Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
Sooo, would "lesser beings" (if there can possibly be lesser beings than mass murderers under color of authority) have been prosecuted long ago, whilst the Doctor Strangelove's not only go free, but draw posh pensions from US, in addition to the graft and profits from the military industrial complex? I have seen Doctor Strangelove, the movie, yet as I was living it inside the complex found that this great work of art didn't know the half of it. Truth was, and no doubt is, strangelovlier than fiction.— January 14, 2015 3:51 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
Again, the important thing is SWIFT justice. The more remote the punishment from the crime, the less likely justice will be served. Give potential victims the right and the training to effectively protect themselves and others and court costs (except for prosecuting the victim) might go down. Death penalty cases drag on for years--lucrative for lawyers and clogging the courts. Better to let the scum rot in prison, though the cost of keeping them there may well exceed the tax money consumed by appeals. At least the innocent would only rot, rather than die quickly. And, if justice finally does prevail for them, they might even be released--minus decades from their lives . . .— January 14, 2015 3:45 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
Don, I agree with your policy; that's what makes it a great "blog." Perhaps we, the readers, should endeavor to spread the word amongst our friends far and wide, so that there might be a Pulitzer in your future.— January 14, 2015 3:34 p.m.
Hirshman’s hustle
And here I had thought Hirshman was robbing the taxpayers and students blind. I guess he's a bargain after all! But "Leadership Starts Here?" PUH--LEEEZE . . .— January 14, 2015 3:24 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
" I do think everyone should be on the alert for terrorism and crime but perhaps stopping it with more armed citizens isn't the best approach." -- ImJustABill Jan. 13, 2015 @ 4:43 p.m. Perhaps not, but what are the specific superior alternatives? Let's get a list going here.— January 13, 2015 6:58 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
Well-planned attacks are predictable. Strategic and tactical planning should be based on that knowledge. One possible variation that would have been actually feasible would have been to have posted guards where they would not be seen by the terrorist planners who must have cased the situation repeatedly. Full-length, armored, disguised shields for guards covering all possible entry points, with viewing and weapon ports would have been a good start. In such close quarters, limited range, small-pellet scatterguns would have been able to disable the terrorists by ripping up their hands and other unprotected body parts while limiting the level of injury to both the terrorists and others in the path of the wide pattern. This would at least temporarily neutralize the terrorists, followed quickly by application of restraints or almost instantaneously by a lethal round or rounds as the situation dictated. Bystanders might not have been injured at all, but injuries would have been relatively minor. No bullets spraying into the street either. Posting visible armed guards is simply amateurish under the circumstances, and invites their immediate murder, besides being improperly-gunned, rather than under-gunned. This is not the ONLY possible tactical plan, but it is a workable, feasible one.— January 13, 2015 6:54 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
These particular murders apparently did happen very quickly. Apparently the attack was well-planned, as I suspect the terrorists murdered the armed guards first. So, yes, the "security" system didn't work. What would have worked?— January 13, 2015 6:36 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
I must have missed the evidence. Supposing you are right, how would you go about pulling off this miracle in the context of cultural realities?— January 13, 2015 6:27 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
But "limiting" is a tricky concept. Just what do you mean--can you be more specific?— January 13, 2015 6:24 p.m.
San Diego lawyer helps defend Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
"Shall "we" take all weapons away from all law-abiding citizens? Will that reduce violence?" -- Twister Jan. 11, 2015 @ 9:54 p.m. Please respond. Will that reduce violence? Upon what evidence do you base your conclusions?— January 13, 2015 10:57 a.m.