If you are reading this, you more than likely have a Facebook account or a Twitter account. Both are very useful tools for sharing information. Unfortunately, both are also very useful for spreading misinformation.
Occasionally, this misinformation can lead to instanced of localized hysteria. You've seen it. One friend posts some story they saw on someone else's wall and like a cancer, before too long, 10 of your friends have posted the same thing. Even if the story is debunked in the first comment, people will still post and comment as if it were true.
Social media is an increasingly powerful tool we have at our disposal, but it must be used responsibly. Sharing "bananas cure cancer" and "Abe Vigoda has died(for the 30th time)" without checking the facts, which are almost always readily available, makes you look bad, lose credibility and can sometimes cause more serious problems. It takes very little effort to determine the veracity of something you see on social media.
Don't you think if one third of Americans had indeed been "infected with cancer" from the polio vaccination, it would be a huge news story? If bananas were found to cure cancer, don't you think someone besides that guy you dated in high school would have the information? If Ted Cruz had announced he was running for President, don't you think his own social media pages and website would have information about it? Instead, they actually have detailed denials on the subject, right there, for anyone who cares to look for the facts.
When you post something on social media, without any comments regarding your position on the matter, what you are actually saying is, "I believe this to be true". When you speak to someone, face to face, it can be assumed that what you are saying is what you believe. Posts online are no different. You have the freedom to post or say whatever you desire to say(with limited exceptions). You also have a responsibility to not pass on misinformation. If you fail to act responibly, you may reap the negative rewards that go along with that, and you deserve to as well.
Sadly, most people won't learn the lesson they need to learn. Why not? Because there will be a line of people behind them eagerly waiting to pass on the misinformation. How can we stop this? You have to be someone who is willing to stand up and confront this garbage. You are more than able. Willing is the key.
I think most people will stand up for the truth if put in a position to do so. If the truth involves your reputation or that of your family, it is easy, right? If it is a truth that might affect you in a major way, financially for instance, it isn't hard to stand up for it. What if it were a truth that could affect the very heart of information technology?
People, en masse, tend to believe everything they see on news sources. Major news media has proven this over and over. More and more, television news is being replaced by online sources. It won't be too many years before the balance has completely shifted toward the internet. It already has for some demographics. If we can't trust what we read, what we read will become nothing but a tool for those who would have us to believe what they want to. This would be a disaster. I don't see the current state of information dissemination being too far removed from this reality. The ONLY way to combat this, short of some sort of horrible legislation that would ultimately do more harm than good, is for the common citizen to speak up every time they see garbage being spread.
You will be held up to be a trouble-maker. You will hear the arguments that the person spreading the lies are "well-intentioned", good people. You will hear that you are an agitator. You will lose friends. You will be flooded with garbage. You will have all the tools that those who spread misinformation have at their disposal thrown at you. For this reason, you must stand up to it.
It may seem like a small, innocuous thing to say something when you see some stupid internet meme being spread. In reality, it is a huge responsibility to do so. The truth is the truth. Whether we are talking about Abe Vigoda's health, the cure for cancer, or the coming of Jesus Christ, the truth is the truth! There are no shades of grey. Truth is a black and white issue. Stand up for it, no matter how small of a truth it seems to be.
Truth is worth preserving and if we don't do that, what do we have left? You can answer this question for yourself, If you don't stand up for truth, aren't you just as guilty as the one spreading the lie?
Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts
Monday, September 29, 2014
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
How Do You Stomach This Stuff
I was recently asked, "How do you stomach this stuff?". This was after a comment on the Bill O'Rielly interview with Obama. "This stuff" refers to all of the political and current event stories dealing with our country that we are absolutely flooded with.
We are being fed stuff every day, from everybody who has something they want us to swallow. We have three basic choices; We can eagerly swallow it, we can hold our nose and reluctantly swallow it or we can push it back across the table and refuse to swallow it.
The third option is my answer to the question. I don't swallow it. You have to be vigilant. How can you be vigilant if you don't examine everything that is placed in front of you. We are asked to believe all kinds of garbage by everyone, from the president, congress, media, friends and so on. If you can't discern what is truth and what is agenda-driven fiction, you are going to swallow some bad stuff.
Lies come at you in many forms. Skewed numbers, bad data, flawed studies, twisted words, misinformation and bald-faced lies. You have to be able to see things for what they are. You have to be able to dig into things and find the truth. You have to be able to see past this stuff. If you just swallow it, willingly or unwillingly, you are not merely going with the flow. You are helping to create the current.
The question I pose is this. How can you NOT stomach it? How can you idly sit by and not speak up? If you believe in this country, if you believe in what the founders put together in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, you need to be prepared to prove it. I'm not suggesting you have to be a constitutional scholar or an expert debater, but you need to at least, understand some basic things and be willing to expose lies when you see them.
The premise and the driving theme of this blog is that we have rights and freedoms granted to us and we have to be responsible in the way we live in order to maintain these liberties. There is an insidious ideology that has been creeping and gaining steam for the last 100 years or more called progressivism. It is called by many names including liberalism and statism. We are living in a time when it is no longer creeping, it is standing tall and declaring itself as the only way. It is willing to knock anyone to the ground who disagrees. There have been generations blinded by this. We have two choices, close our eyes or do everything we can to open the eyes of others.
How can I stomach this stuff? Because I don't believe I have a valid option.
We are being fed stuff every day, from everybody who has something they want us to swallow. We have three basic choices; We can eagerly swallow it, we can hold our nose and reluctantly swallow it or we can push it back across the table and refuse to swallow it.
The third option is my answer to the question. I don't swallow it. You have to be vigilant. How can you be vigilant if you don't examine everything that is placed in front of you. We are asked to believe all kinds of garbage by everyone, from the president, congress, media, friends and so on. If you can't discern what is truth and what is agenda-driven fiction, you are going to swallow some bad stuff.
Lies come at you in many forms. Skewed numbers, bad data, flawed studies, twisted words, misinformation and bald-faced lies. You have to be able to see things for what they are. You have to be able to dig into things and find the truth. You have to be able to see past this stuff. If you just swallow it, willingly or unwillingly, you are not merely going with the flow. You are helping to create the current.
The question I pose is this. How can you NOT stomach it? How can you idly sit by and not speak up? If you believe in this country, if you believe in what the founders put together in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, you need to be prepared to prove it. I'm not suggesting you have to be a constitutional scholar or an expert debater, but you need to at least, understand some basic things and be willing to expose lies when you see them.
The premise and the driving theme of this blog is that we have rights and freedoms granted to us and we have to be responsible in the way we live in order to maintain these liberties. There is an insidious ideology that has been creeping and gaining steam for the last 100 years or more called progressivism. It is called by many names including liberalism and statism. We are living in a time when it is no longer creeping, it is standing tall and declaring itself as the only way. It is willing to knock anyone to the ground who disagrees. There have been generations blinded by this. We have two choices, close our eyes or do everything we can to open the eyes of others.
How can I stomach this stuff? Because I don't believe I have a valid option.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
California Gun Grabbing
Two recent stories that caught my attention should send chills down your spine. The first talks about a recent session inside the Public Safety Committee of the California State Legislature. In that meeting, a total of six bills were advanced out of committee. All six bills are gun-grabbing measures advanced by the usual suspects in war on the second amendment. As part of the process, the committee heard testimony from both sides of the argument. One exchange featured Leland Yee, state senator and Sam Paredes, Executive Director of Gun Owners of California. During this exchange, Paderes called Yee out and corrected the fallacy that because of some "loophole" in a previous gun ban, there were now illegal guns on the street. Yee confronted Paderes and let his anger over being called out over his misrepresentations be known. You can read the story for yourself here, Inside the Committee. You can also watch just the video exchange between Yee and Paredes.
If Yee put half as much energy into getting criminals off of the streets as he does into creating new criminals out of law-abiding citizens, he might actually do some good for the state. His misguided progressive vision of Californian Utopia prevents him from doing anything that actually advances the cause of freedom and upholds our constitutional rights.
What troubles me, among many things, is illustrated by Yee every time he speaks on the subject. He has no idea what he is talking about. He ignores facts, makes up his own version of reality and uses this erroneous information to demolish the constitution which he is paid to and swore to uphold. He and his ilk are absolutely relentless in the pursuit of this end. Why do people continue to vote for people like Yee? I believe that there is a large chunk of society, that is otherwise smart enough to see the truth, that don't necessarily believe what these people say, but they want for it to be true. If they desire a thing to be true hard enough, maybe it will magically transform into truth. I don't know about you, but I don't like my liberties being decided by fairy tales.
Another story highlights the recent resolution passed by the Los Angeles Community College board of trustees to ban all firearms on all nine of its campuses. This effectively put an end to gun safety courses that had been taught here for the past six years. These courses were co-sponsered by the National Rifle Association and taught by Gerry Koehler, an NRA certified pistol instructor who is also certified by the California Dept of Justice for Handgun Safety training[1]. Koehler asked for an exception to use plastic toy guns in the classes, but they are specifically banned as well. No word on whether he could use Pop Tarts or not. The resolution goes so far as to ban use of the word "gun" in campus literature. That should make you feel safe.
The lunacy of this is far reaching. Board of Trustees Vice President Scott Svonkin had some very interesting things to say regarding this decision. Among them, this:
Why should you not expect them to protect you? Isn't that their job, to serve and protect? Not according to the supreme court, who spoke to the matter in Castle Rock v Gonzalez in 2005. Its not just an opinion of some NRA approved Dirty Harry, it's the law.
This is what I find scary. The law says, you are responsible for your own safety, yet the lawmakers are increasingly saying you are not responsible enough to defend yourself and are systematically taking your means to do so out of your hands. We can only hope that Sam Paderes and those like-minded individuals will ride this wave all the way to the supreme court and once there that the supreme court will uphold our second amendment rights as they have in the Heller decision.
Is hope enough? Don't rely on it. Don't rely on others to speak up for your rights. Don't become dependent on someone who is not responsible for your safety and freedom. You are responsible. Be so.
If Yee put half as much energy into getting criminals off of the streets as he does into creating new criminals out of law-abiding citizens, he might actually do some good for the state. His misguided progressive vision of Californian Utopia prevents him from doing anything that actually advances the cause of freedom and upholds our constitutional rights.
What troubles me, among many things, is illustrated by Yee every time he speaks on the subject. He has no idea what he is talking about. He ignores facts, makes up his own version of reality and uses this erroneous information to demolish the constitution which he is paid to and swore to uphold. He and his ilk are absolutely relentless in the pursuit of this end. Why do people continue to vote for people like Yee? I believe that there is a large chunk of society, that is otherwise smart enough to see the truth, that don't necessarily believe what these people say, but they want for it to be true. If they desire a thing to be true hard enough, maybe it will magically transform into truth. I don't know about you, but I don't like my liberties being decided by fairy tales.
Another story highlights the recent resolution passed by the Los Angeles Community College board of trustees to ban all firearms on all nine of its campuses. This effectively put an end to gun safety courses that had been taught here for the past six years. These courses were co-sponsered by the National Rifle Association and taught by Gerry Koehler, an NRA certified pistol instructor who is also certified by the California Dept of Justice for Handgun Safety training[1]. Koehler asked for an exception to use plastic toy guns in the classes, but they are specifically banned as well. No word on whether he could use Pop Tarts or not. The resolution goes so far as to ban use of the word "gun" in campus literature. That should make you feel safe.
The lunacy of this is far reaching. Board of Trustees Vice President Scott Svonkin had some very interesting things to say regarding this decision. Among them, this:
“I believe that the NRA’s goal is to promote gun ownership, and that guns lead to deaths,” he said. “So, not having the NRA teach classes, not having the NRA classes on our campuses, is a good thing. I’m much happier with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department protecting our students and our staff and our faculty than having some random person who took a three-hour class and thinks that they’re Dirty Harry.”
The implication that the NRA's goal is the cause of death by gun violence is pathetic. No one on that side of this debate ever seems to take into account personal responsibility. It is always the fault of the gun or an organization or something other that the person perpetrating the crime.
He is also happier with law enforcement protecting his campus. How happy was he when John Zawhari killed three people on campus before police could respond and kill him? This was after killing his father and brother then setting the house on fire. The same John Zawhari who several years earlier had threatened students and been found to have bomb-making materials in his possession. That infraction cost him the ability to own a firearm for 5 years. The killings took place seven years later. Maybe Leland Yee should think about a law where someone so demented should be locked away instead of counseled for a bit and then set free to do what he ultimately did.
Svonkin didn't mention how well he thought law enforcement protected his students, he just took the opportunity to equate students taking a gun safety course to legally armed citizens who could have protected themselves and others and possibly saved lives in that incident. Oh, but they couldn't have done that, right? Because they are just "Dirty Harrys". No, because that campus was already a "gun free zone" at the time of the rampage. That rampage was part of the reason they widened the "gun free zone" to all nine campuses. Great plan, allowing a killer to come unchallenged onto the campus and take three lives worked so well, that they have extended the plan to create the same scenario in eight other places ripe with defenseless targets. It boggles the mind...
Koehler is the only one who had anything sensible to say regarding this:
“Don’t expect the police or the government to protect you. YOU are the only one that can protect you and your family. Learn how to do it right. Learn how to do it safely.”
Why should you not expect them to protect you? Isn't that their job, to serve and protect? Not according to the supreme court, who spoke to the matter in Castle Rock v Gonzalez in 2005. Its not just an opinion of some NRA approved Dirty Harry, it's the law.
This is what I find scary. The law says, you are responsible for your own safety, yet the lawmakers are increasingly saying you are not responsible enough to defend yourself and are systematically taking your means to do so out of your hands. We can only hope that Sam Paderes and those like-minded individuals will ride this wave all the way to the supreme court and once there that the supreme court will uphold our second amendment rights as they have in the Heller decision.
Is hope enough? Don't rely on it. Don't rely on others to speak up for your rights. Don't become dependent on someone who is not responsible for your safety and freedom. You are responsible. Be so.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
First They Came...
There was a Lutheran pastor named Martin Niemöller that lived in nazi Germany. He suffered greatly at the hands of Hitler after believing the lies Hitler told him regarding potential persecution of the church and of the Jews. Hitler was a fantastic liar. He got an entire country to believe him. He convinced them of mighty things and better ways of life, and they believed him. They voted for him. They followed him. Then, when he had all the power he needed, he showed them who he really was. That whole episode didn't really turn out that well for a whole bunch of people.
Mr. Niemöller wrote this little verse at some point, presumably after everything fell apart.
We Americans are in the cross hairs of a very similar "they" referred to in his poem. They aren't nazis. They are best described as statists, as defined by Mark Levin. They are those who want state, or government control of everything. Every aspect of our lives would be controlled and limited as they see fit. These statists aren't limited to liberal or conservative, democrat or republican, left or right, young or old, no, they are a disgusting mixture of everything. Labels like those are merely hiding places for these would be tyrants.
They aren't rounding people up, putting them on trains and sending them off to camps, or worse. They aren't that bold yet. Hitler worked fairly quickly. Stalin wasn't much of a dawdler either. Mao made quick work of his people. America's statists have been very determined and have been working for well over 100 years. Woodrow Wilson could rightly be called the modern father of progressivism. FDR took the ball and ran. LBJ continued and modern liberals have been the main group for the last 40 years or so.
What has been the main tools they use in this creeping tyrannical oppression? The two I contend that have had the biggest impact are the administrative state and judges that have legislated from the bench by way of the decisions they made. The examples are many in both instances. Some examples of the administrative state gone wild are the multitudinous regulations forced upon us by the likes of the FDA, EPA, IRS and countless other agencies that are accountable to no one. I could post specific examples, but the number of pages of law they have created was well over 75,000 last time I looked at it. Meanwhile the federal courts at all levels have been acting as lawmakers with very little oversight for over 200 years. If you don't know how Roe v Wade came into being for example, it's a fascinating, yet maddening read. It has far less to do with abortion than you would imagine. It is just one example of how judges have picked out a word or phrase here and inserted a word or phrase there in order to change meanings and open up door that had been shut either legislatively or by popular vote.
So, back to Mr. Niemöller. How are "they" coming for us? I believe they are coming one freedom at a time. His poem could be re-worded to fit our time.
I enjoy what freedom I have by virtue of being born an American. If you sit silent and watch me lose my freedoms and wind up in the same train car, rest assured, I'm going to punch you in the throat.
Wake up America. Be responsible with the liberty you still have.
Mr. Niemöller wrote this little verse at some point, presumably after everything fell apart.
First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Catholic.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
We Americans are in the cross hairs of a very similar "they" referred to in his poem. They aren't nazis. They are best described as statists, as defined by Mark Levin. They are those who want state, or government control of everything. Every aspect of our lives would be controlled and limited as they see fit. These statists aren't limited to liberal or conservative, democrat or republican, left or right, young or old, no, they are a disgusting mixture of everything. Labels like those are merely hiding places for these would be tyrants.
They aren't rounding people up, putting them on trains and sending them off to camps, or worse. They aren't that bold yet. Hitler worked fairly quickly. Stalin wasn't much of a dawdler either. Mao made quick work of his people. America's statists have been very determined and have been working for well over 100 years. Woodrow Wilson could rightly be called the modern father of progressivism. FDR took the ball and ran. LBJ continued and modern liberals have been the main group for the last 40 years or so.
What has been the main tools they use in this creeping tyrannical oppression? The two I contend that have had the biggest impact are the administrative state and judges that have legislated from the bench by way of the decisions they made. The examples are many in both instances. Some examples of the administrative state gone wild are the multitudinous regulations forced upon us by the likes of the FDA, EPA, IRS and countless other agencies that are accountable to no one. I could post specific examples, but the number of pages of law they have created was well over 75,000 last time I looked at it. Meanwhile the federal courts at all levels have been acting as lawmakers with very little oversight for over 200 years. If you don't know how Roe v Wade came into being for example, it's a fascinating, yet maddening read. It has far less to do with abortion than you would imagine. It is just one example of how judges have picked out a word or phrase here and inserted a word or phrase there in order to change meanings and open up door that had been shut either legislatively or by popular vote.
So, back to Mr. Niemöller. How are "they" coming for us? I believe they are coming one freedom at a time. His poem could be re-worded to fit our time.
First, they came for the guns,There is no time to wait. This is no time to be silent. They have been and continue to get more bold as they come for our rights as American citizens.Our constitution was written to be the law of the land. There are provisions within the document that lay out, very clearly, how to amend it. The back door to the constitution has been left open for too long now. We can not afford to let progressive statism run rampant any longer. This is a critical point in the history of this great nation. Should we let our freedom be taken away, like John Adams said, it will be gone forever.
I didn't speak because I wasn't a gun owner.
Then they came for the gas-guzzling cars,
I didn't speak because I drove a Prius.
Then they came for the right to speak against the government,
I didn't speak because I said no such things.
Then they came for the right to vote,
I didn't speak because I wasn't registered.
Then they came for the churches,
I didn't speak because I'm not religious.
Then they came for me...
I enjoy what freedom I have by virtue of being born an American. If you sit silent and watch me lose my freedoms and wind up in the same train car, rest assured, I'm going to punch you in the throat.
Wake up America. Be responsible with the liberty you still have.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Target Corporation and Your Personal Information
I recently read an article about a gentleman who encountered Target's policy of "swiping" your driver's license in order to purchase nicotine patches for his son[1]. The story contains links to several other instances of related experiences at Target. I became very interested in what they are doing and why.
Last week I had the occasion to visit Target in order purchase a bottle of NyQuil. I had the story in the back of my mind when I reached the check-out line. Sure enough, upon scanning the single 12 oz bottle of NyQuil, the computer informed the cashier(who was brand new) that she needed to scan my ID. She asked to see my ID, and I opened my wallet to the window where it is and showed it to her. She then informed me that she needed for me to give it to her in order to scan it. I told her(as I had read in the story) that she could do a manual check and have a manager override the computer. Being new, she seemed reluctant. I told her just type in the birth date and it will ask for a supervisor. She did and it did as well.
When the manager came over and saw the screen prompting her for a password, without asking me or the cashier anything, she blindly typed it in, thereby giving the system approval to sell me the NyQuil. Only at that point did she realize why she was being asked for a password. She never addressed me or even made eye contact with me. She told the cashier, "oh, its because it is medicine, we have to swipe the ID, I'll show you how later". With that, she turned and walked away. The cashier apologized for the time it took to get that done and finished the transaction. I assured her that there was no problem and that I appreciated her taking care of my request.
When I got home, I wrote Target Corp. an email asking why they require an ID to be swiped when purchasing NyQuil as I had done. It was a simple request to see if they would let me know what their policy is in this matter. A couple of days later, I received the following response. (Emphasis mine)
Oh. Well, that explains nothing. So I responded to "Beth" with the following:
What I found was that the PSE restrictions were in an amendment that attached to the Patriot Act of all things. So all of this was George Bush's fault apparently(I kid). There were quite a few restrictions surrounding products containing PSEs. Most of them however, would require you to buy around 400 bottles of NyQuil in order to sound the alarms. 400 bottles in one single day. Somewhere around 1000 bottles in a month. Now seriously, who besides a meth producer would ever purchase such quantities of NyQuil? As far as I could tell, in the bill, there was no such restriction, but a lot of retailers will only allow you to purchase 2 separate medicines in a single purchase. I don;t like that policy, but I can see where they are just trying to protect themselves completely.
So back to Proctor & Gamble. How much were they actually putting into NyQuil? Turns out, none. Only one variety of NyQuil used PSE, NyQuil D, and that had been discontinued in 2010. This changed everything. I wrote "Nancy" with my findings.
You would think "Nancy" would have known that before sending me that email, wouldn't you? I was beginning to suspect Nancy and Beth were probably used to responding to people who thought dog toys should be on aisle 17 close to the dog food, instead of on aisle 19 closer to the bird and cat toys. But I admired their effort... The next response I got from Target was as follows:
I decide, since "Katherine" mentioned only media reporting on kids misusing the product and "retailers" taking steps to control it, that I wouldn't bring up any laws surrounding the product. She didn't appear to know any such laws exist and why should I be the one to fan her flames. I saw her response as more of a brush-off than any of the others so far. It kind of angered me that they were unwilling to engage in a real conversation about why they have a policy to swipe and store personal information when the law didn't require them to do so. So, I responded to them again with the following:
It is no secret that Target Corporation is very liberal. You can see this by who they regularly support. What troubles me the most is what we don;t yet know about them. What is this national database? Who has access to it? What will it be used for once the (un)Affordable Heath Care Act goes into full swing?
Once you establish a customer ID at Target, everything you purchase is tracked. It is tracked every time you use a credit or debit card or when you allow them to scan your ID. Target has come under a little bit of fire for this, and that is good. What is bad, though, is the number of other businesses that are doing the exact same thing that have been able to fly under the radar so far. Call me a kook if you will, but then research it for yourself. It is happening and it will continue to happen on a much larger scale.
What can be done about it? Well, you could always just use cash. Lots less convenient and some have even suggested doing that will land you on a watch list. I've heard the term "potential terrorist" associated with the practice. Big Brother is watching folks. But the scary part is we are opening up our windows, in most cases, for him to stick his head into. Government as we know it wants to be involved in every aspect of our lives. This is one way they are succeeding. Be careful out there...
Last week I had the occasion to visit Target in order purchase a bottle of NyQuil. I had the story in the back of my mind when I reached the check-out line. Sure enough, upon scanning the single 12 oz bottle of NyQuil, the computer informed the cashier(who was brand new) that she needed to scan my ID. She asked to see my ID, and I opened my wallet to the window where it is and showed it to her. She then informed me that she needed for me to give it to her in order to scan it. I told her(as I had read in the story) that she could do a manual check and have a manager override the computer. Being new, she seemed reluctant. I told her just type in the birth date and it will ask for a supervisor. She did and it did as well.
When the manager came over and saw the screen prompting her for a password, without asking me or the cashier anything, she blindly typed it in, thereby giving the system approval to sell me the NyQuil. Only at that point did she realize why she was being asked for a password. She never addressed me or even made eye contact with me. She told the cashier, "oh, its because it is medicine, we have to swipe the ID, I'll show you how later". With that, she turned and walked away. The cashier apologized for the time it took to get that done and finished the transaction. I assured her that there was no problem and that I appreciated her taking care of my request.
When I got home, I wrote Target Corp. an email asking why they require an ID to be swiped when purchasing NyQuil as I had done. It was a simple request to see if they would let me know what their policy is in this matter. A couple of days later, I received the following response. (Emphasis mine)
Dear Chad,If a guest approaches checkout with an age restricted-item, cashiers are prompted to check ID and scan the guest's driver's license. Scanning an ID provides a more accurate way to verify date of birth and creates a quick and efficient checkout experience for our guests. The personal information collected is solely for legal compliance and fraud detection.When scanning an ID for this purpose, the systems only capture the same data that would be captured in a manual check: first name, middle initial, last name; ID type, ID number, ID state of issue; address, country; date of birth. The data is stored in a secure environment and is deleted at the end of the standard retention period that we have established for that data.
Sincerely,BethTarget Guest Relations
Oh. Well, that explains nothing. So I responded to "Beth" with the following:
Beth,I eagerly awaited for "Beth" to answer my questions. I was sure there had to be a reasonable explanation for all of this. Like I said in the above, no one else around here requires this in order to purchase NyQuil. Two days later "Beth" responded, or at least I assumed it was her... (emphasis mine)
Thank you for responding. I do, based on your response, have a few more questions about this policy. If the sole reason for scanning an ID is for legal compliance and fraud detection, why is ANY information other than that legally required to purchase a product(age) scanned? My address or middle initial or drivers license number is not required to determine my age. You state the system only captures the same data that would be captured in a manual check. Again, what manual check would ever look at anything besides date of birth?
I'm also curious what the "standard retention period" is for this information. What secure measures do you have in place? As far as I can tell, the consumer never signs or agrees to any sort of privacy policy before submitting this information via the license swipe.
I am a regular shopper at your store. We, in fact, do most of our shopping there. This policy troubles me greatly, however. There are many other stores in our area that do not practice this policy of information gathering for purchases of the same products. The law does not require it.
I look forward to further answers in regards to this matter.
Thank you
Chad
Well, what happened to "Beth"? Anyway, "Nancy" had taken over with much more official sounding information. More sinister as well. A national database that tracks my purchases at all retailers? Even the ones that don't require any sort of information scanning? I just had to know more... I was using my full name in the emails, for the record.Dear Chad,Thanks for taking the time to ask us about your purchase of Nyquil.Here is some helpful information for over the counter items containing Pseudoephedrine.The driver’s license (or other ID) number and guest information are used only to tie the sale of PSE to an individual purchaser in order to comply with local and state laws surrounding the purchase of PSE and is not used for any other purpose. We share information only when required with authorized entities in compliance with legal requirements. Many states have additional limits in place and Target follows whichever law is most restrictive: federal, state or local. We use a national database that tracks your purchases at all retailers.Thanks for writing.Sincerely,NancyTarget Guest Relations
Nancy,That seemed to be a simple enough request. Surely if they were complying with the law, they would know which law it was that they were, in fact, complying with. I eagerly awaited "Nancy's" response. Again, with my emphasis.
Was this in response to the email I sent to "Beth", the first person to respond to me? If so, why didn't she respond? Why doesn't anyone use a last name? If this is in response to the follow-up inquiry I sent to Beth, it failed to answer a single question that I asked. Can you tell me which SPECIFIC law you are following that requires you to swipe my ID(as opposed to simply verifying my age) and store the information contained therein? I have a hard time believing that Target is the only retailer in this area that complies with this law.
Any help in understanding this would be appreciated.
Chad
Finally, one answer. They were in fact responding to emails that I had sent. I asked that question only to be sure multiple people weren't responding to the same email. At least this time, "Nancy" was the respondent. I felt like we were developing some sort of relationship at this point. So I decided to dig deeper. This led me to research what law she was talking about. Also to research what Proctor & Gamble is actually putting in this, what seems to be, highly-regulated drug sitting on store shelves around the country.Dear Chad,Thanks for taking the time to write again. The emails you have received from Guest Relations are in response to your emails.Here is some additional information your requested. Federal law limits purchase of PSE products to 3.6 grams per 24 hours and 9 grams per 30 days. Many states have additional limits in place and Target follows whichever law is most restrictive: federal, state or local.We use a national database that tracks your purchases at all retailers.
We'll do our best to help you find what you're looking for at Target.
Sincerely,NancyTarget Guest Relations
What I found was that the PSE restrictions were in an amendment that attached to the Patriot Act of all things. So all of this was George Bush's fault apparently(I kid). There were quite a few restrictions surrounding products containing PSEs. Most of them however, would require you to buy around 400 bottles of NyQuil in order to sound the alarms. 400 bottles in one single day. Somewhere around 1000 bottles in a month. Now seriously, who besides a meth producer would ever purchase such quantities of NyQuil? As far as I could tell, in the bill, there was no such restriction, but a lot of retailers will only allow you to purchase 2 separate medicines in a single purchase. I don;t like that policy, but I can see where they are just trying to protect themselves completely.
So back to Proctor & Gamble. How much were they actually putting into NyQuil? Turns out, none. Only one variety of NyQuil used PSE, NyQuil D, and that had been discontinued in 2010. This changed everything. I wrote "Nancy" with my findings.
Dear Nancy,
That is informative. Thank you. However, Nyquil Cough contains NO PSE products. The only form of Nyquil that contains any PSE products is Nyquil D, which according to the manufacturer, Proctor & Gamble, they discontinued in 2010.
There are other aspects of that law which don't seem consistent with your policy of scanning and storing consumer information either.
So, why would Target require such information for the purchase of a product which does not require it?
Thank You
Chad
You would think "Nancy" would have known that before sending me that email, wouldn't you? I was beginning to suspect Nancy and Beth were probably used to responding to people who thought dog toys should be on aisle 17 close to the dog food, instead of on aisle 19 closer to the bird and cat toys. But I admired their effort... The next response I got from Target was as follows:
So my illusions about my relationship with "Nancy" were premature. "Katherine" sent me researching again. I found that there were a small amount of state laws dealing with DMX, mostly very similar to the laws surrounding PSE. The only Federal regulations on DMX are from the FDA and they involve nothing more than labeling restrictions and requirements. Senator Durbin introduced legislation that read almost identical to the Patriot Act provision, but it died in committee with no action in 2009.Dear Chad ,I believe Nyquil Cough contains Dextromethorphan, or DEX, is an intoxicating substance used in some cold medicines. It suppresses coughs safely, but in large amounts it produces a chemical imbalance in the brain that causes hallucinations, vivid dreams and a feeling of being outside of one's body.
Various media sources have described how teenagers use cold medication which contains DEX as an intoxicant.
Retailers are taking various steps to control how the product is sold in their stores.
Guests may also refer to Dextromethorphan as “DXM.”
Sincerely,KatherineTarget Guest Relations
I decide, since "Katherine" mentioned only media reporting on kids misusing the product and "retailers" taking steps to control it, that I wouldn't bring up any laws surrounding the product. She didn't appear to know any such laws exist and why should I be the one to fan her flames. I saw her response as more of a brush-off than any of the others so far. It kind of angered me that they were unwilling to engage in a real conversation about why they have a policy to swipe and store personal information when the law didn't require them to do so. So, I responded to them again with the following:
Hi Katherine, welcome to the conversation.I laid out, in full, how they had been avoiding my questions and summed it up with several direct questions. I told my wife that expected their next response to either refer me to their legal department or to tell me that they would no longer respond to my emails. This is what I got:
This is all in regards to Target's apparent policy of requiring the swiping and subsequent storing of personal information in order to purchase a bottle of Nyquil. First, I was told it was for legal compliance and fraud detection and was done to make my experience quick and efficient. Then I was told of all the information gathered(which goes well beyond age verification) and that it would be stored securely for a standard retention period(of which my inquiry as to how secure and for how long was ignored).
Then I was told the purpose was, "only to tie the sale of PSE to an individual purchaser in order to comply with local and state laws surrounding the purchase of PSE and is not used for any other purpose". When I asked which law Target was complying with, I was only given "Federal law limits purchase of PSE products to 3.6 grams per 24 hours and 9 grams per 30 days".
After researching and finding out that Nyquil doesn't even use PSE in it's product(something you would think retailers should know in order to be in compliance with federal law), I again asked why I was being asked to provide extensive information to be stored in a national database for the purchase of said product. Now you tell me that you "believe" Nyquil contains DMX and that various media has described how teenagers use it and that "retailers" are taking steps to control the sale of it.
Does Target have a written policy regarding age restricted products?
Does Target have a written policy regarding the sale of PSE products?
Does Target have a written policy regarding the sale of DMX products?
Does Target have a written policy regarding the way it confirms the age of the consumer?
I have read in other national media outlets that one can request that their info not be swiped/stored, that instead a manager can override the system and manually input the age verification data. Is this true?
Can you please answer the questions I have asked so that I can finally know what Target's policies are?
I have been a Target customer for many years and have spent a LOT of money in your stores. I think you owe me at least the courtesy of answering those questions.
Respectfully
Chad
Dear Chad Y,So, in the end, what have we learned? We have learned that they mine personal information for arbitrary reasons. They store and share this information with whom they see fit. They will not be forthcoming or honest in their responses. And, in previous documented cases, they have given altogether different answers than they gave me.
Thanks for taking the time to share your additional thoughts. I'm sorry we aren't able to help with this further.We have sent you our information regarding PSE, DEX and the reasons why we scan your driver's license.I've shared your comments with the appropriate team.Sincerely,KatherineTarget Guest Relations
It is no secret that Target Corporation is very liberal. You can see this by who they regularly support. What troubles me the most is what we don;t yet know about them. What is this national database? Who has access to it? What will it be used for once the (un)Affordable Heath Care Act goes into full swing?
Once you establish a customer ID at Target, everything you purchase is tracked. It is tracked every time you use a credit or debit card or when you allow them to scan your ID. Target has come under a little bit of fire for this, and that is good. What is bad, though, is the number of other businesses that are doing the exact same thing that have been able to fly under the radar so far. Call me a kook if you will, but then research it for yourself. It is happening and it will continue to happen on a much larger scale.
What can be done about it? Well, you could always just use cash. Lots less convenient and some have even suggested doing that will land you on a watch list. I've heard the term "potential terrorist" associated with the practice. Big Brother is watching folks. But the scary part is we are opening up our windows, in most cases, for him to stick his head into. Government as we know it wants to be involved in every aspect of our lives. This is one way they are succeeding. Be careful out there...
Friday, March 22, 2013
Reactionaries and Guns
Reactionaries and guns; This could be about any number of people who over-react, misrepresent, lie, freak out or attack over the sight of a gun. We have an unlimited supply of those who fit any or all of these descriptions it seems. I want to focus on two recent stories however.
Recently in New Jersey, a man posted a photo on facebook of his son holding a .22 rifle he received for his 11th birthday. Some busybody friend of his(presumably on facebook) reported the the family to the Department of Children and Families(DCF). The DCF along with the Carneys Point Police Department soon paid them a visit[1]. After much duress and discussion with the police and the DCF, Moore was able to keep all of them out of his residence without having to show anyone anything. This was three days ago and no further action on the part of authorities has taken place. We can only assume that they were satisfied and legally restricted from acting any further.
This man, Moore is a certified firearms instructor for the National Rifle Association, an NRA range safety officer and a New Jersey hunter education instructor. In short, there are probably few people in the state any more qualified to own a gun or to teach his own son about gun safety. Even the child has a New Jersey hunting license and recently passed the state’s hunter safety course. He too is probably more qualified than most in the state when it comes to handling a firearm. You can even see in the photo that he is following safety guidelines in the manner in which he is holding the rifle. You can't tell from the photo, but I would bet you any amount that the gun is not loaded.
Someone who probably knows next to nothing about firearms, other than how evil they must be, decided that they were acting in such a reckless manner that they were obviously endangering the welfare of the child by allowing him to pose with his new rifle. To the point that child protective services must be called. If Moore didn't have the wherewithal to call his lawyer, he could very well have had his child taken by these reactionary thugs. The DCF worker that came to the home wouldn't even identify themselves when asked. What kind of policy is that? Luckily, the police had a little bit of sense in the matter and the constitution stood.
What about the person that reported this to begin with? Are they responsible for starting a witch hunt that produced no witches? Not according to a spokesperson for the DCF, "the person who reported the false allegations of abuse cannot be held liable", she noted. “You can’t be prosecuted for making an allegation of child abuse –even if it’s false" Why not? You can be prosecuted for false allegations for anything else. Couple this with the recent news that New York is planning on rewarding citizens $500 for reporting anyone for illegally owning a gun if it leads to an actual conviction. Again, in this scenario, you don't(you can't as far as most cases would go) even have to prove an illegal gun is possessed, you just make the accusation and let the snowball start rolling. This is bad news for all of us, not just for someone illegally possessing a weapon.
In the case of Mr. Moore and the photo of his son, so far, it has turned out ok. They left him alone when he confronted them with his legal rights. It is still a scary situation for anyone to have gone through. I fear that we will hear many more stories like this in the near future.
UPDATE ON THE MOORE CASE : 3-26-2013 Governor Christie gets involved
On the other hand, there is a completely different kind of lunacy at work on this front. Take the well publicized story of 7 year old Josh Welch from Maryland[2]. He had the recent misfortune of being suspended from his second grade class for bringing a fully automatic Thompson Machine Gun, fully loaded, with a plan to... Wait, wrong story. He actually had a Pop-Tart that his teacher decided had been nibbled into the shape of a gun. She alone was offended by this. No students complained, no one was injured, no one even knew about it until the teacher went ballistic. Welch was suspended, notes were sent home with the rest of the kids explaining that an incident had happened and there would even be counselors available for whom ever needed them after this horrible traumatic event.
I have very little to say about this that doesn't personally attack the intellect of all of those, except Welch, involved. Seriously, if anything, give the kid credit for being possibly the only 7 year old who knows what a Walther PPK looks like(if in fact, he intended to nibble himself a gun). He claimed he was making a mountain. Oddly enough, it is the teacher and school that ended up making a mountain out of a misidentified molehill.
Reason and accountability may prevail in this case as well. Sen. J. B. Jennings, a Republican representing Baltimore and Hartford counties, introduced Senate Bill 1058 -- "The Reasonable School Discipline Act of 2013" on Thursday. The bill would, absent a direct act of violence on school grounds, prohibit students from being suspended for "making a hand shape or gesture resembling a gun" -- the bill would also stop principals from expelling students who bring to school "any other object that resembles a gun but serves another purpose." Like a creatively nibbled-on Pop-Tart, a piece of torn notebook paper or a map of Florida.
It is a sad state of affairs when someone feels the need to introduce a piece of legislation to encourage teachers to stop being complete pantywaists and use 1/10 the amount of common sense it would take to blow their nose. But, I guess this is what we've come to. You have the leaders of our country brainwashing people into believing that guns are evil and evil people are not to blame for evil acts. You have lawmakers from the top down trying to ban guns in every way imaginable while letting 1000's of dangerous, hardened criminals out of jail to wreak havoc on society at large. You have the VP giving seriously detrimental advice on how to use guns to protect ourselves and senators giving equally bad advice on how to check for a pulse if you happen upon a homicide victim in your office.
We have to start educating people and we have to start now. We are in a war right now. It is a war of words, ideas and ideals. It is a war that can be won by telling the truth. Truth can not be refuted. We need to arm ourselves with as much truth as we can find and refuse to fight battles based in emotion. The opposite of truth is deception. Lies are being told by so many people and they have to be confronted. They have to be confronted. The truth doesn't have much of an outlet right now. You won't hear it on the evening news. The only way the truth is going to be heard is by us shouting it from every pulpit we have at our disposal.
This is no time to be silent. Stand up for your rights. Speak up for yourself. You have to believe that no one else is going to do it for you. If you believe otherwise, you may as well travel to Washington DC and kiss the constitution goodbye.
Recently in New Jersey, a man posted a photo on facebook of his son holding a .22 rifle he received for his 11th birthday. Some busybody friend of his(presumably on facebook) reported the the family to the Department of Children and Families(DCF). The DCF along with the Carneys Point Police Department soon paid them a visit[1]. After much duress and discussion with the police and the DCF, Moore was able to keep all of them out of his residence without having to show anyone anything. This was three days ago and no further action on the part of authorities has taken place. We can only assume that they were satisfied and legally restricted from acting any further.
This man, Moore is a certified firearms instructor for the National Rifle Association, an NRA range safety officer and a New Jersey hunter education instructor. In short, there are probably few people in the state any more qualified to own a gun or to teach his own son about gun safety. Even the child has a New Jersey hunting license and recently passed the state’s hunter safety course. He too is probably more qualified than most in the state when it comes to handling a firearm. You can even see in the photo that he is following safety guidelines in the manner in which he is holding the rifle. You can't tell from the photo, but I would bet you any amount that the gun is not loaded.
Someone who probably knows next to nothing about firearms, other than how evil they must be, decided that they were acting in such a reckless manner that they were obviously endangering the welfare of the child by allowing him to pose with his new rifle. To the point that child protective services must be called. If Moore didn't have the wherewithal to call his lawyer, he could very well have had his child taken by these reactionary thugs. The DCF worker that came to the home wouldn't even identify themselves when asked. What kind of policy is that? Luckily, the police had a little bit of sense in the matter and the constitution stood.
What about the person that reported this to begin with? Are they responsible for starting a witch hunt that produced no witches? Not according to a spokesperson for the DCF, "the person who reported the false allegations of abuse cannot be held liable", she noted. “You can’t be prosecuted for making an allegation of child abuse –even if it’s false" Why not? You can be prosecuted for false allegations for anything else. Couple this with the recent news that New York is planning on rewarding citizens $500 for reporting anyone for illegally owning a gun if it leads to an actual conviction. Again, in this scenario, you don't(you can't as far as most cases would go) even have to prove an illegal gun is possessed, you just make the accusation and let the snowball start rolling. This is bad news for all of us, not just for someone illegally possessing a weapon.
In the case of Mr. Moore and the photo of his son, so far, it has turned out ok. They left him alone when he confronted them with his legal rights. It is still a scary situation for anyone to have gone through. I fear that we will hear many more stories like this in the near future.
UPDATE ON THE MOORE CASE : 3-26-2013 Governor Christie gets involved
On the other hand, there is a completely different kind of lunacy at work on this front. Take the well publicized story of 7 year old Josh Welch from Maryland[2]. He had the recent misfortune of being suspended from his second grade class for bringing a fully automatic Thompson Machine Gun, fully loaded, with a plan to... Wait, wrong story. He actually had a Pop-Tart that his teacher decided had been nibbled into the shape of a gun. She alone was offended by this. No students complained, no one was injured, no one even knew about it until the teacher went ballistic. Welch was suspended, notes were sent home with the rest of the kids explaining that an incident had happened and there would even be counselors available for whom ever needed them after this horrible traumatic event.
I have very little to say about this that doesn't personally attack the intellect of all of those, except Welch, involved. Seriously, if anything, give the kid credit for being possibly the only 7 year old who knows what a Walther PPK looks like(if in fact, he intended to nibble himself a gun). He claimed he was making a mountain. Oddly enough, it is the teacher and school that ended up making a mountain out of a misidentified molehill.
Reason and accountability may prevail in this case as well. Sen. J. B. Jennings, a Republican representing Baltimore and Hartford counties, introduced Senate Bill 1058 -- "The Reasonable School Discipline Act of 2013" on Thursday. The bill would, absent a direct act of violence on school grounds, prohibit students from being suspended for "making a hand shape or gesture resembling a gun" -- the bill would also stop principals from expelling students who bring to school "any other object that resembles a gun but serves another purpose." Like a creatively nibbled-on Pop-Tart, a piece of torn notebook paper or a map of Florida.
It is a sad state of affairs when someone feels the need to introduce a piece of legislation to encourage teachers to stop being complete pantywaists and use 1/10 the amount of common sense it would take to blow their nose. But, I guess this is what we've come to. You have the leaders of our country brainwashing people into believing that guns are evil and evil people are not to blame for evil acts. You have lawmakers from the top down trying to ban guns in every way imaginable while letting 1000's of dangerous, hardened criminals out of jail to wreak havoc on society at large. You have the VP giving seriously detrimental advice on how to use guns to protect ourselves and senators giving equally bad advice on how to check for a pulse if you happen upon a homicide victim in your office.
We have to start educating people and we have to start now. We are in a war right now. It is a war of words, ideas and ideals. It is a war that can be won by telling the truth. Truth can not be refuted. We need to arm ourselves with as much truth as we can find and refuse to fight battles based in emotion. The opposite of truth is deception. Lies are being told by so many people and they have to be confronted. They have to be confronted. The truth doesn't have much of an outlet right now. You won't hear it on the evening news. The only way the truth is going to be heard is by us shouting it from every pulpit we have at our disposal.
This is no time to be silent. Stand up for your rights. Speak up for yourself. You have to believe that no one else is going to do it for you. If you believe otherwise, you may as well travel to Washington DC and kiss the constitution goodbye.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)