@The_Nybbler's banner p

The_Nybbler

Does not have a yacht

8 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

				

User ID: 174

The_Nybbler

Does not have a yacht

8 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 174

I've written before about pretextual excuses, such as when NYC *claimed *their employee vaccine mandate was for public health reasons, but then implemented exceptions that were inconsistent with their lofty claim.

Or, for instance, when someone writes a long comment purporting to be about the US legal system, but is really just a vehicle to take a shot at Trump.

  • -27

The Supreme Court, and conservatives in general, do not want people to have gun rights. They want to make an abstract legal point about the Constitution, but they'd be horrified if it had any practical effect. "Sure, you have the right to keep and bear arms. But what makes you think that means you can carry a GUN?"

The link I posted claimed 6-14% in 1985. Like I said, this is evergreen drug warrior propaganda and I don't give it credence. I doubt they know the actual numbers and if they did they would lie about it.

Not clear why the flip-side, a dozen or so cops getting capped in the process of serving warrants during the initial weeks of the confiscation effort wouldn't also demoralize their side.

There won't be a dozen or so. There might be one. They would respond with overwhelming force, and further confiscation would be done by cops in full riot/stormtrooper gear, and that would be the end of that.

Why do we assume the unshakeable will of LEOs vs. the meek compliance of the American citizenry?

It's not the will of the LEOs, it's the will of the confiscators giving them orders. There will be enough LEOs who won't push back on their orders.

Which makes it about 112% THC now, right? If people really did usually smoke low-potency ditchweed, it was before most current smokers were born.

The post to me read as just a shot at Trump, not so much criticizing him for engaging in lawfare but gloating over him being sanctioned for it. The whole long introduction on the legal system read as an attempt to add verbiage to make the post acceptable as a Motte top-level post. As for what you should have done, either not posted it or gotten to the point more quickly.

The precedent it sets isn't a legal one, but a practical one. If you're on the right, you can be destroyed for any reason and the legal system will bend over backwards to do it. Your motions will be summarily denied and your appeals unheard. You will be denied your day in court based on procedural gotchas, your lawyers will be sanctioned for defending you, and you will be penalized well beyond your ability to withstand.

True; the "Stand with Gaza" sign was the part where she's supporting Hamas, not the plushie.

Yeah, it wasn't one of those either.

And then the IRS would start digging into your parents finances to see if anything belonging to them could be construed as belonging to you... which they would then take. Your parents might not be too hot on that idea.

when someone says "you can't do x," they don't typically mean it's impossible for it to be done, but that doing it would cross some sort of line which would turn off people and cause more damage than what is gained through the use of huge violence

There's no line. People will accept anything as long as the authorities doing it, with the connivance of the press, confidently declare themselves the good guys.

It's weird to hold the idea that some portion of legal gun owners are ticking time bombs willing to throw their lives away to kill random people if pushed to far, but that there WON'T be some amount of violence and deadly if the government sustains a campaign of door-to-door confiscations.

I think in both cases the "some" is very small. The US government declares "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in" and enforces it through door-to-door confiscation, they'll do it with very little bloodshed. What little there is will be almost all on the formerly law-abiding gun owner's part.

He wasn't allowed to present any defense in court, since a default judgement was entered against him.

Q.E.D.

(and also this )

I remember them claiming that in the 80s. Link. It's an evergreen drug-warrior claim.

Sure it is. Abbott is arrested, Dan Patrick orders the Texas National Guard to stand down on threat of being arrested himself, Abbott is brought to DC for trial for insurrection, duly convicted, and sent to Federal prison. ADX Florence if the Democrats are feeling super-feisty and claim he presents an escape risk.

Most likely Abbott will back down, but Biden has carte blanche here.

I don't see where the offramps are other than Abbot backing down.

The 101st Airborne shows up at the governor's mansion to arrest him for insurrection.

There's plenty of housing available in the existing "levittowns". The problem is that there are a small number of cities in US and Canada that you and many others consider "worth living in", and a relatively small amount of housing within those cities, hence high prices. Eliminating commercial development in the suburbs and building housing there only makes nearby suburbs less desirable (because people need places to buy things); it does nothing about the cost of housing in the places you consider "worth living in".

The alternative, of course, being subjection to those of higher status they are connected to. Aside from "be the patriarch in the patriarchy", there's no good solution.

Why is “Israelis don’t have a right to continue to settle on Palestinian land and they should give it back” so hard to say?

Because it's equivalent to "Israeli Jews should be pushed into the sea."

You say that, and I say that, but the media won't say that and the normies don't think that way (unless they're told to). They'll see starving Palestinian babies, be told Israel is causing it, and blame Israel. If you give them a reason Israel is causing it, they'll tell you the babies aren't responsible and how can you punish them for the sins of Hamas, you monster. They'll point out that most Palestinians really don't have any control over Hamas (eliding the point that most of them would not act differently if they could). And if you argue more it'll just be Israel! Starving! Babies!

Oh, and if you point out the pictures of starving babies are actually from a 1972 Sally Struthers commercial, they'll call you a liar and a monster and stop speaking with you.

Also, there is enough money in right wing circles to create institutions.

They will be laughingstocks. Not just because they're right wing, but because, having to start from zero, they will suck. If you manage to keep one around long enough, it will be suborned.

And you can change current institutions.

If you do (e.g. the way DeSantis is trying with New College) , they will be cut out of the art world as a whole. You will not be able to get prestigious or even competent staff or faculty, any students or clients will be shunned until the institution returns to the fold.

This attitude of hopelessness stinks and ensures that nothing will change.

That nothing will change is what engenders the attitude of hopelessness.

Also, it makes the act of complaining a waste of time. What is the point if you got no positive vision?

Fine arts only survive because of subsidy. A lot of it is private subsidy from what I call "Left, Inc.", but a lot is government subsidy. I favor zeroing that out whenever possible; trying to subsidize right-wing art is doomed to fail and will most likely just hand money to the left.

It means they are fun in themselves, there does not need to be some "source of FUN".

In a situation where the US wasn't honoring its treaty obligations, the NATO treaty clearly would not be sacrosanct.

What has it done to slow cars down ?

Pack too many people in too little space.

Parking is free or dirt cheap in most of the city

Which excludes most of Manhattan.

But your claim was

When you build for transit, everything is so close by that even walking is faster than a car.

Have you walked from Chelsea to Soho? I have, it takes a damn long time, and it's not a huge portion of the length of the island. If we're not talking just about Manhattan, crossing the East River on foot takes a long time itself -- the Brooklyn bridge is a mile long and the pedestrian path is often crowded. The Williamsburg bridge is even longer and has more of a climb. Cities aren't built to walking scale.