Depleting natural resources

Since I require two consecutive science classes in order to graduate, I've been taking one this Winter. One of the questions that has been discussed in this class recently is about the consumption of our resources and how it needs to be handled for people to use less energy and continue to use the resources they have. I've been a little surprised by the number of students that seem to feel as if it is the President's job to limit the fuel used, the number of televisions in each household, the number of cell phones a person can have, etc.

I think it is absolutely ridiculous to assume that it is our President's job to regulate the way each individual lives their life. And, for the record, the President cannot simply make a law. It has to go through Congress and be approved by them. A Congress that can't seem to agree on anything. If our government can't agree on a way to handle the fiscal cliff, how are they ever going to pass a law that tells a family how many miles they are allowed to drive and how many television they can have or how often they can get a new television and what kind of car people have to drive?

Does that really seem like a viable solution to this culture that prides itself on always having the latest and greatest gadget? Can anyone see Congress actually getting together and banning all cars that are non-hybrid and limiting the number of electronics a person can have? No one would ever give up their individual right to determine how much light they want in their living room and how many relaxing bubble baths they want to take.

Maybe we should instead look at taxing things at a higher rate. Alcohol and cigarettes are taxed at a higher "luxury" tax because they are unhealthy and bad for individuals as well as the environment. Maybe fuel should be taxed at a higher rate? When gas prices went up in recent years, people have learned to do less driving. Maybe there needs to be more regulations about the fuel efficiency of cars that are allowed in the US (there might be, I don't really keep up with what goes on in vehicle regulations). Maybe there should be a tax that is added in when people file their taxes if they choose to have an older car that is worse for the environment. But that wont change the fact that people will always want the newest television, blue-ray player, video game system, and cell phone. How could we fix this problem that is quickly depleting so many of our natural resources?

For this, I say we need to take a look at this society that says it is okay to line up every year for a new cell phone. If you have people lined up for days ever year to get a brand new model of a cell phone, this is a problem. Cell phones and televisions and cameras and all electronics require an awful lot of resources that are quickly being used. Society as a whole needs to get over this idea that they have to have a new, shiny device every six months. People also need to focus more on recycling their "old" devices. There are many programs out there to recycle old electronics that few people take advantage of. Many people get a new television and just throw out their old one. they stuff an old cell phone into a drawer and forget about it.

People need to be able to change. We need to stop expecting the government to tell us how to live our lives. Especially if we're going to get mad if they attempt to do just that. So recycle your old wrapping paper, remember to recycle your electronics if you got a new one for Christmas, donate clothes when you get new ones, and turn off your lights when you're not in the room. This isn't rocket science people. Be responsible for yourself and your own home.

Worst dentist appointment EVER

So I went to the dentist yesterday and it was terrible. Just awful. And I feel like I'm dying.

My thoughts go out to those in Newtown

This morning, our company lost all connection to email, our network and the internet. And since we don't really have great service in the office (I think because they want people to stay off social media... oops), I had absolutely no idea what had happened in Newtown this morning. And when I found out about this tragic shooting around 1:00 this afternoon, my heart absolutely broke.

This is just a awful, horrific tragedy. Sadly, the reporting of this shooting has also been terrible. The reports were originally stating that Ryan Lanza was the shooter, then they claimed it was his brother. The counts of those involved ranges anywhere from 18-27. And the thing that bothers me the most about all of this is the fact that every major news station is trying to interview the children at the school. At most school shootings, they do try to talk with the students. But most school shootings seem to happen at a high school or college level. Not at an elementary school. Reading and watching these reporters trying to interview children that have just been through such a terrifying and traumatic experience is disgusting.

When something like this happens, reporters and news stations should not be interviewing people for shock value in order to bolster their ratings. Just the same that people should not try to say what the cause of this event was. Not the police. Not the reporters. And most of all, not the rest of us that are watching this unfold. Who are we as the "internet people" to take the news and report on it? Who are we to find a random person on twitter named "Ryan Lanza" and start harassing him for this only to realize this guy just happens to have the same name? Who are we to start telling people they aren't mourning "the right way"? Who are we to try and find the single cause of all of this?

Yes, it seems that this shooter was mentally unstable and needed treatment. No, this is not the time to push your agenda of the failed healthcare system in the US. Yes, it is obvious this man should never have been able to purchase a gun. No, this is not the time for you to say we need to rid the country of all guns. Yes, politicians are the ones that decide which laws are put into place. No, it is not their fault that this man killed so many innocent, young children. People are trying to blame healthcare, gun control, video games, the NRA, politicians and lobbyists. But no, there isn't one single cause for this.

Its natural that we want someone to answer for the loss of life. We can't put the shooter on trial since he was killed during this massacre (at this time it is not clear whether this was suicide or not). We as a country are outraged that this could happen in what should be one of the safest places for children. Children and parents should never have to worry about the safety of a school, an elementary school at the very least. We're all looking for someone to blame for this and there isn't anyone. And this is not the only time this happens. We all know that shootings are a fairly frequent thing and school shootings are also not unheard of here.

Maybe instead of blaming everyone, we lend our support to those in Newtown? Whatever needs to be done for those parents and families should be a priority right now. Maybe we should start questioning how we let 20 innocent children get murdered in cold blood and then turn this into a political issue. Maybe we should look at the fact that within a matter of hours stations were looking to increase ratings by interviewing the fucking children that just witnessed a shooting. Maybe we should talk about what we can do to help the parents and families that were affected and not try to push our own agenda. Maybe we should try to step back and evaluate the facts before reporting on every little snippet of information before reporting it as news to a country that is devastated and looking for answers. Maybe we should question how we as a society know that this is not the first school shooting that we've had.

Or maybe we should all just get together and cry. Because, honestly, that's what I want to do. I want to cry and check on the few kids that are in my life. I want to make sure these kids know they're loved.

My thoughts are with everyone in Newtown.

A journalist's responsibility

Journalists are meant to be the people that report on the world around us, without bias, with all of the facts available. A major newspaper such as the New York Post should have the ability to determine whether an article or a picture should be used. When a tragedy such happens, journalists have the obligation to report on it and newspapers have the obligation to present the information to their readers. When an incident such as the man who was pushed in front of a subway is killed occurs, there is no question about whether this should be reported. But should the photograph of the man in his last moments of life be published?

The story of the man that was pushed in front of the train definitely needed to be covered by news agencies. This was a tragic story of an innocent man that was pushed in front of a train and then killed. Even worse? The man that committed this act was not apprehended on the scene and was still roaming the streets of New York. Journalists were publishing photographs of the man that committed the act and spreading the story in order to make people aware of this event and to find the man. New Yorkers needed to know about this story. Newspapers and websites everywhere were reporting on this event. The actual reporting done is not what is questionable. What is questionable is whether the New York Post should have published the photograph of the man just moments before his death.

Photojournalists have long held the belief that they should only photograph and not interfere with the subject that they are photographing. It is not uncommon for photojournalists to feel that it is their job to only report on a story and if they interfere and help out, they are changing the story. By changing a story, there is a conflict about whether the journalist even has the right to report on a story. It has long been a challenge in photojournalism when reporters are in war zones and third world countries and are forced to only report on the terrible things they see. When natural disasters hit and people are struggling in the aftermath, a journalist may want to help but they must realize that they are helping more by simply raising awareness of the situation. As a caring human being, a reporter or journalist may want to help everyone they see, but they simply don’t have the resources to do so. They also want to present the scene they are seeing in the most unbiased way possible.  

Does this philosophy still apply to a situation such as the photojournalist who saw the train coming for the man who had been pushed? Should he have acted differently? Should he have helped the man? Should he have put his camera down? Should anyone else that was close to the man have tried to help? According to the journalist’s story, he was trying to help. Umar Abbasi says that he was not trying to take a picture of Ki Suk Han. He was only using his flash on his camera in order to get the train conductor’s attention and to try and alert him that something was wrong. Abbasi claims he was trying to help in the only way he could because he was simply too far away to lend a hand himself. Even the New York Post has stated that Abbasi did not have the strength to lift him even if he was close enough to help.

While the general consensus is that this photograph should never have been taken, there is little question about the inaction of the people around. Why did none of the other people waiting for the train try to help? Abbasi has made it clear that he was simply too far away to physically help the man; he was firing off shots with his flash to alert the conductor. He also has stated that there were many other people around that also did not help Ki Suk Han. Where is the public outcry about the inaction of all of those that stood by and watched this happen? Where is the outcry about the man who did get away? It seems this is just another instance of people waiting for someone else to do the right thing.

So where does this leave the photograph of Ki Suk Han’s last moments on earth? Did the New York Post have an obligation to post this photograph? Or were they simply trying to use this photograph to generate sales? The public outcry about this photograph is loud and most people seem to feel that this should not have been taken let alone published. The New York Post seems to have forgotten about the family of this man. Instead of remembering him as he left for work, his family will now forever have the lasting image of their father and husband just moments before his death. There is no thought about the lasting effects this will have on his family and friends. The Post should have known better than to run such a graphic image across their paper only the day after his death. The Post never once thought about the fact that this image is not something the public needed to see. Why was there instead not a picture of the man who pushed Ki Suk Han? Why was there simply not a recent picture of the man with a small article about his life and speaking of what a tragedy this is?

If this was a widespread problem that happened several times a day and there were hundreds of people pushing others in front of subways, this might have been appropriate to run. If this was not an isolated incident with one mentally ill man, this might have been appropriate to run. Since this was a single attack, this should picture should never have been published. This does not depict a tragedy that all New Yorkers should be wary of; this is one sick man that did a terrible thing. There is no reason any print or broadcasting agency should have ever shown such a graphic and terrifying picture of this man’s final moments.

Photographers and photojournalists often have to struggle with the proper way to deal with a situation they are in. Everyday citizens are also forced to deal with this question. The New York Post also has to deal with the question of how to handle pictures and stories that are insensitive and grotesque. The only person it seems that made any move to help was the photographer. And he will forever have to live with the fact that he was the one who that the last moments of a man’s life. People reading the story can all claim how they would or would not have handled the situation if they were on that platform.  The truth is, no one will ever know until they are faced with that situation. 

It Snowed!

This morning, I woke up to find out that Dallas had received its first snowfall of the season. And by "snowfall" I mean a very light dusting of powder that barely covered the ground. It was nice to be able to wake up and have it actually feel like its Christmas time with the snow and not the 70's that we've had for the past couple of weeks.

I could understand Sam's confusion about this cold white stuff that covered his lawn, he was absolutely baffled by it. Since this is the first winter he's been through, snow was obviously a new and different experience. Sam kept trying to play in it then he would bark at it. Like I said, he was baffled by the snow. I'm curious to see how he would react if there was a real snowfall in Dallas... I'm sure that would be fun for both him and me both.

Sadly, my amusement with this light dusting of snow ended there simply for the fact that people in Dallas forget how to drive when you even throw around the"s" word. Even though there wasn't snow on the roads and there was no fear about ice on the streets, people feel the need to try and drive 10-15 MPH below the speed limit. Why?? Do people here just not realize that just because its cold outside they are allowed to drive the speed limit? I'm all for being a cautious driver, but it is just ridiculous trying to get anywhere. My usual 15 minute morning commute took a whole 25 minutes!

I know, I should be used to dealing with these drivers since I have been in Texas for a little over four years. But I'm not. It still drives me up the wall. I hate slow drivers on a good day so when there's anything but sunshine and Dallas forgets how to drive, it really makes me question how these people get anywhere on time. I'm also baffled by the reaction to the snow because I lived in DC and New York for several years. A dusting of snow there is barely even thought about. You would get several inches of snow and still have to go to work and school. A friend of mine from Buffalo is equally annoyed by the Texas reaction to the cold. He made the comment this morning that if you don't need a shovel, it doesn't count as snow. And I'm inclined to agree. So unless you're a dog that has never experienced snow before, in which case you wouldn't be driving anyways, learn that you can go the speed limit if there's a light dusting of powder.

Enjoy the cold weather, I'm sure Dallas will be back to the 70's and 80's in no time!!

Meet Sam!

We've been looking for a dog since we bought a house. When we started fostering Sheba, we thought we might have found the dog for us until we realized that Sheba just wasn't going to get along with our cats.  Sheba was adopted by a young couple a little over a month ago and Austin and I have been looking for a dog (and one that would get along with our cats).

On Sunday, we went to the Dallas Animal Services to see if we could find a dog that would fit in out home. This little guy is Sam (Samwise, really) and he's a seven month old Norwegian Elkhound. Although, I'm really not seeing that in him at all... Last night he came to realize that he absolutely loves jumping from the ottoman to the couch to the ottoman to the chair. Since he is still a puppy, I think he'll be pretty easy to train. We will have to work around the fact that I don't think he's had to deal with being in a kennel all day. Sam does seem to be a very smart dog, so he shouldn't be too difficult to train.

There will be many more (better quality) pictures of little Sam posted along with all of his status updates on how he's adjusting to living in a home.

Also, I wanted to make note that the Dallas Animal Services is one of the nicest shelters I've seen. The dogs are all in fairly large rooms and kennels. The staff do a pretty good job of keeping everything clean (as clean as possible when you have that many dogs to take care of) and the dogs are taken care of. I was also amazed at how many of their dogs are listed as "Very Special Pets" and the already low adoption fee is waived. So, if you're looking for a pet in the DFW area, I would highly suggest taking a look there. Maybe you could end up saving a dog or cat's life.