You Say 'Auditor,' I Say...

 

ASSHOLE.  Here's why.

To a man, every video I've ever seen by these self-proclaimed 'auditors' shows that they are doing nothing but causing trouble.  They call themselves 'auditors' and say that they're 'auditing' their ability to exercise their First Amendment rights, but let's be real.  That's total bullshit and everyone knows it, including the asshole with the camera.  The ONLY reason they're out there sticking a camera in everyone's face is to provoke them into a confrontation that they can record and then post on YouTube or TikTok to get 'likes' or catch their 15 minutes of fame.  

That's it.  There's nothing noble or righteous or even necessary about what they're doing.  They're attention-seeking assholes who are looking to get famous at your expense.  They pick an area that they know is going to be sensitive or controversial - like a military base or a doctor's office - and stand outside on the sidewalk on public land, turn on their camera, and wait for the inevitable response.

And I say 'inevitable' because just as sure as the sun is gonna rise tomorrow morning and God made little green apples, some well-meaning soul will get in front of the camera and make a scene about the asshole being there.  99% of the time these well-meaning souls will be tragically unaware of what's legal about this and what's not, but that only makes the video juicier which will result in more views, more likes, and more stroking of the asshole's ego.  (Every now and then the asshole will fuck up and film from private property, and when he gets arrested it's VERY satisfying to watch!)

So why is recording in public like this legal?  Simple - because the Supreme Court of the United States has said that when you are out in public you have 'no reasonable expectation of privacy.'  That means anyone can record you, and they don't need a signed release from you or your permission to record you.  Now, if they were going to use the recording for commercial purposes and make money off of it, THEN they would need a signed release from you.  Either that, or they'd have to obscure your face so you can't be recognized.  But these assholes aren't in it for the money, they're in it for the attention, so no release is necessary.  They know that most people simply don't like being recorded without their permission, and they're going to take advantage of it.

And THAT is what makes them ASSHOLES. 

How to handle these assholes is so simple it's ridiculous, but it requires control over your emotions which sometimes can be a challenge.  All you need to do is IGNORE THEM.  Just go about your business with the knowledge that if you don't give these assholes anything to post to TikTok, they won't post the video with you in it.  Don't even wave at them and tell them 'hello,' because they'll post that as an acknowledgement that what they're doing is OK and that no one has a problem with it - which will only encourage them to continue. 

So as tough as it may be, just ignore them and they'll go away.  You'll be glad you did, trust me.

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

DUI Procedures - What's Really Going On

 

So let's talk about what's going on during a traffic stop for a suspected DUI.  But first, my credentials so you'll know that I know what I'm talking about.

From 1987-1989 I was a Certified Type II Breath Alcohol Operator in the State of Missouri.  This means that I was certified to operate AND REPAIR the Breathalyzer 900/900A in the state of Missouri.  From 1993 to 1998 I was a Certified Breath Alcohol Instructor for the Division of Forensic Science, Commonwealth of Virginia.  This means that I was certified to operate the Breathalyzer 900/900A and the Intoxilyzer 5000; additionally, I was certified as an Instructor and taught police officers from all over the state how to operate these machines.  I was also certified as a Field Sobriety Test Instructor from the DFS in Virginia, which means I taught police officers from all over the state how to conduct Field Sobriety Tests to include Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN).  I also have 212 DUI arrests with 212 convictions under my belt.  And just for giggles, I was also a Certified RADAR Instructor which means - well, you get the idea.

So having said all that, let me tell you why it's never a good idea to drive after you've been drinking, and what goes on from the moment a cop suspects you of DUI.  This is gonna be a tad lengthy, so get comfortable.

 First and foremost, most DUI arrests begin with a traffic stop for something completely different.  Most of my DUI arrests came from speeding violations, but the national average was 'Driving Too Slow.'  But for the sake of argument, let's say that the cop sees a car traveling down the roadway, and the car is weaving from side to side.  This is called 'Failure to Maintain Lane Position' in legalese, and is sufficient probable cause for a traffic stop.  Once the blue lights come on, the process begins.

First thing the cop is going to notice is how long it takes you - or how short it takes you - to see the lights and pull over.  If it takes you more than a minute or so to pull over, that's a clue.  If you pull over right away and slam on the brakes, that's a clue.  And trust me when I tell you that from the moment the cop decides to turn on the lights, he/she is making notes of EVERYTHING you do.

When the cop gets up to the car the first thing he's going to look for is the odor of an alcoholic beverage emitting from the car and/or your person.  (Yep, more legalese for you.)  If it's there, that's a BIG clue.  

Next, he's going to look at your face and your eyes.  He's looking for flushed cheeks, a red nose, and bloodshot eyes.  If he sees any of these, that's a clue.  He's also looking at the condition of your clothing.  If you're covered in vomit, then yeah, that's a clue.  If the car reeks of urine because you've wet yourself while sitting in your car, yeah, that's a clue.  (Yep, I encountered both of these during traffic stops for DUI.) Then he's going to ask you for your driver's license and vehicle registration.  While you're searching through your wallet to get your driver's license, he's watching that, too, because if you're having trouble finding it, that's a clue - especially if you go PAST it at least once.  

And while you're searching for your driver's license, he's going to ask you a simple non-incriminating question.  With me, most of the time it was "Sir, what year is your car?"  If you're drunk, you're going to stop, look up at the cop, and go, "HUH?"  It is a scientifically proven fact that an intoxicated person cannot have two thought processes at once, so once the drunk gets asked a question while looking for his driver's license, his thought train is immediately derailed.  This is another BIG clue.   

Once you hand the cop your driver's license, he's going to ask you another non-incriminating question.  My go-to question was always, "Sir, what's your middle name?"  Invariably, if the driver was drunk he/she would tell me their LAST name, because that's what they're used to.  I mean, really, how many times has someone asked you your MIDDLE name?  This simple question involves a separate thought process, and a drunk won't be able to do it - they'll respond out of habit, especially if they're still looking for their registration, and will tell you their LAST name.  Another clue.  (Sometimes I'd ask, "What month were you born?" and most of the time the suspect would tell me their ENTIRE birth date.  Another clue.)

By now the cop has enough probable cause to ask you to submit to a series of Field Sobriety Tests, but most cops will take it one step further.  They'll ask the driver, "Have you been drinking tonight?"  For those of you who say, 'THIS IS A VIOLATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!' my reply is no, it's not.  It's not a crime to have a drink if you're of legal age, and it's not an infringement of your rights to ask this since drinking itself is not a crime.  Now, if the cops asks the drive if he's drunk, then THAT is a violation of the driver's rights because the answer could incriminate the driver.  That's why a properly trained cop will NEVER ask this question.   

Now it's time for the Field Sobriety Tests.  Do you have the legal right to refuse to take the tests?  Absolutely.  Can you be charged with a separate offense for refusing this?  NO.  And about the FSTs - there is no 'pass' or 'fail' grade assigned.  The suspect either 'performed the tests as instructed' or 'did not perform the tests as instructed,' which will be followed by exactly what the suspect messed up during the administration of the tests.  

One of these tests is the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus, or HGN.  This is the evaluation of the ability of a person's eyes to track a moving object traveling from side to side, and the cop is looking for three things:  smooth pursuit, onset of nystagmus (jerking of the eyeball), and degree of nystagmus at maximum deviation (how badly your eyeball is bouncing when you're looking all the way over to one side).  This test has been proven to be 70% accurate if a minimum of TWO of these clues are observed; that means if you have two of these clues, there's a 70% chance that your blood alcohol content (BAC) is AT LEAST 0.08%.  

In short, you're drunk.  And this test, unlike the Field Sobriety Tests, cannot be practiced because nystagmus is a naturally occurring involuntary condition present in ALL human beings, and intoxication only makes it visible by making it more pronounced to the point where it's easily observable.

This is the point at which the cop should advise you of your Constitutional right against self-incrimination, because if you've given him enough probable cause to ask for a breath test, he has enough probable cause to arrest you - and trust me, he's going to arrest you. 

Next is the Chemical Test, or Breath Test, if you prefer.  This is when the cop asks you to submit to a chemical analysis of your blood/breath/urine for the purpose of determining alcohol intoxication.  When the cop asks you this, shit just got real.  Do you have the legal right to refuse to take the test?  Absolutely.  Can you be charged with a separate legal offense for refusing?  ABSOLUTELY.  And I can guarantee you that you WILL be charged.  It's called the Implied Consent Ruling, and is a law in every state of the Union.  This law says that by operating a motor vehicle on the public/private roadways of your state, you have been deemed to have given your consent to a chemical test of your blood/breath/urine for the purpose of determining alcoholic intoxication when asked by a law enforcement official.  A failure to consent to this test is a separate criminal offense and WILL result in the AUTOMATIC suspension of your driver's license for a period of not less than 1 year.   

Tack that onto the 1 year suspension you're gonna get for the DUI charge (if it's your first offense), and you're gonna be taking an UBER for the next two years.

 So let's say that you refuse the FSTs, and you also refuse the breath test.  Can the cop still get a DUI conviction?  If he's properly trained to recognize the clues and you've given him enough of them, absolutely.  I went into court on several occasions with nothing more than my visual observations during the screening process (which began the moment I suspected intoxication) and got a conviction every time thanks to the copious notes I took on the many and varied clues the drivers gave me.  I even got a conviction with no FSTs, no breath test, and no advisement of rights.  When the defense attorney moved to have the case dismissed because I didn't advise his clients of his rights, the judge asked me why I didn't advise the suspect of his rights.  My reply was, "Because I didn't ask him any questions."  Case closed, 1 year suspension for Violation of Implied Consent, and 1 year suspension for First Offense DUI.

Why am I telling you all this?  A couple of reasons.  First, to let you know that there's a hell of a lot more going on when a cop stops someone for suspicion of drunk driving than the average person knows, and that the cops are more highly trained than anyone would think.  But the main reason is to try and get you to see while you're sober just how bad an idea it is to drive drunk.  A DUI charge will cost you somewhere between $10,000 and $30,000 dollars, not to mention what it's going to do to your insurance.  If you have a job that requires you to drive, you're really fucked now because you're going to lose your job.  If you have a CDL, you can kiss that goodbye for the rest of your life.

Even worse, drunk drivers kill more than 10,000 people each year, and the last thing you want is to go through the rest of your life with the knowledge that you were responsible for one - or more - of them. 

Unless you become one of them yourself.  Then your family gets to live with that for the rest of their lives.

Get the point?

In closing, let me say this:  if you're a friend of mine and if you ever need a ride home because you're too drunk to drive, call me and I'll come get you, no questions asked.  I won't tell anyone it happened, either - not your wife, not your mom, not your dad, no one.  Ever. 

That's what friends do.

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

 

What I Believe - Burning the American Flag

 

Yeah, I know, yesterday I said I'd be discussing DUI procedures, but this topic popped up and caught my attention, so here it is.  I'll talk about DUI processing tomorrow, I promise! 

My feelings on burning the American flag are simple.  Burning the American flag in protest of whatever it is you're protesting is not "freedom of speech" and should be illegal.  The ONLY time the American flag should be burned is when it has reached the end of its serviceable life.  Other than that, nope.  I don't give a damn what you're 'protesting,' or what 'message' you're trying to convey - you DO NOT burn the American flag.  Make a sign, march in protest, shout until you're hoarse, but don't burn the flag.

Before someone says it (and I'm sure they will), no, I don't claim to know more than the SCOTUS.  But then again, the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written in language that is designed to be understood by the average citizen, and as I understand the Bill of Rights, nowhere in the First Amendment is burning the American flag covered or deemed to be okay.  I have no idea where the Justices got their reasoning from, but I vehemently disagree.  

For those of you who have never read it, here's what it says. 

Amendment I

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

To me, the average American, 'abridging the freedom of speech' covers placards and signs, because written words are a manner of speech.  Instead of vocalizing it you're writing it down, and that's fine.  But IMHO nowhere in the realm of realism and common sense can ANYONE construe this as meaning that it's OK to burn the American flag.  NOWHERE.  Again, IMHO when the SCOTUS delivered this opinion they fucked up.  And to me this is rather incredulous considering that in 1989 when this decision was published 6 of the 9 justices were Republicans.

Now for the elephant in the room.

While it is my opinion that burning the American flag should be illegal, the President of the United States does not have the power to make it illegal or order the prosecution of those who burn an American flag.  Regardless of who he/she is or what good he/she has done, they don't have the authority to make laws.  Only Congress can do that.  So yes, while I agree with his feelings on this, President Trump does not have the authority to make this act illegal, and I'm not surprised to see that he's getting backlash from conservatives on this.  We love what he's doing for the country, but we love our Constitution more, and that document says that only the Congress can make laws.  So no matter what the topic is, the President doesn't have that authority.  End of discussion.

But I will say this:  burn an American flag in my presence, and there's gonna be trouble.  I'll gladly go to jail over this and will laugh all the way to lockup while you're on your way to the hospital in an ambulance.

And now it's time for someone in Congress to introduce a bill making the burning of an American flag for any reason other than its disposal when it reaches the end of its life illegal.  Considering that the President has already made his feelings on this known and that the Republicans control both houses of Congress, any bill such as this could become the law of the land in a very short period of time.

The only question now is will someone in Congress have the balls to stand up and do this?  Judging from their dismal performance so far this year, I'd say no.  

And that's a shame. 

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

The Worst Legal Advice EVER

 

Social media, just like cellular phones, is a two-edged knife that cuts both ways.  It can be the best thing that ever happened to you, or the worst.  You can get really good advice from social media, but you can also get some of the worst advice you'll ever find as well.

Such is the case with these lawyers who post a video on social media where they tell you, "NEVER ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE POLICE!  NOT EVEN YOUR NAME!'

Speaking as one who worked within the legal system for 19 years as a street cop, I can tell you that while there is some good in this advice, there is more bad than good.  The good is, if you're a bad guy who's trying to hide something illegal that you've done, then not answering questions is not only a good idea but your Constitutional right as well.  And if the cops think you've done something wrong, they are required to advise you of your Constitutional rights before asking you any questions about it.  When this happens, your very best choice is to refuse to answer questions.  At that point the questioning concerning the illegal event being investigated is legally required to stop.  The cops CAN ask you other questions, such as your name, address, things like that, but once you've invoked your 5th Amendment rights they cannot legally ask you anything else about the suspected crime.

But the absolute worst thing you can ever do is refuse to answer ANY questions from the police.  If a cop pulls you over, the first thing you need to realize is that he has a good reason for it.  (99% of the time, anyway.)  If he asks you where you're coming from, he has a reason for it.  Maybe he's looking for a car like yours that was involved in a crime, and he wants to see if he has the right car or not.  If not, he'll let you go.  Simple as that. 

So what's the harm in telling the cop your name when he asks?  If you refuse, he's just gonna ask you for your driver's license and find out that way, so why not just tell him?  I can guarantee you he's got a reason for asking instead of getting it from your license.  Most of the time he's screening you to see if you're intoxicated, and your ability to speak clearly and concisely - and the ability to remember your name - is one of the ways he does it.

Here's what happens if you choose to refuse to answer ANY questions from the police.

The cop automatically thinks that you're trying to hide something that he doesn't know about or hasn't noticed yet.  (Either that, or you're just being an uncooperative asshole.)  When THAT happens, the cop is going to start an investigation right then and there into your suspicious activities (and yes, refusing to answer simple questions such as what your name is can be considered suspicious) and he's going to legally detain you.  And he can detain you until one of two things happens:  until he's satisfied that no crime has been committed and that you're just being an asshole, or he proves that a crime has been committed at which time the detention is going to become an arrest. 

See, it works like this:  honest people have nothing to hide, and shouldn't have any problems with answering simple questions.  If you're one of those people who just don't trust the police and will refuse to answer any questions including what your name is for this reason, then you're just making things harder on yourself.  Your refusal to tell the cop your name is a giant red flag to him, and you're just asking for what comes next.  The cop is going to treat you as an uncooperative and possibly hostile suspect, and he's going to act accordingly.  His next step will most likely be to get you out of the car to separate you from any weapons you may have in there - but of course you'll refuse, and things will go downhill quickly from there.  End result - you face down on the ground in handcuffs, possibly with a couple of taser probes sticking into your skin and your nerves still tingling from the 50K jolt you just got.

Remember, you asked for this. 

Is there a point at which you should stop answering questions?  Yes, there is.  If the cop asks you a specific question concerning a specific illegal activity, if you are guilty of this offense then yes, you should invoke your 5th Amendment right and STFU.  (And it's not illegal to drink alcohol unless you're underage, so the cop is legally allowed to ask you this.) If you're not guilty, why not answer?  You've got nothing to hide, right?

Oh, yeah, you just don't like cops because you don't trust them, especially if you're black.  Gotcha.  Do you need me to tell you (again) how this is gonna turn out?

If you just feel uncomfortable answering questions from the police, there's a right way and a wrong way to let the cop know.  The wrong way is to just say, "I'm not answering any questions" and not elaborate.  Your attitude and tone of voice have a lot to do with it, too, and most of the time this response is given in an irate/hostile tone of voice with the person either glaring at the cop or not looking at him at all.  The right way is to look the cop in the eyes and in a smooth, non-confrontational tone of voice simply say "I'm sorry, officer, but I just don't feel comfortable answering any questions at this time."  If the cop replies with something like "Why not?" then he's not paying attention.  Just repeat what you said and let it go.  But most of the time the cop will just say "All right, then," and will just give you your ticket and be done with it.  

Now let me address the elephant in the room.

Are there bad cops out there who will break the law to get what they want with a suspect?  Sure there are.  Just as with any profession, there are good cops and bad cops, but the good news is that the good cops outnumber the bad ones by a couple hundred thousand to one, so your chances of running into one is slim.   But if you do, just keep your cool, stand on your rights, and let things play out.  

And when it comes time to get a lawyer, don't get one like Saul Goodman.

Tomorrow we discuss DUI procedures and what's really going on when the cop pulls you over.  Trust me when I tell you that there's more going on than you realize.

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

 

Truer Words Were Never Spoken

 

Saw this slogan on another site this morning and it really struck home with me, because it describes me to a "T."

 

And the side effect of this, the side effect that most people won't recognize and will criticize the 'loner' for it when they finally do see it, is that having people you once trusted turn on you and betray you makes you not want to trust anyone.  It makes you suspicious of people and their reasons for doing things, which keeps you from doing things that you truly want to do.

 

I know because I'm going through this right now.  There are several groups I would love to get involved with that are motorcycle-related, because as much as I love riding it's a lot more fun when you're riding with others.  But because of just how bad I was burned by most (but not all) of the so-called 'brothers' in my former Masonic lodge, I'm very hesitant to get involved with these groups because I don't want to be hurt again. 

 

So I guess I'll just do the 'lone wolf' thing and wait until things get better, which I'm sure they will.

 

I hope.

 

Deo Vindice

IHC  

If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It

 I'm sure just about everyone else in this country has heard that slogan at least once in their life, right?  

Well, maybe everyone but Julie Felss Masino, that is.  She's the new CEO of Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, and she's made some changes to the chain that aren't going over well.  This is her:

I don't know about you, but I can take one look at her and tell that she's a screaming liberal.  The giveaway for me is the glasses - NO conservative that I know of would wear glasses like that.  Combine that with the changes she's made to a much-loved and revered brand, and it all becomes clear.  Her reasoning behind the changes is that the brand "isn't as relative as it used to be" and needs to be "revitalized."

Anyone who has been paying attention over the past 4 1/2 years or so knows what THAT bullshit means.  It means a liberal wants to change the way something has always been just because THEY don't like it, because it's not "modern enough."

What this woman fails to understand is that the draw of Cracker Barrel was just that - it wasn't modern.  When you walked into the country store lobby of a Cracker Barrel you took a step back in time to a place where the world was simpler, less complicated, and enjoyable.  Seniors would go there because it reminded them of their world when they were growing up, and younger people would go there because they just liked the decor and the feel of the place.

And the food.  The food was always top-notch, especially the biscuits and gravy.

But not anymore.  You won't find that item on the new menu.  Neither will you find the country store-like entrance, as that has been done away with as well, all in the name of "modernization."

We don't want "modern," Julie.  We want "old fashioned."  We want our biscuits and gravy.

The first thing she did was change the logo, the one that the company has been using for 48 years.  Here's the old and new logo side by side:

I don't know about you, but I think that the new logo has all of the charm and appeal of a dead fish.  There's no substance to it, no soul, no meaning.  It's just another corporate logo in a sea of corporate logos.  In other words, it's just another dead fish in a sea of dead fish.  But if you think that's bad, take a look at what she'd done to the inside.

Here's the old Cracker Barrel we all knew and loved:

And here's the new version:

Now I don't know about you, but that new version has all of the charm and family appeal as a McDonald's.  It's lost ALL of the country charm that made Cracker Barrel as popular as it was.

So now it looks like Cracker Barrel is going to go down the same path that Bud Lite took two years ago, and that's too bad.  I refuse to set foot in any of the "new" restaurants, no matter what.

This is a prime example of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  And if Cracker Barrel wasn't broke before, it sure as hell is now.

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

 

 

 

 

Remember When Being a Liberal Was A Good Thing?

 

Remember when being a liberal was a good thing?  I sure do.  I remember growing up listening to the news - back when the news just reported the news without an agenda - talking about these new, unheard-of changes that needed to be made in American society.  And I remember hearing all of the uptight, straight-laced conservatives saying how bad the change was, and that it would lead to the downfall of the nation and all that other crap.  Even at 6 or 7 years of age I could see that the conservatives were so stuck in their ways and so unwilling to change that they'd never see the good that liberals were trying to do.  

But thankfully the liberals got their way, and some very important things in American life changed for the better.  Things like desegregation, the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Act, and more women entering the work force.  And surprise, surprise, the nation survived.  How about that.  The liberals were all about changes that would benefit everyone, not just liberals.  Of course the conservatives refused to see this, and I'm happy to say that they were proven wrong. 

Well, that was then and this is now, and things have most certainly changed.  I won't say that some of the ideas that the liberals of today have will cause the downfall of the nation, but it'll be close.  Some of the causes that the liberals of today support have been disastrous to the nation, such as open borders.  Flooding the nation with illegal immigrants who take jobs from Americans and sponge off of the system by getting benefits to which they're not entitled (such as social security and health care) have a detrimental effect on ALL American citizens because those services are paid for with OUR tax money.  I don't know about you, but I didn't give up a percentage of my pay to Social Security every payday to have an illegal alien criminal apply for and get benefits.  

Allowing non-citizens to vote in our elections is another one.  The open border policy is directly tied to this one, because the liberals (spelled Demoncrats) know that if they let the illegals in, then give them benefits that they'll vote for whatever candidate the Demoncrats put up.  This will in turn allow the Demoncrats to remain in power and give them the chance to force more of their idiotic policies on us and further fuck up the nation.

 

 

But the thing that concerns and dismays me the most is the unabated, open hatred that liberals have for conservatives to the point where they openly state on all kinds of social media how much they wish Trump would be assassinated, how they hoped that all conservatives get sick and die of covid, and other shit like that.  And this, coming from the same group of people who preach tolerance, acceptance, and understanding in one breath, then turn around and wish sickness and death on anyone who disagrees with them in the next breath.  This is the thing that concerns me the most about the liberals in our country, and is the main reason I refer to them as 'libtards.'  

 

The mere hypocrisy of the libtards in our nation today is nothing short of astounding.  One of the things I have NEVER seen on any form of social media is a posting by a conservative in which the poster says that they hope Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi get cancer and die, or anything like that.  But a five minute trek through TikTok will show you all kinds of posts by blue and purple haired libtards wishing all of this and more on Trump, Vance, and literally anyone who doesn't agree with them.

 

This is disgusting, pure and simple, and contrary to what the libtards may think this is NOT the American way of life.  There is NO excuse for this, period.  But of course the libtards will disagree with you, then tell you that they hope you die.  

 

And that's why they're libtards. 

 

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

Sometimes It's The Little Things That Make Me Happy

  

Every now and then it's the little things in life that make me happy, and today's blog entry is about one of those.  It's called the "Watch Mug," and it's something that I'd been trying to find for a long time.  I just wasn't looking in the right place.

First, let me tell you about the watch mug.  This style of mug was first used by the USMC around 1913 at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba - or at least that's the earliest proven date by the stamp on the bottom of a mug shard found on Glass Beach at Gitmo.  The mug was designed to be heavy and sturdy to withstand the rigors of military use; it was also designed without a handle.  This was for two reasons - the handle was normally the first thing to break off, so they didn't put one on it.  The second reason is that Marines on guard or sentry duty - and later sailors on watch on board a ship at sea - would use the mug of hot coffee to warm their hands.  The size of the mug (it's HUGE) and the lack of a handle made it perfect for wrapping your fingers around it to warm them up in the cold weather.  This is how the mug got its name, the 'watch mug.'

 

 

The picture above shows a Marine on board a Navy ship after the invasion of Entiwok Island in WWII drinking coffee out of a watch mug.  You can see two other watch mugs on the table behind him. 

 

 As you can see from the picture above, the watch mug wasn't exclusive to the Marines and the Navy; the Air Force and the Army used it as well.

 

The mugs became standard issue on US Navy vessels, staying in use until around the time of the Vietnam War.  I haven't been able to find anything about when the mug went out of use by the other services, but I know that by the time I joined the Air Force it was long gone.

 

As soon as I saw one of these mugs I wanted one.  I thought it was cool as hell, and the fact that it was a part of Navy history is the part that intrigued me the most.  As you may recall from my previous posts, my father was in the US Navy from 1946-1951 stationed on board the USS MISSISSIPPI AG-128, which means that he drank from a mug just like this when he was either on watch or eating chow.

 

The first time I found one of these mugs was on e-bay (of course), and it was an original Corning mug from WWII - and the seller wanted $80 for it.  Nope, not happening.  I looked around some more, but couldn't find anyone who made a reproduction mug.  And all of the originals I found were all sky-high in price, so I was just about ready to give up.

 

Then, about two weeks ago, I found a company online called Glass Beach Mugs.  They make an exact replica of the 1917 USMC mug designed from shards of broken mugs found at Glass Beach, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  They also make three other versions of the mugs, one of which has the Masonic Square and Compasses on it.  (Too bad I didn't find this one last year, huh?)  Of course I immediately bought one, and since the Centennial USMC Mug was sold out, I went for the next one in line, the Filibuster Mug.  Including shipping the total cost was right at $30, and let me tell you it's worth every penny!

 

This mug is HUGE!  It holds 13 ounces of liquid, so if you use creamer in your coffee you're gonna want to leave a little room in the mug for that.  It's also HEAVY, weighing in at 1.25 pounds!  It's VERY thick, and I'm quite sure that if I dropped it on the floor it wouldn't break.  Like I said, this mug is worth every penny!

 

While I'm very pleased with all of the attributes of this mug, the main reason I love it as much as I do is very simple.  Since my father drank out of a mug like this when he was in the Navy, every time I use it I feel like I'm having coffee with my father.

 

Like I said, sometimes it's the little things that make me happy. 

 

I love you, Pop, and I miss you.

 

Electrician's Mate 3rd Class (EM3) Raymond Craig, 1950

Deo Vindice
IHC

 

 Glass Beach Mugs

You Say 'Auditor,' I Say...

 

Would somebody please explain to me the purpose of this whole 'auditor' thing?  You know, the guys who go stand in a public place on public property, point their video camera or cell phone at a sensitive building (such as a clinic or a bank or a hospital) and record the front of the building to include the people coming in and out of it?  This seems to be all the rave these days, and for the life of me I can't figure out a sound, logical reason for it.

In the first place, exactly what are they 'auditing?'  And why?  If they were hired by a company to take video, then that's one thing - but to just stand out on the sidewalk and record the outside of a building for no good fuckin' reason other than you can makes no sense. 

The clowns who do this - and IMHO that's just what they are, clowns - will tell you that they're 'exercising their First Amendment rights,' but I don't buy that.  Whenever they're asked why they're recording, they'll just say "I'm exercising my Constitutional rights" or "I'm exercising my First Amendment rights" without actually answering the question.  Nine times out of ten the people who are confronting them don't know anything about the Constitution or the First Amendment, so they'll always say that "what you're doing is illegal and I'm calling the cops!"  

News flash - this is exactly what these clowns want you to do.  They know that when the cops get there they'll say the same thing as the so-called 'auditor' - that he's on public property and can record anything he wants.  If it's happening in front of a clinic, the person who confronts him will claim it's a violation of HIPPA laws, but the truth is that it's not.  HIPPA laws cover the release of medical information on a patient to someone other than a family member; it says nothing about recording the outside of a clinic.  So no, HIPPA laws don't apply.

So why are these clowns doing this?  Simple - they're trying to stir up shit to have something nice and juicy to post on TikTok or YouTube and get their fifteen minutes of fame.  That's it.  That's the whole reason for it.  Either that, or to bait an uninformed cop into taking some kind of action against them, which will make the video even juicier and also let the 'auditor' sue the police officer, the police department, and the city.  And the sad thing is that every now and then some dumbass cop will do just that, and the video will go viral.  That gives ALL cops a bad name, and that's something that the good cops can do without.

Until someone gives me a sound, logical reason for these clowns standing outside anyplace and recording the people walking past, I'm going to stand by my opinion that they're doing it just to stir up shit and get something to post on the internet - all for the sake of VIEWS.

These clowns are both sad and pathetic.  If you have to stoop to something like this in order to get attention, then you have a serious problem.  

And if you're doing it just to stir up shit and cause trouble, then you're an asshole.

Period.

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

What I Believe - Men In Women's Sports

 

One of the things I absolutely don't understand is why this topic is even being discussed, or why anyone with an ounce of common sense would support it.  My opinion on this topic is very simple - men don't belong in women's sports.  Period.  It is a proven biological fact that most - not all, but most - women are physically incapable of competing against men.  That's why they have women's sports in the first place, to allow women to compete in sports in a FAIR and EQUITABLE environment, where everyone has a fair chance at winning.  When you put a man who has a mental illness and thinks he's a woman into this environment, it ceases to become fair and equitable.

 

Need proof of this?  Okay, for all of you screaming libtards out there, here it is - every single time a man has been allowed to compete in women's sports, he's won.  Every.  Single.  Time.

 

And he won because biologically HE'S A MAN, NOT A WOMAN.

 

Yes, I said it - a man who thinks he's a woman has a mental illness.  I don't give a damn what anyone else says, in my opinion any man who thinks he's a woman and wants to cut off his own Johnson has a severe mental illness.  Likewise, any woman who thinks she's a man has the same mental illness - either that, or she has the most severe case of penis envy in the history of mankind.

 

And it's high time the majority stopped kow-towing to the 1%.  

 

I personally don't care how others live their lives because it's their lives and not mine, which means that it's none of my business.  I don't care what you do with your body, I don't care who you sleep with, I don't care who you marry, I don't care what 'pronouns' you use, and I don't care what color you dye your hair.  As I said, it's none of my business.

 

But when you start forcing your mental illness and/or your liberal lifestyle down other people's throats and start demanding that others give in to your lunatic demands, at that point it becomes my business because I'm one of the 'others.'  I refuse to use your 'preferred pronouns' because I refuse to participate and thereby legitimize your fantasy of what you are or what you think you are.  I'm not going to call a 'transgender' man 'she,' and I'm not going to call a 'transgender' woman 'he.'  As the meme says, if you were born with a penis, you're a man.  And if you were born with a vagina, you're a woman.  

 

Men don't belong in women's sports. And this includes Brittany Griner.  

 

End of story.

 

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

 

Change My Mind

 

If you're an adult with any common sense (which means you're a conservative Republican) then no further explanation is necessary.  But just in case there's any libtards out there looking at this and don't understand it or disagree with it, let me lay it out for you.

Here's a small list of the things that the Demoncratic Party supports and that almost all of their candidates push:

1.  Men participating in women's sports

2.  Men using women's bathrooms

3.  Open Borders

4.  More inflation

5.  Soft stance on crime

6.  Taxes on tips and overtime

7.  Taxes on retired senior's social security checks

8.  Censorship

9.  Trans surgery for children

10.  Gun control to include repealing the 2nd Amendment

11.   Defunding the police

12.  Allowing illegal immigrants to vote in national elections 

13.  Giving state/federal benefits to illegal immigrants who did nothing to deserve it except show up

If you agree with any of these stances, I'm not going to waste my time trying to change your mind because my past experience has taught me that it's useless.  Trying to change a libtard's mind is like trying to teach a pig to fly - it's impossible and only irritates the pig.  (The only difference is that the pig will just run away instead of calling you a racist, a fascist, or a Nazi.)

On the off chance that there is someone who supports these idiotic ideas and is reading this, here's a serious question for you that I'd really like an answer to.  Ready?  Here it is.

WHY?  What's the logic behind supporting ANY of these?

Anyone want to take bets on whether or not I get a reply?

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

Friends, Buddies, and Acquaintances

 

I heard something a very long time ago - as in 50+ years ago when I was in high school - that everyone in your life, male or female, fits into one of three basic categories.  Those categories were Friends, Buddies, and Acquaintances, and when I asked what the differences between the categories were, what I was told made a hell of a lot of sense.  Now that I'm 50+ years older, it makes more sense than ever, and life has proven it to be 100% true.

So now let me share with you these nuggets of wisdom that were shared with me so many years ago.  I'll start at the bottom and work my way up.

Acquaintances are people that you merely know in passing.  In high school it was someone that you knew from school and maybe was in one of your classes, and was someone that you'd say 'hi' to when you passed them in the hall between classes.  Maybe you'd stop and talk for a minute, but most of the time the quick 'hi' was it.  Other than that, they weren't a part of your life and you never spent any more time with them than the situation required.

Buddies are people that you know from either school or, if you're old enough, from work and are people that you get along with.  These are the people that you socialize with, go to parties with, go drinking with, and generally have a good time with.  These are people that you get along with and who get along with you, and you get to know each other on a personal level - but you're not really sure if you'd want them to marry into your family.  Still, you get along well and have no problems other than the occasional drunken argument over which baseball team is better or who's going to the Super Bowl this year.

Friends are something completely different.  Friends are on a whole different and a much higher level than buddies.   Friends are someone in whom you have total and complete trust, someone that you would share your deepest, darkest secrets with and whom you trust to keep yours.  Friends are the people that you can call at any hour of the day or night and tell them that you need them right fuckin' now, and the only thing they would say is "where are you and can you hang on until I get there?"  There is no limit as to what a friend will do for you, and a true friend will even die for you.   And if you're a true friend to them, you should be prepared to do the same.

Throughout my entire life, I don't think I've ever had more than four or five friends at the same time.  I've had a few that I thought were my friends, but they later proved to be no more than buddies, with a lot of them falling all the way down to acquaintances.  And some of them are even lower than that, as I wouldn't even look at them if I pass them on the street.  And there's one or two of those that I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire.

So ask yourself a couple of questions when you get the chance.  Ask yourself where among these three categories do the people you know fit, and this includes family.  You can be related to someone and still only be acquaintances or buddies, believe it or not.  When you've decided who your friends are, ask yourself a second question.

Ask yourself if you are as good a friend to them as they are to you.

I hope the answer is yes.  If not, you need to fix that right away.

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

 

Are Liberals Really That Stupid?

 

Yes.  Yes they are.  And they're getting stupider by the day.

First, they complained when the President federalized the National Guard and sent them into the District of Columbia to clean up the city and free it from the staggering crime rate that it's been enduring for the past 4 years.  And this is no thanks to the DEI hire chief of police who, when asked about it during a live press conference, didn't even know what a chain of command was.  

Yeah, I'm not kidding.  This is what happens when you hire someone based on sex and/or skin color instead of merit and abilities. 

D.C. has a murder rate that is one of the highest in the nation, which is really saying something considering that A) it's the nation's capital which you'd think would be one of the safest cities in the nation, and B) the small size of the city itself.  Needless to say, D.C. has some pretty stringent gun control laws which only helps the bad guys.   Most cities with staggeringly high crime/murder rates do.  (See Chicago.)

So of course when Trump sent in the Guard to clean things up, the libtards had a conniption fit.  Instead of being grateful that someone was finally doing something to get rid of the thugs, muggers, thieves, and murderers roaming the city streets, they chose to demonstrate and protest instead.  So aside from being stupid as a box of hammers, the liberals are also ungrateful as hell.

And just when you think that the level of libtard stupidity has reached its limit, the libtards step it up a notch and take it down even lower.

There is now a group of libtards walking around handing out whistles to criminals so that they can blow them to get help when the police and/or the Guard tries to arrest them.

No, I'm not making this shit up.  You can't make up anything this fuckin' stupid, and only the libtards would do this.

I'm just waiting for the inevitable news story telling of one or more of these stupid libtards getting assaulted/robbed/raped/murdered by one of the criminals they're trying to help stay out of jail.  And this one is coming, trust me.  Just as sure as God made little green apples, it's only a matter of time before this happens.

And when it does, of course the libtards will blame Trump.  But then, what else is new?

As Forrest Gump once said, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

What I Believe - Transgenders In The Military

 In a word - NO.  Now let me explain why not.

First and foremost, transgenderism is a mental illness.  Anyone who thinks that they were 'born the wrong sex' and 'are really a man/woman' instead of their birth sex has a mental illness.  And if you need any further proof of this, let me throw this at you - what man in his right mind wants to cut off his own penis?

Sure sounds bat-shit crazy to me. 

Up until Barry NObama and his band of merry idiots came into power, that was the medically and socially accepted standard.   The biggest hallmark of his presidency (aside from the blatant racism and the fact that he's married to a man) is that just about all of the standards and morals the nation had been founded on and had been following since 1776 were disregarded.  The liberal left had a field day, shoving their agenda down our throats with the full backing and support of the POTUS.  Suddenly every form of sexual deviancy and mental illness were all acceptable, and the vast majority of the population of this country were forced to sit back and watch as the inmates took over the asylum.  In my mind, one picture sums up NObama's legacy, and this is it:

While this was publicly intended by NObama to be a message to the homosexual community that they had his support, privately it was his way of telling the conservatives that he was going to overturn everything they ever believed in and make this country a living hell for straight white heterosexual conservatives.  IMHO lighting up the White House - which is the PEOPLE'S house, not NObama's - with the rainbow colors used by the homosexual community is the most disgusting, disgraceful thing any sitting President has ever done.  The White House represents ALL of the people of the United States regardless of their sexual orientation, and this disgusting display told the world that NObama wasn't interested in ALL of the people, just the ones he could con into voting for him.

And it worked, as we all know.

But back to the main topic.

So yes, IMHO (and that's what this blog is, my opinion) transgenderism is a mental illness.  And any form of mental illness, be it transgenderism or kleptomania, will disqualify you from military service.  

Now let's look at the practical side of it, shall we?  And this will be short, I assure you.

The drugs that a postoperative transgender person has to take are expensive as shit, but the main thing is that they disqualify that person from worldwide military service.  You can't send a person into a combat zone that absolutely have to have a certain medicine in order to survive, much less function in a combat role.  Hell, if you have a wisdom tooth extracted and they put you on pain meds, you're temporarily disqualified for worldwide deployment until you're off of the meds.  Depending on what the meds are, you're also disqualified from even carrying a weapon, much less deploying.  And I know this for a fact because it happened to me twice while I was in the Air Force. So if you can't carry a weapon and can't be deployed worldwide, then you cannot perform the duties required of you and are of NO USE to the military.

So NO, transgenders have no place in the US Armed Forces, and anyone who is a transgender who is currently serving needs to be discharged immediately.  

And don't blame Trump or Hegseth for this - blame NObama, because he's the one who started it all.  Trump and Hegseth are the ones who are ending it, and they're doing it with my full support and the support of the majority of the American people.

The time has come where the majority is no longer going to kow-tow to the 1% minority.

Get used to it, libtards, because this is the way it's gonna be for the next 11 1/2 years.

Deo Vindice

IHC

 

  

"And Then That Damned Movie Came Out..."

 I think one of the happiest times of my teenage years were the years my family was involved in Citizen's Band Radio, or CB for short.  I got involved in it in 1974 when a good friend of mine, Bobby Sanderford, installed one in his car and I heard him talking on it.  His CB name - or 'handle' as it's called ' was "Ace High."  I thought that was just the coolest thing ever, and as soon as I could make it happen I got one for myself. 

My first CB radio was a Royce 23 channel 5 watt mobile radio, and I mounted it under the dashboard on the left side of the steering wheel of my mother's 1973 Ford Pinto.  At that time in my life I was planning on joining the Navy when I graduated from high school, so of course my CB handle became "Navy Man."  My father was quickly bitten by the CB bug, as was just about everyone else in my family except for my sister Cindy.  CB was never her thing, and I don't think she's ever talked on it.  But that didn't stop the rest of us from getting involved in it, and my father went at it just like everything else he did - whole hog.  It didn't take long before my father had one in his car and we had a base station sitting on the counter in the kitchen, complete with a tunable radio, a D104 microphone, a 500 watt ABC tunable linear amplifier, and an external speaker hooked up to a 4 element "Moon Raker" directional antennae 200 feet up in the air in top of a pine tree in our back yard.  And just for good measure, Pop hooked up a police scanner as well.  Here's what the setup looked like:

As you can see from the placard, our call letters were KHW-2767.  My father's handle was "Raleigh Golfer," my mother was "Little Orphan Annie," and I was "Navy Man."  My sister Dorothy was in college at this time so she wasn't around except for during the summer, so Pop didn't put her handle on the placard when he made it.  Her handle was "Dewdrop," and my father hung the handle of "Nuisance" on my sister Cindy.

I very vividly remember sitting up until all hours of the morning with my father on the weekends "talking skip;" that is, using the cloud cover to bounce the radio signal around and talk to operators in other countries.  Talking skip was illegal as hell, but we did it anyway.  The laws governing CB radio at that time mandated a 5 watt output limit on radios, but we had that 500 watt tunable amplifier anyway.  And let me tell you, when that thing was cranked up at 2AM so as not to interfere with anyone's TV (that went off the air at midnight anyway), we we talked, EVERYBODY listened!  Our signal was so strong that it would bleed over three channels in both directions, meaning that if we were talking on channel 15 you hears us all the way down to 12 and all the way up to 18!  We had the "walkin'est, talkin'est" base station in the city of Raleigh, no doubt about it! 

The rules in CB radio at that time were simple.  First, you had to have a license.  This was a one-time purchase of $20, so that was no big deal.  As I mentioned before, power output was limited to 5 watts, which gave you about a two or three mile range (unless you had a linear amplifier installed in your car under the seat).  Channels 1-8 were reserved for businesses, channel 9 was the emergency channel, and channels 10-23 were the "hobby" channels.  Channel 19 was the trucker's channel, so you didn't talk on it unless you were traveling.  And you absolutely didn't talk on channel 9 unless you had an emergency.  There was even an organization called R.E.A.C.T. (which stood for Radio Emergency Action Communication Team) made up of volunteers that did nothing but listen to channel 9 for emergencies and then notify the authorities as needed.  When you were talking on the radio you were allowed to talk for 5 minutes ("getting your nickel's worth") and then you had to shut up for 5 minutes to let others talk if need be.  There was hardly ever any need for this, however, because CB wasn't so popular as to be THAT crowded.  Usually you could talk for as long as you wanted, especially early in the mornings.

Every city had its own 'monitor channel,' the channel that was set aside for people to contact other CBers on, and the monitor channel for Raleigh was Channel 11.  The way it worked was simple - if I wanted to see if "Ace High" was on the air, I'd go to the monitor channel and call for him.  If he answered, we would immediately go to another channel to talk, leaving the monitor channel free.   If you got to that channel and found someone talking on it already, when one of the people stopped talking you'd key up your microphone and say "BREAK," then wait for a reply.  When the other guy said, "Go ahead, break," you'd tell the person you wanted to talk with to go to another channel.  It was courtesy to do it this way, and courtesy traveled in both directions - you didn't talk after you asked for a break until you were given permission, and if someone asked for a break you gave it to them immediately.

 And then there were the 10 codes to learn.  There weren't that many so they were fairly easy.  10-4 was 'ok,' 10-9 was 'repeat,' 10-20 was 'location,' and 10-36 was 'time check.'  I'm sure there were more, but these were the only ones used on a regular basis.

I met some really nice people through the CB radio, and everyone involved had a ball.  I enjoyed it so much that when I got my own car after I joined the Air Force I put a CB radio in it, changing my handle to "Blue Knight."  CB radio was a lot of fun, something that we all looked forward to doing, especially on the weekends when you'd have 4 or 5 people talking on the same channel, having a blast and just enjoying the experience.

And then that damned movie came out.

Don't get me wrong, I love "Smokey and The Bandit," and it's one of my favorite movies, but the truth is that the movie absolutely ruined CB radio.  Once that damned movie came out, for Christmas of 1977 every kid in the nation wanted either a CB radio or a Pontiac Trans Am for Christmas.  And since most parents couldn't afford the car, they got their kid a CB radio instead.

The result was that the radio was flooded with kids who had no idea how to talk on the radio.  You name it, they did it wrong.  They talked on the monitor channel.  They talked on the trucker's channel.  They talked on the business channels.  They even talked on Channel 9.  And it became impossible to have a conversation for longer than 2 minutes without this happening:

Me:  "So I'll meet you at the KK at nine o'clock, then?"  (The KK was the Krispy Kreme donut shop at the corner of Person and Peace Streets in Raleigh, a CB hangout.)

Kid:  "BREAK!"

Me:  "Stand by, Ace High; go ahead, break."

Kid:  "What's your 20?"  

OR

Kid:  "How about a 10-36?"

After a while, my reply to those questions became either "IF I WAS UP YOUR ASS YOU'D KNOW WHERE I WAS!" or "TIME FOR YOU TO BUY A FUCKIN' WATCH!"

There were so many requests for licenses that the FCC couldn't keep up with them.  What used to take 30 days to process was now taking 90 days or longer, so you were told to use the letter "K" and your initials followed by your zip code as a temporary license until yours arrived.  And even then they had to add a letter to the license because they were issuing so many.  (My license was KBLK-9720.) Then they dropped the fee down to $5, then eliminated the need for a license entirely.  Soon after that they increased the number of channels from 23 all the way up to 40, and that still wasn't enough.  All of the channels were flooded with kids breaking into your conversation and asking for time or location checks.

I put up with this nonsense for about six months, then said the hell with it.  When I sold my car in '78 I took the CB radio out of it and didn't install it in the next car.  I didn't have a CB radio in my car again until the early '90s; by that time things had calmed down, but the CB radio experience was never the same again.  The fellowship and camaraderie was gone, never to return; not even the truckers were talking as much as they used to.  I had a CB in my car until 2000, and when I sold that car I took the radio out and never installed it again.  CB radio had just stopped being fun.

All because of that damned movie.

Deo Vindice

IHC