Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Crime category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Crime’ Category

KARE11’s Boyd Huppert traveled to Somerset, WI, to see if Justin Rivard’s invention would save lives. While DC-based politicians and special interests retreat to their predictable positions, Justin applied a little American ingenuity to the school shooting crisis situation to see if he could make a difference. What he created in shop class might impact more students’ lives than anything that the politicians and special interests come up with.

The article opens by saying “The flag at Somerset High School flies at half-staff in honor lives lost in Florida. Inside, Somerset senior Justin Rivard was inspired in his shop class to try to save lives here. “I call this the JustinKase,” Justin says of his invention. “You don’t want to use it, but just in case you need it, it’ll be there. Made of steel plates and connecting rods, Justin’s device slips beneath a classroom door and latches to the door’s jam. With his device in place, Justin has yet to find a person who can push a classroom door open, including linemen from his high school football team. “You can lock a door with a lock, it can get shot out,” Justin says. “You can lock a door with this, it can’t get shot out. You can’t get around it.”

It’s time for politicians and special interests to step aside. It looks like Justin Rivard just built a better mouse trap:

What’s not to love about this invention? It doesn’t violate a person’s civil rights. Politicians can sit on the sideline and applaud old-fashioned ingenuity. Gangbangers can’t get past it.

When a shooter is stalking the hallways, the police are 5 minutes away. Justin’s device helps protects students and teachers until the first responders and law enforcement get there. Isn’t it time the politicians and the special interests got out of the American people’s way so they can fix this problem?

When a shop teacher challenged his students to build a device which could increase school safety, Justin Rivard rose to the occasion. Only 15 at the time, he researched current products and then sought to learn their strengths and weaknesses. After months of refinements, JustinKase was engineered, built, refined, and is now helping protect hundreds of students with orders meaning thousands of students in Wisconsin & Minnesota will soon be made safer due to his innovation.

Justin Rivard should get an award from the White House, Congress and others. Everyone knows there’s a problem with school safety. Justin Rivard didn’t complain that politicians weren’t protecting him or his classmates. He just started innovating until he fixed a big problem. I won’t pretend that this is the only thing that’s needed to stop mass shootings. It isn’t. The JustinKase will protect students until police arrive, though, which is a huge deal.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

When I read articles like this one, I want to punch the author for being this dishonest or this ill-informed. Ill-informed diatribes like this don’t get us to a solution on stopping school shootings. In his ill-informed rant, Scarborough wrote “More than 90 percent of Americans agree that Congress should pass tougher background checks. More than 80 percent of Americans at least somewhat favor a ban on “bump stocks” that make rifles fire much like automatic weapons. And nearly 80 percent believe that assault-style weapons should be banned.”

Guess what, Joe? You’ve been pumping out this BS about tougher background checks for years. It’s a myth. Whether a person buys a gun at a gun show or at a gun shop, the dealer must perform a background check. The so-called ‘gun show loophole’ is a myth. As for banning bump stocks, I’m totally fine with that. Nobody needs an automatic weapon. Finally, Scarborough’s elitism and ignorance is showing when he talks about “assault-style weapons.” The difference between “assault-style weapons” and regular semi-automatic weapons are entirely cosmetic.

Banning assault-style weapons is a feel-good thing that won’t affect a solution. The old liberal saw that ‘Well, if it would save one innocent life, it’s worth it’ is hogwash. That change won’t save a single life. Period. Earlier in the article, Scarborough wrote this:

And once again, I and many other reasonable conservatives find ourselves at odds with GOP — read: National Rifle Association — orthodoxy.

Apparently, Joe isn’t bright enough to understand that the NRA isn’t an evil boogeyman. The NRA is a potent political force because it’s made up of people who feel passionately about guns and gun safety. The NRA is We The People, not some bunch of right-wing lunatics.

Rants like Scarborough’s do more harm than good. It’s what makes conservatives distrust liberals like him. He should step out of his liberal echochamber and watch thoughtful shows like this:

One of Gutfeld’s panelists was Tyrus. Elitists will roll their eyes when they hear that he’s a professional wrestler. These elitists will ignore the fact that he used to be a licensed body guard. Here’s his thoughts on how to prevent these shootings:

This is coming from being an executive of security and, for a short stint, I was a teacher. When I was listening to this, first of all, if we outlawed guns tomorrow, no more guns in this country, all you would do would be opening the business market to the black market. That’s just not who we are. We have freedom of speech and we’re allowed to have guns. When 9/11 happened and the planes crashed into the Towers, airports were changed forever. Our children are getting hit. It’s time to change the schools forever. There’s a population out there, and I’ve checked — they didn’t have the new stats out but they had last year’s stats — 4.3% unemployment rate of returning veterans. That’s 435,000 trained men who have eyes and ears. We need to have them in schools.

Hardening soft targets makes sense. This notion that we don’t want the nation’s children exposed to guns is dangerous. It’s time we admitted that gun-free zones are where these killers feast. They know they don’t have to worry about getting shot.

Another thing that isn’t talked about is how many of these mass shooters were on the FBI’s radar with very specific information, only to not get kept under scrutiny. That’s leading to people on social media starting a new hashtag: #SeeSomethingSaySomethingDoSomething. That’s because the government failed us. According to this article, “police responded to his home 39 times over a seven-year period.”

Scarborough didn’t mention that in his anti-gun diatribe. Isn’t it time we held the FBI accountable for their failures? That likely wouldn’t sit well with Scarborough’s pro-government tendencies. He’d probably join with other liberals in singing the ‘Republicans hate law enforcement’ anthem. When government makes a deadly mistake, should we pretend that everything is fine? I don’t think so.

While elitists like Scarborough predictably retreat to their ‘let’s ban guns’ corner, people living in the real world attempt to find a solution. It’s a shame that elitists don’t think things through and pursue a solution.

Spoken like a true cookie cutter Democrat, last Friday night, newly minted U.S. Senator Tina Smith said that she’s opposed to building the wall, saying that “the wall is just a dumb idea”, adding that “most people don’t think it’s a good idea.” It’s good to know that Democrats think it’s smart to set national security policy based on public opinion rather than on what works.

I’d love hearing Democrats explain why they’re opposed to the wall after people read this article about El Paso. In the article, it says “Tell that to the residents of El Paso, Texas. Federal data show a far-less imposing wall than the one Trump envisions — a two-story corrugated metal fence first erected under the Bush administration — already has dramatically curtailed both illegal border crossings and crime in Texas’ sixth-largest city, which borders the high-crime Mexican city of Juarez. In fact, the number of deportable illegal immigrants located by the US Border Patrol plummeted by more than 89 percent over the five-year period during which the controversial new fence was built, according to Homeland Security data reviewed by me. When the project first started in 2006, illegal crossings totaled 122,261, but by 2010, when the 131-mile fence was completed from one end of El Paso out into the New Mexico desert, immigrant crossings shrank to just 12,251.”

In other words, a wall has already significantly reduced illegal border crossings in El Paso. That isn’t the only benefit of building the wall:

And crime abated with the reduced human traffic from Juarez, considered one of the most dangerous places in the world due to drug-cartel violence, helping El Paso become one of the safest large cities in America.

Let’s summarize. The wall in El Paso dramatically reduced illegal border crossings and it helped reduce drug-related crime, too. Let’s hear Democrats explain their opposition to something that dramatically reduces illegal border crossings and drug-related crimes.

Before 2010, federal data show the border city was mired in violent crime and drug smuggling, thanks in large part to illicit activities spilling over from the Mexican side. Once the fence went up, however, things changed almost overnight. El Paso since then has consistently topped rankings for cities of 500,000 residents or more with low crime rates, based on FBI-collected statistics.

Democrats opposed to the wall need to explain why they’re opposed to stopping violent crime and drug smuggling.

Another core promise made by Trump to justify constructing a massive wall spanning from Texas to California is that it will slow the flow of drugs coming across the border from Mexico. “We need the wall for security. We need the wall for safety,” Trump said last week while answering questions about the sweeping new GOP immigration bill. “We need the wall for stopping the drugs from pouring in.”
On that score, El Paso already has exceeded expectations.

Drug smuggling along that border entry point has also fallen dramatically. In fact, since the fence was completed, the volume of marijuana and cocaine coming through El Paso and seized by Border Patrol agents has been cut in half. The year before the wall was fully built in 2010, the volume of illegal drugs confiscated by the feds along the El Paso border hit 87,725 pounds. The year after, the amount of drug seizures plummeted to 43,783 pounds. Last year, they dropped even further to a total of 34,329, according to Border Patrol reports obtained by The Post.

Obama, Schumer and Feinstein all voted for building a wall in 2006:

I don’t doubt that Democrats will insist that things have changed since 2006. That’s true. Since then, large portions of the wall have been built. The FBI and ICE have had time to accumulate crime data. Since those sections of walls were built, illegal crossings have dropped, illegal drug confiscation has significantly increased and crime has dropped.

In other words, we now have proof that walls work. This isn’t theory anymore.

I just read Roger Simon’s article about the Steinle miscarriage of justice verdict. Saying that it’s pi$$ed me off is understatement. Simon is right in saying “the real villains in the Kate Steinle story are the San Francisco politicians who made the rules that prevented ICE from removing the already five-time deported criminal Zarate from the country. These SF pols already had Kate’s murder forever on their consciences, what they have of them anyway. Now they will also have to deal with the growing disgust of the American public and an administration that loathes these politicians, backed up by a Supreme Court that will ultimately be on the side of that administration for most actions it might take.”

Let’s be perfectly clear about this. Let’s tell our politicians to insist that they fund the building of the wall. Let’s tell them that people that stand in the way of the building of that wall are road kill. Let’s tell these politicians that letting another person die at the hands of an illegal alien or a member of MS-13 isn’t acceptable. We won’t put up with that.

Simon made a series of predictions, starting with “Attorney General Sessions, with the firm backing of the president, will redouble his efforts to do away with sanctuary cities both financially and legally.  It may take some time, but the days of these sanctuaries are over.”

This morning, I said that the Steinle family will get a little justice when they win their wrongful death lawsuit against SF politicians. After 10s of millions of dollars are stripped from their budget, they’ll feel even greater financial pain.

The border wall will be built, at least a good part of it, and Trump will find it far easier to get his way with border security. The Dreamers will remain, but the public will back Trump on further security measures that will be enacted. Those measures will be stronger than hitherto predicted.

Swing-state or red-state Democrats that vote against the wall will suddenly face an uphill fight for re-election.

Fewer people will “leave their hearts in San Francisco.” Many Californians have already left the state, but some who have been on the fence about decamping will get off that fence and finally leave.

It’s time to send the message that these politicians are insane and we won’t tolerate it anymore.

Finally, let’s use the Steinle miscarriage of justice to prove that Democrats care more about playing identity politics than keeping people safe.

Saying that Twitter is rendering a different verdict than the Steinle jury reached is understatement. The sanctuary city lowlifes that reached their not-guilty verdicts should be ashamed of themselves. Earlier tonight, the Steinle jury ruled Jose Ines Garcia Zarate not guilty. Tonight, the Steinle jury “found a Mexican man not guilty of murder in the killing of a woman on a San Francisco pier that set off a national immigration debate two years ago. Jose Ines Garcia Zarate was found guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm.”

La Raza, the vast majority of the Democratic Party and others who don’t care about the rule of law undoubtedly are quietly rejoicing. That rejoicing will be short-lived. Andy McCarthy just posted this tweet, in which he stated “It is a federal felony, up to 10 yrs’ imprisonment, to be an illegal alien in possession of firearm (18 USC secs.922(g), 924). DOJ should indict Zarate if haven’t already. Sentence consecutive to today’s state gun conviction could keep him in prison 13 yrs or so.”

Attorney Gen. Jeff Sessions issued this statement:

When jurisdictions choose to return criminal aliens to the streets rather than turning them over to federal immigration authorities, they put the public’s safety at risk. San Francisco’s decision to protect criminal aliens led to the preventable and heartbreaking death of Kate Steinle. While the State of California sought a murder charge for the man who caused Ms. Steinle’s death-a man who would not have been on the streets of San Francisco if the city simply honored an ICE detainer-the people ultimately convicted him of felon in possession of a firearm.

The Department of Justice will continue to ensure that all jurisdictions place the safety and security of their communities above the convenience of criminal aliens. I urge the leaders of the nation’s communities to reflect on the outcome of this case and consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to cooperate with federal law enforcement officers.

Democrats have threatened shutting the government down if Republicans don’t cave on DACA. If Democrats continue to insist on that, they’ll get trampled by the biggest Caterpillar they’ve ever seen. Based on what’s trending on Twitter, I’m betting that those people will be more than motivated that The Wall be built immediately. I’m also betting that they’ll be motivated to vote out any dirtbag standing in the way of building the wall.

This video is of Jim Steinle testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee:

In his testimony that day, Jim Steinle said “In fact the day she was killed we were walking arm-in-arm on Pier 14 in San Francisco enjoying a wonderful day together. Suddenly a shot rang out. Kate fell and looked at me and said ‘Help me dad.’ Those are last words I will ever hear from my daughter.” The Democrats on the Committee have Kate Steinle’s blood on their hands.

Jim Steinle couldn’t help his daughter that afternoon the way any father would’ve liked to have helped. I’m betting that breaks his heart to this day. Let’s help Jim receive justice in a different way. Let’s defeat the dirtbags that didn’t care about his daughter’s safety.

Further, let’s hope that SF law enforcement officials that ignored ICE’s request that the murderer be turned over and the City of San Francisco get hit with a massive wrongful death lawsuit that costs them 10s, if not 100s, of millions of dollars.

Finally, when The Wall is finally built, it should be named Kate’s Wall. That’d be fitting, wouldn’t it?

Predictably, Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy were quick to call for more gun laws within minutes of the slaughter of 26 parishioners at a church in Texas. Their mindless diatribe should be ignored. Further, they should get ridiculed for making this argument. According to this article, Devin Patrick Kelley “was court-martialed in 2012 for two counts of assault on his then-wife and assault on their child, Stefanek said. He received a bad conduct discharge, and reduction in rank and confinement for 12 months. The Air Force tells CBS News Kelley’s case was a general court martial, the most serious level of military trial proceedings. It is reserved for more serious criminal allegations, those substantially similar to felonies in civilian jurisdictions. While personnel tried under general court martial can be subject to dishonorable discharge, Kelley received the less severe bad conduct discharge. Federal law prohibits those who have been dishonorably discharged from buying a firearm, but the law does not prohibit those who have received a bad conduct discharge.”

Further, it was reported that Kelley was dressed all in black, including a face mask with a white skull on it. Additionally, “Neighbors said that they heard intense gunfire coming from the direction of the address listed for Kelley in recent days. ‘It’s really loud. At first I thought someone was blasting,’ said Ryan Albers, 16, who lives across the road. ‘It had to be coming from somewhere pretty close. It was definitely not just a shotgun or someone hunting. It was someone using automatic weapon fire.'”

This video should shut up the gun grabbers (but it won’t):

His application was rejected. He wore an attention-getting black outfit. His neighbors heard him firing weapons. How many other warning signs were missed? Shouldn’t we focus on how many existing laws were missed? Shouldn’t we focus on the mental illness part of this equation?

Perhaps, what we should focus on is the fact that we need to enforce existing laws. Another thing that’s likely to pay big dividends is having government do what it’s supposed to do. These sorts of things shouldn’t happen:

Before 26-year-old Devin Kelley received a bad conduct discharge from the U.S. Air Force in 2014, he was court-martialed in 2012 for assaulting his wife and child. Kelley “intentionally” fractured his stepson’s skull, The New York Times reported Monday. “He assaulted his stepson severely enough that he fractured his skull, and he also assaulted his wife,” retired colonel Don Christensen, formerly the chief prosecutor for the Air Force, told the Times. “He pled to intentionally doing it.” As punishment, Kelley was confined in military prison 12 months, received a reduction in military rank and was discharged for “bad conduct” — a step above a dishonorable discharge.

Finally, there’s this:

SUTHERLAND SPRINGS, Tex. — A day after a gunman massacred parishioners in a small Texas church, the Air Force admitted on Monday that it had failed to enter the man’s domestic violence court-martial into a federal database that could have blocked him from buying the rifle he used to kill 26 people.

In other words, existing laws should’ve prevented this horrific slaughter.

If this story doesn’t get your attention in a positive way, I don’t know what will. The article starts by saying “A Minnesota farmer was presented with a $7,000 reward for finding a missing teenage girl and then just moments later gave the money to the girl, who was a captive of three men for a month. Earl Melchert, 65, of Barrett, turned the reward money over to the  girl Friday at police headquarters.”

That’s the uplifting part of the article. Unfortunately, there’s a disgusting part to the article. That’s when Fox9 News reported that the “15-year-old girl was abducted from her home on Aug. 8 in Alexandria, Minn., and taken to an abandoned house where she was physically and sexually assaulted.” According to the article, the “three suspects” have “been charged with kidnapping, criminal sexual conduct, assault and false imprisonment.”

The girl’s identity wasn’t revealed by Fox9 News because they don’t “name alleged victims of sexual assault without their consent.” What they did report was that “the girl escaped Sept. 5 by swimming across a lake. Melchert found her when she came running toward him.” Here’s a picture of Minnesota’s newest hero and Alexandria Police Chief Rik Wyffels:

Here’s hoping the young lady’s kidnappers get imprisoned for a very long time.

I won’t question Jimmy Kimmel’s sincerity because of his anti-NRA, anti-GOP rant the night after a domestic terrorist with an automatic weapon killed 59 people while wounding over 500 more people. After reading this transcript of Kimmel’s monologue, what I will do is demand that he try to propose actual solutions. It isn’t good enough to express outrage. If you’re going to speak out on the issues of the day, then you’d better have a solution. Ranting to express your outrage is just a waste of time.

What’s obvious is that Kimmel hasn’t thoroughly thought things through about this. He all but officially admitted it when he said “All these devastated families who now have to live with this pain forever because one person with a violent and insane voice in his head managed to stockpile a collection of high-powered rifles and use them to shoot people. The guy was an accountant; he has no criminal record. His brother who lives in Florida seems totally shocked, genuinely dumbfounded, he said he saw no sign of any of this. The owner of the store that sold the killer some of the rifles said he passed the government-mandated background check when he was in the store.”

Everything that Kimmel said is accurate. In other words, all of the well-thought-out policies that have been signed into law throughout the years didn’t prevent a depraved individual from killing 59 people. What are the odds that hastily-written new legislation will stop the next depraved individual from killing dozens of people? Passing new laws will help people feel better about themselves because they didn’t just do nothing but it won’t stop the next killer with a death wish.

Kimmel continued:

He wasn’t on any watch list. He didn’t seem to have been a religious or political extremist. Came out of nowhere. Because of that, because there weren’t any of the usual signs, I’ve been reading comments from people who say, “This is terrible, but there’s nothing we can do about it.” But I disagree with that intensely. Because of course there’s something we can do about it, there’s a lot of things we can do about it.

I’d love hearing Kimmel explain what we could do that would’ve stopped this mad man. Disagreeing intensely might feel therapeutic for a minute but it isn’t a solution.

The point I’m attempting to make is that we’ve been down this path more times than I’d care to admit. Within minutes of a horrific massacre, Democrats insist that we need new laws. Their policy prescription is virtually always the same thing: universal background checks, banning assault weapons, large capacity clips and bump stocks, banning people with mental disorders from purchasing weapons.

Why do we always go after a maniac’s tools rather than going after the maniac? Why don’t we attempt to identify the maniacs more proficiently? Why don’t we attempt to be a more virtuous society that strives to live up to higher ideals?

I’m tired of getting lectured by the Jimmy Kimmels of the world. I’m tired of people who try treating the symptoms rather than fixing the disease. Attempting to take a maniac’s tools away is a fool’s errand. If history has taught us anything, it’s that depraved individuals will invent new tools to kill with.

On 9/11, terrorists used box cutters and airplanes to kill 3,000 people. In the 1990s, Timothy McVeigh used a truck and some fertilizer to bring down the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. The point is that terrorists will always invent new ways to kill people. Anyone thinking that it’s possible to eliminate evil from the world isn’t dealing from a full deck of cards.

This article features a tweet from a “community college professor” who tweeted “I’m not wishing for it…but I’d be ok if #BetsyDevos was sexually assaulted. #SexualAssault #TitleIX”.

The professor’s name is Robert Ranco. He’s “currently an adjunct Professor of Paralegal Studies at Austin Community College, where he teaches the ‘Advanced Research and Writing’ class. He is also a member of The Carlson Law Firm.” What type of disgusting person would make a statement like that? Here’s hoping that Professor Ranco doesn’t have his contract renewed. Saying that you’re ok with a person getting sexually assaulted is about as disgusting as it gets.

Later, Professor Ranco tweeted “Yes, @twitter. My words were harsh. I don’t wish harm on anyone. I wish there’s some way #BetsyDevos would understand and care about others.” Rather than stop there, Ranco tweeted “Twitter trolls are now due process experts! Priceless. #TitleIX” If that isn’t dripping condescension, it doesn’t exist. Why does Professor Ranco think it’s beyond Twitter users’ ability to understand one of the foundational principles of the Constitution? Here’s another of Professor Ranco’s tweets:

While I don’t know this for certain, I’d say there’s a 90+ percent chance that Ranco is a Democrat. First, he’s a lawyer. Next, he’s a college professor. While that doesn’t guarantee that he’s a Democrat, it’s still highly likely that he’s a bitter Democrat.

Berkeley’s mayor is getting called out in Allahpundit’s post. In his post, AP quotes Mayor Arreguin as saying “I don’t want Berkeley being used as a punching bag. I’m very concerned about Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter and some of these other right-wing speakers coming to the Berkeley campus, because it’s just a target for black bloc to come out and commit mayhem on the Berkeley campus and have that potentially spill out on the street. I obviously believe in freedom of speech, but there is a line between freedom of speech and then posing a risk to public safety. That is where we have to really be very careful; that while protecting people’s free-speech rights, we are not putting our citizens in a potentially dangerous situation and costing the city hundreds of thousands of dollars fixing the windows of businesses.”

Actually, it isn’t obvious that Mayor Arreguin believes in free speech. I’d argue quite the contrary, in fact. It’s obvious that Mayor Arreguin is letting thuggish rioters like Antifa cast a ‘rioters veto’, thereby chilling the exercise of free speech.

If Mayor Arreguin wants to restore free speech to Berkeley, he should take a page out of President Trump’s immigration handbook. Before President Trump took office, Fox News interviewed Sen. Schumer. One of the topics discussed was building the wall. Sen. Schumer insisted that Democrats wouldn’t budge on building the wall, that they’d insist on “comprehensive immigration reform” instead. I said at the time that Schumer was blowing smoke because Jeff Sessions could stop Sen. Schumer in his tracks simply by enforcing the law.

The point is that Gen. Sessions’ enforcement and President Trump’s belligerent tone on immigration, illegal immigration has slowed to a trickle. The point Mayor Arreguin should take from this is simple: If you’re willing to enforce the law and dangle the possibility of stiff prison sentences in front of Antifa, the conditions on the ground shift pretty dramatically. BTW, forget about expensive fines. They won’t work because Soros is willing to pay the fines.

Enforcement is the only way to restore free speech in Berkeley or any other place where Antifa threatens to cast a rioter’s veto. If they know you’re serious, they’ll stop. If they don’t stop, then they’ll be thrown in prison for a lengthy stay. According to this TV segment, there was a standoff between law enforcement and Antifa:

The reporter then said that law enforcement “withdrew.” If Mayor Arreguin wants to be seen as a wimp who won’t defend his citizens’ civil rights, then he should be impeached, then immediately thrown out of office without his pension. When rioters threaten citizens’ civil rights, it’s time to take action.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,