Blog Archives

Remembering Gun Violence Victims

10/30/2019

On June 12, 2016 a deranged murderer entered the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida. He killed 49 and injured 53 more. People who were having a fun evening out. People not used to the power of guns, or the sickness of individuals wanting to use them, or the horror of violent death. People who, through no fault of their own, were mowed down or who survived a situation that will impact them in various ways the rest of their lives.

Now one of the owners of the nightclub is leading an effort to develop a memorial and a museum. The memorial is promised to be a “sanctuary of hope” honoring the lives lost, the other victims, families of victims, survivors, first responders, and involved health care professionals. The museum’s goal is to educate and inspire, to “start conversations that will change mindsets.”

Who could argue against such noble goals? Certainly not I. Nevertheless, the project has its detractors, some saying a museum where items are sold is inappropriate.

I have reservations also, but they arise from a different point of view. Over the period of a couple of weeks my local newspaper included the following headlines:

23-year-old man killed in Mercy Drive shooting
Woman injured in shooting in Winter Park neighborhood
Man injured in shooting after argument at west Orlando pool hall
2 people, suspect injured after shooting outside west Orlando home
1 dead, another detained in east Orange domestic shooting

At this rate, spread over a year, the local shootings would mount to well over 100. The actual figures are more dire. Statistics report at least 358 people were shot and killed in Orlando during a five-year period stretching from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018. Another 687 were injured. That’s a 209 average per year!

As I’ve mentioned in an earlier post, the heartache and trauma and long-term problems associated with each of these undoubtedly are as severe as for the victims of mass shootings. But we’re immune to the daily reports where “only” one or two are victims. We read the headlines and move on to the sports section. It takes the murder of a dozen or more to catch our interest these days and ignite the concern for survivors, to initiate fund raising and counseling efforts, to recognize the heartbreak, to start to talk about a memorial.

It got me thinking. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the memorial honored all victims of gun violence? In a way that emphasizes the threat to civilization of our unchecked love affair with guns. Sort of like the Ann Frank house in Amsterdam deals with the horrors of all victims of Nazi extremism and prejudice in any form.

This may well be a part of the goal of the proposed memorial, but what I’ve read shows the main concentration is on the victims of the tragic Pulse shooting. And if that’s what is created, so be it and I will honor it with the respect it deserves.

Suppose, though, that the roughly $45 million expected cost is indeed employed to create a memorial honoring all who have died or been injured by guns. Wouldn’t that be an even greater legacy of those who died or were injured at Pulse?

0 Comments

College Education—Part 1

10/23/2019

1 Comment

I’ve spent a large part of my life concerned with college and university education, what it is and what it should be. My university had a provost once who expressed the radical idea that everything the school does should enhance the education of students. I’m not 100 percent in agreement, but I believe it’s a worthy guide when making decisions about a school’s path. This is the first in a series I expect to produce over time.

Today’s subject has been motivated by the recent push to allow star college athletes to earn money for endorsements, an NCAA no-no. California recently passed a law granting such permission and I believe my state will take it up in its next legislative session.

The arguments in favor include the following. Colleges, the NCAA, and others are making billions off the backs of those poor slobs who are getting nothing. It is consistent with a free-market philosophy. It is an injustice when a person is not allowed to reap the benefits of capitalism. And it’s okay for a music or other type of major to do endorsements.

Critics’ objections include the following. There are very few “stars” that companies would pursue. And let’s face it, such stars most likely would not be on the volleyball or rowing teams. Athletes already are receiving reimbursements worth tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in free college tuition, books, healthcare and everything else other students are scraping for.

This all relates to the importance we place on college sports, and I wonder how they satisfy the provost’s demands for an education relationship. Before I’m attacked for such radical thoughts, let me assure you I understand these activities increase recognition of the school. This in turn generates funding not only for the main athletic programs, but also for the minor sports and, indeed, the university as a whole. Furthermore, student and alumni interest is fostered and this is only for the good.

In fact, I find, in spite of myself, an interest in how my university’s (the one where I taught—none of the schools I attended had a football program) team is performing. So perhaps in what follows I’m being hypocritical.

Most colleges, including mine, discuss the student athletes on the teams. Is that a fair designation? I think it is if the school is Harvard, Yale, MIT or any of many others. At these schools, students are admitted on their intellectual ability and then decide to go out for a sport. But you don’t see their teams often appearing in bowl games. The schools that do earn bids to those contests admit students talented in sports based on their athletic ability, and then they decide to sign up for classes (or more truthfully, they are forced to, another pesky NCAA rule).

As I’ve said, football and basketball may build a school’s name recognition which results in increased enrollment, increased donations, increased exposure across the board.

But is it education? Should it be a part of a university’s mission? I don’t think so. I know how difficult it is to get a college degree, even when one has time to devote to studies. I’ve seen hundreds of students take on jobs to finance their education. I’ve had long talks with many who were having difficulty getting the grades they wanted. I told them how hard it is to attend while working, something I did in graduate school for seven years, and that one should expect grades to suffer when a quarter or more of their free time is lost to work and associated travel.

So how can we expect a football player to do well in his courses given the exhausting workouts they endure? Here’s a typical day at one major school during the football season.

5:00-6:00 am: Eat breakfast, pack for day.
6:00-8:00 am: Strength and conditioning training.
8:00-8:30 am: Team meeting.
8:30-9:00 am: Shower, go to class.
9:00 am-2:00 pm: Classes, lunch.
2:00-2:30 pm: Watch game film.
2:30-3:15 pm: Get taped before practice.
3:30-6:00 pm: team practice.
6:00-7:00 pm: Shower, training.
7:00-7:30 pm: Dinner.
7:30-9:30 pm: Academic support.
9:30 pm- 12:00 am: Homework.

Notice only five hours are set aside for sleep, a respite that comes at the end of a day involving 7.25 hours of football activity, much of it strenuous, and 4.5 hours of academic study outside the classroom (it they can stay awake). So what’s the priority here? Assuming this schedule works for five days a week, 22.5 hours are devoted to academics for the week. I often told my students getting a degree is a 60 hour per week job, counting 15 hours in class.

Now I don’t want to paint all athletes with the same brush. Some truly are excellent students. I am doubly impressed by their accomplishments given the rigor of their sports requirements. I’ve known several. And I’ve known others who think they’re hot stuff. I had one who, when he claimed he just couldn’t attend any of six times set aside for a final in a huge class, said, “You don’t really care about the fact I’m an athlete.”

Look, I know big deal college sports are here to stay. Please, though, don’t try to convince me the activity is educational. Nor is it education for the vast majority of the athletes. Because I fear they are not receiving a good training, one that will provide them comfortable lives when the exhilaration of the sport season is over for the final time.

1 Comment

Can't Trust Scientists—Really?

10/16/2019

2 Comments

If scientists can’t predict hurricanes with perfection, how can we trust them to accurately forecast the extent of climate change?

I haven’t actually come across an argument based on this question, but it would be no more foolish than many of the denials of the man-aided destruction of our planet. It’s exactly the kind of anti-science “analysis” we have heard so much on this controversial subject that should be non-controversial.

Let’s take a look at it and see if there’s any merit to such a contention.

What is it the hurricane experts are doing?

They analyze the data available to them and, based on that information and their expertise, predict the most likely track a storm will take.
They recognize their projections have no guarantee of perfection, so they provide an indication of the potential error of their forecast.
They gather additional data.
Employing the new information, they apply it to the latest situation and update the forecast accordingly.

I can hear the climate deniers pointing out how much a forecast can change over the life of a hurricane, and there is no reason to expect a prediction of a future earth to be any more accurate.

But would an argument like this have any merit?

Not really!

Let’s see how climate researchers have attacked the subject.

Preliminary investigations are made and, based on the data accumulated and the expertise of the researchers, they formulate a theory.
When they can’t be precise on all repercussions, they may, for example, provide ranges for possible sea water or average temperature rise by a certain year.
They gather additional data.
Incorporating these data into currently known information, the theory is updated.

Notice that the steps are pretty much the same as for weather forecasting. Because that’s how science works. So why don’t our deniers have a point? Why should we believe in climate change when we can’t accept an early path of a hurricane?

Here’s the difference.

The updated information in the case of hurricane prediction often points to deviations in the previous path and the scientists report it with honesty.

The updated information in the case of climate change prediction verifies the findings of the past and the scientists report that with honesty. Perhaps they might modify some of the earlier points such as amount of sea level rise. But the key is that in this area the new information does not show significant variation from previous research. The evidence is irrefutable: Our planet is changing for the worse and human action bears great responsibility.

The conclusion on a hurricane’s path changes because new evidence requires reinterpretation.

The conclusion on climate change remains unaltered because new evidence supports the previous theory in study after study.

In both cases, the conclusions based on revised information reflect the true situation. In both cases the scientists are being honest.

Why is it so hard to accept?

And as far as the future of the earth is concerned, it will be harmed much more by ignoring the results of climate change than by the devastation of any one hurricane.

2 Comments

Grandparents

10/9/2019

4 Comments

There must be something special about grandparents. I hear so many friends speak lovingly of theirs. Some of the younger ones look forward to reuniting with them during the holidays or throughout the year. Many of my students requested understanding because a grandparent was ill or had passed on. In fact, I think some of them had about 20 grandparents, their requests arose so frequently. Many books I read develop special relationships between a character and his or her grandchild.

I’m envious. I never knew a grandparent. Not one of the four possibilities!

My mother’s mother died during her birth.

My mother’s father couldn’t handle it and farmed her out to relatives. He lived until I was in my mid-teens, but I heard not a word about him until he died and left mother enough money to buy a Plymouth.

My father’s father was ostracized because of some extracurricular activity and I never heard anything about him. I’m not sure where I learned the salacious information.

My father’s mother is a complete mystery to me. I can’t recall a single word ever mentioned about her.

There are others that might have filled the void. Great Aunt Annie, for example, who lived in Worcester, Massachusetts in her small home with a refrigerator cooled by a daily delivered block of ice. But we made the 200 mile visit only once a year and a relationship never developed.

There was Great Uncle Arthur, from whom dad’s middle name came, who ran a Boston restaurant where my father bussed. But by the time I met him and wife Alice, in my teens, they were incapacitated and near death’s door. I don’t know why it took so long to be in their presence because I don’t believe there was any animosity.

So what did I know about grandparenting when I became a grandfather to a wonderful baby girl, my only grandchild? Not much.

We were separated by distance for most of her childhood, so I saw her sporadically. It has been easy to love her. She was adorable as a child, clearly intelligent, and fun loving. Now a young adult, she is beautiful, amazing, and still fun loving. When we are together we have a wonderful time.

But neither of us is good at maintaining communication over the thousands of miles that still separate us. Far different from many of my friends who dote on their grandchildren.

I think I’ve missed out on a type of relationship that seems to be truly special to so many. From both ends. As a child and as an older adult.

It gladdens my heart when I hear talk by others of their grandchildren and the activities they share. And by younger people of their grandparents and the activities they share.

Yes, I am happy for their pleasure.

And wistful.

4 Comments

Compromise

10/2/2019

2 Comments

Politically I’m suffering. I live in a state where both houses of the legislature and the executive branch are controlled by Republicans. Until the 2018 election the same was true at the national level. The ruling party has operated in a take no prisoners mode, saying my way or the highway.

The problem is that the views of half the country are ignored.

This feeling has galvanized us, made us angry, motivated us to fight back.

Most of us think the only solution is to replace the Republican control with a Democratic (not democratic) one.

Let us suppose a miracle happens and this change actually occurs. What will result?

Will it be our turn to be dictatorial, to pass our legislation and the rest of the nation be damned?

If that’s what’s done, half the country, as now, will feel disenfranchised. It’s just the other half.

And that half will be galvanized, angry, and motivated to fight back.

I want to make clear and have so stated previously in this space, I can think of nothing more important than ridding the country of our current president. Removing the rigid, heartless, and cruel members of Congress making up so much of the opposition would also bring me joy.

However, if my party obtains control, I don’t want it to act like Republicans.

Certainly, I want it to push the priorities that make it appeal to so many.

However, I want it to recognize that it is not omnipotent, that it doesn’t have the answers to all questions, that there are people of good heart with different views.

I want it to be willing to question its beliefs and to search for ways in which giving up some of our goals encourages a like response from the other side.

What’s an example? How about the national budget?

I look at things in a simple-minded way. My family must spend no more money than it has. My parents, who lived through the Depression and conceived me in its midst, instilled in me that simple tenet. I have lived by it all my life and I cannot understand how the same rule doesn’t apply to a nation. My God, I’m sounding like a Republican!

I know a lot of smart people say spending more than we take in is good for the economy. I took an economics class in college. The text was written by Paul Samuelson, a professor there who was the first American to win the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences. The text said annual deficits were a good thing. I didn’t understand it then and I don’t understand it now. I’ve heard the same mantra repeated by others over the years including quite recently.

However, I think there currently is recognition on both sides of the political spectrum that the debt is getting out of hand. Unfortunately, everyone talks a good game but both sides are willing to spend and spend to get what they want.

Is anybody ready to say enough is enough, let’s pitch in and each side give up some of its agenda so as many important goals are reached as possible within the confines of a balanced budget? Our side may have to delay Medicare for all, free college tuition, and other stated goals. The other side may have to reject its love of tax cuts and its obsession with boundless increases in defense spending.

A few of the many other areas demanding compromise are healthcare, student debt, reasonable regulatory policy, humane but strict regulation of immigration, climate change, and infrastructure.

Please don’t ask if I see hope for any of this because I don’t want to sound negative.

I know many will say the other side will never compromise, a stance difficult to contradict because of recent history. Be honest, though, does the same assertion apply to us?

In a hopeful sign, I do see a willingness on the part of some younger elected officials on the Democratic side to work with their Republican counterparts on some issues.

It’s a start.

2 Comments

Remembering Gun Violence Victims

College Education—Part 1

Can't Trust Scientists—Really?

Grandparents

Compromise

Author

Archives

Categories