More than the usual number of major or potentially major ethics tales swirling around that Ethics Alarms hasn’t gotten around to (yet), and having been chastised yesterday by a veteran commenter for “all this e-ink on Bud Light” (marketing is one of my many past and present occupations and special interests, so bite me), I am even more interested than usual in what issues the commentariat wants to discuss.
I think my favorite news item that I’m not going to write about is the Mississippi state Senator who says it’s time to revive the old Confederate-themed state flag. I’ll just mention that by pure coincidence, Grace and I re-watched “Mississippi Burning” last night.
I wonder if that senator has seen it?
(And no, I will not be seeing an 80-year-old Harrison Form reprise Indiana Jones. I care about the integrity of the character even if he and Disney don’t.)
Ethics Alarms 
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nhl/nhl-bans-pride-jerseys-even-during-warmups-pride-nights-will-continue/ar-AA1cUBZy?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=5bf24c2286044f5d91ac75effb65b375&ei=28
Looks like the whole Pride in major league sports has come full circle. They say first something becomes tolerated, then it becomes celebrated, then it becomes mandatory – I guess the last step is then it becomes forbidden again. The idea that any cause is so important that participation is compulsory is just not a good one.
We should add a step in there…after mandatory, it sometimes takes a step back when people don’t like and is put away until people are more accepting of it.
I don’t think I have seen this covered here yet:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna90255
-Jut
Ina word, “unfuckingbelievable.” Or maybe “brazen.” Makes me wonder why we file a tax return, never mind pay the amount due.
Professor Turley does an excellent job tying up the entire walking talking trainwreck that is Hunter Biden and the Biden family in a single column.
Ooops: https://jonathanturley.org/2023/06/23/hunter-is-resolved-washington-celebrates-the-end-to-the-biden-corruption-scandal/
The US is a corrupt, lawless, failed state. You pay your taxes because if you don’t the government will burn down your house and your business, lock you in jail, and throw your family out into the streets to starve to death. They are like the local gang bangers running a protection racket, only with far less concern for the people they are shaking down and a lot more fire power.
Tell that to the Virginia mom whose six year old shot his teacher after getting hold of her gun. She was charged with the exact same firearm charge as Hunter by the Feds because she had a history of using marijuana. No diversion for you says Garland
Regardless of what their official announcement states, we don’t truly know what the motivation was for their policy decision. I would be willing to place a small wager that it was prompted by the devastating Bud Light fiasco. As deepthroat suggested. Follow the money.
I was told we were supposed to follow the Science®™ and trust the Experts®™.
https://reason.com/2023/06/22/maryland-supreme-court-limits-testimony-on-bullet-matching-evidence/
Excellent. Bullet matching, much like fingerprinting, isn’t so much ‘science’ as it is ‘The Science’. People just decided that it was unlikely 2 things would have this same pattern. OK, that seems reasonable. Then they said “I’ll bet we can determine if these two complex patterns are the same”. Hold on there, partner. This last part always seems to go off the rails.
Let’s look at fingerprinting. Yes, if you have 2 substantially intact, undistorted fingerprints, I believe you can reasonably say if they are the same pattern or not. I would like to see some other connection in the crime, but sure, why not use that. However, the slippery slope arguments always creep in. “We only have this really bad partial print that has been distorted, I’ll bet with software I can undistort it and fill it in so it matches the suspect I want to convict” becomes the norm all too soon. Ridgeline are moved up or down, points are discarded as being probably dirt, points are added because they probably just didn’t make a mark. None of this needs to be documented or disclosed to the court when stating that fingerprints match.
With firearms, it is even worse. Many of these are mass-produced with methods that produce nearly identical barrels. Now, wear over time will be unique, but how do you determine uniqueness? Pretty soon, differences can be explained away and this become very arbitrary. Is the bullet comparison evidence? Yes, yes it is. Is it individual characteristic evidence? Probably not.
If I know that the brass is the same as the bullets the suspect has at home,
the scratches left on the case by the extractor, ejector, and locking lugs are in the same place as the ones on the suspect’s gun,
the primer dimple is the same size, shape, and location as the one left by the suspect’s gun
the rifling marks on the bullets are the same as that left by the suspect’s gun…
Is this good evidence? Yes, yes it is. Is it enough to convict without more? Probably not.
I would like to know that the suspect had a viscous, public argument with the victim right before the shooting about a lot of money, the suspect was seen following the suspect off in the direction of the murder, and that hair and fiber evidence similar to that of the suspect was found on the victim.
There have been doubts about these comparisons for a long time. In my days as a detective and detective supervisor, our training and practice was to never use ballistic comparisons as definitive evidence. It was often used to determine the type of firearm used, and was actually most useful for excluding particular firearms from having been used in a crime. Other tool marks’ evidentiary value has also been drawn into question due to modern manufacturing methods that have narrowed the differences between individual specimens of a particular firearm.
In my experience it would be a very sketchy investigation / prosecution that would hang on a single forensic test. Any time I used a ballistic comparison in a case, it was just one piece in a mountain of evidence supporting the charge against the defendant.
This week, I saw an update on a legal case I was interested in. In the incident, the Little Rock Arkansas, SWAT team entered a man’s apartment in the middle of the night without knocking. They were all dressed in plain cloths, no police insignia or badges visible, did not identify themselves as police, and broke down the door. As they rushed in, the man grabbed a gun, probably thinking this was a home-invasion and was shot by the police.
I noticed the case was at the federal appelate court level and I wanted to see what was happening. I clicked the link
It was the WRONG CASE! This was a SWAT team in South Carolina that did the same thing! Now, you might wonder, why are SWAT teams breaking down peoples doors at 3 AM wearing mismatched plain clothes (some in shorts, some jeans, some khaki’s while wearing ski masks) with no warning and no identification that they are police officers? Well, the people involved in both cases were small time drug dealers. I suspect these SWAT teams were robbing them. This is never brought up. There is no answer as to why they were out of uniform.
The police have a confidence crisis on their hands in this country. The fact that SWAT teams are allowed to do this and their cities try to extend qualified immunity to them is really bad optics. How many of our police forces really are just ‘thugs with guns’? How long will people tolerate it before they just ignore the law like they do in San Francisco, Chicago, and other leftist cities? You can’t have law and order if the people don’t voluntarily submit to the law. People won’t voluntarily submit to the law if they don’t respect the law of the officers who enforce it. The first amendment auditors’ channels make it clear we have a crisis. Just look at what is going on in the WV State Police. Don’t think this is new, this has been going on since Fred Zain or before.
Don’t think your local police are any better. There is a lot of room for police reform, but we can’t have a reasonable discussion about it because of the leftist ‘defund the police’ narrative.
Australia threatens Twitter with huge fines over hate speech
Money graf:
“We are seeing a worrying surge in hate online,” Inman Grant said. “eSafety research shows that nearly 1 in 5 Australians have experienced some form of online hate. This level of online abuse is already inexcusably high, but if you’re a First Nations Australian, you are disabled, or identify as LGBTIQ+ you experience online hate at double the rate of the rest of the population.”
As we all know, there is no First Amendment analog in the Australian social compact nor is their much in their jurisprudence suggesting the courts will be friendly to the idea. What makes this an ethical problem is, like in Europe, Elon Musk’s Twitter platform is faced with what is surely a barrage of complaints from authoritarian leftists looking to sabotage his business. If you look closely at reports of “hate speech,” they are virtually always allegedly directed to the political Left and never the other way around. It seems that Leftists are only capable of hate speech when they attack other Leftists.
Musk should simply stop operating in Australia. While Twitter can always censor Australian-origin speech, I don’t think that will satisfy the government censors, so perhaps Australians can only see tweets from other Aussies. I don’t know, but it seems an intractable problem.
Foreign efforts to force Musk to censor Twitter will be his greatest challenge — perhaps too great.
Any social media company that is asked to censor online speech should simply cease operations in that jurisdiction. Ceasing operations in a region doesn’t actually stop anyone from using the social media site. Anyone can get around location blocking with a VPN. It’s an extra hoop to jump through, but the internet is nothing but hoops to jump through. Free speech is worth the extra hoop.
Caving to these demands to censor speech because leftists don’t like anyone talking but them legitimizes the idea that leftists are the only ones who have anything of worth to say. Legitimatizing the idea that only leftists have any worth saying actually does create hate. Put the blame for censorship where it belongs, put the blame for hate mongering squarely where it belongs, on the out of control leftist extremists making everyone’s life a living hell.
I am in total agreement with you. Don’t want to pay for a VPN? Use TOR.
Taibbi has a good explanation of the harms of social media censorship.
https://www.racket.news/p/the-elite-war-on-free-thought?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1042&post_id=130446078&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
Thanks very much for pointing me to this link! I had not seen it yet.
Canadian Content!
Sorry to blow my own horn, but:
https://humbletalent.substack.com/p/rex-v-sussex-justices?utm_source=activity_item
The government of China was threatening the in-China family of a Conservative Chinese Canadian Member of Parliament (MP) ((Think congressman)). The Trudeau government was aware of it. Did nothing. And sat on the information for almost six months before it became a scandal. The Opposition parties called for an inquiry as to how the actual fuck that happened, and the Trudeau government demurred, saying that an inquiry wasn’t necessary (because of course they did). This was insufficient, and so Trudeau tapped his Ski Buddy and former Governor General of Canada, David Johnson, to inquire into whether an inquiry was needed, and Mr. Johnson, after two months of inquiring, said that no further inquiry was needed.
This reminded me of one of the more quoted British cases, Rex v. Sussex, which coined the phrase:
“It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”
and
“Nothing is to be done which creates even a suspicion that there has been an improper interference with the course of justice.”
Canada is a Belt and Road country. China owns them, which is why China is training the PLA in Canada.
I think you’re referring to the ad hoc “police” stations the CPC had set up internationally.
There were many, many more of those in America than there were in Canada, and we have both shuttered them.
No, I mean the Canadian military being contracted to train Chinese troops in cold weather combat in Canada and Canadian military officers being trained in Canada’s military colleges.
That’s not quite what that was, and those exercises ended in 2018.
After the “Two Michaels” incident, the CPC requested that some of their brass attend an open-summit military conference, with topics such as resilience and cohesion in the face of new forms of disruption,” and “China and Russia’s information space attacks on democracy.” Now, I’m not sure how intelligent it was to invite China to a meeting about Chinese information gathering, but frankly… It was an open conference, those meetings were attended over Zoom, and the reality is that China was getting a copy of the information one way or the other.
I like your horn. Blow it here whenever you like.
I’ve got an interesting story locally. Wednesday, we had a nasty storm roll through, which dropped golf ball sized hail on a concert which was going up at red rocks amphitheater. The weather had been suspected all day, but the skies were clear when the concert started. 8 people were taken to the hospital for severe bruising and a few broken bones.
Now, at red rocks, it’s all outdoors. The only covered spaces are a few bathrooms and staff only locations – green rooms, rehearsal space, and wing space. Plus, the stage. The whole space is hewn from stone, and the stairs are steep – and slick when wet. To get back to the parking lot requires a 20 minute hike along some pretty steep slopes. Also, in order to protect patrons, items you can bring with you ate limited – and umbrellas are not allowed.
After the storm, a conversation came up locally, first, appalled that the staff wouldn’t let people into the staff only areas or onto the covered stage to take shelter from the storm. Others are upset that the concert wasn’t simply shut down as soon as a storm was likely. Still others are discussing if there need to be covered areas added, or the space itself should be roofed.
All ticketing does warn that it’s an outdoor space, and inclement weather is to be expected. The staff only spaces usually contain millions of dollars in sensitive stage and musical equipment. If there had been a rush for cover, more people would have likely been hurt. I think red rocks did the right thing, but like the companies ordering their employees to stand down, it doesn’t sit particularly well.
OK, concertgoers are warned inclement weather is to be expected. Getting from your seating to your vehicle takes a 20-minute hike. And patrons are not allowed to possess umbrellas. What is the reasoning for the umbrella ban beyond it possibly being used as a club or spear? If that is the case what makes them such a threat at this venue vs other facilities? I am not trying to be argumentative I just don’t see the logic.
As far as I can tell, it’s a combination of weapon threats, plus is everyone opened unberellas, it would block the view of the stage of other patrons. It would be a unique problem in outdoor venues, especially one as narrow and deep as red rocks is.
Minor comment re Indy.
There is an old TV show, never got very popular, called the Young Indiana Jones Adventures. It opened and closed with a very old-looking Indy telling a story of his childhood or early teen years. Ford is now at the point where he could be the one playing that old version of the hero.
And when the show went into reruns and was released on DVD, they cut the Old Indy segments done by a gentleman named George Hall. The show is apparently available for streaming, though I suspect the bookends haven’t been restored. Thanks, George Lucas, for chopping your work up again!
Damn. BRB, making a backup of my SW Despecialized Edition Trilogy.
It would be too expensive to hire Harrison Ford again to refilm the Old Indy sequeneces
https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-older-convictions-951e0644e96aef5150d69154e492f726
I thought that it was standard procedure for convicts convicted under law that is later overturned as unconstitutional to be able to appeal their convictions on those grounds.
Are there other examples that provide precedent on this? Or is this yet another example of the Second regarded as a second-class right?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/study-warns-of-catastrophic-scenario-that-could-hospitalize-thousands-the-greatest-climate-related-hazard-we-can-imagine/ar-AA1cPLBa?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=a79236d77f564e84a7c8914a7436351e&ei=28#image=1
Fear mongering has reached new levels. This article posits that climate change could cause thousands of Pheonix residents to be hospitalized during the summer months because heat will overwhelm the electrical grid causing days long blackouts.
Never mind the fact that it ignores the fact that it exposes the myth that solar is our renewable savior from fossil fuels and that the grid’s capacity and health are totally within man’s ability to improve it. Pheonix and other southwestern states have for centuries been hot and dry.