It's the last blog of 2015...

My apologies for having been neglectful of my blog for a couple of weeks.  I've been otherwise occupied.  First off let me wish everyone a very Happy New Year and express my best wishes for you and yours.  I hope everyone has their best year yet in 2016.  I thought I'd use this final blog of the year to look at some of the most recent news items and share my ponderings on them.

Bill Cosby has been arraigned and posted bail in the amount of $1 million after being charged with aggravated sexual assault in a Pennsylvania case that dates back to 2004.  This cased involves a woman, Andrea Constand.  She was an employee of Temple University at the time.  This is the woman that Cosby made a sealed settlement with in a civil case.  He insists the sex was consensual but given that multiple sources report that Ms Constand is a lesbian and was involved with a woman at the time, that seems unlikely.  Reporter's note:  Even if some of the women who have come out and leveled accusations that Bill Cosby sexually abused them are just jumping on the bandwagon of the initial accusers, it is clear that something untoward happened.  In most of these cases, the statute of limitations has expired.  Not in this one.  Not in the case of Chloe Goins either, although there are reports her civil suit will be dismissed in the next week or so because her lawyer has never had Cosby formally served.  The rumors are the parties in that matter are close to a settlement.  The thing is, you can't make a criminal case just go away by throwing money at it.  You can hire the best lawyers, mount the most vigorous of defenses, but you can't just buy your way out of it.  It will be interesting to see if this case ever gets to a courtroom.

* * *

Anyone who grew up in Southern California and has any knowledge of the local surfing community knows that a number of beaches are truly considered to be "locals only" by those who use them regularly.  None more so than Lunada Bay in Palos Verdes Peninsula.  For decades, a local group known as the Bay Boys has allegedly done a lot of things to keep anyone they considered an intruder away from their beach.  Among the allegations against this group of wealthy, mostly white, middle-aged men is that they've thrown rocks at people, vandalized cars and in some cases physically assaulting visitors to what they consider "their beach."

Now there's a new sheriff in town in the form of Palos Verdes Police Department Chief Jeff Kepley.  He says he won't allow his officers to ignore these transgressions.  "We will make an example out of anyone behaves criminally down there" is just one statement Chief Kepley has made regarding Lunada Beach and the Bay Boys.  Reporter's note:  This has been going on since before the 1995 protest against the locals by visitors that police ultimately broke up.  Long before.  I don't know if the residents of the area will get behind this new chief's efforts or not, but I'd like to see him finally clean up that mess.  The beaches of California belong to all, and all should be able to use them without fear of retribution.

* * *

Kyle Montgomery is a medically retired U. S. Marine who was awarded the Medal of Honor in 2014.  Back in 2010 while deployed in Afghanistan he jumped on and covered a grenade to protect his fellow Marines.  He was in a coma for five weeks, and lost most of his jaw. 

He's in the news at the moment because he was arrested on New Year's Eve in connection with an alleged hit and run accident in South Carolina.  Police say Carpenter cooperated with the investigation and was not believed to have been under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the incident.  Police also report that a pedestrian was injured in the accident, although no details of those injuries were given.  Reporter's note:  The only reason this is news is because of our societal obsession with anyone with any kind of notoriety.  There were dozens, maybe hundreds of hit and run accidents this week in the U. S. and this is the only one I've seen mentioned on the national news.  Although I'd much prefer we be obsessed with true heroes than fame whores like the Kardashian Klan.

* * *

There are reports that after the first of the year and before President Obama's scheduled State of the Union Address on January 12th, the President will announce he will issue an Executive Order that will require more rigorous background checks prior to people being allowed to buy guns. 

Details of the proposal are not yet available and the National Rifle Association said through a spokesperson the organization would not comment at this time.  Reporter's note:  All the background checks in the world won't stop people who intend to use guns to commit crimes from obtaining those guns as long as they are in the possession of the public.  They will steal them, buy them illegally or do whatever else is required.  Someone planning an armed robbery isn't going to worry about violating any gun control regulation.  If we want to take assault weapons like those used in San Bernardino away from terrorists and criminals, we can't allow anyone and everyone to own them.  We can create a "well-regulated milita" and those who wish to be part of that militia can submit themselves and their weapons to those regulations.

* * *

Miss Colombia, Ariadna Gutierrez has given an interview in which she claims she was humiliated by the mix-up at the conclusion of the Miss Universe pageant.  For anyone living under a rock, she was incorrectly crowned the winner by host Steve Harvey before he corrected the error and crowned the real winner, Miss Philippines, Pia Wurtzbach.  Miss Gutierrez said "It was very humiliating for me, but also for the whole country and for all the people not only from Colombia but the other Latinos that were in the auditorium."  Reporter's note:  The national pride of Colombia can't be very secure if an incident like this would threaten it.  This is as big a non-story as there is out there.

* * *

Kathryn Simmerman has been the manager of a small credit union in Norton Shores, MI.  She became manager in 2006 but she's been employed there for over 15 years.  During that time she always arrived first at the office.  On 433 of those days she helped herself to wads of cash in the credit union's lockbox.  More than $1.9 million in cash.  Now she's going to prison.  Reporter's Note:  How did this embezzlement go undetected for so long?

It can be very frustrating....

to be unable to jump into a Facebook thread that shows up on your timeline because a friend is involved in it, but you aren't friends with the original poster.  So I've decided to repost the entire thread here so I can comment on it.

First, the link that started it.  Then the thread.  My comments are in italics.  I've removed all of the names of the posters and any identifying language.

Well, there goes the whole First Amendment.

 

Only if we the people allow our nation to become a theocracy, which isn't going to happen.

Leave it to the socialists at Forward Progressives to interpret what Cruz said as wanting a theocracy. Not even close.

 

Actually a political system where voting decisions and the passage of laws are based primary on religious principles would indeed be a theocracy.

 

How do you figure that, ?

 

Why don't you find out what Cruz actually said? He is encouraging Christians to actively become part of the process. How different is that when the Democrats are conspiring to register Hispanics for the purpose of voting against Trump? the same logic would say that the Democrats want to save the US by turning it into Mexico.

 

How is it different?  Trump is a bigot.  Trump is a racist.  The interests of Hispanics in the U.S. is not the same as "saving" Mexico.

 

Oh yes, the American Family Association is a hate group. Like the Poverty Law Center is an unbiased group, sponsored by George Soros. What a complete joke. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid. 

 

I went through the last three years of nonprofit tax returns for both the Soros Foundation and the Southern Poverty Law Center.  According to those returns, Soros hasn't given them one dime during that period.  Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary?  Other respected groups concur with the labeling of the AFA by the SPLC as a hate group.  Or do you not find the rhetoric of their former Director of Issues Analysis, Bryan Fisher that blames Hitler on the LGBT community to be evidence of hate-mongering?  Fischer has compared making criminalizing LGBT people with bans on murder, stealing, child molestation, delicious trans fats and prostitution.  Sure sounds like hate to me.

 

 It sounds to me like Cruz is actively soliciting Evangelicals to vote in accordance with certain "Biblical" principals, which could be a way of saying that the majority religion (or vote, anyway) should dictate law. One can debate the "hate group" designation, but the American Family Association does have a history of anti-homosexual propaganda, which includes misrepresenting the nature of homosexuality in order to discredit and dehumanize homosexuals.

Just watched that video, No surprise Ted Cruz is Bat Shit Crazy

, that's what moral people do. They vote according to what lines up with them morally. Believe it or not, there are many that think abortion is immoral. To vote according to what they believe or vote people out of office for not representing them is democracy. Unlike the left which are now becoming more and more socialist and communist. Regarding the feelings about homosexuality, your stance is based on your moral position, does not line up with everyone's. To impose a homosexual agenda that directly conflicts with another's first amendment right is abhorrent. The fact that one does not subscribe to the redefinition of marriage is not homophobic. (The fear of man). it is a moral stance. The government should not be in the place of dictating a religious belief.

But here is the interesting dichotomy in all of this. the left demonizes Christians for their stance, yet calls Islam the Religion of Peace, where there law is an automatic death penalty for homosexuality. Hows that?

 

Real moral people begin at the beginning, with the recognition of certain basic premises.  That we are all created equal.  Endowed with certain inalienable rights.  No one is imposing a "homosexual agenda" on anyone.  Don't want to marry someone of the same sex, then don't.  That some people of the same sex want to be married in the eyes of the LAW is all about equality of treatment.  Religion shouldn't be a component of marriages in terms of their recognition by government entities.  Get rid of marriage as a governmental construct.  Abolish them.  Replace them with civil unions.  Any two consenting adults can enter into a civil union and receive the rights, privileges and responsibilities thereof.  Then sanction any marriage performed by a licensed officiant of any religion as meeting the criteria for a civil union being entered into.  So the religious folk who want to be married in a church (or other faith's equivalent) can do so and those who just want the same rights can avoid that if they so choose.

 

Thanks for explaining morality to me. To make same sex marriage legal does not impose a belief on anyone. It simply grants equal rights to homosexuals. I think a lot of the Freedom of Religion questions hinge on how far we believe that freedom ought to extend. I believe that religious freedom should encompass more than "worship," but I do not believe that every dictate of one's conscience must be accommodated by the government, particularly when the dictate would deny civil or human rights to another. The anti gay stance of some Christian s is not what the left demonizes, as much as the active attempt of some to denigrate and deny human rights to gays. It is not so much a question of belief, but of actions. Some Evangelicals simply cannot be at peace knowing that their views are not universally accepted. Maturity means that one acknowledges that the world does not always confirms to one's beliefs, and that people have the right to decide what to believe.

 

The bottom line is that denying any human being the same rights as any other being, based on the religion of any person, is discrimination and it must be prohibited.  With only a few, extreme exceptions.  None of which are being discussed in this thread.

Memes and accuracy

This meme has been around for a couple of years now.  It's as inaccurate now as it was when created.  I pointed this out once again on FB and was asked by one of the friends of the friend who shared it what makes it so inaccurate and to provide sources.  Sounded like a challenge.

Let's start with the numbers above.  According to Siri, that's $4,597.98.  Just to be sure, I checked her math in an Excel spreadsheet.  Siri got it right.  Now the first source cited at the bottom of this meme claims that the average American pays $6,000 in corporate subsidies.  Their math seemed wrong since they counted one factor of $870 twice.  So why should we rely on a source for the creation of this meme that begins with a false premise.  Also, if we're calculating a family's "share" of government expenditures based on their income, the methodology should be different.

What makes this corporate subsidy amount even more inaccurate is that more than 10% of this amount is made up of business incentives granted at the state, county and local level, which has no correlation to a family's federal tax burden.

This source took their "total" corporate subsidy amount and divided it by the total number of taxpaying "families" (which includes those taxpayers who have no spouse/dependents).  This means that a family earning $500,000 is paying the same amount of corporate subsidies.  Therefore, their share of this burden isn't based on their income of $50,000.  It's an apples and oranges comparison.

The second source is a calculator found on the White House website.  The values it shows when you input an estimated 2011 income of $50,000 for a married couple with one child are the source for some of the values in this meme.  And it proves how they are wrong.  The $235.81 shown for "Medicare" actually includes the $43.87 shown for "retirement and disability for civilian to government workers." 

Then there's the fact that this calculator doesn't show any spending on payments to those receiving Social Security benefits that aren't SSI or SSDI.  That means that these calculations, which do include the FICA tax paid by employees and the self-employed, which were $2,100 on the White House calculator, don't include nearly $600 billion in spending in 2012 to those receiving Social Security retirement benefits.

Then there's the fact that there are "subsidies" given to individuals that aren't accounted for at all in this meme.  Some are.  The Earned Income Tax Credit was included in the White House calculations.  Then again, so is the Making Work Pay tax credit, which actually expired in 2010.  None of the following individual tax "subsidies" are included in the White House calculations:

Self-employed health insurance deduction
Hope Credit
Lifetime Learning Credit
Tuition and Fees Deduction
Educator Expense Credit
IRA and SEP-IRA Deductions
Student Loan Interest Deduction

If we're going to assess an amount for corporate subsidies (even a totally inaccurate one), we have to include one for individual subsidies as well.  But the entire concept of imputing an amount for subsidies is a bit specious since it mostly refers to imputed tax revenues foregone by the government.  Very little of that amount involves actual expenditures.

The bulk of this material actually comes from the two sources cited in the meme.  The rest is available at www.irs.gov and through the Statistical Abstract of the United States, published annually by the federal government.

The Mouse That Extorted?

Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens opens in wide release this coming Friday, December 18th.  It was scheduled to open at the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood among the several thousand other theaters it will be showing in.  But apparently it was only scheduled to be there for one week.

That's because one week later, on Christmas Day, the 8th film from Quentin Tarantino, The Hateful Eight was supposed to open there.  QT shot this film in 70MM Cinerama, and planned to open the movie only in those theaters equipped to show it in that mode.  One of those is the legendary Cinerama Dome.  It's iconic.  I stood in line for hours to see the last showing of Lawrence of Arabia there when the theater was about to close for 18 months of renovations.  That was 15 years ago.

Now, the Arclight Cinema company has backed out of the contract to show QT's film in the Dome.  According to the director himself, in an interview on the Howard Stern program, Disney basically extorted the theater to back out of the deal and keep the Star Wars film running in the dome throughout the holiday season.

So far, Disney has refused to comment.  Their total box office take from Star Wars Episode VII will not be diminished if it runs for only one week in the Dome.  People are so excited about this movie it is breaking all kinds of records.  There was a story today that the pre-sale of tickets in the U.S. for Episode VII is already over the $100 million mark.

Why is Disney doing this?  Could this be a case of sour grapes?  Prior to Disney and the Weinstein brothers parting of the ways in 2005 or so, every film that QT made, put profits into the coffers of the mouse.  But Disney wasn't involved in any of the Weinstein Company's collaborations with Tarantino after Bob and Harvey Weinstein left Miramax to form their current film company.  Two of the five biggest grossing films produced by the Weinstein Company were written and directed by QT. 

Maybe Howard Stern is right and either Bob Iger or J. J. Abrams will solve this and fix it so Arclight honors their deal with QT and The Hateful Eight will open in the Dome.  Maybe not.

Pete Rose, the Hall of Fame and some numbers

As a position player in Major League Baseball, there are two metrics that are considered to make a player a "lock" to be elected to the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown.  Either 3,000 hits or 500 home runs is basically automatic enshrinement.

Of those players who have more than 3,000 hits and are eligible for election to the Hall, only the following have yet to be voted in:

Pete Rose
Rafael Palmeiro

Of those players who have more than 500 home runs and are eligible for election to the Hall, only the following have yet to be voted in:

Sammy Sosa
Mark McGwire
Rafael Palmeiro
Gary Sheffield
(Honorable mention for Fred McGriff, who hit 493 home runs and would have cleared the magic 500 plateau if not for the 1994 strike)

Five men.  Four who aren't going to ever make it because of the allegations against them involving performance enhancing drugs.  And Pete Rose, who is still banned for life from baseball due to violating the prohibition against gambling.  He's been in the news recently for asking to have the ban lifted and current MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred says Rose admitted he still gambles on baseball.

Based solely on performance, Rose deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.  But if he was on the ballot and I was given a vote, I would not give it to him.  Personally I can't get past his lifetime ban.  If you're banned from the game, that should include the Hall of Fame.  We watch institutions strip honors from people like Bill Cosby even though they weren't convicted.

This is an arbitrary thing and I recognize I'm in the minority.

I said it but I didn't really mean it

NBA referee Bill Kennedy has been a ref for a long time.  In a sport where the regular season is 82 game long, he has officiated in more than 1,000 of those regular season games.  Players should respect him, even if they occasionally disagree with him.

So when Sacramento Kings guard Rajon Rondo hurled profane, homophobic slurs at Kennedy, the NBA chose to suspend him for one game.  It also prompted Kennedy to come out and announce that he is gay, something he'd chosen to keep private for many years.  That is certainly his choice and right.

Rondo tweeted the following two comments:

"My actions during the game were out of frustration and emotion, period!"

"They absolutely do not reflect my feelings toward the LGBT community. I did not mean to offend or disrespect anyone."

The problem is that this is what Rondo "allegedly" said, according to multiple sources:

"“You’re a mother-f*****g- f****t. … You’re a f*****g f****t, Billy.”

You cannot utter those words and then claim you did not mean to offend or disrespect anyone, especially the person you direct those ugly utterances at.  It is just ridiculous to claim you didn't mean it.  Of course you meant it.  Do we say things we don't really mean when we're angry, or does that just mean that the filter that keeps us from saying them when we are in better control of our emotions is gone when anger appears?

The truth is, if you wouldn't hold those words in your mind as epithets and insults, no matter how angry you become, you won't say them.  They shouldn't be part of your vocabulary.  Unless you believe that they are insults and will need to use them as such at some point.

It's been an interesting week

Normally at this point in the year I'm working one shift a week at work, two at most.  This week because someone needed to be off on Friday, I wound up working three days.  As a result I'm pretty tired.  Especially when you consider I worked three shifts in four days.  That's approaching my limit at any point in the year, thanks to the bad lungs and heart that still manage to keep me going from day to day.

I can't go into the specifics of what the various clients I helped during those three shifts needed because of the requirement to keep client information confidential.  A responsibility I take seriously.  But I can talk about the one thing that was involved with every single one of these clients, some mine and some clients of my colleagues.  I was able to help them.  I was privileged to be assist them.  I loved helping them.

One of them came to me from an office that isn't open at this point in the year.  They'd gotten a letter from the City of Los Angeles claiming they owed hundreds of dollars for the city's gross receipts tax.  They don't owe the money.  But people who react out of fear sometimes just pay the amount billed and it's much harder to get money back than it is to get the city to reverse a balance due when it isn't actually owed.

One new client came in because they hadn't yet filed their 2014 tax return.  They weren't really late, when you have no balance due there is no penalty for not filing the return.  But they'd gotten a call from someone pretending to be an IRS agent and claiming they were in big trouble.  I assured them it was a scam and we had fun playing our respective scam call voice mail messages.

One of them thought they owed thousands of dollars and substantial penalties on top of that amount because of something omitted from a prior year return.  I went through and found a way to reduce the amount to only a few hundred dollars.  Not by doing something wrong, but by simply using the law as written.

There's more but I think you get the idea.  I was able to make a positive difference in their lives.  It may be exhausting, but it is also extremely fulfilling and satisfying.

* * *

Let's ignore the constitutional questions about the proposal from Donald Trump about barring Muslims from entering the U. S.  There is a far more basic question to consider.  An international flight has just landed at New York's JFK airport.  Over 200 passengers are clearing customs.  Can anyone explain to me just how the customs agents are going to determine with absolute certainty that any of them are Muslims and deny them entry into the U. S.?

Passports do not normally contain information on the holder's religion.  But even if they did, it isn't all that hard to obtain false documents.  So we can't check passports or any other documents that might identify someone as a Muslim and enable them to be barred from entering.

When it comes to people attempting to emigrate to the U.S., the vetting process is more involved, but again the same question applies.  How do we know that someone trying to come here is a Muslim.  There's nothing we can do in terms of evaluating their appearance.

So while the questions of constitutionality of Trump's idiotic approach remain valid and worth of exploration, the practical question needs to be moved front and center.  Just how do we determine who is and isn't a Muslim before we let them into the country?

* * *

A friend of mine posed an interesting question on FB.  How should they deal with their friends who post political things where those who discuss those issues get hateful and very angry with their discussions. 

It's a good question.  You can of course unfriend someone, or just unfollow them.  That allows you to stay friends, but none of their activity will show in your timeline. 

I thought about how else one can try to make things less angry in online versus in person discussions.  The level of invective people use online, especially in anonymous comment forums, is nowhere near what they would say to someone if that person was seated at a table across from them.

So I suggested that maybe what we should be doing is imagine that we are sitting at a table with the person we are having this online discussion with; before we write a single word.

What do you think?

A lesson in history and political science for Donnie Trump

The man whose brain apparently never gets fully into gear before his mouth opens has really done it this time.  Not only has Donald Trump issued a call for a complete ban on any Muslims entering the United States, he's compared that proposal to what happened to the Japanese and the Germans after December 7th.  Perhaps we should take this back to his apparently elementary school level IQ and use simple pictures to begin.

That's a map of Japan.

And that is a map of Germany.

And the space between this line and the label of the map of Germany above is where the map of the Nation of Islam would go, if such a nation existed.  You see Donnie, now stop trying to steal Nancy's lunch money young man, Japan and Germany were nations at the start of World War II (and remain so today).  There is no Nation of Islam.  It is a religion, not a nation.

We were at war with Germany and Japan.  In fact, Donnie, it was on this date, December 8th in the year 1941 that the U.S. formally declared war on Japan and Germany, one day after Japan's unprovoked attack on the U.S. at Pearl Harbor.  Once formal declarations were made, citizens of Japan and Germany within the borders of the U.S. could be legally interned.  That our nation improperly and illegally interned Japanese-Americans and some German-Americans doesn't justify what you are suggesting, Donnie.

The faith of Islam is not at war with the United States, Donnie  Just as the U.S. is not at war with the faith of Islam.  We are at war with a very small group of Muslims who are perverting their faith's tenets to wage a campaign of terror all over the planet.  There are over 1.7 billion Muslims on Earth.  We are only at war with those who try to kill and terrorize us.

I know it's tough for a fifth grader like you to grasp the difference between religions and nations, but by now you should have a basic understanding of the difference.  We did study the First Amendment's language that prevents government from "infringing" anyone's freedom of religion.  If you'd been paying attention all along, you would know that what you've proposed is patently a violation of the First Amendment.  It won't stand up to any legal challenge.  Congress won't pass a law implementing your idiotic idea.

So you're on a time-out, young man.  Go sit in the corner and trade stocks on your iPhone until I say otherwise.

#DumpTrump 

The answer found in a movie

President Obama's Oval Office statement was solid.  Measured.  It wasn't bad.  But it wasn't the answer to the dangers of ISIS and other terrorists.  What we need to do is borrow a concept from a brilliant film.

It is eerie just how spot-on the words written by the great Paddy Chayefsky nearly 40 years ago are today.  Peter Finch won a Best Actor Oscar for this role.  It was right in the movie and it is the right reaction to what's going on in our world today.

If enough of us were to get as mad as hell and proclaim we will not take it anymore then perhaps our elected leadership will finally take real action to stop ISIS, stop mass shootings and let us feel safe in our living rooms and everywhere else we roam in our day to day lives.

Are you as mad as hell yet?  Go to that window.  Shout it out at the top of your lungs.  Then perhaps find a more effective way of telling the politicians that we are mad as hell!

Terrorism and fear exact a heavy price on keeping us safe

We can debate whether or not what happened in San Bernardino was a case of radicalized Islamic terrorism or a case of workplace violence; but it doesn't really matter.  The point is that this is almost certainly going to be the catalyst for a major change in how we (and therefore the rest of the world) is going to try to stop this scourge.

The news media was trying to make a story out of the fact that the FBI and other agencies investigating this heinous act can no longer access five years of this couple's phone records data collected by the NSA because the legal authority for such searches has expired.  Ask yourself, now that this data can't be passed on to investigators, do you wish that the ability to use that data still existed?  I do not. When probable cause exists to subpoena records, then that can be done.  This isn't a case where there is an urgent need to get those records.  But such cases will come up in the future.

I have no problem with the NSA collecting so-called "meta-data" as long as it isn't available for being used or searched on a whim.  If the data is collected and stored securely, available only when probable cause is shown to a judge who will order the data made available after agreeing that the burden of showing probable cause has been met, then our civil liberties are safe.  At least safer than they were under the old system.

This leads to other questions about our liberties.  In the days to come, how will the 535 morons in Washington, DC propose to make us safer?  The Senate already voted down an idea to expand background checks for people who want to buy guns.  Odds are good they won't do anything that might reduce the number of assault weapons available to be used in future terrorist attacks.  I've already suggested confiscation of assault weapons from anyone who isn't a member of law enforcement or the military so I won't harp on that again so quickly.  But I will postulate that the Congress will do nothing to alter the status quo in spite of the fact it is not working.

Why?  Because of things like this.

The totals are just how much money the NRA has directly donated to the reelection campaigns of these two politicians during their careers in Congress.  One Republican.  One Democrats.  While Republicans get NRA money much more frequently than Democrats, this isn't a completely partisan issue.  Gun manufacturers also give freely to those who oppose gun control legislation of any type, sensible or otherwise.

I think we would all sacrifice a small amount of our civil liberties if we can keep our nation safe from terrorists.  I know I would.  But only the smallest amount necessary.  The price of being safe should not be all of our freedoms.

Another mass shooting, another set of bullshit

The Republican candidates for the presidential nomination send their thoughts and prayers to the victims and their loved ones.  The best ever response to that was this newspaper front page.

Prayers are not the answer.  Thoughts are not the answer.  Wishing is not going to work.  As my late father often said, "wish in one hand and pish in the other and see which one fills up first."  We need a complete solution if we hope to reverse and ultimately stop mass shootings.

For statistical purposes the FBI defines a mass shooting as one that involves four or more people being shot.  Now that puts the murder/suicide of a family of four where one parents kills the other three family members and then themselves on the same level as what happened at Sandy Hook, or this week in San Bernardino, or in that theater in Aurora, Colorado.  That may not much sense but then again does anything involving statistics make sense when we're talking about the death of human beings.

Like it or not, statistics tell us that the number of gun deaths in the U.S. has been on a decline since 2007.  In that year there were 4.2 gun homicides per 100,000 people in our nation.  By 2013 that number had fallen to 3.5 per 100,000.  Meanwhile the number of these "mass shootings" as defined by the FBI has been on a dramatic upswing.

Just about any gun can be used to engage in a mass shooting.  A six shot revolver can be used to kill six people without having to reload.  With speed-loaders, you can reload that revolver in mere seconds.  But that doesn't mean they are as "efficient" in terms of the ability to kill as an assault rifle.

Even if we limit the size of magazines for an assault rifle to ten rounds, there is still no useful purpose for that kind of weapon other than to engage in combat or to kill large quantities of people.  They aren't needed for hunting unless you're a really lousy shot.  That can be addressed by practice rather than replacing a hunting rifle with an assault rifle.  They aren't good for home defense unless your home is under attack by a squad of soldiers.

This is the weapon of a soldier.  It isn't the weapon of choice for home defense.

So, let's confiscate all of them in our nation.  Those in the hands of law enforcement agencies and the military remain where they are.  The rest get taken through eminent domain.  Any and all arguments that their present owners "need" them are nonsensical.  You can't stop a tyrannical government with a few hundred thousand assault rifles in the hands of an unorganized, unregulated militia.  Our U. S. military has almost the entire world outgunned.  If they were to be illegally unleashed on the U. S. civilian populace, they could not be stopped.  This isn't a Revolutionary War scenario.

You want a "well-regulated militia?"  Then let's borrow a concept from the Swiss.  All males who reach the appropriate age are subject to conscription.  But in a nation whose population is just over 8 million, they have 200,000 able bodied men who keep their issued military weapon in their homes.  A few years ago they stopped allowing them to keep sealed boxes of ammunition in those homes.  But they are armed.  Yet their murder rate is the 9th lowest on the planet.  Only Monaco, Lichtenstein, Singapore, Japan, Iceland, Kuwait, Bahrain and French Polynesia have lower rates.

There is no good argument for individuals who aren't part of law enforcement or the military to have assault weapons.  None.  If someone has one, please feel free to share it.

* * *

U. S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced that in 30 days, all combat jobs in the U. S. military will be opened to women who can meet the required standards.  If a woman can make it through just over 61 weeks of intense training, she can join the Navy SEALs.

Finally, equality will be the standard.  Pass the tests, serve in ANY military specialty, any unit.  So now that we've finally achieved this great victory for equality, it's time to fix another inequity.  Time to change the laws under which all males must register with the Selective Service System when they turn 18.  That law needs to read all individuals must register on or before their 18th birthday.

There is no logical reason to exempt women from this requirement now that all military specialties are open to both men and women.  Equality works both ways. 

Tuesday Things

You've seen the commercials from People's Choice Charities on your television.  Donate your car and the money goes to the charity of your choice.  They claimed all proceeds from your donation would go to the charity you selected.  But CA Attorney General Kamala Harris has filed a lawsuit and in the documents filed with the court, she accuses the charity of actually spending 97% of the proceeds from the donations on salaries, advertising and other expenses.  She is also suing another car donation company, Cars 4 Causes, located in Ventura County.  People's Choice Charities is in Los Angeles County.

Reporter's note:  The majority of charities are extremely ethical and honest.  But there are always those who try to take advantage of the lax oversight of charities to make money for themselves rather than a cause.  Earlier this year the Federal Trade Commission and 58 state/local agencies reached a settlement with four sham cancer charities that scammed donors out of $187 million.  Check out a charity before you choose to donate to it.

* * *

The WWE has finally realized they need to pay attention to the ratings of their flagship TV show, RAW, falling through the floor.  Those ratings are off 25% since June of this year.  So they sent a survey to their WWE Fan Council membership.  The link isn't there to encourage you to sign up but just to show you what it is.

Reporter's note:  You write lousy scripts, your audience will dry up.  The past few months of RAW and Smackdown have sucked.  They're uninteresting and no longer compelling.  John Cena is gone, at least for a while.  Same with Daniel Bryan and Seth Rollins.  That's only part of the problem.  It is fixable, but it will take some major changes in the decision making process.

* * *

This past April, the CEO of Gravity Payment, Dan Price made gigantic news.  He gave everyone in his company a raise to a minimum salary of $70,000 annually.  He made this possible by cutting his own salary of $1.1 million.  Then it came out that his brother, who owns 30% of the company, had sued him over this.

Now Bloomberg Business has published a story claiming that it wasn't the pay increases for others and cut in Price's pay that caused the lawsuit, but it was the lawsuit that prompted Price to cut his own pay.

Reporter's note:  We probably won't know the entire truth until the lawsuit goes to trial, next May.

* * *

I did a mini-rant the other day about accuracy and checking things in reporting/commenting on events.  Here are a few examples of why this is a lot more important than people might think at first.

Relying on interns can be dangerous.  The NTSB has a policy of not releasing names of pilots, and placed the blame on a summer intern.  One wonders what really happened.

The minute this guy called the KABC Channel 7 newsroom, and gave his name as "Louis Slungpue" someone should have verified he really was a DWP spokesperson.  Big organizations like that have offices that handle interactions with the press.  That person with the big fire hat that reads PIO at the scene of the fire is the Public Information Officer, the go-to person for news updates.

On April 8, 1955, famed singer Mario Lanza was scheduled to do two shows at the New Frontier Hotel in Las Vegas, as a major come back.  Ralph Pearl, the entertainment reporter for the Las Vegas Sun newspaper was there for the opening show.  The start of the show was delayed and then delayed a few more times.  Facing a deadline and having just heard that Lanza would be there in just a few minutes to start the show, Pearl went to the payphone and dictated a rave review of Lanza's performance to run in the morning edition.

Lanza was too drunk and too drugged to even walk out on stage, let alone sing and the appearances were canceled moments after Pearl hung up the phone.  He tried and failed to stop the review from being printed.  He writes about this in his book Las Vegas is My Beat, a great read for anyone interested in the history of the entertainment industry's connection with Vegas.  Proof you can't write the story until the event takes place.  It just dawned on me that I used this story in a blog entry from 2004.  The context it was used in is interesting. 

* * *

While searching for that old blog entry, I found something else that shocked me by its existence.  My old movie review website is still out there, lying dormant.  I was a much more prolific moviegoer/reviewer in those days.