I don’t expect that Gov. Dayton actually has well formulated thoughts or understanding of this, and that his veto pledge is a result of typical institutional / constituent / partisan Democrat obligations. But he or the policy aide that wrote this is a combination of low info, wrong, and completely full of crap. http://bringmethenews.com/2015/04/23/dayton-vows-veto-if-gun-suppressor-bill-lands-on-his-desk/ The 2A’s protection of small arms from infringement doesn’t assume a public good or rationale for infringing on a bunch of other things. … And these aren’t guns…. And these aren’t ‘silencing’….And there’s been about say 1 silencer murder in this country in the last 100 years…And they’re very expensive, which obviates a notion they’ll proliferate beyond real shooting enthusiasts. So there’s no practical reason to maintain a ban, and no reason rooted in the Bill of Rights. If you are of a mind to keep a ban, it’s strictly political and ideological, to prevent a further expansion of gun rights. And…. I don’t know why this is the direction the party chooses. The number of gun guys you make feel comfortable to vote Democrat is always going to outnumber the number of abolitionists who already vote D anyway and would never be motivated to do otherwise.
The deuce 4/24
Terrible bet because the sleaze problem was foreseeable, and terrible bet because she’s not a candidate of formidable appeal or skill… which was also something that had already been demonstrated. http://www.nationaljournal.com/against-the-grain/democrats-went-all-in-on-hillary-clinton-it-s-looking-like-a-terrible-bet-20150423
This would seem to be to be a pretty egregious example of profiling and the institutional racism that we talk about commonly with the police. http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2015/04/josh_lawrenz_disgraced_chaska_cop_created_a_culture_of_fear_latino_residents_said.php Much as I, a conservative, am able to recognize these phenomena without much reservation… racism would not be my preferred word. Yeah, if racial minorities are the ones disparately feeling the boot of the police apparatus, its racism, somewhat by definition. But I quibble, because I don’t think it comes from a pervasive body of thought on racial superiority or inferiority. Societally, that stuff is a bit in the rearview mirror. I think it’s better explained by contemporary academic thought on privilege actually. With these patrol cops and prosecutors, to the extent they’re going to act against people with either assertive or casual malevolence, they do it to people who are passively discerned to have low ability to come back to the system for redress… poor, disenfranchised, out group minority people. In group / out group dynamics and other stripes of otherism are not unique to law enforcement / cj, but those have power that makes for particularly corrosive abuses. You could also ask a chicken egg question, do you figure the system attracts all these people with character flaws or makes them? More regularly, it probably makes them. Related: http://www.salon.com/2015/04/24/we_must_disband_the_police_body_cameras_arent_enough_only_radical_change_will_stop_cops_who_kill/ I agree, but it’s too much to expect to achieve.
Meh. http://www.vox.com/2015/4/24/8490091/chris-rock-baseball The game is doing fine really.
Not actually a big problem, and seemingly one that takes care of itself if you don’t actually stop these guys from leaving and joining ISIS. http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2015/04/a-questionable-headline-frames-terrorism-discussion/ There’s 90% chance they’re dead in 12 months isn’t there? Not trying to make light, just trying to frame the actual significance of a handful of guys doing this each year and then getting killed for their trouble. It is also to say, there’s not any collective fault here, it is what it is.