A.M. Links: California Plastic Bag Ban Proposal Going Nowhere, Venezuelan Police Raid Warehouse For Toilet Paper, Hagel Visiting Asia

|

Credit: Brandon Blinkenberg/wikimedia
  • Police in Venezuela have raided a warehouse for toilet paper, which is in short supply in the socialist-run country.
  • Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is in Asia, where he hopes to reassure allies and highlight the Obama administration's commitment to its policy of pivoting to the region as the war in Afghanistan winds down. 
  • Rebel reinforcements have arrived in the Syrian town of Qusair, which is under assault from government and Hezbollah forces.
  • The State Department has kept Cuba on its list of state sponsors of terrorism while acknowledging that there have been some improvements on the island.

Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7news and Reason articles! You can easily add a widget here.

Have a news tip for us? Send it to: 24_7@reason.com.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content


NEXT: Dump Worker in Canada Finds Film of Dan Akroyd With Dead Body, Calls Police

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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Police in Venezuela have raided a warehouse for toilet paper, which is in short supply in the socialist-run country.

    At least they didn’t buy it at Walmart.

    1. I hope they used a no-knock raid, otherwise the suspects might have had time to flush that contraband down the toilet.

      1. Dave’s not here!

      2. I heard that they wiped them out.

        1. Puns about toilet paper? How charmin.

          1. I expect a Bounty of disposable paper product jokes.

            1. I’m not exactly rolling in laughter here.

            2. Soemtimes you jsut have to roll with it!

              (Props to AnonBot.)

            3. It’s a dangerous trade to ply

              1. These are all really shitty jokes, guys. You should flush em.

  2. Rihanna lipstick gave me herpes, claims New York woman

      1. Sounds more like the stupid person demonstrating the lipstick gave her herpes. Or she already had it and didn’t know.

        1. Yeah, I’ve never done this at a concert, but it was fucking Mac, it would be unheard-of for them not to sanitize a sample in-store. The chances of her having it already and not knowing are too great.

          1. I guess you are the resident herpes expert.

  3. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/i…..ewyorkpost

    Diplomats get into a gunfight at a strip club in Venezuela. With NSFW pictures.

    1. I love that it’s coming out that they may have shot each other.

      Also, pic #3? That’s a man, baby.

    2. Ugh. Cheap plastic.

  4. DETECTIVE BITES THE HEADS OFF FIVE PUPPIES,
    GIVEN PROMOTION, HOLIDAY IN MONACO

    http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/20…..28×471.jpg

    1. Sounds justified.

    2. Have you ever met a cop whose dick you didn’t suck?

      1. Yes, but then he and his thug pig pals tore up my car and bashed my friends’ band equipment right there in the driveway, and then he whispered in my ear, “Go ahead. Say something. Make my day!” True story.

        1. Do you steal everyone’s anecdotes, or just mine?

          1. Watch out, sarc. You’ll end up the subject of a particularly boring and unfunny YouTube video.

          2. Kay Pasta a rebranding of someone or a new person I didn’t notice before yesterday?

            1. I’m guessing M. Stack.

            2. I had thought American, but not frothy or birchery enough…

          3. It just means she’s into you sarc.

            1. So if I dress up in a cop uniform she’ll rape me?

              1. The horror. The horror.

              2. Did I ever tell you about the time I tried to cross the Canadian border and then these fascist INS pigs hauled me out of my gf’s car and proceeded to slice up all the upholstery and empty all our backpacks out on the pavement and then raped our pet Labradoodle, Sugarfree? True story.

  5. A human rights official at the United Nations has called for a ban on the development of lethal autonomous robots.

    I think the three laws of robotics would handle that problem.

    1. You just have to be certain not to include the zeroth law of robotics…

    2. 1. No water.
      2. No food after midnight.
      3. No bright light.

    3. Autonomous being the key word. The Executive Branch or CIA controlling them is just fine.

      1. Probably not to the UN general assembly. But it is also important to remember what a joke UN human rights stuff is. Wasn’t Iran the head of the human rights commission recently, or something?

  6. 2 US Diplomats May Have Shot Each Other at a Venezuelan Strip Club

    http://gawker.com/2-us-diploma…..-510593915

    1. Two down, how many to go?

  7. So, Dr. Girlfriend has started reading George R. R. R. R. Martin’s books. What horrors do I have to be prepared for?

    1. I just finished Book 4.

      So, ummm, spoilers?

      I think thats all you have to worry about.

      1. She might get turned on and he’d have to have sex too. That might be bad, I guess?

        1. Turned on? Do the books change dramatically after halfway through the second?

          1. Oh come on, Cersei and Jamie having period sex next to a rotting corpse is such a turn on.

            1. Redhead with a banging body screwing in a cave?

              1. The TV show has more sex than the books, I think. Unless you count food porn. Because the books have a lot of food porn.

                1. Martin put a lot of sex in the last book. I remember graphic sex scenes. Was actually pretty weird since the sex in the other books was mostly off scene.

      2. Spoilers for book 5: Nothing happens.

        1. Spoilers for book 6: They fall into the Moon.

          1. Spoilers for book 6: They fall into the Moon.

            “We’re caught in the moon’s gravitational pull, what do we do?”

          2. That’s no moon.

        2. I was half way through the book when I found this out. Did not bother finishing it.

          1. Uhh. All the action is at the end. Seriously, it was my one last chance and GRRM totally comes through.

    2. Blind rage 2/3 through the first book and even worse halfway through book 3.

      1. Before I watched season 1 (and well before I picked up the books) I knew not to get attached to any characters.

    3. The Red Wedding…how fast does she read?

      1. You people are the worse.

        1. Before I saw/read anything, the only two spoilers I knew was:

          Ned Stark dies
          The Red Wedding

          I didnt know exactly what the Red Wedding was, but I had a good idea, and I was mostly right, but it went down a bit different than I expected.

          Also, its a frickin sled.

          1. Just hearing the name gives it away, at least enough for you to not be surprised at all.

            1. Well yeah.

              And I had an obvious first guess from midway thru book 1.

              But then book 3 has about ninety bajillion weddings, so I was unsure.

              My initial guess was pretty close to right, only I thought there might have been a different cast of characters at the wedding.

              1. SOS could have been called “Two Weddings and a Shitload of Funerals”.

                The TOR Re-Reader happened to blog her read of the Red Wedding yesterday. Her reaction is pretty funny.

                http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/…..ds-part-30

                1. Three weddings.

                  1. woops – forgot Sansa’s. What fun is a wedding without murder?

          2. Ugh, I’ve also been spoiled and worked out what the Red Wedding is. Or, I suspect I know; I don’t want it confirmed until Sunday night.

            It pisses me off because I had no idea about Ned’s fate, and it was intense when I watched it go down on the show. Here, I’m going to constantly be thinking, “Ahh, so that’s how that happens.”

            1. Yeah, I don’t understand why people are such dicks about spoilers.

              “Well you should have read/watched exactly when I did if you didn’t want to be spoiled!”

              I can understand accidentally spoiling something that came out years and years ago, but some people do it even when they explicitly know you are about to view it for the first time.

      2. Pretty fast. I’m not muchof a fantasy fan myself, and I don’t care at all for political intrigue or glorifying kings and slavers, so I’m really reallu unlikely to begin reading them myself.

        1. I dont think any Kings or Slavers are glorified at all.

          1. Really? I thought it was all about Top. Men. that get to run the world and fight bullshit political battles while the little people slave away in the background to enable and pay for it all. The one or two episodes of GoT I’ve caught gave me that impression.

            1. It is.

              But all the Top Men are cunts.

              And one character goes on an anti-slavery spree.

              The most likable characters are at the wall (and beyond it). And they are a bunch of rapists and thieves.

              1. I agree, my favorite characters were at the wall.

            2. Yeah it’s a deconstruction of the high fantasy tropes.

              1. Is it explicitly so, or does it tend to lead a reader to draw conclusions like “Kings are shitty?”

                1. Decide for yourself, seems pretty explicit to me:

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxfcvJZBy4s

                2. Oh it’s very explicit. It’s feudalism as it actually is.

            3. I thought it was all about Top. Men. that get to run the world and fight bullshit political battles while the little people slave away in the background to enable and pay for it all.

              Wait a minute, I thought these were fantasy books, not contemporary political non-fiction.

        2. I’m just saying, the rains will be on Castamere soon.

      3. Looks like the TV show gets to the Red Wedding this Sunday.

    4. I stopped reading about 1/2 way through the third book… just lost interest. Perhaps it was the stream of new characters or just the damn length of the books.

      1. I thought the 3rd book was the best fantasy novel I’ve ever read. The second half was better than the first, and much more satisfying.

        1. I’ve been meaning to give the series another stab… someday soon.

    5. Wildcards is where the real GRRM is at. That is some crazy shit. Although the first two are the best.

      1. But that’s mostly not GRRM. I don’t remember his characters being the runaway best, either.

  8. A human rights official at the United Nations has called for a ban on the development of lethal autonomous robots.

    Because they can’t be bargained with. They can’t be reasoned with. They don’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

    1. But you can reprogram them.

      1. Just… give me a reason. You think I’m unemotional, don’t you? I can be emotional. Jesus, I cried like a child at the end of Terminator 2.

        1. You think I’m unemotional, don’t you?

          Um… aren’t you a woman?

          1. An allusion my dear Auric

    2. “OooOOoo, you have me shaking in my alloy frame… is what I would say if I felt fear. Reaquiring target…. United Nations Plaza, NYC……”

      -Sentient Drone

    3. Because they can’t be bargained with. They can’t be reasoned with. They don’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

      Wait, are you referring to the Terminators or the United Nations Commission on Human Rights?

      1. They aren’t the same?

  9. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..sequester/

    UNPOSSIBLE! Private donations could never fund such a crucial government function.

    1. Close cousin of ketamine lifts hard-to-treat major depression without side effects:

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23303054

      So you wanted to go to Mars but you were worried about being irradiated? Don’t even worry about it:

      http://www.nature.com/news/spa…..rs-1.13099

      1. Yeah, I already knew it wasn’t a big deal, and they stealthily admit it during the first sentence:

        Astronauts travelling to Mars on any of the current space-flight vehicles would receive a dose of radiation higher than NASA standards permit

        So if we put people in space craft that are designed for a low radiation environment and send it to a high radiation environment, they get more radiation than an incredibly overcautious bureaucrat says is OK? Oh noes!

        1. More great science reporting!

          How feasible would a magnetic shield be? That’s how the Earth does it, after all. Would the magnet weigh too much?

          1. Probably, although they might also be able to use the magnetic field to help propel a spacecraft as well.

            http://www.ess.washington.edu/Space/M2P2/

              1. Not exactly. Solar Sails rely on solar radiation pressure and solar wind pressure against a large thin film to produce a tiny amount of force, but on the plus side requires no fuel. M2P2 uses a mini magnetosphere and relies on the interaction between the field and the solar wind to produce a small but constant amount of thrust. So there’s no physical sail, but instead the force is produced by the interaction of the charged particles of the solar wind with the magetic field.

                I’m actually not that knowledgeable about it, I’ve just heard about it and it sounds like a neat idea, but I don’t have the requisite background in plasma physics or magneto hydrodynamics to have anything more than a rudimentary understanding of how it works.

                1. Magnetic sails (if you got one working well) are probably a decent option for an interstellar trip. You can get thrust for a long time to accelerate up, it provides some radiation shielding to the probe in flight, and then you can use it to decelerate as you approach the target system. All without bringing propellant! Accelerating the fuel you are going to use to decelerate is a huge efficiency hit.

                  Pro Lib: Basically its magnets. Just accept their magic.

                  1. I do. Look, action at a distance! Spooky!

                    It’s interesting that some of the advanced propulsion technologies aren’t so good at acceleration–solar sails, ion drives, etc.

          2. It would be difficult, but it’s not immediately impossible.

            However, you don’t need to do anything that exotic. Just don’t stay in space forever, and have a small room with a lot of thick shielding that you use during solar flares (and maybe while you sleep too). When you get to Mars, bury your habitat under a couple of feet of dirt. Then you just need to take people that are willing to go to another planet in exchange for increase their lifetime cancer risk from 20% to 21%.

            1. I don’t think there’s any question about what we’d do on the surface–burrowing is the obvious answer. It’s all about transit.

              Speaking of obvious solutions, or, at least, major mitigations, the one for transit is to get there faster. A nuclear system could get a ship to Mars in what, weeks? That would greatly reduce the risk.

              1. Orion drive?

                1. Orion drives are good, but they’re missing a certain something. I think it needs more explosions.

                  1. Michael Bay would like this comment if he weren’t busy working on his film: Explosions!

              2. A nuclear system is certainly one solution. The main problem with getting there quickly is that it takes a lot of energy to carry all the mass you require for the round trip. Which is why it should be obvious not to carry all that weight. Try something like: send the return vehicle out, in advance, on a slow, energy efficient orbit. Then launch a small one way vehicle carrying the people really fast to get there. They do their time on the planet, then board the fully loaded return vehicle, which now makes a quick return trip. This way you avoid having to accelerate all the return-mass to such a high speed. (Or do the Mars Direct method of creating the return fuel at your destination).

                Also, I forget if I mentioned this to you already: I currently do not have a manager. Why not? Because he just left to work at Blue Origin.

                1. …he just left to work at Blue Origin

                  Are they actually hiring right now?

                  1. Are they actually hiring right now?

                    Apparently they are hiring at least one guy. They came at him hard too. He wasn’t trying to look for another job.

                2. Ah, Blue Origin and its secret space program. Maybe they’ll give us a nuke drive.

                  As always, the major solution to most of our space travel woes is cheap access to orbit. Get that, and we can build without so much concern about mass.

                  1. Well, without as much concern about mass.

                    1. All depends on how cheap it gets.

                    2. Even if it’s free to get to orbit, you still have to pay for the delta v to get from Earth to Mars (and possibly back).

                    3. That’s a lot less of a problem than getting to orbit, though.

                    4. Getting from LEO to Mars surface would actually have a higher delta V than getting from Earth to LEO. You just coast a lot longer while doing it.

            2. have a small room with a lot of thick shielding that you use during solar flares

              Back when I worked on Orion the plan was to have some of the floor and wall panels made out of a high density polymer that could be deployed into a small shield in the event of a large solar flare. They ditched it because of weight.

              Plus they wouldn’t really need it for moon missions anyway because the moon’s only ~3 days away and the odds of a massive solar flare hitting was pretty slim. If they ever actually send a mission to an asteroid or Mars though, they’ll need something like that.

      2. Hey, look, REAL science:

        “Models are all well and good, but there’s no substitute for data.”

        1. You know, I think the rise of computer modelling is still new enough that many scientists (and even more laypeople) have trouble understanding the limits of modeling, especially with complex systems.

          1. This is an area I am an expert in. It’s pretty easy. You look as some data, and use that to create a model. Then you trust the results of the model implicitly, and never bother with any kind of validation.

            1. So you’re a climate “scientist”?

              1. I’m not so constrained as that. I’l make you computer models of whatever you want (though I do prefer it to be something more aerospace/mechanically based). And I won’t validate any of them either.

                1. Could be true. Model says it is. Might want to test that in reality, but that’s your problem, not mine.

                  Some things really have to be modeled. Like nuclear explosions. Otherwise, we have to actually explode the things.

                  1. Otherwise, we have to actually explode the things.

                    I fail to see the problem with this.

            2. This is also my first boss’ model of the shipping documentation agent productivity.

              1. My point, as I am sure you all get, is the method. guess, model, test, evaluate.

                Model is a new piece but by no means removes the need for the last two.

  10. Catholic Church’s Top Exorcist Claims He Rid World of 160,000 Demons
    http://global.christianpost.co…..ons-96794/

    The Catholic Church’s top exorcist, who claims to have sent 160,000 demons back to hell, says he wants Pope Francis to allow all priests to start performing the ritual to deal with a rising demand for exorcisms from the faithful.

    Father Gabriele Amorth, 88, who also heads the International Association of Exorcists, told The Sunday Times that he will ask Pope Francis to allow all priests the right to do exorcisms without the church’s approval. According to the report, priests currently need special approval from their bishop to perform the rite and it is rarely granted.

    1. Catholic Church’s Top Exorcist Claims He Rid World of 160,000 Demons

      I would have thought there are a lot more priests than that.

    2. The Catholic Church’s top exorcist, who claims to have sent 160,000 demons back to hell,

      Think what he could have done with a drone program.

    3. Dude looks good for 88. Just goes to show, if you eat right and exorcise…

      1. Gaaaah, that’s awful. Congrats.

    4. Satanic Cult’s Top Conjurer Claims He Saved or Created 160,000 Demons

      1. Fucking sequester.

    5. And yet Suki still walks the earth.

      1. I thought Suki was dead b/c Epi killed her. Or was it Fist of E?

        I can’t keep up with these wheelings and dealings.

        1. it’s a madhouse! A MADHOUSE!

          1. [Gorillas firehose Lord Humungus.]

              1. Not that kind of firehose, your lordship.

            1. +1 big spray.

        2. Epi didn’t kill me, much as he would like to have. He made the mistake of instead marooning me at the center of a dead planet.

          1. very much ALIVE!

          2. Sorry for the unclear interpretation I allowed in that second sentence, I won’t let it happen again.

  11. The makers of a parody of the Twilight franchise have filed a US$500 million suit against Lionsgate and Summit Entertainment, claiming that they have engaged in “anti-competitive” conduct by abusing intellectual property law and squelching their efforts to find a distributor for their movie.

    more

    1. “Twinkly Movie?”

  12. Short version… Kraft Mac & Cheese, and other Kraft products are worse for our kids than we realize. Stop feeding food-like products made from GMOs to your kids. It’s terrible for them.

    Via facebook, the anti-GMO quest continues

    1. They’re probably right, but for the wrong reasons.

    2. Stop reading cognizant-like postings made by generally moronic organisms

    3. Fucking tofu is food-like

      1. it’s not even that

        1. I really hate it when you see a dish that looks like it has little chunks on chicken in it, but when you try to eat one it tastes like absolutely nothing.

          1. Plus will tend to have the texture of unvulcanized rubber. You can usually test it with a fork before making the mistake of putting it in your mouth.

    4. I have a FB friend who is not very political and not very smart but lives a healthy lifestyle now. The progs have found a new batch of true believers to peddle their bullshit without them even knowing it.

      The organic lifestyle families and crossfitters I know who are otherwise only worried about their own shit are now all of a sudden political cogs.

      I saw one yesterday that conflated sodium nitrates and preservatives as GMO characteristics.

      1. It’s a lot like fears of radiation and nuclear power. People don’t understand it, so they imagine that no one knows what they are talking about and anything could happen.

      2. Organic is mostly just another marketing gimmick. Note, too, that like many of these sorts of fads, it’s expensive. It serves more as a signal of upper-class culture than it does anything else. It’s not like your hybrid, organic food, etc. are cheaper than other products.

        1. Whenever someone asks me what organic means, I always tell them “made of carbon”.

          1. There are rules governing the use of the term, but they’re kinda bullshit, too. And anyone can say “natural” or similarly meaningless terms.

            1. Soylent green was “all natural” too.

              1. Polystyrene is natural…made from earth given petroleum by earth born animals.

              2. Fire is natural. Radioactive materials are natural. Even if you want to use natural to exclude “manmade,” there’s lots of bad things that are natural.

                1. hence my point…kind of.

        2. True, that’s why I laugh every time one of them rails against some marketing campaign or another.

          1. For some, the confusion is increased because organic often involves something locally grown. Naturally, stuff you buy that is picked closer to ripeness and isn’t shipped hundreds or thousands of miles is generally superior in taste and texture. But, of course, organic local isn’t really distinguishable from traditional local.

            That’s really only true for fresh fruits and vegetables. Processed stuff is probably close to no difference, though I suppose some “organic” products, given their much higher price, could include some better ingredients. Like higher-end flavorings, not “organic.”

      3. I like how Alton brown used actual Salt Peter to make his corned beef on the corned beef episode. He mention briefly something about it being supposedly bad for you then continued to use it…he likes the pink color is leaves the meat.

    5. generally speaking, if you can eat it and not die, it’s food.

      dirt anyone?

      1. I had a friend in college who used this argument & she suggested she could digest styro-foam.
        Not that I’d want to see her try (or anyone).

        1. Maybe she was thinking of those foam packing pellets made of corn starch.

          1. I don’t think she was. She meant “poison peanuts.”

      2. I’d add that it has to have some nutritive value to my definition of food.

        1. is iceberg lettuce food then?

  13. California’s plastic bag ban proposal is not going anywhere after it failed to pass the State Senate.

    I knew that thing would be DOA when they decided to send it to the Senate with a plastic bag over it.

    1. I hope it gets caught in the wind and sort of meanders there for a bit…because it would be so goddamned beautiful, you know?

      1. +1 Academy Award

      2. +1 League of Gentlemen reference.

  14. Sunbather, 21, seriously injured after she is run over by a COP in pick-up truck as she slept on beach

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..beach.html

    The 30-year-old could face disciplinary action for the accident.

    Oh no! Not disciplinary action! A paid vacation? Fucking shit!
    Also, the first thing they do is check to see if she’d been drinking. Why? Because if she’d been drinking then the accident would have been her fault, and she likely would have been forced to pay thousands of dollars in restitution to the poor officer who ran her over.

    1. It only says the cop could face disciplinary action; not that he will.

    2. The same thing happened in my hometown a few years ago. The person the cop ran over died a few days later. The cop is now pretty high up in the local PD.

      1. Was the person charged with impeding a police vehicle or some other crime?

        1. He was on the beach at an “impermissible hour.” Which usually doesn’t carry the death penalty.

          1. I got caught in a park at an “impermissible hour” once. Cop didn’t run me over. He clenched his fists and flailed his arms after I asked him to show me the sign that said the place was closed. He said “Because I fucking said so now get the fuck out of here!” I got lucky.

            1. He said “Because I fucking said so now get the fuck out of here!” I got lucky.

              I AM THE LAW!

  15. This article is wrong about almost every detail. But the standards at the atlantic take a back seat to the dreaded austerity monster.

    1. If anybody specializes in building fake towns with government money, it’s Keynesian and monetarist clowns, as demonstrated by China.

      And the writer kind of sort of comes close to discovering an iota of wisdom:

      Now, paying people to disguise vacant storefronts as vibrant ones is probably the worst stimulus ever, but it’s better than none at all.

      So close.

      1. If we really want stimulus, wouldn’t it be simpler to raze Chicago to the ground and rebuild?

        (Sorry, Nicole.)

        1. Don’t apologize to me, apologize to architecture. You can have the west side though.

      2. I wonder if they’ll pull it when he realizes he’s talking about the wrong country?

      3. “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

    2. Holy shit, to paraphrase Billy Madison, I feel stupider for having read that.

  16. California’s plastic bag ban proposal is not going anywhere after it failed to pass the State Senate.

    Big Plastic.

  17. http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/2163089

    The IRS does more bad things. This is getting insane, we’re well into Hugo Chavez level thuggery at this point.

    1. More stuff to be dismissed as ‘so-called scandal’.

  18. Video of brave officer who was forced to subdue a dangerous 14yr old boy!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..stare.html
    I don’t think I have ever seen such heroism! What a guy!

    1. Oh no, he clenched his fists! Clenched them!

    2. Well, if you stare down an aggressive dog, it is likely to attack. Never a good idea to stare down aggressive animals.

    3. Well, maybe you should consider the cemeteries that are literally littered with brave heroes who perished at the receiving end of a dehumanizing stare before you make such a cynical and sarcastic comment.

      1. Hey, change any smelly diapers in a blatantly inappropriate public place lately?

        1. That’s no way to talk about your own mother.

    4. dehumanizing stare

      Nice band name.

  19. Cowboy-style cap gun gets 5-year-old suspended from school in Calvert County

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..story.html
    Good thing it didn’t have any caps in it, or the kid would have been charged with a felony for having explosives.

    1. God damnit. I used to carry around roll caps and smash them with rocks at recess in elementary school. Good, harmless fun.

      1. or pound the a roll with a hammer.

        1. That’s how I did it at home. Tear off a nice long strip of caps and fold them up so they are all stacked on top of each other, then strike them with a hammer and an upside down nail. You can get a pretty good bang that way.

          1. Terrorist!

            1. Hell, when I was kid we used to steal black powder from one of the other kid’s dads who loaded his own ammo, make our own bombs and blow up shit in the woods. If kids did that now they’d likely be locked up for life.

              1. Boys will be boys terrorists.

                1. My boys are in preschool….perhaps I should go ahead a hire a lawyer on retainer?

                  1. perhaps I should go ahead a hire a lawyer on retainer?

                    Yes! I’m available.

              2. m80s, firecrackers, gasoline… ah, my youth.

                We also liked to “load” model rockets with an extra explosive punch. Of course it was a waste of a good rocket, but hey, it looked and sounded awesome.

                1. I never got to play with m80s. They were illegal long before I came onto the scene. Though my dad said he’s light them and toss them into water cisterns at nearby farms. Total destruction. Good times. Then again he’d bring a shotgun to school so he could shoot squirrels for dinner on the walk home. Back when it was a free country.

              3. Same here. My buddy also make a homemade shotgun, doing some of the work in metal shop at school, and we test-fired it by duct taping it to a tree. Good times, good times.

                1. made

          2. Yep.

            “Have you ever stacked a strip of caps on top of each other and struck them with a hammer, known anyone to have done so, or thought about doing so?”

            If your answer is “yes”, no cap gun for you!

    2. What about Snap Pops, are those illegal too now?

      1. I’ve actually got some at home right now, though I’m not going to give them to the kid to take to school. They’d send me up the river for providing explosives to a minor.

        1. I use to keep them in my bag when I was in middle school.

          1. We made water weenies when I was in school. Bet that would result in felony firearm charges today.

            1. I’ve concluded that I wouldn’t make it out of elementary school today.

              1. Nope. I’ve had a knife and the means to make fire in my pocket since I was about 8.
                I remember one time a kid brought a live cartridge on the bus with him. He got a talking to and had it taken away. Now they’d probably cancel school and call in trauma counselors or some shit.

                1. I’ve had a knife and the means to make fire in my pocket since I was about 8.

                  Same here. I’m pretty sure it’s a crime for a minor to possess matches these days, let alone a knife.

      2. Those seem to be pretty OK still. Though not in school, I’m sure. You’d have to grind one into your eye to injure yourself with one of those. You can set them off with your fingers and squeezing the gritty stuff in them hurts more than the bang.

        1. They were illegal here in Maine up until last year. All they allowed was sparklers. Now I’ve got a legal arsenal of roman candles and mortars in the basement. It rained the last couple days, which means I’ll be lighting up the sky this weekend!

          You might think my neighbors hate me, but they tend to respond to my antics with fireworks of their own.

          1. I seem to have moved to a fireworks-free neighborhood. Which doesn’t bother me at all. I will go to my sister’s house if I want to let off fireworks, there were some on Memorial Day already.

  20. Female Parks Department workers stripped for permanent jobs, more work at raunchy holiday parties
    http://www.nydailynews.com/new…..-1.1357067

    A stripper pole, free-flowing booze and female city employees performing sexy tricks are just a few staples at raunchy holiday parties hosted by Parks Department supervisors. Seasonal employees ? some disrobing down to their bras and panties ? tantalized as many as 10 men at a time during Christmas and New Year’s Eve celebrations going back to at least 2009, a Daily News investigation found.

    The clandestine parties were held in a so-called “boom boom” room at a city-owned facility on Randalls Island. And the seasonal workers who “got on the pole” were rewarded with additional work or permanent jobs, sources told The News.

    best use of tax dollars I’ve ever heard

    1. At least the sequester will stop this, right?

    2. I’m hoping a stripper pole and nudity feature prominently in next the next season of Parks and Recreation….as long as it’s that Aubrey gal.

      1. What, you don’t want to see a topless Leslie Knope?

        1. Nope.

    3. At least they got their jobs based on merit.

    4. This is more preferable to the Park Rangers in Philly that detained two people for pamphleteering.

  21. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..t-anymore/

    WA cop dogs no longer trained for pot.

    1. Of course they are. They’ll still alert when they read the signals from their handlers.

  22. Christina Ricci channels her dark side five-head as she reveals a hint of cleavage in an elegant black dress at charity gala

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvs…..-gala.html

  23. Vintage Advertisements for Heroin, Cannabis and Cocaine

    http://io9.com/how-todays-ille…..-510258499

  24. Police say 36-year-old Andrea Mobley and 38-year-old Jennifer Morrow face petty theft charges after stealing bathing suits and beef jerky during a trip to Wal-Mart on Wednesday.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..z2UsJRki00

    Florida!

    1. Jesus. Talk about aiming low. The two women claimed that stealing from a retail store was on their “bucket list”. Along with what? Getting out of Ocala for three days in a row?

    2. People steal the strangest things from Wal Mart. The local police blotter doesn’t go a day without someone being arrested for stealing pantyhose and mayonnaise, or some other strange thing. My favorite are the ones who steal $10 worth of crap, get arrested, and pay their $500 bail with cash they pull from their pocket…

      1. Kleptomania is really weird.

  25. The State Department has kept Cuba on its list of state sponsors of terrorism while acknowledging that there have been some improvements on the island.

    Sounds like they just had a screening of Sicko.

  26. Traps set for troublesome bears at Lake Tahoe

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..z2UsJX283W

    Just grease up some twinks and leave them on the beaches.

    1. Hey there is no need to go all Mr Ranger on them, they are just trying to score some pic-a-nick baskets

      1. Damn! 40 minutes too late.

    2. Watch out, Jesse! IT’S A TRAP!!

  27. Lake Worth man accused of indecent act on business’ door
    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/ne…..4345.story

    Police said the employee watched and recorded as Berry then performed an “indecent act” on the door. Berry then walked to a nearby bus bench and took a seat.

    That’s where police found him shortly after and when asked if he did the act, he smiled and said, “Yes, I have a mental problem!” according to the report.

    1. when asked if he did the act, he smiled and said, “Yes, I have a mental problem!” according to the report.

      Why didn’t I think of this.

      1. you don’t need to. The yak vomit smell and high-waisted pants say it all

  28. Child-Porn Suspect Ordered to Decrypt His Own Data
    http://www.wired.com/threatlev…..ion-order/

    A federal magistrate is reversing course and ordering a Wisconsin man suspected of possessing child pornography to decrypt hard drives the authorities seized from his residence. The development comes as a month after the same magistrate thwarted prosecutors’ demands that Jeffrey Feldman unlock drives they believe contain child pornography.

    Decryption orders are rare, but are likely to become more commonplace as the public slowly embraces a technology that comes standard even on Apple computers. The orders have never squarely been addressed by the Supreme Court, despite varying opinions in the lower courts.

    1. If I have a locked closet, they wouldnt make me unlike, they would just bust in.

      I dont see the difference. They have a warrant, bust into it. All it takes is time and effort.

      1. In concept, it’s like busting in a locked door, as it is the LEO’s job to get through it, not the accused’s job to open it for them. However, it’s a bit different than just busting in a closet door. It’s much more like trying to break into a top of the line tungsten carbide vault.

        Modern encryption technology is so difficult to encrypt, you need a supercomputer to even have a chance at breaking it. If it’s 256 or above, there’s very little chance of breaking in.

        That being said, if the guy decrypts it for them, he’s a fucking moron. Whatever is on that computer is going to get him WAAAAY more jail time than refusing to comply with any court order.

        1. Modern encryption technology is so difficult to encrypt, you need a supercomputer to even have a chance at breaking it.

          Or lots of normal computers working in parallel.

          The point is, a crazy amount of calculations.

        2. Exactly. There are free tools out there that would take a supercomputer and hundreds of years to crack. If he provides the key, he’s an idiot.

          That the government can hack any encryption out there is a myth. You use a good encryption scheme and a strong password, and they can go pound sand.

          That said, if this guy was REALLY smart, he would have had his setup configured for plausible deniability, and they wouldn’t even know there was data there to decrypt.

    2. How is that not a violation of the 5th Amendment?

      1. It’s not a violation because fuck you, that’s why.

      2. Look, they asked a judge and he doesn’t think it is. Who the fuck are you to question an expert? Bases are covered, procedures were followed, and thank Christ Almighty that these brave prosecutors are looking out for our safety.

        1. Besides, its child porn. Child porn. This is for the children you monster.

      3. Came here to ask that. What better case for them to get the camel’s nose under the tent on the 5th amendment though. Who the hell would want to “side” with the child pornographer?

        1. The presence of the kiddie pics is not the point. The self-incrimination is.

          1. I know, I’m just saying the 5th amendment is going to have a hard time getting any acknowledgement in this case. I’d imagine the list of people willing to take it as far as it needs to go is pretty short, sadly, because nobody wants to be seen defending a pedophile.

            Well, the left elite does it frequently, but its certainly not to defend the constitution.

      4. Whether having to give up your key was a Fifth Amendment violation was a pretty big topic during the 90s, what with all the fears about encryption.

        I don’t know how it all turned out, but there were different schools of thought. On the one hand, it’s compelling someone to give up information that might tend to incriminate him. On the other hand, there’s not really a Fifth Amendment right to not open the door to your study when the cop has a warrant to search your house.

      5. For similar reasons that being compelled to give a blood, breath, or urine sample when popped for DUI doesn’t run afoul of the 5th. The state really, really wants the evidence, and can’t proceed without it, so we’ll taffy pull the Constitution so they can get it. Basically, what Ted said below.

        Not having read this case, but my guess is that the judge is reasoning that the state isn’t compelling the guy to be a witness against himself; he already did that when he stored the videos/pictures. They don’t need him to give testimony at all. All they want is the key to a lock he owns.

        It’s crap, of course.

        1. On the other hand, there’s not really a Fifth Amendment right to not open the door to your study when the cop has a warrant to search your house.

          It pays to scroll down…sigh.

          I dunno, ProL, are you obligated to help them open the door? I mean, you can’t stop them from kicking in the door, and whatever additional destruction’s from their doing so is on you (so the same thing, basically), but do you have to unlock it for them?

          I genuinely don’t know, and suspect that different jurisdictions are all over the map on that question.

          1. I’m operating solely from memory, but I think they can compel you to cough up the key.

            1. In this case, compelling him to give up the key would be futile if he actually understands the technology.

              If the court orders him to unlock a room and he doesn’t, they bust in the door. Now aside from whatever evidence they find, he’s going to be charged in connection to disobeying.

              If the court orders him to decrypt his HDD and he doesn’t, they’re pretty much screwed. They will certainly charge him with whatever they can for disobeying, but I have a feeling that punishment is far less severe than if they had access to the (probably GIGS of) kiddie porn on his computer.

    3. “Oops, I forgot the key.” Can’t really refute that.

      1. Enhanced interrogation techniques.

        It’s for the children.

      2. “I never knew the password – can’t help you.”

    4. So obviously there’s a market for a program an encryption program that decrypts with one password and formats with another.

      1. Or overwrites with something innocuous then decrypts with the alternate password.

      2. I mentioned the debate in the 90s about encryption above, and your comment reminds me of another debate: The Clipper Chip. That’s what the government wants–intentional backdoors into your encryption protocol. Of course, introducing a known backdoor isn’t exactly the standard in security.

      3. I was just thinking the exact same thing myself

      4. TrueCrypt will let you set up two passwords. One password opens up one data set, the other password opens up another data set. I trust the implications are obvious.

        1. yup…there is some great software out there. But stay on top of Bruce Schneirer’ blog to understand what is solid technique and what is folly.

  29. A human rights official at the United Nations has called for a ban on the development of lethal autonomous robots.

    Does anyone know if it was it in time to stop Eric Stoltz’s character on Caprica?

    1. Dude, you’re tens of thousands of years too late for that.

      1. DON’T REMIND ME.

  30. ah, exceptions…

    But in the days since the president’s speech, American officials have asserted behind the scenes that the new standards would not apply to the C.I.A. drone program in Pakistan as long as American troops remained next door in Afghanistan ? a reference to Mr. Obama’s exception for an “Afghan war theater.” For months to come, any drone strikes in Pakistan ? the country that has been hit by the vast majority of them, with more than 350 such attacks by some estimates ? will be exempt from the new rules.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05…..anted=all&

    1. those kids won’t kill themselves, you know

      1. I thought those kids were being raised to become suicide bombers?

        1. Yes, they explode a hellfire missile by proximity.

  31. A judge has ordered the police to sift through all digital material taken illegally from Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom and to return anything irrelevant to their investigation- at their own cost.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/technol…..-to-Dotcom

    1. Good, I’ve been waiting to get my shit back!

  32. Police in Venezuela have raided a warehouse for toilet paper, which is in short supply in the socialist-run country.

    No worries. Central banks worldwide are working overtime to alleviate this shortage.

  33. I know this example of the most popular form of feminist theory taken to it’s natural conclusion. Has been posted extensively here. But I figured you might want to see what a feminist feels when confronted with it. Most enlightening.

    1. Well, I mean, she is correct to want to beat him up. Her reasons are wrong, but that’s small potatoes.

      1. Her reasoning is wrong because this is an instinctive reaction on her part. Her reasoning is superfluous.

        1. I mean, what’s your reasoning for liking kittens? Even if you had a logical reason, would it matter? Did you think about the first time you saw one? Or did you just say “awwww”.

          1. Kittens are tender and can be prepared in so many ways. They’re an incredibly versatile food.

            That’s why I like them anyway.

            1. Careful of that around Warty. He’s like Koko the gorilla. In almost every conceivable way.

        2. Does she have reasoning? I don’t even get what she wrote. At least I understood his column.

    2. Wait, why does she want to beat him up?

      1. I think it’s satirical, but poorly done.

        1. Really? from the comments:

          Yes! I wasn’t sure how I was feeling about the article, if I was being too womany-feministy-pc-overbearing-angry as discomfort about every word of the article washed over me as I read it, but I felt it too. Brilliant. Thanks for writing this, I feel much better for having read it.

          1. And I am indulging this fantasy in a very long article on the Internet, because my exhibitionist desire to parody Andy Hinds is greater than my respect for Andy Hinds.

            I stopped reading after that.

            1. Hey, I do the work so you don’t have to. Unlike others, content to live in an echo chamber and pat themselves on the back for it. I like to really understand the crazy.

              1. So I think the author was parodying the mangina’s article from yesterday. But then other feminists thought she was dead serious. I think.

                The crazy is deep.

                1. She was. But it seems she was using the format to vent her true feelings. Just like that “girlfriend zone” article from a few days ago.

                2. Yeah, agree with Virginian. But that’s what happens when you write a shitty column for a stupid audience.

          2. This comment made me think of one of the greatest stand-up bits

            The fact you can’t think about, look at, or be around women without having sexual fantasies not only defies your being a feminist, it defies your being a decent human being who respects other human beings outside of the number of holes in their bodies.

            how would you keep your man if you lost your vagina in some horrible accident?

            (suck his dick! okay, mouth. Anal sex! okay, asshole)

            [in a booming voice] YOU JUST CLASSIFIED YOURSELVES AS A SERIES OF HOLES! I’m supposed to treat you special but you’re just a bunch of holes to yourselves. Nobody said learn how to plan xbox, learn to play pool, tell better stories..

            /Patrice (RIP)

        2. From an article which links it:

          But that didn’t diminish the “triggering” urges I feel after reading his piece to…well, The Cut’s Maureen O’Connor sums up my feelings nicely. All out of “basic human decency,” of course.

    3. Uncle Tims might get to visit the manor house, but they’ll never be respected.

      It’s the flaw in modern feminism. If they achieve their goals, the greatest loss would be their own. They would be left with a field of so called “men” who are incapable of providing for their families, incapable of being worth loving, and incapable of being a father for their children. (PUAs have the same issue but in reverse.)

      Declaring war and hating half the population is no way to go through life.

      1. I believe you are referring to MGTOW, not PUA. (been reading reddit lately. They find the best feminist stuff so I don’t have to go searching as much).

        1. Please explain MGTOW and PUA.

        2. Jebus, man. That’s too much crazy on a nice Friday morning. Never even heard of those folks before.

          (I am somewhat sympathetic to their view on marriage, however. I’m personally not going down the marriage road again, and I would counsel my son not to either unless he arranges legal protection beforehand. Still, MGTOW strikes me as every bit as unhinged as their cousins, the radical feminists.)

          1. Agreed on all counts.

          2. From what I’ve seen of MGOTW, it’s basically: don’t get married, because you’re essentially playing Russian roulette. You wouldn’t play Russian roulette, would you?

            1. No, that’s rational. MGTOW is “don’t interact with women at all”.

              1. Huh? How do you even do that?

            2. From the second result of Coeus’s helpful link, it seems like more than that.

            3. I thought the whole MGOTW thing was because their periods attract bears.

              1. If you’re giving your lifestyle an acronym, I think it’s time to evaluate your choices in life.

                1. Hey, I used to be a dink and loved every minute of it…then got kids, started business, became overly broke and have little “me” time.

                  Dinks are winners

            4. Sadly, that’s the part most men of a certain age can pretty much agree on. I don’t have a solution here, but I think we will see, sooner than we expect, a generation of men who reject marriage in large enough numbers to cause serious societal harm. One just has to look at the African American community to see what large scale rejection of fatherhood looks like.

              Although I may not know what the solution is, I do know what the solution isn’t. The idea of “rejecting all contact with women” is foolish and self defeating. After heading down the rabbit hole Coeus presented, I can only wish for all the third wave feminists and MGOTWS to be exiled to an island until they sort out their issues.

              1. Well to draw a parallel with libertarianism, we know that the status quo is fundamentally unjust. So you can either work to change it, or you can say “fuck it” and go Galt, to one degree or another.

              2. But you’re assuming they’re going to reproduce. It would seem that MGOTWs would be scrupulous about condom use, or have vasectomies, knowing the financial and legal liabilities.

    4. If I told her that she is no different than the bible thumping soccer mom who thinks condoms in the school nurse’s office gives teenagers impure thoughts that she would give it any serious consideration and application to her own worldview?

      Ah, who am I kidding?

  34. Local news: I drive down this road just about everyday. Driving home from work yesterday, it was shutdown by a mob of police.

    Witness: Woman run over multiple times
    http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news…..-car-crash

    Then, police said, the Good Samaritan tried to grab the driver’s side door handle. The truck accelerated and ran over the woman.

    Blessing said the truck then backed up, running her over again, and then pulled forward, running over her a third time.

    “And she was flipping underneath the truck, literally, with the tires,” Blessing said. “Every time she was hit or backed up, I was screaming the entire time.”

    1. it was shutdown by a mob of police.

      Heh.

    2. This is the sad, inevitable destination of the vehicular-manslaughter-of-women-culture that we all had a part in excusing and allowing to grow all these years.

    3. The writing is atrocious there. Seriously, can anyone make sense of this:

      Initially, a vehicle described as a pickup truck by a witness and driven by a 76-year-old Grand Rapids woman pulled out of a private drive and was hit by with a vehicle that was southbound on East Paris, according to the Kentwood Police Department. The pickup truck continued on across East Paris.

      A woman not involved in the initial crash got out of her car to help the driver of the truck, police said.

      Witness Terry Blessing said the Good Samaritan was shouting at the driver of the truck and holding up her hands.

      1. it’s a local TV station – hardly surprising.

  35. California pit bull owner charged with murder in fatal mauling

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..z2UsKmEecA

    1. I don’t believe it. I have seven pit bulls and they’d never hurt a fly. That adorable family member must have been provoked.

      1. Sarcasm? I agree that most seem to be very sweet and gentle. But I’ve also known one that wanted to eat my wife’s face off.

        1. Statistically, you’re more likely to be struck by lightning as mauled by a pit bull. If you own a pit bull.

          Pit bull maulings are entirely a media/select ownership creation of the 1980’s. Pits have a much better temperament than most breeds of dogs, and have been well known for their loyalty and docile nature with humans for centuries.

          1. Obviously, I have no idea what statistics you’re citing and it sounds correct on its face, but what if you don’t own a pit bull? I’d imagine a good portion of mauling victims aren’t the owners. The comparison seems incomplete.

            1. Ok, let me put it another way – if you are AROUND a pit bull.

              It’s a complete statistical outlier, as I mention downthread. Don’t have the numbers in front of me, but something like 150 reported fatal pit bull maulings over a decade (with ALL reports coming exclusively from media reports that ‘pit bulls’ were responsible…there are a couple dozen breeds commonly mistaken for pits, and less than 10% of Americans can reliably identify a pit bull from these breeds).

              Pit bull attacks pretty much do not appear in recorded history before the late 70’s/early 80’s. That’s not an accident.

              I know this will be hard to believe, but the media has made the pit bull out to be a menace to support their own bottom line through sensationalist fear-mongering.

              1. Look, this is just anecdotal, but I’m a pretty big dog person, and I currently have a very large German Shepherd, who is well-socialized and plays with other dogs in a dog park every weekend. There are many pit bulls that also come into the dog park to play, and they are all friendly and non-agressive. In fact of the dogs that have started fights with other dogs, none of them were pit bulls, and the dogs that seem to start the most trouble in the park are Huskies. MOST pit bulls tend to be very friendly and docile toward humans, although some can be dog-aggressive if not properly socialized. To have pit bull be aggressive toward a human requires some pretty serious mis-handling.

              2. I know this will be hard to believe, but the media has made the pit bull out to be a menace to support their own bottom line through sensationalist fear-mongering.

                They also claim any dog involved in an attacl is a ‘pit bull’, whether it really is or not.

        2. Any powerful breed can be dangerous if not properly trained and socialized. 99% of the time if a dog is acting badly, a human is at fault.

          1. I agree. I’m not for regulations on specific breeds or anything. But some breeds are going to do a lot more damage if they are not well trained or are abused and become aggressive.

            1. ^^^THIS

              Dogs from any breed can become aggressive. Some breeds are naturally more prone to agression than others (Chows, for example, put me on guard much more than standard poodles). Pits, IMO are no worse than your average dog in terms of likelihood to become aggressive. The problem is that when they go bad, they go really bad because they have the capacity to cause so much more damage than, say, some asshole Chihuahua. Very powerful jaws, no instinct to release once biting down, etc.

      2. WTF is wrong with pitbull apologists? You ever see those FB memes about how falling coconuts have killed more people than pit bulls each year?

        Everyone comments with furious back-patting until I finally ask “but how many people were mauled or maimed by coconuts? Does the data give any indication?”

        Trying to convince people that pit bulls are no different than a border collie is fucking dangerous. It sucks they had the rotten luck of being bred to be blood thirsty, but its a part of their nature now and ignoring it is more infantile, tolerant BS.

        1. I don’t know much about the breed so I’m not going to comment on their bloodthirstyness but I do notice that a lot of pitbull owners are incredibly irresponsible. What I mean is, people who can barely take care of themselves always seem to own pitbulls.

        2. It’s not “pitbull apologists”, it’s people who believe in objective reality. You either do or you don’t, and the reality is that, with the tiny exception of extremely rare instances where certain individual dogs have been bred/raised poorly, pit bulls simply do not seriously attack humans. It’s an incredibly remote margin.

          1. I’m not discounting the responsibility of the owner, its just there are genetic predispositions, whether naturally (like the sharpness of an Akita’s teeth) or man-made, like the emphasizing of a fight over flight reaction within pitbulls.

            My brother-in-law used to have a well trained Australian Cattle Dog because he is has always been a good owner, but that doesn’t mean he’s going to ever let if off its leash outside because it has a predisposition to want to herd cars.

            1. Are you taking into account the genetic predisposition of pit bulls to be extremely friendly and well behaved as well or are you just cherry picking the items that allow your confirmation bias to run rampant?

              1. All dogs are by and large extremely friendly and well behaved and I’m an attentive owner, but it doesn’t mean I’m lining up to buy the ones with the sharpest teeth or the strongest jaw. Sorry, but I’m just not going to willingly take an Akita, Chow, Rottweiler, or Pit Bull Terrier into my house.

                Some breeds are statistically more likely than other breeds to maul a human and its typically breeds that have been trained to be guard/attack dogs. Has the data been revised and I missed it? Just quickly looking it up, Pit Bull terriers are 3.3% of the dog population but account for just over half of reported dog attacks in the US. What definition of confirmation bias are we operating on in this discussion, exactly?

                We can all agree that you wouldn’t take a sheep herder off its leash for a walk, and why? Because it was bred to herd things and will get run over.

                1. Just quickly looking it up, Pit Bull terriers are 3.3% of the dog population but account for just over half of reported dog attacks in the US.

                  Citation??

                  Also, what is meant by “reported” and who is doing the identification of the dog breed? I’ve seen so many stories about “pit bull bites person” and looked at the dog and screamed because it’s NOT A FUCKING PIT BULL. However, someone (either a reporter or a cop) SAYS it’s a pit bull to keep the fearmongering alive. I’ll buy that half of the media reported atttacks are from pit bulls. They don’t report when it’s a lab or a schnauzer. That’s not good copy. But when an evil pit bull so much as nips at someone’s feet, they print headlines like “PIT BULL SAVAGELY MAULS LOCAL MAN”

                  1. Citation??

                    You’re right, bad form. Here’s what I was just looking at: http://images.bimedia.net/docu…..d+2012.pdf

                2. “but it doesn’t mean I’m lining up to buy the ones with the sharpest teeth or the strongest jaw.”

                  German shepherd dogs have a stronger bite than pits. Not by much, but still.

            2. Guns can go off accidentally when you mishandle them, too. Not a gun problem.

              Pits are more dangerous when they do attack because of their speed and strength, but there is nothing in their genetics that predisposes them to attack. They are actually much less likely, as again, they are more docile toward humans. They’ve actually been bred that way – do you think someone who raises pits to fight other pits wants them to attack humans? Fuck no, and that trait will get a pit culled.

              The TINY percentage of pits who DO attack (assuming the absolute MAX estimate available, you could attribute at most a couple hundred deaths to pit bulls a decade, out of millions of the dogs) are pretty much completely due to a.) people who want the dog as a status symbol, and spend no time raising it correctly and b.) people who purposefully raise them wrong, as guard dogs.

              Pits were bred for jobs like cattle herding, and nannying. They were never, at any point in history, bred in large numbers for violence toward humans. They are, by any rational standard, extremely docile and loyal toward humans.

              1. They are, by any rational standard, extremely docile and loyal toward humans.

                This is true, because they were intentionally bred that way so as to be safe to handle when actually fighting another dog. I’ve read accounts of pit bull breeders who bred their pits as fighters having to put German Shepherds and Dobies inside the kennel runs to keep people from stealing their pits, because the pits would just go off with anybody.

                1. because the pits would just go off with anybody.

                  I could see my pit bull or rottie doing this. They’re extremely friendly to everyone he meets and think people exist solely to pet them and receive copious amounts of face licking in return. The rottie once broke through my fence because there were kids playing in the street and it wasn’t fair that he couldn’t play too.

        3. It sucks they had the rotten luck of being bred to be blood thirsty, but its a part of their nature now and ignoring it is more infantile, tolerant BS.

          Arguing from ignorance is no way to go through life, son.

          1. Arguing from ignorance is no way to go through life, son

            This. Seriously, don’t be moron. I own a pit bull and have several friends who own pit bulls. They aren’t “bred to be blood thirsty”.

            The fact is, they are extremely tough and loyal dogs. They will do ANYTHING they are trained to do just to please their master. That’s why they are so often used as fighting dogs or guard dogs. A pit bull that’s raised like a normal dog is just that, a normal dog. A pit bull that’s raised to be aggressive will be aggressive. It really is that simple.

            I’ve been attacked by a few dogs in my trips to fix things at people’s houses. A pomeranian, a chihuahua, and a poodle. None of the pits, rots, dobies, sheperds, or any other breed that gets a bad name has ever been anything but sweet to me.

            1. I freely admit the rarity of a dog attack in general, but give statistics about the population of attacks that do occur that are overwhelmingly pitbull. Regardless of the excuses about owners and training, there is a statistical liklihood that just can’t be discounted away.

              There are numerous comments from incomplete comparisons to lightning to “I own a pit bull” and I’m the one who is charged with coming from a place of ignorance and using “confirmation bias?”

              At first I thought my use of the word “apologists” might be too presumptuous and back handed, but no, it was spot on.

              1. http://pets.webmd.com/dogs/fea…..lls-safety

                Yeah, you are the one with the confirmation bias. I used to hate pit bulls. I specifically went out to find info to discourage my friend from getting one. I thought he was just one of those guys who wanted one because they’re a “badass” dog. By educating myself about the breed, I found that many of my biases were way off. I then set off to dispel my ignorance. I suggest you do the same.

                1. Just got back to this. Thanks for giving a counter argument from a good source and that doesn’t amount to much more than false equivocation with lightning strikes and coconuts. Not being sarcastic, thanks, I mean that. I’ve gotten used to a higher level of dialogue around this place, but pit bull owners/supporters on this blog sure have a take no prisoners mind set, sheesh!

                  Like everything I believe, from trivial dog preferences to game changing politics, I do keep an open mind about things, so you’ll have to excuse me if I get butt hurt over having my intellectual practices debased.

                  1. I try to keep it civil, but things like this do tend to get the better of me. Especially considering that I had to eat a lot of crow when I switched from the “pit bulls are vicious” crowd to realizing that they are just normal dogs.

                    Yeah, they’re really strong for their size. Yeah, they make great attack dogs due to their strength and loyalty. But, again, all things being equal, they are exactly the type of dog you’d want around your family. Especially children.

                    I had a funny encounter with a “gangsta” and his pit bull. I went to his house to fix his computer and this huge female was running around like crazy barking and growling. The dude warned me to stay away because she didn’t like strangers. At some point in the visit, she came into the room to investigate me. The dude came into the room looking for her, worried that she would bite me. By that point, she was sitting by the desk looking up at me with her tongue out while I was scritching her head. The dude was amazed. She wouldn’t let anyone but him that close.

        4. Rather than bullshit disingenuous arguments about coconuts, why don’t you review stats on attacks on humans by dogs across breeds.

          Then remember that those attacks by breed must be weighted against the total populations of different breeds of dogs. Also remember that except in the case of a pure-bred dog that the numbers may be skewed, ie does the bite from a pit/lab mix get reported as a pittie bite or a lab bite?

          And, yes, a pit bull bite is way more potentially dangerous than a chihuahua bite.

          This might actually require some rational thought and emotion-free analysis on your part.

          1. The data I was referring to doesn’t assign any mix data that is too low a percentage. Few mixes are even represented on this list because of the vast amount of mixing possibilities. So the data is actually filtering out pit bull terrier mixes and most every other mix that don’t include pit bull.

            The write up acknowledges a previous, similar study over represented pit bull terrier attacks by 20% because of your exact concerns. Obviously a mix could easily have been misreported as a pit bull terrier only, so weight that however you like.

            http://images.bimedia.net/docu…..d+2012.pdf

        5. This might shed a little more light on the subject:

          http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/he…..l-mauling/

          Acting on information, sheriff’ and animal-control officials obtained a warrant and searched Jackson’s home, located about a block from the site of the attack. Eight dogs, six pit bulls and two mixed-breeds, were taken from the home….
          “They’d be walking past the house, and the dogs would attack them or their livestock, he said. “In one instance, they were attacking a guy on a horse. [Jackson} encouraged it. When he tried to stop the dogs, [Jackson] threw rocks at him, and said to leave his dogs alone.”

          In other words, a hood rat who thought owning a bunch of mean dogs was “gangsta” was responsible for the woman’s death, not the dogs.

          1. In other words, a hood rat who thought owning a bunch of mean dogs was “gangsta” was responsible for the woman’s death, not the dogs.

            THIS.

            Reports like the one that ABW posted above completely ignore who the typical owner of a breed is. Pitties, by and large, are owned by “gangstas” who want a dog that makes him look like a badass and due to the media vilification of the pit bulls, rottweilers, etc they are more likely to get one of them than a labrador. They then train them or abuse them so they are vicious, and their bite statistics go up, causing more media fury. Less good people buy the “vicious killing machines”, leaving the vast majority in the hands of people who WANT a vicious dog.

            Study after study has shown that all things being equal, pit bulls are less likely to attack someone unprovoked. But ignorant assholes are always going to cherry pick some data to vilify some certain breed of dog and create the same cyclic pattern that reinforces these asinine ideas that they are vicious “by nature”.

    2. Pamela Devitt, 63, died after being bitten 150 to 200 times by his four pit bulls.

      STOP RESISTING!

      1. ^^Who in the fuck is this useless cunt?^^

    3. I work for a large insurance company and in an area that tracks claims from injuries from dogs closely. Damages from pittbulls, and related breeds, are the most frequent and costly by far.

      Still rare in the grand scheme of things.

  36. Texas woman run over by her own car in front of school

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..z2UsKoZfVL

    1. The 50-year-old woman, whom police did not identify, was killed in front of Churchill High School

      So it was probably a Mercedes or BMW.

      Alternate snark: Usually in Texas a woman’s car “accidentally” runs over men suspected of being unfaithful.

      1. So? she’d been driving other cars?

  37. Judge says Orange County authorities can prosecute man in Italian cruise ship death

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..z2UsKqtPMZ

    Anyone know anything more about this case?

    1. If California can now charge people for crimes that occurred in other jurisdictions, they can probably make some money charging other states to retry cases that resulted in an acquittal.

    2. California now claims jurisdiction over the entire world, apparently.

    3. I’d be interested in reading the opinion and seeing how the judge asserts jurisdiction after reading CA’s criminal jurisdiction statute, CA Penal Code section 27:

      (a) The following persons are liable to punishment under the laws of this state:
      (1) All persons who commit, in whole or in part, any crime within
      this state.
      (2) All who commit any offense without this state which, if
      committed within this state, would be larceny, carjacking, robbery,
      or embezzlement under the laws of this state, and bring the property
      stolen or embezzled, or any part of it, or are found with it, or any
      part of it, within this state.
      (3) All who, being without this state, cause or aid, advise or
      encourage, another person to commit a crime within this state, and
      are afterwards found therein.

      Not seeing how murder on an Italian cruise liner, in International waters, fits under this statute. Of course, there’s always the, “Well, you’re in CA now,” way of asserting personal jurisdiction. How are crimes on ships or other international vessels prosecuted? Is it in admiralty law?

  38. Obamacare to increase individual premiums by 64-146% in California. Let’s see how much these idiot liberals love it in a year from now.

    1. Fuck….. Why the hell do I still live in this State? Oh yeah… the ol’ ball and chain.

    2. Being a Liberal means never admitting something is wrong or broken, just that more government intervention is required to fix.

      1. “It’s projection all the way down.” -Epi (quoting him from memory, hope I got it right)

    1. From the comments:

      I don’t mean to be glib at all, but we can’t erase the injustice of the past. That injustice was the result of long term social and political processes and can only be remedied through long term social and political processes aimed at ideas of justice.

      Holy fucking derp.

    2. If he’d quit living in the echo chamber, he’d bat .400 or better, which is damn good for a 2-3 post per week blogger.

  39. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013…..ng-in-day/

    Philly cops get in three shootings in one day. Only one dead, but they managed to wing a 2 year old so it’s all good.

    1. Did they kill any dogs while they were at it?

    2. I hope none of the cops got hurt!

      1. No, thank god!

  40. Obamacare Naysayers Take Heed: This Provision Is a Success
    http://wallstcheatsheet.com/st…..ml/?ref=YF

    While that statement may be perhaps too broad, as not all of the legislation has been enacted, data suggest that the measure that allows young adults ages 19 to 25 to remain on their guardians’ insurance policies has been a success.

    Researchers at RAND Corporation found that provision of Obamacare shifted at least $147 million in healthcare costs from patients and hospitals to insurance companies in 2011. As evidence of that phenomenon, the results of the study, which was published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, showed that the percentage of visits to the emergency room by uninsured young adults fell 9 percent in 2011 while the number of emergency visits by young adults covered by private insurers increased 5 percent.

    your lack of economic knowledge is disturbing…

    1. The NEJM is one of the biggest industry rags ever. I read one of their stupid fucking articles for every one of my master’s classes every week and it was painful.

      It was for an MHA, so we didn’t read much of the nitty gritty clinical stuff, just the operational and healthcare economic studies. Its like in order to get published, the first requirement is to check sound empirical study principles and assumptions at the door.

  41. The Saddest Tweeters Live in Texas
    Researchers analyzed ten million tweets to map happiness in the U.S.
    http://news.nationalgeographic…..alifornia/

    The town of Beaumont is known as “Texas ? with a little something extra.” But the industrial town along the Gulf Coast now has a more dubious distinction: It’s been named the saddest city in America?at least, if you’re measuring sadness on Twitter.

    That’s according to a group of researchers at the Vermont Complex Systems Center, who analyzed over 80 million words from more than ten million geotagged tweets written throughout 2011. The results of their study, published Wednesday in the journal PLoS ONE, showed that the happiest tweeters in the U.S. live in Napa, California, and their sad counterparts live mostly in the Rust Belt and along the Gulf Coast border.

    1. I’d be pretty sad if I lived in Beaumont, too.

      1. I was jut thinking that. The real tag ought to be:
        Beaumont: the worst mix of the South and the Southwest

  42. Veteran Arrested, Has Rifle Confiscated After Firing Warning Shot at Wanted Felo
    http://www.guns.com/2013/05/30…..lon-video/

    A U.S. military veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan was arrested and had his rifle taken away following an incident Sunday night with a man who he says was trying to break into his home in Medford, Oregon.

    The vet told the suspect that he was armed, fired a warning shot from his AR-15 and although he perhaps helped bring the wanted felon into police custody, he now faces criminal charges as well for his actions.

    1. The creep to out UK the UK continues…

      1. Fortunately, I think we are still a very long way from there when it comes to guns. If we were anything close to that, all privately owned guns would have been confiscated after Newtown.

        I don’t know that the charge is so unreasonable. The article makes it sound like the felon guy was being threatening. If he did shoot in his direction and not at the ground, it is a bit reckless. You’re not supposed to shoot at something alive unless you want it dead.

    2. Ah, the land of the free.

    3. And I must mention that the reporter in the video is smoking hot.

    4. Never fire warning shots. If you’re pulling the trigger, you should be justified in shooting the bad guy.

    5. It would have been fine if he had used a shotgun per Joey Biden’s advice.

    6. Medford Police Lt. Mike Budreau said, “There was nothing that the suspect was doing that was aggressive enough to justify the shooting. In fact, the suspect was walking away.”

      I am sure the cops will apply the strict standard the next time an Oregon cop shoots someone. When they shoot an unarmed man 30 times like a gang of angry baboons, it is all about officer safety. When you fire a warning shot at some scum bag who has broken into your home, that guy better have been doing something to justify that warning shot or your are in big trouble.

      God I hate cops.

    7. This article is blocked for me, but it’s come to a point where you should never call police.

      1. Yup. That and don’t fire warning shots. If he had just shot the guy, chances are he could have claimed he was terrified and felt threatened and got off. What got him in trouble was not shooting the guy.

        The other lesson is don’t live in states that don’t have the castle doctrine if you can avoid it.

        1. I think Oregon does have the castle doctrine. So he could have shot the guy.

          1. He will never be charged. They just arrested him and took his rifle, which he will never see again as a way of the cops telling civilians to be sheep not wolves.

            1. The article said he’d get his rifle back if the charges were dropped. Of course he’ll have to hire a lawyer that will charge him more than the rifle is worth, but he’ll eventually get it back.

          2. The guy had not actually entered the home, so shooting him would have been a bad idea.

            1. Probably. IT is the problem with apartment complexes. The common areas don’t count as a “home” for the purposes of self defense, whereas a yard around your house does.

      2. but it’s come to a point where you should never call police.

        You should call the cops AFTER you have dealt with the intruder. That way they can do the paperwork.

        When you fire a warning shot at some scum bag who has broken into your home, that guy better have been doing something to justify that warning shot or your are in big trouble.

        I would say breaking in would cover the “doing something to justify that warning shot.” However, never fire a warning shot.

  43. Maine teens wary of social media after homicide
    http://news.yahoo.com/maine-te…..20513.html

    The death of a 15-year-old Maine girl allegedly killed in a bizarre kidnapping plot involving a fake Facebook profile has prompted some of her classmates to scale back their social media use ? or ditch it altogether.

    Nichole Cable was allegedly killed by an acquaintance who used a fake profile to lure her from her home, then kidnap her in hopes of becoming a hero when he miraculously “found” her, according to state police.

  44. David Malpass: Fed Policy Is a Drag on Recovery

    One line of Fed criticism has emphasized money printing and an inflation risk. This is off target and, with inflation low, gives the Fed an opening to keep going. … The M2 money supply, the measure of bank deposits often used by monetarists to anticipate inflation, is unaffected. Private-sector credit grew only 0.8% from the end of 2008 through the end of 2012, whereas credit to the government grew 58%.

    So hey, what’s the problem?

    The Fed’s intention is that the low bond rates it provides the government will spill over to big corporations and banks, who in turn will help the little guy. This trickle-down monetary policy has contributed to very fast growth in corporate profits, part of the explanation for the record stock market, but also to weak GDP growth and declining middle-class incomes. The extra credit the Fed channeled to government and big corporations meant less credit elsewhere in the economy, a contractionary influence since most new jobs come from small businesses.

  45. The Fed’s intention is that the low bond rates it provides the government will spill over to big corporations and banks, who in turn will help the little guy.

    And distorting the price signal could never, ever lead to large scale misallocation of resources. Not here. Not with Top Men on the job.

  46. http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..story.html

    Nice flying chief.

    1. Article says the flight was out of Philadelphia bound for Manassas and the passenger was “taking infrared photos.” Hmmm…

  47. Johah Goldberg review Kevin Williamson’s new book The End Is Near and It’s Going to Be Awesome:

    Leviathan Fail
    The State faces humiliation and bankruptcy, and that’s the good news.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/…..h-goldberg

    The State ? properly capitalized ? is a different creature altogether from mere government. It is an instrument of will. It seeks to tell people how to live. Worse still, it uses force to do so. Worst of all, its paramount purpose is not answering the question “What’s best for the people?” ? that is at most a secondary consideration ? but “What is good for the State?”

    1. I forgot to add this bit about Nock:

      For Nock, the government is the machinery created by the Founders to protect our individual rights, our shores from foreign enemies, and, well, that’s about it. Even a police force was an iffy proposition for Nock. “When Sir Robert Peel proposed to organize the police force of London, Englishmen said openly that half a dozen throats cut in Whitechapel every year would be a cheap price to pay for keeping such an instrument of tyranny out of the State’s hands,” Nock wrote. “We are all beginning to realize now that there is a great deal to be said for that view of the matter.”

      1. It is amazing how the fears of our ancestors so often are proven to be valid. During the great Mississippi flood of 1927, the progs demanded that Coolidge send in federal troops to help stop the flood and provide assistance. Coolidge at first said no because he thought doing that would set a terrible precedent that the federal government is responsible for every misfortune. Today we have FEMA working on snow removal in Hartford after an average blizzard. Coolidge knew of what he spoke.

  48. I heard about this story on the radio this morning and I thought it would go well here in Morning Linx. Unfortunately the trying too hard to funny youtube twits was the only link I found about after googling “man arrested for violating a door.”

    Cops: “Sir were you just violating a door?

    Man: “Yes, I have a mental problem.”

    …The hell you say? What was your first clue?

  49. This morning’s Morning Joke drive-by featured a discussion about Eric Holder and the usual empty platitudes abut “freedom of the press”.

    Donny Deutsch piped up to say Holder, instead of apologizing, should tell the American people their safety is his responsibility, and allowing treasonous vermin to leak State Secrets must be stopped at any cost. No right-thinking American could object to that, could they?

    No mention of why we have a President or Secretary of Defense when the Atty General has such sweeping power and authority.

    1. And no mention of just exactly what a “state secret” is and how that term could be abused to cover up wrong doing and corruption. No. top men would never do that.

  50. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/maryl…..35275.html

    The Pop Tart kid gets NRA Junior Life Membership.

  51. Englishmen said openly that half a dozen throats cut in Whitechapel every year would be a cheap price to pay

    How the mighty have fallen.

  52. Baseball regionals start today, Go Owls!

    1. Golf final 8 match play started a few minutes ago.

      Go Jackets, beat the Rebs!

      1. 1 Cal vs 8 Arizona St
        4 Texas vs 5 Illinois
        2 Georgia Tech vs 7 UNLV
        3 Alabama vs 6 New Mexico

        Seeding is based on the last 3 days of stroke play. Next 3 days is team match play.

        Texas A&M would have finished at +1 and qualified but one player got a 1 stroke slow play penalty. They finished in a 4-way tie at +2 with New Mexico, UNLV, and Arizona St for the last 3 spots and then lost the 1 hole playoff.

    2. Go Tigers! I’m pissed they have to play in Columbia though.

      1. I was hoping my Jackets would be in the Louisville regional instead of Nashville, which is death. Vandy might be winning it all this year.

        1. The committee clearly hates Clemson since they keep sending them down to Cola if they aren’t hosting. I don’t know how many more losses to the Cocks I can take. Although, after what they did in the ACC tourney they’re lucky to be anywhere.

          1. uga ends up at GT whenever we host. They do this to everyone, they try to avoid travel whenever possible, which isnt bad, but you get this stuff over and over.

            1. The Bulldogs suffer? So it’s win-win for everyone.

              1. For some reason, we thump them in regular season and they beat us in playoffs.

                1. I cannot lift this.

                  Grow stronger!

      2. Hogs got screwed. Mightily.

        Oh well, Kansas State/Bryant/Wichita State is gonna get boofooed to Bolivia. If someone could knock off Oregon State, we can still have the Super at the best college park in the game.

  53. Trivia question: Despite being regularly one of the best conferences in college baseball, when (and what school) was the last time an ACC school won the NCAA baseball title?

    Because no one who doesnt know this already is ever going to guess it:

    Wake Forest, 1955.

    That is the entirety of ACC baseball national titles.

    1. I didn’t know they were one of the best conferences. My knowledge of college baseball is a bit dated. But when I think of college baseball, I think of the California and Arizona schools, and Texas, and Oklahoma State, and the Southeastern schools like Miami, LSU and Florida. I don’t really think of any ACC schools.

      1. What’s funny is that FSU and Miami both have titles, but those predate their involvement with the ACC.

        Just going off of memory, the ACC has always seemed pretty tough in baseball. I’m surprised at the lack of titles.

        Right now, the SEC is strong, but that is less entrenched than in football. As John notes, there are some powerhouses out west.

        1. Rob is going to hate me saying this, but outside of basketball, the ACC’s new entrants have been drug down to the ACC’s level rather than lifting the conference up. Both FSU and Miami were marquee football schools before joining the ACC. After about five years in the ACC, not so much.

          1. Agreed, though whether that’s cause and effect is anyone’s guess.

            Generally speaking, the ACC has always been a solid conference, but it usually fails to be dominant, except for its top teams in basketball.

  54. So, the whole “Reasonable” extension…

    On this, my work computer, the history thing in the bottom right corner (the only real reason I use Reasonable outside of the highlighting of new posts and the gravatars), stopped working some weeks ago. On my computer at home, it’s never worked at all. Can anyone explain this? I usually comment on shit somewhere around 8 hours after everyone else, and I hate trying to dig back through later to see where exactly I posted, and if anyone else drive-by’d it.

    1. I’ve never seen this magical “history” thing that you speak of. I was thinking the other day that it would be a great addition to be able to click something that shows me when people respond to threads I’ve posted in. Is this what it did?

      1. In the box in the bottom right, above “Most recent comments”…it USEDta be that if you hovered over the word “History”, it would pop out a list of your most recent comments across the site, so you could go back and peruse real quick-like. Then, all of a sudden, it stopped updating…it still pops out, but the last comment it has listed for me was on May 6th. This is the same on my work computer, and my laptop at home.

        On my desktop at home, the box does not, and has never, even popped out. I assume this is built on a simple css hover command, which is why I find it odd that it doesn’t behave similarly across different installations of the same version of Chrome.

        As far as the updating, and recent lack thereof, I assume that has something to do with Cinco de Quatro.

        1. I wasn’t clear. I have the actual text that says “History” above the most recent comments, but it’s never actually done anything like you describe.

    2. I see the word ‘History’ on mine, but I didn’t know what that meant. The ‘most recent comments’ thing works fine for me, but I didn’t even know the history thing was supposed to do anything.

    3. I’ve been trying git out the past couple of days. I thought you were supposed to be able to collapse/expand subthreads?

  55. http://news.cincinnati.com/art…..ck_check=1

    But, But… I am constantly reminded that voter fraud doesn’t actually ever happen ever and I’m a racist for wanting people to prove their identity to vote…

    Fuck I’m already in a foul mood today.

    1. Now, INMIY, this is good news. We now have objective proof that deliberate voter fraud has occurred in n0 cases. Don’t expect the die-hards to believe this, but this will help sway that critical, rational middle.

      1. I would of course rather live in a universe in which voter fraud never happened, but this is good in the sense that we all believed it did and now have proof of that.

        1. Oh, I’m very glad that this is happening. Not the fraud, but the prosecution of the fraud. I’ve had so many arguments about this being a right wing/racist fantasy that I could probably hold the entire argument by myself and have it exactly mirror what an actual debate would sound like.

          I have a friend who works for the board of elections and ASSURES me that there is absolutely no way that voter fraud takes place anywhere at any time.

          Also, the “racist” claim seems awfully racist. I asked her to explain why it’s racist. From her mouth came something to the effect of “poor people can’t afford to get an ID, so since most poor people are minorities, they won’t be able to vote since they can’t afford it” Really? That’s not a racist statement? But wait, it gets better.

          When I confronted her with the fact that along with the plan to require ID to vote, they put in a bill to give FREE State IDs to anyone who needs one. Upon receiving this information, she said “well it still would require them to go the BMV, and that’s a big hassle. Most of these people are poor because they are not motivated, so they won’t go get an ID so they can vote.” Wait, wait, wait… YOU just said that most poor people are minorities and they’re poor because they’re lazy. How the fuck does that make ME a racist?

      2. “n0” was supposed to be “n [greater than] zero”.

  56. Hey, I just watched House of Cards (US version), S1E7 last night. The antics of VP Jim Matthews are very amusing.

    1. He’s so Biden.

  57. Won’t the underworld be who produces assassin droids, anyway?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.