Mark Hamill & Daisy Ridley Seem to Have Opposing Feelings About Their Star Wars Characters

Okay, so even though a couple of months and change has now passed since "The Last Jedi" was released, I still want to remain courteous to anyone who might not yet have seen the movie, yet intends to sometime in the future.

So, that means that this is a warning that there are spoilers up ahead. If you have not yet seen the movie, and do not want the surprise to be spoiled for you, then stop reading now, and look away.

*****SPOILER ALERT!*****

Last warning, because here goes:

Okay, so if you are still reading, either you have seen the movie already, or have not seen it and have no intention of seeing it or do not mind spoiling surprises in advance, and yet are reading this regardless, for some reason.

Recently, two of the actors portraying major characters from the recently released Star Wars movie  took very different positions regarding their characters. For one, it seems that there is a hesitancy to let go of the character, to resign his fate. For the other, it appears that there is almost an eagerness to get the next movie over and done with, and to move on with her life and not look back at the character that she has come to define in the most recent Star Wars trilogy.

Mark Hamill, who played the iconic Luke Skywalker character that the first Star Wars trilogy largely revolved around, has voiced some of the problems that he has had with the character's portrayal in "The Last Jedi." Although he later regretted his differences with the vision of director Rian Johnson, Hamill had said that he had could not believe how the director saw his traditional character, Luke Skywalker, and warned old school fans of the original Star Wars that they were not going to see the Luke Skywalker that they had grown up on and loved.

Now, more recently, he also suggested, a bit jokingly, that he cannot believe that Luke is actually dead:

 “I refuse to believe that he’s gone. My theory is he just teleported to somewhere else and left his robe behind. He teleported to a nudist colony, that’s what I’m hoping.”

Daisy Ridley, who plays Rey - the character similar to Luke Skywalker for this new trilogy in that she appears to be "the new hope," if you will, as the rising Jedi strong in the ways of the Force, to help fight in the struggle against the Dark Side of the Force - has gone quite the opposite direction, suggesting that she will hang up her role of playing Rey forever after the still untitled Episode IX movie comes out (it is slated for release in late 2019).

In an interview with Rolling Stone late last year, around the time that "The last Jedi" was being promoted and about to be released, Ridley said that she would not be interested in any future reprise of her role as Rey, which seems almost like a throwback to Harrison Ford's reluctance to ever play his character, Han Solo, again:

“No. For me, I didn’t really know what I was signing on to. I hadn’t read the script, but from what I could tell, it was really nice people involved, so I was just like, ‘Awesome.’ Now I think I am even luckier than I knew then, to be part of something that feels so like coming home now." 

Perhaps there is still a possibility to play the role again, after Episode IX?

“No, no, no. I am really, really excited to do the third thing and round it out, because ultimately, what I was signing on to was three films. So in my head, it’s three films. I think it will feel like the right time to round it out.”

So it appears that either we will have to go without Rey following Episode IX, or if we see her again, it will either be another actress, or perhaps even CGI.

Strange developments again surrounding the Star Wars saga, where the drama outside of the films sometimes rivals the drama within the films.

Here are the links to the two Star Wars-related articles that I used in writing this particular blog entry:

Mark Hamill doesn't believe Luke is dead by Jordan Ruimy, March 2018:

http://www.worldofreel.com/2018/03/mark-hamill-doesnt-believe-luke-is-dead.html

Daisy Ridley Says She Won't Be Playing Rey Again After Episode IX, December 2017:

http://www.worldofreel.com/2017/12/daisy-ridley-says-she-wont-be-playing.html

Article on How 'Dark Money' is Ruining American Democracy Gives Incomplete Diagnosis

We are now in the midst of some of the most blatantly corrupt and anti-democratic days that this country has ever seen.

That is what happens when the country elects a rich jackass like Donald Trump - a man with a long history of lies and shady deals - to it's highest office.

And yet, Trump won, at least in part, because he exploited this general knowledge that our whole political system is corrupt and rigged in favor of a few elites, as he claimed that his own wealth basically translated to him not being capable of being bought, or being corrupted by big money and powerful forces in Washington. In fact, he promised to fight all of this corruption, in his now famous "drain the swamp" sentiment.

Instead, of course, the swamp has been overflowing, as tons of reports of staggering corruption and/or various conflicts of interests regarding this President and members of his administration continually surface. 

Here is just one example of reporting that the conflicts of interest currently in the White House are reaching levels of criminality perhaps never before seen in this country's history:

One such report found that since Trump secured the Republican nomination in 2016, the fraction of anonymous purchases of his properties through shell companies has "skyrocketed" from 4 to 70 percent. The public can only guess at the source of these funds, whether they be foreign governments or wealthy domestic interests—and to what extent unknown sums pouring into other Trump businesses are being used to curry favor with the president.

Surprised? 

Yeah, neither am I. Again, this man has a well-known history of lying to promote his own self-interest. Time and time again, he did ridiculous, disgusting things to fatten his own wallet, and he said whatever he wanted to say beforehand to get his way, and more often than not, ignored these promises later on. As a candidate and then as President-elect, he demonstrably lied numerous times already. The story above, of course, hearkens back to when he promised to cut all of his business ties once in office, a promise that he obviously never meant to keep. He also promised to release his tax returns, which again, he clearly never meant to keep that promise. Although I was not a fan of Hillary, he claimed that Hillary was lying when she pointed out, quite accurately, that Trump had referred to climate change as a hoax, although he actually did say that in the past, and has expressed clear cynicism towards it since, as well. He claimed to know more about ISIS than his generals, which is clearly, laughably wrong. He claimed that he would be the greatest job creating President in history, and that he would bring America into a new era of greatness, when we would, in his words, start winning and continue to do so, until we would get tired of winning. What a joke that was! And who could forget that he promised to make Mexico pay for his wall, when anyone with an ounce of common sense knew full well that he would never, ever be able to do that. 

And, of course, it seems a bit ridiculous for Trump to suggest that he could not be bought, when his entire business empire was based on making deals with special interests for things to get done. Yet, he filled his administration with corporate friendly people, and his administration has been filled with corporate friendly policies and nods to special interests. Until recently, none of these seemed to exert as complete influence as the NRA did over Trump and his administration:

The NRA is among the largest "dark money" organizations, reporting the greatest amount of campaign spending without revealing the source of the funds — over $35 million in the 2016 election cycle alone. Still, this amount was just a fraction of the over $175 million in reported campaign-related spending that came from unknown sources."

Yet, it should be noted that Trump has been worrying the NRA of late, with suggestions that run very counter to the NRA's traditional talking points, and strong emphasis on an unbending, unyielding interpretation of the second amendment that would place absolutely zero limitations on the rights of any citizens to obtain however many firearms, and however deadly the firearms, as they can afford, on the spot. Suddenly, Trump seems to be somewhat of an independent voice, at least on this one issue in particular. Still, action has not been taken on the NRA, and whatever Trump's seemingly constantly shape-shifting position on guns and the NRA (and other political beliefs, for that matter) seem to be at the moment, it is hard to imagine meaningful gun reforms occurring anytime soon, so long as Republicans control Congress. 

I am not as certain about all of the enormous funds that allegedly systematically come from Russia, because my own suspicions are that many Trump detractors, and particularly mainstream Democrats who supported Hillary, are clinging to that as an excuse as a convenient explanation as to why they lost to Trump in 2016, when the real reasons why she lost were more compromising, and are damning to the Democratic party in general, and the mainstreamers in particular.

It is this that the authors of this CNBC article (see link below) miss, because there was a clear reason why voters in general did not either like or trust Hillary Clinton. After all, the hefty "speaking fees" that she collected, and the ringing endorsements that she received from numerous big banks and Wall Street firms suggested that she was very much a part of the problem, that she was, in a very real sense, bought and sold to the highest bidder. This perception had it that once elected, she would do whatever her corporate masters wanted her to do.

And really, this was not exactly hard to believe. After all, her endorsements did come from big banks and Wall Street firms, her policies were very corporate friendly, and her apparent disclosure to those same Wall Street corporations and banks that she was fine with having both a public and private position on issues, and that the two were not necessarily one and the same. 

This was the kind of blatant corruption that people associated with the worst excesses of Washington in the modern day, and the normally advantageous notion of Hillary being seen as the most experienced was also taken as a negative, as she was also regarded, perhaps not entirely inaccurately, as the ultimate Washington insider running in the race. 

Not coincidentally, it was the general lack of serious journalism on any major level covering all of this that added fuel to the fire of this perception of Hillary as corrupt and rotten to the core. And this particular article, which delves into matters of dark money and, presumably, to many corporate interests being involved in our politics, yet gets Hillary off scot-free, time and time again, that added to that sense that Hillary keeps getting special favors (and in return, gives them back to her corporate sponsors). 

So, yes, this article makes some valid points about the obvious 'dark money' that is corrupting our political system. Indeed, to some degree, it is revealing. Yet, what is also revealed is the overly convenient narrative where Trump or Republicans, and perhaps Republicans as a party alone, are responsible for the ridiculous, out of control, disgusting corruption that Washington is completely plagued by, and which has eroded public trust in our elected officials. But if you dig a little deeper - and really, you only have to dig just a little bit - you will see that the complete omission of Democrats from stories like that actually adds quite a bit to the problems. So sure, go ahead and read the article that I attached the link to. But please keep in mind that it talks about corruption exclusively about one party, and even one man, while suggesting that corruption is poisoning American democracy as a whole, all while conveniently neglecting to mention the other of the two major parties, the one currently not in office, and how this overly convenient approach might itself be contributing quite strongly to the erosion of American democracy.

NRA, Russia and Trump: How 'dark money' is poisoning American democracy by Alex Tausanovitch and Diana Pilipenko of the Center for American Progress, 15 Feb 2018:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/15/nra-russia-and-trump-money-laundering-poisoning-us-democracy-commentary.html?__source=sharebar|facebook&par=sharebar

What's the Matter With Florida? State Senate Approves Ban on AR-15's for Less Than Quarter of One Hour Before Taking It Back

It sounds like it should be a bad joke.

Unfortunately, this is not a joke, and it most certainly is not funny.

Just two weeks and change after the third worst school shooting in modern American history took place in Florida, the state senate there approved a ban on AR-15's for all of 15 minutes, before rescinding their own decision and giving up on the idea of the ban.

Indeed, even though the Florida state government rarely ever takes any sort of action on limitations on gun ownership, they did yesterday, as the Senate President announced that the proposed measure had passed.

Then, fifteen minutes later, the measure was defeated by a 21-17 vote. Only Republicans voted in favor of overturning the measure.

Are you shocked?

Yeah, neither am I.

It really is beginning to feel like a bad joke. I mean, the rest of the world really is looking at us, at what is going on here, and scratching their heads, unable to make sense of our collective attitude on things. Why are we the only industrialized nation in the world that fails to pass meaningful gun legislation? Why are we the only industrialized nation that makes healthcare unaffordable, as we have by far the highest prices in the world, including for the mentally unfit, which Republicans keep pointing to as the problem in terms of gun violence.

Now, there is a final vote on this measure on Monday, although with Republicans against standing united against common sense gun legislation, it hardly looks like it would be a sure bet that meaningful limitations on gun access will be passed in Florida. After all, in the past two years, this state has seen two major mass shootings that managed to jolt the country. First, the Orlando night club shooting, with 49 people killed, and then the Parkland shooting that killed 17.

Yet, no major gun control measures were passed.

So, the final vote will be held on Monday. But really, is anyone even shocked that the NRA has the Florida Senate in their pockets, and is paying them to do their bidding? This is an old story, and it has been played out now so many times, both on the state level (in numerous states) and the national level, that it is as predictable as it is nauseating. Just another reminder that the only thing that matters in the United States is power, usually in the form of money. Money talks, and in places like Florida, it seems to speak so loudly, that it drowns out even basic common sense laws that would keep Americans safer.

Of course, we also known that a lot of politically strange things seem to happen regularly in Florida, more than most other states. It is supposed to be a purple state, but we all remember the bizarre chain of events that led to George W. Bush "winning" the election based on what happened in Florida, where Bush's brother, Jeb, just happened to be overseeing everything, and was in charge of a "fair" review of the situation. No conflicts of interest there, right? They have a governor there who ignores the regular flooding issues in Miami and other parts of coastal Florida, and was the first to ban any terms hinting at global warming or climate change, well before Donald Trump was ever elected President (with the help of Florida, of course). And of course now, after two huge mass shootings in under a year, the NRA still clearly exerts more influence than the vast majority of citizens, who are in favor of common sense laws to keep guns out of the most dangerous hands. Florida, like Texas, is starting to look like one of the symbols of what is wrong with the United States right now.

Frankly, if another huge mass shooting happens in Florida, like it did in 2016, and like it has in 2018 already, will anyone be surprised? It will indeed be nauseating, but unfortunately, it will also be all too predictable. 

Florida senate approved AR-15 ban for 15 minutes before rescinding it by Josh Delk, 03/03/18:

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/376586-florida-senate-approved-ar-15-ban-for-15-minutes-before-rescinding-it

⚽️ Paris Saint-Germain 2, Troyes ⚽️

⚽️ ⚽️ Paris Saint-Germain 2, Troyes 0 ⚽️  ⚽️ 

Paris Saint-Germain earned it's third straight shutout win in a seven day span today, as PSG defeated Troyes, 2-0.

PSG was held scoreless for quite some time in this one, as Troyes played tough and held PSG to a scoreless tie through the first half of play.

However, PSG broke through when Angel Di Maria  scored in the 47th minute, giving PSG a 1-0 lead.

They managed to extend it, and put some cushion in their lead when Christopher Nkunku scored in the 77th minute, virtually icing the game. PSG managed to hold Troyes off for the duration of the game, thus earning another valuable win as they inch their way closer to another Ligue 1 championship.

PSG extended their already sizable lead in Ligue 1 play with this victory. THey now have 74 points after 28 games played, and own a whopping +67 in goal differential. They are now fully 14 points ahead of Monaco, the second place team, and have 28 point differential advantage. 

However, PSG's main concern for the immediate future is their match against Real Madrid later this week, on Tuesday, the 6th. They lost the first match against them, 3-1, and will need to beat them by at least two goals, and preferably three. But they will have to try and win that game without star player Neymar, who had a successful surgery on his broken foot following an injury in last week's victory against Olympique Marseille.

It will be interesting to see if PSG can rise up to the challenge against Real Madrid, even if they are not at full strength. Let's see how they fare! At the very least, it should be interesting!

Florida Teacher of the Year Speaks Out About Child Behavior

Stories regarding angry and abusive student behavior have been generating considerable attention in recent years, but that has been especially true for Florida in the past few weeks, ever since the school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. 

One Florida teacher, Kelly Guthrie Raley, a sixth grade language arts teacher who was named Eustis Middle School Teacher of the Year 2017-2018 last month, laid out some serious issues with a Facebook post that has since gone viral in the aftermath of the Parkland school shooting. She laid out some issues, as she sees them, with what is wrong with the behavior of kids today, and what role parents may play in all of that. Here is what she had to say about it:

"Okay, I’ll be the bad guy and say what no one else is brave enough to say, but wants to say. I’ll take all the criticism and attacks from everyone because you know what? I’m a TEACHER. I live this life daily. And I wouldn’t do anything else! But I also know daily I could end up in an active shooter situation.

“Until we, as a country, are willing to get serious and talk about mental health issues, lack of available care for the mental health issues, lack of discipline in the home, horrendous lack of parental support when the schools are trying to control horrible behavior at school (oh no! Not MY KID. What did YOU do to cause my kid to react that way?), lack of moral values, and yes, I’ll say it – violent video games that take away all sensitivity to ANY compassion for others’ lives – as well as reality TV that makes it commonplace for people to constantly scream up in each others’ faces and not value any other person but themselves, we will have a gun problem in school. 

“But you know what? My parents NEVER supported any bad behavior from me. 

“Parents, it’s time to step up! Be the parent that actually gives a crap! Be the annoying mom that pries and knows what your kid is doing. STOP being their friend. They have enough ‘friends’ at school. Be their parent. Being the ‘cool mom’ means not a damn thing when either your kid is dead or your kid kills other people because they were allowed to have their space and privacy in YOUR HOME.”

“But you know what? I never dreamed of shooting anyone with his guns. I never dreamed of taking one! I was taught respect for human life, compassion, rules, common decency, and most of all, I was taught that until I moved out, my life and bedroom wasn’t mine…it was theirs. And they were going to know what was happening because they loved me and wanted the best for me.

“This post wasn’t about gun control. This was me, loving the crap out of people and wanting the best for them. This was about my school babies and knowing that God created each one for greatness, and just wanting them to reach their futures.”

Raley makes clear that she herself is a gun owner, and that she enjoys hunting. 

When Raley began teaching twenty years ago, she felt that there was more respect for teachers by parents. No parents would think of cursing her out or threatening, or generally implying that their child was beyond reproach.

Somewhere along the line, though, that changed, she says. Parents allow their kids too many freedom, too much privacy, and are scared to confront them, to discipline them.

With this, she indeed probably has a point. I remember seeing a cartoon once that really resonated with me. It showed two different parent-teacher conference, with the kid present in both. The first cartoon showed such a conference in 1969, and both the teacher and the parents were angrily looking down on the kid, and screaming, "What's the meaning of this!" or something like it as the kid was shrinking away. Then, it showed the present day, with the same quote underneath. Only this time, the parents were angrily shouting at the teacher, who was shrinking away, and the child was watching happily, with arms crossed, and a clear sense of entitlement being stoked. And you know what? There is some truth to that indeed.

Generally speaking, I do not believe that she is wrong about the vast majority of what she says here. Indeed, I think it is applicable to the general state of decline of the American education system, and why the United States has been sagging, and went from being the envy of the world with a public education system that worked back in the golden age of the country in the 1950's and early 1960's, to one that seems to be sliding consistently closer to being the worst education system among industrialized nations. A lack of respect towards authority hurts everyone, and trust me, I have seen firsthand, from both sides of a teacher's desk, just how disruptive and contagious this kind of bad behavior is.

I also agree with Raley about this being largely the product of the failure of parenting. Many parents - and I mean far too many parents - really seem like they should not be parents at all. An alarming number of them - and here I have to specify that men in particularly seem to be a problem - seem to not care enough to discipline their children. When the kids are allowed to get away with bad behavior at home, who can blame them for feeling that they can also get away with that kind of nonsense in the schools? Again, I have seen this firsthand. When I was a kid, the thought of being sent to the Principal's or Vice-Principal's Office was terrifying! It happened, but very, very rarely. Nowadays, I see kids regularly being sent to the office, and they do not care. It does not faze them one bit. They know that, at worst, they will get a slap on the wrist. Only on very rare occasions do kids actually find themselves being perhaps kicked out of the school, and only then - sometimes - do they express some measure of regret. By then, of course, it is too late. Besides, it should never be allowed to reach that point.

But the thing is, schools are kind of at fault, as well. After all, they are so terrified of being slapped with a lawsuit, that they bend over backwards to accommodate every whim by the parents, even when the parents are wrong. Once again, here is an example from my own experience: I was called into the office one day for a meeting with a parent, who was unhappy that I had given her son extra homework after he was caught cheating by me. He even admitted to cheating! Yet, his mom was unhappy, because he had baseball practice, and he had extra homework to finish. So, naturally, she thought it best to tell him not to do the homework, and she told her son "I'll take care of" that teacher, meaning me. So, I looked her straight in the eyes and told her to go ahead and take care of me, but I reminder her that her son was caught cheating, and admitted to it. He recognized that he had done something wrong, and at the very least, as an emphasis to recognize that he had done something wrong and needed to understand that it was wrong, he had been given extra work to do, just to hopefully deter him from doing it again. Education often goes beyond the ABC's and 1,2,3's, and sometimes extends to life lessons, as well. What would we be teaching him if we allowed him to be exempt from punishment when he did something wrong, even after admitting to it? Frankly, I thought he was getting off lightly, because cheating is a serious offense, even for young kids (he was about 10 years old).

She yielded to that point, but it was not easy. And she definitely had an attitude. At least enough of one for me to hope avoiding dealing with hr in the future. I am not saying that she is an unfit mother, but it was hard to understand her logic that baseball was more important than schoolwork, and that disciplining her child when he had done something seriously wrong in school was simply not a priority.

Yet, she was far from the worst. She actually cared about her child, which is more than I could say for some of the kids there. One of the boys in that class had a disorder that prevented him from being particularly athletic, and it was no secret that the father had expressed little interest as a child, likely as a result of those physical abilities.

Perhaps, indeed, the constant exposure to violence in movies and television shows and video games starts to have an effect, as well as the generally trashy nature of other aspects of modern culture, particularly television (especially many of the reality shows) and the internet and music. But again, that is in large part due to how much of this the parents allow, and if they never provide more positive alternatives to their children. Using myself and my experiences with my son, I felt there had to be standards. Once I learned something about Deadpool, for example, I decided not to take him to see the movie, and to take away one of my Christmas gifts to him (that he had specifically requested) because I had seen such trashiness within it. Maybe someday, he can make up his own mind about it. But not at such a young age. I also do not let him get away with swearing, or showing too much disrespect, period.

This was the pretty much the norm as I was growing up. There are things that you want as a child. The cool toys and/or video games that the other kids seem to have. Cable, perhaps, and the ability to see all the new, cool movies that the other kids have seen several times over, by now. Cool, fun trips to Disneyland, and to sunny Florida in general. Video games came later, and I envied those other kids there, as well. Later, it was cool clothes, and the acceptance of peers. Hell, a girlfriend.

Looking back, though, I have to admit that on some levels - many levels, actually - I am glad that these things did not necessarily come to me as quickly or conveniently as they did for other kids. I am far from perfect, but some of the things that I am most appreciative and think are some of the best parts of the person that I have come to be are rooted in those early lessons about not always getting my way. And a large part of that was having adults tell me no, and to not be afraid of a slightly unpleasant interaction. Kids need to be told no every once in a while. Frankly, I think they even want it, and can sense, on some level, that it is good for them, that adults are not doing that to hurt or embarrass them, but rather quite the opposite. It builds character to be told no, and to be reminded that there are limits.

These days, it feels like there is a complete absence of limits. It feels like anything goes in our modern world, and nowhere is that as true as right here, in our United States. I would not go so far as to blame school shootings on kids being spoiled and not getting their way, although it would be difficult not to believe that this has at least some impact on the problem. But let us not conveniently forget that mass shootings do not always, or even usually, happen in schools, and it is not always young men who are the perpetrators. After all, Stephen Paddock can hardly be lumped into the spoiled Millennial generation, right? And despite Raley's assertions that things were radically different twenty years ago, the education system was very much in an advanced state of decline back then, and levels of disrespect towards learning and teachers were already being practiced by both kids and parents, as well as other adults, alike. And as for school shootings, they existed and were a problem back then, too. After all, who could forget Jonesboro or Columbine? Was she remembering a more distant past, then, perhaps? Well, was respect not a serious problem back in the golden era of this country, when people of different skin color were not allowed, by law, to attend the same schools? And when efforts to integrate were finally imposed, was it a not a show of serious disrespect when there was a new kind of "white flight," and once again, schools seemed to be segregated, more de facto now then legally imposed? There has been a steady influx of efforts to privatize schools ever since. Is this not an issue that goes right to the core of the crisis regarding insufficient respect in this nation?

Also, I would take exception to her notion that gun violence, specifically, cannot possibly be solved until we learn to respect one another. I think gun violence specifically can be resolved if we take the easy access to guns out of the equation, pure and simple. What makes me think such a nonsensical, "pie in the sky" notion? Why, the fact that it has worked everywhere else in the world that has seriously tried it. And to some degree, we tried it here in the United States, with an assault weapons ban that was allowed to expire during the George W. Bush administration. Guess what happened after it was allowed to expire? Rates of deadly gun violence went up. Yet, gun advocates, and the NRA, would surely have us believe that there cannot possibly be a relation between the two, and that is just utter and complete nonsense.

But I do agree with Raley's main points about insufficient respect by kids being a huge problem. Really, it is one of the elephants in the room, even if I disagree that it is the only elephant. And indeed, that problem is not really with the kids, as much as it is with the adults - or rather, those who pass themselves off as adults. I have met some fellow parents, and can tell you without any doubt that some parents really are much like children themselves,  and spoiled children at that. Again, this trend seems to be alarmingly true for men, in particular. We did not come up with the term manchild for no reason, after all. And if you do not think it is a huge and glaring problem, just look at who is sitting in the Oval Office and representing the United States around the world right now.

So, until we start to produce better adults, the glaring problems facing our nation - gun violence and failing education and kids going wild, as well as numerous other huge problems that are eroding what greatness this country might once have had - will simply not go away. In fact, things are likely to grow worse, not better, at least in the near term. This will continue to be the case, until we as a nation finally recognize that it is indeed an urgent problem that needs to be taken care of right now, once and for all. 

Florida Teacher of the Year’s Gun Violence Post Goes Viral After School Shooting By Lauren Richardson 15981:45 PM February 17, 2018:

https://truthuncensored.net/florida-teacher-years-gun-violence-post-goes-viral-school-shooting/

Today is Holi - a Spring Holiday in India

Happy Holi Day!

Okay, that was a poor attempt at humor, but it actually is a holiday in India. 

Holi (होली) is spring holiday that is celebrated throughout India, but especially in northern India. It is a Hindu tradition, and is known as the "festival of colors." 

Like with Easter in the Christian tradition, the date of this holiday varies according to the religious calendar. It symbolizes the triumph of good over evil, and trumpets in, if you will, the arrival of spring. Presumably, spring arrives a bit earlier in India, generally known as a hot country, than it does here in the the northeastern portion of the North American continent. 

Walmart and Dick’s Sporting Good Put Restrictions on Selling Guns

When you think of gun sellers, it does not get much bigger than Walmart and Dick's Sporting Goods stores.

These two huge retail gun sellers did put some restrictions for their gun sales moving forward, despite the looming threat of rising anger from gun enthusiasts and NRA activists, which might even rise to the level of boycott.

Doing anything that might fuel the apparently great anger of gun enthusiasts, or provoke the highly organized anger of the NRA, has been a constant fear for many, including politicians and, of course, retail stores that sell guns.

Yet, Walmart and Dick's decided that action needed to be taken, with a growing disapproval across the country rising against that same NRA and the gun enthusiasts that support them.

Yesterday, Dick's Sporting Goods announced that it was ending all sales of assault-style rifles, effective immediately. It also announced that it would no longer sell high-capacity magazines, and would not sell guns to anyone under the age of 21, even if local laws allow younger people to buy guns. 

Later in the day, Walmart followed suit and announced that it would no longer sell guns to anyone under the age of 21 years, and also, it would no longer sell guns resembling assault rifles, including toy guns.

All of this happened while the gun debate is raging stronger than it has in many years, with more and more people feeling pressured to actually do something. Even the White House is not immune. President Trump is all over the news this morning, claiming that while the NRA has enormous power over "you people," meaning other politicians, they have apparently relatively little power over him, personally.

We'll see. 

I will say this: for the first time in a very long time, the passion driving action on restricting gun access seems to be matching, and perhaps even surpassing, the famous passion of gun advocates, particularly the NRA. Numerous corporations have severed their ties with the NRA recently, including Fed Ex, UPS, First National Bank, Delta, United Airlines, Symantec, MetLife, Hertz, Avis, Budget, Enterprise, National, Paramount, and Starkey.

There are plans for walkouts in schools in numerous cities throughout the country on March 14th, the one-month anniversary of the shooting at Parkland, and there is supposed to be a national march for gun control on March 24th.

For once, indeed, it does seem like momentum is on the side of people in favor of reasonable gun control measures, and the NRA, and gun enthusiasts (some people refer to them as "ammosexuals") seem even more on the defensive than usual.

Again, though, let's see if this time, something happens. Enough is enough after Parkland, sure. But wasn't enough enough after Sutherland Springs, or Las Vegas? Wasn't enough enough after Orlando, or San Bernardino? What about Sandy Hook, when 26 people, including 20 children in elementary school, were killed? Wasn't enough enough then?

You might think it would be. The shock value of Sandy Hook was unbelievable, even for a mass shooting. Yet, that was not enough to jolt the country enough to change the gun laws, to make some commonsense reforms. Just months earlier, there was the shooting in the Aurora movie theater, and that failed to truly shock the nation into taking serious action, as well. The shooting at Tuscon before that was not shocking enough, and the shooting at Virginia Tech also failed to force more sensible gun laws. And, of course, Columbine shocked the nation, and indeed the world, yet it also ultimately did not change the landscape of our national gun laws, either.

So with all of that, you begin to grow wary, and skeptical that this country will ever make any serious move towards sensible gun laws. I mean, really, how can not giving guns, let alone assault-style rifles, to people with a history of violent behavior, be even remotely controversial?

Somehow, though, it is. At least in the United States, it is. Other countries put in sensible gun legislation after horrific mass shootings and, low and behold, the legislation seems to have worked. Look at Australia, as one of the most obvious examples. They had a horrible mass shooting that killed over 30 in 1996, and they tightened their gun laws afterward. It worked, because there has not been a mass shooting there since. And unlike what fear-mongering gun nuts might tell you here, none of the various nations that enacted sensible gun laws turned into evil dictatorships, where citizens were packed into cattle cars and taken to concentration or death camps. All that these laws did was make the nations safer, by making guns a bit more difficult to obtain. Certainly not impossible to obtain, but to have some standards, nevertheless.

Maybe I am wrong, and this time, indeed, more sensible gun laws will be passed. Hopefully, I am wrong. But something in this country truly is different than the rest of the world, and not necessarily in a good or positive way, I would say. So, let's see what happens, although I will say that it has been both impressive and refreshing to see such a huge backlash like never before against the NRA and gun enthusiasts, who have simply gone too far for far too long in remaining blind to horrific violence and terrible rates of violent crimes and deaths caused by guns in this country.

Yes, the time is now. But then again, hasn't it been time since at least Columbine, which was nearly 19 years ago? If we can go almost two full decades without passing some kind of really meaningful gun control laws, then it makes you wonder what it will take for Americans to get sick of the NRA and their backers, and to tell them to go to hell? Perhaps we are finally seeing a bit of that, but I am willing to bet that there will be more such actions in the future, until we finally do figure out something that prevents a good amount of the staggering levels of gun violence that we see in this country.

You know, kind of like the rest of the world already pretty much has?

Walmart and Dick’s Raise Minimum Age for Gun Buyers to 21 By JULIE CRESWELL and MICHAEL CORKERYFEB. 28, 2018:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/business/walmart-and-dicks-major-gun-retailers-will-tighten-rules-on-guns-they-sell.html




Gun-control activists aren't backing down on a boycott of Apple, Amazon, and FedEx — here's how it could affect sales by Leanna Garfield, March 1, 2018:

http://www.businessinsider.com/nra-boycott-companies-brands-will-it-work-2018-2

    
One By One, Companies Cut Ties With The NRA by Amy Held, February 23, 2018:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/23/588233273/one-by-one-companies-cut-ties-with-nra

More than a dozen businesses ran away from the NRA. How it went down by Jackie Wattles, February 26, 2018:

http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/25/news/companies/companies-abandoning-nra-list/index.html