Thursday, June 26, 2008

Oh, shit

Megan is having an "up" day. Lots of posts, lots of lack of consideration. This is just sad. Shorters, or semi-such.

Heller affirmed!:

I have no idea what the Supreme Court ruling means yet, exactly, because I am waiting for the legal scholars to explain it all to me. Apparently, they want to read the opinion first.
And still she posts about it, and continues
At least one good thing has come out of the Bush presidency. Let's hope this blow for individual rights outlasts the executive power grab. I think the Bush administration genuinely believes that the executive should have more power. I also think they're desperately, hopelessly wrong. But of course, since I think all government officials should have rather less power, I would say that, wouldn't I?
Yes, you would conflate the creation of an Imperial Presidency with "extralegal" surveillance and detention powers with wanting to get rid of food stamps, wouldn't you?

The problem with Africa: I'm not saying colonialism was good, just that it was more efficient. Africans died to generate sacred, blessed profits back then, now they die because colonialism helped destroy the underpinnings of civilization on the continent.
So why am I defending colonialism? As I said earlier, I'm not; the fact that most Zimbabweans might have been better off under Smith doesn't mean that they didn't deserve to be even better off under a government that didn't think blacks were not quite human. However, on any metric I can think of--ethnic violence, political rights, economic prosperity, social cohesion--ordinary Zimbabweans were probably better off in Old Rhodesia.

Lord, grant me a gun and self restraint . . .:
. . . but not yet, Oh Lord, not yet. Apparently, it will be a little while before we can actually have guns in the district.
Yay increased gun violence!

Guns are a feminist issue: Oh, christ.
I'm hardly the first person to make this observation, but I don't know why it isn't noted more often: guns are the only weapon that equalizes strength between attacker and attacked. It's the only time when men's greater speed, strength, and longer reach make no difference; if you pull the trigger first, you win.
Yes, Bernard Goetz really is a winner.
This is an enormous social advance. I am all for strengthening the social contract (and law enforcement) so that fewer men commit rape, assault, or robbery. But until human nature has improved so radically that grievous bodily harm has passed from living memory, I don't understand why more feminists don't push for widespread gun ownership.
Perhaps because most feminists take time to educate themselves on the issue with resources besides NRA literature. Or maybe it's because women are, just maybe, more compassionate than men, on average? Or, and this is really out there, because folk who spend time defending a woman's right to authority over her own body see a problem with also promoting a device that gives someone authority over whether the people around them live or die?

Why not the death penalty for child rape?: Megan is against the death penalty, and for that she should be commended. However, that doesn't mean I can let the following pass
I think people have a perfect right to shoot robbers--once someone has implicitly threatened you, they've forfeited their right to the protection of the law.
"implicitly"? That's a pretty fucking low standard to set for quite possibly ending someone's life. Besides which, shooting someone to keep whatever cash you have in your wallet, your phone, and your watch, ain't right. Your stupid yuppie shit ain't worth a life.

By request:
What do you guys want to talk about?
Dude, I dunno, wanna watch a movie?

I really hope she takes the weekend off. The stupid has been thick this week, I need a break.


Adam Eli Clem said...

She's not a girl who misses much
Do do do do do do- oh yeah

Penis envy, anyone?

Anonymous said...

Yeah, that "implicit" thing bothered me, too. It's another example of why she's such a shitty writer. Excuse the hell out of me, but if I'm ever unfortunate enough to be in a position to need to kill someone, I'd say the threat had better be pretty damn explicit.

"guns are the only weapon that equalizes strength between attacker and attacked."

That's just stupid. STUPID. If I'm being attacked by a man physically and I pull a gun, my strength is not equalized. It's superior. Hell, if he's got nothing but size on me, a pair of scissors or a kitchen knife makes my strenght superior. But Brad - my lack of interest in gun ownership and guns in general has nothing to do with my compassion as a woman. Believe me, you threaten my life and safety and my compassion for you goes right out the window. I just honestly have no need for a gun, even living in the 'hood in L.A.