New at Reason

Julian Sanchez | April 26, 2005

If e-mail distractions are like cannabis, does that make our weekly Reason Express the chronic?

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

← :) | Main | New at Reason →

See all 10 comments | Leave a comment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

tomwright|4.26.05 @ 4:31PM|#

Don't bogart that post, man.....

CodeMonkeySteve|4.26.05 @ 4:41PM|#

No, it just means you should only read it after a good bong hit, for a net IQ increase.

|4.26.05 @ 4:46PM|#

I always drop by H&R for my daily dimebag of reason!

|4.26.05 @ 4:57PM|#

From John L. Smith's column,

Remember, fellow travelers, it's the petty tyrannies against the little people that make us all less free.

Hmm, a few weeks ago, one of the local news stations interviewed smokers at McCarran (in Las Vegas) just after the "no lighters past checkpoints" rule went into effect. They said that no smokers they talked to objected to the rule. The comments they aired amounted to a lot of, "well, if that's what the government says, I guess it's the right thing to do."

If that is really true, we've already lost the battle for libertarian ideals.

|4.26.05 @ 4:58PM|#

If e-mail distractions are like cannabis,..

Let be very clear, email distractions are nothing like cannibis. Email distractions don't relax me, don't relieve my headaches, and certainly don't give me the munchies. But, my eyes do get bloodshot when dealing with a lot of email distractions!

|4.26.05 @ 6:50PM|#

Shawn - that's how a lot of people think. People will give up a lot for a little bit of security, whether or not the security actually makes them more, um, secure.

|4.26.05 @ 7:45PM|#

I agree, Lowdog. It's just depressing to hear and see. It makes me believe the authorities will be coming for me soon enough.

|4.26.05 @ 9:44PM|#

On the Iraqi desertions blurb...

The Iraqis and Syrians obviously don't want to have a militarized, secure border. They want to have a porous border. The only interest the governments have ever shown in securing that border is to exert just enough force to be able to get a piece of the action. People and stuff moving unimpeded between Syria and Mesopotamia is the way it works. Any mission that requires having a secure border between those countries is doomed to failure.

|4.27.05 @ 12:36PM|#

That story about the TSA frisking a little girl and her teddy bear in the name of "security" really infuriated me. The irony is, yesterday my boyfriend and I returned to the US after a few day's vacation in Canada, and going through Customs took all of thirty seconds, despite the huge pile of shopping bags visible in the backseat:

CUSTOMS GUY: (after a cursory glance at our driver's licenses) Are you U.S. citizens?

BOYFRIEND: Yes.

CG: How long were you in Canada?

BF: Four days. Went to Montreal and Toronto, and just visited Niagara Falls.

CG: Anything to declare?

BF: Some books and CDs.

CG: Here's your license back.

I hope no terrorists are reading this to discover that you can smuggle any damned thing you want into the US, provided you cross the border at Niagara Falls, look very touristy and windblown, and (in my case) have your hair tucked under a dorky baseball cap embroidered with the words "Niagara Falls" and the US and Canadian flags.

While BF and CG were having this discussion, I looked over at the car in the other lane, driven by two vaguely Arab-looking men; their trip through Customs took even less time than ours. But maybe they didn't look Arab after all; my glasses were fogged with about three gallons of dried Niagara River mist.