Darwin missed him, but got his wife instead

Here is a hint, just in case you need it:

Your GPS is a GUIDE. Look outside the car…. pay attention.

Man drives car off of partially demolished bridge. 

I know this bridge. I live sorta nearby. You gotta go around 4 sets of orange and white signs and 2 sets of Jersey barriers to get to where he fell off the end of the bridge.

It’s been closed since fall of 2009 or so.

I’m sorry the Mrs. died. Shoulda been him, if only for stupidity. Dying while trapped  in a burning car isn’t the end I’d wish for anyone.

But seriously, you gotta TRY to get to where he did in order for this to happen.

One wonders.

Oh, and update your GPS maps occasionally…….. the bridge had been closed since 2009….

Good to see the courts are finally putting limits

on Police behavior.

Court indicts Alabama policeman for throwing 57 year old Indian man to the ground.

I’m not sure of the “Indian” part had anything to do with it, but I suspect it did. Either way, if he can’t behave better than that, he should be in jail. If it were you or I there would have been no doubt…we already would have been incarcerated. Police should be given a small amount of latitude and benefit of doubt. But not Carte Blanche.

Nice to see that there are limits.

Like Adam Lanza only with a plane.

Psychotropic drugs and all.

Mass murder. Only with a plane instead of a gun.

explanations for Lubitz’s actions are that he may have stopped taking his medication so it would not be detected in any medical tests


Seems that each of the latest mass murderers were, just before their “final episode”, on SSRI type pscychotropics.

How many others are we NOT hearing about because they failed to make the high enough death count…..or didn’t use an “assault weapon” or a plane to commit mass murder?

It’s not an uncommon issue, apparently…some folks have bigger issues than others….

More here

Welcome NAMBLA members?

So everyone is up in arms about the whole Religious Freedom Restoration Act which passed here in Indiana. This was an act of legislation passed in response to those weasley little assholes who sued the bakery in Colorado just because they HAD to have a cake made by a Christian baker in order to validate their lifestyle.  (“We’re Here, We’re Queer, get used to it!….Tell everyone my lifestyle is OK and show me it is allright”). They CHOSE to try to force this business make ’em a cake….Why?

Why do these people fall for the media hype that mischaracterizes the (not so) new law as discriminatory. Most of the commentary shows they haven’t even read it. It isn’t anti gay. It is actually anti-government-led coercion.

Thing is, a private business SHOULD be able to discriminate against anyone and everyone they please. Private. Business. Not Government Business.  No one forces you to spend your (private) money at any business. You get to choose. Don’t like the stance that Chick-Fil-A has on gay marriage? Take yer money elsewhere. Dislike Kroger’s choice to not ban concealed handguns in their stores? Good. Buy at Sav-Mart down the road. No one forces you to spend your money at places which have a philosophy at odds with yours. Conversely, we get to support those businesses whose decisions or stances we approve of….we get to support those we choose and not support those we don’t. (So why should we force businesses to do business with people who’s lifestyle choices are at odds with the business owner’s beliefs?)

All this law does (BTW, it mirrors the same FEDERAL law put in place 21 years ago) is protect those who would choose, because of a religious objection, to not do business with people whose lifestyle or other choices the business owner finds objectionable.

The sad part is the law even has to exist…..I, as a private business owner, should be able to and allowed to discriminate against anyone or any group I should choose to. Anyone.

If I should decide that I hate to see single women walking/travelling alone…unsupervised by a male, and I choose not to serve them, that is my business. Jews? nope no protection for them, or Muslims, or Christians. Gays? Yeah, my choice. Blacks? Whites? Eastern Asians? Chinese or Japanese or Koreans? Yeah, if I don’t want their business, I should be able to exclude ’em. South Americans? Gotta keep them out. If I don’t want to do business with Europeans, (or folks with European ancestry? )My choice. No one forces them to do business with me, and I should be able to exclude any or all of them I so desire.

I mean, already we have those businesses who discriminate against me based on my gender or choice of lifestyle….they ban firearms in their places of business. Ever watch a man try to get into a “Women only” gym? (yet, oddly, women can’t be banned from men’s gyms…why is that?) Why should a business that is privately owned not have the right to determine who they must serve? That’s like saying you have to let anyone that wants to walk through your (privately owned) yard…..or that the State can force you to go to a church . We just can’t discriminate against the currently favored group or the one who makes the most noise.

If the rest of the public should choose to also not do business with that place that discriminates, well, they’ll go out of business. And if not, well, then there is an under-served segment of the market…someone else can open up a competing business and say “(lifestyle choice or religion) welcomed!” and they will have a captive market…Perhaps the first business will then go out of business.

Would you do prefer to shop at a mall which included and welcomed NAMBLA members or Registered Sex Offenders or one which excluded them? Especially if you had young children? Which one would you prefer to shop at? They, too have made lifestyle choices. Should businesses be forced to welcome them? Bake and decorate a cake celebrating the molestation of a child? Perhaps a rape? Lifestyle choices, remember? Celebrate diversity, and all that. How about murderers? Or those who promote murder? KKK members? Again, lifestyle choices. How about if they asked for a cake which celebrated a lynching?

(and NO, I am not suggesting that Gay/Same Sex Marriage folks are equivalent to murderers or to NAMBLA members, Child Molesters or KKK members. I am using these examples because to some people, the Gay lifestyle/Same Sex Marriage is as repugnant as Child Molesters or KKK is to the rest of us. Again: NOT equivalent in my mind, so stop with the outrage over that, please) 

Now, to be clear: I don’t really care (unless you are  NAMBLA member or a child molester or a murderer or rapist) what your lifestyle choices are. In my business we accept all denominations: $1, $5, $10,$20, $50, $100…We are all inclusive and non discriminatory: AMEX, VISA, MasterCard, Discover, (Diners and CartBlache and JCB too!) I really don’t care who you have sex with (as long as they are consenting adults) who you worship (or how) as long as such ceremonies don’t hurt others and are legal…..I could give a shit what gender(s) you claim, or how you present them.

But for Klaatu’s sake, people: If a business doesn’t want your business, go somewhere else. Don’t whine. Don’t sue. Just go somewhere else. Tell everyone you know that this business didn’t want  your money. Let them choose to buy there or not. If you can get enough people to protest or boycott that business, then they’ll either apologize and change their ways….or go out of business. If you can’t get enough support, then your cause may not be that important.  Protest out front if you wish (that First Amendment  thing) but respect their FA rights too. Just because YOU think your behavior is ok doesn’t mean everyone thinks it is ok. You may have the freedom to do what you want, but your fellow citizens don’t have to condone it . Accept it, yes. Approve of it, no. And if they won’t validate your lifestyle, then deal with it and move on. Spend your money elsewhere. Or take a long hard look at yourself.

And just in a sorta related areas, there is THIS. The (job) market has spoken. The (retail) market will as well.

My grandfather always said:

That one really good measure of someones character is how a person treats someone who they think is lower on the social order than they are… I.E. say how a CEO treats a waiter or a bank teller..

Friday, I had a person prove how low their character really is. First he trashed my employee, then when I stepped in, as a manager, he attempted to trash me.  When I asked him to leave, he suggested that he would speak to my supervisor. He was dismissive and insulting and downright rude and referred to both of us as “minimum wage drones”. I explained that I was also the owner of the business, and he could complain all he wished, but he was still leaving.

His demeanor changed entirely.  Having had no idea that I was the owner, he assumed he could rant and rave with impunity. When he realized he couldn’t slam someone “lower” than him, he became all servile and such.

Too late, brother, go find somewhere else.