Now that there's no hell, it's going to be a really Happy Easter.

The media Hogg
David the Media Hogg is running Rachel Ray’s Nutrish pet food company and several others.  He is causing advertisers are jumping ship on Laura Ingraham’s show because she lampooned poor little Davey Hogg.  Ingraham made the critical mistake of apologizing instead of doubling down on and insulting poor little Davey Hogg again.  It never goes well when an apology is extended to a leftist.

For his part the Hogg refused Ingraham’s apology tweeting out instead:

“I 100% agree an apology in an effort just to save your advertisers is not enough. I will only accept your apology only if you denounce the way your network has treated my friends and I in this fight. It’s time to love thy neighbor, not mudsling at children.”

This is BS on so many levels.  Where to begin?  First off, it should be “friends and me” instead of “friends and I.” No wonder you can't get into the UC system.  

Then the twit tweets to “love thy neighbor” but he won’t accept thy neighbor’s apology unless she goes all Judas Iscariot (Nice Good Friday reference don’t you think?) on her employer – weird huh?  Logic fail and more proof you're not college material.  I think he has yet to embrace this whole “love thy neighbor” thing.

Then the little twit tweets that we shouldn’t “mudsling at children.”  Well at least the truth has finally surfaced.  Hogg is a child.  He’s the same age as George Washington when Washington set out survey Northern Virginia, but Hogg’s a child and Washington a man.  Young MEN not much older than the Hogg are, at this very minute, rucking up, moving out and drawing fire, but Hogg’s a child, and they are real men.  Maybe UC doesn't admit children.

No doubt the Hogg will be jumping on Michael Moore’s extra wide band wagon to lower the voting age to 16.  The obvious response will be, “Children shouldn’t be allowed to vote. In fact, if you’re not old enough or responsible enough to own a gun, you’re not old enough to vote.”

For Rachel Ray, I’m happy you finally found a cuisine, dog food, that you’re comfortable with cooking. 

And it’s just in time for Easter
Dope Francis the Red says, don’t worry, be happy.  There is no hell.  So, Frank, where does the devil live?

I’m reading Jordan Peterson’s book 12 Rules for life (slowly).  Peterson is a big if there’s a yin then there must be yang guy.  As Monsignor John once famously told me when I was trying to convince myself, “If God loves me, He’d never send me to hell.”  “Ahh, but if you believe in heaven, then you must believe in hell.”

ASIDE:  The other bit of brilliance Monsignor laid on me was, “If you recognize even just one miracle in the world past or present, then you must concede everything is a miracle.”  Baffles me to this day.  Not the miracle thing.  My life is a miracle and the way it has turned is a bigger miracle.  But I look at pile of rotting horse manure and ask, how in the world is that a miracle? Then the answers to improbable questions start to pile up.  Did you ever think you’d own a horse?  Did you ever think a horse could create so much waste?  Did you ever think the rotting manure could produce such wonderful tomatoes from your neighbor’s garden?  And on and on and on.  If you work everything backward and forward in that manner the Monsignor eventually wins every time.

The Devil got inside Dope Frank’s head and played his greatest most evil trick on him.  The Devil convinced Dope Frank that he – the Devil – does not exist.  The Bible is full of references to the Devil and hell.  So how is all of that reconciled two days before Easter?  Way to ruin the party, Frank.

As has become a full time job at the Vatican, a spokesman has been sent out to clean up Dope Frank’s mess.  Here’s what has come out:

* In a statement released on Mar. 29, after Scalfari's report garnered worldwide attention, the Vatican said:

"The Holy Father Francis recently received the founder of the newspaper La Repubblica in a private meeting on the occasion of Easter, without however giving him any interviews. What is reported by the author in today’s article [in La Repubblica] is the result of his reconstruction, in which the textual words pronounced by the Pope are not quoted. No quotation of the aforementioned article must therefore be considered as a faithful transcription of the words of the Holy Father."

Notice anything weird about that?  It only says Dope Frank was not “quoted”.  It does not say, “Of course Dope Frank KNOWS that hell exists.”  I guess the new jargon for Dope Frank is, “I wish he’d just disappear.”

  

AntiFa arming up
So yeah, sure let’s turn in our guns now.

Yesterday’s JG rant

Re: JG editorial “Nonfatal shootings gauge of safety” on Mar 28, 2018 by Natalie Kroovand Hipple

What’s the worry with missing data for an anti-gun report?  There’s a pretty obvious research model already in place for Liberals for such studies.  Use the global cooling-warming-change-disruption model.  First, gather all of the research that confirms your bias. Then hide, distort or ignore all of the other data.  Then declare that, “The debate is over.”  Then demonize anyone who questions the shoddy work by comparing them to Holocaust Deniers. Last, if you’re going to follow the global cooling-warming-change-disruption model, you probably need to be a total hypocrite.  So, buy a couple of sporting rifles to protect your own family while demanding everyone else turn theirs in.   

It’s pretty clear that Kroovand Hipple is looking only for data to confirm her bias.  If she weren’t, she’d be just as concerned about the missing data for the number of times every year a firearm is used but never fired to prevent unreported crimes. Those are burglaries, assaults, batteries, rapes, murders that were not completed due to just the mere display of a firearm.

If we’re looking to gauge safety, collect all of the missing data.  Don’t cherry pick just the data that is sure to confirm your bias.  Maybe an honest assessment of community safety will determine that we’re all safer if we have concealed carry permits. My guess is that if Kroovand Hipple stumbles across that truth, that data will never see the light of day.   

Wednesday, March 28, 2018 1:00 am

Nonfatal shootings gauge of safety

Natalie Kroovand Hipple

There is no crime that grabs headlines quite like homicide. Yet while the homicide rate in the United States has risen in recent years, homicides made up just 1.4 percent of all violent crime in the United States in 2016.

Criminal nonfatal shootings are a better yardstick of a community's safety. They are, in many ways, a superior indicator of violent crime, and determining their frequency would give a more precise snapshot of community safety and better inform police policy and practice.

For the past several years, I have been working in partnership with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department to help the agency learn more about nonfatal shootings. Our work, going back to 2013, shows that nonfatal shootings occur roughly four times more often than homicides committed with a firearm. In Indianapolis, the 13th-largest city in the nation, someone is shot by another person and survives every day. Sometimes it happens more than once a day. Yet there is no system to nationally assess and compare these numbers with other cities.

Nonfatal shootings are basically homicides that weren't completed. Just one centimeter movement to the left can make the difference between the two. Among law enforcement and researchers, there is little distinction between people involved in homicides and in nonfatal shootings.

Counting nonfatal shootings sounds simple, yet most cities are unable to accurately report them. That's partly because the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports and National Incident-Based Reporting System do not require jurisdictions to report such numbers.

In fact, there is no standard definition of a criminal nonfatal shooting. In both the UCR and NIBRS, nonfatal shootings are categorized as aggravated assaults, but neither system makes it easy to separate out nonfatal shootings from other aggravated assaults, such as firing a gun at someone and missing.

To be sure, any person's death at the hands of another is a tragic, irreversible event. But it makes no sense to base our policies for reducing violent crime on such rare incidents. Gathering data about the people, places and situations surrounding nonfatal shootings would better inform law enforcement and improve overall community safety. You cannot understand what you cannot count.

Natalie Kroovand Hipple is an assistant professor in the department of criminal justice at Indiana University.