Hadiya’s Wound Cried Out ~ Revised

This is a revised version of the April 15th post. Additional information has been added. (Note: The Constitutional Carry Law referred to here did not make it out of the Senate in SC. However, the SC Legislature did pass a law allowing concealed weapons in bars and restaurants.)

The New York Times’ blogger, Joe Nocera, has been running a feature column on his blog at NYTimes.com. He calls it “The Gun Report” and it contains a daily selection of gun violence news reports. There’s a daily report Monday through Friday and then a cumulative weekend report. It makes for sad reading. Unfortunately, we must rely on the media for our data on gun violence because the government doesn’t provide a centralized data repository. Oh, they have a piece meal system of reporting that they manage to gather the minimum data with and if you search, you can similarly piece together the data. But as far as actually having a real database to rely upon, the NRA and the GOP have effectively legislated to prevent it. Legislative restrictions placed on the CDC bans them from doing certain research on gun violence and the GOP provision that made creating an ATF director a Senate confirmable position has resulted in seven years with only a part time temporary ATF director. As a result, there is no centralized and/or standardized means of reporting nor are current gun laws effectively enforced. We do have a sense of how many people die from firearms in the aggregate, but the information that we need—the details that would allow us to approach gun violence as a systemic problem rather than an individual one—is simply unavailable. The human cost as well as the attendant fiscal and social costs of gun violence can be alleviated by approaching the problem as a public health issue. However, we don’t have the data necessary.

If you’re wondering about my credentials and whether or not my facts are accurate, then I applaud you. I will soon be posting more information on gun violence and reform. While I am not an epidemiologist or strictly speaking a social scientist, I do have years of experience and am well-trained as a researcher with critical thinking skills on par with any social scientist. I have spent the past two months immersing myself in the scholarship, research, opinion, law, history, and data dealing with gun violence, injury, crime, and reform. I know more about the effects of firearms as tools of destruction and as touchstones of ideology than I ever wanted to know. I know the ins and outs of the NRA and enough details about firearm manufacturers to make me dislike Wayne LaPierre even more than I already did. I have been and continue to scour the crime pages of every major newspaper in South Carolina daily for news reports involving guns and keep a record of gun violence by clipping those pages into a software program. I supplement that with several news alert systems that pull reports of items that contain both “South Carolina” and “gun” or “shooting” within the text. The people who know about this project frequently send me emails alerting me to news that they’ve heard, articles they’ve read, or news they’ve seen on television.

So, since I’m not an epidemiologist, sociologist, or in a related field that would make my gun violence research a logical choice, the next question would be why am I researching gun violence and even more so, why am I researching it so thoroughly and with such passion. In response, I’d say that there are a lot of reasons, but oddly it wasn’t Newtown that was the instigating factor, although ultimately that tragedy became one of the reasons. Of course I was pained and horrified by the events in Newtown. The tragedy of those beautiful lives lost weighed on my soul, as did the losses that they made me remember—the many children lost daily in the frequently violent urban areas and whose loss is mostly quiet and unremarkable. Certainly their deaths are not national news and they do not occupy the national consciousness for months. And yet they are no less precious in spite of our negligence, those of us who are privileged enough to not live in areas where gunfire is part of the soundtrack of our lives and where waiting at a bus stop can be as dangerous as Fallujah. Nor are they less precious for the lack of economic or pigment or race privileges that typically has so much to do with whether your environment is filled with the cacophony of bullets or the lullaby of crickets and so this is why the first of the two instigating factors moved me to action. In spite of my personal depression, the death of Hadiya Pendleton added another wound to the injured social fabric of the world we live in, the one that is so filled with acts and words of violence. I knew then that I needed to do something, to fight back against those who would continue to flood our world with instruments whose sole purpose is to cause death. Yes, violence exists, but guns make its execution so simple and easy. So just as I imagined that I had caught a glimpse of Hadiya marching proudly in her uniform during President Obama’s second inauguration, I also imagined her body ripped through with the wounds made by the bullets that stole her precious future. While Sasha and Melia joked with each other on a day that was an immensely happy one for me and probably an absolutely amazing one for her, I was certain that I had glimpsed her and her bright future through the tv screen, just as I would later hear the all too familiar story of how she was in the wrong place at the wrong time and imagine the scene of her death, the cries of her friends, the ringing out of the gunshots and how in that moment and smallest of actions, a squeeze of a finger, a young life and promising future was extinguished. The words “wrong place, wrong time” should not apply to a school or walking home from school or at all. The wounds and the words were crying out. Those wounds that ended Hadiya’s life cried out to be heard; they cried out for a voice. The wound in our social fabric demands a voice.

My other reason for engaging so vigorously in this fight relates to several pieces of legislation introduced in the SC General Assembly. The passage of this legislation would weaken South Carolina’s already lax gun laws and likely increase the already high levels of gun violence in the state. The most extreme of these is still under consideration. This lovely piece of “constitutional freedom” legislation was proposed and is sponsored by Senator Lee Bright from the Upstate (he of the Personhood Amendment and Tea Bagger Party renown) who is also, by the way, involved in sponsoring and co-sponsoring several bills that would essentially nullify federal laws. South Carolina and nullification? Hmm, haven’t we already deja-ed that vu? I don’t remember it turning out so well for us the first time. Anyway, Senate Bill 151 “The Constitutional Carry Act” would essentially do away with the concealed carry law in South Carolina. But wait—you haven’t heard the best part! He’s not suggesting that it’s a bad idea for people to pack heat with a concealed carry permit. On the contrary, the right good Senator Bright thinks that anyone should be able to carry a gun anywhere without having to get a license or conceal their weapon and that carrying the gun should only be against the law if they are carrying it with the intent to commit a crime. Wow. Unfortunately, I’m pretty sure that the intent part won’t be clear until they actually commit the crime. There’s a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting this Tuesday afternoon and the subcommittee will be submitting a report with, I assume, their recommendation. I will, of course, be in attendance. I have every intention of posting further information after the meeting to share what I’ve learned. I’ll also be posting information from the policy brief that I’ve been working on. Much of that information will be useful for anyone who is on the fence regarding the proposed gun control legislation or who would perhaps like to know more than the shallow information product provided by the majority of the media. In fact, some of the information that I’ve heard is factually incorrect and reads like NRA talking points. To a degree this is Wayne LaPierre’s strategy. He seems crazy and overwrought even cruel in his reactions to Newtown (or that is my perception) at the very least, he is performing a bit of a spectacle and as a result we are paying attention to him. His rhetorical strategy relies upon attention and repetition. It is a cheap form of persuasion. Repeated false information heard and then repeated over and over by news media, even if it is repeated with questions of its validity, and mixed in with other information becomes so entangled that it is difficult to remember the source and its credibility. And so it is that we innocently integrate the fictions and manipulations of the pro-gun lobby and the gun manufacturers that they represent. In a future post, I’ll even go into how they shifted the way we as a society interpret the Second Amendment leading up to the Heller which opened the door for NRA sponsored legislation in the form of more relaxed concealed carry laws, guns in restaurants and bars, Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws, and so on. If you’re unfamiliar with those, I’ll fill you in soon. Look forward to my next informative post and the history of gun violence and gun reform in the US and abroad.

And finally, here is Joe Nocera’s blog, excerpted from my Scoop,it account (which I’ve done very little with, but here’s hoping) which unsurprisingly only contains a Gun Reform collection at the moment.

See on Scoop.itGun Reform

handgun

One of the problems with guns is that there are too many people who simply don’t take seriously their killing potential. Either that or they don’t care. Either that or they don’t care. Last Friday, for instance, a woman named Mary Frances Alday, 61, went into a Walmart in Crawfordville, Fla., and when she got to the checkout line, demanded that the store redeem a “dollar off” coupon she procured online. She became furious when told the store would not honor Internet coupons, and after lashing out at the store clerk and other Walmart employees – and hurling a shopping cart at them – she went to her car, where she pulled out a loaded Smith & Wesson .38 Special and waved it in the direction of the Walmart staff. After she fled the parking lot, Alday was pulled over by the sheriff’s department and charged with four counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Here is today’s sampling of gun violence.

Two teenagers were shot in the back at the Delmont Village Apartments in Richmond, Va., overnight. Police found one teen in a stairwell in the apartment complex and the other half a mile away in another complex. The first victim told police he was robbed; the second victim couldn’t remember if someone put him in a car and drove him away. They are being treated at a hospital.

News 12

… [eight more excerpts from news articles discussing multiple incidents of gun violence are omitted here. See more on Nocera's blog.]…

According to Slate’s gun-death tracker, an estimated 2,474 people have died as a result of gun violence in America since the Newtown massacre on December 14, 2012.

See on nocera.blogs.nytimes.com

Share the love!

Hadiya’s Wound Cried Out

The New York Times’ blogger, Joe Nocera, has been running a feature column on his blog at NYTimes.com. He calls it “The Gun Report” and it contains a daily selection of reports of gun violence in the media. He has a daily report during the work week and then he does a weekend report. It makes for sad reading. Of course, we must rely on the media for our gun violence data because there is no truly centralized means of reporting. Oh, they have a piecemeal system that they manage to gather the minimum data with, but because of restrictions placed on the CDC regarding the research that they are allowed to do and the lack of a permanent ATF director these past seven years, there is no centralized and/or standardized means of reporting. We do know how many people die from firearms in the aggregate, but the information that we need—the details that would allow us to approach gun violence as a systemic problem rather than an individual one—is simply unavailable. The human cost as well as the attendant fiscal and social costs of gun violence can be alleviated by approaching it as a public health issue. However, we don’t have the data necessary.

If you’re wondering about my credentials and whether or not my facts are accurate, I understand. I will soon be posting more information on gun violence and reform. While I am not an epidemiologist or strictly speaking a social scientist, I am an extremely experience and well-trained researcher with sharply honed critical thinking skills. I have spent the past two months immersing myself in the scholarship, research, opinion, law, history, and data dealing with gun violence, injury, crime, and reform. I know more about the effects of firearms as tools of destruction and as touchstones of ideology than I ever wanted to know. I know the ins and outs of the NRA and enough details about firearm manufacturers to make me dislike Wayne LaPierre even more than I already did. I have been and continue to scour the crime pages of every major newspaper in South Carolina daily for news reports involving guns and keep a record of gun violence by clipping those pages into a software program. I supplement that with several news alert systems that pull reports of items that contain both “South Carolina” and “gun” or “shooting” within the text. The people who know about this project frequently send me emails alerting me to news that they’ve heard or articles they’ve read or news they’ve seen on television.

So, since I’m not an epidemiologist, sociologist, or in a related field that would make my gun violence research a logical choice, the next question would be why am I researching gun violence and even more so, why am I researching it so thoroughly and with such passion. In response, I’d say that there are a lot of reasons, but oddly it wasn’t Newtown that was the instigating factor although it was one of the reasons. Of course I was pained and horrified by the events in Newtown. The tragedy of those beautiful lives lost weighed on my soul as did the losses that they made me remember—the many children lost daily in frequently violent urban areas whose loss is mostly quiet. Certainly their deaths are not national news and they do not occupy the national consciousness for months, and yet they are no less precious in spite of our negligence, those of us who are privileged enough to not live in areas where gunfire is part of the soundtrack of our lives and where waiting at a bus stop can be as dangerous as Fallujah. and nor are they less precious for the lack of economic and pigment and race privilege that typically has much to do with whether your environment is filled with the cacophony of bullets or the lullaby of crickets and so this is why the first of the two instigating factors moved me to action. In spite of my personal depression, the death of Hadiya Pendleton added another wound to the injured social fabric of the world we live in, the one that is so filled with acts and words of violence. I knew at that point that I needed to do something to fight back against those who would continue to flood our world with instruments whose sole purpose is to cause death. Yes, violence exists, but guns make its execution so simple and easy. So as I imagined that I had seen Hadiya while I watched the second inauguration of President Obama while Sasha and Melia joked with each other on a day that was an immensely happy one for me and probably an absolutely amazing one for her, I also imagined her body ripped through with the wounds made by those bullets and in that moment and smallest of actions, a squeeze of a finger, a young life and promising future was extinguished. Those wounds that ended Hadiya’s life cried out to be heard; they cried out for a voice. The wound in our social fabric demanded a voice. The research and what I am able to say and write as a result gives them a voice—one that is strong and confident. Continue Reading →

Share the love!

On Chasing the Right “Zero”

As usual Merlin Mann is spot on. Rather than trying to attain the arbitrary goals espoused by productivity “gurus” (bit of irony here, as many would consider Mann to be one, but I am referring to folks like Ferris and Allen), we should focus on actions that enable us to do the work that we love. Productivity should focus on being productive in the generative sense—creating. Too often productivity turns into being good at being busy, doing many necessary but meaningless tasks and never producing, generating, creating. I’ve found that the key to gaining anything useful from time management tools or philosophies or systems like Inbox Zero is to keep in mind two important things. First, they are tools and thus should be used towards creating or repairing. In this case, their purpose is to assist me in managing all of the competing interests making demands on my time and energy thus opening up more time and resources for doing work that matters. They are not an end but a means to an end. I say this because it is all too easy to get caught up in the pleasures of accomplishing tasks and (if you’re a geek like me) playing with the toys ehrr, uhm tools of productivity and GTD. This brings me to my second point: don’t let productivity become a substitute for being unproductive. In other words, sometimes engaging in the work you truly love and care about is terrifying and when you finally break down the barriers between yourself and that work, giving you unfettered access, the freedom turns to fear. It’s easy to obsess over perfecting your productivity techniques or getting every single thing done to the extent that you avoid actually doing the work that you love. Sure it sounds counterintuitive, but love makes us do the whacky. And, as it turns out, that bit of Buffy philosophy holds true for platonic as well as romantic love. So, there you have it. I have a pretty intense digital workflow these days and I’m definitely using some fancy toy/tools but at least these days I’m pretty sure I’m chasing the right zero.

merlin:

Not to be all “Merlin Mann” or anything, but, maybe somebody will find this useful.

I was recently asked to talk about how I think about the infamous Inbox Zero these days, and here’s what I said:

Read More

Share the love!

Signal Versus Noise: Why Academic Blogging Matters

Signal Versus Noise: Why Academic Blogging Matters: A Structural Argument. SAA 2011

Share the love!

Apple 1976

pbsthisdayinhistory:

April 1, 1976: Apple is Founded

On this day in 1976, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, and Ronald Wayne founded Apple, a business dedicated to selling personal computers.The three founders worked in Jobs’ parents’ garage and developed their first product, Apple I. The following July, Apple introduced 200 personal computers to the market and sold them for $666.66. 

Throughout the years, Apple has gained its title as a global leader in the consumer electronics industry due to its iconic products such as the iPhone, iPod, iMac, and iPad. 

In 2011, the world had to say goodbye to Apple’s leading force – Steve Jobs. Take a moment to remember the life of Steve Jobs with PBS NewsHour’s special report

Image (from top to bottom): Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs (Tony Avelar/Bloomberg via Getty Images), An early Apple Macintosh computer c. 1981 (Bertrand LAFORET/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images)

Share the love!

Poetry Bomb! National Poetry Month

tumblr_mkkuvnSpUL1s8k9l8o1_1280
poetrybomb:

Abrams Books and Tumblr are celebrating National Poetry Month with a month-long Poetry Bomb! Join us by reading, reblogging, submitting your own poetry, or meeting us IRL on April 30th at Housing Works Bookstore Cafe.
*Note: You need to click on the image to initiate to gif. It’s a great “poetry bomb.”
Share the love!

Mark Kelly calls for background checks to curb gun violence

See on Scoop.itGun Reform

CBS Local

Mark Kelly calls for background checks to curb gun violence

Mark Kelly, the husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the lawmaker who was wounded in a gun attack, on Monday called for universal background checks for private sales of guns during testimony in Colorado.

Los Angeles Times

Kelly and Giffords have previously said they plan to lobby strongly on state and federal levels for laws to address gun violence. Kelly, a former astronaut, testified before the Colorado Senate’s State, Veterans and Military Affairs committee, which is considering tougher legislation. The Colorado proposal requires all private gun sales to be subject to background checks.

Kelly, who stressed that both he and Giffords own guns, said that such checks would be “a small price to pay” to prevent guns from falling into the hands of those who are dangerous.

See on latimes.com

Share the love!

visinfocat:The Creative Process

visinfocat:

The Creative Process

The Creative Process

Share the love!

Rachel Maddow talks ‘Hubris’ with Ed Schultz and David Corn

Rachel Maddow talks ‘Hubris’ with Ed Schultz and David Corn – The Maddow Blog

The Ed Show on MSNBC

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Share the love!

TV stations: default passwords are no protection against zombie apocalypse

TV stations learn that default passwords are no protection against zombie apocalypse

| The Verge

Share the love!

Post Navigation