hey baby don’t you worry
even though the road is rocky
i’ll be coming home to you again
cuz if you thought that I was lost
i had to bare my cross
now I’m free from all these chains
4.28.2007
4.22.2007
a lone gunman
there is an emotional (and political) undercurrent that saps the rigor out of any intellectual discussion of gun control in the USA. what's worse is that analysis is often inconclusive not just because of the overwhelmingly complex nature of issue but also as a result of the abuse of data (cherry-picking for t-stats), and the flaws and bias inherent in the models used to analyze the data. [relevant plug: some interesting legal empirical research at Stanford Law School. disclaimer: yes my name is somewhere on there but my personal opinions, if any, probably would have drowned in the sea of statistical methods.]
here i mull around a couple thoughts about gun control as it might be related to one particular type of gun violence.
there is a shooting massacre that evokes emotional outrage on a national scale. naturally there are calls for sweeping reform. in spirit this is justified but in reality it is lacking in tenability. mind you, the opposition's calls to resistance of reform goes a step further from "lacking in tenability"and in fact sometimes loiters somewhere in a region of "ridiculousness."
how do we prevent a lone gunman from carrying out a massacre? with varying profiles for such perpetrators it will be difficult to identify and constrain all of them. there are already millions of guns floating around that can be stolen or bought in back alleys if someone is determined enough to source them. the average joe might be discouraged from jumping through hoops to acquire a weapon, but the average deranged school shooter won't be as deterred. if the illegal gun angle was closed off at the same time (through a massive crackdown and harsher possession penalties) perhaps there would be more merit in the idea of strengthening current legal restrictions regarding the general availability of guns.
further to availability of guns is that of ammunition. let's face it, the more bullets there are in a clip the more people a deranged gunman can kill in a short amount of time. when i did pistol training the coach restricted us to five bullets in the clip at any given time to reduce the likelihood or extent of any gun mishaps on the range. that logic seems fair and can be extrapolated in my opinion. to sensationalize a bit here: you wouldn't make more C4 accessible to a community in which lurks a potential suicide bomber so why would you have rambo belts and banana clips available with deranged suicide shooters feening for a glorious exit? because guns are protected in the constitution but not bombs? please.
and what about the actual crazy people. how do we stop them? are current procedures for acquiring guns thorough enough to preclude those with mental dysfunction from arming up? i don't know. even if the law was thorough enough the enforcement and monitoring capabilities are probably shoddy. it seems to me that the vetting time and background checks are quite often insubstantial. perhaps the sale and flow of guns needs to be (virtually? electronically? physically?) centralized and controlled at a government level, if it's not already. we have the technology to do that... political will is another question.
here i mull around a couple thoughts about gun control as it might be related to one particular type of gun violence.
there is a shooting massacre that evokes emotional outrage on a national scale. naturally there are calls for sweeping reform. in spirit this is justified but in reality it is lacking in tenability. mind you, the opposition's calls to resistance of reform goes a step further from "lacking in tenability"and in fact sometimes loiters somewhere in a region of "ridiculousness."
how do we prevent a lone gunman from carrying out a massacre? with varying profiles for such perpetrators it will be difficult to identify and constrain all of them. there are already millions of guns floating around that can be stolen or bought in back alleys if someone is determined enough to source them. the average joe might be discouraged from jumping through hoops to acquire a weapon, but the average deranged school shooter won't be as deterred. if the illegal gun angle was closed off at the same time (through a massive crackdown and harsher possession penalties) perhaps there would be more merit in the idea of strengthening current legal restrictions regarding the general availability of guns.
further to availability of guns is that of ammunition. let's face it, the more bullets there are in a clip the more people a deranged gunman can kill in a short amount of time. when i did pistol training the coach restricted us to five bullets in the clip at any given time to reduce the likelihood or extent of any gun mishaps on the range. that logic seems fair and can be extrapolated in my opinion. to sensationalize a bit here: you wouldn't make more C4 accessible to a community in which lurks a potential suicide bomber so why would you have rambo belts and banana clips available with deranged suicide shooters feening for a glorious exit? because guns are protected in the constitution but not bombs? please.
and what about the actual crazy people. how do we stop them? are current procedures for acquiring guns thorough enough to preclude those with mental dysfunction from arming up? i don't know. even if the law was thorough enough the enforcement and monitoring capabilities are probably shoddy. it seems to me that the vetting time and background checks are quite often insubstantial. perhaps the sale and flow of guns needs to be (virtually? electronically? physically?) centralized and controlled at a government level, if it's not already. we have the technology to do that... political will is another question.
overheard in the vatican
pope dude: "unbaptized babies and everyone living before a human blood offering appeased the gods will be in an eternal state of neither bliss nor hellish pain."
dwindling followers: "dude. baptism is so last season."
pope dude: " ok ok, we'll change our truth to be more accomodating. please don't leave!?"
dwindling followers: "dude. baptism is so last season."
pope dude: " ok ok, we'll change our truth to be more accomodating. please don't leave!?"
4.15.2007
look what i found from my deleted blog
said marc, to the black queen:
"...the best way to go about getting old is to focus primarily on a healthy mind that is open to, and actively desires, learning everyday. One of the downfalls of human beings is their predilection for learning up to a point and then cementing their views; stagnation is always the precursor to decline, which is why I [must] always strive for perfection even if I [think I] am already perfect. You can see the flaws of the older generation as the future generation will be able to see yours, unless you live your life thinking ahead of your time, thus preempting them."
and she to the world:
"... the more knowledgeable one is, the more likely one is to realize that he or she does not know everything, and indeed knows very little. This is, of course, not an argument for the end of learning based on what a daunting task it would be to learn everthing, but rather a push FOR learning with a caution against any resulting heady sense of entitlement."
and what of this heady entitlement, this professor's pride? it seems natural that intellectual stasis would lie in the shadow of arrogance. such was the folly of the isolationist orient, regarding the outside world as devoid of worthy ideas. the chinese would eventually come to rue that era of inertia, as the barbarian hordes of europe emerged from their own darkness to project their will onto the world. but turn the earth always will, and, err the humans. for it now seems to me that the western world as derived from european concepts is at a point of inflection and the second dawn of the dragon, mindful of its past mistakes, and with vehement discipline, draws closer and closer. whether it stems from arrogance or self-righteousness*, always, stagnation is to our detriment. civilizations made the mistake of comparing themselves to each other. like i always say, if one aspires only to be a great man, one will never be a god. that is, relative concepts of greatness, as we humans foolishly live by, will always preclude attainment of perfection. to safeguard the integrity of human progress we must always aspire to improve simply for improving's sake, until we can no longer find ways to improve. what better way to achieve absolute perfection?
*i believe it was chomsky who said, "... self-righteousness comes naturally to those able to impose their will by force...". we saw it then in europe. we see it now in america, the empire of the moment.
"...the best way to go about getting old is to focus primarily on a healthy mind that is open to, and actively desires, learning everyday. One of the downfalls of human beings is their predilection for learning up to a point and then cementing their views; stagnation is always the precursor to decline, which is why I [must] always strive for perfection even if I [think I] am already perfect. You can see the flaws of the older generation as the future generation will be able to see yours, unless you live your life thinking ahead of your time, thus preempting them."
and she to the world:
"... the more knowledgeable one is, the more likely one is to realize that he or she does not know everything, and indeed knows very little. This is, of course, not an argument for the end of learning based on what a daunting task it would be to learn everthing, but rather a push FOR learning with a caution against any resulting heady sense of entitlement."
and what of this heady entitlement, this professor's pride? it seems natural that intellectual stasis would lie in the shadow of arrogance. such was the folly of the isolationist orient, regarding the outside world as devoid of worthy ideas. the chinese would eventually come to rue that era of inertia, as the barbarian hordes of europe emerged from their own darkness to project their will onto the world. but turn the earth always will, and, err the humans. for it now seems to me that the western world as derived from european concepts is at a point of inflection and the second dawn of the dragon, mindful of its past mistakes, and with vehement discipline, draws closer and closer. whether it stems from arrogance or self-righteousness*, always, stagnation is to our detriment. civilizations made the mistake of comparing themselves to each other. like i always say, if one aspires only to be a great man, one will never be a god. that is, relative concepts of greatness, as we humans foolishly live by, will always preclude attainment of perfection. to safeguard the integrity of human progress we must always aspire to improve simply for improving's sake, until we can no longer find ways to improve. what better way to achieve absolute perfection?
*i believe it was chomsky who said, "... self-righteousness comes naturally to those able to impose their will by force...". we saw it then in europe. we see it now in america, the empire of the moment.
stream of consciousness: mad scientist
mathematical methods 'll make the lyrics much fresher than half a packet of breathmints that explode under pressure, bomb in rapid succession to blast this pathway to heaven, dropping answers to questions that leave a lasting impression / but know that microphone prominence don't come from vitamin supplements, only skill that's straight ominous, maybe purpose or providence, prose that's sicker than choleras flowing off the speedometers, and baby mamas are loving us what with that alpha male dominance.
4.09.2007
mims: i'm hot cuz i'm fly...
... you ain't cuz you not!
hahahaha, cyclical causality blows my mind, every time.
hahahaha, cyclical causality blows my mind, every time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
