A guy in Chicago wrote an article saying how much he enjoyed seeing Andrew Meyer tazered (tasered? whatever) and listing other folks whom he believed were suitable targets. It was a vapid, inane "article" and I'm pleased to report that of the 88 online comments, at least 80 were along the lines of "you sadistic fool..." etc. I had been almost afraid to read the comments for fear that I would lose all faith in humanity/Americans. But it was okay.
I even pitched in. I said:
"I think it's true that we all have someone we'd *like* to taze. I think that's why it's essential that we have laws that prevent it. And even the police need to be governed by the rule of law. If we let our annoyance dictate our behavior, we wouldn't be a very civilized society. I know being "natural" is very popular, but we don't really want to comport ourselves like animals -- snapping, snarling, and scratching at everyone who displeases us? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe this is the same crowd who'd like to go back to pawing, groping, and goosing people who do please us. Please, people, let's move forward."
And then I thought of another point:
"Oh, wait -- wait, wait, wait. It seems that some people think the statement "Andrew Meyer should not have been tazered" means that the speaker: a) is defending or agreeing with Andrew Meyer; or, b) thinks tazers are inherently bad; or, c) thinks police are bad. I can't speak for everyone who says that Andrew Meyer should not have been tazered, but I can say for myself that: a) the kid strikes me as an egotistical blowhard chump (sorry kid); b) tazers are an essential piece of police equipment and must be used with skill and good judgement just like guns, nightsticks, handcuffs, sirens, dogs, citation books, etc.; and c) I am very, very grateful to anyone courageous and generous enough to work to protect and serve their community often while risking their own lives and not earning adequate respect or pay -- especially if they can do it with skill and good judgement. None of those,'a,' 'b,'or 'c,' are incompatible with my belief that the police at the university in Florida blew it and should not have tazered the blowhard chump. Just wanted to be extra clear there."
And I didn't add this to the comments I posted, but I thought of it also.....the original article says that it's us "aging baby-boomers" who don't see the humor in obnoxious people being electrocuted. If it's just a question of age, oh, I can't even say it. It's too sickening. I mean, on the one hand, what I was going to say is, thank Cod I'll be dead. On the other hand, not everyone will be. At least half of the people who outlive me have to be obnoxious so they can be punished so the others can be amused. But, wait, isn't being amused by punishment obnoxious? Yes. Shouldn't they be punished? Yeah, thank Cod I'll be dead. But if anyone survives, and they have this society to live with, it's a hollow victory.
Alex Jones Is Helping Stephen Colbert Re-Find His Comedy Groove, and It's a Beautiful Thing - If you're like me, you've been a little disappointed with the new incarnation of Stephen Colbert on *The Late Show*. Don't get me wrong, he's always funn...
10 hours ago