Category: Things that matter

A parenting tip from your host

This post comes courtesy of a series of tragic events that happened here in Memphis and nearby very recently. Since I have no idea how long that article will be reachable, here’s a small chunk of it.

A 15-month-old boy died Wednesday after he was left inside a sweltering truck in Lauderdale County, Tenn.

The child was found unresponsive around 2 p.m. by his mother, who had left him inside a parked sport utility vehicle when she went to a neighbor’s home to drop off a package, Lauderdale County officials said.

“She said she left the air running and was gone 15 to 20 minutes but when she came out the air was blowing hot and her baby was hot and sweating and wouldn’t wake up,” said Lauderdale County Investigator Clay Newman. “She called 911 and the child was rushed to the hospital.”

That’s tragic, and an event I would never want to have happen to any parent.  But unfortunately, this happens far too often.  So here’s my little parenting tip of the day – never leave your child in the car alone.  I know it’s tempting to just “run in for a second” to do something.  Even planned brief trips can run longer.

It frustrates my wife that I won’t stop at a convenience store and leave the kids in my Jeep while I run in to just grab a gallon of milk.  I’ll make them get out with me, which of course means I have to corral them while inside and then get them back in a buckled in their seats again.  But by taking 3 extra minutes on my trip to do this, I make sure that if someone picks my Jeep as the break-a-window-and-drive-away target of the day, they get the Jeep and all my crap inside, but not my children.  My wife calls me a melodramatic paranoid, but I’d rather be that than a childless middle-aged idiot who is facing reckless endangerment charges for leaving the kids.  The same holds true when I stop at someone’s house to drop something off – the kids go where I go, rather than staying in the car.  That way, if the 30 second drop-off turns into a social visit (ignoring for the moment my tendency to not be social) that lasts half an hour, I won’t come back out to the child I forgot about sitting in a 106 degree car not breathing.

So please, people, practice the simple move of never leaving your child in the car alone.  It makes them safer, and you less likely to forget them and end up the parent talked about in a tragic tale in the papers.

[tags]Parenting tip of the day[/tags]

I don’t get it – why aren’t more travellers outraged?

The idiocy continues.  Our government has made a public relations move and disallowed all liquids on flights.  Rather than continuing to do real work that improves safety for travellers, they have made things worse by forcing anyone travelling with a dangerous liquid to pour it in a large receptable and expose *EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO COMES NEAR THE RECEPTACLE* to that liquid.  In other words, our government has increased the power terrorists have for disrupting our daily lives – moreso than they have already disrupted it by giving the government reasons to implement stupid policies that they’ve probably wanted to do any way.

But in same locations, the current levels of stupidity are not enough.  No, in same places, the inspectors are making people peel bananas to prove that there are bananas.

At Dulles International Airport near Washington on Thursday morning, one traveler reported that screeners were also making passengers remove all food items from their carry-on luggage for inspection, and one passenger was told to peel her banana.

[tags]Our government is staffed by idiots, Lose of rights continues in America, Let’s not let people take food either because they would be a way to top the idiocy of no liquids[/tags]

The reality of our latest stupid restrictions on travel

(via boingboing)
People, understand this – the newest travel restrictions are absolutely not increasing your security.  In fact, they are probably making things worse by fooling millions into thinking something positive is being done while simultaneously stripping away rights and increasing your potential exposure to dangerous materials at the airport instead of in the air.  So, since our government is gladly giving us nothing while reducing our rights and taking away safety, isn’t it time to ponder just what it is that the enemy is really doing?  Well, here is a bizarrely accurate view of what’s happening that no one in charge can seem to see.

wondermarkliquidsonaaplane.jpg

[tags]Losing our rights for travel, Less safety under the guide of more, Terrorists disrupt America and the idiots in government are too stupid to get it[/tags]

No fluids on planes? Idiocy in action

A terrorist plot is foiled, then we elevate the restrictions on normal people travelling by plane.  So we are rewarding the terrorists for attempting to bring planes down by continually restricting travellers’ freedoms and imposing limited restrictions on what people can bring on flights.  Let’s not continue doing this half-assed, folks – stop all carry-ons, implement 100% checked baggage checks, and just get to the end.  Every time the “authorities” restrict certain items being carried on planes, the bad guys just come up with a different way to attack.  Let’s just put up the biggest barrier we can, and see what they come up with next, OK?

That out of the way, I love The Consumerist’s photo essay of what it is like now in the airports.  In particular, this last photo is priceless, given the caption used on the site:

dumptruck.jpg

Now that we have all the incendiary devices collected, let’s dump them together and smash them.

I notice that the brilliant folks that came up with the idea of smashing the suspected explosives are nowhere to be seen.  “Let’s let the minimum wagers handle it!” seems to be the way to handle it.  Way to come up with a “great idea,” not think through the consequences of said brilliance, and then let people who earn less than you bear the risks.

[tags]Terrorist attacks, Flight inconveniences, Idiots are in charge of how we are allowed to travel[/tags]

Historic events in gun-control history

This one is for all of you who support gun control. Check out the great things that gun control has brought other countries, and keep fighting the good fight.

  • In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • In 1935 China established gun control . From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • In 1938 Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
  • In 1956 Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to 1977, one million ‘educated’ people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • In 1964 Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
  • In 1970 Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

“But Randy,” you might protest, “those things were all so long ago. We know better how to do gun control now to make society better.”

OK, how about this tidbit, then?

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent!) In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!)

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in “successfully ridding Australian society of guns.” The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.

Wake me up when someone gets it right.

[tags]Gun control, Historic events[/tags]

Happy glow-in-the-dark day

I knew this, and forgot to post it earlier today. For those that aren’t aware of today’s historic event, we’ll let the History Channel website fill us in:

August 6

1945 – Atomic bomb is dropped on Hiroshima

On this day in 1945, at 8:16 a.m. Japanese time, an American B-29 bomber, the Enola Gay, drops the world’s first atom bomb, over the city of Hiroshima. Approximately 80,000 people are killed as a direct result of the blast, and another 35,000 are injured. At least another 60,000 would be dead by the end of the year from the effects of the fallout.

More information on this momentous occasion is available in the full History Channel article. Go read just how bad this was to the victims of the attack.

Oh, and yes, I know someone will be offended by the article subject or my Technorati tags below. I recommend they start their own blog and word it more nicely, however, as I kinda like the macabre humor implied in my wording.

[tags]Today in history, The History Channel, What’s that green glow?, What’s that cloud mean momma?, Hiroshima, Enola Gay[/tags]

Tennessee (and soon Minnesota) help users find meth dealers

(via boingboing)

Perhaps hoping to shame meth dealers into living more carefully, the way sex offenders presumably do after being listed in sex offender registries (I don’t know if they change their behavior, but I believe that is part of the intention of the program), it seems Tennessee is going to try shaming meth dealers into better lifestyles (go on and check the site – you can look up meth dealers near you).  As written in this Slate article, what does this really do, other than make it easier for addicts with internet connectivity to find a convenient dealer?

What exactly will this punitive harassment accomplish? It certainly won’t encourage meth offenders to assume a lawful place in society. Minnesota State Attorney General Mike Hatch, the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party candidate for governor and no softie on the drug issue, considers the meth registry a referral service for users. “What better place to find a meth dealer than on an Internet Web site,” Hatch said last week.

Or maybe not. The Tennessee meth registry doesn’t promise accuracy, covering its ass with a disclaimer on the home page stating that the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, which is in charge of the database, doesn’t verify any of the information sent to it by counties. If it’s not accurate, why bother?

Even if desirable, are the registries practical? Law enforcement doesn’t have the resources to keep tabs on sex offenders who refuse to register. How are they going to track the thousands of meth offenders streaming out of prisons? Would any police chief, sheriff, or state attorney general advocate such a deployment of resources?

Perhaps the folks responsible for these programs didn’t consider this?  But what does this registry really do?

[tags]Meth offenders registry, Tennessee helps you find a meth dealer[/tags]

British adopt stupid threat level model similar to US

(via Scheier’s security blog)

Do you know the current American terrorist threat level? Probably not. And why is that? Because almost since inception, the threat level has been at yellow. Occasionally, it climbs up to orange. threat-level-chart.jpgIn certain parts of the country, it has been at red at times. But never has it been at blue or green – the two lowest levels. And what does that mean? It means since the inception of this idiotic political ploy the current administration has saddled us with, we have been told to be aware of anything out of the ordinary, for there is a significant risk of terrorist attack.

Let me let you in on a little secret – we are no more at risk of terrorist attack now than we were 10 years ago – OK, maybe a little more at risk given our attack on a country on questionable evidence of potential threat, thereby alienating many people who previously didn’t care enough about the US to even think about us, and making the ones who already hated us even more hateful and driven by vengeance – but really, that’s a tiny change, probably not even enough to measure on that little chart on the right. The only difference is the 9/11 attacks showed us that we were at risk, when we thought we were safe and secure in our little bubble of North America. And I don’t call the threat level security model stupid because of who is in the White House – honestly, I believe that had a Democrat been in the White House, we’d still have some stupid model of similar design. It might be something different, but it would still be there. And why do we have it? So politicians can point out the elevated risk in an easy to understand format and use that as justification for taking more of our money to spend it on more stupid “security” measures that won’t actually increase America’s security, and likely will reduce it.

The problem with constantly telling everyone to “be alert” is that we aren’t given any guidance on what we are to watch, how to tell if something is out of the ordinary, what we might expect as a higher risk attack, or anything else that would make an elevated alertness warning have meaning. And we’re Americans. Do you know what that means? We have short attention spans, an unwillingness to change our ways, and a tendency to ignore security and safety procedures when they inconvenience us. Even if the threat level model were any good, it’s been at yellow too long to matter. To make an impact on Americans’ behaviors at this point, it would probably take a red alert – I doubt even an orange alert on a nationwide basis would phase 99+% of the people in this country.

So, why the rant over all this? Well, the British are going to be implementing a similar poorly-conceived alert model. The one difference is, they suffer attacks sufficiently more often than we do that it might make a difference. It won’t, mind you, but potentially it could. If their government is smart enough to maintian a blue or green alert stage equivalent the vast majority of the time, going to yellow or orange equivalent might make a difference in peoples’ behaviors. I just hate to see more money wasted on more “security precautions” that are just well publicized ways for governments to spend money on actions that typically reduce security instead of improving it.
Continue reading “British adopt stupid threat level model similar to US”

Today in history – 2006-08-01

Complete text taken from The History Channel’s Today in History feature.

1966 An ex-Marine goes on a killing spree at the University of Texas

Charles Whitman takes a stockpile of guns and ammunition to the observatory platform atop a 300-foot tower at the University of Texas and proceeds to shoot 46 people, killing 16. Whitman, who had killed both his wife and mother the night before, was eventually shot to death after courageous Austin police officers, including Ramiro Martinez, charged up the stairs of the tower to subdue the attacker.

Whitman, a former Eagle Scout and Marine, began to suffer serious mental problems after his mother left his father in February 1966. On March 29, he told a psychiatrist that he was having uncontrollable fits of anger. He purportedly even told this doctor that he was thinking about going up to the tower with a rifle and shooting people. Unfortunately, the doctor didn’t follow up on this red flag.

On July 31, Whitman wrote a note about his violent impulses, saying, “After my death, I wish an autopsy on me be performed to see if there’s any mental disorder.” The note then described his hatred for his family and his intent to kill them. That night, Whitman went to his mother’s home, where he stabbed and shot her. Upon returning to his own home, he then stabbed his wife to death.

The following morning, Whitman headed for the tower with several pistols and a rifle after stopping off at a gun store to buy boxes of ammunition and a carbine. Packing food and other supplies, he proceeded to the observation platform, killing the receptionist and two tourists before unpacking his rifle and telescope and hunting the people below.

An expert marksman, Whitman was able to hit people as far away as 500 yards. For 90 minutes, he continued firing while officers searched for a chance to get a shot at him. By the end of his rampage, 16 people were dead and another 30 were injured.

The University of Texas tower remained closed for over 30 years before reopening in 1999.

[tags]Today in History, UT shootings, A marine and his rifle[/tags]

Anti-RFID techies are here to protect you

(via Engadget)

With the recently announced RFID passports we’ll be getting here in the states soon, some folks are wisely concerned about their electronic safety in a world were RFID signals are easy to pick-up.  Given a desire to protect RFID identities in the coming age where you will not be able to be sans RFID, the folks at RFID-guardian have worked on a device to protect you and all your RFID-ness.

The Guardian has three main components: an RFID tag emulator (that consists of a receiver part, a transmitter part, and an antenna), an RFID reader (also with antenna), and an embedded computer.

. . .

The Reader that is built into the Guardian is used to perform periodic scans of all tags that the Guardian owner carries around with her. If tags keep turning up in those scans, they will probably belong to the Guardian owner, so they must be protected from interrogation or corruption by unknown RFID readers. The Guardian decides this for itself, but it can (of course) be overridden by its owner.

. . .

The RFID Guardian could eventually be integrated into a PDA or a cellphone, but our research prototype is currently built on a breadboard (the next one will be on a single PCB). The current prototype consists of three separate parts:

  • some electronic circuit boards, one for its tag emulator receiver, one for its tag emulator transmitter, and one for its reader (plus some voltage translator boards)
  • a number of radio frequency antennas
  • an embedded computer that performs all the software tasks. This is an XScale PXA270 (an ARM descendant manufactured by Intel) on a development board, the Triton-270 sold by Karo.

There is no estimate yet on how much this will cost.
[tags]RFID, anti-RFID, privacy[/tags]

Wait, there are people not actively seeking that?

According to ArsTechnica, the just passed Internet SAFETY (Stop Adults Facilitating the Exploitation of Youth) act includes provisions for prison sentences to people who deceptively link to p0rn. So anyone who links to p0rn and attempts to pass it off as other legitimate web link can be penalized by this new law. So anyone who accidentally find p0rn online could possibly get the link provider in trouble. This doesn’t worry be, as I neither link to p0rn nor get to it accidentally – I get all my p0rn from quality sites, so I have to actively seek it out.

The bill deals mostly with sex offenders, though it also includes provisions for stopping the sale of the “date rape” drug and boosting the National Police Athletic League. For our purposes, the end of the legislation is the most interesting. Section 703 deals with “deception by embedded words or images,” and rehashes the idea found in the Internet SAFETY Act.

(a) In General- Whoever knowingly embeds words or digital images into the source code of a website with the intent to deceive a person into viewing material constituting obscenity shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not more than 10 years.

(b) Minors- Whoever knowingly embeds words or digital images into the source code of a website with the intent to deceive a minor into viewing material harmful to minors on the Internet shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for not more than 20 years.

The bill purposely leaves the provisions vague. What constitutes “deceit,” for instance? The law is worded loosely enough to allow prosecutors to use their discretion, and remains broad enough to deal with future changes in technology that might render a more specific bill obsolete.

Though the bill obviously applies only in the US, the government has recently shown a willingness to go after foreigners who operate web sites that are largely used by Americans.

[tags]Internet SAFETY Act, Online pr0n[/tags]