POLITICAL CORRECTNESS CAN KILL YOU

The President of the United States, with his hapless policies and feckless notions, fails to understand what justice and terrorism really look like

By Greg ‘Gadfly’ Doyle

PACOVILLA Corrections blog
December 4, 2015

As a retired police sergeant who worked in San Bernardino County for over a quarter of a century, I am not surprised by the excellent police work performed under the harsh and stressful conditions the San Bernardino Police Department, Sheriff’s Department and surrounding mutual-aid policing agencies responded to on December 2, 2015.

Job well done, Brothers and Sisters! Well done, indeed!

The question in my mind is whether or not they will be allowed to continue to do so considering the imposition of the President of the United States into this and similar tragedies around the country with his hapless policies and feckless notions of what justice and terrorism really look like.

Terrorism is NOT work place violence. Justice is NOT mob rule. Yet the president often lends his support to these notions to the detriment of American sovereignty and security. And I for one am sick of his pathetic double-speak.

I submit that the changing landscape within these United States, whether through student uprisings on college campuses, riots over allegations of racism and police brutality in urban areas, or the rise in home-grown Radicalized Islamic Terrorism by lone wolves or small cell groups are, in part, the consequential fall-out from bad progressive policies and scholarly notions that have little to no practical application in real life. That is why university professors are rarely, if ever, hired as police chiefs and sheriffs.

As we have witnessed in San Francisco, Merced, and now San Bernardino, fear of profiling suspicious people and immediately notifying the authorities to investigate (often due stigmatization from political correctness) can kill you (or someone else.) That appears, at least, to be the circumstances in Redlands, California, where a suspicious neighbor remained silent regarding the suspects in the San Bernardino tragedy, according to news reports.

Failing to enforce laws to discourage illegal aliens from entering and remaining in the United States is a standing policy of our president. The failure to crack down on sanctuary cities by the Department of Justice is also a prerogative of the Executive Branch. Failure to act decisively in the Middle East—and instead withdraw the American military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, just as the Surge had stabilized much of the region—was a conscious and calculated decision by, and policy of, our president.

Do these policies make you feel more secure? Our allies are under attack abroad, our embassies have been targeted, and now our citizens at home are subject to attack.

Who was it that refused to use the term “War on Terror” after taking office in 2009? Who puffed up his chest about killing Usama Bin Laden, then misled the American people in the rose garden about the embassy attack in Benghazi to win an election? Who claimed Al-Qaeda was on the run and dismissed ISIS as the JV team?

If you said the President of the United States, you would be correct.

Who has consistently refused to utter the word “Muslim” in any speech concerning terror at home or abroad? Who has been regularly adverse to identifying our enemy “Radical Islam” by name, even in the face of terrorist attacks at home and abroad?

Who continues to blame firearms, and not the individuals or groups who wield them, as the culprit in the acts of domestic and radicalized Islamic terrorism we have witnessed in recent tragedies? Who continues to vilify the National Rifle Association for its stand on the Second Amendment? Who is determined to obtain the early release of convicted drug traffickers and alleged non-violent felons back into our communities?

If you said the president, the ACLU, or Governor Jerry Brown (all political operatives of the left) you would be correct.

What have their progressive and politically correct notions really done for the average citizen?

Hmmmmmm. That is an interesting question. In my opinion, the mantra of the duplicitous left and a feckless president is leaving a conspicuous crimson blood-trail leading right back to an incompetent and divisive leftist-agenda-driven White House.

Ask yourself this: Does the disarming of soft targets (aka:law-abiding citizens) prevent criminals or fanatics (or deranged individuals intent on committing first-time criminal acts) from obtaining firearms?

My answer is, “No.” There is a black market available to anyone who needs a gun badly enough.

Please consider this: Are the probabilities of survival better or worse for a well-trained and armed citizen when suddenly thrust into a confrontation with one or more armed suspects during an active shooter situation? Are the probabilities of survival better or worse for an unarmed and defenseless citizen (soft target) in the same situation?

Strange. The president seems to think limiting our access to firearms and ammunition will minimize the risks of us being attacked. How does that work?

To my knowledge, in nearly every active shooting tragedy in the United States, unarmed civilians were mercilessly gunned down because no one among them was armed in the location where the shooter gained access and control. However, where a firearm was available, the threat was usually neutralized and the carnage IMMEDIATELY stopped.

My suggestion to this president is to reach out to the NRA and seek their assistance in improving training for an otherwise defenseless citizenry.

With all due respect, Mister President, your domestic policy on terrorism is the poorest performer when compared to your foreign policy and government-run health care law at the moment. I am not impressed by your performance in those areas either.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Instead of “Radicalized Islamic Terrorism” or “Radical Islam,” Greg would be more correct to say “Islamic Terrorism” and “fundamentalist Islam.” There is nothing radical about fundamentalist Muslims other than that they believe in every word of the Quran and that Prophet Muhammed must be obeyed. And Muhammed ordered the faithful to take up the sword and kill the infidels. All acts of Islamic terrorism are committed by extremists among fundamentalist Muslims.

I also take issue with the following:

“To my knowledge, in nearly every active shooting tragedy in the United States, unarmed civilians were mercilessly gunned down because no one among them was armed in the location where the shooter gained access and control. However, where a firearm was available, the threat was usually neutralized and the carnage IMMEDIATELY stopped.”

Greg should know better than that. If one, or even three people at the scene in San Bernardino had been armed, they probably would not have been able to stop the heavily armed Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik. Hell, it took an army of cops firing more than 300 AR-15 rounds to take them down in their SUV.

And if several armed civilians had been present at the Planned Parenthood facility in Colorado Springs or in the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, in all probability they would not have been able to stop the shooters. More likely, instead of IMMEDIATELY stopping the carnage, they would have unintentionally added to it.

As for what Greg said about the police response and President Obama, he is spot on.