Tale of Two Doctors

This was in ye olde email inbox this morning.


Two patients limp into two different medical clinics with the same
complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require hip surgery.

The FIRST patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day and
has a time booked for surgery the following week.

The SECOND sees his family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an
appointment, then waits 8 weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray,
which isn’t reviewed for another week and finally has his surgery
scheduled for 6 months from then pending the review boards decision on his
age and remaining value to society.

Why the different treatment for the two patients?

The FIRST is a Golden Retriever taken to a vet.
The SECOND is a Senior Citizen on Obamacare.

In November if Barack Obama and his Czars get another term we’ll all have to find a
good vet.

What Fish?

Great joke in the mailbag today:


A redneck with a bucket full of live fish was approached recently by a game warden in Central Mississippi as he started to drive his boat away from a lake.
The game warden asked the man, “May I see your fishing license please?”
“Naw, sir,” replied the redneck. “I don’t need none of them there papers. These here are my pet fish.”
“Pet fish??”
“Yep. Once a week, I bring these here fish o’mine down to the lake and let ’em swim ’round for a while. Then when I whistle, they swim right back into my net and I take ’em home.”
“What a line of horse …you’re under arrest.
The redneck said, “It’s the truth, Mr. Gov’ment Man. I’ll show ya! We do this all the time!!”
“WE do, now, do WE?” smirked the warden. “PROVE it!”
The redneck released the fish into the lake and stood and waited. After a few minutes, the warden said, “Well?”
“Well, WHUT?” said the redneck.
The warden asked, “When are you going to call them back?”
“Call who back?”
“The FISH,” replied the warden!
“Whut fish?” asked the redneck.
MORAL OF THE STORY :
We may not be as smart as some city slickers, but we ain’t as dumb as some government employees.
You can say what you want about the South, but you never hear of anyone retiring and moving north.

Facebook Addiction? Information Addiction?

Perhaps it’s not just Facebook, but I find it ironic that Scott Adams and Leo Babauta both wrote about similar addiction on the same day:

  1. Click here to read Scott Adams’ 3/9/2012 Dilbert with a plug on Facebook Addiction
  2. Click here to read Leo Babauta’s article on his Zen Habits site: A Survival Guide for Beating Information Addiction

A Look at Current Self-defense Common Law in Virginia

Here is some great information Mr. Van Cleave from the VCDL gave me permission to re-publish.


Virginia currently has excellent protections for those involved in the use of force for self-defense.  Our protections are much broader than the “Castle Doctrines” that many states have.  True “Castle Doctrine” bills provide protection only in a person’s home, while Virginia common law provides protections everywhere you might be – at home, in the yard, at work, at the store, in church, etc.  Some states desperately needed “Castle Doctrine” laws, as their existing laws were horrible on self-defense.  Many required a person to retreat EVEN IN THEIR OWN HOME!  Not true in Virginia.
Virginia is a “stand-your-ground” state.  That means AS LONG AS YOU ARE NOT PART OF “THE PROBLEM” and are innocent, you can stand your ground and use force to defend yourself wherever you may be.  Deadly force is only allowed if you are under IMMEDIATE threat and you reasonably fear that you, or another innocent party, will be killed or be grievously injured.  The death of an attacker caused by use of such deadly force is considered “justifiable homicide.”  Note that you don’t actually have to be in a deadly situation, but only have a REASONABLE FEAR that you are in such a situation, to be justified in the use of deadly force.  For example, if someone tries to rob you with a toy gun and you don’t know it’s a toy gun, you would be justified in responding with deadly force since you would reasonably fear that your life was in immediate danger.

If you are part of “the problem,” say by making an obscene gesture or yelling a threat at someone, then, if attacked, you MUST RETREAT.  The retreat must be as far as you can reasonably go and you must indicate that you give up the fight.  Then, and only then, if the attacker persists, can you use force against them.  If they are trying to kill you or grievously injure you, and they die because of your use of deadly force, it is considered “excusable homicide,” a lower standard than “justifiable homicide.”  Moral to the story:  don’t give up your right to stand-your-ground by being part of the problem – ever.

The reason that a person who is part of the problem is required to retreat is to avoid someone committing murder under the guise of self-defense.  Otherwise, a murderer could intentionally badger a victim to the point that the victim attacks out of sheer anger or frustration.  At that point the murderer, standing his ground, could use that attack as an excuse to kill the victim “in self-defense,” getting away with murder legally.  Not good, not acceptable, and not legal.

Would common law or the “Castle Doctrine” bills GUARANTEE that a person legally defending themselves could NOT be charged with murder or sued civilly?  NO.  If the police and/or the Commonwealth Attorney have reason to believe, rightly or wrongly, that you committed a murder instead of true self-defense, you are going to be arrested and charged.  Period.  As far as a civil suit, you can be sued for anything and nothing can stop that either.  However, common law (and the wording in the Castle Doctrine bills) provide a defense.  However, the common law provides the same defense wherever you may be, while the “Castle Doctrine” would only apply inside your dwelling.

Author: VCDL

Unemployed or Out of Work?

This was in my email inbox this morning.

Why don’t we hear about this on the news???

Abbot and Costello

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.
ABBOTT: Good subject. Terrible times. It’s about 9%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that’s 16%.

COSTELLO: You just said 9%.
ABBOTT: 9% unemployed.

COSTELLO: Right: 9% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that’s 16%.

COSTELLO: Okay, so it’s 16% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that’s 9%.

COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 16%?
ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 16% are out of work.

COSTELLO: If you’re out of work you’re unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, you can’t count the “Out of Work” as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.

COSTELLO: But … They’re out of work!
ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.

COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn’t look for work can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair.

COSTELLO: To whom?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.

COSTELLO: But they’re ALL out of work.
ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work… Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. If you give up, you’re no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

COSTELLO: So if you’re off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

COSTELLO: The unemployment goes down just because you don’t look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That’s how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 16%. You don’t want to read about 16% unemployment do ya?

COSTELLO: That would be frightening.
ABBOTT: Absolutely.

COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.

COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct.

COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.

COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like an economist.

COSTELLO: I don’t even know what the hell I just said!

And now you know why Pres Obama’s unemployment figures are improving.

Internet Collaboration

Happy New Year! Let’s kick it off with something cool. Here’s a great video that came in the mailbag today. Projects like this and the YouTube Orchestra just go to show how powerful global Internet collaboration can really be. If only more businesses were able to pull this sort of coordination off.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJtq6OmD-_Y#![/youtube]

My Message to the Red Cross

Yes, I really did just send the following email to my local Red Cross.

Subject: Video Games?

Greetings,

Can you explain this to me so I understand the ICRC’s intentions regarding this matter? I certainly do not want to continue contributing money and blood to an organization that would frivolously waste my contributions on such trivial matters.

Stimulus Package Explained

This lovely joke ended up in my inbox today courtesy of my friend Dave.

INTERESTING….

It’s a slow day in the small town of Pumphandle, TN and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, everybody is in debt, and everybody is living on credit.

A tourist visiting the area drives through town, stops at the motel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs to pick one for the night.

As soon as he walks upstairs, the motel owner grabs the bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.

(Stay with this…..and pay attention)

The butcher takes the $100 and runs down the street to retire his debt to the pig farmer.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay his bill to his supplier, the Co-op.

The guy at the Co-op takes the $100 and runs to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer her “services” on credit.

The hooker rushes to the hotel and pays off her room bill with the hotel owner.

(Almost done…keep reading)

The hotel proprietor then places the $100 back on the counter so the traveler will not suspect anything. At that moment the traveler comes down the stairs, states that the rooms are not satisfactory, picks up the $100 bill and leaves.

No one produced anything. No one earned anything. However, the whole town now thinks that they are out of debt and there is a false atmosphere of optimism and glee.

And that, my friends, is how a “stimulus package” works!