Was thinking this morning — no idea why — about a friend who was once arrested on the absolutely magnificent (and no doubt Victorian) charge of “tending to lead an idle, lewd, and dissolute life.” A kind of catch-all charge, I gather, for underage kids who weren’t actually caught in any specific act, but who were nevertheless up to no good.<\/p>\n
A 17-year-old high school senior, he was busted at a college party where drugs figured heavily. Apparently that high-flown charge was originally invented by reformists committed to the belief that minors were salvageable and as yet incapable of actually<\/i> leading an idle, lewd, and dissolute life.<\/p>\n
I can confirm that my friend was already thoroughly immersed in lewdness and dissolution (which eventually killed him) but not idleness. On the contrary, he was a diligent, focused worker who got a full-time job at 18, never left it, and continued to rise in the ranks despite being stoned out of his mind half the time he was on the clock. He bought a house when he’d barely turned 21 and owned lots of toys for his genuinely idle druggie friends to steal while he was at work.<\/p>\n
As it happened, the “idle, lewd, and dissolute” charge had to be dropped because cops made the mistake of tossing him into a cell with adults when he was underage. So the Victorians never got a chance to save his tender young self from dissolute ways. Not that they’d have succeeded in any case. Never in my life did I know anybody so determined on slow self-destruction.<\/p>\n
—–<\/p>\n
Speaking of being highly functional while on drugs, a new study casts doubts<\/a> on the arbitrary blood-THC levels pot-legalizing states have chosen for punishing drivers.<\/p>\n —–<\/p>\n Creepy story: “I am the Watcher.”<\/a><\/p>\n No doubt the culprit’s going to turn out to be some obnoxious but otherwise harmless neighbor with a grudge. And with a large collection of Stephen King and Dean Koontz books in his library.<\/p>\n —–<\/p>\n Forget Obamacare. The real, long-term disaster the Supremes perpetrated this week in King v Burwell<\/i> was to define their job<\/a> as being to help incompetents in the other branches grow the government.<\/p>\n Separation of powers. Yeah. Thanks, you Hamiltonian federalists. <\/p>\n —–<\/p>\n