A couple things I want to talk about briefly.

First off, congratulations to the UK for the birth of a potential new Monarch.  The little bundle of blue blooded joy is 3rd in line.  Tremendous national adoration for a Bronze.  Thankfully the Royals no longer play by the Richard III rules.  Even though that would be entertaining.
Just saying.
Because I’d put my money on Royal Ginger that drives Tanks and Apaches and shit.  He’s awesome.  Whoops it up in Vegas “Hangover Style” then goes off and kills shit with high tech weapons of awesome destruction.

Okay, no, really… In all seriousness…

He should do that.  Fight his way to the Crown.  Take over England and rule it with an Iron Fist.  Remove all Gun Laws and Traffic Laws and let Health And Safety have a permanent Holiday.  Then the entire UK can run through the Darwin Filter so the only ones left are the Brits with Big Enough Balls.

Now, if that works in the UK.  We do the same to Washington DC, New York City, Chicago, and Southern California.  See if things level out.  Give it a couple years.  If that doesn’t work, re-institute Dueling.  It used to be legal way back when and we didn’t have half the problems we have now.  I think the nation started to go down hill when we outlawed it.  I think if we had Dueling, CSPAN would be Pay Per View and the Democrats would become the minority in this country.

11 thoughts on “A couple things I want to talk about briefly.”

  1. You could empty the US prisons out by a similar pay-per-view scheme; simply convert all sentences to death sentences with the possibility of winning a commutation or even a pardon by combat a la outrance in the arena.

    1. I don’t think we want to use a selection process which favors the most successfully-violent prisoners to determine who gets released…

      Release everyone who was in for a victimless crime, and that would remove a huge chunk of the prison population.

      Make everyone who was in for any property crime work off their debt to whomever lost by their actions, whether theft, destruction of property, or whatever.

      That only leaves the violent criminals, which are a fraction of the total prison population.

      1. I have a hard time that people still believe the myth that the prisons are full of prisoners who are there because of “victimless” crimes. They are mostly thinking crimes like drug dealing – which are far from victimless – or drug possession. This simply isn’t true, but everytime it comes up the media reinforces the myth instead of showing the truth. When the democrats took over Colorado government (they currently hold the governorship and control both houses of the legislature) the first thing they wanted to do was pass a bill to release the prisoners in jail for victimless crimes. And found out that less than 10 prisoners qualified, and all of them had had prior convictions for very violent crimes that they had served the sentence for then were put back in jail after a new conviction.Yes, there still may be a few unjustly convicted prisoners who are in prison because of incorrect eye-witness identifications or lying prison snitches; but almost everyone in jail is there because they are violent felons who are going to hurt people as soon as they get out of prison again.

        1. How, pray tell, does selling a product to someone who wants it have a victim? Same for simply possessing an item, be it a firearm in a place which bans them, a particular chemical, or whatever.

          No, the majority of crimes have no actual victim.

          You’ve provided no evidence to support your claim that this is a “myth.”

          The simple fact that the US incarcerates a greater percentage of its population than any other government in history (more than Stalin, more than Pol Pot – more than /any/ dictator, etc.) would prove that it is not a myth, at all. If they were all in their for victimizing others, the sheer number of victims necessary for that to be true would make it so that there would be almost no one alive who had not been violently attacked. But violent crime rate is nowhere near sufficient to make that statement true.

  2. The UK certainly does need some thinning out, way to much inbreeding over there. At least the new bundle of joy can say he has the best set of teeth in the country.

  3. Two things ruined this country.
    1) The ban on dueling. When Bladensburg Dueling Grounds was active and Congresscritters had to back up their political theories with blood they were less likely to be … well, stupid.
    2) Air conditioning. Washington is built on a swamp. It got so hot here British embassy personnel use to get a “tropical allowance” during summer months. Congress would adjourn in late May and not come back until late September. Now they have a full 12 months (less long weekends, district visits, CODELs) to muck things up.

    1. You have a great point. If Congress was not comfortable, they wouldn’t be hanging around ruining everything.

  4. I note there are no “victimless crimes” you just have to expand the field of view to see the whole city failing. Cross reference Detroit and Chicago.
    Who is an open minded fellow.

    1. Really? So, if someone in Chicago defies the unconstitutional, immoral ban on guns and peacefully carries a concealed pistol to defend himself and his family, you are saying there’s a victim in that?

      1. I’d consider that civil disobedience. Until you have to defend you or your family against some thug. In which case you, the victim, goes to jail for illegally carrying a weapon.

        1. It’s only civil disobedience if you go out of your way to get caught, for the sake of making a political statement.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *