Thursday, July 25, 2013

Sargassum

There is, apparently, a sort of seaweed called sargassum (Sargassum muticum, among other species) that is well known for drifting about endlessly in the west Atlantic gyre. The early European mariners that sailed that stretch of ocean found it so inescapable that they tagged the place the "Sargasso Sea", a term that has come to mean a mysterious nowhere that traps travelers in a sort of no-time and no-place. These unfortunates drift aimlessly in stasis, without purpose or hope, until, perhaps, they emerge somewhere confused and disoriented.


That's a bit where I am at the moment.

My little life goes on apace; I am busy in small ways with home and family, wife, children, work, my own foolish pleasures.

But all about me I am more and more adrift. I can see the sort of rank, appalling idiocy, meanness, and shortsightedness that seems to be bringing my country closer to a sort of Gilded Age dystopia. (And I really recommend you follow the link to the Bob Reich post I linked to right there; it does a terrific job of summarizing in the example of Detroit how we in the U.S. today really are becoming two societies, separate and unequal, how this is a feature, not a bug, and how this is not good for those of us not in the two-yacht family.)

It seems like every time I bother to read the national news I rediscover that the depressing reality that about a third of my "fellow Americans" are batshit crazy has not changed. It makes me not want to read the national news. Or see if the National Institute of Mental Health can classify "voting Republican" as a mental illness.

In my national legislature the "people's house" does not find it objectionable that a secret agency can use a secret program to secretly collect...something; every single phone call made anywhere? Somewhere? Somehow in pursuit of phantom enemies that may not even exist, since we can't know what or who these enemies are lest we frighten them from using the phones that we then secretly surveil to secretly learn...something secret.

And using this blog to point out, discuss, complain, or rant about this vast national desuetude just seems...well, louche.

So I've been adrift lately, not really wanting to turn this blog into some sort of bottomless well of personal minutiae and yet not really having any sort of real reason to tackle the big issues of the day, those issues being either utterly insoluble so far as I can see or the "solutions" as or more distasteful than the problem.

In fact, the only "issue" that raised my hackles even so far as to make me consider a blog post was the entire business of "self-defense" as defined by the laws of the State of Florida that, in effect, allows an asshole with a weapon to pursue you, force you into either fleeing or fighting and, if the latter, allows them to then legally kill you if the fight goes against them.

This, in a nation that is increasingly idiotic about firearms and who and where they should be carried about in public, is not a good idea. As I have mentioned before; the most fundamental tradeoff required for the "domestic tranquility" specified in the nation's foundation document is internal disarmament. For civil society to function I must be confident that I can disagree with you - even to the point of getting up in your face and using intemperate language - without you pulling a hogleg and blowing a hole in me.

Because if I cannot I really only have two options. I can walk wide of you, all of you, for fear that you can do that. Or I can arm myself and enter into any public dispute ready to draw and fire if I even think you're going to do the same.

There's a reason that those old Westerns where the hero sheriff "tames" the wild out-of-control cowtown always has a scene where the hero sheriff confronts the drunken cowpoke carrying his shootin' iron in violation of the big ol' sign the hero sheriff has nailed up reading "The Carrying of Firearms Is Strictly Prohibited".

Because if he doesn't, then little me the meek store clerk has to strap on my own .45, just in case the drunken cowpoke comes into my store demanding a bottle of whiskey and some hard candy and threatening to plug me if I don't give it up. Or stops me on the sidewalk to tell me I look like a sissy and that I need to lick his boots because that's what sissies do.

And I was all het up about this until I read our Oregon laws regarding "self-defense" and realized that we here rather sensibly draw a bright line at the place where the armed citizen starts the fight; "...a person is not justified in using physical force upon another person if...(t)he person is the initial aggressor..." (ORS 161.125 (2)) There's a little loophole where if I start the fight and then lose and the other party doesn't let me escape I can shoot 'em. But there's none of the sort of nonsense here that's in the Florida law about how if I'm fearful that the guy I followed and bullied may kill me that I can kill them.

So there's nothing here for me.

So...how about a nice picture of my son's swim lessons? The Boy is totally rocking both the front and back crawl.


Does anyone still call that the "Australian crawl" anymore?

Oh, and "my" EPL club Norwich City came to Portland last night and played a "friendly" with the Timbers.


Nothing at stake, just a fun evening watching some of the Timbers guys we don't see much play and checking out some of the new signings for Norwich that included the improbably named Ricky van Wolfswinkel who turned up wearing #9 for NCFC but was rather less than wolfish in front of goal, the local lads running off 1-nil winners.

One thing I should mention; this now-inescapable procession where the players of both teams are escorted onto the pitch by (or escort onto the pitch) twin files of local urchins.

I guess I'm not sure of the point of this parade. Is it to give the nippers a thrill? I guess I'd have been thrilled to have marched out alongside some idol of my youth; I certainly hope these kids are. But given my own son's interest in the game I wonder. He loves to play but for the playing itself. He doesn't know any of the professional players or care about them. He'd have a hard time picking any of this year's Timbers squad out of a police lineup.

So it makes me wonder if the little kid-parade isn't just a bit of cynical showmanship on the part of the club.


I just liked this image, the patient woman with her book waiting for the gates to open. Very Portland. Generally we don't race about and shout unless we have a good reason for racing about and shouting.


And you will not find me at a Timbers match sporting the opponent's colors...unless the opponent is a team I have followed and cared about for many years that has come 5,000 miles to play in Portland.


"Kick it, throw it, have a little scrimmage,
Keep it low, a splendid rush, bravo, win or die;
On the ball, City, never mind the danger,
Steady on, now's your chance,
Hurrah! We've scored a goal.
City!, City!, City!"


Mind, I'm still drifting. I'll try and come up with something of interest this weekend, some stray seaweed tendril from the slow, sunny summer of my personal ocean.

37 comments:

Leon said...

I'm reminded by a observant observation from somewhere (cracked.com?) that Americans are in love with the concept of guns but haven't figured out the practicalities yet.

Nice to know your neck of the woods is fairly sensible about that law.

FDChief said...

I think that was what got me about the whole Zimmerman trial; not the ridiculous assertion that the guy wasn't a fairly cracked pot of an asshole that chased down a scary negro, but that the revelation that, by Florida statute (and this was aside from the whole "stand your ground" nonsense that turned out to have played a very minor role, if any, in the business) you can effectively judicially murder someone if you force a fight on them (and they are stupid enough to fight you) and then either begin losing or claim to have begun losing and thus "fear for your life". It's a ridiculous law and one designed for assholes that get all groiny when they're strapped.

Still, it's a nasty little reminder that we've largely forgotten the whole business of civil disarmament that the old boys as far back as Hobbes figured out was fairly critical to social tranquility.

Meanwhile jim and Lisa over at their place are STILL trying to keep this ball rolling about how the whole thing wasn't about Race. Or how liberals are to blame for it. Or something. It's become too difficult to figure out what they're arguing for or against over there, and I usually count on them to be less incoherent than the regular news media on most issues.

Like I said in the post; it's all very depressing...

Syrbal/Labrys said...

I've noticed my own fires are low this year; as you say the winds of stupidity are not encouraging me, but making me sink into my home hermitage and cover my eyes. Perhaps it is the 'dog days' of summer upon us, with hot stale air and then too much of that OTHER hot air that makes us just feel stagnant in hope?

I try to point and laugh, but generally, yes, I wonder if the war is lost to the morons and they will only learn when they have immersed everyone in a baptism of pure malicious ignorance -- including themselves fully enough to see why those with triple digit IQs have been shouting "No, don't!"

Syrbal/Labrys said...

About the Zimmerman mess....I hear everyone going "They didnt' defend him with the Stand Your Ground law!" And no, they did not. BUT, and very large as a butt gets....the judge DID tell the jury they could consider that law, and the twit juror admits it was MUCH discussed. So it did matter.

I find in matters of whether it is racial or not, I had to not read RAW, some of the anti-Obama stuff there struck me as purely racial, and yet, this was denied. Kind of like the one juror claiming it had naught to do with race, but oh, how "they" live...

It makes me grind my teeth.

FDChief said...

Labrys: Dunno what it is. Maybe a slow summer. But I think it is more likely what you've identified; the sad, slow sense that "we" have lost, that we're destined to watch as our country becomes smaller, meaner, poorer, more desperate, and more bitterly divided into the small coterie of haves and the vast slough of have-nots.

And so far as RAW goes...I can't quite make out what the hell jim and Lisa are doing over there.

Someone (Lisa?) is fulminating about "liberals" lynching Zimmerman, there's a whole lot of yelling and fingerpointing about "black culture" and black on black violence and how the wars in central Asia (that's jim, I suspect) relating to violence here in the US. I read through the posts and come out more confused than when I started.

Seems pretty simple to me. This guy Zimmerman is an asshole. He started out on his own hook playing sheriff for his local 'hood. Apparently the cops and the 9-1-1 call center had several encountered with this asshole and tried to tell him to be less of an asshole. One night he saw someone he thought was a crook. He chased the person down, they fought (and Martin may very well have willingly jumped into the fight - who the hell knows?) and when it looked like Martin was going to kick his ass Zimmerman shot him.

ISTM that this is a pretty straightforward deal; the armed guy chased down the unarmed guy (whether for racial reasons or otherwise - who the hell knows?), forced a fight in him (in direct contradiction to what the 9-1-1 operator advised him) and then shot him when he was losing.

That isn't "self-defense" to me or any other sane human being, but it is under the laws of the great State of Florida and as such Zimmerman was correctly acquitted.

That, to me, says that the laws of the great State of Florida are as fucked up as a football bat and need to be changed, ASAP, to something more like Oregon's. You shouldn't be able to corner me and force me to either flee, fight, or beg for mercy and then kill me if I choose door #2. Period.

Apparently it says something far different to jim and Lisa and I'll be damned if I can figure out what the hell that is. So I'm just staying the hell out of the "conversation" over there; I've got nothing to add that's not self-evident and I don't feel like shouting over the ocean...

Podunk Paul said...

Reading RAW is like listening to a drunk with a budge under his coat skitter and rave about blacks and liberals.

FDChief said...

Paul: Well, at the very least there seems to be some sort of violent emotion going on there; this Zimmerman story has produced an outpouring of anger at some sort of "liberals" that don't resemble any of the people I know (or that I am, I hope...) that shocks and surprises me. And that bugs me, because both jim and Lisa are very well-read, smart, compassionate people.

Like I said; I'm not sure what the hell is going on over at RAW, and therefore I'm staying the hell out of it until (hopefully) things calm down. At the moment all I can see happening is getting into a fight with people I like and respect over this worthless business, and who the hell wants to do that?

Ael said...

Heh, read this and consider implications.

You only *think* you remember happier days.

Now get started on a science fiction novel!

Podunk Paul said...

Hell, Chief, you’re right. There’s no use getting into fights with these good people. Lisa strikes me as a cultured person, a lady in all senses of the word. She loves the language. And Jim seems like a proud and honorable man. I just don’t get this Zimmerman business coming on top the concealed-carry brouhaha.

rangeragainstwar said...

Chief,

When I wrote things critical of GWB, no one seemed to mind or call me disrespectful. But when I wrote the same way about Obama, everyone jumped on me as being racist, using my terminology such as "Mr. Obama" as being disrespectful, when it was the very same term as I'd used for GWB (and, the very same term the WSJ uses for any President.)

When I criticized Powell's lying at the UN, no one called me a racist.

My comments on T-Z would not vary if their races were reversed.

Why are you people so happy to be crucifying Z. -- a Latino man -- as the new nigger of the world? Have you accomplished anything?

What happened to the concept of "innocent until proven guilty"? The man went through the jury system and was acquitted. Why the witch hunt? Did we do that with O.J. (Oh, and BTW, would O.J. have been found not guilty if he had a public defender?)

Anyway, Lisa was not discussing the trial at all; her point was a different one -- if anyone bothered to read it.

Lisa said...

I understand the Sargasso Sea reference. I feel I have pulling great gobs of the stuff off of me these past several months.

I am sorry that my intent has been misunderstood. I have never discussed CCWs, guns or the material facts as I know them in the TMZ case because I cannot have all the facts and I think the jury system generally gets it right.

I have just used it – as everyone else does – as a hopping off point, save I am not pushing an agenda. Well, I guess “wake up” is an imperative and an agenda.
What happened is, after breaking my arm I’ve been sitting here watching the wheels, as it were, and a lot of things did not make sense, and the sense they made wasn’t good (was not not coherent, logical or unbiased.)

I’ve gotten tired of being fed the lies and distractions, and realize that the people I thought I most affiliate with (=liberals) are largely filled with bias and hatred – no different from their conservative fellows. I realized I was wasting my time digesting bad data to interact with people largely operating in bad faith (people whose agenda is already ossified.) That is not what I had hoped being liberal meant.

Jim and I are not racist – I’ve seen Jim’s interactions with different races and I know my own. My writing on the topic only tangentially touches the case, and even that happened in response to the commenters who could not get away from their fixations on the case and their perceived details and ramifications, as they saw it.

I don’t deal with those as the liberal press is meting out details befitting its agenda, and when the good liberals respond in the predictable ways, you are satisfying their agenda. Our purpose is to maintain open minds, while the criticisms we receive are indicative of closed minds.

That has been the point of my writing. I reject being a marionette puppet for fear of being smeared as racist by the press’s unknowing minions ... the Good Liberals.

I guess it’s my Network moment, and I’m just tired of it. I want to talk about things as they are, as we must understand that before there is any hope for progress. And I don’t think most of us understand the cages in which we operate, and that the media holds the key. The good news is, we walked into the cage willingly and closed the door, so we could walk out again.

Are you people really happy with casting Z. as the new negro, because that's what you are doing. How has this changed anything?

FDChief said...

jim: I don't have any particular problem with your issues with Obama; I've got issues with the man, too. I didn't have anything to say about that, here, or elsewhere, and still don't.

But your posts on this Zimmerman business have been really angry and full of a peculiar slant; furious with "liberals" - as if there was some sort of majority of "liberals" who were skreeing about Zimmerman other than the bizarre nature of this entire affair - and packed with stuff about black-on-black violence and general black "culture" that seem, well, over the top. How does bringing up "gangsta culture" square with "not varying if the races were reversed"?

And had you read THIS post you would have noted that I observed that 1) per Florida statue as currently written Zimmerman was acquitted and 2) that says more about how fucked up Florida statue law is than how sensible that is. You can't rationally claim that an armed man who chases down an unarmed one, forces a fight on him, and then kills him when he loses is "innocent" of manslaughter. Fuckadoodledo, that's practically the definition of manslaughter. That's what I'm saying here; that if that ridiculous trial said anything it said that your state has some seriously fucked-up definitions of "self-defense".

The "witch hunt" (and it's called "criminal justice, BTW...) was because when an armed man chases and kills an unarmed one it's generally held by sensible men that the armed man is likely to be guilty of manslaughter at the very least. The local cops seemed to think differently, which was one reason the "witch hunt" started; because it's hard for anyone with a functional sense of proportion to see why.

And OJ. Do you see the connection here...not between OJ and Zimmerman but between OJ and Klaus von Bulow? Both men of immense wealth, both men who were suspected and in a position to kill their wives (or ex-wife). Both men brought to trial. Both acquitted. Bulow now comfortable back in Society, enjoying his wealth and privilege. OJ? In the pen doing 10 to 15 for armed robbery after a circus of publicity that followed him for years...

And I'll tell you straight out; as I said in the post and the comments above; I honestly have no idea what the heck Lisa is saying in the posts over at RAW. I read them and can't make heads or tails of them. "Liberals" are guilty of "lynching" Zimmerman? Blacks are often criminals? Wars in central Asia have something to do with all this? The news media is to blame somehow?

Like I said. Seems simple. Asshole with gun forces asshole without gun to fight, starts to lose, kills asshole #2. Manslaughter. There's probably some questions about race and firearms and society wrapped up in there, too, but this seems like altogether way too simple a story for the thunder and lightning it's producing over at your place, man.

Barry said...

It's defending the right of a white man (and yes, under other circumstances Zimmerman might not have been 'white') to kill a black man at will. I can't see any defenders of Zimmerman defending Trayvon if he had wrestled that gun the other way. Of course, nobody would have heard of him, outside of the two families, because Trayvon would have been doing life withing a couple of months.

FDChief said...

Lisa: OK, so here's an example of what I'm not getting; from your latest post on the subject.

"Ranger has a suggestion for a final bravura installment: "George Zimmerman IS me!" as he meditates upon his drone killing of 16-year-old U.S. citizen Abdulrahmen al-Awlaki. It would be momentous. The truth shall set you free, Mr. Obama, and the humility may even effect a reconciliation with your mentor, Rev. Wright."

Hunh? How'd we get from Martin to al-Awlaki? Wright? I get that two young people got waxed, but you DO see the difference of how a black man (given the history of judicial murder of, and lynching of, black men but their fellow citizens) might see this versus how he might see the death of a foreign "enemy", whether it's a kid in Yemen or a kid in Dresden or Yokohama?

"...the following fabulation disguised as fact: "Yes, Zimmerman is the one who pulled the trigger. Yes, white-on-black racism dwarfs black-on-white racism..."

Are you seriously arguing that white people aren't been the ones on top and haven't been for most of the past 200 years?

"Racism is a felt emotion and as such, purely subjective."

No. Prejudice is an emotion. Racism is "...discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis". You or I feel prejudice. If I have political or legal power I can act on that in a racist way; keep you out of buildings, or jobs, or in the back of buses. If you don't have power you might be able to act out your prejudice on ME, but not on my group as a whole.

That's why "...the liberals are chomping at the bit to diminish the public black-on-white murder of a white man by four blacks in an Atlanta suburb last week." Because what's happened to those four blacks? "Four south Cobb teenagers are in custody in connection with the beating death of a 36-year-old Mableton man on Mableton Parkway early Sunday morning."

No question of self-defense there? Mmmm...

Oh, and by the way - they said they attacked the white guy not for his crackerishness, but...because he "looked gay".

"There is nothing new or wholesome in the liberal message, just deaf, impotent rage and anger."

So...because Bill Saletan and some talking heads over at Atrios are pissed off that this Zimmerman asshole got off on a badly written piece of Florida law an entire political worldview "...founded on ideas of liberty and equality" is just "deaf impotent rage and anger? The Left is just as "guilty" as the Right of racebaiting, hatemongering, scapegoating? Hell, I'll be the first to agree that there ARE people on the Left that do that, but to the degree of the Limbaughs talking about black bucks buying steaks with food stamps or Malkin talking about interning all American muslims?

C'mon...

So that's what I don't get, Lisa. You and jim seem to be throwing the liberal baby out with the Zimmerman bathwater here, and I don't get this at all, and that's why I'm trying not to engage you on this issue.

FDChief said...

Barry: The baseball writer Bill James once made a comment about the issue of "whitness" discussing about how somehow professional baseball had lost the wonderful nicknames associated with racial and ethnic prejudices; nobody called anybody the "Polish Rifle" or "Superjew" anymore. And his observation was that so long as the game was all white those differences WERE differences; it mattered whether you were Jewish, or Italian, or Polish, or German.

But after the blacks got in everyone else was all just "white".

Latins have always been in an interesting position. Very Euro-looking people in Latin American countries are typically considered "white" and are often referred to by nicknames that suggest that; in Panama the upper crust - sometimes called "los dorados", the Golden Ones - were denigrated by the lower class Panamenos as "rabiblancos"; "white asses". Very Indian-looking Latins, however, were often discriminated against as blacks were and are in the U.S.; the dictators Torrijos and his successor Noriega often used that to whip up support amongst the poor black and Indio parts of Panama.

But even these folks had their issues; in the Eighties we had a fairly massive riot because the locals in Colon (largely descended from Caribbean blacks) took over the old Coco Solo naval installation and renamed it "Christo Negro"; "Black Christ". Their non-black Panamanian neighbors promptly invaded and burned and beat the shit out of any black Panamanian they could catch.

Ah, race; how fucking stupid it makes us hairless monkeys.

FDChief said...

Anyway; look, guys. Jim and Lisa have their opinions on the goddamn Zimmerman thing, and they've aired them at their site. I don't understand them, but that's why they're THEIR opinions and it's THEIR site. This issue obviously has them both pretty upset, and since I like them and I generally enjoy their writing I'm just trying not to get involved in something that is just going to lead to us shouting at each other over the Internet, perhaps the most eloquent definition of insanity ever invented.

However, this is MY site, and I'm going to suggest that - just like I commented in the post - my point was that there's nothing for us here. We're not going to change anyone's mind on this issue; it obviously has very deep roots in various parts of the human id. I suggest we accept that we're going to disagree and move away before we all say something we'll regret.

basilbeast said...

And this post started out as a NothingBurger?

in re the Zimmerman/Martin affaire, Z entered into a situation which authorized law enforcement told him not to and shot an unarmed man dead.

That is undeniable fact.

In the same state of Florida, an armed woman fired a handgun into the ceiling to warn off a possible ( likely ) attacker, the only harm resulting was a hole in some wood or plaster, no one dead.

She gets 20 years in prison.

If that's not a solid basis for the belief that the law in Florida is thoroughly and racially fucked up, I simply cannot fathom what would be.

As for the malaise you expressed at the top of this post, I do have a sense of dread that this time may be similar to the false peace in Europe after the Nazis invaded Poland in '39.

I truly can't see how things can go on as they are presently in this country. I don't think we'll escape the social turmoil that has erupted in Brazil, Egypt, Turkey. Like those demonstrations, it will be triggered over some minor thing, like the price of bread in France a couple of centuries ago.

OTOH, the planet and its atmosphere may not give us much choice ( or time ) as to the civility of our possible social change.

As for me, I read your post at milpub, last call, and your comment about the lack of posting and me. I've stopped posting at my one-time favorite message board, for more or less the same reasons you outlined here. I'm down to sharing the occasional newsy bit or pithy pic on FB and keeping up with internet friends. I think I've gone Publius, hope he's still alive and kicking

I'm still involved in local and state politics. I've got 2 assholes for US Senators and a stinker even his fellow goopers can't stand for a US Rep. In a state that will doubtless re-elect them all when they're on the ballot.

So there's not much leverage as far as I go.

I feel like I'm at the Restaurant at the End of the Universe, waiting to see what happens.

As for baseball ( not a fan anymore ) and politics and race, here's a bit from Digby:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/it-isnt-about-border-its-about-other.html

bb

FDChief said...

basil; this did sort of turn into something, didn't it? I'm kind of sorry it did, though, since the basis of that turn was the wretched Zimmerman trial, of which, as Pierce continually noted, nothing good would and has ever come.

I think a large part of what's happening is the sense that the ship of state is utterly adrift; we are mere passengers as we bear down upon the iceberg whilst the supposed "helmsmen" screech and bicker and the wealthy in the first-class saloon loll about in oblivious luxury. We know things suck, we fear they will only get worse, and yet there seems no escape or hope for a better outcome.

At any rate, I REALLY don't want to burn up anymore bandwidth discussing the goddamn idiotic "self-defense" law of Florida. I'm going to sit down and try and come up with something more robust to post about this weekend...

basilbeast said...

Our family will celebrate ( 5 months in advance, so they better last that long! ) my parent's 65th anniversary of being able to stand each other well enough to stay together.

I assume they were happy enough, they never aired their greivances to us kids, except when I found dad's racy girlie magazine underneath the car's driver seat and mom chewed him out for it.

So it goes with friends and family, my sister will likely proclaim "No politics!" and all will go well.

I still read RAW but jeez . . .
jim and lisa, you still get a warm welcome and loads of hospitality if you show up here, but there's little to be gained from discussing guns and Israel.

And I'd truly be honored.

Back to Digby, in the same light. It is interesting to see her, and others' progression from elation at Obama's election to the White House, to something near disgust.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2013/07/heads-we-win-tails-you-lose.html

Speaking of the which, I see our Feckless Leader sending his DOJ thugs to beat up on the pot heads in your neighbor to the North.

Stinker.

bb

basilbeast said...

Let me specify.

"show up here in Kansas."

:)

God bless yore pea pickin' hearts.

bb

FDChief said...

The sad fact is that with the political reality we have, basil, Obama IS probably about the "best we can do"; an Eisenhower Republican. I don't like that, I'm glad as hell my guys Wyden and Merkeley and Blumenauer are pushing him from the left (or at least as far Left as they can go), but I'd be kidding myself if I thought that we'd get anything significantly better out of the national political process as it stands.

I hate to say this, but what just happened here is classic. Here are the whole bunch of us who want classic "liberal" things; removal of power from the hands of the wealthy and connected, domestic employment at fair wages, foreign peace without the "entanglements" Washington warned us against, and generally a fair shake for all Americans; men, women, black, white, whatever...

And we've just spent a couple of hundred words ripping each other up because some triggerhappy douchebag shot a guy.

I'll bet you that real red-meat Republicans would laugh themselves sick to see our classic circular firing squad...

rangeragainstwar said...

BB,
A dispatcher ain't a authorized le official.
Dispatchers are friggin' minimum wage untrained people, they are not fdle qualified as OFFICIALS.
Chief,
Our friendship goes beyond differences of opinion.
The war is a issue here. Do u not see the fund cuts and budgetary constraints that have less police on the patrol scene? I'm talking community policing ,NOT black uniformed killers chasing the bogey man.
jim

no one said...

Chief, a couple of questions for you, if you would please.

1. Why is talking about gangsta culture and its negative impact on blacks - perhaps on Trayvon specifically - off the table? Is it reasonable or intelligent to discuss issues/situations while barring consideration of potentially key contributing variables? To my mind not discussing gangstahood is like talking about traffic fatalities, but making it a faux pas to mention drinking and driving.

2. In a country with a 1st amendment in its laws why do people try to suppress certain discussions by extra legal means? e.g. social pressures, media manipulation? Do we still value freedom when certain topics are verboten? Maybe this is one of Jim's/Lisa's points. They will not have their speech or thought oppressed officially or non-officially - that's what I see any how.

3. Why must a liberal (or a conservative) buy the party line - hook, and sinker on every issue? e.g. "as liberals we must see this situation as....." Can any one camp be that righteous and objectively correct in all things? What is more important a) getting to the truth of things and working to actually be as righteous as possible in this world or b) simply one's side winning as if our society is engaged in some existential internal war?

no one said...

A couple more b/c I'm really interested in the answer from someone of your political persuasion;

4. Why do people not have the right to defend themselves?

5. What happens when something as fundamental as the right to defend oneself is removed and we all become utterly dependent on the government for protection of our person, loved ones' persons and possessions?

Are we even still Americans when we have become drones in the collective hive and POTUS is the queen bee?

no one said...

And, now that I'm a couple drinks into cocktail hour - why the emotion? While Trayvon's older doppleganger was agitating to have Z persecuted for what was deemed a justifiable homicide, he damned near killed my son. Now that he's home - mostly - nolimitsnigga, the elder, is trying to screw him out of his benefits.

Who fucking cares? Not you guys. Not the media. Not Al Sharpton.

Crocodile tears for T? No thanks.

no one said...

Or - why should I care about nolimitsnigga (Trayvon's self chosen call sign for the site where he posted pictures of himself with guns, drugs and boasted of his ability to sucker punch and beat down opponents; for those still in denial).

Why should I avoid racial stereotypes when T and POTUS have obviously bought into them themselves?

Why should I have any faith in "leadership" that identifies with such foolish rot?

When it is obvious that someone(s) is out to screw me and mine along racial lines why would I accept it and take. T and POTUS brought racism into this. Fuck them both and their liberal sycophants, I say.I am not ashamed of being white.

Where is the leadership? I don't see it. I see agitation for special (read black) causes, excuses and divisiveness where there should be unity. Why should I take anyone seriously who wants to make T a cause celebre?

Z hunting T down is a lie that fools have to believe in order for all the other pieces of their fragile - and false - world view to remain glued together.

How is walking along a public area, "hunting someone down"? How is keeping an eye on strangers in a neighborhood hunting humans? How is the proper response to someone watching your movements, in a civilian setting, to physically attack them?

Without the "hunting down" concept, born of fevered dreams induced by smoking the liberal pipe too much for too long, by neutered whites, being melded with black activist racial socio/economic aggression, all we have is an unfortunate incident that should have never made it past page 7B in the local paper.

I'm pretty sure you won't offer an answer to any of this b/c you'll just say it's crazy or something - much easier than thinking or engaging in self examination.

Gosh golly all reasonable people know that it's not that way.


Do you allow your children to hang out with nolimitsnigga types? Do any live in your neighborhood?



no one said...

One last, promise: Where is the liberal outrage over the vigilantism of the new black panthers calling for Z's death? Where is NLN senior's leadership in this regard?

If you are against hunting people down you are against hunting people down.

Or are you?

FDChief said...

"The war is a issue here. Do u not see the fund cuts and budgetary constraints that have less police on the patrol scene?"

No. First of all, dunno about your 'hood, but our local coppers (and firefighters) have been exempted from budget cuts WAY past where they should have been; everything else has taken it in the shorts. Example; mental health and detox programs are getting hammered. Guess what; the coppers are seeing WAY more stressed out whack dudes, alkies, and dopers than they did five years ago...

One thing I will agree with; with state and local funding in the shitter (because the GOP refuses to consider ANY taxes at all for anything) more money is coming from DHS. That (in my opinion) tends to make the coppers take the funding in the form of tools and training that tend to make them more "military"...without either the mission or the actual need for militarization.

I will add this to your observation about Zimmerman and the 9-1-1 dispatcher. Regardless of who or what the dispatcher was, it was the closest thing to trained law-enforcement advice the fucker was getting. And the advice was common-sense; "you're a neighborhood WATCH, dumbfuck. So do all that you're "trained" to do; fucking WATCH. Keep and eye on this dude, wait for the REAL coppers, and ID the perp."

Instead the trigger-happy sunofabitch got stuck in and earned himself what in any same legal system would have been 5 to 7 for voluntary manslaughter.

Regardless of the legal position of the 9-1-1 desk, for him to disregard that advice was fucking stupid.

FDChief said...

"Why is talking about gangsta culture and its negative impact on blacks off the table?"

Because it is immaterial to this specific case; an incident in which an armed man chased down an unarmed man, forced him to flee or fight, then killed him when he (the agressor) was losing.

Whether or not the dead man had any connection to "black culture" had no bearing on this particular incident, and in particular because had he BEEN A real gangsta he'd have capped the dumbass neighborhood watch commando before he cleared his bullet-launcher from his Dockers.

"In a country with a 1st amendment in its laws why do people try to suppress certain discussions by extra legal means?"

This is simply nonsense. No one is "suppressing" any discussion, since we're having it right here as well as at RAW. Having it pointed out that your "discussion" is not logically coherent or sensible is not "suppressing" it.

"Why must a liberal (or a conservative) buy the party line - hook, and sinker on every issue?"

What does that have to do with this, either?

I'm liberal as hell and I don't see this as anything more than I've said in this post; an asshole with a gun who got off on the technical detail that the State of Florida has an insanely fucked-up definition of "self-defense".

"Why do people not have the right to defend themselves?"

If you think this has ANYthing to do with what actually happened between these two people that night I want what you're smokin'. If I'm packing and I chase you down and I force you to run, fight, or beg me for mercy, and you choose to fight, and I kill you that's self-defense like I am the fucking Dragon King of Bhutan.

"What happens when something as fundamental as the right to defend oneself is removed and we all become utterly dependent on the government for protection of our person, loved ones' persons and possessions?"

See above.

"...why the emotion?"

Because, in case you haven't noticed, us white boys killing black, brown, red, and yellow people for fun and laughs is a tradition as old as tricorn hats. A lot of those people are sick and tired of it. I seem to notice that a lot of WHITE people have their panties in a twist about this Zimmerman dude, an asshole who couldn't resist forcing a fight on an unarmed man and a pussy who resorted to armed force when he couldn't beat the unarmed man in a fistfight.

And I DON'T care - that's what I'm fucking saying! Fuckadoodledoo, do you guys READ what I write?!?

FDChief said...

"One last, promise: Where is the liberal outrage over the vigilantism of the new black panthers calling for Z's death? Where is NLN senior's leadership in this regard?

If you are against hunting people down you are against hunting people down.

Or are you?"


Sigh.

Of COURSE I'm "against" the "New Black Panthers" (or whatever the fuck imaginary organization this really is other than something that flew out of Glenn Beck's earhole) doing a hit on Zimmerman. As fucked up as the verdict was in any sane polity the guy was tried and correctly acquitted in a court of law under the "self-defense" statute of the State of Florida. Obviously I like and support the rule of law; it's enabled me to feel secure that rich people cannot steal bread and sleep under bridges with impunity since my infancy.

But I have no fucking control over the "New Black Panthers" (or whatever this group actually is other than something Rush Limbaugh uses to make his Costa Rican rentboys afraid to pilfer his supply of oxycontin) or any other such organization or individual. Were this an actual realistic threat instead of some kind of ridiculous Fox News talking point and I were a resident of Florida I would be all over the Florida DOJ to provide Zimmerman with some sort of protective arrangement.

But since is isn't, and I'm not, like I said above; I don't give a shit. Zimmerman is free to continue to walk around with his 9mm dick hard, and the price of the 2nd Amendment means that even if I did give a shit enough to be outraged that he'd have to do that and take his chances, just like Martin did the night they met.

FDChief said...

OK, one last comment.

"How is walking along a public area, "hunting someone down"?"

When you walk along a public place...with a loaded pistol and order someone to halt or you will shoot (or attempt to physically detain them) or harrass them, or force them into a fight and then kill them when you lose...that is "hunting someone down".

"How is keeping an eye on strangers in a neighborhood hunting humans?"

It is not. However, if you attempt to use force to confront them or detain them, if you force them to either flee, fight, or beg for your mercy, and if they fight you you then kill them if you're losing...that is "hunting someone down".

"How is the proper response to someone watching your movements, in a civilian setting, to physically attack them?"

It is not. However, in this case there is no evidence that this is what happened. From what we can tell, Zimmerman got OUT of his vehicle, approached Martin first, and attempted to either question, detain, or apprehend him.

Had Zimmerman stayed in his vehicle and continued observing Martin, as the fucking 9-1-1 operator advised him (and common sense would have guided anyone but an asshole who wanted a fight) he would never have been placed in the position to BE "physically attacked".

Look, guys. It's really this simple: the fucker got away with manslaughter, pissing everyone off in the process, and making the U.S. criminal justice system look clumsy and biased.

Here's the thing; the U.S. is an odd place. We're not "Americans" because of the language we speak, or the food we eat, or the clothes we wear. There's no "American culture" like there is one in France, Greece, or China.

Instead we depend on our national ideals; "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", remember? "Liberty and justice for all"

Now in reality we all know that some pigs are more equal than others. Lisa's four black bucks from Atlanta are going to do 20 to life for murder. Meanwhile, our man Zimmerman walked on what should have been a straight-up manslaughter rap.

That's NOT in all of our best interests. Really. We shouldn't be defending this decision, or this idiot, in any way, any more than black Americans should have celebrated when O.J. Simpson got off or Wall Street should be celebrating that nobody got jailed for the Great Con of 2008.

In the latter case it was cash and influence, in the former cash and fame. In the the Zimmerman case it was a piss poor prosecutor and a ridiculous "self-defense" statute, but in all three cases it just drives home that we are the Land of the Free...if you're the right kind of person and the people you harm are poor, powerless, black, or just dead and can't testify against you, like the two poor bastards Simpson opened up like pillowcases.

We done here? Because I am.

FDChief said...

And to make this official: this is as far as I'm going to take this "discussion".

As I said in the original post, I've got no real give-a-shit in this fight. The fucked-up behavior of people I don't know and don't care about is too much work for me to get worked up about, and the fucked-up laws of the State of Florida are not mt problem, living in Oregon as I do.

So; you're welcome to continue paddling in this dirty water. I'm moving on to a new post and something that I DO gove a shit about.

no one said...

"...with a loaded pistol and order someone to halt or you will shoot (or attempt to physically detain them) or harrass them, or force them into a fight and then kill them when you lose...that is "hunting someone down"."

and

"
However, if you attempt to use force to confront them or detain them, if you force them to either flee, fight, or beg for your mercy, and if they fight you you then kill them if you're losing...that is "hunting someone down".


This is the problem. You have completely confabulated every aspect of the statements above, other than the fact that Z had a gun. Everything else is straight out of your imagination.

And it is peculiar to some people that liberals keep repeating the same erroneous BS, as if they all get the same talking point memo or they are mind melded with the same borg.

Z got out of the vehicle to a) read the street sign b) to see which way T went. Period. Full stop. That was the testimony and there is nothing criminal or manslaughtery about any of it. After four full minutes T re-appears and attacks Z.

Again, anything in addition to that is pure imagination.

Why is T's gansta history material? Because sensible people would wonder why there was a fight, especially given that T had four full minutes to get away, to go home, to call 911, whatever. To say hello to Z and ask wassup. Why didn't he? Hmmmm....could it be he was reacting as a little gangsta? Like the guy who bragged on tweets about sucker punches and beat downs and even wanting to shoot someone with the guns he posed with? Yes, by golly. That fits - fits a lot better than the cadence the lib.s keep calling.

FDChief said...

OK. I'm breaking my promise, but only this once.

If Martin had been a genuine gangbanger we wouldn't be taling about this case. He would have capped the idiot wanna-be crimefighter as soon as he looked at him crossways.

Let me give you an example.

One Fourth of July one of our local boys got pissed off because one of the homies let his pitbull walk on my man's blanket. Badass goes to the truck, gets the .45, chases the brothers down the beach shooting like these dumb fuckers usually do. About 500 yards down the beach the slide locks backm both sides look at the now-empty pistol, and supposedly the dumbfuck's last words are "Oh, shit..."

Brothers beat him to death with a rock.

A fucking ROCK. The Portland cops - after locking up the brothers - laughed about dumbfuck as "the guy who brought a gun to a rockfight - and lost."

So discussing Martin's wannabe gangsta posing is about as relevant as the rest of your ridiculous attempts to try and make this anything but what it was; an asshole with a gun who got himself into trouble and had to kill an unarmed man to get himself out. He was a gangster like...well, like I'm Robinson Crusoe.

So. Now I'm REALLY done. And further comments on this thread will be cheerfully ignored.

no one said...

That is an interesting story, Chief. I would say (assuming you got the facts right on this one) that your local banjo picker was criminally in the wrong and his head being introduced to the rock was self defense on the home's part. Case closed.

And that being said, the story also seems to support the idea that T was, indeed, a blossoming gangsta. Note that his reaction was to slug in the nose and then seize the opportunity to do some head bashing of his own.

And for what excuse. He just didn't like being watched? You lookin' at me? You lookin' at me?

rangeragainstwar said...

Chief,
I find this all so interesting.
You ALL fire several shots across our bow and then you shut down the discussion.
WTF?
I find it amusing that you celebrate the death of a dude with an empty pistol, but fail to see that beating his head in with rocks WAS NOT SELF DEFENSE, but rather aggressive killing of a man. Christ, this is more aggressive than what Z did to TM.
If the dudes gun was empty then he was no longer a threat.
What's with you?
You blast gun men but yet you have guns for , i presume home defense. You blast stand your ground laws , but would you roll over if attacked?
I bet not.!
I agree - i will cut off and break contact, but not because you tell me to do so.
You started the shooting match, but won't balls up and follow it through.
My belief is that your blog is your home, and i'll respect that, but don't start shit you can't or won't finish.
That's a violation of stand your ground.
hruska

no one said...

I need to correct my self. As Jim says, if the gun was clearly empty, then your homi heroes are murderers. If they had reason to believe that the good ol boy could reload, then I understand the self defense argument.

My last word here is that you seem to like it when blacks kill whites. You'd like to see more of this? This is righteous to you for some reason?

That thinking won't get you to the shining city on the hill.