Vancouver Riot 2011 – Those who came forward voluntarily

So far, 15 rioters, instead of waiting to be reported or found, turned themselves in to police (http://vpdreleases.icontext.com/2011/06/20/riot-investigation-fact-sheet/). Whether they feel real remorse for their actions or merely regret being photographed, only they know. I can’t help but wonder whether they would have done so had there been no chance of discovery. Still, many have no previous record of wrongdoing and they want to apologize, explain, and in some cases atone.

Coming forward voluntarily to apologize is a start, even if some doing so are still in denial about the enormity of their offences or are only doing so in the hope of receiving a lesser punishment than if they had been hunted down.

Nevertheless, I think we should listen to them, regardless of their motives for coming forward. Not because of dew-eyed “everyone is a good person underneath” idealism or even compassion. Listening to what could make a normally exemplary young person behave like that is essential to understanding how to prevent this in the future. Which is the result I would like to see.

The listening should be conditional, though. Restorative justice is not the same as no justice. I believe we are entitled to let the rioters know the full extent of what they inflicted, as an emergency room nurse who was on duty that night at St. Paul’s Hospital did: http://riot2011frontlines.tumblr.com/post/6682186192/a-e-r-nurses-thoughts-on-an-instigators-apology.

And we are entitled to more than tearful apologies and sincere acknowledgements that they are responsible for their actions. The rioters owe us. They need to pay out of their own pockets for the damage and do community service. Lots of it. There should be restrictions on where they can go and when and with whom. They need to find ways to make amends and re-earn our trust.

There is far more value to us all in such a solution than in flushing these kids, their families, and their lives down the toilet out of angry revenge. Mahatma Gandhi was right when he said, “An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.”

We also need to back off from the friends and families. If these young people are to make the amends they owe us and contribute to the world in the future, they will need the support of the few people who love them enough to stick by them through this. Supporting them in taking responsibility is not the same as protecting them from having to take it. The ones who have come forward voluntarily have mostly done so with the support of people who love them. I see no reason to harass an already broken-hearted mom or dad. You never stop loving your child. No one should be punished for that.

Moralizing platitudes about today’s youth, our culture of privilege, and bad parenting are balm only to those who find more solace in being right than being happy. I am pragmatic. If we want meaningful healing and change to come out of this mess, then the answer is, as Ram Dass once said, “just say ‘know.’” And the only way we can know is to listen to the ones who are willing to talk.

Vancouver Riot 2011 – Telling the good guys from the bad

Bad Guys

The instigators are unquestionably villains. They came with weapons, prepared to riot regardless of the game’s outcome. They thrive on destruction and knew that they could count on emotionally charged drunks to join in.

I’m also going to include those who joined in the feeding frenzy and are waiting to see whether they get caught. And likely won’t feel bad about what they’ve done if they don’t.

Those are the people who make me wonder whether we should bring back flogging. Just for them.

Good Guys

The clean-up crews were angels.

Then there were the people who, drunk or sober, effectively or quixotically, stood up to rioters to defend businesses and cars. Standing O. From my heart.

Emergency crews did the best they could in a bizarre situation that sometimes forced them to wait for instructions before responding to an emergency.

Although police were lambasted for being unprepared and no doubt did injure innocent people who got in the way, they did an admirable job of handling the craziness. And - let’s be honest - had police been more pro-active and prevented the riot, the criminal liberties acolytes would be bleating about nannying, jackbooted, genocidal maniacs sucking all the joy out of being a public menace.

Good or Bad?

First, there were two types of people who took pictures:

-      law-abiding citizens who wanted to help police identify and prosecute rioters later and

-      rubberneckers who wanted souvenirs of an event they found entertaining, which they would not even have thought of sharing with police had there not been a popularity pay-off.

Regardless of intentions, the effects were the same. The picture-takers were generally not active rioters, tended to get in the way of emergency responders, and have provided useful tools for identifying and prosecuting the offenders.

Then there was the justifiably angry reaction of the larger community, which has led to a massive campaign to identify the rioters and bring them to justice. I’m all for that.

But some call it snitching, oblivious to the subtle difference between ratting out someone who stayed at a parking meter an extra ten minutes without paying and reporting serious, violent vandalism to the proper authorities.

Still others are promoting racism and vigilantism under a halo of self-righteous indignation against not only offenders, but also their families, friends, employers, and other associates. Like sadistic prison guards, they know that few will pity their victims. Just last night I saw a Facebook post by someone who felt that one of the offenders, who had come forward voluntarily, should “take his chink ass back to Korea or whatever shithole he came from.”

I am clear that I want all the rioters held accountable for their actions, including the ones who come forward voluntarily. They owe us and they should pay.

But somehow, deep down, I have more room in my heart for a frightened young man who has admitted to doing something horrible and knows he deserves the consequences than I do for someone who would feel good about himself for posting a comment like that.

Asthma

What is it?

Asthma is a chronic inflammation of the airways. Symptoms differ for each person, but a key characteristic is that they recur frequently or go on for long periods of time.

Asthma symptoms include	-    coughing -    wheezing -    chest tightness -    shortness of breath -    difficulty breathing -    burning pain when breathing -    mucus build-up in the airways
An attack might bring on other symptoms, such as	-    rapid heart rate -    trembling -    panic -    depression -    sleep disruptions -    inability to think or concentrate -    headaches

Many other medical conditions share the same symptoms as asthma. Your doctor can run tests to diagnose your condition.

What causes it?

There are no definite known causes for asthma, but some factors can predispose you to the disease or trigger it.

Heredity	-    family history of asthma, especially in one or both  parents
Irritants	-    cold air -    aerobic exercise -    reflux -    dust -    mold -    pollution, including: ·   secondhand smoke ·   thirdhand smoke ·   perfumes ·   chemicals, including pesticides ·   wood smoke ·   clothes dryer exhaust ·   car and diesel exhaust ·   industrial pollution -    anything else that irritates the airways
Allergens	-    dust or dust mites -    cockroaches or other insects -    pollen -    plants -    animal skin and fur -    feathers -    mold -    chemicals -    perfumes -    clothes dryer exhaust -    any other allergens
Illnesses	-    cold -    flu -    pneumonia -    other viruses -    bacterial infections
Other triggers	-    hormones ·   adolescent ·   premenstrual ·   pregnancy ·   perimenopausal ·   menopausal -    stress and deep emotional shock -    sleep deprivation -    exhaustion -    any other shock to the immune system

Reactivity and severity are unrelated. How much of a trigger it takes for symptoms to appear is unrelated to how severe the symptoms become.

Is there a cure?

Asthma is a chronic disease with no known cure. Symptoms may worsen or disappear depending on your environment, stress levels, and other trigger factors.

You can improve your chances of staying healthy or minimizing the severity of the illness by managing factors that you can control.

Medication	-    research your options ·   cost ·   effectiveness ·   short- and long-term side effects -    discuss them with your doctor -    take prescribed medication as directed
Aerobic exercise	-    do it properly – it helps -    warm up gradually -    do your best, but know and respect your limit
Cold weather	-    stay indoors or -    wrap a clean scarf made of breathable non-allergenic material around your mouth and nose if you go out
Reflux	-    maintain a healthy weight -    avoid foods that give you heartburn -    keep portions small, especially for your last meal  of the day -    stop eating at least two hours before going to bed
Home (do what you can)	-    use alternatives to carpets -    put up easily cleaned window blinds -    use dust mite proof covers on bedding -    use low-emitting paints -    find an alternative to a furnace -    if you have a furnace ·   use the best filters for the furnace and vents ·   change the filters often ·   have the ducts cleaned at least annually -    limit use of strong chemicals and fragrances -    ban smoking in and around your home -    if you live in multi-unit housing, make sure your  building has an effective smoke-free policy -    keep your home dust- and mold-free -    close windows near clothes dryer vents
Pets	-    avoid pets if you are allergic to them or -    get a hypo-allergenic dog breed
Illnesses	-    take proper care of yourself -    drink lots of fluids -    get plenty of rest
General health (do the best you can)	-    eat a nutritious diet -    minimize processed foods -    exercise -    maintain a healthy weight -    get enough rest -    manage stress levels -    avoid triggers

Anything else worth a try?

Some people find the following two items helpful. They are meant for use in addition to, and not as a substitute for established asthma care methods.

Chocolate	-    should be a minimum of 70% cacao -    is an effective cough suppressant -    opens up and relaxes airways (but is not a substitute for a rescue inhaler) -    has an antidepressant effect
Zymactive	-    is a brand name product made of protein-digesting enzymes -    is effective at reducing inflammation -    has been used for over 25 years in Europe and Japan -    should be avoided if you are pregnant or nursing, due to insufficient research

Grama Queen on me, myself, and I

I have been (accurately) accused of being pedantic. So once in a while I will howl at the moon about my grammatical pet peeves.

Misuses of me, myself, and I are probably the worst offences, not only because of their ubiquity, but because it is so easy to use these words correctly.

When is it correct to say “please give I chocolate”?

You’re right. Never. It is always “please give me chocolate.”

Then why do so many educated and literate people believe that me should become I if they put another person’s name and the word and in front of it? Why would someone say “please give me chocolate,” but if including another recipient in the request, say “please give Opus and I chocolate”?

A simple trick to figure out whether to use I or me

Take away the other party’s name and the and. What is left should look and sound correct to you.

Opus and I love chocolate.

Please give Opus and me chocolate.

But what about myself?

Myself is reflexive, which means that I am both the person acting and the person on the receiving end of the action.

I bought chocolate for Opus and myself.

There is never a time when someone else can do something to or for myself. If someone else is buying the chocolate, then it is for me, whether or not Opus is also included as a recipient.

Marvin bought chocolate for Opus and me.

The comparative trap

Beware the comparative, which contains a hidden trap to lure you into grammatical perfidy.

Marvin bought more chocolate than Opus or I.

HUH?

The comparative conjunction than links two independent clauses. The verb for the second one is implied.

Marvin bought more chocolate than Opus or I [did].

According to the Canadian Oxford Dictionary, it is acceptable to treat than as a preposition and use me in informal contexts, when I would simply sound awkward.

Marvin bought more chocolate than Opus or me.

When writing a comparative, use I. If speaking in an informal setting, use me unless you want people staring at you as though you had just eaten their chocolate.

UBC "bad luck" hospice

http://www.theprovince.com/Furor+mounts+hospice+plans+push+forward/4891568/story.html

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/06/03/bc-ubs-hospice-approved-reax.html

One of the things I am proudest of about my country, Canada, is its inclusiveness. I love diversity. I can travel around the world without leaving my home city, Vancouver.

I also love that my country does a decent job taking care of its sick. Our health care system has its problems, but I am grateful every day that I live here and not in a country where only the very rich have any meaningful care or choices. I love that we are compassionate and that our inclusiveness encompasses the terminally ill, allowing them to die in peaceful dignity, surrounded by their loved ones in beautiful, accessible environments.

The University of British Columbia has a perfect spot for a hospice. Unfortunately it is beside a condominium in which 80% of its extremely wealthy residents believe that having dying people next door will bring them bad luck.

Having chosen to immigrate to Canada – presumably because of its reputation for inclusive social values and accommodation of diversity – and having been welcomed into our country, they are puzzled that we seem inclined also to include people they would prefer to exclude on grounds of superstition.

-   Jane argues that Canada is a democratic country and that most of the condo residents do not want terminally ill people next door. Her vision of democracy dismisses the opinion of the Canadian people who welcomed her here, that caring for the dying is a higher priority than accommodating superstition.

-   Maggie compares telling someone’s dying mom to go bleed to death somewhere else because her ghost might upset the neighbours to refusing to touch a trophy because it might jinx a hockey game.

-   Keri eagerly argues for her own right to speak, seeming to believe that exercising it obliges her listeners to do everything she tells them to do.

-   David pleads for a humanistic solution… Even after a bath break to mull it over, I still don’t know how to begin to respond to such chutzpah.

If there were real and meaningful concerns that were being ignored, such as pollution, noise, or higher crime rates or risks of fire, I could understand. I would support indulging the condo owners’ superstition if all they wanted were to put up some weird-looking phantom traps. But if they believe that their superstition is a good reason to treat suffering fellow humans like convicted pedophiles, my sympathy snaps. It seems to me that it is the terminally ill who are at risk for misfortune from these solipsistic whiners.

These condo owners have resources. They can afford to hire ghost-busters. Or move (until it is their turn to die). There must be plenty of rich people happy to snap up luxury housing beside quiet, respectful neighbours.

Maybe UBC should consider relocating the hospice after all and putting up a halfway house instead.

If UBC caves to these ludicrous demands, I swear that when I die I will haunt every single unit at Hawthorn Place, 2688 West Mall, until every person who opposed the hospice is driven out.