home

Tuesday Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 10:12:13 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It got very busy here today. Your turn. Have fun.

Update: Lots of death and sickness around. ABC's Peter Jennings has lung cancer and will begin chemo. Neil Young has been released from the hospital following last week's brain surgery. At least he is recovering nicely.

And there's a very fishy story about a warden's wife who has surfaced after ten years, saying she was held captive by an inmate the whole time.

< Undocumented Workers Help Fund Social Security | Death Penalty Facts >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Tuesday Open Thread | 57 comments (57 topical)
    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by soccerdad on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 10:48:43 AM EST
    more clear thinking from the right Rush has said that the ativities at AG were ’sort of like hazing, a fraternity prank. Sort of like that kind of fun.’” – a view repeated here ad nauseum by our resident apologists. On the other hand, Rush feels that Buchanan geting hit by cream pie is much more serious.
    It’s the left, my dear. It is the left, my good friends, that is out there fomenting violence.”
    LINK

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:14:41 AM EST
    I'd like to kwow what this left-wing crowd thinks of the "Fox Blocker" (some device apparently that blocks Fox News in the household). To me, this just epitomizes left-wing hypocrisy. Free speech, no cenorship, let's get all the ideas on the table...except when we don't like them, then all of the above is ok.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by soccerdad on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:21:39 AM EST
    MB - if people want to put a blocker on their TV for FOX, porno, sports, whatever in the privacy of their home thats their right. MB you're confused about freedom of speech. FOX has the right to broadcast I have the right not to listen.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:24:01 AM EST
    If the govt. was censoring fox news, I'd be right with ya BB. A blocking device installed in the home is not censorship.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:24:12 AM EST
    of course you have a right not to listen. But apparently there is a device being sold which specically blocks Fox News. Why would anyone want to block Fox News. You think I want to block PBS or CBS? It makes no sense.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by soccerdad on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:32:59 AM EST
    FOX news is propaganda news,of course it makes sense to those who don't want the koolaid.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:34:32 AM EST
    Sorry...s/b MB. In apolitical news, baseball is officially underway and already the Mets are giving me heartache. I know it's just one game, but it's not a good omen.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:39:42 AM EST
    Why would anyone want to block Fox News
    The same reason some would want to block p*rn, because they find it offensive. As long as you aren't blocking it out of your neighbors house, I see no problem.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:40:28 AM EST
    Just to finish the point, I understand that it (the Fox Blocker) is not government censorship. And yet, that people of the left wing would invent such a thing as a Fox Blocker seems to me goes against all the principles they (at times) espouse. Look at the Ward Chruchill stuff. How many did we hear free speech arguments (and the taxpayers are actually paying his salary) for him? Would not true liberals embrace the likes of Fox News? Baltimore will win the AL East this year....

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:53:01 AM EST
    MB, anyone who has a vchip has a 'fox blocker' built into their set. This chip was mandated by congress. Why do you hate america?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:00:38 PM EST
    MB, anyone who has a vchip has a 'fox blocker' built into their set. This chip was mandated by congress. Why do you hate america? Oh please, I'm crazy about this country. I just don't understand why the free speech party/ marketplace of ideas party would want to espouse turning off a network with which it disagrees. And look, I disagree with Fox plenty (particularly on religous matters), but clearly it's a well-done, well-thought out network worthy of being in the public debate. If I was going to act like you guys, I'd say, what's next after the Fox Blocker, we go by the library and burn some books we disagree with? All of you know there's a fair amount of hypocrisy with (some people of) the left wing pushing a Fox Blocker. Marketplace of ideas people...not marketplace of ideas we agree with only.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:24:06 PM EST
    I totally agree. As much as I hate the things that are said on FOX News. As much as I dislike seeing them win over the dullards and wing nuts among us with their propaganda...I believe in the absolute right to FOX's free speech. I do think, however, that there is a problem with Murdoch owning it. You think if he was a brown foreighn national it would be allowed? If you need a laugh today go to http://Farmer-ted.com. There is a feature on the contents page called "Dick of the Week" that is guaranteed to make you smile. If you don't smile I'll let Greta Van Sestrin tongue kiss my wife.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:25:43 PM EST
    Oh please, I'm crazy about this country. I just don't understand why the free speech party/ marketplace of ideas party would want to espouse turning off a network with which it disagrees. We want to tell others that, in our opinion, they should turn off a propaganda source that claims to be 'news' while feeding us Publican hypocrisy. We don't want to force them to have no choice in the matter - but we would like to inform them that they are being hoodwinked. And recommend that they get this cool toy if they don't want to be bothered flipping past Faux anymore. And look, I disagree with Fox plenty (particularly on religous matters), but clearly it's a well-done, well-thought out network worthy of being in the public debate. Faux is an Orwellian propaganda source which should be subject to the Fairness Doctrine and should be broadcasting retractions daily for the misinformation that they spew out on the airwaves. If I was going to act like you guys, I'd say, what's next after the Fox Blocker, we go by the library and burn some books we disagree with? No, if you were going to act like the straw man that Publicans make Democrats out to be, that might be what you'd do. If you were going to act like us, you would be providing examples of hypocrisy coming from your own people, and asking them to try and play by the rules. All of you know there's a fair amount of hypocrisy with (some people of) the left wing pushing a Fox Blocker. Marketplace of ideas people...not marketplace of ideas we agree with only. Nonsense. We know nothing of the sort. There is a fair amount of hypocrisy in attacking others for doing the same thing that your own party leaders are doing every day (blocking the dissemination of news that they don't want others to hear). It's also a bit unrealistic to criticize Dems for not conforming to your ideas of how they should behave.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by desertswine on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:27:37 PM EST
    kdog: The Mets? It would take another miracle. (I'm ready for one.) I don't understand why you would need a fox-blocker when you can just turn the channel or not program it into your remote.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:30:30 PM EST
    fox blocker, eh? that sounds like a disgrace... maybe a good idea, at times, if it could be programmed however, i don't want porn in my home, or dan rather, must i buy a blocker for the above? or can i just refrain from veiwing stations that support them. cheaper and easier. i think a "fox blocker" is more propoganda than ANY station in itself. if you have a remote control, you can change the channel to something you'd rather see.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:36:09 PM EST
    You are being deliberately obtuse. No one is stopping you from burning your own books. Burning the library's books is censorship of other people's books. Got anything better to kvetch about? Aside from the popathon there must be actual important events you have an informed opinion on.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by roy on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:37:24 PM EST
    I like the Fox Blocker. If Leftists are pushing their personal responsibilities onto technology, maybe they're finished pushing everybody else's onto the government.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 12:37:56 PM EST
    It does seem like a waste of money to me, just surf on by if you don't like a certain channel. Yet, we have untold numbers of useless crap sold in the marketplace, what's one more item?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:03:25 PM EST
    It is funny how some neocon publications, such as National Review, are running all sorts of columns paying tribute to John Paul II. Many of them questioned JPII's judgment, and even his sanity, when he staunchly opposed the unjust war on Iraq. Now that JPII is dead, the neocons are trying to attach themselves, like leeches, to his moral coattails.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by desertswine on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:09:27 PM EST
    By 2008, we're going to need passports to go to Canada, well actually to return from Canada. Is that "special relationship" over?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:16:52 PM EST
    pet rock, invisible dog w/leash, chia pet. it's a novelty item, you wingers are out there.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:26:28 PM EST
    I want to make sure I understand. Kicking Democrats out of a public presidental function - OK Selling a product that blocks a certain channel in the privacy of your own home - not ok.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:32:48 PM EST
    ...In other News... "The Washington Times reports that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi helped secure $3 million last year for a nonprofit organization, WestStart-CALSTART, whose president gave money to her political action committee. The organization also paid for the European trip of one of Pelosi's policy advisers. Republicans are suggesting that nothing distinguishes Pelosi's actions from those of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and other Republican members Pelosi has criticized." - Deacon, at Powerline

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 01:43:07 PM EST
    Campaign-watchdog groups said it doesn't appear that Mrs. Pelosi or her staff member broke any rules, but said the timing looks bad.
    horse whose's name is definitely known, did you read the article or are you just passing on straw bits picked up from wingnut sites. typical: quote the first paragraph and leave the context out. weak, real weak! your troll skills are slipping!

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 02:04:28 PM EST
    sean hannity said the pope was a wild-eyed liberal looney:
    COLMES: …And before you respond, let me just put up what the pope says. “No to war,” says Pope John Paul II. “during his annual address to scores of diplomatic emissaries to the Vatican… ‘War is not always inevitable,’ he said. ‘It is always a defeat for humanity.’” Are these a bunch of wild-eyed liberal loonies? HANNITY: Yes.
    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 02:13:42 PM EST
    Outside As long as we're cherry picking quotes - from the same Wash. Times article Ken Boehm, chairman of the conservative National Legal and Policy Center, which has challenged Mrs. Pelosi's campaign fundraising in the past, said the trip looks shady. "I think it looks like she's doing legislative favors for donors, because she is," he said. Mr. Boehm said Mrs. Pelosi's actions are starting to look like a pattern. He has questioned Mrs. Pelosi's earmark in early 2003 of $1 million to a University of San Francisco research center named after Leo T. McCarthy, who has been treasurer of her political action committees. BTW - Ever heard of a Chinese Finger Trap?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by pigwiggle on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 02:30:07 PM EST
    MB- It is nonsense, a novelty, a goof. Spainster- Let me clue you in; when someone dies you’ll see all kinds of folks tripping over themselves to say nice stuff about the former. No one is going to publicly talk about all that cloddish crap you did until you’re long dead. But of course you knew this, right? Taking your shot no matter how you get em’; so who’s riding who’s coattails?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 02:50:51 PM EST
    Ken Boehm, chairman of the conservative National Legal and Policy Center
    wingnut hack group! of course your sensibilities would lay with such a partisan organization!
    campaign watchdog groups
    non-partisan, citizen activist! go figure! yeah, "trap" is sufficient. you know the best way to escape a trap?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 02:58:07 PM EST
    Outside Opinions are like noses, everybody's got them. Facts are facts; and they look bad for Pelosi. RE: Trap Escape. Sure. Do you? ;-)

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 03:02:18 PM EST
    If I was going to act like you guys, I'd say, what's next after the Fox Blocker, we go by the library and burn some books we disagree with?
    I like TL's troll blocker feature. Ask Dr. Ace about it.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 03:06:55 PM EST
    pigwiggle, Yes, the de mortuis nil nisi bonum principle is probably responsible for some of their comments. I really wasn't thinking of that before, so you really did "clue me in." Thanks. But if you'll contrast the neocons' present writings about JPII with their previous disdain for his failure to line up behind the Empire, you'll see that they are trying to ride his coattails. They really seem to think he was one of them.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 03:08:32 PM EST
    horse whose name is definitely known, facts are facts, opinions like noses, whatever. what we have are two differing opinions, of course you side with the opinion that fits your desired end, and vise versa. this deflective tactic will not work for delay, when the repthugs smell blood, even their own, they circle for the kill. you do understand this! escape trap - straight-ahead, full tilt boogey. ?do you know the difference between a sentient being and a clone?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 03:17:55 PM EST
    "Faux is an Orwellian propaganda source.." In the sense that many react to it like the "three minutes hate" of "1984".

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 05:15:36 PM EST
    I'd block Fox news in a minute, if I had children still at home. I can see the reason to keep such hate and lies out of my living room. It's not censorship if you choose to do it to your own TV. Now if I went to my neighbor's house and sneaked a blocker in, that would be different.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 06:06:33 PM EST
    if you don't smile i'll let greta van sestrin tongue kiss my wife.
    i'd buy that for a dollar!
    that people of the left wing would invent such a thing as a fox blocker seems to me goes against all the principles they (at times) espouse
    you are wrong in your conception of the lefty stand on free speech. we believe everyone has a right to say what ever they want (within justice douglas' parameters). but we also believe anyone has a right not to listen to what they don't want to. you really think that because i believe in ward churchill's right to say what he wants, that i am obligated to listen to him? please.
    if i was going to act like you guys, i'd say, what's next after the fox blocker, we go by the library and burn some books we disagree with?
    once again, the hardly-ever-right wing is taking a point to its extreme and then denigrating the ludicrousness of that extreme. actually, i signed on to comment on talkleft's original post:
    and there's a very fishy story about a warden's wife who has surfaced after ten years, saying she was held captive by an inmate the whole time.
    didn't diane keaton star in that movie?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 09:18:32 PM EST
    Outside After carefully reading the Washington Times Article (as I’m sure you did), I gleaned the following facts and opinions: Facts: 1. Pelosi helped secure $3 million last year for a nonprofit transportation-research organization whose president gave money to her political action committee. 2. Pelosi earmarked in early 2003 a $1 million to a University of San Francisco research center named after Leo T. McCarthy, who has been treasurer of her political action committees. 3. Pelosi had a staff member take a trip paid for by the same group that funded one of Delay’s ‘questioned’ excursions. Opinions: Blah, left/rightwing spin, Blah. The Facts make Pelosi look bad. BTW – Being/Clone? One has societal obligations, one does not.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 05, 2005 at 11:22:01 PM EST
    The inventor of the Fox Blocker, Sam Kimmery, is not a liberal. He is a former Republican, who became an independent in the 1990s. This March 25 article says that Kimmery has so far sold about a hundred of the devices. Not exactly a widespread left-wing conpiracy, no?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 06:47:54 AM EST
    Posted by Doctor Ace at April 5, 2005 04:17 PM "Faux is an Orwellian propaganda source.." In the sense that many react to it like the "three minutes hate" of "1984". Actually, Faux is similar to the Three Minutes Hate - in its' level of factual content. Isn't it amazing the way Publicans try and point out the possible flaws in others' lives, instead of taking a look at their own? Somebody creates a product that prevents people from being exposed to Publican propaganda, and the Publicans try and paint anyone who uses it as a betrayer of their principles. Many somebodies point out the many instances of embezzlement and fraud coming from Delay's office, and all of a sudden Publicans want to talk about Pelosi. It's almost as though they know they're acting like a bunch of arrogant spoiled brats who are used to getting whatever they want whenever they want, and they choose to try and beat up anyone who points out that they're acting like a bunch of arrogant spoiled brats who are used to getting whatever they want whenever they want, instead of trying to stop being quite so arrogant and spoiled.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 06:55:41 AM EST
    Horse - Look, everyone knows that Pelosi is good, and Delay is evil. She would never break the law. And besides the story came from the WT, and the staff person probably thought the trip has paid for by AARP and GM. I mean, the Righties expect the Lefties to be judged the same as the Righties are. I mean, really. Isn't that just so funny. Really. Next thing I know you'll be saying that the MSM is for the Left and supported Kerry. I mean really. Doesn't CBS have the right to have a biased news department? I mean really. Equality. I mean that is just so funny.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by pigwiggle on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 07:48:05 AM EST
    Law Expands Right to Kill in Self-Defense

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 08:59:09 AM EST
    Pigwiggle, WOW. Are they frikkin insane down there? Just handing out reasons to kill people.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by pigwiggle on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 09:21:23 AM EST
    I think it is an excellent idea. When confronted by deadly force I think discretion in response should be left to the victim. Why should a victim be required by law to test the intentions of his/her attacker before responding? I would like to point out the same rhetoric of ‘shootout at the OK … ’ was thrown around about the time Florida passed its conceal carry law. Turns out there wasn’t a bloodbath, there weren’t the gunfights predicted. In fact, Florida benefited from the same drop in violent crime the rest of the country was experiencing. It seems folks can be trusted to protect themselves and handle firearm safely, even in public.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by soccerdad on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 09:42:22 AM EST
    It seems folks can be trusted to protect themselves and handle firearm safely, even in public.
    ludicrous on its face, given people have been shot on Calif freeways for minor traffic problems.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 09:46:01 AM EST
    The ability to carry concealed firearms worries me. I'd much prefer people have the right to carry unconcealed weapons, they can be easily seen and the threat is obvious. For example, I'm walikng down the street and see a guy heading my way with an AK, I can stay the hell away from him. With concealed handguns, there is no way for me or other passerby to gauge the threat until it is too late. I always found handguns much more worrysome than assault rifles, for their ability to be concealed. I have no problem with people having the right to defend themselves from someone who confronts them and says "Gimme your money or your dead". I don't need a law to tell me that, it's common sense.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#45)
    by Patrick on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 09:53:08 AM EST
    Pigwiggle, I couldn't agree more. The perception of a threat is as personal as finger print. Giving someone the option to stand and defend themselves, versus requiring them to flee is just common sense. There are many times when discretion is the better part of valor and fleeing is exactly the right thing to do, but there are also times when the best defense is a good offense. So ends the cliche lesson of the day. Kdog, I'd rather face a pistol any day, any way rather than a rifle.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by pigwiggle on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 10:11:16 AM EST
    SD- California does not have a shall issue conceal carry law like Florida. You are so secure that these kinds of legislative controls work you don’t even bother checking the law in the state you use as an example, ludicrous indeed. Honestly, what makes you think someone so unstable as to shoot another over offensive traffic will consider state law before packing a gun so they may shoot another over offensive traffic? If legislation is all it takes, SD, we should simply go to the source and outlaw murder. But, perhaps I was a bit vague; I should have wrote ‘It seems [otherwise law abiding] folks can be trusted to protect themselves and handle firearm safely, even in public.’ As proof I offered that there wasn’t the shootouts, or increased homicides, or increased road rage shooting that the naysayers predicted. And, I will predict that there won’t be the shootouts, or increased homicides, or increased road rage shootings foretold by the clairvoyant histrionics of the nannystaters.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by Patrick on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 10:16:40 AM EST
    Pig, In fact in some places, including LA, Santa Clara County and I believe SF County, it's virtually impossible to get a CCW unless you know someone. Some of the rural counties and jurisdictions issue CCWs, but California is a long way away from a mandatory issue statute.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 10:24:11 AM EST
    Pat..I'd rather see a potential threat than have it hidden from me.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by roy on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 10:43:37 AM EST
    I'd rather see a potential threat than have it hidden from me.
    Sounds like the reason people give for sex-offender registration laws.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#51)
    by soccerdad on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 10:54:24 AM EST
    pig - nice distortion, as usual. what i said had nothing to do with the law whether it had one or not had one. It had to do with your assertion that the public can be trusted to behave in a proper manner. repeating
    It seems folks can be trusted to protect themselves and handle firearm safely, even in public.
    This assertion is crucial to the premise that we can just arm anybody who wants one. The point is that not everyone can be trusted nor will everyone properly judge the situation. Maybe you and Patrick have enough commonsense to use weapons properly, but there are plenty of cases in the paper showing that many don't. So the "let everyone get armed crowd" is essentially saying I have the right to defend myself and carry a gun and will use it wisely and we can live with the carnage of those who don't have common sense. BTW I am not for elimination of firearms I had about 8 guns when I was young all sporting, but they should be difficult to get, i.e. there should be registration,background checks, a waiting period, mandatory training, and the gun show loophole needs to be closed. Will that eliminate all problems? Of course not. But its an attempt at balance.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 01:48:47 PM EST
    Read Tom's April 6th, 7:47 am post and substitute the word "Tom" for "Publican". The post then makes perfect sense.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by pigwiggle on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 02:11:49 PM EST
    SD- You are taking my quote out of context. I’m not claiming everyone is reasonable, safe, or otherwise responsible. Those folks that would not otherwise carry a concealed weapon in violation of the law are not the same folks shooting up the freeways. Likewise, those folks who would heed the law and test an attackers intention before responding with deadly force are not the same folks who would arbitrarily escalate any given confrontation. “This assertion is crucial to the premise that we can just arm anybody who wants one.” Who exactly is doing the ‘arming’? We are talking about letting folks who are now currently respecting a prohibition on conceal carry to carry and conceal. Again, these are law-abiding citizens; likening them to rage fueled freeway cowboys is silly. “Maybe you and Patrick have enough commonsense to use weapons properly, but there are plenty of cases in the paper showing that many don't.” Uniform FBI crime stats have shown that civilians using a firearm in self-defense, as opposed to police, are ~2% less likely to injure an innocent bystander. Anecdotes from the paper aside. “and we can live with the carnage of those who don't have common sense.” This is a sentiment that has been repeated ad nauseam in every state that has proposed a conceal carry law. The bulk of states now have them, yet no carnage. Again, where is this anticipated bloodbath? In place of making guns extremely difficult and expensive (poor folks should be able to defend themselves as well), why not make the punishments for committing crimes with a firearm extreme?

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by Patrick on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 02:17:33 PM EST
    Soccerdad, I didn't get that he was supporting unfettered access to firearms, and I don't think there should be. Unlike Talkleft, I think that is a right that felons should never get back except in the most unusual of cases. I also wouldn't want persons with violent misdemeanors to have access, and, at least in my state, they do not. Local law enforcement in California is tasked with issuing CCW permits. That means the County Sheriff in unincorporated areas and Chief of Police in cities has the power to grant such requests, but only to people who can qualify. California requires a background check, a 16 hour firearms safety class, and annual qualification with the weapon that you want to carry. I believe we're already well past your starting point. The people you mention, "In the paper," in almost all cases were not carrying a weapon pursuant to a CCW. In fact, I'd argue that people who do qualify for a CCW and obtain one, are less likely to be involved in a use of force issue than a person who would carry a weapon illegally.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by soccerdad on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 03:06:34 PM EST
    You are taking my quote out of context.
    I'm taking it literally as written. It would appear to me from the rest of your response that was not what you precisely meant.
    I’m not claiming everyone is reasonable, safe, or otherwise responsible.
    OK fair enough
    Those folks that would not otherwise carry a concealed weapon in violation of the law are not the same folks shooting up the freeways.
    I'm not convinced you can say this is precisely true, but certainly like you said it disproves the shoot out scenario. OK the fog has lifted

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by soccerdad on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 03:11:24 PM EST
    I didn't get that he was supporting unfettered access to firearms
    I didn't mean to imply he was. It was bad wording on my part.
    In fact, I'd argue that people who do qualify for a CCW and obtain one, are less likely to be involved in a use of force issue than a person who would carry a weapon illegally.
    Given the process you describe I would agree.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#57)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 04:33:15 PM EST
    MB - if people want to put a blocker on their TV for FOX, porno, sports, whatever in the privacy of their home thats their right. I don't want to buy a blocker -- I want the cable company to line item delete Conservative propaganda television off my cable bill at my discretion. As it is now, I have no choice but to donate my dollars to Rupert Murdoch's evil empire or be forced to live without access to all digital entertainment in my home. I'm supporting my own oppression -- there is no "elective representation" or "social contract" in private enterprise -- only social darwinism. The shareholders are all institutional investment corporations, so they are completely unaccountable. At least we get to participate in a sham electoral process every 2-4 years for our government. Since everyone is so pleased that our media has dumped all semblance of "fairness" in reporting information, we should no longer be forced to buy entertainment in packages. The technology exists - this is private enterprise acting as a Trust/Monopoly -- one that needs to be broken apart piece by piece LONG before we get to the Enrons, Worldcoms, Etc. If all of you supposed "Free marketers" still believe that Conservative media is that popular with the public-at-large, then you have nothing to fear, do you? Oh yeah, those 2500 or so Millionaire Media Executives that selectively edit access to information for some 300 Million-odd people could lose some money -- so much for that idea. Free Market my ass.

    Re: Tuesday Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Apr 06, 2005 at 10:00:31 PM EST
    Pigwiggle, You better carry two guns. Patrick knows why.

    Tuesday Open Thread | 57 comments (57 topical)