E. Pluribus Unum
Since Nov 22, 1998

view home page, enter name:

Only sociopaths/psychopaths would refuse to acknowledge the difference between legal immigration/immigrants and illegal immigration/immigrants.

We now have an entire federal government with leadership so thoroughly preoccupied with promoting homosexuality, Islam, racial divisiveness and political correctness that federal employees cannot perform the simple tasks that comprise the job they are employed and paid to do.

Comparing murder rates and gun ownership across countries


The statistical sleight-of-hand gun-haters like to use is that places with high gun ownership rates have more "gun deaths."

What they won't tell you is that those places have the lowest per capita murder rates.

More guns, less murder.

Bill Whittle’s YouTube video “Number One With a Bullet” illustrates this very succinctly.

Here is a link to it.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE]

Here are links to the three data sources that he references.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate]

Here is a graph of the data showing the decline in murder rate with increasing gun-ownership rates.

[http://i.imgur.com/f2mtToX.png]

Fact is, states and countries with low gun ownership rates lead the nation and world in per capita murder rate.

They also lead the world in violent crime rate.

Gun-controlled Britain has a low homicide rate, but it has the highest violent crime rate in the EU, a violent crime rate that is higher than even South Africa, and much higher than the United States.

The only first-world nation with a higher violent crime rate than Britain is Australia, a nation that also banned and confiscated firearms, stripping its people of their ability to defend themselves from violent criminals.

A Congressional Research Service report published in 2013 counted 78 mass-shooting incidents over a thirty-year period in which 547 people were killed.

In other words, on average, 20 people a year die in mass shootings.

There are varying estimates from the CDC, FBI, Harvard and Northwestern studies that say there are between 300,000 and 3,000,000 defensive firearm uses every year, and no shot is fired in 99% of those incidents of successful self-defense.

A lot more than 20 of those 300,000 to 3,000,000 people will wind up being murder or violent crime victims if you deny them the most effective tool for self-defense that there is, a firearm.

So if you like high violent crime and murder rates, by all means advocate taking guns away from law-abiding citizens.


http://web.archive.org/web/20141228215842/http://freerepublic.com/~epluribusunum/

One-third of black babies are now aborted. The dream of Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, to use abortion to exterminate the black race is finally coming to pass. If black lives really mattered they’d be burning abortion clinics to the ground instead of 7-Elevens.

Outsiders cannot fix what is wrong with America's indigenous urban peoples. The systemic maladies of racial separatism, anti-intellectualism, sloth, criminal behavior and perpetual victimhood must be corrected from within their own community. More welfare-reparations cannot overcome their moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

BLACK FEMALE Police Sergeant Supervised Eric Garner’s Deadly Arrest

(1) The Gentle Giant boosted a box of cigarillos used for making 
    marijuana blunts from a convenience store and shook the convenience 
    store clerk like a rag-doll.

    http://i.imgur.com/DYehQUx.jpg

(2) Minutes later The Gentle Giant shoved the door shut on a police
    officer as he attempted to get out of his vehicle. The Gentle Giant 
    then punched the officer and attempted to take his firearm. The 
    firearm discharged during the struggle, wounding the Gentle Giant 
    in the hand, as evidenced by blood and empty cartridges in the 
    vehicle.

(3) The Gentle Giant was high on marijuana at the time that he stole a 
    box of cigarillos, roughed up a store clerk, assaulted a police 
    officer and attempted to take his firearm, as evidenced by forensic
    blood analysis.

    Is there anything incorrect about the above statements?


The Ten Planks of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto
(and How Statists Implement Them)

  1. Abolition of private property rights (via high property taxes, restrictive zoning laws, "fair housing" edicts, environmental and "wetlands" regulations, UN Agenda 21, etc.)

  2. Institution of a heavily graduated income tax (by calling it "taxing the rich")

  3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance (through a confiscatory estate tax on "the rich")

  4. Confiscation of the property of enemies of the state (through lawless application of asset forfeiture and eminent domain)

  5. Centralization of credit into the hands of the state (Federal Reserve, Federal Trade Commission, TARP, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, federal takeover of student loans, etc.)

  6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation into the hands of the state (FCC, DOT, FEMA, NTSB, FAA, etc.).

  7. Consolidation and subjugation of all major industries to central government control (FDA, EPA, OSHA, ICC, HUD, NLRB, EEOC, DOE, TSA etc.)

  8. Mandatory labor union membership ("card check" to bypass employee consent, automatic withholding of union dues, forced unionization of health care workers, teachers, police, firefighters, etc.)

  9. Equitable redistribution of all wealth (TANF, SSI, EITC, SNAP, Community Reinvestment Act, etc.)

  10. Free public education (and food, housing, health care, cell phones, Internet access, etc.)




http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2013/09/17/minimum-wage-madness-n1701840/page/full

http://www.creators.com/conservative/thomas-sowell/minimum-wage-madness-part-ii.html

...In South Africa during the era of apartheid, white labor unions urged that a minimum wage law be applied to all races, to keep black workers from taking jobs away from white unionized workers by working for less than the union pay scale.

...Some supporters of the first federal minimum wage law in the United States — the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 — used exactly the same rationale, citing the fact that Southern construction companies, using non-union black workers, were able to come north and under-bid construction companies using unionized white labor...

...In the United States, the last year in which the black unemployment rate was lower than the white unemployment rate — 1930 — was also the last year when there was no federal minimum wage law. Inflation in the 1940s raised the pay of even unskilled workers above the minimum wage set in 1938. Economically, it was the same as if there were no minimum wage law by the late 1940s.

...In 1948 the unemployment rate of black 16-year-old and 17-year-old males was 9.4 percent. This was a fraction of what it would become in even the most prosperous years from 1958 on, as the minimum wage was raised repeatedly to keep up with inflation....


ENOUGH of the “unarmed black teenager” propaganda.

There were 726 homicides committed in 2011 alone with hands, fists and feet, and the majority of those homicides were committed by young black males.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate

The US Supreme Court has decided that a person is any race or gender that they wish to be.

If I as a white male decide that I am a black female, I expect the affirmative action laws to be applied to me just the same as they would be to any black female.

Anybody who disagrees is a racist homophobe who belongs in a prison cell.


“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago


AGW/Climate-change is not science

Physics is science. Chemistry is science.

Climate-forecasting with computer models is soothsaying.

Climate models cannot possibly encompass all the variables involved in global climate, because they are as infinite as the universe.

We know from chaos theory that, unless your model encompasses every last variable, its predictions will diverge more and more from reality over time.

You do believe in mathematics, right? That's all chaos theory is.

You make fun of people who believe that they are not the center of the universe and that there are things that we do not and cannot know much less control, but it's a lot more insane, not to mention malignantly-narcissistic, to believe that you know everything and can control things like global climate.


1st Amendment,Section 1:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

14th Amendment, Section 1:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


I am beginning to look forward to the Islamic Caliphate and Moslem takeover of the US and institution of Sharia Law that Barack Hussein Obama is engineering.

After a few human-torchings, stonings and beheadings, "gays" are going to be longing for the good old days when the worst thing they had to worry about was some Christian baker not baking a cake for them.


Plank #3 of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto: Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

Government is the greediest, most corrupt and murderous force on Earth (governments murdered 262 million of their own citizens in the 20th century alone*), but there are those who have a religious faith in government and think that government should inherit all wealth.

Do they believe that government officials and employees are somehow intellectually and morally superior to mere peasants who don't work for the government? That somehow they will do something magical with the wealth, other than find a way to get it into their own pockets?

Those people deserve the totalitarian state that's coming.

* https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM



Earth's atmosphere contains 0.04% CO2.

Man is responsible for 3.4% of that 0.04%

The total amount of CO2 In the atmosphere due to man’s production is just 0.00136%









Wealth is nothing more than unspent money kept in a financial account or invested in property or a business.

People who spend every cent they can get their hands on the minute they get their hands on it will never have wealth no mater how much of other peoples' money you steal and give to them.


30 US jurisdictional studies have shown 91% of US murder victims are themselves criminals. Over 80% with felony or five or more arrests.

For one of the studies google: criminals target criminals trend shows usatoday In fact if you are not a felon or prior criminal, you and your household members are 25% safer if you own a gun than equal demographic unarmed homes. Indeed your risk of being murdered in the US, if you are not a felon, gang ember or prior criminal is 20% LESS than the developed nation mean.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-08-31-criminal-target_N.htm


Common Core was never validated because it is such a mess it can't be validated. What little validation can be done shows that there is less than a 60 percent congruence between Common Core and the higher-performing countries it is allegedly preparing our children to compete against.

http://pioneerinstitute.org/featured/common-core-english-and-math-standards-not-properly-validated/

Five of the 29 members of the Common Core Validation Committee refused to sign a report attesting that the standards are research-based, rigorous and internationally benchmarked. The report was released with 24 signatures and included no mention that five committee members refused to sign it, a highly deceptive and unprecedented act. No member of the Validation Committee had a doctorate in English literature or language and only one held a doctorate in math, and he was one of the five who refused to sign off. Only three of the 29 members had extensive experience writing standards. Two of the three refused to sign off, including the PhD mathematician. In other words, no math expert or English literature expert approved the standards, and only one of the people who wrote it had extensive experience writing standards.

http://pioneerinstitute.org/featured/common-core-english-and-math-standards-not-properly-validated/

Common Core was not "written by the states."

http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2013/06/07/five-people-wrote-state-led-common-core

It was written by five Left-wing activists, one of whom proudly-admitted that his goal was to "end white privilege."

http://libertynews.com/2015/03/video-dr-david-pook-admits-he-wrote-common-core-to-end-white-privilege/


The Washington Post says a Congressional Research Service report published in 2013 counted 78 mass-shooting incidents over a thirty-year period, in which 547 were killed.

That means, out of 118 million gun owners, 78 or 0.00007% of the gun owning population are potential mass murderers.

Now compare that number to 10,076. According to MADD, that’s the number of people killed during drunk driving crashes in 2013 alone. In fact, every day in America, another 28 people die in drunk driving crashes. Every. Single. Day.


Denial that Gender Dissociative Disorder is a mental illness is itself a mental illness.

If I bolt a corkscrew to my forehead and call myself a unicorn and you agree that I am a unicorn, you are just as loony as I am.

In 1973, The American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality as a mental disorder from the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-II).

This decision was a significant victory for homosexual activists and they have continued to claim that the APA based their decision on new scientific discoveries that proved that homosexual behavior is normal and should be affirmed in our culture.

This is false and part of numerous homosexual urban legends that have infiltrated every aspect of our culture. The removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder has given homosexual activists credibility in the culture, and they have demanded that their sexual behavior be affirmed in society.

What Really Happened?

Numerous psychiatrists over the past decades have described what forces were really at work both inside and outside of the American Psychiatric Association---and what led to the removal of homosexuality as a mental disorder.

Dr. Ronald Bayer, a pro-homosexual psychiatrist has described what actually occured in his book, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnoses. (1981)

In Chapter 4, "Diagnostic Politics: Homosexuality and the American Psychiatric Association," Dr. Bayer says that the first attack by homosexual activists against the APA began in 1970 when this organization held its convention in San Francisco. Homosexual activists decided to disrupt the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, homosexual activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kamney grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a decleration of war against you."

Homosexuals forged APA credentials and gained access to exhibit areas in the conference. They threatened anyone who claimed that homosexuals needed to be cured.

Kamney had found an ally inside of the APA named Kent Robinson who helped the homosexual activist present his demand that homosexualiy be removed from the DSM. At the 1972 convntion, homosexual activists were permitted to set up a display booth, entitled "Gay, Proud, and Healthy."

Kameny was then permitted to be part of a panel of psychiatrists who were to discuss homosexuality. The effort to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM was the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, not scientific discoveries.

Prior to the APA's 1973 convention, several psychiatrists attempted to organize opposition to the efforts of homosexuals to remove homosexual behavior from the DSM. Organizing this effort were Drs. Irving Bieber and Charles Socarides who formed the Ad Hoc Committee Against the Deletion of Homosexuality from the Dsm-II.

The DSM-II listed homosexuality as an abnormal behavior under section "302. Sexual Deviations." It was the first deviation listed.

After much political pressure, a committee of the APA met behind closed doors in 1973 and voted to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from the DSM-II. Opponents were given 15 minutes to protest this change, according to Dr. Jeffery Satinover, in Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. Satinover writes that after this vote was taken, the decision was to be voted on by the entire APA membership. The National Gay Task Force purchased the APA's mailing list and sent out a letter to the APA members urging them to vote to remove homosexuality as a disorder. No APA member was informed that the mailing had been funded by this homosexual activist group.

According to Satinover, "How much the 1973 APA decision was motivated by politics is only becoming clear even now. While attending a conference in England in 1994, I met a man who told me an account that he had told no one else. He had been in the gay life for for years but had left the lifestyle. He recounted how that after the 1973 APA decisiion, he and his lover, along with a certain very highly placed officer of the APA Board of Trustees and his lover, all sat around the officer's apartment celebrating their victory. For among the gay activists placed high in the APA who maneuvered to ensure a victory was this man--suborning from the top what was presented to both the membership and the public as a disinterested search for truth."

Dr. Socarides Speaks Out

Dr. Charles Socarides has set the record straight on how homosexuals inside and outside of the APA forced this organization to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder. This was done without any valid scientific evidence to prove that homosexuality is not a disordered behavior.

Dr. Socarides, writing in Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic : The Issue of Homosexuality writes: "To declare a condition a 'non-condition,' a group of practitioners had removed it from our list of serious psycho sexual disorders. The action was all the more remarkable when one considers that it involved an out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports, but also a number of other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists, and educators over the past seventy years..."

Socarides continued: "For the next 18 years, the APA decision served as a Trojan horse, opening the gates to widespread psychological and social change in sexual customs and mores. The decision was to be used on numerous occasions for numerous purposes with the goal of normalizing homosexuality and elevating it to an esteemed status."

"To some American psychiatrists, this action remains a chilling reminder that if scientific principles are not fought for, they can be lost--a disillusioning warning that unless we make no exceptions to science, we are subject to the snares of political factionalism and the propagation of untruths to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, to the rest of the medical profession, and to the behavioral sciences." Dr. Socarides' report is available from the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality: www.narth.com.

The Importance of The DSM.

The DSM(Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) is the most widely used diagnostic reference book utilized by mental health professionals in the United States.

It's a manual by which all diagnostic codes are derived for diagnosis and treatment - every single physician (an estimated 850,000*) in the United States refers to this book in order to code for a diagnoses. In plain English, what does this mean? It means that for over 30 years physicians have been prevented from properly diagnosing homosexuality as an aberrant behavior and thus, cannot, recommend a treatment for these individuals.

Prior to that time, homosexuality had been treated as a mental disorder under section "302. Sexual Deviations" in the DSM-II. Section 302 said, in part: "This category is for individuals whose sexual interests are directed primarily towards objects other than people of the opposite sex, toward sexual acts...performed under bizarre circumstances...Even though many find their practices distasteful, they remain unable to substitute normal sexual behavior for them." Homosexuality was listed as the first sexual deviation under 302. Once that diagnostic code for homosexuality was removed, physicians, including psychiatrists, have been prevented from diagnosing homosexuality as a mental disorder for more than three decades.

*American Medical Association statistic, 2002.



There hasn't been any warming for almost twenty years, as shown by satellite data.

[http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/satellite-data-shows-no-global-warming-for-nearly-19-years/]

Satellite temperature measurements are much more accurate than surface measurements, but you climate change hysterics refuse to use them because it doesn't give you the result you want.

And as if that weren't bad enough, a quiet solar cycle is just around the corner.

[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150709092955.htm]

Seems like you poor climate change hysterics just can't catch a break.

Makes sense, since your "science" isn't even science.

[http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/21/the-scientific-method-and-climate-science/]


Homosexuality was not removed from the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders because of scientific evidence, but because of a campaign of terror conducted by homosexual supremacists.

For documentation, Google "Homosexual Activists Intimidate American Psychiatric Association into Removing Homosexuality from List of Disorders"

Homosexual supremacists continue their campaign of terror to this day.

For documentation, Google "Occupy the APA Protest Planned for San Francisco"


You are in a lot more danger from mass-murdering governments than you are from mass-murdering crazies.

Governments murdered 262,000,000 of their own citizens in the 20th century alone, and prohibiting those citizens from the possession of guns was always the first step.

Mass-shooters killed 547 people in thirty years.*

262,000,000 versus 547.

Government needs to be controlled a lot more urgently than gun-owning private citizens.

*A Congressional Research Service report published in 2013 counted 78 mass-shooting incidents over a thirty-year period in which 547 people were killed. In other words, on average, 20 people a year die in mass shootings. There are varying estimates from the CDC, FBI, Harvard and Northwestern studies that say there are between 300,000 and 3,000,000 defensive firearm uses every year, and no shot is fired in 99% of those incidents of successful self-defense. A lot more than 20 of those 300,000 to 3,000,000 people will wind up being murder or violent crime victims if you deny them the most effective tool for self-defense that there is, a firearm.



This mentally-ill attitude that anybody who creates a job for another human being is "rich" and must be sitting on piles of money that he/she is just too selfish to share is going to destroy all the jobs we have left.

The way most jobs are created is somebody has an idea for a business, puts together a business plan, borrows money from the bank, leases business space, hires employees, signs contracts with suppliers and starts selling to the public.

If the business earns enough money to meet payroll, service the debt, pay the suppliers, pay taxes, etc., there may be enough left over for the owner to actually have an income.

If expenses exceed revenue, the company goes out of business and those jobs are gone.

Yet we continue to have this mentally-ill attitude that anyone who creates a job for another human being is evil and must be punished.


Twenty-Five Top Quotes from the DOJ's Report on the Michael Brown Shooting

http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/doj_report_on_shooting_of_michael_brown_1.pdf

(For official DOJ report, Google "DOJ Report on Shooting of Michael Brown PDF.")

[01] The evidence, when viewed as a whole, does not support the conclusion that Wilson’s uses of deadly force were “objectively unreasonable” under the Supreme Court’s definition. (Page 5)

[02] when the store clerk tried to stop Brown, Brown used his physical size to stand over him and forcefully shove him away. (Page 6)

[03] Wilson was aware of the theft and had a description of the suspects as he encountered Brown and Witness 101. (Page 6)

[04] Autopsy results and bullet trajectory, skin from Brown’s palm on the outside of the SUV door as well as Brown’s DNA on the inside of the driver’s door corroborate Wilson’s account that during the struggle, Brown used his right hand to grab and attempt to control Wilson’s gun. (Page 6)

[05] there is no credible evidence to disprove Wilson’s account of what occurred inside the SUV. (Page 7)

[06] autopsy results confirm that Wilson did not shoot Brown in the back as he was running away because there were no entrance wounds to Brown’s back. (Page 7)

[07] witnesses who originally stated Brown had his hands up in surrender recanted their original accounts (Page 8)

[08] several witnesses stated that Brown appeared to pose a physical threat to Wilson as he moved toward Wilson. (Page 8)

[09] The physical evidence also establishes that Brown moved forward toward Wilson after he turned around to face him. The physical evidence is corroborated by multiple eyewitnesses. (Page 10)

[10] evidence does not establish that it was unreasonable for Wilson to perceive Brown as a threat while Brown was punching and grabbing him in the SUV and attempting to take his gun. (Page 11)

[11] Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses (Page 12)

[12] Wilson’s account was consistent with those results, and consistent with the accounts of other independent eyewitnesses, whose accounts were also consistent with the physical evidence. Wilson’s statements were consistent with each other in all material ways, and would not be subject to effective impeachment for inconsistencies or deviation from the physical evidence.8 Therefore, in analyzing all of the evidence, federal prosecutors found Wilson’s account to be credible. (Page 16)

[13] Witness accounts suggesting that Brown was standing still with his hands raised in an unambiguous signal of surrender when Wilson shot Brown are inconsistent with the physical evidence, are otherwise not credible because of internal inconsistencies, or are not credible because of inconsistencies with other credible evidence. (Page 78)

[14] Multiple credible witnesses corroborate virtually every material aspect of Wilson’s account and are consistent with the physical evidence. (Page 78)

[15] several of these witnesses stated that they would have felt threatened by Brown and would have responded in the same way Wilson did. (Page 82)

[16] there are no witnesses who could testify credibly that Wilson shot Brown while Brown was clearly attempting to surrender. (Page 83)

[17] There is no witness who has stated that Brown had his hands up in surrender whose statement is otherwise consistent with the physical evidence. (Page 83)

[18] The media has widely reported that there is witness testimony that Brown said “don’t shoot” as he held his hands above his head. In fact, our investigation did not reveal any eyewitness who stated that Brown said “don’t shoot.” (Page 83)

[19] Wilson did not know that Brown was not armed at the time he shot him, and had reason to suspect that he might be when Brown reached into the waistband of his pants as he advanced toward Wilson. (Page 84)

[20] Wilson did not have time to determine whether Brown had a gun and was not required to risk being shot himself in order to make a more definitive assessment.

[21] In addition, even assuming that Wilson definitively knew that Brown was not armed, Wilson was aware that Brown had already assaulted him once and attempted to gain control of his gun. (Page 85)

[22] Wilson has a strong argument that he was justified in firing his weapon at Brown as he continued to advance toward him and refuse commands to stop, and the law does not require Wilson to wait until Brown was close enough to physically assault Wilson. (Page 85)

[23] we must avoid substituting our personal notions of proper police procedure for the instantaneous decision of the officer at the scene. We must never allow the theoretical, sanitized world of our imagination to replace the dangerous and complex world that policemen face every day.” (Page 85)

[24] “It may appear, in the calm aftermath, that an officer could have taken a different course, but we do not hold the police to such a demanding standard.” (citing Gardner v. Buerger, 82 F.3d 248, 251 (8th Cir. 1996) (same))). Rather, where, as here, an officer points his gun at a suspect to halt his advance, that suspect should be on notice that “escalation of the situation would result in the use of the firearm.” Estate of Morgan at 498. An officer is permitted to continue firing until the threat is neutralized. See Plumhoff v. Rickard, 134 S.Ct. 2012, 2022 (2014) (“Officers need not stop shooting until the threat has ended”). For all of the reasons stated, Wilson’s conduct in shooting Brown as he advanced on Wilson, and until he fell to the ground, was not objectively unreasonable and thus not a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. (Page 85)

[25] Given that Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses, to include aspects of the testimony of Witness 101, there is no credible evidence that Wilson willfully shot Brown as he was attempting to surrender or was otherwise not posing a threat. (Page 86)

For the reasons set forth above, this matter lacks prosecutive merit and should be closed.


18 U. S. C. §1519: “Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

All those photo's/film clips from the 50's with the cops holding the water hoses on the civil rights marchers, and the police with the police dogs barking at the crowds, and the cigar smoking major with the bull horn yelling at the marchers etc - they were ALL DEMOCRATS - every last one!"
You are in a lot more danger from mass-murdering governments than you are from mass-murdering crazies.

Governments murdered 262,000,000 of their own citizens in the 20th century alone, and prohibiting those citizens from the possession of guns was always the first step.

Mass-shooters killed 547 people in thirty years.*

262,000,000 versus 547.

Government needs to be controlled a lot more urgently than gun-owning private citizens.

*A Congressional Research Service report published in 2013 counted 78 mass-shooting incidents over a thirty-year period in which 547 people were killed. In other words, on average, 20 people a year die in mass shootings. There are varying estimates from the CDC, FBI, Harvard and Northwestern studies that say there are between 300,000 and 3,000,000 defensive firearm uses every year, and no shot is fired in 99% of those incidents of successful self-defense. A lot more than 20 of those 300,000 to 3,000,000 people will wind up being murder or violent crime victims if you deny them the most effective tool for self-defense that here is, a firearm.


Outlawing guns will get rid of guns the same way that outlawing drugs got rid of drugs.

The main thing that outlawing drugs did was give government a monopoly on medical issues.

Government is the greediest, most corrupt and murderous force on Earth.

Governments, primarily redistributionist governments, murdered 262,000,000 of their own citizens in the 20th century alone, and taking guns away from the peasants was always the first step.

Just Google "20th Century Democide" for proof.


If Romney had won 71 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2012 instead of 27 percent, he still would have lost. On the other hand, had he won just 4 percent more of the white vote, he would have won.”
What do you get with science that is reproducible? Cell phones, HDTV, space flight, life saving medicines...

What do you get with "science" that is not reproducible or falsifiable? Government grants.


If you are for gun control, then you are not against guns, because guns will be needed to disarm people. So it's not that you are anti-gun. You'll need the government's guns to take away other people's guns. So you are very pro-gun, you just believe that only government (the greediest, most corrupt and murderous force on Earth) should be allowed to have guns. There is no such thing as gun control. There is only centralizing gun ownership into the hands of a small political elite and their minions.