Another Massacre

A couple of weeks ago, I received an email asking me if I was interested in seeing a short video called The Business of Guns.  Apparently, my occasional gun related posts had resulted in my contact believing I might find the video interesting.  I watched the video a few days later, then watched it again, today, in light of this past weekend's massacre in Washington DC.

First, here is a link to the video if you are interested.  It appears to be a (mostly) unbiased presentation of facts as related to the gun industry.

http://www.onlinemba.com/blog/business-of-guns

I also did some research about mass shootings and found this detailed list of mass shootings with "mass" being defined as 4 or more fatalities.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data

Finally, I looked for articles with data about gun ownership in America and found these two, interestingly enough with different conclusions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/rate-of-gun-ownership-is-down-survey-shows.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx

As I have said many times before, I prefer stronger laws to control guns based on the assumption that many gun deaths, and a significant percentage of gun related violence is the result of impulse rather than a planned crime or event.  People get mad, i.e road rage, domestic quarreling, bad day at the office, etc, and act without thinking, act out of passion, or just plain lash out at what is nearest.  Having the availability of a gun in these situations increases the chance of a fatality.  For me then, the less guns there are, the less chance they will be used irresponsibly and/or with unplanned consequences.     

It has been argued that this logic does not apply to most mass killings, in that most seem planned.  If we glance at the list compiled in the link above, there are not that many spur of the moment killings.  Rather, the perpetrators have reacted to a specific event or have killed as a result of a mental illness.  Still, I would maintain that the ease of attaining weapons with high killing capabilities, makes it all the more easy for them to fall into the hands of those with bad intentions.  That being said, I agree wholeheartedly with those responsible gun owners who make the case for tighter enforcement of current laws that limit the sale of guns to those with a history of mental illness.  The problem is that the mentally ill are still able to procure guns since they are so readily accessible via holes in the legal process, and illegally.

For me, the most insidious aspect of the gun debate, is the gun's industries soaring profits as detailed in the video.  Of course, much of the blame for why people buy guns which produces the sales and results in the profits, is our own, the people of the United States.  We continue to buy in to the notion that violence offers a solution to the problems we face, whether personal or national.  And then, we complete the charade with the rationale that if only we could keep the guns out of the "bad" guys hands, and get more into the hands of the good guys.  I would love to see the app that a gun dealer could use to determine who is good and who is bad!!

The good news is that despite the increase in guns in America - we are #1 in the world according to the video - the rate of homicide, overall and by guns, has not increased in the past 30 years despite the seemingly endless barrage of news stories detailing gun violence and the increase in mass killing.   As the gun-ownership-is-down link suggests, I am a firm believer that man, as a whole, continues to evolve spiritually and that in so doing we more and more embrace the concept that killing each other, whether for reasons of religion, land, money or love, is slowly, ever so slowly, becoming a trait not compatible with the survival of our species.  

And so I hope that one day there will be a world without guns.  Not through legislation, although it is a nice way to move us forward, but through the shared realization that violence, whatever its manifestation, solves little, destroys much, and is a poor choice of solutions for our problems.      

     

Another 9/11 Anniversary

September 11, 2001. 

9/11.

Regardless of how you say it, the events of this day will forever have an impact on the people, politics and future of America.  Today marks the twelfth anniversary of that fateful day.  And, as was true of all past anniversaries, memorials are taking place all across the country.  We remember where we were when we heard the news, what we did as the horror unfolded, how we united in our suffering, and, to this day, how the lump in our collective throats is just that much bigger when we hear our national anthem played and recall the sacrifices made by both the victims of that terrible event and their families.

Coincidentally, we are also involved in a national debate about Syria. Despite the history of the citizens of this great country to respond to injustices throughout the world, polls indicate that we are not all that eager to get involved in punishing or otherwise addressing the horrendous treatment of the Syrian people by President Assad and his military.  

Would we be so reticent to slap down a bully like Assad had we not spent the last dozen years in Iraq and Afghanistan in response to a past bully?  

Have we grown tired of our role of world policemen, especially in face of the vengeful response of those we have labeled terrorists, the indirect assistance that these groups have received by countries like China and Russia who are supposed to be our friends, or at least not our foes, and the unappreciative attitude of those countries that claim to be our allies but are loath to contribute monetarily to the ever increasing bill we face to "keep the peace"?

Interestingly, I just finished reading an article in this month's Smithsonian about the muriqui monkeys.  See link below.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Humans-Would-Be-Better-Off-If-They-Monkeyed-Around-Like-the-Muriquis-220566921.html#spider_monkeys_01_631x473.jpg

A remarkable woman named Karen Strier has been studying these primates for the past thirty years, and in the process has helped focus the world of primatology on animals other than just gorillas and chimps.  In so doing, she has also opened up this field of study, and in conjunction, the study of the most evolved of the primates, man, towards the consideration that competition, aggression, and territorialism, all the precursors of war, are not necessarily common among all primates.  That there are other traits that primates share that are not based on violence.

In the world of the muriqui, cooperation, and physical and emotional support are the rule of the day.   They do not compete for food, but share it with each other, old, young, healthy and in-firmed.  Males do not fight each other for access to mating rights, but are invited to mate by the females who do not appear loyal to one male over another.  As a result, infant muriqui do not need to be protected from males eager to kill off another's progeny.   Hugs and embraces have replaced fighting and killing.

As a believer in evolution, specifically that all primates evolved from a common ancestor millions of years ago, it is uplifting to think that our aggressive traits may be the result of environmental pressures and specific situations as opposed to the more common belief that they are inbred and impossible to avoid, or worse, some type of "original" sin that God has inflicted upon us.  Perhaps if we stopped for a second, took our heads out of the swirling sands of materialism, greed, and winner takes all cutthroat competition, we might begin to understand that helping each other, those in our direct "pack", those in neighboring packs, and even those in packs that have different customs, language, skin color, religion, is a better way towards species survival. 

If we believe that primates do what they do, the good, bad and the ugly (sorry Clint) out of a desire for access to food, shelter, and sex, then we need to address what forms this desire might take, and what methods provide the most food, shelter and sex for the most people.  Clearly, killing all the competitors can produce this result, but only if you are willing to accept the possibility that you, as an individual, will be killed by someone with bigger muscles, whether those muscles are the ones on a body or in the form of tanks and bombs. 

But, if we decide that peace through war is the    ultimate oxymoron, then perhaps we might imitate the muriqui who do not measure their wealth by how much one has more than others, but by the collective resources and happiness of the group.



       

The future of health care

So, then there were two.

I drove my daughter to college over the weekend which has now resulted in our version of the empty nest.  Of course, I miss her, just as I miss seeing my son, but I am also happy that our children are progressing towards independent lives without "parental" oversight.  As I have said to my wife, while we might miss the kids, we (and especially my wife) did a great job raising them and it is time to let them fly on their own with the knowledge that they can return if they need to.  Let's just hope they don't!!

As for writing, I must say I have been uninspired.  My interest in politics is wavering, my interest in debating issues is flailing, my interest in time in front of my computer is slight.  Still...

As the Affordable Care Act begins to kick in, and despite the obsession that the Republican Party has exhibited to repeal and/or defund it rather than addressing its weaknesses and proposing alternatives, I am hopeful that the American people will realize its benefits outweigh its negatives.

Ultimately, it seems apparent to me that we need to sever the link between employment and health care insurance.  Everyone needs to become more involved in the cost of their health care, and as long as we allow our employers to act as intermediaries, and allow the health care industry to dictate coverage, benefits, and choices through the filter of their profit, rising premiums and costs will remain the norm.

From what I am hearing, the exchanges that are being set up in some of the states that are ahead of the curve on this issue, are providing much more attractive premiums than have been traditionally available to individuals and small businesses in the past.  If we are not ready for a single payer option (due to the wrongheaded notion that this smacks of socialism) then we need to make sure that every state in America embraces the goal of providing the means for each of its citizens to have access to affordable health care insurance. 

I often ask my friends and family what contribution their employer pays toward their health care premiums and many don't know.  They certainly know what is deducted from their pay, but they don't know the extent of the subsidy that they are receiving from their employer.  Perhaps if that subsidy was paid to the employee, and each employee was required to purchase their own health insurance, we would be more cognizant of its cost and shop for the policy that bests suits our needs.  My experience has been that most employers offer a single rate and a family rate, and perhaps a married with no kids rate.  But families with one kid might find a more suitable (and less costly) policy assuming that the family rate is based on an insurance company configuration that most likely assumes 2 or 2.5 kids per family.  And, perhaps a single, healthy person might find a single rate on their own with a high deductible that would better suit their situation.

During my years of employment in the private sector, and in discussions with small business owners today, health insurance costs is a big part of their overhead, a pain to have to negotiate every year, a distraction from their actual business, and an impediment to hiring new employees. 

Of course, all that assumes that the health insurance industry is forced to offer group rates to all Americans, regardless of the size of their employer or group affiliation.  Yes, forced.  And, it assumes that all people must participate; yes I am in favor of the "Romney" care individual mandate.  Or, as Hilary Clinton might say, the 1990's Republican alternative to her universal healthcare proposals.  And, it assumes that employers will increase the pay of their employees in lieu of the their current health care insurance subsidy. 

You see, I believe in the market place to establish supply and demand for most products and services.  But, as there are exceptions to every rule, health care insurance is the exception to this rule.  If you want to buy a car, you purchase the car that you can afford. But if you are really sick, you need the health care services that will make you well, despite your ability to pay.  Everyone deserves an insurance plan that provides basic health care services with a catastrophic option that prevents bankruptcy, or worse, the necessity of choosing between health and death.  But personal involvement in the coverage, benefits and costs of our own health care and health care insurance may be the only way to break the vicious cycle of escalating health care costs.



 
   

Past and Present

Our family has a tradition of taking a group vacation every year in the Poconos.   While this year was different in that my dad was not there for the first time in 45 years, my four brothers, one sister, mother, aunt, two sister-in-laws, three nephews, one nephew’s girlfriend,  one brother’s girlfriend, my wife, both my children and their respective girl/boy friend, one cousin and her husband, four nieces, and a sister-in-laws’ two sisters and one brother, were all in attendance, scattered in four cabins on the property.    Add to that the various friends who we see every year in three of the other cabins, and it all adds up to a vacation of family, friends, and fun.  As I write this, it is the last day of the 2013 version of this tradition.

In addition to spending time with all these people, I look forward to reading by the pool, falling asleep in the sun, jumping in the cool water, and starting that cycle over again. 

Apropos to the reading/sleeping/pool cycle, I read the August edition of the National Geographic.  Two articles particularly interested me.

The first was called Sugar Love (A not so sweet story).  It traced the history of sugar, its modest beginning as a spice, rare, and only known to a small group of people in the islands of the Pacific off the Asian mainland.  From there it spread across Asia via the march of the Arab armies in the first millennia AD, and then was introduced to the Europeans during the Crusades.  As the taste for sugar gained traction in Europe and since trade between Europe and Asia did not prosper, new sources for sugar were required, and with the discovery of the New World, specifically the islands of the Caribbean, a source was found.   Here is a link to that article.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/08/sugar/cohen-text

Of course, like most people, I was aware of the connection between the expansion of the slave trade and the need for cheap labor.  However, this article provided some details that I did not know about.  According to the article, over the course of a few centuries, over 11 million Africans were shipped to the New World, more than half ending up on sugar plantations.  Perhaps it sounds a bit dramatic to say, but there is a graphic illustration of the bloody and inhumane connection between sugar production and satisfying the sugar cravings of Europe.   A slave of the time, who is missing an arm and a leg, states “When we work in the sugar mills and we catch our finger in the millstone, they cut off our hand; when we try to run away, they cut off a leg; both things happened to me.  It is at this price that you eat sugar in Europe.”  

Well, at least we don’t do that anymore, one might say.  And yes, perhaps we have evolved, as I continually hope, in a manner in which we value human life a bit more highly.  Yet it is still true that workers in gold mines in Africa receive a minuscule amount of compensation for efforts that yield mine operators millions of dollars.  And it is still true that the rulers of various third world nations make deals resulting in lucrative contracts for them and their western business partners, but paltry salaries for the labor force.   And, while some may debate this trend, it even seems true that here in America, the value of labor has been kept artificially low in the past thirty years while those with wealth take a bigger percentage of the pie.

To me, It would be better if, instead of (or perhaps in addition to) learning the lessons of economics which includes the desire for cheap labor to provide new tastes, or precious metals, or inexpensive consumer goods, or lower cost energy, we were to focus more on the cost to indigenous populations, local environments, or the imported labor that is exploited to provide that new taste or cheaper energy.  It is all too easy to dismiss the days of forced labor and the toll that unregulated mining and non-existent air pollution controls had on our air and water and land, now that those days seem to be in the past, unless it was your ancestor who was forced into slavery, your land that was mined and left dead, your water and air that was fouled.     

So, when we debate the issues surrounding the Keystone Pipeline, fracking, repealing some of the teeth behind the Clean Air and Water Acts, or even the minimum wage, it might be wise for us to consider the immediate cost to the people who risk limb and health for our newest western technology, might be of benefit to include the long terms costs of shooting chemicals into the ground or digging holes in the ocean, perhaps even include requirements to consider the cost of cleanup when that pipeline bursts or that oil rig explodes, as opposed to weighing everything by the short term benefit of some temporary jobs or a few additional percentage points of profit. 

It is said, by some, that man's progress has been marked by upheaval, violence, the suffering of the few for the benefit of the many.  Perhaps that is how it will always be.  For the good of the whole, the few will pay the price.  Whether it be through wars, low wage labor, lack of  environmental safeguards or just plain greed and non-caring, there may always be situations and events that require some people to suffer while others prosper.  It would just be nice, the Christian thing, if those humans on the advantage side were to recognize the pain of those on the sacrifice side as opposed to actively abusing them, and/or consciously developing ways to profit from that sacrifice.

The second article was about the Mayan civilization, specifically about their ability to mark time.  I imagine that all civilizations, all people who reflect on their moment in time, think that they are alive at man’s most evolved moment.  Those advanced Greeks who first discussed democracy over 2000 years ago probably thought they were living during the greatest time in history just as the great thinkers and artists of the 17^th century Renaissance regarded themselves in a similar manner as did the great inventors and entrepreneurs of the recent century who gave us flight, computers, and instant, global  communication.  But sometimes I think in our mutual rush to glorify our particular time and contributions, we forget that greatness, uniqueness, times of incredible bursts of progress, all build upon what has come before.  Sometimes I sense that we believe that our 21^st century condition exists in a vacuum, forgetting that the basics for so many of our advanced technologies were imagined and developed in past times.  Here is that link.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/08/sacred-cenotes/guillermoprieto-text

The Mayan article detailed their ability to identify the exact moment each year when the sun was directly overhead.  This twice yearly event enabled them to adjust their calendars which helped them plan for planting and harvesting.  Their advanced understanding of the cycles of the sun and the seasons produced a civilization that lasted a few thousand years despite soil with little moisture retention.  When we focus on their poly-theistic religions, their belief in the need for sacrifice to appease the gods, be it food, animal or human, their agrarian society without industry, we gloss over the simple facts that their understanding of the cycles of nature was perhaps more advanced than our own.  Well, maybe not more advanced, as a hurricane in their time would have most likely been devastating as well as a surprise event, but more advanced in the practical use of the knowledge they gleaned from nature.  They knew the signs of a coming good or bad harvest and took the appropriate measures to feast or conserve.  With all our high-end technology, we seem to act or not act based on economic or political reasons (see the continued debate on climate change) as opposed to what is required for base survival. 

History indicates that the peak of the Mayan civilization was about 650 years, from AD 250-900.  It is also conjectured that the Mayan people existed from as far back as 1800 BC.  By simple arithmetic, we can conclude that these people were present in the area of the Yucatan Peninsula for more than 2500 years.  

As I said before, in an age when one can type an essay from a desk in Perkasie, PA, post it and have it become available to anyone, practically everywhere in the world in an instant, when telescopes have been developed that enable us to "see" practically to the beginning of the universe, when bombs have been created that can be released hundreds of miles away yet hit an individual target the size of a man, it is normal to assume that we believe that we represent the apex of human existence to date.  But perhaps before we rush to judgment we need to survive the test of time, to be around in the year 4000 before we come to that conclusion.   And to more fully understand that we are only us, now, because of the past.

 

   

 

 

 

   

  

The Conspiracy (that changed America)

Well, I know it has been a bit since I promised my newest story, but here it is, finally.  Feel free to comment.  Thanks for your continued interest.

The Conspiracy that Changed America

As the news reports began to filter across the TV and radio waves, it became clear rather quickly that these were not isolated events.  Twenty-five shot in a supermarket in New Jersey, eighteen shot in a bowling alley in Ohio, thirteen shot while waiting in line at an ice cream stand in North Carolina, thirty-four shot at a community carnival in Wisconsin.  

Within thirty minutes, word of shootings, one each in forty states, was penetrating every nook and cranny of the United States via TV crawls, cell phones and computers.  Each new revelation struck the American people like a body blow.  The final hay maker came when the fiftieth attack became public, this one involving eight people at a church in Mississippi; the country swayed and fell to its knees as one. 

Terrorism.

Quickly, the word was on everyone’s lips.   And just as quickly, demands for justice, revenge, and answers filled the air waves.  Some news outlets attempted to secure and include solid facts in their reporting, but many rode the waves of fear and distrust that they had sown for the last dozen years and fed the flames of hatred with unsubstantiated rumor, bias and downright lies. 

In some cases, witnesses who saw machine gun waving Muslims were heard describing their experience through tears and anger.  In other cases, blacks with automatic weapons were detailed as the culprits.  There was even a report that one shooter was seen tossing pamphlets in the wake of his attack, pamphlets that one irate witness shook violently at the TV cameraman, pamphlets promoting gay marriage.

While most spiritual leaders called for calm and forgiveness, those with TV and radio shows proclaimed the attacks as God’s punishment, while requesting donations to combat the particular group of people that their God had determined to be evil and who therefore needed to be purged from America.

Within twenty-four hours, bipartisan proclamations were passed in Congress condemning the attacks, and a new flag pin was worn to display support for the victims, support for the United States.  Spontaneous demonstrations sprung up throughout the country; anger mixed with tears and confusion.

Many of the victims, those with minor injuries were released and feted at some of these demonstrations but none spoke or gave interviews and everyone assumed it was too early for them to discuss the details.      

Within thirty-six hours it was determined that there were nine hundred and eleven victims of the shootings and a new wave of hatred-filled accusations was launched.  Like a cut across an old scar, old memories mixed with new fear seeped into every conversation, at every water cooler and kitchen table, and on every political news show.

Within forty-eight hours, a dozen perpetrators had been identified via various on-site cameras and eye witness descriptions.  No identities were released but various news channels suddenly had unnamed sources revealing details of the men with “Muslim sounding names”.   Calls for retribution and political columns about the growing Muslim threat doubled in number and intensity.  Many more victims were released and America seemed grateful that so many had escaped serious injury. 

On the third day credible information was released indicating that another dozen shooters had been identified, and that like the first twelve all were white males.  This information was used by the far left to condemn the various right wing militia groups that existed throughout the country.  

It was equally used by some extremely right wing organizations who called it a fabrication by a White House that hated America and white people.  Neutral news organizations noted that virtually all of the victims of the shootings had now been released from the various hospitals where they had been sent.

On the fourth day all fifty attackers were caught.  Well, not exactly caught, all those who had not already been arrested, turned themselves in to local authorities at or around noon.  All were white, all but five were male.  All were American, born and bred.  All were unmarried.  All lived in the neighborhoods where the shootings occurred.  All brought their weapons as proof, as well as a copy of the plan that each was issued as part of the conspiracy.   

And each had the same name of the man who had created the plan, recruited the shooters and organized the attacks.  Amazingly, this information did not get leaked to any news agency, but every local, state and federal police officer in the home state of the alleged ring leader knew his name.  

Unfortunately, more than a dozen innocent men were accused in print and on TV by those with a grudge or just blind with fear.

The following day the named man, following his own plan, surrendered without fanfare to the desk sergeant on duty at a police station he had carefully chosen about a year before.  Like those he had recruited and trained, he was single.  His features were nondescript.  He was 52 years old, college educated.  Those he worked with all expressed complete surprise with the revelation of his involvement.  While both his parents had passed, his two siblings were shocked.  By all accounts, he was an average American.   

Two days later he was dead.  Shot and killed by an ex-Marine who used his military connections to gain access to him during a transfer from one federal facility to another. 

His death was greeted with celebration.  Citizen led parties carrying his effigy, burned, stomped upon, ripped apart and destroyed them in all manners and with as much anger as possible. Many were celebrated on TV and the internet.  There was even a contest sponsored by a well-known celebrity to “kill” the man in the most unique and gruesome way. 

It had been one week since the shootings, and in that week America had experienced incredible sorrow, then shock, then elation.   One week of the most intense emotions as could be remembered in United States history.  One week that most Americans thought might never be matched in terms of the roller coaster of emotions that this man had created.

A day after his death, it was revealed that each shooter had another piece of the puzzle, non-sensible to each shooter, but when combined they revealed the thinking of the man, the reason for his actions.  Information was also released which indicated that each of the fifty shooters had a police record including at least one felony charge.   

Those news outlets that had so vigorously been condemning Muslims and their religion shifted their fervor, now targeting the non-religious, the forces that had removed religion from America, those they said denied the Christianity of our founders and of the nation.   

On the tenth day after the shootings, the combined text of the man who had coordinated the worst domestic terrorist attack in United States history was printed in almost every newspaper in America.  It read as follows:

If my plan was successful, it is likely that these words will be made public, and the citizens of America will be seeking an explanation for my actions.  

First, I send my deepest condolences to those who were hurt in any of the shootings.  My instructions were very explicit as to the location and number of those to be injured, and if they were followed precisely there will have been no fatalities, no loss of limb, sight or sense,  and all the victims will have been released from the hospital by now.  Of course, I know that their mental anguish may take time to heal and for that hurt I take full responsibility and accept the judgment of those victims, my country, and my God.

Of course, you want to know, why?

For the last five years, there has been a concerted effort by various forces in this country to scare the citizenry into believing that their freedoms were at risk, and that only through the ownership of a gun could freedom be safeguarded.  

While I acknowledge that some of those responsible were acting from a sense of patriotism, truly believing that our founders penned the second amendment to provide everyday citizens with the right to arm themselves against tyranny, foreign or domestic, it is all too clear to me that much of this effort is either politically or racially motivated, or worse, being spurred by an obscene grasp for profit.  It is no coincidence that gun and ammunition sales have skyrocketed since the election of our first African American President.  

As a result, any rational, sensible attempt to ban those guns which have only one purpose, to kill as many people as possible, have been met with millions of dollars of donations from the coffers of those benefiting from the pretense that our rights were at stake.  Using cute slogans, sound bites, and distorted facts, this group has managed to paint those favoring gun control as anti-Constitution, anti-American, even, amazingly, anti-God.

They have bribed and threatened our elected officials to vote their way, and helped make short work of even the most basic of regulations despite the desires of the American people and in face of the multiple deaths in places like Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut.  

So, taking my cue from the old adage, fight fire with fire, I devised a plan which I hoped would show the folly of more and more guns, the gaping holes in our current system for background checks, and the ease in which weapons of mass killing can be purchased in America.

First, I recruited fifty individuals who were unmarried, perhaps even without siblings or much of a family, and who were willing to sacrifice their freedom for a bigger purpose.  Each had to be born in America, with no ties to any radical "ism" or foreign government.  And each had to be a convicted felon.  

Then, after studying both the federal and state laws governing each of the 50 states, I worked with each of them to purchase an assault weapon, in their own name.  No third party purchases, no fake ID’s.  Many used gun shows where ID was required but not researched.  Some did so via the mail within the borders of that particular state.  And many purchased their weapon at a gun retailer, where in many cases, they found a willing supplier for their weapon with very few questions asked.

This was not an easy plan to execute.  Unfortunately, much of the difficulty came in locating the people willing to be the shooters.  There is one thing that I cannot dispute when so many citizens claim that America can be a violent place and that owning a gun can make them feel safer.  But when some among us turn to crime and are arrested and incarcerated, they are condemned to an even harsher world of violence.  

Finding fifty felons for this plan was simple, finding fifty felons who were willing to injure only was not so easy, but finding fifty felons willing to go back to jail once they were caught was borderline impossible, so strong was their fear of going back to that violent world.  

Sadly, once I had my team in place, getting them weapons was the easy part of the plan.

I do not hate guns.  I realize that a gun is only as good or as bad as the person holding it.  I support any American citizen wishing to purchase a gun for self-defense, to hunt for food, for security in a neighborhood that is not safe.  

But we have lost our perspective on the purpose of a gun, lost our ability to distinguish between a right to own a gun and a right to take a life, lost our humanity when we think killing another human being somehow preserves our freedoms.  

Killing should be the last choice of conflict resolution yet through a misplaced devotion to bearing arms and the tendency for our culture to use violence to solve our problems we have convinced ourselves of the glorification of vigilantism, have accepted the ridiculous notion that we need more “good" people with guns, and have equated the right to protect ones material possessions with the right to maim and kill anyone trying to take them.

The sad truth is that I have become as guilty as those I condemn.  After the failure in the spring of 2013 by Congress to pass any meaningful gun control law, I gave up on the legal, more desired approach and meticulously planned the injury of over 900 fellow Americans as a way to demonstrate the folly of the belief that assault weapons and multiple clip magazines somehow make America safer, or preserve our freedoms. 

While I am saddened that I chose this path, I do not regret the decision. Sometimes, as they say, the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Below this text is a list of the Senators who voted last year against those bills to improve the background check process, to ban assault weapons, and to ban multiple clip magazines.  

Next to each name is a dollar figure, the amount of money donated to each of these elected officials by a gun lobby or gun manufacturer.  These numbers are not made-up and can be easily confirmed by accessing donation records and bank receipts.  Happily, not all of those voting against those gun control proposals received overly generous donations, but sadly most of them did.  

The number at the bottom is the total donations, the amount of money it took for this particular piece of legislation to be defeated despite the overwhelming support of the American people.  It represents the most recent price paid to buy our democracy.

Below that is a list of all members of the House of Representatives.  Each name has two columns beside it, one which also shows recent monetary donations to their campaigns from the gun lobbies, and the second which lists the reps “Brady Campaign” Score.  

For those of you unfamiliar, the Brady Campaign is an advocacy group that works to pass gun-control laws. The organization assigns lawmakers a “lifetime score” based on how they voted on gun-control measures.   A score of zero represents those voting against gun control legislation, up to a score of 100 which indicates a willingness to vote for more gun control measures.

I am fully aware that my name may become synonymous with treason, perhaps replacing the use of Benedict Arnold in our references.  It is also possible that my name will be used to advance future gun control laws, as there may be some who while decrying my methods, advance my cause.  

My preference is to be forgotten.  But what I hope will not be forgotten are the names of those legislators who voted against the interests of America and for the profits of gun manufacturers, and that those men and women be removed from office in the upcoming mid-term elections. 

I will not insult you by asking for forgiveness.  I willingly sacrificed my life for my beliefs, just as my co-conspirators have sacrificed their freedom.  If you disagree with my perspective I accept your condemnation and hatred.  

But if you agree with my end result, my Machiavellian plan, I urge you to wrest American democracy from control by the biggest wallet or the most outrageous misinformation network by wielding the most powerful weapon you have, more powerful that the biggest gun or fastest firing weapon. 

Your precious right to vote.

Vote for those people who understand the dangers of more guns and rapid fire weapons, and the proliferation of those who believe in shoot first, ask questions later.     

Vote for those fellow citizens who respect the right to bear arms but respect more the right to a life without fear of being mowed down like so many targets at a shooting gallery. 

Vote for representatives who are not afraid to sacrifice their jobs by supporting gun control regulations that will put them on the various “hit” lists that those with the money and power use to intimidate those who disagree with their agenda.

Vote for the men and woman who actually live by the teachings of Jesus who was big on forgiveness and mercy and love and not an advocate of revenge and murder and violence.

And if those elected officials do the bidding of those who profit from the deaths of American citizens, vote for someone else the next time.   

 ------

Ten days after publication of the publication of the man's admission, a group of victims of the shootings created an organization advocating the electoral defeat of those identified as pro-gun while a different group of victims attended NRA rallies to support the idea that more guns were needed in America, not less. 

On the forty-fifth day after the shootings, a little over a month after the attacks occurred, and the conspiracy and its creator were revealed, the mid-term elections of 2014 were held.

Of the 46 Senators who voted against merely expanding background checks, against banning high capacity magazines, against banning assault weapons, 28 were up for re-election. 

Thirteen lost.

Of the 435 House of Representatives, those with monetary donations in the top half of the group, mostly Republican, lost five times more than those in the lower half of the list of Congressmen who accepted donations from gun related interests.

Similarly, those with Brady scores above 50 were almost universally re-elected, while 43 representatives with Brady scores below 50 lost their re-election bid.

On the forty-sixth day after the shootings, NRA President James Porter resigned his post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

     

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

Justice Roberts' Courts' Decisions

Very little time to write lately.  Sorry.  I can't say I am uninterested in writing, but I also can't say I am excited either.  While there is certainly a plethora of topics to discuss, I guess I am too absorbed in my life to spend the time to sit and blog.  The conspiratorial side of me would say that that is how the powers to be want it for the average working class family.  Keep them too busy to reflect, too busy to opine, too busy to research the topics of the day, to delve into the details of the sound bites that our politicians are so fond of using. 

One topic I do want to touch on is the various decisions by the Roberts' Court.  Before doing so, I would like to pass along the link for the Supreme Court.  It details the actual writings, both for and against, for all the recent decisions, not just condensed versions and/or opinions of the decisions as you are more likely to hear and read about.  It is not easy reading, but it is important to peruse what was actually said, before relying on the opinion of any political pundit who most likely has a biased point of view.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/

First, I was very disturbed by the prospect of the Roberts Court undoing the social progress made by earlier courts, as well as presenting opinions that laid the groundwork for future problems.  But, in the almost eight years since being appointed Chief Justice, his court's decisions have angered me less and delighted me more than I expected. 

From allowing the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act to the recent tepid decision which declared The Defense of Marriage Act to be inconsistent with the existing understanding that the question of marriage is a states right question, my faith in the logic and reasoning ability of our Supreme Court Justices, and their respect for the Constitution even when that respect seemed to conflict with the party ideology of the appointing president, was rewarded. 

And, despite my horror at the ruling a few years ago which equated freedom of speech with the right to spend money, and the even more puzzling allowance that a corporation might have similar rights as a person, along with the confusing ruling last month that seemed to indicate that the restrictions imposed on the various states by the Voting Rights Act were no longer necessary because they worked, it is clear that I will never experience a time when all Supreme Court rulings are to my liking.  But I accept that as the reality of the range of opinion and perspective that exist in America.

After all, I may not always be correct. 

Sadly, not enough of us remember this simple axiom.  We all accept that no one is perfect, yet we seem to cling ever so tightly to our various beliefs as if they are perfectly correct.

We see this obsession from both sides of the gun control issue, both sides of the abortion issue, both sides of the gay marriage issue, both sides of almost every issue that can be used to energize one half of the electorate.  All or nothing seems to rule the day.

So, again, take some time to access the actual rulings before you repeat the opinions of someone you heard on the radio or saw on TV.  And, if you have the time, read the dissenting opinion from the Supreme Court Justices who did not agree with the majority vote, especially when that dissent disagrees with your perspective. 

Listening to, or reading another opinion might seem a waste of time for those who will not waver, but understanding the logic and reasoning which produced an opinion by a person with an advanced education and practical experiences in applying the laws of our land, might present an angle of the issue that you did not consider.  Then, if you still disagree, at least you understand the best of the opposite argument as opposed to merely saying those that believe unlike yourself hate America as seems to be the state of debate on most of our airwaves today.

For Rachel

Last Tuesday featured the high school graduation of my youngest child, Rachel.  While this was our second high school graduation, my son passed this milestone three years ago, it was still extremely special and very emotional.  While it is true that I cry much more these days, the wet eyes and lump in my throat that Rachel's graduation brought forth, lasted a few more days than the everyday teary moments.

As I have mentioned before, I have a lot of alone time during my second job.  I am usually at the mercy of my thoughts for at least 5 hours each shift.  This past week I tried not to direct the mind meanderings but allowed it to conjure up as many memories of Rachel's childhood as I could.

Some were shared experiences, some individual moments.   Here are a few.

Rachel's birth was difficult, to say the least.  After 24 hours of labor which ended in a brow presentation, the petite woman doctor, clutching a plunger above her head with both hands, attacked and plucked Rachel out of the womb.  It was horrific!  (OK, perhaps that is an exaggeration, but that is how I remember it).  When frustrated or angry with my wife, I will sometimes recall that moment, and no matter the cause of my consternation, forgive her with a "yes honey" and/or a kiss on the forehead.  Amazingly, such a horrendous moment produced as gentle and lovable a creature than I could ever imagine.

As a toddler, Rachel was rarely still.  Even when dead tired she would press on.  I recall bringing her home from an especially long day at the park, carrying her into the house and putting her down on the kitchen floor.  When I turned back to her after removing my coat, I found her fast asleep on the floor, coat still on, head on the cool linoleum.   That drive and energy never left her.

As a young sister, Rachel loved her brother JW, but could only say Da-doo.  She followed him everywhere, always a few steps behind, invariably calling Da-doo.  At a friend's horse farm, she had somehow lost her pants (or escaped during dressing) and was seen running after JW and his friend, diaper falling around her legs, "Da-doo wait", being repeated over and over again.

Rachel started swim lessons around age 5 or 6 at a local YMCA, then progressed to the local swim club.  There she was among gaggle of other little girls waiting for their chance to swim the 25 meters across the pool.  Over time she became proficient at the breast stroke, even excelling for a few years.  While my son had played a bit of soccer, he was never very good, but Rachel actually won some events.  For a few brief years I was able to understand the parental pride of seeing one's child do well in sports, was able to fantasize about the Olympics, or better yet, free college.  Eventually Rachel's love of the water moved her from swimming to water polo but alas, her knees were not up to the challenge and her career was short lived.  Still, she stayed on the team, coaching and encouraging her team mates, which made me just as proud in knowing that she didn't drop out when the going got tough and she could no longer play.

As a child, Rachel had an impish smile with dimples on both sides.  While there were times during her early teenage years that those dimples remained hidden, for the most part she passed through middle school and early high school only hating being in the presence of her parents, as opposed to actually hating her parents as so many of her peers did their parents.  But even if the smiles were less frequent, she would occasionally step out of the required teen attitude, and light up the room with her smile and inner light.  Sometimes an especially happy day released the inner Rachel, sometimes a funny happening that she would share with us.  Happily for us, and especially her mother, Rachel only occasionally became less Rachel and more a teenager.

While Rachel, when asked, claims she will never have children, her love and caring for her pets throughout the years convinces me that she will not only be a mom some day, she will be a wonderful one.  When we decided to put our dog in the kennel for the day of the grad party, Rachel was upset even though she knew it was best for Bubba who gets overly excited when people come to the house.  She loves him and, I am sure, will demonstrate that same love and concern for her babies when she chooses to become a parent.  Like her mother, she has a great capacity for empathy and compassion, two traits which, if there was a test for parenthood, I believe should be of main importance.

Which brings us back to graduation day.  Rachel's high school uses a local college arena for graduation, both because of the size of the class and to eliminate any weather related issues.  Of course, they read each and every name as the young adults walk to the stage for his/her diploma, but they also show the picture of the person, in this case the graduation picture in which all the students looked their best.  The camera generally likes Rachel, and so, of course, the picture that flashed of her ever so briefly on the screens was the loveliest of the lot.  I was just able to cheer before the emotion of the moment overwhelmed me, but I could still clap and clap loudly I did.  As she walked back to her seat, almost gliding along the hardwood floor, she was truly Rachel, as carefree as those diaper- less days of her youth yet brimming with the confidence, relief and sheer excitement of the day, mixed with the boundless hope of the future that lay ahead.

Congratulations Rachel!! 

Your mother and I love you, not just because you are our child but also because you are an amazing young adult, full of love and energy and goodness.  We wish you as bright a future as your smile, and as much happiness as the depth and breadth of the seas.



        

"Responsible" writing

A full two weeks has passed since my last post; sorry.  I have been working a lot; 68 hours between the two jobs last week, another 61 scheduled this week.  I have also spent some time on a new story; more on that later.

The interest in my blog has returned to pre-April levels.  As I noted in past blogs, I was averaging over 200 hits a day since mid April, and that remained constant through May.  Both months recorded over 6800 page hits on my blog.  As also noted, the two big posts were those written April 16 and April 23 about the 2nd amendment.  The first has seen over 6100 hits, the second just short of 5000.

Considering that before April 16 I had just finally reached 2000 hits for a month, and will probably not reach 1500 this month, the interest in those two posts was remarkable.  I even considered "monetizing" my blog during that time as I thought it might be cool to earn some money from my writing, although I remain hesitant to allow Google to determine which ads to run within my posts.  All in all, an interesting 6 weeks.

I mentioned in a previous post that I have received both solicited and unsolicited advise on how to ramp up interest in my blog towards either fame, money or both.  A few of those conversations evolved into discussions on a writer's responsibility to society for what one writes.  Since I am not paid to maintain this post, I have the freedom to write about what I want.  And while there are some in my circle of friends and family who might think some of my writings radical, I have tried to fashion my opinions so as to avoid demonizing those who disagree with me.  To me, having a controversial opinion or perspective is fine; presenting it in a vitriolic way or via an attitude that says my way or the highway, or worse with the stance that if you don't agree with me you are either stupid, anti-American or both, is the problem with our current mode of debate.  For some reason, five people yelling at each other at a round table attracts more viewers than four people discussing a topic with logic and facts.  And the internet, for all its potential for a more open worldview, is chock full of people presenting their biases as fact rather than as opinion.

So, let me be clear.  My blog, my posts are full of my opinions.  I do my utmost to back them up with facts, but we all know that facts can be used to prove virtually anything.  I also try to employ reason as I move down the path to my decisions, and, believe it or not, a liberal viewpoint of God and religion that recognizes that there is a moral right and wrong in the world but that no particular religion or tome of God has cornered the market on what is right and wrong. 

A friend recently commented that perhaps we need God to return to earth to straighten us out.  Now, without getting too involved in whether I believe that Jesus was the son of God (hence my friend's wish for a "return"), I hold the view that perhaps if we stop glorifying the messenger, whether it be Jesus, Buddha, Mohamed, etc, and listen and internalize the message, actually try to live our lives as those great people taught, then we wouldn't need a return.  Frankly, in most cases, the truly superior spiritual beings who have lived were generally ostracized and or killed for their message, so to think that we would be able to recognize a new light on earth seems a bit unrealistic.  

But I digress.

Invariably, in my discussions about earning fame or money via my writing, I express a reluctance to achieve either.  Don't get me wrong, earning my living via posting a weekly opinion piece with the occasional cameo on an opinion TV or radio show, while also writing and publishing stories seems like it would be my ideal job.  I certainly would like to try it for six months or a year.  

But I already have decided that having huge sums of money is undesirable, and I am pretty sure that being a face that is recognized wherever one goes would be uncomfortable, at best.  I do not envy the very rich or very famous the responsibility they shoulder to use their great fortune and fortunes to improve the world.  The Bill Gates types aside, I don't think many of them rise to the challenge, don't even think they understand the responsibility that fame and fortune should require.  It is nice to think that should I suddenly awake with more money than I can spend, or more attention than I can acknowledge, that I would use that money and attention to make the world better.  But I have my doubts.  Perhaps that is the exact reason why I will never attain riches or fame, perhaps I underestimate myself, or perhaps I just don't have the talent so I use not "wanting it" as a way to ignore the truth.

And so I return to the story I mentioned above.  I expect to finish it in the next month.  I think those who know me might find it uncharacteristic of me, perhaps disturbing.  As I have been writing this story, I have questioned whether I should post it.  Whether I might violate the freedom vs responsibility tenet that I have just detailed.  That perhaps this kind of story might produce fame but fame that comes from notoriety.   That its moral might be used to justify actions that are not spiritual in nature, regardless of the end result they might produce.

I guess only time will tell.  Most likely, the story will be posted, some comments will be made, and it will stay ensconced in my blog as in a tomb, with most everything else I write.   

Winning isn't everything...

The famous quote "winning isn't everything, it is the only thing", is generally attributed to the iconic football coach Vince Lombardi.   But I recently watched a movie called "The Big Year" which led me to think about the necessity of winning, the sacrifices often required to win, and most importantly, the definition of winning.

For those of you unfamiliar with movie The Big Year, it features Steve Martin (as Stu), Jack Black (as Brad) and Owen Wilson (as Bostick)  in a story about birding.  Yes, birding.  Unlike most sports involving birds in America, this hobby is not about hunting/killing birds but about seeing the birds, as many different bird species as possible, either as an accumulative life list, or in the case of our three characters, in one year. 

Without revealing the plot too extensively, the movie follows Brad as he crams multiple trips throughout the United States around a full time job in an attempt to see the most bird species in one year as well as break the one year record held by Bostick. Along the way, we are introduced to the other main characters, as well as the ways and means of knowing where to go and when to be there in order to see as many birds as possible.

Two particular scenes are revealing.  In one, there is a huge storm off the Texas coast which produces huge "bird fallout"; in other words large numbers of birds are forced inland by the storm.  All the serious birders flock (sorry) to the area.  As the mostly American birders rush around in hopes of spotting the various species that have landed, one birder is bumped aside by those sprinting among the group.  He turns to his partner and says with dripping British disdain "only Americans can turn birding into a competitive sport".

The second scene occurs towards the end of the movie when the results of the Big Year are published.  During the movie, Brad was finally able to communicate his love for birding to his dad, and they share a wonderful moment in the forest spotting a rare owl.  Also, he finds a girl who shares his passion, and they are together as the movie ends.  Stu is finally able to retire after trying for a few years, holds his first grandchild, and reconnects with his wife.  (Played by Jobeth Williams, by the way, which is a major smack in my face, as I had a serious infatuation with her and now here she is, playing a grandmother!)  In the meantime, Bostick maintains his title as the greatest birder in the world, but has lost his wife who has tired of being the second most important thing to him.

Anyway, the dialogue that struck me is that Brad, after being told that neither he nor Stu finished first, says in essence, we won.  Not, of course, the big year competition, but in the more important event called life.

Perhaps that is why Americans in particular love sports so much.  We live vicariously through the wins and losses of our favorite teams because we have lost sight of winning in our personal lives.  Or perhaps, because we have lost sight of what winning in our personal lives really means.

Stu finally realizes that he is more than just the CEO of a huge company.  It is not who he is, just what he does.  His family, wife, son, new grandson, gain new meaning for him.  Or more exactly, are revealed as just how important those people, his family are to him.  And, of course, at the end of the flick he is sharing his hobby with his new grandson.

So, perhaps winning is everything.  But not winning a game or a contest but winning at life.  Finding a career or hobby that provides pleasure, like birding for Stu and Brad, or writing for myself.  Sharing your life with someone special, then adding to that family by having children and watching them grow to become happy adults with children of their own.  Connecting with friends to create extended families, related or unrelated.  And then, and here is the big THEN, realizing that you have won at life, not because you have multiple homes or new cars, a huge bank account and all the material trappings of our Americanized version of a successful life, but because you have love in your life.

The really ironic thing is that winning at a game is not all that hard; it happens all the time.  But its rewards are fleeting, and often need repeating for the winners to keep that feeling.  Winning at life takes, well, a lifetime.  But the rewards are endless and last beyond the moment. 

Fields and Dreams

One of my most favorite movies is "A Field of Dreams".  I saw the last half of it again last week, then took Bubba out for his afternoon walk.  Our "routine" walk takes us past the community baseball field, and, it being baseball season, there was a high school game in progress.  I am fortunate to live in a town with a walking trail which connects the various recreation areas and on this particular day as we meandered past the various fields of trees, grasses, wild flowers, beside the creek which borders the trail, my mind turned to the movie. 

I imagine that most people consider Ray Kinsella (played by Kevin Costner) as the main focus of the lesson of this movie.  If you are not familiar with it, Ray plows over a portion of his corn field at the behest of a voice he hears in his head.  Of course, this places his family in financial distress as the bills aren't reduced by the lower output of his farm.  To add even more stress to Ray's decision to obey this voice, old time baseball players appear on his field, but not everyone can see them.  One person in particular who is blind to the players is his brother-in-law who, coincidentally is a partner in an investment firm which owns the note to Ray's property.  

In a pivotal scene, Ray is told that he must sign over sale of the home to the investment firm or risk eviction.  When Ray asks the brother-in-law if the field will be maintained, he is reminded what the value of the land is ($2200 per acre) so obviously there can't be land that does not generate revenue.  As I continued my walk with Bubba, I felt a bit sorry for those who cannot see the value of land that provides quiet trails, fresh smells, bird sounds, and the crack of a bat followed by the cheers and groans of the people watching the game. Let's all hope that the wishes of those who only look at land as the revenue it can produce are always and as strongly countered by the wishes of those who know the incredible value of land that is left to nature.  

Paradoxically, when the brother-in-law finally see the ballplayers he repeatedly tells Ray to keep the land, but we all know that it is because he now sees revenue in the field, not the true meaning that the land is providing.  Such a sad character.

That aside, I have a different perspective of the true lesson of this movie.  I believe that the Archie "Moonlight" Graham character played by Burt Lancaster presents an even more powerful inspiration. Moonlight was a baseball player who only played in one major league game in his career, and only for one inning at that.  He eventually quit baseball, went back to school and became a doctor.  When asked by Ray if he could have one wish, the elder Graham wishes that he could have batted, even once, against a major league pitcher.  And, of course, through the magic of Hollywood, when Ray leaves Doc's small town, he encounters the younger Archie Graham hitchhiking to find a place to play baseball, takes him to his field and gives Archie the chance to play in a real game with the heroes of his time, and to bat against a major league pitcher.

It is at this time, after Moonlight has fulfilled his dream of getting to the plate, that the scene with Ray and the brother-in-law comes to its head.  And it is at this time that Ray's daughter falls from the bleachers and lays, not breathing, on the ground.  Just as Ray's wife is about the run back to the house to call for an ambulance, Archie "Moonlight" Graham crosses over the stark white chalk line along the first base line and turns once again into the elder doctor.  He claps Ray's daughter on the back freeing a piece of hot dog that had lodged in her throat, saving her life.  But he can not go back to his dream life of playing ball, he can't cross back over that first base line to his youth.  In a final tear producing scene, he says goodbye to his now fellow ballplayers, thanks Ray for the chance for some time in the sun and returns to the life that, while it  may not have fulfilled his dreams, it certainly made the lives of those in his small town much the better. 

Archie Graham could have stayed a ballplayer in his youth, perhaps one day making it to the majors.  Archie "Moonlight" Graham could have stayed a ballplayer in Ray's field and played the game for all eternity.  Yet in each case, and especially the latter, Graham chose service to others over personal gain.  While I would not say his were selfless decisions, because clearly he attained much joy and happiness as a doctor, he certainly did not ONLY think of himself.  To me, that is the lesson of the movie, and the lesson we need incorporated into our thinking, personally as well as collectively.  We need less greed, less energy expounded for personal wealth and fame, and more balance that combines personal reward with acts that improves, helps, even inspires the lives of those around us.