domain:parrhesia.co
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
20hr ago
I've noticed the quality at my local jersey Mike's has declined precipitously since the PE buyout. I've basically abandoned the place.
Which is a shame as they used to send us dozens of BOGO coupons that made them fairly affordable.
Throwaway05
20hr ago
Okay let me actually think about this deeply and come up with what I'd consider acceptable policy.
I figure felony and involuntary commitment should be considered around the same in terms of severity (we'll come back to this).
This means default to no for gun acquisition for people in those categories. People deserve rights including the right not to be limited in their behavior when possible, however other individuals deserve the right to be free of molestation and incidents of bad behavior skyrocket once you look at the pot of the population that are felons or involuntarily committed. Schizophrenics crime rates are lower than many might anticipate but this is in part driven by underreporting and the most heinous crimes in society are committed by violent psychotics, both of those facts should be kept in mind.
Both involuntary commitment and felony charges get misused. Trump is now a felon. A patient who was diagnosed with cancer at age 19, made a credible attempt to end their own life in the setting of that stressor but then survives and has no further interaction with mental health care? Yeah seems like both of those shouldn't be limited.
Therefore there should be an adversarial process to get permission to own a gun again (like an expungement hearing). Yes this puts a time and financial burden on people to regain their rights but they lost them for good reason and the majority of people who go through either of those are appropriately labeled.
Okay so why does this guy not deserve his gun? Well: involuntarily committed. Reading between the lines looks like for good reason at the time despite his protestations to the contrary. Now he also appears somewhat disorganized, likely has mild cognitive impairment and has poor judgement (why was he not organized in his defense? Where's the lawyer? He admits he is lying to healthcare professionals...). It's not unreasonable to assume the guy is full of shit. Navigating expert witness testimony, dealing with HIPAA and subpoenas and all the good stuff is time consuming and expensive, likely it would establish that the guy was lying about ongoing psychiatric care and the reason for his admission, the judge skipped ahead and tried to look for a justification and found one. If the guy hired a lawyer he'd be fine.
For basic rights the idea is probably that both the responsible and irresponsible are supposed to have them (and that includes 2A even though the latter part of that scares people). But once you've gone through the first "hit" it seems reasonable to make the standard now be that you have to be responsible. This guy clearly fails to establish that he is now responsible.
Okay back to why Invol and Felony should be labeled as similar faults.
Maybe the best way to make this case is to look back at one of your other points: "Sure, who are the courts going to believe?"
Most medical schools give students a chance to witness (continued) commitment hearings during the psychiatric clerkship.
Here's how it goes:
Public defender: Don't talk. If you don't talk the judge will let you go.
Patient: Okay.
Judge: Let's begin, on the matter of...
Patient: I DO NOT RESPECT THE COURT'S AUTHORITY THE JUDGE WORKS FOR THE NORTH KOREAN GOVERNMENT AND HE RAPED ME LAST NIGHT.
Public defender: "..."
Their are absolutely doctors and facilities that are soft in their commitments but especially in large urban areas you'll see patients get discharged with situations like:
-"I'm going to go home and kill myself" (16 year old and parents say they can go home safely)
-"I'm going to shoot up the school" (criminal/police matter not a psychiatric one if no pathology is present)
-Patient who won't speak to anyone in the facility because they think everyone works for the CIA but takes steps to shower, eat, and sleep.
Involuntary stays are usually appropriate.
What complicates matters in the public imagination is that most conditions that lead to commitment involve some impairment of insight so when they complain on the internet they withhold details and context and make it seem like they were abused by the system.
yofuckreddit
20hr ago
Pikmin is such a strange game for me. I was obsessed with the visual design and marketing, read so much about it.... but never really played it. The time limit wrinkle was such a big deal and one of the things that I thought was interesting. To this day it's still the game with the highest obsession/time-played ratio.
Strategy games in particular always have an interesting tension with QoL features that aren't apparent unless you're really into the genre. In Company of Heroes 1 and for most of 2's life, for instance, AT guns would fire at infantry despite being almost totally ineffective. Tank destroyers would do the same. Members of the community argued almost entirely against these units being smart enough to prioritize what they were best at automatically. The compromise was a toggle that allowed you to control the target validity algorithm. FWIW it's a feature that I'm still stunned anyone put up with not being in the game to start.
gattsuru
21hr ago
Also, 2A rights are still largely intact? Some states can screw with you a bit or place some minor restrictions on firearms, but none have been able to ban them outright.
aqouta
21hr ago
So... even though the twin studies can't really be proven, despite two decades of intensive, worldwide research focus and ungodly amounts of funding, he still argues they are "mostly right."
There's two sides to this tango, they've not been proven right, but neither have they been proven wrong. The pathway between genes and outcomes is very complicated. It would have been nice if there ended up being some really simple way to map everything out but we can't even do that for height, let alone something as difficult to nail down as intelligence. The question is nurture vs nature and the twin studies convincingly argue that nature is a very large share. Scott convincingly points out that educational attainment may itself have some problems as a proxy for intelligence.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
21hr ago
someone using natural family planning within a Catholic marriage
That isn't what the article describes.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
21hr ago
Our Orthodox parish has a lot of relatively recent young female converts who come out of the New Age scene and apparently converted to Orthodoxy during the Covid era. Some other women in their circles went Pentecostal. This, combined with the more recent wave of young men into Orthodoxy (like in other Western countries), has recently led to some marriages, and more appear to be on the way.
naraburns
nihil supernum
21hr ago
I've seen firsthand that the "trad" lifestyle does not always work out.
I'm always a little arrested by this observation, particularly when it is offered as if in refutation of something. Have you seen a lifestyle that does always work out? If not, then surely this is no objection at all!
The grass is always greener on the other side; as always, the trick is finding the reasonable middle ground.
It seems rather to me that the trick is accepting that whatever your problems are, they are your problems, not someone else's--and are substantially the result of your own actions. Whether your own actions are, in turn, the result of some biological or cultural impetus, is a purely academic question. You can't just opt to take the good parts of trad life while never facing any possible negative results.
(Alain de Botton's Atheism 2.0 TED talk is a benighted classic for this very reason; he thinks we should find a way to incorporate all the good bits of religion into our lives, while keeping all the ridiculous nonsense at bay. It's not a terrible thought, but not only has that not worked out, I would argue that Wokism accomplished exactly the opposite--incorporating some of the worst ridiculousness of religion, without bringing along any of the tangible benefits.)
crushedoranges
21hr ago
"Dad, I want to get married to a husband who takes marriage seriously and wants to start a family with me."
"Noooooo, my daughter, you need to ride the cock carousel from fifteen to thirty and waste your time with cads and fuckboys! How else are you going to become a bitter wine aunt? The world needs more girlbosses. Focus on your career and I'll pay for your IVF in your late forties with the finest Oxford sperm!"
FarmReadyElephants
21hr ago
The Trump name will be enough to get them instantly top 2 in any statewide primary. They wouldn’t need too much talent to have a political career if they want it, though capturing the Presidency is a difficult feat
As a Desantis supporter, I was disappointed by the power of the Trump name with your typical chud Republican. But nevertheless it exists
Anybody who refers to Trump as God Emperor is putting on a trollish performance. Maybe they do support Trump across the board, or maybe they're more mixed, but it is not to be taken as sincerely held belief. It is said specifically for other people to hear and see, prompting either a high five or a sour facial expression to be mocked. One should also consider its usage in our ironic/post-ironic/sincere-but-not-really discourse.
I refer to him as God Emperor with some regularity, and I am nether religious nor an imperialist. This wasn't a good gotcha even when Kimmel did it. "Oh wow, did you see this photoshop of Trump on a golden chariot ascending to heaven wearing glowing laurels and weilding the Ancient Sword of Prophecy? How insane! Yikes".
I don't think the Left got this excessive with their Obama worship, but I think that's because it WAS taken more seriously. You don't want it to seem like a big joke. With Trump, just putting his face anywhere out of context feels like a punchline on its own. "Trump is watching you poop".
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
21hr ago
Imagine thinking a President was practically the Second Coming
The QAnon stuff goes here.
and deifying him in art
...and the "God-Emperor" memes, among others, go here.
DTulpa
21hr ago
I definitely know a few hard leftists/socialists who were quick to go cold on him as well. But in general Dem normie-sphere, he was a gold standard POTUS who reigned without controversy, and his photos were posted wistfully in the Age of Trump.
I sense that too has been fading, though. Although I think that's more due to aging out of relevancy than a reappraisal of the man and his admin.
You could say they're not the real Left, but they're the one that matters.
And as a big Obama supporter for both his terms... yeah, there was a 'culty' (generously described as enamored) vibe going on. Even the Daily Show poked fun at this, with John Oliver even going to the DNC in 08 and getting little more than 'Obama will fix everything' from the crowd attendees.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
21hr ago
I believe a normal person should not have their rights abridged.
And a "normal person" will never have seen a mental health professional, will never have been confused about the names of his medications, will have three friends willing to swear he's moral enough to buy a firearm, etc, etc. In fact, perhaps a "normal person" wouldn't want a gun at all.
No. If you want to be a strong advocate of the Second Amendment, you must think those carveouts must be small and strongly limited. Carving out those convicted of a felony is OK. Carving out those who some psychiatrist once thought wasn't in such great shape is not. Carving out those who aren't socially connected enough to get people to vouch for them is not. Yeah, this is really hard, because it means some people who you probably don't want having a gun will (if you get your way) lawfully be able to get one whether you like it or not, but that's part of the cost of being a strong Second Amendment advocate.
Important to note is that you can sue for inappropriate involuntary commitment and that this is a major cause of malpractice claims. The opportunity to defend yourself from malfeasance is there. Yes psychiatrists have notoriously cheap malpractice insurance.
Sure, who are the courts going to believe, the psychiatrist or the crazy person?
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
21hr ago
I mean vs Ukranian civilians relative to population size for both countries.
So per 1,000 people in each country, there ~30 Gazan civilian deaths per capita for each Ukranian civilian death.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
21hr ago
Color me skeptical that there's going to be any direct dynastic successor to Donald Trump. None of his children seem to have his sheer unprincipled audacity, nor will they inherit his cult of personality. I think once Trump himself is out of the picture, the knives are going to come out and the Trump children are going to discover their fellow Republicans don't like them very much.
SecureSignals
Training the Aryan LLM
21hr ago
Yes, but I was answering your question. As a father the question of whether my kids will have kids unnerves me much more than the prospect of natural family planning.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
21hr ago
Grenfell tower
A much smaller concrete building.
AnonymousActuary
21hr ago
Thinking that someone using natural family planning within a Catholic marriage is going to be what ruins their lives is uh, an interesting conclusion
mrvanillasky
Indo Aryan Thot Leader
21hr ago
There was a grappling tournament on a 5v5 format called quintet which made grappling really exicitng. I'm a purist in mma but we do need freakshow fights. Half of pride was the best vs the best and the other half being freakshows.
Templexious
21hr ago
Musk's revealed preferences (ie, actions) strongly indicate otherwise.
Don't get me wrong, if i had a few billion dollars, I would also maximize my number of offspring, but the ideal of the involved father in a typical happy 90s marriage is not something I would suggest musk actually, demonstrably wants for himself.
ABigGuy4U
21hr ago
It’s the only steel framed skyscraper in history to do that. Grenfell tower was burned to a charred husk and didn’t collapse.
Throwaway05
21hr ago
I believe a normal person should not have their rights abridged.
However, I believe a convicted murderer shouldn't be allowed to have guns. That's pretty common sense (although I'm sure some disagree), in the same way that I am strongly pro-1A but don't want a nuclear scientist giving detailed instructions to ...certain kinds of people.
Some carve outs should be allowed.
Some people shouldn't own guns.
Another clear category is schizophrenics. Once you get the schizophrenia diagnosis (assuming it is well formulated, which it may not be) then you should never ever allowed to own guns because you don't know what is real and that makes you a huge risk to yourself or others.
If you are involuntarily admitted to the hospital that means at some point you were a imminent serious risk to self or others (thats more or less the commitment criteria in most states), and while some people have one episode and then they are done, generally that is not the case. The risk calculus is instantly much different (sidebar: if you believe people have a right to end their own lives even when they have a potentially modifiable medical or psychiatric condition then this changes the calculus significantly).
While they do get it wrong some times the vast vast majority of committed people have some combination of a. incredibly serious mental illness. b. credible suicidality or homicidality. c. are an absolutely enormous asshole.
Society is almost certainly better off restricting the rights of those three kinds of people and doing so results in less death and crime.
Important to note is that you can sue for inappropriate involuntary commitment and that this is a major cause of malpractice claims. The opportunity to defend yourself from malfeasance is there. Yes psychiatrists have notoriously cheap malpractice insurance.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
21hr ago
Personally, I see this as Mamdani doing much, much better among kitchen-table issues for the median voter. All about affordability. Of course, the merit of his attempt is a separate question. He's pro rent control (economically sketchy but not unheard of), wants to create public supermarkets (horrible idea all around, supermarket margins are very small), taxing the rich (will they flee or not?), and is obviously young and not super experienced.
Something I would note is that for all handwringing about socialism*, none of this is particularly atypical of a progressive candidate. Which is not the strongest endorsement, but he seems well within norms for silly-but-popular policies. The public option for Bodegas is the most out there, and even that isn't as out there as people think (it's still a bad idea, but it's a tried and proven bad idea). Some of these things aren't even new polices. NYC has rent control!
This more or less comports with my expectations. To one side, Mamdani seems kind of vacuous - he mostly seems to agree with whoever he's talking to. A useful trait for a politician, but not particularly indicative. To the other side, it's unsurprising mirror of the right-wing. The Right hates the aesthetic of radicalism, and will try to present their policies as common sense even when they're completely bonkers. The Left loves the aesthetic of radicalism, and will try to gloss normal policy as revolutionary.
Aside: Mamdani winning the primary seems to have aroused a spectacularly unhinged fury from certain sectors, e.g. one representative calling for him to be denaturalized and another saying he was the vanguard of an effort to turn NYC into a Shia Caliphate.
*illustrative: I once had an argument with a guy who was stridently advocating for socialism, and when I pressed him for specifics on what that would entail, it basically boiled down to UHC + a sovereign wealth fund.
Thank you for your comments. They are very thoughtful.
"Does not always work out" was an inarticulate and convenient shorthand for this basic idea I was getting at: both young men and women should be judicious and careful in adopting a "trad" lifestyle solely because it presents an alternative to modern day degeneracy. A young woman, let alone a teenager, shouldn't expect to LARP herself into marital bliss by emulating a TikToker.
Completely agree, and that's why some level of moderation and humility is required before venturing into unchartered territory.
More options
Context Copy link