Web Search powered by Yahoo! SEARCH
Although I guess I didn't read the whole story first. 44 percent of Tennessee homes have at least one gun. Wow. But still less than half of the households, and even if it's gone up significantly, it's still certainly far less than half the total population.
Even with a number that high, even in Tennessee, you are statistically more likely to be a non-gun owner and live in a gunless home. (Though I'll concede the possibility that the 44 percent cited has since gone above the 50 mark, I haven't seen it.)
"what IS it about the "journalist" sub-culture that they so seldom own firearms?"
This is the essence of the gun-friendly side of the gun debate. Being gunless doesn't make you part of some ultra-liberal minority sub-group, but gun owners can't imagine anyone living without one. But the fact is most people don't own a gun.
There are 6 million people in Tennessee, right? 300,000 of them have gun permits. Even accounting for (1) people who only own hunting guns and thus don't need a permit and (2) people who own guns illegally and, what the hell, let's throw in (3) antique gun collectors, does anyone really believe the tally will come out to more than 3 million? Really?
Jack, please keep writing about this and making sure that the concepts "slavery" and "Confederacy" remain closely connected. It's disturbing how much reverence for the CSA I've seen from Tea Party types who call themselves Libertarians. If there was one sure thing the Confederates were fighting against, it was personal liberty.
Puns!11! Those things make me literally figuratively metaphorically cringe! Ellipsis...!
Well, that certainly sounds nice, but it doesn't really address the points of the argument we were actually having. Whatever. To be completely honest, I always thought using both the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life" was the best, most recognizable, most succinct option. They're both so manipulative that they kind of cancel each other out.
Controlling language? The term "pro-life" clouds the issue, doesn't it? Are they advocating for all life? Soldiers? Terrorists? Sea life? I've met more than one pro-lifer in my time who decidedly favors the death penalty. Putting the word "abortion" right in there narrows it and de-politicizes it as much as it can be narrowed and de-politicized. And one side is in favor of abortion rights while the other opposes it. Harping on the whole "anti makes it sound bad" thing is dumb. I'm "anti-genocide." Does that sound bad? Do I have to say I'm "pro-genolife" in order to convey that meaning clearly? Your whole argument seems to assume that you don't think people know what the word "abortion" means.
Hey jpinto: Take up the "pro-life" vs. "anti-abortion" thing with the Associated Press stylebook.
p.s. The people in question are anti-abortion, right? So just say it. No need to politicize the terminology if you believe that abortion is wrong, is there? (Similarly, the other side is referred to "abortion rights advocates" or "pro-abortion," etc.)
Cue the umpteenth explanation of Knoxville Googled.
Somebody ought to do a round-up of inaccuracies and omissions in Knoxville historical markers that were put up by the Sons of Confederate Veterans and the Daughters of the Confederacy. Note: Yes, this idea was stolen from "Lies Across America."
It's odd that you'd need a reminder of what Jack wrote since you quoted it and all, but life's funny sometimes. Jack mentioned urban COUNTIES. As in county code, not state code. TN also allows guns in parks but many of its counties have chosen to opt out of it. That's what this whole thing is about, no? So, let's take a look at an urban COUNTY in one of the states you've cited, Georgia.
Source: Fulton COUNTY CodeSec. 50-38. Firearms and other weapons banned.No person shall use or possess within any Fulton County park or recreational facility any rifle, pistol, shotgun, bow and arrow, slingshot, BB gun, pellet gun, or any other device capable of throwing any projectile of any sort, including the hand throwing of rocks or stones intended to be used as weapons. This section shall not be operative in any specific area now designated or to be designated in the future as a rifle range, archery range, or any other specific area whose purpose is to allow the activity otherwise proscribed by this section.
That took me all of thirty seconds to find.
I don't understand the analogy here. In the Wal-Mart scenario, you'd be in breach of an explicit store policy (not to mention the explicit law). The entire point of this article was that the policy of these garages (as worded on the sign posted on these garages) is, at best, ambiguous.
This shows the contact list, which includes Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell and several of her aides. In particular the first screenshot, where she appears to be discussing policy issues in regards to a fight Parnell was having with some radio host, seems pretty damning.
Of course Parnell IS using his alaska.gov email address, so theoretically the exchange would be subject to inquiry. Still, though, she should be using hers for this type of thing.
Isn't the central issue here that Gov. Palin was using this email address to discuss state business? Now, from what I can see, Alaska law allows a governor to claim executive privilege if she is seeking advice from her aides in her communications, but that is heavily qualified. If those communications are requested, they must be reviewed by a third party who then has to explain what the communications were about and why the governor is claiming executive privilege. But all of this assumes that the governor is using her state email address to begin with, rather than skirting the records request issue entirely by using an address that journalists, legislators, and her constituents may not even know about. Dave is right. What this kid did does not legally qualify as "hacking." I would go a step further and say that what he did qualifies as heroic.
Yes we did. ---------------------------^Article citation. -----------^link
----------------------------------------------------------------------cit. in sidebar^
Wow! Are you Glenn Reynolds?
Re: Steve Hall.
That line says general election. Ragsdale beat out Hall in the 2006 primary.
Mr. Conley has just sent me the aforementioned document, and, indeed, the $85,000 EBITDA is listed in there. Metro Pulse will run a correction. --Charles Maldonado
I have a copy of the document filed in October. I couldn't find the numbers Mr. Conley is talking about and, apparently, neither could Mr. Eason. If Mr. Conley would like to share his copy of the document in question, I would be more than happy to run a correction.
Thank you, Good Doctor, for pointing out the error. It has been corrected online.