🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ef911acc-f78e-4722...@googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc  <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 1:18:31 PM UTC-6, durg...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Not sure if I believe the posting dates I'm seeing... did Google Groups exist in 1997?
>
>USENET existed in 1997. And, in fact, so did Deja News, which was what Google 
>bought and made Google Groups from.


1997 had a mature usenet. 1977 is more doubtful.

-- mrr

"Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message 
news:p1356d-ila.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
> In article <ef911acc-f78e-4722...@googlegroups.com>,
> Quadibloc  <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 1:18:31 PM UTC-6, durg...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure if I believe the posting dates I'm seeing... did Google Groups 
>>> exist in 1997?
>>
>>USENET existed in 1997. And, in fact, so did Deja News, which was what 
>>Google
>>bought and made Google Groups from.
>
>
> 1997 had a mature usenet. 1977 is more doubtful.

Yes. I started in 1994.

gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339 <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
> "Morten Reistad" <first@last.name.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:p1356d-ila.ln1@sambook.reistad.name...
>> In article <ef911acc-f78e-4722...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Quadibloc  <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 1:18:31 PM UTC-6, durg...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Not sure if I believe the posting dates I'm seeing... did Google Groups 
>>>> exist in 1997?
>>> 
>>> USENET existed in 1997. And, in fact, so did Deja News, which was what 
>>> Google
>>> bought and made Google Groups from.
>> 
>> 
>> 1997 had a mature usenet. 1977 is more doubtful.
> 
> Yes. I started in 1994.
> 

I don't even remember now, but  I do recall chipping messages  into a stone
tablet and sending them by camel caravan.

-- 
Pete

On Thursday, July 21, 2016 at 6:02:07 AM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:

> I don't even remember now, but  I do recall chipping messages  into a stone
> tablet and sending them by camel caravan.

Have you visited Mars - after an encounter with hostile Apache Indians - by any 
chance?

John Savard

Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Thursday, July 21, 2016 at 6:02:07 AM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
> 
>> I don't even remember now, but  I do recall chipping messages  into a stone
>> tablet and sending them by camel caravan.
> 
> Have you visited Mars - after an encounter with hostile Apache Indians - by any 
> chance?
> 

Yes, I left my thoat double-parked when I came back.

-- 
Pete

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:22:33 -0400, Bud Frede wrote:

> Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> writes:
> 
>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, July 21, 2016 at 6:02:07 AM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I don't even remember now, but  I do recall chipping messages  into a
>>>> stone tablet and sending them by camel caravan.
>>> 
>>> Have you visited Mars - after an encounter with hostile Apache Indians
>>> - by any chance?
>>> 
>>> 
>> Yes, I left my thoat double-parked when I came back.
> 
> After reading a number of references to ER Burroughs in Robert
> Heinlein's books and talking to other people that enjoyed them, I wanted
> to like the Barsoom books.
> 
> I didn't particularly care for the several that I read, although they
> were better than the Tarzan books I tried. I kept thinking, "When is it
> going to get good, like I've heard people say it is?"
> 
> Heinlein also talked up EE Smith. I tried some of the Lensman books and
> Skylark books and they're not my cup of tea either.
> 
> I'll go for a trifecta. One of my friends tried to get me interested in
> the Conan books. They put me to sleep.
> 
> I'm sure there is someone out there who will denounce me for not knowing
> great fiction when I see it, but I'll just have to hang my head in shame
> and live with it.

I had exactly the same experience as you. You are not alone.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 12:51:09 PM UTC-6, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:22:33 -0400, Bud Frede wrote:

> > After reading a number of references to ER Burroughs in Robert
> > Heinlein's books and talking to other people that enjoyed them, I wanted
> > to like the Barsoom books.

> > I didn't particularly care for the several that I read, although they
> > were better than the Tarzan books I tried. I kept thinking, "When is it
> > going to get good, like I've heard people say it is?"

> I had exactly the same experience as you. You are not alone.

Well, if you're looking for something to take seriously - something that has 
meat to it, something that deals with ideas - you will be disappointed in Edgar 
Rice Burroughs' Barsoom novels.

All they are is melodramatic adventures that give the reader a rollicking good 
time - like, say, the James Bond novels of Ian Fleming. And not everyone enjoys 
those either; if you _are_ looking for what someone called "cotton candy for 
the mind", you will still also want to choose a particular genre that is 
gratifying to you.

Since the Burroughs oeuvre consists of deathless literature that is still not 
great literature, not... finding it useful... is nothing to be ashamed of.

John Savard

On 2016-07-22, Bud Frede <fr...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> On Thursday, July 21, 2016 at 6:02:07 AM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I don't even remember now, but  I do recall chipping messages  into a stone
>>>> tablet and sending them by camel caravan.
>>> 
>>> Have you visited Mars - after an encounter with hostile Apache Indians - by any 
>>> chance?
>>> 
>>
>> Yes, I left my thoat double-parked when I came back.
>
> After reading a number of references to ER Burroughs in Robert
> Heinlein's books and talking to other people that enjoyed them, I wanted
> to like the Barsoom books.
>
> I didn't particularly care for the several that I read, although they
> were better than the Tarzan books I tried. I kept thinking, "When is it
> going to get good, like I've heard people say it is?"
>
> Heinlein also talked up EE Smith. I tried some of the Lensman books and
> Skylark books and they're not my cup of tea either.
>
> I'll go for a trifecta. One of my friends tried to get me interested in
> the Conan books. They put me to sleep.
>
> I'm sure there is someone out there who will denounce me for not knowing
> great fiction when I see it, but I'll just have to hang my head in shame
> and live with it.

Almost all fantasy-fiction books, say 1880-1950 were racist. Heinlein was 
a good writer, but a psyc* would spend weeks dredging his deepest needs.
Then psych* aare full of shi* anyway. I must reread Clarke's
 "The City and the Stars" again.


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
 .
  .
...

On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 1:34:06 PM UTC-6, ma...@mail.com wrote:

> Then psych* aare full of shi* anyway.

There's definitely one former science-fiction author who strongly agreed with 
that sentiment... but then, they thought he was practicing quackery in their 
field.

John Savard

On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 3:34:06 PM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote:

> Almost all fantasy-fiction books, say 1880-1950 were racist. Heinlein was 
> a good writer, but a psyc* would spend weeks dredging his deepest needs.
> Then psych* aare full of shi* anyway. I must reread Clarke's
>  "The City and the Stars" again.

Lots of old books were racist.  I was surprised they had us read
Mark Twain in public school due to its racism and liberal use of
the n-word, as in "nobody was killed except some n-----s".

I read a 1910 engineering book which explicitly recommended
against utilizing "colored labor", despite the cheaper price.

Even Eleanor Roosevelt's memoirs--going by today's standards--
would not pass muster with political correctness, and she was a
fighter for civil rights.

In article <798342bb-e74b-4f0a...@googlegroups.com>, 
hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com says...
> 
> On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 3:34:06 PM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> 
> > Almost all fantasy-fiction books, say 1880-1950 were racist. Heinlein was 
> > a good writer, but a psyc* would spend weeks dredging his deepest needs.
> > Then psych* aare full of shi* anyway. I must reread Clarke's
> >  "The City and the Stars" again.
> 
> Lots of old books were racist.  I was surprised they had us read
> Mark Twain in public school due to its racism and liberal use of
> the n-word, as in "nobody was killed except some n-----s".

For certain values.  Twain was an abolitionist.  Painting him as a 
racist is reaching.
 
> I read a 1910 engineering book which explicitly recommended
> against utilizing "colored labor", despite the cheaper price.
> 
> Even Eleanor Roosevelt's memoirs--going by today's standards--
> would not pass muster with political correctness, and she was a
> fighter for civil rights.

<hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 3:34:06 PM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> 
>> Almost all fantasy-fiction books, say 1880-1950 were racist. Heinlein was 
>> a good writer, but a psyc* would spend weeks dredging his deepest needs.
>> Then psych* aare full of shi* anyway. I must reread Clarke's
>> "The City and the Stars" again.
> 
> Lots of old books were racist.  I was surprised they had us read
> Mark Twain in public school due to its racism and liberal use of
> the n-word, as in "nobody was killed except some n-----s".

The funny thing is, Twain was not a racist, and his portrail of Jim was
groundbreaking for the time.  Jim was shown as a human being and not a
watermellon eating jive-monkey.

> 
> I read a 1910 engineering book which explicitly recommended
> against utilizing "colored labor", despite the cheaper price.
> 
> Even Eleanor Roosevelt's memoirs--going by today's standards--
> would not pass muster with political correctness, and she was a
> fighter for civil rights.
> 

A lot of old stuff makes me cringe, and I'm not particularly PC.

-- 
Pete

Bud Frede <fr...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> writes:
> 
>> On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 12:51:09 PM UTC-6, Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:22:33 -0400, Bud Frede wrote:
>> 
>>>> After reading a number of references to ER Burroughs in Robert
>>>> Heinlein's books and talking to other people that enjoyed them, I wanted
>>>> to like the Barsoom books.
>> 
>>>> I didn't particularly care for the several that I read, although they
>>>> were better than the Tarzan books I tried. I kept thinking, "When is it
>>>> going to get good, like I've heard people say it is?"
>> 
>>> I had exactly the same experience as you. You are not alone.
>> 
>> Well, if you're looking for something to take seriously - something that has 
>> meat to it, something that deals with ideas - you will be disappointed in Edgar 
>> Rice Burroughs' Barsoom novels.
> 
> I read more serious things too, but in this case I wasn't looking for
> anything very deep. 
> 
>> 
>> All they are is melodramatic adventures that give the reader a rollicking good 
>> time - like, say, the James Bond novels of Ian Fleming. And not everyone enjoys 
>> those either; if you _are_ looking for what someone called "cotton candy for 
>> the mind", you will still also want to choose a particular genre that is 
>> gratifying to you.
> 
> I do like the Fleming Bond novels. I've read them several times since I
> first read them as a teenager. I also really like Chandler and
> Hammett. I've even read a Mickey Spillane novel and it killed some
> time. :) I got stuck overnight at an airport and there wasn't anything
> really worth reading, and beggars can't be choosers...

I'm not sure I ever read Hammett, but Chandler seems to have held up quite
well.  One thing I like are his descriptions of an L.A.  that's long gone.

> 
>> 
>> Since the Burroughs oeuvre consists of deathless literature that is still not 
>> great literature, not... finding it useful... is nothing to be ashamed of.
> 
> It might be useful for starting fires, although these days with ebooks
> you can't even use a book for warmth or to wipe your posterior. (The
> Sears website just would not have done the trick when most houses had an outhouse.
> 
> 



-- 
Pete

On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 8:34:14 PM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article <798342bb-e74b-4f0a...@googlegroups.com>, 
> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com says...
> > On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 3:34:06 PM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote:

> > > Almost all fantasy-fiction books, say 1880-1950 were racist. Heinlein was 
> > > a good writer, but a psyc* would spend weeks dredging his deepest needs.
> > > Then psych* aare full of shi* anyway. I must reread Clarke's
> > >  "The City and the Stars" again.

> > Lots of old books were racist.  I was surprised they had us read
> > Mark Twain in public school due to its racism and liberal use of
> > the n-word, as in "nobody was killed except some n-----s".

> For certain values.  Twain was an abolitionist.  Painting him as a 
> racist is reaching.

And the story Huckleberry Finn has, as a major element in it, a young boy, in 
his innocence and naivete, having difficulties understanding why it is wrong, 
as the adult world claims, to help a runaway slave to escape.

For Twain to attempt to shield his readers from words that were used every day 
in his time would then have been quite useless, only making him subject to 
ridicule. When slavery was the law of the land, the battle for what is itself 
ridiculed by calling it political correctness - originally a Soviet term - lay 
in the future.

John Savard

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Bud Frede wrote:

> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>
>> On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 3:34:06 PM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Almost all fantasy-fiction books, say 1880-1950 were racist. Heinlein was
>>> a good writer, but a psyc* would spend weeks dredging his deepest needs.
>>> Then psych* aare full of shi* anyway. I must reread Clarke's
>>>  "The City and the Stars" again.
>>
>> Lots of old books were racist.  I was surprised they had us read
>> Mark Twain in public school due to its racism and liberal use of
>> the n-word, as in "nobody was killed except some n-----s".
>
> The public school I went to was "progressive," so we didn't read Tom
> Sawyer or Huck Finn. I read them anyway, and it hasn't seemed to hurt me
> none.
>
> I got in trouble when I was 10 because I got caught in class reading
> "1984." I was supposed to be reading "A Wrinkle in Time," but had
> already read that a couple of years before and considered it to be a bit
> childish by that point.
>
In grade 7, I tried to read a "Get Smart" novel (from the tv series), we 
were supposed to read something and write a book report.  The teacher made 
me pick another book.

What was amusing was that I was reading hobby electronic and ham 
magazines, as many as I could get my hands on, so I was reading higher 
than my grade, but that apparently didn't count.  I picked the Get Smart 
book as "escapist" reading, something different, not because it was 
"simple".

I ended up rereading "Have Spacesuit WIll Travel" by Heinlein, which 
starts with him refurbishing a space suit, sort of on the level of what I 
was doing after school in hobby electronics.

   Michael

Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> writes:
> In grade 7, I tried to read a "Get Smart" novel (from the tv series),
> we were supposed to read something and write a book report.  The
> teacher made me pick another book.
>

I remember, very vividly, in Grade 6 we had to do weekly book reports,
and the teacher had a very specific format he wanted -- characters,
setting, a couple of other details that I've forgotten, and a small
fraction of pupil-written narrative.

At the time, I was getting seriously interested in electronics, so my
free-time reading was mostly 7400 and 4000-series databooks.  

In an effort to subvert his system, I did one on an 8080 programming
manual -- the "characters" where "The Accumulator", the "HL Register
Pair" ... Setting was "8 Kilobytes of read-write Memory".

I got a "C" on that report.

It frustrated my father no end, that I voraciously read anything I could
get my hands on, and had a vocabulary that far exceeded my peers, but I
was getting a "D" in Reading, because what I read did not fit into
Mr. George's pattern of what a 12 year old should be reading.

In article <87shv0t...@senguio.mx>, lawr...@senguio.mx says...
> 
> Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> writes:
> > In grade 7, I tried to read a "Get Smart" novel (from the tv series),
> > we were supposed to read something and write a book report.  The
> > teacher made me pick another book.
> >
> 
> I remember, very vividly, in Grade 6 we had to do weekly book reports,
> and the teacher had a very specific format he wanted -- characters,
> setting, a couple of other details that I've forgotten, and a small
> fraction of pupil-written narrative.
> 
> At the time, I was getting seriously interested in electronics, so my
> free-time reading was mostly 7400 and 4000-series databooks.  
> 
> In an effort to subvert his system, I did one on an 8080 programming
> manual -- the "characters" where "The Accumulator", the "HL Register
> Pair" ... Setting was "8 Kilobytes of read-write Memory".
> 
> I got a "C" on that report.
> 
> It frustrated my father no end, that I voraciously read anything I could
> get my hands on, and had a vocabulary that far exceeded my peers, but I
> was getting a "D" in Reading, because what I read did not fit into
> Mr. George's pattern of what a 12 year old should be reading.

Sounds like Mr. George is an example of why throwing money at the 
schools isn't going to fix them.

On Saturday, July 23, 2016 at 8:24:41 AM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
 
> > Even Eleanor Roosevelt's memoirs--going by today's standards--
> > would not pass muster with political correctness, and she was a
> > fighter for civil rights.

> A lot of old stuff makes me cringe, and I'm not particularly PC.

The contrast does show how far society has come.  When I think about
social expectations in terms of race or even ethnicity were 40
years ago, I shudder; times have changed a lot.

Back in the 1930s-1950s, world society was quite 'classified', that
is, social classes were a big part of life, including what class
one belonged to.  The U.S. prided itself, correctly, on not always
basing class on birth, that is, people could and sometimes did, with 
extremely hard work and talent, rise to a higher social class than 
birth.  In many other countries, birth played a much larger role.
In the U.S.S.R., they claimed to be a classless society but in
reality had sharply defined classes, and parentage played a big role.

Admittedly, I don't IBM didn't hire anyone except 'well-bred' WASPs
until the 1950s, when it was growing so fast that it was desperate
for intelligent talent.  (Even then, after hiring it trained its
people to become well bred WASPs.)  I think (based on histories)
that the other computer companies were more diverse.

However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
"knapsack of privilege".  

On Saturday, July 23, 2016 at 1:04:53 PM UTC-4, Lawrence Statton NK1G wrote:
> It frustrated my father no end, that I voraciously read anything I could
> get my hands on, and had a vocabulary that far exceeded my peers, but I
> was getting a "D" in Reading, because what I read did not fit into
> Mr. George's pattern of what a 12 year old should be reading.

It was probably the school district's standards that had to be met.

In one sense, I could see the school's point of view--technical manuals
and the like usually don't deal with characters and emotion, and the
other elements of 'literature'.

Schools were very sensitive if kids were reading literature that
contained sensual matter, such as uncensored Shakespear, especially
if it was intended for older kids.  (By the time we were seniors,
some of the books we were assigned had some language and plots
that probably wouldn't be good for a junior high kid*.)

However, if a kid was reading general material of a higher grade,
our schools were happy with that and rewarded the kid.


* We were told to watch a Shakespear production on PBS.  It turned
out to have topless character.  The boys who missed it were
disappointed.

On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
> "knapsack of privilege".
>

Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and 
don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" 
before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a 
jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is 
admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but 
an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".

I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one, 
you're less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.

"J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> writes:

> In article <87shv0t...@senguio.mx>, lawr...@senguio.mx says...
>> 
>> Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> writes:
>> > In grade 7, I tried to read a "Get Smart" novel (from the tv series),
>> > we were supposed to read something and write a book report.  The
>> > teacher made me pick another book.
>> >
>> 
>> I remember, very vividly, in Grade 6 we had to do weekly book reports,
>> and the teacher had a very specific format he wanted -- characters,
>> setting, a couple of other details that I've forgotten, and a small
>> fraction of pupil-written narrative.
>> 
>> At the time, I was getting seriously interested in electronics, so my
>> free-time reading was mostly 7400 and 4000-series databooks.  
>> 
>> In an effort to subvert his system, I did one on an 8080 programming
>> manual -- the "characters" where "The Accumulator", the "HL Register
>> Pair" ... Setting was "8 Kilobytes of read-write Memory".
>> 
>> I got a "C" on that report.
>> 
>> It frustrated my father no end, that I voraciously read anything I could
>> get my hands on, and had a vocabulary that far exceeded my peers, but I
>> was getting a "D" in Reading, because what I read did not fit into
>> Mr. George's pattern of what a 12 year old should be reading.
>
> Sounds like Mr. George is an example of why throwing money at the 
> schools isn't going to fix them.

Really?

You have evidence that Mr. George was highly paid but incompetent anyway?

-- 
Dan Espen

In article <nn161t$nrq$1...@dont-email.me>, des...@verizon.net says...
> 
> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > In article <87shv0t...@senguio.mx>, lawr...@senguio.mx says...
> >> 
> >> Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> writes:
> >> > In grade 7, I tried to read a "Get Smart" novel (from the tv series),
> >> > we were supposed to read something and write a book report.  The
> >> > teacher made me pick another book.
> >> >
> >> 
> >> I remember, very vividly, in Grade 6 we had to do weekly book reports,
> >> and the teacher had a very specific format he wanted -- characters,
> >> setting, a couple of other details that I've forgotten, and a small
> >> fraction of pupil-written narrative.
> >> 
> >> At the time, I was getting seriously interested in electronics, so my
> >> free-time reading was mostly 7400 and 4000-series databooks.  
> >> 
> >> In an effort to subvert his system, I did one on an 8080 programming
> >> manual -- the "characters" where "The Accumulator", the "HL Register
> >> Pair" ... Setting was "8 Kilobytes of read-write Memory".
> >> 
> >> I got a "C" on that report.
> >> 
> >> It frustrated my father no end, that I voraciously read anything I could
> >> get my hands on, and had a vocabulary that far exceeded my peers, but I
> >> was getting a "D" in Reading, because what I read did not fit into
> >> Mr. George's pattern of what a 12 year old should be reading.
> >
> > Sounds like Mr. George is an example of why throwing money at the 
> > schools isn't going to fix them.
> 
> Really?
> 
> You have evidence that Mr. George was highly paid but incompetent anyway?

He presumably passed all government requirements for obtaining a 
teaching certificate.  How would paying him more have made him more 
competent?  Or is it  your suggestion that if we spent more on education 
he would have been fired and replaced with someone better?  If so, 
consider that the union would have a good bit to say about his 
termination without cause.

On 2016-07-24, Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
>> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
>> "knapsack of privilege".
>>
>
> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and 
> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" 
> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a 
> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is 
> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but 
> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
>
> I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one, 
> you're less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.

I am told that, wearing a bulletproof vest, and being shot by
a .375 (or whatever) is not an enjoyable experience, and as 
pointed out in "Dumb and Dumber", wont help if one is shot 
in the head.


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
 .
  .
...

In article <slrnnp95rq...@Smaus.org>, ma...@mail.com says...
> 
> On 2016-07-24, Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> > On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> >
> >> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
> >> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
> >> "knapsack of privilege".
> >>
> >
> > Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and 
> > don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" 
> > before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a 
> > jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is 
> > admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but 
> > an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
> >
> > I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one, 
> > you're less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.
> 
> I am told that, wearing a bulletproof vest, and being shot by
> a .375 (or whatever) is not an enjoyable experience, and as 
> pointed out in "Dumb and Dumber", wont help if one is shot 
> in the head.

Being shot is not in general an enjoyable experience.  How much injury 
you get depends on the vest.  If it has solid inserts you'll get less 
blunt force trauma than if it doesn't, but it's also a heavier, stiffer 
vest.  I recall a demonstration by one of the suppliers of such vests in 
which he shoved a telephone directory (big thick big-city variety) 
between the vest and him before taking the shot.

In article <slrnnp95rq...@Smaus.org>,  <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>On 2016-07-24, Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
>>> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
>>> "knapsack of privilege".
>>>
>>
>> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and 
>> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" 
>> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a 
>> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is 
>> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but 
>> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
>>
>> I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one, 
>> you're less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.
>
>I am told that, wearing a bulletproof vest, and being shot by
>a .375 (or whatever) is not an enjoyable experience, and as 
>pointed out in "Dumb and Dumber", wont help if one is shot 
>in the head.

ISTR that wearing a vest makes it MORE likely that you are actually
shot, but the consequences are less. For one, you are not as likely
to run for cover on the slightest hint of being hit.

It is about as pleasant as having your torso hit by a baseball bat
in the hands of some professional hitter. There ARE deaths from the
use of vests, too.

Yes, you are likely to be in a pretty incoherent state for the first
minutes after the hit. If conscious at all.

-- mrr

"J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> writes:

> In article <nn161t$nrq$1...@dont-email.me>, des...@verizon.net says...
>> 
>> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>> > In article <87shv0t...@senguio.mx>, lawr...@senguio.mx says...
>> >> 
>> >> Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> writes:
>> >> > In grade 7, I tried to read a "Get Smart" novel (from the tv
>> >> > series), we were supposed to read something and write a book
>> >> > report.  The teacher made me pick another book.
>> >> >
>> >> 
>> >> I remember, very vividly, in Grade 6 we had to do weekly book
>> >> reports, and the teacher had a very specific format he wanted --
>> >> characters, setting, a couple of other details that I've
>> >> forgotten, and a small fraction of pupil-written narrative.
>> >> 
>> >> At the time, I was getting seriously interested in electronics, so
>> >> my free-time reading was mostly 7400 and 4000-series databooks.
>> >> 
>> >> In an effort to subvert his system, I did one on an 8080
>> >> programming manual -- the "characters" where "The Accumulator",
>> >> the "HL Register Pair" ... Setting was "8 Kilobytes of read-write
>> >> Memory".
>> >> 
>> >> I got a "C" on that report.
>> >> 
>> >> It frustrated my father no end, that I voraciously read anything I
>> >> could get my hands on, and had a vocabulary that far exceeded my
>> >> peers, but I was getting a "D" in Reading, because what I read did
>> >> not fit into Mr. George's pattern of what a 12 year old should be
>> >> reading.
>> >
>> > Sounds like Mr. George is an example of why throwing money at the
>> > schools isn't going to fix them.
>> 
>> Really?
>> 
>> You have evidence that Mr. George was highly paid but incompetent
>> anyway?
>
> He presumably passed all government requirements for obtaining a
> teaching certificate.  How would paying him more have made him more
> competent?  Or is it your suggestion that if we spent more on
> education he would have been fired and replaced with someone better?
> If so, consider that the union would have a good bit to say about his
> termination without cause.

I read your reply and I'm still at a loss to understand how this
anecdote supports your assertion that this is evidence that paying
teachers more would have not resulted in a better outcome.

Sounds to me like you just took this anecdote as an opportunity to push
your right wing ideology.

-- 
Dan Espen

On 2016-07-24, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrnnp95rq...@Smaus.org>,  <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>>On 2016-07-24, Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>> On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
>>>> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
>>>> "knapsack of privilege".
>>>>
>>>
>>> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and 
>>> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" 
>>> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a 
>>> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is 
>>> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but 
>>> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
>>>
>>> I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one, 
>>> you're less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.
>>
>>I am told that, wearing a bulletproof vest, and being shot by
>>a .375 (or whatever) is not an enjoyable experience, and as 
>>pointed out in "Dumb and Dumber", wont help if one is shot 
>>in the head.
>
> ISTR that wearing a vest makes it MORE likely that you are actually
> shot, but the consequences are less. For one, you are not as likely
> to run for cover on the slightest hint of being hit.
>
> It is about as pleasant as having your torso hit by a baseball bat
> in the hands of some professional hitter. There ARE deaths from the
> use of vests, too.
>
> Yes, you are likely to be in a pretty incoherent state for the first
> minutes after the hit. If conscious at all.
>
> -- mrr
>

I once saw a demonstration of firing a (.375?) special at a truck
engine block, and it went through it like paper. Picking the right
spot helped.


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
 .
  .
...

In article <nn2k5m$gbm$1...@dont-email.me>, des...@verizon.net says...
> 
> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > In article <nn161t$nrq$1...@dont-email.me>, des...@verizon.net says...
> >> 
> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clark...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > In article <87shv0t...@senguio.mx>, lawr...@senguio.mx says...
> >> >> 
> >> >> Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> writes:
> >> >> > In grade 7, I tried to read a "Get Smart" novel (from the tv
> >> >> > series), we were supposed to read something and write a book
> >> >> > report.  The teacher made me pick another book.
> >> >> >
> >> >> 
> >> >> I remember, very vividly, in Grade 6 we had to do weekly book
> >> >> reports, and the teacher had a very specific format he wanted --
> >> >> characters, setting, a couple of other details that I've
> >> >> forgotten, and a small fraction of pupil-written narrative.
> >> >> 
> >> >> At the time, I was getting seriously interested in electronics, so
> >> >> my free-time reading was mostly 7400 and 4000-series databooks.
> >> >> 
> >> >> In an effort to subvert his system, I did one on an 8080
> >> >> programming manual -- the "characters" where "The Accumulator",
> >> >> the "HL Register Pair" ... Setting was "8 Kilobytes of read-write
> >> >> Memory".
> >> >> 
> >> >> I got a "C" on that report.
> >> >> 
> >> >> It frustrated my father no end, that I voraciously read anything I
> >> >> could get my hands on, and had a vocabulary that far exceeded my
> >> >> peers, but I was getting a "D" in Reading, because what I read did
> >> >> not fit into Mr. George's pattern of what a 12 year old should be
> >> >> reading.
> >> >
> >> > Sounds like Mr. George is an example of why throwing money at the
> >> > schools isn't going to fix them.
> >> 
> >> Really?
> >> 
> >> You have evidence that Mr. George was highly paid but incompetent
> >> anyway?
> >
> > He presumably passed all government requirements for obtaining a
> > teaching certificate.  How would paying him more have made him more
> > competent?  Or is it your suggestion that if we spent more on
> > education he would have been fired and replaced with someone better?
> > If so, consider that the union would have a good bit to say about his
> > termination without cause.
> 
> I read your reply and I'm still at a loss to understand how this
> anecdote supports your assertion that this is evidence that paying
> teachers more would have not resulted in a better outcome.
> 
> Sounds to me like you just took this anecdote as an opportunity to push
> your right wing ideology.

Fine, you tell me the logic by which paying more for education would 
remove this person from the system and eliminate the sort of training in 
teaching colleges that leads to his behavior.

On 7/24/2016 6:25 AM, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> On 2016-07-24, Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
>>> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
>>> "knapsack of privilege".
>>>
>>
>> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and
>> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege"
>> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a
>> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is
>> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but
>> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
>>
>> I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one,
>> you're less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.
>
> I am told that, wearing a bulletproof vest, and being shot by
> a .375 (or whatever) is not an enjoyable experience,

".357", probably.  Since US cops mostly use (semi)automatic pistols 
these days, substitute 9mm or .40S&W, which aren't quite as energetic. 
But in any case, that is why a knapsack of privilege is superior, 
because it protects you before they pull the trigger. It would help 
afterwards, too, but being surrounded by a bevy of politicians fanning 
you and declaiming about what a terrible mistake has occurred isn't 
really the desired outcome, though it's still better than having the 
cop empty his pistol into you and leave you lying on the pavement.

On Sat, 23 Jul 2016, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:


> * We were told to watch a Shakespear production on PBS.  It turned
> out to have topless character.  The boys who missed it were
> disappointed.
>
Was that the theatre release of "Romeo & Juliet" with Olivia Hussey?  I've 
never watched it, but apparently it matches the times it was made.

   Michael

On Sat, 23 Jul 2016, Dave Garland wrote:

> On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
>> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
>> "knapsack of privilege".
>> 
>
> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and don't 
> believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" before. My first 
> thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a jug of wine, but what 
> do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is admittedly more than my control 
> search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but an order of magnitude less than "sack 
> of cats".
>
> I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one, you're 
> less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.
>
I figured he made up that term, to represent the sort of things being said 
now.

"White privilege" applies to some but not everyone. If I was black, I'd 
have a much easier time understanding all those times I did get stopped 
while walking along a busy street in the daytime.  Black people (well 
mostly it's men) who have written about their experiences are the ones who 
match my experience.  I remember one time when we were blockading a Litton 
factory (and we couldn't get arrested where we were), someone talking 
about some arrests acted like the women had been violated because they 
were strip searched.  And maybe they were, and maybe it was just a routine 
search.  For many people, that is their first encounter with the law, and 
they want it to be about something more than a routine experience.

   Michael

On Sun, 24 Jul 2016, ma...@mail.com wrote:

> On 2016-07-24, Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
>>> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
>>> "knapsack of privilege".
>>>
>>
>> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and
>> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege"
>> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a
>> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is
>> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but
>> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
>>
>> I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one,
>> you're less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.
>
> I am told that, wearing a bulletproof vest, and being shot by
> a .375 (or whatever) is not an enjoyable experience, and as
> pointed out in "Dumb and Dumber", wont help if one is shot
> in the head.
>
Yes, from watching tv shows and movies, the force of the bullet is still 
there, just more spread out.  So it doesn't go in you, but the vest 
spreads the force out, so there's a bad bruising.  And if tv is correct, 
it can knock the wind out of you.  This is certainly a plot point, someone 
shot and everyone else believing they are dead, only for them to recover 
and reveal the bulletproof vest.

And real SWAT guys where helmets with visors, so their heads are 
reasonably protected.

   Michael

In article <alpine.LNX.2.02.1...@darkstar.example.org>, 
et...@ncf.ca says...
> 
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2016, Dave Garland wrote:
> 
> > On 7/23/2016 2:54 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> >
> >> However, I think today, some folks push the racial issue too far,
> >> such as by seeking out things like "structural racism" or the
> >> "knapsack of privilege".
> >> 
> >
> > Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and don't 
> > believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" before. My first 
> > thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a jug of wine, but what 
> > do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is admittedly more than my control 
> > search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but an order of magnitude less than "sack 
> > of cats".
> >
> > I guess it's sorta like a bulletproof vest, if you're wearing one, you're 
> > less likely to be shot by the cop in a traffic stop.
> >
> I figured he made up that term, to represent the sort of things being said 
> now.

It seems to be a term made up by someone named Peggy Mcintosh and 
distributed or published as part of "The National SEED Project" where 
SEED is an acronym for "Seeking Educational Equity and Diversity".  
Google "Peggy McIntosho Knapsack" and you'll find quite a lot about it.
 
> "White privilege" applies to some but not everyone. If I was black, I'd 
> have a much easier time understanding all those times I did get stopped 
> while walking along a busy street in the daytime.  Black people (well 
> mostly it's men) who have written about their experiences are the ones who 
> match my experience.  I remember one time when we were blockading a Litton 
> factory (and we couldn't get arrested where we were), someone talking 
> about some arrests acted like the women had been violated because they 
> were strip searched.  And maybe they were, and maybe it was just a routine 
> search.  For many people, that is their first encounter with the law, and 
> they want it to be about something more than a routine experience.
> 
>    Michael

On 2016-07-24, Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2016, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>
>> * We were told to watch a Shakespear production on PBS.  It turned
>> out to have topless character.  The boys who missed it were
>> disappointed.
>>
> Was that the theatre release of "Romeo & Juliet" with Olivia Hussey?  I've 
> never watched it, but apparently it matches the times it was made.
>
>    Michael
AFAIK, women were not allowed onstage in Shakespear's time?,,
so 'topless' would be disappointing.


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
 .
  .
...

On Saturday, July 23, 2016 at 10:34:43 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote:

> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and 
> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" 
> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a 
> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is 
> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but 
> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".

FWIW, here is the article that the phrase appeared in.  You can
judge it for yourself.  Personally, I didn't care for the commentary;
I don't think "racism is baked into our society".

http://www.chestnuthilllocal.com/2016/07/13/unpacking-the-knapsack-of-privilege/

Also, about two months earlier, two kids were shot while walking
down a street in that area.  Supposedly it was gang related.  There
was some brief news coverage and the incident faded from memory.  What
bothered me was zero community outcry over the brutal murders, no
raging protestors, nothing.  I don't want people shot by cops for
no reason, but I don't want people shot period.  

On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 2:23:37 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:

> "White privilege" applies to some but not everyone. If I was black, I'd 
> have a much easier time understanding all those times I did get stopped 
> while walking along a busy street in the daytime.  Black people (well 
> mostly it's men) who have written about their experiences are the ones who 
> match my experience.  I remember one time when we were blockading a Litton 
> factory (and we couldn't get arrested where we were), someone talking 
> about some arrests acted like the women had been violated because they 
> were strip searched.  And maybe they were, and maybe it was just a routine 
> search.  For many people, that is their first encounter with the law, and 
> they want it to be about something more than a routine experience.

One of the challenges on this issue is that some incidents black
people feel are racist discrimination are in fact happening to
everybody of all races, so they are not racially discriminatory.

For instance, blacks in one town complained about being cited for
violating "quality of life ordinances", and the ACLU said such
laws should be repealed.  Well, in the suburbs, such laws are very
important to most people, which is why they exist and are enforced,
less so in urban areas.

Years ago, some blacks complained of poor service at a restaurant
chain.  Well, I ate there numerous times and always had poor service
(I stopped going).  I wondered if they were really being discriminated
against, or just got the same lousy service as other people did.

On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 2:16:41 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:

> Was that the theatre release of "Romeo & Juliet" with Olivia Hussey?  I've 
> never watched it, but apparently it matches the times it was made.

I think it was Midsummer Night's Dream, with the Fairy Queen being
topless.  Don't know why, but it sure was an OMG moment for us
boys who did see it.

Now, I wonder if the school got any complaints from parents about
it.  I strongly suspect today parents would complain, but in our
day they would be more open minded (party since we were city kids;
suburban parents were more conservative.)

On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 14:05:49 -0700, hancock4 wrote:

> On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 2:16:41 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:
> 
>> Was that the theatre release of "Romeo & Juliet" with Olivia Hussey? 
>> I've never watched it, but apparently it matches the times it was made.
> 
> I think it was Midsummer Night's Dream, with the Fairy Queen being
> topless.  Don't know why, but it sure was an OMG moment for us boys who
> did see it.

This, perhaps:

 http://goo.gl/TYSPlq

(schoolboy smirk; the topless one was Titania)

The Leonard Whiting/Olivia Hussey one was controversial because of 
Hussey's age (she was only 15 and wasn't even allowed to attend the 
premiere), and the fact that there was a nude wedding night scene:

 https://goo.gl/OOlBRp

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

On 7/25/2016 3:23 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Saturday, July 23, 2016 at 10:34:43 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote:
>
>> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and
>> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege"
>> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a
>> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is
>> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but
>> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
>
> FWIW, here is the article that the phrase appeared in.  You can

Can't say that I think the metaphor is all that good, it's not even 
very catchy.

> judge it for yourself.  Personally, I didn't care for the commentary;
> I don't think "racism is baked into our society".

Unfortunately, it seems to be, although there again one could take 
issue with the metaphor. It's not always Blacks, of course, around 
here historically Indians have been targets, and more recently 
Latinos. It sometimes seems like we humans have a baked-in instinct 
for "different is bad" or "different is dangerous".
>
> http://www.chestnuthilllocal.com/2016/07/13/unpacking-the-knapsack-of-privilege/
>
> Also, about two months earlier, two kids were shot while walking
> down a street in that area.  Supposedly it was gang related.  There
> was some brief news coverage and the incident faded from memory.  What
> bothered me was zero community outcry over the brutal murders, no
> raging protestors, nothing.

When it's gang related, the prevailing public opinion seems to be "let 
them shoot each other, we don't care". Until some little kid gets 
nailed by a stray bullet. It bothers me too.

  I don't want people shot by cops for
> no reason, but I don't want people shot period.
>
Agreed. I think cops who shoot people should be treated exactly the 
same as anybody else who shoots people. Sometimes there's a good 
reason, but that should be determined by others who have absolutely no 
personal or employment relationship to the shooter.

On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 2:23:37 PM UTC-6, han...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Also, about two months earlier, two kids were shot while walking
> down a street in that area.  Supposedly it was gang related.  There
> was some brief news coverage and the incident faded from memory.  What
> bothered me was zero community outcry over the brutal murders, no
> raging protestors, nothing.  I don't want people shot by cops for
> no reason, but I don't want people shot period.

I'm sure that the black people who lived in that area didn't like having two of 
their children shot by gang members.

Why didn't they protest?

What would a protest achieve? Would it get members of drug dealing gangs to 
stop their activities? No.

What responds to protests is government, because the government has to serve 
the electorate, while drug dealers have to serve their customers.

Did the black people in the neighborhood want to encourage the government to 
intensify its law enforcement efforts to do away with gangs that sell drugs in 
their neighborhood?

No. Because they feel they stand to be collateral damage in the War on Drugs.

It's not that they're on the same side as the drug dealers, and on the opposite 
side as the police. They're just responding to the situation they're in. 
Getting them out of that situation _will_ involve getting rid of the 
drug-dealing gangs - but the police will have to work smarter, not just harder.

John Savard

On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 3:17:36 PM UTC-6, Bob Eager wrote:

> The Leonard Whiting/Olivia Hussey one was controversial because of 
> Hussey's age (she was only 15 and wasn't even allowed to attend the 
> premiere),

Yes, age restrictions on movies do occasionally have bizarre results. After all, 
no one would seriously claim that her morals would be corrupted each time she 
takes a bath or a shower, so seeing herself naked on the silver screen would 
hardly do so either.

But this is what comes of having a general rule. We don't even have a rule, 
say, that movies whose only objectionable feature is female nudity are 
age-restricted *only* for male viewers - and vice-versa.

John Savard

On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 5:17:03 PM UTC-6, Dave Garland wrote:

> Agreed. I think cops who shoot people should be treated exactly the 
> same as anybody else who shoots people. Sometimes there's a good 
> reason, but that should be determined by others who have absolutely no 
> personal or employment relationship to the shooter.

Why don't we do that?

Basically, it's because police officers are the only people we expect to be, 
daily, in a position to use deadly force against dangerous criminals.

Just as a surgeon can make innocent errors with tragic consequences - but 
society feels it's counter-productive to follow every error with a full-scale 
criminal trial for negligence - because of what police have to face and do 
every day, because of how quickly they have to react, tragedies can happen.

And only the "experts" - other police officers - can really understand this and 
judge it properly.

This narrative makes some sense. However, it also has some defects.

For one, it means that when a tragedy happens, justice will often not be seen to be done.

For another, it neglects the possibility that a particular police department might be infected by endemic racism.

Basically, one has the collision between two sets of facts.

The drug trade is now being handled by a group of criminals that is predominantly black - and that is violent in an unrestrained manner.

Ordinary law-abiding black Americans cannot go about their daily lives in the 
same serene and confident manner as white Americans - even when doing innocent 
things, there is always the possibility that they will be confronted by a 
gun-wielding police officer, and be moments away from death.

Look at the recent, fortunately non-life-threatening, shooting of the caregiver 
of an autistic adult, for example.

But juries are reluctant to convict police officers in situations like this. 
Can it be proven that it wasn't an innocent mistake? Would you want to create a 
chilling effect, preventing police from doing their jobs, preventing them from 
*protecting YOU*?

When the senseless shootings of black people, of course, have zero chance of 
being a problem for you, since these cases *are* decided, out of fairness to 
the accused, by all-white juries.

Since both sides have valid arguments, I suppose the only answer is partition. 
However, that is not practical.

John Savard

<hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, July 23, 2016 at 10:34:43 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote:
> 
>> Funny, being one myself, I hang out in leftie circles quite a lot, and 
>> don't believe I've ever heard the phrase "knapsack of privilege" 
>> before. My first thought is that it must contain a loaf of bread and a 
>> jug of wine, but what do I know. Google had 3270 hits, which is 
>> admittedly more than my control search for "knapsack of rocks" (7) but 
>> an order of magnitude less than "sack of cats".
> 
> FWIW, here is the article that the phrase appeared in.  You can
> judge it for yourself.  Personally, I didn't care for the commentary;
> I don't think "racism is baked into our society".

We're better than we used to be, and hopefully not as good as we're going
to be. Think back  to "Gone with the Wind", where Hattie  McDaniel was
considered groundbreaking for appearing in a mainstream movie, and to when
Jackie Robinson was considered a trailblazer.  The remaining problem today
is the people who consider  that their "culture" involves joining gangs and
selling dugs.

> 
> http://www.chestnuthilllocal.com/2016/07/13/unpacking-the-knapsack-of-privilege/
> 
> Also, about two months earlier, two kids were shot while walking
> down a street in that area.  Supposedly it was gang related.  There
> was some brief news coverage and the incident faded from memory.  What
> bothered me was zero community outcry over the brutal murders, no
> raging protestors, nothing.  I don't want people shot by cops for
> no reason, but I don't want people shot period.  
> 



-- 
Pete

<hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 2:23:37 PM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:
> 
>> "White privilege" applies to some but not everyone. If I was black, I'd 
>> have a much easier time understanding all those times I did get stopped 
>> while walking along a busy street in the daytime.  Black people (well 
>> mostly it's men) who have written about their experiences are the ones who 
>> match my experience.  I remember one time when we were blockading a Litton 
>> factory (and we couldn't get arrested where we were), someone talking 
>> about some arrests acted like the women had been violated because they 
>> were strip searched.  And maybe they were, and maybe it was just a routine 
>> search.  For many people, that is their first encounter with the law, and 
>> they want it to be about something more than a routine experience.
> 
> One of the challenges on this issue is that some incidents black
> people feel are racist discrimination are in fact happening to
> everybody of all races, so they are not racially discriminatory.
> 
> For instance, blacks in one town complained about being cited for
> violating "quality of life ordinances", and the ACLU said such
> laws should be repealed.  Well, in the suburbs, such laws are very
> important to most people, which is why they exist and are enforced,
> less so in urban areas.
> 
> Years ago, some blacks complained of poor service at a restaurant
> chain.  Well, I ate there numerous times and always had poor service
> (I stopped going).  I wondered if they were really being discriminated
> against, or just got the same lousy service as other people did.
> 

Probably some of each.

-- 
Pete

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> The drug trade is now being handled by a group of criminals that is
> predominantly black - and that is violent in an unrestrained manner.

	Portugal solved that problem.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

On 26/07/2016 20:53, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>> The drug trade is now being handled by a group of criminals that is
>> predominantly black - and that is violent in an unrestrained manner.
>
> 	Portugal solved that problem.
>

What did the Portuguese do?

On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 21:08:02 +0100, Andrew Swallow wrote:

> On 26/07/2016 20:53, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
>> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> The drug trade is now being handled by a group of criminals that is
>>> predominantly black - and that is violent in an unrestrained manner.
>>
>> 	Portugal solved that problem.
>>
>>
> What did the Portuguese do?

Decriminalised drugs 16 years ago.



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 1:17:55 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:

> Ordinary law-abiding black Americans cannot go about their daily lives in the 
> same serene and confident manner as white Americans - even when doing innocent 
> things, there is always the possibility that they will be confronted by a 
> gun-wielding police officer, and be moments away from death.

You make a number of good points.  However, I must respectfully
disagree with the above paragraph.  FWIW, IMHO, law-abiding black
Americans are more at risk from getting shot by a criminal (either
as a direct victim of a crime or being in the wrong place), than 
getting shot by a cop.  Despite all the publicity, police shootings
are extremely rare, and conventional murders far more common.


> Look at the recent, fortunately non-life-threatening, shooting of the caregiver 
> of an autistic adult, for example.

That is a curious case.  We don't know the details, such as the
actual line-of-sight that the cops had.  Note that cop says he
was shooting at the kid because he thought the kid had a gun,
and was trying to _save_ the caregiver.



> But juries are reluctant to convict police officers in situations like this. 
> Can it be proven that it wasn't an innocent mistake? Would you want to create a 
> chilling effect, preventing police from doing their jobs, preventing them from 
> *protecting YOU*?

After the Baltimore case, where a bunch of cops were indicted, cops
pulled back, and the murder rate in the city soared.  Like it or not,
that says something about the condition those cops have to work in,
which is really the big issue--the overall level of violence today.

On 26 Jul 2016 21:27:13 GMT
Bob Eager <news...@eager.cx> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 21:08:02 +0100, Andrew Swallow wrote:
> 
> > On 26/07/2016 20:53, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> >> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
> >> Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The drug trade is now being handled by a group of criminals that is
> >>> predominantly black - and that is violent in an unrestrained manner.
> >>
> >> 	Portugal solved that problem.
> >>
> >>
> > What did the Portuguese do?
> 
> Decriminalised drugs 16 years ago.

All of them, not just the 'safe' ones.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 6:44:57 PM UTC-6, han...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 1:17:55 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> 
> > Ordinary law-abiding black Americans cannot go about their daily lives in the 
> > same serene and confident manner as white Americans - even when doing innocent 
> > things, there is always the possibility that they will be confronted by a 
> > gun-wielding police officer, and be moments away from death.
> 
> You make a number of good points.  However, I must respectfully
> disagree with the above paragraph.  FWIW, IMHO, law-abiding black
> Americans are more at risk from getting shot by a criminal (either
> as a direct victim of a crime or being in the wrong place), than 
> getting shot by a cop.  Despite all the publicity, police shootings
> are extremely rare, and conventional murders far more common.

Police shootings may be more rare than shootings by criminals, but they are an additional hazard - *and* it's the poor black people who live in the poor black neighborhoods who bear most of the risk of getting shot by criminals.

The black people who have made it into the middle class, and have left the slums behind them, _still_ face a significantly higher risk of being shot by the police than white people in a similar situation.

This has an impact on how they can live their lives which is out of proportion to the actual level of risk of being one of the people who get shot.

> > But juries are reluctant to convict police officers in situations like this. 
> > Can it be proven that it wasn't an innocent mistake? Would you want to create a 
> > chilling effect, preventing police from doing their jobs, preventing them from 
> > *protecting YOU*?

> After the Baltimore case, where a bunch of cops were indicted, cops
> pulled back, and the murder rate in the city soared.  Like it or not,
> that says something about the condition those cops have to work in,
> which is really the big issue--the overall level of violence today.

I'm not saying the other side of the argument is devoid of validity. Yes, 
points on that side are valid too, which is _why_ this isn't going to be an 
easy problem to solve.

That makes things worse, not better.

John Savard