Categories
Born again Cynic! California Grumpy's hall of Shame

Californians Get the Government They Deserve..and That’s Deadly

“The government you elect is the government you deserve.”
— Thomas Jefferson
The state of California is massively in debt. Middle-class jobs are leaving and taking California’s middle class along with them. With growing crime, it is more dangerous to live in California each year.
After failure like that, California politicians call for higher taxes and more gun control. Why would politicians propose more of the prescriptions that failed in the past? That is a fascinating question. Let’s see if we can help.

California compared to other states-

California has some of the strictest gun-control laws in the country. California is ranked first of the fifty states when it comes to gun-control.
Those laws are so severe and so extensive that California has an “A” rating by the Giffords gun-control group. Shouldn’t those gun-control laws guarantee very low rates of violent crime and a remarkably low murder rate?
The answer is a tragic ‘No’. California has regulated guns for decades, yet gun-control hasn’t come close to delivering on its promises. Not then, and not now.
California gun laws-
Unless you’ve lived there, you might not be familiar with California’s extensive gun laws. The state mandates safety training before a sale can take place. They have universal background checks before each gun sale, and a ten day waiting period before you can take possession of your gun.
Ammunition sales are also regulated. You have to buy a gun lock with each firearm. Most handguns sold in the United States are not allowed for sale in California. Magazine capacity is limited, and you can only buy one gun a month. California also regulates and registers what the state calls “assault weapons”.
Most California citizens can’t get a permit to carry a handgun in public. Nor does the state recognize carry permits from other states. California proposes more gun-control laws each year.
Each growing infringement on the right to keep and bear arms was supposed to guarantee that criminals wouldn’t use guns for violent crime. The opposite took place. In California, the criminals are armed and the law abiding citizens are disarmed.

Comparing California’s crime rate to other states

California is quite violent when compared to the rest of the fifty states. That is bad and becoming worse year after year. California ranks in the worse half of states when ranked by violent crime. Thirty five states were safer than California in 2016.
Also, the homicide rate in California increased by 18 percent from 2014 to 2016. Note that California classifies some crimes as non-violent that most states, and most citizens, consider to be very violent. For example, forcible rape is punished as a non-violent crime in California.

Political considerations

Why do California politicians persist with more of the same old policies in the face of repeated failure?
High taxes mean there are lots of government programs that reward special interests. Special interests provide campaign contributions to incumbent politicians. California is ruled by Democrats, and high taxes persist because they work for California Democrat politicians.
It is more important that California Democrat politicians succeed than that California citizens succeed.
We see similar forces at work with gun control. For Democrat politicians, rising rates of homicide are a beneficial feature rather than a fault. High rates of violent crime provide a justification for more gun-control legislation.
That legislation provides more campaign cash from gun-control donors. Gun-control works for Democrat politicians even while it fails for California citizens. Now, California Democrat politicians want to tax guns, but does anyone think that criminals will pay those taxes?

For all the compassion that politicians show in front of the cameras,
very little compassion makes it to the streets where people are dying.

This isn’t an academic question. We pay for these political adventures with our lives.

Categories
Born again Cynic! Grumpy's hall of Shame

Poor Africa! An Irishman's Insight On Africa

By Kevin Myers
Exclusive To Rense
6-4-18

This is all so true and accepting refugees from these countries only makes the rest of the world have the same afflictions.Worth a refresh on the facts, before sending aid to Africa!
Kevin Myers (born 30 March 1947) is an Irish journalist and writer. He writes for the Irish edition of the Sunday Times, having previously been a columnist for the Irish Independent and a former contributor toThe Irish Times, where he wrote the “An Irishman’s Diary” opinion column several times weekly. Until 2005, he wrote for the UK Sunday Telegraph.
His articles criticize left-wing opinion and the “liberal consensus”, sometimes incorporating hyperbole, sarcasm and parody. This essay appeared in The Irish Independent:
Somalia is not a humanitarian disaster; it is an evolutionary disaster. The current drought is not the worst in 50 years, as the BBC and all the aid organizations claim. It is nothing compared to the droughts in 1960/61 or 73/74. And there are continuing droughts every 5 years or so.
It’s just that there are now four times the population; having been kept alive by famine relief, supplied by aid organizations, over the past 50 years. So, of course, the effects of any drought now, is a famine. They cannot even feed themselves in a normal rainfall year. Worst yet, the effects of these droughts, and poor nutrition in the first 3 years of the a child’s life, have a lasting effect on the development of the infant brain, so that if they survive, they will never achieve a normal IQ. Consequently, they are selectively breeding a population who cannot be educated, let alone one that is not being educated; a recipe for disaster.
We are seeing this impact now, and it can only exacerbate, to the detriment of their neighbours, and their environment as well. This scenario can only end in an even worse disaster; with even worse suffering, for those benighted people, and their descendants. Eventually, some mechanism will intervene, be it war, disease or starvation.
So what do we do? Let them starve? What a dilemma for our Judeo/Christian/Islamic Ethos; as well as Hindu/Buddhist morality. And this is beginning to happen in Kenya, Ethiopia and other countries in Asia, like Pakistan. Is this the beginning of the end of civilization?
AFRICA is giving nothing to anyone outside Africa — apart from AIDS and new diseases. Even as we see African states refusing to take action to restore something resembling civilization in Zimbabwe, the begging bowl for Ethiopia is being passed around to us out of Africa, yet again. It is nearly 25 years since the famous Feed The World campaign began in Ethiopia, and in that time Ethiopia’s population has grown from 33.5 million to 78+ million today. So, why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country? Where is the logic? There is none. Now they want to move to other countries to continue to breed and commit crime.
To be sure, there are two things saying that logic doesn’t count. One is my conscience, and the other is the picture, yet again, of another wide-eyed child, yet again, gazing, yet again, at the camera, which yet again, captures the tragedy of children starving.
Sorry. My conscience has toured this territory on foot and financially. Unlike most of you, I have been to Ethiopia; like most of you, I have stumped up the loot to charities to stop starvation there. The wide-eyed boy-child we saved, 20 years or so ago, is now a low IQ, AK 47-bearing moron, siring children whenever the whim takes him and blaming the world because he is uneducated, poor and left behind. There is no doubt a good argument why we should prolong this predatory and dysfunctional economic, social and sexual system but I do not know what it is. There is, on the other hand, every reason not to write a column like this. It will win no friends and will provoke the self-righteous wrath of, well, the self-righteous hand wringing, letter writing wrathful individuals; a species which never fails to contaminate almost every debate in Irish life with its sneers and its moral superiority. Itwill also probably enrage some of the finest men in Irish life, like John O’Shea, of Goal; and the Finucane brothers, men whom I admire enormously. So be it.
But, please, please, you self-righteously wrathful, spare me mention of our own Irish Famine, with this or that lazy analogy. There is no comparison! Within 20 years of the Famine, the Irish population was down by 30%. Over the equivalent period, thanks to western food, the Mercedes10-wheel truck and the Lockheed Hercules plane, Ethiopia’s population has more than doubled.
Alas, that wretched country is not alone in its madness. Somewhere, over the rainbow, lies Somalia, another fine land of violent, AK 47-toting, khat-chewing, girl-circumcising, permanently tumescent layabouts and housing pirates of the ocean. Indeed, we now have almost an entire continent of sexually hyperactive, illiterate indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world or allowances by the semi-communist Governments they voted for, money supplied by borrowing it from the > World Bank!
This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or common sense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against AIDS infection. Needless to say, poverty, hunger and societal meltdown have not prevented idiotic wars involving Tigre, Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea etcetera.
Broad brush-strokes, to be sure. But broad brush-strokes are often the way that history paints its gaudier, if more decisive, chapters. Japan, China, Russia, Korea, Poland, Germany, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the 20th century have endured worse broad brush-strokes than almost any part of Africa. They are now — one way or another — virtually all giving aid to or investing in Africa, whereas Africa,with its vast Savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS.
Meanwhile, Africa’s peoples are outstripping their resources and causing catastrophic ecological degradation. By 2050, the population of Ethiopia will be 177 million; the equivalent of France, Germany and Benelux today, but located on the parched and increasingly Protein-free wastelands of the Great Rift Valley. So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?
How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them?
Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity! But that is not good enough. For self-serving generosity has been one of the curses of Africa. It has sustained political systems which would otherwise have collapsed. It prolonged the Eritrean-Ethiopian war by nearly a decade. It is inspiring Bill Gates’ programme to rid the continent of malaria, when, in the almost complete absence of personal self-discipline, that disease is one of the most efficacious forms of population-control now operating. If his programme is successful, tens of millions of children who would otherwise have died in infancy will survive to adulthood, he boasts.
Oh good: then what? I know, let them all come here (to Ireland). Germany and the rest of Europe is already inundated and there are literally millions queuing up who want a hand out, taking in refugees because you feel sorry for them will end in the demise of those countries taking part.
You will note that: No Gulf State is taking any refugees, and the head of the human rights commission is Saudi Arabian !?!
Categories
Born again Cynic! Well I thought it was funny!

“Introducing our Guest of Honor…..”


Yeah I know, TOO SOON!

Categories
Born again Cynic! Dear Grumpy Advice on Teaching in Today's Classroom

Something to ponder upon




 

Categories
Born again Cynic! California

Some thoughts on the California latest Fires

Image result for FIF5

Categories
Born again Cynic! Well I thought it was funny!

My Underachieving Christmas efforts!

Inline image 1

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

Ah fair Harvard, it is still the same!

Landlord Tells Harvard Student to Move Out Over Legally Owned Guns

Roommates searched room for guns after finding MAGA hat

Leyla Pirnie

BY: 

A Massachusetts landlord told a Harvard University graduate student that he wanted her to move out of her apartment because her legally owned firearms made some of her roommates uncomfortable.

“Since it’s clear that Leyla wants to keep her firearms, it would be best for all parties if she finds another place to live,” Dave Lewis, president of Avid Management, said in an emailto the household obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The request that the student, Leyla Pirnie, move out came after her roommates searched her room while she was not home and found her firearms. That prompted one of the roommates to email Lewisrequesting he verify that Pirnie was in compliance with applicable firearms laws.

“We discussed with Leyla that all of us are uncomfortable with having firearms in the house, and that their presence causes anxiety and deprives us of the quiet enjoyment of the premise to which we are entitled,” the roommate wrote to Lewis.

Pirnie said she feels her roommates violated her privacy and now they and her landlord are trying to violate her rights.

“A few weeks ago, I came back to my apartment from a weekend trip and was confronted by one of my roommates who asked if I had guns in the house,” she told the Free Beacon. “After being told far too many lies to count, my roommates finally admitted that they searched my closet, under my bed, and all of my drawers in pursuit of finding my guns.”

While she was given several different explanations for why the roommates entered and searched her room, the 24-year-old said she felt her political beliefs and where she is from played a significant role in the roommates’ actions.

“When I asked them why they were in my room to begin with, they each came up with completely contradicting stories (none of which made any sense), but one comment struck me in particular: ‘We saw that you had a MAGA hat and come on, you’re from Alabama… so we just kind of assumed that you had something,'” she said. “I asked why they didn’t just call me and ask me before intruding. One of the girls responded that fear took over her body and she felt compelled to search my room until she found proof… I cannot make this up.”

Pirnie said she had been living in the apartment since September without incident, and she kept her political beliefs to herself before the incident. But she did have a Make America Great Again hat in her room.

In response to the email from Pirnie’s roommate, Lewis contacted Captain James Donovan of the Somerville Police Department to inspect Pirnie’s firearms and ensure they were in compliance with Massachusetts law. Pirnie agreed to allowing the police to inspect her firearms and said she was told she is in compliance with all applicable laws. Lewis acknowledged the department’s conclusion that Pirnie was not breaking any gun laws in his email telling Pirnie to move out.

Captain Donovan told the Free Beacon he could not comment publicly on the matter. Dave Lewis and the roommate who emailed him did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Pirnie said the roommates confronted her about her firearms and she explained to them she was a legal gun owner who is trained in the safe handling of firearms. She said the roommates weren’t concerned with Pirnie’s handling of the guns but rather that somebody might break in and turn the guns on them or the guns “might go off on their own.”

She said her landlord’s concern over some of her roommates being uncomfortable with legally owned firearms is misplaced and his request that she move out is inappropriate.

“What I find uncomfortable is coming home to find out that six people I barely know went into my bedroom without permission and went through every single one of my drawers, without any regard to my privacy whatsoever,” Pirnie said. “My landlord’s e-mail, though carefully crafted, showed tremendous prejudice against my right to legally have firearms.”

Pirnie said her motivations for owning firearms have been ignored even though she shared them with her roommates. While an undergrad, she said she was in a physically abusive relationship. She said the experience is part of what drives her to be armed.

“Nobody has bothered to question, ‘Well, why do you want to have protection? Could it be because you’ve experienced something where you need to protect yourself as you see fit?'” she said. “I have a real and legitimate reason as to why I want to protect myself.”

When Pirnie and her father rejected Lewis’s request that she move out in the middle of studying for finals, Lewis responded by saying his request “was based strictly on practical and not idealogical (sic) terms.” He then warned that if the other roommates moved out Pirnie would have to pay their rent.

“If the other roommates were to move out, Leyla would need to find roommates to share the place or foot the entire $6000+ monthly rent herself,” Lewis wrote in an email to Pirnie and her father. “Obviously it would be much easier for the others to stay and just fill one room (and I’m confident—were this to happen—that the remaining housemates will release Leyla from any further responsibility under the lease) and that’s why I proposed what I did.”

Pirnie feels she’s being punished for being a gun owner.

“I’m still very much so being threatened out of my apartment,” she said. “Either I leave and incur moving expenses or my roommates move and I incur their rent expenses… Doesn’t seem right.

“Not only is this a blatant violation of my privacy, but it’s also a violation of my rights.”

Categories
All About Guns Born again Cynic! Cops Dear Grumpy Advice on Teaching in Today's Classroom

Ya Think!?! Maybe thereb is some little Hope for Harvard yet!

According to a study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, which cites the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the United Nations International Study on Firearms Regulation, the more guns a nation has, the less criminal activity.
In other words, more firearms, less crime, concludes the virtually unpublicized research report by attorney Don B. Kates and Dr. Gary Mauser. But the key is firearms in the hands of private citizens.
“The study was overlooked when it first came out in 2007,” writes Michael Snyder, “but it was recently re-discovered and while the findings may not surprise some, the place where the study was undertaken is a bit surprising. The study came from the Harvard Journal of Law, that bastion of extreme, Ivy League liberalism. Titled Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?, the report “found some surprising things.”
The popular assertion that the United States has the industrialized world’s highest murder rate, says the Harvard study, is a throwback to the Cold War when Russian murder rates were nearly four times higher than American rates. In a strategic disinformation campaign, the U.S. was painted worldwide as a gunslinging nightmare of street violence – far worse than what was going on in Russia. The line was repeated so many times that many believed it to be true. Now, many still do.
Today violence continues in Russia – far worse than in the U.S. – although the Russian people remain virtually disarmed. “Similar murder rates also characterize the Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and various other now-independent European nations of the former U.S.S.R.,” note Kates and Mauser . Kates is a Yale-educated criminologist and constitutional lawyer. Dr. Mauser is a Canadian criminologist at Simon Fraser University with a Ph.D. from the University of California Irvine. “International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions are all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error.”

Read more at https://www.beliefnet.com/news/articles/harvard-university-study-reveals-astonishing-link.aspx#opE5hh6rEppIM8hC.99
 
By the early 1990s, Russia’s murder rate was three times higher than that of the United States. Thus, “in the United States and the former Soviet Union transitioning into current-day Russia,” say Kates and Mauser, “homicide results suggest that where guns are scarce, other weapons are substituted in killings.”
“There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate,” report Kates and Mauser. “Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated,” the statement “is, in fact, false.”
Norway, Finland, Germany, France and Denmark, which have high rates of gun ownership, have low murder rates. On the other hand, in Luxembourg, where handguns are totally banned and ownership of any kind of gun is minimal, the murder rate is nine times higher than Germany. Their source of information? The United Nations’ International Study on Firearms Regulation, published by the UN’s Economic and Social Council and the United Nations Commission on Crime-Prevention and Criminal Justice.
When Kates and Mauser compared England with the United States, they found “’a negative correlation,’ that is, ‘where firearms are most dense violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense, violent crime rates are highest.’ There is no consistent significant positive association between gun ownership levels and violence rates.”
In 2004, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences released an evaluation from its review of existing research. After reviewing 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and its own original empirical research, it failed to identify any gun control that had reduced violent crime, suicide, or gun accidents, note Kates and Mauser.
“The same conclusion was reached in 2003 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control,” write Kates and Mauser. “Armed crime, never a problem in England, has now become one. Handguns are banned but the Kingdom has millions of illegal firearms. Criminals have no trouble finding them and exhibit a new willingness to use them. In the decade after 1957, the use of guns in serious crime increased a hundredfold. In the late 1990s, England moved from stringent controls to a complete ban of all handguns and many types of long guns. Hundreds of thousands of guns were confiscated from those owners law-abiding enough to turn them in to authorities.” But crime increased instead of decreasing.
Ignoring these realities, gun control advocates have cited England, as the cradle of our liberties, as “a nation made so peaceful by strict gun control that its police did not even need to carry guns,” write Kates and Mauser.
“The United States, it was argued, could attain such a desirable situation by radically reducing gun ownership, preferably by banning and confiscating handguns.”

Read more at https://www.beliefnet.com/news/articles/harvard-university-study-reveals-astonishing-link.aspx#opE5hh6rEppIM8hC.99

Categories
Born again Cynic! Well I thought it was funny!

Something that will really upset the ladies out there but will put a smile on the Gentlemen Readers too!


Sorry ladies but I just could not help myself on this one! Grumpy

Categories
Born again Cynic!

They grow up so fast now a days!