Monday, December 07, 2015

Reflection



21 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Goodness, it's tomorrow already? The computer really does eat time, especially when you're looking for files that turn out not to be there.

      Delete
  2. Listener, Marcy lives near Branson, where she insisted they move. Both she and Jason thought she would be happier there. Seemingly she is, to a certain extent, but still not settled down. Jason is currently in L.A. and, yes, though Jason told me Engeleon has expressed his feelings on the subject, he is still with his mother. Jason wants him and in my somewhat educated opinion the youngster would be much better with his father, but Marcy won't let him go. That doesn't surprise me. Like I told Jason, it seems likely to me she considers Engeleon is all she has left. *shakes head*

    She has medication but I gather it doesn't always help. And it's one of those situations where no one can force her to go to the doctor. Sis and I know all about that. We suggest and even beg Mum go to have her meds reviewed but, not seeing a need, she won't. So I understand about that.

    It's vital that I not get involved, that's obvious to me. But, Damn, it's so frustrating when you see good people hurting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It sure is, Cat. I think that's how prayer got started…appealing to a higher power to intervene where one cannot or must not. I love the concept Madeleine L'Engle borrowed from the Scots, of Kything. Maybe you could Kythe Jason some strength.

      Delete
    2. Absolutely. It's all I can do.

      That reminds me: A year or two ago I read a book from the library, a Christmas anthology of fiction and nonfiction by Madeleine L'Engle. Magical, as you can imagine. Unfortunately, I don't remember the title.

      Delete
  3. After a foggy start, Sunday was beautifully sunny.

    Did anyone see the President's address? Sis and I were very impressed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, we watched the President's address. It is good to hear that our President still believes we can topple ISIL. It is good to know he is keeping watch every day (which we knew) and that he isn't going to send in ground troops.


      I was glad he gave it from the Oval Office for emphasis. I see that as an appeal to the people to hold their legislators' feet to the fire on gun control. Of course, up here in Vermont, he was preaching to the choir. But think of it: there has been so much frustration that the President doesn't do more, when it's Congress that's gumming up the works. Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama both have been telling we the people that the Executive Branch can no longer keep the Legislative Branch in check sufficiently, and I suspect that has a lot to do with the Judicial Branch being a too far tipped to one side. We need to elect people who will vote for sane gun control. And we need a President after President Obama who will remain strong on this issue.

      Even with the passage of excellent gun control legislation, assuming they grandfather in all the present legal guns, it will still take several generations before those guns are no longer a factor. This is a big concern.

      Delete
    2. Don't kid yourself. There'll be no gun control legislation. Yes, a lot of people want it, but a lot don't. And those who don't are very vocal and in-your-face. They seem well organized too from what I gather. And you know what else, Listener? They aren't very bright, which makes them both tenacious and dangerous.

      I had a woman tell me just the other day on my FB page that taking guns away from law abiding citizens would not solve the problem of gun violence. After all, the San Bernardino shooters probably did not own their guns legally. How can you answer such lack of logic? I mean, it's very simple. If fewer firearms are sold, fewer firearms can be stolen, and fewer firearms, legally or illegally owned, can be used in the commission of crimes. Fewer guns, less gun violence. What's so hard to grasp?

      Delete
  4. Cat—re The Woman in White, your note [that you couldn’t have guessed the outcome] is appreciated; it adds interest. I am at the place where Lady Glyde et al. have arrived at Blackwater. Dark omens abound, but there is no evidence that any actual crime has yet occurred. Based upon your observation, I must assume that most [perhaps all!] of the apparent clues are red herrings. It occurs to me as I write this that separate tendencies eventually combining to result in whatever happens might be far less observable than frank conspiracy or collusion. Perhaps there are actors yet to be introduced! All good fun. As for the “sun photography” of Mr. Fairlie’s collections, it must refer to heliography. [Click] Gaiters must be pretty much what we refer to as the same, although in some cases they were little more than spats. Evidently they went out of fashion when streets became cleaner, with neither mud nor manure.

    —Alan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hmmm, I've never stopped to wonder what gaters are, which is odd since I tend to wonder about everything. Seems to me gentlemen wear them in Dickens too. I know what spats are, and IIRC they remained in fashion, at least among American gangsters, through the '30s.

      Black Water Park is definitely atmospheric. Pay close attention to Marian's observations, she is an acute observer. I'm bound to say the story does not proceed in the way we moderns are accustomed to with mystery or suspense stories.

      To tell the truth, Alan, I fully expected Sir Perceval to murder Laura for her money on their wedding tour, so I was at aloss to explain how the book could be so long. My favorite character is Marian, a strong, intelligent, capable young woman. Laura is a bit fluttery for my taste. I rather like Walter as well.

      Let me know how you get on.

      Enjoying The Moonstone so far, though there's pretty heavy foreshadowing that something bad is in store for Rosanna, the second housemaid. We'll see.

      Delete
    2. "Black Water Park is definitely atmospheric. Pay close attention to Marian's observations, she is an acute observer. I'm bound to say the story does not proceed in the way we moderns are accustomed to with mystery or suspense stories."

      >>>The tale is truly from a different world, despite our common language. And our expectations of how such a story should proceed are shaped by generations of evolving expectations and conventions. All the better! To call Blackwater Park "atmospheric" is a euphemism.

      "To tell the truth, Alan, I fully expected Sir Perceval to murder Laura for her money on their wedding tour, so I was at aloss to explain how the book could be so long. My favorite character is Marian, a strong, intelligent, capable young woman. Laura is a bit fluttery for my taste. I rather like Walter as well."

      >>> I was not necessarily expecting it on the Continent, but Sir Percival is certainly suspect. I suppose he has tuberculosis. Marian seems to have more brains than the rest of them put together, excepting Gilmore, the solicitor. Walter I am not so sure about at this point; it seems he too has some predisposition to the vapors.

      Well, I have three sets of documents to look over for a public defender; better get to work on them.

      --Alan

      Delete
  5. I will have to watch the President's address; haven't yet. We are running about one mass [four or more victims] shooting per day; what if he were to address the nation for each one, and point out that Congress has done nothing about it, again that day?]

    The San Bernardino murders evidently were in legal possession of their firearms and ammunition; so much for that argument.


    Ammunition is in very short supply compared to firearms, so is the best place to regulate the problem. California should have an ammunition control proposition on next year's ballot, and I fully anticipate voting for it. Oregon has lately made significant strides in gun control, using bog standard campaign and lobbying approaches; the locals called in national organizations to fund and direct the lobbying--a multi-year effort.

    This in from Bill's neck of the woods, via politicalwire.com:

    “The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away a challenge by gun rights activists to an ordinance enacted by a Chicago suburb that bans assault weapons and large-capacity magazines,” Reuters reports.

    “The refusal by the nine justices to hear the case, coming at a time of fierce debate over the nation’s gun laws following a series of mass shootings, means that the 2013 ordinance passed by the city of Highland Park, Illinois remains in effect.”

    listener--am I mistake to understand that Vermont has some of the most liberal gun laws in the US--including both unlicensed concealed carry and open carry?

    Back to my work simulation...

    --Alan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The San Bernardino murders = The San Bernardino murderERs

      but you knew that...

      Alan

      Delete
    2. Applauding the Supreme Court, though their refusal seems uncharacteristically firm backboned.

      Delete
    3. Alan, you are correct. Ironic, isn't it? On the other hand, we have small communities in which people are known and trusted. There isn't that much crime, and people are generally responsible. I feel two ways about it all. On the one hand I am vehemently opposed to guns used by average citizens. On the other hand, I am among Vermonters, so it somehow works.


      Vermont has very few gun control laws, and has among the most permissive laws in the nation regarding the purchase and open or concealed carry of firearms. The state's rural character, along with its strong hunting and outdoor sports traditions, have contributed to the state's permissive gun policies. Gun dealers are required to keep a record of all handgun sales. It is illegal to carry a gun on school premises or in a courthouse. State law preempts local governments from regulating the possession, ownership, transfer, carrying, registration or licensing of firearms.[1]

      The state of Vermont neither issues nor requires a permit to carry a weapon on one's person, openly or concealed. This permissive stance on gun control known in the US as Constitutional carry, since one's "permit" is said to be the constitution. For many decades, Vermont was the only state where this was the case (hence the alternative term Vermont carry).[2] Vermont law does not distinguish between residents and non-residents of the state; both have the same right to carry permit-free while in Vermont.

      The Vermont Constitution of 1777, dating well before the Bill of Rights to a time when Vermont was an independent republic, guarantees certain freedoms and rights to the citizens: "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State – and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power."[3] In the modern era, the Vermont Supreme Court established the right to carry firearms without a permit in State v Rosenthal, 75 Vt. 295 (1903).[4][5]

      In January 2013, the city of Burlington approved an ordinance banning semi-automatic assault weapons and large capacity magazines within the city.[6] The policy's constitutionality is ambiguous,[7] and its passage generated controversy and disapproval from gun rights advocates in the state, culminating in an incident in Morrisville, where the owners of a firing range have prohibited Burlington Police officers from using the facility to protest the City Council's decision.[8] The ban was ultimately dropped and never reached a local vote.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Vermont

      Delete
    4. I wonder what peculiarities of the Highland Park ordinance made it OK with the Supreme Court. Will have to look into that.

      Alan

      Delete
    5. The Highland Park mayor when the assault gun ban was passed was Nancy Rotering, who I am supporting for Congress in the 10th district (I'm in the 7th district).

      In its previous 2nd Amendment decision, the Supreme Court apparently noted that the principle it cited might not apply to "unusual weapons." It is not hard to see assault rifles as unusual weapons.

      Delete
  6. Yay, Oregon!!

    As for Vermont, d'y'know, I've never heard of anyone here having assault rifle.

    ReplyDelete