Page 3 of 6
Posted on March 1 at 4:32 a.m.
Bill, I'm not really sure.
SezMe apparently criticized a comment pointing out the ineffectiveness of Chicago's gun laws by arguing that criminals undermine the laws, rendering them ineffective.
On Shoot-Shoot, Bang-Bang
Posted on March 1 at 2:34 a.m.
"Roughly 32,000 Americans are killed a year by gun violence, [Toni Wellen] pointed out."
Per the CDC, that number is TOTAL firearm related deaths (31,672), but firearm homicide is "only" 11,078 (the rest being accident, suicide, and lawful action by civilians or law enforecement). That's still too many, sure, but let's put those statistics in perspective:
The leading cause of death of Americans is heart disease, at 597,689 per anum. Six hundred thousand. Where is the public outcry against fast food? Where is the advocacy for subsidized gym memberships? Homicide (of any nature) isn't even among the top ten causes. Those positions of honor are mostly reserved for passive-suicide: poor diet, smoking, and other lousy lifestyle choices.
If gun-control advocates truly wanted to save lives, they'd be better served lobbying against McDonald's.
My point isn't to trivialize gun violence, but to hopefully put it into perspective, and hopefully mitigate knee-jerk reactions. I am a strong proponent of "better laws, better enforced" instead of an unended cascade of more laws that are ineffective, unenforceable, or unconstitutional.
Posted on February 22 at 12:50 a.m.
Georgy said, "HOV or commuter lanes have not worked in California. To few cars use them while others cars in the single-use lanes sit in traffic polluting the air. The State has recognized this and is now letting hybrid single-use cars use them. So if you have the money to buy an expensive hybrid or Tesla Roadster, you get to use the commuter lane. Class system transportation in all it's glory."
I think you're logic is a bit reversed there. HOV lanes reward carpoolers; the congestion is because most people who can afford their own car insist on driving their own car. The irony of "class-based transportation" is that people pay more to sit in traffic.
Back to the primary article, what exactly is the basis of the MA's objection / suggestion of alternate plans? Is it really simply based on aesthetic merit alone? That's what I am taking from this....
On Montecitans Pull Rank on Caltrans
Posted on January 11 at 11:03 p.m.
@KV, that actually, and literally, made me laugh out loud.
I signed in just to give ya the hat tip.
On Live Ammo Burning Inside San Marcos Pass Yurt
Posted on December 28 at 12:48 a.m.
I guess it's validating to Kimoko and Martha that their objection to the rodeo is being challenged not in defense of its pointless cruelty and barbarism, but as random personal attacks at them and those who agree with them.
"The rodeo is promoting cruelty; please don't promote the rodeo." "Oh yeah, well you're a lousy feminist!""Um... what?"
On Cruelty Not Sport
Posted on December 28 at 12:37 a.m.
To clarify, I hope: St Francis Hospital in Santa Barbara was no longer financially viable. Increased operating costs, decreased market share, and the final straw being the new government-mandated sesmic requirements: rebuild, refit, or shut-down. They chose to close, and then Cottage bought the abandoned facility (if I understood my sources correctly).
Like small independent farms, factories, etc, stand-alone hospitals are increasingly bought out or closed down. It's just not as financially viable. The rehabilitation hospital, Goleta Valley, and Santa Ynez hospitals all are still operating as they are because they merged with / were bought by Cottage. If they hadn't, they would either have closed or been bought by some out-of-town corporate hospital system.
On Cottage Housing Spoken For
Posted on October 14 at 3:18 a.m.
The 154 is notoriously dangerous due to the way people drive (primarily way too fast). I avoid taking the pass if possible for that very reason. And yet you are complaining because there is... too much law enforcement... enforcing the law?
Perhaps they are there precisely because it's such a dangerous stretch of road? No? Don't buy it? Consider this: could the CHP use that corridor to "garner income" if people weren't so reliably breaking the law there?
I'm going to let that sink in. Meanwhile I'll assume you are just angry about your ticket.
On Doing 70 on the 154
Posted on September 23 at 1:05 a.m.
I think we have two camps, each trying to emerge the victim by pointing out the villany of the other. Sad to say, you're both in the wrong.
Drivers: I've travelled and lived all over the US, and from that experience I have decided that Santa Barbara drivers are the worst I have ever encountered. It's that perfect blending of incompetence with that quintessential Santa Barbara trait, self-entitlement. You don't need to know how to navigate a four-way stop, because it's everyone else's job to not hit you. You self-righteously see cyclics as pests on YOUR road, getting in YOUR way.
Cyclists: You're not innocent either. You share the same self-entitlement, but instead infuse it with willful disregard. You use the roadways, but blatantly ignore all signs and regulations. Fly through stop signs, use turning lanes to pass cars, it doesn't apply to you; oh no, those rules are for schmucks in cars! You self-righteously assume you can do anything, because if something happens it'll be the driver's fault.
I carpool to work, take the bus when it's convenient, and otherwise use my car. I used to bicycle but it's too damn dangerous in this town. Would I prefer a more bicycle-friendly town? Absolutely. Are the criminal antics of a handful of morons on bicycles the way to effect change? Absolutely not.
On Thou Shalt Have No False Dogs Before Me
Posted on September 22 at 9:51 p.m.
There are benefits to a large healthcare provider; that weight can be thrown around for good, too. Santa Barbara Rehabilitation Institute, as an independent entity, could no longer stay afloat. Merging with (being bought by, depending on who you ask) Cottage a few years back allowed them to stay open, and the community benefits from having an acute rehab facility, which is rare in a town this small.
On Attorney General Probes Cottage
Posted on September 21 at 11:47 p.m.
"Funding to Planned Parenthood should be done at a personal level. No government office should be contributing to a private agency. If people want to donate money, good for them! But my tax dollars should not be going to a place that provides something (abortion) that I completely disagree with."
By that logic we should abolish tax-exempt status and benefits for religious organizations. If people want to donate money to a church, good for them! But I don't see why we can't collect revenue from a place that advocates something (faiths other than my own) that I completely disagree with.
Why is "equality for all" such an incomprehensible concept for some people? Oh that's right, it's the 'mine first' mentality. It's agreeing to share the cake with everyone else, as long as you are first in line & get as big a piece as you want, even if it screws over the next guy.
Hate to break it to ya, but there's no such thing as "my equality first".
On Time for the ERA