Right on about voting

Sadly, so-called "conservatives" show up to vote for "flawed" candidates, but so-called "liberals" stay home if they perceive a "liberal" candidate as "flawed".




Supporting two commenters from Arizona who support Tuscon's police chief, Chris Magnus, in his even-handed law enforcement.

The crime of war

"That’s because war — no matter how justified or unjustified, noble or ignoble — is always a crime."

David Brooks, "The Moral Injury", New York Times, 2015-02-17

The victims of war are not only those who are killed or maimed, but those who were put in a position of killing.

Solitary Confinement - George Will a Liberal?

I often disagree with George Will, but he generally shows a reasonableness in his writing and doesn't take an automatic dogmatic position on many issues.  He did so with his column "The Torture of Solitary Confinement", Washington Post, 2013-02-20 and republished in today's Star Tribune.

Will points out how psychologically damaging solitary confinement can be.  Ironically, it was the Quakers who were influential in creating solitary confinement as a way to help prisoners gain some penance (thus, penitentiary).  The colloquial "pen" wound up being more descriptive.  Will also compares the three known water boarding cases to the tens of thousands who are put in solitary confinement.

I used to think that the conclusion of "El Secreto de sus Ojos (The Secret in Their Eyes)" was quite appropriate for the crime.  Now I have second thoughts, especially considering the number of people sentenced for crimes they did not commit.

More on more appropriate party names

Given the number of misleading and untrue statements that Mitt Romney made in the first debate, given the Republicans claim of voter fraud, denial of climate change, and mischaracterizations of free markets, maybe the best name for their party is the Republicons.

Given how often the Democrats give in to many of the Republican charges against them, like soft on communism, soft on crime, and soft on terrorism, maybe the best name for their party is the Fraidycrats.

A start on getting back to 1940 budget levels

If we want 1940 government budget levels, then we will have to give up many government services that we take for granted.  Let's start with our well-equipped, modern police forces and consider what they would have in 1940.

First, we have to get rid of the computers and all the services that they provide.  If we start with patrol cars and assume a department has 20 cars, that is easily 60 thousand dollars saved.

Next, we have to toss out the radios and go back to call boxes.

Modern cars have many costly features that were only luxury add-ons in the 1940.  We should revert to manual transmissions, take away power steering and power brakes, remove air conditioning, windshield washers, side view mirrors, turn signals, backup lights, electronic locks, air bags, and seat belts.  I must have missed a few other things that were only wished for in 1940 that are standard in any car now.

We could also reduce the number of police cars and put more officers on foot patrol.

My gosh, these "efficiencies" could save hundreds of thousands of dollars for any medium size city.

The downside is that police departments effectiveness would go down because they lack many of the modern tools.

But, the great upside is that our taxes would go way down.  Now, if we could only get insurance companies to charge us 1940 premiums for theft insurance.

Is "prosperity" worth the cost?

Many are pointing at North Dakota as a low-tax state that is prosperous. If so, why are so many people moving out of the "high-paying jobs" areas. For some of the answers on all the costs on local people who don't have or want those jobs, see "America's Boomtown locals to big oil: We want our town back!", Blake Ellis, CNNMoney, 2011-10-24.

How to end the "war on drugs" in one fell swoop

A friend wrote that her brother had a fire in his apartment. When the fire marshal investigated, he found marijuana residue. As a result the brother lost his teaching job. Would a teacher have lost his job if the fire marshal had found alcohol?

Isn't it time we end the war on drugs? It certainly hasn't succeeded, it costs lots of money for enforcement, it leads to violent crime, and it doesn't make us friends in foreign countries when we aid unpopular governments in the eradication of the plants.

Isn't it time we treat drugs the same as we do alcohol? People get in trouble when they pose a public risk: driving under the influence or being a public nuisance. Shouldn't we only concern ourselves with the use of drugs when the use directly impinges on us? We don't worry about people getting drunk in their own homes; should we worry about people getting high in their own homes?

A lot of money and law enforcement personnel were wasted during Prohibition. Not only was time and money wasted looking for alcohol, but even more was wasted fighting the dealers. Didn't we learn anything from this?

Now instead of wasting these resources on enforcing the unenforceable, we regulate the sale and use of alcohol at a much lower cost and also gain tax revenue from its sale. Isn't time we did the same with drugs?

We would save money in enforcement, prosecution, and incarceration. We would gain money in taxation. We could use the gain to provide many more productive public services.