Page 1 of 69
Posted on November 16 at 4:08 p.m.
I guess NikkiN that if any public servant spends thirty years serving the community while constantly improving his or her experience and education and remaining dedicated to doing a superior job, then he or she can't escape the appellation of "good ol' boy." I thank Patterson for his service and dedication and wish him a long, active, and enjoyable retirement.
On Undersheriff Don Patterson Retires
Posted on November 11 at 8:04 p.m.
Dewdly, my analogy works not because it compares messages but rather because it compares extreme speech which provokes response. I am not defending Miller-Young's response to such speech. However, the speech issue becomes secondary when one party begins to chase down another and engage in physical confrontation. At that point it is very difficult to discern who is the aggressor and who the defender. I suppose a court room might be the place to split those fine hairs, but my point is, why bother? From my perspective, the person that chases becomes the aggressor due to the act of chasing. A long time ago, I witnessed dramas like this play out at the beach between surfers arguing over which one of them had the right of way on a wave or who violated the surfing etiquette. By the time the dispute landed on the beach, it was very difficult to tell who was the original aggressor. The police almost never got involved in such disputes because of that ambiguity and the tendency for the local witnesses present to defend the local surfer. If someone steals your sign, call the cops and let them deal with it. Don't chase that person down and instigate violent contact. At that point, culpability for the whole mess becomes ambiguous. I should avoid Nazi analogies, but they are so perfect for comparisons of extreme speech that is likely to incite violence that I could not resist.
On Anti-Abortion Group Sues UCSB, Professor, Students
Posted on November 10 at 8:37 p.m.
So, if somebody steals my sign and, rather than calling the police, I chase after that person and engage him or her in a physical confrontation, and in the process my arm gets scratched, I get to sue that person? Let me put it this way, say that I am a Nazi and I have a sign that shows concentration camp ovens and the sign says something about it being a good place for Jews. And then say that a Jewish person is offended by my sign and takes it from me and I chase that person across a long distance and engage that person in a fight. And say that Jewish person kicks my behind and steals my sign. Does the Nazi get to sue? My point is, if you chase after someone who has stolen your sign and the subsequent confrontation turns physical, who is the aggressor at that point? Isn't this a case of co-combatants? Of course this a case of two silly people wrestling over a stupid poster, but is our legal system really going to accommodate a lawsuit based on this silliness?
Posted on November 9 at 1:34 p.m.
Barbara S., I respect your point of view and appreciate the rational and polite manner with which have comported yourself on this string of posts. However, I believe that your analogies or anthropomorphisms comparing dog behavior with human behavior and human systems and institutions of justice are incorrect. If a dog bites a human or attacks another dog or a cat, that is not analogous to a human driving under the influence or texting while driving. People who attack or kill other people are placed in long term custody or "euthanized" by way of the death penalty. First-time violent human offenders go to prison. We don't attempt to require them to undergo behavior modification therapy. We lock them away to separate them from society. I believe that it is much more humane to euthanized a violent dog than to incarcerate it for the rest of its life is some cage. Also, nobody would want to pay for a doggie prison system. Dog behavior modification techniques are not guaranteed to be effective over the long term and it is simply not worth the risk to give a dog with a violent past a second chance.
On The ‘Dangerous’ Dog Dilemma
Posted on November 6 at 7:33 p.m.
Long ago, I spent a great deal of time in the Ventura County oil fields. They are old, some of the first developed in California, and back in the 70s, some were well managed and some were not. I remember, unlined open sumps as big as an Olympic sized pool. There is no doubt a great deal of pollution associated with these operations. I would not even hazard to guess how we would approach cleaning it up. And natiivegeo, we surfers on the South Coast like our tar balls just fine. They make the decks of our surfboards distinctive and recognizable throughout California. If you don't like tar on the beach, please stay up there in shark land. As it is, too many of you come down here to use our beaches.
On Oil Industry Polluting Ventura?
Posted on November 6 at 7:21 p.m.
I never thought that I would agree with Peter Adam about anything, even the color of the sky. However, I have to admit that I am 100% in agreement with his sentiments on this issue. Dogs that attack and kill other animals and that attack and bite humans should be euthanized, period, end of the story! I suspect that Mr. Adam is shaking his head about all the fuss over this. In the rural world in which he grew up, a world (at least the Midwestern version) of which I am very familiar, dangerous and vicious dogs were simply shot dead and left in the woods. Sometimes there were bad feelings between neighbors about such justice, but the government authorities were seldom involved unless rabies was suspected. Dogs that attack other pets and/or people should be euthanized. Let's not spend any more time and resources on this issue.
Posted on November 5 at 9:21 p.m.
I avoided Facebook for the longest time, thinking that I was too old for such nonsense. But I finally relented for personal (and also, alas, commercial) reasons and a whole other interesting world opened up. All of a sudden, I was in contact with all kinds of persons I used to know but with whom I had lost contact (including the first woman (she was 15 then) with whom I ever...well you know). I did a little stalking of other people, and "friended" a few. But most old girlfriends, I just did not have the guts to say "hi." It felt too weird. Besides, I can't imagine crawling beneath the covers with anyone besides my wife of nearly 30 years. If something ever happened to her (God forbid), it would be the monk's life for my from then on.
On Plan B Partners
Posted on November 5 at 8:12 p.m.
So my take on the election, for whatever little it is worth, follows: Nationally, the election was won by pot smoking Republicans who believe that the minimum wage should be raised. Go figure. Locally, even though the Republican curmudgeon wing won the day with Prop. P and Prop. S. Lois Capps still won. That shows that there is no way for a Republican to take that seat no matter what they do. Think about it. A low turn out election which favors the Republican measures and candidates and they still can't beat Lois Capps. The National Republican machine won't ever spend a dime here ever again. Notice that Das, who is ideologically somewhere left of Karl Marx, had no problem. Notice that Meg West who had a reputation for lefty proclamations on the Goleta Planning Commission and ran a platform of hording the rain water that comes off our roofs, got the most votes. All these liberals won in the face of the conservative rout of Measures P and S. That tells me that in a real election, when the disaffected millennials, the single issue stoners, the immigration concerned Hispanics, and the John Kenneth Gailbraith liberals all get off their couches and rise up from their leather arm chairs to vote, whomever is the Democratic candidate for Lois Capp's seat will have a rather easy time. I could be wrong, I have been before.
On Capps Survives; Measures P and S Flame Out
Posted on October 20 at 7:53 p.m.
geeber, I hardly ever agree with your posts, but this last one was absolutely spot on. I knew a guy (first name Bob) who was the quintessential Stanley's local (in fact he was the guy who discovered the Oil Piers break after the Stanley's off ramp was finished. That was a crime against nature and surfing by Caltrans. However, I am not sure that government agencies (or corporations) can be consigned to hell for eternity. Too bad. I drive to Ventura at least once per week, and I agree that the barrier for the bike path has cut off the view and completely blocked the access to the beach at La Conchita. How did the Coastal Commission ever approve that?! When will we learn that pouring ever greater amounts of concrete will not improve our lives? When I was sixteen years old and driving between Ventura and Gaviota looking for surf, I hardly ever encountered an 18 wheel truck on Highway 101. Now they are like stones in stream. Back then, if somebody in Ventura got a job in Santa Barbara, they moved to Santa Barbara and visa versa. Tell me why things are better now.
On Mayor Blasted for Alleged Conflict-of-Interest
Posted on October 17 at 9:17 p.m.
First and foremost, the sales taxes of residents (and tourists) in Santa Barbara County should not be used to pay for the widening of 101. State and Federal tax revenues should pay for such a project. Secondly, today, by ill planning and bad luck, I found myself driving from Ventura to Santa Barbara just at commute hour. I arrived at Milpas at 5:00 PM exactly and within less than a half mile it was a parking lot (actually about 20 mph). So this is three lanes without a two-lane bottleneck all the way to Fairview. By the time I got to Fairview, there was no congestion. So it appears as if three lanes is (are?) not the answer to commute time congestion. Considering the fact that we do not need congestion relief at any other time, why the heck are we spending several hundred million dollars on this stupid project? Remember the lights on 101 through Santa Barbara? Those were the halcyon days of yore. I understand that Schneider is trying to shake down SBCAG for some more money for City infrastructure projects; but that's just politics as usual. The bigger questions is: Why are we paying for this debacle?