Alternative Site

At long last, Britishland is building a new (and large) prison somewhere in Yorkshire.  Predictably, all the NIMBYs are screaming and shouting because “eyesore”, “ugly” and so on.

This is the kind of thing that drives me mad.  On the one hand, it’s obvious to even the most stupid people (e.g.  liberals) that Britain needs MOAR PRISONS because MOAR CRIMINALS.  However, why build the thing in Yorkshire (which is quite pretty, in parts)?  With about ten minutes’ search, I found a far better location:  the (uninhabited) island of North Rona.  Here’s where it is on the map:

…and here’s what it looks like:

Yup:  over 200 acres of fuck-all, what better place to house criminals?  Remote, cold, windy… hell, on second thoughts why build a prison at all?  Tents, that’s the thing.  Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio and a dozen Mexicans would have them up in a few hours, job done, ship a couple thousand convicted criminals in (I’m thinking bastards like this one) and wave good-bye.  Don’t even need prison guards, so ongoing savings.

You can be damn sure that the mortality rate would allow for fresh shipments of assholes on a monthly basis, when the food supplies* are brought in.

And when the liberals start their predictable squealing about Krool & Hartless Treatment Of Misunderstood Yoofs… we substitute them for the criminals.

All in favor, say “Aye”…


*Bread, water, dog food, you get my drift.

See You In November, Asshole

I did not need to read this.

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) told Fox News on Monday that the ability for strangers to sell guns to strangers without a background check is a “loophole” that needs to be addressed.
“I think one of the things, Jon, we have to do in this country is, take a strong look at this ability for people to buy a weapon when they’ve been turned down by a background check. … I believe, as a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, we should protect that family transfer or family sale. But any stranger-to-stranger, however — we don’t know how this person got their gun, but we do know that that’s a real loophole in the law. Because I’m a gun owner, I’m never going to sell my gun to someone I don’t know that — do they have a criminal record, are they a danger to other people, are they ready to commit evil? There’s no need for that.”

Fuck you, Patrick.  If I want to sell a gun, I’ll fucking well sell it.  If a guy has been turned down for a prior gun purchase and he then tries to get a gun anyway, then he’s at fault, not I.

And what if he was turned down because a vengeful ex slapped a restraining order on him, just for spite?  Am I supposed to know that, too?

What you and your fuckbuddies in the gun confiscation business call a “loophole”, I call a personal freedom — the freedom to sell my personal property whenever I choose to do so.  If the buyer turns around and commits a crime afterwards, that’s not my fault  — just as it’s not the (FFL) gun dealer’s fault when a “legal” gun buyer turns round and murders someone.  In both cases, the actual perpetrator caused the problem, not the seller.  

As someone who wants to sell a gun, I have a right to ask the prospective buyer if he has a carry permit, and the right to refuse to sell him my gun if he doesn’t have one.  That’s the right you want to turn into an obligation?  Bite me.  If you want me to perform a “background check” on someone, go ahead and deputize me.  Otherwise, stay the hell out of my business.

Wait, here’s a thought:  why don’t you and your politician buddies pass legislation that automatically grants every concealed-carry permit-holder a FFL?  Then we’d have  to perform background checks each time we sold a gun (except to other CHL holders, of course).  Go on, I dare you.

And stop listening to the screams and wails to “do something”.  That “something” that they want you to do is going to piss off a lot of people who might otherwise have voted for you.  Like me.

Stolen Loot

Maybe it’s a major character flaw, but for some reason, I can’t get upset about what this guy did:

Fraudster, 61, commits suicide at his Missouri ranch three days after he was handed 10-year sentence for falsely marketing corn and soybeans as organic in $142M scam and then ‘spending the cash on gambling and escorts in Vegas’

I mean, seriously:  if you’re going to defraud stupid people for their bullshit beliefs and oh-so-virtuous lifestyle, why not  go to Vegas and gamble / whore the money away?  Go out in style, say I.

Have to say, though:  $142 million  on chips and whores?  Dude.

 

I’m surprised he lasted long enough to suck on his exhaust pipe.

Ban Them!

Here’s a good one, from Brazil:

Masked man who took 37 hostages on a bus in Rio de Janeiro is shot dead by a police sniper after a three-hour standoff — and cops then discover it was a toy gun.

Now quit that sniggering, you lot.

From this tragedy, it is clear that the only answer is to ban toy guns.

 

Or buses.


En passant, the word “sniggering” above was flagged by SpellCheck when I typed it in.  (No prizes for guessing why.)

 

Go Boris!

When I saw this sentence from BritPM Boris Johnson, my heart sank:

You can’t just arrest your way out of a problem.

Then he redeemed himself:

It certainly helps, but it is only part of the answer. You need to tackle all the causes and incentives that are encouraging the criminal mentality, and that means first of all exploding any sense that the law is weak, or that criminals can get away with it. When the police catch a violent criminal, it is vital they get the sentence they deserve.
At present, there are too many serious violent or sexual offenders who are coming out of prison long before they should.
In the past five years, we have seen literally hundreds of convicted rapists who have come out of prison commit another sexual offence. There are thousands of ‘super prolifics’ – criminals with more than 50 convictions to their name – who are being spared jail altogether.
This cannot go on. I am afraid that as a society we have no choice but to insist on tougher sentencing laws for serious sexual and violent offenders, and for those who carry knives.
Our first duty is to protect the public in the most basic way – and that means taking such people off the streets.

[pause to let the applause and cheering die down]

Of course, policies like “stop and search” are going to cause palpitations amongst the liberals and criminal-symps [lots of overlap], but the plain fact is that when the police can do their job — i.e. try to prevent crime before it happens — and the justice system is allowed to work — i.e. impose jail sentences that keep criminals off the streets — society as a whole improves.

Just ask the denizens of NYFC when Mayor Giuliani and Police Chief Bratton did just that, back in the late 1990s and early 2000s.  And if it made it worked there, it can make it work anywhere.

And to let the BritPM have the last word:

Yes, in the short term it will mean more pressure on our jails, and that is why today I am also announcing that we are creating another 10,000 spaces in our prisons. The Chancellor, Sajid Javid, has agreed to invest up to £2.5 billion to deliver this commitment.

Get going, Boris.

Like That

From Reader Paul W. comes this gem:

I see that the failure of the suicide watch is being blamed on (duh) a staff shortage in the federal prison system, and we’re supposed to believe that a guy with a 6″-thick black book containing several tons of dirt on famous people (like the Clintons) simply offed himself?