Found: One Troll

It has taken me a few days to decide whether to write this entry. I read TJIC’s original post the day he posted it and I thought it was in very poor taste. When I got the news that his Massachusetts gun permit was suspended, I still could not defend what he said. I’ve asked myself a number of times over the last few days: do I want to associate myself with speech with which I disagree? I decided that it doesn’t matter if I agree with TJIC because ultimately I still believe:

1. TJIC had the right to say what he said.
2. TJIC’s constitutional rights have been violated by the Arlington Police Department and the State of Massachusetts.

For those reasons, I am TJIC.

(Image credit: Borepatch)

I’ve been trying to explain the second point on the xkcd forums for the last few days. The thrust of it is the same thing Borepatch (and everyone else) has been saying; basically, that if he hasn’t even been charged with a crime then due process for denying an individual his constitutionally protected rights has not been served. As I wrote there:

Would you be cool with it if all the government had to do to limit your freedom of speech was suspend a license? A license they don’t even have to grant you in the first place, the issuance of which is entirely up to the policies of your local chief of police or sheriff? Maybe it’ll be a graduated license. It’ll be easy to get one if all you want to do is talk about sports, but if you want to talk about politics or religion you need to get a Class A License to Offend, for which you need to show cause and take an anger management class. And even then you can’t use hate speech or any words that aren’t on the Massachusetts Approved Diction Roster. You can get one without trouble in the suburbs, but in Boston you had better be a professional journalist or, well, I guess you won’t be talking about politics because the Chief of Police there is a hardass who thinks only the Right People need the freedom of speech. If you get caught spouting off about the Governor without a license that’s a felony. Does that sound like an individual right with constitutional protection to you?

I fail to see how TJIC’s First, Second, and Fourth Amendment rights were not violated by confiscating his property without due process. I hope that something good can come of this, namely that we can get a judgment against the Arlington PD and the State of Massachusetts stating in no uncertain terms that their restrictions on constitutionally guaranteed rights are Not Okay. Perhaps a measure of freedom will be restored to its birthplace. I am cautiously optimistic, but I think it is more likely that the governmental bodies involved will try to sweep this incident under the rug as it enters the judicial system and settle the case without conceding anything.

Hello Airlines,

I know you’re slow to move. That’s fine. I just thought you should know why you won’t be moving me anywhere for the foreseeable future.

I used to love flying. It’s one of the reasons I studied aerospace engineering in college. I’ve held a US Passport since I was six years old. I’ve flown hundreds of thousands of miles around the world. So know how much it saddens me to say that flying commercial airlines has become so unbearable that I will no longer be doing it if I can help it. Right now I’ve got trips to San Jose, Reno, Las Vegas, Boston, Seattle, and possible Pittsburgh planned for 2011. In light of recent events, none of those plans include you. The most recent act in the TSA’s security theater is the last straw for me. You’ll get my employer’s money when I have to travel for business, but you’ll not see a dime of my own salary.

I’ve been through airport security in London, Bern, and Geneva. I’ve been scanned in Tokyo and Kuala Lumpur. I’ve had my bags prodded in Delhi, Bombay, and Madras. But I have never been treated in Europe or Asia with the depth of contempt that I’ve experienced from TSA employees in airports in Texas, California, and my home state of Arizona. I realize that you have no direct control over the TSA, but you have the lobbying power to get the Federal Government to back off unless they intend to spend a few billion tax dollars to bail out your failing businesses (again). Until you make noises about alleviating your passengers’ frustrations with the fatally ineffectual TSA, I hope your aircraft remain empty and unprofitable.

Sincerely,

Eseell

Probably some readers are aware of Australia’s idiotic video game censorship system. Unlike movies, which can be classified up to a level of R18+ (suitable for adults only), the video game classification system in Australia only scales up to M15+ (suitable for teenagers). My understanding is that altering this policy requires the unanimous consent of Australia’s various State Attorneys General.

The inevitable stuck pixel, in this case, is Attorney General Michael Atkinson of South Australia. AG Atkinson wrote a letter recently to Grow Up Australia (Via GamePolitics) explaining why he wouldn’t vote aye for an R18+ classification to be added to the system for games. It reads, in very small part: “I cannot fathom what State-enforced safeguards could exist to prevent R.18+ games being bought by households with children and how children can be stopped from using these games once the games are in the home. If adult gamers are so keen to have R.18+ games, I expect children would be just as keen.”

Well, Mr. Atkinson, that’s none of the State’s gorram business, is it? I can see how an official from a government with State-enforced firearm safety checks would think that censorship and “saving the children” is part of its mission, but you are wrong. Let me put it plainly: how your citizens choose to entertain themselves is none of your concern until they start hurting each other. Without mutual consent.

There’s one lie that I’m really sick and tired of hearing from proponents of socialized medicine, and specifically of the Obamacare bills. I keep reading that the new Government-run health care will increase consumer choice by allowing the Government to compete with existing health care plans. Frankly, that’s bullshit. Oh sure, for a few months or maybe even years existing private insurance carriers will continue to operate without much change, but in the end private insurers have to pass their expenses on to their customers. They have to operate at a profit or else they cannot remain a viable business.

The Government has no such restriction. It can offer its services seemingly below cost because its expenses are subsidized by the taxes paid by every working American. What will happen when private insurers have to compete against an entity that can sell its coverage below cost? The proponent of Obamacare might say that the private companies will be forced to cut costs and cut their rates, but the simple fact is that private insurers will never be able to compete with the Government. How can they, when their competitor is selling insurance at rates impossible to match? The Democrats may not be pushing for single-payer health care in name, but make no mistake, single-payer health care is exactly what we’re going to get.

And, many folks may reason, why shouldn’t we? Anyone with private insurance will be paying twice for their health care; once with their taxes and again with their disposable income. It’s not as though there will be an opt-out where you pay for your own care and pay nothing into the Government system.

Unless we stop these bills, private health care will go the same way in the US that it did in Canada: something that only the wealthiest among us can afford. The premium for quality health care will put private care out of reach of increasing numbers of Americans and more and more of us will end up on the Government program as private insurers either raise their rates to prohibitive levels or drop out of the game entirely.

Wired points to an article in the UK Sunday Express which indicates that a movement is afoot to place telescreens CCTV cameras into the homes of crappy parents. Says the Express,

They will be monitored to ensure that children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals.

The families are part of a program called the Family Intervention Project, which, as far as I can tell, aims to get the parents of unruly yobs more involved in their children’s lives. And by “parents,” I mean “Big Brother.” No word yet on whether they must also participate in mandatory calisthenics or the Two Minutes Hate. I presume that comes later.

But wait! There’s more (this time from Wired):

It gets worse. The government is also maintaining a private army, incredibly not called “Thought Police”, which will “be sent round to carry out home checks,” according to the Sunday Express. And in a scheme which firmly cements the nation’s reputation as a “nanny state”, the kids and their families will be forced to sign “behavior contracts” which will “set out parents’ duties to ensure children behave and do their homework.”

That would be a security group separate from the usual police force. Coming soon to a police state near you!

A comment on the Express article by CloverGirl asks, “Why are people not up in arms about this?” Well, that would be partly because they have no arms to be up in. Don’t think it couldn’t happen here.

At Slashdot:

Eastcoastsurfer: This bill should really be called “A Tax Increase For All Americans.” The estimated tax revenue the government expects to extract from the population from the passage of this bill is huge.

goldspider: This can’t be true. Obama promised that taxes would not go up for 95% of Americans.

AlexDV: He told the truth. Taxes will go up for 100% of Americans.

Heh.

I worked a router cut-over last night, so I had to drive down to the office at 10PM. As I was headed down the I-17, well below the camera’s speed threshold, some fool in lane 1 tripped a camera as I was at the closest point to the flash. The damn thing literally blinded me for a split second. The State of Arizona has installed tons of these infernal speed cameras along the freeways. I rarely speed fast enough to trip the cameras but I still hate the damn things because, as many people do not know, they record video 24/7, whether you are speeding or not.

Even if they were not recording video, any such system could easily be used to surreptitiously spy on citizens. While they are not currently used for such, the company which provides and maintains the cameras (Redflex) claims that they could be used to scan licence plates and thus to track the movements of any cars which pass the cameras. In Arizona! We’re supposed to be a free(er) state! There are a few bills in the state legislature this season which limit or outright remove the cameras from state highways. I got the following list from the Arizona Citizens Defense League website. If you live or drive in Arizona, it’s a good idea to write your state representatives about these. It is not a complete list of speed camera-related bills (which can be found at AzCDL).

House Bills:

• HB 2106 kills the camera program altogether
• HB 2124 restricts the use of the photo radar system to enforcing only a few specific sections of ARS.
• HB 2168 mandates a study to determine the necessity of photo radar cameras before AZ DPS and DOT can enter into or renew a contract for speed cameras.
• HB 2494 creates a statutory limit for photo radar violations of 11 miles above the speed limit. The threshold for triggering speed cameras is currently decided by the police jurisdiction which controls the cameras.

Senate Bills:

• SB 1291 allows the courts to share photo enforcement violation records with ADOT.
• SB 1355 removes the cameras from state highways.

If you are attending the 2A Blog Bash and driving, be aware of these damn things and drive the speed limit.