Just Kidding

Let’s say you want to setup an emergency preparedness drill for a hospital. As part of the planning committee do you:

A – Create a list of potential emergency situations and hold a training day for hospital staff on how to prepare for such situations?

B – High an outside group to prepare a detailed report on mechanisms the hospital can implement to best survive likely emergency situations?

C – Hire an armed man to run into the emergency room one random day to terrorize the staff by aiming a firearm at them?

If you answered C you may be the exact type of person St. Rose Dominican Hospitals-Siena Campus hospital is looking for. Via Bruce Schneier’s blog we learned this was what the above mentioned hospital decided to do for terrorism preparedness:

How’s this for an ill-conceived emergency preparedness drill? An off-duty cop pretending to be a terrorist stormed into a hospital intensive care unit brandishing a handgun, which he pointed at nurses while herding them down a corridor and into a room.

I can’t imagine how this could possible go wrong.

But in Monday’s incident, which occurred in a unit that houses the hospital’s sickest patients, nurses, patients and their families did not know it was a drill, said Renee Ruiz, organizer of the California Nurses Association, which represents staff at the hospital.

So nobody present knew this was a drill. Although it was reported by the Las Vegas Sun the incident took place in Nevada where people are allowed to carry a firearm through licensing. Imagine if one of those doctors or a patient had been carrying a firearm and decided to shoot the person he or she believed was a terrorist (I’d say a man running into a hospital brandishing a firearm at people would be good grounds for a self-defense case).

These kinds of acts have consequences. The hospital which designed and enacted the drill should have thought this through a little more thoroughly. Likewise the off-duty officer they hired should be brought this potential problem to their attention. There are simply layers of stupidity here that can’t be overlooked.

We’re Not Happy Until Everybody is Watched

As it sits right now if you want a cellular phone without having to be on a list (the phone company’s subscriber list in this case) the only way to go is pre-paid. In this case you walk into a store, grab a pre-paid cell phone, and pay for it using cash (it’s that funny green colored paper for those of you who only know how to pay for things using plastic cards). A couple of senators have decided that any means of avoiding the government knowing what you’re doing is a bad thing.

Senators Charles Schumer and John Cornyn have introduced legislation that would require people buying pre-paid cell phones to show identification and be recorded. For a quote from the stupid:

“This proposal is overdue because for years, terrorists, drug kingpins and gang members have stayed one step ahead of the law by using prepaid phones that are hard to trace,” Schumer said.

So now what? They’ll have to go back to either using phone booths or stolen cell phones? Face it this law won’t change anything, criminals are always one step ahead of the authorities. Oh but best of all:

Faisal Shahzad, the 30-year-old suspect in the Times Square plot, allegedly used a prepaid cellphone to arrange the purchase of a Nissan Pathfinder that he attempted to turn into a car bomb, the senators noted.

Wait a minutes doesn’t a car require tax, title, and license? That generally means you have to register it with the state. So how exactly would having a law preventing people from buying pre-paid cell phones without identification help? Oh that’s right it wouldn’t.

Let’s hear some concerns from the people who actually think things through:

Civil liberties advocates have concerns about the proposal, saying there must be a role for anonymous communications in a free society. “They remain important for whistleblowers, battered spouses, reporters’ sources,” said James X. Dempsey, policy director for the Center for Democracy and Technology. And yet, he said, the space for such anonymous or pseudonymous communications has been narrowed. Pay phones, for example, have largely disappeared.

Pre-paid cell phones obtained with cash are also useful to those who want to keep the government out of their business.

Thankfully there currently is no similar bill in the House. But I’m sure that will change in about two days since this is needed to “fight the terrorists” (terrorists being anybody who doesn’t step into line with the government).

You Really Can’t Cure Stupid

It appears one of Sea Sheppard’s little nitwits is on trial in Japan. Peter Bethune was the former captain of the super high-tech speed boat Ady Gil before he parked it in front of a massive moving harpoon ship thinking the laws of physics could break for his righteous crusade (they didn’t). Well being one to blame other people for his fuck up he decided it would be a good idea to board the harpoon ship (after he was able to get a jet ski, it appears even Sea Sheppard wasn’t dumb enough to give this guy another expensive boat) to make a citizen’s arrest of the captain.

So what happens when one man illegal boards another vessel full of rightfully angry people? He gets arrested himself and sent to Tokyo for trail (he’s lucky if it were a Russian ship they would have probably dropped him in the middle of the sea on an inflatable dingy):

He pleaded guilty to four charges, including trespass and obstructing commercial activities, but denied a fifth charge of assault.

If convicted he could receive a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison.

Pro tip: don’t trespass on other peoples’ property. Illegally boarding the Japanese whaling vessel is akin to breaking into somebody’s home. It doesn’t matter if you don’t like what they are doing. If somebody doesn’t like the fact I own firearms they can’t break into my home and try to place me under citizen’s arrest.

Even More on Arizona’s Illegal Immigrant Law

A while back a certain state passed a certain law that was really unpopular. I expressed my worries about the wording of the law as well. My main beef was the fact the bill simple stated:

OR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

I feel that wording is poorly chosen as “lawful contact” could mean any number of things. Well I’ve been doing a little more digging into this law and found out that Arizona’s House actually corrected the wording in their HB 2162:

For any lawful contact stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released. The person’s immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States code section 1373(c). A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution. A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:

I don’t know why I didn’t find this earlier but I can see why it was never really reported by the big media companies. This rewording pretty much takes care of my biggest gripe with this law. It does seem reasonable to check a person’s immigration status upon enforcement of other laws being background checks are usually run anyways.

There is still the potential issue of an officer pulling a person over solely to check their immigration status by making up some phony bull shit about a light being out but that threat exists for every law on the books. But I will openly admit I was wrong here and should have done more research at the time of writing about my issues with the law.

Yet Another TSA List

We have the selectee list, the no-fly list, and now Dvorak Uncensored reports we have the uncooperative serf list:

Airline passengers who get frustrated and kick a wall, throw a suitcase or make a pithy comment to a screener could find themselves in a little-known Homeland Security database.

The Transportation Security Administration says it is keeping records of people who make its screeners feel threatened as part of an effort to prevent workplace violence.

Now I can understand wanting to deal with customers kicking walls and throwing suitcases (for instance removing them from the airport) but making comments? Seriously? Are the poor wittle TSA agents getting hurt feewings? On a more serious note this list could be used as a sort of “revenge” list:

Privacy advocates fear the database could feed government watch lists and subject innocent people to extra airport screening.

Once again I’ll state that customers who are acting outwardly violent by damaging equipment should be removed from the airport like the tantrum throwing child they are. They still shouldn’t be put on a list that opens them up to additional screening as a form of revenge by untouchable government agents. This goes double for people making rude remarks. But here’s the funniest part:

The database was created in late 2007 as the TSA launched a program to prevent the nation’s 50,000 airport screeners from being attacked or threatened, agency spokeswoman Kristin Lee said. At the time, TSA officials voiced concern about passengers disrespecting screeners, and they began issuing new uniforms with police-style badges pinned to shirts.

Lee said attacks and threats against screeners are “rare” and the database has records from about 240 incidents. Most are screeners in conflict with other screeners. About 30 incidents involve people such as passengers or airport workers attacking or threatening screeners, Lee said.

I don’t know why they put the word rare in quotation marks. Considering the number of people who fly every year having only 30 passenger names in it since 2007 means it’s pretty fucking rare. I do find it funny how 210 of the recorded incidents involved screeners in conflict with their colleague. It shows what happens when you give two morons a little bit of authority, they can’t use it responsibly.

All That Video Gaming May Have Benefits

It’s not secret that I played a lot of video games when I was younger. These days not so much although I did clear up some free time for MegaMan 10. Apparently all that video gaming wasn’t a complete waste of my time though. It seems people who play video games have higher levels of awareness when they’re dreaming:

The first study suggested that people who frequently played video games were more likely to report lucid dreams, observer dreams where they viewed themselves from outside their bodies, and dream control that allowed people to actively influence or change their dream worlds – qualities suggestive of watching or controlling the action of a video-game character.

Maybe that’s why I have such an uncanny ability to control what goes on in my dreams. Finally a benefit to all that time spent playing games!

When You’re All Alone

Jay, as the title of the linked post implies, brings up a tough question. Greg Baer, a higher up employee of Bank of America, had a slight dilemma on a Sunday morning when 500 SEIU hoodlums showed up in his front lawn screaming and holding placards. Of course Mr. Baer wasn’t home at the time only his 14 year-old son was but he did arrive at the scene while the hoods were doing their “protest.”

The question being asked by Jay is when is it OK to introduce such crowds to the business end of a defensive weapon. On one hand they didn’t hurt anybody but on the other hand there is good reason to believe lives were in danger (an angry mob is never a safe thing). Of course most people would say you should barricade yourself in your home and call the police. Of course that’s the best advice except for one little detail:

Intimidation was the whole point of this exercise, and it worked-even on the police. A trio of officers who belatedly answered our calls confessed a fear that arrests might “incite” these trespassers.

In this case the police were going to be of no assistance.

I believe there most certainly was a reasonable fear of life in this case. These protesters numbered in the hundreds (large crowds develop a hive mentality and all it takes is one person to turn violent for the entire crowd to follow suit) and were fired up big time. In addition the protesters weren’t protesting on the sidewalk or other public property but walked right up to his home. If they decided to go bursting in there would not be enough time for the police to react and with that many hoods the three officers on site couldn’t do anything anyways (gee maybe they should have called for backup).

Personally I think the best solution to this type of problem would be to call barricade yourself and family members in the home where a natural choke point exists (at the top of the stairs in a two story home for instance). Have every weapon available at hand along with as many loaded magazines as possible. I’d also ensure everybody capable of shouldering a weapon would be armed.

Why not give the invaders (what those hoods really were) some warning shots and hope they disperse? Well legal issues aside you’re facing odds of 500 to maybe one or two in most cases. No matter how well armed you are those odds aren’t going to look so survivable. You can only hope the crowd will disperse on their own without attacking, the police will show up and disperse the crowd (which they weren’t looking to keep on doing), or realize you’re surrounded by a superior force.

One thing I would do though is try to get a camera on hand to record or photograph the protesters. This would give a record and source of identifications so you could bring up changes at a later time (trespassing at the very least).

Of course Mr. Baer’s situation was different and worse in my opinion. He was not at the house but his kid was. What he did required major balls:

Baer, on his way home from a Little League game, parked his car around the corner, called the police, and made a quick calculation to leave his younger son behind while he tried to rescue his increasingly distressed teen. He made his way through a din of barked demands and insults from the activists who proudly “outed” him, and slipped through his front door.

I don’t care who you were walking through a crowd of people who outwardly hate you takes guts.

This entire situation was messed up to say the least. As usual the SEIU thugs were using fear and intimidation in an attempt to get what they want. This becomes more obvious when you see how cagey they are:

Targeting homes and families seems to put SEIU in the ranks of (now jailed) radical animal-rights activists and the Kansas anti-gay fundamentalists harassing the grieving parents of a dead 20-year-old soldier at his funeral (the Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on the latter). But that’s not a conversation that SEIU officials want to have.

When I asked Stephen Lerner, SEIU’s point-person on Wall Street reform, about these tactics, he accused me of getting “emotional.” Lerner was more comfortable sticking to his talking points: “Millions of people are losing their homes, and they have gone to the banks, which are turning a deaf ear.”

Millions of people may be losing their homes but that doesn’t give them the right to trespass on the property of those who still own a home. And not only trespass mind you but in an obviously threatening manner. Then the obvious question:

Okay, fine, then why not continue SEIU protests at bank offices and shareholder meetings-as the union has been doing for more than a year? Lerner insists, “People in powerful corporations seem to think they can insulate themselves from the damage they are doing.”

Wait what? That makes no fucking sense. They aren’t insulating themselves from damage they are going to work. Oh right I forgot the SEIU wanted to scare Mr. Baer, not make a statement against him or his company’s policies. They are probably also trying to get out of the massive loan Mr. Baer’s company was so good to give them:

Complicating this picture is the fact that BofA is the union’s lender of choice — and SEIU, suffering financially, owes the bank nearly $4 million in interest and fees. Bank of America declined comment on the loans.

I’m just saying. Oh and to just judge the intelligence of the SEIU’s supporters in this particular matter:

Of course, HuffPost readers responding to the coverage assumed that Baer was an evil former Bush official. He’s not. A lifelong Democrat, Baer worked for the Clinton Treasury Department, and his wife, Shirley Sagawa, author of the book The American Way to Change and a former adviser to Hillary Clinton, is a prominent national service advocate.

In the 1990s, the Baers’ former bosses, Bill and Hillary Clinton, denounced the “politics of personal destruction.” Today politicians and their voters of all stripes grieve the ugly bitterness that permeates our policy debates. Now, with populist rage providing a useful cover, it appears we’ve crossed into a new era: The politics of personal intimidation. To top of page

Yeah they’re supporters are mostly uninformed nitwits.

What He Really Said

So I’ve noticed a meme going around that is pegging Rand Paul as a racist. I thought that was pretty surprising being he just won the Kentucky Republican nomination and thus coming out as a racist would not seem the wisest political maneuver ever. Needless to say I did a little digging and found out he didn’t say anything racist at all.

What Rand Paul did say was the Civil Rights Act is in direct conflict with private property rights. Of course when he came under fire he went and said the opposite which I think was just plain dumb.

I agree with the fact that private property rights give you the ability to do what you want on your property including being a racist bigot. If you don’t want to allow black, brown, white, or indigo people into your place of business that’s fine it’s your right to determine your clientele. If you want to require all customers of your business to wear red shoes before they walk in that’s your right as well. Likewise if I don’t support your rules of business I can take my money elsewhere.

What the Civil Rights Act should have done is required all facilities receiving public funding to recognize all races and serve them equally. In essence it should have only applied to government and people receiving tax payer money. Our system of laws are supposed to protect us against our government not protect us against idiots who are willing to turn down business from customers who have a different skin color than themselves.

Needless to say Rand Paul doesn’t seem to have quite the backbone as his father but he most certainly is on the right track.

Everybody Draw Mohammad Day After Shocks

I’m sure most of you who read gun blogs realize that yesterday was Everybody Draw Mohammad Day. The idea was to spit in the fact of censorship by committing sacrilege. A lot of funny and well done drawings were produced. Obviously I didn’t partake in the day’s festivities because I’m incredibly lazy.

But now we have the day after and the person who is credited with the idea, Molly Norris, is apologizing profusely. She’s pretty much doing everything she can to separate herself from the idea she sparked via her cartoon.

So what are some of the after shocks from the event? Well Pakistan went and blocked Facebook and YouTube because they were hosting images and videos for the day’s events. Threats are being made by extremists and one cartoonist is trying to back peddle in an effort to avoid possible attack against her person.

Censorship is dangerous stuff.