Yatta, yatta, yatta.
One of my favorite bloggers, wirecutter, gives us his take on the Supreme Court failing to follow through with their own decisions.
This week the Supreme Court passed up an opportunity to get the government out of the bedroom. Counterintuitively, the case involved an ordinance adopted by the famously tolerant and progressive city of San Francisco just eight years ago.
The puzzle is solved when you learn that the ordinance deals with guns, tools for exercising a constitutional right that is decidedly unfashionable in the City by the Bay. By declining to hear the case, the Supreme Court, which in 2010 affirmed that the Second Amendment binds states and cities as well as the federal government, undermines that principle, suggesting that the right of armed self-defense is constrained by local sensibilities.
San Francisco’s ordinance, enacted in 2007, requires that handguns kept at home be “stored in a locked container or disabled with a trigger lock” except when they are being carried. As the six residents challenging the ordinance pointed out in their petition asking the Supreme Court to consider the case, that requirement means “law-abiding individuals must render their handguns inoperable or inaccessible precisely when they are needed most, whenever they are not physically carrying them on their persons—including when they are asleep in the dark of night.”
My solution? A.C.E. ALWAYS CARRY EVERYWHERE
And let the constabulary try to figure out how they are going to determine the gun in your hand whose muzzle (flash) they are seeing when they breach your door wasn’t worn by you to bed!
And vote those anti-rights bastards out at the soonest possibility!
And change the stupid law.
My good friend Old NFO recently posted about playing board games (as opposed to playing electronic, I suppose?)
Of mention was the at one time ubiquitous Trivial Pursuit™.
And this tweaked a memory of mine.
(BTW – I’m not a big game player. Was never that skilled at chess, and sports are a loss for me, most of you regular readers know. Perhaps I’ve just not found the right game…?)
Sometime back in the 80s, Trivial Pursuit appeared on the scene. Being married at the time, the wife commanded we join with other couples to socialize. And play games. Sigh.
And Trivial Pursuit was the name of the game. (Better than Uno, that’s for certain!)
(I’ve made this statement before) My mind is a veritable cornucopia of useless crap! Translation – I know a lot of trivia!)
If memory serves me, we played twice, and we won twice! Then the other couples stopped playing with us for some reason(?) :-)
My Achilles heel was always the sports questions, unless there was some kind of historical import – then I knew it.
Fast-forward to working at TMCCC. Once of my coworkers for a while was a hipster. Calf length pant-shorts (somehow allowed in the dress code), tattoos on arms and legs. Visible piercings and ear gauges.
And a nice enough guy. Just not the sharpest spoon in the drawer. I think he was high during most of high school.
During some forgettable 4 month period, management created ‘games’ for us to play in our ‘teams’. To create cohesiveness amongst us. Even though we still we pitted against each other in the real world!
And one of these games was a daily trivia question from – you guessed it, someone’s defunct Trivial Pursuit set.
And I got a sports question:
Whom (I think it said who) did the Boston Red Sox (jokingly) offer to trade for Mickey Mantle in the 1950’s?
Of course, this was also historical, so I knew the answer – Ted Williams!
And tattoo boy was beside himself! HOW could you possibly know such a thing? You’re not a sports guy!
I don’t remember what menial award I received for getting the answer correct. Befuddling the hipster was the best reward.
Liberal journalist or asshat?
You probably already knew that, but he provides further proof.
Geraldo mocked Vaughn’s contention that the Founding Fathers hedged in the right to bear arms so we could resist tyranny not only outside our borders, but also within.
Yeah, all those things the founders of this country, and the citizens, said: they mean nothing. Right.
Geraldo later denied that guns are used by law-abiding citizens to stop crimes. He asked fellow host Eric Bolling, “When was the last time you heard of a civilian stopping a crime with a gun?” And when Bolling said, “It happens thousands of times per day,” Geraldo responded by saying, “That’s a legend. You’re watching too much True Detective.”
A friggin’ idiot to whom facts mean nothing when they conflict with what he wants to be true.
I go back and forth with regard to Mr. Rivera. There’s the story he graduated law school as Jerry Rivers, then decided to access his Latino heritage to find work. His landmark broadcast of the Zapruder film on national television was indeed!
And the less-than-landmark opening of Al Capone’s vault…
But the above is simply not even journalism or debate.
Some time back, I wrote regarding the cat, and her predilection to walk, stand and suddenly change direction in front of a cripple (THIS cripple) whilst I trying to descend the staircase. Or walk anywhere. I came to the conclusion that she was trying to murder me, and, that if I were found at the bottom of the stairs, she should be considered a feline of interest!
Of course, as she has gotten older (and larger – resembling an 18″ long beanbag) these attempts have lessened.
Lulling me into a false sense of security, as though I’d been forgotten.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Enter into this equation the puppy dog. Now just over a year old, a wiggly, wriggly, jumpy, licky, all manner of puppy.
False sense, I’m tellin’ ya!
The other day, in a surprise search of her kennel, THIS was discovered:
(For the uninitiated) a shiv! A makeshift knife, manufactured through gnawing on a piece of disposed-of plastic cutlery.
Of course, she denies any complicity in the making of this implement, and continues to be all licky. As if she and the cat aren’t in this together! (She LOVES the cat!)
SO, if I’m found at the bottom of the stairs with such an implement imbedded in me, you know whom to question – both the cat AND the puppy!
I’M WATCHING YOU!
(Seriously, pets are the greatest! Just ask Brigid.)
Rep. Linda Sanchez (CA-D) “And The Vietnamese Do Turn Out And Vote” called for drug testing Americans who inherit substantial legacies from their parents. In speaking at a committee hearing on March 18, the California Democrat said that Americans who receive government subsidies such as food stamps already submit to drug tests and thus reasoned that the “lucky” inheritors of wealth should do likewise. “What work requirements are there to inherit up to $10 million tax free?” she asked a witness. “Why is that [a single mother] should be drug tested, which is an unrelated requirement to receive food assistance, to make sure that her family has enough to eat,” asked Sanchez. “And people who are lucky enough to inherit millions of dollars are literally required to do nothing to get the federal tax benefit with their inheritance?”
More @ Spero News
Yeah, those 1% folks, yatta, yatta, yatta…
I wonder if millionairess Senator Nancy Pelosi will submit to a blood test? Or Secretary of State Heinz Ketchup? (Or is that Catsup?)
If the argument were people who make millions from the government coffers (e.g. corporate welfare) I might agree with Rep. Sanchez. Good for the goose, and all that.
But private monies within inheritances? Does she think the government owns that money?
h/t Brock Townsend
I can’t find a single study from Bloomberg’s groups that aren’t loaded with errors. They have an anti-gun agenda and will lie to achieve it. – John R. Lott, Jr.
How Bloomberg’s Million-Dollar Desire For Gun Control Is Backfiring
[While I think there is a fair amount of lying going on they don’t think of it as lying. They just don’t understand facts are independent of their feelings. If they feel something then, in their view of reality, it is true. I’ve had people flat out tell me this. I would point out that what someone was saying was in direct contradiction to verifiable facts. And I would get a response of something to the effect, “Well, it’s true to them and that is what matters.”
There is also a very telling anecdote about liberal “research” in this same article:
In 2006 I was at a cocktail party in Arlington, VA, talking to a liberal journalist about his soon-to-be-released book on Iraq when John Lott joined us. John listened for a moment and then said to the author, “I’m curious. You say you just finished a book on the Iraq war. I always find it so hard to finish a book. I get so deep into the research I have a hard time stopping to write. I’m guessing you had a hard time leaving Iraq. There is so much to investigate and understand.”
The author said, “I didn’t go to Iraq.”
John paused with this quizzical look on his face before asking, “Oh, how did you do your research?”
The author said, “I didn’t have to do much. I mean, I already know what I think.”
Feelings versus facts. It’s a type of mental disorder.—Joe]
There’s a thesis in popular conservative/libertarian culture that liberals (or at least the current flavor of liberal, the progressive) act(s) based on feelings more than facts, even if the facts deny their feelings. “Oh, those cute polar bears are dying in records numbers, due to global warming!” – even though recent data shows their populations have increased and so have the square footage of ice on which they live. Not to mention they are extremely dangerous to humans, cuteness aside. “If it just saves ONE life.” or “It’s for the children.”, facts aside are other feeling-based statements.
I cannot speak for all conservative libertarians, but, I have on occasion questioned my use and ownership of firearms, looking at how doing so affects my community, my family and myself. And I stuck to my principles. And didn’t buckle to ‘feelings’ about some whack-job shooting up a school by disarming myself.
I did the same process after the accident that killed my daughter. However, I ultimately didn’t give up my driver’s license, my vehicle, or insist others do the same “for the children”.
I see that as counterproductive, and unscientific.
h/t The View From North Central Idaho, John Lott
At NRO, Frank Miniter examines what the billionaires contributing to gun control groups hope to accomplish, and the playbook they’re using:
In a section labeled “Overall Messaging Guidance,” the guide gives its number-one “Key Messaging Principle”: “Always focus on emotional and value-driven arguments about gun violence, not the political food fight in Washington or wonky statistics.” It further explains this strategy by saying, “It’s critical that you ground your messaging around gun violence in prevention by making that emotional connection.” Its second key principle is: “Tell stories with images and feelings.” The guide says, “Our first task is to draw a vivid portrait and make an emotional connection. We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence.” They realize they’ve lost the rational and empirical debates about what really stops gun violence and instead want the debate enflamed by emotion.
That’s ever the way, of course; you can’t win the argument with rational facts, so legislate by emotions.
Isn’t this the tack they take with virtually EVERYTHING? After all, it’s for the children!
(an addendum to the post below…)
PHOENIX — Three months before a new state law goes into effect requiring police to sell any weapon they receive, Phoenix officials plan to destroy as many guns as residents bring them.
Those efforts begin Saturday with a gun buyback at three churches in the city, and two more events are scheduled later this month.
After that, gun buybacks coordinated with Phoenix police will likely cease.
(The Arizona Republic)
Sounds like previous post commenters had a good idea – offer the City some healthy competition across the street!
♫…and like a
good neighbor OWS is there!♫
Taken yesterday (Wednesday, May 1) in Manhattan’s Union Square, note the signs praising North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung.
Oh! It was MAY DAY. Celebrate the millions killed by communism! I forgot…
Vladimir was correct – “useful idiots”…
h/t/ Weasel Zippers, NRO
I wasn’t even going to make a passing comment on today, the so-called Earth Day. I remember in high school (in 1970) when a bunch of like-minded college folk decided to create a holiday to support recycling, and not fouling the environment. One of my pals (another David – David Mitchell, where are you?) even put a bumper sticker on his 1966 Chevy Nova which read “Ecology NOW!”
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not for intentionally fouling the Earth’s water, air or resources. And I do believe we are stewards of the planet. But, when our friend the government gets involved, buoyed by persons with an agenda, we have political forces far beyond a few Earth-friendly hippies trying to get us to think about waste and pollution. Think Nixon’s EPA…
We end up with green fascism. Tried to purchase a 100-watt incandescent light bulb lately? Or throw out one of the new, squiggly ones-made poorly in China? With mercury? Or seen photos of Al Gore’s energy gobbling/carbon spewing house in California?
Do as I say, not as I do come to mind?
The Silicon Graybeard shares his opinion with us of the farce that is Earth Day.
As for me, I’m having a bumper sticker made: