From the desk of Rex Mortar:
I’m Hank Mortar, and I’m a University-educated redneck. I take complex social problems, apply college-level tools, and then boil everything down using common sense.
On both sides of the coin there are problems. But a few things are certain:
Police officers are not motivated to kill civilians. They will do so only to protect their own lives, or to protect the innocent against immediate hostile aggression threatening mayhem or life.
Police do not demonstrate racial prejudice in their job conduct, against members of other races. It may appear to be the case based on misleading statistics, but these serve only to justify the poor behavior of criminals.
Police officers are objective in practicing law enforcement. They use the experience they gain to better enforce the law.
Black males commit more crime per capita than white males do, and black neighborhoods are the site of more violent crime than white neighborhoods.
Black males commit more violent and physically destructive crime than whites. They display open willingness to physically harm or kill law officers, or to evade capture by police.
Blacks are more impulsive in committing crime, most of them under the influence of alcohol and/or mood altering substances at the time.
Black males are highly motivated to escape punishment, preferring any amount of destruction to avoid capture.
OK, let’s examine some of the complaints against the police. Ethnic minorities get pulled over excessively for traffic violations. If any person drives a vehicle that is not street-legal, or violates traffic laws by their behavior on the road, they might get stopped by the police.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with that. Police officers develop a body of experience that states: ethnic minority traffic-violators have a very high incidence of simultaneously committing felonies. While white traffic-violators are usually in violation of traffic laws only.
But that’s racial profiling! Yes it is. And it’s an important tool to law enforcement! What can ethnic minorities do to prevent excessive traffic stops? Abide by the law. If the police suddenly find that ethnic minorities are no more likely than whites to use their automobiles to commit felonies, they won’t bother pulling over ethnic minorities more often than whites.
How can we prevent the police killing black males? If black males cease threatening police officers, the officers will be less likely to kill them. There is perhaps one case per year, more often zero cases, in which a police officer is found guilty of wrongfully killing a civilian, in the line of duty.
But there are hundreds of cases each year of criminals murdering on-duty police officers. If the police unfairly targeted suspects and killed them, there would be more suspects wrongfully killed than police killed by suspects.
The most reliable accounts of a crime scene are provided by police officers. Videos taken by bystanders are frequently edited to omit assaults on police that precede attempts to subdue a violent suspect. Time and time again civilian accounts have been revealed as contrived to falsely indict the police force of wrongful conduct.
Black Lives Matter members refuse to comply to conditions of established order and lawful authority structures, instead preferring violence, destruction, arson and murder to get their point across. In previous generations this has not been effective, and it will continue to be ineffective.
No one remembers another who gave his life in the midst of his own mass-murder rampage—no matter how noble the cause—because criminals are forgotten! Destruction requires no skills or talents, so it’s seen as the bastion of the ignorant and lazy, which it is!
The black male population is overrepresented in the prison population. The justice system must consider—among other things—what the offender requires to improve his chances at success. More black males per capita commit serious crimes than do white males.
But theres more to it. Blacks typically do not study the finer points of criminal justice. Until a student is in upper-level classes, (s)he is not even exposed to the concepts of which we now encounter.
Equality is not that everyone be treated alike. It is each according to his need. Those offenders who have less to lose require more incentive to avoid future violations.
A white college student from a suburban family in which the parents are one or both educated professionals, and whose brothers and sisters are economically successful, has a lot to lose—college degree, future income, his way of life, respect of others—by a cocaine conviction and subsequent prison sentence.
Therefore, he requires less incentive to avoid future transgressions of the law. If his family proves to support him, and he is cooperative with authorities, He will receive less severe punishment than a black man who dropped out of high school, is presently unemployed, has an absentee, alcoholic father and a mother who’s a prostitute; and who is out on the streets each night!
The black man will lose practically nothing by the same punishment given to the white man described above. The white man will be discharged into an environment where crime and criminals are easily avoided, into a good support system of loving parents and siblings whose values are compliant to a peaceful civilization and personal responsibility.
The black man will be discharged into an environment without support, where crime is the norm rather than the exception, an environment in which personal accountability is nonexistent—where rather than obeying the law, the people develop techniques to work around law enforcement, while crime is undeterred.
Clearly, the black man is likely to re-offend no matter how severe the penalty. That would be bad for society and for the man himself! Severe punishment handed to the white man is not effective to produce the desired result. Society will lose a highly probable productive member. But it gives the black man needed incentive to avoid criminal activity in the future.
The above would cause consternation if spoken by the criminal justice system, because no one would believe its sincerity. But I have no connection to government, except that I abide by the laws set forth by lawmakers, and I am able to survive and prosper in peace because the government protects my rights.
That’s the promise given to every American by the governments ruling therein. The government says, “If you, Hank Mortar, comply to the law, you will receive all the benefits of government: protection of your civil rights, use of roads, police protection, processes for redress against grievances, educational opportunities, fire protection, protection against tyranny; and an environment conducive to rewards for proper conduct, hard work and the virtues of prudence, temperance, fortitude and justice.
Personal responsibility requires that citizens be held accountable for their behavior if it violates the law. Taking things that don’t belong to you, without permission of the owner, whether or not the items are secured by lock and key, is against the law; except in the case that the use of such items is to protect the innocent against immediate and credible threat of loss of life or limb.
That works well, because practically no one would mind their possessions being used for such a purpose. But if a means exists to avoid taking possession of goods belonging to others, and to accomplish an equally good result, the alternative means must be employed.
In the United States there are banned and regulated substances and objects. There is no wiggle room for some of these. Cocaine is a banned substance. If you possess it, you’ve broken the law!
Other substances are regulated. Amphetamine is a schedule II controlled substance according to federal law. Like all schedule II controlled substances, you can possess up to a 30-day supply of amphetamine according to the dose marked on the required, pharmacy-supplied container, the container also marked with the patient’s identity, the prescribing physician’s identity, the identity of the medication, and within one month after the date marked.
If any of the above conditions are not met, there is no legal protection against a charge of possession of a controlled substance. Citizens are not permitted to stockpile medications (gather together and hold unused medications from previous legitimate prescription fills) for future contingencies! They are not legally permitted to release from their custody, drugs prescribed for themselves.
Citizens are not legally permitted to behave in a way that shows wanton or reckless disregard for human life. If someone fires a pistol straight into the air, or into soil, the probability of consequent injury is quite low. Therefore, a first offense is usually subject to a heavy fine. But there are many laws that govern such an act.
Just let it be said, “If you fire a gun within 500 feet of a building—occupied or not, owned by you or not—you’re guilty of a crime, except when defending the innocent against immediate threat of loss of life or limb, and only if no alternative means exists in the moment, to protect life.
If there is a summons issued to appear in court, and the subject fails to appear without contacting the court, a bench warrant is usually issued for the persons arrest, but only to compel the individual to make his/her required court appearance.
It is illegal to carry concealed weapons in a way not permitted by law. Many complex and even nonsensical regulations exist, and they vary from state to state, but most of them are common-sense regulations.
If a person is carrying a weapon in a permitted manner, and the same person has contact with a police officer, the officer has a legal obligation to take possession of the weapon if he deems need be.
So, those are some laws that are often violated. Our criminal justice system is concerned first with conduct. Unless the court can prove you did what you are accused of, you’re not guilty. But if you admit it, thinking you’re justified by some extenuating circumstance, you’re not justified. It doesn’t matter whether or not you had a good reason.
Of secondary concern are the extenuating circumstances. There are some instances in which extenuating circumstances preclude prosecution. Most places in the USA, if a stranger enters an occupied dwelling place, the owner or legal tenant may employ deadly force if necessary to allay the perceived threat.
But if two men are making a drug deal, the crime-element present strips both of their rights to self-defense against others involved in the crime. Innocence is required to substantiate the self-defense defense.
In no case is self-defense allowed against a police officer properly performing his sworn duty. There was a case in which a defendant killed two police officers with his bare hands. The jury found that the defendant truly feared for his life. He was set free.
So, the police do not want to induce fear in suspects. They strive to use an appropriate response, because suspects who suspect they will be killed will apply every bit of resistance possible to preserve their own lives. This presents significantly more risk to law officers.
Probably the gravest misunderstanding is one of personal responsibility. It doesn’t matter why someone commits a crime. If they admit it they are still guilty of it! If the offender leaves evidence, and the police build it into a criminal case, no one cares why you did it!
The other grave condition is one of entire communities developing to commit crime while working around law enforcement. When ethnic minorities cry foul against police they are usually omitting important factors.
What can be done to help ethnic-minority communities improve their outcome. I think the truth will set them free. The girls should avoid intimate contact until their wedding night. Excess use of beverage alcohol should be avoided along with abuse of mood-altering substances.
If there is some question as to whether or not a certain act constitutes a crime, the individual(s) involved should err on the side of caution. If you have to ask, it’s probably illegal.
Parents must practice what they desire for their children. Roman Catholicism offers moral guidance that divides right from wrong into sin and righteousness. If ignorance to the good is a problem, i.e. parents don’t understand right from wrong, Roman Catholicism lays it right out.
When a nation once faithful abandons God’s teaching, there is some foundation of righteousness on which that nation may coast for decades. But increasing violence against established order and authority is a sign of the ensuing end.
Law devoid of moral standards—supposed objective law—is untried. The human race has been living under subjective moral codes much longer than secularism. There are certain judgments that can be made on the face of a thing. It doesn’t require objective analysis. And, in fact, objective analysis will lead men astray at times.
The Catholic Church made an academic rule that governs the teaching at every university in the world. Scientific fact must be demonstrated by rational conclusions made from the observations of controlled, repeatable experiments!
But law is not scientific. Therefore, moral judgments can be made into law. To do otherwise is insanity and certain destruction. Since we can make moral judgments within the law, we can make moral judgments regarding violation of the law.
The notion that the strong should dominate the weak is flawed. Why? Because that tenet produces civilizations in which vicious warlords rule loosely defined territories, and the world exists purely for war. Men are divided into military personnel and slaves. Women are valued according to their relative reproductive and infant-feeding potential.
Females are used as a medium of exchange. There exist no systems of education, no written language, primitive mathematics, and systems of law that depend on the ability of the victim to exact vengeance for himself.
The key to end suffering is to blame some one or group for the cause, and exact vengeance on them! The black community blames the consequences of its own criminal behavior on the police force. In the eyes of many black people, the police are to blame for their relatives receiving prison sentences, or suffering injury or death as a consequence of resisting arrest.
There is a grave misunderstanding among ethnic minorities. The police are legally entitled to use deadly force to preserve their own lives and to protect the innocent. Many officers have been injured or killed because they waited a fraction of a second to identify an immediate threat.
The police do not go off unpredictably. In every case of a civilian combatant killed by police, the victim failed to obey the officer. Police officers communicate clearly in basic language that everyone can understand. Here are some things that police might say in the course of performing their job duties:
Do not move.
Put your hands up.
Keep your hands where I see them.
Get out of the car.
Do you have any weapons?
What are you doing here?
Stay right here.
Lay face down on the ground.
Drop the gun.
Where were you before you came here?
May I please see your license and registration?
Come with me.
Leave the premises.
You’re under arrest.
There is no mistaking the meaning of any of those. If the cop says:
Cease locomotory impetus, then we might get confused. OR, raise the upper extremities with the digits pointed up, we might have to worry. OR, relinquish custody of the projectile device, there could be a misunderstanding!
If a suspect, or anyone, willfully disobeys an order given by a police officer, the officer is legally obligated to employ physical force to overcome resistance. Otherwise, the officer would have to say, “Well, OK, if you don’t want to do what I say, I’m just going to leave.”
Of course police officers can’t just leave! They must overcome the force being used against them, and take into custody those they place under arrest. In a police-related killing, the same laws apply to the police, with the exception that police can legally apply physical force in situations not permitted to civilians.
But every police officer is sworn to uphold the law, no matter what! The Dallas massacre was a crying shame. It proves that black males are a threat to white police officers. If a thing isn’t true in every instance, it may still be true much of the time.
Stereotypes are stereotypes because they’re correct most of the time. They don’t have to be universally correct to be correct.
My solution to the problems experienced by ethnic minorities is: take responsibility for your actions! It’s illegal everywhere in America to beat your woman!
I was at a wedding some months previous, and I spoke to my cousin who works on a police force. He routinely receives calls for domestic violence between Mexican immigrants. Inevitably the male admits the crime, but also claims he did nothing wrong!
“Hey, officer, I wasn’t doing nothing wrong. I was just beating my woman. I mean, you beat your woman too, no?”
So, Mexican immigrants are ignorant to US laws against wife-beating. But the law is the law whether or not a person is aware of it! So, the Mexican husbands are arrested and put through court-ordered educational programs!
If any person can provide reliable evidence that an on-duty police officer killed a black person, because the officer hated blacks and wanted to kill one of them, please contact the news outlets, because that would be a first.