Press "Enter" to skip to content

The USA is certifiably INSANE

I almost titled this post, “Why I’m thinking so hard about leaving ‘my’ country.”

When I first saw this over at Joel’s place


… I assumed he had fallen for some Internet parody. When the second place I saw it was an Alex-Jonesy site, I was relieved. Now I knew the ‘Net was falling hard for somebody’s hilariously awful put on.

But apparently, appallingly, it’s no put on.

No. It’s no longer merely acceptable for cops to blow away anybody who might be holding a cellphone, a squirt gun, a wallet, or a remote control. They’re actually being conditioned to blast any mere “civilian” without hesitation.

Without hesitation.

After all, it’s for “officer safety” and no doubt once the police department or government agency investigates itself it will decree that “procedures were followed.” And the officer in question will get to enjoy a long paid vacation in the meantime.

Hey — everybody wins! Well … except … you know. But who cares about mere “civilians”?

Have TPTB and their robotic servants totally lost track of the concept that hesitation (i.e. the use of judgment) might be a good thing before deciding to splatter the brains of little kids, pregnant women, old folks, and others whose behavior may not actually be threatening? Have they all forgotten that hesitation (i.e. good judgment) in fact should be a duty for so-called “public servants” dealing with the actual public?

Yes, they’ve lost sight of all that. And why not? There are no consequences for murdering the innocent — as long as you can cite “procedures.”


Seriously, this is why I think so often these days of just getting the hell out.

Back in the 1990s, every time somebody mentioned some cool place for expatriation I would respond (knowing the answer in advance), “So, how are their gun rights compared with ours?”

Gun rights still matter vitally of course.

But for years now I’ve suffered a growing feeling that the country of my birth has gone completely, absolutely paranoid bonkers. How many times a month (or a week or a day) do you see or read something about “security” or “public safety” that you first believe is simply too outlandish to be true? Then you turn right around and find that not only is it true, but it’s just a little mole that signals an underlying metastatic tumor?

Freedom-loving Americans are rapidly coming to realize that “our” governments have covertly declared war on us — that we are no longer mere criminal suspects subject to arrest for ordinary, peaceable acts, but we are outright enemies to be obliterated at the will of the state or any of its functionaries.

That would be awful enough if Our Enemy the State were merely calculating and ruthless. But living in a society where the governmental norm is a state of paranoid insanity grinds a body (and a mind) down.

We’re forced to become hypervigilant and downright paranoid ourselves — only to discover each time that we haven’t been vigilant or suspicious enough. Even if it turned out that these “no hesitation” targets were somebody’s bad joke, you can know for certain that something just as bad — or worse — is going on that you can’t (yet) see.

Eventually, no matter how sane you are or how calm and well-balanced you are determined to remain, you inevitably end up accepting insane premises as “normal.”

THAT is no way to live.


  1. Water Lily
    Water Lily February 20, 2013 9:07 am

    I think that they are purposely provoking some people into extreme violence, and others into extreme fear, so that they have a really good excuse to crack down hard and begin eliminating the “dissidents.” Of course, the ones who have been frightened to death will welcome the crackdown.

  2. Scott
    Scott February 20, 2013 9:11 am

    I think the whole planet is bonkers, and that’s why aliens don’t come here-it makes their spacecraft insurance go up, Earth is is on a recommended no-fly list, or the only ones that come here are the “Vacations For Maniacs” type.

  3. Jake MacGregor
    Jake MacGregor February 20, 2013 9:17 am

    i exchanged emails with fellow marine this morning on these very same ‘targets’

    his response: these targets are beneath contempt! and they don’t have any targets of us … and they’ll never see us until it is too late

  4. Jim Klein
    Jim Klein February 20, 2013 9:23 am

    Is it maddening? This society’s been insane for a long while; we’re just seeing the physical results now.

    Yep, certifiable. And nope, “THAT is no way to live.”

    We could’ve saved ourselves so much time, cuz you had the answer all along—“So don’t live that way.”

  5. KenK
    KenK February 20, 2013 9:23 am

    In one of my training classes we had children “targets” similar to the one you feature that were to be used in a “shoot/don’t shoot” quick judgement threat assessment drill. But this target just creeps me out.

  6. Jim B.
    Jim B. February 20, 2013 9:25 am

    You just figured out the USA is insane just now? I’ve known we’ve been this way for quite a while now. All you have to do is look at who kept getting voted in.

    As for the targets? This only confirms that the civilians aren’t the only ones “preparing for war”. That’s my take on it. Something big is coming.

  7. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty February 20, 2013 9:42 am

    Hmmm, does this mean it’s ok for me to post targets with pictures of Pelosi, Feinstein and so forth?

    I didn’t think so…

    But I just might anyway. :)>

  8. Jake MacGregor
    Jake MacGregor February 20, 2013 9:43 am

    and re the question of staying v going: (fight or flight)

    I see this as the defining question of our times.

    Our fore-fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes and scared honor so we would have the enunciated rights like the 2nd amendment.

    I understand the ‘get outta dodge’ thought process as I have considered this option myself as re our special needs child. In fact, I have often used the “Sound of Music” story as analogy. (Escaping tyranny with nothing but clothes on your back)

    Then I think about those who came before, and as ‘corny’ as this might sound – I hear their voices whispering to me ‘It is times like these that your right to bear arms matters most! Stand on your hind legs and re-take your country!’

    Why would it be noble to pledge your life, your fortune and honor in 1777 but not 2013?

    If not us, who will keep the light of freedom alive? If not now, when?

    I think we need to bang the drum, send out riders and stand on our hind legs … now.

    Let us call Committees of Correspondence, rededicate ourselves to our founding charters and deny the tyrants the choice of time, place and plan.

    When in the course of human events it becomes self evident …

  9. Matt, another
    Matt, another February 20, 2013 9:57 am

    It is just the latest in a long line of madness. The U.S. Govt killing civilians has a long history. It used to be justified as accidents such as Wounded Knee or destroying the enemies will to resist (Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki) or just collateral damage (Ruby Ridge, Waco) to a larger police operation. The only thing new is they are putting less effort into hiding it, including the media and we are more aware. The gloves are off. We have a federal g0overnment in place that has decided it can decide who to kill, when and where with no oversight or justification, let alone a trial, conviction etc. It does so on a regular basis. We have local governments that decide they can also kill their citizens with impunity and get away with it. LAPD is a great recent example. Shoot at anyting that scares you then trap and kill a person alleged to have killed LAPD officers. No remorse, no recourse.

    It is time to fly the black flag.

  10. Laird
    Laird February 20, 2013 10:08 am

    Words fail. What they need is targets bearing the photos of the senior officers of the company which published these. And also ones of uniformed police officers. Now there’s a “worst possible situation” (from their perspective, anyway), and one where we definitely wouldn’t want there to be any hesitation!

    Re MamaLiberty’s question, I read recently about a range (in Michigan, as I recall) which was forced to remove targets showing pictures of men wearing turbans. Too offensive, you know. So no, I don’t think you’d get away with using photos of Pelosi et al at your local range. The range owner couldn’t afford to permit it, and you’d likely receive a pleasant visit from the Secret Service. Of course, if you’re just firing in your own back yard . . . .

    Jake, in 1774 the Committees of Correspondence were established by the governments of the 13 colonies, not by individual citizens. Not sure how to do that today; I don’t see any states which are upset enough by what’s happening in Washington to take that step. If you have any ideas I’m all ears.

  11. Shel
    Shel February 20, 2013 10:15 am

    I’ve worked with a young woman who is a Russian citizen and who came to this country a few years ago. I’ve told her multiple times not to give up her Russian citizenship. She looks at me and smiles with apparent minimal understanding. At least Russia is stable. Giving that kind of advice would have been unimaginable even two years ago.

    N.B.: I’d like to have an address to enable me to send info to Claire Wolfe to allow for wider distribution, but I don’t know where to send it. One recent interesting article is

  12. Pre-press veteran
    Pre-press veteran February 20, 2013 12:14 pm

    I saw this early this morning – along with the other item I linked.

    I’d love to know what Massad thinks about it, but I’m concerned for his blood pressure lately.

  13. Bear
    Bear February 20, 2013 12:23 pm

    Pre-press veteran Says: “I’d love to know what Massad thinks about it, but I’m concerned for his blood pressure lately.”

    I’ve long been concerned about Ayoob’s sanity. Based on my last exchanges with him (and his refusal to answer several questions about police procedure), I suspect he has plenty of these targets for his own use, and thinks they’re the greatest thing since sliced bread. But maybe I’m wrong; maybe he gave up his cop-sucking ways.

  14. Kent McManigal
    Kent McManigal February 20, 2013 12:43 pm

    A few years ago I copied some photos of cops at “checkpoints” and individual traffic stops I found at various places online, and using the Paint program made nice little targets on their empty heads. I was going to use the pictures for a blog post, but I decided it might be seen as “too suggestive”. Or, at least I don’t think I ended up using any of them. And I can’t find them now. But maybe I need to make some new ones and write a new post. It might cause a comment war, if nothing else.

    At least I’d be on the right side of the battle.

  15. Pat
    Pat February 20, 2013 12:47 pm

    The Committees of Correspondence were set up to communicate inter- and intra-colony by American revolutionaries in 1774, to keep each colony apprised of what was happening elsewhere throughout the colonies, and around their own colony as well.Some of these original Committees were not “State”- sponsored because the colonists were fighting their own State governments, which were put into place by British authority. Some State governments (British) then established _their_ Committees as a way of keeping track of their own rebellious “citizens”, thinking if the Committee was under their auspices, they could keep better control.

    Anyone today could set up his own system between trusted people in each State, or across State borders. It does not have to be initiated by a State or any official government body.

  16. Chem
    Chem February 20, 2013 1:03 pm

    That is creepy. So are TPTB producing this or is it some company’s idea of a good idea? The use of picture targets including non-traditional threat and non-threat targets is pretty old. Is anyone terribly surprised in the wake of Sandy Hook that someone produced this?

    In a world of madness I don’t see this as proof of anything earth shattering. If it is set up as a threat target *shrug* Sam Colt can make a 10 year old equal(ly) a threat. Likewise you can make big tattoo biker targets that are designed to be non-threats. I am a little disturbed by the target’s expression, which is ambiguous to my mind. But that is far more likely to be an issue with the target manufacturer, not a sign that The Man is getting ready to kill us.
    “Government Bid: DHS wants 3 million targets of nuns, children, invalids and harmless dogs for the furtherance of oppression training.”

  17. UnReconstructed
    UnReconstructed February 20, 2013 1:06 pm

    Odd how one can become so inured over time. After Waco (where the noun ‘Waco’ became a verb, as in they “waco’d” him) and Ruby Ridge (Drop that assault baby or I’ll shoot), I find it difficult to summon much outrage over a paper target.

    How very odd the ‘twist’, though. I have done ‘hogans alley’ shoots where targets like that were the *no shoots* (kid was holding a water pistol).

    Maybe ‘they’ are in fact preparing to wage total war on the American people.

    Or maybe this is yet another (Admittedly especially) egregious example of the many signs of societal decay all around us.

  18. -S
    -S February 20, 2013 1:49 pm

    I did some training at a professional firearms academy. Three day course, excellent in all respects.

    There were federal air marshals training at the same facility. They had realistic airplane interiors, seats, aisles, etc.

    They were trained to literally shoot anything that moved. They set up Lolli-Popper targets, the kind with a steel plate on the end of a spring. There might be one target or several, in seats, in rows between seats, in aisles.

    The drill was for the FAM to sit in his airplane seat with eyes closed while the targets were set up and put in motion. The object was to shoot all the wobble targets as fast as possible.

    There weren’t any dummies or other indicators of children, women, cabin crew, or pilots. Just shoot what moves.

    Are they now putting pictures of pregnant women on the wobblies?

    The FAM trainees were the worst sort of redneck yahoos, a different breed entirely from the higher-class redneck yahoos that read Claire’s blog. 😉 Our class and instructor kept a wary eye on them whenever they were on the range with us.

    One day after the course was finished they played a game in the parking lot of ramming their pickup trucks while driving in reverse. Two trucks got locked together, and one of the FAMs severely injured his shooting hand trying to separate the bumpers.

  19. chem
    chem February 20, 2013 2:50 pm

    Isnt the purpose of picture targets to identify threats? Are people really saying that children, little old ladies and the like cannot conceivably be threats at all?

    There are no training evolutions for any law enforcement officers, anywhere, where the use of picture targets that include a child threat target could possibly be appropriate? If thats the case perhaps there should be a law. *innocently*

    A private company is offering these targets. We have no idea who is or is not ordering them (for all we know the LEAs are all to PC to use them and the series will be a flop), how the training using them is structured, etc. No the mere existence of these targets by themselves is apparently evidence that we are insane as a society?

    I mean, is he not mean enough looking in the picture or is any target depicting a child designed to be a threat intrinsically wrong? What are we getting at here?

  20. Paul Bonneau
    Paul Bonneau February 20, 2013 3:06 pm

    Of course, these (and the people who produce them) are unbelievably vile.

    But Claire, don’t forget, “Turn-about is fair play.” If they want to shoot pregnant women and kids without hesitation, then we can train the same way. Pretty soon walking around in any uniform will be like having a target on your back.

    We’ll see if they really want to go there. It sure would simplify things, wouldn’t it?

  21. Matt, another
    Matt, another February 20, 2013 6:07 pm

    LAPD doesn’t need targets like this, they have real little old ladies to shoot at.

  22. Jim Klein
    Jim Klein February 20, 2013 6:16 pm

    The question isn’t whether or not it’s fair play, Paul, but whether turn-about is in your best interest. It would be a hard case to make. Contrary to almost everyone’s opinion, it isn’t. How are you going to benefit by copying the behavior of the worst among us? That’s why you don’t, of course.

    Chem, get with it. You’re busy justifying the targets because they’re not of a thousand nuns yet, when they already bought more than enough hollow-points for all the nuns and their parishoners to boot.

    You pick—was it just to throw money down the drain? That’s the best option, right?

    PLEASE excuse the language Claire, but I wouldn’t care what targets any sick-fucks want to use. It’s the WHY that’s the problem.

  23. Claire
    Claire February 21, 2013 5:46 am

    “It’s the WHY that’s the problem.”

    Amen. Nailed it.

    That some obscure company wants to sell targets like that is sick. But lots of stuff in the world is sick and no big deal. That some obscure company with major government contracts and LE as its primary target sees a market for targets like that is a freakin’ OMEN.

  24. Michael Stone
    Michael Stone February 21, 2013 6:56 am

    You suggest they have covertly declared war on us.
    I’d say it’s overt.
    The war on drugs is a war on people, not plants.

    I’m leaving next week for New Zealand.
    I can’t wait to get out. Every time I read the news I’m sickened by yet another murder-by-pig. Every time.

    I’ve just got to clench my teeth for another week…

  25. Mike
    Mike February 21, 2013 7:04 am

    Shel, great link. I’ve thought the same a couple times…I’d love to have Claire’s e-address thingie to toss the occasional link her way.

    Paul – For me, “turn about’s fair play” isn’t so much a moral judgement on whether it’s OK, but instead something that eventually gets enough public momentum behind it for various (right or wrong) reasons that it becomes the norm. That extends into other things like economic issues (e.g. – the bailouts were wrong, but inevitible in the economic and political climate; I’ve had several people tell me we need to pay for care for the poor through takings by the gov’t so as to placate poor people so as to prevent violence/theft). Right or wrong aside, if any one side pushes too far, there will be backlash.

    Jim – ABSOLUTELY right, regarding the “why,” but before even getting to the reason why they’re advocating the shooting of pregnant women, children, and the elderly, let’s back up a minute and firmly establish the intent. In a particular forum I’m a member of, one of the other members, an LEO, remarked that he was particularly disturbed by this because the background was faded…which suggested to him that the targets were intended specifically to desensitize, and not to force shooters into a shoot/no shoot determination.

  26. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty February 21, 2013 7:13 am

    On another note…

    Has anyone here actually had to fire a gun at a human being? I have. I’d never had any training before, so my decisions and actions were driven by one thing only… fear of death.

    You can’t go back, of course, but I’m not sure any amount of practice shooting at ANY kind of target would have made any difference to what happened or my ultimate decision to pull that trigger. It might have improved my aim, just not my decision making process. At that point, it was very cut and dried. Shoot or die.

    The only purpose I can see for these photo targets is exactly what they said… to condition the cops to be more comfortable shooting at people they would normally not want to harm. And being in fear of their lives is obviously not going to be any part of that.

  27. IndividualAudienceMember
    IndividualAudienceMember February 21, 2013 7:14 am

    “The U.S. has the highest prison population rate of 743 per 100,000 of its national population followed by Rwanda (595 per 100,000).”

    How is that for perspective?

    I saw that bit here: Yes, You ARE a Criminal…You Just Don’t Know It Yet
    by Mark Nestmann

    I was remind of BWH Freedomistas, and The Moon is Down, yet again.

    The natives so many People seem to be afraid of in other lands – are here – does that change things for some?

    A $20,000 a year bronze plan translates to $1,600+ per month. Who would be unhappy about that? And having to be forcibly injected with a flu-shot? A bill and a jab in one day, plus a late penalty and administration fee? What’s rising prices and stagnent wages in the face of that? The photos you see?

    Happy days are here again?

    Yup, like another Person said the other day: “whatever happens, things aren’t going to stay this way for long.”

    … but like after a snowstorm, some People will come together and get through ok …?

  28. Paul Bonneau
    Paul Bonneau February 21, 2013 10:01 am

    “How are you going to benefit by copying the behavior of the worst among us?”

    Jim, as Mike guessed, my statement was not a moral prescription. It was a prediction of what would happen if LEOs continue down this path. All actions have consequences. EVEN IF the more moral and responsible among us recognize this is not something that the rest of us should do, it will still come about. Kill a pregnant women or a child, at some point the father or brother will pick up a rifle and not worry too much about finding the actual individual who did the deed. The uniform will be enough. And really, how far wrong is that, when the war is truly on? The continued wearing of a uniform, when others in that same uniform are murdering innocents, is a choice too. Actions have consequences…

    I wrote an article about proper forms of resistance:

  29. Pre-press veteran
    Pre-press veteran February 21, 2013 1:12 pm

    “Pretty soon walking around in any uniform will be like having a target on your back.”

    Oathkeepers and militias take note.

    Some LEOs have said they have been in situations where just these sorts of people are pointing loaded guns and intending to shoot them. So, OK. But what if it’s a 6 yr old with a black Wii controller and black pistol attachment? Or a bb gun or …

    The times cops have shot those kinds of targets mistakenly have been traumatic all the way around. Career-ending, even. So, the question of shoot/no shoot targets DOES make sense – but adding a gun to those previously no-shoot targets to imply an actual threat is…. misleading? or [need a better word than that…]

  30. Woody
    Woody February 21, 2013 2:06 pm

    When I was teaching defensive handgun classes I always warned students that using a gun as a target indicator was a dangerous practice, lacking some other behavioral indicator as well. If we shoot at anyone with a gun then we are training ourselves to shoot fellow armed citizens who may be responding to the same threat we are. That’s also why I caution against intervening in 3rd party disputes unless you are _absolutely sure_ you know who the bad guys are. Of course the police don’t see it that way. That’s why they routinely shoot undercover officers by accident. Most of the photographic targets used in police training use a gun as a shoot indicator. We have seen how well that has worked out for 1000s of innocent people who have been shot by cops. It also seems like cops have trouble telling cellphones and wallets from guns.

  31. gooch
    gooch February 21, 2013 2:20 pm

    “The times cops have shot those kinds of targets mistakenly have been traumatic all the way around. Career-ending, even. So, the question of shoot/no shoot targets DOES make sense – but adding a gun to those previously no-shoot targets to imply an actual threat is…. misleading? or [need a better word than that…]”

    Try conditioning as in conditioning or training to shoot “without hesitation” as their brand name clearly states. ” ‘No-More_Hesitation’ targets”.

    Now it seems as though even the LEO’s are repulsed by the targets in question. The website of the manufacturer has the following as a statement on the front page.
    “We apologize for the offensive nature of our “No-More-Hesitation” products. These products have been taken offline due to the opinions expressed by so many, including members of the law enforcement community. … ”
    More follows … read it here – ht tp://

  32. jed
    jed February 21, 2013 4:03 pm

    So, the product line was orginally requested by the LEO community, to help train where “split-second decisions could lead to unnecessary loss of life”? Well, it’s possible to take that the right way, but not with a moniker of “No Hesitation”.

  33. Karen
    Karen February 21, 2013 4:42 pm
    There’s now a retraction of sorts on their page, apologizing for the “offensive nature” of the NMH targets which were “originally requested and designed by the law enforcement community”. Those targets have been taken off line. Damn! Caught! Nothing like going viral to bring on some crocodile tears.

  34. Bear
    Bear February 21, 2013 6:57 pm

    The wording of LET’s statement is highly ambiguous:

    “These products have been TAKEN OFFLINE due to the opinions expressed by so many, including members of the law enforcement community.” (emphasis added)

    They don’t say that they suspended sales of the targets. Does this mean they still stock and sell the psychopathically offensive targets _offline_? If so, to whom?

  35. Woody
    Woody February 22, 2013 2:16 am

    In the past, while I was teaching I bought a lot of targets from LE Targets. They were a good company to deal with in my experience but I agree with Bear. The targets are probably available to any LE Agency that requests them. LE Targets is a pretty big company that sells millions of targets, mostly to the government. Many of their silhouette type targets were designed by or for specific LE Agencies. It would be pretty naive to think they would discontinue a target for which they have a large market.

  36. Pre-press veteran
    Pre-press veteran February 22, 2013 5:03 am

    UGH. That only makes this appear even worse to me. More intentional, rather than just some well-meaning, but misguided unthinking stupid marketing gimmick.

    At which point, I’m inclined to give all the other “tinfoil” discussions a second look. And hope all my backorders come in.

  37. Tom from WNY
    Tom from WNY February 22, 2013 10:14 pm

    The term “officer safety” is beginning to scare me. A dark and foreboding scare.

    At one time, I was sympathetic to the idea that LE Officers go in to dark places to do dangerous things and needed intensive training to deal with the dangers. Now, I can see the overreaction in the name of “officer safety” at the expnese of “citizen rights”; that is the fear. Just tonight, I was reviewing a DVD from the Personal Defense Network on LE/Legally Armed Citizen reactions; the terms “comply with the officer” and “officer safety is paramount” came up frequently.

    From some old cops (Old School variety) I am hearing that one reason they retired was the lack of respect for the community at large by the younger officers. Newbie cops tend to like the militarizaion of the PD, the old Guard was quite comfortable with Community Policing.

    I see no good coming out of the Militarization of the Police movement. Yet another reason to restrict the toys they can have.

  38. Mr Galt
    Mr Galt February 23, 2013 7:04 am

    I sent L.E.T., Inc. (the maker of these disgusting targets) the following:

    “Your company slogan “Targeting for a Safer America” strikes me as particularly amusing, given you see fit to produce targets of pregnant women, children, and old people. At a time when many in your industry are “showing restraint” in limiting sales of high cap magazines and legal firearms to civilians, I think it is interesting that such restraint does not apparently apply to our government. Enjoy your financial run while it lasts. In the end, the crocodile may eat you last, but eat you he will.”

  39. DRK
    DRK February 24, 2013 3:11 pm

    Never dial 911

Leave a Reply