My Outrage Over Fort Hood
Four days after the shootings at Fort Hood, I finally feel ready to try and express the anger and outrage I am feeling about the shooting.
I’ve heard the word tragic used to describe the incident, and it certainly was. It was tragic that over 50 people on a US military installation were unable to defend themselves.
In a combat zone, soldiers aren’t without their weapons. That rifle or sidearm gets carried everywhere the soldier goes, because they never know when they’ll need that weapon. We trust them in a combat deployment to handle their weapons safely, and to know when to shoot, and when not to shot.
I’m told that it wasn’t that long ago that officers and non-commissioned officers always carried a sidearm with them, on post or off. I suppose it’s been quite a while, as I served some 20 years ago, and no one I knew carried a weapon off duty. But it used to be a matter of honor for personnel to carry a weapon; they would never be caught without one.
But on 5 November, many were caught without one. Some were caught dead. Fort Hood Police Sgt. Kimberly Munley and Sgt Mark Todd responded to reports of gunfire within three minutes. There’s no question that their speedy and heroic response saved lives. But what of the lives lost in those three minutes?
I’m not faulting the response of Fort Hood Police at all. But they can’t be everywhere. Sgt Munley happened to be within three minutes of the SRC. But what if she had been farther away? How many more would have died?
I am outraged that a member of the US Armed Forces would turn a weapon against his fellow soldiers, violating his oath as an officer, and the Soldier’s Creed.
I am even more outraged that members of the US Armed Forces were disarmed on their post, unable to respond to a threat. There is no excuse for Major Hasan, and no excuse for the inability of his victims to defend themselves. What have we come to as a nation that we would disarm the very people who are sworn to protect us from all enemies, foreign and domestic?
Home Bible Study Groups Banned in San Diego?
I’ll start with a link to the original Fox story that got my attention. That led me to a Google News search, and a pair of WorldNetDaily articles and with a little more information.
Pastor David Jones and his wife life on a cul-de-sac. Last month, they were met by a county official who asked them a series of questions about their Tuesday night bible study, such as “Do you say ‘Amen?’ or ‘Do you sing?’” They were then told that their weekly bible study with about 15 people violated land use guidelines, and they had to “stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit.”
MUPs seem to be designed for churches and other large concerns, as they require traffic and environmental studies, etc. to make sure the land is used properly. They’re expensive, too, and the Jones’ face escalating fines for each violation if they don’t stop their “religious assembly.”
So where’s the line between home bible study and church? My church has about 23 people there on a given Sunday morning; 9 are named Mueller. 5 are named Johnson. It’s just about 4-5 families and couples. Are we a congregation at the church building? What if we meet at a home for bible study?
I think obviously the county stepped in it by singling out “religious assembly” in the complaint. Had they said the couple was violating some ordinance about parking, or occupancy, they might be on better ground, but this seems to be a clear First Amendment violation. I’d be really interested to see the county’s guidelines about major use permits, and who needs them and when. I’d also be curious about their regs concerning churches, and how those regs mesh with the . I’d also be interested to know if the county is going to start cracking down on other weekly events held at homes, like cookouts, or football parties.
Who Thought This Was A Good Idea?
“Voluntary surrenders,” AKA the Greyhound Escape Plan.
Since 1996, the US Bureau of Prisons has let some prisoners transfer between prisons unescorted. How? By buying them a one-way ticket to the bus terminal nearest their new home.
How effective has it been? Historically, fewer than 1 in 500 inmates being transferred without escorts have absconded, according to bureau spokeswoman Traci Billingsley. The reason behind such moves? Purely economic, says Billingsley. USBP and US Marshals Service say it’s cheaper this way, and that they don’t have the staffing to escort every prisoner transfer.
But how much is it going to cost them to go after Dwayne Fitzen? He’s been gone since 2004, when he got off a bus in Las Vegas, on his way from Minnesota to California. He had two years left in his prison term, but he he got to Vegas, withdrew $12,000 from the bank, and disappeared. USBP notes that they’ve only lost about 180 inmates since 2006, and that of the 77 inmates who escaped during unescorted transfers from October 2003 to September 2005, all but 19 were recaptured or returned to custody. Dwayne Fitzen is one of those 19, by the way. His crimes? Cocaine distribution, along with a prior gun conviction. Additionally, he was only 12 years into a 24-year sentence, which is way outside published guidelines for such a transfer. The USBP website says inmates only have two years left on their sentence; wardens say it’s usually like 10. Fitzen had 12. Hmm.
Certainly makes you reconsider ever letting my kids travel alone by bus, doesn’t it?
Parental Rights vs Children’s Health
There are several related stories in the news in the last few days.
13-year-old Daniel Hauser has Hodgkin’s, and his mom is refusing chemo in favor of natural/alternative treatments. She and Daniel are on the run. Supposedly Daniel has refused treatment, but other reports say he’s learning-disabled and may not understand what’s involved.
11-year-old Madeline Neumann of Wisconsin died last year of complications of untreated diabetes, while her mother prayed over her. Mom’s on trial for second-degree homicide; dad’s trial is coming.
14-year-old Alexander Draper of South Carolina was just found; his mother took him and fled a court appearance over neglect and endangerment charges stemming from Alexander weighing 555 pounds.
Finally, here’s a Newsweek link that states things a little better than I can.
Where do you draw the line? When should The System step in to protect a child? Certainly Alex Draper has issues, and Madeline Neumann could have been saved. But what of Daniel Hauser? His mother is supposedly seeking the counsel of a man who claims to have cured his own case of Hodgkin’s through natural remedies. Should she have the right to seek alternative treatment over proven medical therapies? The treatment she’s fighting has a 91% success rate.
There’s a group wants faith-based exceptions to medical treatment overturned, or at least more limited than they currently are. The founder is a former Christian Scientist who lost her child to spinal meningitis in 1977 after turning to CS practitioners. (The website comes down pretty hard on CS in general.)
I’m torn on this one, quite honestly. For something like cancer, where we really don’t know all that much about some types, and the side-effects of the cure are almost as bad as the disease, should The System step in? When? How long should you give an alternative or faith-based treatment before expecting results? The concern though is that sometimes, the alternative treatments can be just as dangerous as the accepted medical treatments, or the parents aren’t getting good information, relying on just one or two websites that probably talk about the conspiracy between Big Pharma and Doctors.
For the record, I have seen some medical conditions seemingly cured through prayer: multiple uterine cysts that disappeared; a cancer sent into remission before medical treatment was begun. I believe in the power of prayer.
As a parent, I’d move heaven and earth to save my kids. But. This will be a step to the outside for some of you, but what if I’m convinced that God has told me to stop the conventional treatments, and let Him work? Who am I responsible to at that point? And yeah, there’s been one time in my life that I know God spoke to me – I literally felt His touch.
Here’s one more angle to consider. There are some who say a 13-year-old child should be allowed to consent to a particular medical procedure without the parents having any say in the matter. So should 13-year-old children be allowed to give/withdraw consent for any medical procedure, or just some? Which ones?
You Say Escalate Like It’s a Bad Thing
The mainstream media is becoming more aware of the long-existing issue of piracy on the high seas. The Associated Press reports that the various maritime academies are beginning to offer training to their students on how to deal with pirates. Such training includes increased vigilance, the use of fire hoses, and, of course, floodlights. Oh, and evasive action, too.
Wait…what? Floodlights? Against automatic weapons and RPGs? This is a joke, right? Evasive action? Yes, that supertanker that tops out at about 12 knots, and takes something like 5 miles to turn can evade (get away from, dodge, or avoid) the smaller, faster, and more maneuverable boats.
No, sadly, it’s not a joke. California Maritime Academy professor Donna Nincic points out that many countries do not allow merchant seamen to bear arms in their territorial waters, and that many captains fear arming the crews, as it might lead to armed mutinies. She added that “some worry that arming crew members would only cause the violence to escalate.”
Well….duh.
Jeff Cooper, a Shooter and wordsmith of some skill, once remarked
“One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that ‘violence begets violence.’ I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure–and in some cases I have–that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy.”
Isn’t escalation of violence the best way to end the violence? We saw what happens when you just sit there and go along with the bad men who want to hijack your plane, didn’t we? Or have we forgotten that one of the planes hijacked in 2001 didn’t get where it was supposed to go–because someone escalated the violence.
Professor Nincic says that “If you demonstrate a culture of awareness, that you look like you know you’re in pirate waters and are clearly standing watch, patrolling, etc., the pirates know you’re going to be more difficult to board and are possibly going to wait for the next ship and board the one that’s easier.” That’s all well and good for your shipmates, but what of the folks on “the one that’s easier?”
The Maine Maritime Academy is putting together an anti-piracy course, and department chair Ralph Pundt says the best way to combat pirates it to keep them from boarding in the first place.
He’s right, as far as he goes. I’d suggest the truly best course is to do whatever one can to keep them from boarding anyone ever again. Even if you have to “escalate the violence.”
Funeral Processions and the Law, Take 2
An Oregon resident writes about rude drivers in a letter to the editor. Note that the drivers weren’t just being rude, they were in violation of several Oregon statues covering funeral processions. I’ve come to the realization that people are just ignorant of procession laws, since they vary so from state to state. What’s required in some states isn’t even mentioned in others; several states don’t recognize processions at all. Add in self-appointed legal experts, and things become even more murky.
Locally, a Delhi Township police officer was struck during a funeral procession in suburban Cincinnati. His injuries were not considered life-threatening. The driver apparently left the scene after the crash, but later returned.
Dial 911 and Die
Over 40 years ago, Jeff Cooper coined the word “hoplophobe,” meaning a “mental disturbance characterized by irrational aversion to weapons.” I’d like to coin a new word, pertaining to the irrational dependence on protection orders, restraining orders, and the 911 emergency system. There needs to be such a word for people who think that a court order is going to stop someone who is bound and determined to kill them, or that all they have to do is call 911, because the people there will always protect you. Not.
We’re the “Only Ones” Who Can Be Trusted
Two gun bills recently came through the Virginia legislature. One, SB 476, would have allowed CCW permit holders to carry their guns into a restaurant that serves alcohol, provided they didn’t drink. Permit holders would be required to notify their server that they were carrying, so the server wouldn’t bring them any alcohol. The media went crazy, naturally. Democrat Mark Herring said, “Drinking alcohol and carrying firearms is not a good mix. It’s a public safety issue. There was no compelling case for loosening the restriction on carrying a concealed weapon into bars.” Never mind that the bill specifically prohibited “drinking alcohol and carrying firearms.” Gov. Tim Kaine vetoed the bill, because mixing guns and alcohol? It’s just not a good idea.
Unless, of course, you’re an “Only One.” Because SB 776 “[a]uthorizes an attorney for the Commonwealth or an assistant attorney for the Commonwealth to carry a concealed handgun without obtaining a permit wherever such attorney may travel in the Commonwealth,” like bars, restaurants that serve alcohol, and so forth. By the way, as “Only Ones” like this, you get a pass on training, too, since you’re apparently so good that you don’t need any training. That must be the case, since Gov. Kaine signed this one. Maybe it’s that whole bar exam thingie.
Because Everyone Deserves a Name…
…and “John Doe” doesn’t count. Neither does “Tent Girl,” or “Buckskin Girl,” or “Johnny ‘Dupage’ Doe.” Those aren’t real names. Those are the names given to people by the press, because no one knows who there are. Those names belong to dead people, bodies found by the side of the road, or wrapped in a bag in a vacant lot, or mummified in an abandoned railroad tunnel.
Law enforcement officials have some 40,000 unidentified bodies in their records, and over 100,000 people go missing each year. The Doe Network works to “give the nameless back their names and return the missing to their families.” I can’t think of many better uses of energy. What an amazing calling.
We’re The “Only Ones” Not Asking Much
“I won’t ask for much. Just sex, once or twice. You’ll get to like me. I’m a nice guy.” So allegedly said “Only One” Isaac R. Baichu, who reviews over 2,600 green card applications each year, as an adjudicator in the Garden City, N.Y., office of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
He was talking to a 22-year-old Colombian woman who, he suggested, might have some trouble on her application due to a couple of old legal issues. But, for the right price, this paragon of civil service could make those problems go away.
The victim would have reported the issue directly to CIS, except they quit publicizing the complaint email address and phone number last year. Lovely.
