2.) More should be made of that TARP re-payment business. Let’s see: you force someone into taking a loan they don’t want, then you use that leverage to coerce them into doing favors for you. Isn’t that the behavior we’d expect of a Corleone rather than an Obama?

“President Obama’s national intelligence director told colleagues in a private memo last week that the harsh interrogation techniques banned by the White House did produce significant information that helped the nation in its struggle with terrorists.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?_r=1&hp

http://missoulian.com/articles/2009/04/21/news/mtregional/news14.txt

Frankly, as much of a breath of fresh air as it was, I am generally disappointed in Heller. It provided too little guidance as to what sort of infringements shouldn’t be considered infringements. The most obvious conclusion would be that, if one needs to bother parsing such equivocal matters, there is an infringement. But, the exceptions for “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places…” opened the door for anyone to decide what constitutes a sensitive place based on nearly any criterion. In this case, apparently, any place where a substantial number of people may gather can be considered a sensitive place.

(Although the issue was focused on county property, I’m not sure how the Ninth stops government from restricting gun rights on private property, aside from the home itself. For instance, there is a big gun show in at the Reno Hilton every year, and lots of people are there. Why isn’t that a “sensitive place”?)

And, as a practical matter, you wouldn’t want to bother having a gun show at some place where a large number of people couldn’t gather. Which, not coincidentally in my view, squares quite well with the goals of the ordinance’s author, County Supervsor Mary King. She stated that she had “been trying to get rid of gun shows on Country property” for three years when her ordinance finally passed.

At any rate, I’m glad the Ninth found the due process argument for incorporating Heller at the state and local levels. But, they did so while at the same time leaving a gaping hole for legislation that restricts this particular civil liberty.

In one of the justice’s opinions, he wrote (I’m quoting from memory) that if blacks were citizens of the United States, they’d be free to move from state to state and take their guns with them.

I’m sure that there are all sorts of technical, legal arguments; but that’s not what I’m talking about. What I’m saying is that prior to our “enlightened age,” it was taken for granted that people of one state would be free to take their guns to another. Prior to modern anti-gun laws, it was taken for granted that people were free to possess guns in all states of the union.

So, yeah — the Second Amendment should be incorporated, as are the First and the others.

In any case, that was definitely the stupidest thing in the article. The rest of it was remarkably evenhanded and realistic.

“if super potent pot was available…”
It is. Almost all weed is super potent now, and has been for nearly 2 decades.

“surely many of them would think they were dying after smoking a bit of it (even though they aren’t dying).”

Really? I’ve never seen that happen EVER. The worst symptom I’ve seen is elevated anxiety, easily remedied by sitting down and maybe sipping on a glass of water. Contrast that with taking an excessive dose of pharmaceuticals where, you know, you could actually die.

Almonte, director of the Texas Narcotic Officer’s Association:
“But more importantly, we’re seeing a more potent marijuana. And with that we’re seeing … an increase in the emergency room admissions.”

There is no way this guy can be that misinformed. Therefore he is outright lying. I also loved his argument about how criminals will continue being criminals. How insightful Shirlock. Legalization would at least end their drug dealing profits and the violence associated with said dealing.

#21 J. Blanton

…I own a few guns…

You probably don’t have much to worry about then. I don’t think cops like to pop flash bangs, burst through people’s doors with guns drawn, kill family pets, throw the occupants down, kneeling on their heads, and shout hysterical incoherent commands when they know someone on the other side might have a weapon. Fuck, that would be dangerous.

That’s an interesting take. I can’t say that’s how the piece came across to me at all. Can you point at any other reports from a popular news source (CNN, FOX, et al) that you feel were significantly better?

There are sound engineering reasons for the length of a yellow light. There’s a range you put the duration in, so that you don’t put people in dilemma zones. The goal of the signal in the first place is to apportion right-of-way so that more people get through the intersection quickly and without injury to themselves or their vehicles.

It’s not a revenue generation variable, you asshats!

Red light cameras have been so perverted by euphemistically named ‘law enforcement’ and city money grabbers. They can be a super effective tool for reducing ALL accidents. Sign the heck out of it. Give proper yellow time. And you’ll get good reduction of red-light running and a reduction in accidents. But no, these dickweeds want to play with people’s lives because their budgets are a little tight right now.

Vile scum of the earth.