Month: June 2017

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgme6mDXfUg

Last Friday, Minnesota Police Officer Jeronimo Yanez was acquitted of manslaughter in the shooting death of Philando Castile which occurred in July of last year.  This is a case that never should have been tried and the acquittal of Officer Yanez is a completely just and fair verdict.  Sickeningly, people like CNN’s Don Lemon are portraying it as an extrajudicial police shooting.  Choosing the path of emotion instead of logic, and based on complete ignorance of Law Enforcement methods, they are ignoring Mr. Castile’s culpability and instead focus on what they perceive as the fault of a racist Police Officer.

There is a lot more to this case than the liberal media would have us know, and there are important lessons to be learned; particularly with respect to the responsible handling of firearms and compliance with both the law and lawful directives from Law Enforcement.

You cannot have an honest discussion of Officer Yanez’ culpability in the situation without acknowledging Mr. Castile’s contribution toward creating an unstable situation.  When it comes right down to it, it was Mr. Castile’s failure to display overall compliant behavior that led to the shooting.  Instead of ignoring the evidence and Mr. Castile’s actions as Don Lemon and most of his panel did in their mostly one-sided “discussion,”  let’s examine the facts of the situation that unfortunately ended in Mr. Castile’s death.

The following are summaries of the key actions that Mr. Castile took which demonstrates his responsibility/culpability in creating an unstable and unsafe situation.

Mr. Castile was driving under the influence of marijuana

First of all, let’s not ignore the fact Mr. Castile is guilty of placing his fiance’, her daughter, and the general public in danger by driving under the influence.  Secondly, he is guilty of creating a situation in which it would be obvious to even the most oblivious of Police Officers that he was in clear violation of the law (the odor of marijuana in the car was reportedly apparent).  This is important because when a Police Officer recognizes a clear violation of the law, he/she also recognizes/anticipates the potential for a suspect to flee or resist arrest for that violation.  In a good Police Officer, this will heighten his/her sense of potential danger.  This further results in heightened awareness, either consciously or subconsciously, of an increased threat to his/her own mortality and the mortality of all those in the immediate area.  

It was Mr. Castile who chose to violate the law and drive under the influence; thereby contributing, whether he knew it or not, to unsafe circumstances.

Mr. Castile was carrying under the influence of marijuana

Per Minnesota state law, those who are licensed to carry firearms may not do so under the influence of marijuana.  We have to assume Mr. Castile went through at least minimal training in firearms as part of acquiring his license to carry; including the legal and responsible handling of firearms.  Whether he did or not, it is his responsibility to know and understand the seriousness of carrying a firearm and the laws pertaining to it.

Since the liberal media has (in regular fashion) done a disservice to their viewers and Law Enforcement by ignoring facts and logic, I will briefly explain to everyone why there are laws that prohibit/limit the carrying of firearms while under the influence of drugs/alcohol.  I really shouldn’t have to because it is pretty much the equivalent of explaining to somebody why they should not drive drunk.  But since it is key to understanding the instability of circumstances that led to Mr. Castile’s death, I will break it down for everyone:

Just as a vehicle can be, a firearm is a deadly weapon which should not be carried or operated while under the influence.  The reason: because your decision making ability is affected by drugs/alcohol.  Here is just one example: when an individual is stoned out of their mind, they are more likely to make unsafe decisions; such as reaching around in their pockets after telling a Police Officer they are carrying a deadly weapon.

Mr. Castile is unfortunately guilty of giving too little regard toward the responsible handling of firearms.  What he should have done after informing officers of his firearm was keep his hands absolutely visible and still; this important behavior is generally taught by instructors when acquiring licenses to carry firearms.  I will give Mr. Castile the benefit of the doubt by assuming his decision not to do so may very well have been influenced by the cannabis in his system.  By carrying a gun under the influence, he exposed everyone around him to potential danger.  Again, it was his decision to do so which led to unsafe circumstances.

Mr. Castile demonstrated an overall disregard for the law and lack of compliance with lawful directives

Aside from the infraction-level traffic violation, Mr. Castile broke at least two other important laws: driving under the influence and carrying under the influence.  The former was obvious to officers almost immediately and they became aware of the second soon after.  Mr. Castile began reaching around immediately after telling officers he had a firearm on him.  Though Mr. Castile’s intentions may have been innocent (possibly to hand officers his IDs and/or the firearm), there is no way officers on scene could have known that; they’re not mind readers.  All they knew was they were encountering someone who 1) was probably under the influence, 2) disregarded at least two laws relevant to public safety, 3) admitted he was carrying a deadly weapon, and 4) began reaching around immediately after being instructed not to reach for something.

Once again, it was Mr. Castile’s behavior that led to the overall instability of the situation.  Prior to the shooting, officers on scene had only approximately 40 seconds worth of familiarity with Mr. Castile with which to evaluate the situation.  They did not have time to tell Mr. Castile to make his hands visible before Mr. Castile began reaching.  For officers trying to evaluate such a rapidly evolving situation, Mr. Castile’s overall behavior was not entirely consistent with someone who fully complies with the law.  It had nothing to do his skin color, and everything to do with behavior.

---

That’s not to say that Officer Yanez’ reaction was not at least a little panicked.  Anyone watching either of two videos of the situation can see he was distressed.  But no Police Officer can reasonably say Officer Yanez had no reason to fear for his and/or his partner’s safety at that exact time and place.  After all, this is the standard Police Officers are generally held to; whether a reasonable officer in the same situation could have perceived a threat to life and limb at the time of the incident.

To those of us sitting comfortable watching the video at home in safety and security, it doesn’t seem that Mr. Castile had violent intentions.  We will never know.  What we have to realize is, if he did have bad intentions, he had the capability to kill Officer Yanez within a second.  Officer Yanez knew this and, based on his evaluation of the totality of the circumstances, reacted to what he reasonably believed could be a threat to him, his partner, and the public.

Does all this mean that Philando Castile deserved to die?  Of course not.  The whole situation is absolutely unfortunate.  It’s tragic for both Mr. Castile’s family and for Officer Yanez.  Anyone can see from Officer Yanez’ reaction he never imagined he would end up taking a life that day.  Unfortunately, The Castile family must live without their son and Officer Yanez must live the rest of his life with the fact that he took a life.  Officer Yanez may have been completely justified in his actions but that doesn’t mean he will not have extreme regrets over how the situation turned out.  Nobody here is saying Mr. Castile was a bad person.  People make mistakes and that is understandable.  Unfortunately, Mr. Castile’s mistakes contributed to a situation which resulted in his own death.  Officer Yanez’ actions could be viewed as a mistake also.  But if you are going to be understanding about Mr. Castile’s actions, you must also be objectively understanding of Officer Yanez’ response.

The issue never should have been brought to trial but it was for political reasons.  It is fortunate Officer Yanez was acquitted.  Unfortunate as the shooting was, it was nevertheless justifiable considering the totality of the circumstances. Officer Yanez was not guilty of manslaughter and clearly the jury, after examining the evidence, thought so as well.  Officer Yanez did not demonstrate culpable negligence and there was no evidence to suggest he would have acted differently if Mr. Castile had not been Black.  Mr. Castile mistakenly neglected to adhere to the responsible, safe handling of firearms.  Thankfully, nobody else was hurt.

The liberal media has been reckless in its politicization of this situation to fit their narrative of police brutality.  Consider this irony: the same liberals who are often equally critical of both law enforcement and gun owners, have left the gun owner blameless in this instance.  We have yet to hear from any of the liberal press about Mr. Castile’s unsafe and careless disregard for Minnesota’s gun laws.  Moreover, when it came to demonizing Officer Yanez and Law Enforcement, CNN (among others) was quick to play the “think of the children” card by showing Mr. Castile’s fiance’s daughter in the back of a patrol car.  Yet, they conveniently ignore the fact Mr. Castile placed that very same little girl in an unsafe situation by knowingly driving and carrying a firearm while smoking dope.  They ignored it because, in this instance, their anti-gun narrative did not fit in with with their anti-law enforcement narrative.  The liberal media is truly unprincipled, disgusting, and disgraceful.

~AD

Share This:

Thus far I have hesitated to comment on the circus revolving around former FBI Director James Comey, and the special investigation into Russian interference in American politics.  For all the special attention by politicians and news coverage by the media, nothing even remotely damning has been revealed in terms of legally actionable material.  A lot of time and energy has been invested in this situation, only to reveal that all we have is a “he said/he said” situation.  Given that this is the case, until something important is revealed, I don’t care about the investigation and I’m still not going to write anything specifically about it.

More important than anything revealed today is this: nothing has been revealed that would cause President Trump to lose his most valuable and powerful ally; the average American who voted for him.  Let me remind the media and politicians of something very important which, regardless of all the attention that has been drawn to President Trump and this investigation, they both seem to have completely lost sight of:

President Trump is a populist president.

President Trump is the first president in a long time to be elected because his views and understandings of the nation’s problems matched the same views and values of the average American voter.  President Trump was not appealing to either major political party.  He most certainly was not appealing to the media (though hypocritically they find his style irresistibly appealing to their ratings/coffers).  In summary, he was not appealing to any of The Establishment.

As much as many Americans do vehemently detest President Trump and think of his supporters as the basket of Deplorables found after the “proverbial lifting up of a rock,” they still have to face the fact the Deplorables are still  Americans; with just as much legitimate voting power that the progressives, in all their angelic wisdom, have.  Or perhaps President Trump’s opponents are hoping that his supporters represent only a minor portion of the population, and that Russia made all the difference in creating extra votes to get him elected.  

Regardless of what you think of President Trump and his supporters, you must acknowledge that he was elected as part of a considerable and passionate movement that defied everything that The Establishment wanted.  Contrary to everything floating around in the media, there is currently nothing that demonstrates President Trump obtained the highest office in this nation by any means other than fair and legal election.  Despite all the efforts of partisanship, the establishment, and the media, the will of the average American citizen was demonstrated in a very fair and political manner for the first time in a very long time.  

Nobody has stopped to think what would happen if Trump was successfully impeached.  Nobody has considered the potential reaction from his many followers.  More importantly, they haven’t considered the reasons why they wanted him to be the President; so much so that they placed their bets on him against all odds.  There is currently an effort to undermine President Trump (and those who fairly elected him) via bureaucratic processes.  For all their blindness, The Establishment should realize this: there are consequences for ignoring and trivializing the concerns of half your electorate.  This doesn’t necessarily mean revolution.  However, impeachment would certainly be further verification to the President’s supporters that their values have been marginalized by just about everyone in power except President Trump.

The Establishment is so caught up in sensation it has tunnel vision.  Once again, they are forgetting to consult the average American, whom they are supposed to represent.  I have watched coverage across multiple news channels.  I have seen all the standard “experts” consulted on the matter.  By and large, these are all the same people who were consulted prior to the election; most of whom guaranteed a Trump defeat.  And now, more than six months after President Trump was fairly elected, these so called experts are doing the same thing they did before the election; ignoring what the average American thinks and feels.  The Establishment is making the same mistake they made six months ago!  They learned absolutely nothing from the election of President Trump.

I don’t care if President Trump said he expected loyalty from Comey.  I don’t care if a few members of President Trump’s campaign spoke with a few Russians.  You know what I care about?  I care about illegal immigrants that bring crime to America.  I care about defeating Jihadists who want to destroy American culture.  I care about paying ridiculous health insurance premiums while Juan Doe comes across the border and gets free health care.  I care about the difficulty Americans have buying anything that is not made by China or Mexico.  Here is what is most infuriating about all this: after everything the election revealed about the will of the average American, THE ESTABLISHMENT STILL DOESN’T CARE ABOUT WHAT WE CARE ABOUT.  They do not represent our interests.

The American citizens whom The Establishment has forgotten represent what writer Daniel Greenfield refers to as “flyover country.”  They are the citizens who do not belong to the great liberal city-states of the coast whose agenda was upset by the election of President Trump.  Their values and wishes are largely neglected or ignored.  While The Establishment spends all its time and energy creating committees that spin the wheels of impotence, a lot of American’s are out there thinking, “can’t somebody just put a little of that energy toward Making America Great Again?”

But what do we know?  We’re just the “uneducated” basket of deplorables who, unfortunately for the other half of the country, have the right to vote and have our concerns acknowledged.  The Establishment and the progressives may wish that President Trump’s election was the result of Russian manipulation.  But in all likelihood, all those who oppose President Trump will soon have to face the fact he was elected with the solid support of a significant portion of America; regardless of what this investigation finds.

~AD

Share This:

Westerners don’t get it.  

The two attacks by Muslim Terrorists (a.k.a. Islamist Extremists) against the West in the United Kingdom in the past two weeks will probably have minimal effect on the majority of American’s and Europeans.  The major news networks will broadcast a lot of vapid reports, politicians will spew a lot of empty rhetoric, and celebrities will rally around feel good moments like One Love.  With the exception of those present at the attacks, most Westerners will likely go about their lives without much serious thought.

The problem is still out there.  Muslims who follow a strict, literal, and/or extreme interpretation of The Quran will still plot and carry out violent attacks against the West.  In all likelihood, most peaceful Muslims (who make up the majority of the religion) will be content to stand on the sidelines.  This is because they have more loyalty to Islam as a religion than they have loyalty for any nation; regardless of whether they vehemently disagree with a terrorist’s perverted interpretation of their religion.  Many credible studies have proven this.  As for most Westerners; they will be happy enough to ignore the problem of Muslim Terror as long as it continues to be “low-impact” in nature.

Muslim Terrorists launched their most significant attack on the West (thus far) on September 11, 2001.  With the exception of a few minor air travel complications, very little changed for the average Western civilian (unless maybe one has/had a close relative in military service).  Since then, Muslim Terrorists (both foreign and home “grown”) have perpetrated multiple attacks against Westerners from San Bernardino, California to Hamburg, Germany.  Innocent civilians have been run over, stabbed, shot and/or bombed.  Up to this point, a significant number of  Westerners are apparently okay with it; as long as it does not affect them on any large scale.

Westerners will not understand the problem until the storm reaches their door steps and people they know are being injured and/or killed every day.  The Intifada will have to occur on the streets of Los Angeles, London, and Paris before the West begins to take seriously the threat Muslim Terrorists pose to our civilization.  It is imperative then, we start having what Theresa May feebly described as, “embarrassing conversations.”  Well Theresa, I am not embarrassed at all to say this:

“Peaceful and moderate Muslims need to voraciously step up and start being loud in their condemnation of Islamic Terror.  They better start taking significant consideration for preserving, and indeed promoting, the national identity and values of the nation(s) that provide them the many freedoms which allow them to exercise their religion/lifestyle peacefully.  If they do not, and if the terrorists succeed in destroying Western culture, they will find themselves in another version of the same crap-hole country they or their parents left behind.”

Unfortunately, at this point, it may be too late.  Right now, Westerners are too content to accept casualties as long as they occur on a relatively minor scale.  They are too afraid to utter controversial phrases such as, “Muslim Terrorists” and “Islamist Extremists.”  They are happy to limit Military and Law Enforcement abilities to effectively combat crime and terrorism.  They refuse to acknowledge that the lack of assimilation into Western culture by many immigrants is leading to a considerable number of civilians with minimal interest or stake in preserving or protecting Western civilization or national identity.  In fact, too many Westerners feel that challenging multiculturalism in any way is tantamount to Nazism.  No matter what your position, let me pose a hypothetical situation to all Westerners:

Imagine for a second you live in a nation where there is a terrorist attack every day.  You leave your home in the morning and get into your car or hop on the bus, hoping that a car bomb does not go off nearby.  You hesitate to let your children go to the mall for fear they will end up as stabbing victims.  A car backfires and you are tempted to dive to the ground to avoid a potential bomb.  Welcome to the New Intifada; this time it could happen on an international scale.  ISIS is certainly encouraging it.

Since 2015, 13 terrorist attacks have occurred in Europe alone.  All signs point toward the potential for more attacks against the West.  Western leaders have the power and ability to stop, or at least reduce the number of attacks; they’re just choosing not to.  They are willing to accept a few casualties, rather than having any “embarrassing conversations.”  Westerners who want something to be done about it are ignored or shouted down as Xenophobic or Islamophobic.  Any realistic solutions for combating this ideologically-driven terrorism are struck down as “Fascist” or “Racist.”  

Western Civilization is not ready for what could easily start tomorrow.  It has grown complacent and it cannot fathom what is would be to experience The Intifada on an international scale.  With any luck, Westerners will simply learn to live with a level of violence the Israelis have lived with for years.  The leaders of the West have proven either powerless or unwilling to protect their citizens.  Apparently there is very little we are willing to do, or capable of doing, as citizens to hold our leaders accountable for their failure to protect us.

But hey, if it makes you feel better, attend a fundraising concert for victims of Muslim Terror; hold hands, sing Kumbaya and pretend there aren’t still a lot of people out there who want to annihilate your culture and freedoms.  As long as you cry over the victims and spend a few bucks on a good cause, you’ve done your part, right?  As for me, I’m going to be aware of my surroundings and carry a defense weapon wherever legally possible.  We’ll see who survives the New Intifada.

~AD

Share This: