A Happy Ending to a Vandal Story

For those of you curious about the ongoing situation at Northern Kentucky University, where, as is typical with Lefties, craven vandals have been attempting to trample both the truth and the freedom of speech of the students, we have an update that the cowards have been caught:

(Names replaced to avoid any breaches of confidentiality.) It was fairly cold out around 1 AM Friday Morning. A few hours ago I had been at a Latin Holy Thursday Mass with some friends, muddling through a wonderful Sacrament that I knew well in a language that I did not. My friend Perry and I were sitting on the inside of the giant metal modern art sculpture, hiding far back in the cleft facing the NKU University Center, keeping to the shadows and keeping quiet. Last night had been easier, as me and my two other friends, Jackson and Mark, had been blessed with more shadow to hide in. The nearly full moon had been covered by clouds then. It had also been warmer and the wind had not bitten half so harshly. Earlier Perry, Jessa, Sally and I had been hiding among roughly broken rocks underneath the UC/BEP walkway. It is entirely reasonable to ask why on earth we were hiding out like this, and why myself and other compatriots had been hiding out the previous night.

The answer is simple. We were hiding near the Northern Kentucky University Right to Life Onesie Display, to protect it from vandals. You see, a simple sign with a properly researched and cited fact on it, coupled with a few clotheslines that had baby clothes hung on them, is apparently enough to warrant the destruction of property under the cover of darkness. Did I mention that the display was approved by the University, or else it would have never been put up in the first place? Or that once used, the baby clothes, of which every fourth article had a red X in tape that was easily removable, were to be donated to babies in sore need of help? Yet, of course, because our stance is not the most popular, on Monday and Tuesday night our display was torn down, with all the onesies picked from their clothespins like charries and dropped to the dirt. We do not know what time this happened on Monday, but, Tuesday, we know it happened before 1AM, as Perry, Jackson, and I, along with several of our friends, had gone to check on it and found the onesies taken down again. We also know the deed was done after 11 PM, thanks to a passerby who remarked that she had been out smoking around then, and the display had been just fine at that time.

Being very tired of this sort of guerilla trampling of our Right to Free Speech, we called the Campus Police, and various measures were taken to ensure that if it happened again, the perpetrators would be identified and caught. However, we decided that we would do what we could ourselves, after making sure our methods were legal by checking with the proper Authorities. You see, this is not the first year this sort of thing has happened. When our club was founded, one of NKU’s Professors took her class outside to tear up the crosses in our Cemetery of Innocents. She was let go and soundly chastized Each cross represents a varying number of children slain daily by abortion in the USA, depending on the space available. Year after year, semester after semester, despite constant recriminations and condemnations from the University, displays have been damaged, and flyers torn down. With the flyers at least, some of our members have caught those responsible in the act. They were almost always unrepentant and hostile.

To that end, on Wednesday and Thursday night, several of us stayed out of sight and in the cold, watching our display to make sure that this would not happen again and that the vandals would be caught. We were lucky Wednesday, nothing eventful occurred. It originally seemed to Perry and I that the same would hold true for Thursday, and up until around one we waited, wedged in a cramped, freezing, steel hideout, whispering back and forth to pass the time. Then, he motioned for me to be silent. He had heard the distinct snip of scissors when I had not. I saw one of the clothelines jerk, and it half fell. I was calling the police that instant, and Perry was readying his camera. I saw a short man steal up and cut down the remaining rope. Then, I was busy trying to whisper into the Police Operator’s ear. My voice came out so hushed and garbled that they originally thought I was telling them that someone had pulled a gun. While I was sorting that out, Perry stepped from our hiding place and began snapping pictures. He saw four men rushing to stuff the clotheslines and baby clothes into the trash cans outside of the Art Building. By the time I stepped out, after I was sure I had gotten the situation through to the Operator, I saw them running hard and fast towards the Natural Science Center. Perry was already in hot pursuit. I followed, but being slower and fatter and more out of shape than my speedy friend, remained far behind. I was roaring into the phone by that point, having figured that any noise could only help our cause. My own voice and heavy breathing, combined with my pounding footsteps, drowned out Perry’s yelling. Afterwards, he explained that in the rush, what he had meant to say got mixed up in his head, and he had bellowed “RUN, YOU COWAAARDS!!!!” instead. I sincerely wish I could have heard that.

A few moments later, both he and the fleeing vandals had vanished around the front end of the Science Center, and I was beginning to catch up, having finally found strength in my tightly-cramped legs. I kept talking to the Operator, and realized that it was very likely my good friend was alone with four criminals who had at least one cutting blade between them. I had no knowledge of whether they carried scissors or buck knives, and so when I caught sight of one of them doubling back, possibly to see if I was still on the chase, I was ready to charge in, fighting like a madman, in the event that they had turned back upon him. Praise God that such Evil did not take place. When I rounded the corner, I could not find the man I had seen before, and saw two of them standing by Perry and a squad car with its lights flashing in the parking lot behind the Norse Commons Cafeteria. Still relating everything to the Operator, as best as I could between breaths, I stopped running and shakily walked up to the Officer who was now questioning the two that had been stopped. The Operator left me in his capable hands. Officer Serious demanded that they call their fellows, and the man I had seen by the Science Center did not abandon them and reappeared in a few minutes. Their fourth man, I found out from Perry, had ducked into a building somewhere along the way, and could not be reached.

While they were standing there, I asked Officer Serious if I might say some polite words to them. He allowed it, and I asked them why they had done this, when none of us had ever torn down any Pro-Choice Display. Their response was unified, instantaneous, and loud. The three began leaning forward, angry and belligerent, speaking about how horribly offensive and vile our simple baby clothes had been. One barked that the information of the sign had been a lie, that the phrase “1 out of 4 babies die from Abortion” was untruthful. I explained that the Guttmacher Institute, which was where we had gotten that fact, was founded by a man who had once been the President of Planned Parenthood. I was shouted down and told that Mr. Alan Frank Guttmacher, an obstetrician and gynecologist as well as a member of the Association for Voluntary Sterilization, had no idea what it was like to be a woman. As if womanhood had anything to do with the ability to report valid medical statistics. Perry coolly remarked, “Yes, and it seems that the three of you have so much experience with knowing what it’s like to be a woman.” During these few sentences, which had originally begun as an innocent request for an explanation, they had moved forward several steps, and Officer Serious found in necessary to step in front of me and tell them to shut it because there would be no debating here. To be frank…I am six foot three, two-hundred and twenty pounds. The biggest one of them was probably two-thirds my size, at the greatest. One of them could not have been more than ninety pounds. If you are willing to be that aggressive to a man that much larger than you, WITH an Officer of the Law present, to the point where he has to literally move in front of you to block your path, and YOU are the one who has committed the crime, you might want to seriously reconsider your position.

They were already trying to downplay what they had just done, and had begun apologizing like children caught with their hands in the candy jar. I was more than somewhat amused when they declared that “surely, we can work something out, come to some sort of resolution”, considering what had happened minutes before. Perry and I accepted their apologies personally, but I warned them that I was not the President of NRTL, and that if my Club Officers asked my opinion of the situation, I would advise them to do whatever the University Code and the Law required, without any thought for pleas for leniency. Given the history of actions like these, a strong and clear example needed to be made that this sort of behavior was intolerable. Their faces darkened then, but they remained silent, probably because they had learned overt aggression would not be looked kindly on by the Lawman present. I gave them a brief lesson on all that had taken place before that night, starting with the first destruction of our displays and going all the way to the present moment. Now, by their own admission, they were not the ones who had taken down the onesies earlier in the week. It does bother me that the vandals were not contained in one isolated group, but, we at least caught somebody. During this, two other Officers, Jogger and Comedian, pulled up and took over the parking lot situation, while Officer Serious took Perry back up to the display. Officer Comedian took over further questioing, from which we all learned several things. It turns out that they had planned to do this earlier in the day during classes, and that all three were Theater Majors at NKU. They also had been drinking beforehand, even though one of them was only 18. The other two were 21. It turned out later that the 18-year-old tried to tell my NRTL President that he was actually Pro-life and that he had been a lookout. His behavior towards me on this night proves that statement an outright lie. I saw no disapproving look in his eyes when the three of them began shouting at me in unison. They had used scissors, thankfully, so my fears of having to face knives had been unnecessary, though not entirely unfounded. They repeatedly gave their reason for vandalism as the terrible offensive nature of our display. Officer Comedian, who has my undying applause for his handling of the situation, detained them, made them wait on their knees in the cold, and then took them off under arrest to jail. While he was doing this, he kept up an impressive stream of humorous and educational banter. When the underage man remarked that he had relatives in the military, he asked him how those relatives would feel when he told them that he had violated the very Constitutional Rights they had been fighting for. His weak response was a mumbled ‘Dissapointed”. He also managed to sum up the stupidity of what those three had done by explaining that if he saw a sign declaring “Kill the police!” in someone’s yard, he did not have the right to go tear it down, break their windows, raid their fridge, and eat their food in their easy chair.

One of the vandals complained that the pavement was really hurting his knees. I remarked that the large chunks of rock and cold wind under the walkway by the University Center had hurt while we were waiting for them earlier. They responded that that took dedication. “Well, we’re tired of you tearing our sh*t down.” I said.

In summation, all three planned this ahead of time, got themselves a little drunk, and came up to campus to cut this display down and throw it in the trash. They seemed unphased when I explained that the clothes were to be donated to needy children. All of their behavior was admitted to Campus Police Officers, who promptly processed them, including the fourth man, who turned himself in later that night. In addition to various alcohol related charges, they have been charged with Criminal Mischief. The University, while unable to tell us what punishment they would receive due to coonfidentiality rules, made it clear that they would handle the situation, and I have full confidence in their ability to do so.



  1. Comment by JoeCool:

    Eh, I’ll call it an acceptable ending. Justice was served, at least.

    A happy ending would have been if the perpetrators repented of their sins and went to confession, or went to get baptized if they were not already Christian.

    And as long as I’m dreaming, I’d like a pony.

    • Comment by Boggy Man:

      That would be at least 20% cooler no doubt.

    • Comment by John C Wright:

      It may not even be an acceptable ending, since we don’t know if the perpetrators will actually be punished or learn better. I wrote the headline, not Mr Hall, who ran down the villains.

    • Comment by Stephen J.:

      I have to admit that happy as I am that those three were caught and stopped, it’s their state of mind that tempts me almost overwhelmingly to despair. Because they believe they’re right.

      It’s easy and plausible to speculate that maybe their fierceness is the product of unadmitted doubt, or deep-down guilt; that may even be true. But it need not be. They may simply be so sentimentally convinced of their righteousness that they genuinely see nothing wrong with their actions.

      Evil that knows it’s evil, either admitting it or putting effort into lying about it, I can accept; evil that simply doesn’t care about good or evil, in itself or others, I can also accept. Evil that truly and honestly thinks it’s good, or that what is evil when done by others is good when done by itself because it is itself which does it… that always frightens and depresses me, to realize that certainty of conviction is not necessarily a marker for truth.

      • Comment by John C Wright:

        It is Leftwingy thing: the glorification violence and lawlessness in the name of whatever the fashionable revolutionary cause is this season.

        Leftism is like Gnosticism. It is the stance that says “because God is the devil and the devil is God therefore one is immune to moral rules in the name of a higher morality”

        This so called higher morality which always turns out to be an inversion of normal morality, praising things normal men abhor, such as baby-killing or sodomy or the genocides of communism.

      • Comment by Mary:

        Unchastity gives rise to blindness of spirit, as Thomas Aquinas put it.

    • Comment by lampwright:

      Do you have a place ready for your pony? Just in case?

    • Comment by Mary:

      Why stop there? I’d like a dragon. A nice one.

  2. Comment by Boggy Man:

    I suppose expulsion is too much to hope for, though well deserved.

  3. Comment by Patrick:

    What a goofy and awesome caper. Go you! Congrats to you and your friend on stopping some bad-guys!

  4. Comment by The Dragon of Mordecai:

    Oh wow…this became a conflagration of words rapidly.

    So it turns out that dillweeds don’t need new excuses. They’re still claiming tearing the display down was free speech…Which Sally Jacobs did all the way back in 2006.


  5. Comment by Tom Simon:

    To your PS: I think that ‘no, u’ is an acceptable response here. If the thing that you were responding to was not, in fact, intended as a grossly insulting remark, then it is slander, is it not?

    No, it does not fit any part of the definition of slander. I quote OED: ‘the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person’s reputation’. It was not a spoken remark. It was not false — you have, in fact, been behaving in a manner that fits the etymologically secondary dictionary definition of the term ‘jackass’. You have no possible case for saying that it damaged your reputation, since I made it directly to you and in direct response to a written remark of yours, and anybody can judge from the evidence whether it was deserved.

    I did, I concede, make a statement. If you leave out ‘false’, and ‘spoken’, and ‘damaging to a person’s reputation’, then what I said to you was slander; and so is every other remark that has ever been made using the human faculty of language.

    By the way, whether or not you intended your remark to be grossly insulting, I was grossly insulted. The very least you should take away from this is that you need to be more careful in your use of inflammatory language; if you are doing so in order to lampoon a position to which you are opposed, you had better be sure that you do so very explicitly. Instead, you seem to be taking away the idea that you are in some way the aggrieved party.

    The fact, by the way, that you now wish you had called me ‘lebensunwertes Leben is simply rich. First, because you did in fact call me that, and have ever since been trying to wriggle out of owning your own words; second, because you have been trying to present yourself (and your murderous political philosophy) as occupying the moral high ground, and a blatant statement of personal hatred goes so very well with that, don’t you think? Here’s a hint for you: Pose on the moral high ground, OR publicly wish your opponents dead; you can’t have both.

  6. Comment by Patrick:

    “But it is futile, impossible, which she shares with the homosexual couple.”


  7. Comment by Andrew Brew:

    Branabus, if you are going to continue to post here (and I hope you will) you are going to have to make some changes.

    Others have noted that you do not argue – you just repeat slogans. That may pass, where you come from, for dialectic, but it does not pass here. In particular, it is common for you to reply “No, you!”. Unless you want us to think that you really are six years old (and plan to stay that way for ever and ever) I urge you to drop that tactic.

    There was talk above of excluding you, and you interpreted a call for you to educate yourself as a requirement to become right-wing in order to be accepted. Outside of Marxist circles, that (being trained to accept a desired ideology) is not what education means. In means gaining both knowledge and the ability to make meaningful connections between the things that you know. You can then construct arguments that others may find persuasive, instructive, or amusing.

    In any case, you do not have to look far here to find left-wingers who are honoured guests on this blog, or who vigorously disagree with our host in other ways. Pretending that conformity is required to post here is either a cheap rhetorical trick or willful blindness.

    The main point I want to make is concerning terminology. Much of what you post here amounts to the equations:
    Left-wing = Communism (as defined by you, although without actually sharing your private definition) = Good
    Right-wing = Everything else = Bad

    Good and bad we can discuss, as long as we have the same referents. The way you are currently using the terms “left-wing” and “right-wing”is, as has been pointed out, Stalin’s usage. It is not a useful application of the terms, since it is intended specifically to obscure the truth – to create in the speaker’s and in the listener’s mind false distinctions and false equations. If you want to communicate actual ideas you need to adopt a more traditional set of meanings. I suggest something like the following:

    Left-wing: Governing authority is derived from adherance to a utopian theory, previously untested against reality.

    Right-wing (European): Governing authority is derived from traditional sources confirmed by experience and received wisdom: from God, administered through legitimate kings and priests whose powers balance each other.

    Right-wing (American): Governing authority is derived from traditional sources confirmed by experience and received wisdom: from God, confirmed by the will of the governed and administered by various branches of government whose powers balance each other.

    Leave a Reply