Category: Psycho News

Posted on

Gotta love hypocrites

Journal News publisher Janet Hasson

A letter has appeared from Janet Hasson the publisher of The Journal News  explaining why the paper has decided to take the gun permit map down.

Her letter doesn’t hold water, yet she’s trying to spin taking the map down as a victory.

Read the comments after her letter and It’s pretty obvious that the heat must have been and will hopefully continue to be withering against her and the paper.

To our readers:
 
In the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings, The Journal News thought the community should know where gun permit holders in their community were, in part to give parents an opportunity to make careful decisions about their children’s safety.
 
The Journal News mapped the public database of permit holders, placing a dot on the address of every permit holder in Westchester and Rockland counties and providing the name and street address of each holder. The dots conveyed a powerful message: gun permit holders are everywhere in our counties.
 
But public reaction to the posting of names and street addresses was swift and divided. Many in the community expressed their gratitude for The Journal News’ decision to make the information available, but permit holders were outraged at what they considered to be an invasion of privacy. Gun owners from across the country vocally conveyed their anger and accused The Journal News of having exposed permit holders and non-permit holders alike to the risk of burglaries and other crimes. Hundreds of threats were made to Journal News staffers.
 
So intense was the opposition to our publication of the names and addresses that legislation passed earlier this week in Albany included a provision allowing permit holders to request confidentiality and imposing a 120-day moratorium on the release of permit holder data.
 
Today The Journal News has removed the permit data from lohud.com. Our decision to do so is not a concession to critics that no value was served by the posting of the map in the first place. On the contrary, we’ve heard from too many grateful community members to consider our decision to post information contained in the public record to have been a mistake. Nor is our decision made because we were intimidated by those who threatened the safety of our staffers. We know our business is a controversial one, and we do not cower.
 
But the database has been public for 27 days and we believe those who wanted to view it have done so already. As well, with the passage of time, the data will become outdated and inaccurate.
 
Equally important, the legislature has weighed in on the issue and representatives of residents from across the state have said that some New Yorkers who hold gun permits should have the right to keep that information private. As a news organization, we are constantly defending the public’s right to know. Consequently we do not endorse the way the legislature has chosen to limit public access to gun permit data. The statute is very broad and allows anyone who meets certain criteria within qualifying categories to keep their permit information private. When the moratorium concludes, far fewer permit holders will be identifiable, and those who want to know which houses on their block may have guns will not be able to get that information. But we are not deaf to voices who have said that new rules should be set for gun permit data.
 
Make no mistake, The Journal News will continue to report aggressively on gun ownership. We will continue to pursue our request for data from Putnam County, and will closely analyze the data for Westchester and Rockland counties when it once again becomes publicly available. And we will keep a snapshot of our map — with all its red dots — on our website to remind the community that guns are a fact of life we should never forget.
 
Sincerely,

Janet Hasson

President and Publisher

Journal News Media Group

Here is the link to the article.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20130118/NEWS02/301180125/Letter-from-publisher-gun-map

They’ve removed the map and the information about the gun permits because the law said they have to.

Sadly, this is rather like locking the barn after the horses have escaped, there are no doubt copies replicated on countless servers, blogs, and on private computers worldwide.

In short The Journal News has created a situation that can never be undone.

In other related news there is this from ProjectVeritas

The video is about 10 minutes long and it’s very interesting to note a couple of things…

First, not one of the editors/reporters who describe themselves as anti-gun will place a sign on their lawns saying that their homes are essentially gun free zones

Second, a large percentage of the editors/reporters either have armed guards at their homes or they’ll call the police at the “drop of a hat”.

Talk about people that think nothing of the safety of others (regardless of what they say) but when it comes to their personal safety all the sudden their concerns about guns vanish.

I guess this is what Über liberalism is all about.

I’m reminded of the line from Plan 9 from Outer Space. “All you people of Earth are idiots” I supposed we could revise that line to read “All you non-liberals are idiots, you’re either with us or you’re racist morons!”

Posted on

Time for journalistic responsibility.

NewImage

I couldn’t resist the Reagan poster. But you have to admit if anyone aside from James Brady could speak to the subject it’s Reagan. 

CBSNews Is reporting the New York paper responsible for publishing a map showing the addresses of registered gun owners in two NY counties has added to their grandstanding by hiring armed security guards to protect one of their offices.

The so called “journalists” are kinda missing the point.

I love the irony in that they’ve turned to armed security to protect them.

Registered gun owners are law abiding citizens which by default means that these people aren’t likely to go to the newspaper to exact revenge.

Law abiding citizens are going to choose weapons of mass destruction…. LAWYERS!

The Lawyers will be far more devastating to the newspaper than anyone with a gun.

If I were one of the people affected I’d be seriously pissed off. Not because now the world knows I have guns, but because of the invasion of privacy for no good purpose other than headlines.

Essentially this newspaper has stigmatized the gun owners of these counties. What they’ve done is tried to equate gun owners to sex offenders. “Who are the gun owners in your neighborhood?”, Who are the sex offenders in your neighborhood?”

I’m sure that the editors of the newspaper have gotten some really negative mail and deservedly so.

The gun owners affected have committed no crime, they’ve done absolutely nothing that should have resulted in the forfeiture of their privacy and yet… They’ve lost their privacy. Their homes may be targeted for potential break-ins by criminals who would like to steal guns and resell them to other criminals.

Now the newspaper is trying to look like the victim, and spin the story that they’re scared of the gun owners. 

I have a few things to say to that;

1 Buck up. You published the piece, you must have thought about the invasion of privacy you were enabling and if you didn’t well you’re not very good journalists. You need to accept the consequences and responsibility for your actions.

2 You have nothing to fear from the registered gun owners. You need to fear their attorneys.

3 In the years to come you need to fear the criminal element that breaks into these houses and manages to steal the weapons. They’re the people that are going to mug you, rape you, and shoot you. The blood of innocent victims, and the blood of the home owners occupying these houses will be on your hands.

In my opinion, a single injury or god forbid a death caused because a criminal targeted these homes should result in prosecution of the journalists involved in the story.

I’m for freedom of the press, but with that freedom also comes responsibility. 

There’s a quote from one of the Star Trek movies. “Just because we can do a thing, it doesn’t necessarily follow that we should do a thing.”

Yes, it wasn’t said by a statesman, or a scientist, or a politician. But it’s nonetheless a wonderful cautionary statement.

I suspect that the movie quote is based on something Robert Oppenheimer said;

“When you see something that is technically sweet, you go ahead and do it and you argue about what to do about it only after you have had your technical success. That is the way it was with the atomic bomb. – J. Robert Oppenheimer”

The point is, sometimes it’s important to take a step back to look beyond your ability to act and decide if the ends are really justified. 

How many wars, how much harm would have been avoided if people had simply considered the ramifications of their actions?

Posted on

This has to be a major WTF???

18961899 BG1

I heard of an instance a couple of months ago where a brave young life guard was fired from his lifeguard job because he saved someone that was drowning.

The problem is… The drowning person was beyond the area the young lifeguard was supposed to be tending to. 

This occurred in Hallandale Beach FL, and the young heroes name is Thomas Lopez

So the message is Save a life, as you’ve been trained to… BUT ONLY in your area! 

I suppose that if during the save, the lifeguard and the drowning victim had drifted out of bounds that young Mr. Lopez was supposed to let go of the victim, commending his soul to Poseidon’s mercy. 

What the hell is wrong with our society you may ask… Well here is one example of litigation and liability taken to it’s insanely logical conclusion.

382854 lifeguard t640

I just heard of another instance where someone saving a life was penalized for their trouble.

In this case it was a young man In Oregon. Seventeen year old off duty lifeguard John Clark jumped into rough surf to save a 12 year old that was being swept out to sea. 

How did the ambulance company hospitals and doctors tell him he’d done the right thing? They sent him a bill for nearly $2600

When Johns story appeared on the local news the good people in his local area began donating to cover the bill. You see, Johns family doesn’t have health insurance or the cash to cover the cost. 

Johns bill will be paid I’m sure of that, any extra cash from the donations, John is putting into a college fund or donating to help cover the medical bills of the victim, because he’s a good kid.

It’s exactly this kind of selfless people we need more of in our society. And yet… we punish them indirectly for doing the right thing.

I suspect that the trouble is just beginning. I’m sure that John or his family will be taxed on the donations he’s received to pay for the hospital charges that he never should have been billed for!

Hospitals go through $2600 bucks of toilet paper in the emergency room lobby every day just due to illegal aliens.

The ambulance company should have waived their bill to say;

“Good Job, Well Done, you’re a hero and made of the right stuff” 

The hospital and the doctor that checked him out should have done the same.

Instead they’ve sent a message not only to this heroic young man but to everyone nationwide.

The message is Human life is worth $2600 or in the case of Mr. Lopez… Your Job!

Sadly, this is one of the reasons I no longer have a current CPR or first aid card.

It works like this… If I have the card and don’t help I’m liable and If I do help and something bad happens once I’ve accepted the responsibility to help someone I’m liable.

I don’t have 8 Million in liability insurance and couldn’t afford the premiums even if I wanted to.

So If you’re bleeding out, or have a heart attack around me, and you’re not my best friend or a member of my immediate family… well YOUR’E GOING TO DIE. Sorry about that, Can’t be helped but you will have the joy of actually seeing all the ambulance chasing  attorneys in a special circle of hell reserved JUST for them…

I figure that my best friend and immediate family members aren’t likely to sue me for trying to save their lives.

Our overly litigious and greedy society is unfortunately filled with tons of people looking for an angle… A way to get rich quick, even if it’s on the back of a Good Samaritan whose only sin is that they tried to help.

After reading articles like these… It’s obvious that a value has already been set. A human life is worth $2600. If it costs more than $2600 to treat you then you’re dead! Obamacare take note!

I suppose that the converse is also true… As a Good Samaritan I could only be sued for $2600.

Hmmm, maybe I could go get that CPR/First Aid card renewed. I could afford to be sued for that amount….

Nahhhh, I’m a white guy I’ll be sued for millions, especially if I happen to help a lawyer. I can see it now…

“Is it true that you prevented me from bleeding out from a gunshot wound? ‘Uhh Yes.’ But you weren’t trained to deal with gunshot wound were you? ‘Uhh No.’ Your honor, the prosecution rests it’s case. The defendant wasn’t qualified to save my life and therefore should pay restitution for bruising me with the tourniquet that saved my life in the amount of 20 million dollars.”

The Obscene part is that I and millions of other people just like me will hesitate for a second or two to consider the ramifications of getting involved.

That second or two could mean the difference between someone living and dying. Is this really the society that you want to live in?

Something to think about…

Posted on

I saw this little jewel on TOWLEROAD a while back

I’ve let this one steep a while since I wasn’t really sure that I wanted to be quite this out there. But I’m thinking aww what the hell?

I’ve gotta file this one under the WTF category…

Friend of Norwegian Mass Murderer Anders Behring Breivik Thought He Was Gay, Closeted

Read more: TOWLEROAD

I have to ask what does this guys sexuality have to do with the fact that he’s on trial for killing 77 people?

This guy has confessed to committing the murders but claims that he did so to protect his beloved homeland and culture.

The piece also comments on the fact that Breivik had a nose job “so he could have a more “Aryan” nose”. So what?

I’m not sure what the attorneys in Norway are trying to prove.

Breivik, had he been the leader of a revolution that won… would be described as a liberator and hero to his people for protecting the purity of Norwegian culture.

However since Breivik was acting alone he’s perceived as a nutcase and murderer. Now it looks as if the Norwegian court is trying to marginalize the crime and his stated reasons for committing it by painting him as a vain, closeted homosexual who acted out.

This suggests to me that perhaps Norwegian society isn’t ready to consider that they may have a larger problem…

They’re hoping that the Breivik case is a “one-off“.  Perhaps it is.

Images

But what if it’s not?

Lets look at this another way…

What kind of social pressure, cultural change, and abuse does it take for a vain, closeted homosexual to make, plant and detonate a bomb, or pick up a rifle and start shooting people?

The Norwegians had a bit of civil unrest several years ago because one of their cartoonists drew a picture. That picture while protected under Norwegian free speech rights still had to be apologized for. The artist still had to flee his home. The Norwegian government, instead of expelling those who sought to deny the artist his rights made concessions to a radical minority.

The imposition of foreign cultural taboos on a society will inevitably result in unrest. 

Vivid examples include Palastine, and Iran.

The Shah of Iran was deposed at least in part because his policies were too progressive, and  too Western. Apparently the religious infrastructure of the country perceiving a threat to their tradition, power and culture incited a coup. The ruling government then exiled all foreigners, nationalized all the resources and descended into an almost isolationist (from the West except for oil sales) period.

The Palestinians resented in 1947 and do to this day control being imposed on them by the West in the creation of the State of Israel.

I’m not suggesting that Breivik was in any way correct in what he did.

What I’m saying is that perhaps Norway should look more carefully at it’s rising nationalism and the factors that are contributing to it.

Otherwise the next  Breivik will organize an insurgent movement. Such a movement could easily be aimed at focusing Norways’ rising nationalism against the Norwegian government and all people that are perceived as a threat to Norwegian cultural values.

Posted on

Psycho News #1

The recent flap over Ted Nugents comments started me thinking…

120504 ted nugent 380

More often than not I read or watch news broadcasts and find myself saying WTF? It’s led me to the conclusion the reason the world thinks we’re nuts is beacuse of News like the following bits of psychosis.

Here for your amusement is the first installment of Psycho News…

Mr Nugent said some things that the liberal media blew up into a “potential threat”. The media flap cost the American Taxpayers a chunk of change because the secret service felt obligated to investigate.

Really?

Ted Nugent NEVER, I REPEAT never threatened the president. At worst his comments sounded to me like he expected to be in jail because of his participation in protests of acts of civil disobedience. It’s not like we haven’t seen people arrested in recent years during protests… That Nugent said it was possible that he might be dead speaks to a general belief among conspiracy theorists that vocal dissenters end up having “Accidents“.

It’s all in how you choose to interpret the information. In this case a simple statement was blown out of proportion by an overly sensitive liberal sensationalist media.

Then I saw an interview on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl where she was interviewing a former CIA operative Jose A Rodriguez Jr. about his book Hard Measures.

 Leslie StahlAs I watched the 60 Minutes piece I couldn’t help noticing the squeamishness of Ms. Stahl while Mr Rodriguez calmly and rationally explained the mechanics of getting information from detained terrorists.

Ms. Stahl appeared at points downright argumentative. She kept using the word torture like a hammer.  Yeah by any stretch of the imagination we tortured detainees. We didn’t slit their throats, or saw off their heads on camera. We engaged in “Torture Lite”, we had protocols and rules and with few exceptions we followed those protocols. 

My opinion of the interview was that Ms. Stahl was trying to spin the CIA, Mr. Rodriguez, and our interrogation methods as negatively as possible. 

I found Mr. Rodriguezs reasoning sound. In defense of my nation well…. In all honesty I would have been far less humane about how I gathered information. I’m a firm believer that communication is best facilitated when you’re speaking the same language.

In the case of Al Qaeda and The Taliban the language that they use to make their point is a language of brutality and torture. Torture, I might add that is far worse than anything the CIA has done.

I could see dusting off Torquemadas‘ and the Marquis de Sades‘ reference books on the subjects of compliance and conversion then pulling out all the stops. Just imagine The Rack powered by a wench motor!

However, were I to speak to Al Qaeda and The Taliban in this language I’d be labeled a “War Criminal” and no doubt be brought to trial.  In the case of the Al Qaeda and Taliban murderers… It’s obvious there will never be any changes filed in any court either here in the US or in The World Court at The Hague.

470 pastor responds 120503

Last Sunday a preacher in North Carolina advocated torture of effeminate boys as he ranted against a ballot measure 1. So much for freedom and tolerance guaranteed by the Bill of Rights and the Constitution… and where the hell is Leslie Stahl? Shouldn’t she be interviewing people in this church? Where is the liberal medias sensitivity in this case?

What does it mean when we’ll express concern over torturing combatants in war, and yet remain silent when a man of the church espouses torture of our own children because of perceived sexual orientation in prepubescent boys. Dr Robert Cargill asks a chilling question at the end of a blog entry about this story. The question is below, Dr Cargill’s blog is worth reading don’t pass it up.

“at what point can we conclude that advocating violence against children – for whatever reason, but especially for reasons of bigotry – from a Christian pulpit is ABSOLUTELY NO different than when militant preachers of other religious traditions advocate violence from the pulpit?? Can we condemn one and not the other? And can we go ahead and admit that inciting violence in the name of God is reprehensible and unworthy of the protections commonly afforded religious institutions?“

800 tanning mother 120502

Yet we have National outrage because a woman in New Jersey took her child to a tanning salon. It’s not even clear if the woman allowed her 5 year old to be in the tanning booth. The mother in question looks like a poster child on the ills of tanning and skin cancer and is seriously scary looking. That however doesn’t automatically make her a bad mother or a criminal. 

This week, Mitt Romneys campaign lost Richard Grenell due to the so called religious base in the GOP bitching because Grenell is an out Gay man. This is hysterically funny since as an out gay man he’s living his life honestly.

Think about it, what kind of scandal is likely to come out of an open gay mans life? The worst the GOP base had to worry about is that Mr. Grenell might be caught in bed with… a woman (gasp)!

Richardgrenell 200x200

The scandals that have rocked our country have been those created by “Discovery” that the Jerry Sanduskys, and Larry Craigs are “straight” but like sucking or fucking boys or men in restrooms or public showers.

The GOP Religious wingnuts ignore those facts and instead bitch and whine loud enough that the best qualified person for the job feels compelled to step aside for the benefit of the campaign and arguably for the benefit of the American People as a Nation. Not because he’s ashamed or intimidated, but because he was concerned about the controversy damaging the campaign

Presumably Grenell believes that Mitt Romney is the best man for the office of President. If you get right to it, by extension he was attempting to act in the best interests of our Nation by working for the Romney campaign.

By that logic… you can argue that the GOP Wingnuts did a disservice to the country, because they may have weakened Romneys staff.

 

 

That’s it… These are the news stories that have left me saying WTF this week.

As I sit shaking my head I sometimes consider getting my backpack, tent, Bow and supplies and just heading out into the forest.

Perhaps there is such a thing as too much information….