[sorry this post is late — I set it to appear at 6pm, not 6am]

Apparently, the U.S. is not a safe place to be — in fact, there are 127 countries safer than ours.

I guess that it all depends.

Here in Plano, I see sights like this every morning in the pre-dawn hours — dozens of them, mostly jogging all by themselves, and I seriously doubt that you’d see much of this in, oh, Qatar (#31) or Oman (#69), let alone in Jamaica (#83).

Of course, I wouldn’t imagine you’d see many of the above in the South Side of Chicago or in Detroit, either, which just proves how dangerous averages can be.

What comes to mind immediately, by the way, is that according to the study, San Salvador and Honduras are ranked higher than the U.S. — begging the question as to why, then, thousands of their citizens are supposedly fleeing crime and persecution and flooding our southern border.

Actually, I call bullshit on the whole thing.  Reason:

South Africa is ranked one place higher than the U.S., at #127.

While there may be safe and unsafe places in the U.S., there are no  safe places in South Africa whatsoever.  As I said:  bullshit.

That’s Why

This tragic tale reminds me of something of my own experience.

Back when I worked for the Great Big Research Company, I had a client who was VP of a large supermarket chain.  One day, the local Chicago “city” newspaper (i.e. 99% Black readership) published a stinging exposé which showed that the chain’s suburban store prices were as much as a third lower than those of their inner-city stores.

Cue a visit from an irate “community organizer” (I don’t know which one, but I sure hope  it was one Barack Obama) who demanded to see the VP, wanting to know why “his people” were being “gouged” by the (obviously) racial practice of discriminatory pricing.

The VP (a tough little Irish bastard from the South Side) then explained the facts of life to the “organizer”, thus:

“We’re in business to make a profit.  Our inner-city stores have a lower profit than our suburban stores because of what we call ‘stock shrink’ — which is a nice name for ‘theft’, or ‘shoplifting’.  Suburban stores typically have a shrink percentage of less than 2% — in other words, less than two percent of sales are lost each year to theft.  In our inner-city stores, that percentage loss is over ten times as much — between 12 and 14 percent.  We have to make up the lost sales and profits somehow, and so we put our prices up in those stores to make up the difference.  If we didn’t put up the prices, the stores would have to be closed altogether.  So,” he concluded, “if you don’t want your people to pay those higher prices or find the stores have closed, you need to tell your people to stop stealing from our stores.  And that’s the end of the story.  Was there anything else?”

This happened about thirty years ago.  Nowadays, of course, he’d be imprisoned for telling the truth being so racially insensitive.

I miss the old days so  much…


And people ask me why I never go out without carrying a gun.  Here’s a little fun and games for you:

A mob of eight to 10 males wielding hammers descended upon bystanders at the East Bank Light Rail station on Friday night injuring several.

Just so everyone’s clear on this:  all ten* of the “males” were Somalis.  And it happened in Minneapolis, where carrying concealed handguns is not common.

Curious that this doesn’t seem to happen much in areas where a lot of people do  carry guns, e.g. in my neighborhood.

Wow.  Looks like Minnesota’s policy of allowing thousands of Muslim “migrants” from Africa to settle there is working out just as planned, huh?

*Ten?  Looks like I need to start loading the 1911 with these bad boys.  Good thing I have one or two on hand.

Major Affront, Meet Corporal Punishment

I think what pisses me off most about modern-day “petty” crime is not the robbery of cell phones from people’s hands, or the theft of cars for the sake of a “joyride”, or even the painting of graffiti on walls — although each one in its own way renders me irritated beyond belief.  Try these “petty” crimes, however, and see how they make you feel:

Arsonists destroy 250-year-old oak tree that has stood since George II was on the throne

Hunt for yobs who vandalised model town and brutally kicked a cat in the head as they made their escape

Mindless vandals wreck a charity model railway show

Correction to that last piece:  they’re not mindless;  they’re amoral, antisocial and spiteful, and their vile actions are those of childish anarchists.

Unlike a lot of people (especially on this website), I don’t think these little shits should go to prison for these crimes — although there’s a lot to be said for taking them out of society for a while.

What’s needed here is for these childish hooligans to be treated like children — but not in the modern manner of making them sit in the Penalty Corner or “grounding” them (whatever that means).

Prison’s too much punishment, they (usually) have no money to pay restitution, and “community service” is a fucking joke when by their actions they have demonstrated that they have no ties to the community whatsoever.

No.  We need to bring back flogging, because that ancient punishment is precisely what these kinds of actions call for.  We need to catch these assholes, make sure they’re guilty (of course), and then immediately  after sentencing lead them off to a punishment cell where they can be given ten lashes with a heavy cane.  (And for the feministicals:  female miscreants of this nature, although much rarer than their male counterparts, should get the same punishment, except with a light  cane.  Feel free to insist on equality for the womyns, however;  I’m not feeling too charitable at the moment.)

I know, corporal punishment is supposed to be barbaric and all that.  Remember, though, that the reason that these horrible people are called “vandals” is because their behavior is of a kind with the ancient and barbaric tribe named Vandals — and we should punish them accordingly.

The hell with them.


Somebody explain to me why we should ever — ever — trust the fucking FBI again, when they get involved in this kind of bullshit, trying to entrap a U.S. citizen into committing several federal crimes.

When did they do this?  In 2017:  after Donald Trump’s inauguration as POTUS.

And under whose auspices did they do this?  Why, those of Special Counsel Robert Mueller and DOJ prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, of course.

Why  did they do this?  All in the cause of trying to bring down President Donald Trump and overturn the fully-legal election result of 2016.

So to repeat myself:  somebody explain to me why we should ever — ever — trust the fucking FBI again.  With anything.

Iniquitous Theft

I was watching some stupid BBC-TV show about how a titled earl’s mansion was saved from ruin only by royal intervention (Prince Charles and his Prince’s Trust), and how the place was restored to its former glory and was now in essence a museum (said earl having relinquished title to the property many decades ago).

Which house and which earl is not important.  What was not said was why the place had to be abandoned in the first place, which can be summed up in just two words:  inheritance taxes.

Of all instances of government bastardy — and there are thousands — this is the one which gets my goat, because there are two major principles in play, and neither of them is good.

1)  The State decides that your property doesn’t really belong to you, so the gummint takes part of it it away from you (or more properly, from your heirs) after your death and puts it into their coffers.  It’s nothing less than fucking theft, pure and simple.

2)  The principle that “unearned income” — i.e. that your wealth gets passed on to your heirs, who didn’t work for it and therefore it should be treated as a windfall — is a bad thing because it simply perpetuates the wealth inequality of society.  The underlying Marxist lie that underpins this idea is self-explanatory:  that wealth is a finite quantity, and that keeping it in the family prevents others in society from benefiting from it.  (Never mind that history shows that almost all  great fortunes are dissipated within four — and usually three — generations because of multiple heirs, wastage, poor judgement and so on.)

What we also know is that inheritance taxes do not affect the very wealthy much, if at all, because they protect their property by a multitude of (perfectly-legal) tax avoidance schemes.  Instead, the taxes hit the middle classes (and especially family business owners and farmers) hardest of all.

So it’s all very well for HRH the Prince of Wales to come riding in on his faerie chariot and save some great house from ruin, when in fact it was the policies of his (and his forerunners’) government that was the principle cause of that ruin in the first place.

Just so we know the extent of the villainy:  the family was going to be forced to sell off the household effects to help pay the bills.  Which sounds trivial except that the earl was the owner of the largest collection of Chippendale furniture in the world (simply because the fifth earl had seen the first-ever catalog of the Chippendale Brothers furniture company in the 1750s, liked what he saw and bought hundreds of pieces of the stuff for his new country home, and all of which had stayed in the house ever since).  To give you an idea of its worth:  just one large glass-fronted bookcase — now being used to house some of the family’s equally-valuable china — would have fetched at auction around £20 million, and each of the hundreds of Chippendale chairs around £50,000… yes, each.

All the household goods had been packed up in an eighteen-wheeler, and were actually halfway to the auction house in London when the truck was intercepted and turned back to the house.  All very heroic stuff — and all completely unnecessary.

What’s interesting is that here in Murka, where we don’t even have titles and such, the popular antipathy towards inheritance taxes is profound — something like 80% of people polled hate the very idea of it, even though the vast majority of people are unlikely ever to be affected by inheritance taxes.

That’s because we’re not stupid, and we can recognize theft when we see it.  It’s the principle of the matter, and as this nation was founded upon principle, we can recognize its villainy where other countries’ inhabitants might not.

By the way, here’s the Wikipedia entry for Dumfries House.