A Good Ol’ Gal With A Gun

A  South Carolina woman kills an escaped inmate who had just kicked down her back door:

The inmate was still in his orange jail jumpsuit and had grabbed a knife sharpening tool from the woman’s kitchen in Pickens as he headed toward her bedroom around 3 a.m. Tuesday, Pickens County Sheriff Rick Clark said.

“This was a big guy. If she hadn’t had a weapon there’s no telling what would have happened,” Clark said. “I gave her a big hug. I told her how proud I was of her.”

I’m trying to imagine any Metro area chiefs of police who’d do that.

Bruce McLaughlin Jr., 30, died from a gunshot to the head, Pickens County Coroner Kandy Kelley said.

McLaughlin and a second inmate, Timothy Dill, beat up two guards in an escape they had planned for days, Clark said at a news conference.

I’m not gonna call it a “Happy Ending” – killing someone is the second-worst possible outcome.

But the worst – a dead victim – is far, far worse.

Too bad gun control activists would prefer women like that to shut up and get raped to death.

Serious

Joe Doakes from Como Park notes that if we’re really serious about climate change…:

Climate scientists insist we must stop driving petroleum powered vehicles.  Public health officials are worried about an epidemic of childhood obesity.  Cities want heavy vehicles off the streets to reduce wear.

Seems to me there is one common solution.

Ban school busses.

And we should ameliorate schools’ huge carbon footprints by making homeschooling mandatory…

…oops.  Went too far.

How The Other Half Fumes

Many years ago, I went out on a date with a woman who was a pretty “out” DFLer.  Public employee union member, second generation DFL activist (at least), and predictably emotion-driven in her approach to all things political.

We went out 3-4 times – “dates” that almost always involved being out with quite a number of her friends, and an amazing paucity of one on one conversation.

Nonetheless, when “fish or cut bait” time came along, she said “I’m just not sure I can trust you to be kind”.

Bear in mind, nothing about me or my senses and practice of kindness, charity or anything of the sort had ever come up.  But my conservatism had.  Literally, the only thing she knew about me was the stereotypes she had of conservatives.

It was, if unwittingly, one of the nastiest things anyone’s ever said to me.

I thought about that when reading this New York Magazine piece about women who are abandoning relationships and marriages in a flurry of “Lifetime Network”-caliber pique and huff…

…Because Trump.

David Thompson fisks one of the interview subjects to a fine sheen – go and read it – but that was by no means all:

[the writer] goes on to share other tales of bedlamite sorrow. A woman named Samantha complains that her husband of 25 years, a fellow lefty, has “much less rage” than she does, specifically about “white privileged men,” and doesn’t wish to spend every evening equally infuriated by the existence of people whose politics differ somewhat. “Anger,” says Samantha, is her “de facto mode.” Though she’s trying to “get rid of it through therapy.”

A Brooklynite named Betsy boasts that “cultural change is like a steamroller. It flattens distinctions, and some people will get hurt,” by which she means men falsely and maliciously accused of rape, before adding, “and I’m okay with that.” Betsy and her husband are currently in counselling.

Another lady named Sarah tells us that her marriage became unsustainable “after the 2016 election, when I ramped up my political activism.” Sarah’s husband is described as “completely aligned” politically, a feminist, even, albeit one who doesn’t care to spend every waking hour raging about politics. “Talking about the Trump election,” says Sarah, “makes me more emotional than the end of my marriage.” And presumably, more emotional than the thought of her children losing the stability and reassurance of a family structure. But hey, priorities.

It’s not a new, original observation to say that progressivism is to the left what faith is to the cultural right.  Far from it.

But some parts of “progressivism” are becoming downright cult-like.

SIDE NOTE to Minnesota Republicans fussing about “Sharia Law”:   Progressivism will destroy this nation long, long before anything else will.

The Next Tilt

Is O’Rourke the candidate to beat for the Dems, next time around?

Former Rep. Robert “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX) has been meeting with former President Barack Obama. A meeting of these two minds makes a great deal of sense. In Obama, the Democrats found a blank slate candidate on whom voters could project their wishes and dreams and he won two terms. In O’Rourke, the Democrats may have found the answer to their struggles in Texas. And if they can even become competitive in Texas, national politics will shift in the Democrats’ favor. Democrats see 2020 as an opportunity to topple President Trump.

Two years is a long time in politics, but at the same time it’s no time at all. The 2020 primaries are just over a year away. Any serious candidate for president in 2020 must be laying the groundwork now if they have not already started. They must be looking at building campaign staff, and they must have money in the bank or proven access to money.

Read the whole thing

 

Lie First, Lie Always: Nancy Nord Bence’s Unbroken Streak!

It’s not quite a “Berg’s Law”, since it only pertains to a few groups, most particularly “Protect” Minnesota – the voice of the gun control movement in Minnesota – but it’s getting close.

Let be say this as clearly and unequivocally as I can:

“Protect” Minnesota has never made a single statement about guns, gun violence, gun laws, the 2nd Amendment, or law-abiding gun owners that is simultaneously substantial, original and true [1].  

Not one. 

Doesn’t matter if it was Heather Martens, or Nancy Nord Bence, or any of their constantly-rotating stream of lobbyists, lieutenants and creepy hangers-on; it’s still true.

Not one single statement that is simultaneously substantial, original and true. 

Case in point:  their “coverage” of the episode a few weeks ago where a (WHITE!  MIDDLE AGED!) Eden Prairie man got into a scuffle with a bunch of reportedly Somali teens at a gas station.

This was their first response to the story, going back a bit.

Now, I’ve been watching the story as well.  We don’t know much about the story, but we know a few things:

First – the man had no Minnesota carry permit.   Thank goodness.

Second – while the laws about displaying and threatening the use of lethal force are even more vague in Minnesota than the ones about the use of lethal force, it is under some circumstances legal to “brandish” a firearm to make a potential threat go away.    The law – a mixture of vague statute and very specific case law – is muddled and specific; while the juridprudence on the subject might not be designed to be a transfer of wealth from taxpayers to prosecutors, and from people to defense attorneys – but if they had set out to design such a system, it wouldn’t look a lot different.

Third – for purposes of my point, the actual behavior of the “Somali teens” doesn’t matter; they may have been utterly blameless (although groups of teenagers, especially with adolescent boys showing out for the girls, are pretty much always small, demented mobs no matter their ethnicity; given that the news reports mention nothing about their behavior, I’m doing to assume there’s something to hide).  So with that said – the video from Channel 4 seems to show that the man tried to retreat as the group of “teenagers” harried him.

Which means it’s not a “Stand Your Ground” case.

The guy may or may not have reasonably feared for his life and safety, thus possibly justifying brandishing a firearm – that, it seems, will be decided at trial.

Someone needs to tell the howler monkey – likely the gaffe-prone, not-especially-fact-obsessed Nord Bence:

As usual when “P” M makes a statement?   No.  This case wouldn’t be any different at all.

Why?

As we’ve pointed out countless times on this blog, there are four criteria you need to meet under current Minnesota law to use lethal force in self-defense; you have to reasonably  fear immediate death or great bodily harm, you can’t be the aggressor, you can only use the force needed to end the threat, and you have a duty to make a reasonable effort to retreat.

“Stand your ground” merely removes that last clause when you are anyplace you have a legal right to be.  Including McDonalds.

It doesn’t remove the other three criteria!

Was he in immediate life-threatening danger?    Was he the aggressor?  That’ll be decided at trial.

But – let me find the “Bold” button for emphasis:

He retreated!     He backed away from the “teens”!   Was it a “reasonable” effort to do so?  We’ll see what the jury decides.

But “Stand Your Ground” was not, and would never be, an issue in this case.

And if you get your information from “Protect” Minnesota, about this or any other case, you are not only less informed, but you’re participating in making our society dumber on this issue.

Continue reading

White Liberal Gilt

A friend of the blog writes:

Those young, progressive, priveleged white men who fight their older progressive, priveleged counterparts are just so entertaining. Here, the new executive director of Union Park District Council is essentially calling some of the people in Union Park racist because they are opposing large development projects in their backyards.

He, and other young progressives, cry about lack of affordability (for some other group of unknown people), while they live in their single family homes in Mac Groveland or Highland Park (as is the case for this director.) Thinking about affordability, I wonder how these young, just out of college people afford their houses in neighborhoods like Mac Groveland or Highland Park. Thinking about racism, I wonder why these young, privileged white people chose those neighborhoods instead of the more transit connected, affordable neighborhoods in the city…

Urban Progressive Privilege – when nobody who matters in your social and vocation circle will ever call you on “inconsistencies” like this.

I’ve found that the correlation between these young non-profiteers and old Saint-Paul-DFL money is really, really high.

I Always Suspected…

… that this was how the world of fashion worked

Payless’ recent marketing campaign tricked fashion influencers into paying significantly more for a pair of affordable shoes. The retailer created a new store, called Palessi, as an experiment to see just how much fashion-forward people would pay to have high-end shoes...Those that attended the exclusive party paid between $200 and $600 for Payless shoes that typically run up to $40. Payless, as Palessi, sold $3,000 worth of shoes in hours within the opening.

“I would pay $400, $500,” said one influencer. “People will be like ‘where did you get those?’”

Other influencers remarked on the look of the shoes, the quality of the material, and were overall impressed by the Payless shoes.

The discount shoe company “wanted to push the social experiment genre to new extremes, while simultaneously using it to make a cultural statement,” Doug Cameron, DCX Growth Accelerator’s chief creative officer, told Adweek.

My entire life, I have suspected the “fashion and put industry was built entirely on exploiting gullibility, herd mentality and insecurity.

The GOP Dumbass Bigot Caucus

GOP precinct in Texas is working on removing a high-ranking officer…

Because he’s Muslim :

 Republican leaders in one of the most populous counties in Texas want to remove a party vice chairman because he’s Muslim, according to emails between party leaders.

The emails delivered anonymously to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram indicate the Tarrant County GOP executive committee plans to vote Jan. 10 on whether to remove Shahid Shafi from his leadership position.

Some in the party say Shafi, a surgeon and city council member in a Fort Worth suburb, may be more loyal to Islamic law or not supportive enough of the party’s pro-Israel platform.

Shafi counters that he supports American laws and the court system, and says he has no affiliation to “any terrorist organization,” as some have alleged. Shafi, who became a U.S. citizen in 2009 and shortly after joined the Republican Party, says he supports the Second Amendment and has never promoted Sharia, or Islamic, law.

Members of the Republican Party’s burgeoning “Dumbass Bigot Caucus” would respond by claiming “every Muslim in the universe obeys every “Hadith” in the Koran to the letter, including the ones about deceiving infidels”, implying that Muslims, regardless of sector or even observance (25% of ethnic/cultural Muslims are non-observant) adhere to their holy texts absolutely, without question and all in the same way, in a way that no other faith does (or perhaps you’ve noticed how not a single Catholic gets divorced or get an abortion, no evangelicals ever root for Notre Dame, and no Jews ever, ever eat pork).

Radical Islam – Wahhabism and radical Shia – and attendant Muslim laws are a threat to western civilization – or at least to weak, fundamentally corrupt and decaying ones, like in Europe. The United States is still, despite the best efforts of progressives, a vibrant, strong, resilient nation, the kind of place people want to come to. We cannot, and will never be, defeated by an external threat – List of all by one that wants to drag humanity back to the seventh century A.D.

Progressivism, on the other hand, is a clear, present, immediate threat to this nation and everything that made it strong, vital and resilient. And this kind of bigotry drives pro-life, pro free market, pro second amendment, pro constitutional, people who happen to be Muslim straight into the arms of the progressives.

It is – I’ll be diplomatic – cripplingly shortsighted, and the kind of thing that needs to be expunged from the party.

The Invisible Trigger Finger

Dick’s Sporting Goods signals virtue, drops all “AR”-pattern rifles from its inventory, accompanied with a tsunami of smug.

Shooters groups promise a boycott.

The boycott works:

Dick’s Sporting Goods took a firm, anti-gun stance. Oh, it’ll still sell guns, but it’ll only sell “approved” guns, the kind that anti-gunners generally pretend are fine. At least until they get around to demanding those be banned too.

When Dick’s made its announcement that it would not sell AR-15s at any of its stores going forward and that it would discriminate against legal adults looking to buy long guns, gun rights advocates called for a boycott. It was answered. So much so that the company has been reeling from the lost revenues.

It’s now to the point that the company is considering cutting out all of its hunting merchandise.

The CEO for the sporting goods retailer said Thursday that the company was doing a trial run in 10 locations, pulling all hunting merchandise and replacing it with other items.

“Though it’s too early to discuss performance, we’re optimistic these changes will better serve the athletes in these communities,” Dick’s CEO Edward Stack said in a conference call, as reported by JSOnline.

The reason for the new approach may be because sales in that department have plummeted across all of Dick’s 732 stores.

“Specific to hunt, in addition to the strategic decisions made regarding firearms earlier this year, sales continued to be negatively impacted by double-digit declines in hunt and electronics,” said Lee Belitsky, chief financial officer.

By “strategic decisions” Belitsky is referring to the company’s announcement in the wake of the February massacre in Parkland, Florida that it would no longer sell guns to adults under the age of 21 and that it would not only stop selling but destroy its existing inventory of modern sporting rifles at its 35 Field & Stream locations.

The grabbers can buy o=all the media they want – but they don’t control the market.

Which is, of course, why they’re trying to destroy the market.

Fet Ish

British “socialist dominatrix” claims to turn “white, right wing” men into socialists.

For many of her clientele, who are almost exclusively white right-wing men because she finds herself unable “to be even fictionally cruel to any other type of man,”

Of course they are, and of course she does.

that fetish is serving a powerful woman. Maybury derives her pleasure comes from forcing those men to see the contradiction between their love of powerful women and their support for political parties that actively work to limit women’s rights and empowerment. In her book, Dining with Humpty Dumpty, she detailed conversations with a man she said exhibited the “disgusting contradiction” of claiming to be both “a ‘female supremacist’ and a Tory.’”

A cursory Google search of Ms. Maybury shows no indication that she’s actually successfully “converted” anyone, but that she is the sort of D-list pseudo-academic (but increasingly, academic) “celebrity” that does pop up on NPR “arts and culture” programming often enough to get talked about…

…and this post would indicate it worked.

Some of my “progressive” friends over the weekend were chortling over this one, naturally, the way they usually do over this sort of pseudo-story.

My first reaction:  it says more about the nature of socialist men than about “right wing white” guys; they make Pajama Boy look like Chuck Norris.

The second?   This is such a complement to Berg’s Seventh Law that I am inaugurating a new one:  The Maybury Corollary to Berg’s Seventh Law.  To wit:  When a “progressive” makes a mocking or defamatory pronoucement about the deviance, depravity, deceit, dissipation or lack of a conservative’s sexuality, it is invariably a combination of their own insecurities and what they desperately want to believe about those who believe differently than them.

Progs want to believe that all it takes to convert a conservative male into a socialist…er, being is a little highly-stylized pseudo-sex from a modern pseudo-academic phrenologist.

And perception is reality, among the “evidence-based” set.

But it’s called Berg’s Law for a reason.

Boogie Finger

The world has fairly erupted with tribute (and a little abuse) for President George HW Bush, who passed away over the weekend after 94 exceedingly eventful years and maybe six months without his wife of seven decades, Barbara.

I have little to add, myself.   His presidency coincided with a time where I honestly wasn’t paying much attention to the world around me, and probably even less to what was going on with me.

He had, of course, an impossible job – following The Gipper.  He made his mistakes – “Read My Lips!  No New Taxes!” – but ran a fairly capable administration that managed to complete Reagan’s work of dismantling the Berlin Wall,

I got one in my inbox over the weekend that caught my attention.  Sam Moore – of “Sam and Dave” fame.   Moore played Bush’s inauguration party back in 1989:

My wife Joyce and I are personally saddened by the passing of one of the most honorable decent men our country ever had serve as its President.

I had the honor of performing at his 1989 Inaugural concert Joyce co-produced ‘The Celebration for Young Americans’, his and Barbara’s 50th wedding anniversary celebration, where The Oak Ridge Boys helped celebrate them, The Points of Light Kennedy Center Concert & Fundraiser and last year’s One America Appeal hurricane relief concert at Texas A & M in College Station.

Our strength and comfort goes out to the entire Bush family who we’ve been fortunate to know, see and feel their collective love and admiration for Papa Bush who has now gone to join the love of his life, Barbara.

Rest in heaven President Bush with Mama and that beautiful little girl you two lost but never forgot, Robin. God speed sir.

As a related note – Bush’s inaugural concert was an amazing event:

 

 

Optics

The Hennepin county attorney’s office has ratcheted up Muhammad Noor’s charge. Way, way up:

Prosecutors said Thursday they are seeking to charge Mohamed Noor with intentional second-degree murder in the death of Damond, who the officer shot and killed in July 2017 after the 40-year-old woman called 911 to report a possible sexual assault in the alley behind her home.

“A person acts with the intent to kill not just when they have the purpose of causing death, but also when they believe that their act, if successful, will result in death,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing. “As a trained police officer, the defendant was fully aware that such a shot would kill Ms. Ruszczyk, a result he clearly intended.”

Does that seem a little – excessive?

While the information available via the news media is most likely incomplete at best, the evidence that Officer Noor rolled up to that call intending to rub out Justin Diamond is exceedingly sketchy.

I’m going to speculate – with a certain amount of information behind the speculation – that that’s because the evidence is extremely sketchy.

There is a reason for that.

The prosecutor has to reach a “beyond a reasonable doubt” verdict to convict the former cop. Given the evidence available, that would seem to be exceedingly unlikely.

Which I am going to assume, is intentional. Overcharging the former policeman, fully intending to fail to meet the “reasonable doubt” threshold, leading to his acquittal and freedom, will accomplish the county prosecutors office’s primary mission: look “aggressive” to an angry public, but preserve the prosecutors office’s relationship with the police department.

Because make know mistake – that relationship is more important to the county prosecutor than the lives of any mere peasants.

For The Children

SCENE:  Mitch BERG is out behind his house, turning his city trash barrel right side up, when Avery LIBRELLE turns down the alley, riding a Lime Bike. BERG can’t escape.  

LIBRELLE:  Merg!   It’s time for comprehensive gun control!

BERG:   Of course it is.  Even though none of it can have any effect on gun violence – none at all – and it violates wholesale the rights of the law-abiding.

LIBRELLE:   Hah!   When I heard about Newtown, I stopped caring about your so-called “rights” (makes scare quotes as h…er, sh…er, as LIBRELLE says “Rights”)

BERG:  You did, huh?

LIBRELLE:  Yep!

BERG: For the children?

LIBRELLE:  Yes!

BERG: I hear and understand you completely, Avery.  I did the same thing.

LIBRELLE:  Er – wait.  What?

BERG:  When I saw pictures of the Holocaust…:

…and what happens to the children when people lose their freedom…

…even – no, especially their children, then I stopped caring about the emotions of people who put the word “rights” in scare quotes.

LIBRELLE:   (Absentmindedly looks down at the control panel on the bike) – Hey, Merg – I ran out of stored money on this bike.  Give me your credit card.

(And SCENE)

Snivel Your Sidewalks. I Mean Shovel. Shovel Your Sidewalks.

After seven nastygrams from the City of Minneapolis, Councilwoman Lisa Bender got her sidewalk shoveled by the city, and a $149 fine to prove it.

Bender – a far-far-far left DFLer famous for compelling the City to clear bike lanes in the dead of winter that nearly nobody uses when the weather is gorgeous – reacted with grace and equianimity.

Of course I’m kidding.  She’s accusing the Strib of mansplaining.

Er, manshovelling.

Anyway, she’s accusing the Strib:

And…Trump!

Jeremiah Ellison is a permanent city payroll receiver. Er, I mean, city council…well, it’s a distinction without a difference.

Trump Trump Trump!

Don’t you peons get it?  TRUMP!  And MANSPLAINING!  MISOGYNY WOMYN KITTY HAT RESISTANCE ANTIFA YOUTUBE PANTSSUIT!

Dang conservative Strib.

Urban Progressive Privilege:  when everything you do can be defended by citing things your opponents never did.

Birds Of A Feather

I don’t believe in “guilt by association”.

On the other hand, I can sense that an off a lot of Democrats, especially in the Twin Cities, are not going to be especially mortified by this development – which would have been considered comical 30, to say nothing of 60 years ago:

published his essay last week at People’s World, a “daily news website of, for and by the 99% and the direct descendant of the Daily Worker.”” data-reactid=”23″ style=”margin: 0px 0px 1em; caret-color: rgb(38, 40, 42); color: rgb(38, 40, 42); font-family: “Helvetica Neue”, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.301961); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none”>

Communist Party chairman John Bachtell published his essay last week at People’s World, a “daily news website of, for and by the 99% and the direct descendant of the Daily Worker.”

“[L]abor and other key social forces are not about to leave the Democratic Party anytime soon,” Bachtell promised. “They still see Democrats as the most realistic electoral vehicle” to fight against perceived class enemies.

Bachtell, 58, is playing the long political game and he has a strategy, he said.

“First, we are part of building the broadest anti-ultra right alliance possible, uniting the widest array of class (including a section of monopoly), social and democratic forces. This necessarily means working with the Democratic Party,” the communist leader explained.

“Second, our objective is not to build the Democratic Party. At this stage we are about building the broad people’s movement led by labor that utilizes the vehicle of the Democratic Party to advance its agenda,” Bachtell further expounded. “We are about building the movements around the issues roiling wide sections of people that can help shape election contours and debates.”

“[W]e are for building movements in the electoral arena and see engagement in the electoral arena and democratic governance as a vital means to further build movements,” Bachtell also said.

But don’t you dare say the Democratic Party has moved to the left!

‘Splain Me This

Ever wonder what the protcol is for explaining things to women, if you’re a man, without being accused of “mansplaining”?

A professor – I know, contain your shock, right – heard your, er, “plea”:

Er, yeah, Ms. Goodwin. I’m sure you did.

Anyway, here’s the chart.

Apparently in Ms. Goodwin’s world, people grow infallible with experience, and should not be questioned by (male) underlings (no word if it cuts both ways – if a woman with less experience should “just stop talking now” when the guy outranks her?

As Dennis Prager says, it takes an elite education to be this stupid…

A Satirical Proposal. Probably.

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

If Democrats honestly believe in global warming, they should insidt we declare war on Canada so we can shift our citizens Northward to survive the Deluge.
 If Republicans honestly believe in global cooling, they should insist we declare war on Venezuela to shift our citizen Southward to escape the glacier.
Bonus. Both have lots of oil to maintain our lifestyle.  This is what a resilience officers ought to be working on.
Or just invade New York, DC and California to curb the efflux of hot air.

Low Expectations

Democrat politicians tend to talk down to black voters, according to Fox News Fox News Fox News!

Sorry.  I mean Yale:

The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences. The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates…There was no difference in Democrats’ or Republicans’ usage of words related to warmth [the mnemonic for “acceptance or friendliness toward people different than  you” – Ed]. “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

Now, we’ve seen these social science polls with amusing (?) partisan results for decades – most of them garbage.  It’s important to know what the methodology that led to the study was:

They designed a series of experiments in which white participants were asked to respond to a hypothetical or presumed-real interaction partner. For half of these participants, their partner was given a stereotypically white name (such as “Emily”); for the other half, their partner was given a stereotypically black name (such as “Lakisha”). Participants were asked to select from a list of words for an email to their partner. For some studies, this email was for a work-related task; for others, this email was simply to introduce themselves. Each word had been previously scored on how warm or competent it appears. The word “sad,” for example, scored low for both warmth and competence. “Melancholy,” on the other hand, scored high for competence and low on warmth.

Participant also completed a variety of measures that assessed how liberal they were.

The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”

Unpleasant surprise.  “Unexpected”, even.

 

 

The Sixty Year Old Strawman

Liberal feminists seem to be perpetually lodged in battle with men from the Mad Men generation…

…er, wherever they are:

Feminist author Jessica Valenti was pretty impressed with a piece in Glamour about a woman who has sworn off cooking for men now that her divorce has come through.

It’s Jessica Valenti, so you know it’s not actually “good”.

But you do know it’s wrenched straight from the little box of cultural cliches that no liberal enters an argument without.

Read the whole thing.  Feel better about your own level of intellectual oomph.

Denied!

Last week, when a middle-aged white man was arrested for waving a gun at some Somali teenagers at a gas station, you could fairly hear the panting fro the anti-gun crowd:  “Please let it be a permit holder!  Please let it be a permit-holder“, they prayed in fractured Unitarian.

Alas, they were denied:

Investigators with the Eden Prairie Police Department applied for a warrant to search Johnson’s property and motor vehicle last week.

The application said investigators have learned Johnson applied for and was granted a firearms permit to purchase in 2011, but as of last week, he does not have a permit to carry in Minnesota. The application also states that he was the suspect in a 2011 assault in which an individual alleged Johnson threatened him with a knife and a gun.

But that case was cleared exceptionally due to lack of victim cooperation.

Now – we can allow for the fact that there is going to be some “he said / they said” in a story like this.  But if this story is accurate, it’d seem Johnson is qualified to be a great example of how not to use a firearm in lawful self-defense (emphasis added)

According to the application, several of the teens reported seeing Johnson pull out a black handgun during the altercation, and begin waving it around during an incident captured on both surveillance video and cell phone video. One reported he felt threatened and believed Johnson was going to begin shooting at him…He too reportedly recorded part of the incident on his cell phone. The application states that video does not show Johnson removing or displaying the handgun, but that he can be heard yelling at the group of teens.

“Just give me a reason,” he can allegedly be heard to say. “Just give me a god damn reason.”

If you’re asking them to give you a reason, a jury’s gonna look at that “immediate danger of death or great bodily harm” requirement for a self-defense claim, and laugh out loud with the judge’s tacit blessing.

But – let’s watch for Nancy Nord Bence and Erin Maye Quade to claim he is a permittee.