Sneak Previews with Skorpen and Skorpen

9 09 2016

Note: since I seem to have worked myself into a perfect rage/shame paralysis over everything that matters, I’m going back to blogging about things that don’t matter, as if they do.

Wyatt and I have made extensive studies of children’s television. We put in the hours, and now we are the experts. Despite our often sharply divided opinions, we present here our combined ranking of shows, from worst to best.

Super Why

Wyatt: Cartoons! Plus the main guy’s name is Wyatt! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: From the way they toss around the “super” prefix, it’s obvious the creators have never read a comic in their lives. 😑😑😑😑

Curious George

Wyatt: Cartoons! Antics! Squeaky babbling! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: Monkeys have tails. George is clearly a chimpanzee. Stop calling him a monkey! πŸ˜‘πŸ˜‘πŸ˜‘πŸŽ“

Thomas and Friends

Wyatt: Cartoons! Trains! Thomas! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: Sir Toppemhat. Top EM hat?? What the £*<# is that?! It makes my teeth curl every time I hear it. 😑😑😑😁

Dinosaur Train 

Wyatt: Cartoons! Trains! Dinosaurs! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: Who designed that train? Willy Wonka’s meth-head uncle? 😑😑😲😺

Ready, Jet, Go! 

Wyatt: Cartoons! Space! Amy Mainzer! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: Mindy stays home and plays in the sandbox, while all her friends blast off into space, and she’s fine with it? That’s just not believable. πŸ˜‘πŸ€”πŸ€”πŸ˜‘


Wyatt: Cartoons! Animals! Emotions! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: Drawing broken lines for the sake of broken lines? No thank you. γ€°γ€°γ€°πŸ˜‘

Nature Cat

Wyatt: Cartoons! Animals! Kate Micucci! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: What’s the deal with Hal’s nose? πŸ‘ƒβ“β“πŸ˜‘

Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood

Wyatt: Daniel Tiger!!! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: Avoid episode 108 at all costs. β˜£πŸ™ˆπŸš«β˜’

Sesame Street

Wyatt: Muppets! Songs! Elmo! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: I feel old. πŸ‘΄πŸ»πŸ‘΄πŸ»πŸ‘΄πŸ»πŸ‘΄πŸ»

Wild Kratts

Wyatt: Cartoons! Animals! Mild peril! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: Howcome those guys get youthful cartoon versions of themselves? πŸ‘΄πŸ»πŸ’₯βž‘οΈπŸ‘±πŸ»

Odd Squad

Wyatt: Kids! Wackiness! Problem solving! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: I legitimately enjoy this show. 😊😊😊😳

Peg + Cat

Wyatt: Cartoons! Musical numbers! Number numbers! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

Neal: As a sometime professional animator, I can unequivocally state that Peg + Cat is the winner. πŸŽ“πŸŽ“πŸŽ“πŸ†

Trump’s Intentions Don’t Matter

10 08 2016

So now Trump has said only “second amendment people” can do anything about Hillary Clinton. His camp says he was merely referring to their power as a motivated voting block. I certainly don’t buy that. Neither do I think he was actively calling for an assassination. I think the phrase just came into his head, and he thought it would be fun to say to a crowd. Trump doesn’t have intentions like a fully conscious human being; he’s just a guy with no filter who craves attention.

Ultimately though, Trump’s intentions, or lack thereof, don’t matter. The effects of his words matter. In a population as large as ours, in our current political climate, it is a statistical certainty that some unstable people will hear his words and take it upon themselves to gun down Clinton, and/or her supporters. 

Last November in Minneapolis, some hooligans shot into a crowd of Black Lives Matter protesters. They reportedly called out “Trump 2016.” This was back when Trump was battling more than a dozen candidates for the nomination, before the press thought he would still even be a candidate in January. Now, despite all the prevarications of Ryan and McConnel, Trump and his antics have the tacit endorsement of half of our political landscape.

This is a campaign that was literally about penis size in its early days. The only thing surprising about Trump’s “second amendment people” comment is that it took this long to happen. This time his rhetorical vomit will lead to bloodshed. Count on it.

Arguing with Myself Vol. 25B-XXI

29 07 2016

Since the death of Philando CastileΒ and the shooting of Charles Kinsey, all my posts seem petty and stupid. I’m outraged over gun violence because it’s turned formerly safe places into danger zones. But some people have no safe places. Freddie Gray, Michael Brown, Eric Garner and all the rest are tragic atrocities, but Castile and Kinsey finally made the reality clear for me. Those two did everything they could to defuse situations which shouldn’t have been tense in the first place, and they still got shot.

I have some good friends who are cops.Β I like and respect and admire them. I know their courage and integrity represent the majority of officers. I know they are up against some awful shit and deserve our support. But institutional racism is real. We have to do better.

Walking around without fear of getting shot is a privilege that everyone is entitled to.

Reinvention of Self (blue pill version)

4 07 2016

matrixPillsBlueHere’s a funny thought: on a typical day in real life, I interact with a dozen people at most. On Facebook, I’m having conversations with several hundred people. SoΒ which identity has more legitimacy?

More to the point: let’s say I wanted to reinvent myself. (I could go into just what that means and why it’s attractive but I’ll skip that part for now.) In real life, I’d have to keep a constant vigilance over my own unconscious tendencies in order to change my behavior. With social media, I can take the time to edit my behavior before releasing it into the universe. It wold take some effort to craft and maintain my ideal identity online, but it seems a much easier prospect than wrangling my natural failings in realtime.

If you tell me that my real-life self is the inherent real me in a way that my online self can never be, I won’t argue. But as The Fixx said, It’s not what we are, it’s what we do. If I’m interacting with 20-30 times more people online, isn’t my online self the one with the greater impact? Isn’t it reasonable to measure ourselves by our affect on others, rather than some philosophical construct of self?

I suppose it’s likely that my little online missives have a very small impact on a lot of people, while my real life behavior has a larger impact on those close to me. But maybe, if I work long and hard to make my online self into my ideal, those habits and behaviors will spill over into my real life.

Seems like it’s worth a shot.

Arguing With Myself About Guns, Part CMXVII

29 06 2016

This post is for my peace of mind. I have no reason to believe it will change anyone’s thinking, or even be read by anyone who disagrees with me. But I need to get to a place where merely raising the issue of guns doesn’t make me crazy. So I want to address a couple of the more reasonable pro-gun arguments I’ve run across, and clarify my own thoughts about what should be done.

Style Matters

The AR-15 is hugely popular with gun owners, due to its flexibility and capacity for customization. Mechanically it is virtually identical to some hunting rifles. Gun owners have argued that the AR-15’s military styling is just a shell, with no real bearing on it’s lethality, and therefore a ban on the AR-15 makes no sense.

But why do people go on shooting rampages?  Going on a massacre is not logical. It is emotional. It is dramatic. Shooters are using the most shocking means available to address their personal pain. I submit to you that the military styling of the rifle adds to the power of the gesture in the shooter’s mind. If he only had access to a wooden stock hunting rifle, he might not bother.

I realize I’m dealing in fuzzy psychological hypotheticals. But given the stakes (mass murder, prevention of), is the role of symbols in an unstable mind less compelling than the right to pursue a hobby? Everybody likes the AR-15. Arguments against banning it are reasonable, but boil down to the defense of a sophisticated toy. Most gun enthusiasts won’t be pushed into irrational homicide by the gun’s action movie aesthetics… but a handful will. Which leads me to:

Numbers Matter, but Lives Matter More

It is undeniably true that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible, law-abiding citizens. This article from the Guardian (which I found very helpful in humanizing the other side) has the numbers:

Set 30,000 gun deaths, or even 500,000 gun victimizations, against 300 million. As incomplete and imprecise as much gun data is, the bigger picture is clear: most guns are not being used in crimes. Most gun owners are not committing crimes.

I can’t argue with that. But I do argue with the conclusion that onerous gun regulations would unfairly victimize all those responsible gun owners.

Our world is different than it used to be. A mass shooting of random people was unthinkable at one time. Now they happen several times a day in America. Relative to all the daily occurrences in the country they are still rare, but so what? Any workplace, any public place, any school is a potential target. We shouldn’t have to live like that. Not just so that hobbyists can bolster their collections.

I’m sorry for being derisive. There are legitimate reasons for owning guns. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. But guns are dangerous. That’s the whole point. It should be hard to acquire them. There should be requirements for keeping them. There should be limits on what is available. This Texas gun owner gets it, believe him if you don’t believe me.

Responsible gun owners get training, get training for their families, keep their weapons secure, and know their weapons well. Their efforts should be honored. No one who is willing to do less should be allowed to own, buy, or fire guns.

What To Do

Some things we can do relatively easily that will make a big difference:

  • Ban magazines bigger than 10 rounds.
  • Enact universal mandatory background checks for all gun sales. Yes, this means you can’t sell your old hunting rifle to your cousin, like you could a car. The model of cars, car insurance, and driver’s licenses is often cited as instructive for gun practices. It’s not a perfect analog, but it’s a good model. I think the prescription drug model is equally instructive. You can’t sell your cousin your leftover Vicodin either.
  • Ban online gun sales. Require presentation of ID in person to buy a gun. Yes, some criminal masterminds can work around this. The point is to make it harder. As I’ve said before, mass shooters are not criminal masterminds. Most of them rely on easily acquired weapons. We must take steps to erase the gray market.
  • Severely restrict open carrying. There is no reason to carry a rifle into Starbucks. Laws can be crafted to make threatening carriers subject to immediate arrest, while allowing hunters and target shooters to transport their guns as they will.

What we should not do, at least not right away, is tie gun ownership to terrorist watch lists. It sounds like a good idea, but currently our watch lists and no-fly lists are highly problematic. We need to refine our law enforcement and national security mechanisms beyond racial profiling. We would be better served by scrapping the next round of new fighter jets and putting the money into training and development of human beings to understand, locate, and assess other human beings.

That brings up big picture items. Guns are not the only piece of the problem, and we need to address deeper root causes if our lives are ever going to be secure. But that’s another post. This one has served it’s purpose. Thanks for reading.








16 06 2016

My last post went to an unproductive place. That was not my intention. I could edit or take it down, but I’m going to leave it alone. The point was; gun advocates, please measure your language and your tactics. Imagine you are talking to mournersΒ at a funeral, because essentially, you are. History lessons and snark areΒ just repulsive and crazy-makingΒ and push the discussion toward an actual fight to take away your guns. No one wants that fight. Help us avoid it. Just be mindful.

All that stuff seems totally pointless as I type it, but I’m leaving it there too. I’m going to repeat the following from another previous post, because it’s still the best I have to offer:

“The problem… isn’t that criminals don’t follow laws, but rather that criminals aren’t dissuaded by weak laws. And gun laws in all but a few states are decidedly weak.”

The full article from The Trace is here.

Don’t Be a Dick About Automatic vs Semi-Automatic

15 06 2016

My friend Troy recently wrote something that clarified for me why a ban on semi-automatic weapons is unreasonable. Here’s the highlight:

Semi-automatic and fully automatic weapons are different. For the few who haven’t checked wiki on this yet: a semi-automatic weapon loads the next round into the chamber, but it takes another trigger pull to fire it off. While semi-automatic does *not* mean three round bursts, it does mean one can fire off many rounds very, very quickly. If you had the horror of listening to the audio recorded on a victim’s cell phone like I did driving home (thank you NPR), then you’ll hear exactly how fast that is,

The reason gun nuts and respectable gun owners don’t want to ban semi-automatic weapons is because nearly *all* rifles are semi automatic these days. That .22 ruger that holds 10 rounds and is not powerful enough to kill a deer in one shot? It’s semi automatic.

An AR-15 to the best of my knowledge is ‘just’ a higher powered .22*. Mechanically identical.Β 

And no, I had not wikied it. Because unlike Troy’s very kind and informative post, most people arguing the difference between automatic and semi-automatic sound like snarky assholes, splitting hairs while people die. Those type of posts don’t make me want to understand anything.

Here’s the beginning of a more typical one currently making the rounds:

Ok. I’m going to have to fix a few people on here because emotions are high and stupid shit is being supported.
First off, most of you have no clue what an assault rifle is! It’s not your fault you don’t know, I will educate you. An assault rifle is a rifle with the ability to go fully automatic. That means if you hold the trigger down, it keeps going bang until you release the trigger or the weapon runs out of ammo. The first assault rifle came about during WWII with the German Stg44. It had the power of a rifle with nearly the rate of fire of a sub-machine gun (full auto). Inspired out of this WWII era gun came the most well knows assault rifles of all time, the AK-47 and the M-16…

I’ma stop you right there smarty pants. I don’t give a single fuck about the history of guns right now. I will take any definitiveΒ information you want to share, but guns to me are not fun or beautiful or even the least bit interesting.

I understand that some people like guns. That’s fine. I like a lot of weird shit that is completely pointless, I won’t fault anyone for liking guns. But when you’re talking to us regulators, you have to understand: we are exploding with rage and frustration. People are dying, for no reason, more and more and more, and we get nothing but a stone wall of resistance to any action whatsoever.

My hands are shaking as I type this. I know that compromise is the only workable path forward. I know that stricter laws and tighter regulations will go a long way to solving the problem. I know that a ban on all rifles is not warranted or possible. But if I’m honest, I absolutely agree with my friend Sarah:

Take away our guns. All of them. Defend yourself with fists for all I care. Purge this country of its metal plague. Melt them down into little cups to catch the tears of the NRA. Every last gun ripped from its owners’ hands. No more fucking around.

This is where we’re at. Congress won’t take a single step to solve a problem that other countries have shown how to solve. People are dying for no reason. Literally anyone could be next.Β So don’t talk to me about your hobby, or your wild west good guy scenario, or god forbid your rebel vs tyrant standoff fantasy–seriously, how does end in any way but you getting squashed under a tank?

It’s unfair for me to be snarky and tell the other side you can’t, I suppose. You know what else is unfair? Gun owners and gun buyers have access to all the guns. Dead people have nothing.

So fuck you guys. It’s on you to make this right. I don’t want to hear a single fucking word out of you that doesn’t move us toward a solution.