Saturday, December 08, 2018
Not as nasty out there as feared,
but it's still cold. And warm inside, checking out the new study material
An Irish lecturer was stabbed to death by a student
outside the Paris
university where he taught on Wednesday for allegedly insulting the prophet Mohammed by displaying a drawing of him during class.
In honor of the professor, the only proper response to this:
In honor of the professor, the only proper response to this:
A false accusation, a kangaroo court;
he should sue the ass off everyone involved. ESPECIALLY this asshat:
As the procedure rolled on, it turned out that Masin was accused of making a threat by a professor.
Despite ample evidence proving that he wasn’t even in the area at the time of the alleged threat, both by showing his phone and by having witnesses state he was with them at the time of the alleged incident, the school didn’t see fit to drop the allegations.
So the professor lied. Nail their ass to the wall for it.
As the procedure rolled on, it turned out that Masin was accused of making a threat by a professor.
Despite ample evidence proving that he wasn’t even in the area at the time of the alleged threat, both by showing his phone and by having witnesses state he was with them at the time of the alleged incident, the school didn’t see fit to drop the allegations.
So the professor lied. Nail their ass to the wall for it.
Well, yeah
In a scathing opinion issued Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge
Royce Lamberth said that despite FBI, inspector general and
congressional investigations into Clinton’s use of a private account for
all her email traffic during her four years as secretary of state, the
conservative group Judicial Watch should be permitted to demand
documents and additional testimony about the practice.
Lamberth, who has clashed with Clinton and her aides in cases dating back to her husband’s administration, was unsparing in his assessment of the former secretary’s actions. He blasted Clinton’s email practices as “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”
There's pretty much zero chance of her- or her staff- being held responsible for their crap. And none of the people involved give a crap about the damage they've done(in numerous ways). But at least JW might come up with some stuff to keep this crap in the news, at least a little bit.
Lamberth, who has clashed with Clinton and her aides in cases dating back to her husband’s administration, was unsparing in his assessment of the former secretary’s actions. He blasted Clinton’s email practices as “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”
There's pretty much zero chance of her- or her staff- being held responsible for their crap. And none of the people involved give a crap about the damage they've done(in numerous ways). But at least JW might come up with some stuff to keep this crap in the news, at least a little bit.
Friday, December 07, 2018
Not exactly confidence-inspiring, is it?
They looked at hit rates in two ways, “incident level” and “bullet level”. On an “incident level” basis, they found that officers got at least one hit, regardless of the number of rounds fired, in about 54% of the shootings, just barely over half of the time.
However, on a “bullet level” basis, they found that out of 354 shots fired, there was only a 35% hit rate. One half of all officers missed with every shot they fired, including one officer who fired 23 misses and no hits. This means that six out of every ten shots fired was a miss. How does this happen?
Let’s look at this “amount-and quality- of firearms training” in Dallas, which is actually a very representative sample. Officers qualify with their firearms once per year. That’s right, once. The course of fire they “qualify” on is a joke, essentially a sobriety test for anyone with any skill at all with a gun. I, or any other competent private sector trainer, could take a brand new shooter, with no prior training or experience, and have them pass this course of fire at the end of one day of range training. DPD officers receive “firearms training” once every two years, consisting of 50-100 rounds of firing in exercises and scenarios. That’s it.
Unfortunately it's a Bookface link, but if you can it's worth reading.
"However much it takes, comrade!"
That’s why it’s fair to ask Rep. Bloodlust how much blood he’s prepared to shed to achieve his goal of disarming Normal Americans.
Rep. Swalwell, some people are going to fight rather than cave in, so what’s the number of bodies you would be willing to pile up to win? Let’s put aside the right or wrong of resistance; it’ll be a thing. It’ll happen.
...
Now, Congressman Strangelove properly took a lot of grief for suggesting nuking fellow Americans, but even if you accept his backtracking about how this was a joke – nothing’s funnier than suggesting the mass murder of fellow Americans! – he only put nukes off limits. What killing systems are still on the table? Infantry? Artillery? Bombers? Because his answer assumed that he would support prosecuting a war against those who failed to obey and submit to arrest.
Guarantee that if someone was able to ask him this, he'd try to blow it off and ask why they're being so dramatic. Because he either hasn't thought through this, or he doesn't have the balls to admit it outright: every time you pass a law, you're saying you're willing to put people in prison, and kill them if they resist the arrest, to enforce that law. As the gentleman put it, "It all ends in puppy-killing SWAT teams".
Rep. Swalwell, some people are going to fight rather than cave in, so what’s the number of bodies you would be willing to pile up to win? Let’s put aside the right or wrong of resistance; it’ll be a thing. It’ll happen.
...
Now, Congressman Strangelove properly took a lot of grief for suggesting nuking fellow Americans, but even if you accept his backtracking about how this was a joke – nothing’s funnier than suggesting the mass murder of fellow Americans! – he only put nukes off limits. What killing systems are still on the table? Infantry? Artillery? Bombers? Because his answer assumed that he would support prosecuting a war against those who failed to obey and submit to arrest.
Guarantee that if someone was able to ask him this, he'd try to blow it off and ask why they're being so dramatic. Because he either hasn't thought through this, or he doesn't have the balls to admit it outright: every time you pass a law, you're saying you're willing to put people in prison, and kill them if they resist the arrest, to enforce that law. As the gentleman put it, "It all ends in puppy-killing SWAT teams".
Thursday, December 06, 2018
Ah, the wonders of Green Energy
Especially when you make most of the messy parts happen to other people.
Here's something I've pointed out as problems with the bird cuisinarts to greenies; they scoffed at the amount of materials and just what they mean:
Each of the turbines at Dunmaglass will require servicing, which means a network of new and improved roads 20 miles long being built across the hills. They also need 1,500 tons of concrete foundations to keep them upright in a strong wind, which will scar the area.
Don't forget all the rebar in those foundations, either.
But don't worry, it's all worth it. Say the asshats who hate nuclear, which has fewer downsides:
Many environmental pressure groups share Salmond’s view. Friends of the Earth opposes the Arctic being ruined by oil extraction, but when it comes to damaging Scotland’s wilderness with concrete and hundreds of miles of roads, they say wind energy is worth it as the impact of climate change has to be faced.
"We must act now OR WE'LL ALL DIE!!" Sound familiar?
And let's not forget what this 'green' energy COSTS, and how people are screwed for it:
There’s a simple beauty about RO for the government. Even though it’s defined as a tax, it doesn’t come out of pay packets but is stuck on our electricity bills. That has made funding wind farms a lot easier for the government than more cost-effective energy-efficiency measures.
"Try to hide the costs from the people who pay them. When they find out, tell them it'll all be fine."
By 2020, environmental regulation will be adding 31 per cent to our bills. That’s £160 green tax out of an average annual bill of £512. As costs rise, more people will be driven into fuel poverty. When he was secretary of state at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, Ed Miliband decreed that these increases should be offset by improvements in energy efficiencies.
Right...
Study a graph of electricity consumption and it appears amazingly predictable, even down to reduced demand on public holidays. The graph for wind energy output, however, is far less predictable.
Take the figures for December, when we all shivered through sub-zero temperatures and wholesale electricity prices surged. Peak demand for the UK on 20 December was just over 60,000 megawatts. Maximum capacity for wind turbines throughout the UK is 5,891 megawatts, almost ten per cent of that peak demand figure.
Yet on December 20, because winds were light or non-existent, wind energy contributed a paltry 140 megawatts. Despite billions of pounds in investment and subsidies, Britain’s wind-turbine fleet was producing a feeble 2.43 per cent of its own capacity – and little more than 0.2 per cent of the nation’s electricity in the coldest month since records began.
There's more; oh, lots more. And it all boils down to "We know what's best for you, peasants, so pay up and shut up."
Which has something to do with those disturbances in France, if I'm not mistaken...
Here's something I've pointed out as problems with the bird cuisinarts to greenies; they scoffed at the amount of materials and just what they mean:
Each of the turbines at Dunmaglass will require servicing, which means a network of new and improved roads 20 miles long being built across the hills. They also need 1,500 tons of concrete foundations to keep them upright in a strong wind, which will scar the area.
Don't forget all the rebar in those foundations, either.
But don't worry, it's all worth it. Say the asshats who hate nuclear, which has fewer downsides:
Many environmental pressure groups share Salmond’s view. Friends of the Earth opposes the Arctic being ruined by oil extraction, but when it comes to damaging Scotland’s wilderness with concrete and hundreds of miles of roads, they say wind energy is worth it as the impact of climate change has to be faced.
"We must act now OR WE'LL ALL DIE!!" Sound familiar?
And let's not forget what this 'green' energy COSTS, and how people are screwed for it:
There’s a simple beauty about RO for the government. Even though it’s defined as a tax, it doesn’t come out of pay packets but is stuck on our electricity bills. That has made funding wind farms a lot easier for the government than more cost-effective energy-efficiency measures.
"Try to hide the costs from the people who pay them. When they find out, tell them it'll all be fine."
By 2020, environmental regulation will be adding 31 per cent to our bills. That’s £160 green tax out of an average annual bill of £512. As costs rise, more people will be driven into fuel poverty. When he was secretary of state at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, Ed Miliband decreed that these increases should be offset by improvements in energy efficiencies.
Right...
Study a graph of electricity consumption and it appears amazingly predictable, even down to reduced demand on public holidays. The graph for wind energy output, however, is far less predictable.
Take the figures for December, when we all shivered through sub-zero temperatures and wholesale electricity prices surged. Peak demand for the UK on 20 December was just over 60,000 megawatts. Maximum capacity for wind turbines throughout the UK is 5,891 megawatts, almost ten per cent of that peak demand figure.
Yet on December 20, because winds were light or non-existent, wind energy contributed a paltry 140 megawatts. Despite billions of pounds in investment and subsidies, Britain’s wind-turbine fleet was producing a feeble 2.43 per cent of its own capacity – and little more than 0.2 per cent of the nation’s electricity in the coldest month since records began.
There's more; oh, lots more. And it all boils down to "We know what's best for you, peasants, so pay up and shut up."
Which has something to do with those disturbances in France, if I'm not mistaken...
Wednesday, December 05, 2018
"The author received death threats!"
Lots of conservatives and libertarians say "Welcome to the party, pal."
This is two brand new things happening in two weeks. The Middle Class rioting in France and forcing the government to back the hell down off their shiny new fuel tax, and now pop music fans telling Lefties to shut the fuck up about their diva.
If you're expecting praise for being so sensitive and caring, and suddenly some of the people you're expecting it from tell you to eff off, it would be a horrible shock to an Enlightened One.
Excuse me while I catch my breath from laughing.
Surpise!
The latest study published by the highly-credentialed researchers in these well-funded programs, “California's comprehensive background check and misdemeanor violence prohibition policies and firearm mortality,” was designed to evaluate the effect of California’s 1991 comprehensive background check and prohibiting those convicted of violent misdemeanors policies on firearm homicide and suicide. The study period was 1981-2000, with secondary analysis up to 2005.
Using a synthetic control methodology, the researchers found that the comprehensive background check and violent misdemeanor prohibitions were not associated with changes in firearm suicide or homicide.
In conversational language, the two policies had no effect.
Higher Education: "I want to get rid of you, so I'll find SOMETHING you've done. Even if it's bullshit."
Herzog placed Gouws on “Official Warning Status” on November 13, on the grounds that he was guilty of “substantial and manifest neglect of professional duties.” Sounds serious, does it not? Was Gouws out throwing darts in the Springfield pub when he should have been teaching class? Using students’ term papers for tinder at campfires for Springfield’s dwindling cohort of men?
No. Herzog’s complaints focus on his refusal to meet in person with the chair of his department to discuss some student complaints. The chair, Alice Knox-Eaton, declined to tell Gouws the nature of the complaints or who had complained, and she refused to put the matter in writing. Gouws has his back up about this, having already been subjected to closed-door berating on the basis of supposed student allegations that he was never allowed to see.
I'd be pissed about that, too. An administrator playing "You can't know what the complaints are, and none of this will be in writing" is a Party enforcer who figures they can get away with anything. And you'd be a fool to play their game.
One of the Democrats admits that their clown show over the Kavanaugh nomination cost them.
Well, that and being a hypocritical asshat politician in other ways.
This is two brand new things happening in two weeks. The Middle Class rioting in France and forcing the government to back the hell down off their shiny new fuel tax, and now pop music fans telling Lefties to shut the fuck up about their diva.
If you're expecting praise for being so sensitive and caring, and suddenly some of the people you're expecting it from tell you to eff off, it would be a horrible shock to an Enlightened One.
Excuse me while I catch my breath from laughing.
Surpise!
The latest study published by the highly-credentialed researchers in these well-funded programs, “California's comprehensive background check and misdemeanor violence prohibition policies and firearm mortality,” was designed to evaluate the effect of California’s 1991 comprehensive background check and prohibiting those convicted of violent misdemeanors policies on firearm homicide and suicide. The study period was 1981-2000, with secondary analysis up to 2005.
Using a synthetic control methodology, the researchers found that the comprehensive background check and violent misdemeanor prohibitions were not associated with changes in firearm suicide or homicide.
In conversational language, the two policies had no effect.
Higher Education: "I want to get rid of you, so I'll find SOMETHING you've done. Even if it's bullshit."
Herzog placed Gouws on “Official Warning Status” on November 13, on the grounds that he was guilty of “substantial and manifest neglect of professional duties.” Sounds serious, does it not? Was Gouws out throwing darts in the Springfield pub when he should have been teaching class? Using students’ term papers for tinder at campfires for Springfield’s dwindling cohort of men?
No. Herzog’s complaints focus on his refusal to meet in person with the chair of his department to discuss some student complaints. The chair, Alice Knox-Eaton, declined to tell Gouws the nature of the complaints or who had complained, and she refused to put the matter in writing. Gouws has his back up about this, having already been subjected to closed-door berating on the basis of supposed student allegations that he was never allowed to see.
I'd be pissed about that, too. An administrator playing "You can't know what the complaints are, and none of this will be in writing" is a Party enforcer who figures they can get away with anything. And you'd be a fool to play their game.
One of the Democrats admits that their clown show over the Kavanaugh nomination cost them.
Well, that and being a hypocritical asshat politician in other ways.
Tuesday, December 04, 2018
Surprise!
Except it isn't.
A majority of “non-citizens,” including those with legal green card rights, are tapping into welfare programs set up to help poor and ailing Americans, a Census Bureau finding that bolsters President Trump’s concern about immigrants costing the nation.
In a new analysis of the latest numbers, from 2014, 63 percent of non-citizens are using a welfare program, and it grows to 70 percent for those here 10 years or more, confirming another concern that once immigrants tap into welfare, they don’t get off it.
Which a lot of the left considers a feature: "They'll vote for us if we promise to let them keep doing this."
Macron the Leftist Hero has announced he's 'delaying by a few months' the latest fuel tax increase.
And it doesn't appear to be going over well, since 'delaying' just means "I'll shove this down your throats later."
A majority of “non-citizens,” including those with legal green card rights, are tapping into welfare programs set up to help poor and ailing Americans, a Census Bureau finding that bolsters President Trump’s concern about immigrants costing the nation.
In a new analysis of the latest numbers, from 2014, 63 percent of non-citizens are using a welfare program, and it grows to 70 percent for those here 10 years or more, confirming another concern that once immigrants tap into welfare, they don’t get off it.
Which a lot of the left considers a feature: "They'll vote for us if we promise to let them keep doing this."
Macron the Leftist Hero has announced he's 'delaying by a few months' the latest fuel tax increase.
And it doesn't appear to be going over well, since 'delaying' just means "I'll shove this down your throats later."
Monday, December 03, 2018
FINALLY this is getting out to a wider audience
For months, Broward schools delayed or withheld records, refused to publicly assess the role of employees, spread misinformation and even sought to jail reporters who published the truth.
New information gathered by the South Florida Sun Sentinel proves that the school district knew far more than it’s saying about a disturbed former student obsessed with death and guns who mowed down staff and students with an assault rifle on Valentine’s Day.
After promising an honest assessment of what led to the shooting, the district instead hired a consultant whose primary goal, according to school records, was preparing a legal defense. Then the district kept most of those findings from the public.
The district also spent untold amounts on lawyers to fight the release of records and nearly $200,000 to pay public relations consultants who advised administrators to clam up, the Sun Sentinel found.
Some might ask "What could be so bad that they'd to all this to try to hide it?"
Glad you asked:
With a judge’s approval, the district obscured references to Cruz — nearly two-thirds of the text — to protect his privacy under law. Only when the Sun Sentinel obtained and published an uncensored copy did the truth come out: Cruz was deeply troubled; the district improperly withdrew support he needed; he asked for additional services; and the district bungled his request, leaving him spinning without help.
And on. And on.
And this article doesn't touch on the failures by the Sheriff's Office, which tie directly into a lot of this.
Go read it. Breakables warning in effect.
New information gathered by the South Florida Sun Sentinel proves that the school district knew far more than it’s saying about a disturbed former student obsessed with death and guns who mowed down staff and students with an assault rifle on Valentine’s Day.
After promising an honest assessment of what led to the shooting, the district instead hired a consultant whose primary goal, according to school records, was preparing a legal defense. Then the district kept most of those findings from the public.
The district also spent untold amounts on lawyers to fight the release of records and nearly $200,000 to pay public relations consultants who advised administrators to clam up, the Sun Sentinel found.
Some might ask "What could be so bad that they'd to all this to try to hide it?"
Glad you asked:
With a judge’s approval, the district obscured references to Cruz — nearly two-thirds of the text — to protect his privacy under law. Only when the Sun Sentinel obtained and published an uncensored copy did the truth come out: Cruz was deeply troubled; the district improperly withdrew support he needed; he asked for additional services; and the district bungled his request, leaving him spinning without help.
And on. And on.
And this article doesn't touch on the failures by the Sheriff's Office, which tie directly into a lot of this.
Go read it. Breakables warning in effect.
That post on 'cops shooting when they shouldn't' got a big reaction
from both sides. Since I've been called, in the past, a hater of cops for posting such, and too easy on cops by others, I'm going to throw this in:
As I've said before, I won't call all cops bad guys because I've known too many good ones to tolerate that. I will call a lot of otherwise good cops a problem because they won't generally do anything- other than trying not to work with them- about the bad ones, and that itself is a big problem.
US policing took a real wrong turn when it began emphasizing 'law enforcement officer' instead of 'peace officer', and that's where a lot of the crap began. Then, over time, throw in the 'street warrior' crap that some trainers use, and it gets worse. In large part because it seems a lot of it emphasizes "Shoot fast, because you may not get another chance", which winds up with innocent people dead(that incident in the Wal-Mart a couple of years ago is a fine example).
Then the department lawyers up, in far too many cases because, in essence, "Whatever he did, we cannot publicly admit any wrong." Throw in police unions who, even when there's video of an officer acting truly horribly, will make excuses. Which, taken together, causes a lot of people to decide "The cops don't give a crap about us, why should I give a damn about them?"
Put together, it really messes things up, especially for the cops who are NOT abusive, or uncaring, or badly trained. People who know them think they're great, but "All those others, guy, they suck."
Answers? Personally I think getting rid of qualified immunity would help a lot; if the bad ones, and iffy ones, knew that pulling the crap they get away with now would mean paying damages out of their own pockets, I think a lot of it would stop real quick. Department brass who care more about the profession and the people they serve than about 'image', and get rid of the bad ones as fast as possible. Cops need to know that when they're in the right, their brass will be right behind them all the way; when they're in the wrong, they'll answer for it.
Clean up the SWAT bullshit. It's a very valuable tool when used correctly, but that means
Do NOT use it unless it's actually needed.
Unless something actually requires the violence and hazard of a kick-in-the-doors raid, DO NOT DO THAT.
Your team raids the wrong address? Didn't make sure, as much as humanly possible, that person actually lives there? That needs to be punished harshly.
Add in, as demonstrated by the Portland and Seattle bullshit, that the cops are not used as enforcers by politicians. That shit is going to come back on them really badly, and I'll bet they whine and moan a lot when it does.
Ok, I'm done on this for now. I shall now see if I can get my sinuses to stop acting like someone's sneaking quick-set epoxy in there.
As I've said before, I won't call all cops bad guys because I've known too many good ones to tolerate that. I will call a lot of otherwise good cops a problem because they won't generally do anything- other than trying not to work with them- about the bad ones, and that itself is a big problem.
US policing took a real wrong turn when it began emphasizing 'law enforcement officer' instead of 'peace officer', and that's where a lot of the crap began. Then, over time, throw in the 'street warrior' crap that some trainers use, and it gets worse. In large part because it seems a lot of it emphasizes "Shoot fast, because you may not get another chance", which winds up with innocent people dead(that incident in the Wal-Mart a couple of years ago is a fine example).
Then the department lawyers up, in far too many cases because, in essence, "Whatever he did, we cannot publicly admit any wrong." Throw in police unions who, even when there's video of an officer acting truly horribly, will make excuses. Which, taken together, causes a lot of people to decide "The cops don't give a crap about us, why should I give a damn about them?"
Put together, it really messes things up, especially for the cops who are NOT abusive, or uncaring, or badly trained. People who know them think they're great, but "All those others, guy, they suck."
Answers? Personally I think getting rid of qualified immunity would help a lot; if the bad ones, and iffy ones, knew that pulling the crap they get away with now would mean paying damages out of their own pockets, I think a lot of it would stop real quick. Department brass who care more about the profession and the people they serve than about 'image', and get rid of the bad ones as fast as possible. Cops need to know that when they're in the right, their brass will be right behind them all the way; when they're in the wrong, they'll answer for it.
Clean up the SWAT bullshit. It's a very valuable tool when used correctly, but that means
Do NOT use it unless it's actually needed.
Unless something actually requires the violence and hazard of a kick-in-the-doors raid, DO NOT DO THAT.
Your team raids the wrong address? Didn't make sure, as much as humanly possible, that person actually lives there? That needs to be punished harshly.
Add in, as demonstrated by the Portland and Seattle bullshit, that the cops are not used as enforcers by politicians. That shit is going to come back on them really badly, and I'll bet they whine and moan a lot when it does.
Ok, I'm done on this for now. I shall now see if I can get my sinuses to stop acting like someone's sneaking quick-set epoxy in there.
I can't find this on Youtube, but if you're using Bookface you can see it
here: a very good demonstration of what happens when you
A: Don't clean up the unburned powder on a range, and
B: Have matting or some kind of 'residue falls here' setup in front of the line where said powder can accumulate.
Once, after a really busy weekend, we were cleaning up brass and this stuff and wound up with a fairly impressive pile of powder when it was all pushed together; my comment was "Gentlemen, the smoking lamp is OUT."
A: Don't clean up the unburned powder on a range, and
B: Have matting or some kind of 'residue falls here' setup in front of the line where said powder can accumulate.
Once, after a really busy weekend, we were cleaning up brass and this stuff and wound up with a fairly impressive pile of powder when it was all pushed together; my comment was "Gentlemen, the smoking lamp is OUT."
Some LEOs, when the law counts, don't give a crap
There are two interesting things that happen in this segment. First, Ngo
is headed off by two antifa carrying what appear to be some civilian
knockoff of the M-4 and they tell him they will not let him pass. Then a
cop intervenes and tells them to let Ngo through. The cop is less that
six feet from the armed antifa, he seemingly heard them tell Ngo he
couldn’t pass but somehow the blocking of passage on a sidewalk and the
possession of a pair of semi-automatic rifles are never linked into one
act.
I guarantee that if one of the Three Percenters had done that, they'd have been on their way to jail right away.
And then
A woman screamed into a bullhorn in front of my face. I was pressed up against a barrier. She led the mob into called me a “Nazi.” It was so loud that I felt physical pain in my ear drums.
...
This was a surreal moment: @SeattlePD officer came up and said I was "inciting conflict" and potential violence just by being there. If my physical presence in a public space makes someone else want to become violent, the problem is not with me.
Again: if some of the III guys had done these things, you can bet they'd have been arrested.
It appears that, like the Portland PD, Seattle PD has chosen sides.
I guarantee that if one of the Three Percenters had done that, they'd have been on their way to jail right away.
And then
A woman screamed into a bullhorn in front of my face. I was pressed up against a barrier. She led the mob into called me a “Nazi.” It was so loud that I felt physical pain in my ear drums.
...
This was a surreal moment: @SeattlePD officer came up and said I was "inciting conflict" and potential violence just by being there. If my physical presence in a public space makes someone else want to become violent, the problem is not with me.
Again: if some of the III guys had done these things, you can bet they'd have been arrested.
It appears that, like the Portland PD, Seattle PD has chosen sides.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)