Back on the soapbox

By Jeff Orvis

Hello faithful readers! It's been awhile since we last communicated and I have been collecting some random (some say weird) thoughts and questions. Here goes:

The other day, we commemorated 12-12-12, one of those strange days when all the numbers in the date line up. Some folks around the world waited for some monumental event at 12:12 p.m. While they were waiting for the end of the world, or at least a major earthquake, I was thinking about lunch.

Here in the Quads, a local couple celebrated the date and time with the birth of a daughter. The local TV news folks did the customary hospital interview and the family seemed really happy, especially since the father had to deliver his daughter when she decided to arrive early. While the focus should have been on the beautiful baby and her mother, I wonder how many other viewers were drawn to the appearance of the father. He had tattoos covering the visible upper parts of his body and more piercings in his face than I could count.

I realize that I officially became a member of the “over-the-hill club” more than nine years ago. But whenever I see anyone with a tattoo, especially a lot of them, or any piercings of the face, nose, lip, tongue, breasts...you get the idea...several questions come to mind like: “What were you thinking?” “Do you really think you improved your appearance or were you simply trying to draw attention to yourself?” For those of you who have piercings, how difficult is it for you to pass through airport security screenings?

As we are in the thick of the televised basketball season, we are being bombarded by the spectacle of tattooed players. What really puzzles me are those guys who have stories, full paragraphs, tattooed on their arms. If these guys are such good athletes, how often are they going to stand still long enough for us to read their vital messages carved on their bodies? What happens in five or 10 years when their bodies begin to change? Will these crucial messages become just black blemishes?

I've always had an aversion to needles and the only ink I've had on my skin was back in my newspaper days when I helped get the issues out by inserting and loading the finished product for delivery. I guess if I have to belong to a minority class, being a member of the non-tattooed class is okay for me.

Switching gears – How many of you are aware that the National Hockey League is currently in a labor dispute and the season is in serious jeopardy? Me either. No, I am aware of the dispute, but I must say that the only ice that concerns me is the ice I put in my tea each day. Maybe if I didn't think of an ice rink as a broken hip just waiting to happen, I would be more upset. Hockey can be an exciting sport and it's worth taking in an occasional game, either in person or on TV. But it's not like the end of NFL football or NASCAR, at least to a lot of us.

Because there are real hockey fans out there, as well as a few thousand folks who rely on the sport for their main source of income, let's hope the two sides can reach an agreement and some of the season can be saved.

On to a couple of more serious topics for a moment: Violence has reared its ugly head here in Iowa and across the country in recent days. The discovery the bodies of the two girls in Bremer County who disappeared from just outside of Waterloo this summer has ignited new rumblings for the reintroduction of the death penalty in Iowa.

Question: Why mar the memory of these two happy little girls with talk of taking other lives? Another question: Why is it that the most vocal proponents of death penalty legislation are the same ones who are so opposed to any form of abortion, including in the case of the life of the mother or rape or incest? Anyone else see the conflict here?

When the Kansas City Chiefs player killed his girlfriend and then committed suicide a couple of weeks ago, NBC's Bob Costas read a portion of an opinion piece from another journalist suggesting that this country is in the midst of a “gun culture.” It didn't take long for the gun nuts to call for his scalp. But Costas explained that he is not against the Second Amendment. But it just seems that the availability of certain guns (handguns for example) can lead to more violence, especially domestic violence.

When many athletes become pros and suddenly see a lot of money, their first thought may be that they have to buy a handgun for protection. Unfortunately, they may not stop to think that just because they're outstanding on the playing field or court, they may not have the mental or emotional maturity to deal with that sudden fame and fortune.

That's what Costas was saying. There's a big difference between the responsible hunter and some young men who gain instant wealth and may drop their game controllers and pick up a gun if they become angry or threatened.

The other recent act of violence happened in Oregon, where a young man allegedly stole an assault rifle, went into a shopping mall filled with holiday shoppers and opened fire with the weapon capable of firing several shots in rapid succession. What do you suppose the original gun owner was hunting with that kind of gun?

One more time: no matter what the National Rifle Association may lead you to believe, revisiting and revising the Second Amendment is not a threat to our civilization. If you are a hunter and you think you need to hunt with a multi-shot assault rifle, take up golf instead. If you think that assault rifle will protect you in the event of an attack from an enemy, odds are that enemy will have the drop on you or will have some sort of chemical weapon that trumps your rifle. If you think you can be safer by owning a handgun, at least have the common sense to take a gun course and don't be afraid to submit to a background check, including any past criminal history, as well as any history of mental illness.

Remember, when the Constitution was written, those who advocated the right to bear arms, those arms did not include a gun that can shoot dozens of bullets per minute.