Right now, December 12th, 2015, the United States is in some pretty harsh times. Paris was victim to a terror event, perpetrated by ISIS, The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. We recently had a mass killing in San Bernardino, California, perpetrated by two Muslim people, one an American born male and one who married him and entered this country on a very poorly vetted marriage Visa. They used two military style assault rifles and two semi-automatic handguns. They also had more than a couple homemade bombs. The first event scared this country, the second event has polarized it. Our news today covers every event in this country with the same intent...to make every tragedy feel like it could happen to the audience. It's not about news, it's about ratings. And, while they pursue THEIR agenda, the rest of the country is scared to death and is moving into their neutral corners. Get ready for a fight. Fight the government, fight Islam, fight the NRA, and fight your neighbors.
Right or wrong, gun control and the 2nd Amendment are once again a topic. The "left" side of our government is clamoring to put better, and tighter, gun control laws into effect. The "right" side is now pushing back and saying that it's terrorism and terrorists we should be focusing on and they are defending their right to own guns. The more the rhetoric rises, the more people on the right are running to the gun stores to buy and own the guns that they may not be able to get in the future, if the laws are restricted. That's where we are right now.
I have to be completely transparent, so I will say a few things about where I fall philosophically. On social issues, I am pretty liberal. On government issues, I am conservative. I personally think that less government is better and I lean towards fiscally conservative policies. So, I am like about 75% of the United States population...I'm not all 'leftist Democrat' nor am I 'right-wing Republican.' Like most of us, I'm somewhere down the middle. While the rest of society tries to figure out what label to slap on me, I'm stuck with government leaders that are widely separated to the far left and far right, and I have no real political representation without taking a side that I would prefer to shun for their extremist views on certain issues.
So, on gun control, personally, I lean toward being able to own firearms if I so choose. I was in the Army as a Military Policeman for four years. I was also trained by the FBI in counter-terrorism and SWAT. I have had to train in, and consider often, the use of force...deadly force. In short, I believe I'm fully qualified to own and possess a firearm. I defend that right. I hadn't touched a gun in almost 30 years. I never thought, in my suburban home, that I needed one. I maintained that thought until my government started to tell me I shouldn't have one. At least, that was my attitude and state of mind as I drove to the Gun Training and Safety Class. In the State of Massachusetts, you have to take that class to get a firearm license. I wanted to preserve my right to own a gun.
So, I went online and found myself a program for the course and signed up for a four hour class. It wasn't easy. Not because it was restrictive, but because they were filling up every class. Full to the rafters, every day. I could barely find a parking space.
As I stood there registering, in a class of about 30-40 people, I took note of the people in the room. It was about 40% female, but a broad spectrum of age ranges. The oldest person was a man who looked about 75. He had his wife with him. There was a family of four, parents and their son (with wife), who all lived together under the same roof. There were boyfriends and girlfriends taking the class together. As I listened to them talk, and you can't not hear them, I realized that they weren't hunters or store-owners, they were just regular people with regular jobs, and they wanted guns. Just like me...but, not really.
I was listening pretty well. There was almost a giddiness amongst them. I'm sure it was driven by nerves. 75% of the class, by my observation of hands, had not handled a firearm in their life. Some of them weren't nervous...which made me more nervous. Some were giddy with anticipation of being able to get their gun. A woman teacher in front of me in the registration line was talking to two other people and said, "If someone is going to attack my kids, I'm going to be ready for it." She may have been shocked later to find out that the State of Massachusetts doesn't allow you to carry a handgun at ANY school...but for the moment, she aggressively wanted to be able to protect her kids. I listened to her and thought, when the SWAT team comes into your invaded school, and they enter your class and if you're holding a handgun, you're going to be one of the fatalities. She truly had no idea what she was talking about, and it was scary to me. I started to look around. How many people in here are like her?
There's a certain look or expression that I expected to see on the faces in this class...and it's not giddiness, or fear. It's the humble and somber expression of someone who fully realizes that they are signing up to be able to hold a human life in the palm of their hands. Maybe my family's life. Maybe mine. I didn't see enough of that look. If this had been a game-show, I would have wanted a button that, when pushed, opened a little panel up under some of these people and just dropped them out of the class. URRRNNNTT. Buh-bye. Thanks for playing. The second amendment says almost anybody should be able to own a gun? Really? Anybody?
The class lasted four hours and covered the laws of possession and transportation and gun safety. I took copious notes. I know nothing of the laws, I never had to. But, if I was considering this, I wanted to know them inside and out. I looked around and saw some scribbles, but no one had four pages of notes like I did. I was one of the most trained people in that class, and I was taking all the notes. I listened to some of the questions asked. I've always heard, "There's no such thing as a dumb question." I'm sorry, in a gun safety class, when this instruction and a police interview is all that stands between the person asking the question and a handgun...there are some dumb questions that are just plain scary.
There was some instruction on the definition and legality of an Assault
Rifle. I just looked at the evolved version of the M-16 that I had used
in the Army, thinking, "That's for hunting? Just how bad a shot ARE
you? And are you going to actually eat that deer with all that lead in
it?" Hey, I don't hunt. It just struck me that I was trained to kill
people with an Assault Rifle, not hunt with it. Someone would really
have to explain to me what that would be needed for in civilian hands.
I sat there deep in thought. I did believe in my 2nd Amendment rights. I truly did. So, why was I so disturbed? It occurred to me that when people say, "Everyone should be able to own a gun," they mean, "I should be able to own a gun." First person. As I looked around, I firmly believed I should be able to own a gun. But, not that person sitting over there. And, certainly, not the manic person sitting behind him. And, not those two girlfriends, one of which just dropped the demo Glock on the floor because she has never held a gun. And, while I was taking away gun privileges, not the aggressive, but well intentioned, teacher.
Then, we all went up to handle some demo guns. They were instructing on how to safely hold, clear, load, and shoot it. That's where I saw the girl drop her gun. She was one of three women who dropped them. I saw guns being waved, as the instructors tried to correct all of the bad behavior. I'm not making fun of these people. They want to own a gun. They were looking at these firearms like they were looking at some strange dog-cat hybrid. There were way too many people with way too many confused looks. I went up and went through the motions. I spent 6 months running a Military Police Armory in Colorado, so, even after 30 years, my mental muscle-memory just kicked in and the guy just looked at me..."Yeah, ugh, you're fine. You can sit down."
I sat down and looked at the young man, about 30, sitting next to me. He had the right expression on his face. So, I asked him, "Are you really going to buy a gun?"
"Yeah."
"Ever shot one before? Do you know anything about them?"
"No," he said nervously. The right kind of nervous.
We talked about what might be right for him in terms of ease of learning, safety, etc. I finally said, "Look, if you're going to get one of those semi-automatics, here's what you're going to do. Buy the gun and buy those training bullets. Do NOT get any real bullets. Take the gun home and pull up a safety YouTube video of your gun and do it over and over with those fake bullets until you know the drill inside and out. When you get the real bullets, don't open them. Take them to a range with a qualified instructor and explain what you are doing and have them walk you through all of it while completely supervised. Then, please, get some additional training." He really seemed to enjoy and feel better about the advice. I felt like I may have saved his life from a tragedy.
Then came the moment many had been waiting for, the live-fire practice with a semi-automatic and a revolver. They took us in groups of seven. I decided, after watching the handling of the firearms by my classmates, that I would go last into the live shooting training. I have life insurance, but I have no desire to use it.
As I sat there, waiting for my turn, another woman in waiting asked a question. She was about 35 and, by her ring finger, she was apparently single. It was the coup-de-grace question of the morning.
"If I'm in my apartment, and a man comes in, how will I know when to shoot him?"
Now, rightly, the instructor thought she meant, "When can I kill an intruder when he enters my home?" He tried to answer that legal issue for her.
"No...no...I mean, when should I pull the trigger?" She had meant, "When, in the course of confrontation, should I kill him?"
Some angry looking guy in the back said, "Whenever you want, he's in your house!"
Where the hell is that game-show button when I need it? My God, I hope she puts that question in quotes on her Match.com profile. It might save some guy's life. Time to eliminate her and the angry guy from this class. Thanks for playing!
Just then, the aggressive little teacher comes back from the range and drops her target on my desk to show me. The target is shaped like a person and there's a smaller square around the chest, the rest is a human body. Her shots were all over it...head, arms, bottom. I hadn't gone in yet, but thought, "How the hell far away was the target?" With a broad grin, she said, "Now, I would say that THAT guy would be really dead!"
Now, I'm not anti-woman, and I'm not trying to pick on them. The men, for some odd reason, even when confused, barely asked questions. At least, of the female population, I knew which ones would be a problem. I had no idea how many of the men would potentially be problems with firearms.
I was seriously conflicted. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Yeah. Got it. People like THESE people kill people...or themselves. Intentionally or by accident. Wow.
I finally went in last to do my shooting. I took a look at the targets. Holy cow. The targets were only about 30 feet away! What the hell had Annie Oakley been shooting at? The instructor tried to tell me how to hold the gun. I just smiled and said, "I was trained by the FBI. It was about 30 years ago, but I'm comfortable with this method." I then put ten shots into a little square about the size of my fist. He laughed and said, "Just like riding a bike, eh?" I was happy my skills hadn't diminished that much. I could still stand a little practice.
I got my certificate and drove off in my car. I was deep in thought. Did I really want a gun? I still don't know. After you eliminate the places where a gun can't be taken, there's almost nothing left. You can bring it to your friend's house and grocery shopping. So, how useful would this privilege be? But, I'm very confident that, no matter what decision I make, that I am competent to be able to own one.
The 2nd Amendment. Written in 1787. At a time when there was no law enforcement, no urban sprawl, everyone already HAD a gun, and it was a flintlock. You got one shot. If you were proficient, you could reload that flintlock in under one minute. Gun powder, tamp it, rod press, drop in the ball round. Bang. In another 60 seconds, if you aren't shot first, you can shoot it again. It wasn't even a revolver. Those came later. I remembered a scene from the movie Tombstone in which Wyatt Earp told the red-sash Cowboys that they couldn't carry revolvers within city limits because the city was civil. They were just carrying revolvers...in the old west!
All that my classmates needed now to possess a gun, after this class, was to apply at the local police station and be cleared by interview, including a background check. Then, it's wait for the license and off to the gun store. If I were to make a rule here, it would be that you had to take and pass a written test, and then a physical one, in front of a trained instructor, that demonstrated that you could safely and proficiently use a gun.
It stands to reason, to me, that there has to be a common-sense middle ground for this issue. There has to be. Because, there is no game-show button. If there had been, that forty person class would have about 8 people holding certificates.
I stand firm on my 2nd Amendment Right. Just, maybe, not yours...or yours...or yours.
How to Use this Blog Site
This blog is about the random thoughts that go through my head on a daily basis. These rants are simply my responses to the experiences in my life and the things going on in the world today.
If you want to keep up with this blog, please become a 'follower' on the right and you will get updates when I add something.
If you want to keep up with this blog, please become a 'follower' on the right and you will get updates when I add something.
Sunday, December 13, 2015
Friday, January 30, 2015
"No One Wrote Down the PSI?"
Unfortunately, after almost two weeks of questions, accusations and media overkill, we now know that the most critical element to winning a football game is the PSI of the football being used. It trumps planning, strategy, execution and, yes, even talent. It is perhaps the single most important facet of the game.
That said, when that's the case, why would you measure the balls to be between 12.5 and 13.5 PSI and then give them back to the teams? Doesn't that invite almost any modification to the ball? Of course, it does. It's supposed to...that's how the NFL wants it.
If the ball's PSI is so important, what about the other aspects of the ball? You can basically scuff the surface off of the ball to get a better grip, it just can't weigh less? The pressure of the ball trumps even the ability to grip it? Yes, it does. Apparently. Because, that's how the NFL wants it.
Why did the NFL, just several years ago, change the rule so that the ball could be modified at all? Well, for the same reason that they changed the rules about hitting a Quarterback after the play...or in the head...or below the knees...or if they sneeze. Also, for the same reason that they changed the rules about touching a Wide Receiver just before the catch...or during their perfect route...or if they can't see you about to hit them (indefensible position)...or if they burp. Because, the NFL knows that viewers LIKE...no, viewers LOVE seeing the passing plays and the touchdowns that ultimately ensue. Letting the ball be specially "tailored" by and for the Quarterback just ensures that the Crown Prince of viewing on any given day has his football perfectly set up to make the NFL Event look awesome. No one wants to watch a 10-7 victory by Cleveland over Cincinatti...they want to see Johnny Football score touchdowns. If he needs the ball to be a certain way, so be it. The NFL isn't exactly about sports and rules...it's Sports Entertainment...and that's a little bit different.
Okay, so now we get it. There's one divine rule. You can't change the PSI of the ball to a weight outside the 12.5 - 13.5 PSI range. We understand the value of this rule now. So, if this number is so precious, and if you are going to give the balls back to the teams to modify, out of your view, you MUST have some kind of system of accountability for the balls. This is the NFL. This isn't their first rodeo. If you are going to be this strict about the PSI of the football, you have to have a plan, right? I mean, when I drive to work every morning, I have to think about how I'm going to get there. I don't just hop in the car, point it, and put my foot on the pedal...just hoping I end up where I want to go. Everyone plans stuff, especially when it's that important.
So...the Patriots are cheats. The game balls for the Colts and the Patriots were measured at halftime of the game. The Patriots' footballs, apparently 11 out of 12 used in the first half of the AFC Championship Game, were below the 12.5 PSI. The Colts' footballs were not. It has already been scientifically proven, over and over ad nauseum, that balls tested at room temperature and then put in a 50 degree environment will lose 1 PSI, give or take. So, the range of legality is 1 PSI and the weather can lower the ball by 1 PSI.
This isn't hard people. There is only one thing we need to know to solve this. It has nothing to do with the weather or anything else.
HOW MUCH DID THE BALLS ACTUALLY MEASURE IN PSI????
Why has no one told us this? It makes all the difference in the world. If the Colts handed in pre-game footballs at 13.5 PSI and the Patriots at 12.5 PSI...and the weather deflates the ball by .75 PSI...whose footballs are legal? But, if the Patriots handed in balls at 13.5 PSI, and they measured at 11 PSI, then you may have an issue. So, we just need to know....
HOW MUCH DID THE BALLS ACTUALLY MEASURE IN PSI????
It's easy. The NFL said they gauged the balls properly before, during and after the game. In some instances, they used multiple gauges. Awesome. Now, we're getting somewhere. Just go get the sheet of paper the PSI was written down on and show us the numbers. What? What do you mean you didn't write it down? You took the time to measure the balls, with gauges, and no one recorded the PSI on them? No one wrote it down?
Wait...you said, "11 of 12 Patriots' footballs were about 2 PSI less."
Than what? You can't have said that without at least knowing the baseline number. X - Y = 2. What was X? What the hell do you mean, "I don't know?" Was it 2 less than 13.5 PSI? Or was it 2 less than 12.5 PSI? Or, did you average it...because you had no idea what it was, originally?
You had to know that no one wrote it down. You had to know that you had no numbers. You had to know the Monday following the game...right? You also knew that you allowed the chain of custody on the balls to be broken because you never thought, at any time, that this rule was actually THAT important. Or, of course, you would have policed it better.
And...more importantly...lacking all of this, you allowed the Patriots to be called cheaters for two weeks and forced them to defend themselves against charges that you were making, but knew, through the lack of your own accountability, that you couldn't prove.
YOU DIDN'T ACTUALLY LOG THE MEASUREMENT OF THE BALLS????
So, how do you know???
The biggest crime in this story is that the real perpetrator, the NFL, will make trillions of dollars because this is going to be one of the most watched Super Bowls in history. Because, they created a drama that has been covered by every major news outlet for two weeks...so, they will profit from it. Because, at the end of the day, the thing we all look at as a sport...the thing we treat as life or death because we live and die by our teams is, to them, Sports Entertainment. Who loses in all this? Who cares?...so long as it's not the NFL. In this day and age, there's no such thing as BAD publicity. Right?
That said, when that's the case, why would you measure the balls to be between 12.5 and 13.5 PSI and then give them back to the teams? Doesn't that invite almost any modification to the ball? Of course, it does. It's supposed to...that's how the NFL wants it.
If the ball's PSI is so important, what about the other aspects of the ball? You can basically scuff the surface off of the ball to get a better grip, it just can't weigh less? The pressure of the ball trumps even the ability to grip it? Yes, it does. Apparently. Because, that's how the NFL wants it.
Why did the NFL, just several years ago, change the rule so that the ball could be modified at all? Well, for the same reason that they changed the rules about hitting a Quarterback after the play...or in the head...or below the knees...or if they sneeze. Also, for the same reason that they changed the rules about touching a Wide Receiver just before the catch...or during their perfect route...or if they can't see you about to hit them (indefensible position)...or if they burp. Because, the NFL knows that viewers LIKE...no, viewers LOVE seeing the passing plays and the touchdowns that ultimately ensue. Letting the ball be specially "tailored" by and for the Quarterback just ensures that the Crown Prince of viewing on any given day has his football perfectly set up to make the NFL Event look awesome. No one wants to watch a 10-7 victory by Cleveland over Cincinatti...they want to see Johnny Football score touchdowns. If he needs the ball to be a certain way, so be it. The NFL isn't exactly about sports and rules...it's Sports Entertainment...and that's a little bit different.
Okay, so now we get it. There's one divine rule. You can't change the PSI of the ball to a weight outside the 12.5 - 13.5 PSI range. We understand the value of this rule now. So, if this number is so precious, and if you are going to give the balls back to the teams to modify, out of your view, you MUST have some kind of system of accountability for the balls. This is the NFL. This isn't their first rodeo. If you are going to be this strict about the PSI of the football, you have to have a plan, right? I mean, when I drive to work every morning, I have to think about how I'm going to get there. I don't just hop in the car, point it, and put my foot on the pedal...just hoping I end up where I want to go. Everyone plans stuff, especially when it's that important.
So...the Patriots are cheats. The game balls for the Colts and the Patriots were measured at halftime of the game. The Patriots' footballs, apparently 11 out of 12 used in the first half of the AFC Championship Game, were below the 12.5 PSI. The Colts' footballs were not. It has already been scientifically proven, over and over ad nauseum, that balls tested at room temperature and then put in a 50 degree environment will lose 1 PSI, give or take. So, the range of legality is 1 PSI and the weather can lower the ball by 1 PSI.
This isn't hard people. There is only one thing we need to know to solve this. It has nothing to do with the weather or anything else.
HOW MUCH DID THE BALLS ACTUALLY MEASURE IN PSI????
Why has no one told us this? It makes all the difference in the world. If the Colts handed in pre-game footballs at 13.5 PSI and the Patriots at 12.5 PSI...and the weather deflates the ball by .75 PSI...whose footballs are legal? But, if the Patriots handed in balls at 13.5 PSI, and they measured at 11 PSI, then you may have an issue. So, we just need to know....
HOW MUCH DID THE BALLS ACTUALLY MEASURE IN PSI????
It's easy. The NFL said they gauged the balls properly before, during and after the game. In some instances, they used multiple gauges. Awesome. Now, we're getting somewhere. Just go get the sheet of paper the PSI was written down on and show us the numbers. What? What do you mean you didn't write it down? You took the time to measure the balls, with gauges, and no one recorded the PSI on them? No one wrote it down?
Wait...you said, "11 of 12 Patriots' footballs were about 2 PSI less."
Than what? You can't have said that without at least knowing the baseline number. X - Y = 2. What was X? What the hell do you mean, "I don't know?" Was it 2 less than 13.5 PSI? Or was it 2 less than 12.5 PSI? Or, did you average it...because you had no idea what it was, originally?
You had to know that no one wrote it down. You had to know that you had no numbers. You had to know the Monday following the game...right? You also knew that you allowed the chain of custody on the balls to be broken because you never thought, at any time, that this rule was actually THAT important. Or, of course, you would have policed it better.
And...more importantly...lacking all of this, you allowed the Patriots to be called cheaters for two weeks and forced them to defend themselves against charges that you were making, but knew, through the lack of your own accountability, that you couldn't prove.
YOU DIDN'T ACTUALLY LOG THE MEASUREMENT OF THE BALLS????
So, how do you know???
The biggest crime in this story is that the real perpetrator, the NFL, will make trillions of dollars because this is going to be one of the most watched Super Bowls in history. Because, they created a drama that has been covered by every major news outlet for two weeks...so, they will profit from it. Because, at the end of the day, the thing we all look at as a sport...the thing we treat as life or death because we live and die by our teams is, to them, Sports Entertainment. Who loses in all this? Who cares?...so long as it's not the NFL. In this day and age, there's no such thing as BAD publicity. Right?
Labels:
#deflategate,
Cheating,
deflategate,
football,
footballs,
New England,
NFL,
Patriots,
Roger Goodell,
Seahawks,
Seattle,
Super Bowl XLIX
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

