Cops Grumpy's hall of Shame

Cops Handcuffed, Arrested a Uvalde Mom for Trying To Rescue Her Kids Why did it take an hour for the police to stop alleged killer Salvador Ramos? by ROBBY SOAVE

The performance of law enforcement during the mass school shooting at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday appears to have been even worse than previously known.

Early reporting that a school resource officer confronted alleged killer Salvador Ramos and engaged him in a gunfight was erroneous. At a press conference on Thursday, Texas Department of Public Safety spokesperson Chris Olivarez clarified that no such confrontation took place and became increasingly irritated as journalists pressed him to explain the source of the misinformation.

Ramos entered through an unlocked door and faced no opposition until the police arrived several minutes later. He then became barricaded in a classroom, and the police failed to gain access and neutralize him for the next hour. It is likely that most of his victims—perhaps all of them—died in that classroom.

As that hour elapsed, desperately frightened parents arrived outside the school and were prevented from entering by law enforcement. Video footage obtained by The New York Times shows parents frantically begging the police to either enter the school and intervene or get out of the way so that they could rescue their kids themselves. Their pleas were in vain.


In fact, it took the police so long to get the situation under control that one mother who was 40 miles away when she learned about the shooting had enough time to drive to the school. According to The Wall Street Journal, police arrested and handcuffed her to prevent her from trying to save her children:

Ms. Gomez, a farm supervisor, said that she was one of numerous parents who began encouraging—first politely, and then with more urgency—police and other law enforcement to enter the school. After a few minutes, she said, federal marshals approached her and put her in handcuffs, telling her she was being arrested for intervening in an active investigation.

Ms. Gomez convinced local Uvalde police officers whom she knew to persuade the marshals to set her free. Around her, the scene was frantic. She said she saw a father tackled and thrown to the ground by police and a third pepper-sprayed. Once freed from her cuffs, Ms. Gomez made her distance from the crowd, jumped the school fence, and ran inside to grab her two children. She sprinted out of the school with them.

It’s understandable that the police would not want to contend with the mayhem of parents storming the school themselves. But the apparent fact that they exerted considerable effort to keep parents at bay while failing to dislodge the shooter—who was actively murdering the kids inside the room with him—is disgusting. Any significant delay in gaining access to the shooter’s classroom is hard to explain in light of the fact that Uvalde employs a SWAT Team for this very purpose.

These alleged failures bear some similarity to what transpired during the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida. In that instance, School Resource Officer Scot Peterson hid instead of confronting the active shooter, Nikolas Cruz, who would ultimately kill 17 people. It was eventually revealed that Cruz—a disturbed teenager with a long history of violent, threatening, and anti-social behavior—was well-known to various law enforcement agencies, including the county sheriff’s office and even the FBI.

The public deserves answers about exactly what transpired in Uvalde on Tuesday and why these questionable decisions were made. Rep. Joaquin Castro (D–Texas) has called for an investigation of the timeline: Any public official whose actions detracted from the urgent need to save the lives of all those kids should be held fully accountable.

Cops Some Scary thoughts

“They could’ve been shot; they could’ve been killed”

Officers waited for backup during Texas school shooting because ‘they could’ve been shot’: lieutenant

A Texas state police official said officers outside the Uvalde school where a gunman slaughtered 19 fourth-graders and two teachers Tuesday waited for backup to engage the shooter because they feared “they could’ve been shot.”


Texas Department of Public Safety Lt. Chris Olivarez said in a Thursday interview with CNN that the first few officers who entered Robb Elementary School after 18-year-old shooter Salvador Ramos were met with gunfire and retreated to avoid being shot and killed.

“At that point, if they pursued it any further — not knowing where the suspect was at — they could’ve been shot; they could’ve been killed and, at that point, that gunman would have the opportunity to kill other people inside that school,” Olivarez told host Wolf Blitzer.

Local and state police outside Robb Elementary School waited for a specialized US Border Patrol tactical team to arrive and take out Ramos nearly an hour after he began his killing spree.

Ramos had locked the door of the classroom where he killed all 21 victims, and officers weren’t able to get inside until a school staff member gave them a key, the Associated Press had reported.

UVALDE, TX - MAY 24: Law enforcement work the scene after a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School where 19 people, including 18 children, were killed on May 24, 2022 in Uvalde, Texas. The suspected gunman, identified as 18-year-old Salvador Ramos, was reportedly killed by law enforcement.
Texas Department of Public Safety Lt. Chris Olivarez said responding officers waited to enter the school out of concern they’d be shot by Salvador Ramos.
Jordan VonderhaarGetty Images
Law enforcement, and other first responders, gather outside Robb Elementary School following a shooting, Tuesday, May 24, 2022, in Uvalde, Texas.
Ramos was killed by a specialized US Border Patrol tactical team about an hour after his killing spree began.
AP/Dario Lopez-Mills
People react outside the Ssgt Willie de Leon Civic Center, where students had been transported from Robb Elementary School after a shooting, in Uvalde, Texas, U.S. May 24, 2022.
Parents were frantically begging officers to enter the school building and save the children before the tactical team arrived.
REUTERS/Marco Bello
Crosses with the names of Tuesday's shooting victims are placed outside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, Thursday, May 26, 2022.
Ramos killed 21 children and teachers before he was stopped by law enforcement.
AP/Jae C. Hong

Olivarez said the officers were able to contain the gunman inside the classroom so that he was unable to kill more people throughout the school building.

Dozens of parents arrived at the school while Ramos was still inside and begged officers waiting outside to charge the building.

Some parents suggested going into the school building themselves, videos from the scene show.

The latest from the Texas school shooting

One mother yelled at an officer, “You’re scared of getting shot? I’ll go in without a vest — I will!”

Another mom of two did just that. After breaking away from the crowd, she jumped the school fence, entered the building and ran out with her two kids.

Born again Cynic! California Cops

The Los Angeles Times Won’t Let the Facts Get in the Way of a Good Story BY JACK DUNPHY

AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill
Any government whose law enforcement apparatus is immune from scrutiny by a free press is all but guaranteed to become oppressive, and it goes without saying that we, as free Americans, would bridle at any such arrangement. But there is a danger in the other direction as well, one in which police leaders are so concerned with how they are portrayed in the media that they lose sight of their mission to reduce crime. Such is the current state of the Los Angeles Police Department, whose chief Michel Moore lives in fear of what might be written about him in the Los Angeles Times.

On May 3, in downtown Los Angeles, 54-year-old Leron James allegedly brandished a handgun at firefighters, who then notified the LAPD. Patrol officers responded but could not coax James from his 5th-floor apartment, prompting a response from the LAPD’s SWAT team. When James opened fire from his apartment window, two SWAT officers returned fire and killed him. So here we have a straightforward set of facts and a use of deadly force by the police about which there should be little controversy.

Alas . . .

According to a May 20 story in the L.A. Times, as SWAT officers were preparing to deploy on the incident, one of them was captured on another’s body-worn camera saying, “Happy hunting.” Neither the officer who made the comment nor the one he said it to were involved in shooting James, and as hot-microphone indiscretions go, this one strikes me as pretty mild. That didn’t prevent someone from bringing it to the attention of the L.A. Times, whose writers and editors exult in any opportunity to present the police, especially the LAPD, in an unfavorable light.

Responding to the Times’s story like an obedient servant was LAPD chief Michel Moore, who said the offending officer had been removed from field duty pending the outcome of an investigation. “It’s a disturbing remark,” Moore said. “Gallows humor or otherwise, it doesn’t have a place.”

Oh, please. Having worked some time ago at the same division and same rank as Moore, I can attest that he regularly made comments far, far more “disturbing” than this one. He can be grateful (as can I) he did his time on the streets in the days before body-worn cameras, when mildly inappropriate remarks like this one resulted in nothing more than a talking-to from a sergeant out by the gas pumps. Those days are long over, and yes, this and every officer should be circumspect in what he allows to be recorded for posterity, but the reaction to this has been beyond absurd.

Moore promises an “investigation” into the matter. Of what, exactly? The remark was caught on video, so the only questions to be asked are what policy was violated, if any, and if there was a violation, what to do about it. No matter how quickly and easily these questions can be answered, the unfortunate officer will probably spend up to a year on administrative duties as Moore and his top brass twiddle their thumbs in their typical fashion and the internal affairs process drags on. In the meantime, the officer’s life will be upended, and the LAPD and the citizens of Los Angeles will be needlessly denied the benefits of his skills and expertise.

Not content with giving the shaft to a single officer, Moore has ordered a review of SWAT operations over the last ten years in an effort to uncover “any potential problems or patterns” that might have gone unnoticed in what is already the most scrutinized entity in the LAPD. I expect the L.A. Times to soon report on an officer being reprimanded for parking the SWAT truck in a handicap zone during a barricaded-suspect operation.

What will not be investigated, unfortunately, is the question of who brought the “happy hunting” matter to the attention of the L.A. Times. Who is it within the organization who stands to benefit from the upheaval that will follow? The Times was quick to link this incident to its 2020 reporting on a pending lawsuit filed by a former SWAT supervisor who alleged the existence of a “SWAT mafia” whose members encourage the use of deadly force. In August 2020 I commented on that lawsuit here on PJ Media, offering statistics that would seem to belie the plaintiff’s allegations. The L.A. Times clearly has a source close to the matter, yet these relevant statistics are never included in any of the paper’s coverage on this issue.

Related: More Dishonesty in the LA Times About the LAPD

So, since the L.A. Times can’t be bothered to ask for these numbers, or else has them but won’t print them for the corrosive effect they may have on the paper’s long-propagated narrative, I present them here. The LAPD began capturing detailed statistics on SWAT deployments in 2013, since which time the team has responded to more than 1,200 incidents. And bear in mind they respond only to incidents in which suspects are armed or believed to be, to include call-outs for barricaded suspects and warrant service for high-risk circumstances. In all of these deployments, force of any type, ranging from deadly force to tear gas to even the least aggressive forms of physical restraint, was used in just 8 percent of them. Deadly force was used in a mere 1.4 percent of the deployments.

If there is a “SWAT mafia,” they don’t seem to have much influence on these outcomes, a fact you won’t find in the pages of the Los Angeles Times.

Cops Grumpy's hall of Shame Some Sick Puppies!

Remembering the deadliest school massacre in U.S. history by Theresa Vargas

Aversion of this article was originally published on April 16, 2017, under the headline “Virginia Tech was not the worst school massacre in U.S. history. This was.”

That spring morning in 1927 could not have been more beautiful, one of the students would later recall.

The Bath Consolidated School just outside East Lansing, Mich., was holding final exams, but before the morning bell rang on May 18, 1927, children ran and played outside. Peals of laughter could be heard.

“Little did their young minds, as the rest of ours, fancy their destiny was at hand … perhaps in half an hour they would rest in eternity with their playmates,” a 15-year-old student name Martha Hintz later recalled in an essay.

Later that morning, once students and teachers had settled into their classrooms, an explosion brought walls and ceilings down. The school had been dynamited by an angry school board member, but no one knew that yet. The only thing certain was that children and educators were hurt and others were dead or dying.

14 students dead in Texas elementary school shooting, governor says

“We began to run screaming and crying in the same breath, some running for the door while others made for the windows,” Hintz, a ninth-grader, wrote in an essay published in a book titled, “The Bath School Disaster.” Once outside, she recalled: “From every direction, we could see people coming, some running at their utmost speed, and others driving machines, both hoping and praying that their children or friends were not among the dead.”

After each school killing, there is an urge to capture its magnitude in superlatives. That happened after the 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech, in which senior Seung Hui Cho killed 32 people and then himself. Media outlets at the time — and as recently as 2015 — described the event as the country’s “worst school massacre.” One Virginia newspaper ran a headline with the phrase: “Nation’s Worst Rampage.”

But they were wrong. As horrific and devastating as that April 16, 2007, day proved, it was not the worst mass killing on a school campus.

Bath Township School Bombing: Why Have We Forgotten It? | Time

That distinction belongs to the mostly forgotten, harrowing explosion at Bath Consolidated School 95 years ago. That day, local farmer Andrew Kehoe, angry about taxes used to fund the school, killed his wife and then blew up the building before doing the same to his car as he sat inside it. In total, 45 people were killed, among them 38 children.

Larger memorial image loading...

After the bombings, a sign found fastened to a fence on Kehoe’s farm read, “Criminals are made, not born.”

Unlike the school killings that would later follow it — among them Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook Elementary and now Tuesday’s mass shooting at an elementary school in Uvalde, Tex. — the Bath event did not spur debate about mental health. A New York Times article that ran at the time described Kehoe as the “Michigan maniac” in the headline and as a “madman” in the first sentence.

Bullies and black trench coats: The Columbine shooting’s most dangerous myths

The sign on the fence, the author wrote, “may give an inkling to the psychology of the man who with measured deliberation, it is believed, attempted to wreak vengeance on this community for what he felt was the high tax imposed on him and other financial troubles … He was notified last June that the mortgage on his farm would be foreclosed, and that may have been the circumstance that started the clockwork of anarchy and madness in his brain.

Monty Ellsworth, one of Kehoe’s neighbors, who later wrote “The Bath School Disaster,” described him as “the world’s worst demon.”

Kehoe’s mother had died when he was young, and he didn’t get along with his stepmother, Ellsworth wrote. He recounted a story Kehoe’s former neighbors and classmates told him about the day the boy’s stepmother lit an oil stove and it exploded, setting her on fire: “Andrew stood and watched her burn for a while and then he got a pail of water and threw over her. It spread the flames and made them worse. His stepmother died from the effects … Although there was never any trouble made about it, the neighbors whom the writer talked with were of the opinion Andrew knew something about what was wrong with the stove.”

In the book, Ellsworth described in painful detail those who were killed in the school that educated more than 300 elementary to high school students: a teacher who was found with a child in each arm; a sixth-grade girl who had a talent for the piano and had picked a bouquet of lilacs that morning; a 7-year-old boy who loved to play baseball and before he left for school had said, “Goodbye mama, I’ll be good.”

A masked shooter. A campus killing. And a manhunt 159 years before Columbine.

Also killed that day was the school’s superintendent, Emory Huyck. He had a contentious relationship with Kehoe, who became the treasurer on the school board in 1924. Huyck survived the blast but was killed when Kehoe blew up his car. An 8-year-old boy was also killed at that time.

Before the day was done, hundreds of people had joined the rescue effort, and the town hall had became a morgue. Some families lost multiple children. Among the survivors, dozens were left with horrific wounds.

“There were sights that I hope no one will ever have to look at again,” Ellsworth wrote. “Children would be brought out, some with legs dropping, some with arms broken and hanging, some would be moaning, and others would be still. When carrying them, you would know they would never answer their mother’s call again.”

Days later, on a Sunday, the town’s roads were clogged with thousands of cars, each filled with people hoping to pay their respects at the many funerals.

“I think,” Ellsworth wrote, “we had the greatest demonstration of American sympathy ever awarded a grief stricken community.”

The instinct for superlatives, it seems, existed even then.

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops

Media Attack Sheriff Advocating Self Defense by Charlie Cook

U.S.A. –-( Santa Rosa County (Florida) Sheriff Bob Johnson has created a media stir over comments on his preference for law-abiding citizens to shoot home invaders.

The events that preceded these comments from Sheriff Johnson were reported on AmmoLand by Lee Williams; read more here.

Events began when 32-year-old Brandon Harris allegedly broke into four homes in Pace, Florida. Harris is known as a “frequent flyer” to Johnson and his deputies, he has been arrested 17 times. During Harris’s alleged four break-ins, one homeowner attempted to take a shot at the criminal but missed.

At a press conference after Harris’ arrests, Sheriff Johnson said:

“I guess they think they did something wrong, which they did not. If somebody’s breaking into your house, you’re more than welcome to shoot them in Santa Rosa County. We prefer that you do, actually,” Johnson said.

“So, whoever that was, you’re not in trouble. Come see us. We have a gun safety class we put on every other Saturday. And if you take that, you’ll shoot a lot better, and hopefully, you’ll save the taxpayers money.”

Proponents of gun control in the media quickly jumped on this quote.

They all want to focus on the end of the quote, accusing the sheriff of telling citizens to shoot home invaders to save taxpayer money.

None of them want to acknowledge the Sheriff was trying to save the lives of law-abiding citizens from violent criminals.

Sheriff Johnson said, “If somebody’s breaking into your house, you’re more than welcome to shoot them in Santa Rosa County. We prefer that you do.”

For most people, myself included, this is the kind of Sheriff you want in your county

Unfortunately, the good Sherriff failed to add, “We also offer a basic courses on excavator operation, wood chipper maintenance, and guiding courses to help you locate the nearest well. – Grumpy

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops Some Scary thoughts

AI may be searching you for guns the next time you go out in public by Steven Zeitchik

When Peter George saw news of the racially motivated mass-shooting at the Tops supermarket in Buffalo last weekend, he had a thought he’s often had after such tragedies.

AI may be searching you for guns the next time you go out in public

© Evolv TechnologyAI may be searching you for guns the next time you go out in public

“Could our system have stopped it?” he said. “I don’t know. But I think we could democratize security so that someone planning on hurting people can’t easily go into an unsuspecting place.”

George is chief executive of Evolv Technology, an AI-based system meant to flag weapons, “democratizing security” so that weapons can be kept out of public places without elaborate checkpoints. As U.S. gun violence like the kind seen in Buffalo increases — firearms sales reached record heights in 2020 and 2021 while the Gun Violence Archive reports 198 mass shootings since January — Evolv has become increasingly popular, used at schools, stadiums, stores and other gathering spots.

To its supporters, the system is a more effective and less obtrusive alternative to the age-old metal detector, making events both safer and more pleasant to attend. To its critics, however, Evolv’s effectiveness has hardly been proved. And it opens up a Pandora’s box of ethical issues in which convenience is paid for with RoboCop surveillance.

“The idea of a kinder, gentler metal detector is a nice solution in theory to these terrible shootings,” said Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union’s project on speech, privacy, and technology. “But do we really want to create more ways for security to invade our privacy? Do we want to turn every shopping mall or Little League game into an airport?”

Evolv machines use “active sensing” — a light-emission technique that also underpins radar and lidar — to create images. Then it applies AI to examine them. Data scientists at the Waltham, Mass., company have created “signatures” (basically, visual blueprints) and trained the AI to compare them to the scanner images.

Executives say the result is a smart system that can “spot” a weapon without anyone needing to stop and empty their pockets in a beeping machine. When the system identifies a suspicious item from a group of people flowing through, it draws an orange box around it on a live video feed of the person entering. It’s only then that a security guard, watching on a nearby tablet, will approach for more screening.

Dan Donovan, a veteran security consultant who rents Evolv’s systems out to clients for events, says that by allowing guards to focus on fewer threats, it avoids the fatigue metal-detector operators can feel. Like other consultants, he notes no system probably would have stopped the Buffalo shooter, who began firing in the parking lot.

Consumers can expect to see Evolv a lot more. Sports franchises like the Tennessee Titans and Carolina Panthers now use it; so do the New York Mets and Columbus Crew. The Super Bowl at SoFi Stadium in February deployed for an outside perimeter. In New York City, public arts institutions such as the Lincoln Center are trying it. So is a municipal hospital. (NYC Mayor Eric Adams has touted it as a potential subway security measure, but tight spaces and underground signal interference make that less plausible.)

North Carolina’s Charlotte-Mecklenburg school system, with 150,000 students, has also licensed Evolv. Theme parks are excited, too — all 27 Six Flags parks across the country now use it. Evolv has now conducted 250 million scans to date, it says., up from 100 million in September.

George believes accuracy and lack of friction make Evolv compelling. “No one wants a prison or an airport everywhere they go, which is what you have with a dumb analogue metal detector,” he said. “And the cost of doing nothing is going up by the day.”

The company, which went public last year, has raised at least $400 million, with diverse figures including Jeb Bush, Bill Gates, Peyton Manning and Andre Agassi investing. (The space is growing, with a system from Italian rival CEIA also gaining popularity.) Relying primarily on the four-year subscriptions it sells, Evolv more than doubled its revenue in the first quarter to $8.7 million compared to 2021, though also more than doubled its losses, to $18.2 million.

Retails stores are an appealing use case, George said, because people want to feel safe shopping but don’t want to be stopped and checked every time they walk in to buy some groceries. (About 60 people can be scanned every minute, Evolv says.) George said that when the system was installed at an Atlanta-area mall, Lenox Square, in January, it caught 57 guns in the first four hours.

Overall, George said, at least 15,000 guns were flagged by Evolv in the first quarter of 2022. (These numbers are not publicly vetted.)

But IPVM, a security-industry trade publication, concluded after a review that Evolv has “fundamental technological limitations in differentiating benign objects from actual weapons.” One issue, IPVM said, citing its examination of the company, is that some metallic objects confuse the AI, including particularly the ruggedly designed Google Chromebook.

IPVM says Evolv has not provided sufficient data. The publication also says the company will not engage with it due to its inquiries; it says the firm has even asked it to stop reporting on Evolv in the name of public safety.

In a statement to The Washington Post regarding the conflict, Evolv said: “We believe that publishing a blueprint of any security screening technology is irresponsible and makes the public less safe by providing unnecessary insights to those who may try to use the information to cause harm.”

Alan Cowen, a former Google scientist and AI expert, says he’d also worry about “adversarial examples,” in which bad actors learn how to circumvent the AI — say, by putting tape around a gun handle — as well as a delay in figuring this out because Evolv won’t flag it.

Some techno-ethicists say accuracy is only one fear.

“If it can reduce false positives while still catching the real positives, that seems like a benefit,” said Jamais Cascio, the author and founder of Open the Future, an organization examining technology’s consequences. “My concern is what happens when it moves beyond looking for weapons at a concert — when someone decides to add all kinds of inputs on the person being scanned, or if we enter a protest and a government agency can now use the system to track and log us. We know what a metal detector can and can’t tell us. We have no idea how this can be used.”

George says that no data is applied to a scanning subject and no information captured or catalogued. As for accuracy, he acknowledges the Chromebook has been an issue but says the algorithm is being improved. He suggests students might simply come to realize they need to hold them up on their way in to school, a small price to pay. “Why shouldn’t there be a system where kids can learn safely and also enter without breaking stride?” he asked.

Whether that will be possible in large districts like Charlotte-Mecklenberg, though, remains to be seen. Requests for comment from the police department overseeing the district’s security were not returned.

Several Evolv clients The Post spoke to say they’re happy with the system.

“We went from 30 metal-detector lines to four lanes, and we’re not stopping people for every cellphone or house key,” said Jason Freeman, Six Flags’ vice president of security, safety, health and environmental. He said overall stops have gone from 32 percent to 15 percent, with the great majority still not considered threats. The idea is not just to catch more weapons; it’s to waste less time on everything else.

Mark Heiser, venue director for the Denver Performing Arts Complex, says the system is light years ahead of the metal detector. “We’d never go back,” he said.

Heiser cited fewer alarms for items like pen knives — “which is good, because it allows us to focus on [the more destructive weapons].” And, he noted, a lot of audience members feel freer walking in.

But Stanley of the ACLU remains unconvinced.

“Devices being more subtle is a good thing. But they can also be more insidious or even just annoying,” he said. “You’re going to have a lot of people shocked an umbrella tucked inside a coat pocket is suddenly leading to an encounter with a security guard.”

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops

Execute the Buffalo Shooter The highest punishment sends a message to those deranged few who will admire his actions. by Charles Fain Lehman

On Saturday, 18-year-old Payton Gendron opened fire at a Tops Friendly Markets in the predominantly black Kingsley neighborhood of Buffalo, New York. Over the course of his ten-minute rampage, Gendron murdered ten people and injured another three; he livestreamed the massacre on the platform Twitch. The horrific incident is being investigated as a hate crime, owing in part to a manifesto in which Gendron allegedly justifies the attack as a defense of the white majority against “replacement” by blacks and Jews.

The shooting has already been absorbed into the culture war. Commentators on the left have been quick to argue that the Buffalo massacre is simply more evidence of white supremacy’s grip on the Republican Party, and on American society as a whole. Some on the right mutter about the manifesto’s stranger sections, insinuating that the whole thing is some sort of FBI conspiracy. These efforts misappropriate, or wholly obscure, the bare meaning of these murders. Our response to the Buffalo mass shooting should be that a monster committed a heinous and indefensible act, and that justice demands we hold him to final account. Try him, convict him, and put him to death.

Doing so would acknowledge the basic mandates of morality. Certain offenses are so reprehensible as to be unforgiveable. To fail to answer a vicious, hate-motivated rampage with anything but death is to deny the requirements of retribution.

Just as important, executing Gendron sends a message to those deranged few who will admire his actions: violently enacting your bigotry is intolerable to our society. As I have argued, hate-crime laws can be seen as a set of guard rails, delimiting certain criminal behavior as incompatible with shared values of civic tolerance and respect for one’s fellow citizens. When those laws are egregiously violated, capital punishment can restore the moral order that the law exists to defend.

Punishing Gendron may seem so obvious as to not be worth mentioning. But the fixation on the vulgar political significance of his atrocity reveals our collective inability to think in such stark moral terms. In particular, taking the killer as mere symbol of white America’s depravity waives his responsibility for his actions. It reinforces the therapeutic morality, undergirding most criminal-justice progressivism, that sees brutal criminals as mere products of their environment, rather than freely choosing individuals culpable for their actions. Punishment, the philosopher Herbert Morris once argued, is the way that we treat wrongdoers as fully human, by acknowledging them as morally responsible agents. The moral drama of retribution should therefore be at the center of our analysis.

Politics does play a role here. Capital punishment is, for no particularly good reason, inoperative in New York State. Several candidates for governor have already called for its return in response to the shooting; others might join them. Gendron can also be charged under federal hate-crime and homicide laws carrying a possible penalty of death, just as Emmanuel AME church shooter Dylann Roof was. But doing so would require the Biden administration to undo its death penalty moratorium. If Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice is really serious about combatting hate crimes, then it will proceed accordingly.

Outrage is a subject of much public debate these days: whose outrage is appropriate, whose is not, and when outrage ought to play a role in decision-making. In the case of horrific crimes like Saturday’s shooting, however, outrage is a natural moral emotion that points us to a just end. Only a hard heart can look upon the brutal deaths of ten people and not feel it. Putting Payton Gendron to death is simply the state’s enactment of the horror and revulsion that so many feel. Failing to do so would be a rejection of public moral sense and decency.

Cops Good News for a change! Manly Stuff Our Great Kids

Some great News for a Change! Swatara Township Police Officer being hailed for act of kindness by: Ben Schad

SWATARA TOWNSHIP, Pa. (WHTM) — A story about a Midstate police officer is making its rounds on social media.

Officer Anthony Glass from Swatara Township Police was assisting an elderly man whose card was not working at the Capitol Diner. Police say the senior called them for assistance and that’s when Officer Glass showed up and paid the bill with his own card.

The man offered to pay Officer Glass back but he declined. A release from the Swatara Township Police Department praised Officer Glass saying, “One of the core values of the STPD is caring which was demonstrated by Of. Glass’ actions this morning.” Hundreds more are commending the officer for this act of kindness.

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! Cops

Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who kept their swords. ~ Benjamin Franklin

National gun surrender launched

A new national gun surrender will allow people to anonymously hand in weapons and ammunition including heirlooms, shotguns and antique revolvers, as well as illegal stun guns and gas-firing blank pistols bought overseas.

Many such guns are held in innocence and ignorance that having them is against the law, according to the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) and The National Ballistics Intelligence Service (Nabis).

Weapons handed in during past surrenders included old wartime service revolvers, war trophies – including grenades – and gas-operated blank-firing pistols and stun-guns – bought during trips to Europe , or online.

However innocently held, such weaponry can be acquired by crooks through robberies or distributed to criminal networks in other ways.

The surrender – the first since 2019 – gives the opportunity to dispose of a firearm, gun components or ammunition by simply taking it to a local designated police station and handing it in.

The campaign will see nominated police stations flagged as locations for people to take guns, stun-guns, gas-powered weapons, imitation firearms, ammunition, hand grenades or other weaponry.

The surrender is starting on May 12, and runs for two weeks.

People should check police station locations in advance by visiting their local force website or calling 101.

Deputy Chief Constable Helen McMillan, NPCC lead for the Criminal Use of Firearms, said “We’re inviting people from May 12, for two weeks, to contact local police or attend local police station and surrender any firearms – or any type of weapon – that they’re concerned about, that they have in their possession.

“They can do that anonymously and there will be an amnesty for them in order to transport that weapon or be in possession of that weapon at the point they surrender it.

“No-one needs to be concerned about walking into a station or contacting their local force.

“We don’t need to know your name, we don’t need to know how you came into possession of it, all we need you to do is give us the gun.” Taylor, Nabis ballistic expert, said thousands of weapons had previously been surrendered including “old Webley revolvers”, issued as service sidearms in the Second World War, which were typical of items found “hanging around in the loft for decades”.

Mr Taylor also urged people to check “blank-firer” imitation guns they may have, adding that the “gas-gun” type were “legal in Europe – but definitely illegal in the UK”.

“If you don’t know the status of the gun or are unsure – take the chance to hand it in,” he added.

He also said there were  also “a lot of unregistered firearms and (particularly) shotguns, pre-dating the 1988 (Firearms) Act” in homes, often “hanging over the mantelpiece”, which should be handed in, if unlicensed.

The last surrender saw shotguns making up 69% of all lethal weapons handed in.

Changes to firearms’ laws last year also closed a loophole allowing people to own some old guns – particularly revolvers – perfectly legally as antiques, because they used ammunition in calibres which were no longer manufactured.

Ms McMillan urged antique weapon-owners to “know your gun, and know the law”, adding “if you are no longer in possession legally, surrender that weapon”.

Illegal possession of a firearm can mean five years behind bars and if you are found guilty of possession with intent to supply that can lead to a life sentence.

All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops


Like every “mass shooting,” a recent gunfight in Sacramento initially received breathless coverage in the media. But as the sordid details about the suspects became known, coverage of the bloodshed tapered off.

Six people died. It became clear the reason was gang violence. One of the shooters was recently released early from prison – jailed for the felonious assault of his girlfriend – against the recommendation of the parole board. The man was previously convicted on gun charges, and was also awarded a settlement from the state for alleged poor treatment while behind bars.

While devastating – particularly to the families involved – the incident was not amenable to the left-wing/media narrative about guns.

Craig DeLuzAs Project 21 member Craig DeLuz pointed out in a commentary first published by the California Republican Assembly:

[T]here are a number of underlying truths that they will dare not share with the public. Because if they do, it will become clear that they and their policies are not the solution. They are, in fact, the root of the problem.

These truths, he stated, shred the alleged need for “common sense” gun laws.

Here are the truths Craig highlighted that shatter leftist lies:

  • It’s a violence problem, and not just guns. “[O]nly recent generations… have concluded that violence is an acceptable way to address the myriad of issues confronting them. The firearm is not the cause of this. In fact, it is not even the weapon of choice.” Most crimes involve other kinds of weapons or none at all. “Guns are no more the cause of this violence,” he wrote, “than cars are the cause of drunk driving.”
  • Gun laws are not a crime deterrent. “A 2020 study done as a part of the RAND Corporation’s Gun Policy in America initiative” found “there is zero evidence that gun control laws have any effect on violence in general or gun violence specifically.”
  • “Soft on crime” policies are the cause of rising crime. Spiking violent crime in the 90s led to more money for police and harsher sentences for crooks in the form of things like mandatory minimums. This led to a 20-year decline in crime. “While the media and politicians deny the correlation and instead seek to blame guns; the increase in crime, especially violent crime, directly corresponds with the change in our criminal justice policies.”
  • Gun control is racial. From “black codes” to California’s “Mulford Act” to gun ownership bans targeting Native Americans and Asians, “[g]un control has always been about keeping “Those People” from being able to own firearms.”

Commenting further on how “the gun debate has always been rooted in racism” with “those who push these policies [being] the true victimizers, Craig explained:

We are often told that young black and brown men are disproportionately impacted by gun violence. But it is rarely noted that young black and brown men are disproportionately the ones pulling the trigger. The sad fact is that people who seek to victimize others (black, white, Latin, Asian, etc.) tend to go after people who look like them.

So, while it is noble to try and reduce the number of young black men in our criminal justice system, we cannot ignore that in doing so, we have put black men, women and children at risk of being their victims.

At the same time, we are limiting the ability of these very same folks to be able to defend themselves from the very danger we have put in their path.

“If we are to ever address the scourge of violence in our streets,” Craig wrote, “it will only happen when we all come to grips with these and many other truths.”