Archive for the ‘Law’ Category


Monday, May 1st, 2017

[Note 1: The author is a pilot with a commercial license and multi-engine and instrument ratings. He has flown numerous types of aircraft, single and twin-engined, from Piper Cub to Cessna 150 to Cessna 210 to Cessna 310 to Piper Seneca to Beechcraft p-Baron to Beechcraft Duke.]

Fictional Anecdote 1
“Sir, please take your seat. The Captain has asked everyone to take their (sic) seat. The ‘fasten seat-belt sign’ is on.”

“Hey, I’m just changing my seat for that empty one next to the window across the aisle.”

“I’m sorry, Sir, but we’re experiencing some turbulence, and it could get worse without warning.”

Another male passenger shouts, “Let the guy change seats. What is this . . . a concentration-camp? We’re the customers. We’re not prisoners. The customer is always right. Come on, folks, let’s take a vote.”

“Sir, please take your seat.”

From a loudspeaker, “This is your Captain. Everyone, please be seated with your seatbelts fastened.”

“Sir, I’m ordering you to take your seat.”

“What’re you gonna do? Beat me up? Look, I’m sorry, but it’ll just take a second. Besides, there is no bad weather. Look out the window. The sun is shining.”

“Sir, sit down! That’s an order.”

With those words unheeded, the recalcitrant passenger begins a dash across the aisle to the adjoining row. As he is about to enter it, the aircraft encounters turbulence — extreme turbulence — clear-air turbulence.

It plunges downward hundreds of feet then upward hundreds of feet. Passengers scream. The airliner momentarily is out of control. Violence ends as quickly as it had begun. Meanwhile, the recalcitrant passenger became a human missile, flying through the air, bouncing off other passengers, then landing atop a toddler.

“Mommy, I’m hurt! I’m hurt!”

The mother becomes hysterical, screaming at the man, “What have you done to my baby?”

He cannot hear her. Lying sprawled atop the screaming child, his unblinking gaze fixed at the ceiling, he never will hear anything again. His neck is broken. The child never will walk again. Her spine is severed below the neck. Let passengers rule?

Fictional Anecdote 2
An airliner taxies towards its assigned runway. A young woman in her twenties arises from her assigned seat. A steward leaves his to rush towards her.

Approaching, he surveys the woman — skinny with stringy, multi-colored hair and a multitude of tattoos covering her neck, arms, and legs. Through her left nostril, she sports a metallic object in the form of an arrow with a sharp point facing outwards.

He comments silently, “Man, that thing could make a helluva weapon.”

They meet. The steward detects the odor of alcohol reeking from twixt reechy lips covered with purple paint.

[Note: Alcohol acts as a diuretic.]

“Miss, please return to your seat.”

“I have to pee, and I mean right now.”

A female passenger yells, “Let the girl pee.” Some other women agree, reflecting the new age in commercial aviation.

“Miss, please,” the steward pleads, “we’re heading toward the active runway, and we’ve been cleared by the Tower for departure. You must return to your seat.”

“No way! Let me pass. Have me arrested later for having a pee. Fat chance of that, Big Time! I watch televison, you know.”

As she spits her last words into his face, a fueling truck on a cross-taxiway darts in front of the lumbering airliner nimble in flight, ungainly on the ground. The co-pilot at the controls slams his feet down on the braking pedals. The aircraft lurches to a sudden halt.

The steward grabs seat-backs across the aisle from one another. One hand slips. He plunges forward as the recalcitrant passenger begins tumbling backwards. His head strikes her bony chest, pushing her to the right and spinning her around. She falls heavily into the lap of a male passenger holding in his arms an infant. Her nasal arrow pierces the infant’s eye. The baby howls in agony.

Horrified, the enraged father pushes the bewildered woman off him, hands the howling baby to his wife, then attacks the woman now sprawled across the aisle. Throttling the wretch, he seems intent on killing her.

Two stewardesses rush to her aid. The man swats them away like flies. The injured steward and two other, male passengers pull him off. They wrestle him to the floor.

After a conversing via the inter-com with the steward and receiving clearance from Ground Control to return to the gate, the Pilot-in-Command, shaking his head, says to his colleague, “No more! This fly-boy is getting a job hauling freight.”

The airliner arrives at the gate. An ambulance rushes the injured infant to a local hospital. The police arrest both the young woman and the father.

Days later, an ophthalmologist, now labeled a “healthcare provider,” pronounces the infant’s eye blinded. The parents file suit against the airline for willfully failing to control the passenger.

A prosecutor exonerates the young woman, characterizing the blinding an accident. She files a lawsuit against the airline. The airline settles promptly. Its CEO publishes a personal, public apology to her.

The prosecutor charges the father with assault to commit murder. He pleads “temporary insanity”. The court judges him innocent by virtue thereof and orders him to see a “therapist” to gain “anger control”. After paying his lawyer’s bills, he declares bankruptcy. Let passengers rule?

Actual Incident 1
One sunny afternoon with puffy, white clouds dotting the sky, having departed from Honolulu International Airport in a Cessna 172 for a sightseeing flight around Oahu, a passenger and the author approach Kaena Point. The passenger is carrying a camera ensconced in a hard-shelled case. Without warning, the aircraft encounters turbulence — extreme turbulence — clear-air turbulence. It plunges downwards. The pilot’s hands fly upwards off the yoke. His feet lift off the rudder-pedals. The camera strikes the roof of the cabin. The aircraft is out of control. Violence ends as quickly as it had begun only to recur once more.

Upon returning to the airport with winds now gusting to 35 knots, he lands the aircraft intact. His passenger lifts the camera. Its hard-shelled case is cracked open from the blow received. Were it not for their seat-belts, passenger and, worse, pilot would have been knocked unconscious. Such is the power of Nature.

Actual Incident 2
A passenger on an airliner still sitting at the gate is requested to deplane by personnel from the airline. He refuses. He is directed to deplane. Again, he refuses. He becomes hostile. The personnel call the police.

After trying to convince him to depart, the police forcibly remove him from the aircraft. Unauthorized, he reënters.

When police try to remove him again, he attacks them physically. They drag him from the aircraft, bleeding.

Other passengers? They side with the recalcitrant passenger.

Later, the American public largely sides with passenger. Big Media of both The Left and The Right side with him. Given the ruckus from the public, police nationally, already under fire from Big Media and The Left, refuse to intervene further in such incidents.

Who is the man? A physician who graduated medical school not in these United States of America but from the University of Medicine of Ho Chi Minh City, a city previously known as Hanoi, located in that which previously was North Vietnam. Recall the North Vietnamese? They’re the folk who killed 58,000 American soldiers not so long ago and tortured hundreds others as Prisoners of War at places like the “Hanoi Hilton”, the Geneva Convention be damned!

How did this Vietnamese immigrant express his gratitude for being allowed to live and work in these United States of America? He became a felon convicted of trading narcotics prescriptions and cash for homosexual favors in motels. He became a habitual gambler for high stakes. His gratitude extended to his medical license being suspended in 2003, following his being arrested on charges including unlawful prescribing and trafficking in a controlled substance. At the hospital at which he held privileges, he became the subject of numerous complaints. He developed a history of impulsive, explosive behavior.

This is the man who unilaterally assumed authority on an airliner. This is the man with whom other passengers sided. This is the man with whom the American public sides. Let passengers rule?

Unsurprisingly, anyone who states these facts is branded a “racist”, especially by The Left and becomes subject to all the social abuse that that questionable term unleashes upon those so labelled. As in Canada, the truth is no defense. Western civilization, where goest thou?

The antecedent occasioning personnel to request the man’s deplaning? “Over-booking” with the reässigning of seats to other personnel from the airline.


At issue is not the policy of the airline. Perhaps, the policy was ill advised. A case can be made otherwise. Whatever the case, legally a reservation does not guarantee a seat on a particular flight, merely transportation from Point A to Point B. Flights change frequently as a function of mechanical problems and meteorology beyond the control of the airline.

So, what is the issue? The primary issue in Incident 2 is that a passenger on an airliner received a directive from authorized airline personnel. He resisted the directive and, thereby, interfered with the normal operation of the aircraft by the crew. Even that he subsequently became violent is secondary.

Booking policy notwithstanding, an aircraft is not a bus that can be stopped at the roadside to resolve problems. An aircraft is a delicate machine that operates in an unforgiving environment. The worst airliner mishap in history occurred on the ground.

What if an airliner is in the air in an emergent situation? Diverting the pilots’ attention from flying the aircraft to policing recalcitrant passengers endangers the aircraft, it passengers, and its crew. Potential consequence? People die. Rule by passengers?

The ultimate authority in the operation of an airliner is the operator, the airline. In turn, it designates an appropriately licensed pilot (Airline Transport Pilot) with a current medical certificate as the Pilot-in-Command (PiC). Once the doors close, the PiC has total authority and responsibility. The PiC is just that which the title denotes — in command.

Technically while at the gate with the door open, the operator of the airliner or designee retains authority. The aircraft is the property of the operator, the airline. As owner, the operator possesses the legal right to remove passengers. If you allow someone into your home then he refuses to leave when requested, have you no recourse?

FAR 135.120 Prohibition on interference with crewmembers: No person may assault, threaten, intimidate, or interfere with a crewmember in the performance of the crewmember’s duties aboard an aircraft being operated under this part.

A passenger legitimately may disagree with policy. Once aboard, however, a passenger may not refuse a directive of the operator, the PiC, or a designee. By refusing to comply with a directive, a passenger is interfering with crewmembers in the operation of the aircraft.

Once the door closes, the PiC of an aircraft is just that which the title denotes — in command of any and all operations of the aircraft, including an aircraft on the ground. An aircraft is not a democracy. Passengers do not rule; they have no say. When a passenger boards an aircraft, he is under the authority of the operator and the operator’s designee, the PiC.

trespass vb.: to go or intrude on the property, privacy, or preserves of another with no right or permission.

When the recalcitrant passenger reëntered the airliner again without permission, he became guilty of a second offense — trespass. The recalcitrant, assaultive, trespassing passenger was in the wrong on two counts and, thereby, subject to both criminal prosecution and civil tort.

Some have raised the ridiculous argument that, under this doctrine of operators and pilots’ authority, airline personnel could issue a completely inappropriate, if not illegal, directive such as to undress. Argument ad absurdum! It never has occurred. It never will occur. Other personnel would countermand it immediately.

So, afterwards what actually did occur? What did the perpetrator do?

He did that which many Americans would do. He claimed that he was the victim. He found a lawyer, or a lawyer found him, and they filed a lawsuit.

Rather than being castigated as a perpetrator and serving time in jail as punishment for his misbehavior and rather than facing a civil action by the airline for trespass, he became celebrated and pitied as a victim, and he sued the airline, reaping a sizable reward in a settlement. Likely, had he not settled, at trial he would have received a sizable reward from a jury ensconced in a courtroom housed in a building versus dependent upon an airliner at 35,000 feet surrounded by a thin tube of aluminum — a jury safe and sympathetic to his cause. Justice or mob-rule?

Could this encounter and its aftermath serve as a model for other passengers? It already has.

Another airline just suspended a male employee as a consequence of his arguing with a passenger when she demanded to bring aboard her child’s stroller. Then, another passenger, a male, threatened to assault physically the flight-attendant. Both passengers were given “psychotherapy” on the spot and relented. The incident was recorded, as usual, on someone’s so-called smart-phone and went “viral”. Passengers rule.

[Note: An assault is a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and may result in either criminal or civil liability.]


Consider the following question: Of the more than two-million passengers flying every day, what percentage are mentally deranged? At any given moment, one-percent of the population is actively psychotic suffering delusions and hallucinations. Such people are five times more likely to become violent than the average person. Estimate that only one-tenth of one-percent of the one-percentage is a passenger on an airliner on any given day. The result is that minimally twenty passengers aboard airliners daily are actively deranged and dangerous. That number does not include a multitude under the influence of mind-altering drugs, probably numbering in the thousands. Reality!

A directive is a directive. It is not the occasion for psychotherapy as happened in the latter instance with the argumentative, hostile mother and her assaultive sympathizer.

What will be the long-term consequences of these incidents? Better service? Fine but at what cost? More such incidents? More such lawsuits? Deaths? Ultimately, the reality of context and consequences will rule.

Controlling Variable
So, the American public largely sides with recalcitrant passengers violating laws and jeopardizing safety. What’s the controlling variable?

In the context of being a passenger, actual or potential, the general public is operating vicariously under the same contingencies as though they were the passengers in question. In that context, all have common variables controlling their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. In the jargon of psychoanalytic theory, the controlling variable is “identification” — the public “identifies” with the offenders.

[Note: The term, “identification”, may be a handy shorthand, but it offers no scientific explanation.]

Meanwhile, operators and flight-crews operate under a different and occasionally conflicting set of controlling variables. Aboard an aircraft, which set of variables should take precedence? Who should rule? Operator and PiC or passengers?

Given the public outcry, operators and police are bending to a media-orchestrated public outcry. The at-risk operator of the airline in question even groveled repeatedly before posturing politicians sitting safely in Congress and an outraged public sitting safely at home or at work.

Now, no police will intervene except in cases of safety and security? Oh? Who determines safety and security at any particular moment? What are the criteria? Who makes the decision on the spot and at the moment? Politicians? Lawyers? Perhaps, passengers deciding by vote.

What will be the consequence of withdrawing policing enforcement? Anarchy? Anarchy on an airliner? Anarchy on an airliner in flight? Consider an even more recent brawl between two male passengers aboard a third airline. Flight-crews are not capable of enforcing directives without the contingency of support from the police and the courts, nor should they be.

Now, consider the recent riots on academic campuses where students rule over cowering administrators, and police do nothing — the University of California at Berkeley and Middlebury College, for example. Mob-rule!

The trend will not last because it cannot last. In the end, the reality of context and consequences rule — not passengers on airliners or students on campuses. Forget not that anarchy always is followed by tyranny.

Visit Inescapable Consequences.

In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.



Monday, August 17th, 2015

Note (31AUG2015): During the past week, a Negro shot to death two, young Euro-Caucasoid broadcasters on live television. Then, another Negro shot a Euro-Caucasoid sheriff’s deputy in the back at a filling station, killing him, too.

Note (07SEP2015): The current, increasing tidal-wave of illegal aliens invading European shores mirrors the challenge facing these United States of America. Both in Europe, especially Western Europe, and these United States, the unarmed invasion of territory is greeted by an increasingly dispossessed majority not with armed resistance but with a spectrum of self-defeating responses ranging from apathy, indifference, and passivity to joyous celebration of their own demise among the self-loathing.

Science says, “If you want more of a behavior reward it.”

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

Today, calling Negroes by that which they racially are has become almost forbidden except among Negroes themselves, who frequently and publicly call themselves “niggers”. So, what to call them?

Ironically, the current plight of the American Negro is reflected by the confusion in nomenclature. Even American Negroes themselves do not know how they prefer to be called.

“Negro” as in the United Negro College Fund and as used repeatedly by Martin Luther King, Jr? “Colored” as in the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People? “African-American”, more precisely “Sub-Saharan African-American” — but what of the Euro-Caucasians who settled South Africa before any Negroes even were there? “Black” —yet, to most African Negroes, American Negroes are not “black”?

Given the facts, perhaps American Negroes would do well to recall an answer several decades ago by a Negro given when asked about his race. It was the following:
“I am Negro. I am colored. I am not black.”

PART ONE: Context

“And you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” -John 8:32

violence n: exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse. –Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary

Violence, Evolution,  & the Earth
The cosmos has existed approximately 13.7-billion years. Our planet, Earth, approximately 4.5-billion years.

For the initial 200-million years, our planet remained inhospitable to life. Then, 4.3-billion years ago, a rogue planet, Theia, is believed to have collided with it; bringing water, thereby, rendering it habitable. Shortly thereafter, life appeared — soft-bodied and uni-cellular.

550-million years ago, multi-cellular organisms appeared. With their appearance, survival became increasingly precarious, for individual and species. Previously, the life-cycle essentially had been consume energy and divide; thereby, producing exact replicas of themselves. Not so with multi-cellular ones. They are heterosexual. Heterosexuality allows for genotypic and phenotypic differentiation, in turn, allowing for rapid evolution.

For these new, more complex organisms, the process became birthing, maturing, reproducing, dying in an ehanced context of predator and prey — kill and be killed. Life and violence became fraternal twins. So it remains today.

Violence in these United States of America
Domestic violence? From its inception as colonies, these United States of America have embraced violence as a way of life. British-Americans against French. Colonists against Indians. Americans and French against British with Continentals against Loyalists. Northerners against Southerners. Bandits against lawmen. Citizens against government and government against citizens.

Foreign violence? Spanish-American War. World War I. World War II. Korean Conflict involving China. Vietnamese Conflict. Iraqi Conflict. Afghan Conflict. Most recently, primarily Euro-Caucasoid Christians against primarily Semitic-Caucasoid Mohammedans. Ironically, given the “Cold War”, perhaps better known as the “Long Peace”, the only major country against which the USA has not been at war is Russia.

“An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” -Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975)

The Founding Fathers dreamt of creating a participatory republic incorporating the Four Freedoms; namely, freedom of religion, of political speech, of the press, and of association. To them, the concept — nay, the very word, democracy — represented an obscenity. Today, the concept of democracy has become a misguided, sacred cow defecating on the dream of our founders.

Descending more quickly and more deeply into the dismal depths of democracy, this once-preëminent nation is transforming itself into that which the Chinese characterize as “a nation in terminal decline”. Once again, we have burst into a nation on fire — once again, a consequence of racial diversity.

As we know it today, the notion of racial diversity with racial equality essentially did not exist until after the Civil War. Even Abraham Lincoln publicly proclaimed Negroes inferior.

“I am not nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality; and in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” -Abraham Lincoln (18SEP1858)

Current, domestic violence pits mainly Negroes against Euro-Caucasians; the latter a demoralized, increasingly dispossessed and dwindling majority. By and large, Euro-Caucasians are either too apathetic and too passive to defend their territory, resources, wealth, and culture or too self-loathing not to celebrate the suicide of their own kind.

Pity their youth indoctrinated by The Left via so-called education — education now quasi-Marxist indoctrination; and via entertainment — entertainment in passionate pursuit of vulgarity. They not only tolerate, not only accept, but actually demand their own disenfranchisement and demise — economically, politically, and sociologically.

The Negroid Community Today

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

Sadly, the American-Negroid community, as a group, has come to represent a clear and present danger to the integrity of the remnant that remains of the Republic. With support from members of The Left such as George Soros, Negroes have unleashed a tyranny by a minority to the point that many of its members feel free to riot whenever they claim, even wrongly, that a supposed injustice has been committed against one of their own.

Its members demand not only child-support for their bastardy in addition to preference in hiring and academic admission even when unwarranted but free housing, free food, free clothing, free medical care, and even free telephones. Translate “free” into Euro-Caucasians, Asian-Indians, and Orientals paying. Privilege has become license, and Negroid demands for such license now serve as a model for elements of the exploding, Latino minority to imitate. Such are the consequences of racial diversity.

See “Diversity” at:  .

Unfortunately, the Negroid community is in shambles, partially a consequence of the governmentally-sponsored welfare-state and partly as a consequence of most of its members’ refusal to assume responsibility for themselves. Eighty percent of Negroid births are illegitimate. The intact Negroid family is a mere fragment of its former self.

These are facts. Attacking the messenger won’t change them.

For Negroid demagogues and their supporters among The Left, truth matters not one whit. Truth has become no defense against the inevitable accusation of “racism” as though racism necessarily is invalid or evil. That there are no differences among the various races and sub-races simply is a lie. Ask any physician about the demographics of sickle cell anemia, for example.

Compare contributions of Jews that benefit the world — Jews who number 14-million and represent 0.2% of the human population — to contributions of Negroes who number 100-times greater and represent 20% of the human population. Judge by documented facts not ideologically-based propaganda masquerading as so-called news and entertainment.


Negroes & “Hate Crimes”
When a Euro-Caucasian commits a violent crime against a Negro, an only occasional act, ideologically-driven authorities and Left-driven media automatically label the act a “hate crime”. “Hate crime”?

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” -George Orwell (1903-1950)

To begin, the term itself represents poor grammar. “Hate” and “crimes” are nouns. Grammatically, the proper term is “hateful crimes”; hateful being an adjective. This grammatical point is not trivial. The proponents of these unfair, unjust, and outrageous laws even cannot get the name straight.

Consider the following: The “crime” part of the misnomer represents objective, behavioral activity — arson, burglary, homicide, robbery, and so on. The “hate” part of the misnomer represents subjective, mental activity; specifically, cognition and emotion — for example, 1) cognition such as a Negro’s believing that he routinely is disrespected by Euro-Caucasians; and 2) emotion such as such as a Negro’s feeling hatred toward Euro-Caucasians.

Prosecution of any citizen of whatever race or ethnicity as a consequence of subjective, mental activity represents “thought-control”. Such prosecution is dissonant with traditional, American ideals and values but consonant with the quasi-Marxist ideology of The Left. Recall that Lenin (1870-1924) defined truth as anything that benefits the Communist Party.

The act is the crime, neither the accompanying thought nor the accompanying feeling. Truly, courts historically have applied the concept of “special circumstances”; for example “assault with intent to commit murder”. Special circumstances make for a more serious charge and a more severe sentence if convicted.

Courts have applied that concept and do apply it, but they should not without direct, objective evidence. The law may demonstrate intent objectively, but it never should divine intent subjectively.

Instrumental behavior, the behavior of an organism upon its environment, is objective and public. Verbal behavior is objective and public. Both can be recorded and measured.

Intent is neither objective nor public. It is subjective and private.

Aggravated assault, for example,  is objective and public. “Intent to commit murder” is neither unless the defendant has made documented, explicit statements to that effect.

With regard to ethnic and racial relations, in Canada and the UK the legal situation has become even more egregious than in these United States of America. There, the truth literally is no legal defense in matters of ethnicity and race unless the complainant is a Euro-Caucasian. Make some member of a “protected minority” feel bad about his race or ethnicity? Go to prison.

It is tyranny pure and simple. Tyranny, especially tyranny based upon lies, takes a terrible toll. So it is in Canada and the UK. So it is becoming in these United States.

Negroid Crime
Negroes claim that police exhibit unjustifiable bias against them. Unjustifiable? Consider the following facts:

Negroes constitute approximately 13% of America’s population. Yet, Negroes commit 55% of robberies, 49% of murders, 34% of aggravated assaults; and 33% of forcible rapes. Of total crime, Negroes commit approximately 30%. Despite these statistics, the powers-that-be demand police not use racial profiling. Is it any wonder that police of every race fear for their lives when confronting Negroes? The consequence for the Negroid community is less protection from crime for the law-abiding, peaceful majority.

As for Caucasians constituting a homicidal threat to Negroes, 91% of Negroes murdered are murdered by other Negroes. Only 9% are murdered by other races or persons unknown — the latter a number that likely includes additional Negroes. In a typical, large, metropolitan area with a heavy Negroid presence, Negroes commit approximately 70% of murders; Euro-Caucasians, fewer that 10%. Despite these statistics, the powers-that-be demand police not use racial profiling. Is it any wonder that police of every race fear for their lives when confronting Negroes?

The rate per capita of Negroes committing murders is approximately 12 times higher than Euro-Caucasians and 5 times higher than Latinos. Despite these statistics, the powers-that-be demand police not use racial profiling. Is it any wonder that police of every race fear for their lives when confronting Negroes?

What of Negroid police killing Euro-Caucasians? Generally, trivialized by being ignored. Consider the case of 18-year old Gilbert Collar, a student in Alabama. In 2012, unarmed, naked, and under the influence of drugs, he was shot and killed by a Negroid policeman, Trevis Austin. The legal system cleared the policeman. Big Media ignored the event. Had the races been reversed, would the consequences have been the same?

All in all, Negroes, especially males, are prone to agitation and violence. Conversely, contrary to portrayals by the media, Euro-Caucasians, including males, are relatively tranquil and peaceful. Violence American-style largely is a Negroid phenomenon — phony propaganda from The Left notwithstanding.

“And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.” – Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

Since the dawn of multi-cellular organisms — predators and prey — has the context really changed much? Anyone who believes that it has might take a lonely stroll down a dark street in the South Bronx at night; a stroll likely to be a short one. Americans of The Left blithely ignore that civilized humans live in a state of benign captivity with a thin, blue line separating them from the nasty, brutish violence that would prevail without it.

As for policemen shooting fleeing, unarmed suspects in the back, in the more civilized past, doing so constituted accepted policing procedure. When a policeman ordered a suspect to stop, if the suspect did not obey, the policeman fired two shots into the air. If the suspect continued to flee, he became fair game for a potentially lethal wound.

What factor controls a suspect fleeing from police when ordered to stop, especially when hearing a policeman’s gunshots into the air? Nothing criminal to hide nor to be discovered?

How are the police to know that which controls a suspect’s flight? What percentage of unarmed suspects shot by police are law-abiding citizens with no criminal records?

What is the primary mission of police? To maintain law and order or to play clairvoyants, social workers or pseudo-psychiatrists?

PART THREE: Repairing the Damage

Negroes and The Left
Who suffers the most from Negroid violence? Negroes.

Rioting instigated by Negroid demagogues and their supporters from The Left notwithstanding, remove the presence of police from Negroid neighborhoods then measure the consequences. Whatever mistakes police may make, the benefit from their presence to Negroes vastly outweighs any liabilities therefrom.

Sadly, those of The Left have done Negroes more harm than good. They have reduced them, as a group, to a state of humiliation. Is not that the context in which they are rioting? Would not any group feel humiliated?


The humiliation of so-called affirmative action. Do Orientals require “affirmative action”? Critics recently have accused Harvard University of “negative action” against Oriental admissions in order to prevent too many, qualified admissions. Do Orientals feel demeaned? Do they riot? Hardly. Unwarranted, unmerited preference via “affirmative action” only demeans the recipient.

The humiliation of so-called entitlements. “Entitlements” are little more than governmentally-enforced, involuntary “charity” stolen from the productive in camouflage. “Entitlement” is nothing more than a governmental euphemism for legitimized theft via transfer of money. Receiving something earned by another and taken from another involuntarily simply because the recipient exists demeans the recipient.

In that regard, the humiliation of so-called child-welfare, a program begun decades ago for deserving widows and orphans not for outright bastardy. Then, it mutated becoming almost the sole province of Negroes. It became a curse camouflaged as kindness. It wrecked the Negroid, familial structure. Now, increasingly it is becoming coöpted by Latinos — next on the list of The Left to make all Americans dependent upon government.

Is it not time to allow Negroes to become all that each can be? Is it not time to end humiliating dependence upon government as a consequence of collective, irresponsible behavior and instead to begin uplifting independence with individual responsible behavior? Only when Negroes rightfully gain a genuine sense of pride from genuine accomplishments — whatever form those accomplishments may take — in the same manner as the rest of us, will they truly integrate themselves into society — whatever form such integration may take.

Repairing these United States of America
Complaining is one thing. Repairing is another. Repairing the nation from the ravages of the economic, political, and sociological fire increasingly engulfing it will depend less on The Who or even The What and more on The How.

Truly, repair requires a credible leader committed to stated principles. Truly, repair requires policies and programs based upon principles that are sound — scientifically-based and scientifically-driven; more precisely, the science of human behavior. Most importantly, repair requires a clear, explicit statement of how to undertake the needed repairs, including the methods by which to measure success or failure.

“I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.” -President Thomas Jefferson

Behavioral deficits like behavioral excesses have their consequences. We Americans must do more than complain. We must act.

Ah, but act how? Is there a way? Yes. With justice, fairness, and mercy for all? Yes.

(See Chapter Eleven, “A Dangerous Servant — A Terrible Master”, in the semi-fictional novel, Inescapable Consequences.)

Will repair require rebellion? Has “now and then” arrived? If so, rebellion in what form?

Violence via firearms by which to seize the reins of government or non-violent via civil disobedience such as refusal to pay income-taxes? Open rebellion with rebels showing themselves or hidden rebellion with rebels concealing their respective identities? Reasoned rebellion whereby rebels pursue dialogue with the powers-that-be or unreasoned rebellion whereby rebels forsake such dialogue.

The righteously discontented should hope that repair will come via the voting booth not violent rebellion. How likely is it, though? How likely is it that the productive and their sympathizers can outvote the unproductive and their sympathizers?

“He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty;
And he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city.” -Proverbs 16:32

Anger is abroad in this nation now on fire. Anger colors the speeches of Donald Trump. Anger demands satisfaction. Let us hope that satisfaction be orderly and peaceful. Let us be prepared that it might not be so.  How? Hopefully, by forming an apolitical, political party scientifically-based and scientifically-driven espousing traditional American ideals and values and reflecting the Constitution of the United States of America as envisioned by the Founding Fathers.


Note: In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.


Monday, July 27th, 2015

“I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature.” -Adolf Hitler (1889-1945)

violence n: exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse. -Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary

Hitler was wrong. Nature is neither cruel nor kind. Nature is neutral — indifferent one might say.

Yet, cruelty and violence are common bedfellows. Then again, so are living and violence.

“‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.” -Mark 12:31

Many speak against violence while indulging in it religiously. Love your neighbor? A lofty precept, indeed. The fact, however, is that most murders involve persons who know each other, including neighbors. Thirty percent involve familial members. Thirty percent of the victims are children.

The following is based upon actual events:
Mary lived alone. Another workday had arrived, so off she went. Closing the door to her apartment, she turned the lock then headed one flight down the stairwell towards the garage of the apartment-complex.

Clear and sunny. Warm. Just another workday for the 24-year-old, banking teller — or was it?

Upon entering the garage, she recognized a neighbor — an affable-appearing, late-adolescent. Had she ever known it, she could not recall his name. She also recognized the object fiercely gripped in his trembling, left hand — an axe.

He advanced. She retreated. He raised the axe. She screamed.

Mary had no defense against her assailant. Truly, she owned a firearm with which she was minimally proficient, but the law in her State prohibited her from carrying such a weapon.

Being defenseless against a homicidal maniac generates one of three behavioral responses — fighting, fleeing, or freezing. Automatically without thinking, she fled.

Her 17-year-old assailant, Roger, was an only child residing with his parents in the complex. He was an honor-student in the local high school with no criminal record. In fact, no history of violent behavior, whatsoever. Tending to be something of a loner, he, nevertheless, was reasonably well liked by peers and teachers.

Now in the garage, Roger entered into a not-so-merry chase with his intended victim as she screamed, “Help! Help me! Help me, someone!”

Bolting from the semi-enclosure into the driveway, Mary became an easy target. Panic-stricken, she stumbled, falling to the pavement.

Trapped. Eyes shut. Breath held. Mary awaited a violent death.

It was not to be. As Roger was about to release his lethal strike, a voice boomed, “Drop the axe, sonny, or I’ll blow your head off.”

A short, slender man of middle-age stood before Roger, pointing a .38-caliber revolver at the teen’s head. It contained deadly, high-speed hollow-points. Clearly, the man meant business — violent business in defense of the proverbial damsel in distress.

“Put down that axe, I said — now! Now!”

Slowly, Roger set his weapon onto the concrete. The axe was no match for a pistol.

The three actors in this scene of attempted murder remained stationary. Roger and Mary’s savior with a gun remained silent. She sobbed.

From the distance, sirens. The police.

Upon seeing the their cars approaching, Mary’s savior slid his weapon into the side-pocket of his trousers. He wanted neither to be shot by some overly-anxious policeman nor to be arrested himself.

Squeezing out of his cruiser, a middle-aged, pot-bellied sergeant took charge. Then, having heard the details, he arrested Roger, later charging the youth with attempted murder; a crime that potentially carried a sentence of life in prison. The next morning, a judge released him for admission to the locked unit of a psychiatric hospital, pending trial.


“Thou shalt not murder.” -Exodus 20:13

Murder. The ultimate form of violence.

It can occur on an individual scale, usually between acquaintances, friends, neighbors, or spouses. It can occur on a societal scale as perfected by Hitler and his Nazis, who encountered little difficulty finding willing and enthusiastic accomplices and unwilling but compliant victims.

Factors predisposing towards violence are both biological and environmental. Biological factors can be genetic or acquired.

The neuroanatomy of violence may involve the frontal lobe; the anterior, cingulate gyrus; the temporal lobe, and the limbic system. Violence as a function of a lesion in the brainstem usually is the consequence of a tumor.

The neurochemistry of violence may involve low level of serotonin, low or high level of norepinepherine; high level of dopamine; or high activity of GABA (γ-aminobutyric acid), the last a consequence of an excessive number of related receptors.

Environmental factors predisposing towards violence are a bit more complex but still not difficult to understand. For purposes herein, basically they can be characterized as a function of context and consequences ( They include over-crowding, poor parenting, maltreatment, modeling, generalization, and social reinforcement.

Science and the Daily Racing Form say, “The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.”

Violent behavior is no exception to this rule. Those with a history of violence in the past are more likely to acquire a history of violence in the future.

Temperament offers powerful indicators.  They include aggressiveness, impulsiveness, intolerance of criticism, intolerance of frustration, projection of blame wrongfully onto others, and sel-centeredness.

Mental illness — a predictor of violence? Yes with certain provisions. Not all mental illnesses are associated with violence. Mental conditions associated with violence include anti-social personality disorder, depression especially with psychotic features, homosexual panic, mental retardation, mania in a context of limits being set, and schizophrenia especially with paranoid features such as delusions and hallucinations.

See “Schizophrenia & Government” at .

Who tends to be violent? Adolescents and young adults. Males. Drug-abusers. Negroes. The mentally ill. Contrary to the never-ending bleating of those who best might be termed “Radical Maternalists” and their ilk, it has been documented for two generations that poverty itself is not a controlling factor in criminal behavior, which frequently includes violence.

See “Truth & Consequences” at .

“You get a lot further with a smile and a gun than with a smile alone.” -Al Capone (1899-1947)

Protection against violence comes at two levels — individual and societal. Such protection is highly context-specific, varying from nation to nation and from locality to locality.

In closing, let us note that the agents most prone to violence are governments. During World War Two, it is estimated that more people were killed by their own governments than by enemies.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” -Edmund Burke (1729-1787)

Accordingly, as was well known to the Founding Fathers of these United States of America, the greatest threat of violence to us as citizens comes from government — our own government that now, in a context of no declared wars, has assumed the prerogative of murdering American citizens who have not been convicted of any crime, even have not been charged with any crime, and have not been arrested for any crime. Forewarned is forearmed.


Note: In order to comment, you must be registered with WordPress.


Monday, October 27th, 2014

NOTICE (26JUN2015): We have been banned by Financial Times, Reuters, and Red State (See “Censorship Hard & Soft” .).

“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” -The Constitution of the United States of America (Article1, Section1)

“I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a ‘phone,” proclaimed Barack Hussein Obama from the White House (14JAN2014).

Administrative law — an old tyranny renewed. In America, over the decades it has grown into a monster of gargantuan proportions.

What is administrative law and what does it have to do with EHF? To paraphrase legal scholar, Professor Philip Hamburger, administrative law consists of acts via an executive power that come not through law but through other mechanisms or pathways.

Article 1, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution essentially prohibits administrative law. As Professor Hamburger notes, the Constitution provides only two avenues of binding power — acts of Congress and acts of the Judiciary but not acts of the Executive.

Whereas Congress may create administrative agencies, their courts and they operate under the Executive. They have no constitutional power to make law. Moreover, they have no constitutional power to adjudicate. Yet, they do both with wild abandon, preferring their own unconstitutional “administrative courts” under the Executive to constitutional, traditional courts under the Judiciary.

“Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” -Lord Acton (1834-1902)

Such so-called administrative courts are nothing new. In fact, they are replicas of the old Star Chambers, King’s Councils, and High Commissions from the Middle Ages. The Founding Fathers abhorred and repudiated them. Why? As noted by Professor Hamburger, they aren’t judicial; they’re inquisitorial. They represent absolute power consolidated into a single, governing entity; be that entity monarch, president, or director.

This abhorrent, unconstitutional system began in 1887 with the creation of the Interstate Commerce Commission, an agency of the Executive, to regulate the railroads. The U.S. Constitution, however, based upon separation of powers — balance and counter-balance — forbids Congress from delegating its legislative authority to the Executive.

The fiercest proponents of such regressive, absolute, consolidated power have been the so-called Progressives via Democratic presidents such as Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Lyndon Baines Johnson, and now Barack Hussein Obama.

Consequences? Evasion of procedural rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. No real judges. No real juries. No protection against self-incrimination. Governmental agencies essentially have become extortionists.

“Settle on our terms, or we’ll drag you before our own administrative court, in which we have a record of almost total success. Meanwhile, we’ll bankrupt you with legal fees, even on the off-chance that you should prevail, never mind the adverse publicity we’ll unleash. Win and lose, we always win — you always lose.”

Rationale for such outrageous, governmental tyranny? Efficiency. Efficiency for whom? Efficiency for the tyrant. Tyranny always is more efficient than liberty.

The dreadful consequences of this form of consolidated, tyrannical absolutism become even more dreadful today in the context of EHF; a contagious, highly virulent virus that causes a brutal, ugly death. Curative or palliative treatment? Neither exists.

Accordingly, EHF represents a clear and present danger to the American public and the rest of humanity. Already, there have been four cases in the USA as a consequence of Obama’s “pen and ‘phone” . Experts tell us that there are more cases on the way unless the West contains the virus where it began — in Africa. Time is against us.

Meanwhile, there are only a four, American facilities with a combined total of a eleven beds possessing the Level-4 capabilities required of handling EHF . No other facilities can handle safely cases of this horrific disease, which leaves its victim bleeding externally from the eyes, nose, mouth, and rectum. Spread by contact, the virus can live for some time in soiled linen and used, medical supplies; both of which a hospital must dispose safely.

It is in this context that a particular, administrative agency arrives on the scene but in the shadows — the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Prior to the enforcement of its own regulations by the EPA, hospitals disposed of medical waste via fire in affordable, on-site incinerators. Fire purifies.

Some years ago, however, the bureaucrats at the EPA ordered burning of infectious, medical waste in on-site incinerators to halt in the name of cleaner air — that is, unless the hospital installed expensive, sophisticated incinerators that most hospitals cannot afford. So, administrative absolutism forced hospital-administrators to contract with third-parties to haul infectious, medical waste to some other, distant site to be handled according to the edicts of the EPA.

Consider the risk of such a practice in handling waste containing Ebola. Instead of disposing of the highly contagious waste safely, quickly, and efficiently on-site, hospitals must abide by an extra step of hauling to some other, certified site somewhere else. One consequence? Less air-pollution. Good. Another consequence? Increased risk of contagion. Increased risk? Yes, to the extent that some third parties reportedly have refused to handle medical waste containing Ebola. Bad — very bad.

“God watches out for little children, fools, drunks and the United States of America.” -Otto von Bismark (1815-1898)

Good theory becomes bad practice. As a consequence of the absolutism conferred upon itself by the EPA, at Texas Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas, medical waste from a patient dying from EHF filled an entire room designated for his waste alone then overflowed into the unprotected hallways used by people wearing no protective gear.

That only two, nursing personnel became infected with EHF represents a near-miracle, no thanks to the EPA. For how long shall we Americans enjoy such good fortune when bureaucratically-promulgated, bureaucratically-enforced, and bureaucratically-judged  regulations trump common sense?

Shouldn’t every hospital have an affordable on-site incinerator available in emergent instances such as EHF? Yes, but using it at this time would be violating inflexible rules established by arrogant, self-inflated bureaucrats impressed by their own unconstitutional power. So, who protects us from our so-called protectors?

“An autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” -Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975)

As does all behavior, political and bureaucratic behavior, especially in a medical context, has its consequences. In this case, the consequences amount not only to tyranny but possibly to suicidal tyranny ( Ebola cares not one whit about political and bureaucratic pronouncements. Will God save us from this virus and, once again, from ourselves?