I heard that question presented last night on a show I was watching. But what's the answer?
As most of you know, Bruce Soon To Be Caitlin Jenner has been in the news quite a bit lately. Not only because of the Kardashians' TV show and his divorce from Chris Jenner, but on February 7th he rear ended a vehicle on the Pacific Coast Highway and caused it to strike another vehicle before heading into the oncoming lane, where it was struck head on. The female driver of the car Jenner hit died.
Of course, the big news recently was Jenner's "coming out" as a candidate for transgender surgery - wanting to live the remainder of his life as a woman called Caitlin. He has been on the news daily since then, praised by the left for his courage and ridiculed by the right as just another attention seeker.
The question I heard last night was "If Bruce Jenner has his gender reassignment surgery before he goes to court for the wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of the dead woman (Jenner was not charged by the police) can his lawyer simply say "Your honor - my client was not involved in the accident. That was Bruce,"?
Sounds kinda far fetched, huh? But in today's society where morals are nearly non-existent, where one can change their entire identity with a few surgeries, and where liberal courts legislate from the bench - would it really be surprising to hear it as a defense? I'm not so sure.
In other news - police in McKinney, Texas, were called to a neighborhood on Friday when a group of teenagers crashed a pool party in a neighborhood not their own, allegedly assaulted a security guard and started at least one fight. When police were called to the scene the teenagers were very uncooperative and, as the lone officer attempted to apprehend a female participant, two males ran up on him, causing him to fear for his safety and draw his firearm. (It worked. The two boys ran the other way.)
Many of the teenagers and "Black Lives Matter" advocates are saying the police office overreacted and that he was out of line - completely dismissing the actions of the teenagers. The indication was that these teenagers were harmless (because they're teenagers) and the officer had no reason to draw his weapon. In reality, teenagers injure and kill people all the time. Had the teenagers not been where they didn't belong there would have been no reason to call the police. And when the police responded, had the teenagers done as instructed instead of refusing the orders of the officer no one would have been forced to the ground and/or detained.
Of course, we all know the main stream media is very good at turning things into racial incidents, as they did in the Trayvon Martin case. Benet Embry, a black man who lives in the neighborhood where this incident too place, took to Facebook about what happened. “Look, I LIVE in this community and this ENTIRE incident is NOT racial at all,” Embry's post said. “A few THUGS spoiled a COMMUNITY event by fighting, jumping over fences into a PRIVATE pool, harassing and damaging property. Not EVERYTHING is about RACE. WE have other issues that NEED our attention other flights of made up make believe causes.”
Embry was also critical of the media in a second post about the incident. “I’ve never seen such irresponsible reporting and miss management of media resources in my life,” he said.
The Black Lives Matter activists jump on these stories and seem to think that black Americans should no longer be held accountable for their own actions and that any run-ins they have with the police are the fault of the police. This has been perpetuated by President Obama and the Holder Justice Department since the Professor Gates incident in Cambridge, Massachusetts, following which President Obama weighed in with his now infamous (and ridiculous) statement "I don’t know – not having been there and not seeing all the facts – what role race played in that, but I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two that the Cambridge police acted stupidly..."
No, Mr. President, it wasn't fair to say for precisely the reason you stated first. You weren't there and didn't have all the facts.
Obama also involved himself and his Justice Department in the Trayvon Martin case (which didn't involve a police shooting), in the Ferguson case and every other case involving a dead, unarmed, black suspect and white cops. The details of the incident don't matter. The only thing that matters is that a black person is dead and a white cop was on the scene. (In the Baltimore there were actually (surprisingly) three black officers arrested and charged in addition to three whites but that case may be falling apart.)
The officer who pulled his gun Friday has been suspended pending an investigation. Is it any wonder that police in places like Baltimore and New York City have slowed down in the performance of their duties and stopped being proactive? Why should they put themselves in a position to be suspended, arrested, and prosecuted because of the irresponsible actions of others? You can bet one thing - if the police hadn't responded to this situation on Friday the neighborhood would be filing complaints against them for not taking action.
They're screwed either way, it seems. Thanks, Obama.