There are many who question the need to own or carry a gun. They say that all one needs to do is call the police, and the police are obligated to help you. The sad truth is that the police rarely prevent crimes or interrupt crimes in progress. In all actuality, the courts do not require the police to protect anyone:
``fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.'... a well-established rule that official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection"
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)
Under the public duty doctrine, the District has no duty to provide public services to any particular citizen...
Miller v District of Columbia, 841 A. 2d 1244 (DC: Court of Appeals 2004)
Nor is this legal opinion isolated to Washington DC:
Riss v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579, (N.Y. Ct. of Ap. 1958)
Keane v. City of Chicago, 240 N.E.2d 321 (1968)
Silver v. City of Minneapolis, 170 N.W.2d 206 (S.Ct. Minn. 1969)
Sapp v. City of Tallahassee, 348 So.2d 363 (Fla.Ct. of Ap. 1977)
Weutrich v. Delia, 155 N.J. Super 324, 326, (1978)
Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville, 272 N.E. 2d 871 (Ind.Ct. of Ap.)
Chapman v. City of Philadelphia, 434 A.2d 753 (Sup.Ct. Penn. 1981)
Davidson v. City of Westminster, 32 C.3d 197 (S.Ct. Cal. 1982)
Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 61 (7th Cir. 1982)
Morgan v. District of Columbia, 468 A.2d 1306 (D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1983)
Morris v. Musser, 478 A.2d 937 (1984)
Calogrides v. City of Mobile, 475 So.2d 560 (S.Ct. A;a. 1985)
McKee v. City of Rockwall, Texas, 877 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1989), cert. denied
Hornbeck Offshore Transp., LLC v. US, 563 F. Supp. 2d 205 (DC 2008)
The evidence is overwhelming: the police are under no legal obligation to help you.
The only person who can protect you is you. Security cameras, amber alerts, Identikids, and other such devices and programs only assist the police in catching someone AFTER a crime is committed. A cell phone (assuming the bad guy lets you use one) or an alarm system only lets you call the cops, who will arrive AFTER the crime is complete, so they can take a report.
So the answer lies in being able to defend yourself. How will you do that? A dog? Dogs, unless trained, are not effective against a determined attacker. Bare hands? Karate? Unless you are an MMA fighter, or are a large man, you may have problems defending yourself against another, especially when confronted by multiple attackers, made even more difficult if they are armed even with knives or clubs. Nothing evens the odds like a firearm.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Medical Mishaps
I had a patient at 2:30 this morning. She was complaining of chest pain that this 56 year old woman described as "a set of Vise-grips crushing my chest." She also complained of shortness of breath and nausea. All of this started as she was working her night shift job on an assembly line making 3D glasses. Her husband died in February, after a long battle with cancer. Her 12 lead was unremarkable, she was in a sinus rhythm, and her vitals were: HR 78, BP 89/62, RR 18 SaO2 94% on room air. She has pale lips, and rates the pain as a 7/10. Lungs are clear.
The first thing we did was place her in Trendelenberg, and gave her some O2 at 2 liters, then I started an IV in her right antecubital vein. I gave her 325mg of aspirin, and off we went to the hospital. I couldn't get that blood pressure stable, and it kept dropping. After we had given 800ml of saline, her blood pressure was now 68/44. I started a dopamine drip. She stated that she weighed 136 pounds, so I started her off at 12 drops per minute.
We arrived at the hospital to see the nurses rolling their eyes, and they immediately disconnected the dopamine. THEN they took a BP and got 63/40. Instead of treating her, they retook the BP. 8 times. They moved the cuff to the other arm (the one with the IV), so they started a second IV. Then they moved to the right thigh, and finally to the left thigh, where they got a BP of 100/60. That is the BP they chose to believe.
Now you don't have to have a medical education to understand that if you take a BP 8 times, and get the same result 7 of those 8 times, that the 8th time is probably NOT the correct one. However, in this case, the 8th BP was the one that allowed the nurse to get away with not doing anything.
Sometimes I get so exasperated with the incompetent and lazy people we have in the medical field.
The first thing we did was place her in Trendelenberg, and gave her some O2 at 2 liters, then I started an IV in her right antecubital vein. I gave her 325mg of aspirin, and off we went to the hospital. I couldn't get that blood pressure stable, and it kept dropping. After we had given 800ml of saline, her blood pressure was now 68/44. I started a dopamine drip. She stated that she weighed 136 pounds, so I started her off at 12 drops per minute.
We arrived at the hospital to see the nurses rolling their eyes, and they immediately disconnected the dopamine. THEN they took a BP and got 63/40. Instead of treating her, they retook the BP. 8 times. They moved the cuff to the other arm (the one with the IV), so they started a second IV. Then they moved to the right thigh, and finally to the left thigh, where they got a BP of 100/60. That is the BP they chose to believe.
Now you don't have to have a medical education to understand that if you take a BP 8 times, and get the same result 7 of those 8 times, that the 8th time is probably NOT the correct one. However, in this case, the 8th BP was the one that allowed the nurse to get away with not doing anything.
Sometimes I get so exasperated with the incompetent and lazy people we have in the medical field.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Militia
Isn't this one of the reasons why we have a Second Amendment? Now, I am against the war on (some) drugs, but I don't see this as a crime or a drug problem. The citizens of another nation are entering the country and committing violence against the citizens of this nation, and against duly authorized government officials. The FedGov will do nothing about it, because they are corrupt and wish to use this issue as a bargaining chip to forward their own agenda.
It is time that the citizens of the area start taking care of the problem themselves. Any foreign national caught in this country with a weapon should be treated as an enemy combatant, and shot on sight. I have said for the last three years, that it is only a matter of time before the border conflict between illegals and residents erupts into open warfare.
It is time that the citizens of the area start taking care of the problem themselves. Any foreign national caught in this country with a weapon should be treated as an enemy combatant, and shot on sight. I have said for the last three years, that it is only a matter of time before the border conflict between illegals and residents erupts into open warfare.
Saturday, June 19, 2010
The shape of elections to come?
In a town near where I live, Hispanic residents complained that even though they made up 52% of the voters, there had never been a Hispanic Commissioner elected. They complained, and the Federal Government stepped in and changed the election rules.
A similar complaint was made in New York, and a Judge solved it by allowing Hispanics to vote 6 times each. Six times. Each.
This sort of thought process has a few flaws:
1 Who says that a Hispanic must always vote for a Hispanic candidate? After all, if Hispanics make up more than 50% of the electorate and still don't elect a Hispanic, then how is that a violation of rights? Maybe the Hispanics don't WANT a Hispanic candidate.
2 What happened to one person/one vote?
3 Will this be expanded to other demographic groups? Gays? Women?
4 Or maybe we should just let judges do all the voting.
In the New York article, Hispanics complained that they made up 25% of the voters, but had never elected a Hispanic candidate. Let's do the math:
There is an at-large voting system in this town, where the 30,000 voters elect 6 commissioners. Hispanics make up about 7,500 voters. If they voted 6 times each, they got a total of 45,000 votes out of a total possible 67,500 votes. They had, as a voting block, 67% of the votes, yet the Hispanic Candidate came in fourth. That tells me that the Hispanic Candidate is not getting all of the Hispanic votes. Under this system, the Hispanic voters could control 4 of the 6 seats, and there is nothing anyone could do about it. (If they split their 45,000 votes 4 ways, each of their candidates would get 11,250 votes. The remaining 22,500 the voters would at best split their votes two ways to enter a 6 way tie for the 6 seats.) Even with this advantage, the only Hispanic candidate elected came in fourth.
What comes next? Will Illegal immigrants will get the right to vote, and a judge will let them vote six times each? 10 million illegals, six votes each= 60 million votes. Pretty good trick, since there were only about 130 million votes cast in the 2008 election.
The five states with the highest percentage of illegal immigrants are California (8%), Texas (6.4%), Florida (5.4%), Illinois (5.2%), and New York (2.7%). Those 5 states alone control 169 electoral votes, with only 270 needed to elect a president. With illegals controlling six times their numbers in votes, they would become the second largest voting block with 60 million votes, with only our 46.9 million Hispanic citizens controlling more with about 150 million votes. (The next largest voting block would be voters over 65, with only 40 million votes, and think of the clout that the AARP has)
A similar complaint was made in New York, and a Judge solved it by allowing Hispanics to vote 6 times each. Six times. Each.
This sort of thought process has a few flaws:
1 Who says that a Hispanic must always vote for a Hispanic candidate? After all, if Hispanics make up more than 50% of the electorate and still don't elect a Hispanic, then how is that a violation of rights? Maybe the Hispanics don't WANT a Hispanic candidate.
2 What happened to one person/one vote?
3 Will this be expanded to other demographic groups? Gays? Women?
4 Or maybe we should just let judges do all the voting.
In the New York article, Hispanics complained that they made up 25% of the voters, but had never elected a Hispanic candidate. Let's do the math:
There is an at-large voting system in this town, where the 30,000 voters elect 6 commissioners. Hispanics make up about 7,500 voters. If they voted 6 times each, they got a total of 45,000 votes out of a total possible 67,500 votes. They had, as a voting block, 67% of the votes, yet the Hispanic Candidate came in fourth. That tells me that the Hispanic Candidate is not getting all of the Hispanic votes. Under this system, the Hispanic voters could control 4 of the 6 seats, and there is nothing anyone could do about it. (If they split their 45,000 votes 4 ways, each of their candidates would get 11,250 votes. The remaining 22,500 the voters would at best split their votes two ways to enter a 6 way tie for the 6 seats.) Even with this advantage, the only Hispanic candidate elected came in fourth.
What comes next? Will Illegal immigrants will get the right to vote, and a judge will let them vote six times each? 10 million illegals, six votes each= 60 million votes. Pretty good trick, since there were only about 130 million votes cast in the 2008 election.
The five states with the highest percentage of illegal immigrants are California (8%), Texas (6.4%), Florida (5.4%), Illinois (5.2%), and New York (2.7%). Those 5 states alone control 169 electoral votes, with only 270 needed to elect a president. With illegals controlling six times their numbers in votes, they would become the second largest voting block with 60 million votes, with only our 46.9 million Hispanic citizens controlling more with about 150 million votes. (The next largest voting block would be voters over 65, with only 40 million votes, and think of the clout that the AARP has)
Friday, June 18, 2010
Oops
I have carried a concealed handgun for over 20 years, and today I had a first. I had to make a quick trip out to the store. I never go anywhere unarmed, but being in a hurry, I reached into the leather drawer and threw the first holster I touched onto my belt as I was getting dressed, and put my Kimber Ultra Carry in it. The holster in question was a Don Hume JIT holster. Now this holster fits a niche for me. I use it in IDPA matches because I can draw from it rather quickly. It turns out that this property makes for poor retention.
As I pulled up to the store, one of our famous Central Florida thunderstorms hit, and it began to rain by the bucketful. In seconds, the water was 2 inches deep in the parking lot. The lightning and thunder were pretty intense, so I ran into the store. Well, actually, I had run halfway to the store, when I heard the clatter of my $1300 pistol hitting the pavement. I quickly retrieved it from the growing pond, and reholstered.
Luckily, there was no one else there to see it because it was raining too hard. When I got home, I disassembled and cleaned the pistol, and there was no damage to the weapon. The grip laser still works, the TFO sights were unbroken, and I will be more careful when selecting holsters from now on.
As I pulled up to the store, one of our famous Central Florida thunderstorms hit, and it began to rain by the bucketful. In seconds, the water was 2 inches deep in the parking lot. The lightning and thunder were pretty intense, so I ran into the store. Well, actually, I had run halfway to the store, when I heard the clatter of my $1300 pistol hitting the pavement. I quickly retrieved it from the growing pond, and reholstered.
Luckily, there was no one else there to see it because it was raining too hard. When I got home, I disassembled and cleaned the pistol, and there was no damage to the weapon. The grip laser still works, the TFO sights were unbroken, and I will be more careful when selecting holsters from now on.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Unfair employers
I have had a few jobs in my life. I have been at the bottom of the totem pole, and I have been a supervisor. One of the things that was always taught to me is that you berate in private, and praise in public. Another thing I learned is to treat my employees with respect.
My wife was fired from her job this week. I don't begrudge them the act of firing her, as that is their right. What upsets me is how it was done. Two years ago, she was promoted into her current department. Shortly after, one of her coworkers quit, and when the employer couldn't find a qualified applicant to fill the position, my wife offered to do both jobs in exchange for a raise from $12 an hour to $18 an hour. Her employer agreed, but said that the raise would be to $14 an hour, and if things worked out, they would raise her to $16 an hour after six months. Well, you guessed it, six months came, but the raise didn't. The reason? The economy had tanked, and the boss said, "You aren't getting the raise we promised you because we know that unemployment is so high that you can't leave."
There were 4 other people in her department, plus a supervisor. This department is part of a surgical practice, with half of the employees dealing with insurance companies and their rules so the Doctors would get paid, and the other half of the people dealing with all of the legal and medical requirements for the surgery to be able to happen. Other than the supervisor, my wife was the only one in the department with the experience, education, and knowledge required to do both jobs. When the supervisor was out on FMLA, my wife assumed the supervisor's responsibilities. Other than her scheduled vacation, she did not miss a day of work in four years. She was also making the most money of anyone in the department.
After two years in the position, and four years as an employee, they decided that the money my wife was making was too much, and wanted to be rid of her. Instead of simply doing the proper thing and just firing her, they began making her life more and more difficult. They would berate her for making a decision one week, and then berate her for asking questions about what she should do the next. They made the job horrible. They even told her that they wanted her to quit, so they would not have to pay unemployment. My wife refused to quit her job, saying they would have to fire her.
That was when they started trying to find a reason. They kept adding to her responsibilities, and micromanaging her. They installed spyware on her computer in an attempt to catch her doing things she shouldn't have.
The piled more and more work on her, but would not authorize overtime. So my wife came in early and left late off the clock to keep up. They got the IT department to shut down her computer when working hours were over, so she couldn't do that. Then, this week, they fired her because she was not getting all of her work done, even though she had more responsibilities that anyone else in her department.
They did it at quitting time on Friday, and her supervisor laughed at her when they fired her and said, "Good luck getting unemployment or a job, I hope you starve," Then they watched her while she packed up her things and walked her out.
A real class act. If they deny her unemployment, we are going to hire an attorney. I am also going to hire this company to see if they can get the former employer to lie about her work performance. If they do, we will sue for defamation and slander.
My wife was fired from her job this week. I don't begrudge them the act of firing her, as that is their right. What upsets me is how it was done. Two years ago, she was promoted into her current department. Shortly after, one of her coworkers quit, and when the employer couldn't find a qualified applicant to fill the position, my wife offered to do both jobs in exchange for a raise from $12 an hour to $18 an hour. Her employer agreed, but said that the raise would be to $14 an hour, and if things worked out, they would raise her to $16 an hour after six months. Well, you guessed it, six months came, but the raise didn't. The reason? The economy had tanked, and the boss said, "You aren't getting the raise we promised you because we know that unemployment is so high that you can't leave."
There were 4 other people in her department, plus a supervisor. This department is part of a surgical practice, with half of the employees dealing with insurance companies and their rules so the Doctors would get paid, and the other half of the people dealing with all of the legal and medical requirements for the surgery to be able to happen. Other than the supervisor, my wife was the only one in the department with the experience, education, and knowledge required to do both jobs. When the supervisor was out on FMLA, my wife assumed the supervisor's responsibilities. Other than her scheduled vacation, she did not miss a day of work in four years. She was also making the most money of anyone in the department.
After two years in the position, and four years as an employee, they decided that the money my wife was making was too much, and wanted to be rid of her. Instead of simply doing the proper thing and just firing her, they began making her life more and more difficult. They would berate her for making a decision one week, and then berate her for asking questions about what she should do the next. They made the job horrible. They even told her that they wanted her to quit, so they would not have to pay unemployment. My wife refused to quit her job, saying they would have to fire her.
That was when they started trying to find a reason. They kept adding to her responsibilities, and micromanaging her. They installed spyware on her computer in an attempt to catch her doing things she shouldn't have.
The piled more and more work on her, but would not authorize overtime. So my wife came in early and left late off the clock to keep up. They got the IT department to shut down her computer when working hours were over, so she couldn't do that. Then, this week, they fired her because she was not getting all of her work done, even though she had more responsibilities that anyone else in her department.
They did it at quitting time on Friday, and her supervisor laughed at her when they fired her and said, "Good luck getting unemployment or a job, I hope you starve," Then they watched her while she packed up her things and walked her out.
A real class act. If they deny her unemployment, we are going to hire an attorney. I am also going to hire this company to see if they can get the former employer to lie about her work performance. If they do, we will sue for defamation and slander.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
I can't believe people think this is a good idea
To let a 16 year old sail solo around the world in a 40 foot sailboat. So now a distress signal has been received, and help is two days away. The parents here should be prosecuted. Her course takes her through some of the most pirate infested waters in the world (off Somalia, and through Indonesia)
What astounds me even more are the comments to this story, defending the parents and thinking that this is actually a wise thing to allow your 16 year old daughter to do.
What astounds me even more are the comments to this story, defending the parents and thinking that this is actually a wise thing to allow your 16 year old daughter to do.
Friday, June 4, 2010
What a difference
Secret Service officers have subdued two men who refused to get out of the street as President Barack Obama's motorcade was returning to the White House. The men, who were using profanity, were charged with assaulting a police officer and failure to obey a lawful order.
Flashback to 2002:
When Bush visited Portland, Ore., for a fundraiser, protesters stalked his motorcade, assailed his limousine and stoned a car containing his advisers. Chanting "Bush is a terrorist!", the demonstrators bullied passers-by, including gay softball players and a wheelchair-bound grandfather with multiple sclerosis.
One protester even brandished a sign that seemed to advocate Bush's assassination. The man held a large photo of Bush that had been doctored to show a gun barrel pressed against his temple.
"BUSH: WANTED, DEAD OR ALIVE," read the placard, which had an X over the word "ALIVE."
Protesters slashed the tires of several state patrol cruisers and leapt onto an occupied police car, slamming the hood and blocking the windshield with placards. A female police officer was knocked to the street by advancing protesters, badly injuring her wrist.
The angry protest grew so violent that the Secret Service was forced to take the highly unusual step of using a backup route for Bush's motorcade because the primary route had been compromised by protesters, one of whom pounded his fist on the president's moving limousine.
Yet people accused Bush of trying to be a dictator.
Cheating casinos should pay up
For the second time in three months, a person has hit a multi-million dollar jackpot at the slot machines, and the casino involved has refused to pay, claiming that the machine malfunctioned. I say too bad. That is why it is called gambling. Isn't it funny how malfuinctions always benefit the casino and not the player...
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Why do I care what you think?
A few years ago I saw the band "Live" play for the Mardi Gras event at Universal Studios in Orlando and it almost got me in a fight. They played a song or two, and then the band stopped playing and began to talk about "George Bush's illegal war." This really ticked me off, as I had paid to hear the music, not the bands opinions on politics. I yelled out, "Shut up and play the fucking music." Several fans nearby got very irate, and I thought I was about to get my ass kicked.
The reason this comes up is because of Paul McCartney's comments about GW not knowing what a library was. As Breda points out, GW was married to a librarian. He also graduated from Yale AND Harvard. He is no dummy, but that isn't the point.
The point here is this: YOU ARE A MUSICIAN, YOU BRAIN DEAD ASSHOLES. We pay you to play music, not to hear your opinions on politics. You are no more qualified to comment on political matters than the cab driver that took me to the airport. Shut up and do your jobs.
The reason this comes up is because of Paul McCartney's comments about GW not knowing what a library was. As Breda points out, GW was married to a librarian. He also graduated from Yale AND Harvard. He is no dummy, but that isn't the point.
The point here is this: YOU ARE A MUSICIAN, YOU BRAIN DEAD ASSHOLES. We pay you to play music, not to hear your opinions on politics. You are no more qualified to comment on political matters than the cab driver that took me to the airport. Shut up and do your jobs.