39 thoughts on “Open Forum!

  1. I’ll kick off with this topic: Biden’s “address” to the nation on gun control last night. I refuse to use the term “gun violence” which attempts to place responsibility on inanimate objects rather than holding criminals accountable. It’s all about gun control, emphasis on control. I heard not one new idea or proposal and wondered why he bothered, except of course to satisfy the cries of “Do something!” He repeated the idiotic “No Constitutional amendment is absolute!” line that he seems so fond of (which should send chills down our collective spine) and I was surprised he didn’t say, once again, that “You couldn’t own a cannon.” He seems to be grasping for some big issue on which he can stake out “the right side of history” to save the Democrats in the upcoming elections. I don’t think he’s found it ( nor is he likely to.
    Also, I have also noticed the left-biased coverage of the Uvalde shooting downplaying the role of the bungled police response to the incident, prompting my speculation that they want to keep the Evil Gun front and center and way above any other factor in the tragedy. There has not been nearly the amount of criticism of the police that I expected from the Left.

  2. Ilya Shapiro has been reinstated by Georgetown after 122 days of paid leave over a tweet that was clearly just clumsy wording. Prevailing over the Twitter rage mob is some cause for celebration, but Dan McLaughlin’s take looks right to me — not quite a Pyrrhic victory, but definitely a tainted one.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/ilya-shapiros-reinstatement-is-a-win-for-the-political-power-of-free-speech-but-a-loss-for-the-value-of-academic-freedom/

    • The Dean’s statement is essentially an elaborate grovel. It makes Shapiro’s reinstatement even more surprising. I bet he won’t survive through the summer. Something will be trumped up. I’m guessing some former student/girlfriend will be lured into the spotlight to his ruin. He might as well wear ties with targets on them.

    • Jim Hodgson:

      And that is exactly why we need a Bill of Rights. People with power will almost invariably fail to restrain their use of it. The Bill of Rights makes that violation more readily apparent.

      -Jut

      • They have been trying since the NFA in 1934 to kill the 2nd Amendment by the “death of a thousand cuts.” “First they came for the automatic weapons, but I did nothing because I owned no automatic weapons….” etc. The GCA1968, executive orders restricting the importation of “military looking” weapons, the reimportation of U.S. manufactured weapons like M1911 pistols and M1 Garand rifles and those banning certain types of ammunition imports have all been steps along the way. Now Biden wants to eliminate the most popular defensive rifle, the AR15, and the most popular defensive handgun, the 9mm semi-auto. I predict that if they are ever successful at those efforts, next it will be all semi-auto weapons (even your grandpa’s .22 rimfire) and all telescopic sights. And we can already see that there are weak-kneed RINOs like Sen. Cornyn who are prepared to go along with these types of incremental disarmament schemes.

          • Last I heard, they were still using the .357 SIG, which is the same diameter bullet but higher velocity. I can assume that round would blow a lung into the next county.

            • Not 9mm’s (or “pistols”, in the common sense), but they also use FN P90’s. Thankfully, I don’t think the antis even know those exist, or they’d be having kittens over the fact that civilians own the semi-auto version (PS-90). Of course, the Sec.Serv. are about the only ones who can afford ammo for them on a regular basis ;-)(AMHIK)

              • Oh, the anti-gunners would “be having kittens” over a lot of stuff if they actually knew much about guns. I have a couple of 9mm carbines (no PS-90s) but I find that, for me, pistol-caliber carbines only fit a small tactical niche that doesn’t match my current needs very well, out here in the country. They mainly sit in the safe. Fun to shoot, though.

      • Indeed he did.

        Here is a dirty little secret about our Constitutional rights.

        The street thug and the gangbanger use them to facilitate their crimes.

        They peaceably assemble to plan, plot, and prepare their robberies and drive-by shootings.

        They peacefully bear arms to and from the scenes of robberies and drive-by shootings.

        They use their freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures to conceal evidence that they committed, or are about to commit, a robbery or a drive-by shooting.

        They use their right to a fair trial, their right to an attorney, their right to due process of law, to escape punishment for committing robberies and drive-by shootings.

        They use their freedom from cruel and unusual punishment to avoid the punishment that they deserve for committing a robbery or a drive-by shooting, even if they are judged guilty consistently with their other rights.

        Without the Constitution protecting these rights, the cops can judge street thugs and gangbangers guilty and give them the punishment that they deserve.

        But what would make us think that they will only go after the street thug and the gangbanger?

        What makes us think that they will even go after the street thug and the gangbanger?

      • Yes, I commented on that item, but it seems that WordPress ate my submission. WordPress evidently doesn’t like it when I comment from my phone.

  3. Somewhat related to Ernest’t post above:

    I have thoughts about this, but I need time to write them down (given that this is directly related to my current job).

  4. CA Reparations Report Demands Tree Planting In back Neighborhoods For SHADE EQUITY

    Shade Equity?

    I swear that White Guilt inundated Lefties sit around and think up the stupidest f*****g ideas imaginable, select the stupidest, and proceed to foist it upon their glassy-eyin’ lock-steppin’ unquestionin’ base, which will lap it up like trained seals and embrace it with open arms.

  5. An observation or a question: Whatever happened to all the rape that was going on on every college and university campus a while ago? Have college kids stopped having sex? All the boys are behaving? Or was the whole thing a “Scarlet Letter” styled hysteria? No more articles about how every young woman in America has been raped more than once in her young life by young white guys? What’s going on? Was it just a fad?

    • It did seem like the college boys seemed to realize this was too dangerous and opted out for a while. This upset the girls who were complaining about the fact that they couldn’t find anyone to hook up with. Perhaps this Lysistrata-like sex strike by the men took the flames out of the rape-culture hysteria.

      • “And one more human being is forced into convenient conformity after being punished without fair due process. There is a persuasive and well-written petition on Change.org asking for the use of algorithm-based monitoring systems like Honorlock to cease. It has attracted 545 signatures in two years.”

        Couldn’t find the petition Jack referred to on Change.org but noted during the search at the bottom of the page no less than eight so-called related subjects . . . all of them offering ways for the home-test-taker to cheat the monitoring system under discussion. And all of them, as we know, placed there by the search engine’s opinion-opposing algorithm, the algorithm adjusted to what will attract more readers, thus more meaningless “likes” numbers.. Okay, this is nothing new, but it is an egregious flaw in all online searching methods, even the better ones. You can’t declare an algorithm unethical in itself – it’s only numbers. The only answer I can think of is to rein in my idle curiosity and go find another volunteer job.

        • Computer algorithms are not just numbers, they are also logic. That logic is written by humans. Some humans who write algorithms are unethical, and can certainly write unethical pieces of computer logic. Algorithms in general cannot be inherently classified as unethical, but individual algorithms can certainly be unethical.

  6. Here’s an interesting story out of California:
    https://thehill.com/news/3511064-california-court-says-some-bees-are-fish/
    A California appellate court has ruled that bumblebees fall under the definition of fish, according to the 2015 revision of the California Endangered Species Act. Specifically, it defines fish as “a wild fish, mollusk, crustacean, invertebrate, amphibian or part, spawn, or ovum of any of those animals”. Since bees are invertebrates, and the law doesn’t specify waterborne invertebrates, bees fall under the protection of the law. This decision overturns a lower court ruling that found that bees do not fall under the purview of the California Endangered Species Act.

      • My problem with this is that the writer (assuming this is real) claims that they wouldn’t stop an active shooter *even if* they were capable and had the opportunity. So, the writer seems to suggest that even if they happened to be armed, were trained, and had a clear shot, they still wouldn’t stop the active shooter because it’s “not my job.”

        There’s also an attitude underlying all of the “letter” that displays a very detached attitude when teachers (especially of young children) need to play a protective role, not just in an active shooter incident, but in every way. Children have to be protected by competent adults.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.