Tuesday, December 17, 2019
Sunday, December 15, 2019
Thursday, December 05, 2019
Tuesday, December 03, 2019
The Carpool Line
As an anarchist, I'm anti authority by nature and choice. I believe the world would be a much better and safer place if we could all just cooperate and be kind. But I'm human. So very human.
I help with carpool every morning at my grandchildren's school. It's basically opening car doors and keeping the line moving. It's like an awkward, early morning ballet. The vast majority of families actively help by ensuring their kids are ready to hop out, already unbuckled, bookbags and lunchboxes in hand. For those kids who have special needs (or who just need some extra attention when getting out), there's some space by the door where there are student volunteers to help - or where the parent can get out and help without holding up the line. It works when we work together. Again, the vast majority of families cooperate.
But not everyone. Which brings me to The Man In The Hummer. Every morning, he stops in the middle of the line, gets out of said hummer, and s-l-o-w-l-y extracts his child. He's not oblivious to the fact that he's holding up everyone else - he makes it painfully clear to everyone around him that he doesn't care. When asked to cooperate he simply slows down even more, as if making a point that no one else matters but him.
What do we do as anarchists when someone insists on acting selfishly or refuses to cooperate with others? My first reaction is to just seethe - not at the obvious ruination of the generally smooth running carpool ballet, but at his proud disregard for everyone else.
I'd likely vote him off the island if that were an option. But there aren't really many realistic options here.
We can theorize all day long about how there won't be asshats in an anarchist society, but we live in this society...and let's face it there are always going to be asshats. Theres no magic formula for turning an asshat into a person who puts others first. (If there was, I'd have found it. Trust me on that one.)
So, we can examine our own motives and reactions. Would I be quite so put out if he drove a different car? If he pretended (just a little) to care about the people he inconveniences? Maybe, who knows?
These types of petty irritations and how we react to them can show us how and where we need to develop ourselves. So, since I get massively irritated and even pissed off at people sporting trappings of affluence who act like they own the world and that everyone works for them - what should I do about that? What can I do - actually do - with myself to change my reactions in a way that will benefit everyone?
I have no freaking idea. But it's something to think about since I don't want to turn into The Petty Tyrant Of The Carpool. That wouldn't be very effective, and it would make me the jackass. It would be like Cartman screaming "Respect mah authoritah!"
Maybe there's a little Cartman in all of us - even in anarchists.
I help with carpool every morning at my grandchildren's school. It's basically opening car doors and keeping the line moving. It's like an awkward, early morning ballet. The vast majority of families actively help by ensuring their kids are ready to hop out, already unbuckled, bookbags and lunchboxes in hand. For those kids who have special needs (or who just need some extra attention when getting out), there's some space by the door where there are student volunteers to help - or where the parent can get out and help without holding up the line. It works when we work together. Again, the vast majority of families cooperate.
But not everyone. Which brings me to The Man In The Hummer. Every morning, he stops in the middle of the line, gets out of said hummer, and s-l-o-w-l-y extracts his child. He's not oblivious to the fact that he's holding up everyone else - he makes it painfully clear to everyone around him that he doesn't care. When asked to cooperate he simply slows down even more, as if making a point that no one else matters but him.
What do we do as anarchists when someone insists on acting selfishly or refuses to cooperate with others? My first reaction is to just seethe - not at the obvious ruination of the generally smooth running carpool ballet, but at his proud disregard for everyone else.
I'd likely vote him off the island if that were an option. But there aren't really many realistic options here.
We can theorize all day long about how there won't be asshats in an anarchist society, but we live in this society...and let's face it there are always going to be asshats. Theres no magic formula for turning an asshat into a person who puts others first. (If there was, I'd have found it. Trust me on that one.)
So, we can examine our own motives and reactions. Would I be quite so put out if he drove a different car? If he pretended (just a little) to care about the people he inconveniences? Maybe, who knows?
These types of petty irritations and how we react to them can show us how and where we need to develop ourselves. So, since I get massively irritated and even pissed off at people sporting trappings of affluence who act like they own the world and that everyone works for them - what should I do about that? What can I do - actually do - with myself to change my reactions in a way that will benefit everyone?
I have no freaking idea. But it's something to think about since I don't want to turn into The Petty Tyrant Of The Carpool. That wouldn't be very effective, and it would make me the jackass. It would be like Cartman screaming "Respect mah authoritah!"
Maybe there's a little Cartman in all of us - even in anarchists.
Monday, November 25, 2019
Saturday, October 12, 2019
Wednesday, October 09, 2019
Monday, October 07, 2019
Sunday, October 06, 2019
Wednesday, September 18, 2019
Saturday, September 14, 2019
Wednesday, September 11, 2019
Friday, September 06, 2019
I've spent the day in twitter jail.
Of course I haven't been stuck in an actual jail cell, banging my tin cup against the bars and playing the blues on a harmonica. I've pretty much been going about my usual business, just slightly more amused than usual.
Here's what happened. I'm sure y'all are familiar with the recent kerfuffle involving Debra Messing. (If not, I gave you a link, so you're welcome.) An absolutely awful shithead from Kansas said he hoped she got aids and died! I responded with, "You first, sweetie."
That seems to be enough to ruffle the feathers of the twitter gods. Apparently, twitter has a rule where you're not allowed to wish harm on people...well, at least not out loud on twitter. Well, okay then. The tweet I responded to is gone, so maybe this was evenhanded. Or not. Who knows?
But here's something to think about: a woman suggested using publicly available, open information to see who was financially supporting a controversial politician. Said politician immediately likened her to Joseph McCarthy Then fans of said politician collectively lost their goddamn minds.
The problem is, neither the politician nor his adoring fans know their history. McCarthyism used the power of the federal government to persecute people suspected of communist sympathies. There was an actual blacklist. People couldn't get work. Some states still require loyalty oaths in order to apply for state employment. (I had to sign one in order to volunteer at my grandchildren's school.)
No one is calling for government oppression of Trump supporters. People absolutely have a right not to work with or associate with other people whose values trouble them. People and groups have a right to engage in boycotts - even though there are efforts to stifle that right, those efforts aren't succeeding.
Because people don't know their history, and/or have reading comprehension deficits....well, they lose their minds over the idea of using public records to make decisions about who to associate with or work with. Personally I think it's a good idea to spend my time and my money with folks who share my values.
Anyway, back to my day spent in twitter jail...yeah, I was rude. Twitter, as a private company, can censor whatever they like. But I'm not sorry for what I said. So there.
Here's what happened. I'm sure y'all are familiar with the recent kerfuffle involving Debra Messing. (If not, I gave you a link, so you're welcome.) An absolutely awful shithead from Kansas said he hoped she got aids and died! I responded with, "You first, sweetie."
That seems to be enough to ruffle the feathers of the twitter gods. Apparently, twitter has a rule where you're not allowed to wish harm on people...well, at least not out loud on twitter. Well, okay then. The tweet I responded to is gone, so maybe this was evenhanded. Or not. Who knows?
But here's something to think about: a woman suggested using publicly available, open information to see who was financially supporting a controversial politician. Said politician immediately likened her to Joseph McCarthy Then fans of said politician collectively lost their goddamn minds.
The problem is, neither the politician nor his adoring fans know their history. McCarthyism used the power of the federal government to persecute people suspected of communist sympathies. There was an actual blacklist. People couldn't get work. Some states still require loyalty oaths in order to apply for state employment. (I had to sign one in order to volunteer at my grandchildren's school.)
No one is calling for government oppression of Trump supporters. People absolutely have a right not to work with or associate with other people whose values trouble them. People and groups have a right to engage in boycotts - even though there are efforts to stifle that right, those efforts aren't succeeding.
Because people don't know their history, and/or have reading comprehension deficits....well, they lose their minds over the idea of using public records to make decisions about who to associate with or work with. Personally I think it's a good idea to spend my time and my money with folks who share my values.
Anyway, back to my day spent in twitter jail...yeah, I was rude. Twitter, as a private company, can censor whatever they like. But I'm not sorry for what I said. So there.
Sunday, September 01, 2019
Rick Allen's Got To Go
Does it seem like politics is filled with self important pontificating reactionary asshats? Sure seems like it to me. Of course everyone knows about our fascist philanderer-in-chief, but there are some littler fish that are just as disturbing.
I'm sure by now you've heard of the amicus brief (written by Ken Starr....yes, that Ken Starr) that 58 members of Congress submitted to the Supreme Court in a set of similar cases dealing with workplace discrimination.
Rick Allen is one of the ones who signed the brief. By doing so, he is advocating discrimination against decent people just trying to earn a living....one of whom, Gerald Bostock, is a fellow Georgian!
This kind of behavior makes Rick Allen unsuitable to represent the 12th District of Georgia in Congress. We need to make sure he doesn't get sent back to Washington in 2020.
I've never voted for him. Maybe some of my readers (all 10 of y'all) have voted for him in the past. Anybody who has voted for him, I hope you won't do it again.
I personally would vote for a demented possum before I would ever vote for him...especially now.
I'm sure by now you've heard of the amicus brief (written by Ken Starr....yes, that Ken Starr) that 58 members of Congress submitted to the Supreme Court in a set of similar cases dealing with workplace discrimination.
Rick Allen is one of the ones who signed the brief. By doing so, he is advocating discrimination against decent people just trying to earn a living....one of whom, Gerald Bostock, is a fellow Georgian!
This kind of behavior makes Rick Allen unsuitable to represent the 12th District of Georgia in Congress. We need to make sure he doesn't get sent back to Washington in 2020.
I've never voted for him. Maybe some of my readers (all 10 of y'all) have voted for him in the past. Anybody who has voted for him, I hope you won't do it again.
I personally would vote for a demented possum before I would ever vote for him...especially now.
Thursday, August 29, 2019
Amazon Fires
Okay, here's a super simple work to help the Amazon rainforest with the fires. I decided to call down rain to put out the fires.
Weather work is new to me, but as you can see, I try to keep things simple - there's no reason to try to make it look fancy, just the minimum to do the job.
Here's what you'll need:
A map of South America, or at least of the Amazon jungle. (I just printed one from Google maps.)
3 seashells. Or little dishes if you don't have any. (I chose seashells because of the water link.)
2 candles.
Storm water. (If you don't have any, I guess regular water is okay, but try to get the storm water because this is to call a storm.)
A little spray bottle.
Lay the things out like the picture shows. Pour a little storm water in the middle shell (it's okay to spill it) and put a candle in the shells on either side.
See the rainforest on fire. Visualize rainstorms dropping enough water to put the fires out.
Once you have this in your head, light the candles. Now, see water, rainstorms, clouds bursting into downpours. Know that it's happening.
Then use the spray bottle to spritz the candles out.
This can be repeated over and over. It can be redone as soon as the candles are dry. I aim for about once an hour or so. You can leave it set up. I put mine on the dining room table because in my house that's like Grand Central Station - the more people participating, the better! Just leave the water, spray bottle, and a lighter close by so people can take a minute to add their energy as they walk through.
Wednesday, August 28, 2019
Monday, August 26, 2019
Wednesday, August 21, 2019
Sunday, August 18, 2019
Wednesday, August 14, 2019
Shari Dodge
I am a regular reader of medicalkidnap.com. I've been following the Brandon McCreery case and mentally cataloguing all the ways the state of Idaho has been violating both statutes and common decency.
Shari Dodge, an attorney representing Idaho, is attempting to force the removal of information on this case from the internet.
She has complained about the change.org petition asking for Brandon's release. She has complained about the family's Facebook page. Her plan is for Idaho to keep Brandon detained for the next 2 years, until his 18th birthday, limiting his medical treatment options, and keeping him separated from his mother.
Naturally, her behavior is upsetting to decent people. But she doesn't seem to be able to handle that. So she is trying to use the court to force third parties to remove commentary about her actions.
So, I'm going to post that information here, along with some other information I've found about her. Here goes:
Dodge's photo is the one in the upper right hand corner of the larger image above.
She graduated from the University of Idaho law school and passed the bar in 1996.
In 2005, while working as a prosecutor, she was the subject of a bar complaint involving her lying to the court about a defendant. This complaint was substantiated and she was publicly reprimanded. Wow.
So we have a young man with medical issues who is being forcibly held by the state if Idaho, a prosecutor with a history of dishonesty, a mother being forbidden to have contact with her child, and a judge and child "protection" system that are causing harm.
If you're not at least a little pissed off you're not paying attention.
Here is Shari Dodge's contact information, should you want to tell her what you think:
23 9th Avenue North
Nampa, ID 83687
208-467-9007
Shari Dodge, an attorney representing Idaho, is attempting to force the removal of information on this case from the internet.
She has complained about the change.org petition asking for Brandon's release. She has complained about the family's Facebook page. Her plan is for Idaho to keep Brandon detained for the next 2 years, until his 18th birthday, limiting his medical treatment options, and keeping him separated from his mother.
Naturally, her behavior is upsetting to decent people. But she doesn't seem to be able to handle that. So she is trying to use the court to force third parties to remove commentary about her actions.
So, I'm going to post that information here, along with some other information I've found about her. Here goes:
Dodge's photo is the one in the upper right hand corner of the larger image above.
She graduated from the University of Idaho law school and passed the bar in 1996.
In 2005, while working as a prosecutor, she was the subject of a bar complaint involving her lying to the court about a defendant. This complaint was substantiated and she was publicly reprimanded. Wow.
So we have a young man with medical issues who is being forcibly held by the state if Idaho, a prosecutor with a history of dishonesty, a mother being forbidden to have contact with her child, and a judge and child "protection" system that are causing harm.
If you're not at least a little pissed off you're not paying attention.
Here is Shari Dodge's contact information, should you want to tell her what you think:
23 9th Avenue North
Nampa, ID 83687
208-467-9007
Sunday, August 11, 2019
Saturday, August 03, 2019
The other day I came across a relatively recent episode of 20/20 that featured the Darlie Routier case. Her two older sons were murdered in 1996 and the state of Texas tried her for murder later that year.
I have my own opinions about the case, but that's not really what this post is about.
In the majority of criminal appeals cases I've come across, prosecutors try to block DNA testing and other tools that could be used to exonerate a defendant.
For a really long time, I wondered why. If a prosecutor was truly convinced of a defendant's guilt, it would seem to make sense to want that additional evidence. Prosecutors have a unique role in what many people call the "justice" system. Technically at least, they work for the people in the judicial circuit where they work. They are supposed to get justice for crime victims, not manipulate the system to rack up wins. The Supreme Court even specifically said so in Berger v. United States! (295 US 78)...
Sorry about that...my sometimes naive idealism shows up at the damndest times. Moving along...
A prosecutor's job is trying to put criminals in prison. Wouldn't it stand to reason that a prosecutor should want to be as sure a possible a defendant actually is a criminal? In many cases, the answer is no. This isn't right.
Any prosecutor who actively tries to suppress evidence of a defendant's innocence - at any point in the process - needs to be considered and enemy of the people and should be shunned accordingly.
Here's a few of the instances I found:
Adam Braseel argues new evidence shows wrongful conviction. Prosecutors say so what?
The district attorney's name is Mike Taylor. He can be reached at:
375 Church St.
Suite 300
Dayton, TN 37321
Phone: (423) 775-4468
Fax: (423) 775-2805
Kym Worthy defends waiting years to release innocent Davontae Sanford
....more to come....
Adam Braseel argues new evidence shows wrongful conviction. Prosecutors say so what?
The district attorney's name is Mike Taylor. He can be reached at:
375 Church St.
Suite 300
Dayton, TN 37321
Phone: (423) 775-4468
Fax: (423) 775-2805
Kym Worthy defends waiting years to release innocent Davontae Sanford
She can be reached at:
1441 St. Antoine St.
Detroit, MI 48226
(313) 224-5777
....more to come....
Monday, July 01, 2019
Friday, June 21, 2019
Sunday, June 09, 2019
Friday, June 07, 2019
Here's something real.
So....I'm working on being authentic and even if this doesn't get read, I need to write it. (I'm not going to promote this post, so whatever happens is what happens.)
My older son was legally my stepson for almost the whole of his childhood. I had no legal rights to him. My husband made a point to keep reminding me that my child could be taken away from me at any moment...and several times in anger told me to say goodbye to him forever. Of course later I got "apologies." But threaten me once with something that awful and any trust is over.
I had chosen to be his mother. There is nothing I won't do for my kids - no matter what.
The few people who knew at least some of the truth about my life couldn't fathom why I stayed married. It wasn't something I could articulate.
Then I started watching Bones. In season 4 there was an episode called "Doctor In The Den." In that episode Camille the pathologist reconnected with the child of a man she had once been engaged to.
I found the scenes between the two of them utterly heartbreaking. I still couldn't explain things in words...but I can point to that episode and those scenes to get across my reasoning for staying.
I never wanted my son to have a reason to say, "But you left me." So I didn't leave him.
Here's the episode:
My older son was legally my stepson for almost the whole of his childhood. I had no legal rights to him. My husband made a point to keep reminding me that my child could be taken away from me at any moment...and several times in anger told me to say goodbye to him forever. Of course later I got "apologies." But threaten me once with something that awful and any trust is over.
I had chosen to be his mother. There is nothing I won't do for my kids - no matter what.
The few people who knew at least some of the truth about my life couldn't fathom why I stayed married. It wasn't something I could articulate.
Then I started watching Bones. In season 4 there was an episode called "Doctor In The Den." In that episode Camille the pathologist reconnected with the child of a man she had once been engaged to.
I found the scenes between the two of them utterly heartbreaking. I still couldn't explain things in words...but I can point to that episode and those scenes to get across my reasoning for staying.
I never wanted my son to have a reason to say, "But you left me." So I didn't leave him.
Here's the episode:
Wednesday, June 05, 2019
Tuesday, June 04, 2019
Raise the Age Legislation
Michigan is set to raise the age where teens can be tried as adults. Here's why I think it's a good idea.
Twelve years ago, at the age of 17, my older son Rickey was involved in a bizarre (seriously bizarre) accident with his then girlfriend in our driveway.
She had her license. He hadn't gotten his learner's permit yet. The car was a stick shift. These parts are important.
They were sitting on the hood of her car, listening to music. The car was off, in neutral, and neither of them could remember later if the parking brake was on.
The girlfriend asked Rickey to change the CD. So he got off the hood of the car and plopped into the driver's seat to do that. Well, he knocked the car into gear or it just moved, or something and she fell off and then the car hit her while she was on the ground. Her arm was broken and her face was all scraped up.
That's when a hysterical Rickey came in the house to get me. The girl wanted to call her parents instead of an ambulance, and they came almost right away. They told us not to come to the hospital, and that they would call us later. So we stayed home. Rickey was so upset he wasn't able to explain to us what had happened in any coherent way, so I just tried my best to comfort him.
Then a policeman knocked on the door about the accident. To this day I still don't understand why, but the girl's parents told the policeman at the hospital that Rickey had hit their daughter with the car on purpose. They wanted him arrested.
The policeman demanded a statement from Rickey. Since this was not an accident report being taken, but a criminal investigation, I told the policeman that Rickey didn't have my permission to make any kind of statement.
Then it got ugly. The policeman said, and I quote, "Well, I don't need your permission to take him to jail, and that's where he's going if he doesn't make a statement. He's 17 and that's old enough to go to jail."
I told Rickey to keep his mouth shut, and started explaining to this idiot that you can't arrest somebody as punishment for not giving a statement.
Then it got uglier. He threatened to arrest me for "obstruction" if I didn't tell Rickey to make a statement. That didn't give him his desired result, either.
Please note that my son was in shock, had been sobbing for the past hour, and basically could barely tell you his name. He was terrified of being taken to jail, and the threat to arrest me pushed him over the edge. He wanted to make the damn statement so this jackass would go away.
So, against my better judgement, I told my still sobbing son to write that he was too upset to remember in detail but was giving a statement under threat of arrest. His statement then basically said that his girlfriend fell off the car when he got in it and the car moved. He reserved the right to amend the statement when his frame of mind was better since he wasn't able to make sense. The end.
I then told the policeman to get the hell out of my house and not come back.
Everything ended up working out okay. His girlfriend insisted it wasn't done on purpose and that she shouldn't have left her car in neutral. No criminal charges. Several days later he ended up giving a coherent amended statement to a different policeman who was frankly shocked at the way the first statement had been coerced out of us when my son was too upset to even form complete sentences. He called the "crime" a truth is stranger than fiction, bizarre, crazy, stupid accident.
Here's my point:
My son was 17 when this happened. There is no way in whatever hell you believe in that my son should have been threatened with adult jail at all, much less threatened with jail for not giving a statement.
He was a minor, and should not have been threatened in any way for his mother's decision not to allow him to make a statement.
If a person under 18 is going to be legally handicapped by being a minor - curfew laws and other status offenses, etc for example - then the government should not be able to have it both ways.
It's well past time to Raise The Age.
Twelve years ago, at the age of 17, my older son Rickey was involved in a bizarre (seriously bizarre) accident with his then girlfriend in our driveway.
She had her license. He hadn't gotten his learner's permit yet. The car was a stick shift. These parts are important.
They were sitting on the hood of her car, listening to music. The car was off, in neutral, and neither of them could remember later if the parking brake was on.
The girlfriend asked Rickey to change the CD. So he got off the hood of the car and plopped into the driver's seat to do that. Well, he knocked the car into gear or it just moved, or something and she fell off and then the car hit her while she was on the ground. Her arm was broken and her face was all scraped up.
That's when a hysterical Rickey came in the house to get me. The girl wanted to call her parents instead of an ambulance, and they came almost right away. They told us not to come to the hospital, and that they would call us later. So we stayed home. Rickey was so upset he wasn't able to explain to us what had happened in any coherent way, so I just tried my best to comfort him.
Then a policeman knocked on the door about the accident. To this day I still don't understand why, but the girl's parents told the policeman at the hospital that Rickey had hit their daughter with the car on purpose. They wanted him arrested.
The policeman demanded a statement from Rickey. Since this was not an accident report being taken, but a criminal investigation, I told the policeman that Rickey didn't have my permission to make any kind of statement.
Then it got ugly. The policeman said, and I quote, "Well, I don't need your permission to take him to jail, and that's where he's going if he doesn't make a statement. He's 17 and that's old enough to go to jail."
I told Rickey to keep his mouth shut, and started explaining to this idiot that you can't arrest somebody as punishment for not giving a statement.
Then it got uglier. He threatened to arrest me for "obstruction" if I didn't tell Rickey to make a statement. That didn't give him his desired result, either.
Please note that my son was in shock, had been sobbing for the past hour, and basically could barely tell you his name. He was terrified of being taken to jail, and the threat to arrest me pushed him over the edge. He wanted to make the damn statement so this jackass would go away.
So, against my better judgement, I told my still sobbing son to write that he was too upset to remember in detail but was giving a statement under threat of arrest. His statement then basically said that his girlfriend fell off the car when he got in it and the car moved. He reserved the right to amend the statement when his frame of mind was better since he wasn't able to make sense. The end.
I then told the policeman to get the hell out of my house and not come back.
Everything ended up working out okay. His girlfriend insisted it wasn't done on purpose and that she shouldn't have left her car in neutral. No criminal charges. Several days later he ended up giving a coherent amended statement to a different policeman who was frankly shocked at the way the first statement had been coerced out of us when my son was too upset to even form complete sentences. He called the "crime" a truth is stranger than fiction, bizarre, crazy, stupid accident.
Here's my point:
My son was 17 when this happened. There is no way in whatever hell you believe in that my son should have been threatened with adult jail at all, much less threatened with jail for not giving a statement.
He was a minor, and should not have been threatened in any way for his mother's decision not to allow him to make a statement.
If a person under 18 is going to be legally handicapped by being a minor - curfew laws and other status offenses, etc for example - then the government should not be able to have it both ways.
It's well past time to Raise The Age.
Wednesday, May 29, 2019
Sunday, May 26, 2019
Cops Respond to Hostage Situation by Killing the Hostage...but is that the whole story?
No, that headline is absolutely not the whole story.
I'm not a person who blindly defends the police. I lean pretty consistently in the opposite direction. If anything, my usual response is to see police officers accused of wrongdoing as guilty until proven innocent. This is because most of the time they are the ones who have the power in interactions with the public - and I make a point of being on the side of those without power.
I can rant and rave for hours about police abuses. This situation just isn't what it's being made out to be.
Basically police were called because a violent felon named Guillermo Perez had stabbed his ex girlfriend. So, this wasn't a case of cops walking into an otherwise peaceful situation all large and in charge and escalating things into a clusterfuck. Nope. The cops walked into a situation they knew was already a dangerous clusterfuck.
Once the cops were there, it got worse, with Perez grabbing a bystander and starting to cut her throat. Her name was Elizabeth Tollison. (Note: you can die from having your throat cut. Duh.) So they fired at Perez in an effort to save his latest victim.
Unfortunately, this isn't the movies, and they also shot Tollison.Now, let's pause for a minute. Police officers go through a lot of firearms training. There are certain levels of shooting proficiency required to be a cop. But no matter how good a person is at the gun range, in a situation like what this post is about...well, it's just not the same.
Imagine having to draw and fire a gun in a split second, in the middle of the aforementioned clusterfuck, knowing that you are going to have to kill a person who is right in the middle of killing someone else. Nobody is standing still, people are screaming, a person's throat is being cut - and your job is to save that person. So you draw your gun and shoot - while your heart is pounding, while all these things are going through your mind. Could you do any better? I'm asking seriously.
I completely understand that cops are supposed to have training for situations like this. But in most cases they don't get the type of training that would make it possible for them to instantly go all Navy SEAL and put a perfect double tap into the middle of the attacker's forehead.
That's as it should be. Militarized cops are bad for society, and cause more harm than they could ever prevent. First and foremost cops are supposed to be part of the community they serve. They are working people like the rest of us. (I'm sure I'm going to get called a bad anarchist for this, since police departments are generally used as tools of capitalism - to defend the status quo. On a macro level, I agree. But that's not what I'm talking about right now.)
A crazed, dangerous, murderous degenerate stabbed his ex girlfriend. Then, seeing there was no way for him to escape, he made the decision to grab Elizabeth Tollison and try to kill her too.In less time that it takes you to read this sentence, the 3 cops tried to save her. They failed. It's a tragedy.
There's plenty of blame to go around for her death. Our joke of a justice system that causes peaceful people to rot in prison for a plant while violent dangerous evil criminals walk around free deserves a good bit of the blame. So does society, which produces people like this.
Most of the blame is squarely on Perez, though. He chose to cut Elizabeth Tollison's throat. He tried to end another human being's life.I can't begin to put myself in Elizabeth Tollison's shoes that day.
But I think I would hope that someone would try to save me. And I don't think I'd want the people who tried to save me to be publicly excoriated for it. At least, I hope not.
Friday, May 24, 2019
Tuesday, May 21, 2019
Monday, April 29, 2019
Thursday, April 18, 2019
Sunday, January 27, 2019
Monday, January 07, 2019
Wednesday, January 02, 2019
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
