Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
So. I’m not the only one to have noticed the erosion of liberty in the United States. The cartoonist forgot to add the part about the 4th Amendment no longer recognized by the thugs with authority here in America.
Ah … the paradox of lower middle class Republicanism. Risk your life for the people (war profiteering corporations and government) that are trying with all their might to screw you. Highly illogical but they keep signing up like patriotic lemmings.
Funny, the cartoon lays out problems that are all opposed by libertarians and championed by Dems & Repubs… Insightful.
#2, I’m sure the 3,000 who died on 9/11 would agree with you.
I’m sure the Iraqi Shia would agree with you.
I’m also sure you’re such a die-hard liberal that the lives of others isn’t your concern.
That’s one of the big differences between “Liberals” and “Conservatives”.
By and large, Liberals talk a good game but it’s a lie. They are all about doing good in the world but when it comes to putting their boots on the ground, they run to Canada.
Conservatives, on the other hand, don’t make pretty poses for the camera, they get in and get the job done.
So, if we don’t pay taxes (as the parents did in the cartoon), who pays for Jimmy’s armor?
The 3000 who died on 9/11 would probably prefer that we go after those who did it instead of Sideshow Saddam.
On the other hand, Haliburton’s laughing all the way to the bank.
(Oh, and the actual grunts in the army aren’t just Republicans)
Yah, its just terrible that everyone can’t go around with concealed weapons in their bags. We would have a much more peaceful and free world with handguns for all.
And as to helmet and seat belt laws, people should be able to choose whatever they like, but if you are injured and don’t wear a seatbelt, you should forfeit your insurance coverage. Free to live unburdened by meanie government bullying and free to fly through the windshield unencumbered and/or let their, quite small anyway, brains spill out onto the pavement.
# 5 nomadwolf said, “So, if we don’t pay taxes (as the parents did in the cartoon), who pays for Jimmy’s armor?”
There is no need for personal income taxes. That is the problem the cartoon is referring to… Does that answer it for you?
# 6 Rakiah said, “Yah, its just terrible that everyone can’t go around with concealed weapons in their bags. We would have a much more peaceful and free world with handguns for all.”
Correct, where & when I grew up most people carried on their person or vehicle. Violent crime was non-existent. Criminals knew a stick up would result in instant death and, law abiding folks didn’t commit violent crimes anyways…
Well, it is a strange thing when facts get in the way of wishful thinking, but the states with highest per capita gun ownership and weak gun laws have the highest rates of gun death.
#9 Wrong stat. You want to pull up violent gun crime per capita… Try again.
#4 – Ah_Yea,
Spoken like a true talking point conservative. Why don’t you put some boots on and go to Afghanistan?
#10, Cow-Patty,
There you go again. Obfuscating the man’s point with your own bullshit.
Rakiah is correct.
Don’t you ever get tired of losing?
Ah-Yea==your postings have taken a turn to the right. Whats the matter, being audited? Seriously–hope nothing is going on in your life to motivate such short sighted self involved attitudes.
OTOH, where would the Republican Smear Campaigns be without people like you?
Do you really think volunteering for Bush’s unilateral invasion of Iraq and the Bankrupting of the GOUSA is “doing good?” Too jingoistic for a man of your education and experience. Take a drug, you need a few.
No, actually, at issue here is the issue of loss of life.
And, do you believe that the 17 per 100,000 gap between Louisiana and Hawaii are all due to non-crime related deaths (accidents). Even if so, if the easy availability of guns led to a some seven-fold increase in gun deaths, no matter their cause, shouldn’t we wonder on the logic of those lax laws?
I was actually contemplating many of these things yesterday. Sad really.
#10: those are per-capita rates. They only cover the USA, though, and (if Michael Moore is to be believed?) Canada has higher per-capita gun ownership, yet a fraction of the gun-related crime rates of the USA. That means there’s a cultural aspect to it too.
# 14 Rakiah said, “No, actually, at issue here is the issue of loss of life. ”
Actually, I made statements about crime. If you think the issue is about loss of life why are you talking about guns rather than automobiles? So, you have just outed yourself as a liar…
One more point: I’m not American, but even I can tell the difference between Federal, State, and Local issues and laws. The cartoonist seems to me to be addressing all of these, not just Federal laws. The military is over in the Middle East for Federal reasons, of course, but it’s State laws that put pot smokers in jail. Who do you blame for that: Obama, or Arnie?
Still whining about helmet and seat belt laws? What makes you think you have the right to choose what you do with your body? Unless, of course, you are female and wish to eliminate that pesky little thing growing in your uterus.
Patrick, it is the crime issue, PLUS the total damage done by guns that needs to be assessed, I don’t see why not.
And as to automobiles, the more regulation of automobile usage, the better:, what you have to know to drive, driver tests, driving age, what type of vehicle you are licensed for, etc. If you were arguing to make the automobile license laws more lax, say removing the need for a driving test or lowering the driving age to 9, with the argument lowering the driving age would give children more practice time on the road and make them safer, I would argue against that too.
But you are not, and I am not…at least I hope you are not.
“The military is over in the Middle East for Federal reasons, of course, but it’s State laws that put pot smokers in jail. Who do you blame for that: Obama, or Arnie?”
Actually, that’s pretty ignorant of you to say.
First off, possession of controlled substances is BOTH a Federal and a State crime. So, yes, the feds can bust you for smokin’ a J – they likely won’t, because they have “bigger fish to fry”, but the simple fact is that marijuana possession is a *federal* crime.
Second off, California *specifically* has incredibly lax laws on marijuana smoking and possession, to the point where in I believe in early to mid 2000s they tried to allow people to grow their own. What was the result? The DEA busted a medical marijuana grower who was not selling to *anyone*, was licensed by the state to grow the marijuana, and charged her in Federal court.
The (At this point *very* republican) Supreme Court of the United States (that’s a Federal agency, see) upheld the decision in I believe it was the fall of 2007, perhaps early 2008, and the conviction, because “interstate commerce” was affected by this woman’s choice to grow her own marijuana.
So no, these are primarily Federal problems, and I agree both Democrats and Republicans are responsible.
#13 bobbo
Just stating the facts.
It is the propensity of the liberal mindset to do what is politically expedient, what gives the greatest recognition and accolades – as long as it doesn’t involve sacrifice or even heavy lifting.
The greatest Genocides of this century happened under the watch of liberals.
Roosevelt really couldn’t help it, but it still took a direct attack to get him into action. Carter, Clinton, Johnson, and Kennedy certainly could have done something, but instead they allowed many millions to die because of pressure from liberals.
Bush actually stopped an oppressive, genocidal maniac. Look where that got him. Moreover, look at who put him there.
You, in fact, are the exception. If I remember right, you did serve and give service for this country and helped others in like vein.
That makes you the exception, not the rule. I wish there were more like you. Kudos!
I’m now trying to figure out an appropriate name for our new commander in chief.
Bush Sr. – Taken
Bush Jr. – Taken
Bush Lite – Bingo!
Maybe this is one of the things we should like most about our new Commander. He has the moral compass to know what is the right thing to do, not just what is politically expedient.
Oh, and please don’t tell me about how much Bush spent. Bush Lite spent this amount many times over.
And please don’t spread the lie that Lite had to spend this money because it was already approved.
Lite has a pen, he did not have to sign. He has something called a Veto. He could have sent it back for review and reworking.
But the world would come to an end unless we spent all these trillions of dollars!!
Apparently not. Not to mention, wasn’t it Romney who said that the Automotive companies should go bankrupt? And who was it who promised this would never happen?
Was Lite ignorant or lying?
Bush was stupid, Lite isn’t, or so I hope although he is making the same mistakes.
Either that or he lied through his teeth at every opportunity to become commander in chief.
And let’s not even start talking about Pelosi, Reed, Boxer, Rockefeller, etc.
No, the ends DON’T justify the means. A lie is a lie is a lie.
Isn’t that why we hate Bush?
#9, DC has the highest at ~30/100k.
Also, a little further research on the internet of what “death by firearm” actually means in these statistics:
http://tinyurl.com/oaluuh
Causes of death attributable to firearm mortality include ICD-10 Codes W32-W34, Accidental discharge of firearm; Codes X72-X74, Intentional self-harm by firearm; X93-X95, Assault by firearm; Y22-Y24, Firearm discharge, undetermined intent; and Y35, Legal intervention involving firearm discharge. Deaths from injury by firearms exclude deaths due to explosives and other causes indirectly related to firearms.
As we know DC doesn’t allow firearms at all, we can only assume that those deaths are mostly murder.
If you compare the populations of these states and look at the real stats, the states with the stricter gun control laws have more deaths by crime with firearms. The DoJ site can give you way more information that I care to copy and paste.
Comparing self-defense shootings with assault shootings is a typical liberal trick to make gun control look more appealing.
Yes, it looks like #9 Rakiah couldn’t buy a clue with all the money in the world.
Who cares about gun murders? Of course if you take away all guns, gun murder goes down. But what about Total Murder?
If they couldn’t reach for a gun, did they reach for a hammer, knife, club, or just bare hands?
So, what about total murders?
Turns out, Louisiana falls way behind the District of Columbia, puerto rico (of all places), and Maryland. All who have very restrictive gun laws.
But it makes sense. If you cannot defend yourself, you’re a victim.
Wow! The state with the lowest murder rate has practically no gun laws at all! Vermont!
http://disastercenter.com/crime/US_States_Rate_Ranking.html
#25 for the win re: per capita gun crime.
I prefer giving those hack job websites the finger and drawing my own conclusions. The only conclusion I draw from REAL data is that Europe and Britain must be lying about their stats and disarming it’s citizens because it makes it easier to make them subservient.
http://fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
#26 hoot
Thank you very much!
It’s also amusing, when looking at the numbers, that the EVIL state of TEXAS, with it’s yokels and gun nuts is safer than California.
A few notes about guns and crime in my city, Toronto. I was born here, and have lived here my whole 50+ years and I don’t know anyone who has every owned a gun. We also has a very low murder rate compared with most US cities.
I think gun ownership is about 1% and the murder rate is about 2 per 100,000.
Here are some links
http://www3.thestar.com/static/googlemaps/starmaps.html?xml=080919_gunowners.xml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Toronto
#25 you give a link to Vermont’s low murder rate, but no link to their gun ownership rate.
You say they have very little gun control laws (again no link), but even if so, if no one owns a gun, then gun laws aren’t needed, are they?
I wonder how Vermont’s gun ownership rate compares to other mostly white, mostly rural, states with much higher murder rates.