Saturday, May 24, 2014

Hatpin bans?

Because women dared use them for self-defense?
The piece highlights that the press went wild with stories around of women using hatpins for self-defense, and men in government did not react well. The story highlights that the Chicago Vice Commission earned the ire of women when they turned the blame for assaults on the victims and argued “that unchaperoned women should dress as modestly as possible—no painted cheeks or glimpse of ankle—in order to avoid unwanted attention.” When women objected to being told that they were to blame for attacks and promoted the idea of using self-defense by hatpin, that’s when the men decided that they had enough.
Look it over; he's right, a lot of the arguments against women wearing them sound like they came from the Laddites or Watts.

Can someone explain to me why even the most brain-dead AGW true believer would listen to Erlich?  The bastard's been wrong about EVERYTHING, yet here he is again.

Really, Harley?  You're playing this bullshit game?

What?  Everytown and members don't want to say things outright?  Obfuscate?  Lie? 

Anyone actually surprised?
Erika Soto Lamb, Everytown’s communications director, also clammed up when I asked her a simple policy question: “Does Everytown have a position on an ‘assault weapons’ ban or a limitation on the size of magazines?” Dodging the issue completely, Lamb curtly referred me to the group’s website — which is notably silent on those topics. I pushed again, and received no response. Only on my third attempt did I get anything remotely approximating an answer, accompanied by the instruction that I must quote the reply in full. Here it is, in full:
As I’ve told you before, Everytown clearly outlines our policy priorities on our issues page here including background checks, domestic violence, preventable deaths (child access to guns and suicide), and gun trafficking. 
While we believe assault weapons and magazine size have the potential to put the “mass” in “mass shootings,” we also know that events like these account for a small percentage of the 86 Americans who are killed by guns every day. Our focus is on the reasonable reforms that 90 percent of Americans support like background checks for all gun sales, prohibiting domestic abusers from getting their hands on guns, promoting the safe storage of guns and giving law enforcement the tools they need to shut down gun trafficking.
This is fair enough, as far as it goes. But it is not an answer to my question. Nor, it should be said, are any such answers forthcoming on the group’s website.

Can a federal agency trying to cover up wrongdoing lawfully withhold documents under executive privilege—reserved for the president of the United States—when the records don’t even involve the commander-in-chief?
To anyone except dirtbag lawyers working for the .gov agency, the answer is 'Hell NO!'  But the dirtbags are working hard at it.


AM said...

I looked into the drag equations for the flags in question. If they were nylon and roughly standard size, at 85 mph they would add about 50 lbs of drag to the bike. Nylon had the lowest drag efficient of any of the flag materials listed in the manual I checked, so this represents a best case scenario. Source for wind load equations here:

Obviously the placement of the flags would be a big matter too, if they were behind the drag vortex created by the rider that would greatly decrease the drag effect.

As far as Harley not honoring the warranty, every biker I've known who rides a Harley knows that if you don't use Harley approved after market parts that voids your warranty. Even if it is something as simple as an air intake housing, if it isn't on the approved list then tough titty.

If he wanted to fly flags and keep his warranty, he needed to use Harley approved parts.

Firehand said...

God, I love this! Make a post, get a link to wind loads for flagpoles!