anti_dan
5mo ago
Invisible fences exist and are common. They also are easy for the dog to understand. They are clearly defined boundaries with geographic markers at all times. You train the dog on them at what we think is mild discomfort levels of pain so they stay in the yard and dont get hit by a dump truck. But also they get to be in the freaking yard! Which toddlers (who are smarter than said dogs) dont get to do unsupervised.
anti_dan
5mo ago
Shock collars are used to keep your dog from running into the street by underground fencing your yard.
anti_dan
5mo ago
A large part of the disconnect you are seeing is that clearly this dog is not properly trained. Its fully grown. If it knew its job was to lay there he wouldn't have a shock mechanism to keep it there. Perhaps from time to time he would have to remind the dog to get back to its position. Dogs that are well trained are very obedient.
Instead he chose a different path with physical pain that still appears to be ineffective due to his own negligent training.
anti_dan
5mo ago
I dont know this specific story, but dogs, as part of their nature, love running. If their running was naturally transformed into human worth they dont give a crap.
Dogs dont naturally love being shocked.
anti_dan
5mo ago
Given the amount of time he has had this dog, and the delay in his response, the dog has no real understanding that it has a job or occupation, unlike properly trained occupational dogs, which, it is important to note, we fail out most potential candidates for even to this day. That means, most dogs are not capable of being occupational dogs, unless the occupation is something like ratting or foxhunting for the appropriate breeds. Sitting still for a several hour podcast is not an occupation any dog breed has been bred for.
There is no real defense of this video I saw other than dogs having zero moral valence or some bizarre long running joke on this program that needs to be explained.
anti_dan
5mo ago
I got a chuckle out of this. On one hand, is a cell phone enough to win a criminal case? No. But when it is stacked up with the rest of the evidence, often yes. I recently got sent one from my friends at the state police where 2 guys, wearing the same disguises, robbed 3 places in about 4 hours. Both with cell phones in the pocket placing them at every site. Then they got caught with the car a few days later (which was stolen). Good work fellas.
anti_dan
5mo ago
That is question begging of the real sort. A state medical board could say it has authority to regulate radio programs, and under your definition, that would make radio broadcasts medical treatments.
anti_dan
5mo ago
The rest of the case is on PACER, there are several unavailable documents that, most importantly, stake out ICE's position, as well as the order granting the TRO.
However, if I take the judge's written orders at face value I think the original article was not as misleading as I had anticipated.
Basically, I thought the article was describing the normal application of 18 USC 3142(d) (and analogous provisions in the immigration law, particularly 8 USC 1226) and the associated rules of criminal procedure (such as rule 43) where a detention-eligible defendant is physically unable to be brought to court, in this case because he is hospitalized.
Instead, what appears to have happened is a very odd plan by ICE. I don't know why they did what they did, whether it was just laziness, forgetfulness, pants on head level stupid, or an intentional ploy to generate a test case.
Again, in a normal case, you'd file charges or file for removal and then go to a judge and say, basically, "hey we know the statute says we have to release this guy in 10 days, or have a detention hearing. We can't have a detention hearing because he can't come to court because he's in the hospital." Then the judge sets it over a few days or weeks depending on the diagnosis and then you have the hearing once they can come to court. ICE did not do this. Why is the question, because there were entirely well worn legal ways to keep this fellow detained.
Arguments for laziness/forgetfulness: This case is in California. ICE in California is essentially blockaded within its own facilities. To actually fingerprint and process the defendant requires them to get him into the facility or a similar facility (which local municipalities won't let them use), and then he'd have to be taken back to the hospital. This is a lot of work for essentially finalizing what in their mind is a formality. Once he's fingerprinted they know they have the right guy, and by the way he's in the hospital so he's not "really" being detained in that he can't go somewhere he needs to be.
Arguments for pants on head: This appears to be pants on head stupid. They could just file the right paperwork for a removal proceeding and have mooted this entire habeas petition.
Arguments for intentional test case: The petition itself appears to be highly focused on, and critical of what they call the DHS “Interim Guidance Regarding Detention Authority for Applicants for Admission,” which according to the petition "claims that all noncitizens who entered the United States without inspection shall now be deemed “applicants for admission” and subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A)." This is a new interpretation of the law that ICE and DHS appear to be intent to apply to this fellow. It is easy to see why, this new interpretation, if adopted by courts, would make their lives much easier. It also apparently has many other "test cases" pending which largely are being pursued in places like California that have mostly hostile judges, so DHS has fared quite poorly (at least according to the petition). On this last point, I think the petitioners really have a point. That new guidance is likely to fall and never be reviewed by SCOTUS because it is pretty dumb.
So, that is basically what I am able to glean from the very incomplete record in the case, because most of the documents are not available even to someone with a standard PACER account that normally gets you all the filings in most cases.
anti_dan
5mo ago
The government is deploying the military because of civil violations. Other types of civil violations involve running a red light, building a deck without a permit, accidentally spilling a small amount of pollutants, filing your taxes late (this is closest), letting your dog roam unleashed. If they are merely enforcing the current law, why in this manner? Does or should the military repel down helicopters to clear entire buildings and check everyone's tax documents on the presumption of guilt? Why is it doing differently here? If the law is wrong, why are they not changing regulations etc.?
If this kind of violence was being deployed against the EPA enforcing its anti-deck regulations during the Obama administration what do you think the result would be? I expect multiple governors would already have been arrested.
anti_dan
5mo ago
States rights has never been about preventing the feds from enforcing legitimate federal laws. It has been about saying certain laws are illegitimate (not applicable to immigration), certain laws are unwise on the federal level (same), and that the federal government can't force states to enforce laws they dont consider moral (also no applicable unless there is a new U of I Law Review article I am unaware of arguing arson, aggravated battery, and and attempt murder should be decriminalized).
anti_dan
5mo ago
As far as I can tell nothing is preventing Congress from passing a law to make it mandatory, other than "congress has decided it no longer needs to do its job".
Congress is doing its job of being partisan. Democrats do not want E-Verify to work, so they oppose legislation that would make it work. That isn't not doing your job, its just doing your job in a way that gets stagnant results. The fact that large numbers of Democratic voters prefer a functioning E-Verify, and overwhelming numbers of Republican voters prefer it is of no moment if they do not punish at the polls non-compliance with that desire. Republican voters have carried out that displeasure via Trump, Cotton, etc. Democrat voters have not punished this specific non-compliance with their expressed policy desires, so the elite Democratic party position remains unchallenged in law until enough voters get angry to put 60 yes votes in the senate.
anti_dan
5mo ago
If he was in the hospital ICE would have gone to a judge and obtained a hospital order wherein they explained to the judge why he could not be brought to court for his initial court appearance. The judge then changed his/her mind after this situation continued for such a long time that he/she deemed it unreasonable given the state of the case. Your ignorance of criminal law has allowed you to be propagandized.
anti_dan
5mo ago
E-Verify is currently very easy to circumvent and would require an act of Congress, aka 60 senators, to fix. The current batch of senators cannot cobble together 60 who will vote for a clean continuing resolution because sunset provisions for a free money from the sky provision are going into effect.
anti_dan
5mo ago
There's a million ways he could've implemented the ICE program, and he chose one with the greatest optics of cruelty. Masked and armed bouncers dragging people away at gunpoint has horrible optics. There are documented cases of people being deported to random nations, a few people have been disappeared (from public tracking, limiting a family's visibility into where a loved one is) and there's a general allergy to due process. Horrible optics.
I dont think there is much evidence supporting this assertion. Arresting people is always going to generate the possibility of "bad optics" if the media wants to portray it as bad. Illegal immigrants are concentrated in cities that are run by Democrats. With not just passive resistance by Democratic governments, but often active participation in the thwarting of law enforcement actions, things would always have progressed to this point unless Trump just went along with the program and continued to not enforce immigration law. You had that judge in Wisconsin smuggling away an illegal in court, but court is the most orderly place to arrest ANYONE! They already went through a voluntary weapons screening and/or are already in custody and have been searched. So, no. He isn't going to the max, he's barely doing the minimum proscribed by law.
anti_dan
5mo ago
They were guilty, he was also guilty. The confession of the 6th person is the only exculpatory evidence for the CP5 and carries zero weight with me considering the situation he was already in.
anti_dan
5mo ago
Democrats don't want people to enjoy foreign food? Any time I go to DC all I get is swamped with claims that the locals (all Dems) know the best Ethiopian place in the world (of course all these places inevitably suck because they pick them based on it being a unique choice rather than good).
No no.
There is something I think that is adjacent to what you are talking about which is cultural appropriation, which is frowned upon. But that is basically me, a white guy, starting an Ethiopian food restaurant that is actually good and making profits from it. That is what would be frowned upon.
Calling them old church ladies is pretty unkind to old church ladies. My grandma is an old church lady. She frowns upon premarital sex and excessive drinking. I have found no real evidence that either of those activities are good in the long term. A progressive scold, from my perspective, is a sort of double negative. They frown upon scorning bad things, but rarely have strong opinions on what is actually good. An example is that they might be fit themselves, but are not open to criticizing fat people for being fat. Or they don't steal from retail establishments, but think criminal prosecution of retail theft is wrong.
anti_dan
5mo ago
All they have to do is check the box labeled “Ocasio-Cortez”. That’s it. Nothing can stop them if they decide to check the box.
That is the establishment. Has been for many years. There's nothing she says that Pelosi and Schumer do not, or isn't gospel at Harvard.
I you want actual left-populism you'd need Fetterman to make a magic-level recovery (likely he needs to be smarter and a better communicator than pre-stroke) and his wife to die in a mysterious boating accident. AOC is many things, she used to be hot, which was rare for a politician. She is loud in a fun way, which was rare for a politician before. But she has always marched lockstep with the establishment. Her primary challenge to Schumer, if it materializes, will be a "50 Stalins" primary, not an anti-establishment one. The critique will be that he is insufficiently Democrat, and of course it will not be true, but that is what it will be.
anti_dan
5mo ago
I don't think he's done any soul searching, he's done whatever is intended to get people like yourself to think he's done a soul searching.
This is the fellow who ran the Journo-List after all. You should require extensive and overwhelming evidence to convince you that he is not a malicious actor, he has not provided such evidence.
Instead, he has a shtick, which is talking in PBS voice, which makes him sound reasonable as he says unreasonable things. The most recent example I am aware of is his podcast episode entitled something like "Trump's Blue Scare". In said episode he scares his listeners into thinking Trump is going to use Charlie Kirk's death to fire half the federal work force for being Democrats, round a bunch of people into cages, etc. What happened after Ezra recorded that pod? Jimmy Kimell got back on air, and ICE facilities were attacked by sniper fire. Basically the opposite of what he predicted. He's completely disconnected from reality in a way that makes me suspect everything he says is simply an attempt to cynically convince suburbanites that the Democrats are worth voting for.
anti_dan
5mo ago
Which matters more, act or conviction?
The problem with these charities that get you into Ivies, is there is typically no "there" there. Rarely are these charities engaged in picking up litter, digging needed ditches, shoveling snow, or some other endeavor an unskilled 15 year old could plausibly producing productive labor. Instead there are dozens of make-work charities that exist for the purpose of bolstering college applications.
anti_dan
5mo ago
Somehow this post feels nearly maximally uncharitable to both parties and young men. Have Democrats become too conformist to be cool? I suppose. Are Republicans a party with an excess of unconstrained young male energy? I suppose. Do young men need an outlet for their energy? Yes.
But its not like the Democrats stumbled into being "lame" (your word). It was part of a calculated electoral strategy that prioritized other things, and necessarily excluded male interests, particularly those of noncriminal working males. That left the GOP with an opening that they seized on and since libertarianism has always been unpopular with voters since the franchise was expanded beyond a few landowning men in New England, discarding that in favor of a little paternalism that sounds more masculine was a winning message.
anti_dan
5mo ago
But Somalia's government isn't incapable of stopping pirates because theoretically. It doesn't care to because the people don't care to. And/or there aren't enough functional people in somalia to erect a state with that sort of state capacity.
anti_dan
5mo ago
If the new academic system can produce higher quality education and therefore better graduates, eventually it will be noticed that graduates of these institutions do better in the workforce than traditional college graduates.
Therein lies the problem. Universities are not about education, they are about selection. Until you can reliably demonstrate you are getting better admittees than Stanford, Stanford will be better than you. And no one will agree to go to your school instead of Stanford until you show you can place them...
So the burn it down plan is the only plan that has a chance of working. Once people are dubious about going to the current universities because they cant take out loans to go there and no one else can either, so why bother? Then something else can spring up.
anti_dan
5mo ago
Your hard status rankings seem way off fairly regularly, using your own definitions.
In what way is Prince William comparable to Michael Jordan (well I am at least kinda assuming we are talking prime age for both) in the Jungle? William is fine, and fit, but he's not to the FAR right. That is prime athletes with good looks, etc. I think Ray Lewis in his prime coming off the murder charge is a great example for your "caveman". And the women. By golly. How are you rating snooky higher on hard status than Marilyn Monroe? MM is hard to the right on that dimension, the tough question is how she balances on the princess/whore scale.
Also, come on. Is Ellen really more powerful than Oprah? No one thinks that.
I think you come with decent ideas, but need to workshop the actual rankings a little harder.
The ICE are wearing masks because if they dont they rationally think their children will be killed. That is it. If you think ATF agents have sustained prolonged sieges of major ATF buildings you want to compare these to, please do.
More options
Context Copy link