Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Innocent people do not delay justice.

People identifying as christian while ignoring christ and his teachings is a strange thing indeed.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

We’re watching the self-immolation of the leading world power on a level unprecedented in human history.

You come for women, you’re gonna get your ass kicked.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires.

Live so that if you miss a day of work people aren’t hoping you’re dead.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

Optimism opens the door to great things.

Tide comes in. Tide goes out. You can’t explain that.

Hey hey, RFK, how many kids did you kill today?

Bark louder, little dog.

Republicans don’t lie to be believed, they lie to be repeated.

She burned that motherfucker down, and I am so here for it. Thank you, Caroline Kennedy.

There are some who say that there are too many strawmen arguments on this blog.

Conservatism: there are people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

75% of people clapping liked the show!

They think we are photo bombing their nice little lives.

Republicans do not pay their debts.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

You know it’s bad when the Project 2025 people have to create training videos on “How To Be Normal”.

You are here: Home / Nature & Respite / Birdwatching / Apparently the Blog Took a Siesta!

Apparently the Blog Took a Siesta!

by | 128 Comments

This post is in: , , , , , , , , ,

I have no idea where all the other front pagers have been since Tony Jay’s guest post. I know where I’ve been. I had a teleconference on a project I’m involved in, then I went and ran an errand for the Mominator, then I came home and worked out, then I walked the dogs in the steam room we call the outdoors here, and now I’m typing this. As soon as I hit publish I’m going to go get the grime off, turn on the Avs game, and have something to eat.

In the meantime, I have baby wild turkeys!!!!!!!!

Apparently the Blog Took a Siesta!

Apparently the Blog Took a Siesta! 1

They’re SOOOO CUTE!!!!

Also, I really think I have a chance to win this year!

I don’t care what the odds makers say!!!

Open thread!

 

Reader Interactions

128Comments

  2. 2.

    Another Scott

    Howdy.

    It’s kinda nice, in a way, that one can actually keep up with the threads here even if one is away for an hour or so. ;-) Plus, it’s Friday!!

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  5. 5.

    Wag

    An Adam vs Kim burrito eating contest? I wanna see that on pay per view!

    Edit:  but only if it’s a Zoom contest. I wouldn’t trust Kim after Adam kicked his butt. 

  6. 6.

    dmsilev

    I have no idea where all the other front pagers have been since Tony Jay’s guest post.

    Maybe they’re all still working on reading the whole thing?

  8. 8.

    bbleh

    Wait, what kind of favorite?  Or, sorry, favourite?

    Is that writer’s family just gonna be thrown out of housing, or shot along with him?

  9. 9.

    jl

    Thanks for baby wild turkey pix.

    As for this almost top 10,000 blog having a schedule, I am bit confused. First, I’ve never seen that this blog has any fixed schedule. If the bigshot front posters put things up frequently, then there are complaints about bigfooting, often with subsidiary story arcs about Cole intentionally doing so because he’s pissed about somebody or some thing.

    But, a reasonable gap between posts, people run around in a panic as if, unimaginable as it may seem, the BJ readers are bunch of spoiled toddlers who will throw a tantrum if they don’t get candy on a regular schedule.

    So, I dunno. I’ll go look the wild turkey pix again and then go do something in real life.

  13. 13.

    japa21

    @jl:

     

    as if, unimaginable as it may seem, the BJ readers are bunch of spoiled toddlers

    Not unimaginable at all.

  16. 16.

    HeleninEire

    Yeah Adam. If I were you I wouldn’t challenge Kim to an eating contest. You will lose. Even if you win; nay….especially if you win.

  18. 18.

    VeniceRiley

    The thing to do is lose on purpose and let him win on the fiery bean burritos. Bogart the meats. He wins and explodes on the toilet and you save the world by being a loser. There will be a movie; so decide what star you favor to play you.

  20. 20.

    dmsilev

    So, I was looking at the doomvirus numbers locally, using the tracking page the LA Times runs. Their current state-level summary is:

    Over the past week, the state has averaged 899 new cases and -31.9 new deaths per day.

    Zombies? And, what’s worse, nine tenths of a zombie. Messy.

  21. 21.

    worn

    Good to see you, Adam!

    Flying on an aeroplane tomorrow morning (no not one powered by steam) for the first time since Christmas 2019. Flying halfway across the country to see my dad, sister, her wife & my (now) 3 1/2 year old niece. I haven’t seen any of my family except via video chat within that same span of time.

    I am pretty excited. Fully vaxxed and ready to begin to get life back to normal, at least somewhat.

    Hoping everyone’s weekend is filled with felicity.

  23. 23.

    Adam L Silverman

    @worn: Have fun. Travel safely! Enjoy your family!

    And remember, Einstein’s extra special theory of relativity: the longer your spend with your relatives, the slower time passes.

  24. 24.

    dopey-o

    @dmsilev:

    I have no idea where all the other front pagers have been since Tony Jay’s guest post.

    Maybe they’re all still working on reading the whole thing?

    busy translating Tony Jay’s frist post.

  26. 26.

    worn

    @Adam L Silverman:

    Thanks, Adam. I am really looking forward to seeing them. It’s a reflection on the last 18 months that I am willingly leaving Oregon (in freaking June!) to spend nine days down in Tejas.

  27. 27.

    Adam L Silverman

    @worn: Don’t forget to stop and pick up your complimentary shootin arn at the kiosk between the gate and the baggage claim!

  31. 31.

    Yutsano

    @Gin & Tonic: Kimchi, doengjang, gochujang, and haemul or GTFO*.

    *fermented cabbage, fermented soybean paste, hot pepper paste, and seafood. Which actually doesn’t sound half bad.

  36. 36.

    L85NJGT

    If I never see Love Field again…..

    Anyhow, Tteokbokki is like eating nitromethane, but it will set you right on a cold winter’s day.

  38. 38.

    CaseyL

    I had a strange train of thought, which I will share.

    I happened upon a YouTube channel that follows a stable of Fresians over in the Netherlands (I think the Netherlands, wherever Fresians are from originally).  Fresians are a breed of horse, a particularly lovely breed.  Larger than regular riding horses, smaller than draft horses, they’re famous for their looks:  coal black, long flowing mane, tail and fetlock feathers.  You see them in movies being ridden by armored knights.

    Anyway.  This channel, this stable’s channel, had an episode where a group of mares came in from the pasture to the barn.  They started eating a big pile of hay in the middle of the barn, right next to an oversized stall containing four fillies.  Recently weaned fillies.  Fillies who happened to be daughters of the mares who had just come inside.

    Well, the fillies were very excited to see the mares.  Kept stretching out their necks and heads, trying to get their moms’ attention, make contact…

    And the mares could not have been less interested.  They completely ignored the fillies, even sidled away from the ones who got closest.  The voiceover narration said that, once the offspring are weaned, the mares have no interest in them whatsoever.

    It got me to thinking about parenthood and family ties.

    Most animals – of whatever species, breed – are a lot like those horses.  The parents are intensely focused on their babies – raising, feeding, protecting, nurturing; sometimes literally self-sacrificing for them – but as soon as the babies are grown enough to go off on their own, the parents are completely over it.  If the youngsters ever encounter their parents again, the best they can hope for is a vague “Have we met?” response.  It’s usually a lot less friendly than that (especially if the parents have new babies on hand).

    I know there are exceptions, animals who maintain multi-generational and extended family groups. And I know among those exceptions are our own relatives, primates.

    But it did make me wonder, in view of how the default setting for so many peoples’ families is “dysfunctional”: How natural is it, really, to have a lifelong close family bond?

    How much of our “family feeling” is conditioned by thousands of years of societal insistence on how wonderful and important family ties are?  If we weren’t constantly and ceaselessly told that Family is The Most Important Thing; if families weren’t forever memorialized in art and culture…

    Would our species be more like most other species?  Family bonds that are intense beyond belief while the youngsters are still youngsters… but which then attenuate to mild affection – or complete disinterest – as soon as the youngsters are grown and flown?

    Would we be better off if our longest, deepest attachments were with whoever we bonded with once we were on our own?  What would society look like, if that were the case?​​

  39. 39.

    Adam L Silverman

    @CaseyL: Perhaps you should cut back the dose of whatever you take on Friday nights?//

    Actually it is a great question that demonstrates the difference between nature versus nurture.

  40. 40.

    CaseyL

    @Adam L Silverman: Maybe so.  I think it might also illustrate the inherent problems with insisting there are ties that bind even if the people being so bound have nothing in common other than the family tie.

  41. 41.

    James E Powell

    @CaseyL:

    Capt. Ramsey: Speaking of horses did you ever see those Lipizzaner stallions.

    Hunter: What?

    Capt. Ramsey: From Portugal. The Lipizzaner stallions. The most highly trained horses in the world. They’re all white?

    Hunter: Yes, sir.

    Capt. Ramsey: “Yes, sir” you’re aware they’re all white or “Yes, sir” you’ve seen them?

    Hunter: Yes, sir I’ve seen them. Yes, sir I was aware that they are all white. They are not from Portugal; they’re from Spain and at birth, they’re not white; they’re black. Sir.

    Capt. Ramsey: I didn’t know that. But they are from Portugal.

  42. 42.

    JWR

    CBS TV news just told me a San Diego judge just ruled California’s assault weapons ban unconstitutional. Nothing on their page yet. :(
    ETA: Federal Judge Overturns California’s Assault Weapons Ban​

    ETA2: Statement from Gavin Newsom…

    “Today’s decision is a direct threat to public safety and the lives of innocent Californians, period. As the son of a judge, I grew up with deep respect for the judicial process and the importance of a judge’s ability to make impartial fact-based rulings, but the fact that this judge compared the AR-15 – a weapon of war that’s used on the battlefield – to a Swiss Army Knife completely undermines the credibility of this decision and is a slap in the face to the families who’ve lost loved ones to this weapon. We’re not backing down from this fight, and we’ll continue pushing for common sense gun laws that will save lives.”

  44. 44.

    Elizabelle

    @JWR:   What sloppy reporting by CBS Los Angeles.  Does the federal judge have a name?  He sounds like a nut job.

    The main issue appeared to be the state’s definition of an assault weapon. California’s attorney general argued that assault weapons were more dangerous and were used in more crimes and mass shootings.

    But the judge disagreed, stating in his ruling that the guns are overwhelmingly owned for legal purposes. And, he said, the definition unlawfully deprives law-abiding citizens from owning firearms that are legal in most other states.

    Yeah, let’s have a race to the bottom, Judge.  Because if there is one thing we don’t have enough of in the US, it is firearms deaths.

    What legal purposes?  These are military grade weapons.

  45. 45.

    Adam L Silverman

    @JWR: This will be appealed, by close of business on Monday, to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. And that appeal with see an order staying Judge Benitez’s ruling and orders today from going into effect. Between now and when the 9th Circuit issues such a stay, a lot of people in California are going to be ordering AR pattern rifles online and paying for express shipping to whichever gun store they’ll go to to pick them up and handle the background check to complete the purchase.

  46. 46.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Elizabelle: Judge Roger Benitez. Appointed to the District Court in the Southern District of California in 2003 by President George W Bush. He’s 70 and is currently the senior judge in the district.

  48. 48.

    Another Scott

    @JWR:

    A US District Judge appointed by George W. Bush overturned California’s three decade old ban on assault weapons tonight. His opinion relies heavily on Justice Scalia’s decision in Heller, even though that opinion said you could ban guns like the AR-15. https://t.co/oIYUDlgpHI pic.twitter.com/4ikTf8Cq0j

    — southpaw (@nycsouthpaw) June 5, 2021

    It would be nice to have fewer judges who intentionally misunderstand what the higher courts have said…

    [sigh]

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  49. 49.

    L85NJGT

    They are from Friesland. Frisian is very closely related to English, and spoken in some of the North Sea costal regions in Germany and The Nederlands.

  50. 50.

    Elizabelle

    This jackass judge compared an AR 15 to a Swiss Army knife.  Good for defending the home and the homeland.  Jesus.  His introduction:

    Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment. Good for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). Yet, the State of California makes it a crime to have an AR- 15 type rifle. Therefore, this Court declares the California statutes to be unconstitutional.

  51. 51.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Another Scott: Actually, Scalia’s Heller and MacDonald decisions state that the Federal, state, and/or municipal government may reasonably regulate firearms despite him writing for the majority that the 2nd Amendment created an explicit individual right to keep and bear arms separate from militia service.

    The problem is is that no one can agree on what reasonably regulate means because no one can agree what a reasonable regulation is. The other problem is there ia an entire group of 2nd Amendment absolutists, including Justices Thomas and Alito, that complete ignore that part of Scalia’s ruling because they don’t agree with it. Those folks just go stray to “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!!”

  52. 52.

    JWR

    @Elizabelle:

    What legal purposes? These are military grade weapons.

    That was my first thought as well. I’ll look around for just who in the hell this judge thinks he is, anyway.

  53. 53.

    Elizabelle

    Good God.  Benitez has a footnote about how many Californians were murdered by “attacker’s use of hands, fists, or feet.”

    This thing reads like a parody, but it is sadly official.

    Judge Benitez may be right when he says more murders are committed by knife than by firearm, but there are not that many mass knife murders by a single attacker.

  54. 54.

    Adam L Silverman

    @JWR: He’s the same judge who ruled that the magazine capacity limit/ban on magazines above ten rounds and the state’s ammunition background check laws were both unconstitutional.

    So he’s the go to Federal judge in California for the 2nd Amendment absolutists.

    The 9th Circuit reimposed the magazine ban. Not sure about the ammo background check.

  55. 55.

    Elizabelle

    Benitez’s language.  We are dealing with our friendly, neighborhood guns.  Not some exotic weapon.  He wants you to be more afraid of Scary Mr. Knife.  Or Mr. Foot!  He be lethal.

    This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection. The banned “assault weapons” are not bazookas, howitzers, or machineguns. Those arms are dangerous and solely useful for military purposes. Instead, the firearms deemed “assault weapons” are fairly ordinary, popular, modern rifles. This is an average case about average guns used in average ways for average purposes.

    One is to be forgiven if one is persuaded by news media and others that the nation is awash with murderous AR-15 assault rifles.  The facts, however, do not support this hyperbole, and facts matter. Federal Bureau of Investigation murder statistics do not track assault rifles, but they do show that killing by knife attack is far more common than murder by any kind of rifle. In California, murder by knife occurs seven times more often than murder by rifle. For example, according to F.B.I. statistics for 2019, California saw 252 people murdered with a knife, while 34 people were killed with some type of rifle – not necessarily an AR-15.2 A Californian is three times more likely to be murdered by an attacker’s bare hands, fists, or feet, than by his rifle.

  56. 56.

    L85NJGT

    @JWR:

    If you aren’t exposed to the Faux-rage of the moment, it may be incomprehensible. I think it was Tom Cotton questioning an ATF appointee at confirmation that injected definition of an assault weapon into the lizard brains.

  57. 57.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Elizabelle: There is an old bedouin saying that a running man with a knife can slit a thousand throats in one night.

    I’m not sure if there is any empirical validity to back it up.

    The real issue is that California’s ban is basically all about the cosmetics of the rifle. It isn’t about the caliber. Or different calibers that one can get in an AR pattern rifle. Nor is it about the fact that it is a semi-automatic where after a shot is fired, the next round is loaded from a box magazine. Rather it is about things like having a pistol grip in addition to a stock. That the box magazine is detachable. You can own a California legal AR pattern rifle. It just does not have a pistol grip and the magazine is not detachable and is limited to 10 rounds.

    I’m not a lawyer, nor am I arguing that AR pattern rifles should or should not be legal for civilian ownership. But California’s ban is kind of a strange beast.

  59. 59.

    Ruckus

    @Elizabelle:

    I’ve lived in this country for over 70 yrs, I’ve served in the military and carried a loaded weapon. I’ve lived near two major riots in that time and never ever have I seen the need for a weapon like an AR15. Or any other weapon actually. The only people that one has to protect themselves from are the assholes who carry weapons of warfare around in an attempt to make up for their teeny, tiny dicks. And that doesn’t happen in CA because of laws to prevent it. Sure it has happened but it’s extremely rare and taken care of rapidly.

  61. 61.

    Adam L Silverman

    @JWR: @Elizabelle: Also, Benitez stayed his own ruling for 30 days. I just had a look at the ruling. He did this so that California had time to appeal and ask the 9th Circuit for an appellate level stay and to prevent the status quo from changing as a result of his ruling. Which would’ve been everybody and their sister ordering AR pattern rifles on line over the weekend, paying for expedited shipping, and trying to pick them up Monday before the 9th Circuit could stay the ruling pending hearing the appeal from the state of California. So the practical effect right now is nothing is changing.

  62. 62.

    Steeplejack

    @Elizabelle:

    “Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment.”

    It sounds like an infomercial.

  63. 63.

    Elizabelle

    Benitez is big on “hearth and home”, language out of Heller.

    … The Second Amendment “elevates above all other interests the right of law- abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.” Heller, 554 U.S., at 635.  [All other interests?  Really?]

    … In the year 1989, the California Legislature was not concerned with maintaining room for a citizen’s constitutional right to have a common firearm of one’s choosing to defend hearth and home.

    … As an aside, the “assault weapon” epithet is a bit of a misnomer.  These prohibited guns, like all guns, are dangerous weapons. However, these prohibited guns, like all guns, can be used for ill or for good. They could just as well be called “home defense rifles” or “anti-crime guns.”

    The mechanical design features that identify a rifle as a California “assault weapon,” it is argued, tend to help a person shoot the rifle more accurately under pressure. The Plaintiffs make the point that this is a better condition for all lawful uses, i.e., a more accurate gun is better for everyone. After all, responsible gun-owners worry about the ending point of every round fired. If shooting in self-defense, a home defender wants every round to hit only attackers.

    …  Going straight to the core, the California law criminalizes modern rifles kept or possessed everywhere, including in the home for self-defense. There are no current exceptions for ordinary citizens.37 A Californian who picks up an unregistered AR-15 style modern rifle solely to defend his family in his home commits a crime. It does not matter if the home was burglarized last night or is likely to be invaded this night. When it comes to self-defense in the home, AWCA hits the bull’s eye – a direct burden on the core right.

    …  Because firearm possession for the defense of home, self, and family is at the core of the Second Amendment right, it is important to know if there is evidence of modern rifles used for self-defense or defense of the home and family. Recall that AWCA’s § 30515 has no present exception allowing a typical Californian to lawfully acquire a modern rifle for home defense. There are no exceptions for urban dwellers and there are no exceptions for rural farmers. There are no exceptions for wealthy targets of armed home invaders. There are no exceptions for the impoverished who can afford only one self-defense firearm for all situations. [!!!]

    Without question, there is clear evidence that AR-15 rifles are and have been used for self-defense. For example, in one case an AR-15 was used in Florida by a pregnant wife and mother to defend her family from two armed, hooded, and masked home intruders. Pls. Exh. 1-1. As soon as the armed intruders entered the back door of her home, they pistol-whipped her husband — fracturing his eye socket and sinus cavity. Then they grabbed the 11-year-old daughter. Before they could do any more harm, the pregnant wife retrieved the family AR-15 from a bedroom and fired, killing one of the attackers while the other fled. It does not require much imagination to guess what would have happened next if the wife and mother did not have the firearm, or if she had emptied the AR-15’s magazine before the attackers had fled. The quiet click would be sickening and probably with tragic results. The State contends that one does not “need” more than ten rounds. That is easy to say. Perhaps one should imagine the terror that would have gripped this wife and mother, from the sound of a “click,” out of ammunition, helplessly watching her husband being murdered, her daughter being raped or murdered, and the enraged men coming for her.

  65. 65.

    Another Scott

    @Adam L Silverman: Understood, but the majority opinion is controlling.

    Heller v. DC at Cornell:

    Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.26

    (Emphasis added.)

    Just as with abortion, these RWNJs will continue trying to remove anything sensible from the body of our national laws.

    Fight for 15!! (on the SCOTUS)

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  67. 67.

    NotMax

    Apparently the (limited) ad AI for one streaming TV channel I happened to stop at has gone on walkabout as well.

    Within the most recent two short breaks there was one 15 second ad for a Memorial Day weekend sale and another 15 seconder with reminder information that early voting for the Georgia senatorial runoffs is now open.

  68. 68.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Another Scott: I’m aware of what Heller says. But those aren’t the portions at play here. The part about reasonable regulation are.

    Also, Scalia was a terrible historian. Thomas and Alito are even worse.

  71. 71.

    Elizabelle

    Actual Likely Situation:  Your [grand-] daughter or [grand-] son is sneaking in after being out past curfew or in the middle of the night.  And maybe, God forbid, you went to bed drunk …

    Judge Benitez needed a cigarette after composing this paean to the trusty AR-15 for home and hearth.  Why do I think he might have been licking it?  Be Rambo in your own home!!

    1. Prohibited Features Are Good for Home Defense

    The evidence shows that one reason for the popularity of the modern rifle is that it makes a good weapon for self-defense at home. The AR-15, in particular, is an easy firearm to shoot accurately and is generally easier to fire accurately than a handgun.

    The AR-15 rifle is light in weight, and has good ergonomics, and is suitable for people of all statures and varying levels of strength.

    When burglars break and enter, a homeowner with a modern rifle has thirty rounds at the ready, assuming a standard magazine is used.  Standard size magazines are ubiquitous. With the physiological stress of waking to the noise of home invaders, one may need many rounds to overcome the difficulty of aiming in the dark at multiple attackers making furtive movements. [IT’S AN INVASION, PEOPLE!!]  The adjustable stock can be quickly set for one’s arm length. The pistol grip gives a homeowner a secure hold with one hand while the other hand holds a telephone or spare magazine. A flash suppressor prevents the night-time home defender from being blinded by her own muzzle flash.  It may also hide the home defender’s location from attackers. A barrel shroud serves as a way to attach a flashlight or laser pointer. The straight-line design of an AR-15 is easier to shoot accurately because muzzle rise is reduced. The gas piston design reduces the recoil so that the young or old or not-particularly-strong have better control. The light weight makes it easy to hold and use, while the short 30-inch length (compared to a 48” traditional shotgun) makes it more maneuverable through the narrow doorways and hallways of a home.

  72. 72.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Elizabelle: He went straight to the standard critique of California’s ban being about cosmetic features and not anything substantive.

  73. 73.

    Elizabelle

    @Adam L Silverman:  Yep.

    In the end, the Court finds that the prohibited features do not change an AR-15 rifle from a benign weapon into an “incredibly effective killing machine.”

    Were we calling a gun a “benign weapon?”  I don’t recall that we were.

  74. 74.

    MisterForkbeard

    @Elizabelle: Holy shit. The judge wrote an ad. Then says that justifies overturning the three decade old ban.

    What a dipshit.

  75. 75.

    Elizabelle

    @MisterForkbeard:   I know.  Couldn’t you just hear the silky narration, and see the visuals?

    The pregnant hand.  Caressing the “prohibited features.”

  76. 76.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    have some late night schadenfreude

    Bargain hunters are swooping in to take advantage of prices in Trump buildings that have dropped to levels not seen in over a decade, a crash brokers attribute to a combination of the former president’s polarizing image and the coronavirus pandemic. It’s a stunning reversal for a brand that once lured the rich and famous willing to pay a premium to live in a building with Trump’s gilded name on it.
    An Associated Press review of more than 4,000 transactions over the past 15 years in 11 Trump-branded buildings in Chicago, Honolulu, Las Vegas and New York found prices for some condos and hotel rooms available for purchase have dropped by one-third or more.

  77. 77.

    Amir Khalid

    @Adam L Silverman:

    the 2nd Amendment created an explicit individual right to keep and bear arms separate from militia service.

    I’m no constitutional scholar, but my reading of the Second Amendment’s plain language is different: that the individual right exists only pursuant to fulfilling the duty of militia service. Those AR-15s are never going to be used in state militia service. And nothing in the Second Amendment takes away a state’s authority to regulate firearms for safety.

  78. 78.

    Elizabelle

    @Amir Khalid:  Judge Benitez actually mentioned these guns could be used for militia service.

    When the gun owner is not protecting hearth and home against invaders “making furtive movements.”

  79. 79.

    Another Scott

    @Adam L Silverman: I know you are aware.  My point, probably poorly expressed, was that Heller (as southpaw points out) says that restrictions on types of weapons or having weapons in certain places is fair game for regulation.  Yet RWNJs (e.g. in Virginia) were demanding that they be allowed to carry anything they want in schools and parks and bars and churches and…  It never ends with them.

    Getting lost in the weeds about particular features on a weapon is a losing battle (as you say), but the answer isn’t for judges to decide that they know better how to design them or to throw restrictions out completely.  The people have a right to live without fear of unstable kooks killing them and dozens of their colleagues, also too…

    (sigh)

    Cheers,

    Scott.

  80. 80.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Amir Khalid: I’m not defending Scalia’s ruling. I think it is wrong because he got the history of the 2nd Amendment wrong. I was just stating what he ruled.

  82. 82.

    Elizabelle

    Judge Benitez, the historian.

    Before the Court there is convincing and unrebutted testimony that the versatile AR-15 type of modern rifle is the perfect firearm for a citizen to bring for militia service. A law that bans the AR-15 type rifle from militia readiness is not a reasonable fit for protecting the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for the militia. It has been argued that citizens with nothing more than modern rifles will have no chance against an army with tanks and missiles. But someone forgot to tell Fidel Castro who with an initial force of 20 to 80 men armed with M-1 carbines, walked into power in Havana in spite of Cuba’s militarized forces armed with tanks, planes and a navy. Someone forgot to tell Ho Chi Minh who said, “Those who have rifles will use their rifles. Those who have swords will use their swords. Those who have no swords will use their spades, hoes, and sticks,” and eventually defeated both the French and the United States military. Someone forgot to tell the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents. Citizen militias are not irrelevant.

  83. 83.

    Elizabelle

    And:  the gun ban hasn’t stopped all unlawful gun killings.  So throw it out!

    How long does the experiment go on and what are its limits? California has had more than a reasonable opportunity to experiment. In the face of the failed federal experiment California persists with its experiment. The facts found in this trial are that the California statute has not solved the problem of mass shootings or the shooting of police officers despite 40 years of testing.

  85. 85.

    Steeplejack

    I’m watching Denzel Washington in The Equalizer, which is a satisfying corrective to this thread. Not remotely realistic, but then neither is the judge’s ruling.

  86. 86.

    Mike in NC

    On Memorial Day we returned from a trip to Key West. I always wanted to go there, liked it, and now I never plan to go back. I know of many places like that here and abroad. We get inundated with cruise ship catalogs but will wait at least a year before we even think about signing up (Barcelona to Venice looks really tempting).

  87. 87.

    Elizabelle

    Perhaps there are better experiments that can be tried by the State to reduce mass shootings.   As stated previously, shooters seek notoriety and news coverage. Perhaps restraint in news coverage might be a novel approach. Perhaps the better education of our children or perhaps the expansion of our mental health care system will be the answer.

    Perhaps!

    In the end, the Bill of Rights is not a list of suggestions or guidelines for social balancing. The Bill of Rights prevents the tyranny of the majority from taking away the rights of a minority. When a state nibbles on Constitutional rights, who protects the minorities? The federal courts.

    The Second Amendment protects any law-abiding citizen’s right to choose to be armed to defend himself, his family, and his home. At the same time, the Second Amendment protects a citizen’s right to keep and bear arms to use should the militia be needed to fight against invaders, terrorists, and tyrants. The Second Amendment is about America’s freedom: the freedom to protect oneself, family, home, and homeland. California’s assault weapon ban disrespects that freedom.

     

     

  89. 89.

    Elizabelle

    OMG.  This is from his conclusion.  Takes an anodyne statement, and applies it to modern firearms.  Which took down two of the Senator’s brothers.

    As Senator Edward Kennedy said, “[t]he judiciary is – and is often the only – protector of individual rights that are at the heart of our democracy.” Law-abiding citizens are imbued with the unalienable right to keep and bear modern firearms.

     

  90. 90.

    Jay

    NEW: Hudson's American Legion post has had its charter suspended and its leader has resigned after a veteran's mic got cut while he spoke about Black Americans' role in the history of Memorial Day. https://t.co/2FZG38qDJN— Travis Akers (@travisakers) June 4, 2021

  91. 91.

    Elizabelle

    Double OMG.  Edward Kennedy was not talking about guns.  He was talking about Robert Bork!!    Judge Benitez, cut and pasted Kennedy’s quote.   I suppose it is possible that Kennedy used that phrase in more than one speech.  But I seriously doubt he used it to talk about guns.

    Source:  National Constitution Center.
    On This Day: Senate rejects Robert Bork for the Supreme Court

    Five years later, President Reagan nominated Bork for the Supreme Court on July 1, 1987, to replace a retiring Lewis Powell. Senator Ted Kennedy reacted with a public statement that quickly drew political battle lines over Bork’s nomination.

    “Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists would be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy,” he said. (Bork later stated that he felt every word in the statement was false.)

  92. 92.

    NotMax

    @Steeplejack

    The Equalizer

    Adventures of a man endowed with the super power of being able to add artificial sweetener to anything?

    :)

    Recently watched him in Unstoppable which, so long as one lowers the brain’s pilot light to low, is an okay thriller.

  93. 93.

    Elizabelle

    duplicate.  So may I say here:

    Judge Benitez should be retired, so that he can spend ALL of his time with Fox News and his beloved firearms.

    He included several lurid tales of people defending themselves; the 78 80 year old woman shooting to protect her 80 75 year old husband, under direct attack by invaders.  Are you going to allow her only 2.2 shots?  I say not, good sir!

    From his ruling:

    The Attorney General offers the old saw that large capacity magazines and accurate repeated firing are things needed only by mass shooters. The story goes that for self-defense a citizen “needs” only 2.2 rounds. It is a myth. Take the case of the 80- year-old woman faced with a home invader who began attacking and stabbing her 75- year-old husband.78 When the intruder attacked her husband with a knife, she shot at the intruder. According to her neighbor, “She emptied the gun.” Where there is only a single intruder, 2.2 shots may not be enough. Where there are multiple attackers, it is self-evident that 2.2 shots will not be enough.

  96. 96.

    Just Chuck

    And where are all the Second Amendment fans now with all their guns?  Why, they’re lining up to become fascist paramilitaries, fighting the oppression of health care and racial justice.  The Second Amendment is a complete absolute utter failure at its supposed intent.  I used to be “moderate” about this issue, but I’m no longer inclined to find any middle ground with these fuckers.  The gun humpers were once screaming about the government going house to house confiscating guns.  Now I say that can’t happen soon enough.

  99. 99.

    Elizabelle

    @Just Chuck:   Me too.  Used to be “moderate”, now I think the Second Amendment has got to go.

    It is trumping (ha) too many of our other constitutional rights.  The right of free assembly, free speech, not getting shot in a classroom or theatre.

  101. 101.

    Elizabelle

    @Ruckus:  There you go, being the voice of sanity again.

    I hope we can turn back the craziness.  It seems dialed up to 11, and headed for 13 or 14.

    Perhaps later we will learn we were seeing the death throes of the crazies.  But it is so hard to tell, and the judiciary has its share of whack jobs, one Roger Benitez being Exhibit A tonight.

  102. 102.

    Elizabelle

    @Elizabelle:   Laughing at this Kennedy quote.  Its misuse is so brazen.

    Kennedy was warning about the danger of one crazy ass judge.  And his quote was misused by another crazy ass judge, to protect the right to own assault weapons. Through the looking glass.

    And now, to bed.  Good night.

  105. 105.

    Fair Economist

    @CaseyL:

    But it did make me wonder, in view of how the default setting for so many peoples’ families is “dysfunctional”: How natural is it, really, to have a lifelong close family bond?

    How much of our “family feeling” is conditioned by thousands of years of societal insistence on how wonderful and important family ties are? If we weren’t constantly and ceaselessly told that Family is The Most Important Thing; if families weren’t forever memorialized in art and culture…

    Some time ago I saw a claim that some hunter-gatherer culture, maybe the San of Namibia, don’t have lifelong marriage. The normal pattern is basically serial monogamy with 5 to 7 year pairings. The anthropologists speculated this was long enough to raise a child past extreme dependency but no further. So, no nuclear families. There was no discussion of other family relations but if siblings are all half-siblings often with multiple stepfathers families are going to be quite large with a lot of more distant connections so it’s hard to see how the tight connections expected in our society could be normal.

    Of course observations of hunter-gatherers by first worlders always have to be viewed with some skepticism.

  106. 106.

    Elizabelle

    @?BillinGlendaleCA:   Checking back in.

    Yeah.  Which is why Benitez was stressing the “multiple attackers” story; hit on it several times.  And he brought up seat belts and smoke alarms:  you may only need them once in 100,000 miles or X many years, but you really need them to function well when you do.

    He brought up hands and feet as weapons of attack (early on), so he skipped the dreaded swimming pools that often make it into these screeds.

    On a better topic:  You know that we will require photos of Madame’s Mr. Cat with the Lion Cut.

  107. 107.

    JWR

    @?BillinGlendaleCA: ETA.

    in fact 1.0 shots should be enough.

    No sh*t. (And now I’m thinking about Barney Fife and the one bullet he kept in his shirt pocket.) But I also think about how many rounds from an AR fired by some panicked, untrained Foxbot end up in surrounding homes or apartments (or people.)​​​

  108. 108.

    Ruckus

    @Elizabelle:

    Sanity? SANITY?? This is sanity?

    And not it’s not 11. It might be 11 in CA but in the red parts it’s up to 42. I believe the concept is that everyone on the stupid side of the aisle should be armed so that when the next civil war is declared by some conservative dipshit, they can win this one and have no opposition left. Of course they will find out that if they only have themselves to hate, they will do that, because hate is the only thing they have to sell. OK hate and really, really crappy over priced products that aren’t worth a damn, let alone $39.95, like a certain dipshits pillows.

  110. 110.

    JWR

    I’ve not been commenting much these days, but boy, is this blog borked! It’s almost as if somebody collected all of Watergirl’s listed ill behaviors and decided that tonight would be a good time to let ’em all loose. I can comment in Visual mode, then I can’t. Scrolls to the top of the page after commenting? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. And forget about removing all that data-fragment-mce stuff, because if you have to edit a comment, it puts it all back in. But remember… I’m not complainin’, I’m just sayin’. ;)

  111. 111.

    Jay

    @Fair Economist:

    most Hunter gatherer groups are built around family groups. Enough family groups form a tribe and engage in intermarriage, to avoid inbreeding and form closer tribal bonds.

    still remember the murdered family group found in Siberia, a mix of Neanderthals, Homo Sapiens and their mixed offspring, all murdered.

  112. 112.

    Amir Khalid

    @Elizabelle:

    In the unlikely event of a state militia call-up, somehow I can’t see a well-regulated modern state militia letting people bring in personal weapons that may have been modded in all sorts of non-standard and possibly unsafe ways. I think the judge is full of … it.

  113. 113.

    A woman from anywhere (formerly Mohagan)

    @CaseyL: Years ago, one of my cats had kittens (back when I let my cats have kittens), and after they were weaned, I kept one out of a sentimental thought that our cat would love having one of her kids stay around.  Wrong.  The kitten was thrilled, the mama cat was not pleased.  She apparently had been looking forward to becoming only cat again.

  114. 114.

    Jay

    @Amir Khalid:

    yurp, in Canada, we have “The Militia”, Citizen Soldiers, one weekend every month, 2 weeks solid every year, uniformed with their own Armouries, also know as “The Reserves”. Storied Regiments like the Rocky Mountain Rangers, the Seaforth Highlanders, the Westies, the Princess Pats.

    In the US they are known as the National Guard.

    Senile old dude is confusing a “Well Regulated Militia”, aka the National Guard with a bunch of cosplaying ammosexuals addicted to conspiracy theory.

  116. 116.

    Tony Jay

    @dmsilev:

    Maybe they’re all still working on reading the whole thing

    Pffft. It’s about British politics. It’s not there to be read, it’s there to be endured.

  118. 118.

    JoyceH

    @A woman from anywhere (formerly Mohagan):  Years ago a momma cat brought her litter of kittens onto my deck, which is how I wound up with them. She started pushing the kittens away at about eight or ten weeks. So my dog adopted them. When they needed snuggles they’d run to Jenny.

  120. 120.

    Gvg

    @JoyceH: my neighborhood is full of ferals. Next door neighbor started feeding mama and kittens and I did too some. We tried to catch and get spayed but it took awhile. Mama and 2 of first litter still hang out to get her and 1 sister helped raise the next litter. Both the possible dads hung out and watched the kittens some too. Cats form colonies that stay together.  The second batch I am still working on to tame and find homes for. They have been in the spare bedroom for a few months and are very loving to each other still. Mom used to hang out under window, but seems to have gotten more distant now.

    One black and white male has been ready for a home for awhile. Anybody in Florida want a cat?

    I think their may be variations in how cat families interact after weaning.

  121. 121.

    Geminid

    Kind of interesting this morning to see Ragnarok Lobster retweeting SoonerGrunt. The subject was nitwit Naomi Wolf being suspended from Twitter, presumably over her anti-vaccine advocacy. Wolf  has also wandered onto the assault weapons stage, tweeting video of her firing an AR-15 into some (hopefully) empty woods.

    @MollyConger says that these weapons are called AR-15s because every time she tweets about them there ARe 15 guys who jump in to explain them to her.

  122. 122.

    Feathers

    @Fair Economist: Ancient Ireland had much the same. Essentially, consensual sex which someone else had been informed of was “marriage,” which could last from 1 night to 7 plus years, with a year and a day being a common length. What was due each party in the marriage if there was a split was encoded in law and depended on the length of the relationship. There were a great many lifetime marriages, they just reupped their vows. The short official lengths just meant that there was a socially acceptable was for couples to end a relationship with a split of property which left neither destitute and any children provided for.

    I expect the situation in Namibia was much the same. More a codification of spousal rights than putting an end-by date on relationships.

  123. 123.

    sab

    @Gvg: So we adopted my-step-daughter’s skittish shy cat when she had to move to an apartment. We have a two story split level house (half a basement, half an upstairs, full groundfloor.) But 5 cats already this poor little guy has to blend in with. We didn’t see him for two days, but he ate all his food and used his litter box in the basement, so he is still alive. Then yesterday I saw him. Went up to let him sniff my hand. He let me scratch his head, then he hissed, and clawed my foot on my way out. Sigh. Might be a long adjustment period.

    Our meankitty (shy girl) loves the new pitbull. And the new pitbull likes her. That’s hopeful. Meankitty has missed her late rottmix friend. Pitbull may be what she was pining for.

  124. 124.

    evodevo

    @Adam L Silverman: ​
      LOLOLOL – never heard that one…SO TRUE…nothing like traveling somewhere in son’s car listening to the three grandsons fight in the back seat…

  125. 125.

    evodevo

    @Amir Khalid: ​
      Exactly…there are no “state” militias…it’s called the National Guard, and they are issued standard weapons out of the Armory. The judge is full of it…been hanging out on RedState too much, sounds like…

  127. 127.

    J R in WV

    @?BillinGlendaleCA:

    @Elizabelle: If it’s actually accurate and you know how to use the gun 2.2 shots should be more than enough, in fact 1.0 shots should be enough.

    I suspect the “good judge” has gotten .22 caliber

    ammunition, as in slightly less than one quarter of an inch in diameter, with 2.2 shots, which is from no where, because guns are incapable of shooting .2 shots, they only shoot in whole numbers. But we waste our time talking about logical or factual errors in the opinion — the whole opinion is fanciful dreamland error.

  128. 128.

    trnc

    But the judge disagreed, stating in his ruling that the guns are overwhelmingly owned for legal purposes. And, he said, the definition unlawfully deprives law-abiding citizens from owning firearms that are legal in most other states.

    A federal judge basing a ruling for a state on what “most other states” are doing seems odd, to say the least. Hopefully, this garbage ruling will be overturned by the appeals court. It’s the 9th, so we might have a better than even chance.

Comments are closed.