Quote:
There have been two recent events that I consider to have a common cause and left me more than a bit saddened and concerned for our future.

The first event actually happened last January, and was described in this Washington Post article on April 8. During the morning rush hour on January 12, Joshua Bell, indisputably one of the finest classical violinists alive today, wearing a long-sleeve t-shirt and baseball cap walked into a Washington DC Metro station, pulled his Stradivarius violin from its case and began playing. For the next 43 minutes, nearly 1100 commuters strode past with only seven on them taking at least a minute to pay attention to his performance. His total take for the 43 minutes, a period for which he regularly gets paid tens of thousands, was $37 and change. One of those contributions was a twenty from a woman who recognized him and was astonished to find him performing for free in a subway station.

The second event was the Don Imus debacle. Those five syllables directed toward some extraordinary young women resulted in many hours of coverage of pundits debating the state of racism in the US, free speech, hypocrisy and a whole gamut of other more or less related topics. One of the key points that came out of these discussions is that it is apparently acceptable, even humorous and attractively entertaining, in today

I was taken aback too, when I heard about Joshua Bell's experience. I too, would have bet against the outcome. Pearls before swine. Another brick in the wall of my increasingly dim view of my fellow men. That event was real. It should provoke some awareness of the direction our society is taking, and your bringing to the attention of those who may not have heard about it makes sense to me.

The Don Imus thing, while it seems related in kind as well as timing, is, I think, something entirely different. His disgusting outburst was hi-jacked by a couple of race hustlers. Imus and the stuff he spews, like the stink of a garbage scow, has been around for a long time. Those who led the charge of righteous indignation have quietly ignored him and countless others who've mouthed the same garbage. They just chose to grab this instance as a convenient vehicle for their own purposes. Without their actions, the targets of his slur might have been blissfully unaware of it - as would the vast majority of the rest of us. Pity it didn't go that way.

Societies have always had to deal with garbage of all sorts. It hasn't ever been eliminated. Beauty has always had to share the world with garbage, and beauty has always prevailed. I trust that will continue, though things may continue to get worse before they get better.

Buck up and be of good cheer. Keep trying to enhance the beautiful as best you can. Maybe I'm wrong and you won't win that way, but it's certainly worth the try.

Thoughtfully stated, Clay.

The Joshua Bell performance does not surprise me one bit. It wasn't "convenient" to listen. The point of doing it at lunch time by the fout' is right on. With the sparse crowds at the free Emory concerts I've be attending I am not surprised.

As for Imus...1). He has always been over the top; 2). Sharpton or Jackson didn't care while he was goring white folks; 3). Why do we keep glorifying those who can win the punt, pass and kick competition? What have they really acomplished. Cure cancer?

I love baseball, but find the salaries obcene. No one who can hit or throw a baseball, football, or basketball is worth more than a few hundred thousands dollars, if even that. They are NOT heroes.

Are our lives really so shallow that we must have every gender, every race, every person have their own athletic forum to achieve something of little value. Then, we'll do it again next year and call it March Maddness 2008. We do it so some taxpayers can send someone to BasketBall/Football U, prepare themselves for the NBA/WNBA/NFL and leave school early for the big bucks without a degree. While getting a free ride at Basketball/Football U. they spend their money getting tatoos visible for all the world to see just how rediculous it all is. If we are really equal why do girls and boys need their own teams? Ah, We're not really! Why do we need black only universities? Would white only universities fly in century 21? Hardly! If you think Imus represents America's troubles you don't know the half of it. We even have Grammy's and Movie awards by race. Is this the inclusion we are talking about?

So now that Sharpton and Jackson "got whitey", they'll move on to their next issue which won't be rap artists and their lyrics that are magnitudes worse than what Imus uttered, or why so few on the GA Hope Scholarship (free ride with a B average)actually graduate, or why millionaire pro athletes can't stay clear of the police.

I am not condoning what Imus said, but if you want to take him down then many others needs to follow. If you just want to pick and choose YOUR targets then, so be it. That is what they do. If I went around calling myself a Rev or M.D. without an actual degree you would think less of ME!

I find all of this so tiring. The world has lost it's moral compass, yet we think ourselves more sophisicated? Hardly. The sad news at VT is only more evidence.

This is gonna sound a little bit like a generation gap thing, but I don't think it really is...

I think something more insidious and menacing to our society than gansta rap is the flourishing of this "Emo" and "Screamo" music.

We're looking at a generation of music listening/playing boys who have been told to discuss their feelings since they were 4 years old and now they can't stop.

Popular music, until it was polluted by Brian Wilson's "In My Room" was about the things that guys are about - boy wants girl, boy gets girl, boy loses girl, boy wants to party, surf, race cars, etc...

Now, it's about James Blunt being on a bus and he's too ineffectual to chat up a chick so he writes a song about the "lifetime" they shared as he stole glimpses of her.

Songs that are about being a wussy are just a terrible thing. They make all the other guys who are into their feelings feel validated.

How about that song from last year where the guy sings about "not being perfect enough" for his daddy. A song about not being good enough for daddy? Please!

Come on, boys, man up.

It used to be that even 'loser' songs were manly enough to just be about the guy being a loser, now it's about the guy being the victim of his feelings.

Romantic losers have been usurped by "unhappy, but in touch with his feelings guy."

Those emo guys make goths look cheerful and well adjusted, for crying out loud.

Seriously, I'll take "Gin and Juice" or "California Love" over "You're Beautiful" every day of the week when it comes to the future of this country.

Damn, Buddha. Are you sure you're a lefty? You'll not be invited to the next social responsibility and gender awareness rally.

If you keep talking like this I'm going to send you an application to join the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. Membership comes with an autographed picture of Charleton Heston and a "Run, Hillary, Run" bumper sticker. We encourage placing the bumper sticker on the front bumper instead of the rear.

Who's Joshua Bell? Maybe if he had a Les Paul and did some wailing on them strings, it woulda' done better. If he did Red House or maybe some SRV.

Don't sweat the small stuff. My parents' generation were all screwed up when The Beatles came on the scene. As for Imus? He got fired. People get fired everyday for a lot less. I've been on the D.C. Metro. What is so unusual about someone playing a violin on the Metro? All this while people are trying to get to class, work, or the next tourist stop on the Metro while keeping an eye on those two young Middle Eastern looking men that insist on sitting right next to each other with backpacks on and speaking a language nobody else understands. Pft!

All I want to see is that the dean of VT gets charged with 30 counts of manslaughter. All I want is for a room full of young men instead of turning their backs like they are told to stand up and fight for their lives. All I want is for people to take a little of the blame for what happens in their lives instead of blaming this, that, or the other. It's all bullshit.

So, don't sweat the small stuff. Sh*t happens all the time and you better be ready. Like the lawsuits that are going to bring down Virginia Tech and have it razed to the ground. This is what liberalism is all about. It isn't happening. It didn't happen. It is isolated so don't overreact. Blame something else. Don't use resources like a campus wide PA system. Instead, use the f*cking email system. You want to blame what is wrong with our society. Make every man pull his pants off and lets see who is actually wearing panties.

"All I want to see is that the dean of VT gets charged with 30 counts of manslaughter...."

"...All I want is for people to take a little of the blame for what happens in their lives instead of blaming this, that, or the other. It's all bullshit."

Hey, Lamont, I have an idea. Let's blame the guy who shot them! It is all bullshit. Blame the shooter first.

"Like the lawsuits that are going to bring down Virginia Tech and have it razed to the ground. This is what liberalism is all about. It isn't happening. It didn't happen. It is isolated so don't overreact. Blame something else. Don't use resources like a campus wide PA system. Instead, use the f*cking email system. You want to blame what is wrong with our society. Make every man pull his pants off and lets see who is actually wearing panties."

Blame something else?

That makes you unhappy when that happens, but then you say you want the Dean charged with killing people.

Lamont, I never heard you blame the guy who did it, but I heard you blame alot of other people.

________________________
________________________

I completely agree about the Dean assuming the shooter had left campus.

Let's see: people shot in dorm on a college campus, by a guy who appeared to be of college age....nah, he'd never hide out on campus or be so rude as to endanger others...let's not make too big a deal of this "isolated" incident...

Bad move.

That loser is dead and that's a fact. Blaming him goes without stating. I'm sick of this sh*t happening at schools and the administrations getting a free walk. The dean should be charged with manslaughter. Period.

The real issue is for the campus police and the administration to have spent serious 6 figure money on a wifi campus system and not use it right after the first shooting. And, why do they not have a minimum of 100 wifi cameras about the campus monitoring activity at the campus security HQ?

It is also time for colleges and universities to take their campus security "under cover" and become "beat cops" and blend-in with the student poplulation every hour of every day and be more apart of the campus life. The local municipal police department can privide the "presence" as required by events like yesterday.

The lack of notification clearly falls on the campus security and their inability to quickly assess the situation and be initially planning for the worst, rather than doing nothing for 2 hours in alerting the campus community.

To hold the President accountable would be like holding every city Mayor accountable for every homicide in their town. The size of our major university campuses make them more like small towns than anything else. Most campus police departments are nothing more than glorified security guards. There is no doubt that within the 2 hours between attacks more should have been done.

The scarry part it we are all living, working, and walking by the next wack job who will commit another awful crime like yesterday. We often ignore the "signs" of mental illness. We'll never know just how much his ex-girlfriend knew about the shooter, or what she might haved shared with her closest friends about him.

It is just too sad. I watched Fox News yesterday and listened to Brit Hume try and interview this so called "expert" about campus safety and the guy could not even put two sentences together that made any sense or could get to the point, even with all of Brit's prodding to get him on track. Any college or university who hires this clown is wasting their money for sure. I think real experts are in short supply. We sure need some, though.

too many school campuses. If there where less schools, there would be less school violence. I say eliminate the grounds where these things can happen. Turn the schools back to where it was an open field, where thousands of people are not all clogged together, less people, less problems. It's all due to green house gas. It has made nuts out of nuts. If the gas could be changed to nice skyu blue, there would be less trouble. Let's strat closing schools, and returning teh land back to open space. since all work will be done in India and China, let them open more schools. We need more open space in crowded areas anyway. If this school wasn't there this would not have happened here. The trees that where cut down years ago, would have provided cover for the few people that where there. And i think teh mfg of teh bullets and gun should be hel accountable, AND the parnets and South Korea. Since they let him come here, AND the admissions office at the school, they allowed him to be a student, AND whoever was paying this dudes bills, all accountable. And why didn't the last person that seen him REPORT him BEFORE he di dthis. They should be charged as an un willing accomplist. The show maf. of teh brand of shoes he wore also, without shoes he woulda' probably not been walking around in the cold weahter. And lastly, I blame the creator....wonder what kind of stereo this guy had? Mighta' sounded really bad to make him nutty? Digital grunge, poor soundstage? So many things coulda' been wrong, maybe he couldn't get his VTA right on his TT? What pushed him over teh edge? South Korea owes us an explanation!

If the administration wants to, they can classify this this as terrorism, I'm sure one blowhard politican will, then will that justify atttacking South Korea? Hmmmm This is also another reason to eliminate LEGAL imigration, this guy had a green card, if we close down imigration this alwo would not have happened. This could have easily been prevented, no imigration, no schools.

It more specific than your mayor example. The system failed on campus that directly resulted in a massacre. The dean or president absolutely committed involuntary manslaughter with their decision making. They managed to cancel classes when the peace officer was shot an killed right off campus last August. They have two homocides right on campus and it was business as usual as far as the vast majority of people knew. Educators showed up to teach class. Students showed up to learn. And some loser showed up to kill them with the help of the policy makers giving him two extra hours to execute his mission. In effect, what the VT administration did was commit homicide with absence of malice. That is manslaughter. People need to be held accountable when they are responsible for so many individuals. Hell, we prosecute U.S. Navy commanders when a single loss of life happens on their watch. We prosecute peace officers when they make bad judgments in the line of duty that results in a single loss of life. Get real. Someone at VT needs to spend at least twenty-five to life for all thirty deaths that could have been avoided at the hall. And now it turns out that his own teacher recommended the kid for counseling because his own writings turned in for grading was demented. The school seen this coming and didn't act on it. Now, some of the brightest minds in the nation are gone for good. So, defend those idiots causing this kind of crap. I'll take no truck on that topic.

Hey, a lone psycho-nut decided to kill a bunch of people. It isn't anybody's fault except his and there is no way to stop a person hell bent on killing a bunch of people. Had he not been able to shoot them with a gun he would have mowed them down with a car at a sporting event or something.

I'm not indifferent toward what happened, but I always get nervous when legislation and prosecution are driven by a collective sense of passionate urgency as opposed to sober reflection and calm reason. Lord knows we have enough knee-jerk, reactionary legislation screwing up things as it is.

Exactly right. The real question as more comes out: are there any mental health "professionals" on the VT campus staff?

How do you stay in class when you get away with a class sign-in "X"? In my day this lack of repsect would have been show the door. I guess if you pay your $20K+ a year you can get away with much and totally anti-social behavior. This has gone on for 4 years. This really makes little sense. This the VT Administration IS responsible for. The Campus Police bear the responsiblity for the the 2 hour notification wait.

It won't be long now before a background check/gun buy will include a psych evaluation. This will change the handgun debate, green card, or no. I believe in the right to bear arms, but this will change much.

You're right, Monty. That's all there is to it. The irony that comes out of the recent posts in this thread, however, is that if there were screening measures in place to identify maniacs like this one before they do harm, statements like those of our friend Lamont might put him under close observation if not lock and key. Easy solutions, everyone seems to want them. Pity there aren't that many around.

Lamont: Better check in with Rosie O'Donnel. I understand she says that you're wrong, George Bush is to blame.

Quote:
too many school campuses. If there where less schools, there would be less school violence. I say eliminate the grounds where these things can happen. Turn the schools back to where it was an open field, where thousands of people are not all clogged together, less people, less problems. It's all due to green house gas. It has made nuts out of nuts. If the gas could be changed to nice skyu blue, there would be less trouble. Let's strat closing schools, and returning teh land back to open space. since all work will be done in India and China, let them open more schools. We need more open space in crowded areas anyway. If this school wasn't there this would not have happened here. The trees that where cut down years ago, would have provided cover for the few people that where there. And i think teh mfg of teh bullets and gun should be hel accountable, AND the parnets and South Korea. Since they let him come here, AND the admissions office at the school, they allowed him to be a student, AND whoever was paying this dudes bills, all accountable. And why didn't the last person that seen him REPORT him BEFORE he di dthis. They should be charged as an un willing accomplist. The show maf. of teh brand of shoes he wore also, without shoes he woulda' probably not been walking around in the cold weahter. And lastly, I blame the creator....wonder what kind of stereo this guy had? Mighta' sounded really bad to make him nutty? Digital grunge, poor soundstage? So many things coulda' been wrong, maybe he couldn't get his VTA right on his TT? What pushed him over teh edge? South Korea owes us an explanation!

I'm with DUP on this one. We have way too many schools, way too many campuses, too many vulnerabilities. Closing these schools down, opening up the spaces and sending the students to McDonald's University is the way to go. After all, isn't that what the American dream is all about: to be fat, dumb and happy?

Quote:
Hey, a lone psycho-nut decided to kill a bunch of people. It isn't anybody's fault except his and there is no way to stop a person hell bent on killing a bunch of people. Had he not been able to shoot them with a gun he would have mowed them down with a car at a sporting event or something.

With all due respect, Monty, this is a bullshit argument. The use of automatic or semiautomatic guns with high-capacity ammunition clips enables the killer to kill very many more people than he could with a car or a knife or a club or even a revolver. If you wish to limit deaths from the actions of "psycho-nuts," then I fail to see why sensible restrictions on gun ownership are so problematic.

Quote:
I'm not indifferent toward what happened, but I always get nervous when legislation and prosecution are driven by a collective sense of passionate urgency as opposed to sober reflection and calm reason.

I think that the gorilla in the room on this issue is that those who wish to eliminate all restrictions on gun ownership need to accept as a corollary the fact that on a regular basis someone who should not have access to guns, like the VT killer, will exercise their own uncontrolled 2nd Amendment rights.

Gun ownership in the US is indeed a right, but it is also a responsibility, something that gets very little public acknowledgment, in my considered opinion.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

This is absolutely true. It is hard to legislate responsibility. It is the responsibility of those of us who have written legilation to insure the safety of the citizenry. For people to expect a certain amount of safety is our responsiblity.

The fact that the VT killer is suspected to have some level mental illness should preclude his right to bear arms. To require a psych evaluation prior to a gun purchase may not be a bad thing in 2007 and beyond. If I was still doing it I would author such a bill.

I remember drafting the anti-stalking legislation on my kitchen table with my wife. Our daughter was being stalked by a 50 year old pervert and we could not get him arrested, even though he had an inches thick police file.

The language of "making a reasonble person fear for his or her safety" made our Atty Gen. comfortable and it ultimately became law.

To know from a background check there are no felony connvictions or active arrests warrants out on someone is clearly not enough anymore. A law abiding citizen should not fear this level of scrutiny. It may even save their life from being victimized as at VT. To not have a three-day waiting period in VA is purely rediculous. No one's right to bear arms would be jeopardized, unless you really should not have access to them in the first place, as in the VT case.

Quote:
Gun ownership in the US is indeed a right, but it is also a responsibility, something that gets very little public acknowledgment, in my considered opinion.

Very true.

Additionally, those that want to ban all guns do not like acknowledging the hundreds of people who defend themselves (particularly at home) from seriously bad actors. There is also the loss (or serious limitation) of another freedom.

Then there are the hypocrites, such as Diane Feinstein, who argues in favor of banning guns but has a concealed carry permit and routinely carried a .38 Smith & Wesson in her purse for personal protection.

Like all polarizing issues there are too many zealots on each side and not enough moderate thinkers. I am with Monty when he states

Quote:
...but I always get nervous when legislation and prosecution are driven by a collective sense of passionate urgency as opposed to sober reflection and calm reason.

There has got to be a middle ground that the vast majority of us can live with.

Quote:
Gun ownership in the US is indeed a right, but it is also a responsibility, something that gets very little public acknowledgment, in my considered opinion.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

You are correct. Tactical equipment such as extended clips are unnecessary in the civilian population. And yes, I am a gun owner. The shotguns only go to bird hunts or the trap and skeet ranges. The handgun and sniper rifle are for practice and competition at the range. I do not carry a concealed weapon license. Though in my state it is legal to carry a weapon in plain view. I rarely see this though.

Ithaca Model 37 16 ga.
Ithaca Model 37 12 ga.
Springfield Armory XD40 .40
Remington M700 M40 .308 (USMC)

My concerns regarding 2nd Amendment rights have less to do with what may be considered sensible restrictions and far more to do with the manner in which altering these rights are devised. I don't place any particular hierarchy on which Constitutional rights are to be interpreted incorrectly and enacted in a manner inconsistent with the process of amendment. I'm no less of a 1st Amendment advocate than I am a 14th Amendment advocate.

Still, your point regarding responsibility and a willingness to accept the fact that all rights carry with them unfortunate consequences certainly applies in the case of weaponry.

I suspect our personal disagreements would exist more from what the meaning of the "right" is based on each of our understandings of the intent of the Framers who wrote it and enacted the statute. Unless, of course, we also disagree on whether or not the governing maxim in interpreting a statute is the meaning of those who wrote it until changed by an authentic act consistent with the Constitution.

I'm not an advocate for usurping the Constitution for the sake of political expediency. The Framers made it difficult to amend the Constitution on purpose and for good reason.

Even in Wisconsin, which does not have a concealed carry law, it is legal to open carry a handgun. There are some restrictions as to where one can go carrying such. And I'd like to see the many misinformed LEOs react to someone so carrying.

I'd like to point out that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was not intended to protect hunting firearms. It was intended to facilitate personal protection, citizen availability for local, state and national protection, and citizen protection from a tyrannical government. If anything, the 2nd Amendment as intended protects the right of citizens to own and bear the same personnel weaponry the military uses.

Quote:
Even in Wisconsin, which does not have a concealed carry law, it is legal to open carry a handgun. There are some restrictions as to where one can go carrying such. And I'd like to see the many misinformed LEOs react to someone so carrying.

I'd like to point out that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was not intended to protect hunting firearms. It was intended to facilitate personal protection, citizen availability for local, state and national protection, and citizen protection from a tyrannical government. If anything, the 2nd Amendment as intended protects the right of citizens to own and bear the same personnel weaponry the military uses.

Fully automatic assault rifles weren't around at that time. But surely our forefathers knew that weapons would be designed in the future to be more efficient. But I don't think they meant the Black Panthers should have the right to possess weapons superior to the authorities. There should and are restrictions on such weapons, including shotguns sawed off. Personally, I think there should be restrictions on certain types of firearms. It is just too easy for someone to purchase a cheap knock-off AR-15 or semiautomatic AK47 and convert it to fully automatic. At which point the weapon becomes illegal but still in possession. That is not a constitutional right. Personally, I don't think gun control is the issue. The system itself ended up with a massacre on its hands. The L.A. bank robbers at Bank of America with fully automatic weapons and dressed down in body armor didn't actually kill anyone. This kid, using off the shelf handguns, killed 32 people. And many people in the gun world are of the opinion that the 9mm and .22 caliber are inferior tactical killing weapons. This kid proved otherwise. Which, where gun control is concerned, opens up an entire new can of worms.

The Constitution was written with intentionally vague language to facilitate interpretation in the current social context. Although the Second Amendment was originally penned to allow personal protection with military-grade weapons, it can hardly be argued that putting assault weapons in the hands of civilians is a responsible provision today.

Quote:
The Constitution was written with intentionally vague language to facilitate interpretation in the current social context. Although the Second Amendment was originally penned to allow personal protection with military-grade weapons, it can hardly be argued that putting assault weapons in the hands of civilians is a responsible provision today.

That is an opinion. I see nothing vague in the constitution. I can't imagine the minds of our forefathers intentionally agreeing as a group to be vague. What you are suggesting is that the Constitution is a living document. It's not an uncommon dogma. And you may be correct to some extent because our forefathers created the Supreme Court. It is the only court created by the Constitution. All other courts are created by Congress. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court original constitutional jurisdiction is narrowly focused.

Quote:
"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction"

There is nothing there about the Court revising the meaning of the words within the Constitution. Many people misinterpret the Constitution because they read as if it was written the day before yesterday. For example, "high crimes and misdemeanors" at the time the Constitution was written was a British term.

Quote:
"Contrary to popular belief, the term 'high crimes and misdemeanors' does not translate by the modern meanings of this phrase. Nor was this phrase specifically left vague by the founding fathers for future interpretation. Within the course of debate at the Constitutional Convention it was decided that the 'Ex Post Facto' law and the 'Bill of Attainder' be specifically banned from usage by Congress. These two terms refer to common legislative practices of the time which allowed a legislature to pursue criminal action against individuals without a proper trial in court. Such debate naturally prompted a discussion of impeachment. James Madison quickly argued that, in order to prevent dominance by the legislature through the use of impeachment, impeachment must be specifically limited to the serious offense. Upon this statement George Mason proposed to substitute the old British law term 'high crimes and misdemeanors' as terminology for what constitutes impeachment. Neither James Madison nor the clerk recorded any further discussion of this matter."

At the time the Constitution was written a high crime amounts to a serious offense, or in today's terminology, a felony. A misdemeanor constituted such things as just plain bad behavior in the eyes of society. Like being the President and having extramarital sex in the Oval Office with an intern. That'll get you impeached.

What is an assault weapon? The citizens of Switzerland walk around with and keep in their homes military weapons.

Quote:
What is an assault weapon? The citizens of Switzerland walk around with and keep in their homes military weapons.

"Assault weapon" is currently a slippery, political term. Technically among military historians, if I recall correctly, it requires the weapon to be able to fire in semi-automatic and various automatic modes, be of fairly large cartridge capacity, etc.

All Swiss men under the age of 30 must have a military weapon and ammunition at home. The rifle is made by Swiss Arms, fires a 5.56mm round, is highly accurate, and capable of automatic fire. Since it has automatic fire modes it is more capable than what we define in the U.S. as an "assault rifle."

The Swiss have a long history of hunting and target shooting. Despite the exceedingly high number of guns in the country the gun murder rate is low.

Gun violence is much more a factor of a society's culture than it is of the guns themselves.