"WASHINGTON: The Bush administration said Tuesday it will fight to keep meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease"I found this one incredibly insane. Apparently, the Department of Agriculture wants to restrict the a company from testing all of its animals for mad cow disease. A judge ruled earlier that they had ever right too, but the Department of Agriculture continues to delay them because they supposedly believe that such testing could lead to a false positive and cause a panic. At the same time there is also the issue that larger producers may be forced to test their entire larger herds to if this company advertised its meat as being completely safe.Here's my problem with this. That judge was right - There is no reason why a company should not be allowed to test all of its meat. If they are that concerned with their consumer's safety, that's great. That's their decision to make, and a bigger problem for them should they have a false positive. Secondly the argument that the other companies would have to test their meat too is completely messed up. Our government wasn't put in place to protect big business. It was put in place to serve the people. That is why the government should really be supporting this smaller company in its efforts to protect the rest of us.Personally, I'm not all that concerned about Mad Cow Disease. There are many other things that I consider larger risks. The fact that the a government agency is putting the welfare of a few large companies above the welfare of the people concerns me hugely.
read more | digg story
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Jack Thompson Lays His Legal Sights on Halo 3
"Extending his fifteen minutes just a little bit longer, Thompson targets Bill Gates and Microsoft over Halo 3"I don't know about you, but Jack Thompson annoys me to no end. If you read this article he threatens to sue Microsoft should any copies of HALO 3 be distributed to kids. He also claims the Lee Boyd Malvo used Halo to train for his shootings. I own Halo 1 and 2, and I also have fired guns before, and I don't see how you could consider playing Halo as training for any kind of realistic use of weapons. Had he accused the Army and thier game, "America's Army" his accusation would have held more weight. Maybe even Valve and "Counterstrike." Halo? I don't think so.
Also while it is true that Halo is violent, I would like to see a valid study conducted in such a way as to consider every possible contributor to the violence we see from teens today. In fact, I'm willing to bet that such a study would show that when the other factors such as divorce, the erosion of family structure, and lack of discipline at home, it would turn out that violent video game actually reduce violence by giving these teens a release. I say this because when I was in high school I played quite a few video games, and most of them were violent. My friends and I would spend hours playing death matches, yet for some reason, not one of us is violent. Not one of us killed anyone. Gaming was a release for our anger and tension.
I don't know where Mr. Thompson gets his motivation. I tend to wonder if he's every played one of the games he so willingly slanders. In any respect, he's a dangerous advocate, advocating to take away the games we like to play without ever stating a good reason. I'm sorry but claiming that someone used one to learn to kill isn't a valid argument. That's 1 person, perhaps we should also get rid of cars as well since people could actually use them to run someone over. I'm sorry Mr. Thompson, but if you're going to convince me that violent games cause people to be harmed, it will take alot more than your word. I want cold hard statistics that show that video games contribute more than any other factor that has changed since violent video games have been introduced. Once you do convince me - It's still none of your damned business if my kids do play them, I'm the parent, I'll tell my kids what they can and can't do, that's my responsibility.
That brings us to my theory. This is a theory, pure speculation based on observations, and is not meant to be interpreted as a fact, but instead as food for thought. I believe that a lack of discipline at home has led to these violent teens, not video games. The blame for this lies squarely on the backs of people like Mr. Thompson who feel that it is their purpose in life, since they are so much better than everyone else, to tell everyone else how they should live their lives and raise their children. It seems that after decades of people doing this parents have gotten lazy and have started to expect everyone to tell them how to raise their children, and often times expect their children to be raised for them. On top of that children can no longer be disciplined the way they used to be. My parents could never send me out back to get my own switch so they could teach me a lesson because had they, they probably would have gone to jail. With their parents and grandparents, however, it was a different story. Sure it doesn't seem humane to beat a kid with a stick, but there was more to that punishment than the beating. First of all, the dread of having to retrieve your own switch. Secondly, there was that crucial period while you were out getting the switch for the person who was punishing you to cool down so they wern't beating you out of anger. Lastly, you got your punishment, but I dare say the first step would have been the most dreadful. Now days that would be considered child abuse. As an unfortunate side effect, our children no longer dread being punished. Often when I put my daughter in time out, she spites and mocks me because she knows that's not a real punishment.
This leads to a lack of discipline and to children who don't listen to their parents because the parents are at a loss to provide punishment severe enough to even come close to what the children will face when they enter the real world. The concept of a consequence to them is lost, only to be discovered when they really mess up.
So Mr. Thompson, if you really want advocate something, why not advocate against advocates who generally have near-sighted views that often cause unforseen consequences. Tackle the issues where they really lay, and stop jumping to misinformed conclusions. That's where these problems came from in the first place.
read more digg story
Also while it is true that Halo is violent, I would like to see a valid study conducted in such a way as to consider every possible contributor to the violence we see from teens today. In fact, I'm willing to bet that such a study would show that when the other factors such as divorce, the erosion of family structure, and lack of discipline at home, it would turn out that violent video game actually reduce violence by giving these teens a release. I say this because when I was in high school I played quite a few video games, and most of them were violent. My friends and I would spend hours playing death matches, yet for some reason, not one of us is violent. Not one of us killed anyone. Gaming was a release for our anger and tension.
I don't know where Mr. Thompson gets his motivation. I tend to wonder if he's every played one of the games he so willingly slanders. In any respect, he's a dangerous advocate, advocating to take away the games we like to play without ever stating a good reason. I'm sorry but claiming that someone used one to learn to kill isn't a valid argument. That's 1 person, perhaps we should also get rid of cars as well since people could actually use them to run someone over. I'm sorry Mr. Thompson, but if you're going to convince me that violent games cause people to be harmed, it will take alot more than your word. I want cold hard statistics that show that video games contribute more than any other factor that has changed since violent video games have been introduced. Once you do convince me - It's still none of your damned business if my kids do play them, I'm the parent, I'll tell my kids what they can and can't do, that's my responsibility.
That brings us to my theory. This is a theory, pure speculation based on observations, and is not meant to be interpreted as a fact, but instead as food for thought. I believe that a lack of discipline at home has led to these violent teens, not video games. The blame for this lies squarely on the backs of people like Mr. Thompson who feel that it is their purpose in life, since they are so much better than everyone else, to tell everyone else how they should live their lives and raise their children. It seems that after decades of people doing this parents have gotten lazy and have started to expect everyone to tell them how to raise their children, and often times expect their children to be raised for them. On top of that children can no longer be disciplined the way they used to be. My parents could never send me out back to get my own switch so they could teach me a lesson because had they, they probably would have gone to jail. With their parents and grandparents, however, it was a different story. Sure it doesn't seem humane to beat a kid with a stick, but there was more to that punishment than the beating. First of all, the dread of having to retrieve your own switch. Secondly, there was that crucial period while you were out getting the switch for the person who was punishing you to cool down so they wern't beating you out of anger. Lastly, you got your punishment, but I dare say the first step would have been the most dreadful. Now days that would be considered child abuse. As an unfortunate side effect, our children no longer dread being punished. Often when I put my daughter in time out, she spites and mocks me because she knows that's not a real punishment.
This leads to a lack of discipline and to children who don't listen to their parents because the parents are at a loss to provide punishment severe enough to even come close to what the children will face when they enter the real world. The concept of a consequence to them is lost, only to be discovered when they really mess up.
So Mr. Thompson, if you really want advocate something, why not advocate against advocates who generally have near-sighted views that often cause unforseen consequences. Tackle the issues where they really lay, and stop jumping to misinformed conclusions. That's where these problems came from in the first place.
read more digg story
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
The Children in Iraq
My heart goes out to the children in Iraq. As I read their words in that article I nearly broke down and cried. I am very grateful that my daughter isn't growing up in conditions like that, and that I didn't grow up in conditions like that. I only wish there was something I could do so those kids didn't have to either.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
How throwing two eggs turned into...you guessed it: A bomb threat
I find myself expelled from school with four weeks before graduation for throwing a pair eggs at a wall.
read more digg story
You know stories like this make me think about the experiences I and others I know have had with our wonderful legal system. Just a year ago I was accused of things I didn't do and had a restraining order placed on me. A friend of mine has been arrested twice in the past 6 months when he tried to brake up with a girl, and she got angry, and filed false reports claiming he threatened her. What makes this guys story a little more personal is that a close aquaintance of mine had pretty much the same thing happen to her in High school.
In that case she was suspended from school, coerced into a confession by the police (they told her if she signed it she could go home), and spent 5 days in the county jail because of that all because one of her teachers said she knew she had to have done it because of the way she dressed and the people she hung out with. Even after that teacher failed to answer a subpoena twice, the confession had been thrown out, and the police had no further evidence, the judge refused to dismiss the case. At the reccomendation of her lawer, she was pretty much forced to accept a plea deal that got her ROI'd as a minor because of a couple things. First of all the Columbine massecure had happened relatively recently and she probably wouldn't have had a very good chance had it gone to trial. Secondly the school system, and the prosecutors office were doing everything they could trying to make an example out of her. They didn't care if she was guilty or not, they were going to make it look like they had accomplished something.
What I'm getting at here is that the concept of "Innocent until proven guilty" no longer exists. Now you're considered guilty until you're proven innocent. In some cases it makes sense, but in others people go too far. For those of you who think taking away other people's liberties to save a life is worth it, wait until you're put in that situation, and then think of those who have driven to suicide when their lives fell apart when they were falsely accused of something. The friend of mine who was arrested twice could have been one of those who's blood belongs on your hands.
Assuming this kid is innocent, his whole life could be torn apart by this experience. To all of those judges, educators, and procsecutors who are polically motivated and trying to make examples of people, shame on you. In doing so you're shredding what faith, if any, people still have in our legal system. To those who support laws that allow mere accusations to brand a person as guilty until he/she can prove him/herself innocent, think of those they hurt. While you may believe that an innocent person sitting in jail for a couple days is a fair price to pay to save a life, you fail to consider the fact that you're sentencing that innocent person to much more than a couple days in jail. Just to start with that innocent person could lose his job, and possibly his family. From there the consequences of that few days in jail can continue to cascade completely ruining and potentially ending the lives of innocent people.
But I guess If someone you know has been hurt by something, it's fair to punish everyone else because you're hurt. Now I'm being sarcastic.
read more digg story
You know stories like this make me think about the experiences I and others I know have had with our wonderful legal system. Just a year ago I was accused of things I didn't do and had a restraining order placed on me. A friend of mine has been arrested twice in the past 6 months when he tried to brake up with a girl, and she got angry, and filed false reports claiming he threatened her. What makes this guys story a little more personal is that a close aquaintance of mine had pretty much the same thing happen to her in High school.
In that case she was suspended from school, coerced into a confession by the police (they told her if she signed it she could go home), and spent 5 days in the county jail because of that all because one of her teachers said she knew she had to have done it because of the way she dressed and the people she hung out with. Even after that teacher failed to answer a subpoena twice, the confession had been thrown out, and the police had no further evidence, the judge refused to dismiss the case. At the reccomendation of her lawer, she was pretty much forced to accept a plea deal that got her ROI'd as a minor because of a couple things. First of all the Columbine massecure had happened relatively recently and she probably wouldn't have had a very good chance had it gone to trial. Secondly the school system, and the prosecutors office were doing everything they could trying to make an example out of her. They didn't care if she was guilty or not, they were going to make it look like they had accomplished something.
What I'm getting at here is that the concept of "Innocent until proven guilty" no longer exists. Now you're considered guilty until you're proven innocent. In some cases it makes sense, but in others people go too far. For those of you who think taking away other people's liberties to save a life is worth it, wait until you're put in that situation, and then think of those who have driven to suicide when their lives fell apart when they were falsely accused of something. The friend of mine who was arrested twice could have been one of those who's blood belongs on your hands.
Assuming this kid is innocent, his whole life could be torn apart by this experience. To all of those judges, educators, and procsecutors who are polically motivated and trying to make examples of people, shame on you. In doing so you're shredding what faith, if any, people still have in our legal system. To those who support laws that allow mere accusations to brand a person as guilty until he/she can prove him/herself innocent, think of those they hurt. While you may believe that an innocent person sitting in jail for a couple days is a fair price to pay to save a life, you fail to consider the fact that you're sentencing that innocent person to much more than a couple days in jail. Just to start with that innocent person could lose his job, and possibly his family. From there the consequences of that few days in jail can continue to cascade completely ruining and potentially ending the lives of innocent people.
But I guess If someone you know has been hurt by something, it's fair to punish everyone else because you're hurt. Now I'm being sarcastic.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)