It's hard to believe that it's been 10 years - then again, I had to keep reading to remember the storyline. This was the right to defend oneself in FL. I agree - in the end this was a fist fight won by the person with a gun. One more case in a long list of incidents that was going to lead to big time gun laws - along with shootings in bars, schools, concerts that have come and gone.
I quit donating to The Reader after Goodman’s seriously bad takes on Trump/Russia, he was full-on hoax mode and I assume is now lost in Glen Greenwald’s alt-left mystery world where they don’t know what they believe anymore. The people now supporting Putin and welcoming invitations to appear on the Tucker show.
Your review of the Martin case reminded me of Michael Brown in Ferguson. The 'hands up, don't shoot' story was proven to be a lie by a witness that was a friend of Brown but became the 'truth' of what happened.
I roll my eyes when I see all kinds of nutty prices for collectors' items. But a thing is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it - for whatever reason, it is worth that much to them. The future value of a thing is totally dependent on the desires of future people. Memorabilia values are all over the map, and of course you can expect people in the market to use all kinds of fantasy language to support prices. And I agree, I have no idea why anyone would pay a lot of money for a ticket stub.
I also wonder about Rittenhouse position in a libel/slander case. Is he a 'public figure'? It is kind of a circular definition if the media can say that he is because they talk about him a lot. It is pretty clear that calling him a murderer is malicious and not factual. They can say they disagree with the verdict or call him a killer. It might be harder to prove in other assaults on his character, but I don't think anyone could claim protection in the 'time frame required for news' at this point. But I am also not sure this is the best path for him to achieve being left alone. Maybe he thinks it is the only way for him to be left alone.
“It was a stupid fistfight that turned tragic because the person losing it was carrying a gun.” --Zorn.
This statement presumes the “tragic” death wouldn’t have occurred if no pistol was involved, and many will say the same. However, what if Zimmerman had a knife, a weighty stick, a heavy rock, a shovel, his truck – or even his closed fists or open hands – is it possible then that a lethal result could have followed from any “stupid” (typical) fistfight: The pistol is not necessarily the only possible impromptu weapon available in producing lethal outcomes?
All this has the sense of portended, looming political, anti-gun policies; and although persuasive in theory, in a practical sense I’m dubious about it curtailing violence in the many vitriolic, lethal exchanges people have involving unpremeditated, ad hoc weapons. How are these controlled?
How will anti-gun laws limit the application of lethal human aggression applied by means other than pistols or rifles?
In the book "Taboo: 10 Facts You Can't Talk About", Wilfred Reilly discusses the "Knoxville Horrors", one of the more gruesome murders in recent history that received virtually no national media coverage, presumably because of the race of all involved. Perhaps the Louvins had a premonition.
Speaking of the Louvins, RIP Dallas Good, who passed last week. He was a member of the Good Family (Canada's version of the Carter Family), and his band The Sadies always knocked it out of the park with their cover of the Louvin's "Higher Power"
The Clanchy article was really frightening. Particularly the faceless and unaccountable pool of 'sensitivity readers'. But the most significant issue is the change in the attitude of the Picador publisher. The issue with the 'sensitivity readers' isn't about getting it right. It is about the newly conceived role of the publisher to accept historical guilt, their own undeserved position, their requirement for atonement, and mission to seek out and punish the perceived failings of authors. It is the essence of attempting thought control through the control of writers.
Your Reader story brought up something I recently observed: the term “fact-checking” is now so tainted in general use that I immediately regard it is as something an advocate is pushing. The Reader’s Straight Dope, and, for a while, Snopes, were genuinely disinterested detectives. Snopes is now full-on advocacy, and any use of the term Fact Check by MSM is just a warning that what follows is what used to be called an Editorial.
Florida’s stand your ground law is among other bad laws that place far too much emphasis on guns. This was a very sad case for several reasons not tne least of which is that it bolstered vigilantism with guns.
Eric - Thank you for your very reasoned explanation of the Trayvon Martin shooting. It is your command of reason separated from any ideological filter that makes me most appreciate your writing.
With regard to the Ukraine, I agree that it is not valid to criticize Biden that he did not prevent Putin from invading the Ukraine. But is it not a legitimate criticism that Biden's actions may have created a perceived weakness that made it more likely for Putin to go ahead with the invasion? Consider that Putin invaded Ukraine the first time in 2014 when Obama and Biden were in the White House. He did not invade again until this year when Biden was again in the White House. Pure coincidence?
And, I maintain that it is also very valid to criticize Biden for the relatively tepid and limited set of sanctions levied on Russia that were announced earlier today. From my perspective, why not levy the broadest and strongest sanctions possible immediately so that Putin and the Russians would feel the pain of these sanctions as quickly as possible to hopefully deter them from continuing military aggression?
If you walk in the front door of your house to find a person assaulting one of your children, would you hit them with a partial blow and then wait to see if that was enough to make them stop, or would you almost surely hit them as hard as you could in your strongest attempt to make them immediately stop the assault? I do believe that is a fair analogy.
Mincing Rascals was fun as usual. I had a couple of thoughts on the conversation.
1) I think that Pritzger is continuing to pursue the court case because he expects his GOP opponent to say he abused his authority during the pandemic, and Pritzger wants to be able to say 'no, the courts have agreed with me'.
2) The pandemic is a possible issue for Pritzger in the campaign on several fronts. The GOP candidate can make the case that children were severely harmed by two years of excessive restrictions on in-person learning; the state economy was severely damaged (and hasn't recovered) due to erratic and excessive restrictions on businesses (lost jobs, ruined businesses); state agencies failed to prevent billions of dollars in fraud for unemployment and other covid aid; and IDES injured millions of people in need by failing to provide services or even open offices.
3) I think that Jesse White has done a great job with the Sec of State job. It is important to have an administrator that is intent on providing good service. The Dem selection of a successor is entirely related to internal party politics, which we are only vaguely aware of, and may have very limited relationship to competence for the office.
It's hard to believe that it's been 10 years - then again, I had to keep reading to remember the storyline. This was the right to defend oneself in FL. I agree - in the end this was a fist fight won by the person with a gun. One more case in a long list of incidents that was going to lead to big time gun laws - along with shootings in bars, schools, concerts that have come and gone.
I quit donating to The Reader after Goodman’s seriously bad takes on Trump/Russia, he was full-on hoax mode and I assume is now lost in Glen Greenwald’s alt-left mystery world where they don’t know what they believe anymore. The people now supporting Putin and welcoming invitations to appear on the Tucker show.
I was not able to access the link to vote for Tweet of the Week. Is it you? Or me?
Your review of the Martin case reminded me of Michael Brown in Ferguson. The 'hands up, don't shoot' story was proven to be a lie by a witness that was a friend of Brown but became the 'truth' of what happened.
I roll my eyes when I see all kinds of nutty prices for collectors' items. But a thing is worth whatever someone is willing to pay for it - for whatever reason, it is worth that much to them. The future value of a thing is totally dependent on the desires of future people. Memorabilia values are all over the map, and of course you can expect people in the market to use all kinds of fantasy language to support prices. And I agree, I have no idea why anyone would pay a lot of money for a ticket stub.
I also wonder about Rittenhouse position in a libel/slander case. Is he a 'public figure'? It is kind of a circular definition if the media can say that he is because they talk about him a lot. It is pretty clear that calling him a murderer is malicious and not factual. They can say they disagree with the verdict or call him a killer. It might be harder to prove in other assaults on his character, but I don't think anyone could claim protection in the 'time frame required for news' at this point. But I am also not sure this is the best path for him to achieve being left alone. Maybe he thinks it is the only way for him to be left alone.
“It was a stupid fistfight that turned tragic because the person losing it was carrying a gun.” --Zorn.
This statement presumes the “tragic” death wouldn’t have occurred if no pistol was involved, and many will say the same. However, what if Zimmerman had a knife, a weighty stick, a heavy rock, a shovel, his truck – or even his closed fists or open hands – is it possible then that a lethal result could have followed from any “stupid” (typical) fistfight: The pistol is not necessarily the only possible impromptu weapon available in producing lethal outcomes?
All this has the sense of portended, looming political, anti-gun policies; and although persuasive in theory, in a practical sense I’m dubious about it curtailing violence in the many vitriolic, lethal exchanges people have involving unpremeditated, ad hoc weapons. How are these controlled?
How will anti-gun laws limit the application of lethal human aggression applied by means other than pistols or rifles?
In the book "Taboo: 10 Facts You Can't Talk About", Wilfred Reilly discusses the "Knoxville Horrors", one of the more gruesome murders in recent history that received virtually no national media coverage, presumably because of the race of all involved. Perhaps the Louvins had a premonition.
Speaking of the Louvins, RIP Dallas Good, who passed last week. He was a member of the Good Family (Canada's version of the Carter Family), and his band The Sadies always knocked it out of the park with their cover of the Louvin's "Higher Power"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arhSzPoBG4c
The Clanchy article was really frightening. Particularly the faceless and unaccountable pool of 'sensitivity readers'. But the most significant issue is the change in the attitude of the Picador publisher. The issue with the 'sensitivity readers' isn't about getting it right. It is about the newly conceived role of the publisher to accept historical guilt, their own undeserved position, their requirement for atonement, and mission to seek out and punish the perceived failings of authors. It is the essence of attempting thought control through the control of writers.
Your Reader story brought up something I recently observed: the term “fact-checking” is now so tainted in general use that I immediately regard it is as something an advocate is pushing. The Reader’s Straight Dope, and, for a while, Snopes, were genuinely disinterested detectives. Snopes is now full-on advocacy, and any use of the term Fact Check by MSM is just a warning that what follows is what used to be called an Editorial.
You are hilarious. I like the way you write, your sense of humor. I hope your niece and Willy work out.
Florida’s stand your ground law is among other bad laws that place far too much emphasis on guns. This was a very sad case for several reasons not tne least of which is that it bolstered vigilantism with guns.
Eric - Thank you for your very reasoned explanation of the Trayvon Martin shooting. It is your command of reason separated from any ideological filter that makes me most appreciate your writing.
With regard to the Ukraine, I agree that it is not valid to criticize Biden that he did not prevent Putin from invading the Ukraine. But is it not a legitimate criticism that Biden's actions may have created a perceived weakness that made it more likely for Putin to go ahead with the invasion? Consider that Putin invaded Ukraine the first time in 2014 when Obama and Biden were in the White House. He did not invade again until this year when Biden was again in the White House. Pure coincidence?
And, I maintain that it is also very valid to criticize Biden for the relatively tepid and limited set of sanctions levied on Russia that were announced earlier today. From my perspective, why not levy the broadest and strongest sanctions possible immediately so that Putin and the Russians would feel the pain of these sanctions as quickly as possible to hopefully deter them from continuing military aggression?
If you walk in the front door of your house to find a person assaulting one of your children, would you hit them with a partial blow and then wait to see if that was enough to make them stop, or would you almost surely hit them as hard as you could in your strongest attempt to make them immediately stop the assault? I do believe that is a fair analogy.
Mincing Rascals was fun as usual. I had a couple of thoughts on the conversation.
1) I think that Pritzger is continuing to pursue the court case because he expects his GOP opponent to say he abused his authority during the pandemic, and Pritzger wants to be able to say 'no, the courts have agreed with me'.
2) The pandemic is a possible issue for Pritzger in the campaign on several fronts. The GOP candidate can make the case that children were severely harmed by two years of excessive restrictions on in-person learning; the state economy was severely damaged (and hasn't recovered) due to erratic and excessive restrictions on businesses (lost jobs, ruined businesses); state agencies failed to prevent billions of dollars in fraud for unemployment and other covid aid; and IDES injured millions of people in need by failing to provide services or even open offices.
3) I think that Jesse White has done a great job with the Sec of State job. It is important to have an administrator that is intent on providing good service. The Dem selection of a successor is entirely related to internal party politics, which we are only vaguely aware of, and may have very limited relationship to competence for the office.