Notwithstanding all the above, I grew up in the west where the only "racism" was against Mormons and Native Americans. I had to come to the East Coast to experience Black / White racism. Thing is, I saw (over 6 years working in an auto assembly plant) racism on both sides, black to white and white to black, about evenly distributed, and I personally experienced it.
Seems to me, very little black on white racism seems to get talked about compared to the excessive amout of discussion on the reverse.
"What I think I’m right about is that any proposed change to the electoral system will be evaluated first, last, and exclusively according to the calculus of which party will benefit from that change in the very next election, and therefore no meaningful election reform will ever actually take place. "
Of course. I see it in my state, historically Democrat. They've been working hard to marginalize the few Republicans into new districts that will be hard to win or pit two Repubs against each other.
This caught my eye more though than the main subject: "It’s so much fun to be able to jump up and down and say “I’m right! I’m right!” only when what you’re right about isn’t particularly happy news, that feels like it’s sort of an inappropriate reaction." I disagree. Ex: I enjoy pointing out to pro BOB supporters all the things he said he'd do for them with the phase "how's that hope and change working out for you?" It does have the downside of lowering the number of dates I get with liberal women though. :)
For a long time now, I've preferred the term "statist" and "non statist" to the more conventional Demo/Repub or Liberal/Conservative labels. Seems more accurate.
It's never the income that's a problem, it's always been the spending. Historically, the percentage of income is generally steady. The cause of the deficits is the spending, and Bush (at least B2) was as bad as any Democrat. The majority Repubs, when they were in power, were the same. They both spent like drunken sailors.
I once donated money to a local Repub running for office and I got onto their mailing lists. Now ever federal election I get calls. It's always the same old same old about the spendthrift demos. I delight in reminding them about how their team supported massive spending as well when they were in power and ask them why I should trust them now, much less give them money. They usually don't have a response.
"People who truly cared about the deficit would not start deficit reduction plans with “First, massively cut taxes”." I partially agree, but what should be done is "massively cut spending".
See how much of crap has come out of this decision? This is why we can't have nice things. Dumbasses want to litigate everything, and then we have idiots on the Supreme Court who "discover" a new right.
What ever happened to "It's not a power delegated to you, therefor any "law" is unconstitutional."?
"So even though he gave very brief lip-service to the idea of taming deficits and controlling welfare state spending, the clear point of Obama’s address was to provide a counter to Bill Clinton’s famous assertion that “the era of big government is over.” It wasn’t then, it isn’t now, and if we care about human equality and the struggle for a more perfect union, Obama implied, it never will be:"
More accurately, the era of spending more than we take in will never end. (Actually it will at some point when there is a default but..). Hey, you want a large gov't, PAY for it. If taxes paid for the current size of the gov't there would be a more honest debate about what was "affordable" there might, just might, be some sense brought back to the dialogue. There would also likely be rioting in the streets....
Hey, I'm all for it. As long as the standards for current combat roles are not changed. If the guys have to carry 100 pounds of gear, your weapon and body armour now, (or whatever it is) so should the gals.
When will the gals be required to register for Selective Service?
RE vitamin water. I wasn't clear then. I'm not making allowances. Where fraud or intentional deception can be shown, I'm all for a legal smackdown--for any product.
As to the coffee...you're correct. I recall the "lap" issue and falsely recalled it was from driving:
"Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.[1"
Regardless, coffee is hot, so I have a hard time with Mcdonalds being 100% culpable here.
My food poison was not as bad as Montazuma's (sp) Revenge from drinking the water in Mexico. I think I puked for 6 straight hours. That was the worst.....
I narrowly missed the hospital when I ate some under cooked chicken at a wedding. My Sister in Law didn't and was hospitalized for dehydration. I was able to avoid the same fate-and she's a socialist! :)
I generally agree. My only real criticism is you think Matthew Yglesias is a wonk? The dude's and idiot. Trillion dollar coin. Really. No concept of economics.
Blasise is entirely correct that the most Republicans are nothing but socialists too, his disparaging remarks against Libertarians notwishstanding. :)
I'm sorta torn here in the Coke case. I generally agree that "god would not have made them sheep if he didn't want them fleeced" argument on one hand because trying to regulate down to stupid is an impossible task and I generally prefer less regulation to more. That being said, "you can't fix stupid", so we do have to have some safeguards in place. A company intentionally preying on the stupid gives pause. (I distinguish between the stupid and ignorant. The ignorant could, after looking into the product realize it's probably not healthy and not buy it). I'm all for cases of fraud and illegal marketing to get punished.
Now on to cigs and McDonalds. Sorry, cigs were labeled as coffin nails going back a hundred years. If you couldn't figure out that inhaling something other than "air" was harmful, I can't help you. Allowances made for those who could actually prove deception in individual cases.
As to McDonalds and the coffee, the coffee is hot. IIRC, the woman was driving and spilled the coffee on herself. Nuff said. I don't care if McDonalds kept the temp of the coffee at 1,000 degrees kelvin, its hot coffee. duh.
"Head Start has become a sacred cow because it performs two functions: It inspires us to acknowledge that we can do better for those among us who struggle, and it allows us the lazy comfort of saying that we’ve already got that covered, so there’s no need for us to bother ourselves with it any longer. Better for everyone that we embrace the first and abandon the second. It’s time to consider killing the cow."
Actually, it's at least 3 functions: It's a nice fat bureaucracy that ensures there are some jobs to spread around the country.
Only someone who is unfamiliar with the firearm in question or new to semi autos in general might have a relatively long delay to swap one out. Maybe a total of 5-10 seconds if the shooter doesn't know where the release button is and fumbles the reloading and cycling the bolt. Anyone who's fired a weapon, specifically the same weapon he's shooting at people, can do it in @ 1-2 seconds.
" However, the fact is that even a second can create an opening to stop or slow down an attacker; "
Yes, to a point, maybe, but let's also remember that those not in the habit of receiving fire (i.e. almost everyone) isn't going to have the reflexes, training, presence of mind, to take down someone who's swapping mags. They probably will be running scared, or hiding. I only see unarmed folks being able to take down someone reloading if they are very close to the shooter and / or rush in a group, figuring someone will live to get close enough to knock the guy down.
I consider these opposing sides to be essentially counteracting each other.
Since I was here Burt,
"Despite its name, the caliber of the 38 Special cartridge is actually .357–.358 inches (9.0678 mm), with the ".38" referring to the approximate diameter of the loaded brass case. This came about because the original .38-caliber cartridge, the .38 Short Colt, was designed for use in converted .36-caliber cap-and-ball (muzzleloading) Navy revolvers, which had cylindrical firing chambers of approximately 0.374-inch (9.5 mm) diameter, requiring heeled bullets, the exposed portion of which was the same diameter as the cartridge case (see the section on the .38 Long Colt).
Except for case length, the .38 Special is identical to that of the .38 Short Colt, .38 Long Colt, and the .357 Magnum. This allows the .38 Special round to be safely fired in revolvers chambered for the .357 Magnum, and the .38 Long Colt to be fired in revolvers chambered for .38 Special, and the .38 Short Colt to fire in revolvers chambered for .38 Long Colt, increasing the versatility of this cartridge. However, the longer and more powerful .357 Magnum cartridge will usually not chamber and fire in weapons rated specifically for 38 Special (e.g. all versions of the Smith & Wesson Model 10), which are not designed for the greatly increased pressure of the magnum rounds. Both .38 Special and .357 Magnum will chamber in Colt New Army revolvers in .38 Long Colt, due to the straight walled chambers, but should not be done under any circumstances, due to dangerous pressure levels, up to three times what the New Army is designed for."
Magnum: "A magnum cartridge is a firearm cartridge larger than, or derived from, a similar cartridge. A magnum firearm is one using such a cartridge.", so a .44 round is X powerful, a 44 Magnum round is more powerful than the 44 but can still be fired by the same pistol, usually
Silencers are more accurately called "suppressors": A suppressor, sound suppressor, or sound moderator, is a device attached to or part of the barrel of a firearm which reduces the amount of noise and also usually the amount of muzzle flash generated by firing the weapon. Suppressors can be used both with gunpowder-based weapons and with compressed air weapons. Sometimes referred to as a silencer, this term is a misnomer associated with "movie magic", as firearms cannot be "silenced" due to the pure physics of the projectile moving through the air. Long distance shooting (i.e. greater than 300 meters), while using a suppressor can result in a very low, or retarded, report noise at the moment of impact, creating a "silencing" notion at the point of target. The noise heard at the firearm location as the point a projectile leaves the barrel, though subdued, is not silent at all.[1]
A suppressor is usually a metal cylinder with internal mechanisms to reduce the sound of firing by slowing the escaping propellant gas and sometimes by reducing the velocity of the bullet.
Baffling recoil. Yes, one well know example is a device at the end of an AK 47 that directed muzzle gasses in a particular direction to help combat muzzle rise on full automatic. They are also called muzzle brakes. See below.
Reducing the visibility: A flash suppressor, also known as a flash guard, flash eliminator, flash hider, or flash cone, is a device attached to the muzzle of a rifle or other gun that reduces its visible signature while firing by rapidly cooling the burning gases that exit the muzzle, a phenomena typical of carbine length weapons. Its primary intent is to reduce the chances that the shooter will be blinded in low light conditions. Contrary to popular belief, it is only a secondary benefit that the flash suppressor reduces the intensity of the flash visible to the enemy.
Although they are typically mounted in the same position and sometimes confused with each other, a flash suppressor is different from a muzzle brake. While the former is intended to reduce visible flash, a muzzle brake is designed to reduce painful recoil inherent to large cartridges and typically has no effect on visible flash."
One downsize to longer barrels is they are less maneuverable and more difficult to conceal.
Misfires / Jams: the quality of the ammunition used, how well the weapon was made, how well it's been maintained, cleaned, etc. can all play a part is jams or misfires.
Converting semi auto to full: I believe that this depends upon the design of the weapon, some being easier and some not. I can’t speak more on this issue.
A .50 cal BMG, also called a Barret, is for extremely long distances. The round is typically considered "anti armor" and not generally anti personal, i.e., it's generally not used to kill individual combatants, although it can be and was used so in Iraq and probably Afghanistan. Its desirability is the long range. BTW, a .50 cal bullet is about 6 inches long. It's a big ass round. The recoil on one of those weapons is quite strong. Only a well trained soldier has the ability to fire a number of rounds off with any accuracy. I wouldn't call it a weapon designed "to kill more people". It’s also a damned expensive weapon to purchase, being over 5,000.00 USD the last time I checked.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Beyond Showroom Diversity and Other Thoughts”
Funny,
Notwithstanding all the above, I grew up in the west where the only "racism" was against Mormons and Native Americans. I had to come to the East Coast to experience Black / White racism. Thing is, I saw (over 6 years working in an auto assembly plant) racism on both sides, black to white and white to black, about evenly distributed, and I personally experienced it.
Seems to me, very little black on white racism seems to get talked about compared to the excessive amout of discussion on the reverse.
On “My Pet Cat And Electoral College Reform”
"What I think I’m right about is that any proposed change to the electoral system will be evaluated first, last, and exclusively according to the calculus of which party will benefit from that change in the very next election, and therefore no meaningful election reform will ever actually take place. "
Of course. I see it in my state, historically Democrat. They've been working hard to marginalize the few Republicans into new districts that will be hard to win or pit two Repubs against each other.
This caught my eye more though than the main subject: "It’s so much fun to be able to jump up and down and say “I’m right! I’m right!” only when what you’re right about isn’t particularly happy news, that feels like it’s sort of an inappropriate reaction." I disagree. Ex: I enjoy pointing out to pro BOB supporters all the things he said he'd do for them with the phase "how's that hope and change working out for you?" It does have the downside of lowering the number of dates I get with liberal women though. :)
On “Tractable and Ornery”
For a long time now, I've preferred the term "statist" and "non statist" to the more conventional Demo/Repub or Liberal/Conservative labels. Seems more accurate.
"
+1
On “Republicans really, really, really, really, really need to stop talking about rape”
Well, early documentation of when stuff starting going off the rails....
On “The Second Inaugural: A Big Speech”
It's never the income that's a problem, it's always been the spending. Historically, the percentage of income is generally steady. The cause of the deficits is the spending, and Bush (at least B2) was as bad as any Democrat. The majority Repubs, when they were in power, were the same. They both spent like drunken sailors.
I once donated money to a local Repub running for office and I got onto their mailing lists. Now ever federal election I get calls. It's always the same old same old about the spendthrift demos. I delight in reminding them about how their team supported massive spending as well when they were in power and ask them why I should trust them now, much less give them money. They usually don't have a response.
"People who truly cared about the deficit would not start deficit reduction plans with “First, massively cut taxes”." I partially agree, but what should be done is "massively cut spending".
On “Republicans really, really, really, really, really need to stop talking about rape”
Oh dear Jeebus!
See how much of crap has come out of this decision? This is why we can't have nice things. Dumbasses want to litigate everything, and then we have idiots on the Supreme Court who "discover" a new right.
What ever happened to "It's not a power delegated to you, therefor any "law" is unconstitutional."?
On “The Second Inaugural: A Big Speech”
"So even though he gave very brief lip-service to the idea of taming deficits and controlling welfare state spending, the clear point of Obama’s address was to provide a counter to Bill Clinton’s famous assertion that “the era of big government is over.” It wasn’t then, it isn’t now, and if we care about human equality and the struggle for a more perfect union, Obama implied, it never will be:"
More accurately, the era of spending more than we take in will never end. (Actually it will at some point when there is a default but..). Hey, you want a large gov't, PAY for it. If taxes paid for the current size of the gov't there would be a more honest debate about what was "affordable" there might, just might, be some sense brought back to the dialogue. There would also likely be rioting in the streets....
On “Change in the Air”
Hey, I'm all for it. As long as the standards for current combat roles are not changed. If the guys have to carry 100 pounds of gear, your weapon and body armour now, (or whatever it is) so should the gals.
When will the gals be required to register for Selective Service?
On “Forty Years”
40 years of pointless division and arguments. Sad.
On “Too late for the gun symposium…”
Do you really have to ask that question?
On “Coca-Cola, Big Tobacco, and Why the Personal Responsibility of the Consumer Should Not Be Allowed to Excuse Corporate Malfeasance”
RE vitamin water. I wasn't clear then. I'm not making allowances. Where fraud or intentional deception can be shown, I'm all for a legal smackdown--for any product.
As to the coffee...you're correct. I recall the "lap" issue and falsely recalled it was from driving:
"Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.[1"
Regardless, coffee is hot, so I have a hard time with Mcdonalds being 100% culpable here.
On “Should the Left Fear (Or Hate) Its Wonks?”
My food poison was not as bad as Montazuma's (sp) Revenge from drinking the water in Mexico. I think I puked for 6 straight hours. That was the worst.....
"
I narrowly missed the hospital when I ate some under cooked chicken at a wedding. My Sister in Law didn't and was hospitalized for dehydration. I was able to avoid the same fate-and she's a socialist! :)
"
Connor,
I generally agree. My only real criticism is you think Matthew Yglesias is a wonk? The dude's and idiot. Trillion dollar coin. Really. No concept of economics.
Blasise is entirely correct that the most Republicans are nothing but socialists too, his disparaging remarks against Libertarians notwishstanding. :)
On “Coca-Cola, Big Tobacco, and Why the Personal Responsibility of the Consumer Should Not Be Allowed to Excuse Corporate Malfeasance”
I'm sorta torn here in the Coke case. I generally agree that "god would not have made them sheep if he didn't want them fleeced" argument on one hand because trying to regulate down to stupid is an impossible task and I generally prefer less regulation to more. That being said, "you can't fix stupid", so we do have to have some safeguards in place. A company intentionally preying on the stupid gives pause. (I distinguish between the stupid and ignorant. The ignorant could, after looking into the product realize it's probably not healthy and not buy it). I'm all for cases of fraud and illegal marketing to get punished.
Now on to cigs and McDonalds. Sorry, cigs were labeled as coffin nails going back a hundred years. If you couldn't figure out that inhaling something other than "air" was harmful, I can't help you. Allowances made for those who could actually prove deception in individual cases.
As to McDonalds and the coffee, the coffee is hot. IIRC, the woman was driving and spilled the coffee on herself. Nuff said. I don't care if McDonalds kept the temp of the coffee at 1,000 degrees kelvin, its hot coffee. duh.
On “Kathryn Bigelow Trolls Zero Dark Thirty Critics”
Given you'll never get the real truth until all the relevant documents are declassifed, we'll wait, what, 50 years minimum for the whole story?
"
Not relevant to the topic at hand, much, but I figured ZDT was a propaganda piece anyway and didn't plan on seeing it.
On “It’s Time to Rethink Head Start”
"Head Start has become a sacred cow because it performs two functions: It inspires us to acknowledge that we can do better for those among us who struggle, and it allows us the lazy comfort of saying that we’ve already got that covered, so there’s no need for us to bother ourselves with it any longer. Better for everyone that we embrace the first and abandon the second. It’s time to consider killing the cow."
Actually, it's at least 3 functions: It's a nice fat bureaucracy that ensures there are some jobs to spread around the country.
On “Assault Weapons Ban, Part II: How to Prevent a Meaningful Dialogue on Guns and Gun Control”
I'd like to add a comment about swapping mags.
Only someone who is unfamiliar with the firearm in question or new to semi autos in general might have a relatively long delay to swap one out. Maybe a total of 5-10 seconds if the shooter doesn't know where the release button is and fumbles the reloading and cycling the bolt. Anyone who's fired a weapon, specifically the same weapon he's shooting at people, can do it in @ 1-2 seconds.
" However, the fact is that even a second can create an opening to stop or slow down an attacker; "
Yes, to a point, maybe, but let's also remember that those not in the habit of receiving fire (i.e. almost everyone) isn't going to have the reflexes, training, presence of mind, to take down someone who's swapping mags. They probably will be running scared, or hiding. I only see unarmed folks being able to take down someone reloading if they are very close to the shooter and / or rush in a group, figuring someone will live to get close enough to knock the guy down.
I consider these opposing sides to be essentially counteracting each other.
On “Akemashite Omedetou”
QFT Sir.
On “A Primer on Guns”
I'm not sure, although I always assume Hollywood is wrong.
Check this link out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressor
I guess the answer is "depends".
"
Agreed. My comments were directed at "dual use". I doubt there are many crooks running around with a M2 :)
"
Since I was here Burt,
"Despite its name, the caliber of the 38 Special cartridge is actually .357–.358 inches (9.0678 mm), with the ".38" referring to the approximate diameter of the loaded brass case. This came about because the original .38-caliber cartridge, the .38 Short Colt, was designed for use in converted .36-caliber cap-and-ball (muzzleloading) Navy revolvers, which had cylindrical firing chambers of approximately 0.374-inch (9.5 mm) diameter, requiring heeled bullets, the exposed portion of which was the same diameter as the cartridge case (see the section on the .38 Long Colt).
Except for case length, the .38 Special is identical to that of the .38 Short Colt, .38 Long Colt, and the .357 Magnum. This allows the .38 Special round to be safely fired in revolvers chambered for the .357 Magnum, and the .38 Long Colt to be fired in revolvers chambered for .38 Special, and the .38 Short Colt to fire in revolvers chambered for .38 Long Colt, increasing the versatility of this cartridge. However, the longer and more powerful .357 Magnum cartridge will usually not chamber and fire in weapons rated specifically for 38 Special (e.g. all versions of the Smith & Wesson Model 10), which are not designed for the greatly increased pressure of the magnum rounds. Both .38 Special and .357 Magnum will chamber in Colt New Army revolvers in .38 Long Colt, due to the straight walled chambers, but should not be done under any circumstances, due to dangerous pressure levels, up to three times what the New Army is designed for."
Magnum: "A magnum cartridge is a firearm cartridge larger than, or derived from, a similar cartridge. A magnum firearm is one using such a cartridge.", so a .44 round is X powerful, a 44 Magnum round is more powerful than the 44 but can still be fired by the same pistol, usually
Silencers are more accurately called "suppressors": A suppressor, sound suppressor, or sound moderator, is a device attached to or part of the barrel of a firearm which reduces the amount of noise and also usually the amount of muzzle flash generated by firing the weapon. Suppressors can be used both with gunpowder-based weapons and with compressed air weapons. Sometimes referred to as a silencer, this term is a misnomer associated with "movie magic", as firearms cannot be "silenced" due to the pure physics of the projectile moving through the air. Long distance shooting (i.e. greater than 300 meters), while using a suppressor can result in a very low, or retarded, report noise at the moment of impact, creating a "silencing" notion at the point of target. The noise heard at the firearm location as the point a projectile leaves the barrel, though subdued, is not silent at all.[1]
A suppressor is usually a metal cylinder with internal mechanisms to reduce the sound of firing by slowing the escaping propellant gas and sometimes by reducing the velocity of the bullet.
Baffling recoil. Yes, one well know example is a device at the end of an AK 47 that directed muzzle gasses in a particular direction to help combat muzzle rise on full automatic. They are also called muzzle brakes. See below.
Reducing the visibility: A flash suppressor, also known as a flash guard, flash eliminator, flash hider, or flash cone, is a device attached to the muzzle of a rifle or other gun that reduces its visible signature while firing by rapidly cooling the burning gases that exit the muzzle, a phenomena typical of carbine length weapons. Its primary intent is to reduce the chances that the shooter will be blinded in low light conditions. Contrary to popular belief, it is only a secondary benefit that the flash suppressor reduces the intensity of the flash visible to the enemy.
Although they are typically mounted in the same position and sometimes confused with each other, a flash suppressor is different from a muzzle brake. While the former is intended to reduce visible flash, a muzzle brake is designed to reduce painful recoil inherent to large cartridges and typically has no effect on visible flash."
One downsize to longer barrels is they are less maneuverable and more difficult to conceal.
Misfires / Jams: the quality of the ammunition used, how well the weapon was made, how well it's been maintained, cleaned, etc. can all play a part is jams or misfires.
Converting semi auto to full: I believe that this depends upon the design of the weapon, some being easier and some not. I can’t speak more on this issue.
"
A .50 cal BMG, also called a Barret, is for extremely long distances. The round is typically considered "anti armor" and not generally anti personal, i.e., it's generally not used to kill individual combatants, although it can be and was used so in Iraq and probably Afghanistan. Its desirability is the long range. BTW, a .50 cal bullet is about 6 inches long. It's a big ass round. The recoil on one of those weapons is quite strong. Only a well trained soldier has the ability to fire a number of rounds off with any accuracy. I wouldn't call it a weapon designed "to kill more people". It’s also a damned expensive weapon to purchase, being over 5,000.00 USD the last time I checked.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.