Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Fitness Kickboxing...to the death!
Most of the time in Fitness Kickboxing and JKD 1, I'm one of the more advanced students when it comes to basic boxing. I spend a lot of time working on THEIR form and their feeding technique. But not last night.
There is a girl--she has twins, is "girl" a wee bit condescending??--who comes to the dojo in spurts. She happens to have great legs, a friendly disposition, and a black belt in Muy Thai. Her smile is arresting. Big and honest, she has one tooth in the front row that juts at a precarious angle. Is it a simple renegade tooth making trouble for her brothers and sisters or the result of something vicious, a punch she had for breakfast early in her training or an oopsie, a clutsy mistake we all make, like walking into a pole or it could be the scar of her own personal trauma. The smart money is on the knuckle sandwich.
She-- Oh that's right, she's not JUST a black belt, she passed an instructor level examination. Regardless, I haven't worked with her in at least nine months. When it comes to feeding, it's pretty easy to sit on your heels, get a little too comfortable with beginners. Not with her, I was fighting for my life. She wasn't out to kill me, she's just that good. She has speed, she has intent, and she seemed to lean forward a little.
I couldn't tell if that's what she was doing or the way she carried her head, I was too preoccupied with not getting hit! In fact, during one of the two other times I've fed for her she whacked me twice, once in the eye, once in the mouth. This made me feel tentative. I grabbed my mouth guard at the first opportunity.
"Mouth-guard? You don't trust me?"
"No." And no disrespect was intended, just the opposite. Her punches are straight, and if you ain't ready you will get popped. Despite being a little scared--scared of a girl yes, I admit it--I want to work with her again. She pushed me from both directions, and offered the occasional constructive criticism.
"When you bob and weave, look at my chest." Now there's something you won't hear a woman say very often. I kept this observation to myself.
There is a girl--she has twins, is "girl" a wee bit condescending??--who comes to the dojo in spurts. She happens to have great legs, a friendly disposition, and a black belt in Muy Thai. Her smile is arresting. Big and honest, she has one tooth in the front row that juts at a precarious angle. Is it a simple renegade tooth making trouble for her brothers and sisters or the result of something vicious, a punch she had for breakfast early in her training or an oopsie, a clutsy mistake we all make, like walking into a pole or it could be the scar of her own personal trauma. The smart money is on the knuckle sandwich.
She-- Oh that's right, she's not JUST a black belt, she passed an instructor level examination. Regardless, I haven't worked with her in at least nine months. When it comes to feeding, it's pretty easy to sit on your heels, get a little too comfortable with beginners. Not with her, I was fighting for my life. She wasn't out to kill me, she's just that good. She has speed, she has intent, and she seemed to lean forward a little.
I couldn't tell if that's what she was doing or the way she carried her head, I was too preoccupied with not getting hit! In fact, during one of the two other times I've fed for her she whacked me twice, once in the eye, once in the mouth. This made me feel tentative. I grabbed my mouth guard at the first opportunity.
"Mouth-guard? You don't trust me?"
"No." And no disrespect was intended, just the opposite. Her punches are straight, and if you ain't ready you will get popped. Despite being a little scared--scared of a girl yes, I admit it--I want to work with her again. She pushed me from both directions, and offered the occasional constructive criticism.
"When you bob and weave, look at my chest." Now there's something you won't hear a woman say very often. I kept this observation to myself.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
They go boom 3
I find it interesting that most of the perps in this month's rage-a-palooza had gun permits. What is the procedure for the renewal of a gun permit. How often does one need to renew it? Have these permits helped law enforcement in anyway? (after the fact at least, they've proven impotent as preventative measures)
There are a whole lotta tough questions to ask and no one wants to ask 'em. There isn't a gun debate. There's only a sideshow of horrors followed by mass disavowal, a few tepid calls for reason, and then nothing. Nothing at all until the next heartbreak.
Someone please make the badman stop.
PS--
there are two books on school shootings I'd really love to read:
Columbine (written over a 10 year period by a journalist with roots in Littleton)
and Why They Kill, a text heavy on criminology and the patterns and aberrations that propel someone to think of mass murder as the logical thing to do.
There are a whole lotta tough questions to ask and no one wants to ask 'em. There isn't a gun debate. There's only a sideshow of horrors followed by mass disavowal, a few tepid calls for reason, and then nothing. Nothing at all until the next heartbreak.
Someone please make the badman stop.
PS--
there are two books on school shootings I'd really love to read:
Columbine (written over a 10 year period by a journalist with roots in Littleton)
and Why They Kill, a text heavy on criminology and the patterns and aberrations that propel someone to think of mass murder as the logical thing to do.
The puppy takes no prisoners
Poor Radar. A demon has crawled up his anus with the goal of turning his butt into an honest to God environmental disaster. He''s had--I believe the phrase is---the squirts most of the day, punctuated with a puke, about an hour ago. Radar barf is particularly troublesome, not because it's super chunky or hard to clean, just that it usually reminds me of the Orange Julius drinks I had as a child. A fuzzy childhood memory turned into dog vomit. Yum!
Poor guy even whined a little when he puked. This is the 2nd time in two weeks he's had tummy trouble. As far as I know he's only eating dog food....as far as I know.
Poor guy even whined a little when he puked. This is the 2nd time in two weeks he's had tummy trouble. As far as I know he's only eating dog food....as far as I know.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
They go boom 2
In the end, after most of the shoddy rhetoric has been kicked to the cub, you're left with the 2nd Amendment. I'm not gonna bother quoting it, but the debate itself revolves who the amendment says has the right to bear arms, the nature of the arms, and how that right is fulfilled. I'm sure there's more, much more, than those three issues, but these are ubiquitous.
How you read the 2nd Amendment is often determined by judicial philosophy--at least for judges and lawyer types. As for me, when it comes down to it, I just don't see how regulation infringes upon one's 2nd Amendment rights. Nor do I see how banning particular kinds of guns does this, when citizens still can make a purchase from a wide variety of legal fire arms. I don't understand why the process of owning a gun isn't like the process of acquiring a driver's license. You begin to learn, then you get a permit, you learn some more, then you get a license. This would foster responsible gun ownership and emphasize the point that a gun isn't magic, it's a powerful tool, and owning one means understanding what it can do. Yet, if I suggested this on a right wing blog I'd be tarred and feathered. I'm a genuine survivor of sexual violence and torture, which was facilitated by the fact our attackers were armed with guns, and I STILL can't relate to the paranoia some gun owners feel about home invasions and robbers and blah blah blah. It doesn't matter how many lives are ruined, snuffed out all hail the holy gun. Sigh.
How you read the 2nd Amendment is often determined by judicial philosophy--at least for judges and lawyer types. As for me, when it comes down to it, I just don't see how regulation infringes upon one's 2nd Amendment rights. Nor do I see how banning particular kinds of guns does this, when citizens still can make a purchase from a wide variety of legal fire arms. I don't understand why the process of owning a gun isn't like the process of acquiring a driver's license. You begin to learn, then you get a permit, you learn some more, then you get a license. This would foster responsible gun ownership and emphasize the point that a gun isn't magic, it's a powerful tool, and owning one means understanding what it can do. Yet, if I suggested this on a right wing blog I'd be tarred and feathered. I'm a genuine survivor of sexual violence and torture, which was facilitated by the fact our attackers were armed with guns, and I STILL can't relate to the paranoia some gun owners feel about home invasions and robbers and blah blah blah. It doesn't matter how many lives are ruined, snuffed out all hail the holy gun. Sigh.
Monday, April 6, 2009
They go boom
Nasty weekend. Not for me personally, but there were several mas murders this weekend. Several. As in more than one.
I hate guns. I really do. Before the incident I vacillated between frustration and surrender with gun laws. Then the West Virginia massacre happened...then the rape, torture, assault extravaganza of G and Me pretty much entrenched the idea of gun control within my own system of ethics.
I spent a chunk of time this weekend reading articles about the different mass murders: the Asian immigrant who lost his shit, the death of several police officers by a Neo Nazi twat, and the suicide/homicide of a man who shot his children and himself after discovering his wife was leaving him. This is the slow burn of sudden madness. Each case was really a culmination of disturbing behavior and hard economic times.
These incidents have renewed debate over the efficacy and necessity of gun laws. I've looked at dailykos blogs and comments, the comment section of whatever article I'd read, and I tried to take a step back from the articles themselves, look for patterns of...whatever meme, myth, or political stripe.
Just a few observations about the "pro-gun" rhetoric. These are paraphrases:
1. Guns don't kill people. Poeple kill people.
2. Guns are a tool
3. Cars kill more people than guns.
4. It's mostly gangs killing each other (haven't heard this one in a while)
5. 2nd Ammendment. Nanny nanny boo boo.
I'm sure there are more but I wanted to focus on these in particular. Within the rhetorical matrix, a major strategy by NRA types (and some moderates) is to diminish the role of the gun. After all there are lots of things that kill more people than guns" cars, planes, cancer, AIDs, cancer of the AIDs, and AIDs cancer. (In respect to cars I'm not convinced, but for the sake of argument I'll accept it). All of this might be true. It is also true that guns are a tool, if one says guns are inherently evil you could be construed as engaging in puritanical evil: objects, have no souls or intellects, cannot make decisions, etc. And gangs?? I think that's racist b.s nonetheless the function is to diminish the role of the gun.
So here's my problem with this line of reasoning. A gun has one function: to kill.
The sloganeering of the NRA is specious at best. A gun isn't designed to make donuts or change the tv channel from ESPN to Bravo. Nor is it intended as a nonlethal deterrent, that is at best a secondary, and more realistically a tertiary ability, once you factor in the fragility of human flesh and the unpredictable nature of bullets. (The real secondary attribute is intimidation, fear of death).
Yes, there are things that take more lives than guns, this is because a) they are simply more effective at killing (nuclear bomb, AIDs) or b) their ability to kill is the ole law of unintended consequences (cars).
Cars may kill a lot of people, but we have preventative measures ranging from seat belts and airbags, to that magical thing called a driver's license, which certifies a base level of competency--physical and mental-- while assisting law enforcement in holding drivers accountable.
And yet guns remain a highly effective means of killing with no real system of checks and balances behind them. 50% of all guns sales occur at gun shows which manage to circumvent all federal regulation---more than one high school shooter has purchased firearms at these events.
Getting close to dojo time, think the next time I write about guns the topic will be the 2nd Amendment.
I hate guns. I really do. Before the incident I vacillated between frustration and surrender with gun laws. Then the West Virginia massacre happened...then the rape, torture, assault extravaganza of G and Me pretty much entrenched the idea of gun control within my own system of ethics.
I spent a chunk of time this weekend reading articles about the different mass murders: the Asian immigrant who lost his shit, the death of several police officers by a Neo Nazi twat, and the suicide/homicide of a man who shot his children and himself after discovering his wife was leaving him. This is the slow burn of sudden madness. Each case was really a culmination of disturbing behavior and hard economic times.
These incidents have renewed debate over the efficacy and necessity of gun laws. I've looked at dailykos blogs and comments, the comment section of whatever article I'd read, and I tried to take a step back from the articles themselves, look for patterns of...whatever meme, myth, or political stripe.
Just a few observations about the "pro-gun" rhetoric. These are paraphrases:
1. Guns don't kill people. Poeple kill people.
2. Guns are a tool
3. Cars kill more people than guns.
4. It's mostly gangs killing each other (haven't heard this one in a while)
5. 2nd Ammendment. Nanny nanny boo boo.
I'm sure there are more but I wanted to focus on these in particular. Within the rhetorical matrix, a major strategy by NRA types (and some moderates) is to diminish the role of the gun. After all there are lots of things that kill more people than guns" cars, planes, cancer, AIDs, cancer of the AIDs, and AIDs cancer. (In respect to cars I'm not convinced, but for the sake of argument I'll accept it). All of this might be true. It is also true that guns are a tool, if one says guns are inherently evil you could be construed as engaging in puritanical evil: objects, have no souls or intellects, cannot make decisions, etc. And gangs?? I think that's racist b.s nonetheless the function is to diminish the role of the gun.
So here's my problem with this line of reasoning. A gun has one function: to kill.
The sloganeering of the NRA is specious at best. A gun isn't designed to make donuts or change the tv channel from ESPN to Bravo. Nor is it intended as a nonlethal deterrent, that is at best a secondary, and more realistically a tertiary ability, once you factor in the fragility of human flesh and the unpredictable nature of bullets. (The real secondary attribute is intimidation, fear of death).
Yes, there are things that take more lives than guns, this is because a) they are simply more effective at killing (nuclear bomb, AIDs) or b) their ability to kill is the ole law of unintended consequences (cars).
Cars may kill a lot of people, but we have preventative measures ranging from seat belts and airbags, to that magical thing called a driver's license, which certifies a base level of competency--physical and mental-- while assisting law enforcement in holding drivers accountable.
And yet guns remain a highly effective means of killing with no real system of checks and balances behind them. 50% of all guns sales occur at gun shows which manage to circumvent all federal regulation---more than one high school shooter has purchased firearms at these events.
Getting close to dojo time, think the next time I write about guns the topic will be the 2nd Amendment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)