The 2008 broadsheet letter writing challenge

It’s back again! After my crushing victory in last year’s competition, the panel have decided to modify the rules. Here’s a recap.

1. Items published in a broadsheet newspaper recieve one point per word.
2. If you have two items published in the same day, you receive a 2x multiplier. Three items receives a 3x multiplier and so on.
3. New rule: “The flame war rule”. You receive 0.5 points per word in any response to your item (your name must be specifically mentioned).
4. You cannot enter if your name is Sandra K. Eckersley from Marrickville.
5. To claim points, you need to blockquote your published contribution into the comments section of this page. You should also stick it on your fridge door as proof that you didn’t just make the whole thing up.

Leaderboard

Joel W. Courtney: 259 points
Nicholas Broadbent: 139 points
Sue Brian: 137 points
A cousin of Joel W. Courtney: 118 points

I have been very foolish

Alright, I admit it. I overreacted to the latest university massacre in the United States. Tighter gun control? Ridiculous! What was I thinking?

14 000 US university students have discovered the clear and simple solution to this problem, while I have been busy twiddling my thumbs. Of course, I refer to the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC) organisation. The real problem here isn’t the lack of gun control in the US - quite the opposite! The real issue is the draconian restrictions on gun possession on university soil.

Look at it this way - when Joe Columbine decides to bring a Kalashnikov to class and blow away a few enemies, the poor unarmed students present in calss don’t stand a chance. The SCCC seeks to change that, by overturning the rules banning weapons on campus. Suddenly, we would have a whole lot of vigilante students, upholding the law and protecting the innocent.

The only problem with this plan, as I see it, is that it doesn’t go far enough. What happens if a gunman goes berko in a class without a designated “Concealed Carrier”? More deaths! What America really needs, is compulsary weapon ownership. Every student should be issued with a Colt .45 when they start their degree. As soon as a loony starts waving a gun, he’s got 400 barrels aimed at him, and statistics suggest that he’s not going to last too long. The double digit massacres of the past will be a faint memory. According to my statistical modelling, your average gunman would only be able to bring down 2, or maybe 3 students with the advantage of surprise, before being hit by a barrage of lead.

God bless America.

What does it take?

Another day, another gun-toting maniac on a rampage in a US university. This time, it became a little more significant to me because it occured just 100 kms down the road from the campus where a good friend is studying a PhD in politics.

In Australia, it took just one man and 35 lives to change our gun laws. Let’s have a quick look at Wikipedia’s list of school shootings (note, school shootings only) that have occured in the recent history of the USA:

The mind boggles. Of course, as gun ownership is protected under the US constitution, nothing will change in the forseeable future. But until some action is taken, these shootings will continue like clockwork. Wake up America!

Website hacked

Just a quick note to anyone who hasn’t upgraded wordpress to the latest version: my website was recently hacked due to an exploit in the old version. Upgrade right away!

The auspicious return of reason

In keeping with the finest traditions of Australia’s parliament, I decided to take the first six weeks of the year off from posting. Now finally, I am back, however I make no apology about it.

In under 24 hours we will witness what could be one of the greatest speeches in the history of Australian politics. Just over fifteen years ago, Paul Keating delivered what was recently voted as the most memorable Australian speech in history. Since then, reconciliation has argably taken several steps backwards, with the Howard government and Middle Australia in general being more concerned with their hip pockets than social justice.

Ever so gradually we are learning how to see Australia through Aboriginal eyes, beginning to recognise the wisdom contained in their epic story.

I think we are beginning to see how much we owe the indigenous Australians and how much we have lost by living so apart.

I said we non-indigenous Australians should try to imagine the Aboriginal view.

It can’t be too hard. Someone imagined this event today, and it is now a marvellous reality and a great reason for hope.

There is one thing today we cannot imagine. We cannot imagine that the descendants of people whose genius and resilience maintained a culture here through 50 000 years or more, through cataclysmic changes to the climate and environment, and who then survived two centuries of dispossession and abuse, will be denied their place in the modern Australian nation.

We cannot imagine that.

We cannot imagine that we will fail.

And with the spirit that is here today I am confident that we won’t.

Paul Keating, 10 December 1992 (full transcript)

Today the opening of the 42nd parliament was preceded by a ‘welcome to country’ ceremony performed by the Ngambri people. Kevin Rudd was presented with a message stick to commemorate the occasion. I don’t want to get the constitutional monarchists’ knickers in a knot, but why don’t we get replace the arcane “Black Rod” with the message stick? The Black Rod, which is the ceremonial staff of office used in the senate, was traditionally used to bash people who offended the Most Noble Order of the Garter (to which it is rumoured that Mr Howard will soon be inducted). Since offending upper class British twits is now a national sport, it would be a fantastic gesture for this staff to be scrapped in favour of a symbol which is actually tied to Australia’s history - the message stick.

Anyway, back to the apology. I simply don’t understand the hullabaloo over Rudd not releasing the wording. In my opinion, a speech is a speech, and it should be heard for the first time as it is spoken, not voted upon in a committee before hand. I don’t think that Churchill, Luther King or Lincoln vetted their speecehs with their opposite numbers.

The real question is, will Rudd be able to set the indigenous people on the track to equality with us whiteys? Or will the movement burn out again, as it did with the decline of Keating? I’m hoping that we’ll see some results.