2019-07-25
The
Wikipedia section on the history of guns makes it clear that the
history of guns and war are clearly intertwined, guns being developed
primarily as a means to kill people in warfare.
Indeed
even with the advent of weapons of mass destruction, the infamous
WMDs,
guns are still the weapon of choice in warfare. These guns are often being fired by the poor and disadvantaged against other poor
and disadvantaged in wars started by the wealthy and advantaged.
Hunting
People
have been hunting successfully without firearms for survival and
sport since man started eating meat. Nonetheless the use of hunting
rifles to kill game is a long established and accepted part of many
societies. But, no one needs a military assault rifle to hunt for
sport or survival. Spraying bullets at everything around hoping to
hit something or mowing down a whole herd in one push of a trigger is
not sport.
Sport Shooting
Shooting
as a sport is also a thing, from biathlon in the Olympics to target
shooting with handguns. No harm is done here as long as the guns are
safely stored at the shooting range.
Criminals and Police
Criminals
have discovered that guns can be a useful tool of their trade and the
police have responded. In some countries the police responded
cautiously with beat police and detectives remaining unarmed and
special armed response units established. Other countries decided to
start an arms race with the criminals, with ordinary police armed to
the teeth and and special (SWAT) units armed like military assault
units. We will leave it to your reading of current affairs to
determine which response resulted in more or less gun violence and
deaths.
Mass Murder
The
easy availability of military style assault weapons has made mass
murder a much easier undertaking than in the past. Internationally,
the numbers of incidents of mass murders compared to the availability
of such weapons speaks for itself.
Protection and
Vigilantism
While
some believe that they need guns to protect themselves and to deal
with criminals, most civilized societies believe that should be the
role of the police. There is a a belief, primarily in one country,
that an armed populace is a safe populace and the more people with
guns the safer a society is. Unfortunately the facts internationally
indicate the opposite, particularly when it comes to gun violence and
the deaths from it.
What Should We Do
So
what should Canada do about guns and gun violence. Fortunately we are
not saddled by a foolish Second Amendment but consider gun ownership
to be a carefully regulated privilege as most civilized countries do.
While
hunting rifles can be used in crimes, and no doubt are occasionally,
they are not the main problem.
The
big problem with gun violence lies with handguns and assault rifles
which no ordinary citizens have a need for. This is one situation
where there are simple and effective solutions. No one outside of the
military and certain special police units need assault rifles. They
should simply be prohibited. As for handguns, there is really no need
for civilians to have them either but since they can be easily
controlled for sport shooting purposes by restricting their use and
storage to approved shooting ranges they should be allowed with those
restrictions.
Government
simply needs to ignore the imported ideas of the American right wing
and provide the solutions the majority of Canadians agree with.
2019-07-20
On Free Trade
After we do that we can
consider the question of free trade and free trade agreements.
We need to seriously
look at the so-called free trade agreements for what they are. They
certainly do not guarantee free trade. What they guarantee are rights
to corporations over sovereign countries with things like investor
state dispute provisions that allow corporations to sue countries for
passing legislation in the public interest that offends the
multinational corporations rights to maximize their profits.
So what could real free
trade look like. One option would be absolute free trade. Eliminate
all tariffs and non-tariff barriers. Provide no artificial advantages
to domestic products or corporations. Provide no, intentional or
otherwise, advantages to foreign products or corporations.
Any goods could be sold
in Canada, subject equally to any forms of taxation applied,
regardless of country of origin, as long as the goods are produced
subject to health and safety, environmental, and labour standards
(minimum wages, collective bargaining and workers rights provisions,
etc.) equivalent to those required of goods produced in Canada.
That would be true free
trade.
Posted by rww at 13:35 0 comments
Labels: environmental standards, free trade, free trade agreements, labour standards, multinational corporations, non-tariff barriers, sovereignty, tariffs, taxation, trade, workers rights
2019-07-14
Can We, Should We, Will We Live Forever Online
When typing for this
blog I have often wished I could just think my thoughts at the
computer and have them type out on the screen. This, no doubt, has
much to do with the fact I am a one finger hunt and peck typist
(having been streamed into drafting and electricity in grade nine
rather than typing and home economics).
But this got me
thinking bigger.
First some thoughts on
what makes us human. I have heard it said that what separates us from
the (other) animals is that we are aware of our existence. I think it
is probably somewhat more than that, extending to the fact that we
philosophize and question the meaning of life. Of course we do not
know what (other) animals are thinking but clearly thinking and
communicating are more important to us than simply the tasks
necessary for our physical existence.
On to the idea of
living forever. It seems the biggest obstacle to living forever is
that our bodies wear out, particularly our hearts and lungs that keep
oxygen and blood circulating. The other big factor is that the earth
could not sustain everyone living forever unless we stopped
reproducing.
But what if we did not
need most of our physical body and all those resources we live off
of. What if we only needed to keep our brains alive.
If the essence of being
human is thinking and communication, what if we only needed our
brains to do that.
What if we had a
brain-computer interface that would let us think our thoughts to our
computers and communicate with other humans, including living brains.
What then.
How much space and
resources would it take to just keep our brains alive after our
bodies died,
And what if we did not
even have to do that. What if we could transfer the essence of our
brains, our intellectual being and memories onto computer chips that
required virtually no storage space and only required a few
millivolts of energy to be sustained forever.
The big question is
would you want to live forever on the Internet watching mankind make
the same mistakes over and over forever and ever.
Posted by rww at 14:57 0 comments
Labels: animals, brain, communication, computers, death, human beings, Internet, life, meaning of life, philosophy, thinking
2019-07-06
Metric for Americans
American
exceptionalism often means things like calling football soccer while
the rest of the world calls it football
. Yes, us northern neighbours
do the same thing but it's still wrong.
My
biggest peeve about American exceptionalism is the fact they cannot
get their political colours correct. Every American election period I
am puzzled by which states are red and which are blue till I remember
that the land of Donkeys and Elephants has it backwards. In the rest
of the world red represents the left and blue represents the right
but America chooses to do it differently. BTW Wikipedia's
explanation is here FWIW.
Perhaps
the strangest example of American exceptionalism is that after
fighting a bitter war of independence from the British Imperialists
they choose to be (almost)
the only country in the world still using the Imperial system of
measurement and not using the Metric
system.
So
for those leery of change let's do a quick comparison.
We
can see the multitude of complicated calculations necessary to use
the Imperial System while the Metric system simply requires an
ability to move the decimal point.
So
what would that mean for Americans. Probably less than they fear. In
Canada, in some sense, we have a hybrid system. For almost everything
official Metric is used. The most noticeable changes for the common
person are weather and driving and we have adapted to this easily.
Most of us don't relate to the old Fahrenheit units anymore. The same
can be said of distances and speed limits.
For
the home handyman little has changed. Plywood (and particle board) is
still sold in 4 foot by 8 foot sheets, though sometimes the thickness
will be in millimetres rather than fractions of an inch. And two by
fours are still the same standard 1½
X 3½ inch size. In
Canada most measuring tapes are marked in both Metric and Imperial
measurements. So build away using your existing tools.
As
for cooking have no fear. There is no Metric Fire Department burning
your old cookbooks and grandmother's recipes and no Metric Police
seizing your Imperial measuring spoons and cups. Indeed, most
measuring spoons and cups in Canada are marked in both measuring
systems. You simply gain access to both Metric and Imperial recipes.
So
have no fear America, embrace progress and leave Liberia and Myanmar
to fend for themselves in a Metric world.
Posted by rww at 17:54 2 comments
Labels: American exceptionalism, Imperial measurements, Metric system, United States
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)