Uncategorized

A Blaze of Gory

/ Joe Broadmeadow / Leave a comment

She had a name. Well, in a sense she had a name. In our propensity for anthropomorphic depictions of nature’s other creatures, we gave her a name. Blaze.

Blaze was a 20-year-old sow, which sounds harmless, until you add she was a 20-year old Grizzly bear sow.

Blaze lived her entire life in Yellowstone National Park, raising a number of cubs to maturity over the years. There are many stories and images of Blaze. Unfortunately, it is this last one that brought her to the attention of the public.

download

She made the mistake of being an Apex predator, acting as an Apex predator, in an area of the country we have specifically preserved for Apex predators, by hunting and killing another Apex predator (although one that wasn’t THE Apex predator in this situation.)

Her mistake was selecting a human as her prey. From what I have read about 63-year old Lance Crosby, the man who was killed, he fully embraced the idea of co-existing with these animals. He may have even known her name, or more correctly, the name we choose to make her seem more, well, more like us.

As a result of the manner in which Blaze killed Mr. Crosby, consuming part of him, presumably feeding her cubs, then ‘caching’ the body for later consumption, the ultimate Apex predator determined she must be killed.

I wonder what Lance Crosby would have said about this. I can only assume he understood the risks associated with being in the wilderness with the Grizzlies. I am certain he would have chosen a different way to exit this level of existence, but I wonder if he would demand that we kill Blaze and sentence her two cubs to a life in a zoo, removed from the freedom Blaze enjoyed for her 20 years on this planet.

The conflict between humans and the other creatures that inhabit the earth has been going on since man first evolved. There was a balance once. Man hunted what he needed, animals killed humans in defense of their own or themselves, and it followed the pattern of life.

Now, we have humans that pay to hunt lions just because they can. We have humans that are willing to guide other humans to kill such majestic animals for the sake of a few dollars. That is a whole other argument.

In this case, I think Blaze should have been given the benefit of the doubt. Since Mr. Crosby is not here to tell us what happened, isn’t it only fair that she be allowed to plead not guilty by reason of being an Apex predator by birth and given another chance? If she was guilty of anything, it was of being a mother that wanted to feed her children (there is that anthropomorphism again.)

In our position as the ultimate Apex predator, we had an opportunity to differentiate ourselves from the blind survival instincts of nature. We put ourselves into an environment in which these other predators live. When they act in a manner consistent with their nature, who are we to decide that is any less correct than the many things we have done against this world?

But we didn’t. We killed Blaze and imprisoned her cubs; visiting the sin of the mother on the children, as it were.

If we really want to preserve nature and the creatures that live on this planet, then we have to accept the fact that they will act as they have evolved.

If you going to hike in Yellowstone National Park, dive in the ocean, walk through a jungle, remember you are entering the food chain and you may not be on top. If you do not want to leave this world as a snack, keep that in mind.

How Can There be Good Cops, If There are Bad Cops?

/ Joe Broadmeadow / Leave a comment

I read an opinion piece the other day from the Bangor (ME) Times entitled, The False Message from those ‘Good Cop’ Stories? Things Aren’t So Bad by Heather Denkmire.

Here is the link and I encourage you to read it before you continue with my take on the author’s message.

http://bangordailynews.com/2015/08/05/opinion/contributors/the-false-message-from-those-good-cop-stories-things-arent-so-bad/

My first reaction on reading this was one of profound confusion. How can reports about the many good police officers and their acts of kindness and caring be a bad thing? If all we do is focus on the bad things, it distorts reality.

On reflection, I realized she had a valid point. Not the one she intended and I am sure one she does not even realize she made.

Her premise is clear, reporting stories of a Police Officer acting in some kind and considerate manner does detract from the issue of violence involving officers and civilians, too often civilians of color.

However, the problem is not that the media reports these stories, the problem is the author’s assumptions that all encounters between a police officer and a person of color are motivated by racism.

Ms. Denkmire writes,

“My daughter just heard a radio story about how a police officer who murdered a black man was having trouble finding a job. She found it troubling that the news story was focusing on the murderer’s “difficulties.”

Herein lies the problem. Taken at face value, this paragraph says a police officer murdered a black man and was having trouble finding a job. The statement implies the officer was “convicted” of murder. If that were the case, either the incident happened a long time ago and the former officer is now out of jail, or the statement is misleading. I think it equally possible the officer resigned due the incident, or was forced out by political expediency. Either explanation is viable.

Police use of deadly force is a serious and difficult issue. It would be naïve to assume that all such incidents are investigated as thoroughly as they should be. The benefit of media attention is clear, however media attention that meets standards of good reporting, not a Twitter feed or Facebook rant with questionable images.

The author also bemoans the unequal reporting of black as opposed to white murder suspects.

“We had talked before about the different ways the media portrayed white killers compared with black victims; for example, how Dylann Roof was shown opening Christmas gifts while the media use and crop images of black victims in ways that imply they are not entirely innocent. That kind of biased reporting is pretty standard.”

This is the problem with her premise. The very issue she points out here, about biased or slanted reporting, is the issue. She just has the real point wrong.

Here is an example of two headlines, same incident.

White Police Officer Shoots Fleeing Black Suspect in the Back

Same story, different headline.

Police Officer Returns Fire, Killing Gunman.

The tone of the first headline stirs emotion and the writer chose the words to generate interest in the story (that translates into sales). The second is the same set of facts but presented as just that, facts. Not an editorial comment implying wrongdoing by the officer (or highlighting the race of either party as being significant).

Now, I completely agree with the writer’s point that the incidence of violent confrontations between police and persons of color are, statistically, significantly higher than those between the police and a white person.

As Mark Twain once said, “there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Here is an example, police officers kill more white suspects than suspects of color. The “statistics” bear this out. However, examine the numbers in depth, as a percentage of the population minority suspects are more likely to be confronted with a violent response. Both statistically accurate.

The perception by some officers that persons of color represent a higher threat is a difficult one to overcome, and wrong. Here is the sad reality, according to data from the FBI, though African Americans are arrested and incarcerated at a higher rate than whites, the majority of assailants who feloniously killed police officers in the past year were white.

There is a serious problem with racial bias in this country. Complaining that positive stories about the police ignores the issue, or minimizes its severity, is nonsense.

If you have read the article, it is clear the author holds a dim view of the police. She can barely concede that most officers are well intentioned and honest.

Therefore, I applaud her bringing the issue to the forefront. Underreporting or ignoring the issue is wrong. Portraying the issue as being solely the fault of the police is equally wrong. In fact, it is dangerous.

The only way to deal with this problem in the long term is through education. Racism is a learned behavior; no one is born racist, children are indoctrinated with it. In the short term, focused and impartial attention to the police and better training is the key.

The media needs to report factually and without sensationalizing stories. However, we all know what should happen and what does happen are two mutually exclusive things.

The police are not your enemy and people of all race and ethnic origin need be treated the same. If you break the law, your skin color should not have any effect on the disposition of the case. The numbers are clear. Perhaps we should focus on the inequities in the judicial system more closely since that is the only forum in which unlawful actions by the police should be addressed. Not on the street with a crowd of cell phone equipped people relying on legal advice from a Facebook post.

Here is my last statistic; there are 765,000 (approx.) sworn law enforcement officers in the US. Statistically speaking the overwhelming majority of them will NEVER kill anyone in their career. Nevertheless, I am willing to bet every single one of them will do something good almost every day in that same career.

A Perspective on Sandra Bland and the Issue of Resisting Arrest: Perception versus Law

/ Joe Broadmeadow / 2 Comments

My friend, Kent Harrop, wrote the following editorial on his blog about the Sandra Bland incident. I encourage you to read it before you read my response. You can find it here, https://greenpreacher.wordpress.com/2015/07/24/a-moral-emergency-the-death-of-sandra-bland

The issues raised about the circumstances surrounding the arrest and subsequent suicide of Sandra Bland are genuine. Racism and the difference in treatment of black people by many, but not the majority, in law enforcement is a fact in this country. Yet, having watched the entire video, I am struck by the fact that if the woman signed the ticket and fought the issue in court, this would not have ended the way it did.

I am not trying to explain away the officer’s actions or blame the victim, but we need to look at the incident in context and as a whole. Since we lack all of the facts at this point, a fair and complete analysis is impossible.

Nevertheless, we certainly can examine the incident as it underscores the issue of racism. Clearly, racism is a scourge in this country. It is rampant, insidious, and destructive. It is difficult to understand how people come to hold these beliefs, unless we glimpse into their past. Racism is a learned behavior.

I disagree with Ty Burr’s words mentioned in Kent’s article, ‘This is the tale of two stories, the official version and the one we can see with our own eyes’.

There is only one version recorded on video. Our reaction is a combination of our own perceptions, experiences, and opinions. What happened in the incident is there for all to see and hear. What transpired after, and why she was in jail for three days, remains unclear. The full investigation is not complete and there should not be a rush to judgment.

Up to the point the Officer decided to remove her from the car, he was polite and professional. Once he asked her to step from the car, she contributed as much to escalating the situation. Like it or not, we bear a responsibility to act in a civil manner despite what we may perceive as someone else’s failure to do so.

Assuming for the sake of argument the officer was wrong does not justify resisting arrest. It is not in the best interest of our society to think such resistance is acceptable; it is too susceptible to a range of interpretation.

None of us have seen the officer’s report. None of us know the reason for his deciding to remove her from the car. However, an officer can ask someone to step from the vehicle if he or she has concerns about safety, both the officer’s and the driver’s.

There is no constitutional right to resist arrest. If the officer says you are under arrest, then you are under arrest. There are a number of legal avenues to pursue if an arrest is unlawful, through the courts. That is the proper place, not in the street.

No one is in any position at this point to determine if the officer was justified. The reports of the stop and the reasons behind officer’s actions are still not public. If the agency deserves any criticism, it is in its failure to make those reports immediately available. We have seen this time and time again. Delay adds to the conspiracy mentality. That arrest report, unquestionably a public document, should have been made public.

I do know that officers deserve the benefit of the doubt during the incident to protect themselves. Once the matter is in the court, they can then be held to a high standard to justify their actions.

The issue of Bland being arrested for a minor traffic offense is not accurate. She was not arrested for the motor vehicle infraction; that was the reason the officer stopped her. She was arrested for failure to comply with what appeared to be a lawful request to get out of the car. That is all we have at this point. Why did he do that? What was his justification? All legitimate questions. The officer bears the burden of proving it in court, detailing the probable cause, and validating the arrest. The street is not the place to argue that.

Since the medical examiner ruled the death a suicide, I can only assume there were other issues in that woman’s life we are not privy to. Having had hundreds of encounters on the street with people in all sorts of circumstances, I know officers develop a sense for people that are in a stressful or emotional state. From what I saw on the video, the officer’s initial conversation was polite, professional, and geared to evaluate the person. Doing that is critical to surviving as an officer.

Did Bland pose a threat? Probably not. Should the officer have demanded she put out the cigarette? No. Yet it doesn’t alter the fact that Bland contributed to the escalation. In her own words, “I can’t wait to get to court.” She should have, she would be alive and, perhaps, in the near future cashing a check for a violation of her rights.

None of the above alters the fact that on a daily basis in this country, Police Officers target minorities. Not all officers, not even a majority. However. if even one officer targets a person based on race that is a crime. There is much room for open and honest discussion of this issue. Much room for demanding change within our society.

It starts with education. Learning that despite differences in appearance or cultural norms or social standing we are all human beings entitled to fair and equitable treatment.

It is important we evaluate incidents once we have all the evidence. To do so prematurely leads to misinformation or worse. Recall the Michael Brown “Hands up don’t shoot” phenomenon that caused so much destruction. It did not happen the way it was initially portrayed, and the truth got lost in the media storm.

Knowing the full story, recognizing the deleterious affect racism has on us all, and using the courts to right all wrongs is the only way to deal with these incidents with any hope of eliminating them.

 

Silenced Justice: A Josh Williams Novel Available Now on Amazon!

/ Joe Broadmeadow / Leave a comment

Silenced Justice, the highly anticipated sequel to Collision Course, is now available on Amazon in print and Kindle format.  

Click here to link to my Amazon Author Page and read the early reviews!

Book Cover Silenced Justice Preview

Thanks to all who pre-ordered the book!  If you’d like a signed copy email me at joe.broadeadow@hotmail.com

Send me an email and write a review after you read the book.  I’d love to hear from you!

Setting a Record: Missing the Point

/ Joe Broadmeadow / 2 Comments

On the Appalachian Trail it’s not how fast you hike, or how far, or even that you make it from one end to the other that is important. What matters is that you TRY.

Scott Jurek set a record time of 46 days and 8 hours for a thru-hike of the 2,189-mile Appalachian Trail. This is an amazing physical accomplishment.  Having hiked the trail, I find it even more astounding.  I know the trail; much of the terrain is treacherous to walk on, let alone run.

Yet Jurek did it.  But in doing so, he missed the point and perhaps did a disservice to the trail.

The Appalachian trail is a place of splendor and unspoiled nature open to all.  It offers a solitude surrounded by pristine vistas that are rare in this country.

Jurek’s feat, while physically impressive, is meaningless. His speed masked the power of the trail. It was never meant to be a raceway.

The physical challenge is only a part of the daily hike. The willingness to continue despite the challenges of weather and terrain plays a part as well. Yet doing these things as you enjoy the journey is what the Appalachian Trail is all about.

A record always presents a challenge.  Someone will want to break it. Jurek was so motivated, so there will be someone else.

The philosophy of the trail is, “Hike your own hike.” I do not think we should control what someone does to challenge the trail. That would be as destructive to the spirit of the trail as turning it into a raceway.

Yet, the idea of hiking it faster seems counterintuitive. I fear personal egotism will overwhelm and damage the trail.

One of the greatest joys on the trail was to happen upon a view.  Not just those described in the books, but an unanticipated scene.  It could be a bear and her cub, a gnarled and twisted old tree, or a panorama of mountains.

To sit and see these things is to experience the trail.

To run by them, checking your watch, is to miss the whole point.

Joe “Miracle” Broadmeadow NOBO Thru-hike 2014

Is there anything better than…?

/ Joe Broadmeadow / Leave a comment

(Feel free to send me things to add to the list. I’ll update as they come in. Might be interesting to see the things we find important)

First sip of coffee in the morning.

Walking in  warm summer shower.

The first smile of your newborn child.

Peanut Butter and Marshmallow Fluff sandwiches.

First time driving alone.

A walk along a deserted beach.

The sound of the Ice Cream truck bell as it drives down your street on a hot summer day.

The ride home on the school bus on the last day of school before vacation.

“No school” over the radio (Salty Bryant where have you gone?)

Old friends.

A puppy.

Picking out shapes in the clouds.

Fresh cut grass.

A first love.

The first feeling of a warm sun on your face after a long winter.

Knowing the lyrics to a song you haven’t heard in years.

Recalling each of these moments invokes powerful memories. Holding onto these memories makes me appreciate what I have and where I have been. Looking forward to sharing more of these moments gives one hope.

Hold onto the memories, look forward to the future, but live for today’s moments.  They are all one really has.

1. Collision Course

/ Joe Broadmeadow / Leave a comment

Collision Course is the featured book on this site.

Where is the Old Southwest Airlines?

/ Joe Broadmeadow / Leave a comment

Where has the “old” Southwest gone?

Southwest Airline’s Ramp agents have been without a contract for four years.  I was reminded of this by an image posted on Facebook of a group of rampers (as they are known within the company) proudly boycotting an Employee Appreciation Day in protest over the lack of a contract.

Why should this matter to anyone outside of the company?  Let me explain.

Southwest Airlines became a legendary company through the hard work, dedication, and commitment to excellence of it’s employees.  Everyone from the comedic routines of the flight crew, the care and kindness of the customer service agents and operations agents, to the dedication of mechanics and other support staff all made Southwest successful.

Somewhere along the way, those in management have lost sight of that.

Four years without a contract is criminal.

Herb Kelleher, the legendary founder and original CEO, built the Southwest brand. He was proud of the fact he did it with an organization that was 85% unionized.  Kelleher understood the protections of a union were important to the overall satisfaction of the members.

Kelleher recognized that management changes were inevitable and other CEO’s might take a different approach to employees.  Unions insure fair and equitable treatment for their members.

These unions made the company successful.

I find it interesting that with the decline in union membership nationwide, the disparity between those in the lower economic range and the highest has grown exponentially.

CEOs and upper management salaries far outstrip those of labor, perhaps due in part to this decline of unionized representation.

I do not begrudge Gary Kelly, Southwest’s CEO, his salary.  I just do not understand why he has abandoned the philosophy that made Southwest the success that it is, people.  Take care of your employees and they will take care of your customers.

Do not put profits before people.  Southwest has made record profits.  Invest in those that made you successful.

I am not saying the union is blameless in this.  I worked for Southwest for several years. I know understanding the language of the contract can be frustrating. That is what negotiation is about.  The language was negotiated in, change it through the same process.

I also know some union members spend more time trying to figure out how not to work, or gaming the system, exploiting the contract language, than doing the job.  However, it is a small minority of the workforce.

The process of negotiation has to be fair and open; in this case, the company holds all the cards.  They have taken the approach of waiting the union out, at the expense of the very people that made the company successful.

Here is a little perspective. The next time you fly on Southwest watch the ground crew.

There is more to what they do then load bags.

A ramp agent has to plan the weight distribution and the off-loading order of the bags.  They are not randomly put aboard; there is a method to it.

But here’s the thing to really pay attention to.  Something most people do not know.

Everyone has seen the First Officer (commonly known as the co-pilot) checking the outside of the aircraft.  They do that whenever they begin their day, or change aircraft.

There is one person responsible for inspecting every aircraft just before pushing back from the gate.

A ramp agent.

They are the last set of eyes that checks the outside of the aircraft before pushing off the gate.

Think about that.

The lead agent, the one everyone thinks is just loading bags, is the last set of eyes that checks the outside of that aircraft before every flight.

The lead agent then operates the vehicle that pushes that aircraft worth tens of millions of dollars, holding up to 175 passengers and 6 crewmembers off the gate. I’ve done it, it is no easy task.

Yet Southwest thinks it is okay to leave them without a contract for 4 years.  That says a lot about the value they put on people.

Where did the old Southwest go?

Killing Americans

/ Joe Broadmeadow / Leave a comment

I came upon an interesting infographic the other day that caught my eye.  I have selected the most significant ones, but if you are interested, the full graphic is here.

(http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/causes_of_death#sthash.gxxFi7De.dpbs)

It details the leading causes of death in the United States, some of which are,

Major Cardiovascular Diseases [MCD]                                                796,494

Malignant Neoplasms [Cancer]                                                             584,881

Alcoholic Liver Disease [subset of Chronic Liver Disease]             18,146

Injury by Firearms                                                                                    33,636

Alcohol Induced Deaths                                                                           29,001

Homicide                                                                                                     16,121

Viral Hepatitis                                                                                            8,157

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Disease                                6,955

All Illicit Drugs Combined                                                                       7,000

Cannabis (Marijuana)                                                                               0

(Had to include the fact the Marijuana itself kills nobody)

I found it interesting in light of the saber-rattling nonsense about the ISIS threat from the several hundred thousand candidates for President and the comfort many take in the death penalty of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, including this one from the Governor of Massachusetts;

Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker said he hopes the death penalty sentence for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will bring closure. (http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/boston-bombing-trial)

What exactly is ‘closure’?

I find it troubling how people in this country see ISIS as serious threat to Americans and that by putting Tsarnaev to death somehow is a blow against terrorism.  The act of killing one young man embracing a delusional 14th Century religious fanaticism somehow mitigates or lessens the threat.

They stand and applaud a call to arms to deal with the threat from ISIS.

What threat?

Nothing could be further from the truth.  Here is another interesting fact,

ISIS has killed FOUR Americans, none of them in this country.

Tsarnaev and his brother killed three people.

Between these two threats, they have managed a total of seven.

Hell, the Bandidos and Outlaws managed more than that with one outing at a restaurant. I see no mention of a war on Outlaw Motorcycle gangs being bantered around in Congress.  Although I bet the cops that had to deal with the mess wish there was.

Here is the irony, Tsarnaev and his brother most likely would have been considered enemies of ISIS had they been in Syria, they embrace the wrong flavor of delusional religious fervor.

Do not misunderstand me; while I am opposed to the death penalty, I would gladly stick the needle in Tsarnaev’s arm because there is no doubt of his guilt.  That is a different debate.

Here, I want to make the point that the Republican controlled Congress has tried repeatedly to overturn the Affordable Care Act because of costs, yet is willing to spend another 4-6 Trillion dollars fighting a war in Syria against an enemy that cannot reach us. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/study-iraq-afghan-war-costs-to-top-4-trillion/2013/03/28/b82a5dce-97ed-11e2-814b-063623d80a60_story.html)

If we go on sheer numbers beer, wine, and vodka kill more Americans than any foreign enemy.

Smith & Wesson, Glock, Ruger and other gun manufacturers produce products that kill more Americans annually than terrorist have done in total.

Yet ISIS is a bigger concern to the health and well-being of Americans than heart disease or cancer?

I find it ironic that due to the media pressure on the Presidential Candidates, many are acknowledging they based the decision to go to war in Iraq on flawed or false data.  They agree the choice was wrong in light of new information.

At the time of the decision to go to war in Iraq, the Iraq military or their alleged state sponsored terrorists had killed ZERO Americans.

Afghanistan was different story, they clearly supported Bin Laden and destroying the Taliban was justified.  Of course, the law of unintended consequences took over and the poppy production has improved dramatically, increasing the world’s supply of heroin.

Nothing is simple.

Which is precisely why any discussion of going to war with ISIS need be tempered with reality.

The reality is they pose little threat to most Americans.

The reality is they cannot reach us with any meaningful military threat.

The reality that, should it be ever be necessary, the US military would destroy them assuming they are given sufficient support.  If you are going to loosen the dogs of war, take off their muzzle.

The reality is there are a myriad of issues in this country that are real, serious, and life threatening to Americans.  I am not advocating isolationism, I am advocating reason.

Any death is tragic.  I am in not minimizing the enormity of the Boston bombing; however, we should expect Congress to be intelligent enough to allocate our resources where they can do the most good.

It would seem to me, focusing on saving Americans here should be our top priority.

And if you don’t want to be killed by ISIS, avoid Syria.

P.S. Don’t you dare try to take away my beer, wine, and vodka!

Remembering a Remarkable Woman

/ Joe Broadmeadow / 2 Comments

A woman of character and compassion died the other day.

There will be no public outpourings of grief, no news stories about her life, or any well-known celebrities or politicians mourning her passing.

There should be.

Sister Roberta Campbell, a member of the order of Sisters of Saint Joseph for close to seventy years, known to her family outside the convent as Margaret Mary, died at the age of eighty-seven.

While her name, and the many things she accomplished, may not be known outside of her family and those she touched, her impact on making this a better world is immeasurable.

She did it all out of her commitment to and a faith in her calling, because it was the right thing to do and for no other reason.

Margaret devoted her time to caring for those experiencing all the difficulties this life sometimes imposes.

She did it with compassion and understanding, never standing in judgment but rather offering her unmitigated support.

In this world of instant gratification, where a commitment that lasts more than the length of a Twitter blurb is considered abnormal, she devoted her entire adult life to something she firmly believed in no matter the demands or burdens.

It would serve this world well if there were more people willing to commit to a cause and stay with it despite the difficulties. People like Margaret Mary.

There are many stories about this woman, most of them known only to those involved in them.  I thought I would share just a few.

Margaret would often care for a trio of my young nephews, Randy, Justin, and Matthew.  She would take them to many places eight, nine, and ten year old boys so enjoyed.

She took them to nursing homes, wakes, visiting those confined in their homes.  I am sure she took them for ice cream as well, but I bet they remember the lessons learned about life more (although likely not at the time).

She had a knack for saying the right thing at precisely the right time.

When my sister Mary came home under hospice care, we took Margaret Mary and my mother to see her.

On the way, I had picked up some beer for my brother-in-law Kevin to have in the house as he, and their sons, cared for Mary.

Shortly after we arrived, my sister died.  We all were lost as to what to say or do.

Margaret, sitting on the front porch, reached into her vast well of experience and said, “I’ll have a beer.”

Within minutes those old enough had beers, the conversation livened with stories of my sister, and the process of grieving took over.

No one really knows what happens when you die, but it is the one common experience we all share.

Margaret embraced her faith in what was to come completely.

If there is such a thing as Pearly Gates and a Saint Peter, those gates joyfully opened the other day and welcomed home an amazing woman.

We were all privileged to know her.