You’re Doing it Wrong – Page 97

AT&T Decides You’re Not Shafted Enough on Data

AT&T likes to prove HK isn’t the only company that thinks you suck and thus hates you. They just announced changes to their data plans. First and foremost they are finally going to allow tethering on their oh so precious network. They are only going to gouge you an additional $20.00 a month for the tethering option.

But that’s on top of their new data plan options. The first one comes in at $15.00 for 200MB of data and the other comes in at $25.00 for 2GB of data. If you go above the cap on the first plan you have to pay an additional $15.00 for each 200MB while the second plan charges $10.00 for each additional GB. That means if you want to use 5GB of data you’ll be looking at $55.00 a month. Ouch.

Oh and as a final note that unlimited data plan for the iPad, it’s not unlimited anymore. Nope that plan was moved to the $25.00 for 2GB a month plan. Sweet deal huh?

With customer service like that I’m glad I’m not a customer.

More Bad Ideas from New York

Seriously that state is fast becoming the bad idea capital of the Union. Tam found another bad idea brewing the in the state mostly run by a single city. Meet the “minimum force” bill:

Under present NYPD training, cops are taught to shoot at the center of their target and fire their weapon until the threat has been stopped.

Which is how it should be done. You aim for the largest target that also house organs which the human body stops without. It’s pretty much a win-win area to target. Well that makes too much sense so:

This legislation would require officers to literally shoot the gun out of someone’s hand or shoot to wound them in the leg or arm.

So this legislation would require the police to do the impossible (shoot a gun out of the criminal’s hands) or aim for very small targets that, when hit, won’t incapacitate the criminal in most cases. I’m all for restricting police powers and limiting the use of deadly force to when it’s needed. With that said the gun generally comes out when deadly force is needed and when it’s needed it’s needed. If a criminal is endangering the life of another the quickest way to stop the situation should be taken which is almost always shooting the punk until he stops. A punk will stop a whole lot faster if bullets enter critical areas like the head or chest as opposed to limbs which the human body can very well survive without.

Mayor Daley Threatening Butt Rape with Guns

How the Hell does this douche keep getting re-elected? Or right he’s the mayor of Chicago the single most corrupt city in the Union. Well when he’s not parroting about how guns are evil he’s making threats to Supreme Court justices and reporters. As Days of our Trailers points out High Priest Douche Daley likes to keep himself classy:

“You have to have confidence in the Supreme Court, Maybe they’ll see the light of day,” Daley said at a City Hall news conference. “Maybe one of them will have an incident and they’ll change their mind over night, going to and from work.”

Yes maybe they’ll have an “accident” because they forgot to pay their “protection money.” Seriously that’s just downright violent. I’m so thankful I’m on the peaceful side of gun owners instead of the violent side of those who hate civil rights. But as much as High Priest Douche Daley hates peaceful coexistence he loves his sodomy:

During the news conference, Daley reacted with the help of a prop when a reporter suggested the city’s handgun ban has been ineffective, given the number of shootings that still occur in Chicago.

“It’s been very effective,” Daley said, picking up a gun from the dozens displayed on a nearby table. “If I put this up your butt, you’ll find out how effective it is. Let me put a round up your, you know.”

That’s right support High Priest Douche’s gun ban or he’ll shove a gun up your ass and probably also give you AIDS! Got that? Seriously mayor means serious business and anal rape is seriously business. Oh finally Sir Sodomy (his new name) also states:

“But that’s why you want to get them out,” he continued. “You want to get these out. This gun saved many lives. It could save your life.”

No that gun couldn’t have saved anybody’s life before it’s in the hands of your police station (and possibly later hidden up the reporter’s ass). A gun can only save lives if somebody can use it to defend themselves. If I’m attacked and my gun is at home it does no good. On the other hand if I’m attacked and I have my gun on me I have a fighting chance of surviving.

Although I have to give Sir Sodomy some points, he’s got balls. I certainly wouldn’t have the balls to go around making off handed threats against Supreme Court justices. Oh wait that’s not balls, it’s stupidity.

Being Anti-Gun on the Cheap

Man it’s not easy for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Civil Rights. First they start a fundraiser to get $10,000 and months in they only have $20.00. Second they can’t seem to get any major gun control legislation through. What’s such an organization to do?

Well according to War on Guns they have decided to jump on bored an almost assured victory so they have something to toss on their resume without having to actually do work or spend money.

The Brady Bunch are signing on to the federal lawsuit against the Firearm Freedom Act. Being this is a case where the federal government is stomping on sovereign states’ rights it’s almost a sure bet the feds will win. I don’t think there has been a huge states’ rights victory since the ending of the Civil War.

I Don’t Like this One Bit

Joe Huffman brings up a scary decision that just made it’s way out of the Supreme Court. The case that was just decided pretty much gives the government power to incarserate you indefinably. Of course this case involved a sex offender which is why speaking against the ruling will automatically get you hatred from your peers but alas I could care less so here we go:

In a broad endorsement of federal power, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled that Congress has the authority under the Constitution to allow the continued civil commitment of sex offenders after they have completed their criminal sentences.

Yes that’s right even though you’ve completed your sentence handed down by a judge after conviction by a jury the federal government can chose to extend your punishment after the fact. The very scary part here is the fact the extension of punishment doesn’t even have to pass muster with a jury but only a judge:

The federal law at issue in the case allows the government to continue to detain prisoners who had engaged in sexually violent conduct, suffered from mental illness and would have difficulty controlling themselves. If the government is able to prove all of this to a judge by “clear and convincing” evidence — a heightened standard, but short of “beyond a reasonable doubt” — it may hold such prisoners until they are no longer dangerous or a state assumes responsibility for them.

We all know phrases like “beyond a reasonable double” and “clear and convincing” translate into “whatever the fuck we want” when spoken by the federal government so neither of those two clauses fill me with confidence. Likewise a single judge could very well decide that you stay in jail for life even if you were only sentenced to 10 years.

So now we come to the big problem what to do with people in prison whom are still deemed a potential threat to society? In essence in order to keep such a person in prison we have to give up some of our liberty to the government. I’m a big believer in Benjamin Franklin’s quote, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Personally I don’t believe the risk of losing any liberty could possibly outweigh the potential danger of releasing a prisoner even if they are dangerous.

Of course I’m not one to just complain without offering some kind of potential solution so here it is. If a person is charged with a sex offense (a real one not a bullshit one like taking a piss in public) make part of the punishment committing the offender to a mental facility where he or she can receive treatment and can not be let loose until a psychological evaluation has been passed (and by passed I mean judged by a board of psychologists chosen in a similar manner to a jury not a single doctor). Obviously it’s not a perfect solution but it would offer two things: a method of ensuring a dangerous person is not released into society and the said dangerous person can get treatment for their problem which simply imprisoning them doesn’t accomplish.

But simply stating somebody is a possible danger to society and keeping them locked up indefinably even though that goes beyond the handed down punishment is a violation of essential liberties. This type of power is far too dangerous to hand to the federal government, an entity that has proven itself time and time again they don’t give a shit about your rights.

Oh My God Signs Kill

Apparently advertising can cause suicide! Every Day, No Days Off brought up a quote from a ~~hack~~ individuals claiming to be a counselor that really struck me as well researched and reasonable:

Year after year, I have been disgusted with the blaring and offensive gun show billboards that show no respect to women and millions of victims of violence. I have been disturbed by the plethora of “Buy & Sell Guns” signs littering our streets when the gun show comes to town.

And now the offending stupidity:

It’s a lot easier to pull a trigger than it is to use alternative, and often less successful, means. Putting “guns, knives, and machine guns for sale” advertisements in people’s faces – especially those who are feeling hopeless, or worse yet, angry – is a recipe for death. So stop the suggestive selling because the bottom line is, you don’t know who’s responding to your advertising and what your ads may “trigger.” Or alternatively, expect that people will die, and don’t be surprised by it.

Yes obviously my last statement was sarcasm. I like how this individuals said it’s easier to pull a trigger than to use alternative methods. You know there are a lot of drugs you can take that will kill you silently and with far less room for error (no I’m not talking Tylenol, if you want to kill yourself using that be prepared for a very painful and lingering death). So by this person’s “logic” we should ban all pharmaceutical advertisements because people can kill themselves via overdosing on drugs. Fuck we need to pan automobile advertisements to because some suicidal person may decide to buy one and ram it into a wall (of a school containing teh childrenz of course) at 100 miles per hour.

What this really comes down to is the moron who wrote this doesn’t like guns shows and therefore believes they shouldn’t be allowed to advertise (and I’m sure if you ask the individuals will state they should be outright banned as well).

Hey News Outlets We Need to Talk

Right now you’re reading a blog. You’re probably doing this for one of two reasons: mass media sucks and they don’t report 90% of the important details in a story or you just like your news delivered with an appropriate amount of sarcasm and foul language. On this site I try to correct the first problem by providing links to important details (for instance the actual bill if I’m talking about a law) while also ensure you get your file of foul language.

Sometimes the first item isn’t very easy. It’s not easy because most media outlets leave our very important details (which is why the first item I listed exists). Because of this I have a couple of simple demands to make.

First when a story is talking about a bill I want to know the name of the bill along with the senate and house bill number so I can go read the bloody thing. Simple enough isn’t it? I want to see what’s actually in the damned bill instead of taking some “journalists” word for it. This would help eliminate a majority of the hysteria that floats around with currently pending legislation. Yes I know it’s all written in legalese and I’m not a lawyer but I’m a pretty smart guy and can gleam most of the information I need out of it.

Second when a story is talking about a court case give the named of the fucking court case. This is also pretty simple. For instance is John Q. Public is suing Jane Q. Private please make a reference to the case John Q. Public v. Jane Q. Private. I want to see what’s going on with the court case from multiple sources and having the actual name of the case would be beneficial.

That’s it those are my only demands. Why are either of these things so hard to do? At most it will add a few extra bytes to the size of the story and honestly bandwidth, even for people on dial-up, isn’t going to be negatively impacted by a few bytes.

MAY 6–A Transportation Security Administration screener is facing an assault rap after he allegedly beat a co-worker who joked about the size of the man’s genitalia after he walked through a security scanner. The May 4 confrontation involved Rolando Negrin, 44, and other TSA employees who had previously taken part in a training session at Miami International Airport, according to the below Miami-Dade Police Department reports. Negrin, pictured in the mug shot at right, and his co-workers had been training with new “whole body image” machines–the controversial kind that provide very revealing images of a traveler–when Negrin walked through the scanner.

But remember those TSA agents aren’t going to make such remarks about you just each other. Your privacy is perfectly safe.

Tag: You’re Doing it Wrong