Today at lunch I had a friendly discussion about the recent developments surrounding a particular famous Olympic athlete and his poorly chosen method of relaxation. It seems the sheriff of the town where the unfavorable picture was taken of Mr. Michael Phelps has decided to pursue an investigation into the people involved with the activities partaken in said picture. I did not comment on the legality of the main issue, ie whether marijuana should be legalized or not, but merely on the fact that people are chiding the sheriff for his actions.

I suppose I did get a bit stubborn during the course of the conversation and once or twice prevented the other party from voicing their point. But I already knew what their point was. It was the same point and issue that all the people riding the sheriff were already espousing. Namely that it was a waste of resources to pursue the investigation. Phelp’s already said he was sorry, why can’t we leave it at that?

Facts:

1. It is currently illegal to possess marijuana. (I will neither agree or disagree with this, it simply is the state of things currently.)
2. Michael Phelps was pictured using a bong/water pipe.
3. He later admitted that yes it indeed was filled with marijuana and not tobacco.
4. The sheriff, based on that picture, took it upon himself to find and arrest the parties involved.
5. Michael Phelps has a certain level of celebrity that undoubtedly  brought extra scrutiny to bear.

Yes it may be unfair that the sheriff went after arrests based on the picture simply because of Phelp’s celebrity status.  It may be a huge waste of law enforcement resources for rather minimal charges. As far as I know, Phelp’s has yet to be charged with anything. But he has already admitted to it on record. That alone is enough. His lawyers would have a hard time having his admission thrown out, especially because he said it during a press conference and he was not under arrest at the time so he would not have been in violation of his Miranda rights.

The stubbornness on my part came in when the other party involved in the conversation tried to get out their point that it was simply marijuana and surely a huge waste of resources to pursue it, and I constantly interrupted with the question: Is it legal to posses or consume marijuana?” Sure it was a bit annoying, and it was meant to be. More then trying to support the sheriff, I was trying to drive at the point, were is the line where laws can be fudged a bit?

Sure he was not hurting anyone? I attempted to make a comparison to attacking someone with a knife, but only cutting them a little, to the point of drawing blood but leaving no scar. The other party complained that comparing attempted murder or even assault was not accurate when talking about drug use. Why the hell not? Are not both against the law? The biggest difference I see is that the assault depends solely on the second party (the victim) deciding to press charges or not. In the case of drug use there is only one party. So if we apply the same rules to laws governing drug use, then the victimized party should decide whether to press charges or not. Which then means the person using the drugs should decide whether they want to press charges against themselves or not.

The point being that while the actions the sheriff have taken may be a bit overzealous, especially if he does not apply the same resources to similar cases when no celebrity is involved, he was still enforcing the law which is what he was hired to do. If you think the law he was enforcing is ridiculous or outdated, then you have every right to petition the government (local and federal), seek elected office yourself, stage demonstration (legally and peacefully) and more to see it get changed. Until then, you should full expect to pay for the consequences of your actions until such changes are made. That goes double for celebrities and others under the public microscope.

You may be wondering what do these two have in common and why I would I mention them together. Well the story in “Troll” centers around a family that moves into a new apartment that is being tormented by a troll in his evil plans to take over the human world and restore the fairy world. The surname of this family is Potter. The father’s name is Harry and the son (who is the main character) is Harry Potter Jr. Now the name similarity between Harry Potter Jr. and Harry Potter could be rather coincidental, but at some point in the movie, when Harry finds out that the old woman living in the apartment building is actual a magical princess, he asks her to teach him to be a wizard. Yes, Harry Potter asked a magical princess to teach him to be a wizard long before ever attending Hogwarts.

Now you know and now you can form your own conclusions as to whether or not she (and you know who “she” is) plagarized the Harry Potter character or not. While there are plenty of disimilarities, the name and the desire to become a wizard are almost to big to be a coincendence.

The chased the mouse through the power plant and into the high voltage lines, subsequently causing a power outage. No word on whether the mouse was caught or not, or if the “woman of the house” chased the bad cat out of the house for trying to catch the mouse.

I never did really understand that part of it. Why would you shoo the cat out of the house for trying to catch a mouse (and not shoo the mouse) when your reaction to seeing the mouse was to scream and jump up on the table? And Tom was half the size of a human. That is one damn big cat and I would think it would cause massive destruction in all of its other cat activities and not just while chasing Jerry. I did like the fact that they did not speak, although it was ruined when the little bird was added. I am still trying to decide if they hate each other or not, and whether Tom chases jerry simply for keeping up the traditional roles society has placed on them. Not to mention adding a dog into the mix. I can buy into the dog chasing the cat, but have a difficult time believing the dog would protect the mouse. Personally I would think the dog would proceed to chase the mouse after finishing with the cat.

Recent studies have shown that cats stop killing somewhere around 12 to 15 mice  if placed in a room with mice. This could suggest that they only kill what they need. But if that is the case then if you provide enough equivalent food would they still kill the same number of mice? If so, would this not then suggest that they also kill for fun and not just necessity? So then you could surmise that Tom chases Jerry for the fun of it and not because he needs to eat. I know my cat chases her stuffed mice because they are filled with catnip. So perhaps there is a drug deal gone wrong that drives him.

Take for example: Paging Dr. Jones: Crystal skull stolen from New Age shop near Los Angeles
A store had on display a crystal skull. No, not an original crystal skull, as they admit it is perhaps only around 500yrs old (which I still find a little hard to swallow). In any case, the store had it on display and someone decided to take it. It was not the most valuable item in the store, or even on the alter on which it was being displayed, yet it is the only thing that was taken.

And in a throwback to “Temple of Doom”, Nepal king makes animal sacrifices to power goddess. I thought Indy had taking care of this little problem already. He killed the bad guy, got the stone with the three lines, and returned the children to the village. And Didn’t remove Cate Capeshaws heart in the process. But apparently the great Kali’s power (which make sense since she is the Hindu god of power) reaches beyond the fictional world of movies and still drives people in the real world. As long as they don’t force me to drink that nightmare blood and there is no giant lava pit nearby, then things should be OK if you are taking a trip there.

The article is much funnier if you read it incorrectly, as in Steven Seagal not Seagull. But basically Steven returns the Super 8 for his doughnut. I loves me some doughnuts. If someone gave me a free doughnut every day, damn straight I’m going back for another one. The employees argue they don’t give him any other food, but he keeps returning. Well they keep giving him more doughnuts. Apparently if noone answers he taps on the glass. If too many people are there he starts squaking and making noise until his doughnut needs are met. One of these days he is just going to whip out one of his super awesome karate moves. Although I am certain it would not be as awesome as if it was Chuck.