Category Archives: Perspectives

History, belief systems and more

Accountability & Reputation

Broken in the USA, Perspectives

Chapter 40

Accountability & Reputation

Regardless of your social or economic status the most important asset you will ever earn is your reputation. I say earn because that is exactly the case. This is one element in your life in which you have total control. Whether your reputation is positive or negative will determine your “quality” of life.

What factors do we need to consider in creating a “positive” reputation? One key factor is accountability. Simply stated this is doing what you say you will do when you said you would do it. The sad fact is that most folks are not accountable both to themselves and therefore not to others. The first step in becoming accountable is to take responsibility for your life and your decisions. It has often been stated that if each individual would take complete responsibility for their lives it would solve the majority of the ills that face society. Spend time making good decisions about how you live your life and little or no time worrying about others. Control the life that you have!

In addition to accountability there are other factors that will enhance your reputation:

  • Look for the positives in others and recognize them publically
  • Treat others as you expect to be treated
  • Display honest behavior at all times
  • Actively participate in community projects
  • Consume in moderation

Your reputation will determine your success in life. You only have one, protect it with diligence!

Guns, guns and more guns!

Broken in the USA, Crime and punishment, Perspectives

Chapter 29 Guns, guns and more guns!

Just when you thought I had offended just about everyone, well not quite. I have several friends that are staunch NRA supporters. Actually I am not at opposed to gun ownership as long as they are registered. I see registration as an important item for law enforcement. I am in favor of our law officers having the latest armament available. My concern is regarding the “facts” regarding murder rates in the US vs. other countries. I often the comment “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. That does make sense, but the facts seem to indicate otherwise. Let’s compare our experience to a few other “civilized” countries:                     Source: http://chartsbin.com/view/1454

Current Worldwide Homicide/Murder Rate

Country or Area Rate (rate per 100,000 population) Note Source
  Australia                                                         1.23  

Belgium                                                             1.83

Canada                                                                1.67

Denmark                                                          1.4

France                                                               1.35

Germany                                                             .8

Iceland                                                                  0

I could go on, but you get the idea

U.S.A.                                                                 5.22

The issue is, are we safer because we have more guns (or less gun control)?

The other comment that I hear often is: “it’s a Constitutional issue; the 2nd amendment gives me the right to own as many and whatever type of weapons that I want”. I would suggest that this is not entirely true, and even if it was we might want to modify our thinking based on the facts. Let’s look at the entire wording of the 2nd amendment to the Constitution:  “Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Yep, that is the entire amendment. It should be obvious that the intention of this right had to do with the need to maintain the militia, which at the time made excellent sense. At the time of the writing the Bill of Rights in 1789 the standing Army (created in 1784) was extremely small and the founding fathers realized the need to call on local militia troops should the country face another threat from a substantial foe. In 1812 the opportunity presented itself:  Source: http://www.weegy.com/?ConversationId=BA44DE6B                                                         “The United States was not prepared to prosecute a war, for Madison had assumed that the state militias would easily seize Canada and that negotiations would follow. In 1812, the regular army consisted of fewer than 12,000 men. Congress authorized the expansion of the army to 35,000 men, but the service was voluntary and unpopular; it offered poor pay, and there were few trained and experienced officers, at least initially.[61] The militia objected to serving outside their home states, were not open to discipline, and performed poorly against British forces when outside their home states. American prosecution of the war suffered from its unpopularity, especially in New England, where anti-war speakers were vocal. “Two of the Massachusetts members [of Congress], Seaver and Widgery, were publicly insulted and hissed on Change in Boston; while another, Charles Turner, member for the Plymouth district, and Chief-Justice of the Court of Sessions for that county, was seized by a crowd on the evening of August 3, [1812] and kicked through the town”

Obviously, today’s times are much different and I seriously doubt that the founding fathers would have even considered this type of amendment if there had been a well-funded, substantial Army.

But I need weapons to protect my family. Well apparently they do not in other countries.   Also, consider that of the murders in the U.S.A. where guns are involved 30.2 % of these are committed by friends, acquaintances and/or family. This represents many more than the total murders in most other 1st world countries!

 

We are so smart, aren’t we? (Our changing knowledge base)

Education, Just for Fun, Perspectives

Chapter 27 We are so smart, aren’t we?  (Our changing knowledge base)

Why we “think” we are so smart

I suppose that every generation, since the dark ages, views their existence as being at the peak of civilization and with good reason. We have progressed in many ways since those times. However, I suspect that the residents of Rome during the hay day of the Empire felt the same enthusiasm for the state of their civilization. We now know that times can change sand so can the level of civilization. I’m sure we think we have far surpassed the achievements of the Greeks & Romans, and in technological terms this is probably true. In terms of architecture and engineering there are still structures about which we are still “scratching” heads. There are many examples, but one is the quality of the concrete that they used. Much of it is still structurally sound after thousands of years and yet we have sidewalks that are crumbling after fifty!

During my formative years (50s & 60s) I was so happy to have been born during “modern” times and gave little thought to progress. Looking back it seems that those days were a bit “dark” compared to today. The rate of progress and change is accelerating. Many accepted physician practices of only 100 years ago seem like voodoo now. And yet, those seeking help with their ailments put their faith in these practices. I wonder what our view will be 50 years from now when we glance back in time. There has been more technological, transportation, information availability & communication advancement in the last 50 years than in thousands of years prior. There is every reason to believe that we will continue to advance significantly and perhaps at an accelerated rate in these areas in the next 50. Are we smart now or will we be smart then?

There is substantial evidence that earlier civilizations new that the earth was round and that we were part of both a solar system and a galaxy. A few examples                                  are: The Mayans, the Sumerians, the Egyptians and the Greeks (there were more).

As recently at the 15th century the accepted dogma was that the earth was flat and the center of the universe. So which civilization was wiser?

At the risk of antagonizing my Creationist friends, their view that the universe is only about 6,500 years old was the accepted dogma only a few hundred years ago. Despite scientific evidence to the contrary there is still a significant portion of the population in our country that holds to that “belief”. Because it says this in the Torah it must be true. Keep in mind that the Old Testament was strictly an “oral tradition” for over 3,000 years and was first penned by Moses in 1313 BCE.

Historians that view other oral traditions that are submitted to paper at a later date consider these as myths or legends. I find this interesting. Sumerian cuneiform was scripted as early as 3,900 BCE and speaks of a history which goes back tens of thousands of years (if not even more). There are Egyptian Hieroglyphs that date prior to the written version of the bible. They speak of much earlier times and the many gods that influenced their civilization. Myths or Legends?

“Even the smartest of us don’t know much”