I'm not going to link to the madness we all saw recently, The Ft. Hood shooting and the mass stabbing incident at the Pennsylvania high school, but I do want to talk about it because it will happen again.
Take a minute and read this open letter to Congress written by Lt. Patrick Cook, one of those who was terrorized by the Ft. Hood shooter and saw a fellow soldier die. It's riveting and the message inescapable.
The real question is when is it enough? How much innocent blood is sufficient for those who bathe in it and revel in deaths of the disarmed and helpless? Because Lt.Cook is absolutely right. It will happen again.
I'm not saying everyone should be armed. There are many who don't for their own personal reasons and those who just don't have what it takes to go around with a gun on their hip. I get that and have no issues with them because it's a choice. One that should be a part of every American's life. But to take away that choice from those of us who can and want to is to set us all up for more of the same. Death, tragedy and horror and all of it preventable.
Here's a clue for all those out there who clamor for more gun control and outright gun bans. Ready?
There is no such thing as a Gun Free Zone. Period.
Except in the minds of the delusional or those with visions of absolute statist control. There are only those areas where lawful carry by lawful citizens going about their lawful daily lives is unlawful and they may not possess the lawful means of protection for self and other citizens. You can call them Victim Disarmament Zones or Criminal Protection Zones or anything you like but the hard, cold truth is that there are simply no areas anywhere in these United States where you can guarantee that a criminal will never bring a gun or the means to kill or wound as many innocents as he can reach. It's not possible short of an absolute police state and not even then. Difficult does not equal impossible.
There are guns in the world and will be right up until either the Second Coming or the heat death of the world (depending on your religious views. I favor the first but that's just me). We can join hands and sing Kumbaya until the cows come home but it won't change a thing. And please spare me the whole "It has to start somewhere" nonsense. It doesn't have to start somewhere and preaching that idiocy is akin to lining up the entirety of the unarmed populace at the doors of the abattoir and saying 'so long and thanks for playing.'
Folks, there is evil in the world and that evil is armed. Asking the good, no, forcing the good to be at a constant disadvantage in the arms race is just another face of that evil. It is monstrous and intolerable. Those who champion universal disarmament are creating an underclass of people who are nothing more than potential statistics waiting for the inevitable.
We're seeing the proof literally every day. Those states that loosen the onus of personal defense carry are experiencing downturns in violent crime, especially murder, while the incidences of justifiable homicides by those otherwise at risk are rising. Look at Detroit and it's pro gun police chief if you doubt me. Women are the fastest growing segment of the shooting industry. Gee, I wonder why that is?
Gun Control advocates, and especially those who push the Gun Free Zone myth, are the very face of evil in this country. They have set the stage for every mass killing we experience and an unholy large number of murders and great bodily injury assaults. They have no excuses and deserve no mercy. It is not the gun in one's hand it is the evil in one's heart and those who would take away the means for the preservation of innocent life merit no less than those who committed the act. I detest them to the very depths of my soul and denounce them all as the murderous would be tyrants they are. Strong language? Yep. No less true for that.
I am a gun owner, a shooter and an American. I will not lay down my arms until the day I die. I know those on the anti gun side wish (and plan) for that occurrence but today is not that day. Today I will contemplate my role as protector, as champion for those who have voluntarily chosen not to take up arms or who, for whatever reason, cannot. For the weak and the innocent and the helpless. I will reaffirm my vow and my oath and I will see to my body and my weapons that I will ever be ready to preserve and defend. Because evil walks the face of the earth and no amount of hand wringing, laws or intentions will alter that in even the smallest way. I am an American Gun Owner.
I will remember the ones who died in the name of elitism and control and most especially those who set the stage for their untimely and horrific demise. Oh yes, I will remember. They have reset that stage over and over and over again. The next one is out there, right now, just waiting in the shadows like that great beast thirsting for blood and death and destruction. I reject him and all his works utterly and name his adherents as my bitter enemies.
And when it does I pray it happens within my reach because I am an American Gun Owner. The lives of my countrymen, indeed the life of America herself are within my purview. I am responsible for them and to them. No more innocent lives.
No. More.
Six
Showing posts with label justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label justice. Show all posts
10 April 2014
10 December 2011
Rules Of The Road Bicycle Edition
Let me say right up front that I am a bicyclist. Lu and I do ride on the roads of America. But we avoid narrow, well traveled streets and obey all rules of the road (though I did once give Lu and the DO a near coronary by bombing down a mountain road at breakneck speeds with them following in the truck..another story). Names have been omitted to protect the innocent.
Joan has a post up about those bicyclists who can't seem to act like reasonable people. You know, the ones you fantasize about sideswiping off the road and into the annals of the Darwin Awards. In that light I'll pass along this story to hopefully give you a little satisfaction that there really is justice in the world. Occasionally. I was also nearly punched out by a lawyer. There was spit and screaming and everything.
Back in the day when I rode a motorcycle for my daily bread I was also one of our accident reconstructionists. I was dispatched to and investigated complex accidents, including injury and fatals. On this occasion I was sent to an auto/bicycle crash where the bicyclist received significant but not life threatening injuries.
Here's the stage. There's a doc in the box located near our recreation trail. The parking lot is surrounded by a 6 foot wooden fence. The exit crosses a sidewalk that makes a bend so it runs parallel to the fence on the drivers right. The sidewalk run from the parking lot exit to the curve and fence was short (I can't recall the exact distance but it was short). A careful driver can see pedestrians with no problem. Anything faster? Not so much. The cross street is divided by a raised concrete median with a cutout. The recreation trail ends at the street, requiring that trail users cross a city owned wharf parking lot or use the cutout and the street to pick it up again.
The driver was leaving the clinic after a visit with the ships doctor masquerading as qualified medical professional (another sore spot for me. Don't ask). Witnesses state she came to a complete stop at the parking lot exit whereupon, not seeing any pedestrian traffic close enough to be a hazard, she moved forward and across the sidewalk to enter traffic.
Enter the bicyclist. He decided to leave the recreation trail path and travel down the sidewalk in order to cut off the extra 100 feet or so he'd have to travel to use the cutout and pick up the trail again. He promptly crashed into the side of the car and managed to injure himself and damage the car and his bicycle.
I got there and conducted my investigation, including a time/distance calculation that showed the bicyclist was traveling at considerably faster than a walking pace, fast enough that it would have been impossible for the driver to see him. I found the bicyclist at fault for riding on a sidewalk (against the law in California) and cited him. In the report I noted the blind spot created by the fence and curving sidewalk as well as the bicyclists speed and short sidewalk run as factors mitigating against the driver being able to see the cyclist as well as there being no reasonable expectation on the drivers part to be looking for a bicyclist riding down the sidewalk in the first place. Her responsibility was to check for immediate hazards and when none were present she was free to navigate freely.
Fast forward 3 years and the inevitable civil suit. I was deposed by the plaintiff's attorney and on the fateful day arrived at the appointed place at the appointed time. I should have known what was coming. When I got into the conference room where the deposition was to take place the defendant's attorney was sitting back in his chair with a shit eating grin on his face. Through the whole deposition he said exactly two words.
The plaintiff's attorney started out by getting my training, education and experience in the record. Then he went on the attack. You know those small dogs commonly referred to as ankle biters? The ones who bark furiously and growl and snap and generally threaten without biting until you get a hand just a little too close? Yeah, that was this lawyer to a T. We went back and forth for hours. He just couldn't wrap his mind around the idea that in an auto/bicycle accident the driver wasn't automatically at fault. I imagine the injuries suffered by the rider were enough that he was eyeing a fairly hefty fee for his services and as we continued he saw that settlement disappearing further and further into the distance. At one point he asked me if bicyclists were fair game. If a driver could just completely disregard cyclists and injure them out of hand. My answer sent him into spasms of apoplexy. In that moment I understood what a conniption fit looks like. I was actually concerned that he was going to have a stroke. I told him that as long as a bicyclist was in violation of the vehicle code, operating his conveyance in a place he shouldn't have, in a manner disregarding his own safety and the driver exercised due caution then what happened to the bicyclist was his own fault. He leaned across the table toward me, spittle flying from his lips, and screamed that it was now open season on bicyclists according to me and there would soon be blood in the streets, cats and dogs living together and generally the end of the western world as we know it. I really thought he was going to punch my lights out he was so angry. The defendants lawyer just sat there, a log, and watched the plaintiff's case going down in flames, a smile on his lips. I hated him for that but what you gonna do? Has to be the easiest case he ever took. The deposition wound down from there but that lawyer was obviously a defeated man. I was right and he was wrong and the fact that he couldn't rip me apart and make me recant my investigation and testimony deflated him like a pin popped balloon. You could actually see the dollar signs flying away from his eyes.
The defense attorney's response? The only two words he uttered through about 4 hours of questions, answers and bitter recriminations? "No questions".
I never heard the final outcome but I didn't receive a subpoena for trial so it's pretty certain that the case was settled. I hated that the bicyclist was injured but the bottom line here is the the rules of the road apply equally. If you ride on the road your health and safety is your responsibility. Knowing and obeying the statutes regulating cars and bicycles isn't just a good idea it's essential to remaining a breathing, uninjured person.
But yeah, winning an argument with a lawyer so thoroughly that he nearly smacked me in the snot locker was one of the highlights of my career. It was a good day.
Six
Joan has a post up about those bicyclists who can't seem to act like reasonable people. You know, the ones you fantasize about sideswiping off the road and into the annals of the Darwin Awards. In that light I'll pass along this story to hopefully give you a little satisfaction that there really is justice in the world. Occasionally. I was also nearly punched out by a lawyer. There was spit and screaming and everything.
Back in the day when I rode a motorcycle for my daily bread I was also one of our accident reconstructionists. I was dispatched to and investigated complex accidents, including injury and fatals. On this occasion I was sent to an auto/bicycle crash where the bicyclist received significant but not life threatening injuries.
Here's the stage. There's a doc in the box located near our recreation trail. The parking lot is surrounded by a 6 foot wooden fence. The exit crosses a sidewalk that makes a bend so it runs parallel to the fence on the drivers right. The sidewalk run from the parking lot exit to the curve and fence was short (I can't recall the exact distance but it was short). A careful driver can see pedestrians with no problem. Anything faster? Not so much. The cross street is divided by a raised concrete median with a cutout. The recreation trail ends at the street, requiring that trail users cross a city owned wharf parking lot or use the cutout and the street to pick it up again.
The driver was leaving the clinic after a visit with the ships doctor masquerading as qualified medical professional (another sore spot for me. Don't ask). Witnesses state she came to a complete stop at the parking lot exit whereupon, not seeing any pedestrian traffic close enough to be a hazard, she moved forward and across the sidewalk to enter traffic.
Enter the bicyclist. He decided to leave the recreation trail path and travel down the sidewalk in order to cut off the extra 100 feet or so he'd have to travel to use the cutout and pick up the trail again. He promptly crashed into the side of the car and managed to injure himself and damage the car and his bicycle.
I got there and conducted my investigation, including a time/distance calculation that showed the bicyclist was traveling at considerably faster than a walking pace, fast enough that it would have been impossible for the driver to see him. I found the bicyclist at fault for riding on a sidewalk (against the law in California) and cited him. In the report I noted the blind spot created by the fence and curving sidewalk as well as the bicyclists speed and short sidewalk run as factors mitigating against the driver being able to see the cyclist as well as there being no reasonable expectation on the drivers part to be looking for a bicyclist riding down the sidewalk in the first place. Her responsibility was to check for immediate hazards and when none were present she was free to navigate freely.
Fast forward 3 years and the inevitable civil suit. I was deposed by the plaintiff's attorney and on the fateful day arrived at the appointed place at the appointed time. I should have known what was coming. When I got into the conference room where the deposition was to take place the defendant's attorney was sitting back in his chair with a shit eating grin on his face. Through the whole deposition he said exactly two words.
The plaintiff's attorney started out by getting my training, education and experience in the record. Then he went on the attack. You know those small dogs commonly referred to as ankle biters? The ones who bark furiously and growl and snap and generally threaten without biting until you get a hand just a little too close? Yeah, that was this lawyer to a T. We went back and forth for hours. He just couldn't wrap his mind around the idea that in an auto/bicycle accident the driver wasn't automatically at fault. I imagine the injuries suffered by the rider were enough that he was eyeing a fairly hefty fee for his services and as we continued he saw that settlement disappearing further and further into the distance. At one point he asked me if bicyclists were fair game. If a driver could just completely disregard cyclists and injure them out of hand. My answer sent him into spasms of apoplexy. In that moment I understood what a conniption fit looks like. I was actually concerned that he was going to have a stroke. I told him that as long as a bicyclist was in violation of the vehicle code, operating his conveyance in a place he shouldn't have, in a manner disregarding his own safety and the driver exercised due caution then what happened to the bicyclist was his own fault. He leaned across the table toward me, spittle flying from his lips, and screamed that it was now open season on bicyclists according to me and there would soon be blood in the streets, cats and dogs living together and generally the end of the western world as we know it. I really thought he was going to punch my lights out he was so angry. The defendants lawyer just sat there, a log, and watched the plaintiff's case going down in flames, a smile on his lips. I hated him for that but what you gonna do? Has to be the easiest case he ever took. The deposition wound down from there but that lawyer was obviously a defeated man. I was right and he was wrong and the fact that he couldn't rip me apart and make me recant my investigation and testimony deflated him like a pin popped balloon. You could actually see the dollar signs flying away from his eyes.
The defense attorney's response? The only two words he uttered through about 4 hours of questions, answers and bitter recriminations? "No questions".
I never heard the final outcome but I didn't receive a subpoena for trial so it's pretty certain that the case was settled. I hated that the bicyclist was injured but the bottom line here is the the rules of the road apply equally. If you ride on the road your health and safety is your responsibility. Knowing and obeying the statutes regulating cars and bicycles isn't just a good idea it's essential to remaining a breathing, uninjured person.
But yeah, winning an argument with a lawyer so thoroughly that he nearly smacked me in the snot locker was one of the highlights of my career. It was a good day.
Six
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)