As we approach the time that I must move from this place I enjoy the rides in the woods a bit more. No idea how, because they basically gave me a new lease on life when I got here a few years ago. Cherokee and I spent hours both at sunrise before work and well after sunset negotiating the woods.
The shot below was taken on one of those quiet solo rides in the chill of early winter. There’s just something inviting about a dim unexplored patch of woods. Together we’ve found a lot of those.
Anyway, got to thinking about my workday and the realtime demands that keep you from wandering off and exploring. Reminded me of something I read long ago… one of those poems everyone sees as a kid shortly after the point where they finally get to quit reading “See the cat run? Run, cat, run”.
Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening
1923… by Robert FrostWhose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.He gives his harness bells a shake
To ask if there is some mistake
The only other sound’s the sweep
Of easy wind and downy flake.The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.
I can identify. Been a lotta times I’m pretty sure Cherokee looked back with a “What were you thinking?” look when I tarried in some odd place.
Anyway… work is a good thing. In our current economy nobody in his right mind complains about *having* to do it. We’re thankful, it keeps bread on the table. Still, there’s the trade-off shown in the words above. Not a complaint, just an observation.
There’s still light out for about an hour… and that patch of winter rye up there oughta be in good form about now. Maybe it’s time to saddle up.
Hope your day ends as nicely.
Regards ~ Rob
I'm Rob Jones... and I approve this message.
RE: Forwarded Emails
OK, I’m constitutionally disposed against personally forwarding funny and/or thought provoking emails myself because I’m firmly aware that my sense of humor isn’t universally shared by my friends.
That said, if you read my blog… aside from already having questionable tastes, you’re also subject to being stuck seeing what I really think.
The following showed up in my inbox today, compliments of the lovely & talented Mr Watson. My contribution aside from posting it here is limited to formatting. Fwiw, here’s the difference between a Liberal and a Conservative laid out pretty clearly:
The Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives
If a liberal doesn’t like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
.
If a liberal sees a foreign threat, he wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.
.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.
.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
.
Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.
.
A liberal non-believer says he’s offended and wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
.
If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he’s in labor and then sues.
.
A liberal will delete it because he’s “offended”.
.
Caveat
If anyone on the same email list as myself is paying close attention, they might notice I removed the part about healthcare. That wasn’t an accident because I think our existing system is a clusterfuck of fraud, graft, and ridiculous lawsuits that drive costs thru the roof… but that’s a whole nuther post.
I applaud those sincerely interested in fixing it, a group which unfortunately doesn’t include most in Congress. Expect them to talk a lot and do nothing to fix it, and you’re pretty safe.
Meantime, the list above is IMO… pretty accurate
I don’t worry a helluvalot about offending any friends of a liberal bent, because if they’re my friend, it’s a safe bet they already have a pretty tough skin and can accept a difference of opinion.
If any of my friends on the other side of the spectrum are certain it doesn’t portray their views, then it’s entirely possible they aren’t who I’m talking about. It does however match what I’ve seen from many others, so… if the shoe fits…. :)
I'm Rob Jones... and I approve this message.
ROFL. If any of my friends over at WTF are curious why I don’t answer in there… let’s just say it’d be sorta hard.
Apparently it wasn’t well received when I interrupted Grim’s repeated boasts to inject a dose of reality. Gee… so much for your claim you never boot people for personal reasons.
For future reference, simple concept… if you don’t want folks to point & giggle, don’t display the ego in public. Oh well, good luck growing a thicker skin, cause that temper’s a weakness.
I'm Rob Jones... and I approve this message.
A friend posted a link to a story in West Texas where a guy was arrested under a fairly recent Texas statute (passed this decade) regarding “Indecent Photography”.
The article is here: Man Charged with Secretly Photographing Women, Kids
My objections do not have to do with the speciifics of THAT case. So in fairness, you’ve been warned, and if anyone bothers to drop by and argue why that individual is really and truly a died in the wool pervert, I will suggest a remedial reading course for them. There are plenty of bad laws that CAN be put to good use… the problem is that if a law is witten in a way that it could be easily interpreted to be used to arrest people that are doing nothing wrong… it is a bad idea.
The law in question is as follows:
§ 21.15. IMPROPER PHOTOGRAPHY OR VISUAL RECORDING.
(a) In this section, “promote” has the meaning assigned by Section 43.21.
(b) A person commits an offense if the person:
- (1) photographs or by videotape or other electronic means visually records another:
- (A) without the other person’s consent; and
- (B) with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or
- (2) knowing the character and content of the photograph or recording, promotes a photograph or visual recording described by Subdivision (1).
(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.
(d) If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under any other law, the actor may be prosecuted under this section or the other law.
Having read the statute he’s charged with and seen it misapplied by an officer in my own town (see http://dallas.org/node/88) … the law itself scares me more than any photographer. In the Southlake case the county prosecutor was smart enough to refuse to prosecute, but the Southlake Police spokesperson had already released the man’s name and town of residence and pretty much publicly branded him as a pervert for taking photographs at a public event.
Try running onto the field at Cowboy stadium to get consent before taking a picture of one of the babes they put onto the field. [HINT: Won't be easy, but it'll be MUCH easier than taking a picture of their cheerleaders which *cant* be perceived as "arousing".]
Seriously… the law includes photos taken “with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of ANY person.”
I don’t know how they can prove intent in this case, but I grew up in a good Baptist environment, and frankly at a certain age half the Sears catalog was “arousing”. All it would’ve required to put any guy I knew in jail would be for the picture to include a female, and it automatically fit this statute. Our high school yearbook photographer coulda been jailed for life.
HATE it when I agree with the ACLU, but the law is bad. If limited it to those in a position to expect privacy ( a dressing room or bathroom) I see use. Photographing someone in public wearing what they put on to go out should be ok.
There are those that’d argue the law is intended to combat pervs that’d take pictures serrupticiously in a bathroom or dressing room and publish them on the net. Well, a law that combats that is a great idea… this just isnt it. This could be interpreted to include any shot of a bikini clad girl at a beach.
[Note to self: Print up consent forms next time you go to Padre.]
Personally I find the majority of photos taken of me are embarrassing regardless of what I’m wearing, but that’s just because they tend to provide very graphic proof I’m not *really* still the same age as I act. There’s a little cognitive dissonance in play.
Still, pictures of people dressed in what they put on to go out in public have never been a problem before. My thought is if somebody can take a photo of you in public that’s worthy of a felony charge… you seriously oughta rethink your wardrobe choices.
I'm Rob Jones... and I approve this message.
Haven’t blogged lately, but I’ll wander outta seclusion for a good cause. If helping sick kids isn’t a good cause, your causometer is busted.
Lotta folk’s in the internet marketing industry will be converging on San Jose for the Search Engine Strategies Conference in August, and that’s the scene for the big event.
The Best of the Web crew and the folks at Bing are sponsoring the IM Charity Party. Bottom line, attendees make a $50 charitable contribution to get in the door ($30 if they pre-register)… and the sponsors pick up all the costs of the party so that every dime of the proceeds go to the designated charities.
The charities are “Doctors Without Borders” and “The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society”.
Details are available on the BOTW Blog (see: SES San Jose Charity Party)… and tickets can be purchased on the IM Charity Party site.
Just trying to get the word out… sounds like a good time, and of course it’s for a great cause. :-)
PS – I might add if the Greg and Rob are gonna go suffer for the cause at an open bar and leave me home tending The Herd… they better at least bring me home a T-Shirt.
I'm Rob Jones... and I approve this message.
Self-Defense
I got an email labeled “Self Defense” this week from my brother-in-law Michael… a Naval Academy grad who served his country two tours in Viet Nam. It started with a narrative of a guy being awakened by intruders in his own home. The man grabbed a shotgun and went out to see who the heck broke into his house and was soon face-to-face with two men in the dark… one wielding some crowbar-like weapon and coming at him.
The homeowner did the only thing he should have done, and let loose with the scattergun inside his own home. Both intruders went down, one died.
I immediately recognized the story as that of Tony Martin when the text turned to discussing how the owner was subsequently vilified in the press and the intruders, both of whom had a criminal history, were treated as lovable rogues who were mistreated by a vengeful old man who snuffed one out in the prime of young manhood and caused irreparable damage to the other by his unconscionable action.
The true story occurred in the UK, where gun laws slowly crept to the point to where there are just not very many legal ways to use them for self-defense. Granted, had the man NOT had the shotgun he’d have been in the news too (as a death statistic most likely), but in the true tale he was sentenced to life in prison.
How Did We Get Here
Slowly. That’s how. It CAN happen in the US too, despite the fact that our 2nd amendment was put there to eliminate the possibility. You cannot read the writings of Thomas Jefferson without agreeing that he felt the 2nd was there to enable us defend ourselves jointly and individually from whatever danger confronted us, including all forms of two-legged predators.
His writings included statements that an armed populace is a hedge against a tyranical government, and that laws disarming citizens only assured criminals of a safer working environment because those that’d break the law to hurt you would certainly break the laws saying they couldnt have firearms… whereas law-abiding citizens would be by definition disarmed under that circumstance.
“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes….Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.
Thomas Jefferson’s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting Cesare Beccaria’s of “On Crimes and Punishment”
Yep… TJ was the guy that wrote the statement that is the basis for “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Next time you call the guys in the NRA “gun-nuts”… try to recall they are in rather auspicious company.
Changing Times
Some will say that times have changed and the constitution must change with them. Well, for starters… if you believe that, then try changing the constitution, not writing laws that are in direct contradiction to it. “Shall NOT be infringed” has meaning. If you don’t like that part of the constitution, change it by legal means if you can.
Fine, You can Have a Flintlock ONLY
Gotta love that argument that says the 2nd should only apply to guns in existence at the time the constitution was written. Really? If so, are you prepared to only apply the first amendment to handset type… or would you assume it also covers the internet, newspapers, radio, television, etc…?
Most anti-gun people have to do cerebral contortions worthy of an Olympic gymnast to try to make their arguments seem cogent, but the simple fact is they try to interpret every amendment as broadly as possible UNTIL they talk of the 2nd… then suddenly things are different.
Generational Change
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think those that want stringent gun control are *intentionally* disingenuous… I think they are a product of their times, as I am. I was raised by the WW2 generation. The men that affected my life HAD to carry a gun in their early days and it was the only thing between them and survival.
They knew it only performed on command, they were familiar with it, they knew it was a tool for survival. A huge portion of our country was involved in WW2, and their progeny were raised knowing the value of a firearm in keeping ones life.
NEXT!
The crop of adults coming into the world next were raised not by the guys that saved the world from the Axis powers… but by a generation much of whom spent their formative years dodging the draft and or protesting against it during the Viet Nam era. Their parents mostly did not go to war, they argued about it.
Where my parents grew up in a nation largely rural by nature and gun-friendly by design… the new crew grew up with little positive contact with guns. Guns were what criminals used and police had them to fight criminals. The end. Normal people just didnt own them.
Pardon me for not feeling their pain, but the simple fact is their perceptions that guns are evil do not change my constitutionally protected right to bear arms. In truth they are lucky the rest of us exist, because guys that’d do a home breakin don’t know which house I live in and which one they do.
How Does That Work in Reality?
Test it if you like. Put up a sign on your house that says “gun free zone”. Have a neighbor put up one that says “Protected by Smith and Wesson”. If one of them is gonna be subject to a home invasion… it aint gonna be the second one. People that do that sort of thing prefer NOT to get shot. Just works that way.
Media Influence
The media (whether we’re talking news media or entertainment) is also extremely anti-gun… for reasons we can only guess at. Their story is that it is because they are intellectually superior… though I personally consider Thomas Jefferson a helluvalot smarter than Rosey O’Donnell and her ilk.
If More Guns Cause Crime… Do More Spoons Cause Obesity?
Oddly that particular bastion of anti-gun fervor has her own armed bodyguard, and even if you ignore the hypocrisy (oh, it’s ok if somebody ELSE pulls the trigger to keep you safe) and accept the premise of her arguments about guns… you’d have to also accept that the answer to her obesity issues would be to outlaw spoons.
The effect of a media drenched society in which virtually everyone with an outlet to speak thinks guns are evil is that hordes of impressionable minds are led to believe people like Thomas Jefferson either didnt think firearms were appropriate or else the times have changed and NOW we have the police to protect us.
911 – A Great Way to Find the Victim
Police with any integrity will tell you that they cant possibly protect each and every individual. Most I’ve spoken to have taught their own spouse to fire a gun and have one in their home for self-defense. I’d also posit that it is intellectually dishonest to suggest that somehow you think you are clean if you call somebody *else* with a gun to accomplish what is necessary for your own defense.
There’s nothing wrong with calling 911…
But I’d suggest that in a home invasion scenario it’s highest and best use is to get the police there to remove a bleeding criminal from my carpet… not to find my own corpse. It’s my house. If the sumbitch wanted to live he shoulda knocked on the door like everyone else. Sorry, I have no compassion on that score.
You’re just a “gun nut” (aka: My Own Experience)
Actually, I own over a dozen or so, but I have only drawn a gun on a human once in my life. I didnt fire it, but I did convince him not to stab the guy he had on the ground who was helpless and in danger of losing his life. Guns do not always have to be fired to save a life, they’re remarkably effective visual aids, but then stories where somebody *saves* a life without taking one just aren’t newsworthy.
My guess is the guy that was on the ground is happy I had a gun in my car that day, and the attacker that was subsequently arrested after being held at bay (with what he didnt know was an unloaded gun) is probably banging the drum to get handguns outta the clutches of the populace. If you’re anti-gun… remember, so is HE.
Current Issues
The Tony Martin story may have happened in the UK, but it isnt far away here. In the UK, laws restricting guns were passed incrementally over about an 80 year period. Licensing requirements made it easy to ID and confiscate the arms of legitimate owners who would be criminals if they didnt give up their arms when subsequent laws made them illegal. As such I absolutely oppose registration requirements… those only give a government a way to disarm law abiding citizens… and my constitutional rights are only protected by the constitution… not GRANTED by it.
If that sounds like an extreme position… bear in mind it is also a paraphrase of something said by Thomas Jefferson. I’m not the least bit shy in suggesting the architect of many documents building the strongest free nation in the world was smarter than any of the people currently running it.
Memorial Day
Anyway, didnt plan to write a thesis… but those are the thoughts that come to mind on this day when we honor those that’ve donned the uniform to defend our nation and to aid those oppressed. To them I say thank you. Those home safely at peace owe that condition to those that put themselves in harm’s way on our behalf.
God bless each of you, past and present. Thank you for your service.
I'm Rob Jones... and I approve this message.
The most amazing Cinderella story to hit Kentucky Derby history in ages. The horses flown over in jets by bazillionaires didnt win. The big name high-dollar horses didnt win.
They all got blown away (6 and a half lengths) by a horse that was transported to Louisville in a trailer behind a pickup from New Mexico by the trainer, who was sporting a broken leg. It was probably a $20,000 horse *before* the race. It won at 50 to 1 odds.
The jockey was still on the horse being interviewed, almost crying in the emotion of the moment when suddenly…
We interrupt this program to give you Breaking News!
A big-ass tent at Valley Ranch in which the Dallas Cowboys were practicing blew over. Here’s a live picture of the cloth building NOT standing. Now let’s go live to the scene, where whats-her-name is interviewing people about a tent blowing down.
Seriously, nobody cares. Nobody. You people are just too damned stupid to live.
What a Glorious Time We Live In
How can you not appreciate the availability of a universal excuse?
Much as it pains my soul to give credit to someone whose thoughts I’d much rather steal… here’s what I consider the definitive “get off your ass and do something about it” dictum from someone that is practicing what they preach, the girls (or “ladies”, “women”… pick a descriptive noun of your liking) of Outspoken Media.
Without further fanfare, take a moment to read “It’s Not the Recession, You Just Suck”.
[And yes, this *will* be on the test.]
Bottom line…
Yeah, sure… there have been better times in our economy, times when “showing up” was all that was required. For those that haven’t been paying attention, this ain’t one of ‘em. That doesn’t mean we wring our hands and wish for a different time.
In golf you play the ball where it lies, in poker you play the hand you’re dealt. In whitewater canoing you ride the rapids that are present, not the water you’d prefer… and dodge the rocks that are really there. In life you work with the economic conditions you’re in, not those you long for.
Opportunity is *always* there for those that actively seek it out and act on it. Thanks for the reminder, girls. Only thing I could add to their message is the wisdom of our grandfathers…
You don’t learn a damned thing when you get kicked by the mule the second time.
I'm Rob Jones... and I approve this message.
Hi Byron…
I hear you lost Tyla. You girls seem to be making all the wrong moves lately. What a shame.
Also noticed you arent doing well on the ONE Google search you absolutely need . I’d mention what it is, but don’t feel generous. [Sorry kid.] I suspect the loss was due to your own actions anyway (hate it when that happens). You are one highly skilled webmaster. LOL. Congrats on bringing your own web orders down. It will continue to get worse unless you fix your error.
What is that?
Umm… thats not my problem. Have fun figuring it out, you ignorant rookie.
Have a great Easter
Hope you and the half bro (a fine manager) are well. He’s a peach, and you do a great job of fulfilling the role of the flying monkey. :-p
Love ~ Rob
- I’m Rob Jones, and I approve this message.
Thanks to Moose (aka: Larry Watson) for this contribution via email.
Yeah… I’m gonna go with the theory that a good man could be driven to strong drink by being introduced to that particular promise.
I'm Rob Jones, and I approve this message.
