Isn’t it about time to bring the issue of gun ownership to the forefront?

The fascination of shooting as a sport depends almost wholly on whether you are at the right or wrong end of the gun. - P. G. Wodehouse

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the so-called 'Right to Bear Arms' Amendment, was ratified on December 15, 1791. The exact wording of this amendment says: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Beginning late in the second half of the century just past, this Amendment became the center of a fierce and protracted argument between two factions. On the one hand are those who proclaim that this amendment guarantees us the right to own a gun. On the other hand, are those who say that not only have the times in which we live left this entire idea behind, but that those who claim that this amendment gives us the exclusive right to own firearms have misinterpreted the amendment.

The simple argument to counter those who believe that this amendment continues to give us the right to own guns is to point out that none of us are members of a militia, since our nation no longer (and, has not for many generations) requires the continued existence of a militia. Instead, we have a standing Army which exists to provide us with that security the Constitution also guarantees to us. Yes, I tend to agree with this second interpretation, because I do not see how we can accept part of this statement without accepting all of the statement. No militia, no arms. It is as simple as that.

Maybe if we were under threat of an imminent attack by an enemy force it would make sense to maintain a militia. But, first of all, consider this: how long has it been since any army attacked us on our shores? Secondly, what good would a standing militia have done against the idiots who hit us on September 11? The answer to the first question is nearly two hundred years, when we were attacked by the British, during the course of the War of 1812. To answer the second question, just consider how much good it did us to have the FBI, the CIA, all the Armed Forces of the United States, all the local law enforcement of an entire nation, not to mention an active U. S. Customs Service and the U. S. Immigration and Naturalization Service all in place and active up to and including that infamous day.

Beyond the lack of a militia, there are more compelling reasons for us to no longer cling to this antiquated idea. It may have made sense when we each had to put our own meat on the table, but think about it. If you have a choice between going to the supermarket, or a good meat market, where you can buy any cut of meat you want, or go out and either freeze your butt off, or sweat it off, then get filthy dirty in the process of finding an animal to kill, then you have to dress it. Have you ever dressed a fresh kill? I didn't think so. Would you really want to? Do you have any idea how much it might cost you if you add up all the costs of outfitting yourself properly, transportation to and from the site of your kill, storage of your fresh meat, and so on? Now, logically, doesn't it really make more sense to go pay six bucks for a pound of decent beef, and all you have to do is decide how to prepare it?

Those who favor gun ownership also make the claim that legitimate farmers or ranchers need firearms, maybe if one of their animals needs to be 'put down,' or also to protect the land and livestock of the farmers or ranchers from natural predators. This is not only a lame argument to present, but it is simply not true. When an animal has to be put down (cow or horse with a broken leg, for instance) one can either slit a major artery with a knife, or call a vet, or bash the animal on the skull with a hammer. As for predators, how many are left, after how many generations of being hunted and killed on sight? Or, think about this: before firearms were available to the common man, what did farmers use for these purposes?

Next, and think very hard about this, now: if no one was allowed to own any sort of firearm, against whom would any of us need protection? And, while you're at it, think about this: how many murders, per capita, occur each year in Great Britain, where not even the cops carry firearms? "Britain has a long tradition of unarmed police officers walking the beat with only a truncheon for protection." - - (source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/1156341.stm). And, in case you're wondering about per capita murder rates, here is the most recent data I can find: The U. S. ranked 24th, and the United Kingdom ranked 46th, according to Seventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, covering the period 1998 - 2000 (Source: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention). This translated to these rates: for the U. S. - - 0.042802 murders per 1,000 people, and for the United Kindgom - - 0.0140633. I know. I know. You are going to say that any competent statistician (or incompetent one, too, for that matter) can make any set of numbers say anything he wants them to say (at least that is pretty close to what my old professor of Statistics used to say). I agree with that, but I also know that if I hadn't included some numbers, some smart ass somewhere would for sure ask me to cite some numbers, so there you go. My contention here remains that if guns – all guns – were truly outlawed, and if all guns were thus eventually turned in, collected, confiscated, purchased, whatever; and, if there was no such thing as a gun dealer or a weapons sales business or a purveyor of same or a seller of same or a black market dealer in weapons, then not even the criminals would have access to guns. Yes, this means that weapons manufacturers who wanted to stay in business would need to find another product to manufacture. And, would that be so bad? And, yes, I know that this doesn't mean that someone with a knife would be stopped, but it seems to me that there are a hell of a lot less mass murders being committed with a knife than with any kind of gun, now aren't there? And, doesn't that sort of suggest that a future without guns might well continue the same pattern? And, wouldn't that be a good thing?

We really don't need more pictures like this in the world.

Part III – being the third head of our modern Tico version of Cerberus*

The wonderful, marvelous, modern, new 3g Kolbi internet service is here - - NOT!  You know, I am of course used to dealing with mostly American utilities and service providers.  I also have been a customer of Skype for some years, and they are European, I believe.  I will freely admit that the ‘service’ provided to me over the years from cable providers in the states was not always all that good, and I did not find them to be particularly customer oriented, but generally, they did not offer a service that they were not prepared to deliver.  And, with the exception of the cable company, most utilities that I dealt with – all my life – have been quick to apologize for service interruptions, and even to issue a credit for extended service interruptions.  Skype, for example, just recently experienced a worldwide outage that lasted for some hours.  Personally, I was not even aware of this outage, and before I became aware of it, Skype had issued me a credit as a means of apologizing for the outage.  Not only that, but I have received three apologetic emails from them since the outage.

Now we come to my alteration of Winston Churchill’s famous quote.  ICE has a very small market, compared to just about anybody, right?  That’s the ‘few; I referenced.  Then, take the value we ‘few’ receive from ICE, especially with this Kolbi thing.  That is the ‘little’ I mentioned.  As for the “many,” I mentioned, that would be the many, oh so many, too many employees of ICE.

By the way, the name, Kolbi, it has been explained to me, is the national frog of this little country, and I gotta question the use of such a symbol for this particular purpose.  I mean, many things come to mind when I hear ‘frog,’ but none of them inspire anything resembling what I might want from a service or product – you know, the little things like, oh…say, reliability, dependability, strength, value for money; stuff like that).  OK, maybe if they were quick to “hop” to providing service?  But, we all know better than that, don’t we?

Once more, here’s the thing:  back in December of 2009, that young man I mentioned at the beginning of this epic, came home to spend his holidays with his parents.  He came to see me the day after his arrival in our area, very excited to tell me that he believed ICE (his employer) was about to offer the solution to what I had been complaining about for months.  That would be the solution to my lack of a reliable and fast internet connection (because all I had available to me, up to that time, was dial up).  You see, he knew that I really wanted to be able to watch American Football, via my Slingbox, that was already set up back in Texas.  He excitedly told me about the Kolbi data card/modem.  He mistakenly said that they were going to provide download speeds of 1Gbps (that’s Giga Bit Per Second), which certainly got my attention.

He then went all the way to Tilaran the next day to get his own data card.  He came back that afternoon and showed it off to me, with his laptop, in my little living room.  We both understood that this was new, and that ICE was saying that there was an introductory price for the present because they were acknowledging that their system was not complete, so they could not promise the top speed just yet.  The understanding that we both had was that we were going to pay a very small amount per month until the system was truly up and running, and able to provide a high speed, then we would automatically get the highest speed, and our bill would go up accordingly.

Oh, he was wrong on so many accounts!  First of all the top speed promised was and is an occasional foray up to a certain point, but by no means was it being promised to be a consistently high speed.  And, it certainly was not anywhere near 1Gbps.  It was only 1Mbps (MegaBitPerSecond)**, and the wording is something like, “capable of speeds up to,” as opposed to something like, “offering sustained download speeds of 1Mbps.”  Here we come to another area that might require a bit more explanation:  I have found a web site that does a real speed test, one that offers the user an explanation for why their (ICE’s) supposed high speed internet ain’t.  It is provided by a thing called VisualWare, and is located at this URL:  http://myspeed.visualware.com/servers/namerica/iad.php?testtype=-2&codebase=speedtest.phonoscope.com&message=Speed%20testing%20help%20aids%20in%20customer%20pre%20qualification&location=USA:%20Houston,%20Texas&ver=8&map=namerica&codec=speedstd&codectext=Standard%20View&width=600&provtext=Phonoscope&provlink=http://www.phonoscope.com/

          I know, that’s a long URL, but the test provided sure serves to make me feel bad about my connection.  Yes, I said bad, and that is just what I meant to say.  What I get from their speed test is not just download and upload speeds, but also a very important little item that they label as “Quality of Service,” which is the best indicator of whether or not one really has a broadband connection.  If this percentage is low, one cannot hope to do something as simple as complete a satisfactory VOIP call, let alone ever hope to stream video or have a video conference, via VOIP.  Would it surprise you to know that my ‘Quality of Service’ is rarely up to snuff?  Just now, this morning, I ran a test, and it is actually pretty good for me, at my location.  Here is what the results look like:

 (Just click on the image to bring up a larger size).

          My download speed is rated at 974Mbps, which is pretty good for the Kolbi, and the upload speed of 291Mbps is really good for Kolbi.  Mind you, that upload speed is not as good as I would like it, but it’s better than the 150, or less that ICE usually gives me.  Now, you may have noted that the overall Quality of Service is 84%, which, according to this web sites, is not really adequate for video.  However, that being said, would you believe that 84% is better than I usually have?  And, it is raining cats and dogs right now!  Go figure.  Oh.  One more thing.  You may have noticed that the site thinks I am in the U. S. A.  That is because I use a VPN to hide my true location, since Costa Rica is noted to be a center of serious worldwide internet fraud, and many legitimate web sites, all over the world, block IP’s that are read as being in Costa Rica.

          Now, to carry on, let me sum up.  I signed up for an internet connection that I thought would give me adequate speed to do what I most wanted to do, which is watch American TV via my Slingbox/Slingcatcher combination.  My research has taught me that speed alone is not what I need for acceptable video streaming.  You see, without an adequate upload speed, whatever website you go to for downloading, doesn’t know that you want to download unless you tell them, and you can’t tell them if they can’t receive your information because your upload speed is so slow as to not be able to reach them.  Beyond that, if the connection that you achieve is not clean (jitter and other obscure technical terms apply here), you cannot hope to stream video, no matter how fast your download speed might be.

So, here I sit, more than a year into this thing.  The outages have been frequent, inexplicable, and extensive.  Never once have I heard an apology from ICE.  Even though I have gone in person to the local ICE office many times, never an explanation for outages, never an explanation for why they still are not delivering what I am paying for, never an explanation for why the service is so bad, and certainly, never any offer of credit or refund for the times when service was out.  In short, I sit here now telling you that more than one ICE employee has actually told me that I have two choices:  (1), Accept what they laughingly offer, or (2), don’t.  Can you imagine any reputable business, anywhere in the world having the audacity to offer a service that they cannot deliver, and then having the chutzpah to continue charging for the service that they do not deliver, simply because they know that their customers have no choice in the matter?!  Can you say monopoly?

To get back to that question asked in Part I of this opus, about how they can charge so much for so little:  Yes, I know a large part of the answer is obvious, and I’ve already touched on it.  That would be simply the fact that there are too many Chiefs and not enough Indians.  But, it goes beyond that:  There are too many employees, period.  There are too many folks who don’t want to work.  There are too many folks who can’t think beyond a very narrow set of parameters, as in beyond their own little job description.  There are too many folks who are either afraid to accept, or simply incapable of accepting, any responsibility for ever making a decision.  The saddest thing of all is that monopoly is a dirty word to most of us, but it is not only in Costa Rica that the concept is alive and well.  Look at the size of AT&T once again.  Look at the size of Exxon/Mobil.  Does anyone out there remember what Teddy Roosevelt did?

*Cerberus – according to Greek Mythology, this was the three headed dog that guarded the gates of Hell.  I know that ICE has more than three heads, but in my case there are only three that apply – electric, phone, and Kolbi.  And, I don’t think you can argue that once in (a paying customer of ICE) there ain’t no place else around here that so closely approximates most accepted descriptions of Hell as the inner workings of ICE.

** Clarification of those measurements:  mega means million, and giga means billion, so giga is 1000 times mega.

Part II: Skating On Thin _ _ _.

A continuation of a little something about our mutual friends at ICE started yesterday……….

I, for one, have no choice but to go to them (ICE) for telephone service (landline), cell phone (if I wanted one bad enough to deal with them for this, too, but fortunately I don't need one), and the current bane of my existence, their marvelous, up to date, dependable, reliable, clean and sharp 3g service, known as Kolbi. But, first, let me tell you about how we got a landline connected at our house.

We knew, while construction was going on, and while we were waiting for our cedulas, that we could not even think of asking for a phone until that pesky little residency thing was finalized. So, we didn't. Once we got our cedulas, however, and even before we took our first trip back to Texas (for an event that we knew was coming, our oldest son's wedding in October of 2009), I went to ICE to request a phone. I carefully explained that I already had undertaken to have the line run from our neighbor's property to ours totally underground. What I asked of them was to provide the line from the road down to that pole, and make the connection. There was no need for any digging or for any additional poles to be placed. Just run the line, right? I also explained that we had a document prepared by our attorney, with all necessary signatures, that gave us – and ICE – permission to run any lines needed over the neighbor's property.

They said there should be no problem, and upon accepting my deposit, they printed out a document that they said should be posted in a prominent location for their representatives to see when they got to the property to assess what was going to be needed for our connection. We then posted that notice on our house, explained everything to the caretaker, and took our trip. This notice was essentially to their (ICE's) representative/engineer, to see upon his arrival at our property, explaining to him that all fees had been paid, and even listing our eventual phone number. His job, as I understood it, was to simply look over the situation, walk the property as needed, and give the go ahead to the folks in the office to go ahead and run the additional line (on existing poles, from the road, over the neighbor's property, to the pole on her property where they were to connect to our line) required.

Upon our return from our trip, we were of course disappointed to pick up the phone, and to see that it still did not work. Timeline to this point, by the way, looks about like this: request to ICE, in their office, was made by me, and a deposit paid, on or about September 15. We left for Texas on Sept. 20, and returned from Texas on Oct. 10. So, we're only talking about three weeks and a couple of days at this point.

We naturally asked our caretaker what had happened, and found that he really didn't have a clue. He thought that someone had come from ICE, but wasn't really sure (you should be aware that this is as much due to his being a few fries shy of a happy meal, as to any actions on the part of any ICE representative). He just couldn't tell us anything.

So, I went to ICE, and learned that they didn't really know what had happened. I next asked them to please send their engineer, or whatever, back, so that I could actually talk to him. He came. I showed him my documents. I showed him where my line ran underground. I showed him where the pole is located on my neighbor's property. I showed him where the line runs, on her property, from the road. He said he understood that ICE did indeed have her permission to run my line on her property, and he said that he would give the go ahead for the connection.

A week went by. Nothing happened. So, I went again to ICE's local office. Now, I was told that the engineer, after talking to me, and after reading the documents that I had showed to him, and after being given a copy of said document, had reportedly gone to the trouble to speak directly to the neighbor, asking for her verbal OK. Again, reportedly, she had denied permission. So, I asked how could this be, and why did he feel that he had to talk to her, in the first place. In my presence the clerk placed a phone call. She told me that she was calling my neighbor personally (my neighbor happened to be in San Jose that day, so she called her on her cell). I, of course, only heard one side of the conversation. The clerk concludes her call and says the neighbor has just denied permission to her, yet again.

So, here I am, truly pissed at my neighbor, with whom I haven't spoken for a time, but who had recently, on the street in town, agreed with me that ICE could run my phone line through her property whenever they wanted to. So, next, a friend of ours, a Tica, and a truly lovely lady, went with Blanca (my wife), to talk to our neighbor. Again, she (our neighbor) couldn't be nicer, and repeated that she had no problem with ICE running my line through her property. She also repeatedly said that she had never once denied ICE any permission to go through her property. As a matter of fact, all agreed that this was the most logical way to hook us up. This was again communicated to the local ICE office, by me and by the neighbor.

What we finally figured out was that ICE wanted to run the line down the road, maybe fifty meters west of where our neighbor's line runs, and make me pay for all of the posts that this would take, so that the line would then be ready for future use for any other people who might happen along. I guess I should mention that we are on a public road (at least according to the municipalidad that has authority over our area. And, here we have yet another Costa Rican idea that is similar, yet very different from what gringos might be used to – municipality might mean a city government, but here it refers to what is more like a county-wide jurisdiction), and let's face it, it is sort of logical for a public phone line to run along a public road. However, we were very much aware that we were the only ones on said public road, and that the shortest route between us and the nearest lines, was to go across private land, and that is all we were asking for in this instance. But, evidently the fine folks at ICE had decided that by stalling my request, I would eventually agree to pony up the significantly larger amount of money that it would take to do what they wanted, as opposed to simply acceding to my original request.

It only took a few more weeks before one day two guys showed up in a little truck, with a bunch of ladders and stuff, and in less than an hour, they routed wire from the road, along our neighbors existing poles, and hooked us up right where we had asked for it all those weeks before. And, here is another twist: Those two guys? They were sub-contractors to ICE, because ICE evidently doesn't do any actual connections in our area! However, the phone is still working, albeit less than totally clear at all times, over a year later! But, here is the thing: yes, the phone is pretty much there, but not really all there, if you know what I mean. Lemme 'splain:

Not too long after the phone was finally connected, we started to run into people who asked us what was wrong with our phone because they had tried to call, but never could get through. Turns out, as improbable as this sounds, that the ringers on three separate phones all got fried at approximately the same time, so that if someone was calling us, we had no way of knowing since our phones made no sound! Not only did that happen, but the caller ID ceased to function. So, I had to buy a separate item, a ringer that I stuck on the wall, and it connects to the phone jack, and a phone then connects to it. As if this is not bad enough, we also have noticed that many times the phone rings, we answer it, and there is no one there. People trying to reach us tell us the phone rings, but then just stops. We easily confirmed this because many times when we answer no one is there, so we hang up, and then the phone rings again, and we do this over and over until we find someone on the other end who tells us that they have been trying for numerous times to reach us.

Naturally, there is nothing that ICE can do, and I can sort of see their position. You see, in order to connect us the subcontractors had to run easily over a hundred meters of line, probably more, from the road down to the pole where our line was waiting. My guys, the ones who ran our phone line underground, from the house, up to that pole, had left at least 20-30 meters of coiled line hanging on that pole. The sub-contractors didn't bother to cut off the excess, but connected to the end of that coil. So, I have at least 200, maybe more, meters of phone line running down here, without benefit of any sort of equipment to maintain a strong signal. Undoubtedly, some of the original signal strength, as found in the main line, up on the road, has been lost, so I can't ever expect to get a clean phone connection, without even more expense.

There is more to come, so stayed tuned for Part III.

The Spy Who Came For Dinner (and never left), or The Men From I. C. E.

Winston Churchill said: "Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." I say: "Never in field of utility service was so little owed by so few to so many."

Note: This piece was written at the request of the publisher of Top10CostaRica.com, and has already been published at that site, prior to some further editing.

Part I of III

Oftentimes, when thinking about certain local institutions (OK, just one, really) I recall those evil organizations from the spy movies and from television back in the early sixties. You know; the enemies of all mankind, the ones who wanted to take over the world. Our only hope was a James Bond, or maybe Dean Martin, in his role of Matt Helm. Wait a minute! What a strange twist of fate! Matt Helm was an agent of I.C.E. (Intelligence Counter Espionage). And, they were the good guys! Now, this is ironic, to say the least. We have come full circle! We have met the new, modern enemy, and he is ICE (say it quickly, with a Texas accent, and you'll see that I have made a pun, intended), but, of course, he was the good guy! Go figure.

This is most definitely NOT about good guys, 'cause even though there may be some good guys in the current employ of Costa Rica's ICE, none of 'em are in a position that might allow them to make any changes for the better, as in save us all from this evil. No, as a matter of fact, the good guys I know at ICE suffer right along with the rest of us, shrug their shoulders, and say, "Pura Vida, mae."

Now, one young man who I actually know, and who happens to work for ICE has a degree in Electrical Engineering, and is moving rapidly upward in the hierarchy at that institution (do you suppose, btw, that they named it as an institution however many years ago that they named it, because they knew how closely it would come to resemble bedlam?). Unfortunately, this young man is involved with the electrical supply side of things, rather than the internet 'service,' which is where I have the most problems with ICE.

But, just because I have more problems with their internet that is not to say that their phone service is anything to brag about, nor is their provision of electricity lacking in problems, or spikes on a meter. Actually, here is some real irony for you. Costa Rica can rightly be proud of the fact that ICE does manage to supply an adequate quantity of electricity for the entire country, with little or no sullying of the environment. But, that statement, just like reality, completely ignores the quality (as in, dearth of it), and one has to ask, at what cost, as in "Boy, are their rates ever steep!"?

Now we all know that this is a very seriously labor-intensive nation (one has to deal with three people just to buy one lousy nail at our local hardware store! I used to say screw, but realized that is not appropriate, since the end result is that the purchaser is pretty much well screwed upon his/her egress from the building. But that's another story). And, we know that there does not appear to be any business (other than maybe a Chinese restaurant owned/operated by a family of Chinese immigrants) that ever operates efficiently. Here is just a glimpse of how ICE tops anyone else's attempts at being not only labor-intensive, but seriously wasteful of resources and – naturally – money:

This entity must possess the largest fleet of company owned vehicles (not just per capita, but period) in the entire Western Hemisphere. An example: that young man that I referred to above, who works for ICE, (currently at a lower executive level, but moving up) recently told me how, when the executives have to attend a meeting away from their home office, this will result in the following: say there are four guys from said office going to the meeting in San Jose. Since one of the signs of a successful, one might even say upwardly mobile, ICE exec is to have an assigned car and driver that means that four different cars, with four different drivers will all make the trip. Multiply that by however many execs are attending from different parts of the country, and you get an idea of how many wasted man hours and how much wasted energy this represents. Just take a drive along any of the country's horrible roads. I guarantee you that you will see more vehicles with an ICE logo, usually with only one or two people in them, than you will see of anything else.

Now, what has me totally discombobulated, not to mention confused is this: I do not believe that any other nation on the face of this earth can make as strong a claim to be providing mostly clean energy. But, why is it so expensive? I mean, we are all aware that we pay more per kilowatt hour than any of us paid back in Gringolandia. The hydroelectric plants are in place, and some of them are really old. Windmills have been up and running for many years now. Geothermal plants have been established for a good while. Granted, new plants – both geo- and hydro- in nature, are being constructed as I write these words, and that cannot be cheap, since all the heavy equipment required both for the construction, and for the actual production of electricity, has to be imported. But, as those idiots on ESPN's MNF like to say, "Come on, Man!" Why is your unreliable product so expensive?

In one recent day I counted eight (8) – yes, that's right ocho – power interruptions! All of very brief duration, granted, but what effect do you suppose that many stop/start cycles has on expensive appliances like refrigerators, air conditioners (at the beach), and so forth? I know what effect it had on my PC. The boot portion of the HDD was fried, and I had to spend a day, plus, doing a complete system restoration. The good news is that I am capable of performing this kind of technical feat on my own, but imagine what it costs those of us who have to rely on local expertise in these situations. And, tell me, please, what kind of electrical system is so unstable? To answer my own question, let me suggest that a poorly maintained, and poorly operated, not to mention poorly constructed system might well operate so inefficiently.

Because of all the bad reports I have heard about not only frequent power surges, but ICE's lack of involvement in restoring what their customers lose due to said power surges, and in the interest of protecting my things, I have purchased and installed a whole house surge protector device. I try to remember to unplug certain items at night, not to conserve energy, but in case of yet another surge that might fry delicate circuitry. I made my contractor show me the installed grounds, and I have gone out of my way to reinforce some of the poorly grounded items that I have found. My PC is now connected via one of those UPS devices. So, not only is the questionable service overpriced, but you have to go to extra expense in other ways just to protect your various electrical/electronic devices.

More important, however, is that no one ever asks out loud, and certainly no one ever offers any explanation, regarding the main question here: "How in God's sweet name does ICE possibly justify charging so much for so little?" I'll try to answer that, and other questions, a bit later. But, first let me remind you, just in case you forgot, that ICE is also charged with providing other services, besides electricity. However, since this thing is starting to take on a life of its own, and I now realize I have two areas to cover yet, I think I'll save that for Part II.

A confession of sorts…….

"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov

I confess that I read the online AMCostaRica.com most every day. I know that Jay is not the world's most professional journalist, and he does not employ the most conscientious of journalists to write for his electronic rag, but where he really gets my goat is in his selection of letters from his readers, where they freely express their opinions. I know that he likes (as would any responsible newspaper person) to see controversy stirred up, so as to stimulate people's thinking and get them talking. But, from my perspective he has a tendency to publish the stupidest, most insipid letters, and then chooses not to publish the responses that you know he gets to those letters. OK, maybe this is my sensitive feelings because it seems like he pretty much ignores all of my responses, no longer publishing any of them, and only acknowledges my responses to these letter with an occasional email, pointing out where he thinks I have it wrong. Be that as it may, I no longer bother sending him anything, since it makes no sense to waste the time I spend on it.

However, just today I was going to really go off on a Mr. Colborn, because his letter is nothing more than a rant from a professional victim, but then I saw the second letter Jay published today, from an Alana Shaffer, of Sardinal. All bets are off. No contest, this lady's letter is screaming for somebody to try to set her straight, even though I know this is not a reasonable goal, since she is most likely a card-carrying, paid-up-member of the Flat Earth Society. But, here goes, anyway:

Please, lady, cite for us just one legitimate scientific study that supports your misinformed beliefs. I know that she likely does not believe in science, while she blithely goes on watching television, and movies, talking and texting, taking her medicine and her 'supplements,' and, of course, avoiding like the plague any food that is not organically produced. And, of course, she likely has no idea of where her food really comes from, and ignores the fact that science produced most of things that make her life easy and comfortable. She also probably believes that the gardener who weeds out his carrots, and removes the plants that don't grow quickly is not interfering with any "natural selection," but completely allowing God's plan to move forward. Likewise, she is blissfully unaware that the pig farmer and the cattleman have deliberately, for many, many generations, interfered with natural selection in order to produce more meat for less cost, with more disease resistance, and so on. All of which constitutes the oldest and simplest methods of genetic manipulation, but she would not see things this way. But, wait. She's probably a vegan or a vegetarian, so as not to interrupt any delicate balance of nature.

She says that genetically modified foods are "proving to be far inferior, severely allergenic, and sometimes even lethal to the consumer." Proven by whom? Inferior in what way? Where is her proof of these ridiculous charges? Give me a break! She obviously did not even read Jay's original article (http://www.amcostarica.com/wednesday.htm#77) to which she made reference, did she? She believes that chocolate is a fruit of the Gods, "designed perfectly for our consumption," does she? I will bet dollars to donuts that she has no concept of just what goes into making that fruit of the Gods palatable for human consumption. I'll bet she also has no knowledge of just how the ancients first used this 'fruit,' either. She probably, in her total ignorance, believes that one just goes out and picks a Hershey bar off the tree whenever the mood strikes one. To get back to my request for her to cite any authoritative source of information to support her claims, let's be clear that it will not satisfy this request for her to do one of those loaded Google searches, either. You know the one. That would be the one where she inputs something like, "harmful effects of genetically modified food production," rather than simply inputting "genetic modification of plants." Unfortunately, this lady is like so many others who make up their mind with minimal information, and nothing, not Hell nor High Water, will change their minds, once they have committed to a life-long system of misguided beliefs and values.

I think that what bothers me most about people like this is that they are not satisfied with clinging to unreal ideas, but want to impose their skewed beliefs onto others. And, then, I fall into the trap of speaking out and trying to show them the errors of their ways, even though I know full well that their minds are closed to new information, or anything that does not fit their preconceived idea of what is right and proper. Oh, well, pura vida con o sin genetically modified food.

Tranquilo, Mae……..

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. - - Martin Luther King Jr. (1929 - 1968), Strength to Love, 1963

NOTE: this article has already appeared, in slightly different form, at Top10CostaRica.com.

I recently posted a link on this Blog to the report of the study that shows people who watch FOX News are less than optimally intelligent. I believe that this explains a bit about why I get into so many pointless discussions online. Folks who do not expose themselves to more than one source for news tend to make quick judgments that are all too often incorrect. I, on the other hand, like to hear all the evidence, or points, or sides to a story before I make up my mind on a given topic.

This likely has to do with two major influences on my thinking. First, in order to function well as a Nurse, one has to be observant enough to catch what is going on, and then be able to report objectively just what it was that has been observed. This is very important in dealing with the care and treatment of all patients. Second, later in my Nursing career, I worked for ten years as an Investigator for The Texas State Board of Medical Examiners. I received further training during that time that not only reinforced my already acquired abilities in this area, but that taught me how to gather, preserve, and present evidence in a legal sense.

Another factor in the way I look at things is that, while gathering evidence, noting my observations, and reporting these faithfully, I had to strive to maintain objectivity, because my responsibility was not to provide my own opinions regarding what I observed, or what I uncovered in the course of an investigation. Nor was it my responsibility to offer any sort of conclusions (beyond the obvious summarizing of an investigative report to say that the contents either served as evidence of a violation or did not), recommendations for decisions based on the information thus gathered, or to offer any direction for continued care, or handling of a given situation. That is not to say that I was prohibited from recommending in certain investigations that further action may or may not be appropriate.

Now the folks with whom I have trouble seem to be those who form strong opinions based on little real data, or hard evidence. This either leads to a tendency to forget one of the most basic premises of our legal system, the concept that says all men are innocent until proven guilty. Or, more likely, this is simply indicative that some folks have already forgotten this all important principle. For some reason, a lot of people have trouble with that concept, and I just don't understand that. To me it is so simple. Hold off on reaching conclusions about any given situation until you have the facts – all the facts. Don't let others direct your decisions or let others do your deciding for you. I could go on and on, but I'm sure you get the idea.

Most recently, I got into it with some of my Facebook 'friends' about the Wikileaks things, not because I tried to come out in favor of the leaker(s), but because I supported a public announcement that someone famous (Michael Moore, actually) had contributed towards the bail for Mr. Assange. Then, when I was jumped on for simply saying that was a good thing, I further pissed them off by asking them what had happened to the ancient legal tenet of one being presumed 'innocent until proven guilty.' That really set them off, because a good number of them are convinced (based on the little real information that the world has seen to date on this matter) that Mr. Assange is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors (some fools want to believe that this Australian gentleman is guilty of treason against the U. S.) as is the misbegotten U. S. Army PFC, who allegedly accessed and released certain videos and documents.

For those who might have a question about this, let me admit that there is nothing in the U. S. Constitution that says one is innocent until proven guilty, but this is such an ancient – as I said – tenet of law that it is commonly accepted to be as sacred as any other aspect of our legal system. And, it is contained in some actual statutes and written judicial opinions. It is expressed by one learned professional (whose name I did not get) thusly: "The mere mention of the phrase presumed innocent keeps judges and juries focused on the ultimate issue at hand in a criminal case: whether the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the alleged acts."

Maybe what I'm trying to say here is that we can easily apply this thinking to a lot more than just trial law. Obviously, this is not to say that one should hold a thing up to a legal standard, but what is wrong with waiting until all the facts are in before forming an opinion? Beyond that, we all know very well that no one charged with any crime is supposed to be tried in the press, now don't we? So, why do we let the press continue to do just that? Especially certain networks, like that one that is turning some peoples' brains to mush………….? I'm just sayin'………..

Seasons Greetings

I would like to wish everyone a Very Merry Christmas and a Most Happy and Prosperous New Year.  Thanks for stopping by, and thanks for hanging in there.