GUARDIAN ANGELS ASSIST DC POLICE

D.C. RESIDENTS FRUSTRATED with the failure of city police to curb packs of teens beating and robbing Southeast residents have turned to the volunteer crime-stoppers D.C. Guardian Angels.

"It's a situation that has frankly spiraled out of control," said Commissioner Neil Glick of Advisory Neighborhood Commission 6B, which represents the southeastern area of Capitol Hill.

Mr. Glick said he has received dozens of resident complaints in the past few weeks about violence near the Potomac Avenue Metro station, specifically about groups of three to five teens robbing and assaulting people. He said his office has received more than 50 complaints in the past 18 months.

"Our neighborhood has seriously declined and become a less desirable place to live given the threats of criminal-minded juveniles," said my Caspari, a Capitol Hill resident whose husband, Matthew, was the victim of an August 12 midday attack by a knife-wielding juvenile on the corner of 17th and C streets Southeast.

Said Mr. Caspari: "It's very frustrating trying to raise two kids when you have this kind of stuff going on."

As a result, Mr. Glick has asked for help from the D.C. chapter of Guardian Angels, a volunteer group of unarmed residents who patrol streets and make citizen arrests, if necessary.

Read it all.

MASSACHUSETTS POLICE GO BLACK

SPRINGFIELD, MA—Springfield's men in black are returning. The city's new police commissioner, William Fitchet, says members of the department's Street Crime Unit will again don black, military-style uniforms as part of his strategy to deal with youth violence. Fitchet's predecessor, Edward Flynn, had ditched the black attire as part of an effort to soften the image of the unit. Flynn left Springfield in January to become the police chief in Milwaukee.

Sgt. John Delaney told a city council hearing Wednesday that the stark uniforms send a message to criminals that officers are serious about making arrests, saying that a sense of "fear" has been missing for the past few years.

Okay, when those black uniforms stop bullets, we can all start wearing them, and I'd say we have something worth running up the flag pole.

NEUTRALIZING THE GUN GRABBERS

HERE IS WHAT LEADING gun rights advocates are saying about Alan Gottlieb's and Dave Workman's gripping new book—America Fights Back, Armed Self-Defense In A Violent Age.

“In America Fights Back, through vivid real-life stories of citizens forced to face the reality of violence, Gottlieb and Workman provide an accounting of America's crime problem largely ignored by mainstream media.”– Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President, National Rifle Association of America

“Americans love books in which the good guys win. Gottlieb and Workman are adding to that proud tradition with America Fights Back by documenting case after case in which gun-owning citizens who refuse to wear the label ‘victim' remain the winners.”– Jill “J.R.” Labbe, Deputy Editorial Page Editor, Fort Worth Star-Telegram

“How envious the anti-gunners must be of Dave Workman and Alan Gottlieb, for the authors of America Fights Back have the one thing gun-control nuts never will: the facts about firearms and self-defense in the 21st Century. Presented here in compelling fashion, those facts paint a vivid picture of how Second Amendment freedoms deter and prevent crimes. America Fights Back is a must-read for anyone considering carrying a firearm for personal protection.”– Brian Lovett, Editor, Gun Digest the Magazine

“Dave Workman and Alan Gottlieb are long-time heavy hitters in the gun owners' civil rights movement, and they keep their fingers on the pulses of what' s happening. This new collaboration of theirs is gripping for its deft combination of street action reports and legal/statistical correlation. It's a must-read for all those who argue for the right of the people to protect themselves and their loved ones.”– Author Massad Ayoob, founder, Lethal Force Institute

We couldn't have said it any better ourselves. That's why the Second Amendment Foundation is urging you to buy this book today and help spread the word that gun ownership is important by getting this book into the hands of Americans, and thus making this book a bestseller.

The "gun ban" lobby operating from the lunatic fringe does not want you to read this book. They know that this book is the ammunition that will shoot holes in all their twisted logic and emotional arguments.

"Now people will finally listen to the gun rights side," say Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman, authors of the soon to be bestseller—America Fights Back.

The good news is Second Amendment Foundationhas sent a copy to every Senator and Representative in Congress—all 535 of them. And more copies to the White House and every State House. Why? The government's delusions about taking away your gun rights to fight crime are about to change forever—and soon.

It could be the biggest Impact on gun rights this decade. Will it make a difference that they sent this book? We can only hope so, despite the fact that so many in this fight already have their minds made up, corrupted by influence peddlers on the move. But at the personal level, this book is a wakeup call—as well as a call to arms for every American.

Just read this:

“During my years in the U.S. House of Representatives serving on the Judiciary Committee, I tired of listening to the arguments of one gun-control advocate after another endlessly repeat the same tired, baseless arguments in support of their efforts to disarm law-abiding American citizens. Now, in America Fights Back – Armed Self Defense in a Violent Age, we have a well-written defense of the Bill of Rights that provides both sound substantive arguments in support of the right to keep and bear arms, as well as true-life stories of how the Second Amendment works in practice not just in theory. This book ought to be required reading for every Member of the House and Senate; and every occupant of the White House”– Former Congressman Bob Barr

America Fights Back contains gripping stories of armed self-defense by law-abiding American citizens, woven into analysis of gun control laws and a broken justice system, and how they have failed to protect us.

A blockbuster book filled with the latest guns and self-defense true stories and research from two internationally famous authors, Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman, it finally uncovers the whole secret story of the good side to guns and how and why America must stop the assault on our Second Amendment Rights. And more importantly, you can learn how you can protect yourself and your gun rights from this assault.

Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation is recognized as a member of the working press, maintaining active membership in the Outdoor Writers Association of America. He is listed in Who s Who in America, Who s Who in the World and Who s Who in American Politics. Alan has appeared on over 3,500 TV and radio talk shows, including the Lehrer News Hour, ABC s 20/20, CNN Crossfire, Fox TV, NBC Today Show, Larry King Live and Good Morning America. Alan is also President of radio stations KBNP in Portland, KITZ in Seattle, KITZ in Olympia and KSBN in Spokane and former Chairman of the Board of Talk America Radio Network with more than 700 affiliates coast-to-coast.

Dave Workman is a career journalist, freelance writer and author. Now senior editor for the Gun Week, he spent 21 years as a senior editor and writer at Outdoor Empire Publishing. Workman began his career running a small-town newspaper and "stringing" for the Associated Press. Over the years, his byline has appeared in several newspapers and publications. Both Gottlieb and Workman have written several books.

The One Book for Gun Rights Protection

Inside America Fights Back, you'll discover the specific things you need to know to protect yourself from those that want to disarm you and make you easy prey for violent criminals and power hungry politicians. Don't be caught off guard. America Fights Back shares the things you must do now to protect your gun rights.. (If this book is not already on your bookshelf...you need to get it there right away.) The only sure way to protect your rights is to understand the problem and take action. "America Fights Back" will help you do both.

P.S. "America Fights Back" shows that the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms is our most important right in our constitution.

P.P.S. Will members of Congress read it? We would like to believe that most will. They might even agree with these readers who say...

“Who needs a gun? You do! And this book gives the reasons, complete with dozens of actual cases in which the man or woman with a firearm made the difference between life and death, health or injury in the face of violent criminal attack.”– John Snyder, Board Member, National Association of Chiefs of Police

“America Fights Back offers a stunning insight into the other side of the equation — the one where the good guys win, using guns.”– Roy Huntington (retired police officer), Editor, American Handgunner Magazine

“In America Fights Back, Gottlieb and Workman draw you into the savage world of violent crime as confronted by ‘average Americans.' With gripping detail and a well-written page-turning style they weave together stories of how Americans turn to firearms to fight back against the worst, most violent and depraved predators that prowl our society. The story they tell in America Fights Back gives proof that…armed resistance to criminal predators works!”– Ted Deeds, Chief Operating Officer, Law Enforcement Alliance of America, Inc., (LEAA)

“America Fights Back doesn't just break the myth of the gun free zone, it shatters it. This book is a serious exploration of the effects of violent crime, our liberal criminal justice system, and what we need to do to survive. A must read for every American.”– David Kenik, President of the Police Officers Safety Association, Inc. and author of Armed Response; A Comprehensive Guide to Using Firearms for Defense

“Wow! This is not a book full of statistics, but a book that gives you a punch in the stomach, a kick in the head. The authors wake you up to what kind of violence is truly out there and how men and women fight back and won't be victims. This is a must-read for all people who think the police will protect them.”–Paxton Quigley, author "Stayin' Alive: Armed & Female In An Unsafe World"

“Part textbook and part 'Dragnet,' America Fights Back is a terrific exploration of current trends in the gun control debate interwoven will compelling real-life stories.”–Peggy Tartaro, Editor Women & Guns Magazine

Buy America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense In A Violent Age.

STEREOTYPING 101

The following essay is a very astute and quite complete analysis from a writer named Selwyn Duke one of the most profane horrors of the PC crowd.

In a racial profiling lawsuit against the Maryland State Police (MSP), a plaintiff's attorney named Eliza Leighton said that some training documents contain "startling examples of racial stereotypes about Hispanics."  According to the Associated Press:

For example, one document cautions that Hispanics generally do not hold their alcohol well. They tend to drink too much and this leads to fights. And it notes, Hispanic males are raised to be MACHO and brave, while females are raised to be subservient. Other stereotypes include the assertion that the weapon of choice for Hispanics is a knife and that Hispanics are reluctant to learn English.

Regardless of the outcome of this lawsuit, we can now expect such information to be purged from the training documents.  But, as I wrote about Dr. James Watson's comments regarding Africans, intelligence and genetics, this is part of a very distressing pattern.  Everyone fixates on the fact that such comments constitute generalizations (about groups that are supposed to be immune from such things), as if this is an offense in and of itself.  Yet, no one seems to ask the only relevant question.

Are the generalizations true?

Before anyone waxes stupid, please don't tell me that all generalizations are invalid because not every member of the given group will conform to a generalization.  Intelligent people understand that legitimate generalizations are statements about a group's general characteristics, not individuals' specific ones.  For example, if I say that men are taller than women, I don't mean that every man towers over every woman; nevertheless, it is an accurate relation of a general difference between the groups. 

This brings us to an important point: While we must judge everyone as an individual, there are differences within groups but also differences among them.  Thus, it makes no more sense to paint every group with the same brush than it does to pain every individual with the same brush.

My response to those who cannot or will not accept this is that if they can't understand commentary written for adults, they shouldn't read it.  Besides, not all generalizations can be invalid simply because the statement that all generalizations are invalid is itself is a generalization.

Modern dogma holds that diversity is one of the greatest qualities a society can enjoy, that it bestows many advantages.  But what does this imply?  Well, by definition "diversity" refers to differences among groups.  Now, not only is it illogical to assume that every one of these differences will be flattering, the supposition that diversity is beneficial implies otherwise.  After all, if diversity is beneficial, it is only because certain groups bring qualities or strengths to the table that others do not.  And, if a given group possesses a certain unique strength, then other groups are wanting in that area relative to it.

Any which way you care to slice it, this is a corollary of diversity dogma. 

So, ironically, despite the fact that the diversity dogmatists would eschew stereotyping, a version of it imbues their ideology.  So it's not that they don't have biases relating to generalizations, only that their understanding of group differences is clumsy and primitive, sort of like Archie Bunker but with advanced degrees, the illusion of intellectualism and the inability to be honest with themselves and others.  So let's be honest now.

Stereotypes often arise because they have a basis in reality.  For example, often it has been remarked that Irishmen liked to drink.  Once again, intelligent people know this doesn't mean that every Irishman is a drunkard, but informed people might know something else: Ireland ranks number two in the world in per capita alcohol consumption next to Luxemburg.

Another difference among groups is that some are more patriarchal than others.  We know that Moslem societies are quite so, as women are usually afforded fewer legal rights.  In fact, Westerners will often emphasize and lament this difference as a way to burnish their credentials as believers in women's liberation. 

In light of this, let's now analyze the MSP's statement that "Hispanic males are raised to be MACHO and brave, while females are raised to be subservient."  Since some groups are more patriarchal than others, this can be true; and I venture to say that anyone who has had great contact with Hispanic people and possesses eyes and common sense will know it's often enough true compared to, say, Swedes.

As to these matters, Raul Caetano, Catherine L. Clark and Tammy Tam, three Ph.Ds who received a government grant to study common sense, implicitly vindicate two of the MSP's assertions.  They write in their paper, Alcohol Consumption Among Racial/Ethnic Minorities:

"One traditional explanation for heavy drinking patterns among Hispanic men, particularly Mexican-Americans, is the concept of ‘exaggerated machismo.'"

While these researchers didn't accept or reject this explanation, they didn't question the suppositions that Hispanic men drink too much and are "macho."  So then why are the Maryland State Police probably going to have to pay money for saying what these academics got paid money to say?  Well, it neither serves the left's agenda to sue a few eggheads nor can cash be extracted from them. 

Besides, there is another factor: If a truth hurts, since you can't destroy the Truth, you destroy the truth-teller.

And here is another truth.  I have only one thing to say about the idea that Hispanics are reluctant to learn English: I've never been asked if I wanted to press two for German.

Stereotypes aren't just woven into flawed leftist ideology (please forgive the redundancy) and million-dollar research substitutes for common sense; they also appear in entertainment.  Just think about all the times that whites are characterized as nerdy, lacking rhythm or liking mayonnaise (as to this, watch the movie Undercover Brother or Al Yankovic's music video "White & Nerdy").  Yet, golfer Fuzzy Zoeller was practically clubbed to death for quipping that Tiger Woods shouldn't request fried chicken or collard greens after the latter's record-setting performance at the 1997 Masters tournament.  (I was "startled" myself; since Woods' mother hails from Thailand, I would have thrown in phat gapow).  Seriously, though—or almost seriously—if whites can be smeared with mayonnaise, other groups can be coddled with their cuisines.

This isn't to say that every stereotype or generalization—or what is known as a "profile" in the realm of law enforcement—is completely accurate.  But when one is found wanting, it simply warrants the alteration of its flawed elements, not the throwing out of the baby with the bath water.  If a difference is frivolous and fun, it should be a source of mirth; if it indicates greater ability, it should be applauded; and if the difference is damning, remedy should be sought.

But this standard won't be embraced until we accept what is perhaps the most valid generalization of all: The leftist thought police are a menace to civilization and free speech.  They are turning us into an ideological state, a place where ideology isn't rejected when it departs from truth but truth is rejected when it departs from ideology.

As for remedy, the best antidote to political correctness is its opposite.  We don't have to speak and joke and talk and think in a way that pleases those who prove that infantilism doesn't always peak in infancy.  Instead, we should stand up for truth—be it in the form of wit, policy or paradigm—and those who speak it.  Do this en masse and "startle" those thought police enough, and we just might be rid of them after all.  That is, if they actually do have hearts.  

Selwyn Duke is a frequent contributor to American Thinker.