17 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2020
    1. Stalking Cat has experienced behavioral changes in the vein of no longer drinkin' and druggin', heightened empathy, and reacting to certain things in different ways. By no longer denying these feelings, it's been easier to deal with different situations.

      Reacts to things in a more "natural cat" way than anything else. Very cat-like in actions. (Lynx -> Tiger for e-mail address.)-> general feline affinity, but focus on tiger because it's the largest non-extinct cat on this continent.

      Feline affinity is more great with big cats than smaller, domestic cats. (Primal nature? Bow hunting (Indian tradition) deer. Mutual respect with cats, 10' near bobcat, 25' near mountain lion, leaves when known hunting territory for another animal.) If you're not bow-hunting, and using a gun, you don't deserve that kill, basically. Gun hunting separates people from the experience of hunting. Stalking Cat is very much a cat in hunting & associated mannerisms.

  2. Jun 2020
  3. Jan 2020
    1. As an American and a staunch defender of the First Amendment, I’m allergic to the notion of forbidden speech. But if government is going to forbid it, it damned well better clearly define what is forbidden or else the penumbra of prohibition will cast a shadow and chill on much more speech.

      Perhaps it's not what people are saying so much as platforms are accelerating it algorithmically? It's one thing for someone to foment sedition, praise Hitler, or yell their religious screed on the public street corner. The problem comes when powerful interests in the form of governments, corporations, or others provide them with megaphones and tacitly force audiences to listen to it.

      When Facebook or Youtube optimize for clicks keyed on social and psychological constructs using fringe content, we're essentially saying that machines, bots, and extreme fringe elements are not only people, but that they've got free speech rights, and they can be prioritized with the reach and exposure of major national newspapers and national television in the media model of the 80's.

      I highly suspect that if real people's social media reach were linear and unaccelerated by algorithms we wouldn't be in the morass we're generally seeing on many platforms.

    2. Many of the book’s essayists defend freedom of expression over freedom from obscenity. Says Rabbi Arthur Lelyveld (father of Joseph, who would become executive editor of The New York Times): “Freedom of expression, if it is to be meaningful at all, must include freedom for ‘that which we loathe,’ for it is obvious that it is no great virtue and presents no great difficulty for one to accord freedom to what we approve or to that to which we are indifferent.” I hear too few voices today defending speech of which they disapprove.

      I might take issue with this statement and possibly a piece of Jarvis' argument here. I agree that it's moral panic that there could be such a thing as "too much speech" because humans have a hard limit for how much they can individually consume.

      The issue I see is that while anyone can say almost anything, the problem becomes when a handful of monopolistic players like Facebook or YouTube can use algorithms to programattically entice people to click on and consume fringe content in mass quantities and that subtly, but assuredly nudges the populace and electorate in an unnatural direction. Most of the history of human society and interaction has long tended toward a centralizing consensus in which we can manage to cohere. The large scale effects of algorithmic-based companies putting a heavy hand on the scales are sure to create unintended consequences and they're able to do it at scales that the Johnson and Nixon administrations only wish they had access to.

      If we look at as an analogy to the evolution of weaponry, I might suggest we've just passed the border of single shot handguns and into the era of machine guns. What is society to do when the next evolution occurs into the era of social media atomic weapons?

  4. Nov 2019
    1. the issues of violence with race and racism inAmerica

      Many letters talked about immigration and gun control. I think this is a huge issue the country is facing now and this study reflects the importance of that issue.

  5. Jul 2018
    1. Researchers have found time and time again that more guns mean more deaths. And Americans have a lot of guns, and easy access to them. Americans own almost half of the 650 million civilian-owned guns there are in the entire world, and gun homicide rates in the US are 25 times higher than in other high-income countries. States and developed countries with more guns have more gun deaths.
  6. Apr 2018
    1. In contemporary debates, gun control advocates often respond to assertion of second amendment individual rights to gun ownership by emphasizing the amendment’s reference to a “well regulated militia.”

      Hopefully this suggestion will be accepted in the spirit it is offered (gently!) and if acted upon, would not lengthen the intro too much, but rather help clarify the "anticipatory set" of the reading. Although the first sentence is quite accurate, as someone who has been doing extensive reading on the 2nd Amendment lately, I had to re - read this to be sure I understood the assertion. Bouncing back & forth from references to 1) gun control advocates 2) individual rights to gun ownership and back to 3) reference to a well regulated militia is likely to confuse H.S. readers who may have little interest or grasp of the ideas.

      Suggest: First of all - since it is so brief, it might be useful to actually provide the complete wording of Amendment Two. (Perhaps above the green "About this text" box.)

      Secondly - a note suggesting that gun control advocates tend to focus upon the "militia" clause while gun owner rights advocates often prefer to focus on the second clause re: right to own.

      Thirdly - a (brief) suggestion that the two sides do not even agree upon what constitutes a "militia" and that the context and historical evidence for each side's arguments are lengthy and complex.

      The second sentence beginning " In the excerpt below, is critical to help set the context of the reading, however, there seems to be room to minimize the verbiage without losing meaning.

  7. Nov 2017
  8. Oct 2017
    1. Trump noticeably avoided talking about gun control when he was asked about it, saying that he would speak on the matter with the police as a general assembly. In 2000, trump had different standpoint on gun control, saying that he wanted a ban on assault guns. Personally I think background checks should be placed on people with accounts of a 1 or more felonies. And that weapons with a lethality higher than a pistol's should be restricted during a person's review as a pistol is enough for self defense.

  9. Feb 2017
    1. The Campus Carry movement is largely the creation of the Leadership Institute, a conservative activist organization, partnered with gun rights activists who are further right than the NRA. They have paid college students to form Campus Carry clubs.

    1. Too often when we try to finish up the business of electing at first meeting, we discover, later on, that the finish was an extinguisher

      I understand what she is saying until, "That the finish was an extinguisher." I definitely agree with the first part of this claim. Just to compare it to politics or sports (@sophist_monster): The presidential campaign and college basketball come to mind. A large percent of the population wanted good ole Grandpa Bernie to win and at a few times I thought he was going to beat Hil Gal. For my sports people: most people and myself included thought Duke would dominate the NCAA right now (I still do)(Duke of the Ship). But, back to the point, people back in the 19th century and now still continue to finalize winners before the race really begins.

  10. Jun 2016
    1. Even the most devout gun owners should be able to get behind keeping guns out of the hands of potential terrorists.

      Here is the oppo view, pretty ugly. Hard to climb up that point of view, ain't it? Why can't we get along? Because some of these fuckers are just wrong. Wrong like below.

  11. Dec 2015