Here is an unexpected front-pager from the NY Times:
New Fashion Wrinkle: Stylishly Hiding the Gun
By MATT RICHTEL
Woolrich, a 182-year-old clothing company, describes its new chino pants as an elegant and sturdy fashion statement, with a clean profile and fabric that provides comfort and flexibility.
And they are great for hiding a handgun.
The company has added a second pocket behind the traditional front pocket for a weapon. Or, for those who prefer to pack their gun in a holster, it can be tucked inside the stretchable waistband. The back pockets are also designed to help hide accessories, like a knife and a flashlight.
The chinos, which cost $65, are not for commandos, but rather, the company says, for the fashion-aware gun owner. And Woolrich has competition. Several clothing companies are following suit, building businesses around the sharp rise in people with permits to carry concealed weapons....
And they go one, seemingly straight-faced, as if Times readers don't lock up their children and avert their eye when the subject of guns is raised.
Well - something with generous pockets for my cell phone would be great.
Chinos are my everyday go-to slacks.
Woolrich has a great idea here. Paired with the bespoke bullet proof jackets.(Unpadded, three two roll, no darts,and hook vent of course.) I just picked up in Bogota.(By the way, the hookers are muy linda there.) My chums and I are now prepared for any occasion where the Lumpenproleteriat dare accost us.
Posted by: My Birth certificate is the MAYFLOWER | April 24, 2012 at 10:01 AM
I do not need more shopping tips.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | April 24, 2012 at 10:03 AM
How long till Mayor Bloomberg bans these pants in NYC?
Posted by: jimmyk | April 24, 2012 at 10:04 AM
The current top comment to the NY Times' gun attire article is priceless.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 24, 2012 at 10:07 AM
are they baggy? Do they drag on the ground?
Perhaps for the hip hop generation they should do a concealed holster in their boxers, instead.
Posted by: P Diddy or Daddy, or something | April 24, 2012 at 10:12 AM
Besides would Jesus carry a weapon ? No Actual Christian ever would.
Apparently this dolt is unaware of the story of Jesus in the Temple fashioning a whip to drive out the moneychangers and others?
Or the story of the close supporter who uses his sword to slice off the ear of the servant of the centurion who has come to arrest Jesus?
That is just off the top of my head. E Burke equals mendacious fool
Posted by: GMAX | April 24, 2012 at 10:35 AM
I know what RobC wants for Christmas.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 10:35 AM
A lot of mad people out there these days :)
Posted by: Dimitar Georgiev | April 24, 2012 at 10:40 AM
Samson slayed bunches using the "jawbone of an ass"...like E. Burke.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 24, 2012 at 10:42 AM
I hope this doesn't interfere with the Department of Homeland Security's new mandate: Environmental Justice.
They're going ahead with the full program now, it seems.
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | April 24, 2012 at 10:43 AM
The onlyest part of the New Testament I like is Revelations.
Posted by: Holier Than Thou | April 24, 2012 at 10:45 AM
Jesus didn't have a gun and look what the mob did to him.
Posted by: Dela Cruz | April 24, 2012 at 10:47 AM
-- something with generous pockets for my cell phone would be great. --
Posted by: cboldt | April 24, 2012 at 10:49 AM
cboldt-
What's the monthly data plan like for that?
Posted by: Melinda Romanoff | April 24, 2012 at 10:54 AM
EBurke is the readership that Pinch has whittled the NYTimes down to; Carlos Slim owns the thing someday soon.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 11:01 AM
The most important feature of those pants?
"Reinforced crotch"
(I do NOT want to know where the "two knife openings" are.)
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 24, 2012 at 11:04 AM
Commentary from the typical Times reader;
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/23/opinion/frum-obama-romney-dog/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Posted by: narciso | April 24, 2012 at 11:09 AM
Reading the story LUN, I'm reminded why the 2nd Amendment is so important.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 24, 2012 at 11:12 AM
Has anyone actually tried these pants? It's easy to talk about carrying a decent sized phallic symbol, but actually doing it is another matter, even in winter.
Posted by: Extraneus | April 24, 2012 at 11:18 AM
I'd apologize for that first "actually," but that's just not how I roll.
Posted by: Extraneus | April 24, 2012 at 11:20 AM
All of the men in my family have always been able to carry a decent size.....oh you were talking about a pistol.
Posted by: Skippy Van Heusen III | April 24, 2012 at 11:26 AM
This seems the right place to post this;
http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/stunner-putin-may-have-had-affair-with-spy/
Posted by: narciso | April 24, 2012 at 11:29 AM
Wait until they find out that there is a whole industry dedicated to producing "tactical" gear like vests, belts and braces.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 24, 2012 at 11:39 AM
E Burke seems to be overly preoccupied with convincing teh ladies that gun owners aren't that good in the sack. I'm sensing a cry for attention.
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 24, 2012 at 11:40 AM
CH,
Ladies? More like other guys, if you get my drift:)
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 24, 2012 at 11:45 AM
I knew Edmund Burke, he was a friend of mine, you're no Edmund Burke
Posted by: edward Fox | April 24, 2012 at 11:47 AM
For the Very Stylish Scotsman, we offer the 5.11 Tactical Duty Kilt. LUN.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | April 24, 2012 at 11:50 AM
Melinda-do you remember my statements that there is something that needs to be explained before Rio that holdren is in charge of?
Well it looks to me like he and janet had lunch to develop a "do-you-part" strategy. I can see where that would fit into an already ugly tyrannical power grab.
I think there's a geographic name used to describe that method of politics.
Posted by: rse | April 24, 2012 at 12:00 PM
I recall someone saying somthing about selling what you have and buying a sword. Granted it wasn't a gun but then guns weren't invented yet.
Posted by: Have Blue | April 24, 2012 at 12:02 PM
For the Very Stylish Scotsman, we offer the 5.11 Tactical Duty Kilt. LUN.
Darn, out of stock already.
Posted by: Ranger | April 24, 2012 at 12:02 PM
Besides would Jesus carry a weapon ? No Actual Christian ever would.
Actually, Jesus COMMANDED his disciples to carry.
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
Luke 22:36
The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied.
Luke 22:38
A cloak was used to protect oneself from the elements as the outermost garment worn. The Style and Color would help signify your "place" within society. So, in commanding his disciples to carry, he told them to give up protection from the elements and your standing in society for your Personal Protection. Mind you, the swords in this case were usually the Jewish and/or Roman Short Swords that were for Self-Protection only.
Christians are also called to be "Good Stewards" with what God has provided. As the Author of Life to them, that Life is a precious provision indeed and deserving of Protection under being a Good Steward.
Today, Jesus would tell us to sell our North Face Jacket and buy 2 Glocks.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | April 24, 2012 at 12:03 PM
Darn, out of stock already.
It was actually a April Fools Day Joke, you can kinda determine that from the Video at that link. People actually wanted them, so 5.11 Tactical will be producing a limited set.
Get your order in early!
Posted by: PDinDetroit | April 24, 2012 at 12:05 PM
4/23/12
"‘I carry a gun all the time’ says woman who thwarted Macon holdup attempt
Looking at Lulu Campbell’s bullet-riddled silver Toyota Tundra, common sense says the 57-year-old grandmother should be dead.
It’s impossible to tell how many bullets were fired at 2 a.m. Saturday morning on English Avenue, but what started as an armed robbery attempt turned into a full-blown firefight...
Seconds later, two men carrying guns approached her. One of them, later identified by police as Brenton Lance Spencer, 32, started to shout at her through the front passenger door to open the vehicle up and give him her money. The other, whom Macon police have identified as Dantre Horatio Shivers, 30, stood in front of the truck, also pointing a gun...
“(Spencer) shouted, ‘Give me the f------ money and open the f------ door!’ ” Campbell said. “I said, ‘Oh my God, somebody is going to rob me.’ I said, ‘Baby, you’re going to kill me anyway, so I don’t have to open it!’ ”
Campbell said she reached for her .38-caliber revolver just as Spencer allegedly fired at her. She felt Spencer’s bullet whiz by her chest as she fired back. Her shot hit Spencer in the chest.
“I hurt my back (pushing the seat back to avoid the shot),” she said. “I saw the guy in front of me, and I said, ‘Oh my God, there are two of them.’ I said I’m going to take one of them with me. That’s what was in my head.”"
Read more here: http://www.macon.com/2012/04/23/2000577/i-carry-a-gun-all-the-time-says.html#storylink=cpy
Posted by: El Bango | April 24, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Stephen Green who earlier in the article indicates he thinks a landslide election of Romney is possible, has this insight:
Posted by: GMAX | April 24, 2012 at 12:12 PM
PDinDet-- fab story that the 4/1 joke actually created a market. I am convinced that I was a Scot in a prior life (I live in a town named for a Scotish colony) so I would love me one of them kilts.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 12:13 PM
The Green quote, I think, is an accurate reading of 53% of the electorate.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 12:15 PM
NK - I am Scottish, but do not want one. A "breeze between the knees" is not for me.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | April 24, 2012 at 12:15 PM
"For the Very Stylish Scotsman, we offer the 5.11 Tactical Duty Kilt."
I'd get one only if I carried a bigger bagpipe.
Posted by: Tiny OToole | April 24, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Mind you, the swords in this case were usually the Jewish and/or Roman Short Swords that were for Self-Protection only.
The Roman gladius? For self-protection only?!
I think the Gauls, Cartheginians, Iberians, Britons, Germans, Greeks, Egyptians, Jews, Maromanni, Quadi, and many more would disagree. Heck, the Romans faced each other with them often enough, they'd disagree, too.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 24, 2012 at 12:22 PM
PDinDet-- a Scot (native born) friend of mine thinks I'm insane (among other reasons) because I like the Brit Royals. he thinks they are a cancer on humanity-- while I have an American fondness for them. He's a leftwinger and a Scotish separatist. When I remind him that Scotish independence would ruin the british labor party (they rely massively on Scotish Parliament seats) he says separatism is necessary for Scotish identity and to blazes with the Labor Party, independent Scotland will be completely socialist he says. One Scot's opinion.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 12:22 PM
As some may remember, I Open Carry instead of Conceal Carry most of the time for the past 3 years now. I do not have to "dress around my firearm" carrying this way. People do not scream and run in fear, most do not even notice that I am carrying. From those who do notice, I get plenty of positive comments about exercising Rights.
One of the recent comments was quite comical. I was in downtown Royal Oak, my hometown, while OC'ing and this lady driving by screams out "I got my shit on too!". Way too funny...
Posted by: PDinDetroit | April 24, 2012 at 12:23 PM
"Actually, Jesus COMMANDED his disciples to carry.
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
Luke 22:36
The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied.
Luke 22:38"
A rebuke is recorded in three of the four gospels: Matthew 26:52 ('"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.'), Luke 22:51 ('But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him.'), and John 18:11 ('Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?"'). Mark does not record a rebuke, but does note that while one disciple used a sword, Jesus allowed himself to be arrested peacefully (implying that he disagreed with the use of force).
Posted by: Preaching To The Choir Is Easy | April 24, 2012 at 12:28 PM
Don't get caught taking a hoodie to a chino fight.
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 24, 2012 at 12:38 PM
I cannot believe no one has linked this yet. Video; semi-safe for work (typical LBJ coarseness). But it's the added animation that's hilarious. Be ready to laugh hard and have to explain to your co-workers.
LBJ orders Haggar Pants
Posted by: Porchlight | April 24, 2012 at 12:41 PM
"Brenton Lance Spencer", "Dantre Horatio Shivers"...
Have their moms Tray-marked this shit yet?
Posted by: Threadkiller | April 24, 2012 at 12:43 PM
DoT linked that a few months ago, I think.
Posted by: Extraneus | April 24, 2012 at 12:45 PM
--Jesus allowed himself to be arrested peacefully (implying that he disagreed with the use of force).--
Don't think I'd read too much into that (Ben?) since He had to be a arrested to be tried and executed which He made quite explicit when He told them in Matthew He could call down an army of His own if He chose to but that things must happen as they were unfolding so that His destiny and the prophecies would be fulfilled.
It only implied the use of force at that point would prevent what had to occur.
One cannot read the NT in its entirety and come to the conclusion you claim is implied as some type of general truth.
Posted by: Ignatz | April 24, 2012 at 12:48 PM
I just meant in this thread, Ext. Given the topic and all...
Posted by: Porchlight | April 24, 2012 at 12:56 PM
Mark does not record a rebuke, but does note that while one disciple used a sword, Jesus allowed himself to be arrested peacefully (implying that he disagreed with the use of force).
Or knew his fate was sealed, and that resistance was futile.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 24, 2012 at 01:00 PM
NYT reader E Burke's statement was that no Christian would CARRY a weapon. A review of the New Testatement shows that Jesus encouraged (and certainly allowed) his followers to CARRY. The fact that he discouraged their use in one particular situation does not change anything. Even the "put your sword back in its place" quote indicates that the idea was to carry it, not throw it away.
E. Burke is one of those people who talk about Christianity without understanding it.
Posted by: Theo | April 24, 2012 at 01:03 PM
Preaching To The Choir Is Easy - Offensive Force in this case - NO; Defensive Force - Yes. Jesus did not tell Peter to get rid of the sword, only put it away. One has to ask themselves "How long did Jesus' disciples have these 2 swords, yet Jesus never told them to get rid of them"?
All one need do is look at Creation to understand that both Plants and Animals have means of Self-Protection. One has to be willfully blind not to see it. Evidence all throughout the Bible for self-defense as well.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | April 24, 2012 at 01:04 PM
http://www.saintvespaluus.com/lobby04.jpg>
I find Romney exciting but then I find Mother Angelica sexy.
Posted by: Brother Constance | April 24, 2012 at 01:05 PM
Ig-- you completely explain my understanding of jesus's conduct during Holy Week. He allowed himself to be wrongfully crucified to save our souls. What does that mean for American gun laws? Personaly I think gun laws are one of those 'render unto Caesar' things that jesus referred to at his trial.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 01:10 PM
I just meant in this thread, Ext.
Ah. Sorry, I can hardly ever remember the thread topic after the first few comments.
Posted by: Extraneus | April 24, 2012 at 01:14 PM
I am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land: will never be purged away; but with Blood. I had as I now think: vainly flattered myself that without very much bloodshed; it might be done.
Posted by: Ossawatamie Brown | April 24, 2012 at 01:18 PM
there needs to be a Godwin's law for bringing coloring book Jesus into discussions. I don't know how many times I've heard lefties say, when their views are rebuked, or when someone says they supports a war, "tsk, tsk, and you call yourself a Christian!" as though the Christ was some kind of mild mannered dweeb who never, ever, ever called anyone a viper or a hypocrite.
Posted by: Chubby | April 24, 2012 at 01:31 PM
"there needs to be a Godwin's law for bringing coloring book Jesus into discussions." - LOL!
That is wonderful! Hope you do manage to pull it off, but in the meantime, I'm personally going to think of it as "Chubby's law".
Posted by: AliceH | April 24, 2012 at 01:39 PM
Chubby --
Agree there. This whole "Prince of Peace" nonsense is a crock. The dude could get ANGRY and make serious threats.
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth.
I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."
(And do not forget about the poor fig tree that annoyed him and was sentenced to death.)
Posted by: Theo | April 24, 2012 at 01:40 PM
Porchlight, that LBJ tape is hilarious. What a screwball Uncle Porkchop (as Jackie Kennedy called him) was.
Posted by: peter | April 24, 2012 at 01:40 PM
He was neither gentle nor was he Goy!
Posted by: Ossawatamie Brown | April 24, 2012 at 01:43 PM
ding, ding... we have a winner on this thread, Chubby at 1:31.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 01:48 PM
NK --
I think that you are right.
I also see a bumper sticker in this:
JESUS -- Not A Mild Mannered Dweeb
Posted by: Theo | April 24, 2012 at 01:50 PM
Then what was his message?
Posted by: Ossawatamie Brown | April 24, 2012 at 01:56 PM
Don't make fun of 5.11, I wear one of their "tactical" vests -- it's wonderful for carrying around all of my Nerd Stuff.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy | April 24, 2012 at 02:00 PM
His message was that the Kingdom of God was just about to take over the world and would do so very soon.
Posted by: Theo | April 24, 2012 at 02:02 PM
LBJ,
....talking about dogs.....Remembering "Him"
Posted by: Jack is Back! | April 24, 2012 at 02:05 PM
"Love each other, but don't be doormats"
Posted by: Rob Crawford | April 24, 2012 at 02:07 PM
What a screwball Uncle Porkchop (as Jackie Kennedy called him) was.
Yeah, I can't help but like the guy in some ways.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 24, 2012 at 02:19 PM
Jesus's Gospel according to NK is that to be adjudged as being worthy for an eternity in Heaven, in our temporal lives we must 1. love God as he loves us, and 2. we must love others as God loves them. All else can be forgiven by a merciful God. So unless you are BOTH an Atheist and a misanthrope, you got a shot.
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 02:23 PM
Oh, dear. Such potty mouths these wealthy Obama supporters who like to keep some of their earnings. But Lovitz's assessment of the President is correct.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | April 24, 2012 at 02:25 PM
The onlyest part of the New Testament I like is Revelations.
Me too.
Not really but thought HTT might need some moral support.
Posted by: glasater | April 24, 2012 at 02:32 PM
Another message: "You must not think that I come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword."
Matthew 10:34
Forgive me, Chubby. News from Cleoville: Every Friday near my house, a member of the perpetual religious left, anti-war perseverators holds a "Blessed are the peacemakers" sign. A neighbor we walk past daily has "Jesus loves Wikileaks" on one of his parked cars. "Jesus was a Community Organizer" does not make me smile. The local religious retirement community, replete with Code Pink members, has cars sporting "God is not a Republican" in large letters and as an much smaller afterthought "nor a Democrat."
Posted by: Frau Steingehirn | April 24, 2012 at 02:32 PM
I read the Koran. It's message seemed to be "fire and brimstone!"
Posted by: Jim Ryan | April 24, 2012 at 02:32 PM
Jane,
FOX Business News is reporting that Elizabeth Warren is protesting a 2.3 percent Excise Tax in Obamacare that would hit Medical Instrument makers in Massachusetts. Apparently Warren is happy with all the other taxes in ObamaCare except the ones that effect local folks in Massachusetts who fund her campaign.
Are you hearing any of that and how will it go over up there?
Posted by: daddy | April 24, 2012 at 02:36 PM
You want a fashion statement, this is a fashion statement:
Posted by: Sara | April 24, 2012 at 02:36 PM
Actually, when I'm on the job so to speak I wear a Barbour hunting vest. It's a long one with generous pockets for the paraphernalia I need to pack around.
The pockets could easily hold a smaller handgun -- not that I do that -- but it's a fashion statement I hope catches on:-)
Posted by: glasater | April 24, 2012 at 02:39 PM
Yeah, I can't help but like the guy in some ways.
Ugh; there's no part of Landslide Lyndon that I didn't loathe.
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 24, 2012 at 02:41 PM
Ugh; there's no part of Landslide Lyndon that I didn't loathe.
Well, I didn't mean like-like. Just..well, I dunno, come out and see his ranch sometime. Hard to hate the guy who loved that place. Even though he was indeed hatable otherwise.
Posted by: Porchlight | April 24, 2012 at 02:54 PM
Are you hearing any of that and how will it go over up there?
All I've heard is there are some parts of Obamacare she wants to repeal. And it makes sense it would be that part, which she would never want repealed if she wasn't running for office in MA, unless she had stock in the company.
Recently Brown announced that he was introducing a bill that would require all those deadbeats in federal government to pay back taxes. Like the insider training law I doubt it will have teeth, but I think it resonates.
I tell you, Granny Warren really gives me the creeps. I saw her on TV yesterday in an ad saying we have to make it easier for people to go to college. No responsibility on the part of the student of course, all they need to do is vote for her and they too will be given an education.
Posted by: Jane (Better a crate than a plate) | April 24, 2012 at 03:07 PM
Sara -
Nice holster!
Posted by: Theo | April 24, 2012 at 03:23 PM
BTW I'm on the scholarship committee of my local Rotary club. I am simply amazed at how many kids don't work, and don't plan to work either this summer or at college to help pay their own expenses. Frankly it just blows my mind.
Posted by: Jane (Better a crate than a plate) | April 24, 2012 at 03:24 PM
She's well-equipped, no doubt, but a hammerless revolver would be a lot easier to draw, and have the benefit of leaving her bra on. Something like this one, maybe. :-)
Posted by: Extraneus | April 24, 2012 at 03:44 PM
I am simply amazed at how many kids don't work, and don't plan to work either this summer or at college to help pay their own expenses.
Jane, do you know what they're doing instead? Part of it may be that they're doing unpaid internships. I also wonder whether law schools and med schools are pressuring kids to do all sorts of "save the world" volunteer work as part of their admissions criteria, implicitly denigrating regular old work for pay.
Posted by: jimmyk | April 24, 2012 at 04:06 PM
Good for Tommy Flanagan, but what did he think the business with 'Joe the Plumber'
was about?
Posted by: narciso | April 24, 2012 at 04:42 PM
Jane: My Granddaughter is completing her sophomore year in college. She does have a part time job, but the majority of her college expenses are covered by a Pell Grant and her part time job (club performer and server) buys her food and pays for her gas to get to school. She was living at home until a few weeks ago. She is now living with and taking care of her boyfriend, who is dying of a brain tumor, is a combat vet, and receives gov't disability that pays the rent. He suffered massive head injuries from a grenade while active duty in Iraq, so the disability is coming thru his military benefits.
I asked her why he didn't marry her so that at least when he dies she would get survivor benefits and she came back at me with a shocked, "Granny that would be dishonest." I felt about 2 inches tall at that rejoinder, but in my heart, I'm thinking she is more stupid than me being dishonest.
Posted by: Sara | April 24, 2012 at 04:46 PM
I just picked up a very fashionable and trendsetting canister of Bear Spray, from Walmart. I think it might go very well with TM's $65 chino's, linked above.
For $32.00 (No Sales Tax in Alaska:) you get a handsome black Bear Spray holster, that fits beautifully on your belt or on a backpack strap. It would have looked fetching on George Zimmerman's belt-loop beneath his Red sweatshirt, on even in his suit/shackle courtroom outfit for that matter!
The 8 Oz canister, just a tad smaller in hand than a Budweiser Tall Boy, slides easily into and out of the holster, allowing rapid access to the product, and then with just a quick twist of the trigger mechanism on top as the other hand steadies the canister, one should hopefully be able to get off a second or 2 of the 30 foot poisonous stream as the 600 pound Grizzly races headlong towards one, ala Trayvon Martin.
At that point, the Instructional Brochure provides this excellent illustration not of SYG (standing your ground), but instead of KYG (KIssing your ground) as the proper action to take after emptying the handsome canister in the angry carnivores direction.
As an added bonus, my package says it has "Glow In The Dark Safety", tho' since it is now light up here almost continually, and will remain so until the Bears go back to sleep next December, that would probably be more of a seller for you folks down in the Lower 48.
The packaging has a prominent warning entitled USE RESTRICTIONS:
"This product may be used only to deter bears that are attacking or appear likely to attack humans."
IANAL, but does our JOM Legal Team think I might be subject to a charge of "profiling" if I discharged it at a Grizzly that was simply curious or antsy about my backpack, instead of "likely to attack,"
and would it make a difference if it was a Black, a Brown, or a White (Polar) Bear?
And if I discharged it at an attacking Moose, am I likewise SOL if I cop a "Self Defense" plea?
Help.
Posted by: daddy | April 24, 2012 at 04:50 PM
Daddy: You crack me up. LOL
Posted by: Sara | April 24, 2012 at 04:56 PM
Because the tuition is so high, only the one-percenters aren't eligible for financial aid, so for the other 99%, working is for chumps, scholarships are for chumps, *sigh*.
Sadly enough, the system is set up so that working is for chumps, since any money that the student earns -- and also every dollar that the student gets from scholarships such as Rotary -- just diminishes the student's financial aid by one dollar.Posted by: cathyf | April 24, 2012 at 05:06 PM
Oh a lot are doing a lot of good things - helping with tornado damage, stuff like that. But there are jobs for kids in this town, and if you need money for school - such that you are asking for scholarship help, you really should work a little. I have very strong biases about this stuff, I realize.
I ran into a young woman today working behind a counter, and she told me she also works at McDOnald's. If I could give her a scholarship, I would.
Posted by: Jane | April 24, 2012 at 05:20 PM
Please note I posted neither the stacked gun moll nor the nude young lass on another thread today and in fact both were posted by delightful members of the distaff side of the aisle.
Mind you I'm not complaining, merely noting.
Posted by: Ignatz | April 24, 2012 at 05:24 PM
Excellent, daddy.
BTW is it Clinton's birthday? Why is google featuring a zipper on its home page?
Posted by: Clarice | April 24, 2012 at 05:25 PM
LOL Ignatz. I thought of you when posting that pic. Hope you enjoyed. LOL.
Posted by: Sara | April 24, 2012 at 05:34 PM
excellent zipper snark...
Posted by: NK | April 24, 2012 at 05:35 PM
Speaking of Tommy Flanagan, yeah that's it;
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/04/24/npr-tries-rehab-van-jones-claiming-9-11-truther-signature-was-made
Posted by: narciso | April 24, 2012 at 05:54 PM
Jane-apart from the money you learn so much about people. And you don't think you are too good to do grunt work.
jimmy-I am becoming amazed at how many law schools these days are no longer just law and have non-lawyers on faculty. I think I was tracking one bad idea spokesperson and his CV said School of Law and Cultural Studies at Berkeley. That's just teaching law to be an instrument of public policy.
I always knew I wanted to be a deal lawyer and use language to anticipate problems and describe the essence of the business arrangement.
But I also had an entrepreneurial father and GF who talked business to me, never went to college or read much, and who valued horse sense over book sense and said so.
I don't think enough parents tell their kids you will have to support yourself and you have expensive tastes. Once we were in Florida. We had flown in a twin but their was another family getting in a jet with their dog. My kids stared and I joked "I told you there's always someone richer and smarter." Told that story to one of red's friend's moms (they were in 2nd grade or so). She said they really did not want to tell their daughter things like that at her age.
Why? At what point should you wait to enlighten the little darling with that fundamental reality?
Posted by: rse | April 24, 2012 at 05:59 PM
Do not think that I came to bring peace on Earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword
Matthew 10:34
Posted by: Campesino | April 24, 2012 at 06:31 PM
That little snippet, from that LA Times, was unintentionally illuminating, wasn't it, rse.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-death-penalty-california-20120424,0,4305928.story
Posted by: narciso | April 24, 2012 at 06:53 PM
It is so important to learn how to work and support yourselves. My 4 nieces and nephews worked from the time they could walk and all had to pay for their own educations. Today, they are all very very successful, because against any odds they had, they knew how to work. The youngest, who probably makes the most money, had to overcome a bunch of really tough stuff including a very severe learning disability.
I almost feel sorry for kids whose parents coddle them to the point where they have no clue what to expect in the working world. Think of how tough it would be graduating from college like that today.
Posted by: Jane | April 24, 2012 at 07:29 PM
Expensive tastes? Jodi Kantor's recent book shows Obamas concerned about their personal finances and notes their combined incomes the last few years.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 24, 2012 at 07:29 PM
Agreed Jane. Red works at a gourmet bakery and has learned how lousy some people will treat anyone they can.
That many people with college degrees are barely able to work retail satisfactorily. She says they are all psych majors.
And that women who have known her since she was young and played soccer do not seem to recognize her when she is waiting on them.
She seems to be developing an idea about what too frequent hair color or something does to the stay at homes after a certain time period when the kids are in school all day.
We had a little chat about how many days it takes to buy a favorite dress.
It's like when I told my son he had a job and if he went out without us he could buy.
He said he would just eat at home then.
Posted by: rse | April 24, 2012 at 08:03 PM