Government Failures Cause Kyles- A Guest Post by Francis Turner

Government Failures Cause Kyles- A Guest Post by Francis Turner

The great and the “good” in the US and around the world have been complaining about white supremacy getting a pass thanks to the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse on charges of homicide and so on. As anyone who paid even the slightest attention to the events of August 2020 or the recent trial would know, there is no evidence whatsoever that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist or anything other than an young man with a praiseworthy sense of duty and responsibility.

I’m going to totally ignore all of that (people like Larry Correia have that task firmly in hand) and concentrate on something else, the one place where almost everyone, from the great and good on down to people like me agree: namely that it would have been preferable for Kyle Rittenhouse not to have been patrolling the streets of Kenosha in the first place.

The MSM and the “Liberal” left think he shouldn’t have been there because in their view no one should have objected to the “fiery but mostly peaceful protests”. The rest of us think that is ridiculous but we agree that Rittenhouse and his fellow informal militia members should not have needed to patrol to limit property damage from such “mostly peaceful” protests.

[Aside: it is notable that (almost?) all of the informal militia patrolers seem to have been male. I’m sure that was due to their sexism and nothing to do with the idea of chivalry that strong men protect weaker women… ]

Short of a very small number of willfully ignorant and deluded sorts (e.g. Ayanna Pressley) no one believe that Rittenhouse would have opened fire if the protests had been limited to marches in the street shouting slogans. The one thing that I think even lefties mostly admit, if quietly to themselves, is that Kenosha wasn’t a protest it was a riot. Some of them may consider the riot and property damage to be a legitimate form of protest for something but they do agree that the events in Kenosha the night before and then the night Kyle was on patrol were riots.

So what were the causes of the environment where Kyle felt he should step up and protect property from arsonists, rioters and looters? The quick answer is that the primary causes were “Government” and particularly government policies espoused by progressives/liberals (a.k.a. filthy commies 🙂 ).

Let me explain

The Government Created Kyle – First Strike

Now in normal societies, when there is a riot it is the responsibility of the government to quell it. In Kenosha the government decided not to. We can and should blame the mayor of the town, the governor of Wisconsin – Tony Evers – and so on for that failing. In particular we can blame the governor because it seems he deliberately decided not to send in the National Guard, even though such was offered by President Trump and requested by some local politicians. You may not be surprised to learn that Evers is a Democrat and uttered various nauseating remarks concerning the shooting of George FloydJacob Blake and probably others that I can’t be bothered to go find.

In short the relevant authorities pretty much encouraged the rioting and took no action at all to try and limit the damage the rioters would cause.

Car dealership burning in Kenosha WI, Aug 2020

That is the first way the government created Kyle. If the relevant local government had acted in any kind of way to prevent the riots or provided sufficient personnel to counter the rioters, Kyle would not have felt the need to patrol the streets of Kenosha to protect property from rioters, arsonists and looters. Instead the governor and others made statements that demoralized the police and encouraged the protestors.

If lefties don’t want people like Kyle to patrol the streets of their local towns with weapons to protect themselves and fire extinguishers to put out the fires of arsonists (and in the case of Kyle put out a fire that could otherwise have caused a very large number of casualties) then they should protect the local businesses so that they don’t feel compelled to request protection from militia volunteers.

The Government Created Kyle – Second Strike

But that’s just the first and most obvious failure of (lefty) government. The next most obvious is that governments all across the US have permitted the goons associated with BLM and antifa to riot and burn things. If the authorities in Portland, OR or Seattle, WA or Minneapolis, MN or any number of other places had been willing to use the standard tools of riot control to actually stop the riots and protests there instead of hunkering down and letting their police and themselves be attacked then probably the protests in Kenosha would have been more muted. If nothing else at least some of the protestors would not have been able to be present because they would have been in jail.

But even ignoring those hypothetical jailbirds, I think it is clear that, as anyone who has had the pleasure of housetraining pets, children and the like knows, if you consistently stop them/punish them when they are first bad, they tend not to repeat the experience. See also, for example, the success of the “broken window” policing policy in New York and elsewhere in the 1990s.

Uncle Hugo’s burning in Minneapolis, May 30, 2020

In 2020 Democrat Party state and local government and law enforcement officials all over the USA decided that they should “defund the police” and not react to lawless protests in the name of BLM. Entirely unsurprisingly they got more riots and the the riots and protests were more violent. In places where politicians (generally Republicans) did the opposite the protests were much more limited.

That is the second way the government created Kyle. If governments across had acted to stop riots earlier in the year it is highly likely that any Kenosha protests would have been a lot less damaging and thus there would have been no need to for him to patrol.

The Government Created Kyle – Third Strike

Now let’s step back and discuss the individuals Rittenhouse shot. All three had criminal records, but I think it is fair to say that the first one was the worst. Rosenbaum was a registered sex offender who had served time for pedophile offences. According to a reddit post those sex offences were way more than what was admitted to in court

That ignores the more recent Wisconsin accusations of assault, battery and domestic violence as well as the process crimes relating to his evading the court mandated monitoring and the like.

If there were any sanity to the US Justice system, if he wasn’t still in prison for his 2002 offences he should have been slammed back in there permanently as soon as he assaulted his girlfriend in 2016.

[Aside: in an ideal world he’d simply have been executed in 2003. A lot of suffering would have been averted if he had]

The other two rioters shot by Rittenhouse were slightly less despicable but both they, and Freeland the “jump-kick man” who attacked Rittenhouse and escaped without being injured when Rittenhouse shot at him, had long criminal records. If the two survivors died today the world would likely be a better place. Neither Huber – the second person Rittenhouse killed – nor the two of them show(ed) any sign of becoming anything other than violent criminals. Much the same, by the way, also applies to Jacob Blake whose shooting while resisting arrest was the cause of the riots. Indeed he and Huber seem to share the charming habit of domestic abuse and both quite likely believe(d) they can continue to rape or beat women who become their girlfriends.

A proper criminal justice system would ensure that people like this would either be jailed for their repeat offences and/or be clear that a subsequent repeat offence (such as trying to burn down a gas station) would result in their incarceration for a considerable period of time. It is my belief (see housetraining) that consistently applied rules will not just dissuade the person in question but also others who get to observe their fate

That is the third way the government created Kyle, by not properly punishing repeat criminals who therefore felt free to continue their lives of crime and to take part in a riot.

The Government Created Kyle – Fourth Strike

The fourth way the government created Kyle was in the social services and educational systems that failed in the cases of Blake and all of the people Kyle shot at.

Rosenbaum was apparently abused himself as a child. I’m not entirely clear if this was after he was put in the foster care system or before (or both) but his experience in that system does not appear to have been a positive one. That doesn’t excuse his own abuse of minors but it may be a partial explanation.

Now you can argue that the government does its best and so on, but the fact is that government has more or less put non-governmental competitors for fostering/adoption and so on out of business. In a few cases where abuse was a standard occurrence that may have been a good thing (though child abuse in government care/foster schemes is also rampant – see all those UK “grooming” scandals) but in many others it wasn’t. About 50 years ago it was relatively easy to adopt a child in the US, in the last thirty or so it has become so hard that infertile couples are forced to adopt from foreign countries. It seems quite likely to me that Rosenbaum would have been adopted by some family in the 1960s or 1970s and it is certainly far from impossible that such a hypothetical adoption would have resulted in Rosenbaum growing up to be a useful contributor to society instead of a perennially homeless abuser of children and women.

The others may not have had that level of dysfunction in their personal families but they all had the “benefit” of government provided education. For some reason that education failed to teach them anything about the difference between protests and riots, the ability to critically evaluate reports to find out if they might be biased, or indeed much regarding civic, ethics and morality. Somehow, and one assumes this was due to his (apparently separated) parents and their acquaintances, Kyle Rittenhouse turned into an honorable, civic-minded young man. The others did not.

This is the fifth reason why Government is to blame. The Government has put much of the competition for education and childcare out of business through a combination of regulations and taxes. And has, in place of them, provided an inferior product that doesn’t serve the inmates assigned to it or society at large.

So lovers of government, if you don’t want anymore Rittenhouses patrolling the streets maybe you get the government to do its job right and not fail. 

215 thoughts on “Government Failures Cause Kyles- A Guest Post by Francis Turner

  1. The rioters didn’t loot Uncle Edgar’s and Uncle Hugo’s. They looted other places, but the bookstores? They just burned them to the ground.

    The Fourth Strike is the most worrisome to me. If you don’t teach children to read, they become adults who are easily enslaved. The evil of our government school system is being exposed. I hope it’s not too late.

    1. They specifically targeted the bookstores. Don’t think otherwise for a moment. Those riots were highly organized and their leaders were highly trained. They went after bookstores for the reasons that all communists/socialists do – they hate books, they hate education, they hate anything that might allow a man to think for himself.
      All of these riots were DNC funded, backed, and controlled. That’s why we haven’t seen any since Bidet took office. That’s why we will see them again, should anyone to the right of Stalin gain office.
      A hundred years from now historians will be teaching about this and people will go around asking ‘how come they didn’t see what was happening?’ and ‘Why didn’t they know?’

      1. I won’t argue that the riots were organized, at least they bussed in agitators to lead them. After that, nah. Let’s not endow them with competence they don’t deserve. Taking a course on Marx does not competence make.

        These idiots couldn’t find their arse with both hands. When Biden took over the US was a net exporter of oil, now he’s releasing the strategic reserve. Best thing, price of oil is up, sharply, this morning. First, they only released about one day’s usage and second, he’s depleted the emergency supply to cover a transitory political problem. It shows they’re weak. But, if there’s an actual emergency, there’ll be no reserve. They’re stupid and incompetent. Vicious, yes, but still stupid and incompetent children.

        1. Don’t ignore the blatantly obvious. Those riots had leaders who were under the control of offsite operators. That’s why there were drones flying over head and observing the scene. That’s why there were radio comm links on the the people telling the rioters what to do. That’s why there were messengers on bicycles running around.
          These were highly controlled and highly coordinated. The bookstores weren’t looted because normally rioters ignore them. No, command and control targeted them specifically and had them torched.
          And don’t forget those people were being paid.

          1. There’s the for-me hearsay of brick shipments.

            Basic and key thing proving coordination: why the coincidences involving timing and location?

            That anti-fa and BLM were together, and carried out the arsons attributed to white supremacists, /or/ the white supremacists were brought in by the same people bringing in BLM, is that we never saw the white supremacists committing arson in places where BLM was not. If it was actual white supremacists, you would expect a few black churches burned down in rural areas without any BLM presence at all.

            Likewise, why did BLM never riot and commit arson where Republican authorities would stop them, or prosecute them after the fact?

            At some level, the riots were definitely coordinated. At a minimum, they had organization ensuring that coordinators would only approve actions in locations where they could deniably verify the support of mayor, governor, and DA. Also, they avoided locations with, say, Democrat mayors, but due to the nature of the state a certainty of facing armed resistance. Kenosha was a location where they thought they were safe.

            And it wouldn’t have seemed unsafe if they weren’t using activists/brownshirts who were wildly overconfident and much less tactically aware than Rittenhouse.

            1. I don’t think they avoided places with Democrat mayors. Certainly Portland, Chicago, Minneapolis, and most other cities with “mostly peaceful demonstrations” are Democrat controlled.

              1. I badly arranged the clauses of that sentence.

                Democrat mayors of cities in Red States, where the general population is armed and less terrorized into submission.

            2. Ordinary street crime responds to punishment as well. Indeed, the most important factor is the percentage of crimes that lead to arrest, and the percentage that lead to convictions.

          2. Riots don’t work that way. I’m going to claim lived experience here since I’ve been involved in riots. I spent a fair amount of time in Belfast and Derry. Once the burning starts, everything burns. Fire is fun and exciting.

            Sure there were outside “agitators” and all the command and control was about them not being taken and looking for police. They surely wanted burning but what burned doesn’t matter. The rioters would have burned stuff in any case, that’s what rioters do.

            I don’t believe that a group of proven incompetents have suddenly become ultra-sophisticated political masterminds.

            1. Yeah, but what if this is military action by a para-military?

              Do you have lived experience with a foreign organized insurrection sponsored by an extremist political faction?

              1. Umm, i lived in county Antrim. We had to leave when they told my dad “you’re for lifting.” I still have a lot of family there. The IRA is a foreign organized insurrection sponsored by an extremist political faction, whatever the rank and file might have been the leadership were all Marxist Leninists and no sentimental US exile BS changes that.

                I’ve been on both sides of the riots in NI. I’ve been in Greece when they decided to burn the office I worked in, I’ve been in Jakarta when they blew up the hotel I was in and then the riots that accompanied the Asian Financial crisis, I lived through the NYC blackout when they looted whole sections of town and grew up around the cops who dealt with that and the King riots in NYC.

                Sorry Bob, I know all too much about riots.

                  1. No worries.

                    I do believe we have to stop giving them so much credit, they don’t deserve it. Lenin (e.g.,) didn’t take power, he simply took the tram, sat down in the office, and started having people shot. The key is avoiding the breakdown that makes that possible.

            2. These riots weren’t just random people from the hood. ALL of the rioters were BUSED IN. ALL of them. They had uniforms, they were paid, they were in large groups. Sure you’re going to pick up a few locals here and there, but 90 percent came on buses as a group. With coordinators, leaders, etc.
              This isn’t belfast, not at all. This isn’t a few yobs in a small town. These are hundreds of people, marching in lockstep, well supplied, new gear, etc. They’re attacking cities. With large populations.

              1. I’m sorry, I simply don’t agree and if you think Belfast wasn’t an organized insurgency then, well, I got nothing. Over 3500 people were killed. Roughly 2000 by the Republicans, 1000 by the loyalists and 500 by the army. The cities are partitioned and the British issued campaign medals and gallantry crosses for it. They lost more men in NI than they did in Afghanistan.

                I lost my bloody home over it.

                Antifa might become something, might. Even assuming your data are correct and I’ve heard different, it takes more than bussing in a bunch of thugs in matching Walmart wear for a little looting and burning while backed by the party in power who called off the police. I will not brag about the IRA even though, technically, they’re my tribe but let’s see how antifa does when opposed before we make a judgement about how bloody good they are.

                let’s see how they perform under fire, let’s see how they deal with prison, let’s see them do something complicated, something other than burn random buildings while the police are called off. Nah they’re a bunch of spoiled children playing at terrorism and a few street thugs. They can do damage, vicious children often do, but an organized insurgency? BS.

                I’m sorry, but this really pisses me off.

        2. I understand your reasoning and your motivation, but you are misinformed about Antifa. I’ve known some of the people involved (not at the brick-throwing level, or even the running-around-with-radios level–a level or two above, such that I doubt many of them actually travel to these events anymore). I don’t know whether the loot/don’t loot and burn/don’t burn decisions are made in an organized fashion, but they definitely have the organizational competence to make those decisions and have them followed.

          By the way, when I went to the Uncle Hugo’s website, it has a sidebar for signed books and Larry Correia is right at the top of the list. I don’t know anything about the business, but perhaps they were judged to be insufficiently woke.

          1. I haven’t denied they can start a riot, bus people in, pile up bricks, etc., I suppose they could target something in particular. Beyond that, what exactly? The point was made that they were targeting specific targets for burning and I objected that riots simply don’t work that way. Once the burning starts what gets burned is by chance. Further, they’re supposed to be this multi tentacled organized cabal who are putting in carefully planned operations. These idiots are simply opportunists and I include Soros whose career I have studied in great detail.

            In any case, how much planning does it take to riot in a state led by Evers, or Inslee or Cuomo or any of the other Hitler youth? Nope, they simply stepped into a vacuum.

            1. All it really needs is one person who has instructions. Burn this building. The rest of the riot can run “riot.”

              My mother was in Detroit in the 60’s when the riots broke out. She said you could see people going from one group to another, after which the group would explode into anger and that same person would move on to others.

            2. Targeting what *must* be burned and not controlling what else burns are both possible. It may be hard to stop a particular place from burning once a riot starts, but it shouldn’t be that hard to start a fire in a particular place once the mob is in the area.

            3. I think the people involved in Antifa at the planning level are unwise. I think there is something very wrong with them. I can tell you that they are not idiots, and they are not simply opportunists. They are smart, and they are committed. I can tell you that from first-hand knowledge. I know it’s comforting to pretend otherwise, but ignore that information at your peril.

              Like I said, I do not have information to say that particular businesses are burned on purpose, or that some are not burned on purpose. But I do know that Antifa has the organizational competence to do so if they choose. That doesn’t make them omnipotent–it’s merely the operational competence of your average organized crime syndicate.

              1. I agree they should be taken seriously, after all a bunch of savages in the mountains managed to defeat the US and another bunch of savages in Iraq inflicted too many casualties. A bunch of ignorant savages here could do a great deal of damage. One should never underestimate one’s enemies. One shouldn’t over estimate them either.

                Have you looked at the polling results among blacks? I’d almost wonder if Antifa were a Republican front except the republicans are, if anything, stupider than the other crowd.

                That said, and along with the theme of the,post. Antifa can be as committed as they want only so long as they are encouraged to exist and so Long as their “opponent” is Evers or Inslee or Cuomo or Biden or any of that crowd. They’re the problem. Antifa is just a symptom.

                1. Antifa structurally cannot operate in a non-permissive environment. One of the goals of the Democrats (and, I suspect, some Republicans) is to create as many permissive zones in the U.S. as possible. Austin tried, but they were beaten back. Houston is trying now. So yes, the greater enemy is the politicians who create the permissive environment but I assure you that if you happen to be in one of those zones then Antifa is a problem that grabs one’s attention.

                2. Shortly after St. George Floyd died, BLM and company tried to do a peaceful demonstration in downtown Flyover Falls. It’s a pretty red city in a very red county in Oregon. There were enough notices given that the downtown business people showed up that evening with their AR 15s. They also invited their friends to help out, complete with still more AR-15s, and I presume the occasional shotgun. It *was* a peaceful demonstration, and not repeated.

                  OTOH, in September, 2020, Antifa/BLM tried a new tactic–arson. One damaging fire (the 242) was set at the Collier State Park (and logging museum), and it destroyed a lot of stuff/ (Including trees. SMH) I am not sure what the status of the museum is, I *think* it was largely spared, but I assume it was the intended target. (How Dare You celebrate logging? Says the person buying 2 x 4s…) A similar fire was started near $TINY_TOWN (and I gather, several other communities in eastern Oregon), but ours was put out quickly. Several others were set, apparently trying to isolate the passes over the Cascades.

                  This was also concurrent with the arson fire that devastated much of Medford and wiped out a lot of low income households.

                  1. A similar fire was started near $TINY_TOWN (and I gather, several other communities in eastern Oregon), but ours was put out quickly. Several others were set, apparently trying to isolate the passes over the Cascades.

                    This was also concurrent with the arson fire that devastated much of Medford and wiped out a lot of low income households.


                    I get “pat on the head” (the old “you are delusional”) when I mention that these were arson. Get told “No it was the power companies fault. They didn’t shut down when the wind picked up.” Idiots. Not random enough. One I would believe. NOT (essentially) 7, of which 3 that got put out before they blew up, the Collier State fire, and the ones intended to shutdown hwy 20 (Sweet Home), and Hwy 58 (Pleasant Hill/Oakridge). They’d been better off further east to fully shutdown Hwy 126 like the lightening fire in 2003. Least one forget that isn’t counting the fires started out of No Tie, Hwy 126 west, and Territorial Road. This plus the fact that calls and petitions for class action suits against the power companies have 100% dropped off any radar. We are close enough to the Holiday Fire to be still seeing something on this topic.

                    Regarding starting the multiple fires. Their goals appear to be two fold. Isolate the I-5 corridor from the coast and the high desert, and devastate as many rural communities as possible that they couldn’t otherwise punish loot and burn with impunity. They also managed to shutdown I-5 in the south, and I-205 in the north.

                    1. FWIW, they also tried to shut down SR 140, but that fire wasn’t close enough to the highway to shut it down. As memory serves, the closest it came was 3 miles, and the highway was SE of the fire–not the way the winds were going at the time. OTOH, it isolated some nice rural towns, and shut down a lot of access to Crater Lake. There was also some antifa creepazoid who was delivering water to fire crews and starting more fires. At least the water wasn’t poisoned. Idiot posted his exploits on anti-social media.

                      I had to admit that my first thoughts for both Bootleg (400K acres) and Dixie (amost 1M acres) was arson, but the official word on Bootleg was a long term smolder in duff (mayyyyyyybe) and PG&E doing its usual craptastic job at equipment maintenence.

                      Pac Power has caused a few, but they are agressive at clearing trees from the power lines. Ain’t gonna say it’s arson, but it’s arson.

                    2. I forgot about the fire(s) that shutdown Hwy 97 south of La Pine. Don’t think it was related to the one on the N. Umpqua River Hwy. Plus there was a small one somewhere off Hwy 97 between Hwy 97 and La Pine State Park, north of La Pine. Lots of homes in the latter but none affected (we’d had heard. Inlaws home, sold decades ago, is in that area. Hubby’s golf buddy has a VRBO in the same area.) Heard about the southern hwy 97 fire as we were headed to the Waldo Lake cutoff for Hwy 58. And the other one as we hit Oakridge.

                      I agree. I’m not calling it arson, but … arson.

                      We’ve been up the McKenzie now 4 times. Blue River shocked me every time. We’re still seeing a lot of logs come off fire areas (schooling and former occupational hazard, we pay attention). Weyerhouser lands at least. IDK about the USFS.

            4. Word after the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles was that there were people with lists making sure that certain addresses got hit.

              It doesn’t take much work to hit one or two specific addresses during a riot. As the number increases, it gets harder as the manpower (both targets, and useful idiot rioters) gets spread more thinly. But targeting a small number of geographically close locations is certainly doable.

            5. I keep wondering if Soros is a KGB sleeper. “Here. We’ll set you up, you use your talent for investing and you then fund lots of left-leaning groups.”

              1. Nah. What Soros has is a very high risk tolerance, psychopaths often do. It’s what you need to make high stakes all or nothing bets over and over again. He goes on about his analytical process but the people who know him well say that he really trades on gut and that all the analysis comes later to justify what he’s already done.

                Essentially he threw heads several times in a row, had the thrown tails on any of the bets no one here would have heard of him.

              2. We do know that Soros was a Nazi collaborator. He tries to deny it, but the evidence is just as damning as it was in 1945.

          2. Uncle Hugo’s was instrumental in getting Larry Correia his first publishing deal, but I doubt that anyone was so organized as to target that one store. To me the people who started and/or egged on those riots will always be classified as Book Burners on a par with any others in history. That place had been my favorite bookstore for its entire existence.

        1. Yeah, the DNC lost control of that one, but that’s typical for portland. Someone else is controlling them now. And until that person is either bribed or killed, those riots ain’t gonna stop. Portland is a hell hole, it needs to be nuked.

          1. Portland’s PTB are starting to freak out that business travel and tourism has fallen off a cliff. Why they didn’t figure out that letting uncontrolled rioting go rewarded unpunished would have adverse consequences gets into Alice in Wonderland region.

            I believe the following two sentences are both true:
            “A sufficiently advanced form of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.”
            “A sufficiently advanced form of malice is indistinguishable from incompetence.”

    2. There’s another possible motive for burning book stores– that is about the only act of public blasphemy that isn’t praised, sort of like how pedophilia is about the only sexual practice that is publicly taboo.

      There are folks who need to break the rules to get an emotional high– and there just aren’t that many left where they can’t go and do it without being praised by someone.

      1. A professor just got his, her or its 15 minutes by presenting a paper on coping strategies for “Minor-Attracted Persons (MAPs)”. So someone’s trying to take care of the pedos.

        1. They’ve been doing variations on this since at LEAST when I was in middle school– NABLA comes to mind– but it just keeps not sticking.

          Thank God.

        2. Hm… that *does* sound like the SSA support groups, a little, though I dare not look for the paper; it’s possible that he’s going for actually solving the problem, instead of pretending that it’s OK.

          I know I played with the idea of trying to write a character with that defect who realized it was evil, and worked like heck to make sure he didn’t indulge in it.
          (Was in connection to being support for a vampire, who has similar reluctance to indulge in his natural desires because it’s freaking evil.)

          1. Yes, but there’s no evidence that “pretend to be indulging yourself except use dolls” is a sound strategy for reducing appetite. Indeed, it sounds more like “train yourself with dolls and self-excitation, and thus get over your foolish reluctance to commit nasty acts.”

            If the professor really wanted to train people with p*do tendencies to stop being interested in kids that way, there would be a training schedule for tapering off, finding new interests, and getting over all their deepseated psychological problems, ultimately to become functional adults with good moral practices.

            But that doesn’t seem to have been the professor’s plan. At all.

            1. Like I said, I don’t dare go look for the paper, going strictly off of the unusual name for the improper attraction.

              Thank you for reading it– although I’m sorry you’ve got that in your head, now. :shudder:

              The obvious stuff like not BEING places that kids are, doing shopping at times kids won’t, those might be useful. BAsically, avoid temptation.

              Not sure it would be possible to rewire one’s attraction to the point it would be advisable to attempt normal relationships, but engage in training behavior built around the Bad Thing is DEFINITELY not fixing anything.

            2. Well Ackshyualllyyyyyy

              There is evidence that porn (and possibly dolls) reduces the urge to have “real sex” with prostitutes. It isn’t 100% and it certainly produces a few people (men mostly) that can’t distinguish porn fantasy from grim reality and go rape but on average it reduces the appetite for sex with another person. It hasn’t been widely studied for a whole raft of (fairly obvious) reasons but those that have studied it have come to that conclusion

              It is quite likely that the same would apply to “MAP”s

              1. Thing is, all evidence regarding psychology is a bit weak, and bit weird.

                Good experimental design is difficult, sample size is almost always low, and there are always confounding factors. If you are trying to sort out whether something causes A or B, you will get some studies with an excess of people with pre existing A, and some studies with an excess of people with preexisting B, from not being able to measure enough to reliably isolate an initial population that matches theory.

                So, I), parsing psychological data for guesses about what is really true is difficult, and often requires someone who is both grounded/sane and at the same time has a background in both the truth and the utter raving nonsense of the field of Psychology.

                II) The psychology information around sexual behavior may be especially unreliable.

                III) Some types of experiment have ethical issues. Beyond ethics, information that can only be found from such experiments are less likely to be reliable. Because the experimentalists may be unethical, insane, or both, and honesty is a part of ethics. When it comes to any behavior that might result in someone being executed, learning activities that might bias a patient in that direction would be really unethical.

                Even counting only serious professional fields for past events, this guy would be far from the first faculty to be fundamentally confused about whether a statement or research profoundly undermines whether that field can be trusted. In comparison, he may actually come off well, because of psychology rewarding practitioners who do fairly sketchy things, and trust in psychology being perhaps relatively low. 🙂

                1. The psychology information around sexual behavior may be especially unreliable.

                  After being popularized (Kinsey) with the apparent goal of justifying the perversions of the psychologist?
                  Nicely understated.

              2. Besides the obvious desired conclusion problem, the selection and definition issues for creating an even somewhat effective study for that question would be very, very difficult even before the “didn’t get caught” effect came into play.

            3. Banshee,
              Some of the folks appear to have organic brain damage as a cause. Which may or may not be fixable, but behavior training alone would not be a fix. I do agree when it comes to types of behavior training more likely to work.

        3. Was that the professor who was forced to resign? Not feeling good enough to try a web search. I think I have (drumroll, please) A Cold!

  2. Akshully, I’ve been pointing some of this stuff out.

    The thing you haven’t mentioned, is that these are not unheard of tactics for the Democrats, or for the left.

    The example I talk about most is the Tulsa Race Riots. Which the woke facists at the University of Oklahoma went all in on re-branding as a massacre as a prelude to last summer’s riots.

    Basically, replace ‘black man accused of raping a white woman’ with ‘cop accused of murdering a black man’, and the Democrats today are doing the same stuff they did during the ’20s and ’30s. The ‘scholars’ revising history to prevent it from interfering with current efforts know that what the Democrats did during the ’20s and ’30s was wrong. They know that it had very serious long term consequences. They can maybe even infer that perhaps Democrat victories thereafter were not worth the costs. And if they think that political victories are worth what they tell us are the costs when lecturing on systemic racism, they are vile, insane, and deeply incompatible with living at peace in a civil society.

    1. Bob, that’s scary. And it makes a lot of sense.
      And for dessert, we have the president of the NAACP comparing Rittenhouse’s acquittal to the acquittal of the murderers of Emmitt Till in 1955. That level of willful hatred/ignorance/irresponsibility is even scarier.

        1. Thing is, the core enemy does not see a difference.

          They honestly see everything in terms of whose ox is gored, and whether it serves the party, and cannot have a peaceable agreement with us about justice.

          Their version of ‘deciding a case on its merits’ is completely incompatible with our version of ‘deciding a case on its merits’.

          Whenever we fail to bow to the hat on a stick that they wave over this or that event, they experience our behavior as a violation of their norms that is as profound as their behavior is of our norms. They understand that their behavior is hurtful, and do so intentionally, because they are so salty about us not sacrificing to their pagan idols. They feel it is balanced, because they are hurt by our failure to behave as they expect or demand.

          Which makes it possible that the only way to really resolve these disputes will be violence.

        2. A 14-year- old black kid just down from Chicago spoke to (possibly “flirted with,”) a white woman in Mississippi. Her husband and another man kidnapped, tortured and killed him to, presumably, “defend her honor.” The jury acquitted the pair after a very brief deliberation.
          So no, there is no comparison. That the head of the NAACP made one is horrifying.

      1. There’s a reason why, when I came to ATH and started posting regularly, I was already so angry.

        Being opposed to Segregation, thinking that it was serious, permanently staining misconduct, may have been my first serious political conviction. Because the hearsay I had access to growing up, the roots of where it came from, made clear some of what had occurred, and that the tales of discontinuity were certainly not true for every state Democratic Party. And then I started learning about the post ACW terrorism campaign that was seriously intended to fund another civil war.

        Basically, if I were a historian, and had a historical specialty, it would have been American domestic political terrorism, and related politics.

        Pelosi et al. are not so much personally implicated in support for the Segregation era anti-black terrorism. The 1960s and 1970s communist bombing campaigns on the other hand? I have no evidence personally tying them to anything, but that cohort of politicians we know now is pretty unscrupulous about this stuff.

        The reason why I consider self identified Nazis as beyond what I would support in any but the most dire circumstances is not of them being personally complicit in the Holocaust, or fear that a few Nazi elected officials could force through a new Holocaust. The reason is the tactics the NSDAP considered permissible. An organization that looks up to such a historical actor, or which has organizational continuity with such an actor, also thinks such tactics are permissible, and will use them. I strongly dislike such tactics, and my rule of not supporting them extends to the Democrats.

        For me, Trump’s friendliness towards Democrats was a huge and serious issue. It is one thing if you are stuck with a loved Democrat family member, who has yet to misbehave so badly as to justify disowning. It is another thing to invite the /Clintons/ to a wedding. I do regret my failure to realize that the modern Democrats were definitely bad enough that the ‘vote for a nazi against a much worse nazi’ exception that I had originally made available to myself applied, or even that I had left myself that option.

    2. Also, for about 20 years, until recently, David Boren was President of the University of Oklahoma.

      You may have heard of his son, Dan Boren, a Democrat former federal state representative of Oklahoma. Dan Boren has been taking part in the recent Democrat national push. Basically, the NRA’s still current and grossly incompetent leadership had a bunch of pet companies providing services. To succeed in Oklahoma politics, Dan Boren had to pretend not to be hostile to gun control and conservative values. He still was voted out. Despite being a Democrat, the NRA’s leadership was stupid enough to permit Dan Boren to be employed at a key position in their legal services provider. So, most likely at part of the wider Democrat push, Dan Boren was a key man in the Democrat push to shut down the NRA, alleging (probably correctly) that the current NRA leadership was engaging in misconduct. This had curious timing wrt to the NY attorney general carrying out her effort to put the NRA out of business.

      Anyway, the Borens appear to be snakes.

      IIRC, David Boren was a Federal Senator for Oklahoma, and he was definitely Governor. Boren is and was a Democrat. Key item, this was in the 1970s, when Oklahoma politics still included a certain measure of white supremacy, and when the Tulsa Race Riots were not publicly acknowledged. Norman, where the University of Oklahoma is located, has hearsay of anti black policies being present in the 1980s, and the race riots were acknowledged around 2000. (Note that Oklahoma has regional differences, so there are different local narratives in different places.) 2000s are also notable as the time the feds caught up with Gene Stipe/Stipes, and he was sentenced to community service advising the state legislature. Key takeaways might be Oklahoman political corruption, the until recent friendliness between Oklahoma republican and democrat politicians, and that David Boren was clearly comfortable with white supremacism as long as he was profiting from it.

      Boren retired from the university, alleging health reasons. His replacement was Gallogly, a businessman from the oil industry. Within a year, Boren had removed Gallogly with a whispering campaign among the faculty, allegedly involving Gallogly’s discovery of financial irregularities. Part of it seems to have been Boren’s implication in sexual abuse of students, and part of it seems to have been service to the wider Democrat agenda. To get Boren out of the campus offices he had retained after retiring, and to agree to leave without a fuss, the board of regents cut a deal with Boren. Gallogly left, and agreed to leave the question of having the police investigate the charges to his replacement. The replacement was Harroz, previously head of the school of law, and a Boren crony who had worked for him as lawyer in Washington. The police, the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, have not to my knowledge publicly verified the charges.

      Harroz’s other activities at the University of Oklahoma fit into that interesting pattern.

      He continued with Boren’s program of mandating diversity, and making it very clear that the diversity push did not include freedom of speech. To include informing the faculty that the university would not be complying with the state law against teaching CRT, alleging that the university was in favor of academic freedom of speech. A university in favor of freedom of speech would not sanction instructors for using the N word, nor follow that with a bunch of mandatory speech related ‘training’.

      He pushed back against Trump’s order to limit disease transmission by denying visas to international students who were only attending online courses. At the same time, he has been very eager to push Biden’s suggestions about vaccination and masking.

      He cheer-leaded BLM’s terrorism, and the university has advertised student activities involving socialist and activist events that are not matched by right wing equivalents. He has also been pushing for the death sentence of Julius Jones to be reduced.

      Guzman, his replacement as acting head of the school of law, is signatory to that January 12th letter, and Harroz, as a once law faculty, would be expected to be competent to understand the implications of that letter.

      Governor Stitt, a Republican, currently appoints the board of regents on staggered five year terms. In theory, he can fire Harroz through the board. Harroz is taking some measures that are clearly a calculated response to this. Recently, he made a point of celebrating free speech week at the university, stating that freedom of speech was not incompatible with diversity. Which is technically true, but is pretending ignorance, because the University of Oklahoma’s recent diversity push is explicitly anti free speech.

      So, the University of Oklahoma pushing the massacre labeling is not at all an innocent mistake. Also, the Republican governor appointed members of all of the boards of Regents involved have been grossly derelict at every step. Special mention probably must be made of former GOP Governor Frank Keating, who was on the board of regents during some of these decisions, I think maybe appointed by the GOP governor preceding Stitt.

    3. What Bob said – and the Prog-Dems compound the insult by insisting that the parties switched places regarding race in the 1960s sometime.
      And yes, I have had blog commenters insist on this, over and over.

        1. In charity, with fifty plus pairs of parties, it might have happened somewhere.

          I can’t know the politics of the states and territories so well that I can say it didn’t happen in any of them.

          I can know one or more well enough to say that it didn’t happen everywhere.

          The basic questions include i) when would this have happened ii) who moved, who stayed iii) what would their role in the party have been, and what influence would they have had on behavior?

          If you have a certain amount of influence in Faction A, and broker a defection to Faction B, very rarely are you going to negotiate the same or greater influence than you had in your previous faction. So, for a partial switch, one would expect that racist who stayed in the Democratic party would have retained more influence than non-racist former Republicans would have gained. Frankly, amoral power lovers would not have chosen to change parties because of the influence issue, would have been in a position to sideline idealiistic new comers, and are at least as harmful as people with sincere racist convictions. At the voter level, Bubba-Wayne Ramiriez, the bigoty bigot who hates everyone, has pretty much the same impact on behavior, whether he votes one way, the other, or not at all. Individual elected officials come and go a lot, and have little influence after unless they are supplying political resources. Political resources, technicians and activists have much more influence, and can often squash behaviors they don’t like. If they tolerate a tactic, whether from evil, ammorality, or caring about cause x, that tactic will be used.

          The Democrats institutional inheritance tolerated riots and terrorism in the 1920s and 1930s, the 1960s and 1970s, and again in the 2010s and 2020s.

          Republican institutional inheritance? Bush faction or someone had recruited a /lot/ of political technicians that could pass for sincere Republicans, or conservatives, who we’ve found out were apparently incompetent or Democrat sympathizers.

          1. The simplest version is: Republicans are, and have been since their founding, the party of individual rights. The Democrats are, and have been since their founding, the party of group rights.

            The two cannot coexist. It’s not a left-right or conservative-liberal axis.

            And somehow, the supposed benefits that Democrats have given all the groups it claims to be in favor of makes them worse off in the long run.

      1. Seems like a good place to put this video:

        Interestingly enough, there’s a lot of very small-name, small view videos that come up when searching for the video, including a facebook page with an attempted argument-by-mockery, but not the video itself.

        It took searching youtube itself for Vanderbilt University Professor Carol Swain Prager University to find it.

    4. “deeply incompatible with living at peace in a civil society.”

      Your last point is the most important, IMHO. Because right now, they are being allowed to live in “peace” within our (desired) civil society, and are systematically poisoning it.

      I’ve said before that the death penalty is the immune system of the body politic. The problem is whether or not the immune system can be prevented from attacking itself, and how you train it to recognize the socialist virus when it comes back with a different protein coat.

      Sarah has some experience with autoimmune disorders. They aren’t easy.

    5. My joke about this:

      “What do the woke call white men who go into minority neighborhoods and burn down minority owned businesses?”

      “White Allies”

      “What do they call a boy who puts out the fires?”

      “A White Supremist.”

  3. Many people, especially on the left, but hardly limited to them, fail to recognize that “justice”, and “law”, and “law enforcement” do not originate from the courts, legislature, or police respectively. They are simply the entities set up to specialize what is the job of the entire population.

    If the specialists fail to perform their function the duties don’t go away, they just revert. And since the entire population of Kenosha wasn’t on the streets executing rioters and arsonists it fell to the 17 year old to do it in self defense.

    1. Further, they don’t realize that if they get what they were certainly agitating for during the Rittenhouse trial, mob justice, that it works both ways.

  4. Francis hit the ball out of the park on this. I’m dealing with policing issues in my town this year by virtue of having joined the advisory budget committee. We have a pretty decent police force in town. Problem is, for four nights a week we only have a single officer to cover 100 square miles of town. Now we indeed are fortunate to have one officer at all times; but that singular patrol person is limited in responses. One, he can only be in one place at a time. So if he’s on a domestic call, he can’t respond to the accident on the other side of town. Further, on that domestic call, if it goes violent, the only real response he has is lethal. He doesn’t have the luxury of backup to allow a physical take down, or pepper spray, or taser use first; he has to go straight to gun. That also assumes he wasn’t called to back up an officer in a neighboring town who have similar staffing issues. What’s that mean? It means an extra 80 to $100k per year for the town to hire an additional body. That has to be spread out among about 5000 tax payers; but it’s still more money. We have to fight a small, BLM-defund-the-police group of people in this town, along with the taxes are too high crowd. Heck, I’m in the taxes are too high crowd and I’m struggling to find where we can cut. But get this, 1/3rd of the town’s costs are running the town. 2/3rds are going to the school system. We have new school buildings, aids galore, beautiful school grounds. Yet we have a town transportation department working out of a dilapidated shed and barn, and our own town hall is operating out of a rented building the owner wants back. What we really need is some people to take machete’s to the school budget, not defund the police!

    1. Your town could close the school department then rent the facilities to anyone who wanted to use a classroom. Run it for profit! Taxes could go down and you could hire another officer.

    2. Our school system is relatively sane and, from results, rather good– but it still keeps going up faster than any other cost.

      Including our law enforcement costs, and we are building a new jail so we can stop renting space in neighboring counties.

  5. “if you don’t want anymore Rittenhouses patrolling the streets”… Good Lord above, please bring light into their darkness. We want such people, men and women who are willing to defend their communities doing so. Preferably with proper training and legal recognition. AKA a responsible police department. But civilization depends on having such people restraining those who will not restrain themselves. Of course, they are not in favor of civilization.

    1. I want volunteers like Rittenhouse willing to patrol the streets.

      I don’t want them to have to do so because I want government to do its basic job and pay civic minded people like Rittenhouse to do it and support those front line sorts appropriately

      1. This. It’s like certain skills and tools I have. I have them, I stay proficient with them, and I pray almost daily that I never need to use them. We should have people willing to step up to do their duty. Please, G-d, may we not need them.

    2. But we do want people like Kyle, everywhere, since the cops actually protect these felons if the Mayor tells them to do so in every city I’ve seen…

  6. What we are seeing is the police are becoming “actors of the state” instead of protectors of their communities. Because of this shift, we will see more people who will try to protect their communities. Media will call them vigilantes. I call them responsible. If police are now actors of the State, I think it is time to reform or reduce their power. Maybe we could go back to the time when voters had to do volunteer service to their communities– police and fire… Those who cannot or won’t care for their communities should lose their ability to vote.

    1. I think part of the issue with police is that their status in society has greatly changed. When I was small in the ’60s the local constabulary were decent folks, near the top of the food chain of blue collar jobs, well respected. Detectives/Chiefs had usually started as officers (somewhere) and gotten some college (usually an Associates or occasionally a Bachelors in Law Enforcement). In the 60’s the Cops became the bad guys, the fuzz, the pigs as society became very anti establishment. Their training changed, more often than not in the 70’s and 80’s they started with that BS in Law enforcement which now had LOTS of Psychology and other social sciences nonsense rather than a focus on the law and it’s details. Those particular fields were well and truly held by the SJW/Tranzi types and spewed social Justice and similar concepts giving a false base of how to handle crime. Coming up to today in the last 5-10 years it has become clear that if you’re a cop and you tangle with some of the protected sectors of society your life’s work can be flushed in a single incident. And so the attitude has slowly become for some of the police “why should I risk my life and livelihood on a constant basis for folks that treat me like dirt and look down on me”. The whole Defund the police thing has got to be massively demotivating. It’s a hard issue to fix.

      1. I agree that the 60s and 70s changed the way cops do their work. The best police officer that I knew in the late 70s was the one who lived in our community and knew us. It wasn’t too much later that the newer cops coming in became enemies instead of neighbors.

      2. Plus– when the cops become more concerned with that attitude (why should I risk my life or livelihood) it is time for them to quit the job. As for defunding the police– I was against it until I saw what the police were doing to normal people who got caught in clashes with BLM and Anti-fa. So not all police are like this– What I am seeing is that all city police are like this– rural police are a different breed because there are less of them and they have to work in their communities. Let’s deband the armies that are becoming the Dem stooges. (police are now army instead of police at least from what I am seeing)

        1. There’s an idea that some careers are callings, for example clergy, the military, medicine. The concept is there because there is risk (Military, doctors before say 1950) of loss of life, and/or there is something you give up as part of the deal. Police and Fire were also in this class of calling,with their inherent risk of life and often limited family time and limited wages. Over time it has been part of the SJW/Tranzi goal to remove this concept and its cachet. I think this is because their basic view is a Marxist one and views ALL labor as equivalent. A doctor is a burger flipper is a garbage collector is a lying crap weasel (pardon me journalist). Where credentialing is critical (large Police departments) this is far more so than out in the suburbs and exurbs.

          The other change that really affected things was the war on drugs and its asset seizure. That has made parts of the police structure VERY compromised due to the urge to keep the goodies from the seizures flowing. This has twisted and corrupted some departments (although some were already there with ridiculous speed traps for revenue generation and similar strategies). As Paul of Tarsus noted in his letter to Timothy “For the love of money is the root of all evils”, Mankind has not changed much since the 1st Century AD.

          In addition there has been a whole lot of militarization of the police. This combined with the seizure part really moves them away from policing/ working with the community and to an adversarial position viewing the community the serve more as an enemy to be destroyed or controlled rather than a family or group to be protected. A militarized police force can far more easily be bent into a Stasi or Gestapo than a force that views its purpose as protection and preservation. This may be part of Ian’s observation.

          1. That is a remarkably stupid statement. There are a LOT of evils that have nothing to do with money. Running over 60 people in a Christmas parade, for example?
            ———————————
            Count Vordarian: “What? You’re a Betan! You can’t do—“

          2. There is also the problem that police work is dangerous and always has been, It is only lately that the idea that Officers HAVE to GO HOME at the end of the shift and ANYTHING that they do to ensure that is GOOD and legal. No time to think does that person really pose a danger to me? It’s he posses a danger to me shoot him. Does he have a gun, shoot him, doesn’t matter that he wasn’t going for the gun.

            Question: You are stopped by the police for traffic something. Officer knows you have a carry permit and asks if you have a pistol with you. You tell him yes. He then asks you to give it to him. WHAT DO YOU DO???
            If you pull out the pistol, he can shoot you and get off scot free. Do you TRUST him/her not to shoot you??
            Do you tell the Officer it is in a holster on your right hip. You will be happy to get out of the car and HE/SHE can get the pistol but YOU will not touch it or move toward it with the Officer present.

            The idea that the Officer has the absolute right to kill anyone who is a possible danger to the officer is WRONG but seems to be very common today.

            1. You are stopped by the police for traffic something. Officer knows you have a carry permit and asks if you have a pistol with you.


              Well since you are suppose to hand the CCP with your driver’s license, whether you have a pistol with you or not, they are going to know. Mom & dad had carry permits. When driving, they kept it in the console between them. When stopped, kept their hands visible. Made the stopping officer secure the pistol during the stop, and replace it at the end of the stop. This is what we would do, well kind of*, if, you know we had a carry permits, and the boating accident hadn’t happened.

              * Only because most the time, if not sunk, it is probably in either the camera bag, which is either in the way back or behind driver’s seat under the dog seat protector which is under the jumping up and down, be it small and clipped in, dog. Or it is in hubby’s suitcase way in the back from transporting it between the car and our hotel rooms. In either case, technically concealed, not readily available to either driver or passengers.

      3. There are two pathways working on different sides of the equation but meeting at the same result. One is what you describe. The other is the increasing use of the police as a means of imposing the will of the state on the population.

        1. So far, the sheriff departments have been more responsive to rural people–makes sense since the sheriff is an elected position (and the deputies are frequently from the same rural settings as the people they deal with), while the chief of police (not sure about commisioners) tends to be an appointed position. I noticed that the sheriffs were at the lead for opposing and refusing to enforce COVID mandates from the state governments.

          A friend who was my standard gun dealer noted a comment from a 1990s firearms training course, taught by a retired cop:
          “There are three types of people, Cops, Cop’s familiies, and the rest of you assholes.” The cops as enemies of the people didn’t have that far to go.

            1. And their favorite targets are people who are low threat, high vulnerability.
              Generally, the people trying to do the right thing instead of running away or diving into darkness.

              :angry:

          1. :points at 60s behavior such as physically threatening the families of police:

            A bit late for that guy to be a cause– take the midpoint for retirement at 20 years, he would’ve been getting into police work after “will this get my family killed?” was a valid consideration. Given the 70s, “this may result in my house being burnt down, with my entire family inside” should have been at least considered, just like “people might shoot at me” is considered when one joins the military.

            The Rules for Radicals type “protest” movement has a lot to answer for, even if it was mostly importing Commie tactics from Europe into the US.

              1. Difficulty in removing folks who are Trouble may be a thing, too– there’s a federal law enforcement guy who is currently in public trouble where the only thing I know about it is that the response has been, uniformly, “good” and hopes to get rid of him.

    2. A woman in San Francisco posted a long Twitter thread that’s apparently gone viral. She’s shocked and horrified by conditions there and even more appalled that people are buying guns. But one key point, to me,was she did not want the responsibility of bearing arms(ok) and wants them only in the hands of trained professionals. I just keep thinking variations on, “Welcome to Feudalism 101. Your status is: serf.”

      1. Yeah, the ‘trained professionals’ she’ll be denouncing tomorrow as Jackbooted Fascist Stormtroopers and trying to get defunded.

        “You voted for this, you stupid cow, it’s too late to whine about it.”

        1. Serf hell, if she stays in the San Francisco area as its going she’s either a slave or prey to the hordes of predators. to Quote Sam Adams :
          ” If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

    3. A lot of people forget, or never learned, that police originated in this country as individuals selected by the community to use force if necessary to maintain public safety. “George! Your good with a musket, and you have a good tracking hound. We want you to lead us group of boys and go after that Strafford gang that’s been stealing our cows. An’ when we get back, can you give old man Ayers a thrashin’? Yeah, he done beat up his wife and broke her arm again. She’s over at my sister’s place and willing to sign a complaint.”

      1. Sorry, NO! The Police were created to STOP the Public from running down those they THOUGHT were guilty and punishing them, Hang or beat up or kill. The GOOD PEOPLE didn’t like that and so the Police were created. They would take those people believed guilty put them in jail and they would have their day in court and if guilty be punished. The Public was satisfied (mostly), the GOOD PEOPLE thought well of them selves and the innocent were protected.
        The Criminals and the GOOD PEOPLE have forgotten this. They believe that the POLICE are the problem. If the Police can no longer do their job as happened from time to time in the Old West (San Fran a couple of times) The PUBLIC formed a Vigilance Committee, everyone “KNEW” who the BAD People were and decided to get rid of them. Corrupt Police, politicians, criminals, gangs and such. When they were finished taking out the trash, new Police and politicians would be found. Of COURSE sometime scores were settled and MISTAKES WERE MADE but things generally got much more peaceful and law abiding for a time.
        Is this a good idea HELL NO!!!! BUT that is where we are heading. People are making lists. ARE YOU on somebodies list???

        You really don’t want the Police to go away, you will not like it if they do.

        1. Part Two – http://www.celiahayes.com/archives/633
          “…The image of a ‘vigilante’ most usually implies a disorganized mob; lawless, mindlessly violent, easily steered but ultimately uncontrollable. The Vigilance Committee was something much, much worse than that.

          They were organized, they were in earnest, they would not compromise … and they would not back down.

          And they proved to be very, very efficient. Immediate support for the Committee was overwhelming. A dozen members of the original committee reconstituted themselves, chose a leader and an executive committee, and began enlisting members. The line to enroll in the Committee was day-long: eventually there would be 6,000 – all of them vetted and vouched for, sworn to secrecy.”

          (Third part in another comment – I wish to avoid moderation hell.)

        2. Part three of the story of the 1856 San Francisco Committee of Vigilance – http://www.celiahayes.com/archives/639

          “…Just before one o’clock, the tall windows on the second floor of the building were opened; from two of them, a pair of small wooden platforms were pushed out, and balanced on the edge of the window-sill. Above, from the flat roof of the building, a pair of heavy beams was set into place, just over the platforms; a noose of heavy rope dangled from the end of each beam. Then … silence again, although those who waited in the street below could hear the faint music of a church organ. The music seemed to be a cue of some kind. Charles Cora, his eyes covered by a white handkerchief blindfold was guided out of the window, to stand silently on the little platform. A few moments later, James Casey followed; he was not blindfolded at his request, but his nerve broke, looking down at the implacable faces below. He babbled, pleading that he was not a murderer, he had done nothing, he only responded to insult … the words fell into grim silence…”

    1. I have to disagree. I and many others were laughed at and told we were old fashioned when we said something. So instead of ceding– we got tired. It was so fashionable to be “woke,” “socialist,” “dependent” on government. You can take the blame, but I WILL NOT.

      1. This. So much this. “How I’m being treated is wrong.”

        “Oh, you’re just ungrateful/tired/not aware of how it’s really like out there. Just mind your manners and work from the bottom up, you just have to be patient with these people, they know what’s best for you – oh no, you can’t leave when they need you so much….”

        And on, and on, and on.

        When there’s one person beating on you, and ten-lplus others either standing around, hemming you in from getting away, or threatening to call the cops if you fight back – heck if I’m going to take the blame for just surviving that.

      2. There’s always room for disagreement, however in my opinion the only way we got from the world of the fifties to today’s age of mass psychosis is that we, the people, let it happen.

    2. What’s this “we” stuff? I’ve acted against it and I have the diminished bank balance to prove it. I’ll admit that I chickened out at the point where I realized I was about to do something that would get my wife and children ziptied at gunpoint, and the dogs shot.

        1. I know. [fist bump] We evacuated sooner than you did, and that enabled me to find a “situation” (as they say in the interminable Victorian novels) where my…propensity toward painful honesty…is valued. So financially we’re probably in a better place than what you are feeling right now. But in my opinion, your gofundme success is an indication of what you can do now that the fetters are off.

            1. I’ve thought pretty hard about a citizen’s duties in a time like this. Some people talk like it’s 1775, but it’s not. The redcoats weren’t coming to confiscate arms from individuals’ homes–they were coming to confiscate arms held by the legitimately-elected local government for the use of the militia (which was the constabulary and legitimate armed forces of the suburbs of Boston). We’re just barely beginning to form the structures, and acquire the legitimacy, that would allow us to stand together as a society against the forces that want to turn us, one by one, into rhinoceroses. The men who defended the bridge at Concord knew that their neighbors would make sure the Redcoats didn’t roust them from their beds at night. We’re not there yet.

              It has begun, but we’re not there yet.

              1. yes. Because the mass communication and suppression of communication meant that we’re only now knowing we’re not alone. Along those lines, I guess what I’m doing is actually of some import?

                1. Obviously so. It’s probably not what you wanted, but (remember that painful honesty thing?) I suspect that the gofundme was largely a response to a sister-in-arms who has been manning a communications node and is currently retreating in good order from her outpost that has been overrun.

                  I’ll confess that my own fiction reading has been sparse for over 20 years–at some point my life became a sci-fi novel (a cross between “A Door Into Summer” and “The Year of the Jackpot”), so why bother reading somebody else’s story? I’ve read one from Ms. Ball, a couple from Ms. Hayes, a few short stories from you and a collection of Dr. Pournelle’s and that’s pretty much it since I got all the way through Heinlein and Asimov and E. E. “Doc” Smith. But I made sure to contribute to your gofundme because that was my shot in the volley. No way was I going to be standing there, shoulder to shoulder, and not pull the G-D trigger.

                    1. Yeah. In some ways, this is exactly what I didn’t want when I started out. In other ways, it’s more than I ever dreamed. Along the way, I think I might have seen angels, and I think I might have met demons. None of which was something that I set out to find. I’ve definitely become something more than I knew I was.

                      This is probably not unusual. I grew up surrounded by WW2 vets; some of them did some pretty amazing things, and all of them refused to answer certain questions from a young boy. Their times shaped their lives. I don’t see any particular reason why we can expect better than what they got.

                2. Pulling the camera back a bit– I’ve been pointing out that blogs are the same as pamphlets back before the revolution since I was in high school. I can’t even remember if we called them blogs at that point, it was just… obvious. Websites were the new inexpensive printing press, the internet is that table full of papers at the coffee shop or what have you….

                  1. I first ran across the “blog” term from the geekculture dot com website (home of the After Y2K comic of fond memory) in their Joy of Tech one-panel comics. It would have been in the early aughts.

  7. I read another essay on another site this morning, that pointed out that the active leaders of a movement, (including anti-social movements) are usually a small minority. Then there are the followers, the foot soldiers. Then there are the people who go along to get along, in spite of misgivings or evidence, even if they don’t really believe. .And then, there are those who have the courage of their convictions who are willing to be unpopular, who serve as the opposition. At the time of the American Revolution, those who opposed Royal Privilege and Aristocratic Privilege were the opposition. Right now, in this country, those who oppose Big Government, Big Media, or Big Tech are that opposition.
    If we can no longer rely on our government to protect our inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we need to take back original jurisdiction..starting with ourselves, our families, and what local community we can find.

  8. “In places where politicians (generally Republicans) did the opposite the protests were much more limited.”

    Many of those places also had local citizens “just happen to be around”, carrying guns, when the would-be rioters came to scout the places out. And local law enforcement made it clear that they weren’t going to arrest any of those locals.

    The other problem with local government not doing its job isn’t mentioned in the article. If a Kyle isn’t enough to keep things in check, people will organize. The best option is a group that only forms up against disturbances. But a community is more likely to end up with one of two other options. One of those options is a group that decides to be pro-active in going after “threats”. These are what become death squads. The other option involves Vinnie and Guido offering specialized protection services, for a price.

    1. Amarillo and a few other places in Texas (not Austin or parts of Houston or the Metroplex.), and those are just the ones I know of. Lots of quietly wary people just watching the “protesters.” Many observers on top of businesses, open carrying what seemed appropriate, in order to discourage excessive enthusiasm by the foolish. End of “protests.”

      1. Springfield Oregon … Protestors were “taking protests into the neighborhoods”. They did. It was peaceful. This might have had something too do with what is called “Rooftop Koreans”. Plus a few open carry on front lawns … not in hands, just visible … Not a police officer in sight, in *uniform. Another note. One of the neighborhoods involved was the Thurstan HS area … an area that might, just might, have a little bit to say about firearms in the wrong hands; yet …

        * Would expect the same in our neighborhood area … it just so happens we have a lot of police living in our neighborhood from a large variety of departments. The areas above are the same.

    2. And then there are the Blackhawk types who offer specialized protection services for a price, to those who can afford to hire them. And you don’t have to worry about them coming in and breaking your stuff if you don’t hire them.

    3. Heh. The one in Coeur d’Alene ID, got such good attendance from the “not in my town” crowd that it pretty much turned into an impromptu gun show and tacti-cool gear mutual admiration festival.

      The BLM crowd was so much outnumbered that their spokesdrone made a bunch of noise about how grateful they were to have the armed locals around to prevent infiltrators from getting out of hand.

      The local news was very disappointed that they didn’t get to report on Mostly Peaceful Burning, Looting, and Murdering.

      1. Oh, that would be an EPIC background for an odd couple.
        Random mildly freaked-out by the contrast person: “Goodness, how DID you two meet?”
        Very fluttery, probably blonde, twig-armed sales girl: “Well, I lived just outside of Spokane and worked at a little knife store in the mall, heard about an organized protest over in Coeur d’Alene. When I showed up for the protest there was a wonderfully large counter-protest, and, well… have you seen Billy’s six-layer bandoleers? Especially that set of a baker’s dozen different colors of anodized titanium kunai? How could I NOT take the chance to talk to him about them?!?”

      2. “Local*” news in Meford featured a lot of pearl-clutching over the guns displayed in Flyover Falls for the “peaceful protest” that stayed that way.

        (*) 60 air miles and a 180 degree point of view difference away. OTOH, the news people are closer physically, but not in ideology to most of the people in their area.

        1. Yet the Eugene protests got coverage locally anyway. Including the the two who walked down RR from NEHS to downtown during the day. But nothing on the Springfield Main Street protest that went into the Thurstan neighborhood … Eugene protests had fires and shutdown the Washington Street Bridge, no looting or businesses destroyed. The community affected were the illegal homeless camping under the Washington Street bridge between 3rd and 5th. While “downtown”, and there are businesses, there are few lootable ones (mostly lawyers, climbing gym, flooring store, etc., though there is an REI).

  9. So, the other day BLM did a “say his name” protest for Rosenbaum. I’m thinking they should be renamed.

    “PLM”, maybe?

    1. Or you could claim that what their acronym really means: is not not “Black Lives Matter”, but :”Burn, Loot, Murder”.

  10. All three of Kyle’s “victims” were convicted violent felons, one of them was a serial rapist (not a “pedophile”) of young boys, at least 5, probably a lot more…Fixed it for you! Kyle took out the trash when it tried to kill Kyle for putting out one of their arson attempts, (another aggravated felony)…excellent work!…

        1. That *you* know of. I’d be willing to bet he actually has, but has had it covered up because “He’s good people” or because he’s the right *kind* of people.

          1. Yep if that diary was real (and much like Hunter’s computer things lean toward that) those accusations suggest that the FICUS was/is a serious sexual predator type. If he’s willing to put moves on a daughter whats the odds that her friends didn’t get approached at a minimum?

  11. I’ve never phrased that Kyle shouldn’t have been there regardless of his age. I have phrased it as Kyle shouldn’t had to have been there. Two words had to … I also questioned the judgement of someone who would accept an underage minor to be there to “defend” their business. (I get the reference for a 17 year old to be able to join arm services, with a parents signature approval. But it isn’t like the arm services puts the minor in immediate confrontation (at least when I was 17, it still delayed entry until actually 18 … do not know what the process is now). I did not join, just looked into it.) Despite Kyle’s more than minimal first aid knowledge. Sorry he and his friends should have been sent home with heartfelt thanks, but no thank you.

    The local PD, city, county/parish, and state, should be ashamed of themselves. They knew what was the right thing to do was: Prevent, Stop, the rioters, regardless of their (on the face of) illegal orders; not stand back and watch. Fire department needed to be putting out the fires (and accidentally pointing water hoses at the rioters). But no one in that capacity stepped up. Not one had the conviction of their profession.

    1. The people living there should sue their government for not “fulfilling their obligations.” There should be personal lawsuits to the people in charge. This needs to be stopped and they need to FEEL the consequences.

      1. In theory, to the best of my I-am-not-a-lawyer knowledge, the elements of crime for a RICO lawsuit exist.

        For a pro se filing, one would need to be able to show financial harm.

    2. The plan, as I understand it, was for Kyle and his friend to be in the relative safety that was NEAR the riot, providing support. (That got screwed up by police interference– Kyle wasn’t supposed to be alone, much less alone on the street.)

      Not a bad choice given that 17 year old kids can get a case of Big Dang Hero syndrome.

      1. Kyle and his friend to be in the relative safety that was NEAR the riot, providing support


        Still bad choice for the business “given that 17 year old kids can get a case of Big Dang Hero syndrome.” I’m not even saying that Kyle had a hero complex. I think he thought being there with others as backup for a show of force would be all that was needed. He had no clue how quickly things could go bad, nor how bad it could go. He was raised right. He paid attention. He had as good or better fire discipline than better trained professionals. But still He Was Lucky. Better than the idiot prosecutor. (Why hasn’t he been sanctioned just for that alone?)

        1. The only way #1 Ass-Clown Binger should ever be allowed back into a courtroom is as a defendant. Ditto for Porky the Assistant Ass-Clown. Their lies about the laws alone should be cause for sanctions.

          1. Yeah there were folks whining that the judge was partial to Rittenhouse. As far as I could tell he was bending over backwards for the prosecutors. Both of them should have been hit with HEAVY contempt of court charges and hauled out in irons, and the case dismissed with predjudice. Judge didn’t have the intestinal fortitude for that, Luckily the Jury did the right thing. He may have been concerned that dismissal with predjudice could get overruled on appeal? Beats me I’m a software engineer not a lawyer.

            1. I think the judge was hoping for exactly what happened. Let the trial stagger to its conclusion and get a proper verdict. All the prosecutorial malfeasance, the threats of mob violence against him and the jury, rendered moot by a dozen citizens doing the right thing.

              No amount of shrieking, wailing and gnashing of teeth from Leftroids can undo that trial. A mistrial would inevitably have been portrayed as ‘white supremacists’ conspiring to subvert justice. They’re still trying to push that angle, but they don’t have a leg to stand on and it shows.
              ———————————
              The Capitol is OUR house. Congresscritters are just the help.

              1. This fits with the judge having not removed dismiss-with-prejudice off the table before the verdict.

                I think we got a philosopher type judge, thank God– without sacrificing Kyle, gave folks every chance to do The Right Thing.

                And the Jury did.

              2. The result of a jury is harder to overturn and admittedly if the Judge had had called a mistrial with prejudice it would have been appealed almost instantly and I suspect the appeals courts in Wisconsin are rather liberal. With the Jury decided a judge may not change the findings of fact. Appeals courts can only look at points of law. To overturn this the appeals court would have to find either that the jury selection process was tainted, the jury itself was bribed or that the jury was given information they ought not have (e.g. letting the jury see the records of the “victims” which have no bearing on the self defense case). The Judge did everything he could to avoid any of those mistrial paths so the verdict is very safe. That said the prosecutors behavior was far beyond the pale and would have provided plenty of basis for appeals should the trial have gone against Rittenhouse. It seemed that the prosecutors should have had some penalty for behavior that so strongly violated the norms. Ultimately it worked out for Rittenhouse, but should he have hit the “jump kick” guy either he’d be rotting in prison until his beard was long and white, or if the jury still acquitted Kenosha and all the blue crap hole cities would be burning and smoking yet. Justice that varies like is no longer rule of law but the court procedures for some of Res’ distant relations

                1. ” should he have hit the “jump kick” guy either he’d be rotting in prison until his beard was long and white. . .”

                  Yeah, this for sure. Considering the judgment and fire control under pressure he displayed throughout, I wonder if he realized this and missed the guy on purpose.

                  Since this is a science fiction writer’s blog, I’m going to introduce another “what if”. Imagine an alternate universe where everything happened exactly the same way except for one detail: Rittenhouse was black. Does anyone doubt that the Left would be ecstatic that he was acquitted, and call it “systemic racism” that he was even charged? On the Right, there would be a handful who couldn’t get past “black shooter-white victims”, but no more than that.

                  1. No, they wouldn’t be happy for him– they would’ve done their best to hide that he existed, other than reporting on how a “vigilante” had “attacked protesters.”

                    Same way Mr. Dorn’s death at the hands of at least one looter is only remembered by the “racists” who believe he’s more normal (and admirable) than the “protesters.”

        2. Businesses are still people, and given that they know the kids involved, I’d defer to their judgement on if it’s safer to hope the group as a whole would stay well away from the trouble, or have them near the trouble where there’s a chance to keep an eye on them.

          No way that they could know some uniformed idiot would order a kid into the direction of the violent mob and away from the people he was with.

      2. One of the more conspiracy-minded websites (AC) posits that Kyle was set up to be murdered during the riot. His buddy left at a rotten time, and the timing and route of the drone that captured the HD video of the shooting semed to have been informed as to what was supposed to happen. (I’m told it took off just in time, and directly went to where the action was supposed to happen. Haven’t watched the video because of bandwidth issues.)

        Anonymous Conseervative thinks the intended message was that trying to protect yourself from the mob was only going to get you killed. When Kyle didn’t cooperate, they had to go to Plan B, attempting to make self defense a criminal offense.

        1. I’d go with a less competent type conspiracy theory that matches prior problems– deliberately channeling the law-abiding protesters into the violent mob.

          That minimizes the number of bad actors, especially since Kyle was armed.

          The drone responding to information on violent mob action, such as SETTING A GAS STATION ON FIRE*, would also make sense.

          * Yeah, I’m still a bit… twitchy… about that being treated as No Big Deal.

            1. Problem– isn’t it the *prosecution* that sat on the video?

              And then gave a low-res, cropped version, last minute?

              Not the FBI?

              Thing to look out for in terms of incomplete or slightly inaccurate information– cartels have been going after this stuff for YEARS because it’s hard to leave members of a drone’s family crucified to their front door.

              1. The prosecutors also knew who the “unknown man” was.

                I have heard reports they were unable to persuade him to testify because he demanded immunity for all crimes committed during the riots. Why they would have refused that, I don’t know.

                1. reports they were unable to persuade him to testify because he demanded immunity for all crimes committed during the riots. Why they would have refused that, I don’t know.


                  I do. 100%. His testimony would have been one more admission that the 4 of them, him, the two killed, and the one wounded, were trying to kill Kyle. I also think withholding his name from the defense is more malfeasance. But I too am just a programmer, not a lawyer, so what do I know?

                  1. They had the other guy up:

                    “It wasn’t until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him with your gun — now your hands down, pointed at him — that he fired, right?” Mr. Chirafisi said.

                    “Correct ,” said Grosskreut, ”

                    And it was a prosecution witness who described Rosenbaum’s death threats.

                    1. Exactly my point. Jump Kick Guy on cross would have done exactly the same self incrimination, after lying when questioned by the prosecution, had the prosecution called him. Plus the defense would have pointed out his get out of jail free deal for testifying and lying for the prosecution. If the defense had called him he might have gotten away without lying. The prosecution flat out couldn’t call him.

                    2. But by that logic, they shouldn’t have called the other. If they were not clever enough to realize that for one, why for the second?

                    3. Because everyone, including the defense, had the wounded guy’s name. If prosecution didn’t call him to spin the narrative at the start (the lie), not that they got to keep it, then the defense would. Jump Kick Guy, the defense didn’t have the name because it was withheld. AND the prosecution is criminally stupid legal idiots.

                2. Some residual sense of self-preservation WRT realizing someone claiming that he jump-kicked a kid in the head on video may have been doing other things that would get them even more in trouble?

                  :digs a bit:

                  https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/2021/11/18/jump-kick-man-maurice-freeland/

                  Ah, apparently he wanted immunity for drunk driving with his 7 year old kid, domestic abuse, and pot possession. Which is a bit more limited, but especially with the mother of said child being somewhat loud about the guy publicly declaring intent to kill that white boy BEFORE kicking him in the head, then bragging about having been shot at, probably wouldn’t have done their case much good.

                  She also points out that it was general knowledge that he’d attacked the kid.

                  No wonder they’re in the process of divorcing….

                  1. She also points out that it was general knowledge that he’d attacked the kid. No wonder they’re in the process of divorcing….


                    I’m surprised she didn’t go to the defense. If I were her I’d want nothing to do with the guy except money, channeled through legal sources from the guy. With permanent “stay away or shoot on sight you die” legal orders. I mean court video evidence being forced to admit, after lying, what he did, at her divorce proceedings be it in the court room or negotiations? Absolutely priceless. Plus there was probably a reward posted for the guy’s name. (Vindictive? Me? Naw.)

              2. Oh yeah, two sets of suppressed and/or degraded video. The FBI had aerial video that they tried to suppress, while the stuff that the prosecution played games with (keep the high res, send the low res, blame the defense for getting the inferior copy, get busted) was done by a private entity, who as I recall, the company appeared shortly before the riot and disappeared a few weeks later. No, not sketchy at all. /sarc

                1. All I can find is that they didn’t give the DEFENSE the video, which as I understand it is normal, they’d give it to the prosecution and they’re required by law to give to the defense. That would go along with the agent being called by the prosecution.

                  All I can find is “alleged” and “private testimony” that there was higher resolution video, which seems to be a Human Events exclusive.

    3. When I went in (2000) we had a 17 year old in our basic training. She went straight to her unit after training as far as I know (I think she turned 18 shortly there after. Her parents had signed off on her joining specifically because they thought she would fail and that would ‘get it out of her system’.)

      1. Yep my Dad did the same thing. had a heck of a time in High school, headed off to the CT Guard with permission from his Mom. Got a GED when he came back. A lot of 17 year olds are far more capable than you’d think.

        1. Verily. Her story was a bit more…grumpy making. Her parents only signed off on it because they were 100% sure she would fail and that would get the silly notion of joining the army out of her system. You can imagine the reaction of the Drills (and honestly most of the rest of us) when they heard that…

        2. I signed for my daughter to be sworn in to the Marine Corps inactive reserve, pending a basic training date when she was seventeen – she was eighteen when she finally got the date to ship out to Parris Island, and could sign for herself. My one thought — OMG, if I didn’t approve totally, there was not a d*mned thing I could do to prevent it now …”

  12. Aside: it is notable that (almost?) all of the informal militia patrolers seem to have been male. I’m sure that was due to their sexism and nothing to do with the idea of chivalry that strong men protect weaker women…

    Could be basic “not complete morons.”

    A teen year old boy is going to be stronger than even a rather fit mid-20s woman, and goblins are more likely to target a woman than a male.
    Making it harder for them to focus-fire on a single point is very important, tactically; if they’re guessing about who is the weakest, they’re less likely to all agree. If they all see a woman and go for her, then even if they’re WRONG, they’ll manage to win.

      1. ::is sincerely confused about what a Japanese video game has to do with any of this::

        ::Digs for a bit and gets something *not* curated to usual searches:::

        ….K, hadn’t heard the nickname “Grambo” for Mrs. Fiedler yet, that is epic.
        https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2021/11/09/meet-grandbo-the-star-of-the-first-day-of-defense-case-in-kyle-rittenhouse-trial-n1531286

        I’ll note that the goblins *did* go at her, too– and that’s with her sticking to the dealership, instead of being one of the people going away from the group.

        Hadn’t heard of the possible gas attack under cover of a medical bag, not surprised.

        Being inside of the dealership when things get later and the mob gets more desperate for targets is also a good idea– and thank God she was there, because for heaven’s sake she DOES look like J Random Mom on the block, and she’s EXACTLY the kind of person that poor Kyle probably benefited from talking to when he was back in relative safety.

  13. Entirely unsurprisingly they got more riots and the the riots and protests were more violent. In places where politicians (generally Republicans) did the opposite the protests were much more limited.

    The Des Moines mayor is a D with a really nasty case of Wanna Be Just Like New York itus, but he’s not stupid enough to have tried to get in the way of the local, state, or federal law enforcement.
    So our cops have a much better relationship with the local “communities”– in part because joining the police when you’re a member of all but the craziest of local communities does not get your mom shunned or worse. (I wouldn’t hold the DMPD up as a shining light of all policing should be or anything like that, but they’re far enough from what people are talking about as “normal” that it should definitely be pointed out.)

    So when there were guys casing the Federal building down town, they got friendly greetings from a LOT of the local guys on their way to lunch, both in and out of uniform.

    When some out of town SOB chucked…can’t remember what it was, I think it was a half-thawed water bottle… out of the protest, he got dragged out to the police by the people next to him.

    The half-hearted “unrests” that did happen were after the protests had happened and everyone had gone home, and they didn’t get a second chance to do that trick. I *think* Buzzard Billy’s or one of the places near it lost a window, but I’m not sure if that was vandalism or normal accidents; I don’t go down town very often. (Which is why I can’t even tell you the name of the place I saw the plywood on!)

    Various local morning talk-radio guys in the days leading up to the protest even had “debunking” stories about how the police were responding to phone calls about piles of bricks laying out in the area and how they all had perfectly good reasons for being there…guess what wasn’t left out when the protests actually happened? And what didn’t show up the day before the protests, either?

  14. I think one of the great shocks for TPTB during the 1/6 “Insurrection” was that they couldn’t get a full-fledged riot going no matter how much FBI inciting went on. They beat, shot, and gassed people and still no riot.

    The FBI isn’t used to that sort of failure. Generally they can get a mob going with no trouble at all.

    Why, it’s as if the patriotic crowd that follows Trump is full of law abiding citizens!!

  15. Foxfier got it right… While Iowa is ‘republican’ there is a lot of democrat / liberal still present. Listening to the local radio coordination of law enforcement in Des Moines the ‘protesters’ were not allowed free access to anywhere they wanted but were channeled with road blocks and such to keep them contained and to also minimize any efforts at disruption. Sure, some windows downtown were broken but it never became a full blown riot with substantial property damage. The local law enforcement and the majority of the community didn’t support the unruly protest effort or idea and it was never able to “take off”.

    Out in the suburb (West Des Moines) there was a BLM rally staged where the bussed in group staged from a local church (…church – a whole other issue with all this way beyond this comment) and marched to the major park/swimming pool complex for a demonstration which went through a residential area and past the major mall shopping complex for the metro.

    There were “refreshment” stands with people giving out water and snacks to the marchers every few blocks that was part of the organized effort. The local cops coordinated with the State, county and other local jurisdictions to have great traffic control and crowd management. The marchers were restricted to the sidewalks and never got into the street. I was able to actually watch them go by our house and while they all seemed carefree and easygoing they seemed aware of behavior expectations – they all stayed on the sidewalks and out of yards, the street or commercial property. They had a nice gathering at the park/pool parking lot with some speeches and then reversed the route back to the church and bus transport out of town. No muss, no fuss and done in a couple of hours.

    It was noteworthy that there were no locals joining in or in attendance at the rally point. There were a lot of people watching from decks, porches or business as they went by but I didn’t see any support expressed. As it appeared that there would be little or no support for their efforts they never came back. This is the part that makes the crazy “progressive” BLM tactic fail and is not only the lack of local area support but the overall community values which don’t support and won’t tolerate uncontrolled group behavior.

  16. Completely off topic, but perhaps of interest to science fiction authors:

    I’ve got a megastructure for sale! (Or an idea for one anyway.) It’s a year late, and most of the diagrams are glorified pencil sketches, but I’ve finally gotten a descriptive write-up of the idea together on my blog.

    https://www.amssolarempire.com/Blog/?p=730

    1. Edit: To clarify, I’m not expecting anything for the idea. (A failed attempt at humor). Just seeing if sci-fi authors might be interested, and what they make of it.

    2. First real thoughts.

      1. When I read ‘megastructure’, and ‘arbitrarily large’, I think arbitrarily large. This does not scale arbitrarily large, except in terms of the scale at which humans can plausibly build. One limit is the inner volume you are pressuring. As you put in more gas to pressurize the inner diameter/radius, the gentle gravity you mention creates a slight pressure difference and slight density difference. As inner radius becomes large, as in planet, gas giant, and stars, the pressure difference becomes larger, density difference becomes larger, and gravity from the lower spherical shells of gas becomes larger. So, there are certainly scaling issues there, but they don’t matter because you make an implicit assumption of sanity.

      2. I need to look at your spinning object calculations more, and think about them. My first real thought on the issue of these habitats, back in the day, came from looking at the empirical fly wheel tables in the Machinery’s Handbook. The finding there was that for a certain material and type of construction, the failure point was a number, I think maybe speed, at the outer diameter. IE, if you make a cast steel flywheel out of alloy X, your size for a given rotation is limited so that the outer diameter speed does not exceed Y. I’ve since understood this to mean that for a construction methodology, and set of materials, we have a trade off when we do our back of the envelope for a diameters, rotational speeds, and artificial gravities. My recollection is that at least one of the O’Neill Island designs is not achievable with the combination of flywheel values in the Machinery’s Handbook. My copy is around 15-20 years old, I forget the edition number, and do not have it close to hand for reference.

      3. I don’t understand what the flow of the inner gas would be like with a moving shell. Which is a bit interesting, as I hadn’t thought about this scenario as a approach to a fluid mechanics measurement.

      4. My conclusion of isekai fantasy was partly driven by assumption of much larger scales, and is probably incorrect.

      1. 1. Yeah, you’re right. I was talking with a friend last night, and he pointed out that this doesn’t go to Dyson-sphere scale. Somewhere between 100s km scale and gas-giant scale, the gravitation of the contained air becomes significant, and the pressure surface-to-core-ratio drops to zero. So I need to amend my wording: It doesn’t go arbitrarily large. At 100s – 1000s km scale though, it seems to work out.

        2. Sort of fudged by saying “unsupported ring.” I’ll have to think more carefully if a centrally supported ring with tension cables can grow larger or not.

          1. Easy solution, find some tree of life root and a ~50 year old human with family and a need to make said object. Combine, and wait. Presuming you (and humanity other than his family) survive, voila scrith.

        1. I think I may have misread the proposal this morning.

          Is the spinning object section explaining where you got the idea, or is it essential to the concept?

          If essential, if this is spinning and pressurized inside, I’m not entirely there isn’t a sign error. My intuition is trying to persuade me that the pressure and the motion would both put a tensile stress on the outer part of the shell. I understand that for fly wheels, it is that outer tension that grows surface defects into cracks, starting the burst.

          If it isn’t essential, if this is a largely stationary object, the write up is a bit confusing.

          If it is stationary, this seems to make sense. Build a pressure vessel on a large enough scale, and excepting manufacturing, quality, etc. issues, you eliminate the need for material strength, because gravity, if it is a sphere. If, the material is relatively impervious to the gases, and strong enough to retain that quality. Maybe also if a certain amount of temperature consistency.

          Impervious if may be a big one. I’m not sure what the ‘more volume, more defects’ aspect of mechanics means at this scale.

          Temperature may be an issue, pv=nrt. Temperature, and outside gravity would definitely need to be considered if this is in a solar system. Tidal effect loading could cause fatigue, or defect growth. This scale may also be large enough that the heat flux through the sphere means a temperature difference and pressure that isn’t constant.

          Potentially, we are looking at something that can be moved carefully.

          Another potential, it should be possible to numerically calculate this for a non-spherical shape. IE, a cylinder. Relaxing the no stress constraint and zero internal gravity constraint some should allow for non spherical shapes. If you had a cylinder, you could potentially adjust the length after construction.

          In practice, if you are hanging stuff off the inside of the shellworld, the suspension members will add strength requirements for the shell. You have the tension through the members, as well as whatever stress concentration stuff they do to the shell. It isn’t clear to me how much of the volume you could access through the suspension structure.

          1. Nah, it’s really two seperate things. I just included the spin-gravity section because it might also be interesting.

            The shellworld doesn’t spin – it’s inhabitants live in mostly 0-g. I figure by the time we’re taking apart the crust of the moon to build artificial planetoids, we can manage a little genetic engineering to make ourselves at home in 0-g.

      2. I have updated my document with a new section. After integrating some equations, it seems that the concept scales up to about 100,000 km, after which the gravity of the enclosed gas starts reducing the pressure supporting the shell, and reducing the thickness of the shell that can be supported.

        1. Not only that, the gas would tend to collapse into a sphere. If your shell is 100,000 KM diameter, and average gas density is 1 KG per cubic meter, that’s over 523 million trillion tons of atmosphere or about 1/1,100th the mass of Earth.

          There being no reason for the collapsed gas ball to remain in the center, it would probably migrate to the shell wall and induce catastrophic gravitic stresses.

          If you meant 100,000 KM radius, the situation would be 8 times worse.

  17. Off topic, but possibly of interest to sci-fi writers.
    (Also, I seem to be stuck in your spam trap.)

    I’ve written a write-up on my blog (link seems to trigger the spam trap) on a new idea I had for a stable megastructure. It might be of interest.

    1. Of course it is of interest.

      It is a theoretical problem involving fluid mechanics, and solid mechanics. It is an opportunity to make assertions! An opportunity to count coup against one another!

      And none of it having anything to do with politics, or other stressors, barring whoever is unfortunate enough to have this stuff tied in with an uncertain way of making a living.

      I personally think that the way to do a proper hard sci fi story around this concept is with an isekai fantasy, but I’m perhaps a wee bit out of my mind. I’m about to go to bed, so I will have a closer look tomorrow.

  18. The thing about Seattle isn’t that the police stood down and let the rioters do whatever they wanted. On the contrary, for weeks they were out there every night with tear gas and pepper spray and the occasional baton.

    So the snowflake rioters complained about “excessive violence” and eventually the mayor pulled them back. And that’s when the assault on East Precinct happened, and that’s what led to the formation of the CHOP.

    Even then, a few weeks later after a couple of murders, the police were unleashed to take back the precinct and the nearby park, and then some time later they re-swept the park and then were out in force against rioters who started in downtown and were headed there again.

    The problem wasn’t that the police were absent, it’s that the police were ineffective. They weren’t allowed to crack heads and truly break up the riots because that would look bad, and everyone that they did arrest was released by the next day, just like in Portland. It wasn’t their fault, but all they managed to do was piss the rioters off and strengthen their resolve.

    1. Why did pickup trucks and SUV become popular???
      Because the Government turned smaller cars into aluminum foil, plastic death boxes that people no longer felt SAFE in.
      If the Government tries to FORCE people to give up their SUVs, they might have a few problems on their hands.

      1. Well, now, there’s stupid, and then there’s stuck-on-stupid, and then there’s WORKING at the stupid. They seem to have gone beyond even that.

        I picked up a new saying from Larry C. today: “You can’t put that shit back in the bull.”

  19. The jury in the Ahmaud Arbery case has reached a verdict: all 3 of the defendants were found guilty of most charges.

    And the honkeys didn’t riot, loot and burn down the city! What gives?

    From what I saw of this case, it was like a distorted mirror image of the Rittenhouse case. 3 armed attackers against one guy trying to get away. The defense used some pretty distasteful tactics, and lost.

    I’m going with the presumption that the jury got it right. Of course, the Leftroids are going to claim that it was an ‘isolated case’ and they just managed to find a jury that was a little less racist than everybody else.

    Just watch ’em.
    ———————————
    Facts do not depend on opinions. Unfortunately, for far too many people, opinions do not depend on facts, either.

    1. I’m not ruling out the lawyers conspiring to misinform the jury, and to improperly punish vigilantism. Yet. Not yet.

  20. Just glancing through the comments above- most of ruralville has volunteer fire departments. Which have to screen out the occasional fire bug.

    No reason we couldn’t have VPDs- volunteer police departments. To handle actual problems that involve police.

    IMHO- a higher age then for the VFD- let’s say- 30. And require all volunteers get a petition from at least 10% of registered voters in the ruralville town supporting their application. Will hopefully weed out the really power hungry. And as a further check, to ensure the VFD serves and protects and doesn’t harass the locals, once a year at a yearly scheduled election- Should the following be retained in the VFD? List each member, and a yes/no vote. Forget majority vote I would say 40% no- out they go. If they’ve pissed off that many citizens- they need to go. Five years before they can volunteer again- some people grow up.

    In our 1700 person town- without a PD (we let go of our single patrolman about a decade ago) you’d probably get at least a dozen people willing to go. Require them to arm themselves- but the police cars should be provided by the town. Can’t have people thinking that any car with red and blue flashing lights is police regardless of what it looks like. And, BTW- I’m a firm believer unmarked cars shouldn’t be able to pull people over. How do you know it isn’t a terrorist in that car? Could be with a marked car- but lessens the chances. Am I paranoid? Somewhat.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s