I Long For Vigilante Justice

I am a huge proponent of about two percent vigilante justice. It's unfortunate that this can't actually be implemented into society as we know it because who is going to decide which two percent of things will qualify and be justified to be handled by a vigilante mob and/or individual? Personally, I think that I'd do a pretty good job at it. How about if I take a test run and you let me know how I did? OK, then. Let's see...scanning....looking....reading....oh. Wait. What's this? Ahhh. I think I have a winner! From the Sydney Morning Herald, we have "A former top South African rugby player has allegedly hacked three people to death in a revenge attack after his daughter was reportedly gang-raped and infected with HIV." Uh-huh. And?

Now, provided that the axe-wielding gentleman in question has the right people, I am perfectly OK with those actions. I would have no trouble what so ever with returning that man to live out the rest of his life amongst society. I wouldn't even care if he wanted to move in next door to me. Hell, I'd invite him to move into the neighborhood. That's someone you don't want to mess with. Screw an alarm system when your neighbor will go after evil-doers with an axe.

According to the article, the guy was thorough. "The three people were reportedly butchered with an axe last week. One person was decapitated and the head found in a dustbin nearly two kilometres away." See? He's not such a bad guy. He put the (alleged) rapist's severed dome in a garbage can so as not to deface a public venue. I'm against littering. And I'm still on this guy's side.

The guy was arrested and according to a one Lieutenant Colonel Vincent Mdunge (you can pronounce that however you'd like), "He is currently being detained in one of our police stations. We can't disclose where for security reasons." Hmm. Security reasons. As in...if people knew where this guy was there would be a non-stop parade for him in front of said police station? As in...if people knew where this guy was they would start committing their own crimes in the hopes that they'd be arrested and thrown in a cell with him so that they could shake his hand in person? I'm unclear as to the "security reasons" that they can't disclose the police station. Not that it matters to me. I, personally, don't care where he is being held. I just find it odd that they don't want to tell us.

But in my world, this guy wouldn't be in jail at all. I see absolutely nothing wrong with killing the people who raped your fourteen year old daughter and infected her with HIV. That falls directly within my two percent of vigilante justice guidelines. And if the guy were to be released today, I'd gladly contribute to a fund to buy him a new axe. What?! I'm sure he probably needs one. When you use the same axe to hack three rapists to death, I'm pretty sure that you're going to be in the market for a replacement. The old axe he can hang on his wall. Or outside of his home as a reminder to people what happens in the Two Percent Vigilante Justice World of my dreams.

Wash Your Willie!

We don't hear a lot about how all of that stimulus money is being spent, do we? We don't even hear whether it worked or not. Some folks say it did, some folks say it didn't. Since I guess that opinion depends on how your current situation is, it's really hard to say. But if I had to guess, I would say that the stimulus money hasn't done all that it could have done because it has been spent on dumbass things that have absolutely nothing to do with stimulating the economy over here. Hmm. Perhaps 'dumbass' is a bit harsh. I don't know. You tell me. Is it 'dumbass' to spend almost a million dollars "...on a study by a UCLA research team to teach uncircumcised African men how to wash their genitals after having sex." Wait. What was the question?

The question was just what you read that it was. According to something called CNS News, "The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), spent $823,200 of economic stimulus funds in 2009" on just such a study. The care and feeding of one's grundle in Africa. Paid for with stimulus funds that were paid for by your tax dollars. Why is this an important study? Well, from what I can tell, it's not. It's not even close to being an important study. It's certainly far from being worth almost a million bucks of dough that was supposed to be injected into the American economy, that is pretty clear to me.

But I could be wrong. Let's go over some specifics. First of all, this is a multi-tiered study and it's only the penis washing part that received stimulus money. (There's a sentence I never thought I'd type.) Second, they decided upon the genitalia cleansing goal because they "...have been unsuccessful in convincing most adult African men to undergo circumcision" so they're going to attempt "...to determine whether researchers can develop an after-sex genitalia-washing regimen that they can then convince uncircumcised African men to follow."

Now, one of the first things that I thought (that was printable) when I heard this was, "Why does anyone give a fat rat's ass whether or not African men can keep their unit clean after all of the sex?" That question is a little hard to answer, as it wasn't made real clear (shocking, I know). The closest that I could find to an answer was in the part of this grant that said: "If we find that men are able to practice consistent washing practices after sex, we will plan to test whether this might protect men from becoming HIV infected in a later study." Wait. What?

Um, don't we know how HIV is spread? Does bathing one's grundle prevent HIV? I'm not so sure that it does. I'm pretty sure that it won't. It sounds kind of like a fairly simple solution to not get HIV. Just wash off the ol' unit after the inadvisable coitus that you just engaged in and go about your way! That's not what we've been taught. Is it? I don't think that it is. But maybe they know something I don't. I, personally, don't own a penis, so I don't know how this might possibly translate into the real world. Do you have a penis? Do you wash it? Do you have HIV? I guess if you answered yes to the first two questions and no to the third, then I can deduce that the practice does work? Good Lord, I hope that's not the conclusion that I come to.

You know what part of this makes me think that this is just a complete waste of time? All of it, that is correct. But do you want to know specifically which part? It's where they explain "If most of the men in the study wash their genitals after sex, are willing to do so after the study ends, and report that their partners accept the regimen, the researchers will develop another study to see if the “penile cleansing procedure” actually works to prevent HIV infections." These are the kind of folks who just do not see the benefit in washing the wang after doing the ol' horizontal watusi. These are the kind of folks whose partners might be unaccepting of a dried-off dingus. What possible benefit were they offering these folks to participate in this study?

What is the water situation over there, anyway? I'm guessing that indoor plumbing is out for most of the folks that would be involved in this sort of practice, yes? How feasible is this anyway? I'm guessing not very. How feasible is it that the stimulus money that was spent on penis polishing practices did not stimulate the US economy? Again, I'm guessing not very. And how feasible is it that this could be justified by the weasel that got the money for this study? Judging from the fact that he did not answer the question (posed by CNS News), "The Census Bureau says the median household income in the United States is $52,000. How would you explain to the average American mom and dad -- who make $52,000 per year -- that taxing them to pay for this grant was justified?” I'm going to stick with my answer of 'not very'.

Too bad they couldn't have used this money to teach some of the People of Wal-Mart how to wash themselves. Or, at the very least, dress themselves. Now that would have been justifiable!