Friday, September 23, 2016

Rioters blocking roads and sometimes attacking cars/people,

legal opinion on 'When can you use the car to go through?'
This post is linked in the article, but I'm linking it here, too: Surviving Mob Attacks on Your Vehicle

Well, the local NAACP has gone completely batshit:
But the president of the Charlotte chapter of the NAACP Corine Mack said ultimately it didn’t matter. “I think the most important part is the contrast in him having a book versus a gun. But in my mind and in most of the community’s mind, it really doesn’t matter if he had a gun,” she said.
Oh yes, madam it DOES matter.  Especially since it's come out he had a criminal record, and may have been a prohibited person.

“At the end of the day we have the right under the Second Amendment to carry here in North Carolina,” she said. “And [the police’s] responsibility was to engage him in a more deescalated way, to find out if he had a permit for his gun and allow him to go on his merry way and he would still be living today. That’s not what happened.”
NOW they care about the 2nd Amendment...

I suppose you could make a convoluted argument about how the protests were against white supremacy, and capitalism and the media are agents of white supremacy, therefore attacking those institutions are acts of “protest” or whatever. But if even violent attempted murder and destruction of property can be a “protest” so long as the motives are political, I don’t see why the same can’t be said of, say, a terrorist attack. But I’ve never seen a tweet or headline describing Osama Bin Laden as a mere “protester.”
What I suspect is going on here is that reporters are attempting to stay neutral. Calling the perpetrators “looters” or “rioters” or “attackers” carries a degree of moral condemnation with it. Normally that’d be fine, but there’s also a substantial percent of the country that sympathizes with the perpetrators, or at least their motives. To appease those who sympathize broadly with the Black Lives Matter movement or similar groups, they choose to call them “protesters” instead.
But this is a false neutrality. In an effort to please those of all political stripes, the media ended up misinforming their consumers. The men and women who looted that Wal-Mart and destroyed stores were not “protesters,” and if they had done so in a context divorced from politics, media outlets would have the stones to say so.

'Comforting' this is not.
Public, academic, and private laboratories that work with deadly diseases have mistakenly transferred highly contagious viruses and bacteria to unsecure locations at least 21 times in the past 13 years, a frequency more than double what government officials said their data showed, according to a new Government Accountability Office report. 

 In each case, the scientists and officials involved wrongly concluded that the deadly pathogens had been deactivated and thus were safe to transport elsewhere. One of the incidents, involving mistaken shipments by a Defense Department laboratory of live anthrax bacteria, attracted wide notice in 2015. But the GAO report said key government agencies have been slow to fix managerial and policy lapses that contributed to that event and might provoke additional errors.


Jerry The Geek said...

Is it a mere coincidence that you have commented on both subjects .... the increased incidence (and acceptance) of riots, and the possible release of deadly pathogens (and lack of oversight) ... in the same commentary?

Firehand said...

Actually, it is. And I really should have thought of that