I’ve talked about the Knife Intifada before. Palestinians are stabbing Israeli Jews left and right.
With that in mind, watch the security footage from an checkpoint in Jerusalem, below.
A woman in a Hijab walks up to the guard at the checkpoint. She shows him her ID. The guard starts looking at his… tablet, clip board, something official (I can’t tell what). All the time he’s talking with the woman.
She has a full 20 seconds (from about 0:26 – 0:45) to slowly bring her bag around and pull out a knife.
The situation ended about as well as it could have at that point. The guard received only minor injuries and the woman got shot, but non fatally.
All I can thing is “c’mon Doofus, you’re lucky you’re not dead.”
Let’s count the probelms, shall we?
1- Stabbings all over the city, committed by Palestinians. Woman is wearing a Hijab, indicating she’s probably Palestinian.
2- Woman has a huge bag, that could be hiding anything. Guard doesn’t pay attention to the bag.
3- She starts fumbling in her bag. The guard apparently asks what she’s looking for it in, but makes to attempt to secure her. It could be a knife, it could be a bomb.
4- The guard spent most of his time with his eyes off the Woman and on his … unidentified security object.
5- The guard stands way too close to the woman giving him no space to react when she gets her knife out.
I’m not a cop, but I’ve read about modern police traffic stop procedures. Keep your eyes on the driver and passengers, watch for movement, etc. When the cop has to fumble with checking ID or writing a ticket, where is that done? In his car, with the suspect (for lack of a better word) in his car. Why? So the suspect can’t attack the officer while his attention is elsewhere. This guard dropped every bit of situational awareness and now has a scar to prove it.
Don’t drop yours. If something makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up, listen to that fear. I’d rather be accused of profiling than get killed or spend the rest of my life crapping into a bag through a hole in my side because I chose to ignore something that got my hackles up.
I have been watching the ongoing police/#BlackLivesMatter/Social Justice strife unfold for the last near year and a half. Of course on something this big, it would have to become a political issue. The Democrats have (officially) sided with BLM. The Republicans, to be contrarian, have sided with police.
Police vs. BLM is a false dichotomy that fails to recognize the major problem and therefore prevents them from being corrected. Polarizing politics being what they are, America is being pushed headlong into this and the result will be absolute disaster.
I have been accused of being anti-cop. I’m not. I’m anti-bad cop, there is a difference, a difference that it seems many Republicans don’t want to make when opposing the pro-BLM Democrats. I recognize the need for police in a civil society. The lack of police presence has resulted in a crime wave in major American cities following anti-police protests, like one one in Baltimore that subsequently cause the murder rate to jump.
Pro-cop conservatives will make the excuse for any police misconduct with “he was a bad apple.” Yes, and there is the old expression “one bad apple spoils the bunch.” It’s true. In 1971, a psychologist at Stanford named Philip Zimbardo conducted an experiment that became known as the Stanford Prison Experiment. He took a bunch of students, separated them into two groups – guards and prisoners – and locked them in the basement of the Stanford psychology building. In less than two days, the guards were physically and emotionally abusing the prisoners.
The results of the experiment were (in a nutshell): When people in positions of power are given unchecked authority, a handful of people will very quickly begin to abuse that authority. This creates an Us vs Them mentality between the groups. If people in group with authority try to stand up to the abusers, they will be ostracized by the rest of the “Us” group. In effect, the culture of the group with authority will be driven by the attitude and behavior of a minority of abusers.
This group psychology explains how, for example, run-of-the-mill young German men could carry out the mass executions and torture at Concentration Camps. Or how some National Guardsmen could sexually abuse prisoners in Iraq. Because a handful of sadists set the culture (and no I’m not say Abu Ghraib and Auschwitz were the same, just that the psychology was).
If you think I’m just picking on law enforcement and military, I’m not. I have a very good friend who works on Wall Street. I asked him one time how so many smart, Ivy League educated people could be so blind when creating a bubble and the resulting financial crisis. He explained that a minority of greedy managers set the culture. The traders and financial managers who were more concerned about long term sustainability over short term high profits weren’t promoted and saw their bonuses reduced. If they spoke up, they were fired. A group of greedy managers set the culture on Wall Street that caused the financial crisis.
The good news is, that proper oversight can fix this. By identifying the bad apples that set the culture and firing them is a start. Identifying good officers and promoting them will create a new culture. This type of oversight was one of the demands made by BLM.
So, what kind of culture are we talking about and why do we need to get rid of it? Well, in NYC police on slow down were told to get back to work because the lack of tickets and citations being issued were causing a cash flow problem in NYC. Think about that for a minute… the NYPD was not being used to serve and protect but to generate revenue. Can anybody say “perverse incentive?” How about a culture that allows an officer to back over a 101 year old woman with a squad car, killing her, and getting away with it? Or perhaps blowing the face off a toddler with a stun grenade and justifying it at collateral damage.
It is a culture that puts police in paramilitary uniforms on our city streets. When police dress like soldiers, they act like soldiers. Do we really need police patrolling cities in MRAPs?
I disagree with the BLM movement that police shootings are motivated by racism. I’m not going to deny that racism exists and that there may be some racist cops. But the Us vs Them mentality is enough to cause a police officer to shoot when he shouldn’t.
The back of a commemorative DNC T-shirt sold by the Denver Police Protective Association bears the slogan “We Get Up Early to Beat the Crowds – 2008 DNC.” The shirt was purchased froom the DPPA office Thursday, Sept. 25, 2008.
The ultimate problem this causes is a lack of trust and mutual respect between the citizenry and the police. Policing through fear and intimidation might seem like an effective strategy, but in the long term it doesn’t work. My sister lives in Baltimore, where snitches get stitches. Yes, snitches get stitches is a problem with the criminal culture in Baltimore. But it is also a problem with the Baltimore PD. When the people don’t trust the police, they don’t call them. They don’t expect the police to protect them and so they let a criminal culture dominate.
Now I know some in the black community might say “but J.Kb., you’re middle class and white, what do you know about fearing cops? People like you don’t get shot when unarmed.”
My answer is Canton, Ohio police officer Daniel Harless. Harless was caught on camera, on multiple occasions, threatening to murder concealed carry permit holders.
The good news is that Harless got fired. The bad news is that he only got fired after the video of him went viral. The previous complaints against him went unheeded.
This is where proper civilian oversight, government transparency, and a good law enforcement culture helps protect a citizenry and the reputation of a department from a bad apple. This is one of the good demands being made by BLM. But because Republicans have to Republican they can’t acknowledge that civilian oversight, along with ending police militarization and civil asset forfeiture, are not just reasonable but good positions to take.
Don’t think I’m letting BLM off the hook, many of their demands and the anti-cop culture they are pushing have resulted in crime waves and the deaths of police and regular civilians alike. Their histrionics aren’t generating them any sympathy either. Law enforcement killing of black suspects is genocide? Um… no. Members of my family were gassed at Treblinka. The father of one of the women who helped raise me, floated over to Miami from Cuba after much of his family was stood against a wall and shot by the mass murderer darling icon of the Left, Che. That’s a genocide. BLM showing solidarity with the Palestinians ain’t helping their cause either.
What I am pushing for is recognizing that protecting or not punishing bad officers sets a bad culture in law enforcement. That bad culture causes problems breeding anger and resentment withing the community. That anger and resentment makes it harder for cops to do their jobs. This can be fixed, and the fix is to improve the culture of law enforcement, and do it publicly.
I didn’t think it is an extremist (liberal) position to want my law enforcement to obey the law. I want my civil servants to serve the public trust. I don’t want my police department to patrol the streets of my city like it is Fallujah and see everybody without a badge as an enemy combatant. I want to trust the police in my city and to be able to call them without the fear that they will show up at my house and shoot my dog or shove several feet of fiber optic cable up my ass.
I support good police. I am anti-bad police. Wholesale anti-cop politics causes crime waves. Supporting the police with a blind eye to misconduct and abuse turns police into jackboot thugs. I want neither. We have to take reasonable (dare I say, bipartisan) action that fosters good, positive policing, to restore mutual trust and respect civil society.
This is not a new concept by any means. As was said by the Roman powet Juvenal, “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”
Most of the gun blogs I follow have taken Mr. Wes Siler to task over his idiotic article about Ted Cruz’s particular method of carrying an O/U in the field. I’m not going to break it down, that’s already been done before. Mr. Siler is a biased hack, working for a biased “news” source. Hacks gotta hack. If this guy didn’t have dishonesty, he’d have nothing at all.
I’m gonna pick on “local hunter and lifetime NRA member Scott Nathan” who was the “authority” that Mr. Siler quoted in his attack on Ted Cruz.
“While his action is visibly open, he is still not in control of muzzle direction. In a break-action gun [as Cruz is carrying here] the muzzle should always point down.”
I guess. Sure. I’ve seen both methods carried in the field in SD and on the Sporting Clays range. Cruz was taking to a reporter, so having the barrels over his shoulder rather than pointed at the reporter’s feet seem pretty reasonable. But I digress. It’s M.r Nathan’s later quote that gets me.
“He’s either a poser who doesn’t really hunt, or just a blindingly dangerous nincompoop,” concludes Scott. “He’s got moves like Cheney.”
THERE IT IS. He pulled the Cheney card. Ladies and Gentlemen, we found ourselves a Bush/Chaney derangement syndrome affected Fudd sporting an NRA sticker who is going to side with anti-gun Gizmodo. Thank’s schmuck. With friends like you, we’re gonna lose our guns.
P.S. My father warned me about a politician who gets his picture taken carrying a double gun on a bird hunt. It’s the easiest way for an anti-gun politician to “demonstrate” he’s for the 2A and not believe in it. I’m not suggesting Sen Cruz is anti-gun, he’s a Republican from Texas. I’m just saying there were plenty of pictures taken of Bill Clinton on a duck hunt and John Kerry on a pheasant hunt released during their respective campaigns, and we know where both men stand on the issue of gun control.
If I ever ran for President, your’e not going to see me carrying a double gun, going after pheasants. The media will be too busy running pictures of me at a 3 Gun match with my AR with the “This Machine Kills Fascists” sticker on the buttstock.
The ninnyhammers at Everytown are having themselves a little freak out over the fact that some Kindergartners in PA are getting gun safety lessons in school. By gun safety, we’re not talking about going to the range for PE. It’s the “stop, don’t touch it, leave the area, tell an adult” approach to kids and guns. Of course, even this is too much for the anti-gunners.
They’re right of course, about the abstinence only sex ed. So why do they think that not even talking about guns and gun safety with kids is the right approach?
I propose a compromise. How about taking the sex ed approach to gun safety. With young kids, don’t touch it. At 13, we’re going on a class field trip to the range and we’re going to learn The 4 Rules and safe handling practice. You can give condoms to my 6th grader if I hand hand a .22 to yours.
There are two political movements going on, on America’s college campuses that are dominating the news: campus carry and safe spaces. There is no better illustration of the difference between the Left and Right in America.
Trauma. Trauma? Trauma!?! WTF!?! Is this what passe for trauma in modern Liberalism? Forget getting shot at or having limbs blown off with IEDs, Liberals can be emotionally damaged by having an invited speaker hurt their feelings by telling them their facts are wrong.
The Safe Space movement is an offshoot of the trigger warning movement. Trigger warnings are warnings put by professors on texts and/or subjects that might cause students anxiety if they read them. Again, we’re not talking about some combat veteran jumping at the sound of a car backfiring. We’re talking about pampered, middle class kids flinching at the sound applause. This is so absurd that when The Onion makes fun of it, it reads like every other article I’ve cited so far.
The Left treats American college students, young men and women who a generation and two ago were old enough to be sent off to South East Asia, the islands of the Pacific, North Africa, and Europe to defeat Fascism, Nazism, and Communism, and defend freedom, and treats them like spoiled kindergartners.
On the other side of the aisle, the Right wants campus carry. We look at the these young men and women and have the audacity to believe that they are just that, men and women, who just might have the capacity to take care of themselves.
What is the Left offering as an alternative? Pee on yourself.
How has the Left responded to campus carry? By acting like children. Professors are having temper tantrums, taking their ball and going home. Liberal kids are responding with the unbelievable petulance. I’ve written about this before. The Left, always expecting the least of people while projecting their shortcomings onto others, whines that students will use their guns to intimidate their professors into inflating their grades.
There you have it. Left vs. Right. Children vs. Adults. They want to wrap themselves up in a blanket and suck their thumbs, and hide from anything and everything that makes them feel even slightly challenged. We want people to rise to the challenge of adulthood and take responsibility for themselves.
One of the most important lessons I learned in grad school was “what don’t I know?” The answer, of course, is “a lot.”
As you near the end of your studies as a PhD candidate, you have to take a comprehensive examination. It is a test to see if you have a fundamental understanding of the subject you are going to get your degree in well enough that you can teach it to others.
No it’s not. It is an academic gauntlet. The purpose of which is to teach you humility. You stand in front of a whiteboard while various professors bombard you with questions of increasing difficulty, on a subject, until you have no choice but you say “I don’t know.” Then they move onto a different subject and repeat the process until they break you.
See, you just completed 10 years of schooling. You think you know so much. You don’t, and they have to prove it to you by showing you the boundaries of you knowledge. You’re like a puppy, let loose into a big yard. This is your realm. And so you run until, ZAP!!! You hit the electric fence. You run in the other direction until ZAP!!! You hit the fence again. Soon you learn that in the whole wide world you can see, your realm is tiny. You know a thimble’s worth in the ocean of knowledge.
This is an experience I wish more people would go through. Especially journalists and politicians.
I am an expert on things in my thimble. When I talk about them, I talk with authority. For everything else, I research. Before I opine, I try to learn as much as I can.
There is an expression my graduate adviser used all the time “know just enough to be dangerous.” There is another one by Charles Darwin that I love: “Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.” Psychologists have proven that this is true, scientifically, it is called the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
For weeks the gun blogosphere has been calling out the politicians and journalists who make stupid statements and push for stupid laws regarding universal background checks, gun free zones, and everything else they claim will save lives but won’t. How could these people say on TV or in print what they say and be so wrong with so little shame? They have the confidence of the ignorant.
Politicians and journalists are the embodiment of the Mark Twain quote: “All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success is sure.”
Twain also said “Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.” And we know that Twain was a genius.
There is one law I would love to have pass that I believe would help this country like no other, it is this:
“Before a congressperson can vote on a bill, they have to pass a qualifying exam to demonstrate a basic knowledge of the subject matter the bill will address.”
Such a law would most likely bring DC to a standstill. But once more we yield to the wisdom of Mark Twain “No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.” So maybe it wouldn’t be so bad.
