Concerns and alerts for copycats, follow-ons, protest actions, and other criminal activities come out, have to be tracked and vetted, and lead to publicized activity. Today, tens of thousands of school children were kept home as the result of a fangirl from Florida (really, "A Florida Woman" was involved?). She went to Colorado as part of a roadtrip to commemorate the 1999 Columbine Shooting... with a shotgun...
This week would be sunshine and moonbeams if it weren't for some of the asshats who have popped into the timeline. Our nation's history kicked into high gear with events in Massachusetts nearly 250 years ago. And now every Tom, Dick, and Adolf wants to get in on the act. They have turned Patriot's Day (and Week) into a shitshow of anti-government, white-supremacist, and worship of teen angst.
The Story So Far
1775: April 19 - The Battles of Lexington and Concord - remembered by most of us as the opening shots in our Revolution; Remembered by 3%ers and other miscreants who purposefully misremember history as the rallying point behind which we once overthrew the yoke of tyranny... and we can do so again...
Just your regular, everyday militia members wearing bullshit gear, having done bullshit training, and believing in, you guessed it, bullshit. (photo PBS)
1889: April 20 - Birthday of a certain person with a tiny mustache, a penchant for blaming the problems of his country on an entire segment of the population (and later murdering them), and the target of lampooning by british comedians. Some of his followers are referred to later as "really nice people" by an American President.
1985: April 19 - Siege of The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord begins in Arkansas; The CSA surrenders 2 days later. White supremacists, Christian Identity, AND anti-government? From an organization with the initials "CSA"... hunh... never would have guessed.
1995: April 19 - Murrah Federal Building Bombing in OKC. This event led me to begin following and studying the related subjects of White Supremacy, Christian Identity belief, and anti-government activity more than anything else. I had stayed in OKC just a couple nights before this happened and I wanted to understand why.
1999: April 20 - Columbine - I could have been one of these kids in another life - on both sides of it. I knew kids like the shooters. One of my best friends has kids who have graduated/will be graduating from Columbine. This date ALWAYS ratchets up her blood pressure.
2000: April 22 - Elian Gonzalez Raid - A surprisingly large number of anti-government activists look to this event as Federal overreach, an evil government interfering in parental/family rights, and the last gasp of the Clintons kowtowing to a Communist Cuba (seriously? we are still worried about the evils of Communism?). It's not as if we would want another country to return a child removed from America or anything...
2007: April 16 - VA Tech shooting. Yes, Virginia, there are shooters on college campuses.
2013: April 15 - Boston Marathon Bombing; Bomber killed 4 days later. Take note - this is the only thing on this list that doesn't involve Christian Americans. Yes, I am using the term "Christian" loosely... but it stands out. Oh, and before you call me out on Item Two on this list, check some of his current followers... especially those who showed up in Charlottesville...
I still don't get it.
I really want to, but I don't understand. I really wish I did. Then we could move towards working on these issues...
No, he doesn't actually look like me... except for the chromosomes... and the pigmentation...
The Issue At Hand
Again. It's not Achmed I worry about.
And, for the first time, I feel I need to add I'm not worried about Jamaal - I only use that name as it is likely Black/Urban/African-American enough that "not-racist" racists will get the point.
OK, First: Take it from what? Or from whom? No one took anything from you.
You handed it over in a gift-wrapped package when you decided the you wanted to be afraid of a world that didn't look like the one portrayed on Leave It To Beaver, The Andy Griffith Show, Gilligan's Island, or The Brady Bunch.
You tied the bow as soon as you didn't want to acknowledge there was change occurring around you.
The problem with the worlds created for these shows is that they are one-dimensional. I'm not talking about the empty building fronts and thin plots. I am talking about the lack of interaction between people of color and the main characters. Each of these shows creates a false universe from the viewer's perspective. The main characters are all white, straight, and unoffensive.
Few characters smoke or drink and no one has bodily functions beyond eating. Sex is right out. Sexy can be OK, though, but not too much (just ask Ginger). Even those with problematic traits (Otis on Andy Griffith, for example) are seen as lovable comic relief figures and are treated with patience by all.
The Brady Bunch's Peter meets sportsball star Deacon Jones. Peter is not frightened because Fox News hasn't begun broadcasting. (That and Deacon Jones was forced to wear a cardigan sweater)
This artificial world has the camera looking at a specific view - and it is not the view from the other side of the tracks. You know, the side of the tracks where 'they' know 'they' need to stay - because that is where 'their' churches, schools, stores, restaurants, bars, and homes are located. And that world doesn't leave much room for non-white role models. Well, there are the Harlem Globetrotters... but they fall outside of this made-up world. They are part of the real world. The public world.
Not the minority you were looking for... Italian-American Vito Scotti playing a Japanese Sailor on Gilligan
There are minorities if you look hard enough, but they are cast as set dressing with only a handful of speaking parts. There are no interactions outside of crowd scenes (so long as they stay to the back) and occasional nods of recognition. There are no issues with someone trying to drink from the wrong fountain, go to the wrong movie theater, try to get your hair cut at Floyd's, or sit in at the Five and Dime. There is no friction, no protest, no MLK, much less BLM.
At least those hippies onScooby Doo and The Partridge Family came into contact with minorities... Scooby and the gang encountered minorities as both good guys and bad guys - and as white guys in costumes. The Partridges were really inclusive. They had people of color AND non-Christians... They even showed up in Detroit to help out Lou Gossett and Richard Pryor (with the help of the Black Panthers).
The Times, They Are a'Changing (Maybe)
There are still issues with how television hasn't changed much. For a long time, the minority roles were often the main family portrayed as "all-Americans" - The Cosby Show, The Jeffersons, etc. Not much room for a modern day Chico and the Man or Sanford and Son. There are some outliers with Modern Family, Glee, and others. Surprisingly (or not), the Disney Channel may be one of the best in this area as they recognize the marketing need to be more inclusive. I won't even touch blackface/whitewashing here as others have covered that far better than I could.
Wizened Elder AND Environmental Activist
Either way, I can't help but think that this mental creation of a pre-racial America can only come from the segregated world of popular TV. In other words, a world in which minorities are seen and not heard. It was a world with no BLM. A world in which American Indians were seen as a lost people, at worst, or wizened elders and environmental activists, at best. A world in which everyone went to the same church.
We all were good citizens. Authority had a purpose. Order was there for a reason. Alphas were better than Betas. In many ways (and as a parent), I see parallels to the Isle of Sodor, a place where anything other than solid, serious, diligent work and putting order first results in "Chaos and Delay."
And how would Sir like his Topham Hatt?
This is a world in which everyone could be happy and have little in the way of strife and disagreement. A world in which we didn't have to ask, "Can't we all just get along?" Because we were already getting along.
The Reasoned Response... no, wait... the Opposite of That
But just in case we aren't getting along and it appears that someone is trying to change the camera placement, I can think of no better way to fix it..., er, defend the Constitution... than to have an armed insurrection. It's not like there is a mechanism to modify/throw out the Constitution... Oh, wait... that would be Article V...
A few weeks ago, I left Facebook. Well, I didn't. But I did.
After many, many years of being on Facebook (July 2, 2008), I think I am good with stepping away.
And, yes, I know some of my friends and family have called it ‘Davebook’ in the past - and for good reason. I am a chronic Facebook poster, sharer, over-sharer, linker, liker, etc. I have maintained a few pages related to my personal interests and politics. I created and managed a group related to Military Music. I connected and reconnected with people I have worked with, grew up with, and played with (music, games, whatever). And now I think I am good.
Now. What's all this about NOT actually leaving... Well, several things came up as I was thinking about getting away from Facebook. Part of this is tied to Facebook's insane hold over EVERYTHING on the internet. Whether it is UPS or gaming sites, signing in via Facebook will get you in the door. So there is that. The main reason is I don't want to lose contact with my people. Yes, I said 'My People'. Most of the people on my page are people who want to come into contact with me - or at least are willing to put up with my nonsense. And by nonsense, I mean anything from Star Wars to video games to K-Pop to politics. There are some people I have only known through Facebook. I am closer to some of these people than people I have known since childhood. One of these close friends recently posted the following:
So do you all have "sacred" people?
I know. That sounds weird.
But what I mean is, there's family. There are friends. But beyond those levels of intimacy, there are a select few people who could do no wrong you would find unforgivable. People you're intensely protective of and loyal to. Yes? No?
Is there a term for that? Love is insufficient. I've thought a lot about this, over the years. Despite my lack of religious leanings, the best word I've come up with is sacred.
A number of these folks have become my sacred people. Several of them know who they are. That said, yes, I am Terry. You can be Wayne or you can be Garth. I won't judge.
So, why are you leaving then?
There are a few reasons. Primarily, Facebook itself, and my inability to not browse, comment, link, browse, link some more... wash, rinse, repeat. I will be the first to admit I have a bad case of FOMO. But then I also have the insufferable need to tell everyone what I have learned. That and I have limited self control. Basically, I am a monkey with clothes and no tree to live in. I am working on that. I put a down payment on a tree. A second reason is that it is getting mean. Not just run-of-the-mill mean. This is getting to be a full-bore, GIFT-esque assault on anyone who even slightly disagrees with you. I have seen otherwise sane people turn into complete asshats for the simplest reasons. I used to be one of those people. A friend called me on it. I thought I was being funny but I realized I was being a dick. I am tired of calling people on it. I'm not a cop and I am done thinking I need to be a referee (online, anyway). Finally, I am looking for a change. I am getting rid of the comfort. As I was thinking about why I wanted to get away from FB, I came across this video from Linn/Darbin Orvar, one of my fave YouTubers. She states it much better than I feel I could.
There are other reasons - Not wanting to filter yet not wanting to offend; Disappointment with humanity; Election malaise... But nothing I need to go in to here (at least right now). In general, I feel I can't be who I want to be online.
So what HAVE you been doing? Work, mostly. Coaching soccer. Playing a variety of games. Getting to know western Arkansas. My online socialising has seen me getting more into Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, and Tumblr (links below). My online education has seen me going to YouTube, picking one topic, and letting it roll from one video to the next. Ted Talks one day, Video Game Design another. Soccer Laws of the Game; K-Pop; Prop Modeling; Carpentry; Gaming... It is amazing what you can get done while listening to people who know more than you about a subject. The Upshot: Less stress. I feel like I have time for other things. It's not interfering with other aspects of my life. I don't feel like I have to check my phone every five minutes to see what is going on. I take more of an active role in what is going on around me. I get to realize that there are other things I can do other than scrolling interminably through a newsfeed of what Facebook wants me to see - not the newsfeed I want. To top it off, I get to do all of this without feeling like I am missing out on the latest 'big thing'. The downside is that I don't feel as if I am involved in the lives of my friends out there in the big blue world. From Atlanta to Portland - with side trips to Canada and Europe - many of my favorite people are only accessible through FaceBook. I now miss their lives. And I am sad. So. If you want to contact me but you are not currently a friend on Facebook (I won't be accepting friend requests for the foreseeable future), You can reach me at the following:
This is awkward... Six months with no post... And the last one was about Christmas music and movies... Nice.
I can make some excuses about why I haven't posted about Colorado's 30-round magazine ban (boo), Illinois finally allowing concealed carry (yay), or nonsensical political posturing on both sides of other attempts to (de)regulate gun ownership or use (double boo).
I have also been trying to hook up other professional opportunities... This August, I will FINALLY get a chance to expand my one day "firearms and museums" presentation.
I understand that it may seem a bit expensive, but there is lots of good stuff in the class. If you have questions, give me a holler or shout at the folks at the Campbell Center!
Cheers! (and I'll try not to be such a stranger...)
Now. I will let that point sit on its own. Please don't go all 24-hour-news-cycle on us. We don't need to see his face. We don't need to hear nonsensical eyewitnesses give their side of the story using hyperbole and incorrect gun terms. We don't need news readers making comments of a technical nature.
We do need facts. We do need what happened (as far as we can tell). We do need who did it (as far as we can tell). We do need to know what we need to do next (lock our doors, pack our bags, hug our families).
We do need restraint.
We do need to get on with the other things going on in the world. This may sound callous, and my heart does go out to the victims, their families, and their friends, but I am glad I have the internet so I could see if there was something else going on in the world.
First Response
I guess you know how I feel about the network coverage. Between the inane rambling of people still on an adrenaline high after surviving the worst shooting since the Va Tech Massacre and the inane rambling of a news anchor who knows next to nothing about guns (I love you, Robin Meade, but you need to get to the range sometime), I was boggled. The only decent eyewitness account I felt was legitimate was that of a combat-experienced Marine who was with his wife. He calmly described what he saw and heard. He didn't exaggerate. He didn't make guesses. He told what he knew.
Sadly, I believe the best journalistic effort of the day came from the Onion, citing an imaginary person as saying "Nothing really surprises me when it comes to this kind of thing anymore. And that makes me feel terrible"
and "In
exactly two weeks this will all be over and it will be like it never
happened."
Yep. This.
The United States of Guns
I'll let most of the pundits go into the facts and figures.
TL:DR - There are more guns in the hands of fewer people now than there have been historically. Violent Crime has been decreasing rapidly. Concealed Carry is available in almost every state (several without permitting).
Let me use my golden, reassuring voice to scare you into buying something.
Since Senator Obama was nominated as the Democratic Party Candidate in 2008, sales of guns and ammunition went up in the mistaken belief President Obama would take all of our guns away because of his following a European socialist who was attempting to ban our guns. I was there and I watched it happen. The last four years saw the gun industry as one of the only recession-proof areas of the economy other than the gold sellers advertising via Glenn Beck. (I do have to admit, I expected the bottom to fall out of the gold market by about 2010-2011... I was wrong)
I like my guns. I like being able to shoot them. I like being able to teach people about the role of firearms in American and World history. I like teaching museum people about firearms (reaaaallll small slice of the Venn diagram there...). I like talking to Gun Guys (and Gun Gals).
However, I also can't stand talking to Gun Guys.
Most Gun Guys I know are great people. Some are religious, some aren't. Most are on the right, some are on the left. Some are active shooters. Some are collectors. Some just buy guns. Most are the salt of the earth. Most are white. Most are upstanding members of their communities. Genuinely nice folk, for the most part.
Sometimes, though, being around guns has placed me in the company of some people I really did not like. Racists, White Supremacists, Anti-Government Conspiracy Theorists, Separatist movement folks, and a few Aryan Nation folks. Real great crowd. Shining examples of a group of otherwise great people. Also, the folks who will easily get on camera because they fit the stereotype.
Stuck on the NRA
Then there is the mix. Good people who are believing everything the NRA is telling them. When pundits mention the core of the Republican Party, they are talking about these people. I have written previously about my feelings on the NRA. I will reiterate that I appreciate the non-lobbying activities - firearms use and safety training, youth shooter programs, and grants for ranges to make improvements, to name a few. As I am happy to share, I am a life member of the NRA. However, I have to admit I giggled when I saw the Onion giving Wayne LaPierre a dig.
Over the last couple of decades, Wayne and his people have been pushing Social Security off of the third rail of the political subway and replacing it with Firearms. For the last 10 years especially, they have made the life of our Congresspeople harder than it already was. Vote the wrong way on a bill and every gun owner in your district will find out. nice.
The NRA, as usual after a situation like this is lying low. They did the same after the Gabby Giffords Shooting - smart move on their part.
Some folks, however, are pointing to a decline in the power of their organization. There are different reasons behind why this may be happening. One is that they are outliving their utility as a result of one success and one failure. The success is that they have pushed back or removed many gun restrictions across the country (including hamstringing the ATF through limiting their investigative power). The failure has been in catching the graying of the gun community too late. The retirees with guns are passing away. The greatest Generation is all but gone. The youth are in single-parent homes with no dads (This is what happens when you believe "Only boys shoot guns"). The majority of our population lives in an urban setting. On the one hand, you have one of the most liberal environments for gun usage. On the other, the percent of the population that does own guns is decreasing.
Worshipping at the Altar
The result of this is that those with guns see themselves surrounded by those without. Tie this with the belief in family, church, and country shared by many of these folks and you get an almost religious fervor that has spread among the gun-owning public.This was best shown through the Pat Robertson-esque comments made by Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert. Referring to our Founding Fathers and asking repeatedly, "Where was God in all of this?" he is searching for ties that aren't there. In asking why no one in that theater was carrying concealed, he is making an assumption of your typical concealed-carry permit holder and the situation in the theater. My money is on Representative Gohmert never having a concealed carry permit.
I have. After arriving in Wyoming in 2003, I applied for and received my concealed carry permit. That permit allowed me to carry concealed in more than 1/2 of the United States. I regularly did. Even in Cody, Wyoming, I would carry to Wal-Mart, to restaurants, and, yes, to the movies. Why? Because I knew then what some folks are just starting to understand. This can happen anywhere. Statistically, you have a better chance of getting cancer, but there is always that chance.The best training doesn't just teach safety and how to shoot. It teaches you when to shoot and how to determine IF you should shoot. Many was the time at Wal-Mart when I knew that I would not be shooting - I would be grabbing my kids and doing my best Franco Harris impersonation.
Part of the reason I support legal carry is simply that I have met too many idiots with guns. Most of them, fortunately, do not get the concealed carry permit. Sitting in a class for 16 hours (in a lot of states), filling out forms, writing a check, and then waiting is too much for some. Others aren't legal residents of the state in which they live. Some get refused because of a past crime. Some have "issues." These folks decide to carry concealed for reasons unknown. These are the people I worry about.
And then there are the people like Aurora (I won't call him by name). He picked out what he wanted to do. He picked a great place to attack. He chose a good time to go "in costume." He chose some good weapons for the job. The guns were purchased legally. There were no warning signs (that have been reported). He was not going to be stopped.
Weapons in the Hands of Private Citizens
Even if someone had been carrying (like that Marine I mentioned earlier?), I would expect that their first and best response would have been to get the hell out of Dodge and keep your eyes open. This is due to the stories of the smoke grenade (if that is what it was) and the combination of the Remington 870 and AR-15. If I have a handgun and the other guy has a rifle or shotgun, I am finding hard cover. Why? Because they can do more damage and are more accurate over range.
The larger firearms (and the ones folks tend to freak over) have historically been designed and used for hunting. Even the venerable AR-15 uses a round very similar to small game cartridges. I have an 870. I've shot trap, grouse, and rabbit with it. I would likely own an AR if I had the spare cash. Why - because they can be so heavily modified. Otherwise, there are other firearms that don't look so scary that are more dangerous because that can fire larger ammunition just as fast.
Whether or not we should have these firearms is, to me, not an issue. I believe we have the right, but I would give them all up for a happy peaceful world (this is why I am damned to be a Liberal). The more I have thought about it, though, the more I am surprised the Democratic Party is not on the side of gun rights. This is one of the only rights issues that the Democratic Party does not support. We support the right to choose, the right to love who we want to love, the right to vote, the right to think and worship (or not worship) as we wish. We should be the gun rights party.
The Upshot
I'm just rambling now, but there are bigger issues than gun rights and bans. There is the issue of our society. There is the issue that we have a nation that does not pay attention to mental illness as it should. There is an issue in that our society does not engender more empathy and respect for life. It's not guns, it's not video games, it's not kids underlining 'Eskimo' in their copy of Moby Dick. It's responsibility, it's family, and it's love.
I love how folks on both ends of the political spectrum believe that their beliefs are the only ones that support Freedom and Liberty and that the other end of the spectrum is, at best, sending our Country down the drain or, at worst, actively striving to destroy the country or turn it into some sort of fascist or socialist state (depending on how you roll).
The beauty of our system is that NO ONE PERSON who gets elected - regardless of office - is able to irrevocably harm the nation. As the Chief Justice just told us, if you don't like what someone does, vote them out. If they do something illegal, they will be prosecuted. If they do something stupid, they will be called out for it. If the minority gets beat up, they can (and often do) come back in the next election.
No one person can destroy America. 236 years of various idiots, plutocrats, warmongerers, adulterers, liberals (Yes, I consider TR to have been a Liberal), conservatives, slave owners, racists, gays, Christians (they were all Christians of some sort), or other -ives/-ists have failed to screw it up beyond recognition yet.
A few of my Facebook friends... OK, more than a few of my Facebook friends (and a number of my real world friends) are very Conservative. I mean, c'mon, how can you be involved in firearms without knowing some Gun Guys (and if they aren't a conservative bunch, I don't know who is).
I was called out for offending someone with cartoons and posts that made it seem I was trying to say something about them personally. Most of the posts/shares I made were attempts to show the political beliefs I espouse or to ridicule what I see as the low side of both ends of the political spectrum. One cartoon was about the lowest common denominator within a conservative political group (and something I have seen first hand).
I have known your run-of-the-mill Conservatives, religious Conservatives, economic conservatives, some people who are Reagan Republicans, some folks who think of themselves as Reagan Republicans (but aren't), a number of Libertarians, some folks who think of themselves as Libertarians (but aren't), a guy who thinks of himself as the modern incarnation of Theodore Roosevelt (without using the word 'environmental', because, you know,
only Liberals have something to do with environmentalism - and, no, he isn't on Facebook), and some folks who make the John Birch Society look like the Socialist Party of America. I have gotten along with them all - granted some better than others. I even changed some minds in the process - while I had mine opened as well.
I myself, as the blog title suggests, am not conservative. Well, not about most issues. I have also started to become less quiet about my beliefs.
Given the various places I have lived and one particular job I had, I now tend to let people know what I am thinking about a political subject. I got tired of having to nod, smile, and say, "Sure" when someone suggested the President was born in another country and how he was going to try to force Socialism on us and take our guns away. In the position I worked, I would likely have lost my job if my political leanings would have been made public.
So, back to Facebook...
Lately, I have been sharing some comics, graphs, and other things that support my worldview. Some people have taken issue with these beliefs and think that because I don't like some of their personal and political beliefs that I do not like them. This could not be further from the truth.
The first thing I ask myself:
Are you a mean person? I have known Liberals and Conservatives both who were complete asses. There are people across the spectrum who want to hurt people, who don't respect property, and who think of those who disagree with them as lower life forms. A perfect example of this are some (not all) of the Occupy protestors at Zuccotti Park. Closer to home are people who abuse their family members. Douchebaggery knows no political lines.
Next:
Do you use your worldview to determine how you treat others (coworkers, people on the street, customers, etc.)? For some people this manifests itself through ignoring those who do not attend your church, go to your political club, or attend your rally. An extreme case is robbing and murdering people because you don't like illegal aliens...
If the answer to either is yes, I may not want to be your friend. In a lot of ways this comes down to a simple question: "Would I want to have a beer with you?" In the case of the current presidential election, I could answer yes for either of them. Hell, I would have said yes to Ron Paul. Most of the others would be a solid no.
I can't think of a person I am friends with that I wouldn't want to have a drink with. I hope you feel the same way.
What is my worldview?
Here is a short list.
(Note - I have the right to add, delete, or modify anything on this list without notice)
Yes to separation of Church and State (much of the rest hinges on this)
I believe that many Tea Party members are genuine in their interest to see a better America and that the end result is similar to my image of a better America. Now if we can only agree on how to get to this shared destination
I believe that the people running the Tea Party (There are severalTeaParties to choose from - each supporting slightly different things) have been very good at pulling the wool over the eyes of the rank-and-file, hiding the corporate/1%er wolf under the sheep's wool of God, Flag, and Family
I believe that teachers do not get paid enough and if the pay was better, we would get better teachers.
I believe that unions are a good thing for disenfranchised workers - until they get too greedy for their own good.
I believe that the Amendments to the US Constitution compose a list of our rights, first and foremost. Any attempt to amend it in order to infringe the rights of ANYONE goes against that theme. (There is no such thing as a right to not be offended)
I believe that the President is an American Citizen, a Christian, and the legal Commander-in-Chief
I believe that there is no Muslim agenda to destroy America - I am more worried about a Christian Identity member with a U-Haul full of ANFO
I believe that the 1% is padding their wallets and that the rest of us are suffering as a side effect
Yes. I am the Secular Humanist your parents warned you about.
I grew up rural. We had four channels: the big three and PBS (my wife had two with occasional PBS). By the time I got to junior high, we had a fifth channel broadcasting syndicated shows in the UHF range. We couldn't get cable - unless we paid to lay it - and satellite was just coming into vogue - albeit with a huge metal receiver dish that would make the NSA proud.
Over the years, I have spent most of my life in a rural/semi-rural environment. Without government subsidizing electricity, water, phone, and road infrastructure, these folks would still be living the life of Russian serfs. One of the last areas that has been built up to a decent level is internet access. The use of the old analog TV radio frequencies for this is a HUGE step forward. Access will improve and (more importantly) speeds will improve.
Why is speed important? Currently, most rural internet users live in 1996. Dial-up is the rule, not the exception (note - yes, there is satellite and microwave internet, but they are both prohibitively expensive and each has it's own issues). My in-laws have dial-up. Most ISPs advertise access speeds above 56Kbps, yet the lines and equipment used for transmission is sixty years old (or older). This may allow downloads in the 24-36Kbps range and uploads about 14Kbps... OK, most rural internet users live in 1994.
My internet access at home is in the 7-10Mbs (7000-10,000Kbps) range with uploads in the 2-3Mbs range. I can email a document (conservatively) eighty times faster than they receive it. I can download webpages almost 200 times faster... Loading video on dial-up is prohibitively ssssssslllllllloooooowwwwwwww on dial-up... let's not even go there... Whitespace Broadband is apparently faster than my Cable Internet, but I would like to see the numbers from Wilmington.
An effect of this - less education about what is going on in the world around you. Yes, you have your satellite TV. Yes, you can keep track of what is going on from the point of view of the news channel you choose to watch. However, you don't have access to the Khan Academy, foregoing one of the best learning institutions on the planet. You don't have access to the Weather Channel info about your specific location, foregoing information about the hurricane, tornado, or blizzard bearing down on you..You don't have access to all of the news sources the world has to provide, foregoing the opportunity to learn about opposing viewpoints and the chance to be a better informed citizen.
If this isn't inequity, I don't know what is.
I am not trying to suggest, as some are, that the Internet is a human right. I am suggesting that the better educated the populace, the better the country. Expand Internet infrastructure cheaply and efficiently and your people will reward you. But first, they will have to get in line behind the residents of Wilmington, North Carolina.
Other articles on this: Network World PCMag - with explanation of how this works and it is not really 'Wi-Fi' PC World
As some of you know, I am a Life Member of the National Rifle Association. However, I am also a disgruntled Life Member of the NRA. Part of me dearly believes that it is a great organization. Much of this comes from the various training programs offered by the organization - many at little or no cost. The strengths of the organization outweigh the ills.
It has been my experience that many of the people who are opposed to firearms are either uneducated about the subject or unfamiliar with guns in a practical sense or both. During my time as the Curator of the Cody Firearms Museum, I often met people who were opposed to firearms of any type in private hands. After showing them the museum, talking with them, and helping them understand what firearms are, how they work, and what they are capable of, most changed their minds.
The viewpoint of the non-gun public is not helped by the number of ill-educated gun guys out there who do not aid our cause. Fortunately, the NRA has helped in the education of many hundreds of thousands of the nation's gun owners. Unfortunately, it is also one of the largest rabble-rousing organizations in the country.
An instance from my personal experience -
Just about a year ago, during the run-up to the 2010 elections, I got a phone call. The caller ID said "National Rifle Association." I thought, "OK. Another fund-raising call..." Knowing that our number would stay in the auto-dial rotation until I acknowledged the call, I picked up the phone. Little did I know, this was not a fund-raising call. This was a get-out-the-vote call...
The very nice woman on the line dutifully read from the script in front of her, trying to convince me I should be terrified that President Obama, et al, was going to sign a treaty to restrict our gun rights. I told her to stop right there. I proceeded to tell her several facts:
Since then, I have not heard a WORD from the NRA. Well, the National, that is. The local chapter gives me a call once a year for their banquet. I also have some occasional communications with the National Firearms Museum as I know the Curators.
As I was saying, I have not received a phone call from the NRA in almost a year. They appear to have removed me from their mailing list, as well. I still look forward to my American Rifleman. Granted, I skip past the bits by Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox... and the ads for gold... and the ads for "Commemorative Firearms"...
Amazing. I got through all of this and didn't mention Glenn Beck...
EDIT (1/26/2012): Noticed in my page stats that someone got here by searching for the term "national rifle association stop the calls". #winning
Saw this blog post elsewhere and wanted to cross-post it. This is one of those things that is a double-edged sword.
Yes, such a scope will greatly aid military and law enforcement shooters who have to get 100% accuracy regardless of any issues.
For competition, I think this will allow some folks to have a little bit of an edge. Granted, most folks aren't as accurate as their guns. But at the level of national (and some regional) shoots, the difference between first and third may be less than 1/8th MOA. This type of device could be the decider.
More concerning to me is that this scope could also aid what I have seen as a disturbing development within the rifle-shooting community as a whole. The belief that it is not only OK, but completely ethical, to take overly-long shots on game has been an issue to me for a few years as the level of gun technology has increased while the dedication of many hunters to their sport has declined.
Back when I was young and ignorant (as opposed to being old and ignorant now), I took shots I should have let go. My lack of ethical behavior at the time still bothers me. I have seen and heard of other, more experienced shooters taking these shots. I can only guess they have been spurred on by articles and advertisements pushing that some new gun and ammunition can make them a modern equivalent of Carlos Hathcock or the fictional Matthew Quigley. I say, "nay, nay..."
Practice, Practice, Practice... three zeroing rounds at the start of the season won't cut it. If nothing else, dryfire at a spot in the garage to practice - maybe even use the old dime/washer on the barrel trick to practice your trigger pull...
Know your limits... How fit are you to fire offhand at a deer 200 yards away after running 50 yards? try this at the range sometime...
Know your rifle... Do you have a range card? Is the ammo in your gun from the same lot? or did you just buy a different load from Wal-Mart?
Know the range... Use a rangefinder or practice known range estimation. Do you stand hunt? try using ranging stakes set every 50 yards.
One of the reasons I am writing a lot of this anonymously is that I am currently in a job that would, well, come to a very public end if I were outed as supporting anything other than the political right.
I am about to move to a new job at which no one will care about my politics. I CAN'T WAIT!
Until then, I continue to receive emails like the following:
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the Presidential election:
Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29
Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13..2 Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate,the map of the territory Republicans won was mostlythe land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Democrat territory mostlyencompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes blah, blah, blah...
OK, not only did Olson not write this but the numbers are wrong. This is the kind of crap I have received daily from Conservatives of every flavor for the last five-plus years. I have, on occasion, pointed out to certain individuals that their emails are incorrect and have requested to be removed from mail lists, but have not been able to go further, afraid to out myself and lose my job.
And for those thinking that this is paranoid in itself, please take a look at what happened to Jim Zumbo, formerly of Outdoor Life, and Dan Cooper, of Cooper Firearms. I'm telling you, the firearms world will eat their own young to survive.
