QOTD: Cosmo doubles down on the fail in response to “icky” self-defense comment

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Women friends toasting with shots at a bar

Ladies, please be safe.
Image via HuffPo.

In case you were thinking that Cosmopolitan magazine was going to dial it down a notch or two in the aftermath of the outrage and disbelief over comments one of their managers made in response to Miss USA’s remarks on self defense in the context of campus rapes, think again. Cosmo sex editor Anna Breslaw stomped her feet and churned out this head-scratcher:

During the question-and-answer portion of the Miss USA pageant, 24-year-old Miss Nevada Nia Sanchez, who took home the crown, said she believed some colleges might sweep campus rape under the rug to prevent bad press. Sanchez, a fourth degree black belt in Tae Kwon Do, added, “more awareness [of the issue] is very important so that women can learn to protect themselves … You need to be confident and be able to defend yourself. That’s something we need to start to implement for a lot of women.” 

[…]

Self defense isn’t icky, and anyone with a fifth-grade reading comprehension level can understand that’s not what Elisa was saying.  

Actually, yeah – it was:

I get that the college sexual assault problem can’t be solved in 30 secs but still icky to pretend like self defense is the answer. ” – Elisa Benson

Can’t get much more plain that that.  And as I noted in my prior piece on this issue, she was far from the only one.

Breslaw went on:

What is icky is the idea that we’d pour the entirety of our time, energy, and federal funding into training every 18-year-old girl in America to be jacked, gun-toting Lara Crofts rather than, oh, I don’t know, teaching boys not to rape or shaming college administrators for not taking sexual assault allegations seriously. 

What’s “icky” is Ms. Breslaw assuming that most people who did a double take at Ms. Benson’s remarks believe there’s only room for one solution.  Also “icky” is her implicit assumption that boys aren’t taught from a very early age to respect women. Disturbing is her obvious belief that if respect is taught then it automatically means that a young man won’t grow up and eventually hurt a woman.   We can and should drill it into the heads of every single one of them that respecting women is not optional, but that doesn’t mean on down the line he’s going to abide by that. 

Which is where self-defense comes into play.  Fortunately, Breslaw is on board with women learning self-defense. Sorta:

Self-defense is a fantastic thing for every woman (or man) to have under their belt — in fact, experts say would-be attackers are often deterred by the confident manner in which women educated in self-defense carry themselves — but this limited view of campus sexual assault prevention perpetuates dangerous myths about sexual assault and shames victims for not adequately “preparing” to defend themselves against rape. It’s the same mentality as blaming sexual assault victims for wearing provocative clothing and therefore “brought it upon themselves,” rather than blaming their attackers for the actual assault. 

Do me a favor and please re-read the bolded part of the above paragraph.  Then digest it.  Self-defense “perpetuates myths about sexual assault” and …. “shames victims” for not preparing to defend themselves?? SAY WHAT? She actually thinks promoting self-defense is the equivalent to those who snidely say “but she was wearing a short skirt so she was asking for it”?   And it “shames” women who have been victims of sexual assault? In what  universe does Ms. Breslaw reside?  One wonders if she’d say that exact thing to victims of sexual assault who take up self-defense training and who tour and give speeches promoting that very thing as a very useful tool in preventing an attacker from doing a woman harm?? Good grief!

She says she believes all this but yet wants you to think that she harbors a “big tent” approach to the issue combating violence against women that includes incorporating self-defense into the mix? I don’t think so.  Here’s the shorter version of Breslaw’s ridiculous argument:  ‘Let’s not emphasize self-defense because we don’t want to risk hurting the feelings of women who have already become victims. In fact, let’s put the onus for trying to stop future assaults entirely on “society” rather than try to educate women on how to better protect themselves.’  Maybe that “solution” would work flawlessly in Breslaw’s Feminist Utopia but here in the real world, the reality is that there are bad people out there and no matter how much we try and communicate that it’s not ok to hurt women, those who want to WILL.

Rape is more of a crime of opportunity than it is some guy hiding in an alleyway waiting for you to walk by. With increasing frequency, a rapist is more likely to be someone you know or are otherwise somewhat acquainted with, perhaps casually, than not.    Either way, it’s best to be prepared for any situation.  Travel in groups.  Hold tight to your beverage of choice at all times.  Don’t binge drink. Do not walk to your car alone at night.  Lock your car doors and windows – and the doors and windows to your house.  Do NOT answer the front door if you don’t know who the person is or if they just make you uncomfortable.   Do not get into a car with a man you don’t know.  Do not be free-flowing with personal information about yourself (such as where you live and your phone number) with guys who you’re just getting to know.  The list goes on and on.

It goes without saying but I’ll repeat it anyway: You could do all of the above and then some and still end up a victim of a sexual assault – and if it does happen, it is imperative that you understand that it is/was NOT your fault. Unfortunately, there is no “fool-proof” way of avoiding the possibility of something happening to you.  But you’ll lessen the chances of it happening if you take precautions.  We tell young kids they can’t walk half a block to the store alone because someone might snatch them.  We instruct teenagers to run away if someone they don’t know approaches them in a vehicle. These are common sense precautions that no one ever thinks twice about. Why would anyone on earth hesitate to make sure women are given the vital tips they need in order to try and avoid becoming a victim of a violent crime, in addition to continuing to educate young men that they must respect women?

Unlike Ms.  Breslaw, I don’t speak out of both sides of my mouth.  I really do believe we should do everything we can to prevent future assaults, not just by continuing to instill values at a young age to boys (and girls) that they should respect each other, but also by trying to ensure that women have every available tool at their disposal – both knowledge and physical power – to protect themselves.  Nothing “icky” or shameful about it. The phony, warped political correctness behind Breslaw’s “but we’re shaming victims by doing this!!” mentality only serves to create more victims of rape down the road. She might be ok with that, but I’m not.

Correcting preconceived notions about guns in the aftermath of the #UCSB murders

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Facts

Facts matter.

In the aftermath of the horrific stabbings and shootings at the hands of deranged University of California at Santa Barbara student Eliot Rodger that left 6 dead (not including the murderer) and 13 injured, National Review writer Charles C.W. Cooke provides some much needed clarity on the talking points being thrown around by predictable knee-jerk reactionaries:


From USA Today:

Rodger stabbed to death three roommates at his apartment before starting his shooting spree, said Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown at a news conference.

“It was a pretty horrific crime scene,” Brown said of the murder scene at the apartment.

After slaying his roommates, Rodger went to a sorority house and knocked loudly on the door, Brown said. No one answered. He then shot three women outside the house, killing two and injuring the third, the sheriff said.

Twice deputies engaged him in gunfire, the first time wounding him in the hip as he drove, Brown said. The rampage ended after the young man exchanged fire with deputies and hit a bicyclist before crashing into parked cars.Rodger then fired on random people at multiple other locations nearby over a 10-minute period, police said.

“It would appear he took his own life at this point,” Brown said.

Thirteen people were injured — eight from gunshot wounds, four from being hit by his car and one who suffered a minor injury whose exact cause was not clear yet, Brown said.

Brown added that Rodger had three semi automatic handguns–a Glock 34 and two Sig Sauer P226s– as well as more than 400 rounds of ammo when he died.

The suspected shooter purchased all his firearms legally. They were registered to him.


Ezra Klein, not exactly a rock-ribbed conservative, unwittingly assisted Cooke on the inevitable cries of “we need more gun control!” coming from the left and their allies in the mainstream media:


Not exactly what gun control zealots wanted to hear. Cooke continued:


As I wrote on Twitter this morning, it’s easy to pile on and knee-jerk react in the era of “insta=reax” to what happens in the world. I’m just as guilty of it as the next person. Few people seem to take the time to carefully read and analyze the existing available information on any given developing situation before spouting off, which leads to a lot of irresponsible garbage being written – like the Daily Kos’ lengthy, ridiculous (not to mention shamelessly politically opportunistic) diatribe about how Elliot Rodger’s deadly rampage was the fault of all alpha males aka conservative men. As Cooke demonstrated, the opposition (us) needs to be better than that and come at the various (and typical) arguments tossed out for consumption armed with the facts rather than emotionalism. Sympathy for the victims and their respective families is understandable, necessary as part of the healing process – but regurgitating old, tired emotional arguments that have little to no merit for the sake of scoring cheap political points in an attempt to influence policy in the wrong direction is most definitely not.

Rule of Law? Obama admin releases over 36,000 criminal aliens

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

Might as well throw it away

Might as well throw it away

Well, this should make us all feel oh-so-secure:

Here’s everything you need to know about immigration reform: last year the Obama administration released 36,000 criminal aliens into the United States population. The jailbreak was deliberate and included 193 murderers.

The Center for Immigration Studies obtained the information and released a report documenting the number and nature of the crimes committed by the aliens.

If 36,000 criminal aliens walking around your community wasn’t enough, Obama’s Department of Homeland Security is aiming to make it even easier for aliens to be released from detention. That’s what the groups agitating for immigration reform are demanding. That’s what the groups are likely to get.

The 2013 jailbreak included rapists, kidnappers, arsonists, burglars, sex offenders, and car thieves. That’s merely for 2013.

The criminals that Obama administration policies set free are unlikely ever to be deported. Detained aliens facing deportation are highly unlikely to ever be deported once they are set free into the general American population. They don’t show up for their deportation hearings, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement doesn’t have the manpower or money to hunt down tens of thousands of criminal aliens.

That’s a heaping helping of criminality the Obama administration just introduced into America.

As J. Christian Adams points out, this is just another example of how the administration, particularly its highly politicized Justice Department, sides with the law-breaker over the law-abiding. (For more good, by which I mean “infuriating,” examples, have a look at Mr. Adams’ “Injustice: exposing the racial agenda of the Obama Justice Department”)

And, far beyond merely siding with criminals and applying a racialist filter to the administration of justice, we seen more examples than I think any of us would care to remember of this administration’s cavalier lip service to even the idea of a genuine rule of law, of a law common to all: waivers and delays in the implementation of Obamacare granted with no authority; bondholders and pensioners cheated in the GM and Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings; Congress’ legitimate oversight authority treated with contempt; our tax agency used to harass law-abiding citizens seeking only to exercise their rights to participate in politics, and so many others.

We have a real problem in America when one side feels the rules just don’t apply to them, so long as they think they’re in the right.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

U. of Minn. students urge school officials to drop racial descriptions in crime alerts

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Political correctness

Another one from the ”you have got to be kidding me” files.

Just unbelievable. Via WCCO (hat tip):

MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) – School officials at the University of Minnesota are working with black student and facility organizations after they wrote a letter to the school’s president about the racial descriptions given in crime alerts.

The letter, sent on Dec. 6, 2013, was issued by members of the African American and African Studies, Black Faculty and Staff Association, Black Graduate and Professional Student Association, Black Men’s Forum, Black Student Union and Huntley House for African American Males.

It was directed to University President Eric Kaler and Pamela Wheelock, the vice president of University Services.

Students and staff mailed the letter more than a month after the campus went on lockdown because of an attempted robbery at Anderson Hall on Nov. 11, 2013. University of Minnesota Police wrongfully identified a student as the suspect.

On Tuesday, school officials reported there have been 25 robberies in and around the University, an increase of 27 percent over the last few years.

The organizations wrote that while campus safety is crucial, the profiling can be devastating for black male students.

“[We] unanimously agree that campus safety should be of the UMPD’s utmost importance; however, efforts to reduce crime should never be at the expense of our Black men, or any specific group of people likely to be targeted. In addition to causing Black men to feel unsafe and distrusted, racial profiling is proven to inflict negative psychological effects on its victims.”

At Wednesday’s forum, Ian Taylor Jr., president of the Black Men’s Forum, said members of his organization feel threatened when the use of a racial description is given in the crime alerts.

“The repeated black, black, black suspect,” Taylor said. “And what that does it really discomforts the mental and physical comfort for students on campus because they feel like suspicions begin to increase.”

Welcome to what the absurdity of political correctness hath wrought, and how the “culture of victimhood” – as perpetuated by opportunistic liberals – plays out in real time.  We must provide LESS information about a suspected criminal to students and the police because we don’t want to cause anyone “discomfort”!  Sure, let’s put lives at risk so we don’t offend anyone. Can you believe this garbage?  This level of PC “sensitivity” can and probably has gotten people hurt and/or killed.  You give EVERY BIT OF DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION YOU CAN when a suspect is on the loose so he or she can be reported, caught, and hauled in for questioning. Eliminating crucial information about his or her physical description can prove to be a devastating hindrance to law enforcement – and compromise the safety of students, faculty, and others.

Fortunately, the university agrees and has pushed back – for now:

On Jan. 27, 2014, a formal letter was issued by Wheelock.

[…]

“I firmly believe that a well-informed community is an asset to public safety…I believe that sharing more information in our Crime Alerts, not less, is most beneficial in terms of public safety, especially when that information is available.

The information we share can include a complete description of suspects, unique identifying characteristics such as an accent or a distinctive piece of clothing, or the description of vehicles involved.

We have reviewed what other Big Ten Universities and local colleges and universities include, and our practice of including the race of a suspect when it is available from a victim’s description is consistent with their practices.”

The Daily Caller provides an interesting side note to all of this:

If the university did put an end to its practice of considering race in crime alerts, it would be an ironic exception to campus policy. UM practices affirmative action, and considers an applicant’s race when deciding whether to admit. 

The Daily Caller reached out to the Black Men’s Forum at UM to ask whether the group supports an end to racial considerations in admission as well as in crime alerts. The group did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Why am I not surprised?

What if the MSM scrutinized abortion procedures like they do lethal injections?

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Fetus

Innocence.

Last night by lethal injection of “untested drugs”, Ohio executed the brutal thug who, in 1989, raped and stabbed to death expectant mother Joy Stewart.  Naturally, the left wing advocacy media wants to let people know how inhumane and cruel they believe it was by giving a play by play of what the killer went through in his final moments.   Examples of headlines, along with excerpts (bolded emphasis added by me):

AP – Executed Ohio killer Dennis McGuire took 15 minutes to die with never-before-tried drugs

LUCASVILLE, Ohio — A condemned Ohio inmate appeared to gasp several times and took more than 15 minutes to die Thursday as he was executed with a combination of drugs never before tried in the U.S.

Death row inmate Dennis McGuire made several loud snorting or snoring sounds during one of the longest executions since Ohio resumed capital punishment in 1999.

[…]

McGuire opened and shut his left hand as if waving to his daughter, son and daughter-in-law. More than a minute later he raised himself up, looked in the direction of his family and said, “I love you. I love you.”

McGuire was still for almost five minutes, then emitted a loud snort, as if snoring, and continued to make that sound over the next several minutes. He also opened and shut his mouth several times without making a sound as his stomach rose and fell.

“Oh my God,” his daughter, Amber McGuire, said as she observed her father’s final moments.

[…]

A coughing sound was Dennis McGuire’s last apparent movement, at 10:43 a.m. He was pronounced dead 10 minutes later.

Previous executions with the former execution drugs took much less time, and typically did not include the types of snorts and gasps that McGuire uttered.

Columbus Dispatch – Killer struggles, gasps repeatedly under new 2-drug combination (newer headline: Inmate’s death called ‘horrific’ under new, 2-drug execution)

LUCASVILLE, Ohio — It wasn’t the terrifying, brutal death he inflicted on his 22-year-old victim in 1989, but Dennis McGuire did not go quietly yesterday.

McGuire struggled, made guttural noises, gasped for air and choked for about 10 minutes before succumbing to a new, two-drug execution method at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility near Lucasville.

There was no clear indication that the drug combination — never before used in a U.S. execution — triggered McGuire’s death struggles. But Allen Bohnert, one of McGuire’s federal public defenders, called the execution a “failed, agonizing experiment by the state of Ohio.”

[…]

McGuire’s death by lethal injection at 10:53 a.m. might have been marked by the “air hunger” that his attorneys predicted in legal moves rejected by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and declined for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The article in its entirety poses the implied question as to whether or not this was an inhumane death penalty procedure.

USA Today – Ohio execution drags on for 25 minutes (video report)

Many more headlines made note of the fact that the drug combinations used for the execution were “untested” … “raising questions” about the humanity of it.  Right.

Look, I get that there has been a long-running debate in this country over the death penalty. Opponents argue that it doesn’t deter crime, that it is “cruel and unusual punishment” and therefore unconstitutional, and believe that the state should not be involved in exacting “revenge penalties’ that involve putting someone to death for the intentional death of another.  I’m not here to have that debate. In fact, for purposes of discussion let’s just accept all of those “justifications” banning capital punishment at face value without argument.

I only have one simple question, one simple request for the mainstream media: Will you ever cover the inhumanity of an abortion of an innocent unborn baby? The horrific procedures it goes through before it dies? If you’re going to advocate to spare the life of a convicted, admitted rapist and murderer because taking 15 minutes to die is “too long”, could you ever take the time to engage in advocacy journalism for the unborn baby, who, unlike the murderer, never got the chance at life?  Joy Stewart’s unborn baby was 8 months along when both she – and it  – were killed senselessly.  What differences – if any – do you see between an unborn baby that has been murdered intentionally by a killer versus an unborn baby whose mother has decided it’s inconvenient to have at that time?

If you’re so willing to talk about the “moral side” to capital punishment, why not open up the “moral side” of the debate on abortions?  Why is the issue of  the right or wrongness of abortion mostly”off limits” in the mainstream media outside of giving unquestioned deference to the “right to choose” crowd, and outside of bringing up the rare cases where the life of the mother or baby is at stake?  Most abortions – the VAST majority – are performed purely for convenience purposes. Why can’t we discuss that without being painted as “anti-women’s rights”? I AM a woman, dammit!

I don’t expect answers to any of these questions. But in light of the growing and strengthening movement by anti-death penalty types both in and out of the media to “respect” the life of a killer, I feel they should be asked all the same.   A killer isn’t innocent. An unborn child is.  The time to play the “sensitivity” card when it comes to how abortion is portrayed in the mainstream media should have expired long ago.  It’s time to scrutinize this procedure. Give us the facts, the brutal honesty, the graphic details of what happens to these babies as they’re aborted.  If the media thinks that a killer deserves leniency because he shouldn’t be subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment”, they should extend that same courtesy to the unborn.

BTW, the killer’s family plans to sue the state over the ‘suffering’ he allegedly went through during his execution.  Not making that up.

Update – 1:30 PM: Life News graciously published my piece on their site as well.  Thanks, y’all!

Bizarre: Massachusetts traffic stop leads to heroin found labeled “#Obamacare”

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Obamacare heroin

Wowsers.
Photo via the MA State Police FB page.
Click for more pictures.

Via The Politico:

This probably isn’t the Obamacare PR push the White House had in mind.

Earlier Friday, Massachusetts State troopers found 1,250 bags of heroin labeled with “Obamacare” during a traffic stop in Hatfield, Mass., according to a post published on the Facebook page of the Massachusetts State Police.

A spokesperson for the Massachusetts State Police confirmed the incident, and explained that most times when sealed bags of heroin are found, they are stamped with a branding so that the strain can be identified.

“I think it’s whatever the person decides to put on it. So if the junkies who are buying them go, ‘Wow, that Obamacare stuff was really good,’” said Lt. Daniel Richard, adding that each of the bags weighed 0.3 grams.

“They label them with everything, so it’s not bizarre,” Richard said.

Along with the help of K9 Frankie assisting the troopers, the four individuals were taken into custody and charged with narcotics violation.

[…]

A 2012 story on Politicker reported Obama-branded drugs had become popular since his election in 2008.

Both the drug version and the legislation version of Obamacare: Each bad for you, but in vastly different ways …

It’s time to stop being silent on binge drinking & how it turns women into rape victims

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly
Women friends toasting with shots at a bar

Ladies, please be safe.
Image via HuffPo.

Emily Yoffe at Slate penned a thoughtful, must-read yesterday that I’m sure she’s taking a lot of grief from “feminists” over – the emerging culture of binge drinking among young women and how it is turning some of them into rape victims:

In one awful high-profile case after another—the U.S. Naval AcademySteubenville, Ohio; now the allegations in Maryville, Mo.—we read about a young woman, sometimes only a girl, who goes to a party and ends up being raped. As soon as the school year begins, so do reports of female students sexually assaulted by their male classmates. A common denominator in these cases is alcohol, often copious amounts, enough to render the young woman incapacitated. But a misplaced fear of blaming the victim has made it somehow unacceptable to warn inexperienced young women that when they get wasted, they are putting themselves in potential peril.

A 2009 study of campus sexual assault found that by the time they are seniors, almost 20 percent of college women will become victims, overwhelmingly of a fellow classmate. Very few will ever report it to authorities. The same study states that more than 80 percent of campus sexual assaults involve alcohol. Frequently both the man and the woman have been drinking. The men tend to use the drinking to justify their behavior, as this survey of research on alcohol-related campus sexual assault by Antonia Abbey, professor of psychology at Wayne State University, illustrates, while for many of the women, having been drunk becomes a source of guilt and shame. Sometimes the woman is the only one drunk and runs into a particular type of shrewd—and sober—sexual predator who lurks where women drink like a lion at a watering hole. For these kinds of men, the rise of female binge drinking has made campuses a prey-rich environment. I’ve spoken to three recent college graduates who were the victims of such assailants, and their stories are chilling.

Let’s be totally clear: Perpetrators are the ones responsible for committing their crimes, and they should be brought to justice. But we are failing to let women know that when they render themselves defenseless, terrible things can be done to them. Young women are getting a distorted message that their right to match men drink for drink is a feminist issue. The real feminist message should be that when you lose the ability to be responsible for yourself, you drastically increase the chances that you will attract the kinds of people who, shall we say, don’t have your best interest at heart. That’s not blaming the victim; that’s trying to prevent more victims.

Experts I spoke to who wanted young women to get this information said they were aware of how loaded it has become to give warnings to women about their behavior. “I’m always feeling defensive that my main advice is: ‘Protect yourself. Don’t make yourself vulnerable to the point of losing your cognitive faculties,’ ” says Anne Coughlin, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, who has written on rape and teaches feminist jurisprudence. She adds that by not telling them the truth—that they are responsible for keeping their wits about them—she worries that we are “infantilizing women.”

Ms. Coughlin is right – we ARE infantilizing young women by withholding critical information from women,  giving into the popular myth that it’s wrong to discuss rape prevention methods that involve women taking more care when it comes to their surroundings and state of mind. It’s my personal belief that the deliberate shielding of women from this obvious fact has caused more of them to become victims of rape.  It’s so critically important that the public dialogue on women’s safety gets this right and starts being more upfront and candid about measures women young and old to take to cut down on the likelihood that they will become victims of crime.

I wrote about this a few months ago after reading about the Steubenville, case:

I get in trouble sometimes for making this argument because some people think I’m “blaming the victim.” Nothing could be further from the truth. There is a difference in saying something might have been preventable versus blaming the victim for what happened. No victim of rape deserves to be raped. Period. Full stop. My point is that I want there to be less victims of crime, not more, and the best way to reduce your chances of being a victim is to start by being responsible for where you are and the condition you are in and who you are with. Why is this so controversial to say? Parents tell their kids not to play too close to the street. Husbands remind their wives not to drive or walk in a bad neighborhood at all, especially at night and especially not alone. Mothers strongly urge a buddy system for their teenage daughters when a group of them get together for a beach trip. Why not encourage women, especially young high school and college women, to avoid getting drunk? Doesn’t mean you can’t drink, but it also means to not have so much to drink you forget who you are, where you are, and who you are with —- and what you’re doing. This applies to guys as well, of course, but fortunately for them they don’t have to deal with being date raped very often. Ladies – don’t put it all on the guy to be responsible. You need to be responsible, too, just in case.

These are common sense suggestions that aid in keeping people safe. They aren’t fool-proof, of course – you could take every single precaution possible and still find yourself in a situation you’d rather not be in – but you lessen your chances of being a victim of crime just by following simple advice on how to protect yourself.

Yes, we should be able to go where we want to go, and do what we want to do without fear that we’re going to be attacked – and that goes for men, too. We have the “right” of free will. But having “the right” to do something in our society doesn’t always = being ok to exercise it. With freedom comes responsibility, and we must be responsible for ourselves, and in our decision making, because our society is not perfect. And that is the reality of it – we don’t live in a perfect world, and there are people out there who will always be up to no good, so we must guard ourselves against such people. Amazingly enough, I’ve been able to do this for years and still – gasp – have managed to have fun!

It wasn’t always like this, however- when I was younger I DID find myself in situations that could have gotten me in a lot of trouble. I was VERY fortunate that ultimately they did not. I’ve done a lot of maturing since then, and my hope is that anyone reading this who has the mentality that they are invincible, please do a little soul-searching …. and growing up, too. Most men don’t rape (newsflash for “feminists”!) but there are bad people in the world, and taking precautionary measures to try and prevent yourself from being hurt could save you a lot of pain and grief and agony.

Isn’t it worth it to at least try?

Well?

Related: Yoffe responds to her predictable knee-jerking “feminist” critics here.

The Washington Navy Yard murder rampage: Prayers for the victims, their families

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

My apologies for not posting this sooner.  Had a crammed full day today.  Via the NYT:

WASHINGTON — At least 13 people, including one gunman, were killed, and the police were looking for other potential suspects, in a shooting Monday morning at a naval office building not far from Capitol Hill and the White House, police officials said.

One police officer was in surgery after being shot in an exchange of fire with a gunman, said Chief Cathy L. Lanier of the Metropolitan Police Department. The shootings took place at the Washington Navy Yard, in the southeast part of the city.

Senior law enforcement officials identified the gunman as Aaron Alexis, 34. He was identified through his fingerprints.

According to the Navy, Mr. Alexis enlisted as a full-time reservist in May 2007 and left the service in January 2011. He served as an aviation electrician, and the highest rank he achieved was mate third class. From February 2008 to January 2011, he was assigned to Fleet Logistics Support Squadron 46, in Fort Worth.

The Navy said Mr. Alexis had been awarded the National Defense Service Medal and the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal.

Shortly after 4 p.m., the F.B.I. released a “Seeking Information” bulletin asking for the public’s help in learning more about Mr. Alexis. The bulletin, which had two photographs of Mr. Alexis, said he was 6 feet 1 inch tall, weighed 190 pounds and was born in Queens.

Valerie Parlave, the assistant director of the Washington field office of the F.B.I., urged members of the public to look at pictures of Mr. Alexis on the F.B.I. Web site and to call with any information they might have about him.

“No piece of information is too small,” she said. “We are looking to learn everything we can about his recent movements, his contacts and his associates. We ask the public to look at the photos of the deceased shooter.”

Three weapons were found on the gunman: an AR-15 assault rifle, a shotgun and a semiautomatic pistol, an official said.

“It’s hard to carry that many guns, so there is some thinking that he may have taken some of them from security or whoever else he shot,” the official said.

When loved ones join the military, you expect that if they are injured or killed it will be in the line of action and from the enemy, not deliberately from a fellow soldier, and certainly not on US soil.  While the predictable left and some of their allies in the mainstream media are busy trying to find a link between the now-dead gunman and a Sean Hannity book, please keep the victims and their families in your thoughts and prayers tonight.   Their pain must be unbearable. May God surround them and provide them with a measure of comfort in the agonizing days, weeks, and months ahead.

Photo via Reuters

September 16, 2013: Police block off the M Street, SE,
as they respond to the shooting.
(Photo via Reuters)

Minor or not, he should be executed

FacebookTwitterPrintFriendly

**Posted by Phineas

In 2009, the United States Supreme Court struck down the death penalty for anyone who committed a crime otherwise eligible for death prior to the age of 18.

This case shows why they were wrong:

De’Marquis Elkins now faces life in prison. At the time of the shooting, he was 17 – too young to face the death penalty under the state law.

Another youth, 15-year-old Dominique Lang, is to be tried later.

During the trial, prosecutors said Elkins shot Antonio Santiago in an attempted robbery. The killing sent shockwaves across America.

The jury in the town of Marietta, Georgia, found Elkins guilty of 11 counts, including two counts of felony murder and one count of malice murder on 21 March.

The shooting happened in the town of Brunswick, as Antonio Santiago was riding in a stroller pushed by his mother, Sherry West.

She told the court that her son was shot in the face and she was shot in the leg by Elkins after she refused to hand over her purse.

She said she told the assailants that she did not have any money and tried to shield her son, before shots rang out near her home.

“He asked me for money and I said I didn’t have it,” Ms West said, as she wept in an interview with the Associated Press earlier this year.

Someone kindly explain to me how Elkins committing this atrocity one day after his 18th birthday makes it okay to sentence him to death, but not if he was one day shy of it. Or even a week, a month, or a year.

The fact is we designate as “children” people who in other cultures and in earlier ages would have been old enough to fulfill the responsibilities of an adult: to own land, raise a family, participate in politics, fight as warriors, and to know right from wrong.

But, as we’ve “progressed,” we’ve lengthened the time of childhood and legal incompetency well past the point where it makes sense.

Somewhere around their 15th-16th year, “children” should know enough to know that killing a baby is wrong, among the most horrible things one can do. The killer should not be given special leniency because “he’s only a boy.” Not at that point. The law should be able to impose death for horrific crimes committed by those close to the age of majority, based on a jury’s weighing of the evidence.

Sherry West’s baby is dead, while Elkins is protected from paying the ultimate and just price for what he did. That’s not justice.

That’s just wrong.

via Tommy Hearn

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)