Five Consequences of America’s Moral Collapse

1 Comment

This is from Town Hall.

God has provided the solution to the moral decay.

2 Chronicles 7:14King James Version (KJV)

14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Americans have become so “non-judgmental” that many people can no longer tell the difference between good and evil. We congratulate ourselves for being “nicer,” more sensitive and less prejudiced than past generations of Americans, but we don’t stop to consider how much more there is to morality than that. An America that isn’t full of good people won’t remain a good nation, nor will it remain strong and free over the long haul. Our country’s lack of morality has real consequences that are capable of eventually sinking us as a nation.

1) The Collapse Of Marriage: There used to be quite a bit of social stigma attached to getting a divorce or having a child out of wedlock. That’s no longer true and consequences for society have been horrific.

Although there is some dispute about the numbers, roughly 40% of marriages now end in divorce and half of all children born to women under 30 in America now are illegitimate. Three in 10 white children are born out of wedlock, as are 53 percent of Hispanic babies and 73 percent of black babies.”

That’s important because children raised without a mother AND a father are statistically worse off in just about every area imaginable.

“Controlling for socioeconomic status, race, and place of residence, the strongest predictor of whether a person will end up in prison is that he was raised by a single parent. By 1996, 70 percent of inmates in state juvenile detention centers serving long-term sentences were raised by single mothers. Seventy-two percent of juvenile murderers and 60 percent of rapists come from single-mother homes. Seventy percent of teenage births, dropouts, suicides, runaways, juvenile delinquents, and child murderers involve children raised by single mothers. Girls raised without fathers are more sexually promiscuous and more likely to end up divorced. A 1990 study by the Progressive Policy Institute showed that after controlling for single motherhood, the difference between black and white crime rates disappeared.

Various studies have come up with slightly different numbers, but all the figures are grim. According to the Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, children from single-parent families account for 63 percent of all youth suicides, 70 percent of all teenage pregnancies, 71 percent of all adolescent chemical/substance abuse, 80 percent of all prison inmates, and 90 percent of all homeless and runaway children.

A study cited in the Village Voice produced similar numbers. It found that children brought up in single-mother homes ‘are five times more likely to commit suicide, nine times more likely to drop out of high school, 10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances, 14 times more likely to commit rape (for the boys), 20 times more likely to end up in prison, and 32 times more likely to run away from home.’ Single motherhood is like a farm team for future criminals and social outcasts.”

Instead of trying to reverse the crippling damage being done to our country by the collapse of marriage, we’ve chosen to degrade it even further by allowing same sex unions, soon to be followed by polygamous unions that will degrade the institution ever further. If it’s true that marriage is the bedrock of society, then our nation’s house is built on sand.

2) Crime: Despite the fact that China and India have populations four times our size, it’s stunning that America has the largest prison population on Earth. Not coincidentally, America’s once sky-high crime rate dropped as massive numbers of criminals were locked away.

Bizarrely, many people talk about crime as if it’s divorced from morality. We hear about a supposed “rape culture,” school shootings, the “Knockout Game,” child abuse, etc., etc., etc. without making the obvious connection to morals. Good kids aren’t raping anybody, assaulting strangers to prove they’re tough or shooting up movie theaters unless they’re mentally ill.

Kids who are taught about good and evil, right and wrong, patriotism, chivalry and honor are going to make mistakes. A few of them will even turn out to be bad apples. However, full though our prisons may be, they are not full of God-fearing men. They’re full of people who are morally adrift.

3) Poor Government: America seems to be becoming progressively less governable and there are many reasons for that.Government has become too big to effectively manage, both parties have moved away from the center, gerrymandering has decreased the power of voters and increased the power of special interest groups – we could go on and on. Despite the fact that it’s seldom discussed, one of the biggest factors is the dishonesty of our own politicians.

How does that play a role? Well, it’s impossible to cut any kind of meaningful long-term deal on taxes, spending, immigration or any other big issue because neither party can be trusted to stick to a deal. Politicians lie to the voters, they lie to the other party and they even lie to their colleagues on the same side of the aisle.

Barack Obama’s signature piece of legislation, Obamacare, was entirely built on lies. Hillary Clinton has been caught lying more times than Pinocchio – and it’s not much different for the GOP leadership in Congress. Today, as I write this, Ted Cruz has stepped to the Senate floor to call out Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for lying to his own caucus.

On the one hand, it’s extraordinarily difficult to govern a nation without long term planning, but how do you plan for the future when no politician’s word means anything?

4) Dependence: Americans have traditionally been some of the most self-reliant people on the face of the earth. People used to be ashamed to be on the dole even if they felt like they had no other choice. Judging by the numbers we see today, that’s no longer true.

More than 1/3 of the population, 109 million Americans, are on welfare. That’s more people than there are in the four most populous states in America (California, Texas, New York and Florida) COMBINED. More than 45 million Americans are receiving food stamps. Nearly 11 million Americans, a number larger than the population of Greece, are on disability.

Does anyone care how many of these people are legitimately having hard times and need a little temporary assistance to get back on their feet versus how many are parasites who are looting the system? It certainly doesn’t seem like it. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of people who even feel bad about being on the dole either. In fact, it’s probably more of a social faux pas to suggest that people should feel bad about living off other people’s labor than it is to sponge off the taxpayers without regret. That’s why it’s not just an economic problem, it’s a moral problem and it’s one that is likely to get larger as a smaller and smaller share of workers are asked to shoulder the load for people who don’t work for a living.

5) Lack Of Civility And Manners: The great Samuel Adams once said, “A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.”

Between the anonymity of the Internet, the crudity of much of modern music and TV along with our bad habit of rewarding every reality show star and jackass with 15 minutes of fame as long as they’re willing to go to any lengths to catch our attention, we’ve become a crass, rude and obnoxious culture.

We live in a country that often rewards sarcasm instead of wisdom, rudeness instead of insight and the squeaky wheel instead of the farsighted patriot. You’re more likely to get your way in America if you claim to be angry, offended or can just make enough noise on social media than if you’re plain old right. How well is that working out for our country?



Crime and Wonderment: The Real Cause of ‘Gun Crime’

Leave a comment

This is from Clash Daily.


If the death penalty wasn’t a deterrent, the mob wouldn’t use it!“ – Nate Kirkwood, Security Consultant

An Internet meme that has been making the rounds lately seems to take the “gun-crime” debate head on. It reads: “America will never solve her gun crime problem, until we admit that it’s largely a Black and Hispanic gun-crime problem …” (ACONVERSATIONABOUTRACE.COM 2014)

It goes on to claim that, “In New York City in 2012, 96% of all shooting victims and 97% of all shooting suspects were Black or Latino.”

Assuming the statistics to be accurate, what can we learn from this? Is it that simple? Can this be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

My first day in Statistics as a Political Science Major at the University of Illinois, Chicago, my professor came right out and taught us how to lie with numbers, and to do so from seventeen different positions. The lesson, “Homicides in Texas”, was to demonstrate how facts could be “massaged,” “show-cased,” and “taken out of context” in order to blame guns, alcohol, whites, or the weather and set up our “candidate” or our “cause” for the upcoming “campaign.”

A long list of possibilities were listed with the “how-to” behind each one, yet I kept expecting that at any moment, the other shoe would drop and the professor would smile and say, “Of course, to mislead voters about such important issues would be completely unethical and utterly despicable, so don’t try this at home.” The shoe never did drop, not even by the end of the semester. It didn’t take long for me to realize that there was no other shoe. This was my introduction to “higher learning.” Luckily, my best friends growing up were Sicilians so I learned, as Lewis Grizzard would say, “You can’t pull no boogie-woogie on the King of Rock ‘n Roll.”

Could the cause for homicides in any big city really be as simple as the color of one’s skin? – The darker the skin, the more violent; the more pigment, the less value for life or law?

A similar case could be made that it is a “gang problem,” as the vast majority of these crimes are one gangbanger against another. We can also argue for “ignorance,” as most of the perpetrators are not Harvard educated. “Poverty,” as the majority come from a poor upbringing, is another strong argument. The “lack of a father” in the home, the war over “drug turf,” the “dense population” of the inner city, “pride,” “greed,” “hopelessness” and “recidivism” can all stake a claim to be the cause imprimis of gun crime in the big city. “Guns” themselves are the favorite target of tyrants and simpletons; but all these are symptoms or factors of a deeper issue. This meme may contain “truth,” but it is not “the whole truth.”

A racist may cling to the “Black and Hispanic” facts; a cop or D.A. to the “gang” truth. A sociologist may argue for “poverty,” though The Great Depression didn’t have high crime rates and Blacks in the fifties were terribly poor but did not commit violent crime at these high rates.

Maybe, the Rumble Fish defense? – That people act barbaric because they’re cramped together, living on top of one another in the projects? But people live on top of one another in the John Hancock building, and I’m sure a good number of them have issues with pride and greed, with virtually no “gun-crime.”

Our good friend, Alan Keyes, wrote in his book Masters of the Dream that the black family survived intact, for the most part, throughout slavery, Jim Crow and segregation, only to be devastated by the liberal policies of The Great Society. And there you have it!

The root of excessive gun crime is not race, class or education; we don’t have a “density” problem or a “gun” problem, we have a “liberal” problem.  It is liberal policies that have stripped the inner cities of hope, driving fathers from the home and young men into street gangs. Liberals in the teacher’s unions have ruined the schools and their conspirators in the Democratic Party have stripped parents of choice in education. And where there is no hope, the people perish.

Liberals turned what was once the diamond of the Midwest into Detroit, culminating in another popular meme that shows Detroit and Nagasaki in 1946 and now; concluding that it would have been better to be nuked by the Allies 68 years ago then to allow liberals to govern you in that same time. Liberals have saturated the courts, making the cop’s job harder and the streets more dangerous. The only gun laws that the liberal wants enforced are ones against the law abiding.

So what is the answer? First off, get rid of the liberals. Expose them, drive them out, vote them out, mock them, sock them, impeach them and indict them.

Then, if the American people and the courts had the will to carry out real penalties against those who use guns violently, our “problem” would end tomorrow. It’s one reason that “conceal and carry” states are seeing huge drops in gun violence and murder. This meme pulls the Band-Aid off of the scab but it doesn’t truly expose the deeper problem: that we don’t utilize capital punishment in the way that God prescribed! – “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” – Genesis 9:6

Those that use guns in crime should never see the light of day. Hard labor should be the price they pay. Those that take life should have their life taken. The result would be a greater respect for life and for the law, and no recidivism.

First offenders and gray area cases get parked in prison. Non-violent offenders get to go home to their families at night and work off their debts during the day; it serves no purpose to put them in a cage. How is it sensible to take a man who stole from another man and put him in prison and send the victim the tab? Why should the convict get free college when the man he stole from has to take out student loans? Reparations make a lot more sense. And why punish the non-violent criminal’s family by stripping them of a father or mother and a necessary provider only to make them wards of the state or the welfare system? That’s a method that breeds victims and hardens perpetrators.

No man should live in a cage! Cages are for animals! In the Parson’s world, only violent offenders get parked behind bars and that’s when they’re not farming their own food and working manual labor. As for the hardcore violent offenders, those that take life, that rape life and that hurt kids – they die! And it shouldn’t take fourteen years to get there as most cases involving recidivist animals are open and shut. I say, shut the cell and shut the coffin but keep your damn, dirty hands off of my guns!

Citizens Form Armed Response Group After Local Sheriff’s Office Cut to 8 Hours/Day Due to Budget Cuts


This is from Guns Saves Lives.

 I am glad to see people stepping up to protect each other.

How long before the liberals in Portland try to stop these people?

What would you do if your local law enforcement only worked 8 hours per day 5 days per week and only responded to life threatening calls?

Well, one rural Oregon community has an answer – they formed an armed response group made up exclusively of private citizens working on a volunteer basis.

Josephine County, Oregon – 70% of the land here is owned by the US government. Previously, the county was able to keep its government and law enforcement services running due to federal subsidies paid by the federal government.

When the feds cut that funding, the county had to make severe budget cuts according to Fox News. One of the main things that was cut, the local sheriff’s office. We aren’t talking about reducing the number of deputies or using patrol cars for a little longer then usual. We are talking GUTTED.

The office announced they would only respond to life threatening calls from now on. On top of that, the office would only operate 8 hours a day during week days. The government even went as far as to advise citizens to move to another county if they didn’t feel safe.

Well, a group of 100 citizens decided they could feel safe without agreeing to the massive tax raise proposed by the county government. So, they formed the North Valley Community Watch.

The group responds to calls that the sheriff’s office is unable to. Many members of the group carry legal firearms, although none have ever had to use them.

The group uses technology to keep the local residents informed about its operations and maintains a website and a Facebook page where they post local crime news, recent arrests, and other news.

According to Fox News,

Ken Selig — who was the longest-serving law enforcement officer in all three local agencies when he was forced to retire from the department due to cuts — told he found the sheriff’s declaration unacceptable. And he felt compelled to guard his community’s vulnerable members.

“Who else is going to protect you when your government can’t?” Selig said.

Selig and his friend Pete Scaglione formed the North Valley Community Watch, a county-wide organization dedicated to helping citizens in non-life-threatening situations, primarily property crimes. It is one of a handful of community groups that have formed since the cuts. Without a robust Sheriff’s Office, their mission is broader than the typical neighborhood watch group.

How Do We Know Guns Save Lives?


This is from Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership.

By Rob Morse, December 22nd 2013
Article Source

Picture: Oleg Volk

I know it is the Holidays, but put on your detective hat for a second. How do we know guns save lives? We know a gun was used when the criminal was shot by the victim. Evidence is pretty obvious in that case. There is even evidence if the victim shoots and misses. Ideally, the criminal sees that the victim is armed and stops before shots are fired. Obviously there is no physical evidence of the psychological decision to break off the attack. That explains why the self-defense statistics are inconsistent from report to report. We can’t even define what we mean by using a gun in self-defense. It doesn’t leave evidence at the crime scene. Do guns stop crime or not? Well, Sherlock, what do you think? Here are some recent examples to test you.

♦ In one case, a contractor was working on an empty house. A criminal walked in, picked up a crowbar, and threatened the contractor. The contractor presented his licensed handgun and the criminal fled. The police called it an attempted robbery. The contractor thinks it is a defensive gun use (DGU), even though he didn’t pull the trigger. The criminal knows exactly why he changed his mind and ran. What do you deduce?

♦ In another case, a store owner was struck over the head and threatened with a handgun during a robbery. The store owner pushed the thieves out of his store and locked the doors. A Good Samaritan walked by the store and saw the armed thieves beating on the store windows and doors. The Samaritan drew his own weapon and the thieves ran. Both the Samaritan and the store owner think the Good Samaritan’s firearm made the thieves break off their attack.

♦ A man was sitting in his car when a thief jumped in and attempted to carjack him. The driver had his legally carried gun against the carjackers head before the car moved. The police arrested the thief and charged him with attempted theft of the automobile. I call this a defensive gun use. Would you still call it a DGU if the thief had run away and not been captured? Maybe the police will ask him.

Each week I report on cases where guns are successfully used in self-defense. Sometimes shots are fired, but often the intended victims defend themselves without pulling the trigger. Stopping the attack without firing a shot is the best possible outcome, yet somehow we ignore this outcome in our crime statistics. I guess we should pass a law requiring criminals to stick around and answer research questions.

The National Research Council surveyed many crime reports that use very different definitions of defensive gun use. The results show that guns are used in self-defense between two times and ten times more often than they are used in crime. Take their data with a grain of salt. Scholars will argue about how much and how often, but the good news is law abiding gun owners continue to save lives.

What do you think?



McCarthy: “Carrying a loaded firearm is the gateway crime to committing a murder.”

1 Comment

This is from Bearing Arms.

How many in the Law Enforcement Community have

this mentality?



Chicago police superintendent Garry McCarthy made his authoritarian views on the Second Amendment quite clear in September when he announced that he’d have his officers shoot concealed carriers first and ask questions later.

You know, because the Chicago PD’s anti-gun zealotry has made the city so incredibly safe and not the murder capitol of the United States.

Oh, wait.

McCarthy is now attempting to claim that a new initiative to take guns off the street is a success, even though it’s very “success” shows how much of a miserable of a failure Chicago’s anti gun laws really are:

We’ve reported extensively about Chicago’s problem with gun violence.

Now Chicago police said they have seized more than 6,500 illegal guns this year. That’s 130 illegal weapons each week.

Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy says that’s more than any major city and he says if you can reduce weapons you will reduce crime.

“Carrying a loaded firearm is the gateway crime to committing a murder,” McCarthy said.

Here’s another take on McCarthy’s absurd spin.

If Chicago’s officers are taking 130 from criminals every week—6,500+ so far this year—then that statistic is cold, hard evidence that the draconian anti-gun laws of the city are an abject and complete failure. This suggests that there are probably tens of thousands of criminals with guns in Chicago, while law-abiding citizens are effectively disarmed. Chicago has set their citizens up as lambs to be slaughtered, and being slaughtered they are.

McCarthy’s view of his department’s success is so divorced from reality as to be laughable. There were 500+ murders in Chicago last year, so many that the exact numbers are in dispute; this CBS report claims “just” 507, but Chicago Redeye documents by name 520 homicide victims, and Crime in Chicago blog claims 537!

Crime in Chicago also documents that 2,670 were injured by criminals that ignore Chicago’s laws in 2012, and there are 2,393 casualties so far this year, on pace to easily exceed 2,400 for 2013.

There are entire blocks of U.S. states, and even war zones with fewer deaths and injuries than Chicago, and McCarthy dares claim that Chicago’s anti-gun views, policies, and laws are working, and that even more draconian laws are needed?

Garry McCarthy shouldn’t be running a major city’s police department. He should be institutionalized until he can bring his delusions under control.



Stricter Gun Control Laws Won’t Prevent Criminals From Getting Guns, Say 63% of Americans

Leave a comment

This is from

Yet Little Chuckie Schumer, DiFi, Babs Boxer as well as

Little Dickless Durbin says more gun control is needed.

We can not forget Nanny Bloomberg along with his

magpies saying gun control is needed.


When it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, 63 percent of Americans remain unconvinced that tighter restrictions on buying and owning guns will be effective, according to the latest  Reason-Rupe poll. About a third (32 percent), said stricter regulations would be effective in preventing criminals from obtaining guns.

Seven in ten Republicans say stricter gun regulations would not be effective while just 26 percent say they would be effective.  Democrats are more divided on the issue. While typically supportive of increased gun control, more than half (53 percent) say tighter restrictions on buying and owning guns would not prevent criminals from obtaining the weapons while 44 percent say they would prevent criminals from getting guns. Two-thirds of independents don’t expect tighter restrictions to be effective while 30 percent think they will.

As education increases, so do expectations that tighter gun regulations will effectively keep guns from criminals. For instance, 29% of those with high school degrees or less believe such policies would be effect compared to 41 percent of those with post-graduate degrees. Nevertheless, majorities of all educational groups don’t expect tougher gun laws to prevent criminals from obtaining guns.

Women are slightly more likely than men to believe tighter gun regulations would be effective (35 to 29 percent). However, considering race and gender finds that white women are no different than white and nonwhite men. However, half of nonwhite women think tighter gun rules would be effective compared to 44 would think they would not.

Nationwide telephone poll conducted Dec 4-8 2013 interviewed 1011 adults on both mobile (506) and landline (505) phones, with a margin of error +/- 3.7%. Princeton Survey Research Associates International executed the nationwide Reason-Rupe survey. Columns may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Full poll results, detailed tables, and methodology found here. Sign up for notifications of new releases of the Reason-Rupe poll here.



|Dec. 12, 2013 9:15 am


Kansas City Public Phone Prayer Booths Helping to Reduce Crime

Leave a comment

This is from Godfather Politics.

This is a nice piece of satire.


City officials and police departments all over the nation have been trying a number of ways to reduce crime.   Many think that stripping law abiding citizens of their legal right to defend themselves by banning guns.  One of the favorite methods of fighting crime among liberals is to throw millions of dollars into social programs but it rarely if ever works.

City officials in Kansas City, Kansas just may have found a very cost efficient method of lowering the city’s crime rate.  Several years ago, the city began installing phone prayer booths in some of the inner city areas that had high crime rates.  The booths are equipped with a lowering kneeling bar and instructions for anyone passing by.  Not long after the prayer booths were installed, crime rates in those areas began to decrease.

Seeing the results, a number of city residents lobbied the Kansas City council to install more prayer booths throughout the rest of the city to help lower crime overall.  The council complied and has placed more prayer booths in various locations through Kansas City and they seem to be working.  Currently, the city’s prayer booths are being used by 100,000 a week and the city’s crime rate is going down.

Before anyone hollers separation of church and state, let it be known that the booths are being placed on public park grounds under ‘public service monument of arts and counseling to the people of Kansas City.’  Dylan Mortimer, a local artist designed the prayer booths.  After their initial installation several years ago, Mortimer has been commissioned to create similar booths for Chicago, New York City, Las Vegas, Dubuque, Iowa and other cities.

Secondly, they are not just for Christians, but for anyone from any faith to use.  Notices at each prayer booth tells the people that they are nondenominational.  The sign also says that the city is not endorsing religion and that they can be used for other purposes as well.  Lastly, they ask that when someone is done that they return the kneeling bar back to its upright position.

The prayer booths in Dubuque have signs that read:

“There is no literal affiliation with any particular faith per se, rather the piece aims to question the idea of prayer in the public domain. The piece fuses humor, sarcasm and sincerity, and aims to highlight and spark further discussion about the contemporary expression of religion within the public community.”

Rev. Miles Collier told a state news agency:

“It is therapeutic, that is how we lobbied them through city council.  We said these prayer booths are not just for Christians, but for any person to take a break to close their eyes, ask out loud for what they need in life and just take a break from it all. It is like having a free counseling session.”

I’ve been contending for years that there is a direct correlation between the removal of God, Jesus, the Bible and Christianity from society and the increase in crime and moral decay of our nation.  Nothing can exist in a vacuum and when you remove the only true source of morals and values, they are quickly replaced with immorality and a lack of values and decency.  The end result can only be an increase in hedonistic pleasures that leads to more crime against others and the eventual decay of society.

This has been repeated throughout history, but nations never learn and eventually yield to the godless liberals that are hell bent on destroying another nation.  But in the case of Kansas City, they are giving the people a chance to return to some of their spiritual values by erecting the prayer booths in the city.  The usage of 100,000 times per week demonstrated just how much people need and want to pray.  It also demonstrates that giving people back even a hint of faith, can have a very positive effect on such things as crime in the area.

Now if they really want to reduce crime, all they need to do is put God, Jesus, the Bible and Christian values back into our schools and government.  Then and only then will America stand a prayer of a chance of returning to some of its former morals, values and glory.


NYPD interactive map reveals city’s most dangerous areas

Leave a comment

This is from The New York Daily News.

This is what happens when you have decades of liberal rule.


The online map shows the timing and location of crimes by month, allowing research into the patterns of crime across the five boroughs.

Color coded: The darker the neighborhood precinct the more crime per thousand people is committed. From this map areas of Brookyln, The Bronx and Times Square Manhattan have experienced most violent crime since January


The darker the precinct, the more crime per thousand people is committed. Since January, Brooklyn, the Bronx and Times Square have experienced most crime since January.

The NYPD released a new online, interactive map Sunday that allows users to research major crime across the city.

The map plots the time and location of crimes by month, and for the current and prior year.

A comparison of this map based on 2010 Census Information and the newly released interactive crime map from the NYPD shows that shootings and murders are more prevalent in poorer neighborhoods of New York


A comparison of this map based on 2010 Census Information and the newly released interactive crime map from the NYPD shows that shootings and murders are more prevalent in poorer neighborhoods of New York

People can search the map by address, ZIP code or police precinct.

As a whole, Manhattan suffers greater crime than many parts of the other four boroughs.


As a whole, Manhattan suffers greater crime than many parts of the other four boroughs.

“With unprecedented population levels, New York City is safer than ever, with homicides on pace this year to fall below recent historic lows,” NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly said in a statement. “This administration has relied on data to drive its crimefighting, and this map helps enhance New Yorkers’ and researchers’ understanding of where felony and violent crime persists.”

 The crime-mapping website was mandated by city law earlier this year and created by the city’s Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications.
With an average of nearly 26 crimes per 1,000 residents, Precinct 41 in The Bronx has proved to be one of the most dangerous parts of the city.


With an average of nearly 26 crimes per 1,000 residents, Precinct 41 in The Bronx has proved to be one of the most dangerous parts of the city.

Crime statistics by precinct have been available on the NYPD’s website since 2003 and are updated weekly. The site is at



Harlem shows a large number of robberies between January and October.


Harlem shows a large number of robberies between January and October.

But the data posted online previously did not show locations of crimes and were broken down by precinct and patrol borough.

The map only lists the incidents by the type of crime, which falls into the seven major crime categories – murder, rape, robbery, felony assault, burglary, grand larceny and grand larceny auto.

Much of Brooklyn and Staten Island are relatively free from serious crime.


Much of Brooklyn and Staten Island are relatively free from serious crime.

The NYPD does not release information about misdemeanor crime in the city.

Read more:

Akron police chief: Focusing on gun ownership will never curb gun violence


This is from The Buckeye Firearms Association.

It is good to see that LEO’s understand the gun grabs

can not and do not work.

How many more LEO’s nation wide get it also?


Last month, Akron Police Chief James Nice made waves when he told that mandatory background checks won’t work to stop criminals, and that “gun buybacks are a farce.”

This month, Nice is speaking more words of truth on the subject of the impotence of gun control, in an interview with Cleveland’s fox affiliate, WJW:

Simply put, Akron Police Chief Jim Nice believes almost every proposal to curb gun violence that he has heard won’t work.


Because Chief Nice, who used to head undercover operations for the FBI, says the proposals don’t address the main problems that lead to gun deaths.

“It makes me so mad I can’t see straight,” Chief Nice tells the I-Team.

In the wake of the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Connecticut where 20 children and six adults were killed, many proposals focused on banning assault weapons and increasing security at schools.

The article quotes Chief Nice as saying he doesn’t doesn’t think they will help much to curb crime in his city, since most people aren’t shot in schools and most people aren’t shot with expensive assault rifles.

The legislative focus, Chief Nice believes, should not be on gun ownership, but rather on illegal gun possession and use.

State Senator Frank LaRose agrees.

“Less than one percent of the bad guys are committing 57 percent of the violent crimes,” he says.

Senator LaRose, a Republican from Akron, is working with other lawmakers to try and write a new state law that would stiffen penalties for illegal gun possession and use. The challenge is to write a law that is both tough and narrow – one that targets career criminals without throwing away the lives of some people who have committed crimes.

“Prisons are for people who are a real danger to society,” Sen. LaRose says, “and not just people we’re unhappy with, but people that we’re legitimately afraid of.”

Sen. LaRose told Fox 8 says the goal of the state legislators is to draft a law that will “find the folks who are the worst of the worse and make sure they’re in prison.”

Chief Nice agreed, noting that there are not many people in society who are willing to illegally carry a gun and shoot people, but that “if you can’t incarcerate those people, you will never be safe.”

Earlier this year, Attorney General Mike DeWine proposed the Violent Career Criminal Act, which would change current gun specification sentencing laws and increase some penalties for offenders with two or more violent felony convictions.

The Violent Career Criminal Act calls for a mandatory 11-year prison sentence for those convicted of illegally possessing a gun, if they have previously been convicted of two or more violent felonies. Today, a felon convicted of illegally possessing a firearm faces only one to five years imprisonment.

The act would also double gun specification penalties if the offender has previously been convicted of a crime involving a firearm. Current gun specification sentences range from one to seven years in prison, depending on the underlying gun crime.

Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary, and BFA PAC Vice Chairman.


Admiring Manson

1 Comment

This is from Clash Daily.

What is wrong with todays youth?

Looking up to and admiring a POS like Charles Manson

or Che Guevera.


Ideas have consequences and bad ideas have bad ones. I’m often reminded of that when I have a conversation that broaches the subject of human evil. As most of my readers already know, the denial of human evil is a very real problem among younger generations of Americans. Just last week, however, I had a conversation with a college student that really stopped me in my tracks. I have reproduced it below but not for anyone’s entertainment. I have some observations that follow. I hope you’ll give them careful consideration after you read the following exchange:

UNC-Wilmington Student: What courses do you teach at UNCW?

Me: Right now, I’m teaching Law of Evidence and Trials of the Century, a course that focuses on famous American criminal trials.
Student: What case are you covering now?

Me: We’re discussing Charles Manson.

Student: I sort of admire Charles Manson.

Me: What do you mean by that? Is it the murderer part or the racist part you admire most in Manson?

Student: Well, he didn’t actually murder anyone.

Me: Actually he did. Under the vicarious liability rule of criminal conspiracy, the act of entering a conspiracy substitutes in place of the act of killing in order to fulfill the actus reus requirement. Add the intent or mens rea elements and we have the two major ingredients necessary for a crime.

Student: That’s just a technicality.

Me: The same thing applies to Hitler. Certainly, you would have no reservations calling Hitler a murderer in a purely moral sense. Calling Hitler a murderer doesn’t rest on a technicality just because he had others carry out the acts.

Student: Well, the Manson family was different. They didn’t follow Manson’s instructions. He just wanted people killed. He didn’t want them butchered.

Me: I won’t concede that you are right about that but I want to better understand your position. Are you saying that gratuitous murder is reprehensible but that clean and efficient murder is admirable? Help me out, here.

Student: Manson dabbled in Buddhism and I think that put him at peace with what he did. If he’s fine with it then that’s all that matters.

Me: Once again, I’m not going to accept your factual premises but I want to get something straight. Are you referring to the Buddhist principle that evil is an illusion? Is that what you believe?

Student: (Silence).

Me: Well, let me put it another way. Since it is Veteran’s Day, let me ask you to imagine the following. An American soldier goes to liberate a Nazi concentration camp. He sees piles of bodies lying around everywhere. He smells the stench of death all around him. Are those sights and smells mere illusions or would someone visiting the same camp at the same time see and smell the very same things?

Student: Well, I’m not going to deny the Holocaust. It certainly wasn’t an illusion.

Me: Then what does Manson’s subsequent state of mind have to do with anything?

Student: I’m not following you.

Me: Well then let me help you. Just imagine that you and I get really drunk and I decide to rape you. In the morning, I can’t remember anything that happened. I was just too drunk to remember anything. Since I don’t remember the rape, I’m totally at peace with it. I can’t be upset out about it if I don’t remember that it happened. But didn’t it really happen?

Student: Yes. In the scenario you described there was a rape.

Me: Just remember that whenever you make Manson’s peace of mind an issue you insult the murder victims and their families just as you would be insulted by someone denying your rape with similar logic.

Student: Okay, I don’t admire Charles Manson.

This kind of twisted moral reasoning isn’t totally new among America’s youth. Were it so there never would have been a Manson family in the first place. As a new ex-con, Charles Manson went to Haight Asbury in 1967 because he knew it was a place where morally confused young people gathered. He knew he could find runaways who were victims of abuse or who had fallen prey to addiction. He also knew he could find youths caught up in rebellion against everything their parents had taught them.

The ideas Manson taught were not welcomed on college campuses in the 1960s. There were protests to be sure. But the campuses were not yet steeped in moral relativism. Our universities were still classically liberal. That liberalism was built on a foundation of tolerance. And, by definition, true tolerance presupposes a moral judgment. Relativism simply did not fit into the equation.

Of course, the universities have changed a lot within the last twenty years. Multicultural centers started to pop up on campuses everywhere during the early 90s. Unfortunately, the multicultural worldview (read: cultural relativism) is no longer confined to those centers. New majors have popped up with strange names, which usually begin with the name of a particular cultural group and end with the word “studies.” Basic studies requirements in areas such as “life sciences,” “natural sciences,” and “social sciences” are being replaced with strange new categories. For example, my university now has a basic studies concentration requirement called “living in a diverse world.”

We all need to be prepared for where this is going. If you think debating the question “is abortion murder?” is frustrating then imagine debating the question “is murder is really wrong?” You won’t have to imagine much longer. This is the direction in which we are headed. But those debates won’t be with strung out teenaged drug addicts on the streets of San Francisco. They will be with young adults who have college degrees. And with their multicultural education will come some degree of cultural influence.

A general rule of thumb is that the trends taking place on our campuses today will be taking place in the broader culture in twenty years. The question as always is how the church will respond. It has merely reacted to the culture for far too long. That is good news for the high priests of multi-cultural diversity.


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: