photographers as they were led to a police van.

Meanwhile, Mayor Bloomberg has been doing nothing but trying to outlaw guns, ban oversized soft drinks, and most recently, telling hospitals to hide baby formula so new mothers will breastfeeds their kids.

Instead, these “women” need to be thrown in jail and their welfare terminated.

That was pretty much what they wrote in a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric “My People” Holder. And they’re right. I thought offering a bounty on someone was illegal in this country. But I guess it’s legal for certain people.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday, obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, a family member of George Zimmerman asked the nation’s top law enforcement officer why he has chosen to not arrest members of the New Black Panther Party for their rhetoric — some of which may fit the federal government’s definition of a hate crime — throughout the Trayvon Martin case.

The family member believes the reason Holder hasn’t made those arrests is because he, like the members of the New Black Panther Party, is black.

“I am writing you to ask you why, when the law of the land is crystal clear, is your office not arresting the New Black Panthers for hate crimes?” the family member wrote to Holder.

“The Zimmerman family is in hiding because of the threats that have been made against us, yet the DOJ has maintained an eerie silence on this matter. These threats are very public. If you haven’t been paying attention just do a Google search and you will find plenty. Since when can a group of people in the United States put a bounty on someone’s head, circulate Wanted posters publicly, and still be walking the streets?”

27 year old Lamont Pride is no stranger to jail. He was wanted for a shooting in North Carolina back in August. He was arrested yet again last month for drug possession and child endangerment charges. Here is the picture of the lovely individual.

Yet thanks to Judge Evelyn Laporte, Lamont Pride was set free only to murder officer Peter Figoski.

For once I agree with Mayor Bloomberg!

Fox News is finally asking whether or not there is a racial component to attacks where groups of black teenagers pounce on unsuspecting individuals going about their lives and beat them apparently for fun. The Mayor of Philadelphia, Michael Nutter, who is black, believes it’s about race.

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter, who recently imposed a stricter curfew in response to the city’s latest attack, addressed black youths directly from the pulpit of his church on Sunday, reportedly saying, “You have damaged your own race.”

“If you want …anybody else to respect you and not be afraid when they see you walking down the street, then leave the innocent people who are walking down the street minding their own damn business. Leave them alone,” Nutter told a mostly black congregation at Mount Carmel Baptist Church in West Philadelphia, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Nutter, the city’s third black mayor, spoke after a mob attack July 29 in downtown Philadelphia during which 20 to 30 black youths allegedly beat and robbed innocent bystanders, according to law enforcement. Several people were injured, including one man who was reportedly hospitalized for a fractured skull, and police arrested four people.

Here’s a web site listing even more flash mob attacks/wildings.

Thanks to social media sites like Twitter and Facebook, these feral teens have been able to organize their hoodlum activities on very short notice. It’s also likely that they organize where to meet using either their cell phones or Blackberries. Now being that our government has been working with telecommunications companies like Assurance Wireless (for one) to provide these “poor, oppressed, underprivileged” families with free cell phones/plans, some people are wondering whether they’re being forced to pay for the devices used to organize these attacks.

Personally, I think these flash mobs are all about getting back at whitey, since they have one of their own in power now. After all, we have as our POTUS a black Muslim communist with a chip on his shoulder, who hates America, hates white people, and Jews. This is all courtesy of liberals who wanted to prove they weren’t big bad racists (which includes crazy Jews in Name Only), and so-called conservatives who believed there would be no difference between a McCain or an Obama presidency. Anyway, thanks to Obama, we have as our Attorney General Eric “My People” Holder, who, among other things, refused to prosecute a group of club wielding Black Panthers intimidating white voters in Philadelphia back in 2008. So far, Holder has not uttered a peep about these flash mob attacks. I think Hell will freeze over before he says anything remotely critical of “his people.”

Kudos to the Wisconsin Supreme Court for standing up to the labor unions and their filthy, smelly goons, who made a mess of the capitol building. What that means is no more collective bargaining for govermnent workers unions, and also that these same government workers will have to pay a little more towards their benefits.

MADISON, Wis. — A divided Wisconsin Supreme Court handed Republican Gov. Scott Walker a major victory Tuesday, ruling that a polarizing union law that strips most public employees of their collective bargaining rights could take effect.

In a 4-3 decision that included a blistering dissent, the court ruled that Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi overstepped her authority when she declared the law void. She sided with a lawsuit that claimed Republicans didn’t provide proper public notice of a meeting that helped get the original legislation approved.

Of course these unions won’t go gently into the good night. Rather than tighten their belts in tough economic times like all other Americans are doing, they’ll launch an avalanche of lawuits in order to keep on milking the Wisonsin taxpayers like cows, which they view as their G-d given right.

{snip}

Walker claimed that the law, which also requires public employees to pay more for their health care and pensions, was needed to help address the state’s $3.6 billion budget shortfall and give local governments enough flexibility on labor costs to deal with deep cuts to state aid. Democrats saw it as an attack on public employee unions, which usually back their party’s candidates.

Walker, in a one-sentence statement Tuesday, said “the Supreme Court’s ruling provides our state the opportunity to move forward together and focus on getting Wisconsin working again.”