Quotulatiousness

September 4, 2009

“They shot him. Right there in court.”

Filed under: Law — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 12:54

Radley Balko links to the weirdest “cops gone wild” story I’ve encountered in quite a while:

It was just too much, having to return to court twice on the same day to contest yet another traffic ticket, and Fire Chief Don Payne didn’t hesitate to tell the judge what he thought of the police and their speed traps.

The response from cops? They shot him. Right there in court.

Note also the fascinating fact that there are 7 police officers watching over a population of 174 people. That’s an amazing level of “protection” those folks are getting.

Original story here.

Update: Bonus story from Radley’s site, Feds bust doctor for . . . meeting women on the internet. Amazing. Just freakin’ amazing.

The show must go on!

Filed under: Education, Politics — Tags: — Nicholas @ 12:45

David Harsanyi looks at all the reasons it would be a good thing to support President Obama’s schools webcast next week:

Why would anyone want to deprive impressionable school-age children of hearing the inspiring wisdom of the president? Barack Obama is determined to impart his knowledge upon our pliable offspring via webcast across the country next week, and we should not stand in his way.

This is, as they say, a teachable moment. There is nothing to fear. Naturally, teachers and parents, incapable of handling the sheer concentrated intellectual force of such a historic event, have been forwarded a detailed lesson plan by the Department of Education (sic) so that no child will be blinded inadvertently by the dazzling light of hope.

[. . .]

Moreover, if your child is incapable of handling a 20-minute haranguing from a self-important public servant, he will be tragically unprepared for the new world. (Whom do you think he will be dealing with when he needs that hip replacement in 60 years?)

Even if you oppose the president on a political level, it is empirically evident that the more one hears his homilies the less inclined one is to trust him. And Obama’s penchants to lecture us endlessly, to be the center of attention endlessly and to saturate the airwaves and national conversation are clear indications that he believes government is the answer to every societal, religious, economic, and cultural question we face. Why should your kids be immune?

Well, I’m convinced. Just as long as there’s no singing (Monty Python reference, in case it’s too obscure.).

How many blog checkmarks would you need?

Filed under: Books, Media — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 12:38

Jacob Sullum looks at the quaint, old-fashioned notion of internal fact-checking:

When I was a “reporter-researcher” at Fortune during college, the Time Inc. policy was that one verification by book was worth two verifications by newspaper. If I’m remembering the color scheme correctly, the former was a “red check,” which was good enough on its own, whereas the latter was a “black check,” acceptable only in pairs. I may have the colors reversed, but the point is that we all assumed books were more reliable than newspapers (or other periodicals). That was a mistake, I think. While some books categorized as nonfiction, such as reference works and peer-reviewed releases from academic presses, go through some sort of fact checking, the vast majority do not. (They are generally reviewed by lawyers with an eye toward possible libel issues, but you can get lots of things wrong without risking a lawsuit.) In fact, judging from the finished products, I’d say most books are barely edited, let alone checked for accuracy. By contrast, newspaper stories typically are reviewed by two or three editors before they see print. It’s true that books take longer to produce, which gives a conscientious author more time to catch mistakes. Then again, they are a lot longer than newspaper stories, so there is more room for error.

So, how many checkmarks (of a murky shade of orange) would be required for blog references? Can any blogger count that high?

Yesterday, the wine. Today, it’s the candy label.

Filed under: Britain, Humour — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 12:08

After yesterday’s indecent-in-Alabama wine label, today’s outrage is a German candy wrapper that has raised someone’s ire in Britain. Here’s the Telegraph report:

Obscene_candy_wrapper

Simon Simpkins, a father of two, said he was shocked at the “pornographic” poses when he bought the sour candy for his children Benjamin and Ofelia.

Mr Simpkins, of Pontefract, West Yorks, told The Sun: “The lemon and lime are locked in what appears to be a carnal encounter.

“The lime, who I assume to be the gentleman in this coupling, has a particularly lurid expression on his face. I demanded to see the shop manager and, during a heated exchange, my wife became quite distressed and had to sit down in the car park.”

H/T to Christian T. for the link. Roger Henry quickly commented:

I can understand why his wife became distressed and had to sit down in the car-park. Probably overcome with hysterics after watching her husband make an absolute public prat of himself.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Survey of military use of UAV assets

Filed under: Military, Technology — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 08:17

There’s a useful overview of how Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are changing the tactical situation for troops on the ground in this week’s Economist Technology Quarterly section:

Drones are much less expensive to operate than manned warplanes. The cost per flight-hour of Israel’s drone fleet, for example, is less than 5% the cost of its fighter jets, says Antan Israeli, the commander of an Israeli drone squadron. In the past two years the Israeli Defence Forces’ fleet of UAVs has tripled in size. Mr Israeli says that “almost all” IDF ground operations now have drone support.

Of course, small and comparatively slow UAVs are no match for fighter jets when it comes to inspiring awe with roaring flyovers — or shooting down enemy warplanes. Some drones, such as America’s Predator and Reaper, carry missiles or bombs, though most do not. (Countries with “hunter-killer” drones include America, Britain and Israel.) But drones have other strengths that can be just as valuable. In particular, they are unparalleled spies. Operating discreetly, they can intercept radio and mobile-phone communications, and gather intelligence using video, radar, thermal-imaging and other sensors. The data they gather can then be sent instantly via wireless and satellite links to an operations room halfway around the world — or to the hand-held devices of soldiers below. In military jargon, troops without UAV support are “disadvantaged”.

Of course, it wouldn’t be a current-day Economist article without at least one gloomy caveat:

There is a troubling side to all this. Operators can now safely manipulate battlefield weapons from control rooms half a world away, as if they are playing a video game. Drones also enable a government to avoid the political risk of putting combat boots on foreign soil. This makes it easier to start a war, says P.W. Singer, the American author of “Wired for War”, a recent bestseller about robotic warfare. But like them or not, drones are here to stay. Armed forces that master them are not just securing their hold on air superiority — they are also dramatically increasing its value.

I don’t particularly credit this risk . . . as Chris Taylor pointed out in a comment on a recent post, “degrading the comm links is the easiest way to render UCAVs largely toothless. In their current incarnation they are only good for permissive environments where the other guy can’t really harm your aircraft or comms. When they get autonomous then they’ll be more practical for warfighting against advanced foes.”

Actually, go read the comment thread on that post. Between Chris and “cirby”, I think they cover the technical side very well indeed.

Powered by WordPress