As with many gun safety advocates, this article How Lax Gun Laws In The U.S. Let Domestic Abusers Buy Guns| Huffingtonpost, misses the point. Just as the Spitting, Stalking, Rape Threats: How Gun Extremists Target Women | Mother Jones article did.
Intimidation is a gun rights advocacy goal, not a side effect.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Monday, June 16, 2014
A sling without out a prayer.
The first Queen Elizabeth occasionally used the motto 'video et taceo', 'I see, but say nothing'.
This generally meaning that she knew much -- she had a superb intelligence service -- but that knowing did not require her to act.
And while I could use this quote as the basis of a screed on the NSA, I have a more personal set of plaints.
For the past month, I have been wandering about with a sling on my left arm (as you may recall bears dropping off six foot high ladders do not bounce -- they suffer dislocated shoulders).
This has not seemed to cause strangers to offer to hold doors open for me, nor avoid running into my left side, or suggest helping with packages.
The sling has -- it seems -- given people the belief they have the right to invade my privacy -- a phenomenon which it seems to share with a pregnant woman's abdomen.
On Saturday, while walking, my wife Margaret got an earful about how different injuries could indicate psychic stress -- specifically shoulder injuries indicated that a man was under too much pressure -- and how there was a great book on it. Saying that the injury was due to a fall didn't phase the speaker at all. (I later suggested asking if discomfort in the fundament was due to dealing with a pain in the ass.).
People have walked up saying 'What happened to you', or just 'Rotator Cuff, huh?', and of course offer to tell me all about their own experience.
The reaction when I respond briefly -- and neutrally -- is one of injured offense.
Maintaining a private space seems to have become bad manners, and a limitation on the right to curiosity.
I should note, that I do not object to people saying, 'Excuse me, I know its none of my business, but could I ask what happened to your arm?' That is a request and an acknowledgement that the information is mine.
However, there appears, in the mind of many, that one has an obligation of 'letting others help', to provide a venue for 'sharing', to build community. I do not for a minute believe that such interactions is any form of altruism, as it show no concern for another person's 'otherness' -- the boundaries which make each of us free individuals.
So, two cheers for formality and manners -- the bane of freedom and the mark of civilization.
This generally meaning that she knew much -- she had a superb intelligence service -- but that knowing did not require her to act.
And while I could use this quote as the basis of a screed on the NSA, I have a more personal set of plaints.
For the past month, I have been wandering about with a sling on my left arm (as you may recall bears dropping off six foot high ladders do not bounce -- they suffer dislocated shoulders).
This has not seemed to cause strangers to offer to hold doors open for me, nor avoid running into my left side, or suggest helping with packages.
The sling has -- it seems -- given people the belief they have the right to invade my privacy -- a phenomenon which it seems to share with a pregnant woman's abdomen.
On Saturday, while walking, my wife Margaret got an earful about how different injuries could indicate psychic stress -- specifically shoulder injuries indicated that a man was under too much pressure -- and how there was a great book on it. Saying that the injury was due to a fall didn't phase the speaker at all. (I later suggested asking if discomfort in the fundament was due to dealing with a pain in the ass.).
People have walked up saying 'What happened to you', or just 'Rotator Cuff, huh?', and of course offer to tell me all about their own experience.
The reaction when I respond briefly -- and neutrally -- is one of injured offense.
Maintaining a private space seems to have become bad manners, and a limitation on the right to curiosity.
I should note, that I do not object to people saying, 'Excuse me, I know its none of my business, but could I ask what happened to your arm?' That is a request and an acknowledgement that the information is mine.
However, there appears, in the mind of many, that one has an obligation of 'letting others help', to provide a venue for 'sharing', to build community. I do not for a minute believe that such interactions is any form of altruism, as it show no concern for another person's 'otherness' -- the boundaries which make each of us free individuals.
So, two cheers for formality and manners -- the bane of freedom and the mark of civilization.
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
A Penrose's Law Dilemna for Moderate Reactionaries
Boies Penrose (1860-1921), a Republican boss in Pennsylvania, proposed the Political Law*: "Politics is a profession. Better to lose an election than lose control of the party."**
How the 'establishment Republicans' will react to the head line Eric Cantor succumbs to tea party challenger - The Washington Post, should be interesting.
In the old days, when party's meant something, leaders might follow this sensible, though long term, advice.
I think, in the end, the political leaders of the Republicans will buckle down, and accept. After all they want power, and believe (with good evidence) in co-option by money.
The moneyed interests behind the party seem to believe they can turn the extreme reactionaries to their will in the end (they being moderate reactionaries).
Anyone choosing to draw and analogy between these forces and the Rhur industrialists are welcome to.
However, I think those moneyed interests may be right. You see there is another Pernrose insight worth considering -- "I believe in the division of labor. You [moneyed interest] send us to Congress; we pass
laws under which you make money...and out of your profits, you further
contribute to our campaign funds to send us back again to pass more laws
to enable you to make more money."
---
* There is another Penrose's law, attributed to Lionell Penrose, which posits an inverse relationship between the number of psychiatric beds and prison population.
**This is often ascribed to "Tammany Hall." This is incorrect.
How the 'establishment Republicans' will react to the head line Eric Cantor succumbs to tea party challenger - The Washington Post, should be interesting.
In the old days, when party's meant something, leaders might follow this sensible, though long term, advice.
I think, in the end, the political leaders of the Republicans will buckle down, and accept. After all they want power, and believe (with good evidence) in co-option by money.
The moneyed interests behind the party seem to believe they can turn the extreme reactionaries to their will in the end (they being moderate reactionaries).
Anyone choosing to draw and analogy between these forces and the Rhur industrialists are welcome to.
However, I think those moneyed interests may be right. You see there is another Pernrose insight worth considering -- "I believe in the division of labor. You [moneyed interest] send us to Congress; we pass
laws under which you make money...and out of your profits, you further
contribute to our campaign funds to send us back again to pass more laws
to enable you to make more money."
---
* There is another Penrose's law, attributed to Lionell Penrose, which posits an inverse relationship between the number of psychiatric beds and prison population.
**This is often ascribed to "Tammany Hall." This is incorrect.
Sunday, June 8, 2014
The origins of a killing.
In a article, Occaisionally, our local newspaper, the Seattle Times, stops fronting for developers and does part of its job.In the article, Oso neighborhood never should have been built | Local News | The Seattle Times, we are told that neighborhood wiped out in the recent landslide should never have been built.
That over 50 years ago, unenforced lasw, underfunded agencies, dishonest developers, and unwarranted deference to supposed land rights perpared to kill people this year.
It would be good to recall, that things have not gotten better. In the early 1960s, agencies were better funded and there was actual respect for people in government agencies trying to do their jobs.
Expect more disasters to come.
Friday, May 30, 2014
A Fatal Flaw
If I remember my Artistotle, a tragedy requires a fatal flaw, a wrong decision that engenders disaster.
For that reason, I hate the use of tragedy for unavoidable natural disasters, truly random accidents, and sad oddities -- acts of God as it were.
On the other hand, the landside at Oso might be considered a tragedy, with the fatal flaw being a combination of cowardice, greed, and most of all a failure to govern.
This is shown in a story covered by KUOW, our local all NPR all news station: Oso Highlights A Policy Challenge: Development Pressure Vs. Landslide Risk | KUOW News and Information.*
In short Barbara Dykes, the county hearing examiner whose brief covered review of land slide risks, was not renewed in her position by the board, after intense lobbying by the Master Builders Association of Snohomish and King Counties.
They claimed "[Dykes] was more likely to rule against development interests than in favor ... even while Dykes held the position, more than 80 percent of development projects".
In an initial burst of character, a six-month moratorium on all building permits within a certain
distance of known slide areas was proposed by a member of the Snohomish County Concil. Since then, at the behest of the Master builders, voting on the issues has postponed.
There will, of course, be no significant change in that county's land use policy.
* This was a gratifying 'dog walking on its hinder legs' moment, for this mediocre news service.
Have the Jews Lost Europe? – Forward.com
Have the Jews Lost Europe? – Forward.com
This is an 'on one hand, but on the other hand' article, but at least raises the question -- why do Jews bother to live in Europe.
In the new World, Jews share with most other people's the immigrant experience, and the issues of ethinic identity in a new land.
Here, as a consequence, we are, particularly in the United States, a free people, annoyingly pushing our own issues; or as it is called in Europe (not only on the right) Jews having too much control of US policy.
This position appears to incomprehensible In Europe, where it seems we should be happy to a tolerated, but unliked, minority.
Should any one of us make permanent home anywhere from the Ural Mountaints to the point of Dingle?
This is an 'on one hand, but on the other hand' article, but at least raises the question -- why do Jews bother to live in Europe.
In the new World, Jews share with most other people's the immigrant experience, and the issues of ethinic identity in a new land.
Here, as a consequence, we are, particularly in the United States, a free people, annoyingly pushing our own issues; or as it is called in Europe (not only on the right) Jews having too much control of US policy.
This position appears to incomprehensible In Europe, where it seems we should be happy to a tolerated, but unliked, minority.
Should any one of us make permanent home anywhere from the Ural Mountaints to the point of Dingle?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)