What Ever Happened to the Million Mom March-ers

Tanya Metaksa has a hilarious look at the aftermath of the Million Mom March at FrontPageMag.Com. Several marchers, after going on about the horrors of violence, were themselves involved in violence, including gun violence.

The march also had its share of victims; people who had suffered as a result of the criminal use of firearms or gun accidents. Many stories were poignant and heartbreaking. One victim was Barbara Lipscomb, a mother and grandmother, whose son, LeÂ’Pierre Clemons, was gunned down on Martin Luther King JrÂ’s birthday just four months prior. LeÂ’Pierre was another victim of teenage violence in the nationÂ’s capitol, and his mom told everyone she was going to the MMM to stop the violence.

Yet, 2 months later, on July 14, 2000 Barbara Lipscomb, now known as Barbara Ann Martin, found herself under arrest on a charge of assault with intent to kill. According to the Washington Post, D.C. police say they found three handguns and a TEC-9 submachine gun at her home.

Oops. Metaksa also reports that the shooting was basically an attempt at vigilantism, the only problem being Lipscomb/Martin shot the wrong man.

Of course just because some members of the MMM turned out to be hypocrites doesn’t make them wrong. What does is their bizarre logic.

Right before the MMM, I happened to catch CNN coverage of the March while working out. A woman, perhaps it was Lipscomb/Martin, was going on about how her son had been killed by gun violence and if only guns were illegal her son’s shooting might have been prevented. Very sad, to be sure.

The only problem being that they flashed where she lived and it turned out her son had been murdered in Washington, DC, where it is already illegal for people to own guns. If laws were the answer to gun violence, a reasonable observer might think that Washington, DC, would have a relatively low rate of gun violence instead of always being near the top of murders.

I should qualify that statement by the way. The same Congressman and their aides who fight for gun control have passed a special exemption that allows a member of Congress or anyone on his or her staff to carry a concealed weapon. I can’t imagine why they feel they need guns — surely a member of Congress could talk an attacker into surrendering or waiting on the oh-so-efficient DC police to resolve any disputes.

Just How Bad Is The Olympics Coverage?

Apparently so bad that it’s driving viewers to the SciFi channel. According to SciFi.Com,

The SCI FI Channel reported a 25 percent increase in household ratings in competition against the Olympic Games on NBC. SCI FI said it also captured the highest concentration of adults aged 25-54 of any network, broadcast or cable during the Olympics and posted a 31 percent household ratings gain among such adults.

SCI FI reported a 25 percent increase in September ratings compared with the same month last year. The cable network said it is on track to finish the third quarter of 2000 with a 0.9 household rating, a quarterly record and a 13 percent improvement over the same quarter last year.

That’s pretty amazing considering the crap that the SciFi channel tends to run. Tonight they’re showing “Species II” and I swear they have to hold the record for repeated showings of the horrible Puppet Masters films. Sure they run Babylon 5 and Star Trek: TOS, but they really play a lot of horrible movies.

Why Do Child Killers Spend So Little Time In Jail?

One of the things that happens if you are a reporter is that you get detached from the stories you write about, because you have to on an emotional level. I can, for example, write about how outrageous American foreign policy is in Colombia, but at the end of the day you won’t find me losing any sleep about it either.

The one topic that I get very emotional about and causes my blood pressure to start rising is the way the justice system treats people who kill infants. I have a manila folder somewhere in my house just of press clippings of such cases. For those of you not familiar with this area of law, usually such murders get very light sentences unless there is an aggravating circumstance such as a sexual crime. A person who say molested an infant and then committed murder would probably get quite a bit of jail time, but if the same person simply shakes the infant to death, it is unlikely he or she would serve more than 3 to 5 years.

A case in point is Brian Peterson who is back in the news thanks to John Rocker of all folks (Arrest at baseball stadium may put killer back behind bars). Raymond Maniaci, a New Jersey resident, threw a bottle at Rocker during a recent Yankees game. Peterson was sitting next to his friend Maniaci and was arrested for interfering with police. He claims he was trying to comply with the officer’s order to move.

In 1996 Peterson and his then-girlfriend, Amy Rossberg, murdered their newborn son in a Delaware motel room. He turned state’s evidence and testified against her. Peterson got a 2 year jail sentence; Rossberg 2 and a half years.

Peterson got time off for good behavior and was out of jail after serving only 18 months.

That’s downright obscene. Typically these people get short sentences because they are young and generally have no prior arrests or convictions. In addition, often prosecutors reach plea agreements for manslaughter convictions rather than go for a murder trial, since often there are no witnesses other than the defendant and for some reason juries tend to buy the claim that the defendant lacked criminal intent to murder, for example, when a person shakes a baby to death. Peterson was allowed to plead guilty to manslaughter for what was clearly a crime of pre-meditated murder.

Aside from the very elderly, it is hard to think of a more vulnerable population than newborn infants. The sort of person who could help kill his newborn son and then several years later casually go to a New York Yankees game is not the sort of person who needs to be walking the streets a free man. People such as Peterson need to serve 8 to 10 years, not 2 to 3 years for their crimes.

Unfortunately this seems to be part of a larger societal trend in which people seem to shirk their moral and ethical duties to children. I have seen so much bizarre stuff that most of it doesn’t even shock me anymore. From the neighbor across the street who has watched pornographic films with his 9 year old son, the next door neighbor who has several kids in high school who have a Playstation but have to come to us to borrow a dictionary.

The other thing that really gets me is kids who die in hot cars. A couple years ago there was a case in Arizona where a couple of men took their kids mushroom hunting. The men left the kids locked in a car with windows closed and after 4 or 5 hours of mushroom hunting were surprised when they returned to find the kids dead. If I remember the prosecutor there did charge them with manslaughter, but how someone can be so callous and indifferent to human life is beyond me. I wouldn’t leave my cat in a closed car in Michigan’s relatively mild summers, yet alone leave my daughter even for an instant in a hot car in the middle of the Arizona desert.

The other day the local news broadcast ran an item about a support group to help new parents cope with juggling parental duties with their other obligations like work, etc. I think such groups are often extremely condescending, and I told my wife that with the barrage of support groups, offers of government aid, and other things that we hear about it’s almost as if there is this belief that we are the first generation in 50,000 years to have kids. As if people haven’t been dealing with the problems (and wonders) that children entail for literally millennia.

Then my wife reminded me of the way the neighbors treat their kids and the news stories we share by e-mail of parental abuse, neglect and indifference, and that ended that conversation.

Having children — even engaging in sex that might lead to a child — involves assuming a vast web of moral and ethical duties. Please don’t have kids if you’re not willing to accept such responsibilities.

Olympic Travesty: Give Andreea Raducan Her Medal Back

An arbitrator yesterday ruled against Romanian gymnast Andreea Raducan, meaning she won’t get her gold medal back after it was stripped by Olympics officials when Raducan failed a drug tests. This whole affair represents the mean-spiritedness and tyrannical bureaucracy of the Olympics committee at its worst.

Raducan tested positive for pseudoephedrine, a common ingredient in cold medicine — Raducan was given a cold pill that contained the drug by a trainer. Stripping a gold medal for this makes no sense when you consider that,

  • Raducan had no idea she was even taking a drug containing pseudoephedrine
  • the trainer who gave it to her probably didn’t realize it was banned, since no other gymnastics competition bans pseudoephedrine — had she tested positive for the drug at the world championships rather than the Olympics, the result wouldn’t have even been announced
  • the reason it’s not banned anywhere but the Olympics, at least for gymnastics, is that even the Olympic folks conceded there is no performance enhancing benefit from taking pseudoephedrine for a gymnast

This appears to be a case of simply banning a drug because the IOC can, and robbing a talented young woman of the gold medal she deserves. Shame on the IOC.

Send Me Your Money — Getting Paid and the Independent Web

At his Dreamzone weblog, Mark Morgan points to a very good article by Julie Hayden on the role of independent web sites, Indie Exposure: It’s All About You.

The first part of the article describes perfectly what I’ve been trying to say about the web,

The fact is, with very few exceptions, e-business never packs the impact of the independent content producer. These are the people who are pushing the boundaries, harnessing the power of the web, and building the things people want and need.

No one throws large amounts of money at them, and the stock market doesn’t rise and fall on their pronouncement, but they are the heft, the substance, and the texture of the web.

They are what makes the web go. That hasn’t changed.

I couldn’t agree more. The only large e-business sites I tend to visit are those that aggregate content from the real world, such as CNN. But in many subjects that I’m interested in, I not only don’t buy the print version anymore but I don’t visit the web sites either. I used to buy a lot of computer game magazines. Don’t do that anymore, and I haven’t visited any of the web sites of the big game magazines in a very long time. The smaller sites are a lot better at getting me the news I want, and some of them are literally run by people in their spare time.

On the other hand, I completely disagree with Hayden’s view that independent web sites need to be non-commercial.

Being an independent content producer does involve some sacrifices. You’ll have to have the tools to access, use, and create for the net. These tend to require a financial outlay.

Since most of us aren’t independently wealthy, we need Real Jobs [TM] to subsidize this. This also means that you will have to spend some of your precious spare time on this. Consider it a public service.

I’m asking you to share your content with the world. No profit models. No subscription fees. No ca-chings. Just you, your passion, and your world.

I really hope that few of the independent sites I visit take her advice. I like sites that people do as hobby as much as the next guy, but on the other hand I notice from my own surfing experience that a lot of these sites tend to disappear over time. One might the coolest site in the world on Legos is out there on the net, usually on some free hosting service, and the next minute it’s gone. Or you’ll see an excellent site that has everything you could ask for — except the web master stopped updating it 8 months ago because he got burned out trying to keep up with the web site and her regular job.

Not only do I want to get paid for the things I put on the web, I want to pay others. Take Mark Morgan’s main site, VoicesOfUnreason. The site, like many on the web, publishes a wide range of fiction, poetry and essays. It looks great and while taste in fiction is often very personal, I’ve read stories there that were of equal or better quality than the ones I’ve read in anthologies or magazines that I paid real money for. As an example, I think Sean McMain’s The Head Fairy was one of the best short stories I’ve read anywhere in a long time and reminded me a lot of the sort of stuff that Harlan Ellison writes (and to me, Ellison is the beginning, middle, and end of short stories).

I’m not a big reader of fiction, but I figure I buy maybe 8-10 novels a month at an average cost of $8 a piece (I buy a lot of scifi/fantasy paperbacks). Why should I be horrified or a fiction author or web site recoil in fear from finding a model to siphon some of that money to an author or web site I’ve found gives me a fix of the sort of short fiction I want? I certainly don’t want to spend the rest of my life working a McJob and writing my web site in my spare time, and I’m more than happy to do my part to help the independent web sites I enjoy get closer to leaving their “real jobs” behind.

Barring any unforeseen disaster, income and wealth around the world are going to grow as fast as, if not faster than, they did in the 20th century. The upshot of this is that the amount of wealth and income available to support leisure activities, such as reading a story on Mark’s site, is already higher than at any time in world history and only going higher. Somebody’s going to get that money — I’d rather have it be me, Mark, and other independent web site operators rather than Random House, Columbia Records and MGM.

Starfleet Command II Demo Out

A demo of the upcoming Starfleet Command II game is avaiable at Gamespot. The original Starfleet Command is the only Star Trek game I’ve ever seen that was any good. On the other hand the game is extraordinarily complex. I messed around with it for a couple weeks and it was a lot of fun, but getting to a point where I was any good at the game would have taken a lot more time than I had — the game is loosely based on the Star Fleet Battles pen and paper game which was an accountant’s dream, and much of that complexity and depth is reproduced in Starfleet Command.

Pyramid: The Way to Do a Small Pay-To-View Online Magazine

The other day I was ranting and raving about how online publishers need to a) provide more services to consumers than traditional print, while b) lowering the cost, and it occurred to me yesterday that I’ve been shelling out my hard earned money for the past year for exactly just such a site — Steve Jackson Games’ online Pyramid magazine.

Okay, Steve Jackson Games publishes role playing and board games. Even if you don’t play those games you might remember hearing about them several years ago when they were raided by the Secret Service as part of Operation Sun Devil, which resulted in the company almost going bankrupt but also in a successful lawsuit against the government in which the judge had some pretty harsh words for the Secret Service’s incompetence.

Anyway, for many years the company published a monthly and later bimonthly magazine called Pyramid that featured articles on news in the gaming industry, game reviews, and, of course, articles supporting their games as well as games published by other companies. The short version is that publishing a specialty magazine like that tends to be very expensive with very low margins and SJ Games moved the magazine to an online web only version a couple years ago.

And they really did the transformation right. A subscription to the print magazine was something like $24-$30 per year for a monthly or bimonthly magazine. The online version is $15 per year and is updated weekly, every Friday. They put a lot more stuff in the online version than they could afford to do in print and still stay profitable.

Then they added more value. The overwhelming majority of people who subscribed to Pyramid or bought it in hobby stores when it was a print magazine were devotees of SJ Games’ excellent Generic Universal Role Playing System. Most of the articles in the magazine were devoted to GURPS-related material. The online version upholds that tradition, but also allows subscribers to play test and give feedback about upcoming sourcebooks and rule books for the game.

For example, one of the upcoming rule books is GURPS: Deadlands, a conversion of Pinnacle’s Deadlands weird west role playing game. I like Western-themed games, and at the click of a button can download the current draft of the game in HTML or text version. There are discussion forum set up to provide feedback, etc.

The result of this, by the way, is success. Last November the number of subscriptions hit 3,000 which as a note on the SJ Games site put it, “would be a drop in the bucket at a Hanson concert, but in the game biz, it qualifies as a crowd.”

Those subscription figures are only going to go up, too, as more people get online and as the support offered through the magazine adds value to the game which in turn increases the value of the magazine. I think this is an excellent case study of how to succeed in an online venture without spending millions of dollars in venture capital. No, SJ Games doesn’t have a billion dollar market cap, but they make money doing something they enjoy. Who could ask for more?

Slashdotters Just Don’t Get It

The fun folks at Slashdot are enjoying ripping apart a new study of the effects of a Microsoft breakup. The study is published by a group that Microsoft contributes money to and reaches the conclusion that with a Microsoft breakup, the price of Windows would rise as high as $1,000 per license assuming the average price of a computer is $2,000.

I find this to be as absurd as the Slashdotters, but there’s something they seem to be missing — that figure is completely consistent with the government’s own case. The government claimed Microsoft has a monopoly power on Windows and yet several economists, including some publishing in peer reviewed academic journals, estimate the monopoly price for Windows that would maximize profits to be $900. Even an economist testifying for the government at the MS anti-trust trial, Franklin Fisher, conceded that if Microsoft does indeed have a monopoly power it charges far less than the monopoly price for Windows.

One of the things the Slashdotters seem to think is wrong with this price is that obviously a lot fewer people would be willing to buy Windows at $900, but this shows an obvious unfamiliarty with economics since firms rarely are maximize profits by solely maximizing net sales. At $900, obviously, Microsoft might sell far fewer copies of Windows, but it would not need to sell nearly as many copies at $900 as it needs to at say $150 or whatever the average current price of a Windows license is (not that legally the law only requires that the government prove a firm has monopoly power to bring antitrust actions which is a bit like a police officer giving a ticket to a motorist because his car has the ability to go faster than the speed limit, regardless of whether or not the driver is actually going faster than the speed limit).

As the study author readily admits, the real implication of his analysis is that the existing pricing structure of Windows is completely inconsistent with the claim that Microsoft has an OS monopoly.