By Nathan Barton
After reporting the rude behavior of a cop when she asked for directions, The Free Thought Project reports that the mother was beaten by three cops, in front of her children, after being stopped on a bogus charge. It is all on video, including the way people tried to intervene (unarmed, I might add). Why are these three police officers not already in prison, bond set at millions? Where are the protesters in Carlsbad? Why not?
Mama Liberty answers these questions: In prison? Ha. We already know that’s not going to happen. Where are the protesters in Carlsbad? Why not? Too many people still think that anything the “cops” do is justified; that they have the “authority” to stop people like this. Few will see the video, and will get the twisted “news” from their local MSM. An unarmed woman alone, and especially with children, would be much better off not speaking to cops at all, under any circumstances. And complaining to the cop’s boss is worthless and dangerous, as she discovered. But I’ll bet she STILL thinks government has actual authority over everyone, and these are just “bad apples.” And besides… it’s California. sigh.
Nathan: Amen, and enough said.
More on the theme: Will Grigg has an excellent commentary at Lew Rockwell about what a hideous situation we find ourselves in regarding the interactions of the public with the “law enforcement” community. I should point out that this is NOTHING new. Personal experience two decades ago, when a policeman (member of the local SWAT) pulled out of the driveway of the local Sheriff’s office garage and cut me off. I went about my business, turning into the Courthouse parking lot, only to find the man drove around the block to stop next to me in the parking lot and scream at me and threaten to run me in for not stopping so that he could exit (he was NOT running hot [lights and siren]). Fortunately, another officer intervened before I ended up like the woman yesterday, or the DOZENS of people each day who are abused and tyrannized by the cops on the beat, even in rural areas.
The Florida Libertarian Party has imploded, as reported to me by a correspondent from the state, and in the Orlando Sentinel, after a coup in the FLP’s convention nominated a well-spoken, good- and clean-looking attorney to run for US Senate. The problem is that the man is a pagan neo-Nazi who is openly saying that one purpose of his campaign for the Senate is to trigger a civil war. Because of this (and frankly, the usual dysfunctional state of too many Libertarian parties), the executive committee has resigned, and things are more chaotic than usual. “Herding cats,” of course, immediately comes to mind.
To make it worse, the guy is not just a pagan, he is a blood-swilling, goat-sacrificing pagan as well! His website seems to make it pretty clear that the man (whose name is Augustus Sol Invictus) is in no way supporting of the non-aggression principle, which should resolve the problem. The LP has had its share of nutjobs running for office (and winning, in one case, election to the National Committee) dressed in drag and ugly as… and certainly not living by the non-aggression principle in their personal life. But as my friend (thanks, Steve) worried, it will damage the reputation of many members.
Indeed, someone at Political Outcast has already pointed out that Ben Carson, one of the GOP presidential stable, was viciously attacked and condemned for not knowing the Constitution, when he said that a Muslim should not be elected president. So is it equally wrong to say that a guy who sacrificed a goat to … something… and then drank the blood shouldn’t be a Conscript Father in the US Senate? Are these Florida Libertarians guilty of bias and bigotry? Are not pagans people too, just as much as people who eat dogs and bunnies and Bambi? Who worship Shiva and Kali and think that Buddha or Venus or Apollo are gods? Why not?
Really, Greek or Roman pagans (with or without drinking goat blood) are a lot more likely to be good neighbors and less tyrannical than much more prominent modern religions, like Islam. As The Blaze reports, in a Syrian town, the Caliphate (Islamic State) has said in a newly released video, that Christians in a Syrian town it recently conquered were given the choice to sign a contract pledging subservience to Muslim rule or “be killed” and have their women and children enslaved. This is a system called “Dhimmitude,” as “people of the Book” (supposedly both Christians and Jews) are “protected” provided they know their place and pay the Jizra (a special tax); otherwise they are fair game. The jihadist group claimed that it has “displayed kindness and generosity” to the Christian minority in Qaryatayn (seized by the Caliphate in August), even as the video showed jihadist militants throwing a cross from a church building and ransacking a church hall. This is useful: we now know what THIS branch of Islam considers “kind” and “generous.” The Caliphate also had a special message to American Christians, promising that, if they convert to Islam, “no harm will come to you.” Promise? Or Threat? Well, keeping in mind how another group “serves and protects,” we can be prepared.
Of course, it isn’t just Muslims and Islamists that want to take crosses off of church buildings, or ransack their halls. A Lutheran bishop in Sweden has stated that the cross on a church building in her diocese needs to come down, and a prayer room (with convenient directions to Mecca) be installed in order to “not offend” and make the building “more inclusive.” As reported by Breitbart, this bishop is the world’s first openly homosexual bishop of a “major denomination,” – indeed, the largest Lutheran denomination in the world. This is apparently drawing fire even in Sweden, but is certainly to be expected after the Roman Catholic Pope himself has said the Koran is equal to the Bible and that Catholicism and Islam should “merge.”
According to a Texas Lyceum Poll, 46 percent of Texans support legalizing cannabis – a substantial increase from just 1/3, four years ago. Public opinion in the state is still marginally opposed to a more relaxed policy, with 50 percent against full legalization. But even among those not in favor of Colorado-style legalization, 57 percent supported lighter punishments and effective decriminalization for those caught with under an ounce of pot (just 39 percent favored the status quo). Even Texas! And clearly not just West-Texans.
Mama’s Note: Ah yes, mob rule. So many people eager to control the lives of others.
While Bill O’Reilly makes some good points, as reported by The Blaze, it is clear he just doesn’t get it. He points out that with 300 million guns “afloat” in the Fifty States, no one and nothing can collect them all, and even outlawing them (ala the UK and Australia), just won’t work – even if it were not a God-given right. But then he advocates a “mandatory, automatic” five-year FEDERAL prison sentence on top of any state punishment for ANY gun crime. Putting aside the reality of that passing, who pays? And how many new prisons? And how much more FedGov power and tyranny? No, the solution is to END all the anti-gun laws that keep peaceful and honest people from defending themselves. Outlawing guns is, fortunately, about as possible as outlawing death, or passing laws against traffic deaths. And it isn’t just how many we already have: it is the hundreds of thousands of people who can MAKE guns, with or without 3-D printers.
Mama’s Note: There is no such thing as “gun crime.” Crime committed with a gun, instead of a knife or screwdriver, is no more a crime. A gun doesn’t make aggression any worse than an attack with any other tool. O’Reilly is stuck in the rut of blaming the tool for the crime, as are so many others. The best and most just outcome for any lethal attack, including those using only bare hands as the weapon, is death or great bodily harm at the hands of the intended victim… and the most effective tool in the hands of those would be victims is a gun they know very well how and when to use.