atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,
atomic_fungus
atomic_fungus

#7162: I had a nice ride home

Didn't have time to get the bike out this morning, and anyway it was all cloudy. By the time I came home for lunch, though, it was nice and sunny, so I rode the bike to work. Rode home with my laptop bag on my back, held onto my body with its shoulder strap, and had zero trouble with it.

So: cleared to take bike to work whenever I want to!

Tach cable came off, though, for some weird reason. Anyway I took a few moments after work to put it back in. Maybe use some locktite on it....

* * *

This is why beef is hard to find and expensive. Okay, 80% lean hamburger doubled in price, to $6 a pound on sale. Steaks are extra-thin and extra-expensive.

Fucking Upton Sinclair and his damnable book.

* * *

HOLY CRAP I WANT ONE. A front end loader you bolt onto a pickup truck--whoever thought of that was a genius and I want one even though I have absolutely no use for it whatsoever.

* * *

Let's get this out of the way, shall we? The tired trope of "cop tries to arrest black man who resists arrest and then ends up dying, entire black population of city then rises up in revolt" is playing out again in Minneapolis.

I have no idea why the cop in question thought it was a good idea to kneel on the guy's neck, at least for longer than it took to get him in handcuffs. This can credibly be called "excessive force" regardless of other circumstances.

We don't know what the perpetrator's toxicology report says, nor do we know any other particulars; only that he died in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. I do know that if you have the breath to scream "I CAN'T BREATHE" you are lying. We don't know what drugs he was on--if he had too much meth or crack in his system that could prompt a heart attack.

Every time something like this happens--every time--it happens as a result of the black man resisting arrest. If you don't resist arrest, then the police don't beat the shit out of you or shoot at you or put you in a chokehold or kneel on your neck. They put you in cuffs, they put you in the squad car, they book you.

Even if you are being arrested for something you did not do, the time of your arrest is not the time to fight it. If you're passing a bogus $20 bill and the cop is arresting you for passing a bogus $20 bill, don't resist arrest even if you're utterly innocent of the fact that the $20 bill was bogus.

If a cop is trying to arrest you because you stole a handful of cheap cigars, you can probably make bail and be out of jail in a matter of hours, instead of being shot to death.

Try not doing PCP before going for a drive, so that the cops won't have to arrest you for driving under the influence of an illegal drug that makes you pretty much unstoppable.

Okay?

All that said, there is a difference between the legitimate use of force and excessive force. As mentioned above, kneeling on someone's neck is excessive. I can see how you might end up in that pose during a mad scuffle, but once you have the cuffs on, you get off the guy. The officer in this case knelt on the guy's neck for something like eight minutes.

The media, as usual, are stoking the fires of race riots. The people doing the looting, burning, and rioting are not "protestors", mostly-peaceful or otherwise.

Francis Porretto predicts the endgame of all this horseshit.
I keep telling these idiots – the black savages doing the rioting and the white racialist mouthpieces that seek political advantage by striving to exculpate them — exactly what they’re courting. I can see it; why can’t they? Well, yes: some of them are literally of sub-rational intelligence, but surely not all. What makes the ones with three or more functioning brain cells think that, when the pustule finally bursts and white Americans decide they’ve had enough, they will be spared? Those who have excused – or worse, encouraged – the black miscreants doing their level best to persuade us that the white and black races cannot possibly share a nation will share the fates of those miscreants, despite their shortage of melanin.
I don't know how close we are to that point, to be honest. I do know that things will go on as they have only until they cannot.

Meanwhile, if your vehicle is surrounded by a violent mob which is trying to gain access to it, and they're beating on it and you can't maneuver at all without running someone over, and you have a reasonable fear for your safety, you can run their asses over in self-defense. I AM NOT A LAWYER so do not listen to me and do not take any legal advice from me or anyone I link.

Do not bring your race riots to the suburbs, either.

This may not be good for the Democrats, strangely enough.

* * *

Biden wants to get rid of the curated exemption for social media. That article was published in January of this year. It talks about the very same thing that Trump just issued an executive order about, that he wants to be reviewed; Biden's calling for an outright repeal of it.

As it stands right now, Facebook, Twitter, whoever--they're all protected from the consequences of things their users post. So if someone gets up on Facebook and slanders Joe Jimbob, Joe can sue the person who said it, but not Facebook. Facebook is a platform and doesn't endorse any one viewpoint, but merely provides a conduit through which others can express themselves.

That's all well and good so long as Facebook doesn't start removing posts that its employees find objectionable. The problem comes in when Facebook (or whoever) decides that this or that viewpoint may not be stated on Facebook, because that is an editorial decision which puts the service fully into the "publication" arena.

Understand: this is not about deleting actual objectionable material, kiddy pr0ns or other things that violate the terms of service. This is when the compay says, "That guy posted a picture of himself in a MAGA hat--let's delete his account for being a nazi."

If a social media platform "deplatforms" someone because he expressed political opinions they don't agree with, that's an editorial decision. It's curating the content on their site. Doing that disqualifies them for the liability exemption they enjoyed.

You don't get to curate your content and still claim that you're not responsible for the content on your site. Once you start making decisions about who may post and who may not, based on criteria which are not clearly spelled out in your terms of service, you are assuming responsibility for what your users post on your social media platform.

So far, the social media platforms have enjoyed a special status, allowing them to get away with deleting right-wing opinions and banning the users who posted them while still not having to take any responsibility for the things they do allow to be posted. That needs to change.

* * *

The nazi-communist-bitch from the Bronx apparently has no problem with the sex trafficking of children.

* * *

Ridiculously nice day today. Supposed to be about the same all weekend. Tomorrow, going to the store for paint, cutting grass, then motorcycle work. Whee!
Subscribe

  • #7866: YE CATS that's a lot.

    This is why we need to be concerned about Evergrande, the chinese real estate company. "Real Estate in China is valued at 12 TIMES the entire…

  • #7865: It rained, but not on me.

    Beautiful--ridiculously nice--gorgeous weather today at lunchtime, so I rode the bike back to work. Getting on towards quitting time, the sky…

  • #7864: What--a FOUR STAR ADMIRAL? What the hell?

    Ace's Quick Hits today--you have to scroll down a bit but apparently the health and human services secretary has been sworn in as an admiral. I…

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments