Daughter needed some art supplies for something I'll tell you about tomorrow. It's fun. I was happy to see the store open; we've moved to the point where that now seems the default. I like that. The store had arrows and NO ENTRY ONE WAY signs to make sure everyone moved through the store in the prescribed way. No one paid attention.

This was cute once but I'm sick of it.

But it was fun to get out and do something normal like "go to the art store with Daughter."

But I'm sick of mask chic and ironic mask and mask culture and all of it. If the WHO stories about the low rate of transmission from asymptomatic carriers bears out, it'll be interesting to see how many people still insist on wearing them. Who will be the last man to wear a mask for a lost cause?

Anyway. That whole "abolish the police." I have two paying pieces due on this, so I'm holding my fire here; allow me give you the dregs, focused on a seemingly insignificant detail!

When I read what the supporters say, I always come across a plank that gets the cops out of traffic enforcement. Traffic cameras will handle the infractions! There’s no need for police to stop someone who’s doing 70 MPH down an urban road set at 30 MPH. The cameras will record the number, and issue the ticket, which will be marked “return to sender” since the plates were stolen.

But let’s say the ticket goes to the right house. Why would you pay it? Out of civic duty? What sort of idiot hands out money when they don’t have to? Presumably the massive amounts of fines would attract the attention of an Economic Equity Assurance Coordinator, who sends someone by to see if they’re okay, and presents a list of agencies that can help them in these stressful times.

The alternative, of course, is unacceptable: a bench warrant is issued for unpaid fines, the person gets pulled over, cop runs the plates, finds the warrant, tosses the car, maybe finds something illegal, and now the person is Justice-System Involved, as they say. All because they blew through a red light in a school crossing at 70 MPH, smdh, is that fair?

Since progressives often assume that loft intentions banish any consideration of secondary and tertiary effects, you want to ask them:

So you want the construction of a surveillance system at all intersections throughout the city, eh? Just so we’re clear, the people who shrieked because the Patriot Act would let Uncle Sam subpoena your library book check-out history now want the government peering down from a thousand cameras.

Yes, because for great justice.

Oh. Okay. Second question: the vast majority of intersections are not regulated by traffic lights, but signs. The old-style ones that say STOP - which, when you think about it, is rather authoritarian; there’s no room for dialogue, no consideration of the wishes of the driver, just an immovable proclamation. If there’s no cameras, and no fear of a cop car lighting you up because you blew through the intersection, do you think there will be more or fewer people disregarding the sign, and will that increase or decrease public safety?

Third question: if the person with 100 tickets speeds through a school zone and hits a kid, then speeds off, what’s the next step? Flood the zone with grief counselors, of course, and make sure the parents are given pamphlets with the phone numbers of people they can talk to in these difficult days ahead, but what about the driver?

A chase is out of the question. Perhaps a drone could follow the driver to his residence. Then you send in the community mediator to get the driver to surrender to “authorities,” if we can still use that unfortunate term with all its oppressive historical connotations. They would talk to the driver to facilitate the process of restorative justice. (Jail is out of the question; that won’t bring back the dead.) Community work would be better.

Heretofore the essence of a Minnesotan has been someone who sat idling at the single red light at 1 AM in a small town, because that’s what you do. It’s not up to you to bolt through the light because no one’s watching. You’re watching. You don’t cheat on the small things, because that means you learn to justify cheating on the small things. I mean, okay, if the light lasts five minutes, maybe you turn right on red, pull into a parking lot, turn around, then go back through the intersection, but just bolting through a red light like CHARLES MANSON is wrong.

I have an app I used for parking. It makes my watch buzz when I’m close to expiring, so I can make sure I don’t get a ticket. Because when I see that ticket, I think: dang, I’m going to have to pay this. Same with license tabs - once a year, cut the check, apply the sticker, and go forth knowing I’m in full compliance.

What a sucker.

More laws leads to more lawlessness. Less enforcement leads to more lawlessness. Bad enforcement leads to lawlessness. It seems we’re about to experience all three.




It’s 1973!

Oh, things are . . . they’re just horrible! But still we must sell things. Behold the double-truck Panasonic layout:

Side by side, the triumphs and failures of the age. That nifty little white unit, straight out of the 21st century! Surrounded and smothered by endless planks of wood-grained plastic.

Everyone thought they wanted a portable TV, but it’s notable that no one really seemed to want one that much. I’m referring to the second set, the out-of-the-house battery-powered unit. The others were sold by the million, and were indeed portable, but once they were placed somewhere, they generally stayed there.

If you’re the person who likes meat but the rest of your family likes other shapes of meat, we have beds for you!

Holiday Inn ran a lot of ads in this period that emphasized all their other amenities without quite making them very compelling.

<peaveyvoice> Well, now, I wouldn’t say that </peaveyvoice>



You can smell the burned shag and spilled bong water, eh?


The fact that this played in a major nationwide magazine tells you how low the market was.

Everyone’s grandma had one of these.

It was dusty and it was on a chair and it fell over if you bumped it.

A rare appearance of the Toffler Font that wasn’t used to warn you about FUTURE SHOCK.

Well, it’s a bit rounder, probably because this is the original font. It was modified for the book jacket.

There was more in 1973, but it was just bad ads for smokes and dull cars.


That'll do, I hope; some Webby below to let you know what was funny 101 years ago.




blog comments powered by Disqus