Posted by Scott on May 31st, 2007 — Posted in Uncategorized
Fred Degerberg wrote 101 Self Defense and Safety Tips, which you can download free. He chose the following 5 as the top ones that the every woman should know:
1. Be aware of yourself and your surroundings. Don’t let yourself be preoccupied with thoughts of work, school or home. When you’re on the street you need to be alert.
2. The most dangerous thing you can do is feel afraid and not act. Fear warns you. Many victims afterwards say that they had a feeling something was going to happen and they ignored it. Listen to your intuition and take action.
3. When it is obvious that you are going to be attacked, take action. By fighting the attack, you only increase your chance of survival. The notion that you will only anger the attacker with your lack of compliance, making him more violent is false. The attacker is already angry and violent. Fight until you know you’re safe and can get away.
4. Take aim when dealing with your assailant: the eyes, groin and throat are the most vulnerable areas to strike because they are composed of soft tissue. A successful blow to any one of these three areas on a male will almost guarantee you valuable time to escape.
5. Above all, do not allow the assailant to take you to another location. Do whatever it takes — the situation grows deadlier when it moves to a more secluded location.
Great tips! Degerberg runs a martial arts school in Chicago. His school teaches fighting systems from all over the world, which sounds great, since they would have something for everyone. I can’t personally recommend them, because I’ve never even been to any of their schools.
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 30th, 2007 — Posted in News
Do you think what Santillan did in the following incident qualifies as self-defense:
Witness Esteban Lopez Romo testified that he had just walked into Wildwood Park when he saw Santillan come out of a store and get attacked by Figueroa near the bathrooms. Lopez, who is in federal custody for an alleged immigration violation, testified that they exchanged words, and Figueroa began punching [Santillan]. He said he didn’t remember what was said between the two.
Santillan appeared to step back and try to ward off the blows as Figueroa flailed at him for about two minutes, Lopez said.
Defense attorney Ron Vanesian asked if Santillan took a defensive posture in the fight.
“If you call pulling out a gun and blasting the other guy away being defensive, then yes,” Lopez said.
Figueroa, who was shot in the chest, fell to the ground, he said, and Santillan stepped over the 19-year-old and shot him in the head before running off, he said.
“(The shots) happened very quickly,” Lopez said.
Read entire article on signonsandiego.com.
I think Santillan acted in self-defense, but the judge ordered the trial of Santillan for murder.
I define murder as the offensive killing of one or more innocent persons. From what the witness said, it seems Santillan used lethal force to fend off an attacker. I do not see that as murder. I see it as self-defense, and I want self-defense to remain completely legal.
What do you think?
1 Comment »
Posted by Scott on May 23rd, 2007 — Posted in Domestic Abuse
Rebecca Ross recently wrote an article about Jackson Katz, including an interview. Here’s an excerpt:
Jackson Katz believes it’s time to stop calling domestic violence “a women’s issue.”
The educator, author, filmmaker and activist has spent years speaking out on the issue of gender violence, an issue he feels is firmly rooted in America’s culture.
“There isn’t violence against women because of some genetic abnormality in men; it is our culture. It is learned behavior,” said Katz, who wrote the 2006 book, “The Macho Paradox: Why Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help.”
Read entire article by Rebecca Ross.
I agree with Jackson Katz that domestic violence is more of a man’s issue than a woman’s issue. If we want to stop domestic violence, we have to focus on stopping the perpetrators, which tend to be men. We cannot just tell the victims, which tend to be women, that the problem is theirs. Instead, to fight violence we must change the culture that leads men to commit violent acts against women as well as each other.
Of course, we do need to remember that sometimes women abuse men as well, even though it happens much less frequently.
1 Comment »
Posted by Scott on May 22nd, 2007 — Posted in Politics & Commentary
I highly value freedom above all else. My political philosophy resembles a mixture of libertarianism, anarchism, and minarchism. Basically, I think that humanity benefits most when everyone is legally allowed to do whatever they want insofar as they don’t offensively harm anyone else against those people’s respective wills. Accordingly, I support free trade, and want the eventual reduction of border restrictions on goods and people.
Nonetheless, I understand the immediate need for border security in the United States. The current system leads to terrorists and violent foreigners getting into the country. Most people who enter the country illegally don’t want to hurt anyone. They just want to get employed in the United States, because even crappy jobs pay more in the U.S. than the jobs available in Latin America. Unfortunately, with the unchecked millions of people who come illegally, some are very dangerous people such as terrorists, thieves, and drug-dealer gangbangers.
If the United States government wanted to secure the borders it could. Essentially, the government only provides the limited security that it does to create the illusion of security – much like security at the airport.
As comedian Bill Maher said on his show Real Time:
“We could have good security at the airport. We know how to do it. Have you ever been to a casino? There’s more cameras than a Korean wedding. [groans] With all kinds of zoom lenses that can count the stitches on your date’s sex change from 50 feet! You can’t do math in your head in a casino–without being spotted, reported on videotape, hustled off the floor and buried in the desert by Joe Pesci!”
The same applies to border security.
If the government went after the business owners and corporations that hired so-called “illegal immigrants,” than that would stop “illegal immigration” by eliminating the incentive to immigrate illegally. Additionally, the easier it is for peaceful people to legally immigrate to this country so that they can get a legitimate job, the less people who will do it illegally. Illegal immigration comes with a lot of risks and troubles, people only choose to try it because of how unreasonably hard it is for good people to immigrate to the United States.
The irony is that violent people, drug dealers, terrorists, and such can get in the United States without much trouble, while common people who simply want a job have trouble. If the United States government makes it easier for people in the latter group, than they won’t illegally immigrate. Remember, legal immigration comes with many benefits that illegal immigration doesn’t, including legal employment which comes with benefits such as unemployment pay and healthcare. When working illegally, people don’t get the legal protections granted to legal citizens.
Because of all the irrational trouble involved with legal immigration, so many good people illegally immigrate. And, the government doesn’t have the problem to sort the dangerous criminals (e.g. terrorists and gang members) from the people just looking for modest work (e.g. the peaceful farmers and pool cleaners).
Private citizens can help most of all by reporting businesses that hire “illegals” to the proper authorities, including non-governmental watchdog groups. Additionally, we can boycott such companies. Businesses hire people illegally because it is cheaper and they don’t have to provide them legal work conditions. We need to make them hire people legally, and we need to make our government let good people get into this country legally to get those legal jobs. That way violent criminals won’t be able to sneak in with the pack of hard-working people who just want a non-violent job.
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 21st, 2007 — Posted in News
Kevin Bohn recently reported on violence in Philadelphia and the nation. I include an excerpt:
Isaac Diaz walks through the toughest parts of North Philadelphia each day on his way to and from high school. But what really scares the 18-year-old senior is lying in his own bed at night.
He can hear the gunshots then.
“Last year it wasn’t so often. Now it’s as often as every night,” Diaz recently told CNN. “It might be your best friend dying, and you don’t even know about it.”
[…]
Nationally, violent crime is spiking, too.
FBI data from December, the most recent statistics available, show murders and robberies rose by 3.7 percent nationwide during the first six months of 2006.
Those findings came on top of a 2.2 percent crime hike in 2005 — the first increase since 2001.
Read entire article by Kevin Bohn.
I felt very disappointed while reading that article. Why does the US government have so much money to squander supposedly trying to stop the violence in Iraq, while U.S. cities have so much violence? (Especially since the efforts in Iraq seem to only make matters worse!)
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 19th, 2007 — Posted in Child Protection
Wltx.com recently reported about protecting your child from a stranger. I include an excerpt:
Like clockwork, hundreds of children pour out of schools on weekday afternoons. So, what if a person waiting outside is not a parent, but rather a predator? Would your child know how to react?
“We try to talk about strangers,” said Carolyn Beck, who works at the school her 11-year-old son attends. “We try to tell him they don’t look like the boogey man. They look like anybody’s mom and dad.”
However, Sergeant Jeff Flanders with the Lexington County Sheriff’s Department says parents should do more than talk to their children about dangers. He suggests they role play.
“I’ll reach out and grab him and say, ‘You’re going to come with me,’” explained Flanders, showing Beck’s son how to react to an abductor. “Braden is going to start yelling out, ‘This is not my dad. I don’t know this person. Turn me loose. Someone please help me. Fire. Fire. Fire.’”
Read entire article on wltx.com.
I like the idea of yelling fire. The child needs to know to make a scene if a stranger grabs him. Unfortunately, adults teach children to trust adults. Children need to know not to trust all adults, namely strangers.
Of course, most child abductors know the child. Strangers do not commit most of these. Nonetheless, it remains very important for all children to learn not to go with strangers and how to defend themselves when a stranger attempts to abduct them.
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 18th, 2007 — Posted in News
Actor and anti-violence educator Ben Atherton-Zeman has performed at Whitehall school, in Glens Falls, New York. Sarah Sutton recently reported on the anti-violence performance. I include an excerpt:
“We all know most men don’t rape. So where are the voices of these men?” Atherton-Zeman asked the students at the beginning of the performance. “Most times, the voices of men, we tend to stay kind of quiet. If you’re part of a group that is committing violence, it is your responsibility to speak up.”
Throughout the presentation, images portraying the effects of domestic violence flashed across the screen of the darkened auditorium. One showed a terrified child huddled in a stairway, as his father beat his mother.
The statistics were equally startling. Every 12 seconds in the United States, a man abuses a woman. Every 2 minutes, a man rapes a woman.
Read entire article by Sarah Sutton.
I agree completely. Masculinity does not involve beating or abusing women. There’s nothing masculine about remaining silent like cowards while innocent people get abused.
All of us, both women and men, need to work together and put an end to violence and abuse. Although women and children get abused more often, I want to note that men also get abused.
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 17th, 2007 — Posted in Domestic Abuse
The AP recently reported on grants in New Jersey for domestic violence shleters:
New Jersey on Thursday awarded $1.5 million in grants to 19 domestic violence shelters across the state.
“These grants continue our commitment to those who need a helping hand,” Gov. Jon S. Corzine said. “Unfortunately, domestic violence affects far too many people in communities across our state. With these funds, shelters that provide a safe haven to victims of domestic violence will be able to enhance their facilities and improve the critical services they provide.”
The money will be used for renovations, additions to existing buildings, safety and security systems equipment, furnishings, appliances, and technology improvements.
“These funds will help provide the necessary improvements these shelters need to ensure that individuals have a safe place to go in the effort to move forward with their lives,” said state Community Affairs Commissioner Susan Bass Levin.
Obviously, it makes more sense to spend money on grants for domestic violence shelters and domestic violence prevention, rather than spend even more money on healthcare for victims who have nowhere to go but back to a abusive home. Nonetheless, I would like to see the money come from private organizations funded by donations, rather than governmental organizations funded by taxation.
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 11th, 2007 — Posted in Politics & Commentary
Kathy Rumleski recently reported on a speech by Arun Gandhi. I include an excerpt:
Arun Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, turned the tables at a London conference on children and domestic violence, asking delegates to consider how they may be violent.
“We cannot claim that we are not violent because we don’t go around beating up people,” he said yesterday at the International Conference on Children Exposed to Domestic Violence.
“We are violent in many other ways,” Gandhi told the crowd of 700, which included experts on violence prevention, at the London Convention Centre.
He called teasing, name calling and looking down on others passive violence.
Earlier, Gandhi, an international speaker, asked half the participants to make a tight fist and pretend they held a diamond. He told their partners to try to get the diamond out.
As they pulled on their partners’ fingers, he asked, “How many of you (simply) asked the person to open their hand? You see how violent we are,” he told the nodding audience.
“We have to recognize those weaknesses within ourselves to be able to change those weaknesses to strengths.”
Gandhi, 74, who peppered his speech with humorous anecdotes, said he was greatly influenced by his grandfather, one of the most revered supporters of non-violence in the last century.
Read entire article by Kathy Rumleski.
I’m not a pacifist. While I adamantly oppose offensive force/violence (e.g. rape, murder, theft, etc.), I whole-heartedly support the right to self-defense and the defensive use of force/violence (e.g. jailing rapists or using violent force to stop a murderer).
Nonetheless, I agree with much of the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi. I believe that many times non-violent measures can have more of an impact on corruption than violence. I admire Mahatma Gandhi, and have the utmost respect for the positive impact he had on the world both in life and after death through his legacy.
From the article above, it seems that Mahatma’s grandson Arun Gandhi shares much of his grandfather’s character. I plan to learn more about Arun Gandhi, including his speeches and teachings. I like his point that violence encompasses more than just beating people up.
What do you think?
2 Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 9th, 2007 — Posted in Domestic Abuse
Cara Buckley recently reported on the effectiveness of digital photos in domestic abuse cases:
Providing digital cameras to the police is revolutionizing the prosecution of domestic violence in New York City, according to district attorneys, victim advocates and forensic technicians.
In Queens, the first borough to use the technology, prosecutors say there has been a notable increase in conviction rates since the police there began taking digital photos at domestic violence scenes about five years ago.
Read entire article by Cara Buckley.
I hope all jurisdictions start using digital photos to record evidence in domestic violence cases. It makes sense that they work better than old Polaroids, because digital cameras have such high resolution and better technology. Additionally, they don’t deteriorate like paper photos. Additionally, if private citizens want to take photos of domestic violence evidence on the bodies of victims, I recommend using a digital camera.
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on May 8th, 2007 — Posted in Identity Theft
TransWorldNews reports on identity theft:
In late April, the Federal Identity Theft Task Force, formed last year to investigate this crime, released findings and recommendations. According to Robert Siciliano, a widely televised and quotedpersonal security and identity theft expert, the announcement was one more example of government bureaucracy seemingly unable to counter identity theft in a timely manner.
“Identity theft happens fast,” said Siciliano. “Ask anyone who’s been a victim. A year’s time at the mercy of an identity thief could mean a life’s savings gone. While we need government intervention to stop identity theft, we also need it to happen on identity theft’s timetable, not a bureaucracy’s.”
Read entire article on TransWorldNews.
Governments can’t do much about much to prevent any type of victimization, because governments apprehend criminals after-the-fact, not beforehand. We need to stop identity thieves before they attack, because we can rarely trace them down since they use alternative identities to commit their crime. Fake names, numbers and such leaves little to track a person down.
The entire crime takes place in the private sphere. The victim, the banks, the credit agencies, the merchants and everyone involved has nothing to do with government. All these entities need to work together to find ways to stop identity theft, not wait on government to do something.
The real question is: Do banks and credit agencies really care about identity theft? Only if it costs them money, do they care. And, usually it’s individuals and small merchants who get charged for identity theft.
What do you think?
1 Comment »
Posted by Scott on May 7th, 2007 — Posted in Domestic Abuse
Robert Gold recently wrote an article about the financial costs of child abuse. I include an excerpt:
Child abuse not only destroys people emotionally, it also saps the nation, employers and families financially.
The ninth annual conference on child abuse held by Danbury Hospital’s Department of Pediatrics opened Thursday night with an exploration of the economic problems behind abuse and neglect.
It is a topic Dr. Jack Fong, the event’s main organizer, has wanted to explore for years. Fong, chairman of the hospital’s pediatrics department, avoided it in years past because he didn’t want people to think he was diminishing the emotional impact of abuse. But he realized discussing it could draw more attention to abuse.
“When it comes to economic [impact], it effects everybody,” he said.
Keynote speaker Allen Morton, dean of the Ancell School of Business at Western Connecticut State University, gave the keynote speech Thursday night at the Ethan Allen Hotel in Danbury.
Child abuse costs the nation $94 billion annually, Morton told the crowd, citing a 2001 study by Prevent Child Abuse America. The figures include court costs, mental health treatments and social services for people who were abused as children. About one percent of the costs represent lost productivity.
“The impact of child abuse is much more extensive than the dollar figures just mentioned,” Morton said. “Its effects are pervasive and enduring. Abuse sows the seeds of further abuse, health problems, decreased educational and economic opportunities and huge burdens on taxpayers.”
Read entire article by Robert Gold.
Children lack the ability and maturity to defend themselves. Thus, fighting child abuse depends on societal initiatives. The economic costs mentioned in that article above gives even more reason for our society to do whatever it can to reduce child abuse.
I plan to remember the fact: Child abuse costs the nation $94 billion annually!
What do you think?
No Comments »
