Dakota Beacon

It’s time to sit down and decide what the rules of the game are and whether we intend to abide by them.  We can either have a civilized society, one in which we are able to enjoy sports and entertainment, dining in restaurants, trips to the beach or an art gallery - or one such as our caveman ancestors lived in, where every sort of predator had to be countered every day and mere survival was a miracle and the best we could do by nightfall.  

Lancaster, Pennsylvania is approximately the size of Grand Forks, North Dakota.  This is important to note because last weekend in Lancaster, another riot broke out.   This one was based on the excuse that police shot and killed an “unarmed black autistic 14-year-old boy” (presumably in cold blood). Well, it turns out that the “unarmed black autistic 14-year-old boy” was armed with a butcher knife and was 28 years old.  As to autism, that is not clear from reports I have been able to find.  The occasion for the confrontation with police was a 911 call from a woman who said her brother was armed and violent and attempting to break into their mother’s home.  When police arrived the girl came running out of the house followed by the man, who then chased police with the knife.  Just before he would have been able to hack away at the police officer, the officer fired and killed the man.  So, of course, there was a riot.  By the way, I had to go to Bitchute to find this link - if you were to search YouTube all you would find is "peaceful protesters helping to direct traffic".  

The reason I particularly wanted to present Lancaster, among so many other riots, is because of its similarity to the average Midwestern town.  As I observed earlier, Lancaster (about 59,000) is comparable in size to Grand Forks (56,000).  It raises a few questions we should all be considering.  One:  do we want Grand Forks to grow?  Why?  So we can aspire to this?  Two:  Do we need the kind of “diversity” which is blessing Lancaster as we speak?  Lancaster has roughly 56% white, 18% black and an assortment of other racial elements.  Grand Forks, on the other hand is about 81% white, 4.something % black and other racial elements.  Is diversity more of a problem or a delight here? 

The shooting which triggered this riot could have been anything - stopping an armed robbery, a drug deal that went wrong, any kind of domestic conflict, you name it.  Why do we have police?  To enforce laws that protect us against criminals, basically.  So what do we really want the police to do when called to the scene of a violation in progress?  Sit by and take notes while the violence continues, just to be witnesses?  Maybe not show up at all?  Maybe just legalize domestic abuse or armed robbery or drug dealing or gang activity so we won’t need the police.  How about that as one way to combat crime?  Just let the criminals have their way - maybe advertise it just in case you need more crime in your town.  Cut funding for police.  Disband them, in fact, as Minneapolis voted to do.  

Or, if we want to interrupt a murder in progress, a domestic knife attack, a hold-uip, looting or other violence, maybe arson, we could deal sternly with these people.  Instead of permitting outdoor “protests'' every time a crime is stopped or a life is saved from a vicious murderer by swift and decisive action by police, we could prohibit the kind of “protest” which cannot be carried on indoors.  Protest should consist of letters, of speeches, perhaps (delivered indoors), petitions calling for desired change, campaigning for alternative candidates for public office.  It does not need to assume the form of street marches and demonstrations.  In fact, we should not even call such events “protests”.  The truth is that none of the rioting has anything to do with George Floyd, "police brutality”, “white supremacy”, “systemic racism” or anything of the kind.  All it has to do with is marshalling idle, malicious delinquents and felons and putting them to work at overthrowing our government.   None of these people cares about “black lives'' or really any lives, including, apparently, their own.  They are led by self-proclaimed Marxists.  (Having said this, I am now likely to be charged with a "hate crime" if I am ever involved in a physical conflict - read on.)  They are followed by witless, half-baked students and their professors, egged on by an equally malicious press and aided by “platforms'' which permit anything supportive of disorder and which cancel any opposition to it.  

If a small city such as Lancaster, Pennsylvania, can become a tinderbox, so, too, can any city.  Last week it was Rochester, New York,  before that, Kenosha.  We need to decide on a course of action, and the decision must come soon.  Truly, had the first brick-throwing hoodlum in Minneapolis been shot dead in his tracks, it is likely that few would have followed.  Would it have been worth it?  Well, duh.  How many good and innocent people have been injured and killed in this mayhem?  Why are we allowing it?  Why are our citizens tolerating this malfeasance by their city governments?  When will people begin to realize what is being done to them, to our country?  To our freedom?  

It begins to emerge that the so-called “pandemic” and the riots are not unrelated.  Both are bringing destruction to our country and civilization by different means - both are robbing us of our basic freedoms and we sit by, as if stunned, adjusting our masks while New York, Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, Sacramento, Chicago, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, Kenosha, Rochester and now Lancaster, Pennsylvania, burn, ravaged by wild-eyed, demented, inarticulate mobs.

The thing is this:  it takes literally nothing to trigger a riot.  If there isn’t a case in question, any case will do - a man in custody attempting to reach a knife in a car, a man wresting an officer’s taser from him and turning it on him, a man chasing a policeman with a knife, anything, any instance in which a police officer acts to save his own life or that of another.  Will it happen in your hometown?  In the town where your kids live?  Or your parents?  And it appears that once they start they never end.  Portland has passed the 100-day mark.  The riots will continue for another 100 and then another 100 after that, it would appear.  They have no real cause so there is no way to satisfy them with really any kind of concession.  We can forget appeasement.

New York has been devastated - Times Square is deserted, Broadway is dark and silent, restaurants are closed.  There are no visitors to the “City that Never Sleeps”, the “Big Apple”, “NYC”.   In the Northwest, people are giving up and leaving.  California and New York are emptying out - only a fool would stay for the taxes, shutdowns and riots in a police-free zone,, after all.  And idiots aren’t much use in a pinch.  

And at such a time, with feckless lunatics in our city governments calling for defunding our police and “disbanding” them, there is a concurrent drumbeat, relentless in the eternal demand to repeal the Second Amendment - the only protection left to Americans for their defense.  

So we have learned that 1) riots are not restricted to major metropolises - they are occurring in little towns now - it has spread; 2) these “protests” are not protests but riots - let’s just call them what they really are - they are riots, insurrection; 3) they have nothing whatsoever to do with race, black lives, or anything other than a Marxist movement (oops!  there it is again!) to overthrow our republic; 4) appeasement is of no use at all with people bent on this destruction; 5) our cities’ mayors are on the side of the rioters, so don’t look to them for support.

Here are a couple of juxtaposed scenarios from real life.  Yesterday I read about a “horrific” incident in Johnson City, Tennessee.  A man in an SUV hit a “protester” in the street there and “fled the scene”.  In a normal era, let’s say a year ago, this would have been an unconscionable act, right?  But read the details - the man “inched” forward.  In a video it is clear that there was a car parked in such a way as to obstruct the street ahead.  A group approached the slow-moving vehicle.  The man did not stop but “inched” (in the words of one of the “protesters”) ahead, bumping a man. The pedestrian did not move out of the way.  The driver then hit him and drove away, leaving the “victim” in the street.  Yes - it sounds terrible, doesn’t it?  The man who was hit is in the hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.  Let’s hope he recovers, but let’s hope he does not deliberately stand in front of a car in the street again.  So the man, a resident of North Carolina, a real estate agent and “far right” - which we know because he has called BLM a “Marxist” organization (!) - which, by the way, they claim they are.  So his statement of fact makes this a “hate crime”?  (This is why I will always oppose designating anything a “hate crime” - either it’s a crime or it’s not.  Juries are not supposed to be mentalists.)

Now, today we have another story - not the first of its kind, to be sure, but coincidentally set off against yesterday’s story.  In New York City a man was pulled out of his car by a mob and beaten on a busy street in broad daylight.  He might as easily have been killed.  No one seems to be calling it a “hate crime” even though it appeared that the victim was white, randomly chosen by the mob, and victim and perps did not seem to be acquainted with one another.  Just an ordinary “knock-out game” kind of incident, only the man was in a car instead of being a pedestrian.  Should he have driven through the mob of “protesters”?  If he had, it would have been a “hate crime” and he would have been charged as the North Carolina man was, for hit and run.  So - I ask you, which of these two stories is the more “horrific” in your view?  A man approached by a mob and driving through them, even though they stood directly in front of the car and refused to move?  Or the one where a random motorist stopped and was dragged out of his car by a mob and beaten?  It's funny, but no one seems interested in where that victim is, what his state of health is, or what the mindset of his attackers was/is.  No one seems to be about to be charged with assault and battery there.  I hope someone will be.  

I put it to you.  You are driving down a street, maybe in your hometown, maybe not.  You have your wife and kids in the car, maybe your Goldendoodle.  You see the intersection ahead blocked by a parked car, not a police car, but an ordinary car.  The street is full of “protesters”.  You don’t know any of them.  You slow down and they approach your car.  You move ahead and they refuse to get out of the way.  Decision time.  Do you stop?  If you do, can you expect to get friendly directions or a beating?  Will your passengers be safe?  Will you or they be pulled out of the car?  Do you have a gun, by chance, to defend yourself?  No?  Or . . . will you drive on ahead, bump the man who won’t move and if he still refuses to move, keep going?  The fact that the man did not move when the car “bumped” him indicates a malevolent purpose here.  Why do you suppose he didn’t move?  If you keep moving you must drive over someone, if you don’t, you risk yourself and your passengers being beaten.  You ponder.  Over the past several months you have taken seriously and repeated BLM leaders’ quotes that they are “trained Marxists”.  (Have you done this, by the way?  I have.)  So as you sit there in your split-second decision time, as the mob gathers around you, what is your choice?  I can tell you what I would do - I would keep moving.  Anything else would be asking to be beaten or murdered.  

Many years ago, when things were still normal,  my aunts, four very attractive young ladies, and my grandmother, were on a trip.  It was the 1960s.  My aunts, besides being very beautiful girls, also wore some significant jewelry - watches and rings.  In their effort to get back home late at night, they stopped at a cafe in a sleepy little town in Georgia for coffee and a snack.  They returned to their car.  They drove several miles into the dark night, away from the town’s lights.  A car approached from behind and followed them closely.  Suddenly it sped past them.  With a sigh of relief my aunt Susan drove on.  Suddenly they saw the car again.  This time it was stopped along the shoulder of the road, a narrow, two-lane stretch of highway.  Now the driver was out of the car and standing in the middle of the highway.  None of them had a gun at the time.  They were unarmed and vulnerable.  Susan asked in a panicked voice, “What should I do?  He’s not going to move!”  Fortunately, her sister said, “If he doesn’t move, drive right over him and whatever you do, don’t stop!  Step on the gas!”  Susan hit the gas pedal and the man jumped out of the way at the very last second.  They did not stop to look back.  If they had I would not be telling this story.  There are times when civilization is not there to help you.  At such a time you must fend for yourself.  When a potential perpetrator of a crime challenges you it is decision time, the moment of truth.  Your decision can be life-or-death.  It is compounded when you are not alone in your vehicle.  

A story like the one I just told could have had several different endings, none of them as good as the one that happened.  The man in New York could have been killed if the mob had not heard sirens, or he could have been left in a pretzel shape on the street, perhaps never to walk or regain his senses again, never to work again, or eat food with a fork again.  He stopped for the mob.  We can hope he, too, recovers, but there is no media interest in him so we won’t probably ever hear.  The man in Tennessee could have been attacked and perhaps killed or left disabled had he not acted as he did.

Our Democrat mayors and governors across the nation are bringing this disaster upon us by supporting lawlessness.  Every time they sanction violence they ask for more.  Either we will have civilization, where the rules matter or we will have a free-for-all, with the best hope being some sort of vigilante effort and self-defense.  It’s up to us.  If we vote for a “Kamala Harris administration with Joe Biden as President” we will have decided against civilization, for she says the rioting will and “should” continue.  If we keep allowing idiot mayors like Jacob Frey or Jenny Durkan or Bill de Blasio or the rest of the clown car full of them, to thwart and disparage the police in the discharge of their duties, we will have decided for the vigilante every-man-for-himself option.  Personally, I think it was better a couple of years ago when we still had a civilization.  Maybe we should just go back to that.

Comments?  Please.  (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)