There IS a Middle Ground. We’re Not All Whack Jobs.

***The only thing I ask on this one is that you hear me out to the end. This is a difficult thing to discuss because it’s such a polarizing topic, and I almost didn’t post this, but I put on my Brave Hat and here it is. I will happily answer any questions you may have to the best of my ability.***

Okay, let’s talk about something that’s been in the news this week. Normally I keep politics, religion, and current events well out of this thing, but I have a horse in this particular race, and I’m sick and tired of being silent because of the threat of instant vilification for sticking my neck out and saying:

I am a gun owner.

You read that correctly. I own firearms. I know a number of you who read this know me personally, and you may not have known that fact. There is a reason for this. I am fully aware that I have a ‘hot-button hobby’. I usually only discuss it with people who have a) known me since time immemorial, or, b) share the interest. This is because I know guns make people uncomfortable, and as a basically decent human being, making my friends and acquaintances uncomfortable is pretty high up on the list of ‘Things I Don’t Like to Do’.

Let’s start with a little history, shall we? My maternal grandfather served in the United States Navy in WWII and Korea as a Gunners Mate (First Class at time of honorable discharge). This is where he initially learned the trade of gunsmithing. Post-Navy, he worked in the automobile industry for a number of years, then returned to gunsmithing later in life and worked at that until he couldn’t any more. Firearms have always figured in my life. I was taught to respect them, how to handle them safely, and, as I got older, how to operate them.

Shooting is a hobby. I mostly shoot shotgun sports like trap, and occasionally skeet or sporting clays. More recently, I’ve forayed into fixed targets with handguns and rifles.

My firearms were all acquired legally, and they and their corresponding ammunition are stored and maintained in compliance with applicable regulations.

I follow the rules.

I have no intention of doing harm to anyone.

I don’t even hunt. I took the hunter’s safety course as a teenager, passed the test, and was duly licensed, but I could never bring myself to actually take the life of an animal. To this day, I am strictly a target shooter.

Now, this last week, yet another school shooting was perpetrated. This is bullshit. It. Should. Not. Happen. Somewhere, the system is broken. I’m no law expert, so I won’t even begin to try to fathom where the disconnect is, but it is abundantly clear that the regulations currently in place are insufficient for keeping firearms out of the hands of persons intent on doing harm.

Do I think the solution to this is to do away with firearms completely? No, I don’t.

Do I think the solution to this is stronger and more enforceable regulations? Yes, I do.

There are so many solutions being offered by gun owners like myself (!) who are suddenly — finally — speaking up to say, “Hi, we’re here, we exist, and we want to find a reasonable solution. Here are our ideas.” They vary in stringency and application, but the consensus is that we’re sick and tired of a few zealous assholes absconding with the focus of this discussion.

We’ve had it.

We’re tired of being vilified the instant we say we own and appreciate firearms, but we’re also finished allowing the fear of vilification to keep us quiet. I’ve encountered more like-minded individuals in the last week than I ever have before in the whole of my life, and that is affirming and comforting. For a long time I’ve felt like the lone voice in the wilderness, except I was the lone voice that didn’t actually say anything for fear of the backlash.

It’s that whole rock vs. hard place thing.

So, here’s my two cents regarding firearms regulations in general. Do with it what you will.

You know that whole driver’s ed/driving test/driving license/car registration/smog checking/maintenance thing? That’s a pretty solid model. We’ve been using it for a very long time. Here’s a novel idea: Why not apply it to the ownership of firearms? No one really does that much bitching about doing it for their cars, so why not? I mean, some sort of every-other-year-like-a-smog-test safe firearms handling exam is really just another opportunity to go to the range and shoot, which is the fun part.

Longer waiting periods to be able to take your new firearm home from the dealer? Not really as big a deal as some people have tantrums about.

More stringent background checks? Um, yes, please.

More stringent penalties for persons found not complying with registration regulations? DUH.

No one but law enforcement and military personnel needs a higher capacity magazine than ten rounds. Period. End of discussion. That is plenty for range shooting, which is the only kind of shooting (besides hunting) that a hobbyist should be doing. (Also, if you’re hunting with a military-style rifle, you’re doing it wrong. It doesn’t make you a badass. It makes you a dumbass.)

I will readily admit that I am on the fence about the banning of firearms like the AR-15. If we can get the regulations and enforcement right, we shouldn’t have to. However, I will say that if and when they are banned, I will surrender mine without hesitation. My hobby is not worth more than the pursuit of the preservation of human lives. There is a subgroup who believe that no civilian should have a military-grade weapon for hobby purposes, and I certainly see their point. Military-grade weapons — and all firearms — are manufactured with a sole purpose: to end a life. You cannot argue that that isn’t the primary function of a gun. Is the AR-15 fun to shoot and simple to handle? Absolutely. That also makes them alluring to the jerkoffs who decide to go out and take lives — and that is a major tally mark in the ‘Cons’ section.

I feel the need to note that the only reason I have an AR in the first place is because it was meant to be a sort of bonding project with an ex-boyfriend (a military veteran) — we were planning to build them together. After we split, I had all these parts sitting around, and I thought, “Well, why not?” So I built it. By myself. It was a fun, interesting, challenging project, and I am proud of the result. I can look at it and say “I did that.” That’s not nothing. But it’s also not something I need to have. It does not define me in any way. I have no particular sentimental attachment to it, as I do to some of my other firearms because they were reworked by my grandfather who passed away last year, and they were his legacy to me. (If I am ever forced to surrender my Remington 1100 12-gauge, I will actually cry. That is a fact.)

Let’s not even start on the other big problem facing legislation change for firearms — the private interests trying to sway things in the political arena. The NRA gives me a case of the screaming heebie-jeebies. They don’t have my interests at heart. I don’t think they even have their interests at heart, or that they know what the interests are that they’re trying to protect apart from SHOOT ALL THE THINGS WITH ALL THE THINGS BECAUSE SECOND AMENDMENT. I’m not sure there’s a heart to be found there. I bet on NRA poker nights they only use three-quarters of the deck.

Look, I could keep going on this topic for ages, but this post is getting long so I’ll spare you and instead wrap up with a concise-ish list of ‘Elizabeth’s Personal Thoughts and Feelings About Firearms’:

1. There are rules. FUCKING FOLLOW THEM AND STOP WHINING. Gun ownership is a PRIVILEGE, 2nd amendment or no.
2. Firearms are, in essence, very dangerous toys. I do not say ‘toys’ to be flippant. They are not necessary to life for the vast majority of people. It is highly unlikely that you NEED to have one of any variety. Do you own a ranch in Colorado and have to keep predators away from your cattle to protect your livelihood? Then you, my friend, NEED a firearm. Do you live in suburbia with low crime statistics and within reasonable distance of a police station? You do not NEED a firearm. You can have them for recreational purposes within the confines of THE RULES noted in #1 above.
3. When you own or handle a firearm, KEEP IN MIND THAT YOU ARE DEALING WITH A MACHINE SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUCTED TO KILL. Think about the implications of that statement. DON’T FUCK AROUND.
4. “Ban everything” and “ban nothing” are not viable models for gun control. A middle ground needs to be forged. Are you someone who thinks about this issue in a similar fashion to me? Great! Talk about it. Get evangelical, whatever floats your boat. AND FUCKING VOTE. We’ve been silent on the sidelines too long.
5. Even if you don’t own firearms, educate yourselves and your families in the event that you come into contact with one at some point. You don’t have to like or even agree with something to understand it, and if you understand it, you’re better able to deal with it should the need arise.
6. For the zealots: KNOCK THAT SHIT OFF. You’re making the rest of us look bad.
7. For the sick fucks shooting at children, or anyone else, for that matter: There is a special place in Hell for you. I hope your journey there is fraught with terror.

‘I’ Before ‘E’, Except After Some Idiots Who Didn’t Proofread

Last week, a friend handed me a packet from her daughter’s first grade teachers which contained a sweet little assignment. [Kid] was going to be the ‘Super Star’ of her class for the week of February 12th and was instructed to compile a little booklet of interesting things about herself.

“Look at the photos [kid] chose to use, they’re so cute!”

Because I’m the indulgent sort (and this particular six-year-old is my BFF and I love her), I gave the photos and drawings and whatnot a cursory flick-though, but what caught my eye IMMEDIATELY was a glaringly obvious error on the first page of the packet — you know, the one containing the instructions for the assignment. From the teachers. Notice I say teachers. This class has two teachers who split the week. Two teachers. That’s twice the opportunity to spot things like typos on materials being sent home to parents.

One error by one teacher I would excuse. We’re only human, after all. But once I spotted the first error, I went on the hunt and turned up oh, so many more!

I would like to point out that the people who generated and distributed the instruction page for this task are both credentialed teachers. These are the people we entrust with the education of future generations. If this is the quality of work they’re sending home to the parents, we can only assume that the instruction they are providing to the vulnerable little minds they oversee every day is of the same caliber — in this case, not good.

Allow me to elucidate. The errors include the following:

Spelling/Incorrect word usage:

• “Supper Star” rather than “Super Star”
• This was the big one that sent me down the rabbit hole.
• “mourning” rather than “morning”
• I’ll lay odds that first-graders aren’t dropping like flies and necessitating a daily moment of silence at the start of class.

Singular/plural discrepancies:

• “Your child may bring a favorite book, special award or mementos, and one favorite toy.”
• ‘award or memento’ or ‘awards or mementos’ One or the other, all singular or all plural. You can’t have one of each!
• “Your child may draw pictures, use photographs or magazines pictures to complete the attached pages.”
• ‘magazines pictures’? No.
• Also, this sentence as a whole is awkwardly structured and needs to be revised…

Other errors of note:

• Continuation of underlining of text to include the period at the end of a sentence.
• Period incorrectly enclosed within quotation marks.
• Missing apostrophe — “...it is [city] Unified School Districts rule that…”, should be District’s. It is the rule of the school district, and therefore possessive.
• Missing Oxford comma. This is, of course, a formatting choice. However, the Oxford comma is regularly used throughout the rest of the document, therefore for the sake of consistency it should be employed at all times.
• I could also mention the fact that a deadline for the assignment is given, however, it is not appropriately specific. The instructions, dated 01/26/2018 (a Friday), state that the “packet should be completed and brought to school by Monday.” (There’s that underline I found annoying.) Excuse me, but do you mean Monday the 29th, the Monday following the issuance of this assignment? Or Monday the 12th of February, the first day of the week that [kid] is scheduled to be the class “Super Star” as noted at the beginning of this sheet of instructions? Specificity, people!

That’s a total of ten errors in a 324-word document, written and looked over by two credentialed instructors.

Personally, I find this appalling. The simple fact that these teachers think it’s acceptable to send out first-draft-quality anything in the first place is grating, but since it’s happening I find myself fervently hoping that it’s the result of laziness rather than ignorance. Dear holy heck, please tell me these teachers are aware that they’ve made errors, and would be aware of what those errors were once confronted with them. Please. Otherwise I may have an actual coronary.
 
The thing I find even more appalling, though, is that no one is calling these teachers on their shit. If my child were to bring home something as poorly composed as this from their teacher, you’d better believe I’d be red-penning the fuck out of it, sending it back, and CC-ing the administration.* These are the people we send our youth to for six hours a day in the hope that some of their (presumed) knowledge will rub off on the little ankle-biters. We have to trust that these people know what they’re doing, and when it appears that they don’t, something needs to be said. No one but the teachers benefit from being complacent about this sort of thing. They half-ass everything and collect a paycheck, and we end up with poorly educated progeny. Something is very wrong with this picture.

I asked my friend if she was planning on calling the teachers on the carpet about the quality of this particular set of instructions, knowing full well that she spotted most of the same things I did. She was shocked that I would even think of doing something like that.**

So, here I sit, being livid on her behalf, and on behalf of her daughter and the rest of her class who are being taught by a pair of incompetents.

Parents: Read the stuff your kids bring home. Really, truly read it. Don’t let this kind of thing happen on your watch! Your kids deserve better.

Teachers: Proofread. Edit. Get a second set of eyes. The kids deserve a teacher who knows what they’re doing. You look like a complete moron when you send things out with blatant errors. Also, you’re damned lucky I don’t have any kids, because I’d be the first one to blow a gasket about something like this.




*My mother did this with shocking frequency during my school years, and at some point I started to do it myself. Yeah, I was that kid.
**Ultimately, my friend did circle “Supper” and “mourning” before sending the kiddo back with her homework. I still wish she had let me send back my edits, but never mind...

Tim from Marketing is a Liability

This past Monday morning on my commute to work, I saw a thing.

It was a shiny thing.

It was on top of another car on the road.

It was a miniature LED billboard.

“Excuse me?”

Yes, you read that correctly. There was a little light-up billboard on top of a car on the road next to me. Not even a surface street, mind you, but a four-lane freeway.

Here in the Golden State, it is illegal to use your cell phone without a hands-free device and drive at the same time. I bring this up because cell phones are another shiny thing with lights. Now, this law was put in place to help prevent distracted driving and thereby (hopefully) reduce traffic accidents etc. One would think that if five-inch screens of brightly lit information are a contributor to the distraction of motorists (and they are!), that a significantly larger screen with scrolling, lit-up information placed atop a moving vehicle would quite likely be even more of a distraction.

It’s not just me, right? If you’re driving to Grandma’s house and watching an ad for non-stick cookware on what is basically a mobile television — no matter where it’s positioned — I think it’s reasonable to assume that you’re probably not also paying attention to the road and the other cars on it.

Question time: “Who thought this was a good idea?!”

Someone in marketing, obviously. Probably Tim. That guy is a hot mess.

“Guys! Know what would be great? Light-up billboards — on top of CARS!”

Settle down, Tim. Think that idea through. 

• Does it exist in a format that is new and exciting and eye-catching?
• Absolutely!
• Will it put your product in front of more people and generate interest?
• Yes, it will.
• Is it, I don’t know, safe?
• ::cricket noises::

No, Tim from marketing. No, it isn’t. On Monday, when I first encountered one of these vehicular advertising abominations, I was immediately distracted from what I was doing, which was, you know, driving, which really requires one’s full and undivided attention. It went something like this:

“What the ever-loving fuck? You’ve got to be shitting me. WHY?! Oh, crap, other cars.”

I didn’t even manage to properly see what the advertisement was for, either. I was too busy realizing that I couldn’t both look at the scrolling screen and not cause an accident at the same time. There’s flaw number one in this particular marketing campaign. It doesn’t matter how nifty your new publicity gimmick is if the people it’s targeting (motorists, apparently) can’t see what’s being marketed to them, or, in extreme cases, die before they can purchase the product because the advertisement caused them to plow headfirst into the back of the eighteen-wheeler in front of them.

Not good for publicity, Tim.

And speaking of publicity, think about all the press the marketing firms will get once their immensely distracting car-top billboards start to become the cause of auto accidents? It ain’t gonna be the good kind of press, I tell ya what… And, of course, since as a society we seem to be very fond of the concept of ‘guilt by association’, it follows that companies choosing to use this method of product pushing will receive a portion of the blame, too. Hell, they’ll probably be the first ones to have their HQ overtaken by the torch-and-pitchfork crowd...

“We will now hear opening arguments in the case of Joe Schmoe vs. CarTop Billboards, Inc.and Plumbers-r-Us.”

Litigation isn’t a good look on anyone, Tim.

I suppose I shouldn’t really be surprised at this new development in product placement. Ads are everywhere now. You can’t escape them. They’re on the sides of the roads you drive, the web pages you read, the buildings you pass, the backs of the receipts you get, the fronts of the receipts you get, in your email inbox, plastered anywhere they can think of on public transportation… I mean, ridesharing is a thing now, why not capitalize on that? Your Uber now has scrolling ads on top of it for the new sushi joint downtown, the most recent Bond film, and H&M. This Lyft ride brought to you by Taco Bell, Pier 1, and Lowes!

It might make sense to have ads on top of cars for automotive-related products and activities. Dealerships and body shops and the like, and commercials for Nascar and Formula One or whatever. ‘Follow me to your next oil change!’ ‘Free tire rotation if you come in to Wheel Works and say you saw this sign and didn’t rear-end someone while reading it.’ ‘Does your car look as shitty as this one? Consider donating it to Kars-4-Kleptomaniacs! Or don’t, because they’ll already have made off with it.’*

It might make sense, but it still doesn’t make the car top LED mini-billboard a good idea. Unless the vehicle sporting the ad is stationary at some sort of event, it’s distracting and dangerous. I would hazard to guess that if we see these start to become commonplace, we will also see restrictions slapped on them, as there have been with cell phones. Naturally, the advertising companies will search relentlessly for loopholes, but what can you expect, really? As long as the product moves off the shelves or the service is being used, they get paid. “So a few people got into fender-benders, so what? Not our problem. We just make the signs and then make them seem like a good idea. Beyond that, it’s out of our hands!” Because what really matters ultimately is the bottom line, right? Anything for a dollar. Gotta bring home the bacon — no matter the cost.

At least we’ll see an increase in job opportunities for public relations professionals and corporate lawyers.

Dammit, Tim.




*I’m starting to wonder if I missed my calling. Clearly I should have gone into copy writing...

If It Ain't Broke...

Reboot:
verb — to produce a distinctly new version of (an established media franchise, as a film, TV show, video game, or comic book)
noun — a distinctly new version of an established media franchise

The current film and television studio and publishing bigwigs seem to be subscribing to the following philosophy*:

I don’t think I need to tell you how hard they’re trying.

In recent years there has been an exponential uptick in the woeful cries of, “Why must you destroy everything I love?!” in reference to the plethora of ‘new and improved’ iterations of popular film, TV, and comics franchises. We’re on our third re-telling of the Spiderman saga, DC Comics is firmly ensconced in its New 52 universe, and you can’t turn on the idiot box without finding something you’ve seen before, except with different actors and an updated setting. Words like ‘gritty’ and ‘edgy’ are commonplace in the press blips for these do-overs, presumably with the intent of branding the shows or films as ‘old favorites for a new time’.

I have one question, and I think it’s a valid one: Why?

We could cite all that Platonic business about the first chair being the only true chair and all others being representations and therefore not actually chairs, and thereby fall back on the argument that every story there ever was has already been told, and therefore anything that comes off the presses or out of the final edits is just a rehash to begin with. While there may be a certain degree of truth to this, it’s no reason to use it as an excuse for a disinclination to at least try to rustle up something with a modicum of original thought.

We could cite the popularity and success of the most commonly rebooted storylines and say ‘Well, they’re just giving the people more of what they want.’ The drawback to this line of reasoning is the old adage about too much of a good thing — if you inundate your audience, after the initial euphoria they’re going to wander off to other things because when something gets predictable it gets boring, no matter how much you may love it.

We could cite the human animal’s natural aversion to change. We gravitate towards the comfortable and familiar, so if something is recognizable enough while still having the allure of ‘Oooh, shiny!’ the likelihood of it drawing an audience is higher than something that looks new and scary.

These are all sound enough reasons for business and marketing purposes, but they’re complete cop-outs on the creative end.

“Fine, then. You try to turn out something creative and original on a regular basis and keep people interested and make money at the same time!”

I fully realize the difficulties facing entertainment media on the creative front, I promise. I have enough trouble banging one of these posts out each week. The thought of having to create a world from scratch and then make it interesting enough to run for a season of twenty episodes is a daunting one. Here’s the thing, though — there are people (Whole groups of them! Working together!) who have the job of making these things happen. One assumes they got those jobs because they were at the least marginally creative and clever. However, it’s hard to believe that when all they seem to manage is taking some pre-existing thing, running it through the metaphorical meat grinder, and slapping some dystopian paint on it. And maybe adding a few zombies… well, maybe not so much any more. It looks like zombies are on their way out. (Possibly because there’s no decent brains around to eat anymore, but that’s a story for another time.)

So where’s the disconnect? When did media (paper-based, televisual, or otherwise) cease to be a fantastical breeding ground for new and exciting ideas? I’m not sure. Were they ever really one to begin with? Or were they, at the time of inception, simply new and exciting means through which to tell all the stories we already knew and loved? It’s possible. Or — unpopular opinion — did we just get lazy? ‘This format works, let’s apply it to as many things as possible until people start to notice.’ Sadly, I think this might be at the very least a portion of the case.

Indulge me for a moment while I draw an example. Battle Royale (2000) took a group of children and pitted them against each other in a fight to the last man. Okay, creepy, but reasonably inventive at the time. Fast forward eight years to a new book series, The Hunger Games. Similar in concept, though with more obvious and explored political overtones. Two more books completed the series, and a total of four films (2012, 2013, 2014, & 2015, separating the final book into a two-part saga) were released. A rehash, but different enough to be enjoyable, apparently. (Look, I made it through the original Battle Royale and from that experience learned that my generalized anxiety disorder would not tolerate further entertainment of that ilk.) Here’s the real kicker, though. As early as 2006, New Line Cinema proposed an American adaptation of Battle Royale. In 2012, that remake had to be abandoned because of the Hunger Games franchise.

Now, the first thing I think, here, is “Thank goodness they had the sense to know when to surrender!” The second thing I think, though, is “The original was released in 2000. They were gearing up for a remake six years later? Six years?! The body of the original was still warm, for fuck’s sake!”

I know not everything is remade with this sort of astonishing rapidity — take for example True Grit, the original film released in 1969 and the new version in 2010. I suppose 41 years is long enough to wait if a film has to be remade, but I still don’t see what was so wrong with the original that anyone would stand up in a production meeting and say “I know! We should re-do a John Wayne movie! It’ll be fun!”

I know I can moan about this until I’m blue in the face and it won’t do any good, but it’s just one of those things that makes me stand back and say, “Really, guys? Really? The first one ain’t broke.”




*Meme and life advice brought to you by The Red Green Show (1991-2006). God bless the Canadians! ***This post brought to you by the fact that I recently learned that a remake of The Thin Man was launched by Warner Bros. but has been stalled in development since 2012, and I am very pleased, because Johnny Depp is absolutely not a substitute for William Powell and I can’t stand the thought of one of my favorite films being manhandled by today’s Hollywood!!!***