Obama receives the Nobel Peace Prize
Barrack Obama received the Noble Peace Prize this morning for his commitment to inspiring a brighter future through cooperation and his work in trying to reduce nukes.
What it funny about this is the critics, and how fast they are in their response, republicans claim that it is his 'star power' (the CHAIRMAN of the republican party stated this rather sore-loser line) and that he has not actually 'done anything'.
Where is the "good job"? Our nation's leader gets a highly coveted award, and the best they can do is criticize both the organization, and Obama?
Friday, October 9, 2009
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Sigg, BPA , and typical corporate behavior
Sigg and BPA.
Sigg and Bpa.
So, it comes out that Sigg and their water battles had BPA in them all along. After the huge BPA scare 2-3 years ago, and everyone left nalgene, it is any wonder that as they flocked to Sigg they remained quiet about their own BPA, even going to far as to lie about their bottles were safe from BPA?
It is insanely messed up that a corporation can tell all these 'half lies' and essentially not get punished for what it is going. That gets into the vast legalese of our system that because they did 'nothing' wrong the only thing that will punish them is the market. What a joke. Slap them with a multi-million fine, and watch other corporations tow a very tight line after that.
Sigg and Bpa.
So, it comes out that Sigg and their water battles had BPA in them all along. After the huge BPA scare 2-3 years ago, and everyone left nalgene, it is any wonder that as they flocked to Sigg they remained quiet about their own BPA, even going to far as to lie about their bottles were safe from BPA?
It is insanely messed up that a corporation can tell all these 'half lies' and essentially not get punished for what it is going. That gets into the vast legalese of our system that because they did 'nothing' wrong the only thing that will punish them is the market. What a joke. Slap them with a multi-million fine, and watch other corporations tow a very tight line after that.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Headshot! Pirates killed. 'Victory'
Well, in case you haven't heard, earlier today was a 'great' day for America as some Seal snipers killed three pirates holding the captain, ending the standoff.
Capt. Richard Phillips was on the lifeboat, then the Navy seals sniper shot 'headshots'/'killshots' before everyone was dead and the Captain could be saved.
I use the ' ' because of the fact on the news they said again and again how 'great' of a day this was etc. It was a good day, but do good days have to come at the death of others. Look, these pirates definitely deserved it. A lot of people deserve it. I just ask every time someone cheers a death, think about what you are actually doing.
Capt. Richard Phillips was on the lifeboat, then the Navy seals sniper shot 'headshots'/'killshots' before everyone was dead and the Captain could be saved.
I use the ' ' because of the fact on the news they said again and again how 'great' of a day this was etc. It was a good day, but do good days have to come at the death of others. Look, these pirates definitely deserved it. A lot of people deserve it. I just ask every time someone cheers a death, think about what you are actually doing.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Ecotopia back up. Let's talk about Violence
After a long abandonment, I have decided to not let the Ecotopia die just yet. So I'm back.
Today's topic is going to focus on violence. Particularly, the darker side of violence, a side we too-oft ignore. Anyone who knows me, or has read this, knows that I believe that weapons are fine to carry around. I say 'weapons' instead of guns, because I think that other weapons should be legalized. I will cover that later, but for now, the side we often ignore.
Pro-gun people seem to advocate that by merely having a gun in a women's purse, or in your truck is enough to stop a violent crime. Crime is violent, fast, brutal and efficient. A mugger is going to come out of the shadows and have a knife to your throat before you know what is going on. You can be attacked long before you process where your gun even is, much less go through the long process of preparing to fire it.
Are you really going to have time to unzip that purse, dig around for it, pull the slide back, and aim accurately? Oh... wait, you forgot to make sure the safety is off, that woman just got knifed and killed. It is foolish to think that this process is in anyway 'easy' or 100% success rate of warding off crime.
Police can't even do this, the average statistic for hitting a target within 5 feet are at least 70% missing/striking a different object. The New York Times carried an article about 13% hit rate. If police do this bad, how well is someone on the street, unready for a sudden, bloody assault going to be?
I have guns. I am 'pro' gun as most would consider it. But I am under no delusions about what having a gun for self-defense is about. It is about killing someone without a second thought, because that 'second' thought could get you killed. Ask yourself, how many of your guns( if you are 'pro-gun') are locked in a safe? How useful is that really if a criminal is standing over your bed with a gun pointing at your face?
Are you ready to keep a gun - without the safety on - loaded, and ready to go within arms reach of your bed? If you are serious about self-defense, this is exactly what you have to do, anything else is foolish, dangerous, and self-deceiving. Are you ready to TRY to shoot someone, probably miss, and possibly been immediately shot in return? Its a bloody truth a lot of people never consider.
For the second part of this special two-parter, is about melee weapons.
It seems rather stupid that people can carry guns around, yet knives 'over 3 inches' are somehow the target of vehement hate? A lot of pro-gun people advocate everyone packing guns around and that 'there would be no crime!' this may or may not be true, but to these people, I ask, "would everyone also having swords change anything?" Take this point seriously, for a gun can make even the weakest, oldest person in our society a criminal. This weak, decrepit person can easily go on a killing spree with only a semi-auto pistol. Excluding the odds against actually hitting people, a standard clip could easily end the life of 12 people with only twelve twitchs of the fingers. If that is not a MASSIVE PERVERSION of the natural order, I don't know what is.
But consider if we all had swords and guns. Not only would crime probably drop (unfortunately through the principle of 'mutually assured destruction' more then anything...) but imagine the massive calming effect of having your own destiny in your hands. Would someone decide it was a good idea to go mug someone who had a gun and a sword?
I am putting it out there, and I dare you to prove me wrong, with a five second warning, a sword is vastly more useful to prevent a mugging then fumbling for your pistol.
And if the criminal has a gun?
No problem, you have one too.
Today's topic is going to focus on violence. Particularly, the darker side of violence, a side we too-oft ignore. Anyone who knows me, or has read this, knows that I believe that weapons are fine to carry around. I say 'weapons' instead of guns, because I think that other weapons should be legalized. I will cover that later, but for now, the side we often ignore.
Pro-gun people seem to advocate that by merely having a gun in a women's purse, or in your truck is enough to stop a violent crime. Crime is violent, fast, brutal and efficient. A mugger is going to come out of the shadows and have a knife to your throat before you know what is going on. You can be attacked long before you process where your gun even is, much less go through the long process of preparing to fire it.
Are you really going to have time to unzip that purse, dig around for it, pull the slide back, and aim accurately? Oh... wait, you forgot to make sure the safety is off, that woman just got knifed and killed. It is foolish to think that this process is in anyway 'easy' or 100% success rate of warding off crime.
Police can't even do this, the average statistic for hitting a target within 5 feet are at least 70% missing/striking a different object. The New York Times carried an article about 13% hit rate. If police do this bad, how well is someone on the street, unready for a sudden, bloody assault going to be?
I have guns. I am 'pro' gun as most would consider it. But I am under no delusions about what having a gun for self-defense is about. It is about killing someone without a second thought, because that 'second' thought could get you killed. Ask yourself, how many of your guns( if you are 'pro-gun') are locked in a safe? How useful is that really if a criminal is standing over your bed with a gun pointing at your face?
Are you ready to keep a gun - without the safety on - loaded, and ready to go within arms reach of your bed? If you are serious about self-defense, this is exactly what you have to do, anything else is foolish, dangerous, and self-deceiving. Are you ready to TRY to shoot someone, probably miss, and possibly been immediately shot in return? Its a bloody truth a lot of people never consider.
For the second part of this special two-parter, is about melee weapons.
It seems rather stupid that people can carry guns around, yet knives 'over 3 inches' are somehow the target of vehement hate? A lot of pro-gun people advocate everyone packing guns around and that 'there would be no crime!' this may or may not be true, but to these people, I ask, "would everyone also having swords change anything?" Take this point seriously, for a gun can make even the weakest, oldest person in our society a criminal. This weak, decrepit person can easily go on a killing spree with only a semi-auto pistol. Excluding the odds against actually hitting people, a standard clip could easily end the life of 12 people with only twelve twitchs of the fingers. If that is not a MASSIVE PERVERSION of the natural order, I don't know what is.
But consider if we all had swords and guns. Not only would crime probably drop (unfortunately through the principle of 'mutually assured destruction' more then anything...) but imagine the massive calming effect of having your own destiny in your hands. Would someone decide it was a good idea to go mug someone who had a gun and a sword?
I am putting it out there, and I dare you to prove me wrong, with a five second warning, a sword is vastly more useful to prevent a mugging then fumbling for your pistol.
And if the criminal has a gun?
No problem, you have one too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
