Castle Doctrine in Effect in Pennsylvania; Columbia (SC) Refused to Pass Curfew Ordinance in March of 2011

All across the nation, cities with sizable Black populations are implementing curfews in the vain hope of keeping Black people from engaging in criminal behavior that the "Not Guilty" program will one day try have all charges against them dropped.

Castle Doctrine: Philadelphia moves one step closer to the edge

Atlanta is becoming a police state this summer after 30 Blacks molested Delta employees on MARTA; Baltimore is building curfew centers to hold Black people like war criminals, keeping them off the streets and the citizens safe; Newark is doing much of the same.

Philadelphia is a city where Black violence is becoming the norm, with more than 100 Black people engaging in violent Mahogany Mob on Tuesday and injuring goofy writers from The Onion in another attack that had more than 300 Black people attacking people.

Thirty three people were shot in a three day period, making it clear that the white people fleeing the city of brotherly love are doing so for only one reason: to leave the Black violence behind. The violence has gotten so bad that a state of emergency has been declared in one borough:

Darby Borough, Delaware County is under a State of Emergency due to a recent uptick of gun violence.

Five shootings in three days led to the announcement Friday night.

Mayor Helen Thomas announced the state of emergency telling residents the gun violence had to stop.

“I Mayor Helen R Thomas declare a state of emergency.”


An 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew is in effect for adults and juveniles for at least 10 days.

Anyone outside during that time can be stopped and questioned by police, though Police Chief Bob Smythe says they’re more concerned about groups loitering or causing trouble.

“You’re in a group of more than three people and you are causing a disturbance. You’re going to be stopped and you’re going to be cited,” says Smythe.

A larger police presence is expected on the streets and Mayor Thomas says after the 10 days, officials will re-evaluate and go from there.

We have written this before and it should be crystal clear to all readers that the idea of curfew ordinances are only needed in three occasions: war, natural disaster and when Black people behave Blackly.

Most interesting is that Pennsylvania has just passed Castle Law, making an already combustible situation that much closer to the point of no return:

On Tuesday, Governor Tom Corbett signed a bill that expands a person's legal right to use deadly force in self defense.

Before, for a killing out of self defense to be legally justified, an individual had a duty to retreat, meaning they had to attempt to get away from the situation before using lethal force.

The only exception to that duty of retreat was outlined in the Castle Doctrine.  A person inside of their home, on their property, or in their car was not expected to retreat. 

The amended version of the law eliminates a person's duty to retreat in public places, such as state parks.

Some community members said they are worried the law will encourage violence.  

"I don't think that it's necessary," said Chris Yentzer, who enjoys local state parks.  "State parks are usually pretty calm, pretty family oriented.  I couldn't imagine there being trouble,:

The Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association supports the amended law.  The law will only protect a person if they legally possess the firearm used. 

Still there are concerns, according to Dauphin County District Attorney Ed Marsico.

"Our concern all along has not been for the innocent law-abiding citizens defending themselves on the streets," Marsico explained, "We don't see them getting charged with crimes for defending themselves.  What we're worried about is the criminals that are out there on the street engaging in gun play are now going to use this new law as a defense, a way to get out of other charges."

Supporters have a different take on it.  They see the law as an opportunity to ensure their own safety.   Some even think the new Castle Doctrine could reduce violence.

"I think it will be a reduction in violence because criminals will be wondering whether or not you're armed," said Brad Kelly, who supports the law.

The Castle Doctrine removes the legalistic obligation of retreating from an attacker who threatens a person before they have the right to fight back. Those who would do evil to others have no intention of retreating; those who would defend their person from such attackers now can fight back without legal impediments.

Philadelphia joins Chicago, Milwaukee, Cleveland, Atlanta, and St. Louis as being one of the cities most likely for an outbreak of violence that will make everything else that has transpired pale in comparison. The first person to exercise the Castle Doctrine in Philadelphia (perhaps Pittsburgh?) to ward off a Mahogany Mob attack will unleash a hell unlike any seen since 1992 in Los Angeles.

Imagine if the Mahogany Mob assault on Center City had been greeted by a white dude packing heat? What would have transpired next would have probably cracked the Liberty Bell again.

So many cities are powder kegs waiting to explode and you just wonder what the incident will be that finally causes one to explode. That the Disingenuous White Liberals (DWLs) in charge of most of these major cities actively suppress the reality of crime - and always have - is grounds for accusations of treason, if it wasn't considered a treasonous act to even notice the racial reality of crime.

It should be noted that after the Carter Strange beating in High Points by 8 Black people, the Columbia City Council did passed an emergency curfew:

Starting tonight, children 16 and younger cannot be unaccompanied in Five Points after 11 p.m., and more Columbia police are being dispatched to the bar district if USC's baseball team wins a second national championship.

A unanimous City Council adopted the emergency 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. Five Points curfew for 60 days in response to many incidents of misbehavior by teens this year and last year.

“It’s time,” Mayor Steve Benjamin said Monday. “The challenges Five Points faces right now (are) unique. To not recognize that and to determine that we need to not address this need based on some idea that you are being unequal to other parts of the city is a false choice.”

State NAACP leader Lonnie Randolph called the attack “heinous” said the men responsible deserve “the fullest wrath” possible legally. But he urged council to slow down on the rush to approve a curfew, concerned that it would open the door for police to excessively harass young African-Americans.

“It’s a knee-jerk reaction to one incident by a group of teenagers that was out of control,” Randolph said. “Punishing everybody for what eight did is unjust and unfair.”

Yes, curfew ordinances in every city - not just Columbia - impact Black people disproportionately because Black people refuse to obey the law disproportionately. But wait, why wasn't a curfew in place in Columbia if violence had already been reported? The answer is quite simple:

Columbia City Council decided to hold off on a curfew for teens 17-years old and  younger.


City Attorney Ken Gaines and Police Chief Randy Scott say there isn't enough data to prove that juveniles are committing a significant amount of crime in the Capital City.


Councilwoman Tameika Isaac Devine says the city could face a lawsuit if it passes this ordinance in a hurry.

When we first started talking about it we had the ACLU represented and said they were looking at what we were doing very closely, so I think we have to very cognizant of what we're doing and do it the right way," she explains.

There is timetable for future discussion on this issue.  Councilwoman Belinda Gergel initially floated the idea of a city-wide curfew to deal with rising crime in Five Points.

Well Tameika Isaac Devine (contact information and Web site here), a lawsuit should be filed by Carter Strange or some enterprising lawyer against the city of Columbia, the city council and the local ACLU. It was the ACLU that threatened the city with a lawsuit if they passed a curfew:

A proposed curfew that would apply to teens 17 and under and bar them from being on the streets after 11 pm has cleared one hurdle, but is already facing another before a second reading by Columbia city council.


The South Carolina branch of the American Civil Liberties Union calls the proposed curfew unnecessary and unconstitutional.


In a three page letter to Columbia city attorney Ken Gaines, the ACLU contends the proposal "impinges upon the rights of children and their parents. Sometimes the government may usurp parents' fundamental right to raise children as they see fit."

There are weapons of mass destruction in every city across the land and they are Black participants in Mahogany Mobs who terrorize law-abiding citizens; business owners; and jeopardize potential investments in inner-cities from new companies and tourism.

We approach the moment when an individual fights back against a Mahogany Mob and because the majority of Black people will rally in support of the mob (and those Perfidious White Journalists writing for The New York Times, USA Today and reporting at MSNBC, ABC, CBS and CNN) and the dead youth troubled teen fatherless child Black whose mom will say was such a "good boy."

With Pennsylvania passing the Castle Doctrine, the odds that Philadelphia becoming the host of that moment just increased exponentially.

Always remember that the vicious beating of Carter Strange could have been avoided had Columbia just passed the curfew ordinance in March of 2011.

How many other cities are implementing curfews and issuing states of emergency? Inevitably, each city does so because of a monochromatic problem. Perhaps if Black people behaved (instead of participating in BBB behavior) no such laws would necessary.

Then again, people always say the last war is the one to end them all...

#651. The "Restroom for Customers Only" sign

An obvious indicator that you are in an undesirable neighborhood is the scarcity of legitimate businesses and ubiquity of liquor stores, pawn shops, payday loan stores, and venues that mandate paying customers only can use the lavatory.

We know who this is aimed at keeping away

One of the worst feelings for a person lost is the required asking for the proper directions at the gas station to your destination, only to be greeted by an employee safely behind a bullet-proof, plexi-glass window with a tiny slit at the bottom where money can be exchanged for goods.

It is in gasoline stations such as this that the frequency of “restroom for customers only” is more than likely found. In a bid to ward off loiters – “no loitering” signs don’t always work – businesses are forced to undertake desperate measures.

If you find yourself in a situation as the one described above, please vacate the gas station immediately for your own safety. The probability that crime is a constant customer at this establishment is high and your life is more valuable than trying to decipher the directions some clerk at a gas station is giving you.

Gas stations, department stores, and restaurants that publically stipulate the “restroom for paying customers only” clause have passed into the unfortunate realm described in melancholy detail by Robert Putnam in his study on diversity. High levels of repeat theft have caused a disconnect between the business owner and consumer in this situation, requiring a careful vetting of those who are likely to pay for a good or service and those who are determined to perpetuate stereotypes.

Marginal Revolution attempts to describe this problem:

Ilan, a loyal MR reader, asks when a restaurant decides to make its bathrooms "customer only."  I see a few factors:

1. Fear of drug use or illegal drug dealings in the bathroom; the importance of this factor seems to have declined over time.

2. The belief that some people will buy a drink just for bathroom rights.  We did this in Brooklyn on Saturday and it was worth it.

3. The desire that only paying customers shape the ambience of a restaurant; this is important in areas with gangs.

On the other side of the equation is fear of Jack Henry Abbott, the realization that any restriction is not fully enforceable, the desire to cultivate good will among potential customers, and giving the visitors a chance to look at the food and atmosphere. 

Overall I've found that restaurant restrooms are more available to non-customers than ever before and I attribute this to the aging of America and the greater likelihood of a sharply declining marginal cost curve.  In other words, at least until this year raw materials expenses weren't so important so the profit value of an extra customer was pretty high and restaurants would do a lot to cultivate good will.  In general rising commodity prices mean decreasing margins (retail prices don't rise by full offset) and thus adjustment on other margins, such as portion size and service quality.  The bathroom isn't as clean as it used to be either.

A business owner mandating that only customers may relieve themselves in THEIR bathroom is obviously paying the so-called the-word-that-shall-not-be-named tax. Having been the victim of thievery by those who use their lavatory and quickly depart with stolen goods, business owners are forced to deprive good people who honestly just have to pee of that right.

Gas stations throughout the nation once operated in a manner that allowed consumers to fill up their tanks before they paid. The proprietor of the gas station showing explicit trust in their consumers, which has subsequently been replaced with the notion of pre-paying for gas in a desperate move to stop those drivers who pump-and-run (who else pumps and runs? Hmmm…) Preying on the confidence bestowed by the owner on an unproven customer is a joy of diversity, pushing operating costs up and profit margins down.

If a business has been financially aggrieved by individuals, then precautionary measures will be enacted to off-set future losses. That the freedom of a good natured customer is suspended -- one who may have even paid before at that same establishment – because of reprobates abusing the trust of business owners is a sign of tyranny upon the innocent.

The freedom to use the facilities of businesses without payment was once a question never even broached by those in need of relief. Loiterers, criminals, and villains who prey on the indulgences of business owners blissfully unaware of the-word-that-shall-not-be-named tax have created the notion of tyranny upon the innocent.

Such is the reality of “restroom for customers only” signs, an obvious indicator that the nigger tax is being paid where you stand. The costs of diversity are great; the tyranny upon the innocent it births greater.

Stuff Black People Don’t Like includes “restroom for customers only” signs because they are a clear indicator that Black criminality has transpired in that same business before and that the owner is taking precautionary measures to deter repeat offenses from transpiring.

The-word-that-shall-not-be-named tax (let's call it the diversity tax) cannot be quantified, but can be qualified in a discussion on the following:

• Sensors on grocery carts
• Private schools
• Pre-paying for gas
• Bikeshare programs
• High costs for public transportation
• And… well, help us complete the list.