Guns: Its up to you

         

Take your pick.

 

   The ownership of guns has become a large issue in both America and most other areas of the world. It recently occurred to me that I have reached the age where I could legally own a firearm of my own. My current living condition, living in a college dorm, does not permit owning a deadly weapons, but it is still an interesting thing to consider. The question then turns from a,”could I?” to a “should I?” kind of question. Is it ethically right for me, or anyone, to own a firearm with the expressed purpose of it being used for self-defense purposes? In order to answer this question, I looked at several of the potential societal effects guns may have and the potential consequences of owning one, and attempted to find facts regarding these things to solidify my own opinion. Unfortunately, the information I found was very conflicting.

            The first thing I looked at was the effects of guns may have on crime rates. America, has the highest gun crime rate in the world, and I was interested on the effects of privately owned guns on the crime rates of areas in America. At first I found, to my initial surprise, that areas with higher concentrations of gun owners had statistically lower gun crime rates than areas of similar population with fewer guns. Later, I found various other studies that showed statistics showing that areas with much strict gun laws, and thus fewer guns, also showed lower rates of gun crimes. I then checked out foreign countries, of similar socioeconomic status of the United States, to see if one of these two trends is more common than the other. Unfortunately, even in foreign countries both trends were still present. I also attempted to find some sort of link between gun ownership and an increase in mass murders, hoping to find something solidly for or against guns regarding an extremely negative situation. This too was unclear, as gun numbers may or may not contribute to higher mass murder rates depending on what studies are examined.

            After my inability to find conclusive evidence regarding the relationship between crime rates and private gun ownership, I looked at something that could affect my choice regarding gun ownership in the far future; this being the effects guns in the home can have on the lives of children. In this facet of my research, I found more concrete agreement on the issue. One study I looked at by Judy Murnan, from the Deptartment of Public Health in the University of Toledo, stated that number of guns in an area was the only consistent factor in the raising of childhood gun deaths in America, while other information showed that children exposed to guns while young are more likely to be a part of a gun related accident than those who were not. Interestingly, this information seemed to run counter to my own life experiences. I lived in a rural area where gun ownership was common, and was taught strict gun safety lessons in order to ensure I would never have any sort of gun accident. Thus far I have never had a gun related incident, which made it difficult to accept childhood gun accidents as a foregone conclusion of gun ownership rather than as the result of improper gun safety, or irresponsible gaurdians.

            The Information I have found  seems to show both positive and negative effects of guns. The real question for those seeking gun ownership is not necessarily, "is it ethical?", but rather “are you ready to take responsibility?”. Owning a gun means there is a risk to the safety of others in your home, but only if you are careless with it. Another factor to be considered is that in the case of self-defense are you willing to take responsibility for the life of another person, attacker or otherwise,? If someone is willing to take responsibility for their gun and the actions they may have to commit with it, as well the risks to safety that a gun may entail, then they have every right to own it. There is nothing inherently unethical about owning a gun, there is however something ethical about how someone plans to use a gun. So really the choice comes down to how much you trust yourself and your own judgment. I personally cannot decide whether or not I will or will not own a gun in the future, but if I do it will be after fully weighing the risks and with full knowledge of how to be a responsible gun owner, I feel that everyone should do at least that.

Anyone Got a Moment for Our Dark Lord and Savior Cthulhu?

 

 

All ages fun.

         I feel that most people, at least in my generation, have heard of the fictional mythical creature known as Cthulhu is, at least in passing. He’s that weird, squid dude who is apparently supposed to be scary, but is usually just used as part of tired internet memes. The origins of Cthulhu are actually from the American Author H.P. Lovecraft, considered by some to be the father of the modern horror genre, starting with his short story The Call of Cthulhu. Obviously, the point of the character is to be spooky as possible, Lovecraft was trying to sell stories, but as I have stated before nobody really finds it scary anymore. Unfortunately this is not because people have grown out of their fear of what goes bump in the night but rather out of ignorance of what Cthulhu actually is.

He's just misunderstood...Probably

            Cthulhu is not supposed to be scary like other monsters. It is not some creature from the black lagoon knockoff who plays off your fear of drowning. It is not like modern urban legend Slenderman, who plays off the human fear of being alone in the dark. It most certainly is not like all the various movie monsters that are only scary because they can kill you in really gory ways. Cthulhu is not scary because of anything it can do to you, and it is not supposed to be. The real fear Cthulhu is supposed to inspire comes from what it represents. Cthulhu is scary because it is unstoppable. In a world where mankind stands as the top of the food chain we are not even dust before Cthulhu. Nothing we could ever possibly do can ever hope to stop it, and the worst part is that it doesn’t even hate us, it kills simply because that is what it does. In the face of the existence of a something so terribly beyond humanity’s grasp of power, that cannot be reasoned with, stopped, or even comprehended what other alternative is their but to be driven insane?

How long has it been there?

            I am completely aware that everything I just said was not in the least bit actually scary, because at the end of the day Cthulhu is still just some imaginary squid guy. What I want you to do now is take every time I said the word, “Cthulhu”, in the previous paragraph and now substitute it with the word death. That is why Cthulhu is actually frightening, because it appeals to the fundamental human fear of death. I am not referring to the act of dying, very few people are afraid of the act of dying, but rather the fear of knowing that death exists. There is always a chance at any moment we could die. Nobody knows exactly how they are going to end up dying. It could happen on the way to the bus stop next Tuesday, in a home robbery that that you were not supposed to be there for, or maybe one night we all will simply not wake up. Death comes to all equally and without prejudice. Young or old, rich or poor death is beyond caring about what something as insignificant as a human life has to offer before it snatches someone up. Living with the constant realization that at any moment our stories might suddenly end would be maddening, so in order to cope we force death out of our minds. We trivialize it into some far off event that all life must eventually experience, something that is not to be feared but to be accepted graciously. Cthulhu is the concept of death that cannot be ignored. It is death right in front of you in all its weird, squidy glory, so real and intense that it cannot be rationalized away or ignored. Cthulhu is scary because it is the dilemma of accepting the unacceptable which can only lead to madness, well that and squids are in fact just plain spooky.



The Horror!



Not Found



Add caption

         For some people researching their own “E-Identity” is potentially a very lengthy process. In my lifetime, there have been thousands of new ideas, companies, and services that have appeared online and a lot of people of all ages take part in these conveniences, so I can imagine trying to find every trace of oneself would be arduous. I, however, have had a very easy time looking for traces of myself online. I do not have any presence in the more obvious locations on the internet. I’ve never used any kind of social media site, and while my close friends in high school used social media they were not very into it either, so I don’t appear in any of their posts except for prom photos. Googling myself turned up nothing for the twenty pages of results that I checked, as expected, although there is a Ryan Mueller who is apparently playing pretty good football for the Kansas State Wildcats.

            As far as the internet, at least in the scope of this prompt, is concerned I basically don’t exist. I’m sure that people with better understanding of how to locate information online could find traces of me around the internet, but I doubt that anything that says anything meaningful about my character or personality could be found. I am completely fine with this. I have never really felt like I have been missing anything by my lack of an online presence. It’s not really on purpose; for example, it’s not like I constantly repress myself whenever I go on YouTube so I don’t leave a comment. I just in general don’t feel a need to comment even if I liked what I watched. I am not against putting myself out there online, I just don’t have any reason to want to do it either, this blog being the obvious exception. If anyone wanted to get to know me, then they should just find me and talk to me in person instead of trying to piece together an "identity quilt" from various online sources.

  

 

 

Super What Now?

          

           Look up in the sky! It’s a bird. It’s a plane. No, it’s some random guy in a costume with powers beyond the understanding of mortal men. In layman’s terms it’s a super hero. I am a pretty big fan of super hero comics. I have read my fair share of both classic and modern age comics, and in general I like them both. While I prefer to think of most things in a relatively neutral way, anything can have a negative side if you are looking hard enough, super hero comic books are something that I can say have definitely been an unintentionally oppressive force, even if only a minor one.

            Super heroes did not really begin to appear until the 1930s, specifically 1938 with the first issue of superman. This time period coincides with the ending of the Great Depression and the beginning of World War II. This era is often times called the “Golden Age” of comic books. Most of the big name characters in the Marvel and D.C. comics’ lineups, like Batman Superman Captain America, as well as the classic incarnations of some lesser known heroes, like Green Lantern and the Flash, first debuted in this time period. The comics of the time were very nationalistic, especially after World War Two started. Comics were basically American propaganda for kids, acting as cheap short stories where the obviously good American superhero would triumph over villainous caricatures of the Axis Powers’ soldiers. The number of times Hitler got punched in the jaw by some hero was pretty ridiculous.

 Super heroes at the time weren’t really heroes at all. Yes, they did fight against tyranny and injustice, but it was only the kinds of tyranny and injustice that was defined by the socio-political norms of American society at the time. I think we all can recognize that while the Axis powers governments did some really horrible stuff, the Allies weren’t angels themselves they just happened to be on the side of the angels that time. Superman’s original tagline was a big speech about being faster than a speeding bullet and etcetera, but after comes the more important part where it says that Superman fights for truth justice and the American way, the “and” sticks out to me now. The comics at the time were just so biased and more than a little racist that they’re hard for me to read with a straight face.

            Considering the time period, it’s not really that much of a surprise that super heroes were at the time just extensions if the American national propaganda engine, even the Looney Toons were part of it. It’s just sort of disappointing to find out that something I think is pretty cool originated from using larger than life characters to create an image that America was the most perfect place in the world in the minds of children. This is why I generally prefer to start with silver age comics, like this guy.                                                                      

At this point super heroes stood for truth and justice without getting so caught up in the American Way.

Measuring Up

            Shulasmith Firestone and I would probably not have been friends. Beyond her relative disdain for men, which I find myself as one of, she just is not really the kind of person I could ever see myself getting along with. Her methodology and manners both seem uncouth and extremely rude at times, things that I do not find particularly endearing, and that is ignoring some of her more radical social views.

            I don’t know if I self-identify as a feminist, as I am not a member of any sort of feminist organization, but I am completely behind equal rights for women. I have met many men of similar opinion on women’s rights who dislike the term feminist, because they associate with incredibly radical, man hating, “feminazi” type people, and at first glance Firestone seems to be this kind of feminist. A lot of her ideas are a little hard to swallow. Yes Ms. Firestone, the family structure of your time period did contribute to the lower social position of women by limiting their options for the future, but is destroying the family structure in its entirety really the best choice of action? Some women actually enjoy being mothers as crazy as that apparently is, and I’ve read far too much dystopian fiction to really trust in the idea of raising children in a collective. There are a lot of ideas from Firestone that when only glanced at really seem bizarre and kind of insulting to both men and women.

            While it is pretty easy to get off on the wrong foot with Firestone, her goals are not really the things that I criticize her on. What Firestone wants is the complete freedom of choice and equality for women in the political and social arenas of life. The time period she lived in was remarkably sexist. I mean being booed off a stage is one thing, but being booed off the stage with rape threats is just unacceptable. Given the time period and her restrictive orthodox Jewish upbringing, I cannot really fault Firestone’s more aggressive approach to her goals. Firestone was a person who challenged the entire social order of the time period head on, something I could never bring myself to do. Like I mentioned before I support equal rights for women, and if the equal rights amendment came back around to be voted on I would be for it, but that’s really the extent I would get involved with things. Simply stated while I believe in a great many moral endeavors, I really lack the passion needed to actually help them succeed. Firestone did things that I could never fathom doing myself with an admirable level of passion for her beliefs. Do I even have the right to criticize her methods when I myself would never carry out any alternative actions?

 

            I find Firestone’s attitude to be a little abrasive, and I doubt I would ever be able to hold a conversation with her. She is can rude and has many obtuse sounding ideas that have me shaking my head slightly, but under all those superficial things is a remarkable woman who accomplished more than most do in their lives, because she threw herself passionately into her beliefs. I certainly cannot be her judge when I could not do even half of what she did.

How to Dig Yourself Into a Bigger Hole

            Procrastination, everyone is guilty of it every once and a while. Sometimes you just don’t want to start writing a three page opinion paper even though it would probably only take a maximum of two hours to write. It is definitely smarter to turn in something due Friday earlier if you can, but it also means taking time away from doing something you want to do so you can do something you don’t have to do yet. Simple procrastination like this happens to people all the time, and it is not particularly harmful in small doses. I find such plebian procrastination disheartening. If you are going to procrastinate you need to appreciate the method to the madness. Thus, I have enclosed seven sure fire tips to improve the quality of your procrastination. Following these instructions will undoubtedly leave you scrambling to finish something you should have done ages ago in a professional manner.

1. Be Confident

            Procrastination isn’t for the faint of heart. In order to effectively put off work till the last minute, you have to honestly believe that you can finish as close to the deadline as possible. The less confident the person the more likely they will break down and start working on their assigned task early. You've procrastinated before and it turned out fine, right? That means you can definitely handle doing it again.
 

2.Get Organized.

            Now I know it may seem counter intuitive to organize yourself in order to procrastinate more fully. You are not wrong, if you are planning to organize yourself effectively that is. In order to feed their inner confidence, it is sometimes beneficial for a procrastinator to fool themselves into thinking they are prepared. The key is to put the day which work is supposed to start as close to the due date as possible. Sure it looks like you now have a plan, but in reality this is probably the same amount of time you would have delegated to the task anyways.
 

3. Ignore everything else you have going on.

            This is a pretty self-explanatory but vital part of the procrastinator’s toolbox. When figuring out how much time it is likely to take to do one task, never think about the other things that may prevent you from starting work on schedule. Continue to believe in an ideal existence where nothing will ever distract you, cause what are the chances that more than one thing will be due by Monday, right?

4. Stay up late but don’t adjust your sleep schedule to compensate.

            No I don’t mean stay up late working, I mean just in general stay up later than you should. If you stay up later you will become tired earlier, then lose your motivation to work today, and instead decide to start again tomorrow when you will have more energy.
 

5. Be up for anything.



He was planning to write a blog but...........

 

            Whenever someone asks you if you have time to hang out or help them with something, you are obligated by the ancient tenants of the procrastination bible to fulfill this person’s wish, unless it directly conflicts with the absolute minimum time needed to complete your assigned task.

6. Do the absolute minimum prerequisites.

            This is another potential strategy to boost self-confidence, thus making it easier to procrastinate. Essentially this is like applying skim reading to any sort of real life situation. For example, while doing a biography gathering short trivial facts instead of focusing on your topics whole life. The fact that you have done something towards reaching your goal, regardless of its actual usefulness in the long run, will make it seem like you haven’t been procrastinating at all, making it easy to put off doing any real work.

7. Multi-Tasking.

            In my personal experience multi-tasking only makes things take longer, while making it seem like something productive is happening. I have heard that some people are capable of multitasking effectively, so instead of doing it an effective way you should do it the procrastinator’s way. Instead of actually doing more than one thing at once, try to switch your focus from one thing to another repeatedly. Essentially, it’s like having three YouTube tabs opens on your computer at the same time, each playing a different video. You want to watch all the videos at once, but actually watching them all at once would be chaos. Instead, you can flounder around constantly switching between videos in an indecisive manner. Is this totally inefficient? Yes it is completely inefficient, which makes it perfect for procrastinating.

Sources
http://www.endeavorstoday.com/2011/04/confidence-build-up.html
http://blog.shoeboxed.com/how-to-get-organized-for-tax-time/
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/174725660513689622/
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/177681147771975093/
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/ready-for-anything-keiko-kasza/1112416570?ean=9780399252358
http://www.zazzle.com/minimal_effort_stickers-217261460792414849
http://otomotekno.blogspot.com/2011/06/multitasking.html

 

From gun powder treason to picket lines

            The Guy Fawkes mask is something most people have probably seen, but don’t really understand the significance of. If shown a picture of the mask most people probably know that it is a thing that exists, and if they are more in touch with comic book subculture they might even make some sort of remark about the mask being worn by the titular character in Allan Moore’s classic graphic novel V for Vendetta or the cult classic movie of the same title it inspired. Few make a connection to Guy Fawkes and what it stands for. The mask actually means more than just making someone look like a renaissance era Joker. In fact, the mask has made a complete one eighty degree turn from its original meaning to what it stands for today.

            The Guy Fawkes mask was originally a piece of pro-British government propaganda, created after the failed Gun Powder Plot of 1604. The plot was intended to kill the protestant dominated parliament and king, and replace it with a catholic government. Gut Fawkes, one of the conspirators, was tasked with guarding the gunpowder charges placed under the British Parliament until the time came to detonate them. He was discovered, caught, tortured, and then executed. Afterwards, Guy Fawkes Day, celebrated every year on November fifth, became a celebration dedicated to supporting the Monarchy by burning effigies of Fawkes and wearing masks resembling his face. This practice eventually fell out of practice and Guy Fawkes Day became Bonfire Day. The original masks were meant to demonize those who would rebel against the government through its garish depiction of Fawkes

            The evolution of the symbol came with the movie adaptation of V for Vendetta. The main character, an anarchist terrorist opposing a fascist British government in the near future wears a Guy Fawkes mask to disguise himself. As a promotion for the movie, thousands of free masks were given away and eventually came to reside in dumpsters across the United States. A popular meme on message board website 4Chan called fail guy, featuring a stick figure who fails at everything, comes to wear on of these masks, most likely as a reference to the failure of the Gunpowder Plot. An online, hacking activist group known as Anonymous that frequented the 4Chan message boards is suspected to have seen this and decided to use it as their image during their protests against the Church of Scientology. During this month long protest period, Anonymous members disguised themselves in public by wearing Guy Fawkes masks.

            The mask now is seen to be a symbol of anarchy and protest. From protesting the authority of the government to shady business practices, the Guy Fawkes mask has appeared in thousands of protests in many different countries. It is pretty hard to find a major protest without one Guy Fawkes mask in it; even the Occupy Wall Street movement featured many participants wearing the mask. Guy Fawkes’ image now harkens back to the actions of the Gun Powder Plot Conspirators, as an image of defiance to authority, and as silent threat of revolution when the people are not listened to by the government, while also ignoring the incredibly ludicrous and violent motivations of the original Guy Fawkes. It is sort of weird that the face of revolution and protest in the post 9/11 world the face of a Protestant hating terrorist.