Yelling at the Radio

Yep, that's what I was doing this morning.  Normally my drive to work's too short to bother paying attention to the radio personalities but I got hooked this morning on a call-in portion about the Obama-care decision by the SCOTUS.  Now, my wookie suit is fine and glossy, but it takes a bit to make me rattle the bowcaster.  However, when the twit calling in said that everything would be fixed by voting for Romney, I *might* have scared surrounding traffic with my vocal frustrations.  No, no, no! 

Becoming President isn't a carte blanche.  The President can't make or repeal laws so changing who's in the the big white house with fancy furnishings isn't going to get the ball rolling. So why are you focused on the President, look at Congress!  They served up this fetid mess of spew, so they, or their successors, are the ones that have to undo it.  It's their elections you should be concerned about and putting your effort into.  Obama and Romney are a shit covered coin toss, no matter which side lands up, your money's still covered in shit.  It's the Senators and Reps. that could make a difference - from local up to national.  Look at who's *making* the laws & vote for better representation.



*sigh* it's going to be a long year.

Discrimination

Courtesy of the Russian Times, I found this interesting article:

On Tuesday twelve members of the Buffalo's firefighter squad were rewarded $2.7 million for emotional distress after a judge ruled that the city of Buffalo racially discriminated white men.

According to the lawsuit filed back in 2007, the city overlooked the twelve individuals and promoted black firefighters instead.  "This never should have happened,” said the plaintiffs’ attorney Andrew P. Fleming to BuffaloNews.com.

I'm shocked this made it to court and that they found in favor of the firefighters.  I'm sure they could have taken a payout without much fuss along the way.  Bravo for pushing it to be called discrimination; four years is a long time to fight for vindication.  I don't quite get the 'emotional distress' part of the case, but I'm not a lawyer.

Sad that I couldn't find the story on Fox News, etc.  I find myself using www.rt.com to get a more balanced view of the news.  Seems slightly counter-intuitive to use a foreign news source to find out what's going on in your own country. O_o

That about covers it....

Doesn't it?

BMV = Exasperating Time Suck

Finally, the time came to get The Beast properly papered and tagged for Ohio.  What a merry expedition!  In our little corner of Ohio, even under the best of circumstances, you have to go to 3 separate places over 4 unique visits to get an out of state vehicle vetted, approved and licensed.  In the past 2 days, I stopped at 5 different government offices, 7 separate times and got to pay for the privilege of having my life wasted by petty bureaucrats. 

In the lovely state of Ohio, you have to get an out of state vehicle "inspected" at a license bureau ($3.50) before they'll issue a new title.  Basically, they take down the VIN, make and model on a special form (only good for 30 days - since after 30 days your Taurus may have morphed into a Charger and you have to get it checked again, just to be sure).  Then you have to go to a title office to get the title changed and pay any taxes due - not just on what you paid for the vehicle, but on any admin fees / stocking fees that the dealer may have charged.  The rant about the double dipping created by taxing the sale of a used vehicle must wait for another day.  Then, you have to go get an E-check (emissions).  Finally, you take the title & passed e-check form back the the license bureau and get your plates and tags.


Now the fun begins:
There isn't a office that has both titling and licensing abilities in our county.  Of the  four title offices, the first two are closed on Mondays, open 8:30 - 4:30 T-F, 9-1 Sat. and the other two are open 8:15 - 4:30 M-F.  The closest office is of the first variety & isn't even listed on the website.  Also, their phone # doesn't have a message machine so I had to stop by on Monday to see what their hours were.  Then, when I stopped back on Tuesday, I was told that their computers had been down for the past 4 days and hadn't been repaired yet!

There are 4 licensing offices, all of which have normal business hours - no qualms there.  You just have to go there twice to get through the process (bring a book - maybe two) and it's not like they're right next to the title office, either.

E-check - some green initiative bullshit only required in a handful of Ohio's counties and only has 2 testing stations in our county.  Guess who's awesomely huge truck is over the weight class limit for a free check and has to pay every 2 yrs for the privilege of the eco-nonsense?  Or, I can get an appointment & drive to one of the 2 EPA field offices over an hour away (open M-F 8-5), have them say, "yep, it's a big diesel" and get a permanent exemption. 

Not like it's shocking, but for all the information they have on their website, there's not a clearly defined set of requirements for going through the whole title -> license plate process.  Instead, it's scattered amongst lists of links that make the whole process incoherent.  A simple list would solve a lot of issues.  Somehow, I think that'd be too simple.  The other novel thought would have been to not raze the only dual title-license office in the county!  Or, instead of opening a title-only location afterwards, put the title office into one of the existing license bureaus

Overall, I'm just glad it's done.  If I was of stronger constitution, I would go and demand to know what in the hell "misc fees" ($10.00) refers to but at this point - I just don't care.

Happier posts on the way -- Blog shoot this weekend!

There oughta be a law...

Or at least Cleveland City Council figures there should be another.  In light of the use of social media to create flash mobs they want to make it a misdemeanor to use twitter, Facebook, Google+, etc to create a disruptive flash mob.  Mind you, they don't want to stop the 'good' flash mobs, just those naughty ones.

         "We want to keep the singing in the malls, we want to keep all the flash mobbing that is dancing or whatever you do that's positive but the negative use of it with the intent to disrupt and cause some injury or some type of damage that we're going to speak to," he said.

 Trying to separate a good disruption from a bad one is such a nebulous proposal that I doubt any charge would be upheld in court.  It's ridiculous that they cannot use a current law to control the undesirable behavior; what ever happened to disorderly conduct?  The manner of communication shouldn't have any bearing on the end result they're trying to control.  Saying, "it's okay to meet in a large group due to a phone tree, but not a group text" or "mailed invitations are fine, but e-mails are right out," seems downright silly.  Seriously, how pathetic.  Workers organized strikes before AIM, people marched on Washington before Facebook and riots broke out before Twitter.  People will gather in groups to promote a cause regardless of the source of invitation, punishing them due to their choice of communication is shortsighted and myopic.  Technology doesn't control or create the behavior, it just gives people a new way of accomplishing their intentions.  New facets of wonder and horror are exposed with each technological leap into the future.  It's how we apply our country's founding principles and laws that temper the resulting knowledge and abilities.  Destructive people will find a way to pervert the loftiest advancement and they should be punished due to their intent, not their methodology. 

In this case, it seems like the city council is looking for a new source of revenue more-so than a way to keep the public safe and unharried.  The fines for this new crime would start at $100.00 and climb to $500.00 for repeat offenders.  Hrmm... common sources of communication + large group of undesirable people + sizable fine = $$$$$   I'm starting to see the council's logic!  Hopefully this suggested law dies an ignoble death and the council members move on to playing tiddly-winks, which would be a far more productive pursuit than they've attempted thus far. 

Arming Ohio EMTs

While I agree with the sentiment of House Bill #288, I have 3 words for the creators of this bill, "WAY WRONG ANSWER!"  My understanding of this bill is that when medical personnel are present at a SWAT scene they may have guns distributed to them for their safety... You've got to be kidding me.

 Guns are not teddy bears, you can't just hand them out to make people feel safer.  People who normally don't carry guns won't automatically gain the skills and mindset necessary to use them simply because the situation may be dangerous.

 While I'm glad they're not forcing EMT's to carry guns (+.001 for not being utterly stupid) I don't see why they're limiting carrying guns to SWAT encounters.  If they're going to allow medics to carry guns at all, why limit the scope?  Seems like it would be more appropriate for medics to have guns when SWAT wasn't around.  Also, if the effing SWAT team can't keep them safe, why are they (both SWAT & EMTs) there? 

Another concern is that the bill continually uses the phrase "tactical emergency medical technician" (TEMT?) and the connotation seems to temporarily elevate medics to members of a SWAT team.  Because what our government really needs is more tactical employees!  It also grants EMTs the same protections as a police officer, which doesn't make me feel all warm and fuzzy given it doesn't mention any training / oversight. 

Here's a crazy thought: Why not allow EMTs with CCW permits to carry while on shift?  That would allow inclined EMTs to protect themselves while guaranteeing basic training and personal responsibility.  I can understand an employer's reticence to change policy given the over-abundance of lawyers; however, if a medic has to shoot someone, who (s)he works for is no longer pertinent - they had to defend their life.  No one should hold a liquor store responsible if the cashier has to ventilate a cretin due to personal threat, so why should someone hold an ambulance company responsible if their medic does the same thing? 

Of course there would have to be legal tweaking for them to carry in school zones, no-weapons zones, etc.  But wouldn't that be a perfect opportunity to push for all CCW holders to be allowed to carry in school zones and the like?  (ready the trebuchet and the pig - we'll make it fly)

So, the bill's a nice thought but a non-solution to the problem of EMTs entering dangerous areas to render aid.  Please try again Rep. Combs, etc.; I'd really like to see more people be allowed to protect themselves - just not in the way you're proposing.

Idiots with Power

I wish that I was surprised when something like this happens - but I've lost my shocked face.  A woman, Jean Weber, takes her aged and ill mother through TSA screening and it comes down to this:

"She said security personnel then came out and told her they would need for her mother to remove her Depends diaper because it was soiled and was impeding their search."  

Someone help me out here, what the hell kind of search were they doing?!  The only sideways logic I can scratch up is that the poor old woman was odoriferous or they didn't want to touch a soiled diaper.  I'd like to say that I would've told the fine employees of the TSA that if they were that concerned, they should remove it themselves.  Adding that I have no knowledge of fecal bombs and it was their job to assess the perceived security threat.  Maybe I wouldn't be able to blithely create that kind of escalation, but I sure hope that I would have the constitution to stand up to idiotic ass-hattery.   

Not to surprise anyone: TSA's responses listed in the article are trite and rote.  When will uncommon sense prevail and let us regain pre-flight dignity?  Citing the use of children and the elderly for suicide missions doesn't suddenly make draconian rules and degradation okay.  Somehow, reason and intelligence need to be interjected into airport security.  (Ok, stop laughing!)

The only thing that makes me wonder about the daughter is that she only had one pair of adult diapers (the ones the mom had on).  I understand being upset and disgusted by the TSA's demand but I don't understand being mad about being unable to replace the removed Depends.  That's about the only thing in this sordid affair that isn't the TSA's fault.  "Two is one, one is none" applies to everything in life.  All things considered, I hope she sets the AARP loose on their  ass.  


Edit:  Turns out this may be a case of moronicus-interceptus.  In a follow up story done by CNN it turns out that the daughter admitted to suggesting the removal of the Depends and letting her mom go commando.  They were going to allow her to get a fresh pair out but the daughter wasn't sure how long it would take to get their checked luggage.  Of course this was after TSA couldn't identify a lump in their pat down & wouldn't let the mother board until the diaper was searched.  Ridiculous of them to insist on finding out exactly what that lump was; what else would it be - C4?  Seems like there was stupidity on both sides.