Legislating the laws of physics and economics

Okay, so they aren’t really trying to legislate the laws of physics but the stupid/sloppy/careless/whatever reporter(s) and editor(s) make it sound like they are:

Congress by a wide margin approved the first increase in automobile fuel economy in 32 years Tuesday, and President Bush plans to quickly sign the legislation, accepting the mandates on the auto industry.

The energy bill, boosting mileage by 40 percent to 35 miles per gallon, passed the House 314-100 and now goes to the White House, following the Senate’s approval last week.

Do you see that? All it takes to increase the fuel economy is to pass a law. It’s as if they can’t distinguish between a law of physics and a law of man. They would get my “crap for brains” tag just for that alone. But they continue on, apparently thinking they can somehow change the laws of economics in the same bill:

In a dramatic shift to spur increased demand for nonfossil fuels, the bill also requires a six-fold increase in ethanol use to 36 billion gallons a year by 2022, a boon to farmers. And it requires new energy efficiency standards for an array of appliances, lighting and commercial and government buildings.

“This is a choice between yesterday and tomorrow” on energy policy, declared House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who was closely involved in crafting the legislation. “It’s groundbreaking in what it will do.”

If it changes the laws of physics and economics then Pelosi is correct. If not then she is another fascist. My bet is on a fascism outcome. And, people know it will fail and aren’t being entirely quiet about it:

“What we have here is a mandatory conservation bill,” said Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas. He argued that the auto fuel efficiency requirements and the huge increase in ethanol use may not prove to be technologically or economically possible.

Although I’m opposed to our lawmakers doing this personally it’s great economic news for our family. The big push and subsidies for ethanol over the last few years has pushed the price of wheat to over $10/bushel in the last few weeks (via Idaho Wheat Commission).

Even this graph doesn’t give the “big picture”. The price of wheat has been in the $3 to $5 range for over 30 years. That’s unadjusted for inflation. A lot of the equipment my family uses on the farm is over 30 years old. The bulldozer I use for making modifications to the Boomershoot site is over 60 years old. I visited the farm last weekend and they were putting new tires on tractor which still had the original rubber on it until a week or so ago–rubber that was over 30 years old. They have been hurting for decades and now they are finally making a profit and are attempting to upgrade their equipment.

You might ask, “Why is the price of wheat, delivered to Portland Oregon doubling and tripling in price (the price for delivery in March of 2008 is over $13/bushel) when all the ethanol is made from corn in the Midwest?” It’s because wheat is a substitute grain for corn in some situations. And because a lot of the Northwest farmers are planting more wheat to take advantage of the higher profits to be made the supply of lentils and peas (also grown on our farm) is going down and the prices are going up on those as well.

So when the bozos in congress attempt to challenge the laws of economics the best they can do is obscure the costs of their meddling. The costs of their actions are spread out in strange places via obscure mechanisms but eventually the consumers will pay the price, one way or another.

A few teeth short of a full gear

I find it difficult to model the mind of someone that says, all in the same article, the following things. The best I can come up with is some sort of machine with most of the gears missing teeth. It starts and stops and sort of seems to be working but the end results is totally different from what is expected for the given input.

In the circumstances in which we find ourselves, we have to ask the question whether anyone outside of the security forces must be allowed to carry a gun at all. Gun control is a controversial issue all over the world. Opponents of gun control argue that it takes away the rights of good people to protect themselves while criminals will always find a way to own or use guns.

[…]

I am aware that there is a body of evidence, especially in the US that shows that gun bans or even gun control does not substantially affect the crime rate.

[…]

Therefore the unpalatable conclusion must be that gun control has failed and has to be replaced by a complete gun ban at least for a period of time preceded by a campaign against gun use and ownership and an amnesty for the handing in of illegal guns.

Gun control has failed therefore we need more gun control? It’s typical, even though I don’t understand it except as a sort of psychological pathology.

Quote of the day–Mika Brzezinski

You know, that is the most inane statement I have ever heard.

Mika Brzezinski
December 11, 2007
Video here: 2007-12-11MSNBCMJMika.wmv (2.17 MB)
In response to Joe Scarborough telling her, “One person with a gun in the right place can make a big difference.” in regards to Jeanne Assam stopping the murderer at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs.
Via Mark Finkelstein at NewsBusters and an email from Ashley Varner @ the NRA-ILA.
[No attempt at refuting the claim, just dismiss it. But of course what else could she do other than change her mind? The facts speak for themselves.–Joe]

A Letter From Israel

This is from a friend who lives there.  He’s been a long-time marksmanship and sniper instructor for the IDF, and he does seminars in Israel and the U.S. on counterterrorism.

You just can’t make up this stuff:

Friends:

 

Over 20 Kassam rockets rained down on the northern Negev.  We get only partial information.  If we received all the facts and figures, like Kassams landing around Askelon almost every single day, the government would be forced to defend the country or resign.

 

Have a good weekend.

The response from the U.S. has been to supply arms, ammunition, and training to the Palestinian government in Gaza, which ostensibly are for keeping the terrorists in check, but in fact are being promptly used against Israelis.

 

In summary; the situation in Israel is normal.

Whining about legal sales of guns

Just outside the city limits of Chicago there are gun shops selling guns to people that live in the city. That is an entirely legal transaction. They owners of the new guns are prohibited by Chicago law from bringing the guns into the city. Since some of them violate that law the politicians and media are whining and making plans to shut down the gun shops–who did not violate the law. Nothing to see here, just punishing the innocent, move along now.

The free market is a wonderful thing

The little guys try harder:

In what’s likely to be seen as a privacy-friendly move, IAC Search & Media’s Ask.com search engine Tuesday announced a new feature called AskEraser that deletes a user’s search activity data from the company’s servers.

When enabled by the user, the feature will completely delete search queries and associated cookie information from Ask.com servers — including IP addresses, user IDs, session IDs and the text of queries made, according to the company. In most cases, the deletion will take place within a few hours of the time a search is completed, the company said.

What’s bizarre is that some people want government involvement in something where the big concern is government involvement to begin with:

Ask.com has also said that it will also retain user search data in cases where it is required by law to do so, according to Chester. Formal legal requests for search data will continue to be honored, even if AskEraser is enabled.

As a result, Chester argued that Ask.com still hasn’t fully addressed consumer privacy concerns.

“Some privacy advocates will suggest that this announcement shows the ‘market’ is working,” he said. “No doubt, that’s what Google and the other online advertisers opposed to a serious privacy policy will echo, whispering it to regulators, lawmakers and journalists. That’s why a national privacy policy is required.”

Run in circles, scream and shout

I was browsing some of the bigot sites this evening and ran across this set of pictures (rel=nofollow set on the link so they don’t get a bump in ranking from the search engines). I just can’t see what they think they are accomplishing. I kept thinking of that old adage, “When in danger, when doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. They must actually subscribe to that sort of philosophy. Pictures of people laying on the ground helps in what way?

Their actions remind me that the dead students at Virginia Tech were disarmed by the people that claimed to be protecting them. The people laying on the ground symbolize the people that believe submitting to evil frequently end up dead. It makes me think of “proof by vigorous assertion”. They can’t prove their case with numbers and logic so they have to just insist that lawmakers do things their way. They don’t even bother trying to prove what they want would benefit anyone but the criminals. Just do things their way or they will lay on the ground and have people take pictures.

It doesn’t seem like they are getting their way yet. Maybe if they start screaming and kicking they would get better results. It works for some two-year olds.

Quote of the day–Dan Cunningham

Those who believe that individual rights are more important than public safety often side with reduced gun control laws. On the other hand, those that think other individuals are unable to control their own behaviors, and therefore the law needs to influence the gun supply, would certainly side with increased government control of firearms.

Dan Cunningham
Strive For Balance In Gun Control
[This is just the beginning of his half-truths, incorrect assumptions, and outright falsehoods. He apparently does not realize it’s possible, or even more likely, to have both freedom and safety then goes on to create the case for his bigoted beliefs.–Joe]

Woopie Goldberg – A Voice Made For Television

We hear it said of an ugly guy, “He has a face made for radio”.

Woopie Goldberg has performed brilliantly as an actor in television and in movies.  Her personal commentary however, has been nothing you couldn’t hear at the espresso and chi tea bar in any local natural foods store any day of the week.  Hence it is no surprise that her radio show is being axed.  I believe she still has a future in acting.  Therein she has talent.

There remains a significant part of society that can’t seem to understand how radio is a business (the business of selling advertising) and that in business you must have something to offer that people, you know, want.

Malkin covers it too.

Hint:  If you have no respect for those who made it big in the business, you just might be on the wrong path.  “I’m gonna be just the opposite of that really, ultra successful guy” might not be the best business plan.  Success, one would think, is the best teacher.

And here’s a hint just especially for those on the Left:  We’ve all heard your message every day for our whole lives, as long as we can remember.  You’ve gotten your message out, and that is your problem.  A lot of people are sick of hearing it because most of it has something to do with how wrong, greedy, stupid, evil, and endangered we are– the air we breathe is killing us, the food we eat is killing us, oil is killing us, a shortage of oil is killing us, farming is killing us, starvation is killing us, fat is killing us, dieting is killing us, carbs are killing us, disease is killing us, antibiotics, vaccines, and the drug companies are killing us, freedom and prosperity are especially killing us, poverty is killing us, the good economy is killing us but really the economy sucks, terrorists are killing us (but it’s our fault) and the war against terrorists is killing us, and everything, absolutely everything, is killing women and children, the elderly and the minorities the hardest– and how some form of socialism (government-enforced coercion) is the answer to absolutely every problem, real or imagined.

Does that about sum it up?  Who needs to tune into a radio show to hear that when we hear it everywhere else every day?

More-of-the-same day in and day out nagging and finger pointing and blaming America and our Liberty for the world’s problems isn’t something a lot of people are going to pay money to have broadcast in their name.  But you don’t, and won’t, get it anyway.

Quote of the day–Bryan Miller

But, first, a little background – for those of you who have more to do with your time than memorize old, obsolete and unused Constitutional dicta – the 2nd Amendment reads: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As I said, Ho Hum. How seriously must I (or anyone, for that matter) take a sentence so overwhelmingly categorical, yet which has never been used to overturn any gun regulation, ordinance or law in the 200-plus years since it was adopted?

Bryan Miller
November 29, 2007
Supremes take on 2nd Amendment – Yawn
[It’s overwhelmingly categorical and never been used to overturn a law since it was adopted, therefore we shouldn’t take it seriously and can enact laws that violate it without concern to the constitutionality of the law. Interesting logic. So, Mr. Miller, do you advocate treating the 13th amendment in the same way?

Section. 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

If so then I claim you, Bryan Miller, as my slave. Maybe then you will suddenly recognize the utility of the 2nd Amendment. Or maybe since the 13th amendment is only 142 years old it’s too recent to discard. If it needs to be 200-plus years old before we can start ignoring it then I’ll let my great-grandchildren know that your descendants gave up their 13th Amendment rights on your say so. As my descendants, with guns, take possession I’m sure your descendants will “thank” you for giving up your 2nd Amendment rights earlier. The point is that just because a law hasn’t been overturned recently the constitutional provision against such laws is obsolete.

And, Mr. Miller, it’s obvious you haven’t read this book which demonstrates the Supreme Court has upheld the legal tradition and historical record of private gun ownership, self defense, and armed self defense, since the country began.

My take on Miller’s “yawn” response is that is the best spin he can put on what he thinks is impending doom.–Joe]

When seconds count mandate a cell phone

Via reader Rob:

Montclair State Unveils Mandatory ‘School Phone’

Students Must Carry And Pay For GPS-Based Cell Device

MONTCLAIR, N.J. (CBS) ―

College students at Montclair State University are all talking about a new requirement that will require students to have a cell phone.

CBS 2 HD has learned more on this required feature that is forcing students to dig into their wallets.

At Montclair State, there is no excuse for being out of touch.

“‘School Phone’ I use for campus e-mail, different things like that,” freshman Angela Vuocolo said.

That’s right.

First-year student Vuocolo said ‘School Phone’ — as in a Sprint-operated cell phone — is now mandatory for all students. It’s the first program of its kind in the country.

The cost: $420 a year for a base plan which is bundled into the tuition bill.

It includes just 50 peak voice minutes a month, but unlimited text messaging to any carrier, unlimited campus-based data usage, and student activated emergency GPS tracking.

“What it does is allow students to have an extra pair or group of people watching over them when they’re going from one location to another,” Montclair Police Department Chief Paul Cell said.

The positive impact is already being felt across campus.

“It makes me feel comfortable,” MSU freshman Ricky Bodtmann said. “I guess if people want to feel safe.”

As Rob pointed out, “It makes them FEEL safer. I’m thinking that the phone won’t stop a bullet.”

And it won’t do much good against a knife or superior strength either. If safety were the goal that $420/year would be better spent on a gun, ammunition, and some range time. But this is New Jersey where, “When it comes to firearms, the citizen acts at his own peril.

Situation Normal – Muslims Burning France

Since things are “stable” (no change in the situation) this is not news (but the second year of on-going coverage of the Aruba rape case got tons of play last night and this morning, and the History Channel has been busy talking about Sasquatch and the Bermuda Triangle).  Why report that Muslims are burning and looting in response to an accident?

Malkin has some details.

Le Parisien reports that they burned down a Peugeot dealership, sacked a train station and shops, tore up a McDonald’s, stole the day’s receipts and attacked customers, smashed and burned cars, and are still going strong.

Don’t they have a protection of gun rights in France? (I’m trying to imagine something like this happening in Idaho, going on for over a year, and I just can’t do it)

Yup.  Things are normal in France, so we can concentrate on important stuff like space-alien abductions, haunted houses, Princess Diana, and the Loch Ness monster.

L.A. Times gets snarky

I sometimes wish I could output snark like this:

The report follows recent news that screeners at Los Angeles International Airport missed 75% of the fake bombs that investigators tried to smuggle onto planes during tests two years ago. The excuse from TSA officials: The tests were difficult and designed to trip up screeners. Whereas Al Qaeda will doubtless hide its bombs in brightly marked packages.

But then I would probably want to use it for occasions that would jeopardize my job and marriage.

Clever kids lacking judgment

Clever trick–hacking a soda machine. But they qualify for an Insufficiently Myelinated Award for posting their faces along with their criminal acts.

[Via Bruce.]

Damn reporters

I and nearly everyone else with more than two brain cells to rub together should have learned our lesson. But we fall for it again and again.

Remember when I another blogger or two raised a big stink about the Principle Deputy Director of the National Intelligence said we need to refine privacy? Well… the reporter apparently thought he could read the guys mind or something. Here is the actual speech.

Bruce Schneier took it the same we did at first but followed up with a link the next day to the actual speech–which is how I got straightened out.

The reporter got it wrong. And we believed it because it was what we wanted to hear. We want to hear how dangerous the government is. We latched on to that sloppy (I’m giving her, Pamela Hess, the benefit of the doubt) reporting and ran with it. Shame on us.

The critical passage is here:

Too often, privacy has been equated with anonymity; and it’s an idea that is deeply rooted in American culture. The Long Ranger wore a mask but Tonto didn’t seem to need one even though he did the dirty work for free. You’d think he would probably need one even more. But in our interconnected and wireless world, anonymity – or the appearance of anonymity – is quickly becoming a thing of the past.

Anonymity results from a lack of identifying features. Nowadays, when so much correlated data is collected and available – and I’m just talking about profiles on MySpace, Facebook, YouTube here – the set of identifiable features has grown beyond where most of us can comprehend. We need to move beyond the construct that equates anonymity with privacy and focus more on how we can protect essential privacy in this interconnected environment. Protecting anonymity isn’t a fight that can be won. Anyone that’s typed in their name on Google understands that. Instead, privacy, I would offer, is a system of laws, rules, and customs with an infrastructure of Inspectors General, oversight committees, and privacy boards on which our intelligence community commitment is based and measured. And it is that framework that we need to grow and nourish and adjust as our cultures change.

I think people here, at least people close to my age, recognize that those two generations younger than we are have a very different idea of what is essential privacy, what they would wish to protect about their lives and affairs. And so, it’s not for us to inflict one size fits all. It’s a need to have it be adjustable to the needs of local societies as they evolve in our country. Eventually, we can only hope that people’s perceptions – in Hollywood and elsewhere – will catch up.

I’m not saying everything he said is 100% okay with me. But I will say that I no longer think Mr. Kerr deserves the one-way ticket I had suggested before.

Monopoly of force

Kevin points us at a slide-show on the “wisdom” of government having a monopoly of force. It’s good. Very good.

I’m not sure it will have the impact on “the other side” that we would want it to. They will just say, “We just need to have good people in government.” But I think it is useful for us to have a comeback to when someone says something like, “The government must have a monopoly on force”. You can’t just let that stand. I’m sure that to many people once stated it’s “a no brainer” at first glance. “Of course they should. It just makes sense!” You need to be able to shove something in their face:


From of a poster I purchased from JPFO.

Then you say, “NO! This is the reason why governments should never have a monopoly on force.” It’s easy to come up with a body count of 60 million people in the last century that were killed by they own government. And this is the reason our government was not given a monopoly on force in the constitution.

They may not buy your argument but at least they won’t be able to accuse you of, “loving guns more than life”, or some such stupid thing.

So what did they do to deserve this?

Last December I got a call from a newspaper wanting to talk about illegal bomb building. I posted about it here. In August Michael Blattner, the college student that got caught with the pipe bomb materials, plead guilty to knowingly and unlawfully possessing firearms at the dorm and at his parents’ home. This Thursday Blattner will be sentenced.

From what I can determine about the facts in the case the most Blattner was guilty of was being stupid. Oh, he probably violated several laws here and there but they were all victimless crimes. The type that nearly all gun owners violate all the time without realizing it. Nothing new to report there. Some stupid kid gets his life messed up because the government is overstepping it’s constitutional authority–it happens all the time.

What surprised me is this:

Two agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will be honored in Pittsburgh today for their investigation into a former California University of Pennsylvania student accused of possessing pipe bombs.

[…]

ATF agents Matthew Regentin and Ben Cornali will join a handful of law enforcement officers from western Pennsylvania being honored at the 10th Annual Law Enforcement Agency Directors Awards Ceremony.

The men are credited with the arrest of Blattner, 19, who was charged last year in federal court with knowingly and unlawfully possessing firearms at the dorm and at his parents’ home following a 10-day investigation.

According to the criminal complaint filed in the case by Regentin, police approached Blattner regarding suspected bomb materials on Dec. 5, 2006, at his dorm room in Residence Hall A.

Regentin said that when police – led by ATF agents and the Allegheny County Bomb Squad – searched Blattner’s dorm room, they discovered six pipe bombs ranging from 2 to 4 inches long wrapped in black electrical tape.

Additionally, Regentin said police uncovered two journals detailing the making of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), including drawings of pipe bombs and two sketches specifically titled “medium pipe bomb” and “planted IED” (Improvised Explosive Device).

If you read the original newspaper article you will see the local hardware store turned the kid in. As near as I can tell the ATF agents merely did a little searching through the kid’s places of residence and concluded he broke some law. Yet they are being “honored” for this. Had they done some great detective work, disarmed a bomb about to blow up a school, or successfully taken down a criminal/terrorist gang that had thousands of pounds of explosives with plans to kill people or do extensive property damage I would be in line to congratulate them on a job well done. But to have some poor smuck handed to them on a silver platter then for them to be “honored” tarnishes the meaning of honored.

Maybe there is more to the story and I’m way off base. If so, someone let me know and I’ll update my post. But until then I’ll just have to conclude the agents were so stupid that this awards ceremony is like a Special Olympics contest where the contestants were so severely handicapped you are amazed they know which direction to run and everyone deserves an award for just showing up.

Living in a alternate reality

I had to read this article twice to figure out what they were actually doing with their grant money. It turns out they are apparently taking a stroll into an alternate reality where good intentions make a difference. In their world view gang members need to be offered “alternatives to their current lifestyle”.

I call it wistful thinking but they call it Project Ceasefire:

“Our role in Project CeaseFire is, quite simply, to stop the next shooting,” state Attorney General Anne Milgram said, referring to the name of the statewide campaign and its tagline. “And if we do that, we can save lives.”

[…]

Friday’s news conference, held in the lower level of Plainfield Public Library before more than 100 people, also marked the graduation of eight paid outreach workers who endured 40 hours of training, including nighttime strolls in crime-ridden areas of other cities.

The workers said they will devote their time to consoling families affected by gun violence, offering gang members alternatives to their current lifestyle and promoting safe streets by holding community events such as a proposed midnight barbecue in the city’s West End.

The group, led by Angela Piggee, executive director of the Liberty Community Development Corporation, includes: Arlinda Harris, Ethel Wheeler, Eric Spann, George M. Brown Sr., Amy Concepcion, Tawana Fields and Wanda Lyles.

Though Piggee said she received a number of unspeakable responses when she and fellow trainees attempted to talk to gang members in other cities, Piggee said she remained optimistic about the outreach efforts in Plainfield.

Quote of the day–Albert Einstein

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.

Albert Einstein
[There are times when I’m very discouraged. There are times when it just doesn’t seem worth gnawing through your restraints to get up in the morning.–Joe]

Some Students Understand – Administration Still in the Dark

In spite of a lifetime of indoctrination to the contrary at public schools, some students are figuring out that being in a “gun free zone” can put you at risk.  Here in Moscow, pro rights students at the University of Idaho are making themselves heard.  This comes shortly after our socialist mayor, Nancy Cheney, tried to ban guns in “public places” and was told by the state attorney general to back off.  “Preemption” laws state that a local government may not enact gun laws that are more strict than state law.  Yet hear we have a state-funded institution with a gun free zone policy.  Go figure.

Virginia Tech is also a “no firearms” campus, but that didn’t stop Seung-Hui Cho from killing 32 people there April 16. Baker [one of the student protestors] said he doesn’t believe being able to carry concealed weapons would have prevented the tragedy, but that it would have minimized the number of innocent people killed. He said Cho didn’t obey the “no firearms” signs, and that can happen anywhere when lawful citizens are denied their right to self-defense.

How do you spell, “Duh!”?

“We’re not saying we need a mass arming of students,” … People are not going through these [permit approval] procedures so they can go out and commit robberies and rape.”

Does anyone else understand that a criminal isn’t going to bother getting a carry permit?

Lt. Paul Kwiatkowski, campus division commander for the Moscow Police Department, said while concealed weapons are legal with a permit, the university’s code of conduct is very clear about carrying them on campus and that this policy, if changed, would complicate issues of violence.

Yeah, it would complicate things very much indeed – for the criminal.  Nothing will spoil your day of fun, murdering people, worse than having someone shoot back at you.

“If an individual is carrying a concealed weapon, you shouldn’t see it,” he said. “They like to flash their guns and show everyone they’re carrying a gun.”

Really?  Carry permit holders like to “flash” their guns and “show everyone”?  Got any proof of that, Lieutenant?  I know a bunch of permit holders, and I’ve never once seen it happen that way.  If I’m not mistaken, Lieutenant, “flashing” you gun around, can even get your permit revoked.  One thing left out of this article is the fact that Idaho requires three hours of training before a carry permit is issued.  My experience is that most people get a lot more training than that, all on their own.  Anyone who cares enough to have done even rudimentary study of this issue will already know that concealed carry permit holders are THE most law-abiding segment of society – more so than police.  Furthermore, (and are you listening, Nancy Cheney?) the rates of innocent bystander injuries, and of improper shootings, are far lower when a concealed permit holder is involved in a confrontation, compared to when a policeman is involved.  Look it up.

If concealed weapons were allowed, Kwiatkowski said, and a shooter came on campus, while concealed weapons carriers could fire back, when police arrived they wouldn’t know who the shooter was.

This is one point that has some shred of legitimacy.  However, we were trained in my “pre-permit” classes to be very aware of this potential problem.  If you’re the citizen defender, and you’re the one calling the cops, make sure they have your description and that of the perp.  When police arrive, put your gun down if possible, and identify yourself, etc..  Cops:  You people need to have thought of these things, and know what to do ahead of time to protect the innocent.  Our right to protect ourselves does not depend on what you consider to be convenient.  For that matter, should we automatically assume that anyone in a cop uniform is actually a cop?  Mr. murderer can get a cop outfit at the local rental store.  Now he’s Deputy Freakin’ Dog.  Unfortunately for all of us, criminals don’t wear bright orange arm bands or some such, identifying themselves as criminals, either.