Archive for the ‘Racists’ Category

From my9NJ, last month:

shaneen allen pa nj

27 year-old Shaneen Allen wanted to protect her family. She took a gun safety course, applied for and was granted a concealed carry permit and she purchased a gun.

“One of my family members, he thought it was appropriate for me to get one because I’m a single mother and I have two children and I work two jobs and I work late and getting up at that time of night I got robbed twice last year and he felt the need for me to get my license to protect me and my kids,” Allen explained.

However, while Allen, from Philadelphia, was covered to carry a gun in Pennsylvania, she made the mistake of crossing into New Jersey with the weapon and now she’s facing a mandatory minimum of three-years in jail.

Allen said that she didn’t know her permit didn’t apply to New Jersey so when she was stopped for a minor traffic offense she told the police about her gun and her permit to carry. In this case, being honest may have cost her.

“The judge tried to tell me that telling the truth messed me up, my life up and the cop said the same thing. Me opening my mouth and speaking out he said I’m one out of ten people that spoke up and was honest and that got me in trouble,” she said.

She’s facing a lot of prison time for the mistaken assumption that she has rights:

After hearing about the case, most people thought there’s no way she would do time for an honest mistake. Well, yesterday she was in court and she can now face a maximum sentence of 11.5 years in prison. Ten years for possession of a weapon and another 18 months for possession of the bullets.

Hollowpoint ammunition is illegal in NJ.  Hollowpoints to NJ legislators are scary evil death bullets.  To those who understand how guns work, they’re effective at energy transfer and thus more effective at stopping threats to one’s life, and they also tend to not overpenetrate and are thus safer for anyone who might be standing behind a threat to someone’s life.

Allen’s attorney Evan Nappen discussed how a person with no prior offenses could end up spending a decade behind bars for being honest.

“New Jersey’s gun law is as unforgiving as a prosecutor or judge wants to make it. Either of those two, the judge or the prosecutor could have taken steps to relieve Shaneen from this situation, but it didn’t happen,” he said.

Nappen said that not only did the judge not dismiss the case, but the prosecutor will not allow her into a pretrial intervention to avoid jail time.

And now her life is being destroyed:

Allen is a single mother of two boys with no criminal record who was working three jobs at the time she was arrested. She said she got the gun to protect herself because she was working late nights. Now since the incident, Allen has lost her jobs, is in danger of losing her house and is struggling to support her family.

“I’m not even proven guilty and I have this hold on my criminal background right now and it’s stopping me from working. Every time they run it they’re gonna see pending or unlawful possession. I feel like I’m already made a criminal,” she said.

Her lawyer did make some good points and had no problem understanding that gun control has racist roots:

When asked for a comment on the case, Evan Nappen, Esq., stated, “New Jersey has a history of racist and sexist gun laws. Women are denied the means of self-defense against larger stronger men.”

New Jersey’s earliest gun laws banned Blacks and Indians from possessing guns. Apparently, not much has changed. End the madness. Pass the national carry reciprocity law in which gun licenses would be recognized by every state and be treated much like drivers licenses. No more innocent victims of New Jersey draconian, racist, sexist gun laws, that are out of step with the rest of America.”

original6465700x700 gun control favored by racists photo by oleg volk-

Now, let’s put this NJ obscenity in context of the Constitution:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

I must’ve missed the asterisk that adds *except in New Jersey, where the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall result in 10 years in prison for possession of arms and no less than 1 1/2 years for possession of ammunition for said arms.

Even with the Heller decision’s half-unconstitutional assertion that only arms in common use are protected (which is wrong and it’s wrongness is explained here), Shaneen Allen’s rights would still be inviolate.  The McDonald v Chicago and now Palmer v DC victories make it clear that you can’t have outright bans on possession of firearms or even carrying of firearms.  In no world does the right to bear arms mean you can’t bear arms.

otis mcdonaldOtis McDonald of McDonald v Chicago, to put a face with the name.

The NJ law is wholly unconstitutional, as it denies the natural right of self defense to people from outside the state (and inside the state, too).  If you’re a tourist in NJ, you’re either a criminal or a target.  If you’re a peaceable, peaceful citizen who’s working hard to obey laws, you’ll find yourself the target of the state and statist supporters who demand you be crucified in the name of hoplophobia.

-

In contrast to the perpetual media stereotype, and interestingly if you’re on the left and don’t understand that gun rights are universal human rights for everybody, in the Chasing NJ video, it’s the heavyset white guy who’s defending Shaneen Allen, while the black woman demands she be made an example of because it becomes the responsibility of the “registered” gun owner to know every law that can be used against you, even if such laws cannot coexist with the Constitution.

The Constitution is the law of the land, so that argument should be moot to begin with, but assuming the Constitution has no weight in NJ (which apparently it doesn’t), then there’s still the idea that a loyal minion of the state must know all the laws.  I don’t think the black woman demanding Shaneen Allen be crucified has ever heard of laws like the Lacey Act, the Migratory Bird Act, or Wickard v Filburn, which are laws and rulings that mean a clever law enforcement officer could arrest her for the clothes on her back and make a charge stick based solely on the content of the cloth.

The law certainly could get her if she decided to have lobster for dinner one night, so anyone advocating the position that there should be radically different state laws – especially those that somehow operate in absurd violation of the Constitution – had best start getting reading.  “Ignorance is no defense” works if you have 10 or 20 or even 100 laws, not when you have thousands of feet of laws on bookshelves.

And unlike those examples, again, there also is not a specifically enumerated right in the Constitution specifically outlining that the pre-existing natural right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

If NJ were to treat the Thirteenth Amendment like they do the Second Amendment… well… actually things would be about the same for Shaneen, but for the woman in the media telling Shaneen she needs to go to prison for a decade things wouldn’t be so good.  She’d suddenly be wondering how she and Shaneen are being treated so poorly and not understand that it was her own desire to undermine the Constitution.

-

Also, if NJ Governor Chris Christie wanted to be a serious candidate for president, Shaneen Allen would already be released.

But he’s a RINO who supports illegal aliens and more unconstitutional infringements on citizens’ rights.

Chris Matthews Being “Ethnic”

Posted: August 3, 2014 by ShortTimer in Illegal Immigration, Media, Racists

Via The Right Scoop, a quick video by soopermexican:

That doesn’t even take into account that he says Ted Cruz is “making a name for himself” on immigration, after the liberal news media sphere had a conniption fit over his filibuster on Obamacare. Ted Cruz has “made a name for himself” by being true to the Constitution and fearless about striking at the Democrats and spineless RINO Republicans.

But don’t let that get in your way of being a racist moron, Chris Matthews.

And of course, we yet again have the failure of the left to make a distinction between legal and illegal immigration.  One is being invited and welcomed into a neighbor’s house, the other is breaking and entering.

Immigrant is used because legal terms have been lazy for decades – the two types of people coming to the country are non-immigrants (who file for visitor visas) and immigrants… who are officially anyone who is not a non-immigrant.  So the illegal alien drug smuggler or sex-slave trafficker who’s coming in just to engage in his criminal enterprise and hasn’t filed a non-immigrant visa is officially on paper an “immigrant”.

So Chris Matthews will lump in the people yearning to breathe free with the people yearning to get free stuff from the welfare state.

And of course to him they’re all “ethnic” and all “ethnic” people are a monolithic identical racial block and anyone who disagrees with the leftist race-identity politic block is a race traitor.  Limousine liberal logic.

From Politico, a glowing retrospective on what a wonderful angel Eric Holder is and how everyone who questions his actions is racist.  Fast and Furious has been rendered a footnote to the left.

Holder, people close to him say, isn’t much hurt by the criticism over Wall Street, Gitmo, KSM or even the leaks; he remains confident that his decisions ultimately reflected the priorities of his boss. The same cannot be said for the 2012 vote by the GOP-controlled House to hold him in contempt of Congress for failing to turn over emails and documents linked to the Fast & Furious operation—a Justice-led gun sting that resulted in the death of a veteran Border Patrol agent in 2010. The vote was unenforceable. But no other sitting Cabinet member had ever faced a similar rebuke, and it remains the sorest of subjects with Holder.

Holder views the vote as emblematic of Republicans’ disrespect for Obama and himself, and he thinks that race is one, but not the only, factor in their attacks. Two people in his orbit told me he has described appearing before congressional committees as an experience akin to staring at a hostile “wall of Southern men.” (For the record: All of the 22 Republican members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are white, 21 are male and more than half are from Southern or border states).

“It was all about politics and had nothing to do with law enforcement,” insists former Holder spokesman Matt Miller. “They wanted to get his head.”

Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, ICE Agent Jaime Zapata, and hundreds of Mexicans are dead because of Holder’s ATF.

fast and furious 2010 massacre teens

No one has been held accountable for those hundreds of deaths since Holder simply chose to stonewall.  The left said nothing about Fast and Furious until Holder was held in contempt, and then started lying about it and protecting the Obama administration and the “survivor” Attorney General.

Holder is so disgusted with Rep. Darrell Issa, the aggressive California Republican who chairs House Oversight, that aides find it hard to keep Holder sitting still during the necessary prep sessions. Holder often commiserates about his grillings, via text messages and email, with a group of supportive African-American journalists and public figures, including Rev. Al Sharpton; Juan Williams, the NPR commentator turned Fox contributor; former CNN analyst Roland Martin; Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post; NPR’s Michele Norris; and her husband, Broderick Johnson, a White House aide—a cadre that often encourages Holder to push back harder than his more cautious in-house advisers.

Issa, in a 2012 letter to Holder, denied any other motives than “legitimate Congressional inquiry” and accused Holder of stonewalling to prevent a “co-equal branch of government” from performing its “Constitutional duty.” Members of Issa’s committee have shown no signs of backing off either.

This is what Holder sent to the Oversight & Reform committee:

That's not a print of Malevich's "Black Square".

Thousands of pages of redactions with no information.  Lies upon lies upon lies, and Holder is mad because someone dares to hold him accountable for the actions of his department and the coverup he has engaged in.  Holder, a racist, screams “white people!” if someone questions him.  Holder’s feelings are hurt because he was called out for the hundreds of dead Mexicans and two US agents killed by his operation.  Yet the left’s violent ideological blinders only allow them to see Holder’s hurt feelings in a vacuum, as though nothing has happened.

The entire Politico piece can be best summed up with: “Holder is good.  Republicans are racist and hate him for no reason.  Everything else is a lie.”

The facts of the past are entirely rewritten by the left.

Just to preface this, I’ve read there are some conflicting definitions of “liberaltarian”, but for the most part I’ve seen it used not as a way to indicate some hybrid philosophy, but basically is one that is Modern Liberal that calls themselves libertarian in order to distance themselves from the negatives of the Modern Liberal… or progressive.  Maybe they’ll throw in some classic liberal ideas like Friedman, but then like John Stossel did last week, will cite Hayek’s “Why I’m Not A Conservative” essay… while ignoring that a European conservative is very different than an American conservative… a point which Hayek even makes.

I managed to catch an episode of FOX Business’s “The Independents” on Friday on the radio, which frankly was entirely dependent on misconceptions, absurdities, leftist phrasing, and a lot of broken windows.

The episode’s guests included an illegal alien “Dreamer” who’s lobbying for her own special protections; Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who’s so far down in the trenches and relying on direct experience that he sounds inarticulate when talking to high-rise New Yorkers because his viewpoint and argument is dependent on that experience; and Dan Stein, a representative from the Federation on American Immigration Reform.  There were a couple others as well – one a pro-amnesty shill, and the other one of those subtle muddling-the-issues amnesty supporters.

The entire episode was fraught with fallacies and errors of economic, moral, and logic standards.  There was also an intentional lack of differentiation between legal and illegal immigration, except by the FAIR representative and as footnotes for Arpaio, to whom as a law enforcement official, legal immigration is of no concern.

The hosts, MTV VJ Kennedy, Matt Welch – that other guy from Reason, and I assume Kmele Foster was on, though I didn’t hear him introduced; were all engaged in almost every pro-amnesty progressive leftist point dressed up as laissez-faire economic arguments, emotional humanitarian arguments, and general bullshit.

When Stein was on, they argued that illegal immigration is down because deportations are up (a spurious claim itself), while Stein pointed out that the massive surge in illegal immigration due to stories of the illegal-alien-abetting DREAM Act-by-exec-order means that data from last year is somewhat irrelevant.

They (the hosts plus the pro-amnesty guest opposite Stein) argued that illegal aliens are only coming because the economy is improving, and that thus illegal aliens are good for the economy.  Stein rebutted by explaining that illegal aliens are taking American jobs.  To which the response was basically this:

The highest point the argument against Stein got to was accusing him of protectionism.  To their credit, that’s not completely off base.

The purpose of a nation is to provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.  It’s for the citizens of the nation to enjoy the benefits of the nation.  It’s what citizenship is about.  The whole reason to be a citizen is to be a member of a nation.

The concept of having secure borders and enforced immigration laws that result in deportations for illegal aliens is one that exists in order to protect citizenry and the security and sovereignty of that nation.  The liberaltarians on “Independents” seemed only to see the glazier’s side of the economic argument of broken laws.  They ignored that having a secure nation means protection not just from economic threats, but from physical ones as well – not just the lurking specter of terrorism, but also of criminals and biological hazards illegal aliens bring with them.  You do want to screen who comes in to begin with at the very minimum for those physical threats – all of which lead to second and third order effects due to the hidden damages they cause.

As to the economic threats, they were dismissed by the liberaltarian “Independents” towing their party and paymaster’s line, while ignoring that there’s a much bigger argument than “Durka dur!”  (And keep in mind their master Rupert Murdoch is sitting down with Valerie Jarrett to work out ways for the Ruling Class to tell the American people to agree to be invaded.)

For one, illegal aliens do take American jobs.  The immediate response is – but they’re jobs Americans are too stupid/lazy/spoiled to do.

If there weren’t illegal aliens undercutting US wages, the pay rates for those unpleasant jobs would be higher.  This argument is usually dismissed with a wave of the hand or a subject change, and a bias on the part of the person arguing it.

There are a lot of Americans who do take labor-intensive, difficult jobs.  Mike Rowe’s made that point over and over.

mike rowe dirty jobs 1

If illegal aliens weren’t disrupting the job market with wages that can undercut the minimum, as well as using their illegal status as a way to reduce compliance costs for employers (no workman’s comp or insurance, only paid in cash, etc.), employers would have to pay a wage that’s commensurate with the job itself.

To give an example – throughout the midwest there used to be meat packing plants in downtown areas.  Urban populations would work in them for decent, but not great, wages, but enough to keep an economy afloat, provide for a family, and do all that good-ol-American “living wage” stuff unions get all wistful about.  Once illegal aliens became an exploitable resource, a lot of those meat packing plants moved out to rural areas, closer to farms, and where entire rural communities would be radically changed by the influx of illegal aliens and cheap illegal alien labor.  The plants could’ve hired the guy downtown for $20/hour, but found it easier to hire two illegals for $10/hour – illegals they don’t have to provide benefits for, and if one loses a hand in a band saw, they just get another illegal to replace him.

This usually spins into the idea of “well we need to bring those undocumented angels out of the shadows and into society to protect them”… but they don’t necessarily want that.  While they hypothetically could be deported as they’re here illegally, they also don’t have to deal with regulations and compliance costs, taxes, or often any laws at all.  Hell, they can get drunk, drive, and crash into Democrat politicians who will still support illegal aliens.

Democrat Moran, from the news story, states:

“I know this is a tough issue that we’re dealing with and as you probably know I have been and will continue to be pro immigrant and some cases even pro illegal immigrant. And it would be politically expedient for me at this point in time to change that. That should give you some indication of my commitment to immigration and immigrants to tell you that even after being hit by one I will continue to advocate for immigrants and their rights as citizens of this country.”

>Representative Moron Hit By Illegal Alien

Now, that moron aside, illegals enjoy the benefits of not having laws enforced against them in many states.  A park ranger I spoke with last week told me how he’d encountered people breaking laws in Yosemite National Park, but could do nothing as they were illegal aliens with no ID, no auto registration, and California didn’t allow for arresting illegals for pretty much anything.  A friend who did a ridealong for Wisconsin state police encountered someone who wanted to race the officer’s vehicle – when they pulled over the racing driver, it turned out to be an illegal alien and he was released with not so much as a slap on the wrist.  If a US citizen decided to go race the cops on a street, or tear up through a national park, the US citizen would be arrested and in all probability jailed.  If an illegal alien does it, they’re released.

So again, the illegals don’t necessarily want to stop being illegals – it takes away their protected status.

And it takes away their competitive advantage.  And it gives them the option to take the route some Americans have chosen to already – those Americans who turn down work because something else is better…

Getting back to the economics of it, the next liberaltarian counterpoint is that Americans are still too spoiled and lazy and fat to do dirty jobs anyway… and that’s where welfare and unemployment come in (which would also come into play for illegals granted amnesty).

Remember the Welfare Cliff?

welfare cliffNot working one brings in $46,000 in benefits.

For those who didn’t know it, there’s also a way to game unemployment.  I’ve heard it from employers who have difficulty finding help, and I’ve heard it from the lazy bastards themselves when they talk about what they do.  The scam is to work just long enough to get unemployment, then take unemployment for a few months, then go back to work just long enough to qualify for more handouts.

From a personal standpoint, it makes sense.  If you can work for three months, then take a three month vacation at taxpayer expense while your food is paid for by the taxpayer, your housing is subsidized by the taxpayer, your bills are all supported by the taxpayer, and your health care is just an emergency room trip away that’s also covered by the taxpayer… why work?  Your quality of life is decent – you have access to entertainment and cars and gadgets and such – so why bother aspiring for more?

This undercuts the American work ethic and makes the illegal alien’s labor look good.  The illegal alien is benefiting from being able to negotiate his wages to below the mandated minimum wage.  The illegal alien is further benefiting from having his competition removed from the market via government handouts.

Do away with welfare, take away illegal alien labor and suddenly those Americans who are unemployed won’t be sitting around collecting checks from the taxpayer – they’ll have to work for their money in those now available jobs.

Do away with the minimum wage so those workers can compete at the level of their skills, and this will allow employers and businesses to utilize those lower wages to lower costs of products for everyone (which in turn generates more benefit for the new employees, which moves the economy, generates skills for those workers, and puts them at higher wages anyway – and with lower taxes to boot).  But we’ve talked about the problems of the minimum wage for years.

-

Anyway, back to “The Independents”.

At one point, one of the hosts, while talking with the “DREAMer” illegal alien used the term “undocumented American”.  This is nonsense.

If you sneak into Quebec tomorrow where you don’t speak French, have no plans to assimilate, and seek only to send remittances home to the US, you are not an “undocumented Canadian”.  You’re an illegal alien.

If you sneak into Japan tomorrow, where you don’t speak Japanese, have no plans to assimilate, but think you can make some money by working for less than native Japanese workers by staying out of sight, you are not an “undocumented Japanese”.  You’re an illegal alien.

If you sneak into Mexico tomorrow, where you don’t speak Spanish (Mexican spanish, not that Castillian lisping Spanish), you have no plans to assimilate, but you think you can make some money by offering a skill that isn’t around locally… well, you aren’t an “undocumented Mexican”.  You’re an illegal alien.  And in Mexico, you can’t own property as a foreigner, and you’re also subject to arrest by any authority or citizen.  You’re an extranjero ilegal and subject to arrest by anyone.

-

The entire show was filled with false premises of how illegal immigration works, an economic view through rose colored glasses onto broken windows, it ignored the physical and biological security threats of a totally open border, and the last thing it ignored was the demographics issue.

The swarm of illegal aliens who are going to be made into wards of the state will not be voting for libertarian free market ideas.  They will not be Ron Paul voters or Gary Johnson voters.

illegal aliens democrat registrationThey will be Democrat voters.

They will vote for further expansion of government.  They will vote for the same cult-of-personality leaders they’re familiar with in their home countries.  They will vote for people like The Race who speak to them – The Race being the translation of La Raza.  The same giant racist organization that has Celia Munoz in the White House in charge of Obama’s domestic policy council.

Illegal aliens granted amnesty will not be listening to the erudite arguments for individual freedom because they don’t speak even english.  Those from Central America rarely even speak coherent spanish – instead speaking regional dialects, or regional indian languages.

These are not people wanting freedom – they’re people wanting “free” stuff at the expense of the taxpayer because they heard there’d be a free ride.

Demographically, amnesty will doom the nascent libertarian movement, slowly strangle what remains of both little r republicans and the Republican party, and push the Democrats into perpetual power, reigning as an oligarchy of socialist redistributors.

For those who’ve missed the news in the last few months, the knockout game is a “game” where urban kids punch unsuspecting people in the head and try to knock them out with one blow.  Or many.

You can peruse WorldStarHipHop for plenty of examples.

The perpetrators are almost exclusively of one ethnic background, while their victims are usually of a specific ethnic background, but they target a few different groups.

From the DOJ:

Conrad Alvin Barrett, 27, has been charged with a federal hate crime related to a racially-motivated assault of a 79-year-old African American man, announced   Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels of the Civil Rights Division along with U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson of the Southern District of Texas and Special Agent in Charge Stephen L. Morris of the FBI.

See, if you’ve missed the discussions of it in the news for the last few months, the ethnic background of the punchers is almost exclusively black.  The ethnic background of the punched are typically white and/or Jewish, but have also included at least one noteworthy asian – a congresswoman.  Also, frequently the targets are women.

This worthless sack of garbage just did the reverse for attention:

According to the complaint, Barrett comments in a video that “the plan is to see if I were to hit a black person, would this be nationally televised?”   The complaint further alleges Barrett claims he would not hit “defenseless people” just moments before punching the elderly man in the face.   Barrett allegedly hit the man with such force that the man immediately fell to the ground.   Barrett then laughed and said “knockout,” as he ran to his vehicle and fled, according to allegations.   The complaint indicates the victim suffered two jaw fractures and was hospitalized for several days as a result of the attack.

This guy’s absolute garbage, but he’s also something else.  He’s in it for the attention, like spree killers going for news media coverage.

He wanted to see if it would be nationally televised, because his attack would be one of the incredibly rare examples where colors were reversed.

Anyone paying attention knows the DOJ is biased and that they will prosecute only when it’s in ideological agreement with their beliefs.  This dirtbag who punched a 79 year-old man did so because he figured he’d play on the DOJ for some fame.

It’s sickening on so many levels.  First that some people are more equal than others and that there are “hate crimes” where the color or orientation of the victim means more than the act itself – so there is no equal justice.   Second is that the Obama administration and Eric Holder’s DOJ is such a mockery of justice that they ignore waves of crimes and single another out.   Third is that their very ideology means they only engage in prosecution that agrees with their worldview and that means some dirtbag like this would see assaulting an innocent old man as his key to fame.  Fourth is that when that violence is ignored depending on who the perpetrators are and who the victims are it leaves both groups in turmoil and harms both communities – one community is victimized directly, the other is victimized by having criminals left unchecked in their midst.

The justice system is so screwed up under the social justice progressives that this slackjawed misanthrope knew everything he needed to do to make national news was to just commit a crime that gaves the racists at the DOJ something to hold up.

“It is unimaginable in this day and age that one could be drawn to violently attack another based on the color of their skin,” said Special Agent in Charge Morris.   “We remind all citizens that we are protected under the law from such racially motivated attacks, and encourage everyone to report such crimes to the FBI.”

What a load of crap.

Hey FBI – here’s one to investigate – the victims even managed to fight back and subdue the attacker:

And just so this is crystal clear, there are plenty of folks of all races who recognize this kind of violence for what it is.  There’s no shortage of good people out there saying what it is and calling for an end to it.

Just for two examples, the first is an impassioned, emotional call for an end to the knockout game, the second an assessment more on the practicality of it (with a bit of humor at the end).

-

Update: I realized I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention again and elaborate that there is black-on-black knockout game crime, but it’s another type of crime that goes ignored as it has notably become a prominent black-on-someone-else crime in the last couple years.

For the big government progressive at the DOJ, black-on-black knockout game crime is no more a concern than murders in Chicago are.  Addressing crumbling families (like how Kentray Brown in the first video mentioned there must not be father figures to the kids going polar bear hunting or knocking out UPS drivers or teachers) would require addressing the progressive roots of the destruction of the black community through “help”, as well as the progressive cultural agenda that has utterly failed the black community (though progressives are happy with LBJ’s contemptuously racist promise he’d have black folks voting Democrat for 200 years).

Conservative types often don’t discuss it either because they don’t want to be perceived as racist or because it’s not going on in their neighborhood, or a combination of both.

As evidenced above, there are folks of all races who address that type of knockout game crime, but their voices may not be heard very loudly on a bigger stage.  Their voices are those within a community, though, not of some disconnected talking head in the media nor of some politician in government.

Bill Whittle: The Lynching

Posted: July 20, 2013 by ShortTimer in Bill Whittle, Crime, Culture, Leftists, Media, Racists

Everything the media omitted about the Zimmerman/Martin case.

The white racist murderer whose name you’re thinking of is Roderick Scott.  He gunned down poor innocent black child Chris Cervini.

Scott claimed self-defense.

A Greece man charged with shooting a 17-year-old to death testified at his own trial Tuesday.

Roderick Scott told the court he shot Christopher Cervini in self-defense.

Scott is charged with manslaughter in the April 4 shooting across the street from his home on Baneberry Way in Greece.

Scott told the court he confronted Cervini and other person as they broke into a neighbor’s car. The other person ran away, but Scott said Cervini ran at him.

Scott already had his gun drawn. He said he told Cervini to stop, but the teen kept coming, so he shot him twice.

Of course, unlike the Zimmerman trial, this one was hushed up, because there are hundreds of black children killed by white racist gun owners every day.  This is Scott’s crazy ass cracka story:

Scott said on April 4, he was sleeping on the couch, because he and his girlfriend had a disagreement. In the early morning he awoke and heard voices. He looked out the front door to see what was going on outside.

He testified he saw three individuals who were in his driveway, saw them walk out and cross the street, then walk up to a neighbor’s vehicle, pulling on the latch and handles of the neighbor’s truck. He then went upstairs, told his girlfriend Tracy that someone was breaking into a vehicle, and told her to call 911. He grabbed his pistol, for which he has a permit, “to protect myself” then went outside.

Scott said his intent was “to stop or detain the criminals,” not to shoot anyone. He walked down the driveway and over to 39 Baneberry Way. He saw one person standing on a sidewalk, and some rummaging going on inside a vehicle, which had the dome light on.

At that point, Scott testified he pulled his handgun out of the holster, and chambered a round. “I wanted to protect myself and I intended to,” Scott said.

He walked toward the individual, who started to walk away toward Manitou Road. He did not tell that individual to stop. It’s believed that individual was Brian Hopkins.

At this point, Scott was a foot or so off the sidewalk, and he saw someone rustling around inside the vehicle at 39 Baneberry. He testified he clearly saw two individuals. He drew his pistol and assumed the a shooter’s stance. “I didn’t know what I was up against, or if they were armed,” Scott said.

He told the individuals to stop, that his girlfriend had called 911, and that he had a gun. The individuals stopped, and a few seconds passed. Scott says the teens were talking, then one of them ran around the front of the truck. The other ran down the driveway toward him, screaming. Scott warned him he had a gun, then shot him.

He assumed the boy may have been armed.

“I felt if he got to me he would try to kill me or hurt me,” Scott testified.

Scott was found not guilty.

Just one thing.  This is Roderick Scott:

roderick scott in court 1

But that’s only because while he was a black man, he only shot this poor black child who no one cared about:

chris cervini 1

Justice can never be done when crazy ass crackas like Roderick Scott walk free while honor student black children like Chris Cervini are shot down in cold blood, murdered only for the crime of defending themselves against racist white men like Roderick Scott who walk around their neighborhoods gunning down black children like Chris Cervini and claiming self-defense.

The law must change!  Justice for black child Chris Cervini!  Roderick Scott needs to go to jail and be tried for hate crimes like the white racist murderer he is.

-

Sarcasm over, this is actually in the story:

Cervini’s family members say justice wasn’t served. They say Christopher was murdered in cold blood, that he’d never been in trouble and Scott acted as judge, jury and executioner.

“The message is that we can all go out and get guns and feel anybody that we feel is threatening us and lie about the fact,” said Jim Cervini, Christopher’s father. “My son never threatened anybody. He was a gentle child, his nature was gentle, he was a good person and he was never, ever arrested for anything, and has never been in trouble. He was 16 years and four months old, and he was slaughtered.”

Scott says he acted in self defense when he confronted Cervini and two others saying they were stealing from neighbors cars. He told them he had a gun and ordered them to freeze and wait for police.

Scott says he shot Cervini twice when the victim charged toward him yelling he was going to get Scott.

“How can this happen to a beautiful, sweet child like that?” asked Cervini’s aunt Carol Cervini. “All he wanted to do was go home. And then for them to say, he was saying, ‘Please don’t kill me. I’m just a kid,’ and he just kept on shooting him.”

Cervini charged screaming at Scott in the middle of the night while Cervini and his two friends were stealing from people’s cars.

Could Scott have called the cops and waited for them to show up an hour after Cervini and his thug friends left?  Sure.

Does Scott have a right to protect his property?  Damn right he does.

Does Scott have a right to defend his neighbor’s property?  Yup.  Sounds like a good neighbor to me.

Does Cervini have a right to charge Scott in the middle of the night screaming, while in the middle of committing a theft?  That’s at least menacing, and probably assault – even before he touches Scott.

Does Scott have a right to blast an attacker in the middle of the night in self defense, even though that threat turns out to be a thieving white kid?  Damn right.

Do I care that Cervini was white and Scott was black?  Nope.  The only reason it matters is to prove a contrast to the racist left’s accusations against Zimmerman.   It proves again, with colors reversed, the very concept of self-defense that allowed Scott to defend himself against what would’ve been not one but three white attackers.  Cervini’s friends would’ve come to his aid and the story would’ve been “three white teens engaged in car theft kill black resident”.

-

Right now, with Eric Holder and leaders of the NAACP calling for a destruction of self-defense laws, they’re asking to put the law on Cervini’s side.  They’re asking to put the law on the side of three white kids burglarizing a black man’s neighborhood, and terrorizing him when he comes out to defend his property.

They’ve ignored the facts of the Zimmerman case and glorified Martin as a saint and martyr for the cause of civil rights, when his actions – assaulting Zimmerman, actually proved Zimmerman’s superficial assessment of him as a “f*cking punk”.  Martin’s assault led to Zimmerman’s response, just like Cervini’s assault led to Scott’s response.

Had Cervini tackled and beat Scott to death, the headlines would’ve screamed for the blood of Cervini and his white friends.  Had Zimmerman been pounded into the pavement, Trayvon Martin would be paraded around as a thug who bashed the brains out of a Hispanic Peruvian-descended man who mentored black children, took a black girl to prom, saved a black man from assault in the past, and was thanked for it by having his skull smashed into the pavement – a neighborhood watchman whose only crime was looking out for his neighbors.  The headlines would scream “Teenage Thug Kills Pillar of Hispanic Community”.  Every day on Univision would show Zimmerman’s blood in the streets, and La Raza would be marching demanding justice.

-

Now Eric Holder has set up a tip line to go after Zimmerman.

The DOJ has declared war on pobre Jorge.

Sounds kind of like the witch hunt that imprisoned John McNeil, huh?  (Note that link is from the NAACP.)

john mcneil georgia

John McNeil served 6 years after he had to shoot a white man with a box cutter threatening him and his son on his property.

Last fall, a judge ruled that he deserved a new trial because his original attorney did not inform jurors they could acquit him if he shot in defense of his home or his son. Stand Your Ground can apply to the defense of someone else as well as himself.

Sadly, he pled guilty to manslaughter to get out of jail, which is nonsense, because he should be a free man completely.

-

The left’s take on the McNeil case wasn’t that justice wasn’t served, it’s that justice was just wrong, and that self defense needs to go away completely.

Civil rights activist Markel Hutchins agrees and has filed a federal lawsuit challenging Georgia’s stand your ground law because the law is not applied equally to African-Americans. He accuses the courts of accepting “the race of a victim as evidence to establish the reasonableness of an individual’s fear in cases of justifiable homicide.”

That wasn’t fighting for McNeil’s freedom, it’s fighting against the codification of natural law that should’ve left him free.  Had leftist tyranny-supporter Hutchins instead pushed for McNeil’s defense, he wouldn’t have pled guilty to manslaughter, he would be a free man.

But of course, it’s about destruction of the natural right of self defense, not about justice.  It’s not about protecting the individual black man, it’s about “racial justice” and leftist power and reducing the individual to a ward of the state.  It’s about making individuals into masses who have a duty to retreat, into cowards who are legally obliged to not stand up for themselves.  It lets their betters, who create this great new society, decide who is good and who is bad.

Ultimately, the question of self defense in many of these cases is a deeper ideological worldview expressing itself as a hatred for individual freedom.  I’d say “as always”, but… well… okay, it’s as always.

Update: This examiner link confuses a quote with commentary:

The teen’s father described his son as a “gentle child, his nature was gentle, he was a good person and he was never, ever arrested for anything, and has never been in trouble,” as reported by the internet news portal YNN Rochester (of New York) on Dec. 18, 2009, as well as the right-of-center news portal The Patriot Perspective on July 17, 2013.

I quote the story – as seen above.  Try CTRL+F and type in the word “gentle”.  I don’t describe the thieving white kid as a “gentle child”.  When not sarcastically mimicking the media’s coverage of the Zimmerman trial by taking the same tone where races were reversed and describing him as a “black child” and Scott as a “racist white man”, I describe the kid as what he was found in court to be – the attacker of Roderick Scott.