Bulletproof neocons
John Derbyshire has rightfully been kicked around the blogosphere this week for this asinine post questioning the bravery of the students of Virginia Tech for not jumping a guy with two handguns.

At the very least, count the shots and jump him reloading or changing hands. Better yet, just jump him. Handguns aren't very accurate, even at close range. I shoot mine all the time at the range, and I still can't hit squat. I doubt this guy was any better than I am. And even if hit, a .22 needs to find something important to do real damage—your chances aren't bad.

Tell that to Robert Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Jim Brady -- all of whom were shot with a .22. Kennedy and Brady were both hit in the head, which I suppose in Derbyshire's case would not be considered a vital region.

In an additional post Thursday, Derbyshire ventures the brave and controversial opinion that the VirginaTech shooter was "crazy as a coot" but then tries to argue that the political correctness mafia insists that we not use such terms and that we no longer lock people away for being crazy:

Hold on, though. We no longer (a) acknowledge the category "crazy as a
coot," or (b) lock crazy people up in secure institutions.
Cho (a) had ISSUES, and (b) ought to have been given COUNSELING.
That's better.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it St. Ronald of Reagan that emptied out the mental hospitals in the 80's and started the problem of homeless nuts? And Derbvshire should be careful about pointing fingers in terms of who has issues and needs counselling.

What is Stephen Harper reading?
If it were up to Yann Martel, he'd be reading Tolstoy, but I suspect Martel's first gift will sit on the shelf. While I applaud Yann's efforts, I think I would have started with something more suited to Stephen Harper's intellectual level, like say Theodore Giesel's immortal tale of seduction and alternative lifestyles "Green Eggs and Ham" which at least contains a moral lesson he could use.

GREEN EGGS AND HAM
By Dr. Seuss

I am Sam
I am Sam
Sam I am

That Sam-I-am!
Than Sam-I-am!
I do not like
that Sam-I-am!

Do you like
green eggs and ham?

I do not like them,
Sam-I-am.
I do not like
green eggs and ham.

Would you like them
here or there?

I would not like them
here or there.
I would not like them
anywhere.
I do not like
green eggs and ham.
I do not like them,
Sam-I-am.

Would you like them
in a house?
Would you like them
with a mouse?

I do not like them
in a house.
I do not like them
with a mouse.
I do not like them
here or there.
I do not like them
anywhere.
I do not like green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

Would you eat them
in a box?
Would you eat them
with a fox?

Not in a box.
Not with a fox.
Not in a house.
Not with a mouse.
I would not eat them here or there.
I would not eat them anywhere.
I would not eat green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

Would you? Could you?
In a car?
Eat them! Eat them!
Here they are.

I would not,
could not,
in a car.

You may like them.
You will see.
You may like them
in a tree!

I would not, could not in a tree.
Not in a car! You let me be.

I do not like them in a box.
I do not like them with a fox.
I do not like them in a house.
I do not like them with a mouse.
I do not like them here or there.
I do not like them anywhere.
I do not like green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

A train! A train!
A train! A train!
Could you, would you,
on a train?

Not on a train! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! Sam! Let me be!

I would not, could not, in a box.
I could not, would not, with a fox.
I will not eat them with a mouse.
I will not eat them in a house.
I will not eat them here or there.
I will not eat them anywhere.
I do not eat green eggs and ham.
I do not like them, Sam-I-am.

Say!
In the dark?
Here in the dark!
Would you, could you, in the dark?

I would not, could not,
in the dark.

Would you, could you, in the rain?

I would not, could not,
in the rain.
Not in the dark. Not on a train.
Not in a car. Not in a tree.
I do not like them, Sam, you see.
Not in a house. Not in a box.
Not with a mouse. Not with a fox.
I will not eat them here or there.
I do not like them anywhere!

You do not like
green eggs and ham?

I do not
like them,
Sam-I-am.

Could you, would you,
with a goat?

I would not,
could not,
with a goat!

Would you, could you,
on a boat?

I could not, would not, on a boat.
I will not, will not, with a goat.
I will not eat them in the rain.
I will not eat them on a train.
Not in the dark! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! You let me be!
I do not like them in a box.
I do not like them with a fox.
I will not eat them in a house.
I do not like them with a mouse.
I do not like them here or there.
I do not like them ANYWHERE!

I do not like
green eggs
and ham!

I do not like them,
Sam-I-am.

You do not like them.
So you say.
Try them! Try them!
And you may.
Try them and you may, I say.

Sam!
If you will let me be,
I will try them.
You will see.

Say!
I like green eggs and ham!
I do! I like them, Sam-I-am!
And I would eat them in a boat.
And I would eat them with a goat...

And I will eat them in the rain.
And in the dark. And on a train.
And in a car. And in a tree.
They are so good, so good, you see!

So I will eat them in a box.
And I will eat them with a fox.
And I will eat them in a house.
And I will eat them with a mouse.
And I will eat them here and there.
Say! I will eat them ANYWHERE!

I do so like
green eggs and ham!
Thank you!
Thank you,
Sam-I-am!


NB: If read aloud with the right emphasis and correct eyebrow-raising, this is a very, very naughty, dirty, dirty book. "Would you, could you in the dark?" indeed...nevermind the foxes, goats, mice etc.

Update: Next on Martel's list for Harper is George Orwell's "Animal Farm" -- I suppose "1984" might have hit too close to home.

So much to blog, so little time
It's been a busy few days in the old newroom what with campus massacres and Japanese politicians being gunned down in the street. That, and I have a bunch of books to review and an interview with jam-band moe. coming out on the weekend. Too little time to say everything I'd like to, but here is a quick round up of thing that caught my eye this week:

Gwynne Dyer looks at whether religion makes make people behave better: "In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adultmortality, (venereal disease), teen pregnancy, and abortion," while "noneof the strongly secularised, pro-evolution democracies is experiencing highlevels of measurable dysfunction."

In the hours after the massacre at Virgina Tech, I expected to see the trollish end of the right side of the blogosphere go ape and try to the blame the whole thing on muslimislamofascistboogymenunderthebed and to argue that this kinda thing wouldn't happen if more students and professors carried concealed weapons. And lo and behold, I was not disappointed. Debbie "Ann Coulter's crazier sister" Schlussel offers up a twofer and in the comments even tries to argue that "paki" is not a racist insult. Maybe she should consult Merriam-Websters or be like Dubya and try "the Google". While she's at it maybe she should look up "foaming-at-the-mouth hatemongering racist fuckwit" to see if they used her best side for the illustration. Next she'll say that she's reclaiming the term. Really, if I didn't know better I'd think it was a parody site run by flaming liberals.

As far as allowing or even worse, actively encouraging people to go armed on college campuses is concerned --y'know, I remember my university years (well, okay, I remember bits and pieces) and I think there may have been some beer-fuelled hijinks and youthful exuberance involved. And that was just the profs. There is no way in hell anyone I knew back then should have been packing a firearm -- we shouldn't have been trusted with anything more dangerous than a snowball. Encouraging students to go armed would increase their safety in the same way that filling your neighbors' swimming pool with hammerhead sharks would cut down on noisy parties and people peeing in the pool and burying land mines all over the golf course would keep deer off the greens.

The Japan Times shows us the evidence that the Japanese Imperial Armys sex slaves comfort women were indeed coerced. Predictably, Japan's largest newspaper is silent on the issue.

Oh, and on a Japan-related note, the extremely disingenous (and I am being civil here) Glen Reynolds can kiss my ass.

ATLANTA -- The United States has by far the highest rate of gun deaths -- murders, suicides and accidents -- among the world's 36 richest nations, a government study found. The U.S. rate for gun deaths in 1994 was 14.24 per 100,000 people. Japan had the lowest rate, at .05 per 100,000.

Glen tried to get his snark on about there having been a shooting in Japan, where they have very strict gun control. There was another one today. As is usually the case here when there is a shooting, one mobster shot another. You never hear of husbands and wives shooting each other. They occasionally poison, stab, bludgeon or strangle one another, but annual shootings for the whole country are equal to a single large city in the U.S. and the murder rate in this country of 125 million, crammed into a tiny space, is miniscule compared to the United States.

Handguns are strictly banned in Japan, and only police officers and others -- such as shooting instructors -- with job-related reasons can own them. Hunting rifles are also strictly licensed and regulated.
Crime syndicates, however, have smuggled foreign guns into Japan. Of the 53 shootings reported in 2006, two-thirds -- 36 -- were blamed on organized crime groups, the National Police Agency says.

Some costs can't be measured
In all the talk about Iraq and Afghanistan and whether the West is "winning" there and what price we are willing to pay a lot of things go unmentioned. People on both sides are willing to admit that bad things happen to those we send to fight. That people die is a given in most discussions. That people lose limbs and suffer catastrophic wounds and end up with permanent brain damage from massive head injuries is often, but not always overlooked. Those are the physical costs.
What we rarely hear about is the long term cost in broken families, broken spirits and broken lives paid by both sides. If you are one of the many armchair generals, chickenhawks and REMFs who are debating how "we can still win" or why it is dishonorable to "cut and run" and especially if you are one of death's cheerleaders, the type that say "soldiers sign up to die for their country so lets send them off to do so -- to make an omlette you have to break some eggs." --- go read the Galloping Beaver and Pretty Shaved Ape over at Canadian Cynic. And then go sit in the corner, shut up and be ashamed of yourself.