Harris Clarifies That She Does Not Support Prostitution Decriminalization, Would Use Executive Power To Toughen Gun Laws

Plus: Ohio moves to ban kids in drag shows while Washington wants to keep kids in car seats through middle school.

Kamala Harris answered questions on CNN last night. One important thing the senator and 2020 presidential candidate cleared up is any notion that she actually supports decriminalization of prostitution. Harris still thinks paying for sex should be a crime, she just wants to classify all female sex workers as victims so as to avoid arresting them.

In response to a question about decriminalization, Harris said "what I don't support is criminalizing these women." (Are there no male or non-binary sex workers in Harris' world? Or is it just that only women get to exchange their agency for their freedom?) Harris said she would, however, still target the "johns"—an old-timey word for anyone who pays for sex.

This method of sex policing is called the "End Demand" or Nordic/Swedish model. It's roundly panned by human rights agencies (Amnesty International and the World Health Organization, for example), migrant groups, doctors, criminal justice researchers, and sex workers themselves worldwide, for creating the same harms of full criminalization while letting police and politicians pretend to be taking a liberal and feminist tack.

"The Nordic Model is a legislative wolf in sheep's clothing," as Zoë Bulls and Victoria Watson of the Center for Health and Gender Equity put it. "Instead of protecting the health and rights of sex workers, it embodies an elementary, paternalistic understanding" and undermines "the agency and bodily autonomy of sex workers with a victimization framework."

???? The anti #sexwork abolitionists are now referring to the Nordic model (criminalize the clients but not workers) as "decriminalization."

This is NOT decrim, and has been called a "failed experiment" by UNAIDS & others. Don't let their misleading verbiage confuse you. #sexwork

— Christina C-Bomb Parreira (@VegasTrollop) April 20, 2019

It's also not working out so well in countries that have adopted it.

#swedishmodel has enabled protections against shockingly explicit racial discrimination to be rolled back.
2013- appeal court ruled in favour of a venue who'd refused entry to Asian women- deciding it ok as long as the intent= "preventing prostitution "https://t.co/PVn381zowb pic.twitter.com/v6Qt9so6Ox

— Rose Alliance (@RoseAlliance) April 23, 2019

But this sort of progressive authoritarianism seems to be in keeping with the overall Harris 2020 agenda. She also told the CNN Town Hall last night that she would give Congress 100 days to pass "reasonable gun safety laws" and "if they fail to do it, then I will take executive action."

Harris said her executive order would expand the list of people not allowed to legally purchase guns, require anyone who sells more than five guns a year to conduct background checks on customers, and that any gun seller who violates any gun regulation would automatically have their license pulled by the feds.

Oof. Asked about Bernie supporting the Boston Bomber, those on death row having the right to vote, Harris said…

"I think we should have that conversation."#awkwardsilence

— Josh Kraushaar (@JoshKraushaar) April 23, 2019

In keeping with her all-things-to-all-people strategy, Harris also remained vague about some issues (including impeaching Trump and voting rights for the incarcerated), suggesting that we really need to "look into" or "have a conversation" about them.

kamala harris: the future is looking at the best way of doing that

— man it's a hot zone, (@Mobute) April 23, 2019

I don't think the 10 months we have until Iowa is enough to have all the conversations Kamala wants to have https://t.co/xCgSh4mPjz

— Brent Scher (@BrentScher) April 23, 2019

Notice how she doesn't explicitly call on the House to initiate impeachment proceedings, but endorses "steps toward" that end, which could mean just about anything, including never initiating impeachment proceedings. Lawyerly deflection https://t.co/ykcTjireuM

— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) April 23, 2019

---

FREE MINDS

Child in drag prompts legislative overkill in Ohio. In response to one example of parents letting their child perform in a charity drag show, Ohio is seeking to create a new law criminalizing the appearance of children in any show that "appeals to prurient interest," an incredibly vague category. There are already laws criminalizing actual abuse and (sexual and labor) exploitation of children; this new rule would simply invite threats against and prosecutions of parents for anything folks found distasteful or didn't understand.

In the case of the drag show, the child's parents say there was nothing sexual about the performance and that it's actually outraged conservatives who are sexualizing children here. But the bill's sponsor is invoking everyone's favorite new bogeyman—human traffickers—to back up his legislation. "Given our heightened focus on human trafficking and the role money plays in trafficking children, I knew I had to take action to make sure this activity does not occur again," he said.

---

FREE MARKETS

Washington law could keep kids in car seats through middle school. A new measure signed into law by the state's governor says kids must use booster seats until they reach a height of 4 feet and 9 inches tall.

"In some cases, that means some kids could still be in a booster at the age of 12," points out ABC7 News. "The new guidelines will go into effect in January."

---

QUICK HITS

People underestimate how devastating a stint in jail can be even when charges are dropped. This mother spent a week in jail and lost her job and children. The charges were then dropped b/c of mistaken identity.https://t.co/5raBkoqbyn

— Waqar Vick Rehman (@WaqarVick) April 21, 2019

• Should victims of sexual assault have to spend time in jail for refusing to testify against their assailants?

• "Jennifer [Newstead] is a seasoned leader whose global perspective and experience will help us fulfill our mission," Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg said about the company's new top lawyer. Newstead also helped create the PATRIOT Act.

• Student journalists versus the Department of Education?

I was there on site…no one from our staff knew student journalists were attempting to attend. Everyone attending was required to RSVP (including journalists) but we welcome student journalists & would have been happy for them to attend had we known they were there. https://t.co/IeG0OzhMrM

— ED Press Secretary (@EDPressSec) April 22, 2019

• NYPD confidential:

SCOOP: @WNYC/@Gothamist has confirmed that all 5 borough prosecutors are using (or building) secret databases of cops with credibility problems. If released, these records could call 1000s of past convictions into question:https://t.co/rrEF1wEFk2

— George Joseph (@georgejoseph94) April 22, 2019

• A few Pizzagate/QAnon conspiracy theorists have been scouring my social media for proof of something and found…me and Peter Suderman at a Reason Halloween party and a cover of Reason magazine. (Dastardly!) I bring this up solely by way of sharing this response, which I offer as a peace offering to reason.com regulars unsettled by the site redesign:

https://twitter.com/ardentcrayon/status/1120651295025549312?s=12

Comments

[Fist of Etiquette]

Kamala Harris answered questions on CNN last night.

HUGE mistake.

[Troglodyte Rex]

That's the first thing I thought based on the headline...that may tank her candidacy.

[chipper me timbers]

She already had no chance. She and the others are just circling the drain.

[Fist of Etiquette]

...what I don't support is criminalizing these women.

But instead simply helping them... into handcuffs.

[Longtorso, Johnny]

My female dog humps my male dog. #WokeDogs

Can Dogs be Transgender?

[Longtorso, Johnny]

Dogs are a tool of white supremacy and gentrification. That’s not just my opinion. There is research that shows how white newcomers dogwalking routes stake out territory. And white owners user their pets to socialize with other white owners excluding minorities.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Who knew gay men were so aggressively patriarchical?

[lap83]

"Having said this, there have been cases where dog owners have felt that their dogs are transgender and they have therefore undergone gender reassignment surgery."

And I stopped reading there. I don't like to read about animal mutilation in my spare time

[Longtorso, Johnny]

Aren't you just supposed to remove everything to keep them from breeding anyway? Transgender or not, off come the nuts.

[Don't look at me!]

It’s a slippery slope.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

Bob Barker approves of this message.

[Bee Tagger]

me and Peter Suderman at a Reason Halloween party and a cover of Reason magazine. (Dastardly!)

dastardly is a synonym for cosmopolitan!

[Fist of Etiquette]

Oof. Asked about Bernie supporting the Boston Bomber, those on death row having the right to vote, Harris said…

"I think we should have that conversation.

...with our focus groups.

[Bee Tagger]

A new measure signed into law by the state's governor says kids must use booster seats until they reach a height of 4 feet and 9 inches tall.

if only ralph nader were alive to see this

[BlueStarDragon]

What about midgets and pygmies ?

[Vernon Depner]

My grandmother was 4'9. Could barely see over the dash of her 1960 Comet.

[Mickey Rat]

You not only can live your life in the baby seat, you are required to.

[Juice]

My woman is 4'11." Phew, she just made the cut.

[Fist of Etiquette]

In the case of the drag show, the child's parents say there was nothing sexual about the performance and that it's actually outraged conservatives who are sexualizing children here.

"I'm not the pervert. You're the pervert."

[Robert]

Lots of children play parts for the opposite sex in plays.

The comments at the news site on this really get me down. Lots of them object to children's even being in a bar, characterizing bars as being full of "drunken perverts". Many comments seem to think a child's playing the role of the opposite sex will confuse that child sexually. One even objects to people under 16 years old doing public performances or being in competitions (e.g. sports) of any kind. Most of the comments on the other side are saying, "There are more important things than this to focus on," rather than, "What's wrong with that?"

[Vernon Depner]

You’re throwing together apples, oranges, and doorknobs here.

Lots of children play parts for the opposite sex in plays.

A child being a drag performer is hardly the same thing as a little girl playing Christopher Robin in a school play. Drag performers don’t just play a part in a play; they create complete opposite sex personas as whom they perform regularly.

Lots of them object to children’s even being in a bar, characterizing bars as being full of “drunken perverts”.

Well, bars exist for the purpose of getting drunk and finding other drunk people to have sex with. No, it’s no place for child.

Many comments seem to think a child’s playing the role of the opposite sex will confuse that child sexually.

As I said, encouraging a child to create an ongoing opposite-sex persona, and presenting that persona in a sexually charged setting, is nothing like simply playing a member of the opposite sex in an age-appropriate play. It certainly could be confusing to a susceptible child—and a child not at risk for sexual confusion probably would not have the interest in the first place.

One even objects to people under 16 years old doing public performances or being in competitions (e.g. sports) of any kind.

That’s extreme, but there’s room for some concern there. I don’t understand why high school cheerleading is even allowed—the intent of displaying young girls’ bodies to sell tickets to the games is obvious. And if a childless man is regularly showing up for the middle school boys’ swim meets, keep an eye on him.

[Longtorso, Johnny]

"Europe's true vocation is to make democracy impossible and install a government of experts. Democracy is the future. Europe is a regression."

[Longtorso, Johnny]

Transgender film-maker Jason Barker: ‘I found dressing as a uterus very liberating’

[Juice]

Well, he looks like a lesbo, so maybe he just wants to feel like one too.

[Longtorso, Johnny]

Romanian hospitals in crisis as emigration takes its toll
Thousands of doctors and nurses have left Romania in past decade, leading to dire staff shortages

[Fist of Etiquette]

In some cases, that means some kids could still be in a booster at the age of 12...

AND they should be forced to be driven right up to the school door for all their peers to see. It's not the state's fault you're short.

[Don't look at me!]

Soy boyz have to come from somewhere.

[Ken Shultz]

"Instead of protecting the health and rights of sex workers, it embodies an elementary, paternalistic understanding" and undermines "the agency and bodily autonomy of sex workers with a victimization framework."

Going after Johns instead of prostitutes is a superior model to the one we have now. Opposing the Nordic model because it isn't perfect is like opposing the legalization of recreational marijuana because it doesn't also get rid of zoning laws. Yes, treating recreational marijuana shops like liquor stores is superior to the Drug War, and the Nordic model is superior to what we have now.

Smart libertarians take what they can get and keep fighting for the rest.

[Don't look at me!]

How about we jump right to stop arresting people for having sex.

[Ken Shultz]

How 'bout we overturn Wickard v. Filburn to declare three fourths of the regulatory state unconstitutional, repeal the 16th Amendment to get rid of the income tax, and drop all of our trade barriers with China while they agree to do the same?

The reason is because none of those things are on the negotiating table. Not only that, but the American people don't want them and won't accept them yet. So, what do we do? We take what we can get and keep fighting for the rest.

If we'd opposed decriminalizing marijuana until local government stopped zoning liquor stores, we might not have legal recreational marijuana today. We certainly shouldn't oppose lowering the income tax until the 16th Amendment is repealed. We shoudn't oppose lowering trade barriers until they're all removed either.

All that shit is stupid.

[loveconstitution1789]

+1000000

[soldiermedic76]

Really? How is this better? These women are still being criminalized, just not arrested. Instead their customers alone are being targeted. This doesn't make these women any safer, doesn't five them any more freedom, doesn't respect their autonomy.

[Ken Shultz]

Why is not arresting women better than arresting both women and men?

Are you serious?

[soldiermedic76]

Yes I am serious. Oh so they don't get arrested but nothing else improves in their life. That isn't measurably better. It is a feel good move that does nothing for these workers autonomy. And I suspect they still get arrested just not for prosti

[soldiermedic76]

Prostitution. Maybe for vagrancy or some other victimless crime. We just won't charge them with prostitution but they still aren't any safer, and possibly less safe. It is a bullshit cop out that makes the proponents feel good while not actually achieving anything. In other words, typical progressive bullshit.

[PuzzlesAreFun]

Interesting to read the perspectives of people on the outside looking in whether they are 'pro' or 'against' prostitution. So many people seem to think they are experts regarding what should be done whether pro or against. Most often there isn't an erotic laborer one in the convo and no one borhered to ask erotic laborers what they think.

I wish that people could better comprehend the sex trades for starters. Most have a very over simplified understanding. Street based is usually centered even though street based workers are not the majority population and have very different circumstances and needs from other sectors of the trades. There are many different economies and cultures throughout the sex trades, as well as a variety of vocations. There is no broad stroke here. No pun intended.

Before you can even try to come up with so called solutions you need to understand the terrain. Sex workers are the experts here. Yes we are. We need decriminalization so we can come to the table. THEN we talk regulations with us, the experts at the head of that table.

[soldiermedic76]

I agree. From my reading (I grant no first hand knowledge) people who work at legal brothels (both in Nevada and in countries like Australia and Holland) are satisfied with their work and feel safe. Legalize it, not halfway bullshit that states we won't arrest the sex workers but they are still breaking the law. We will just arrest their customers.

[Ken Shultz]

Yes, not being arrested is measurably better than being arrested.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

""Yes, not being arrested is measurably better than being arrested."'

Then apply the law equally and don't arrest either.

[Ken Shultz]

Yes, that's the goal.

The problem is that we have this thing called "democracy", and it's pretty effective at making politicians reflect what people want.

The reason recreational marijuana is state legal and the president respects that is because that's pretty close to what the American people want.

The reason prostitution isn't legal is because the American people don't want that yet. They might want us to stop victimizing women. That's a step in the right direction! Let's take that and call it a win--and keep fighting for the rest.

Because you can't get everything you want is not a good reason to forego half of what you want, and there is no reason to give up fighting for the rest. Better is better, even if it isn't great. And great is great, even if it isn't perfect. Better is better than what we have now, and great is even better than better. If we ever get offered something great, let's take it--and keep fighting for perfect.

That's how you get from Point A to Point Z--one victory at a time.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

""They might want us to stop victimizing women. That’s a step in the right direction! Let’s take that and call it a win–and keep fighting for the rest. ""

When are women the victim in this? If you profit from a crime, you are not a victim. If you are arrested for your involvement in a crime, you are not a victim.

""The reason prostitution isn’t legal is because the American people don’t want that yet. ""

If that's true than enforce the law. If the people don't like the enforcement of the law, perhaps they will want it changed. When the law is not applied equally, then one side will have no interest in change since they are not being prosecuted.

[PuzzlesAreFun]

I would rather risk being arrested as I have for near 20 years now, over having my livelihood destroyed by the nordic model.

Street based workers are now getting pushed into diversion programs where they allegedly are not being arrested, they get treatment and assistance (or so the story goes) the program is called LEAD (law enforcement assisted diversion) and it is the compromise SWOPUSA already made (which I did not support) endorsing LEAD instead of fighting for decriminalization.

The vast majority of erotic laborers are indoor workers most often independent workers. We likely won't get the diversion program option unless we are addicted and a huge portion of us are pretty damn stable and would not qualify for diversion. Budgets will favor those who are in 'crisis' not the sex worker who is stable and supporting themselves and/or a family who is doing alright. No, our assets if we have any will be stolen and our lives destabilized. Even so, my chances of arrest are far slimmer than you must realize and all the nordic model will do is fuck up thousands upon thousands of erotic laborers ability to pay their rent. We have already been destabilized by FOSTA SESTA.

Don't do us any favors Ken.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

I think you might be guilty of the perfect solution fallacy here. Libertarians need to take what we can get.

[PuzzlesAreFun]

Leave it alone then. If you are going to make it worse DO NOTHING. the nordic model will absolutely make things worse.

At least now we have a better chance at maintaining our livelihoods. The whole point of the end demand nordic model is to attack the buyer part of the market. The earliest reference I have found for this approach was in a 1911 book titled "the horrors of the white slave trade- protecting the purity of our homes" which should tell you something right there! "Suppress the market you destroy the trade"

I thought libertarians were pro free market?!

The nordic swedish end demand model was and is a concept born out of evangelical moralizing. It has ZERO to do with protecting women it is about controlling women who choose to engage in erotic labor.

So now here I see libertarians endorsing evangelical bullshit which is also anti free market. Now you know. Please upgrade your understanding.

[H. Farnham]

This was my thought as well, not that I want to defend Kamala Harris in any way.

I see it as being similar to decriminalizing drug use, while still prosecuting the sale/distribution (I know, kind of a reverse situation, but still an adequate analogy). Any steps taken where fewer people will be subject to government retribution involving victimless crimes seems like a net win to me.

[Azathoth!!]

Going after Johns instead of prostitutes is a superior model to the one we have now

So we should arrest people for buying stolen goods but leave the sellers alone?

We should arrest people for buying drugs but leave the pushers, street gangs and cartels--who only sell or produce the drugs--alone?

The 'Nordic Model' isn't superior. It's a way to pretend that women have no agency when it comes to prostitution.

[Robert]

Isn't it better to have no agency than to be a criminal?

Plus, consider it a step toward further reforms. Maybe we can get an analogous johns-as-victims movement going, and decree the johns also to have no agency, so neither will be a criminal. We can point toward the Nordic model for precedent.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

""Maybe we can get an analogous johns-as-victims movement going,""

Men can't play the victim card.

Isn't the equal application of law a cornerstone of a just society?

[PuzzlesAreFun]

No. Just. No.

Under the nordic model clients know they are targeted and will seek to control negotiations and working conditions on behalf of their own safety, making it a buyers market, good clients are more likely to stay away over risking themselves, predators are on the other hand are more likely to try to take advantage. With the nordic you are hurting the economy of the workers.

Criminalization as it stands is better than the nordic model!!!

You do not understand this topic enough to speak on it Ken Shultz.

[Longtorso, Johnny]

Here Come the Architects: Modernists Want Glass Roof, Steel Spire, or Minaret for Notre Dame
Perhaps most controversial is a proposal in Domus, the architecture magazine, by Tom Wilkinson, for the fallen spire to be replaced with an Islamic minaret, to memorialise Algerians who protested the French government in the 1960s.

“These victims of the state could be memorialised by replacing [the spire] with – why not? – a graceful minaret,” Wilkinson insisted.

[Don't look at me!]

Or maybe a giant penis? Or a missile silo? Why not?

[Sometimes a Great Notion]

Hopefully the French respect property rights more then USA/NYC. Catholic church will repair however they feel like unlike the freedom tower mess.

[Mickey Rat]

Except the French government nationalized historic cathedrals over a century ago. French secularism does not mean a separation of church and state, it means the church subordinate to the state.

[Conchfritters]

Nice shellfish

[OpenBordersLiberal-tarian]

"Oof. Asked about Bernie supporting the Boston Bomber, those on death row having the right to vote, Harris said... 'I think we should have that conversation.'"

I keep telling everybody Kamala Harris is the best choice for us Koch / Reason libertarians, and she proves it once again here. Letting people vote while incarcerated is obviously the pro-freedom position.

#LibertariansForTsarnaevsRightToVote

[Ken Shultz]

The Boston Bomber, though, he's not a Trump supporter, right?

[Longtorso, Johnny]

Matt Gaetz: Evidence of FBI-media 'corruption' coming out before DOJ inspector general report
"One of the other nuggets that the inspector general is working on is the corruption that existed between the media and members of of the FBI," Gaetz said. "Where members of the mainstream media were giving concert passes and athletic tickets and other incentives to people in the FBI to leak to them so we'll be seeing that even before we see the inspector general's report on how this fraudulent investigation began."

[Fist of Etiquette]

kamala harris: the future is looking at the best way of doing that

Someone's looking to surround herself with the best people.

[Erisian]

Which, like Trump, she will ignore the advise given by the best people and then instigate what *she* wants, and not what's best for the country as a whole.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

"" and that any gun seller who violates any gun regulation would automatically have their license pulled by the feds.""

This is the beauty of licensing schemes. You don't need to pass a law, just make something a requirement to receive the license and threaten to take the license away for bad (not necessarily unlawful) behavior.

[Cyto]

Meh, screw the license. With operation choke point, Obama already made that obsolete. In the post operation choke point world, any sort of undesirable behavior, attitude, or heritage is sufficient grounds to ban you from all society spy removing your access to banking, telephony and internet services, hosting services, payment collection services, money transfer services... You get the picture...

under the Obama administration, operation choke point moved from the illegal into the unfavored with things like check cashing businesses and pornography actors. In the intervening couple of years progressive activists both inside and outside of these industries have moved it to political undesirables like alt right groups and even mainstream conservatives.

Licensing schemes? We don't need no stinking licensing schemes. We will unperson you!

[Fist of Etiquette]

Should victims of sexual assault have to spend time in jail for refusing to testify against their assailants?

The answer for any question about someone not doing what state agents or courts think they should do is always jail.

[OpenBordersLiberal-tarian]

More bad economic news.

Warren Buffett Sees Most Newspapers as ‘Toast’ After Ad Decline

Of course Drumpf supporters probably think this is good news since their leader is waging a war on the media like Hitler did. But it's another example of businesses struggling in this terrible economy.

#DrumpfRecession

[Ken Shultz]

That article could have been written 15 years ago. I guess journalists never get sick of navel gazing.

Now tell is what Napster means for the music business.

[Ken Shultz]

"Harris said her executive order would expand the list of people not allowed to legally purchase guns, require anyone who sells more than five guns a year to conduct background checks on customers, and that any gun seller who violates any gun regulation would automatically have their license pulled by the feds."

My understanding is that Harris went beyond that.

"Ms. Harris, who was speaking during a televised CNN town hall Monday night, said she would direct government agencies to write new rules if Congress doesn’t pass a gun bill in the first 100 days of a Harris administration.

The first-term senator from California said she would prefer to sign a bill that widens background checks to all gun sales, bans assault weapons, and repeals the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which broadly shields gun manufacturers from lawsuits seeking to hold them liable for crimes committed with their products.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sen-kamala-harris-proposes-executive-actions-on-gun-control-if-she-wins-presidency-11555985611

While requiring background checks offends my libertarian sensibilities, the position she took should bother anyone who cares about our constitutional rights.

Holding gun companies responsible for what people do with their guns is like holding car companies responsible for terrorists mowing down people with their cars. It's an unacceptable attempt to drive gun manufacturers out of business by holding them responsible for something over which they have no control.

Banning "assault weapons" is unacceptable.

Doing these kinds of things by executive order is unacceptable.

Donald Trump is vastly superior from a libertarian perspective on this issue alone. If comes down to Harris vs. Trump, libertarians should vote for Trump.

[Don't look at me!]

Harris is more Hitler than Trump could ever be.

[Ken Shultz]

I don't know what you mean by that, but she sure as hell doesn't believe in the Second Amendment.

[Ken Shultz]

In all seriousness, my understanding is that the beams they had in that roof dated to the 13th century. If they'd torn that stuff out, for fire concerns, wouldn't the preservationists have gone nuts? I suppose they could have treated it in some way, but trying to put treatment on a log that dried out 800 years ago is like trying to fire treat a stack of dry hay. Not that a government wouldn't spend money on something like that, but I'm not sure that would have been the solution either. I bet they use fake logs or put a fireproof lining on some of that stuff. Hey, Joanna Gaines on Fixer Upper uses fake logs for rafters on ceilings, sometimes, that are no more than 20 feet up--and you can't tell they're fake. That would have been the solution up in the top of the cathedral--and the preservationists would have gone nuts.

[Ken Shultz]

Aw, shit. Supposed to be a reply to Sevo.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

If comes down to Harris vs. Trump, libertarians should vote for Trump.

Is there any realistic candidate that you would recommend voting for over Trump?

[Ken Shultz]

On the Democrat side?

Can you find me one that opposes the Green New Deal, hasn't promised to use EOs to violate our constitutional rights, doesn't support Medicare for all, etc.?

Those are deal killers.

Democrats used to be about all the stuff I don't like about Trump. Now that they've shifted so far to the left that Trump seems like a libertarian compared to them, defeating the Democrats becomes more important than lodging a protest vote for a Libertarian.

As I keep saying, as the Democrats become more authoritarian and socialist, libertarian capitalists need to become more Republican. It's purely a defensive move. The Democrats as they are now are that big of a threat--no kidding.

The last time I voted for a Republican was George W. Bush in 2000. He promised to privatize social security and move welfare from a government program to private charity. Haven't voted Republican since, but I'd vote for Trump over any Democrat at this point. I might consider voting for Biden--except that I don't think he'll fight against his own party. He'll sign the Green New Deal and Medicare for All if they send it to his desk--even if he's against them.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

I was thinking either side.

Amash is a no-brainer if he runs. Though I am skeptical if he would either as a primary challenger or as an LP candidate.

Weld (ugh), would actually be better than Trump on most issues if you believe what he says. He has flip-flopped so much on issues that I don't know where he stands on most. He supported affirmative action, expanding Medicare, and gun control in the past, but seems to be against them now?

Gabbard is intriguing, on some levels but OnTheIssues has her squarely in the left/liberal category on the Nolan Chart.

Biden is basically a 90s Democrat who only looks sane from a relative perspective because he's not off the chart to the left like Warren and Bernie.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

I should add that I like that OnTheIssues.org includes a Nolan chart on every profile, but sadly it has to be all the way at the bottom and requires a lot of scrolling. I'm a firm believer in the 2-axis model vs traditional right-left and wish a site like this would display it more prominently.

[Robert]

Trump's going to do a lot better this time in the popular vote, but I'm afraid the election will still be a nail-biter. I don't know what states he can pick up compared to 2016, and I'm not sure he can't lose any.

[End Child Unemployment]

I too am sad ENB left out the assault weapons ban part

[Sevo]

"Preservationists across Europe see urgent alert in Notre Dame fire"
[...]
"...Experts say what’s lacking is the constant attention and regular maintenance that could help avoid the need for major restoration work, but that costs money. The problem has been exacerbated by the austerity budgets many European nations adopted after the 2008 financial crisis and during Europe’s subsequent debt crisis."
https://www.sfgate.com/world/article/Preservationists-across-Europe-see-urgent-alert-13786111.php

But you KNEW it was a result of that horrible "austerity", didn't you?

[Ken Shultz]

I blame Brexit.

[Sevo]

"In all seriousness, my understanding is that the beams they had in that roof dated to the 13th century. If they’d torn that stuff out, for fire concerns, wouldn’t the preservationists have gone nuts?..."

Wife and I were talking about that in general terms; WIH could anyone have possibly done which wouldn't cause head-explosions from one lot of folks or another, regardless of the 'debt crisis'?
Even if there were an effective fire-retardant, it would take 10 years of 'government studies' to get approval, and then there'd be protesters out front anyhow.
Hell, even now, the yellow shirts are whining that the money should be given to them; screw the church.
'The French, they are a funny race...'

[Enjoy Every Sandwich]

But remember, only Big Government can be entrusted with the care of important historic sites.

[John]

The French government owns the Notre Dame. Great job they did preserving it.

[Sevo]

Well, with that austerity and stuff, how could they?

[TrickyVic (old school)]

""Should victims of sexual assault have to spend time in jail for refusing to testify against their assailants?""

No they should not. However, this should get the case dismissed. A defendant has the right to face their accuser.

[Sevo]

"The inequalities of climate change: Rich nations get richer, poor get poorer"
[...]
"As the oceans rise and the weather warms, climate change will have its winners and losers. But already it has created a sobering patchwork of economic inequality across the globe, according to researchers at Stanford University...."
https://www.sfchronicle.com/science/article/The-inequalities-of-climate-change-Rich-nations-13785755.php?cmpid=gsa-sfgate-result
(may be paywalled)

In the paper version, there's a color-coded map showing which countries gained and which lost, of course as a result of climate change. Strangely, the ones which really took it in the shorts tend to have really crummy economic policies, like India.
And to lend overall credence to the 'study', we see that the poor country USA has suffered a 1.2% drop in GDP between 1961 and 2010.
I'll bet you didn't know that! OBL's gonna be on that like stink on stuff!

[Fist of Etiquette]

>i>Everyone attending was required to RSVP (including journalists) but we welcome student journalists & would have been happy for them to attend had we known they were there.

"If we knew this was going to be exposed to sunlight we would have worn sunscreen."

[Fist of Etiquette]

I bring this up solely by way of sharing this response, which I offer as a peace offering to reason.com regulars unsettled by the site redesign...

People are complaining?

[Ken Shultz]

Sometimes, when I scroll just right, I can see three small comments at the same time. It's almost like a thread.

It looks great on phones. I suspect Reason did a market survey and found that most people read magazines when they're sitting on the crapper.

Since most people, now, use their phones to entertain themselves while they're . . . Reason has evolved. Oh, that, and they really don't give a shit about comments anymore.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

If sharing a picture which includes side boob is your idea of a peace offering, then you owe us big time for the lack of an edit button all this time.

[Enjoy Every Sandwich]

Harris said her executive order would expand the list of people not allowed to legally purchase guns

Expand it to whom? And on what basis?

And where, exactly, does the president get the authority to do that?

[Troglodyte Rex]

I don't think it matters much. Just saying that will bring out the attack ads and non Harris voters in droves...assuming she makes it on the ticket.

[Michael Ejercito]

Expand it to whom? And on what basis?

Gang members, because of gang violence.

[Fist of Etiquette]

Newstead also helped create the PATRIOT Act.

And America and all her founding ideals have never been safer.

[John]

Bernie Sanders came out in favor of the Boston Marathon bomber being able to vote from prison. One would think “are you pro or anti Boston Marathon bomber?” Would be about the easiest question a politician could be asked. Bernie still manages to fuck it up. And apparently Harris gave the same answer. These people have worse things to say about hookers and gun owners than they do terrorists

[Ken Shultz]

The Boston Marathon bomber isn't a Trump supporter, so of course he should be allowed to vote.

[Cyto]

It would be interesting to troll her by asking if perpetrators of hate crimes should be allowed to vote while in prison. The intersectionality of having a white supremacist who is in jail 4 not baking a cake for a transgender married couple being allowed to vote his white supremacist views might make her head explode.

[chipper me timbers]

"Should victims of sexual assault have to spend time in jail for refusing to testify against their assailants?"

I can answer this for you. No.

[Cyto]

Ok, Bing search suggested this article on the landing page.
https://www.al.com/news/2019/04/chalking-tires-for-parking-tickets-is-unconstitutional-court-rules.html
It claims that the fourth circuit rules that chalking tires is an unconstitutional search. That's got to be a joke site right?

[Ken Shultz]

So, the officials never bothered to explain why Ovechkin's goal was disallowed during the game, leaving us all to wonder. They didn't even bother to explain it to the coaches. Turns out they were right on the rules--it's just that the rule is stupid.

I still don't understand why Orlov was called or embellishing. That should have been a power play rather than a four-on-four. It may have been something he said rather than the way they behaved. I have to say I like that rule. Watching basketball players dive and soccer players, especially, roll around like they're hurt when they're not is a huge turn off for the sport, and penalizing players for doing that separates hockey. I just don't see how Orlov did it.

The officiating sucked. Even if they made the right call, they should have told us why that goal was disallowed--not leave it to the league to explain the next morning. You leave the fans wondering why a crucial goal was disallowed in a playoff game? That's fucked up.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

The commentators explained it during the telecast. Not sure if they got word from the league or it was just speculation on their part. It seemed clear to me that it was goaltender interference in looking at the very first replay. I don't have a dog in this game, so take that for what it is worth. I agree though, we need an Ed Hochuli style explanation for some of these things during the game.

There's nothing more exciting in sports than a game 7.

[Ken Shultz]

The telecasters did not explain it during the telecast. Not here in the U.S. anyway. The telecasters thought that the goal was disallowed because the official thought he blew the whistle when he didn't. They replayed it over and over to show that the whistle didn't blow until after the goal was scored. They were as surprised as anyone else that the goal wasn't allowed.

In fact, the officials didn't explain why the goal was allowed to the coaches, the fans, or anyone else either. They just announced that it was disallowed over the microphone and then the call on the ice had been confirmed without any explanation.

"The play was a frustrating one not just because of its importance, but because the Caps were not exactly sure why the goal was disallowed in the first place.

“It’s kind of unclear for me as well right now,” Todd Reirden told the media after the game. “As playoffs go on there’s not a lot of communication between the refs and the coaches as there is during the regular season. They made their decision and it really wasn’t up for debate. They don’t have to come and give you a reason why and they did not come to the bench and tell me why.”

. . . .

The NHL released the following explanation of the call:

At 10:34 of third period in the Capitals/Hurricanes game, Washington requested a Coach’s Challenge to review the “Interference on the Goalkeeper” decision that resulted in a “no goal” call

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/capitals/right-call-bad-rule-ovechkins-disallowed-goal-shows-ridiculous-standard-goalie-interference

The reason the goal was dissallowed wasn't clear to anyone until this morning when the NHL released that statement. Dissallow a goal and nobody knows why? That's a shitty way to treat the players, the coaches, and the fans--even if it was the right call and even if the rules are stupid.

[Leo Kovalensky II]

Turns out they were right on the rules–it’s just that the rule is stupid.

https://torontosun.com/sports/hockey/nhl/simmons-there-is-no-making-sense-of-goaltender-interference-in-the-nhl

[MatthewSlyfield]

...kids must use booster seats until they reach a height of 4 feet and 9 inches tall.

"In some cases, that means some kids could still be in a booster at the age of 12," points out ABC7 News. "The new guidelines will go into effect in January."

By that standard, my mother (I'll be 50 in September) would have been in a booster seat until she graduated from high school."

My state (Wisconsin), use weight, 80lbs, but includes an age cut off.

Again, without the age cut off, my mother would have been in a child car seat through high school.

[Michael Ejercito]

Should victims of sexual assault have to spend time in jail for refusing to testify against their assailants?

No more, no less so than if gun owners should spend time in jail if they refuse to report any loss or theft of their guns.

[AlmightyJB]

Lobster Girl! For the win.

[MatthewSlyfield]

Lobster Girl for President.

[Robert]

Whatever it took to get her back was worth it.

[Vernon Depner]

Are there no...non-binary sex workers

There's no "non-binary" anybody, Liz. We're all either male or female.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

So is it chicks with dicks or dudes with tits?

[Vernon Depner]

Yes, the child drag law is legislative overkill, but to suggest there’s “nothing sexual” about drag shows is absurd.

it's actually outraged conservatives who are sexualizing children

Can we please dispense with the word “sexualize”? It’s nonsense. You can’t sexualize anyone, because we are all already sexual. Adults, children, teenagers, old folks, dogs, goldfish—we are all sexual beings with sexual feelings, and most of us are sexually appealing to someone. What we can do is use our dress, grooming and deportment to emphasize our sexuality or our sexual interest in others. When others notice we are doing that, they are not “izing” us in any way; they are just correctly receiving the message we are sending, and can’t be faulted for that. In the case of a child who is naïve about sex and the possibility of their being sexually attractive to adults, for their parents to allow them to present themselves in a sexually provocative manner for the entertainment of adults is disrespectful to the child at best and arguably abusive.

[Robert]

But "drag" isn't about sexual attractiveness, it's about comedy.

[Vernon Depner]

It absolutely is about sex. Some of it sexual comedy, but some drag performers are very serious about what they do. The point is that a young boy on a drag stage will be sexually titillating to some in the audience, and he's unlikely to understand that.

[Uncle Jay]

She's wrong on both counts.
What consenting people do in the privacy of their bedrooms is nobody's business.
Using an executive order to confiscate guns exceeds the executive's authority. Plus, does this mean she would confiscate her body guard's guns too?

[target]

would putting or threating to put someone in jail to "encourage" testimony, be considered compelling speech?

[If Congress Does Not Change Federal Gun Laws, Kamala Harris Promises, She Will Do It by Presidential Fiat – ALibertarian.org]

[…] or part of his personal collection of firearms.” Under Kamala’s plan, which she discussed on CNN yesterday, a hobbyist or collector who sold more than four guns in a single year would be […]

[If Congress Does Not Change Federal Gun Laws, Kamala Harris Promises, She Will Do It by Presidential Fiat – Grossly Offensive]

[…] or part of his personal collection of firearms.” Under Kamala’s plan, which she discussed on CNN yesterday, a hobbyist or collector who sold more than four guns in a single year would be […]

[If Congress Does Not Change Federal Gun Laws, Kamala Harris Promises, She Will Do It by Presidential Fiat – Michigan Standard]

[…] all or part of his personal collection of firearms.” Under Kamala’s plan, which she discussed on CNN yesterday, a hobbyist or collector who sold more than four guns in a single year would be […]

[Clean Slate Act Would Seal Marijuana Possession Convictions: Reason Roundup – ALibertarian.org]

[…] a prosecutor,” says Harris. After telling a televised town hall audience Monday that we should “have a conversation” about voting rights for the incarcerated, senator and presidential candidate Kamala Harris amended her answer on […]

[Harris Wants to Ban Right-to-Work Laws, Chooses Union Endorsements Over Worker Well-Being: Reason Roundup – ALibertarian.org]

[…] sure that we know she’s an authoritarian. Fresh off announcing that as president she would override Congress to get her way on gun policy, the Democratic senator from California and 2020 presidential hopeful said she would […]

[Harris Wants to Ban Right-to-Work Laws, Chooses Union Endorsements Over Worker Well-Being: Reason Roundup – Grossly Offensive]

[…] sure that we know she’s an authoritarian. Fresh off announcing that as president she would override Congress to get her way on gun policy, the Democratic senator from California and 2020 presidential hopeful said she would […]

[Harris Wants to Ban Right-to-Work Laws, Chooses Union Endorsements Over Worker Well-Being: Reason Roundup]

[…] sure that we know she’s an authoritarian. Fresh off announcing that as president she would override Congress to get her way on gun policy, the Democratic senator from California and 2020 presidential hopeful said she would […]

[Kamala Harris Lies About Truancy Laws, Defends Criminalizing Parents Whose Kids Miss School: Reason Roundup – iftttwall]

[…] First, the headlines told us that Harris wants to decriminalize prostitution. Pressed on CNN in April, Harris made clear that this wasn’t so. […]

[Kamala Harris Lies About Truancy Laws, Defends Criminalizing Parents Whose Kids Miss School: Reason Roundup – ALibertarian.org]

[…] First, the headlines told us that Harris wants to decriminalize prostitution. Pressed on CNN in April, Harris made clear that this wasn’t so. […]

[Kamala Harris Lies About Truancy Laws, Defends Criminalizing Parents Whose Kids Miss School: Reason Roundup – Grossly Offensive]

[…] First, the headlines told us that Harris wants to decriminalize prostitution. Pressed on CNN in April, Harris made clear that this wasn’t so. […]

[Michael Ejercito]

Should victims of sexual assault have to spend time in jail for refusing to testify against their assailants?

No more so than victims of theft should have to spend time in jail for failing to report the crime.

I mean, I am sure no elected official would even propose a bill imposing criminal penalties on theft victims who fail to report the crime...