The Elephant In The Room

Maybe it's because I work at a convenience store with firearm keychains, and also because of some of the people in my life (both digital and real), but the gun issue still hasn't really gotten dropped from my sphere of influence. Now, I figure I might as well put my attitude about artillery out there for the world to see -- address the gun-shaped elephant in the room, I guess.

A quick browse shows that this probably isn't a site I'd be interested in,
but here is the source anyway....

I don't want a gun. As far as I'm concerned, the only purpose for a gun is to hurt or kill something, and I have no desire to own one.

That being said, I also don't give a shit if you want to own one. More power to you, own a hunting rifle or handgun. My attitude, though, is that there is no need for a civilian to own a semi-automatic or fully-automatic weapon. People will bring up the Second Amendment, but the gun-crazy folks don't think about part of the problem with that: the Constitution was written in the time of muskets, bayonets, hunting knives and the like. By all means, I support your right to a musket.

When the Second Amendment was written, our war for independence was still fresh in the minds of lawmakers who had either experienced it, or had family who did. The Second Amendment was written when the weapons with which we killed each other were far less efficient.

Really, I just wanted to get that off of my chest. The rare customers that agree with me and thinks our keychains are ridiculous makes me feel a little bit better.

Do any of you want to own guns? I've got no problem with it, I'm just curious to hear other peoples' reasons why they do or don't want to own one (or more). :)

Yeah... about that? Sorry.

Remember that whole "two jobs" thing? Well, it's back down to one now, entirely through faults of my own. Want a protip? Don't take a job without thinking about whether or not it's the right fit, just because the money is (a very small amount) better.

So, I quit the new job after two days, because it felt wrong. While I can't legally go into specifics, I felt that the clients they were going to have me be caregiver to deserved someone who had an actual interest in the work. There was a bit more to it, but the main deciding factor for me was that I think it would have taken me a while to not feel wrong about taking the job for financial reasons alone -- and, despite appearances (and my own opinion) to the contrary, it would seem that I have something resembling a conscience.

There's been a lot that has happened in the ten days since I blogged last, and not just in my neck of the woods. I'm not going to go into detail on the sad events in Newtown, because I'm sure you've all heard about it. Instead, I'm going to step over that, and highlight a couple awesome things involving some great people I know:

• V/H/S, a movie with Jas Sams from Smile Big And Pretty in it, was in the local Redbox. I rented it solely on that, and while it wasn't the best movie, it had some great parts to it. I might've liked it more if I liked the whole "found footage" thing more.
• Lauren Danger, the awesome rocker-chick that fronts (and is the only consistent member of) The Want Ads, put up a new music video for "We Don't Know How It's Ending". You should watch it. How can you not love a band that includes a hand-written thank-you note when you buy the CD?

I'm sure there's more, but it's 1:30 in the morning... what more do you want from me?! 

It feels good to be posting again, and hopefully I'll have something good for you soon! Like maybe a story/recap (storycap?) of my D&D group's adventure soon? Hmmmm....

Anyway, I'm going to go work on WKH? and then talk to the woman I love. I hope your night is going as well, if not better. :)

Tony Nicklinson

UPDATE: Within 48 hours of this writing, Mr. Nicklinson died of starvation after refusing to eat and contracting pneumonia. Rest in peace.


High Court rules that man must prolong his suffering rather than dying with dignity

It's not often that I get into politics on here. Actually, this might be one of the first times that I've written about sociopolitical issues on here. Regardless, when I saw the above post in my Google Reader feed the other day, I couldn't help but think about it. In time, I decided I'd write about it.



To paraphrase, for those who didn't read the link, an Englishman named Tony Nicklinson had a stroke in 2005, and was paralyzed from the neck down. He can't communicate via any means other than blinking, and wanted to have doctors end his life, rather than suffering, trapped in his body.

As that link above's title shows, the High Court said no. Quoting the Friendly Atheist article, "if doctors let him die before it's 'his time', they will be prosecuted".


This situation makes me think of a serious topic that I haven't really given thought to in a long time: euthanasia/assisted suicide/assisted dying, or whatever else you want to call it. A decade ago, when I was a religious teenager struggling to reconcile my faith's views on things with my own views, I was against euthanasia, for much the same reason that I would presume the High Court was -- sanctity of life, and everyone having a "time to die", all that crap. I considered it part of my belief system, even though I wasn't strongly against it; I said I was for religious reasons, but felt deep sympathies for those who truly were suffering.

Now that I've become aware of Nicklinson's sad story, it's given me pause to think on my stance these days. I'm not sure when it happened, but some time between now and a decade ago, my mind was changed. Maybe it's because I've dropped the religion, or maybe it's because I just feel too sympathetic for those like Nicklinson, who are doomed to die in long, drawn-out suffering, in a prison of a body. All that I do know is that I'm for assisted dying when the alternative is months, years, or even decades of the person's own personal hell-on-earth.

Thanks for putting up with a serious detour, and I hope it made sense, because it did in my head. I'll see you guys on Friday, right? :)

Part Two: Unforgiven

Welcome to the second half of last night's post. For this one, there's a little background you need to know.

My stepdad's family is full of horrible people, him excluded, although he could be an ornery bastard when he wanted. A few weeks before he passed, when he was hopped up on pain meds and 100% dependent on his oxygen tank, my stepdad (Jim)'s brother took him in to get the will changed. Long story and one scummy lawyer (that's known Jim's brother since high school) later, Mom got screwed out of the will and was in legal battles for two years after my stepdad died. His family was saying that she was doing horrible things, like tying his oxygen tube in knots and laughing when he couldn't breathe, or beating him and depriving him of his meds -- really fucked-up shit that my mom isn't even twisted enough to do to people she didn't like. Her (now-former) sister-in-law went along with the scumbag brother, even going so far as to straight-up LIE on the witness stand. Everything in the estate had to be sold to pay off the bills that scumbag ran up, which is saying something, since the estate was worth around $125,000 when my stepdad died.

So, yesterday, Mom and I went to the mall, as I mentioned in yesterday's post. After we were done at the ReStore, we got some food from the mall's food court, and were eating it when Jim's sister walked up to us. She runs a store there, filled with crap that she buys at cheap jewelry stores and thrift stores and then marks up a lot. What does she do? She starts talking to us, as if we were okay with her, and then issues some fake apology about the whole situation. Tells us that Jim's dad -- who lied to his son when his son was dying, by saying he'd come see him when Jim called and cried, asking him to -- had died, and Jim's scumbag brother tried doing the same thing with that estate that he had with Jim's. She made up some bullshit line about having realized the truth, and how she was "brainwashed" by her piece of shit brother. Tried to say how much she wished she could do right by us, but it was all lip service, and an attempt to ease her guilty conscience, because she had gotten fucked the same way she helped screw us over. Mom's comment about how they didn't just ruin things for her and me, but completely went against Jim's wishes didn't even get a reaction other than another unconvincing "I'm sorry".

The situation ended with me saying this: "N----, you're not forgiven, and you won't be. You're not welcome near me, or my mother", before we left to take care of the rest of our business for the day. It might have been cold of me to say, but I've thought of FAR worse things to say to that part of my stepdad's family, and even thought of worse to say to her during her "apology" to Mom. And Mom did say a couple things that I think were worse than what I said, but considering the reaction she could have had (and rightfully so, if you ask me), I think we both were fairly reasonable, for the situation.

The rest of yesterday was okay. Finally got ahead on one bill, and don't need to worry about it for another month, and then took a nap before work. Got a great schedule when I came in to work, too -- I don't work again until Monday night. After almost nine days straight, I'm happy to have a "three off, one on, three off" situation between the two schedules. Now, to go to sleep while listening to the movie Eddie and the Cruisers playing in the other room. See you all tomorrow. :)