Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Yet Another Woman With The Wrong Ammo...

...for the gun she has on her person, but who cares?


That is unless you are concerned about firearms safety and realize that you should only use the correct ammunition for the particular firearm in which you intend to load it and out of which you intend to shoot it. 

Of course, I posted this photo here to educate people about firearms safety and for no other reason. I mean, seriously, why else would I post an image like that on my blog unless for firearms safety education!

All the best,
GB

Are Good Cops Too Scared To Use Deadly Force?

There have been way too many instances lately in which cops and others in law enforcement have been involved in anything from questionable shootings of suspects to what appear to be outright cases of bad shootings and that may have involved an officer committing manslaughter or murdering someone. In some of these incidents, the officers have been fully exonerated.

One such example was the shooting of Michael Brown by Police Officer Darren Wilson in Fergusson, MO. That shooting spurred on riots and looting by people who used the race card as an excuse to act like animals. It also caused a media sensation during which, at first, the officer was found guilty in the kangaroo court of public sentiment. He was fully exonerated of any criminal wrong doing.

Another case of a suspect being killed, in which the officer was exonerated, was that of Eric Garner. He was seemingly placed into a chokehold by one of his arresting officers. After complaining that he could not breathe, the asthmatic Garner subsequently died due to heart failure that was possibly aggravated by him not being able to breathe. The officer was not criminally charged but it was a media sensation followed by protests, illegal mob activity and the beatings of at least two NYPD officers.

In others, the officer has been indicted but there is a lot to question as to whether or not it was an accident or an intentional criminal act, such as the shooting of Eric Courtney Harris by Tulsa County Reserve Deputy Robert Bates. Bates shot Harris with his handgun after he notified other officers he was going to use his TASER to subdue him. He immediately apologized for shooting Harris and later said he grabbed his gun by mistake. Another media press storm was released after that shooting.

Then there have been cases like the one in which North Charleston Police Officer Michael Slager allegedly shot Walter L. Scott in the back as he fled from the officer; there was clear video of the event. From what I saw of the available video, I would say that the officer shot down a man in cold blood for no justifiable reason. That officer has been charged with murder. Again, another torrential outpouring of bad press followed, bad press that is for law enforcement.

There was also the case in which several officers of the Baltimore Police Department were indicted after the death of a subject in their custody. More bad press, more of being found guilty in the kangaroo court of public opinion and apparently in the eyes of the DA prosecuting them even though she supposedly had directed the enforcement action under which it happened. Yes, more protests and lots of riots too. Sure, someone killed the arrest subject - but who did so remains to be discovered and it almost certainly was not all of those indicted.

Today, we arrive at the point where good cops and other in LE, who were already hesitant to ever resort to deadly force unless actually justified, and even then who often showed restraint in applying such force, may be afraid to use deadly force when the situation not only justifiably begs but screams for it to be used. Such is the case of a raid, in NYC, on the abode of a suspected terrorist or suspected terrorist supporter, who had allegedly sworn allegiance to ISIS. During the execution of a search warrant on the suspects home, the suspect allegedly attacked a member of the Joint Terrorism Task Force by stabbing him repeatedly with a knife. Apparently no one shot him as he approached or as he actually attacked. He reportedly was arrested, not killed, and will face criminal charges (source).

So why didn't the officer shoot him. Why did they not use deadly force on him when such force was obviously justified. Was it because the officer being stabbed was in the line of fire and if so, then because they use other methods to restrain him even though they could have shot him and justifiably so at that. Or was it because they all hesitated. Maybe that is why the agent was stabbed in the first place, because of hesitation. Why would they hesitate though, what could make them jeopardize their own lives or the lives of other bother LEOs? Is it that consciously or subconsciously they are all running scarred of what might happen to them in the event they use even justifiable deadly force against a subject who is black? Let's face it, Reverend Al and his entourage do not march in protest if the person shot by police is white, and riots do not ensue unless (or so it seems) the so called 'victim' of a police shooting is black. In this case, the suspected terrorist supporter was indeed a black man (although the sole photo I was able to find of him showed him as an angelic looming black youth of may 12 years of age, despite him now being in his twenties). If it has gotten to that, law enforcers being hesitant to shoot because of a suspect's race - we may a well just take away their guns now and have them all direct traffic at Wally World.

Of course, we may want to reign in the media, arrest violent protestors, and actually look at the facts individually in each case of a police shooting. Law Enforcers, like anyone else, are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the kangaroo court of public opinion ought to be reminded of that now and again. So too should the cops be reassured that they will be treated as such; it will keep the good ones from putting themselves in harms way because of a fear from which they may not even realize they suffer.

All the best,
Glenn B

What Was For Breakfast?

Well, I gave all the little porkers a temporary reprieve for a change so it had none of these in it:


Something new, that's what was for breakfast and it contained beef. It was also something not unheard for my breakfast but yet that is fairly unusual. I had a couple of hotdogs (boiled) on toasted (in a pan with butter) potato hotdog rolls. I did say it was something new and then said it was not unheard of for my breakfast and I guess I should explain what seems like a contradiction. I have had frankfurters for the first meal of the day several times before and while that was not new, what was new was the brand for this breakfast. Last night, for dinner, was the first time ever that I have had Abeles & Heymann dogs and this morning the first time that I ever had them for breakfast.

For dinner, I sautéed them in butter in a pan along with dried flaked onions and a bit of coarsely ground black pepper. I toasted up a couple of potato rolls (also in butter in the pan) then threw the dogs on the buns, smothered them with A. Bauer's mustard with horseradish (my favorite of all mustards that I have ever tried) and chomped down. Even though they were delicious, I really overdid it with the mustard and onions last night to be able to judge the dogs. So, today I cut back and only used a local (to Long Island) horseradish mustard, completely on one and only on halfway on the other. The first bites this morning were of the mustard-free half to see what it was like fairly naked.

They seem to have a firmer consistency than Hebrew National Franks and in my opinion are more chewy than those from HN. That was a good thing. As for the taste, I have got to say they are delicious. Yet, the jurors among my taste buds have not yet reached their verdict as to whether or not they beat out those from Hebrew National as my current favorites. Thus there will be more taste testing to come this weekend.

Once upon a time, in the east, the frankfurters from Isaac Gellis were my, and my wife's, favorites - by far. I don't think that either the A&H franks, or those from HN can compare to those that were made by the Isaac Gellis company but sadly, as far as I can tell, they went belly up. As for comparing the dogs from A&H to those from HN - time and more taste tests will tell. Next time, instead of boiled or sauteed, I will cook them on the grill. I will also wash them down with a good beer instead of with water. I guess some folks might think the real test should be to eat some of each brand totally naked (not me, the hotdogs) and try to determine which has the better taste but while I may do that too, I think the best test is to have them how you would normally and for me that is with at least some of the trimmings like: mustard, horseradish, sauerkraut, beans, onions, hot peppers, hot sauce, crushed potato chips, whatever else I think of at the moment it's available - and in all combinations of those add-ons. Yes, that means there are many taste tests to come and I'm salivating while anticipating them.

All the best,
Glenn B
View My Stats