We’re Doing Science!

“Sir, someone who has COVID took a dump yesterday.” What a waste of time, money, and resources, developing a test to find COVID variants in sewage.

This is what government does- they spend taxpayer money on stupid ideas that help no one. All this test will do is tell you that someone who has COVID pinched off a loaf recently.

This post makes me laugh, because I get to use euphemisms for defecation, like saying “Dropping a Deuce,” or “Taking the Browns to the Superbowl” or “Dropping the Cosby Kids off at the Pool.” Biden even gave me a great idea for a new one: “Taking a visit to the Vatican”

COVID tyranny

Jackboots coming soon

The German Chancellor has announced that unvaccinated individuals will be excluded from nonessential stores, restaurants and sports and cultural venues. Where have I seen this movie before?

How will the German people know who is unvaccinated and who isn’t? Perhaps they can wear some kind of identifying symbol on their clothing, so that good Germans will know that they are not to be trusted. Might I suggest an oldie but a goodie:

Germans sure are good at breaking out the jackboots.


First and Second

Slate is always good for seeing the left’s faulty opinions, and this article is no exception. My first thought when I read the headline: “The Supreme Court May Elevate the Second Amendment Above the First” was something along the lines of, “Oh, what fresh idiocy is this?”

The article begins by pointing out that there are numerous restrictions on the time, manner, and place of free speech. Examples include rules that a ensure that expression does not interfere with their normal use. Rallies interfere with picnics and family gatherings. Parades and picketing block traffic and access to homes and businesses. The author then asks if firearms prevent the public from use and enjoyment of public spaces before going on to say:

Individuals may be injured and even killed when firearms are misused, improperly handled, or even when they are used properly. Even when a gunshot strikes the intended target, others may still be injured because the bullet may pass through the target and injure someone else or because the presence of the gun and gunfire cause a panic.

This is flawed, because the mere possession of firearms do nothing of the sort, any more than mere possession of a bible, political literature, or other materials that some find offensive interfere with the public’s use of a space. What the author is doing is conflating possession with use. No one is saying that people should be permitted to fire weapons in the middle of the street. The above argument is nothing more than the tired, old “yelling fire in a crowded theater” argument.

The author goes on to say:

the plaintiffs are not demanding the right to merely carry the firearm; they are demanding the right to use the firearm for self-defense. Thus, the fundamental question is not whether the presence of firearms threatens public safety but whether their use threatens public safety. The answer should be obvious, and the lessons of First Amendment jurisprudence should apply.

I actually agree. You see, using a firearm for self defense means that the person using that firearm is doing so to protect his own (or another’s) life from the unlawful use of force from a person illegally using that force. Just as a judge may prevent me from yelling out and disturbing his courtroom, no judge would argue that I cannot yell out to warn the occupants that the building is on fire, or that there is a man about to strike the judge with an axe from behind.

The author actually goes on to make a great point, and one which I agree with in principle, but I am betting not in the way that he is intending:

According to the court, “the peaceful enjoyment of freedoms which the Constitution guarantees contingent upon the uncontrolled will of an official—as by requiring a permit or license which may be granted or withheld in the discretion of such official—is unconstitutional.” The same should be true for firearms, and, arguably, this is where New York’s law fails. The requirement that applicants must show “proper cause” may be insufficiently clear and objective, allowing officials to exercise an unconstitutional amount of discretion.

If the court adopts this approach, it will follow a clearly marked path that will force New York to reconsider its standards for restricting guns in public, but allow it to still maintain some such standards. If the public forum doctrine is good enough for those seeking to exercise their First Amendment rights, it should be good enough for those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights as well.

My agreement here is that they should be permitted to require permits for concealed carry, as long as those permits are issued under clear, and unbiased criteria. I would accept shall issue- that is, anyone who completes a reasonable safety course and is not a prohibited person shall be issued a permit.

I am betting that isn’t what the author is thinking.


Who is the master?

The Navy has only issued 7 medical and no religious exemptions to the vaccine. Remember that military chaplains are paid by the military, not God. They do their master’s bidding.

Those “administrative” exemptions? I’m sure they all went to guys with stars on their collars.


Vegan bullcrap

The anti meat coalition is declaring shrimp, crab, lobster, and others declared “sentient” and wants laws passed that would prohibit eating them.

Science confirms what every five-year-old knows intuitively — crab and lobsters feel pain and we probably shouldn’t eat them


Bad Idea

Kyle Rittenhouse says he wants nothing to do with his rifle and is having it destroyed. Considering that many on the left want him dead, I would say that this is not a good idea. It isn’t as if making himself defenseless will convince the left to like him.

Although his shooting was legitimate self defense, he isn’t a superhero. He is still an inexperienced almost child who has expressed his support for BLM.


In the beginning

Nearly 26 years ago, a woman named Jennifer Ringley made internet history when she created the website Jennicam. She placed cameras throughout her apartment and streamed video 24 hours a day, documenting every second of her life. Users could pay for a subscription and tune in 24/7 for a glimpse into what Jenni was doing.

While there were times when she was nude, that wasn’t the focus of the site. It merely allowed electronic voyeurism. The site proved to be very popular, drawing in as many as 100 million visitors a week. The money she collected from this paid her way through college.

This was 1996, the beginning of the Internet. Listen to what Letterman had to say: “This will replace television.” This was an incredibly accurate insight. This was the beginning of the whole “influencer” career we see today.

After almost 8 years, she pulled the plug. At 45 years old, she now has almost no presence on the web, and likes it that way. According to web sources, she is married now, and her name is “Jennifer Johnson” which is a great way to be anonymous as the woman who changed American culture.

Crime Criminals Police State tyranny

More homicides?

In response to my post about the increase homicide rates nationwide, a police officer from Houston sent me an email confirming that the same is happening in his city. Since he sent me an email rather that post a public comment, I will assume that he wants his identifying information held confidential. Here is what he had to say:

while we are nowhere near the 600-900 murders per year when I was a rookie in the early 1990’s, we had been cruising for years with 230-250 per year. Which ain’t bad for 2+million population and a police department with less than 5000 total classified officers.

Buuuuut, beginning in 2020 things have certainly changed: at this point in 2019 we had 249 murders enroute to around 300 total This time in 2020 it was 360 and ended up at 405, first time over 400 in years. This year, 2021, we are at 448 with a month to go. Probably gonna top 500.

Combination of low morale, administration that disincentivizes proactive policing, and officers not wanting to get screwed over, PLUS our local Soros-funded DA, Kim Ogg, putting violent offenders on the street with low/no bail to continually re-offend. Perfect shitstorm.

Things are looking worse all over. Once the police have collapsed nationwide, they will be replaced with cops who are more, shall we say, politically reliable. Maybe a national police force, maybe not. No matter what, they will be more amenable to the left.

Gaming the Courts


How is it that when the left got a Federal judge in a liberal area like California to rule that a Trump executive order couldn’t be enforced, the injunction was effective nationwide, but when a judge rules against a Biden vaccine mandate, that injunction is only effective for the circuit where the judge is located?


It isn’t taken if the thief doesn’t keep it

That is what the 9th circuit said today when it ruled that California’s ban on standard capacity magazines was not an unconstitutional taking.

Accordingly, the ban on legal possession of large-capacity magazines reasonably supported California’s effort to reduce the devastating damage wrought by mass shootings

and as far as the ban being a violation of the takings clause:

the government acquires nothing by virtue of the limitation on the capacity of magazines.

Therefore, they didn’t take anything. The Australians were disarmed in 1996. By 2020, nearly all guns were confiscated. This was the result:

Two months later, and the military began taking Australians off to the camps:

The courts are not going to come to our rescue. There will soon be only two choices: Fight, or be taken away to the camps for our own safety.