Penn State Child Sex Abuse Scandal: Rioting Students Topple TV Van in Wake of Coach Paterno Firing

From The Blaze: Officers used pepper spray to control the crowd. Some students chanted ‘We want Joe! We want Joe!” Others kicked in the windows out of the toppled news van. 

From The Blaze: Paterno had announced earlier in the day he planned to retire after the season and expressed remorse for not having done more after he learned of the sex assault allegations.

A huge child sex abuse scandal has rocked the Penn State community.  Now the fallout has even taken down the famous football coach, Coach Paterno.  Apparently Penn State had more multiple opportunities to stop Sandusky's alleged child sex abuse.  Joe Paterno reported at least one incidence of child abuse to college officials but did nothing else to ensure the safety of young boys.  While he did nothing legally wrong it is evident that morally he should have done something more to make sure that boys were in a safe environment.  Do you think that he should have been fired?  Keep in mind this happened without an investigation by Penn State and the police investigators found no fault with Joe Paterno. Or do you think that emotions were running high and that Penn State trustees simply gave into public pressure?  In addition, after the child sex abuse scandal came to light Joe Paterno had said that he was planning to retire at the end of season.  I have mixed feelings on this one.  I just don't think that this should tarnish Paterno's entire football career.  I just don't see evidence that he was in fact one of the persons who covered up for the child sex abuse.  But this whole situation is disturbing so maybe the Penn State board made the correct decision in firing both the President of Penn State and Joe Paterno.

Here is the video of a t.v. van being toppled over by Penn State students.

Racial Tensions Lead To Brutal Fights

From HAYWARD (CBS 5) – Police have stepped up patrols at Hayward High School following a string of brawls that may be tied to local gangs, some of the fights were recently caught on cell phone video.

Massive fights broke out last Thursday, and were followed up the next day after class. Video, which was posted on YouTube, suggests tensions between African-American and Latino students, with the possibility of a gang influence involved.

Students who spoke to CBS 5 Thursday said the violence isn’t that surprising at a school where gang colors are worn openly.

Here is the cell phone video of a fight: 

It seems like the school is not doing enough to prevent fights from taking place between African-American and Latino students.  The news report only mentioned that red and blue were prohibited from being worn but didn't say whether those colors are worn by the gangs or not.  The school is certainly not enforcing the dress code. Is this a turf war?  What could be reasons for these two ethnic groups fighting each other? After doing a bit of research I will be posting on possible reasons why gangs form.    

Socialism: Hand in Hand with Mob Violence

Here is an article on Socialism and Mob Violence by Joel McDurmon:

It seems to be little more than casual news these days when riots break out in Athens, Paris, London, or some other socialist haven. Greeks riot over austerity; we huff. Francs mob over retirement age; we chuckle. Most recently, London students riot over the threat of higher tuition; we snore. We snore right through the glass breaking and all.

It just seems commonplace to us, I guess, that Europe is a Continent of adolescent children who throw things and break stuff, writhing in tantrum, when they don’t get their way. And they have a common phrase over there, “Crazy Americans.” We could reciprocate, but choose to ignore.

What no one seems yet to have pointed out in all the recent news reports is the obvious: socialism itself is by definition mob rule. It is the most powerful organized and collected interests in society leveraging government force to sate their lusts. To do so they extract wealth from other members of society, divvy the loot amongst themselves (the pirate image is too mild—it is more like hyenas over a carcass), and stuff their gullets.

Socialism is the political embodiment of plunder. It is the denial of the rule of law, or private property, individual liberty, and therefore of Christianity.

This system of governmental piracy unleashes at least two important aspects: the lusts of the mob, and the police-power of the mob.

The lusts of the mob manifest the depravity of man: rebellion against maturity, responsibility and honesty. The curse of the fall—the thorns and sweat—are, consciously or not, assumed to be overcome not through godly ethics, but through political policy. That is, through man’s legislative fiat, not God’s—man’s law-order, not God’s. By passing a law limiting work hours, price controls, wage rates, etc., the mob proclaims itself free of the need to work, build, plan, save, sacrifice, etc. This is fallen man’s futile proclamation that he is free, and free indeed. It is futile and blind—blind to the fact that this alleged freedom must be imposed by force of government. “Free at gunpoint.”

But someone has to pay the bills. So the rich get soaked; then they quit producing as much as they would in a free market; then general productivity declines; then national living standards decline; then the State prints and borrows to maintain its promises; then the debts start to get called. Someone has to pay those bills. You can’t just legislate them away indefinitely.

Eventually, someone, somewhere, must sacrifice, work hard, and produce. And those unnecessarily receiving an unnecessarily generous dole must take some cuts.

This means “austerity.” But austerity means backlash from the lustfully entitled mob. The conversation goes like this:

“We need cuts.”

“Yes we do.”

“Who will take the cuts?”

“Not me. You take the cut.”

“No, not me. You take the cut.”

CONTINUED