Thursday, May 18, 2017

Mobs & Their Suppression

Mobs are, as such, a probable “clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm” to others..
When such mobs are armed or commit such dangerous crimes as “Arson” (eg Both evident at Berkeley in recent days) they clearly demonstrate and multiply that “clear and present danger”---And justify the police or any good citizen to use any level of force (Including deadly force) to suppress that danger.

In fact, the failure of police (Or, if called up by Governors who understand their duties, the National Guard), to fire upon such extremely dangerous mobs as both individuals (ie By snipers under the direct control of a command officer) and by volley-fire in the case of any group attack is a gross neglect of duty.

It might be well for those who are members of such mobs or instigate-and-support such Fascist thugs to remember that the vast majority of privately held, military/police grade, firearms in the USA are in the possession of those citizens who are capable-and-willing to protect themselves, family, friends and “the common good” by using them to put down dangerous mobs in those failed jurisdictions where the police will not do so!

Such actions are matters of self-defense as extends to defense of others and community.

[The above possibility of citizen actions may well be the reason that the mis-leaders of the Democratic (sic) Party have taken the lead in attempts to deprive our fellow citizens of modern-and-effective firearms.]


[For general information, the hard touch of a triangular file to the lands of a gun's barrel and the lighter touch of a flat file to the firing-pin and extractor of such will negate the usual forensic information.]

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Due Process Rights Updated Again


  1. Right to sufficient-time prior (Written)notice-of/access-to the: “Charges” against the citizen; The  Law/rules/regulations alleged to be violated; The names and other identifying information of all witnesses who have provided testimony ;or other evidence; Documents/physical-evidence as to the “charges”.
  2. The right to compel personal testimony of witnesses and to have that testimony given on oath/affirmation (Allowing for criminal or civil punishment for perjury/false-swearing if such is inflicted) AND to cross-examine those witnesses.
  3. The right to a hearing before a neutral hearing examiner.
  4. The right to a written decision from that examiner.
  5. The right to appeal any such decision to a court-of-law based on the facts, the law and state and federal constitutions if a public institution is involved OR to to the highest authority in a private organization.


These were the rights given to convicted criminals facing revocation of probation/parole by Wisconsin's Department Of Corrections. I fail to understand why universities will not provide the same “Due Process” to students facing in-school disciplinary actions. (Where guilt or probable cause was found by a court-of-record, some of these rights were not given.)

Sunday, May 14, 2017

Recusal Of Judges

In Wisconsin and like democracy-based States judges are elected.

There are those who maintain that even its Supreme Court justices should "recuse" themselves if some prior contributor to their election campaign has some interest in a case before them.

What such proponents skillfully avoid is:
1. That position has been well known-to and apparently rejected by the People who cast their ballots for those justices;
2. Contributions are made to such campaigns not as an effort to buy/rent/lease justices, but because the citizens using money to express their "free speech rights" approve of the candidates' general philosophy on The Law or oppose their opponents' like stances;
3. Requiring some judges to so recuse themselves provides a default victory to their opponents; And,
4. Attempts to inflict such recusal is a Fascist effort to vacate the above-noted democratic acts of our fellow citizens.

Thursday, May 11, 2017

The Law VS Censorship Of University Students

The first quote provided below is from Professor Eugene Volokh's editorial as published on May 11, 2017 by The Washington Post.

A. "The Supreme Court has made “crystal clear” that the government may not discriminate based on viewpoint, even in limited public fora such as university open spaces (or for that matter even university programs for funding student speech). Lower courts have consistently struck down campus speech codes aimed at supposedly bigoted speech. See, e.g., Dambrot v. Central Michigan Univ., 55 F.3d 1177, 1184-85 (6th Cir. 1995); DeJohn v. Temple Univ., 537 F.3d 301, 316-17, 320 (3d Cir. 2008); McCauley v. Univ. of V.I., 618 F.3d 232, 237-38, 250 (3d Cir. 2010); Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v. George Mason Univ., 993 F.3d 386, 388-89, 391, 393 (4th Cir. 1993); College Republicans v. Reed, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1005, 1010-11, 1021 (N.D. Cal. 2007); Roberts v. Haragan, 346 F. Supp. 2d 853, 870-72 (N.D. Tex. 2004); Bair v. Shippensburg Univ., 280 F. Supp. 2d 357, 373 (M.D. Pa. 2003); Booher v. Bd. of Regents of N. Ky. Univ., 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11404, *28-*31 (E.D. Ky. 1998); UWM Post, Inc. v. Regents, 774 F. Supp. 1163, 1165-66, 1173, 1177 (E.D. Wis. 1991); Doe v. Univ. of Mich., 721 F. Supp. 852, 856, 864-66 (E.D. Mich. 1989). And in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2010), the Court gave students’ freedom to “express any viewpoint they wish — including a discriminatory one” as an example of “this Court’s tradition of protect[ing] the freedom to express the thought that we hate” (quotation marks omitted). There is no First Amendment exception for “hate speech” or “racist signs, symbols and speech.”.
B. "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" 

Sunday, May 07, 2017

President John Adams On Religion & The USA

Human passions unbridled by morality and religion…would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net.”
Without religion this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean Hell.”
Thanks to God that he gave me stubbornness when I know I am right.” 


Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people”. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Monday, May 01, 2017

"Man" Is Correct Usage


When real universities were developed (By White Christian males) the common language was Latin.
Those early academics very surely knew the difference between “Vir” (As relates to only males) and “Homo” (As designates all humans).

As English universities drifted away from Latin and English became their common tongue (And later the most common international language), the term “Man” became the accepted term used in place of “Homo”.

Only the ignorant or politically correct Fascists or their slaves would deny the above.


It has been reported that some university students have been punished for using “man” (Rather than “submitting” to the above-cited Fascists). Some such petty-tyrants have used the excuse of “style books” as written by other like critters or their subjugated, gonad-less, “Men”.

Although I am not a lawyer, I must wonder if such penalties are free-speech "Violations Of Civil Rights Under Color Of Law" as might allow penalized students to recover severe damages from schools and individual teachers.