Perhaps I should also write about the Dorner case, which currently has the folks in my old home town all a-fluster. Well, there's a lot to be said about that goatfuck. But frankly, I've got a project to do this evening, and I can't spare the time needed to do a proper job of working through all the ramifications of that drama. I don't know where Dorner is right now, but I suspect that, since his vehicle was found in the Angeles National Forest, much of him may already have gone through the innards of one of California's more ursine residents.
Nevertheless, since you were kind enough to visit this blog, I feel obligated to give you something. So here's a picture of Malcolm MacDowell in droog regalia, then and now.
There now. What more could you possibly need?
Well, in my case, I could use a good sword cane, like the one wielded by Little Alex in the movie. This is a tough neighborhood, and the local louts and I have entered into a mutual hate agreement.
The trouble is, Maryland's rules on which personal weapons one can and cannot carry are infuriatingly vague. See here and here; take special note of § 4-101 (b)(4). I have no desire to break the law, but around here, the law appears to be whatever an individual cop or judge decides. And that ain't fair!
3 comments:
You don't need assault knives or high capacity pepper spray devices, that's what the police are for.
America is decidedly too violent, and easy access to deadly weaponry and our culture of violence is why. I commend Maryland for keeping these out of criminals' hands.
From your first link, this comment:
My brother has walked around parts of Baltimore with a sword on his back recently and he said cops have seen him with and he was not arrested....slick.
You are living in the 80s law, things have changed.
I guess one cop getting his ass sued for an illegal arrest for knife laws successfully kinda spread the word.
The question would be whether as a cane, the sword is concealed differently than when in a scabbard slung over ones back.
XI
A year ago (10 Feb 2012) there were media reports saying that word had been put out that Ratzinger would be assassinated within 12 months, and replaced by Scola. That idea was taken seriously by senior cardinals.
The date of the information went back to 30 Dec 2011, but it's interesting that Ratzinger announced his abdication on 11 Feb 2013, almost exactly 12 months after the story broke.
Between then and now, Martini died. A very powerful Jesuit cardinal, he was an important figure at the last few conclaves. The Jesuits have been biding their time. At the last conclave, Martini went to Rome and said now's not the time, let's not split the church, and could people please back Ratzinger. Por ahora!
Ratzinger's abdication (correct word: he's a monarch) is very likely to link to the Dutroux case in Belgium. Dutroux's release application is before the court, which will announce its decision next week. Dutroux's wife was released early last year, to 'spend 10 years in a convent'.
Cardinal Danneeels, head of the Catholic church in Belgium for 31 years, was also involved in the network in which Dutroux was a relatively minor figure. When some of this came to light in 2004, Danneels ran to Ratzinger.
Watch Belgium.
The church is likely to split, big time. This isn't about financial scandals in Milan. Everybody knows the Vatican are a bunch of crooks. It isn't about the widespread abuse of children by local priests either.
Post a Comment