HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » mbperrin » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 7,672

Journal Archives

"The woman" was not out of line. She neither induced the stupid and off-topic

comments made by the idiots, nor did she force them to say them loudly enough for others to hear. The pic of them is not Shopped - they were there, and they did what she said they did, and they need to own it. Or shut up, which I'd prefer.

I wouldn't accept this kind of crap in my high school classroom, and yes, misogyny abounds amongst 16-18 year olds.

Were these guys being paid to attend and not learn anything, to make juvenile comments, or are they supposed to be actual adults and listen, learn, and contribute? I'd have fired them both, and I spent 10 years in management in private industry before I began teaching, so I can speak with assurance about that.

The idea that off-topic assholes who were loudly invading the space of others who might want to actually take something from the session should be tolerated, much less venerated, is repugnant. Unless you think that while watching "The Sessions" in a workshop about sexuality for those with physical challenges, and attended by some with physical challenges that it would be okay for me to make jokes about "fucking crips", and especially loudly enough for others to hear, then what happened to one of the "men" should have happened to both.

And her being fired is just another example of patriarchy. Slave owners whipped female slaves for complaining about being raped. This just continues that fine old tradition.

The point is, it's a start. I personally believe that every round ought to be marked

and registered both in the casing and in the slug. I'd also like to see every barrel on file so that any round could be identified as having been fired from a particular weapon.

Every round accounted for and identified; every weapon accounted for and identified; scrupulous background checks, not this instant stuff, including a psych workup after administering the MMPI (this one would catch most of the mass shooters lately), including an inspection of the storage facility where the weapons will be secured (now this one would have prevented Sandy Hook), annual inspection of every weapon and an inventory update on ammunition to account for rounds used, license for every user to prove safety proficiency, renewed annually, liability insurance for every weapon in an amount sufficient to cover significant misuse (say $10 million as a round number, until some experience is gained, then adjust), and required paperwork transfer with all the above checks for every weapon bought, received as a gift, or inherited. At the time of transfer, any existing weapon that is not id'd by barrel from the factory will be id'd at that time. I'd also think a psych workup should be repeated at least once a decade for all owners, period, with confiscation for those failing. Things change.

Heavy prison time (20-50 years for each violation) ought to help with enforcement, as well as a lifetime prohibition on ownership for violators.

So new weapons would be subject to all the above immediately, as well as all ammunition. Existing weapons would be brought in as transfers occurred, and regular psych exams would certainly do more good than the current system: "he had money, so he looked okay to me," and I'm pretty sure all online sales should cease. Delivery of ammunition and weapons should be face to face with positive ID on both sides.

So yes, it's a start. And everyone agrees it's innocuous, so let's do it.

Here's a modest proposal.

Require every gun owner to register every firearm annually, undergo a background check to see if they will be allowed to keep them annually, pay a licensing fee annually, an insurance premium annually, and require paperwork for every gun transaction, whether sale, gift, or inheritance.

That's for existing guns.

Henceforth, every time a gun is found that does not meet the above requirements will be confiscated and the possessor shot to death on the spot, no further process needed. If the gun was registered to no one previously, that stops there. If the gun was previously registered as above and no transfer done and no theft report filed, execute them on the spot, too.

Every time a gun is used in a crime, even just showing it or just saying you have one, execute them on the spot, too.

I think in a relatively short time, you'd be surprised how law-abiding gun owners really can be, and anxious to be so.

Program is self-funded, registration and licensing and background checks should turn a tidy profit for the government. Prisons don't add a single inmate, so no increased cost there, either. All in all, a perfectly reasonable , modest solution to a problem.

Taking things out of order is always a problem.

1. Get established financially (which means educationally first, whether college, voc school, or whatever).
2. Marry.
3. Stay married a decade.
4. Now you have stable finances and a stable marriage. If you choose, have a child.
5. This means that most people will have their child around 35 years of age. How great to be able to say yes to your child.
6. Yes, I can take time today to play or to help you or just to hang out.
7. Yes, we can take time to have an actual childhood.

In order.

I tell my high school students that I didn't learn the above in a book - I lived it AFTER I did the other first.

Learning to swim is hard enough without being handcuffed to someone else AND having a baby strapped to your back while you're doing it.

Very well said. The "gravy train" just needs to be experienced by those who think it a wonderful


My mother-in-law, who worked 45 years as a waitress and raised two daughters on her own after her husband abandoned her and the girls and was never heard from again, had saved enough money to buy a small one bedroom house with a mobile home in the back yard as a rental property.

After retiring on Social Security ($746 per month) and the proceeds from the rent trailer ($300 per month), she was diagnosed with lung cancer. A non-smoker, but lived her life among the cotton fields and gins of the Texas Panhandle. She could only qualify for at-home care by selling the mobile home, because it was an asset beyond her own home, and that is not allowed.

I would invite anyone to try living on less than $800 per month and paying the difference on prescription meds, as well as the difference between benefits and amounts billed, while bedridden. She finally passed away, but that was her reward for 70 years of living and 25 years of child-raising, long before there was anything like food stamps, TANF, or other programs. No child support from the absentee husband, she simply worked extremely hard her livelong life.

Now if anyone can justify the idea that she had too many assets to receive assistance on healthcare, I'd like to hear it. A little help raising two daughters on your own might be welcome, too, but that wasn't there.

But yes, Exxon has record profits and receives a $4 billion subsidy from the government, instead of paying taxes, and Dick Cheney's company of private prisons reports record profits while he receives the finest in healthcare at no cost to himself, ever. Grand.

If the nuclear plant owners were decent people, they'd volunteer to pay.

But I've already noted that they are part of the nuclear industry, so that nixes anything that decent people would do.

When will we stop using the filthiest, most dangerous, longest-lasting contamination, most subsidized, most expensive way to boil water ever invented, and start using two brain cells by using wind and solar?

I know. I can dream, though. Unlike these young folks, whose lives are over. FFS, we didn't even take care of the 9/11 first responders, and that happened in THIS country.

Wages do not and cannot affect retail prices.

If cost increases could be recovered through price increases, no business would worry about cost increases.

Fact is, prices are determined in the market by the intersection of supply and demand.

Business can either make a profit with market prices, or not. If not, they should leave the market. They're not good enough nor efficient enough to deserve to be in business with those who are.

AGGREGATE wages do however, increase the size of markets, creating bigger GDP, viewed by economists as a favorable outcome.

See, if HIGHER wages were BAD, bank executives would refuse those huge bonuses that they get as regular as clockwork. And bosses would refuse to take raises. But they don't.

Theory and practice meld perfectly in this case, making an economic resonance that I can hear from here.

(Break into "The Hills Are Alive...."
Go to Page: 1