New Jersey did the same thing.  Obviously these people have no idea how the Internet works in real life. I want to bet they do believe what they see on TV and that is why they do stupid stuff like this. And of course, there is the element of grandstanding in front of the voting folks as being tough on crime.

I bet he is so savvy about the internet, he even has his own GeoCities page.

Hat Tip @RogerGascoigne

since J. Kb. and yours truly do not pre-arrange what are we going to write about, you can assume a fair amount of events are bound to be addressed by both. If he beats me to the post, I usually let his post being the only one since he writes better than me.

I was aware of the “documentary” and I had it set up to record, but I did not know it was six episodes. I simply do not have the stomach to stand bull crap in those amounts.

You will probably be facing a lot of people demanding SYG to be taken down.  I want you to ask them one question: How come nobody has appealed to the courts that SYG is unconstitutional? You see that every day with laws that get passed and get taken to appeal courts and even all the way to SCOTUS. Yet nobody has challenged SYG in any court yet.  When they ask you why or remain silent in their ignorance, share the following link with them:

 Supreme Court of the United States: Stand Your Ground Cases.

There are three of them, all favoring the Right of an individual not to retreat and stand his ground when defending himself and dating as far back to 1895.

Beard v. United States – 158 U.S. 550 (1895)

The defendant was where he had the right to be, when the deceased advanced upon him in a threatening manner and with a deadly weapon, and if the accused did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to take his life, or do him great bodily harm, he was not obliged to retreat nor to consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon him with a deadly weapon in such way and with such force as, under all the circumstances, he at the moment, honestly believed, and had reasonable grounds to believe, were necessary to save his own life or to protect himself from great bodily injury.
Next:

Rowe v. U S, (1896)

if the accused did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to take his life, or to do him great bodily harm, he was not obliged to retreat, nor to consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his ground, and meet any attack made upon him with a deadly weapon, in such a way and with such force as, under all the circumstances, he, at the moment, honestly believed, and had reasonable grounds to believe, was necessary to save his own life, or to protect himself from great bodily injury.’

and:

Brown v. United States, 256 U.S. 335 (1921)

The law has grown, and even if historical mistakes have contributed to its growth it has tended in the direction of rules consistent with human nature. Many respectable writers agree that if a man reasonably believes that he is in immediate danger of death or grievous bodily harm from his assailant he may stand his ground and that if he kills him he has not succeeded the bounds of lawful self defence. That has been the decision of this Court. Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife.

It will be tough for any group hating SYG to go against one SCOTUS established case, much less three of them.  Which might be the reason that after all the scandal and all the screaming, tearing at clothes and tossing ashes up in the air, not one single Gun Control group has even tried to challenge the laws in Superior Courts.

Back in the early 20th Century, women were quite adept about getting rid of somebody they hated or needed to get rid of. But interestingly and contrary to the article, Guns, although used, were not the favorite tool nor were one of the most common. Poison was the choice, followed by knives and even hiring third parties to do the killing.

So when I found this Congresswoman (the second to be elected in history) demanding that her gender be prohibited to own guns, it struck me as odd and a lot stupid. But as my wife reminds me every so often, the worse enemy of a woman is another woman.

I go to Twitter this morning to see #TravyvonMartinStory trending as a hashtag.

Oh dear sweet baby Jesus, why?

Tonight is the premier on BET of a documentary Trayvon Martin: Rest in Power.

#RestInPower: The #TrayvonMartinStory, a six-part docu-series from executive producer @S_C_, will debut on @ParamountNet Monday at 10/9c. pic.twitter.com/jR7EM16yCr

— ESSENCE (@Essence) July 27, 2018

I’m tempted to DVR it and watch it just to see what kind of bullshit is says.

So going through the Twitter response to this, I come across this Tweet:

THIS is why we #TakeAKnee!
#PoliceBrutality #TrayvonMartinStory #SayHerName #racialprofiling #ThisIsAmerica #Injustice https://t.co/RZteW3xqVF

— HOMS (@Apope1961) July 27, 2018

That leads to this:

Here's why Florida's “Stand Your Ground” law is racist AF. pic.twitter.com/ZmA06ImIle

— AJ+ (@ajplus) July 25, 2018

So Markeis McGlockton is the next Trayvon Martin.

That led to this Tweet:

Bro was defending his queen. Dude couldn’t stand being put in his place. Push or not I bet bro would’ve still been shot. Because the bully was suddenly scared. He had balls ten seconds ago. Then cops would’ve used the word aggressive ten times.

— Eric Jerome Dickey (@EricJDickey) July 25, 2018

I haven’t touched on this shooting yet, but now I am.

It was a dubious shoot.  The old man got shoved off the pavement onto the ground.  In the video it didn’t look like McGlockton was going to make a second attack on the old man once he was on the ground.

But what I did notice from quite a number of the “SYG is racist” tweets as well as from the pro-Trayvon Martin supporters is a blind eye to the issue of escalation.

Namely this:

Why is it normal and acceptable in black culture to respond to words with violence?

Trayvon Martin didn’t like being followed so he beat up Zimmerman.  McGlockton didn’t like that an old man yelled at his girlfriend for illegally parking so he shoved an old man.

The problem isn’t that McGlockton shoved and old man in a parking lot, it’s that the old man shot McGlocton.

Maybe it’s the very definition of white privilege, but insult me or curse at me, and I’m going to walk away.  It’s not worth fighting over.

“It’s not right that my homie got shot just because my homie took a swing that guy because that guy insulted him.”

How about “don’t take a swing at a person because they insulted you.”  That seems like a better starting point than “SYG is racist.”

Maybe that’s the whole “SYG is racist” argument.  It’s between people who think the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior occurs between using words and taking a swing and those who think it is between taking a swing and taking a shot.

I want to see how this Rest in Power documentary covers this because it seems to be an insurmountable gulf between cultures.

Justice Scalia was right, words have no meaning anymore.

Those damn 3D guns, existing in all three dimensions of space simultaniously.

The horror odd downloadable guns.  You know how easy it is to download a MP3 off of Amazon?  That’s how easy it will be to get a gun.  For $0.99 off Spodify or whatever terrorists and felons will be able to download a gun and then commit a mass murder.

These people are unserious.  They have gone so off the rails with their ideology and emotions that they’ve left reason and critical thinking, no to mention a clarity in the language, behind.

When anti-gun hysterics collides with celebrity vacuousness, the results are entertaining if not stupid.

This Tweet blew my mind

No way that is real.

What did the news say:

Suspicious flight attendants are hailed as heroes after alerting cops to human trafficking suspect who boarded a flight with three young girls

• An older Asian man aroused suspicion on a Hawaiian Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Honolulu when he boarded with three Caucasian girls
• Flight attendant Wesley Hirata said he ‘sensed something wasn’t right’
• All three girls had the same name on their boarding pass and one was underage
• Honolulu sheriffs have turned the case over to the FBI
• The suspect’s name has not been released
• FBI investigated, and quickly established no offence had been committed

I thing that stuck out at me the most was the “all three girls had the same name on their boarding pass” part.  That seems like a big red flag or something.

I’ve never worked as a flight attendant, but I have worked security.  It doesn’t take long to develop a sense, where you notice people’s behavior and what signals they a giving off.  People can act suspiciously.  A kid trying to pocket a candy bar acts differently than a kid who is buying a snack.  I’ve seen it.

I’d assume that after handling tens of thousands of passengers in the post 9/11 era, flight attendants would develop the same sense for disruptive passengers, potential terrorists, people trafficking contraband, etc.

After the FBI investigated it turns out everything was legitimate, although I want to know what was up with the boarding pass name thing.

But Ms. Levy doubled down.

See, in her world, the only way to know if something is off is to be a racist.  This is why people like her hate police profiling.  It’s not that a cop learns to see the signs someone might be carrying an illegal gun or doing something illicit.  The only thing they notice is race.

This is the opposite of situational awareness.

Welcome to Woke, where it’s better to allow children to be kidnapped and raped than to show any signs of racism.

I wonder what a person like this does when a man on a hot day wearing an overcoat yells “Allahu Akbar?”