This America. It is beneath our dignity as a Superpower to tell our Border Patrol to "run away," "hide" and "throw things" when confronted by armed attack.

This seems like the perfect synopsis of the liberal approach to maintaining law and order:

06-20-12 In another nauseating series of "Virtual Learning Center" brainwashing courses that Border Patrol agents are forced to sit behind a computer for hours and endure, we are now taught in an "Active Shooter" course that if we encounter a shooter in a public place we are to "run away" and "hide". If we are cornered by such a shooter we are to (only as a last resort) become "aggressive" and "throw things" at him or her. We are then advised to "call law enforcement" and wait for their arrival (presumably, while more innocent victims are slaughtered). Shooting incidents cited in the course are Columbine, the Giffords shooting and the Virginia Tech shooting.


These types of mandatory brainwashing courses and the idiocy that accompanies them are simply stunning when they are force-fed to law enforcement officers. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that any three of the above shootings would have been stopped cold by an off-duty law enforcement officer or a law abiding citizen with a gun. The Fort Hood shooting would have been stopped cold by someone with a gun as well. The shooters in these situations depend on unarmed and scared victims. It gives them the power they seek. We could go on and on with examples of shootings that could have been stopped by someone with a firearm. One of the videos in this course actually shows a terrified female hiding behind a desk as an example of how to "hide" from some deranged shooter. Multiple quizzes throughout the course and a final test ensure repeatedly that we know that we only have three options when encountering some murderous thug in a public place. 1. Run away; 2. Hide; and 3. Only put up a fight as a last resort by acting aggressively and throwing things at the shooter. Not one mention anywhere of "if you are carrying a gun and you have the opportunity take the shooter out". Calling 911 in these instances is obvious, but we all know that waiting on the arrival of uniformed law enforcement will ensure more people are killed, injured, or taken hostage. Telling law enforcement officers that in all instances they are to run away and hide from some thug while innocent victims are butchered is simply inexcusable and pathetic.

The Reconquista.

Parts of Arizona are under functional control by Mexican gangs:

And blogger the Hyacinth Girl has experienced the warnings firsthand:

On a recent trip to Phoenix, I pulled off the I-8 to let the dogs out and let the kid get her wiggles out. I’d stopped at this place before; it has some abandoned buildings I like to look at. About ten minutes after I’d stopped, a sheriff’s SUV pulled up and a very nice lady sheriff asked me politely but with some urgency if I could gather my wayward puppies and child and leave immediately.

I asked her why, as I’m pretty familiar with Arizona and the freedom within its borders. She explained that it was too close to sunset for us to be on that particular side of the freeway, as the drug and human traffickers would be out very soon. “They’ll shoot you if they don’t know you,” she said, “Even if you’re just here with you kid and obviously not a threat.”

Needless to say, I gathered everyone, and even though Mr. HG needed some convincing on account of his problems with authority, we got out of there posthaste.

The President's answer?  Sue the Sheriff of Maricopa County to make sure he's politically correct:

Well, the Obama administration is doing something. Namely, suing Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio for failing to turn over documents as part of a DOJ inquiry into whether Arpaio’s intense illegal-immigration operations were discriminatory toward Hispanics.

This is surprising....should this be surprising?

Arizona Hispanics support provision of law requiring proof of status.

According to Hot Air, there is ambiguity in the poll, but that is a fair inference from it:

I’ve got a question mark in the headline because, insanely, Rasmussen didn’t refine his sample to isolate the data from Latinos. The racial demographics polled are white, black, and “other,” which presumably encompasses Latinos (30.1 percent of the state’s population as of 2008), Native Americans (4.9 percent), and Asians (2.5 percent). Here’s what he got when he asked respondents if they favor or oppose legislation that would let cops stop suspected illegals to check their immigration status. Click the image to enlarge.


Fully 70 percent overall support this part of the law, and given the fact that Latinos compose most of the “other” category, a majority of their demographic must be in favor too. A few caveats, though. One: Rasmussen polls likely voters, so this is obviously a sample of citizens. Other polls that use “adults” as their sample are bound to show sharply lower numbers since they’ll include some illegals too. Two: Notwithstanding the support for letting cops inquire, 53 percent overall say they’re either very or somewhat concerned that the law will lead to civil-rights violations. Among the “other” group, it’s 54 percent — but of that number, 40 percent say they’re very concerned and just 14 percent say somewhat. (Among all likely voters, that split is 23/30.) So yeah, it’s an issue, and if it starts happening, expect support to start crumbling.

Exit question: Why didn’t Rasmussen emphasize this in his write-up of the data? Is he saving that for tomorrow?

Update: Another worthy caveat from the comments: The sub-sample of Latino likely voters must be relatively small, which would mean a large margin of error. That might explain why Rasmussen didn’t flag it. Just flag this result now for comparison purposes, as there’ll be plenty of more extensive polling in the days ahead.

This may be surprising only to those of us who grow up in they dynamic of victim-group identity politics. It may be the case that Hispanic-Americans are surprisingly like other Americans and want to see the law enforced. After all, nothing leads to a total contempt for the law than that it go unenforced. Also, Arizona is sitting right on the border where all kinds of violence is flowing into Arizona proper. They may feel that the best way to keep that stuff from happening in their homes is to enforce the law.

On the other hand, if law enforcement begins to act like thumb-fingered thugs that attitude will quickly change.

We shall see.