Destroy A City That Already Has Racism

From Black's Law Dictionary:

involuntary, adj. Not resulting from a free and unrestrained choice; not subject to control by the will.

As many of you already know, yesterday a white transit officer was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter for shooting an unarmed black man in Oakland last year.

The masses were not happy with this verdict.  Mostly because it makes no sense.  There's this video that shows the shooting.  Watching it is giving me a headache so I'm just going to post it here.

A better, non-embedable video is here.  Now I'm not sure what happened here, but nothing about this situation appears involuntary.  I guess I need to brush up on my criminal law.  And so do the good people of Oakland.  Because these good people have been acting not so good.

I especially like the grammar in this one.

Reminds me of the good ol' days in L.A.:

And Cleveland:

And at the G20:

For what it's worth, my Criminal Law exam 1L year was a closed assignment about a new area of law and it was Riot. I really hope they don't test that on this exam.

Destroy Sports in a City That Already Has Nothing

OK, this requires being a great athlete, which you are probably not. Or, own a sports franchise, preferably with an expiring stadium lease. You probably don't. Hmm...maybe you can't do this during Barbri, or any other time.

But here is someone who can, on live TV, no less:



So can this guy.

Two more reasons not to live in Ohio.

Teaching Wills and American History

I updated this post and changed the time.  See below for reasons for edit.

Erica Fine is teaching us Wills today, tomorrow, and Friday.  

The best we could come up with, and this was a classmate's suggestion, is the American History Professor from Back to School - Sam Kinison.

 As always, let us know what you think.

 After our original posting we received a few comments of note.  First:

Erica is awesome! She tutored JFK Jr- and he finally passed!  

Then:

Did she tutor him for the bar or to get his pilot's license?

  We also have two more possible lookalikes. 
First from someone who appropriated my computer today:

And second from the comments:

Use Your Rights

The current Supreme Court is all about protecting rights, like the right to assemble without government interference or the right to remain silent. Not like those fascist bastards who preceded them on the Court.

A few weeks ago, the Supremes recognized another right. Actually, they recognized it two years ago, but they just applied it to most people this year. This delay is because the US is a federal system. This, of course, means that states can do certain things without interference from the federal government. Unless the federal government really wants to stop those things or do them itself. Then it will. And if the states don't like it? Well, we all know how that ends. Fortunately for the states, Congress is lazy and inefficient, so they still have lots of stuff to do.

The right I am referring to is, of course, the right to bear arms. Charlton Heston be praised! Apparently, this is a long-established right, which, for some reason, has been ignored for years. But who cares? You can now buy guns. Lots of guns.

There are many reasons to buy guns. First, guns are fun. Destroying things is fun, and guns make this easy and effective. Second, they make you feel powerful. This should probably not be confused with feeling safe. Guns aren't all that safe, especially if you really want to have fun. Because that would involve shooting things that blow up and drinking. Third, guns make people fear you. This can coincide with fun, but it is also useful. To quote one of Chicago's finest: "You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone." Finally, guns can be useful when the zombie apocalypse comes. Or in some other post-apocalyptic world.

Yes, I know some people have mentioned hunting and self-defense. That's just BS, like most of the arguments self-interested fanatics make. Besides, those are pretty much covered by fun and scaring people.

Now that I have convinced you to exercise your newly created announced right to own guns, you may be asking: "How can I use this right?" The answer is to buy guns. Even better, use the interwebs to buy guns during Barbri. Unfortunately, Craigslist is not as useful as usual when it comes to guns. Probably because it is run by godless commies like all the other websites ending in .org. But a quick Google search will find all sorts of reputable dealers willing to sell you a constitutional right.

A nice .22 pistol like this one is a good starting point. .22 pistols are relatively cheap to buy and shoot, reliable, and easy to shoot. Great for beginners. This one is the perfect size to slip into your pocket before heading out to the bar (drink, not fail). Or you can upgrade to something a bit less practical, like this.

.22s are nice, but you also need something with kick. The Colt .45 1911 is a classic. Here's one! Or you can go for something bigger and more modern, like a Desert Eagle. If it's good enough for the IDF, it's good enough for me.

You should also probably get a rifle. They are very useful for shooting zombies at long range. And it is best to stay far away from things that want to eat your brain. This is a decent zombie shooter. But its cousin is better; the best, in fact. And everyone will recognize it. Even people who don't like freedom.

But you should hurry. If one of the new four horsemen, or the swing, kicks the bucket in the next couple years, you will probably have to join a militia to exercise this "right".

Fight Eminent Domain

Governments suck.  And I don't just say that because I was never elected to student government.  No, I say that because I just want the government to leave me alone.  Especially if they think I committed a crime.  I also want the government to take care of those things I don't want to deal with - like feeding poor people.  I'm willing to pay a premium for this service too.  But I digress.

In addition to leaving me alone, I don't want the government just to come take my house.  And I'm not alone in this regard.  I have a friend in China who was doing the same thing.  Yang Youde, a farmer in central China, owned land desired by the government.  He put up a valiant effort to stop the eminent domain takeover. To keep the government away, he built homemade canons and fired thousands of yuan worth of fire crackers (that's tens of thousands of American pennies). 

Here's Yang in all of his glory:

Yang was doing well - at least for a while.  Then the government decided it didn't like all of the media coverage this story was getting and came to send Yang a message.  Yang's brother was mistaken for Yang and here are the results:

Thus in accord with an earlier thought, I would say that yes - it is admirable to try to resist the government's takeover of your land, but it is not wise.  Same goes with illegal arrests.  It is admirable and legal to resist but it is not wise.