Late Morning Links

Friday, October 7th, 2011

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

63 Responses to “Late Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  Dave Krueger | 

    I am equally close to both team red and team blue as measured in bazillions of lightyears.

  2. #2 |  Kristen | 

    Along with Dave Krueger, I’m as close to being a Democrat or a Republican as 2 is closer to infinity than 1.

  3. #3 |  albatross | 

    Re the medical marijuana enforcement: I would threaten not to vote for Obama again, but it’s an empty threat–there is very little Obama could do to win my vote, after the way he has betrayed pretty much every reason I had for voting for him last time. I feel certain that the Republican will be marginally worse (Romney) or much worse (Perry) or bughouse nuts (Bachman). But I just don’t think I can bring myself to vote for someone who so completely and unrepentantly sold me out last time. Let him seek his votes among the supporters of torture, state secrets, endless war, and bailouts for the folks at the top.

  4. #4 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    #51
    Are you the Kristen from the Crunkleton speakeasy in August?
    I remember we discussed this website…

  5. #5 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    “When the officers showed up at the city jail to book Hill a short time later and turn in their evidence, the five pounds of marijuana they bragged about an hour earlier somehow had become a pound and a half.”

    ….and the entire Precinct went out en mass and ate a McDonalds franchise.

  6. #6 |  DK | 

    Democrats and Republicans are effectively statists – polar opposites to libertarians. They are liberal and conservative, respectively, in rhetoric only. Their policies and actions are statist. They always compromise to the statist position in order to maintain maximum control – just what 150+ years of two party control has given to the US.

  7. #7 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    DK,

    I would argue that for the last several decades Statist factions have, for the most part, controlled the direction of both parties. That doesn’t necessarily mean that both parties are entirely Statist. The Statists in the Republican Party are by and large the less conservative segment. The non-Statists in the Democrat Party are the ones that tend toward a Populist impulse. Over the course of the election cycles since Watergate the Republican Party has grown gradually more Conservative and (slightly) less Statist. While the process with the Democrats may have begun before 2006, in 2006 the most successful Democrat candidates were notably Populist. Then the leaders of the party, mostly Statists, grabbed the choice power seats in Congress. I suspect that we may be seeing a power struggle in the Democrats between Populists and Statists. To reject the two party system is all very emotionally satisfying, but it ignores certain subtleties. It will be far easier to make either (or both) of the two parties less Statist than it will be to bring a third party to sufficient prominence to have a real effect. For one thing, a third party will necessarily be opposed by the entirety of both parties.

    It took us several decades to get into this Statist mess. It won’t change overnight, and that’s a good thing. A government that is truly efficient, and can turn on a dime, is an authentic menace.

    I may be wrong, and you may well be right. I think that the two parties will, over time, move away from statism, with or without a third party. But a third party may be necessary, and is likely to be good anyway, if only to move the big two.

  8. #8 |  Bluegill | 

    For those interested, CaliforniaWatch.org has an excellent summary of the medical marijuana dispensary crack down.

    http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/landlords-property-owners-are-new-targets-anti-pot-strategy-12967

    Take note of the comment at the end, even city council members and city managers who permitted the dispensaries might face prosecution from the feds. A lot of sick people are going to suffer because of this.

  9. #9 |  Bergman | 

    A smartphone is basically a small computer. The difference between a laptop and a blackberry, really, is that one fits in your palm. Both have wifi, both can have a built-in cellular “modem”, both have a keyboard, both have a screen, both run software and access the internet. You can do VoIP through either one.

    So why is there a different standard in place for palm-top computers and a different one for lap-tops? Or is it only a matter of time before police extend the “container” concept to everything in your car, on your person, and in your home, and claim they don’t need warrants? After all, your house is just a big box full of things too, right?

  10. #10 |  supercat | 

    //#23 | Roho | “Before entering a home, the police must now verify the address “with certainty prior to entry,” according to a city staff report.”

    What’s needed is an explicit law that says that a police officer or other government agent who uses a search warrant as a pretext to enter a property which is not listed on the warrant, or which the officer should know to be incorrectly listed on the warrant, is a burglar, robber, or worse, depending upon whether the property is occupied, and what the agent does with any occupants therein. Any officer who doesn’t want to be prosecuted (or, for that matter, shot) as a robber would be well-advised to inspect the warrant personally.

  11. #11 |  Puzzling | 

    On the cell phone search, screen locking passwords are ineffective against police search on the most popular cell phones. Google “Cellebrite UFED” for an example of devices used to facilitate these searches and quickly copy contents for later examination. These devices are used at border checkpoints and I think there’s every reason to expect a flourishing police state to adopt them as routine at TSA checkpoints as well.

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

    Cell phones are also not simple “containers” to the extent that modern phones show both local data and vastly more data information stored in cloud services, often all integrated together seamlessly to the user. These law enforcement searches are actually retrieving information stored in “containers” elsewhere.

  12. #12 |  Be Free | 

    Re: warrantless cell phone searches

    The People’s Republic of California continues to lead the way in civilian suppression. Good luck to all of you subjects out there. Maybe you can leave one day and be a citizen again.

  13. #13 |  Jerry Brown Vetoes Bill That Would Require a Warrant for Cell Phone Searches | The Agitator | 

    […] time I posted on this, commenter “Puzzling” made a very good point. Cell phones are also not simple “containers” to the extent that modern phones show both local […]