My Kings Cross life, I was heading off for a cycle but I needed to pick up a bike chain because I had lost the key to my one. Next minute some bloke comes up behind me and tells me it was his bike and that he’ll “break my neck” if I left with it. He then continued to tell me that it had been stolen and explained some of the modifications that he had placed on it. I quickly calmed that situation, reasserting my suspicion that it had been stolen (we found it dumped in our apartment block 3 months ago). I told him that he could have it (he looked like the type that went to the gym too much and was capable of following through on his ‘neck breaking’ threat).
In the end, he was reunited with his bike (if it wasn’t his, he will be in my situation and reunited with some random stolen bike). And I am now stuck with a bike helmet and a rail bus.
Love you Kings Cross.
I am not anti-Gun, I am anti-bad gun. I have no issue with people ‘protecting’ their houses or themselves from tyranny via the use of a shotgun with birdshot. I have no issue with people using rifles to hunt deer in secure areas away from population centres and bush walkers/campers. I have no issue with police officers carrying sidearms in order to dispel the treats they may face from firearms. My issue is with military issue weapons being kept by people, in their homes, handguns in the trucks of their cars. My issue is with those who run off to celebrate Gun-appreciation day. My issue is with Wayne La Pierre being paid $1 million a year to lobby the states and the congress to loosen protection on guns, gun sales and gun ownership.
I too have grown up with war in my mind, the twice monthly visit to my grandparents house also brings with it war stories. I could recount his experience behind a machine gun in the hills of Papua New Guinea better than he could now. I have a fairly good knowledge of what military issue guns can do to the human body and it It sounds like you have a great military history in your family, as do I. I have close relatives that have served and fought for the IDF, one of my great-grandparents served in Turkey in WWI, and the other in the Somme.
I can’t say that I have ever shot a gun with a live round in the chamber, I can’t say that I would ever want to fire anything other than a shotgun. I still do uphold my prior statement that guns are weapons of “mass murder”, they are killing machines, either to kill animals or to kill people. But to say that all gun users are deranged or would kill school aged children is a misnomer.
The Mens Rea (guilty mind) of the person, coupled with the Actus Reus (guilty act) are two parts that both need to be proved in order to convict someone in a criminal case. The mental stability of the person should be questioned as soon as they request the purchase of a gun, and the weapon they require should be questioned as soon as they require it. That means, background and health checks as well as restrictions on the guns that are available.
Guns don’t kill people, ammunition, concealed handguns & military weapons do. A rampage fought with a glass cup won’t have the safe effect as one fought with a M16. Mental illness may cause people to commit such vile and indiscriminate acts, but it’s a multi-pronged approach that can truly prevent these mass-shootings.
What do you agree with and what don’t you agree? Want to write a full post, with your plan to ‘deal with guns’, I’ll publish it in full.
Below, I have uploaded a speech that I wrote for public speaking. The topic is ‘The Price of Freedom’
The price of freedom, is it the total cost of all the bombs and guns, all the aid and troop payments. The money we pay to protect our shores or the money we pay to protect another country from the threats they may face?
Or is the price of freedom just another rhetorical tool deployed faster than a troop engagement? A tool so powerful, tricky and deceptive that it can fool millions, trick them into believing one spurt of discourse, to believe the men in suits over the men in robes.
The price of freedom, one bullet could do it, one quickly phrased line, shot out of an eloquent speakers mouth. One misplaced line typed in a long winded stream of consciousness. One bullet, one speaker, one gun typist.
We live in the modern age, the ‘iGeneration’ we’ve grown up with computers and smart phones, things that can tell you the landmass of Nigeria or the weight of a London bus in under a second.
The perpetual parental push toward restricting us from going out, driving, drinking or smoking whichever it may be. Is a misnomer. We, as teenagers have the world at our fingertips, what we can do is this side of limitless.
With just under 14 million active Facebook and Twitter users in Australia, we have a rapidly growing social media base, you are free to be you on the Internet. Social media is liberating, multiple personalities can be hatched at a whim. Multiple accounts with multiple names can be made faster than the fire of a Machine gun.
Many a revolution and uprising has been won thanks to the likes of social media, the ‘Arab Spring’ started with one fruit seller, Mohamed Bouazizi, angry at the government, then ballooned to 100 men, women and children each on Facebook and Twitter, supporting that man’s cause.
What does that one fruit seller have that we don’t? He has the toppling of four dictatorial leaders to lay claim for. The Arab Spring is well and truly an example of how Social Media can bring rise to freedom.
The American poet Robert Frost once penned that “Freedom lies in being bold.” Exactly what the fruit seller did, he showed the world that his stand could change the world around him.
The Internet has given even the most humble citizens the right to ‘escape’, replacing the book as the preferred medium to carry, to read and to disseminate.
Captivating speeches are no longer the only way to get your message across. Effective and charismatic leaders of yesteryear may have persuaded the masses through the spoken word, through the selective deployment of rhetoric and language.
These days charismatic leaders spread their message via the Internet, via blogs and social media snippets. The price of Freedom is the mere cost of a smart phone.
The cost of policing this freedom however is far greater than you imagine, even though Tim Breners-Lee, the founder of the Internet set it up with the aim of a complete free flow of information, ideas and images without governmental intrusion. It has become just the opposite.
Countries have whole government departments just to monitor the Internet, In China, they employ an army of 3,000 censors to look into the every working of their citizens. Chairman Mao used to say: “As communists we gain control with the power of the gun and maintain control with the power of the pen.” This idea is key to the reasoning behind internet censorship.
In the era of Censorship how can one be free, can they live with their rights of expression and freedom of speech. Can Chinese activists yearning for democracy find it in the form of the digitally typed word? Or will they again be forced to hide from the searchlight of government intrusion.
Freedom on the internet isn’t all sunflower and roses, however, because of it’s high proliferation their is a tendency for terror. Bullying and personal attacks to discredit people are all too common.
The Media has proudly labeled everything on the internet that happens to strike against their editorial line as ‘trolling’, well they are wrong, those who engage in vitriol and intentional attacks are the ones who are trolls. Those who bully and intimidate are trolls. Those who do it anonymously are trolls.
Is the price of freedom the reasoning behind personal attacks online? Do you lose the right to feel safe, be secure or welcome once you signup for a page or profile online. I think not. Nobody has the right to remove your abilities. Nobody has the right to attack you or pull you down. Nobody has the right to vilify you.
Heckling about age, gender, religion or sexuality. It happens every second of everyday. The internet is limitless in it’s ability to carry out attacks. It’s a catalyst to face to face bullying and a conduit for misery. We live in a society where it’s more acceptable for men to hold guns than to hold hands.
The cost of Freedom is often measured in a casualty count, how many died, how many wounded, how many injured. Well how many have died because of the internet, how many democracy activists persecuted?
How many have been wounded, could you call each insult a flesh wound? Perhaps each barrage of argument is like an insurgency and each moment of abuse is like a firefight.
The gun is again superseded by the pen, and now, the pen has been superseded by the touchpad. The price of being free.
Slut, Whore, Skank. Three words used to describe sexual activity. Three that lead you on the path of Slut Shaming.
When men sleep with several women they are patted on the back by their mates. When women sleep with multiple men they are labeled as Sluts.
As a man, interested in women, I can say that my business should not be with the length of a women’s skirt or dress. My interest should not be with her looks, it should be with how she makes me feel, and if she makes me laugh.
Sexuality is supposed to be fun and fluid. We should all be allowed to be ourselves. We should all be afforded bodily autonomy. We all shouldn’t be objectified because of the way we look.
This is something that I, as a progressive man have to admit to. I’ve looked at women, and agreed with people when they have reacted to women. I have been complicit in slut shaming.
A female friend of mine, has told me that she found my comments inappropriate. For that I am sorry. I have seen women in ‘skimpy’ clothes and commented they they are too short and inappropriate. For commenting on something that I shouldn’t, I am sorry.
Saying that we should just brush past looks is hard, approaching the ‘Hot’ girl in the bar or club before approaching the other girls will happen more times than not. I am instead talking about ‘Slut Shaming’
The people that edit Wikipedia have defined it as “the act of making a woman feel guilty or inferior for engaging in certain sexual behaviors that violate traditional gender expectations”. That’s not the definition I give it, I’d define it as “the act of belittling a woman because of her sexuality, or perceived sexuality”.
As a guy, I know guys just get away with it. I have an issue with guys getting away with sexually demeaning women.
Again, I say sorry.
I was shocked at the level of vitriol leveled at NSW minister Prue Goward after she questioned the merit of the Prime Minister’s ‘Captain’s pick’ of Nova Peris over former Deputy Chief Minister Marion Scrymgour. When Julia Gillard opened up Wikipedia and searched through ‘famed’ Indigenous people she squibbed the decision, bypassing the highest ranking Indigenous person let alone Indigenous woman for the ex-Commonwealth hockey player…
View the entirety of my latest Blog post here
I have an issue with guns, I also have an issue with shooting children and the NRAs PR model, they claim they need guns to protect criminals and bad government yet the only two tyrannical democracies that I can think of are Sudan and Mexico. One plagued with the mass death of the predominant fishing industry and the other salted with drug-related violence sheerly because of where the country is geographically situated, right next to the drug-yearning land that is America.
Those at the NRA, Tea Party, Blue Dog (Conservative) Democrats or the broad Republican Party that claim that they’re protecting their constitution’s Second Amendment from a socialistic, ambassador-killing Satanist who wants to snatch their guns from them, are wrong. They have forgotten to read past their prejudices and past the excerpt in the constitution that they regularly refer to as ‘the right to bear arms’.
The constitutional excerpt does provide for the use, sale and display of weaponry, whether they be overtly lethal or not. However the Second Amendment as it reads (apart from the interpretation of the presidentially-tainted jurisprudence) the “right to bear arms” exists when in “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” That does not enable any man, woman or child to have a gun nor concealed weaponry.
Another considerable issue plaguing America is the ease of availability when it comes to purchasing high-powered ammunition or specialised military grade arms. Why does a deer hunter require armour piercing bullets that can tear bits into the limbs of children, why do they need AR-15 assault rifles similar to what the US army are using in Afghanistan, why do they need clips with excessive bullet space?
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, referred to his M4 carbine (his general service weapon) that fires a .223 caliber round, which is 5.56 millimeters, at about 3,000 feet per second. “When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed to do that. And that’s what our soldiers ought to carry.” He then added, “I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets”.
The NRA’s cuckold over the Republican and the Blue Dogs means that they will use their significant fundraising might to unleash against any ‘turncoat’, any dissenting voice. The NRA, are no more than a lobby group, set up to push the benefits of black powder over hardened and forged steel. They are a dangerous organisation, not because they have, or advocate for, the use of guns, but because they have the willpower to mobilise their millions of members to fight against any ‘sensible’ gun control measures.
The American desire to delve into hyper-partisanship along with the ‘Civil war divide’ has lead to a culture of government fear, backed up by events at Waco and McCarthyist fears of socialist health care, the ‘big government that taxes’ is seen to raise much anger. One reason that the guns are cited as being needed is to stop such tyranny, yet, the US government has never been as bad as Hitler, Mao or Stalin, nor truly tyrannical. The US government is elected, by the people, and for the people.
Banning weapons in all Government buildings, Schools, Churches, Banks or Malls; you would have thought that they were already banned, the “Freest Nation in the world” can’t even protect their children. America should be restricting guns not putting them in the face of the future. Be fearful of Joe the Plumber or the man that frequents the gun club and religiously renews his NRA membership every September. Don’t be fearful of a government that wants to protect children, protect the future of their nation.
The Congress needs to recognise that now is the best time to begin a significant and concerted push to restrict the sale of weapons used by the military, to create a national database of previous convictions, mental health issues or domestic violence issues and compulsory background checks. Yes, I support the use of shotguns and the use of low powered rifles, I see them as essential for most farmers.
Australia, Britain and Canada have very safe and effective gun control methods, as has been said before, America needs to look overseas to develop the plan best for their children.
My reply to the Comment posted on this post: http://greenat1something.wordpress.com/2013/02/27/my-reply-to-bonezoz-on-the-gun-issue-in-the-us/
I am writing this email to inform you of the Harassment and Vitriol that I was subjected to from the twitter account that Imre Salusinszky owns and administers. My complaint relates specifically to your State political reporter’s use of the words ‘shit’, ‘grow up’ and ‘moron’ in reference to me. My original issue lies with the public display of Mr Salusinszky’s “photo album” of sexist images, with his current Twitter display picture (avatar) my main issue. As referred to in Section 21.4 of the News Limited Code of Conduct (which I have included below), the reputation of the company must not be brought into disrepute. I find any image of a news-media representative with two ‘stereotypically attractive’ girls as inappropriate for public view, or use on social media more broadly.
After raising my issue about the photo he used, he then proceeded to ‘lash out’ and attack my political views, use of anonymity, as well as his perceived view of my intelligence through the use of his insult “anonymous greenie moron”. I find this attack a most grievous assault on my intelligence, an unwarranted retort to quell what he saw as inappropriate judgement on my behalf.
Mr Salusinszky also alleges a conspiratorial young person ‘Groupthink’, as a teenager I find that utterly reprehensible and stereotypical, I certainly don’t subscribe to any wholistic dogma or editorial line. I am an individual, and find it inappropriate that anybody would suggest otherwise.
The last message (tweet) that Mr Salusinszky sent to me, about me, was a disparaging line about my political involvement, as well as a disparaging line about my age and his perceived grasp of my political nous. The use of demeaning requests like ‘Grow up’ not only significantly detract from the conversation but also delegitimize and deride any future attempt of Mr Salusinszky reporting on youth issues or youth engagement in the political realm.
Holistically, Mr Salusinszky breaches Section 24.1 and Section 24.3(i) as well as, I’m sure, the ‘company policies regarding employees such as bullying and harassment’. Because Mr Salusinszky is one of your writers, who publicly lists his title as ‘The NSW political reporter for The Australian’ I would like you to reprimand him for the degrading assault he has participated in via Twitter. I would also like him to apologize (Both via the original tool he used to conduct his inflammatory foulness, Twitter as well as via a letter or email) to me for the use of the negative words akin to bullying, that he directed to me today. For the record, or validation of my claims I have included a screen-capture of Mr Salusinszky’s messages.
I await a hasty reply.
24. Other Obligations
24.1 Do not bring the reputation of the company, your colleagues or your masthead into disrepute.
24.2 Respect the confidences and sensitivities of your colleagues at all times.
24.3 Familiarise yourself with the company policies regarding employees such as bullying and harassment.
25.3 All employees are required to be neat and dressed appropriately for their particular job.
25.5 Employees must protect company assets from theft, carelessness, waste and misuse and respect the property rights of others.
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 4,000 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 7 years to get that many views.
Don’t come here, you’ll be bashed by all the bikies and hammered on all the intoxicants. Every week you hear something overwhelmingly negative about Kings Cross in the media, but why? What’s so special that we get the stigma?
It seems that the North Shore dwelling non-event crime journalists require a story when there isn’t an elderly man being bashed or a suspicious house being shot at in the middle of the night. So they come to the Cross, like all of the other out-of-towners.
Because of the ‘violence hub’, ‘entertainment precinct’ or ‘red light’ district tags that are often applied as per the tone of the story, we gain a bad image; a congregation of prostitution, girls in skimpy dresses, glassings, cross-dressing and good old-fashion drinking that are common in these parts of a weekend.
But the Cross that I have grown up in, that I have come to love isn’t a sordid underbelly of drugs and strip clubs. It’s a cultural hub with the gentrification and socioeconomic transitioning from the Eastern suburbs coming to the “Paris end of Potts Point”, encroaching on the strip of Darlinghurst and Bayswater roads.
Before I moved here full time I was ashamed of saying that I lived in Kings Cross, heck, everyone is ashamed, there isn’t even a suburb called Kings Cross, more so a postcode shared by residents of Darlinghurst, Elizabeth Bay, Ruscutters Bay, Potts Point and Woolloomooloo. We are all the residents of the 2011 postcode, we are seemingly all ashamed of the stigma that the likes of Channel 9 have placed upon us. As the most densely populated suburb in the southern hemisphere we shouldn’t be ashamed of where we live.
The recent Kings Cross Festival was a prime example of how we aren’t too bad, instead of the usual weekday day sedateness, the festival curators revitalized the suburb. Through late night shopping incentives, a community picnic, a well attended free concert in the park, sponsored acts at clubs and the station, the area was shifted into a new light. Cultural events just overtook the sleaze and innuendo that we have been named for.
The new Wayside chapel has helped all the ‘locals’ a great deal in combating social issues that a 21st century city faces as well as securing the Cross for many years to come, from providing showers, to classes and most importantly a brilliant Reverend to talk to or to read his weekly emails.
When I now say that I live in Kings Cross I do it with a smile, I am proud to live where I do, even though when I tell people that I live in Elizabeth Bay they look puzzled, that is until I say Kings Cross. They all know where that is, they all know the issues that have been heaped onto it.