With still trying to fight this pneumonia, I spent the majority of my Saturday sitting on the couch reading and watching TV. Something I normally do not get to do, but my mom and step dad were nice enough to come visit and entertain my 3 1/2 year old daughter. My daughter has just gotten over a double ear infection and a cold, which is great, however I need some rest now and she just wants to go go go.
I turned on the TV to CNN to catch up on what was going on in the world. Imagine my surprise when it was coverage of the earthquake in Chile and the tsunami that was going to hit Hawaii, particularly Hilo where my brother's girlfriend is from. I called my brother, he and his girlfriend Leslie live in Arizona, to let them know what was going on and send Leslie my best wishes that her family would be safe.
As I watched CNN my concern grew rapidly. I watched as people in Hilo were evacuated. I watched as they showed pictures of a previous tsunami that hit Hilo in the 1960's that caused wide spread damage and death. My concern turned into an obsession, I needed to keep watching the TV. The best I can describe it is it was like reading a suspense novel, I needed to know what was going on, what was going to happen, how it was going to end. As the time for the climax neared, so did my obsession. My heart started racing, everyone was ordered to sit down and be quiet or leave the room, and heaven help them if they stood in front of the TV. And then it happened, nothing. Yup that is right, nothing.
I sat there feeling a multitude of emotions. I felt relief and joy that Leslie's family was not in danger. I am also ashamed to say that I felt a little disappointment that the climax never came. I have read comments out there in cyberspace, comments made by uneducated people who say that there is no cause for such wide spread panic, that in this day and age we should be able to better predict what is going to happen. These people need to learn to enjoy the story and take a ending where no destruction was caused and no one was hurt for what it is, a happy ending to a truly great story.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Smoke Alarms, how many is enough?
Over the past two weeks or so the Sheboygan Press has run numerous articles about a proposed ordinance by the City of Sheboygan that would make it mandatory to have a smoke alarm in each bedroom. There was much public outcry with this, resulting in a few opinion letters sent to and then published by the Sheboygan Press. The opinion letters that I read all stated that they believe that the government is basically overstepping its boundaries once again, and I tend to agree.
It is not that I do not believe in protecting my family, we have 2 working smoke detectors in our apartment, one in the hall between the two bedrooms and one at the other end of the hall between the kitchen and living room. I am a responsible adult, and know how to maintain my smoke alarm. I know that there are people who do not routinely change the batteries, remove the batteries, or destroy the alarm itself (I have had to replace one personally from damaging it with a broom during a cooking gone bad session) and then never replace it. These people are the reason behind this new proposal, requirements and fines, making it unfair to those of us who are responsible.
Since the original proposal, and the outcry, there has been a change to wording of the proposal from making it mandatory to making it recommended that each bedroom have a detector, which is more reasonable to me. There are still issues surrounding the proposal, such as requiring homes to use lithium or hard wired detectors versus the traditional 9volt in most homes, making the detectors more tamper resistant and/or with a long lasting battery. Great idea, especially when dealing with irresponsible people, however forcing responsible people to make changes to their homes or apartments, when the detectors they are using are operational, is unfair. This is another issue, perfect for another blog.
It is not that I do not believe in protecting my family, we have 2 working smoke detectors in our apartment, one in the hall between the two bedrooms and one at the other end of the hall between the kitchen and living room. I am a responsible adult, and know how to maintain my smoke alarm. I know that there are people who do not routinely change the batteries, remove the batteries, or destroy the alarm itself (I have had to replace one personally from damaging it with a broom during a cooking gone bad session) and then never replace it. These people are the reason behind this new proposal, requirements and fines, making it unfair to those of us who are responsible.
Since the original proposal, and the outcry, there has been a change to wording of the proposal from making it mandatory to making it recommended that each bedroom have a detector, which is more reasonable to me. There are still issues surrounding the proposal, such as requiring homes to use lithium or hard wired detectors versus the traditional 9volt in most homes, making the detectors more tamper resistant and/or with a long lasting battery. Great idea, especially when dealing with irresponsible people, however forcing responsible people to make changes to their homes or apartments, when the detectors they are using are operational, is unfair. This is another issue, perfect for another blog.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Who should be allowed to use Wisconsin circuit court access?
There has been an ongoing debate surrounding access to the Wisconsin Circuit Court Access, a website that allows anyone with a computer and to view court records. There are many concerns over how the website is being used, what is displayed on the website, who has access to the site, and if users should be required to create an account and be required to log in (which does not occur now). I do agree that there should be some changes to the site, however, I believe that open record access online (any of this information is available at the circuit court records) should remain available to everyone.
As a former employer I used the site on two separate occasions to check out employees who were not performing as expected. I would have used the site for a pre-employment check, however the home page of the website states that "It may be a violation of state law to discriminate against a job applicant because of an arrest or conviction record". If I would have used the site prior to hiring I would have saved myself a few headaches and as much as that would have made life easier for me, I have to stand by state law. Even though I know how to judge what I read, taking into consideration things such as the offense, severity, date, relevance to their job and of course if the charge was dismissed; not everyone else does.
The ability to have access to such information is a very helpful tool for employers to have, and as previously stated I believe access should remain public but not without changes. I would like to see that records of offenses that have been dismissed be removed from online access. I am not against registering for use of the site and stating purpose of use. To complete registration persons should be required to complete a responsible user survey. If intent is responsible, then there should be no issues with registration.
As a former employer I used the site on two separate occasions to check out employees who were not performing as expected. I would have used the site for a pre-employment check, however the home page of the website states that "It may be a violation of state law to discriminate against a job applicant because of an arrest or conviction record". If I would have used the site prior to hiring I would have saved myself a few headaches and as much as that would have made life easier for me, I have to stand by state law. Even though I know how to judge what I read, taking into consideration things such as the offense, severity, date, relevance to their job and of course if the charge was dismissed; not everyone else does.
The ability to have access to such information is a very helpful tool for employers to have, and as previously stated I believe access should remain public but not without changes. I would like to see that records of offenses that have been dismissed be removed from online access. I am not against registering for use of the site and stating purpose of use. To complete registration persons should be required to complete a responsible user survey. If intent is responsible, then there should be no issues with registration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)