Monthly Archives: April 2012

A Child’s Senseless Death

Posted on by
Reply

Bullies have claimed another victim, this time in Iowa.

The boy was just 14 years old. His name was Kenneth Weishuhn.

I would encourage everyone to look to themselves, their children. Not just for victims who need help, but for bullies who need to get the message that they must stop.

Yes, doting parents. Your child, too, could be a bully.

That sweet little 8-year-old with chubby cheeks and freckles might be the tyrant of her class, the empress of the playground, deciding who gets to sit alone at lunch for the rest of the year and holding other children’s lives in the palm of her bangled hand. Your child could be a victim, yes, but he or she could also be a bully, and a lot of bullies leave no visible marks.

Don’t forget that.

Don’t forget Kenneth, either. He was just a kid.

And no victim deserves it. Not ever. Not if they have glasses, not if they’re gay, not if they joined the chess club or play the trombone or like Shakespeare or have a disability or a speech impediment or a snorting laugh or red hair or the wrong outfit or a Star Trek lunch box.

Stop it. Stop it, stop it, stop it.

Stop it now.

Strangulation? In North Dakota?

Posted on by
5

When I wrote this story about sexual assault, I also talked to Mary Thysell a little bit about domestic violence, an even more common problem, and strangulation came up.

I said I was fairly certain that in Minnesota, choking someone meant additional penalties under the law, and Thysell corrected me, pointing out that “choking” and “strangulation” are not the same thing.

She gave me a brochure: Strangulation in North Dakota.

I wish this brochure didn’t have to exist.

In it, described in accurate, dispassionate and clinical language, it states that strangulation counts as “serious bodily injury” in North Dakota’s Century Code, and therefore constitutes an aggravated assault.

It also states there are four types of strangulation: Hanging, manual (bare hands), chokehold (elbow bend compression) and ligature (using a cord-like object).

All very matter-of-fact. Other than a list of “common trauma victim thoughts and stages,” there’s very little indication of the shock, terror and desperate attempts to survive these people must undergo.

Are there any other reasons to strangle someone than attempting to kill her, or him? At best, the strangler can’t possibly care if he kills or permanently damages the victim, can he?

What does it feel like to know that a loved one is trying to kill you, or maybe just doesn’t care whether he or she does?

Here are some facts from the brochure.

  • 10 percent of all violent deaths are from strangulation.
  • It only takes 11 pounds of pressure placed on both carotid arteries for 10 seconds to result in a loss of consciousness.
  • Brain death occurs in 4 to 5 minutes.
  • Death can occur in 11.5 seconds if both arteries are cut off or blocked.
  • Underlying brain damage can mean that death occurs several weeks later, too.

I still wish the brochure didn’t have to exist.

Pants-Wearing Killer: An Addition

Posted on by
Reply

Apparently pants-wearing spree killer Anders Breivik actually played World of Warcraft as time off from planning his killing spree, not as a way to plan it. The news story got it wrong. In fact, most of the entities covering the trial took that same exact slant.

Plus, there’s even quite a bit of confusion on how the other game, Modern Warfare, could possibly be used as a “wargame.” Breivik wasn’t making a lot of sense when he said that, apparently.

I don’t know. I don’t play that game.

I do have to confess, however… I very often do wear pants.

Zorro Defends Lecture, Cinnamon Wounds, and Puppies

Posted on by
Reply

Here are some funny pranks and some very unfunny, dangerous practices, and also, just because, puppies.

  • First, a college lecture suddenly becomes exciting with the addition of a purse theft, Zorro, and a duel. (via College Media Matters)
  • Here’s ten more simple pranks you can do, if you don’t have a mariachi band handy. Some of them are kind of mean–the ketchup, I think, is a wee bit harsh–but others are amusing. (via BoingBoing)
  • Why swallowing ground-up water-repellent bark is a bad idea. Clue: Cinnamon is ground-up water-repellent bark, so this is about that “cinnamon challenge” we’ve all been hearing so much about lately. (via BoingBoing)
  • If you’re buying a puppy, please consider an ugly one. Apparently looks are often the major reason why people choose the puppies they choose, meaning there must be a ton of sad, ugly-cute puppies out there.
  • And finally, “reporter” has again landed on a couple of lists: one for “careers that pay less than you think” and one for “worst jobs.” I have to question the “worst jobs” bit, personally. I love my job. I find deadlines more helpful than stressful, my coworkers are great, and sure, I work weird hours, but they’re certainly not as difficult hours as my parents (a pastor and a nurse) work. Plus, I get to not only write, but I also get to proofread, which I enjoy quite a bit. Here’s another person’s take on it; I don’t agree with everything she says either (actually, I get thanked a lot, and my higher-ups are nice to me), but thought it was worth a look.

Tired of Blaming Video Games

Posted on by
2

Are people ever going to stop blaming video games for murder sprees?

I’m getting a little bit tired of these sorts of articles, not just as a person who plays video games but as a person who has more sense than a brain-damaged turnip.

First of all, let’s look at the headline. “Norwegian killer used computer wargames to plan attack.” Which “wargames” did he use? Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and World of Warcraft.

World of Warcraft is not a wargame. It’s a MMORPG. While there are a few large-scale battlegrounds, you’re not going to learn a whole lot of strategy that applies to the real world by playing them unless you can cast magic spells in real life. (Hint: You can’t.)

At least this particular article doesn’t actually go so far as to blame the video games for the killer’s obvious mental issues.

An important point here is that correlation doesn’t equal causation. I don’t know if a lot of murderers play video games or not.

I do know that a lot of murderers wear pants.

Hey, maybe that merits an article.

I already have a headline for it.

Norwegian killer wore pants during attack.

Fake and Real Geek Girls

Posted on by
Reply

Tara Tiger Brown, a writer for Forbes, has launched a stunning attack on what she considers to be “fake” geek girls. Note that this is specifically addressed not to fake geeks, but to fake geek girls.

Apparently only females are trying to pass themselves off as geeks. Or maybe it’s totally all right for males to do so, but not females.

I’m a little bit bewildered by Brown’s article. I was always a geek girl in school. I was unpopular and I read a lot of books. I don’t think Brown would consider me a “real” geek, though, because I was not a science/tech geek. I was (and am) a literature/pop culture geek.

Brown’s definition of geek excludes me.

This is a little odd. In junior high and high school I was on the knowledge bowl team, a group of people who would play trivia games against teams from other schools, a very geeky pursuit. Our team included a math geek, a science geek and two literature/culture geeks. We were all geeks together, and by our powers combined, well, we were pretty much Captain Geek.

I wasn’t somehow less of a geek because I’d read “The Merchant of Venice” instead of Richard Feynman. And none of my geek friends treated me any different, although sometimes they would have to explain mathematical concepts in terms a six-year-old would understand for me. That was okay. I was pretty happy to explain the plot of “Count of Monte Cristo” to them as if they hadn’t read a book not about computers since they were 6, so it all evened out.

I still don’t read comics, and I still don’t really play video games. And I’m still a geek from a family of geeks. My dad happens to be a theology geek, and my mom is a literature geek, thank you very much.

It’s a little sad that someone would be less accepting of different types of geeks now than people were in 1989.

We should have less diversity in geekdom? Really? You, Tara Tiger Brown, a female geek, are really arguing that?

And plenty of other people agree with me, too.

Reading Children’s Books Is Totally Bad and Wrong and Embarassing

Posted on by
11

Some guy (Joel Stein, a columnist for the Times) claims that adults should read only adult literature, and really, it just looks silly for an adult to be reading a Harry Potter book.

Does it? I think I grew out of caring what other people thought about what I was reading when I was about 12.

At age 13 I was carrying around my father’s college Shakespeare textbook and my classmates thought I was nuts. I explained to them several times that it was a collection of plays, not a multiple-thousands-of-pages novel, but that didn’t make much of an impression, especially not if I showed them the actual text.

At that point I was pretty much determined to be a very definite nerd. Guess what? Tough cookies. Why would I care what anybody thought of what I was reading? Iago gave me the wiggins and I thought Beatrice and Benedick were the most adorable couple ever.

What about classical children’s literature, Mr. Stein? Do I get a pass for reading “To Kill a Mockingbird” or is that verboten now too? Or is that okay? Is it okay because on one level it’s a kids’ book and on another level it’s a parable about racism and growing up? The first time I read it as a kid I missed some of the nuances; was that my only chance or am I allowed to read it again to see if I missed anything now that I’m 31?

And if that’s okay, what about “The Giver?” Am I allowed to read that one? It’s a kids’ book about freedom, utopia and memory, do I get a pass on that? Is “Lord of the Flies” okay? What about the Leatherstocking tales of James Fenimore Cooper?

What about little-little kid books, like “Animalia?” That came out in 1993, but it still amuses and I still like hunting for the hidden in the ornate, complex pictures. There were quite a few that as a 13-year-old I never found, and my little brother, then 6ish, never did either. Was that our last bite at the apple, Mr. Stein, or can I go back and look again now that I’m 31? Is it offensive if I do?

Really. My response to you is the same response I would have made to people who thought I was weird for reading Paradise Lost in high school:

If the sight of me reading a book written for children offends you, close your eyes.

Or don’t. I don’t care. I’m reading.

Flying Saucers, Stupid Games

Posted on by
Reply

A few links to get you started on a very windy Easter:

Plant Imperilled

Posted on by
Reply

B.G. doesn’t know it, but he is in mortal peril right now.

My aloe plant, B.G., is sitting there in his gorgeous blue-and-violet pot, surrounded by his three beautiful children (the youngest is probably just a few months old, as I didn’t notice her until today), having just been watered, thinking everything is totally fine.

He has no idea that tomorrow, he’s going to be moving to a brand-new home, a red, square-shaped pot with a built-in draining dish.

And he’ll be moving there alone.

Yes, I am breaking up the family, leaving B.G.’s children in his lovely pot until they get big enough to strike out on their own as individuals.

Frankly, I just hope he survives the trip. I have a brown thumb and I would really like B.G. to survive the experience of moving, with as few aches, pains and confusion over where-the-heck-is-my-stuff as possible.

We’ll see how it goes. If all goes well, I will post a photo of B.G. in his brand-new home, perhaps with a snapshot of the kids.

Property Taxes: Whose Money Is in the Bucket?

Posted on by
1

I’ve had a few questions about several stories I’ve written about property taxes, and I would like to share with you my bucket analogy, which simplifies some of the complex things that determine a person’s property taxes.

Imagine a bucket. This bucket represents a single local taxing entity’s levy for a single year, payable the following year–for example, Stutsman County.

1. The governing body of that taxing entity determines the total amount of taxes to levy. That means Stutsman County sets the size of its own bucket. The state, though, usually has some limits on how big that bucket can be.

2. Every taxing entity has its own bucket.

When you pay property taxes, part of your money goes into the county’s bucket. But part of it goes into the city’s bucket, if you live in a city, or the township’s bucket, if you don’t, and part of it goes into the school district’s bucket. The county collects the property taxes for all these entities, but it doesn’t keep them, nor does it have any control over the size of anybody else’s buckets.

Now many factors help determine what goes into the buckets. I’ve written about a few of them. Below I’m going to use Stutsman County’s bucket as an example, but it’s not the only bucket involved, remember! And these three items are all specific to North Dakota.

1. The soils assessment. That was mandated by the state of North Dakota, and affects property valuation. Generally, the idea is to ensure that all land with the same type of soil that is used the same way is valued the same.

This will affect how much property owner A puts into the bucket compared to property owner B. If A had a lot of flood damage and couldn’t plant for several years, or if B just has better soil, B may end up putting more money into the bucket next year than A, even if they have the exact same amount of property.

That does not necessarily mean that B’s taxes will go up as compared with last year, however, because there are other factors. If the County Commission opts to levy less taxes, the county’s bucket will shrink, and require less money to fill it up. In fact, every taxing entity could levy a smaller tax and put out a smaller bucket. B will still pay more than A, but if the buckets shrink enough, B’s taxes could still be lower than they were last year.

2. The change in the statutory cap rate. This is part of how the state of North Dakota determines crop land values for the purposes of taxation. It’s a long mathematical formula.

Essentially, however, it helps determine how ag land is valued. In previous years, the statutory cap rate was held at a certain level by the Legislature, which kept ag land values lower. This year the Legislature did not vote to do that. (I don’t know how it reached that decision.)

This means that ag land values are going up 21 percent.

It still doesn’t necessarily mean that either A’s or B’s taxes will go up as compared with last year. Remember, the taxing entities still could shrink the size of their buckets enough to offset that 21 percent.

It does mean, however, that both A and B will be putting proportionally more into this bucket than last year as compared with C, who owns only residential land, and D, who only owns a business.

Do note that, given the size of the increase due to this issue, it is likely that A’s and B’s taxes will go up.

3. Another part of the complex mathematical formula for ag land values is determined by actual cropland landowner returns.

To keep this number from being volatile, and swinging wildly up during good years and wildly down during bad ones, it was decided that this number should be an average. So the formula takes the last ten years of cropland landowner returns, drops the highest year and the lowest year, and then averages them out.

Cropland returns have more than doubled since 2001, though, and they have increased nearly every year since then (except in 2004). So between 2011 and 2012′s formulas, a low year was dropped from the list of numbers to average and a high year was added. Even dropping the highest number and the lowest number meant there was an overall increase.

More math would be involved to show the precise effect of this, but essentially, that too affected the values of ag land relative to residential and commercial/business land, though not as much as factor 2 above.

This will have A and B putting proportionally more into the bucket compared with C and D than they did last year.

But it still doesn’t mean A and B’s taxes have gone up compared with last year, because the county still sets the size of its bucket, as does every other taxing entity.

4. Here’s one I haven’t written about. Stutsman County’s population decreased slightly between 2000 and 2010, but I’m not sure whether it changed during the past year.

If E and F bought and developed property in Stutsman County, they will have to help fill up the bucket. This means that A, B, C and D could pay proportionally less than they had the year before. However, they might not pay less taxes, because the county still sets the size of its bucket, as does every other taxing entity.

(Note: Just in case you’re wondering about the bucket picture above, it’s an internet meme. In other words, it became inexplicably popular for no discernible reason and a lot of people have seen it. If I’d wanted to mix the memes, I could have titled it something like “Yo dawg, I used to like buckets like you, but then I took an arrow in the knee.” But that might be silly.)