crickets
crickets's JournalThe photo of Gerri Santoro was mishandled.
She was treated as an anonymous victim; no one really thought at the time of the toll it could take on her loved ones. It should not have been published without the family's permission, yet it likely would never have been published if permission had been sought then. Times have changed, and the family has since altered their stance about the photograph.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerri_Santoro (warning-graphic)
https://www.wbur.org/artery/2019/12/03/leonas-sister-gerri-storytelling-abortion-debate
“We have a God given right for lack of anything better to call it, that’s why we’re given a brain,” Blare says in the film. “Certainly I would never want someone to tell me what I could or couldn’t do.”
My point in going over all of this is to illustrate how powerful a photograph can be in showing the public the reality of a situation. If properly handled with consent of the families, photos of the aftermath of a shooting could go a very long way toward showing people just what kind of real life, not part of a screenplay butchery guns are capable of.
There's a reason every war since Vietnam has been sanitized on the news. I grew up seeing the photos, the magazine covers, and the news clips as a child. It's no wonder that the majority of the US citizenry had no stomach for that war after seeing, night after night on the news, what their young men were going through.
With permission from families, and given the stakes involved, I'm pretty sure you can find some who are willing to allow the photos to be shown. Show them. Show them in vivid color. Those cut down in mass shootings deserve for everyone to understand just how they were murdered in cold blood, and how their deaths might have been prevented with better gun legislation. Yes, gun legislation can work to stem violence.
https://fortune.com/2018/02/20/australia-gun-control-success/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/03/23/mass-shootings-response-other-countries-gun-laws/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/11/08/thousand-oaks-shooting-australia-no-mass-shootings-since-1996/1934798002/
I know that other countries are not the same as the US, are not so steeped in gun culture, but the point is that the effort does work given proper programs put in place, and given time. There is a strong will for change in this country regarding gun laws, in spite of the small but loud minority who continue to resist, and in spite of many in Congress beholden to the NRA. Regardless of the "nothing will happen" crowd who crop up every time to pooh-pooh, it is possible to do something about this. We just have to DO IT.
My reaction to hidden media on Twitter is usually, "Oh, please. I'm an adult."
I was not expecting the image I saw. It was a punch to the gut. It is disturbing and awful and people do need to see it. With the permission of family members, I think any and all of the images should be shown over and over again until people realize just how horrible these shooting sprees are. I don't think it would take very long. There will always be the callous among us who pretend to be unmoved, but the majority of the American people would absolutely clamor for gun legislation. The majority already want it, they just haven't been loud enough to drown out the NRA money. If this country had a real look at the dead, many of them children, that would be quite enough to get people off their couches again. No amount of NRA money could stem that tide.
These are the members of Congress with the most NRA donations (2018)
https://www.businessinsider.com/nra-political-contributions-congressional-candidates-house-senate-2018-2
Which Senators have taken the most money? (career totals)
https://elections.bradyunited.org/take-action/nra-donations-116th-congress-senators
Of course Heritage Action is a sister organization of The Heritage Foundation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_ActionHeritage Action was first announced in April 2010 by Ed Feulner, the then president of The Heritage Foundation. He stated the purpose of the organization was to harness "grassroots energy to increase the pressure on Members of Congress to embrace The Heritage Foundation’s policy recommendations." He also said it would not be involved in election campaigns.[9] Heritage Action's goal was to expand the political reach of The Heritage Foundation and advance the policies recommended by its researchers.[10]
The organization was launched primarily as a response to The Heritage Foundation's growing membership, and the fact that The Heritage Foundation is not allowed to back legislation due to its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. Heritage Action fulfills this role and provides a link between the think tank and grassroots conservative activists.[11]
This is just a loophole for The Heritage Foundation's desire to back (and write) legislation. Grassroots, my ass.
I have serious problems with the community caretaking exception for this reason.
The Fourth Amendment has been kicked around enough as it is. Plus, this actively feeds the "Democrats want to take away our guns!" rallying cry, which is the last thing we need right now.
I'm all for federal legislation calling for waiting periods and background checks; in fact, I would love to see gun licensing and insurance laws, along with bans of certain firearms, but warrantless gun confiscation is a bridge too far even for me.
The National Network of Abortion Funds
https://abortionfunds.org/about/Member organizations work across our network to remove financial and logistical barriers to abortion access. Some of them work with clinics to help pay for your abortion. Some of them offer support such as transportation, childcare, translation, doula services, and somewhere to stay if you have to travel to get your abortion.
Our network’s organizations are autonomous, diverse, and united to move towards a world we want to live in, where all reproductive options, including abortion, are valued and free of coercion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_fund
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Network_of_Abortion_Funds
The NNAF works to facilitate networking and to provide support and technical assistance to local member funds, which in turn provide direct financial and logistical assistance to women seeking abortions.[3] The organization also conducts national and state-based advocacy to ensure that those most in need (low-income women, women of color, and young women) have access to abortion and full reproductive health care. In 2000, the Fund spearheaded the Campaign for Access to Reproductive Equity, which aimed to reverse the Hyde Amendment and make it possible for people to secure Medicaid funding for abortions.[4]
Studies have found that financial assistance provided by abortion funds is essential for women who are not able to afford out of pocket abortion costs, and it is particularly beneficial for patients of color, and those who are younger and single.[5][6][7][8]
Wow. Direct link to article:
https://lawandcrime.com/u-s-capitol-siege/federal-judge-to-probe-former-top-d-c-prosecutors-60-minutes-interview-in-oath-keepers-case-proud-boy-also-demands-review/The timing of Sherwin’s tenure with the D.C. office is important. Under legal ethics rules, attorneys are generally discouraged from talking to reporters about cases they have handled or currently are handling. However, the rules still allow plenty of wiggle room for attorneys to discuss matters with the press. [snip]
Sherwin’s reference to the “public record” is legally critical. Under most ethics guidelines, attorneys are free to talk to the press about information already contained on the public docket. D.C.’s rule is even more wide open than the American Bar Association’s model rule in this area.
Pelley referred to Sherwin as “an eyewitness” to the president’s rally which preceded the U.S. Capitol Breach. [snip]
Generally speaking, attorneys cannot appear in matters where they or members of their law firm are witnesses. The relevant D.C. version of the rule, however, explicitly contains an exemption for government attorneys. [more]
From reading the article, it appears Sherwin may have tried to thread the needle that he was exempt from any rule against discussing the case. His sense of ethics stinks; it's obvious he should have kept his mouth shut.
The vaccination rate in GA is frustrating. Availability and online information is spotty.
After the age limit went down to 55+, I found a Pfizer location about 20 miles from me and went there for my first shot yesterday. There was little available in my own town, and none for Pfizer, but I didn't have to go very far to find it.
The thing is, I knew how to go online to look for it and sign up. Also, a short drive out of town was not a difficult hurdle for me, though it would be for some. Anyone trying to find useful information at our local Health Department web page will find few specifics there on how and where to go for the vaccine. On the other hand, the GA Health Department web site is quite good. It's a shame the local page doesn't link to it.
My vax location was inside a Walgreens and only one person at the pharmacy counter was handling all of the customer service, data entry, and actual vaccinations, so the wait was longer than it should have been with an appointment. But I got it done! Little reaction so far other than a sore arm. My second appointment is already set up for next month.
I don't have a local paper subscription and do not watch much TV, so I have no idea what media coverage and information campaigns may be ongoing. The issue of availability vs demand is also interesting. Is there less interest in rural areas? Is this due to genuine disinterest or is there lack of information / lack of access due to the online signup? My area is fairly rural, but most of my older acquaintances (rural) and most family members, including minor children (urban) are already vaccinated.
Kemp's comments are fairly worthless; I don't trust a thing he says. I'm just relieved to see some hope of return to normalcy on the horizon. The faster everyone is able to be vaccinated the better. I'm hoping that general availability for everyone on May 1 will really get things rolling.
Fantastic. Thanks, Nevilledog!
The replies included an xkcd cartoon using Star Wars to explain mRNA vaccines. It was hard for me to get it to readable size just by clicking, so here's a link to it along with a very lengthy explanation:
https://explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2425:_mRNA_Vaccine
and another explanation of how mRNA vaccines work that was really cute and on point:
Fantastic. Just fantastic.
We have a president who 'gets it' and is not afraid to say so out loud. I've been politically aware to one degree or another since Nixon, and no president in my living memory has said these things out loud, meant them, intended to act on them, and then followed through to this degree. Apologies to Obama, but it's true and it's just stunning. I knew Joe was on the side of the everyday citizen, but didn't expect him to be this on the ball, especially this quickly. Love that man.
Ours is supposed to be a government "of the people, by the people, for the people" --
as Lincoln said in his Gettysburg address. Republicans may have conveniently forgotten that, but Joe has not. 💙
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: Georgia
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 25,960
