The advertising above is just a source of revenue. If the ads get offensive enough, I may drop them.
Clayton Cramer's BLOG |
|
|
Clayton's commentary on news and events of the day. Broadly speaking, I'm a conservative with libertarian sympathies (getting more conservative as my children get older).
 Never forget! I ran for Idaho state senate in 2008--didn't win I've written a number of history books, as well as scholarly and popular articles, (see my web page).
PayPal members: to make a contribution
Email me at blogmail at claytoncramer dot com. Sorry to be so indirect, but all spambots must die! But they haven't died yet! Include the word spamIamnot in your subject line to make sure that my spam blocker lets you through. |
Saturday, April 03, 2004
Sorry I've Been So Quiet Today Remember the "wax on, wax off" sequence out of The Karate Kid? I only did one car, not 38 (or however many it was)--my Corvette--but then again, I'm not a kid. The car looks great, but am I sore! (An aerobic exercise by the time I was done, covered in sweat.) Then I started the rebuild of my reflector. I originally was just going to weigh all the major components, but by the time I was part way through removing the rotating tube ring assembly from the tube, I decided that I was going to reinstall it. Just to explain: this is a really neat assembly of stainless steel and aluminum that provides a way to rotate the telescope tube in place--often useful because of how a German equatorial mount design sometimes moves the eyepiece into odd and inconvenient locations. Unfortunately, this neat assembly weighs ten pounds--turning the reflector into a 31 pound behemoth. That's just too heavy for the mount that it is on now, and a bit too heavy for the Losmandy GM-8 mount. Replacing the rotating tube assembly with something designed to attach to the Losmandy dovetail knocks it down to 25 pounds--light enough that the Losmandy should be very happy with it. Removing the rotating ring assembly, however, turned out to be quite a process. The rings attach to the telescope tube with what seems like an excessive number of 3/8" hex head screws that go through the tube, and attach to nuts on the inside. Somehow, I managed to get all these nuts onto the screws 10 years ago--but either my arms have gotten a couple inches shorter, or the fiberglass has grown a couple of inches in the meantime. There were uses I was making of tools that would make your junior high shop teacher either shake his head, or start lecturing you. At one point, I was using a torque wrench to hold the nuts in place while trying to unscrew with the other hand. Most of these were just unpleasant and slow, because the screws and nuts were not stainless steel, and were well rusted. (Why anyone would include non-stainless fasteners for use on a telescope just makes me shake my head.) Fortunately, one of the many friendly strangers walking by in front of the house while I was doing this offered to help, and had the magically longer arm to deal with the last three screws that were beyond my reach. Tomorrow's mission after church: patch the holes with epoxy; repaint the interior of the tube in flat black; sand the exterior's many battle scars from car collisions; then repaint the patches in bright white; wash the mirror again; reassemble. Labels: telescopes First Reported Use By A Concealed Carry Licensee in Minnesota Under Non-Discretionary Law In this case, we have a copy of the blacked out police report available here as a multi-page TIF file. A summary of the report appears here. Important points: the attacker (as even the attacker admits to police) is a bicyclist who loses his temper when a driver honks his horn. The driver asserts that he was honking the horn to let the bicyclist know of his presence. The bicyclist catches up at the next light, throws the bike down in front of the vehicle, and grabs the driver by the throat. The driver starts to pull his gun, warns the attacker, and drives over the bike. Both call the police: they charge the bicyclist, based on his own statement, and that of a witness to the confrontation. Friday, April 02, 2004
Kerry Just Needs to Ride in a Tank I've been noticing the increasing Dukakis-like behavior from John Kerry--trying hard to run from his Massachusetts liberalism, while giving sufficiently "nuanced" answers not to offend the left-wing of the Democratic Party. He has been sinking himself, very quickly. Now this! WASHINGTON - John Kerry (news - web sites), seizing control of his party, tapped Michael Dukakis' 1988 presidential campaign manager to represent his interests at the Democratic National Committee (news - web sites).Oh yeah, and he did such a great job in 1988. "A Lot Can Change Between 9 And 5" This was the slogan that the evening paper in San Francisco used a few years ago, and for the artwork, one of the posters showed Red Square with the famous statue of Lenin haranguing the workers (or is he asking for a light for his cigarette?), and then the same scene, with Bob's Big Boy in place of Vladimir Illich. This change is almost as amazing: Senator Boxer demanding that the federal government work faster on arming civilians--with handguns: Frustrated by the Transportation Security Administration's delay in arming airline pilots with guns, four members of Congress said Thursday they want the agency to quit dragging its feet.The article goes on to point out the entertaining aspects of this: And for someone like Boxer, who flies frequently to her home state of California, the issue transcends her typical alignment with gun-control proponents. Both the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and Gun Owners of America are strong proponents of the legislation. The End Of Trash Cans? I was told (even before 9/11) that the reason that trash cans were no longer present in the Paris subway system was because it was too easy to hide bombs in them. I groaned, and thought to myself, "At least we don't have to operate at that level of fear in the U.S." I'm afraid that these days may be about over. As part of a news story about Homeland Security Department warnings about bomb plots this summer: The new bulletin lists a number of suggestions for city transportation systems to enhance security. These include close monitoring of parking lots, removal of trash receptacles, limiting access points, improving lighting and beefing up overall law enforcement presence.If there is any lesson to be learned from this confrontation with al-Qaeda, it is that we can't let this be anything but a fight to the finish. Al-Qaeda's efforts will force us to choose between al-Qaeda's especially pestilent form of Islam, or complete and overwhelming victory. A continual low-level war without a clear victory will mean the gradual loss of an open society. We've already lost bits and pieces of an open society since 9/11. Considering the severity of the attack, I am very impressed with how little we've lost. It will get worse, however, just because al-Qaeda will continue to change their methods, and more and more of our liberties will come under government supervision. I don't see any way to avoid this, especially because the threats in question are certainly worse than any single intrusion into our personal privacy and rights will seem at the time. Even worse, those making the arguments for these losses of liberties aren't going to be motivated by evil intentions, but a genuine concern about protecting American lives. The ACLU has enaged in a public relations campaign concerning the Patriot Act that has been very misleading. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, and assume that their motivations have been fear of where this may take us--not simple political partisanship. The ACLU needs to understand that the best protection of our civil liberties would be a complete and overwhelming victory against al-Qaeda--one so overwhelming that those Muslims who fancy that Allah is on their side will be disillusioned, and start to question their moral certainty in their immorality. Of course, this would require the ACLU to take sides in a battle between our government, and an ideology that relies on terrorism, genocide, torture, and a form of theocracy that makes Jerry Falwell look like a liberal. I can see why the ACLU might be conflicted about a choice like that. The Dane-Geld Didn't Work for Spain, Either You are doubtless familiar with Rudyard Kipling's poem Dane-geld--the traditional method by which the English paid protection to the Danes to not invade--and it didn't work. IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation,Now we seem that the Spanish people, having tried to buy protection from al-Qaeda, have failed: There is only way to win against monsters like al-Qaeda--complete extermination. Thursday, April 01, 2004
How Trustworthy Is The Consumer Price Index? I always knew that the CPI tended to overstate and understate inflation because of the way that mortgage interest rate changes were factored in--but this article claims that the use of "substitution" for particular brands of products makes the CPI understate inflation quite substantially. I don't know if this is true or not--just passing it along for your consideration. UPDATE: As I said, I don't know if this claim is true or not. This response from reader Steven Vickers argues otherwise: Just had to quickly comment on the misguided analysis you linked regarding the CPI. Bill Fleckenstein makes some strange judgements which cause his results to be dramatically different from that of mainstream economists. Great Bumper Stickers "186,000 miles per second - it's not just a good idea, it's the law" "Red meat isn't bad for you - green, fuzzy meat is bad for you" Interesting First-Hand Account By A Bystander Over on the Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog, my coblogger Pete Drum excerpted a somewhat more exciting than usual news story a few days ago: Two construction workers beat and tried to rob their client in his home yesterday, but he chased them off by grabbing a gun and shooting at them, police said.Today I received an email from someone who claims to have been present, and thinks this was just horrible: Just thought you might be interested in the complete story of the shooting on Avenida Chamnez. I was playing with my 2 year old daughter in my driveway at 5:00 pm when the supposed victim shot twice in the middle of the street whizzing bullets past me and my two year old. By the grace of God, we were not walking with my husband down the center of the street with our dog on our nightly walk. We were lucky to not be killed by a ricocheting bullet.Supposed victim? Do you have some reason to believe that he was not a victim? The news account doesn't give much reason to suspect otherwise. California law does, in fact, allow civilians to use deadly force to prevent the escape of fleeing felons. (Penal Code sec. 196, although the case law is a good bit more complex than the statute suggests.) Police officers are subject to a more rigorous standard since Tennessee v. Garner (1985) was decided by the Supreme Court, about 20 years back. Civilians are subject to civil liability for their actions. This wasn't "almost a tragedy." It was a tragedy for the robbery victim, and his wife; had you or your children been hit by a bullet, it would have been a more severe tragedy. Somehow, considering the level of violence involved, it doesn't sound like the robbers were going to let the victim (who knew who they were) live to testify. I think you would agree that would have been a tragedy comparable to the one that "almost" got you. I'm curious: would you have been even slightly worried by these robbers wandering the streets? They were prepared to threaten his life to get him to open the safe. What do you think they would be willing to do to you, if they thought there was some money in your home, or your bank account? PETA: Fanaticism Unleashed Take a look here at the materials that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals plans to hand out to kids as part of their vegetarian campaign. Just Saw A MoveOn.org Commercial This Morning It was built entirely around a Richard Clarke statement--hardly a high credibility source, even to many liberals by now. My son, who is almost 16, not terribly political, and vastly more cynical than I was at that age, proclaimed it "a stupid commercial. It doesn't even say to vote for someone else." Indeed. I suspect that it will come across to many Americans in the middle--those who think Bush did a good job after 9/11, but might be open to seriously considering voting for a Democrat for President--as a nasty attack piece. The bad thing about being isolated is that you start to think that everyone thinks like you. MoveOn's leadership needs to leave the Millionaires & Billionaires Club long enough to find out what working Americans think. UPDATE: A reader points out that MoveOn.org is funded with soft money, and isn't allowed to advocate (directly) for a candidate. Don't Spend It All In One Place: The Citibank Schwartz Settlement I received a check today settling a class action lawsuit that I didn't even know about. As explained here, some lawyer claimed that Citibank's cutoff time for payments was unfair, and filed a class action lawsuit against Citibank. I tried not to snicker when I walked my enormous $0.37 check down to the credit union. In general, class action lawsuits are a very good thing. They provide a mechanism for assisting injured parties who could not justify suing on behalf of very small amounts. They also act as a club upside the head to get corporations to behave (although a fair number of class action lawsuits seem highly questionable). There comes a certain moment when you have to ask if there is something a little absurd about the lawyer who filed the suit getting $9 million--while Citibank probably spent a dollar to send me a $0.37 check. So here's a question for all you lawyers out there: at what point does a class action lawsuit qualify as absurd, based on how much the injured parties get, and how much the lawyers get? Just to clarify the principles involved, imagine that XYZ Corporation did something wrong that caused 1.000,000 customers to be injured in the amount of one dollar each. That's a million dollars--a pretty substantial injury collectively, and enough so to cause even a medium-sized corporation to get their snout out of the trough. The lawyer expects to be paid for his time litigating this, and certainly he is performing a useful function here. What if lawyers fees come to $990,000, and every member of the class receives a check for one cent? Would this be reasonable? I understand that the judge has to approve the settlement details, but since I don't have much respect for federal judges (who are generally unelected legislators pretending to be apolitical), I find myself wondering if there might be some other manner of righting the wrongs, and discouraging corporate misbehavor, that doesn't put so much of the money that belongs to the injured parties into the hands of the lawyer. New Advertiser Apparently this is an organizational method for bring Bush supporters together locally. Now, where I live, this may not be all that important--most every neighbor we have supports President Bush's re-election campaign. But if all your neighbors are millionaires, or at least most of them are, you may have trouble finding a Bush supporter--you may even be a little afraid to express your opinion openly. In that case, this might be a very effective strategy to meet fellow Bush supporters so that you can work together on assisting getting Bush re-elected. Wednesday, March 31, 2004
Thomas Sowell Being A Troublemaker Again He makes some interesting suggestions for the sort of changes to the government that he would like: Government subsidies would be drastically reduced, starting at the top. That is, there would be a prohibition against giving a dime of government money to anyone whose annual income or total assets exceed one billion dollars. Why should agricultural subsidies be going to Ted Turner and David Rockefeller, or "universal health care" pay for their medicine?Wrong motivations? A few years back, the Department of Justice investigated corruption in the Chicago courts. (Can you imagine that?) I recall seeing one local newspaper reporter observing that the press should have been come curious why judges would spent a million dollars to get re-elected to jobs that only paid about $65,000 a year. The reason was the extra benefits that came with the job. Better to pay our officials well, and hope that we get people of considerably higher talent in the jobs. On those rare occasions when delusions of running for state legislature or Congress have hit me, the harsh reality of low pay (until the 1990s) has brought me back to Earth. Congresscritters now receive $157,000 a year, but remember that unless they live very close to DC, they end up having two homes: one in their home state, and one in DC--and a lot of air travel back and forth. (That link also shows you a history of Congressional salaries, from 1789 to the present.) Is This Really Necessary? A recurring theme is that gay people are just like everyone else, except for who they love. Why, then, is Viacom planning a gay TV channel? Redstone also said Tuesday that he has been in discussions with U.S. cable operators about the possibility of launching a gay and lesbian channel. He called the would-be network "a good channel for them, and a good channel for Viacom."So, if gay people are no different, other than who they love, why do they need their own cable channel? What sort of different programming will this cable broadcast that straight people wouldn't want to watch? Imagine if someone announced that they were going to start a cable channel for left-handers. Would anyone find it credible that us left-handers are so different from the majority that we are going to watch a cable channel aimed just at us? Successful Films Tyler Cowen points to the evidence that wholesome movies make more money than films that do not, but he is skeptical of film critic Michael Medved's claim that this reflects a bias that Hollywood has in favor of depravity: What are we to make of this? Michael Medved has argued for years that Hollywood has a left-wing, secular, 1960s bias, and could make more money with wholesomeness. Perhaps the moguls simply can't comprehend how such movies could be popular, just as they turned away Mel Gibson and made him finance Passion with his own money.Cowen also uses the fact that such films are being made as evidence that Hollywood would make more, if there were a market for them: The more interesting economic question is why wholesome movies (read: children's movies, which I take to include young teenagers) hold a more concentrated market position. That is, they make a high average amount of money yet their success cannot be replicated easily by competitors. My best guess? Children want to see the same movie that their peers are seeing, which implies a concentration of returns. Yet their parents will only take them to the cinema so many times, which limits the number of movies in that market. Furthermore, these movies, which rely on focality, face especially high marketing costs.Here I strongly disagree. Gibson's Passion of the Christ is pulling in movie audiences that seldom see movies. I will tell you that my wife and I watch far fewer films (rentals or in theaters) than we did twenty years ago, simply because there are so few movies that we find worth our time--and it is not a matter of kids driving the demand. Second Hand Lions was a fine film, a reminder that a movie can be very entertaining without being vulgar or crude. It was a film well-suited to both adults and children. Ditto for Pirates of the Caribbean. My wife and I are, I think, pretty typical of a big chunk of America: we would go to a movie theater every week, if there were enough movies being made that appealed to us. There really aren't. I am always amazed at how many movies seem to be running along just fine, and then it is as if the screenwriter suddenly stopped in his tracks and said, "Wow! I haven't written anything yet to offend ordinary Americans!" Here's an example. I was watching Forces of Nature on TV a while back. It wasn't a great film, but it wasn't a bad one, and Sandra Bullock has such an ingratating way about her that if I have nothing better to do, I'lll watch a movie with her. Everything is going pretty well, until suddenly, this mismatched pair needs to scrape up some money to complete their journey to his wedding--and they go into a strip joint so that she can earn some money. I was hoping that at the last moment, the script would veer away from this, but no, it turns into the guy is being encouraged to strip for money. At that point, I turned it off. It was so bizarre to turn a light romantic comedy into something sleazy--why? There are a lot of interesting stories out there that could be made into lavish costume dramas--and drag in an audience that doesn't ordinarily see movies. As an example, Nat Brandt's The Town That Started the Civil War, about the Oberlin Rescuers trial in 1858, would make a splendid film. It has a serious conflict: slavecatchers and U.S. marshals capture a runaway slave in Ohio, and try to take him back South. Oberlin College's students and faculty surround the hotel, with rifles, and demand freedom for the slave. It has social significance, with the Rescuers insisting that the laws of God take precedence over the laws of men. It has a trial, with all the drama that a trial entails. It has political machinations in the background, as abolitionist and slaveowner forces struggle over a jury. It has a great closing sequence, as we see John Brown reading about the case--and becoming increasingly committed to the Harpers' Ferry Raid. So why are properties like this sitting unused? But there's no sex; no homosexuals; no cannibalism; and no torture (although, if Hollywood insists, we can have the slave flashback to being whipped). UPDATE: Lead and Gold has some important comments on this, with respect to worshipping of markets: By that reasoning, all cars should still have tailfins and weigh 5,000 pounds. After all, if there was a market for smaller, more Teutonic cars, Detroit would have offered cars like that in 1958.And that is one of the points that Medved's Hollywood vs. America makes--that much of Hollywood is so out of touch with America that they don't understand their customers, or potential customers, very well. Medved tells of asking Hollywood producers what percentage of Americans regularly attend church, and usually gets an answer like "oh, about 5%." This explains why they completely missed the potential of Passion of the Christ--and did not realize (or did not care) about the enormous backlash from The Last Temptation of Christ. To most of the entertainment industry, a movie dramatically at odds with Christianity would seem an easy sell, while a film that was firmly in the mainstream of Christian belief would seem like a marginal market. Bumper Sticker I Saw This Morning I was dropping my son off at school this morning, and I noticed a bumper sticker that I've never seen before: Pay no attention to the car. My treasure is stored up in Heaven.This refers to Matthew 6:19-21: 19 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.The car, however, was fairly old--old enough that this bumper sticker qualifies as sardonic. Still, a nice mixture of the sardonic and the serious. UPDATE: My favorite bumper sticker of all time: "Eschew Obfuscation." My least favorite bumper sticker (one that I saw a lot in Sonoma County): "Sorry I wasn't in church Sunday morning, I was practicing witchcraft and becoming a lesbian." But of course, that describes Sonoma County to a tee. Traffic Congestion in West Boise On my way to work the other morning, I had to honk at a Canada goose to get it to waddle out of the road. Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Reasons Why High Capacity Firearms Make a Lot of Sense This was just posted by my co-blogger Pete Drum on the Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog: Renter Fires Gun During Alleged Home InvasionSix home invaders? Even with good aim, I can see a need for at least a 13 round magazine here. New Article Posted I am substituting for Neal Knox in Shotgun News every other issue while he undergoes chemotherapy. This is the April 1, 2004 article: "Victory in Missouri, Again--Sort Of". Being Right Isn't Enough There are times that I worry that Bush and his people are a little focused on being right, as opposed to winning the election. There is no question that, in the long run, a global economy, with employers able to pick and choose where to have work done, is good for the U.S.--even though it is often not good for individual workers who can't find jobs, or can't find good jobs. As much as Kerry's proposal to change the tax laws to discourage businesses from outsourcing jobs overseas is nonsense to my rational mind, it is emotionally very satisfying: if you want to send the jobs overseas, you won't get the benefit of our tax structure while you do it! There are also outsourcing deals that are disturbing from a symbolic and nostalgic standpoint: Just Tuesday, 87-year-old Radio Flyer Inc. announced it was closing its Chicago plant and moving the production of its metal red wagons loved by generations of American children to China, resulting in the expected layoffs of nearly half of its 90 employees.And this is the issue where Bush and company seem to have missed an important point: the manufacturing jobs were largely union, a crowd likely to vote Democrat anyway. White collar, college-educated workers are more likely to vote Republican than Democrat--and failing to recognize the fear that a lot of them have is really, really stupid. I'm not suggesting that Bush should play the protectionist game on jobs. I am suggesting that he and his minions need to be a lot more careful to emphasize that as good jobs get exported, that many individuals are going to be hurt, while others may benefit. There is also nothing wrong with encouraging--as loudly as possible--"Buy American." It doesn't impair free trade, it might actually save a few jobs, and it helps to remind Americans that buying the cheapest goods (and often not very high quality goods) may not be good for their neighbors. If you are looking to buy something American, let me emphasize how tremendously pleased I am with the Losmandy GM-8 mount that I bought used a month or so ago. Yes, it is quite a bit more expensive than the nearest Chinese equivalents--but wow! What a beautiful piece of machinery!  You Always Have To Be Careful How Much You Believe From This Guy... It does sound, however, as though Bush's response to 9/11 saved an awful lot of lives in Chicago and Los Angeles: Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, al Qaeda's purported operations chief, has told U.S. interrogators that the group had been planning attacks on the Library Tower in Los Angeles and the Sears Tower in Chicago on the heels of the September 11, 2001, terror strikes.Oh yes, this changes everything! The new transcripts confirm an earlier report by the Associated Press that al Qaeda originally had planned to crash hijacked airliners into targets on both coasts. The Problem With Being "Reasonable" With Respect to Rights One of the recurring questions that comes with the meaning of the right to keep and bear arms is what are the limits of that right. Even judges that acknowledge that such a right exists, and is individual in nature, such as the dissent in U.S. v. Parker (10th Cir. 2004), usually hold that certain limitations on that right are reasonable, usually because the places where those limits apply are not too all encompassing. (See my previous blog entry about this decision.) There are problems with this "reasonable regulation" approach, of which the biggest is the lack of a bright line that clearly separates "reasonable" from "unreasonable." Professor Volokh points to a Michigan Court of Appeals decision that upheld the authority of a public housing agency to bar tenants from having guns in their apartments. The defendant came to the attention of the police at least partly because she was emotionally disturbed, and perhaps suicidal. Someone concerned about her informed police that she had a gun in her home. This led to a search warrant, and eventually, to her eviction. The defendant's argument is that her right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment and the Michigan Constitution's guarantee has been violated. The Court of Appeals did acknowledge that the Michigan Constitution's guarantee is individual in nature, but argued that: This Court has determined that "the constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms is subject to a reasonable exercise of the police power." Swint, supra at 363, citing Gasta, supra at 788. The state has a legitimate interest in limiting access to weapons. McFadden, supra at 540-543.Limiting access to weapons to whom? Just to tenants of public housing? Can they prohibit gun ownership as a condition of receiving a driver's license? They might have been on stronger ground had they argued that there is a legitimate state interest in limiting emotionally disturbed or mentally ill people from having access to weapons, but that wasn't the basis on which the defendant was being evicted. She wsa evicted for having a gun, not being an emotionally disturbed tenant with a gun. Another part of the decision that I find disturbing is: Restrictions on the right to possess weapons in the environment and circumstances described by plaintiff are both in furtherance of a legitimate interest to protect its residents and a reasonable exercise of police power.If you assume that banning guns makes everyone safer, then this makes sense--but this is merely an assumption, and one that seems pretty arguable to me--especially in light of the violent crime problems (both with and without guns) that are endemic in many public housing projects. This is particularly true given defendant's failure to make any allegation she feels physically threatened or in danger as a resident of plaintiff?s complex necessitating her possession of a weapon to defend herself.She lives in public housing; does she really need to articulate that she might need a gun to defend herself? Well I guess so. Leave nothing out, including the color of the sky. The Court of Appeals asserts that the Second Amendment is not incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment--a statement that is accurate, because the Supreme Court has not done so. The rest of their reasoning, however, is why I can't take the selective incorporation method of the Supreme Court seriously: Substantive due process has been determined to safeguard against only the most arbitrary and conscience shocking intrusions by the government into personal matters. ATC Partnership v Town of Windham, 251 Conn 597, 606; 741 A2d 305 (1999). As such, even if applicable, plaintiff?s prohibition against weapons fails to ?shock the conscience? or exceed the ?decencies of civilized conduct.? Co of Sacramento v Lewis, 523 US 833, 846; 118 S Ct 1708; 140 L Ed 2d 1043 (1998).This rather depends on whose conscience is being shocked, doesn't it? Rochin v. California (1952) from which the term "shocks the conscience" comes, involved police officers tried to pry a suspect's mouth open, and then using an emetic to force him to vomit up the morphine pills. Yes, this seems pretty shocking. But what is also shocking is to read Rochin, and see Justice Hugo Black's concurring opinion, where he points out that the majority was not prepared to incorporate the Fifth Amendment's protections against the states, instead relying on "shocks the conscience," a principle plucked out of thin air: In the view of a majority of the Court, however, the Fifth Amendment imposes no restraint of any kind on the states. They nevertheless hold that California's use of this evidence violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since they hold as I do in this case, I regret my inability to accept their interpretation without protest. But I believe that faithful adherence to the specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights insures a more permanent protection of individual liberty than that which can be afforded by the nebulous standards stated by the majority.In brief, Justice Black's point was that the majority wasn't prepared to engage in a principled position on this. They didn't like the result, but rather than incorporate the Fifth Amendment against the states, or admit that the U.S. Constitution contained no clause that clearly struck down this abhorrent practice, they decided that they would just make this stuff up as they went along. And that's exactly what the courts have been doing for decades: striking down laws that they don't like, without any text to justify that action (such as Lawrence), while refusing to strike down laws that they do like, but that have clear conflicts with the actual text of the Constitution (such as the federal assault weapons law). Labels: gun rights The Comments On Scrappleface Are Often Funnier Than Scrappleface Scrappleface goes for sharply pointed satire more than belly laughs, but some of the comments are laugh out loud. Here's a bit of Scrappleface's explanation of John Kerry's Catholicism: 2004-03-29) -- The strict anti-abortion stance of Pope John Paul II is "tragically not nuanced," according to U.S. Democrat presidential candidate John Forbes Kerry, a practicing Roman Catholic.A few of the better comments on this: Kerry is the omni-candidate. He represents all views possible or impossible, that may or may not have been realized yet, those of now, the Vietnam War, The Revolutionary War, etc... But that is phrasing it in military terminology - Kerry does not openly endorse war (nor oppose it). In the battle of political ideals as well, Kerry takes both, nay, several, nay, infinite sides. (For after all, does not a circle have an infinite number of equally perplexing sides?) Is he a patriotic American? Yes. Does he have the support of foreign leaders? Yes, of course, but they're too secret to name, except of course for Kim Jong Il.and I'm trying to get Senator Kerry to speak at one of our black masses, would any of you have his direct number?and the followup: Mr. LeVay,and Sinator,(YES, I spelled it right), Heinz-kerry and his buddy Teddy Kennedy think rosary beads are those things you give the girls at Mardi Gras for exposing themselves. Labels: abortion Monday, March 29, 2004
Astrophotography There's obviously still some room for improvement here. 
This was shot on ASA 800 Kodak film, with a Pentax ME using a Photon Instruments 1147mm f/9 telescope with a 25mm eyepiece projection adapter, and 1/60th second exposure. Labels: telescopes Conflicting Rights? Or Government Overreaching? I've mentioned before that when you find a conflict of rights, it is often because the government has become a bit too overreaching. Focus on the Family Canada has an description of two of those "conflict of rights" situations here: Meanwhile, homosexual-rights activists are threatening to lodge a complaint with the BC human-rights tribunal against civic officials in Terrace, Kelowna and Oliver. All three had bowed to complaints filed with the tribunal in 2000 for having balked at declaring "gay pride" days in their communities. As a result, they have now decided not to issue any more civic proclamations no matter what the event. But that, says lawyer Barbara Findlay, targets homosexuals for hatred. "It further contributes to the intolerance in the community," she told the Vancouver Sun. "By saying that they will not do any more proclamations, the eyes of the community may direct fault at our community."In both cases, homosexuals are arguing that their right to be heard takes precedence over the right of conscience and political speech of others. Another item concerns a bill before the Canadian Parliament that seeks to expand Canada's already very broad prohibition on "hate speech" to include sexual orientation--and with Canada's history of defining any opposition to homosexuality as improper, C-250 seems likely to further erode freedom of speech in Canada. HPV: Not Just A Risk For Women I've mentioned before that HPV is well-established to be a cause of cervical cancer, and there is serious question about the effectiveness of condoms for preventing the spread of HPV. I've suggested that at least part of why this doesn't get any press is that it is only destroying women, and the popular entertainment business doesn't much care what happens to women--there's always another sexual toy available to replace Brittney Spears when she gets too old. They care even less about the teenaged girls that they encourage to regard promiscuity as a path to power. It turns out, however, that men are not immune from unpleasant cancers related to HPV: The role of HPV in the development of cervical cancer is well established, and studies show that HPV DNA can be isolated from more than 90% of the specimens of cervical squamous cell carcinoma....It shouldn't be too difficult to guess why. A lot of HIV-positive women are prostitutes, and the combination of large numbers of sexual partners and probably a higher rate of anal sex (compared to non-prostitutes) would explain this. This report from UCSF shows that HPV infection is common among homosexual men: Infection with HPV is common, with one large study at UCSF detecting HPV in 61% of HIVnegative and 93% of HIV-positive of gay andThere is also a recently established connection between oral cancer and HPV: Oral sex can lead to oral tumours. That is the conclusion of researchers who have proved what has long been suspected, that the human papilloma virus can cause oral cancers.Gee, how about monogamy, so that you reduce your risk of HPV infection? Or giving up smoking and drinking? Or would that be too judgmental? Here's a link to the abstract giving more of the sample size data. As I mentioned earlier, condoms appear not to be sufficient protection against HPV. Unfortunately, the popular culture's promotion of promiscuity means that an awful lot of young women are going to be exposed to HPV. Dr. Stephen Hatfill's Suit He claims that the federal government has made him effectively unemployable: Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Bucholtz said Ashcroft's identification of Hatfill actually was an effort to "downplay" his status by making it clear he was not considered a suspect.While I generally give high marks to the Bush Administration's efforts in the War on Terrorism, there are incidents like this that suggest a certain lack of competence--or at least subtlety: The FBI (news - web sites) had Hatfill under 24-hour surveillance for many months following the attacks. In one incident, agents in a vehicle trailing Hatfill ran over his foot on a Washington street. Hatfill was not seriously hurt, and the surveillance has been curtailed.Trailing someone implies that you are far enough away not to run him over. Or did I miss something? This Sits on the Fence Between Tragically Funny and Just Sad It's from WKMG TV in Central Florida: CORINTH, Vt. -- State officials are investigating a man whose goats and his religious convictions against killing them have collided in a possibly inhumane and definitely stinky way. Another Reminder Where Demon Rum Can Take You I remember reading somewhere that a surprising number of economic crimes (robbery, burglary) take place under the influence. Here's an example, and a reminder of why getting drunk is not a good idea: OKLAHOMA CITY (Reuters) - An Oklahoma couple were surprised when they woke up and found a drunk burglary suspect asleep in bed with them, police said on Thursday.I wish that Brittney Spears's latest vulgarity could be blamed on something as simple as alcohol. Really, really tacky. UPDATE: A reader reports, I recall an interview with Britney when she was about seventeen, saying she wanted to be just like Madonna, except for the, y'know, sex thing. Looks like she forgot the second part. This Is Not A Good Sign Reuters has the following news story in their Reuters Odd collection. There's nothing odd about it at all. What it tells me is that the traditional idea of the Sabbath is lost on the Reuters editors: VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope John Paul (news - web sites) on Friday said Sunday should be a day for God, not for secular diversions like entertainment and sports. Never Get Between a Teenaged Girl & Her Cell Phone From Reuters: A 14-year-old Hong Kong girl flew into a rage and chased her mother around their flat with a knife and wooden pole after she confiscated the teenager's mobile phone, a police spokeswoman said on Monday.As the father of a former teenaged girl with a cell phone, I am not even slightly surprised. Please: Store Your Guns Properly--Not in the Oven From Reuters: SAN ANTONIO (Reuters) - A Texas woman heating fish sticks was shot in the leg by a gun that had been stashed in her oven, police said.See where no guns allowed policies take you? Along with not looking in the oven before starting it? More People Confessing to Crimes Because of The Passion This time, in Norway: OSLO (Reuters) - A Norwegian neo-Nazi has confessed to two bombings a decade ago after a pang of repentance triggered by watching U.S. director Mel Gibson's controversial film "The Passion of the Christ".Oddly enough: "This does not change my view of the film in the slightest," Oslo's Lutheran bishop Gunnar Staalsett told the Norwegian daily Verdens Gang on Monday, reiterating his condemnation of the movie as glorifying sadism and torture.Hmmm. It also seems to be causing people to feel guilt about their past crimes. It makes you wonder if Bishop Staalsett doesn't get it because the movie is talking to sinners in a language that they understand. Ways To Win Friends and Influence People There is a campaign under way to allow illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition at universities. Now, I can somewhat understand the argument. In many cases, these illegals have lived here for many years, paying taxes--why can't they pay the same tuition as residents of those states? The argument against is that you should obey the law, and go through the proper channels. For the first semester after I moved to Idaho, my daughter had to pay out-of-state tuition to attend the University of Idaho. Why should someone who isn't even legally present in the U.S. get to pay the in-state tuition? I find myself also wondering what is really going on--aren't illegal aliens overwhelmingly attending college on full scholarships based on poverty? When I attended Sonoma State University, there were all sorts of scholarships that the university awarded that were only available to Hispanics (other ethnicities need not apply). Let me be clear on this: these were not privately funded scholarships, but were publicly funded. When I wrote a letter to the scholarship office pointing out that this seemed to be in violation of federal law, and asking for a clarification as to how this was legal, I received no response whatsoever. Nonetheless, there are ways to present your argument, and ways not to present it. From the Washington Post: Several hundred people stormed the small yard of President Bush's chief political strategist, Karl Rove, yesterday afternoon, pounding on his windows, shoving signs at others and challenging Rove to talk to them about a bill that deals with educational opportunities for immigrants. Kennewick Man Can Be Studied By Scientists A victory for anthropology. You may be aware that a skeleton discovered near Kennewick, Washington some years ago has been a... bone of contention between anthropologists, who wanted to study it, and a number of Northwest Indian tribes, who insisted that they had a right to rebury it, and not allow scientists to study it. Congress passed a law some years ago to require that human remains that were associated with an existing tribe would be turned over to them for reburial. The idea was understandable; for some Indian tribes, the notion that an ancestor was sitting in a glass case in a museum was religiously offensive. The question has always been how far back does such a link go? What makes Kennewick Man such a disturbing question is that his facial structure doesn't seem very Indian. Indeed, he would appear to be Caucasian. The reconstruction here bears an uncanny resemblance to the actor Patrick Stewart. This, I fear, may be part of why some of these tribes wanted Kennewick Man reburied, quickly. What if the first inhabitants of the Americas weren't Indians at all? This BBC report from a few years ago discusses the strong similarities of some of the oldest South American remains to Australian aborigines. It would mean that the Indians took over in a manner not so different from how Europeans took the New World from Indians. That would severely injure the Indian victimization industry. |
