The Blogg

November 25, 2007

On Compilations

Filed under: Music,Personal — chadhogg @ 12:57 pm

Compilation albums come in many forms: “___’s Greatest Hits”, “The Best Of ___”, “The Essential ___”, “___ Anthology”, and most perniciously of all, those given a name that provides no such information. I hate every one of them. Yesterday I was looking at amazon.com, and saw an advertisement that read “Mothership, the perfect gift for any Led Zeppelin fan!”. That is one of the most absurd things I’ve read in a while. “Mothership” may be a great gift for someone, but it would be a terrible gift for a Led Zeppelin fan. A fan will already own each of the 8 studio albums from which these tracks are culled. The only benefit they would gain from owning the album is to have a particular set of tracks on the same disc, and most people who already own the music have the capability to produce such a thing themselves. Unfortunately, well-meaning people are convinced by advertisements such as this to buy worthless gifts for people.

If you’ve spent much time perusing the racks of used CDs for sale at your local independent record store, as I have, you have probably noticed that 99% of the available stock falls into one of two categories: pop music that was sold not because it was good, but because it was in vogue for a time, and useless compilations. I’ve never seen a copy of any of Led Zeppelin’s studio albums among these stacks of dreck, and I don’t expect I ever will.

Even worse than the single-artist compilation is the “Dance Hits of the 90s” type of disc. Seriously, who buys these things? You have to have a really, really shallow interest in music to find such a product useful. But I don’t want to follow this line of complaint to it’s logical conclusion: a tirade against the affront of top-40 radio stations.

It seems the success of the iTunes Music Store selling single tracks is evidence that few people share my view. You don’t have to look far to find people arguing that one reason for rampant piracy was the insistence by record labels on selling albums where people only want a few songs. If your favorite band only has a few songs per album that you would like to hear, then either you are listening to the wrong bands, or you are appreciating the wrong things about music.

It is difficult for me to think of an example of a band from which I would like to own a compilation album. It would have to be someone good enough for me to want to listen to some of their music, but bad enough that I will not want to at least hear their entire catalogue, and that is a very small window.

November 20, 2007

Reading List Re-Revisited

Filed under: Books,Personal — chadhogg @ 3:12 am

I’ve written before and even before that about what I am reading or should be reading. After spending months not reading because I hated Ulysses and refused to read anything else until I finished it, I finally gave up and moved on. I had started to update my list post again, but found that the format really wasn’t working for me. So I have now created an account on All Consuming, which you can find here. There is also an RSS feed of new entries available here. (And of course you already know how to get an RSS feed of these posts here. The All Consuming interface is kind of clunky, but it does a better job of storing a record of what I’ve read and my reviews of it then I could come up with quickly.

I am now attempting to work my way through the Modern Library’s list of 100 greatest novels of the 20th century, alternating roughly between books on the editors’ list, ones on the readers’ list, and books I would actually like to read. Although the Joyce experiment failed horribly, I think the rest of the list should go better.

November 17, 2007

Microsoft Support

Filed under: Personal — chadhogg @ 7:04 pm

About 6 months ago my wife’s laptop died a horrendous death and, against my better judgment, she bought a replacement that came with Microsoft Vista (without intentions to immediately reformat and install a sensible operating system). For a time she enjoyed the new features and pretty interface, but it wasn’t more than a few months before I started hearing “I hate Vista!” on a regular basis. It kept somehow uninstalling her printer drivers, worked in unexpected ways, and the soundcard stopped operating. Eventually I decided to try solving these problems and found that I was incapable of installing new sound drivers because her copy of Vista would not validate against the Microsoft certification servers.

Her grumbling decreased and I promptly forgot about the unsolved problem while recording yet another case where Digital Restrictions Management-like systems made the lives of paying customers difficult while having no effect whatsoever on piracy. Several months later, however, the issue came to a head again. This time I decided I would figure out what was going on and at least fix the validation issue. After all, I had proof that she was using a legal copy.

After some debugging, I found some fairly strange behavior. Upon first boot, if I navigated Internet Explorer (yeah, my attempts to convert her to Firefox failed when several websites she needed to use depended on a browser that breaks standards) to www.microsoft.com/genuine, the browser would report that I had successfully validated the operating system. While the browser was delivering this good news, a dialog box would pop-up informing me that validation had failed due to “an unauthorized change” made to Windows. If I attempted to run the validation a second time after this, the browser would agree with the pop-up that validation had failed. There was a list of possibly offending programs, none of which were installed. Faced with this bizarre behavior, I decided it was time to give Microsoft’s tech support a try. The rest of this post will be a copy of our correspondence, with my responses embedded in their messages in boldface, inconsequential parts [snip]ed out, and personal information replaced by Xs.

On 10/19/07, Tony XXX (MS) wrote:

Dear Chad,

Thank you for contacting Microsoft Windows Update Support. My name is Tony, and I am glad to work with you. For your reference, the case ID for this service request is XXXXXXXXXXXXX. You can contact me directly by sending an email XXXXXXXX@mssupport.microsoft.com with the case ID in the subject line.

From the description, I understand that issues with Windows Genuine Advantage have been encountered. When trying to validate again after rebooting, it stated that Validation Complete, at the same time, the error message “An unauthorized change was made to Windows. You will no longer receive notifications, including those about your license or activation. Use the link below to find out how to fix your system. Error: 0xC004D401 Description: The security processor reported a system file mismatch error” is encountered. If I misunderstood the issue, please feel free to let me know.

That is correct.

I understand the inconvenience you have experienced. Please be assured that I will do my best to help you.

From the case log, I understand that the error code 0xC004D401 is received when starting up the system. We will work together to resolve this specific issue through the course of the case.

This error code means the secure licensing service reported a system file mismatch error. The issue is most likely caused by third party programs which prevent the registration from taking place.

Before moving on, I would like to know if Spyware Doctor or “Scottie the Dog spyware program” is installed on the computer. If so, please go to Add or Remove Programs in the Control Panel to remove them to see if the issue is resolved.

No, they are not.

If the issue persists, let’s perform a Clean Boot on the system:

Clean Boot

[snip instructions]

Then, please confirm if the issue is resolved under Clean Boot environment. However, if the problem still exists, please first roll back to Normal Mode and then help me collect the following information for further research:

The problem persisted in “Clean Boot” mode.

How to capture a Screenshot:

[snip instructions]

Attached

How to collect the System Information

[snip instructions]

Attached

How to collect Diagnostic Data

[snip instructions]

I had sent this information with my initial technical support request, but I have rerun the diagnostic tool and pasted the results at the bottom of this email.

Please send the above files to at XXXXXXXX@mssupport.microsoft.com. Once I obtain the information, I will perform further research and get back to you as soon as possible. Thank you for your time and cooperation.

Thank you

I’m looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Tony XXX

[snip signature]

[snip diagnostic information]

On 10/22/07, Tony XXX (MS) wrote:

Dear Chad,

Thank you for your reply. I received the information you attached.

From the case log, I understand that the issue persisted after performing the steps. If I have misunderstood your concern, please do not hesitate to let me know.

That is correct.

I suggest we re-enter the key and re-activate the system to refresh the relevant data store.

[snip requests and instructions for screenshots and diagnostic data]

It failed. The now-familiar response dialog is shown in src1.jpg. The output of the diagnostic program is in diagnostic.txt, although I cannot imagine it has changed since the other two times I have provided you with this information. The response from running the script can be seen in src2.jpg.

On 10/26/07, Tony XXX (MS) wrote:

Dear Chad,

Thank you for your reply. In order to help us resolve your issue more effectively, I have involved a higher level support professional to work with us on this issue. They will be contacting you within 72 hours to continue working with you. In the meantime, if there are any further questions concerning the issue, please feel free to contact me directly.

Again, thank you for choosing Microsoft.

Best Regards,

Tony Che

On 10/27/07, Margaret XXXX (MS) wrote:

I have not removed the Symantec software from the system, but I have disabled it and found that the problem persists through a reboot. (I would assume that this was already tested when I was asked to perform a “clean boot” as well.)

To be clear, the symptoms are slightly more complex than as you described them. The first time that I attempt to validate after booting, the browser reports a successful validation while simultaneously a dialog box appears with the “unauthorized change” failure. Subsequent attempts to validate report failure in the browser as well as producing this dialog box.

Dear Chad,

Thank you for contacting Microsoft Online Support. My name is Margaret and I am an Escalation Engineer for our Windows Update Support Team. In order to better serve you and resolve this issue more efficiently, I have taken ownership of your Service Request. To contact me, please send emails to XXXXXXXX@mssupport.microsoft.com with the case ID XXXXXXXXXXXXX in the subject line.

I apologize that this matter has been ongoing for some time, and understand the frustration this has caused. I greatly appreciate your cooperation and apologize for any inconvenience. Please be assured that I will work closely with you to resolve this matter as soon as possible.

After reviewing the case log, I understand that the error message “An unauthorized change was made to Windows” was received and you were redirected to http://www.microsoft.com/genuine website. You would like to resolve this validation issue first and then work on the sound issue. If I am not accurate in my understanding of this case, please feel free to let me know. I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience that you have experienced. Please be assured that as an Escalation Support Professional, I will try my best to help you.

Before we go further, I would like to share the following information with you as a Windows Update Support Professional point. The sound issue is system related and may not be corrected by Windows validation. Please be assured that I will try my best to assist you to resolve the validation issue. After that, let us check if the sound issue exists. If this issue still exists, I will create a Windows Vista system case for you and a Windows Vista Support Professional will follow up with you regarding the system issues. Thanks for your understanding.

Currently, let us focus on validation issue.

After checking the System Information provided to Tony, I found that you have Symantec Shared and Symantec AntiVirus installed on the computer. These issues include third party applications such as firewalls, web accelerators, and anti-virus programs adversely affecting the ability of your computer to connect to the Microsoft Validation server. For troubleshooting purpose only, I suggest that you remove them to see if the problem can be resolved. Your understanding and cooperation is highly appreciated.

Please tell me the result at your earliest convenience. If anything is unclear, please feel free to let me know.

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Margaret XXXX

[snip signature]

On 10/31/07, Margaret XXXX (MS) wrote:

I have completely removed the Symantec software without any effect. The product key I am using is XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX

Dear Chad,

Thank you for your reply.

From your description, I understand that you disabled Symantec software to test this issue, not remove it. You can validate the system first time but the validation failed after you received the “unauthorized change” error. If I misunderstood you, please feel free to let me know.

Chad , please understand that some components for Symantec software may still be working in the background even though it is disabled or at Clean Boot environment. To narrow down the cause of this issue, it is highly recommended that we temporarily remove the Symantec software to test this issue. Please ensure the program is reinstalled after we complete the troubleshooting steps.

If this issue appears to be related to a firewall program, I recommend that you contact the firewall manufacturer to obtain the information to configure the firewall options which allow the Windows Validation.

Meanwhile, this issue also can occur if no Product Key was entered while installing the Windows Vista System. To confirm it, please provide me with the Product Key for further research.

The Product Key printed on the COA sticker in the 5*5 format like XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX. For example, ABCDE-ABCDE-ABCDE-12345-ABC12. A Certificate of Authenticity (COA) can serve as proof of license for a valid and licensed operating system. The COA also contains a number of anti-piracy features that are difficult for counterfeiters to reproduce. To learn more about COA, please refer to the following link:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/howtotell/ww/windows/quiz_coa.mspx

http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/LocateProductKey.aspx?displayLang=en

Please tell me the result at your earliest convenience. If anything is unclear, please feel free to let me know.

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Margaret XXXX

[snip signature]

On Nov 5, 2007 12:23 AM, Margaret XXXX (MS) wrote:

I have no explanation for this. The machine was purchased new, directly from Dell, and we are using the OS image that came pre-installed. The product key I sent you is the one that came with this purchase.

If you have access to a casefile from the tech who first dealt with me, you know we have already been through these exact steps. Nevertheless, I have attached a new screenshot of the useless, generic error message that appears when I attempt to change the product key as ” screenshot.jpg”. I have also added “screenshot2.jpg”, showing a different dialog that pops up about 10 minutes after my attempt to change the product key. Below here is, yet again, the diagnostic data.

[snip diagnostic data]

Dear Chad,

Thank you for your reply and providing me with the Product Key.

From your description, I understand that the problem persists after removing Symantec software. I apologize for the inconvenience you have experienced. Please be assured that I will try my best to help you.

After checking the Product Key XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX, I am glad to tell that it is a genuine key for Windows Vista Home Premium. However, it is different from the Product Key *****-*****-XXXXX-XXXXX-XXXXX collected by the Diagnostic Tool.

This issue can occur if the genuine Product Key was not used while installing this Operating System. At this point, let us refer to the following steps to change it.

Re-enter the product key and activate the system again

[snip instructions]

Then, please confirm if the issue is resolved and let me know if the system can be activated again. However, if the problem still exists or you encounter any error message, please assist me in collecting the following information for further research.

How to capture a screenshot if an error message is received

[snip instructions]

Please help collect the latest Diagnostic Data

[snip instructions]

Please tell me the result at your earliest convenience. If anything is unclear, please feel free to let me know.

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Margaret XXXX

[snip signature]

On Nov 6, 2007 5:47 AM, Margaret XXXX (MS) wrote:

Dear Chad,

Thank you for your reply. I have received the screenshots.

From your description, I understand that the problem persists after performing my suggestions. I apologize for the inconvenience you have experienced.

I notice that this is a newly purchased Dell computer with the Windows Vista Home Premium preinstalled and genuine Product Key. However, the system was not installed by this genuine Product Key and it cannot be recognized by the current Operating System. Therefore, I suggest that you contact Dell Support, inform them about the problem and have them reinstall the Windows by using a genuine Product Key.

I would simply re-install the operating system myself before sending it back to Dell. Or are you implying that there is some way they could do an in-place replacement of the OS remotely?

Meanwhile, please also let me know if there is any new program installed after this computer is purchased.

Yes, of course there are many programs installed beyond those that came in the standard Dell image. Otherwise, I would have just reformatted the drive long ago and avoided this hassle.

Please also provide me with the System Information, I will help you check if there is any program interfere with this validation issue. For your reference, I have included the steps below:

How to collect the System Information

[snip instructions]

Please tell me the result at your earliest convenience. If anything is unclear, please feel free to let me know.

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Margaret XXXX

[snip signature]

On Nov 10, 2007 5:47 AM, Margaret XXXX (MS) wrote:

Dear Chad,

Thank you for your reply.

From your description, I understand that you are going to reinstall the system before contacting Dell. You would like to know if Dell can perform an in-place replacement of Operating System remotely. In addition, many programs were installed after the computer is purchased. If I misunderstood you, please feel free to let me know.

Chad, please understand that I cannot tell how Dell can help you resolve this issue. However, since they did not use the genuine Product Key on your original system, they should help you install the system by using the genuine product key. Thank you for your understanding.

Meanwhile, if you would like to perform an inplace-upgrade by yourself first, I can help you involve one of our system support engineer to help you. This will not influent your installed programs, but I cannot ensure that the Windows Validation issue can be resolved since this issue also can occur if there are some conflicts between Windows and some applications. Thank you for your understanding.

Please tell me your decision at your earliest convenience. If anything is unclear, please feel free to let me know.

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Margaret XXXX

[snip signature]

On 11/12/07, Margaret XXXX (MS) wrote:

Thank you, that will not be necessary. I took the weekend to wipe the drive and re-install everything from scratch and it all appears to be working for now.

Dear Chad,

I just want to say hi and check if there is anything further I can do for you. If there is, please don’t hesitate to let me know.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Best Regards,

Margaret XXXX

[snip signature]

Finally, I sent an email to Tony, Margaret, and their supervisors voicing my displeasure with the system.

Greetings,

I apologize for the mass email, but this issue involves each of you: Tony as the Microsoft Windows Update Support Professional who first assisted me, Susan as Tony’s supervisor, Margaret as the Escalation Engineer who assisted me, and Roger as Margaret’s supervisor.

Tony and Margaret both interacted with me in a polite, professional, and timely manner. I have no doubt that they correctly executed the scripts given to them as prescribed by management. My concerns and complaints are with the process that they are required to execute.

I provided diagnostic data four times — once as part of my initial support request, as dictated by the request-taking applet, twice when Tony asked me for it, and once when Margaret asked me for it. I suppose it is possible that this information would change, but it seems very unlikely. Asking for this continually makes it seem like the person providing the support is not reading the information already sent to them. Similarly, I was asked numerous times to include a screenshot of the same error message that validating consistently produced. I realize this is a way of making sure the customer is actually trying what you suggest, but it becomes quite annoying after a few times.

I was rather surprised to have Margaret ask me to send her my Product Key in cleartext through the e-mail system, considering that e-mail is quite insecure and that interception of this information could put me under suspicion of copyright infringement. This was especially strange given that most corporations are strongly discouraging customers from ever sending such sensitive information to someone claiming to be a representative of them, due to the prevalence of phishing attacks. I provided the information as requested, but I would hope you would be able to devise a more secure method for transmission of this data.

Finally, I recognize that (it appears) that Microsoft is not at fault for this problem. Nevertheless, you are responsible for the absurd difficulty in tracking down the issue. If an unauthorized change has been made to Windows, it should be trivial to determine the file or registry setting or whatever that has been changed and either provide a replacement, or explain how to restore those files from the install CD. If a program is dynamically altering a file, it should be easy to find what processes have an open handle to that file. Rather than providing this information, the error message is as vague as possible. Unless I misunderstood Margaret, it appeared that my ultimate problem was that Windows had an invalid key registered and that it would not let me change the key unless a valid key was already in use. Talk about defective by design!

Thank you for your help,
Chad Hogg

Strangely, I still have not convinced her to move to Ubuntu or even Windows XP, since she now has programs that are “designed for Windows Vista”. Let’s see how long we can go before the next disaster …

November 6, 2007

Municipal Elections 2007

Filed under: Politics — chadhogg @ 3:22 am

I have never before voted in a municipal election, but I hope to do so tomorrow. There are certainly decisions made by local officials that affect my life. I intended to write this to include my decisions on the ballot questions I will face tomorrow, explanations of my choices, and comparisons of candidates on a number of issues. After two hours of research I have decided this will be remarkably more difficult than I anticipated, and that much of what I might have been able to accomplish is already available in the form of the Morning Call – League of Women’s Voters Voting Guide. So I may partially achieve those initial goals, but this will be more of a freely structured comment on the elections.

Making decisions about judges is really quite difficult. For retention elections, it would seem that one need simply to look at decisions written by the judge to determine whether or not he has performed his job adequately. What makes this remarkably difficult is the nature of the judge’s job — he is supposed to interpret and apply the law as written, not make decisions about what the law should be. While I consider myself qualified to determine whether or not someone has a reasonable (to me) opinion about what the law should be, I completely lack the knowledge necessary to know whether a judge is doing his job correctly. To do so would require essentially the same training that a judge receives: a thorough understanding of statutory and case law.

It would be easy for me to look at Justice Thomas Saylor’s previous opinions in high-profile cases and find that I agree with his decisions against the legislative pay raise of 2006 or for allowing independent candidates to appear on ballots in 2004 and 2006. If I did so, however, I would be basing my choice on the fact that his decisions coincided with what I believe the law should be. The only real resource I have is to consider what other, more legally educated people have to say. Unfortunately, opinions on this could not be further apart. The PA Bar Association suggests that all judges up for retention should be retained, while PA Clean Sweep recommends voting against all of them. It seems very unlikely that either of these approaches is actually best.

The same thing can be said regarding new candidates for judgeships. Really, the only thing a candidate can say to make them worthy of election is that they will make decisions based on the law without regard to what is popular or what they believe to be right or desirable. Not surprisingly, every candidate says this. Thus, I believe I will be abstaining from the judicial questions entirely.

There are a number of other offices for which I may vote where the position provides very little power to make decisions. In these cases it does not matter how the candidate feels about issues, only that they are competent and honest. Among these offices I would include County Sheriff, County Clerk Of Judicial Records, County Coroner, City Treasurer, and City Controller. I have not been able to find evidence that any of the candidates for these positions are dishonest or grossly unqualified, so I am not sure I will be casting a vote in any of these elections either.

I am quite surprised to see that the members of the Bethlehem Area School Board of Directors are essentially running un-opposed. (There are 6 openings and 6 candidates, each running with endorsement by both major parties.) This is one office where I do have strong opinions about the job that has been done by the current directors with regards to their refusal to provide the public with information about the John Accera report, their relationship with Superintendent Joseph Lewis, and their decisions regarding re-use of Broughal Middle School. Four of the 6 candidates running are incumbents, and apparently the controversy surrounding them has not been significant enough to convince someone else to run against them.

The only real decisions for me to make, then, are the Lehigh County Commissioners and Bethlehem City Council members. I thought the Voter’s Guide linked above might be a good way to start distinguishing between the candidates for County Commissioner. Each was asked then question, “What do you view as the major issue in the campaign and how will you address it?” Gloria Hamm (Dem.) responded that health care, county finances, emergency management, and land preservation were important issues. While she stated that her experience in health care would make her qualified to work on one of these issues, she did not mention how should would address any of them. Kevin Easterling (Dem.) wrote that preservation of farmland and parks was the top issue, but did not really discuss his approach to it. Rich Gawlik (Dem.) believes public safety is the primary issue, and proposed that cooperation among law enforcement agencies in the county be increased. Bill Leiner (Dem.) states that fiscal stability is the primary issue, and that he will not support tax increases. Andy Roman (Rep.) writes that decreasing the size of county government while retaining essential services is the most important issue, and points to previous work he has done in this area. Robert Reis (Rep.) lists four issues including two large projects: renovation of the county courthouse and building a minor league baseball stadium, regionalization, and (bizarrely) that he is retired. Dean Browning (Rep.) wrote that the county budget is the primary issue, and that it should be balanced by looking at a few specific problems. Brent Labenberg (Rep.) also believes that county finances and taxation are the most important issues, and proposes a few ways to minimize spending. He also notes the importance of making meeting transcripts or video available to the public over the Internet.

Robert Reis seemed incapable of understanding the question, so he is out. Gloria Hamm and Kevin Easterling also had some difficulty actually answering the question asked. Rich Gawlik answered the question, but with none of the other candidates mentioning what he considered to be the primary issue, it seems more likely he answered the question “what would you like the most important issue to be, due to your expertise in that area”. It looks like Bill Leiner, Andy Roman, Dean Browning, and Brent Labenberg will be getting my votes based simply by showing a minimum level of competence.

The four candidates for Bethlehem City Council (I need to choose 3) were asked the same question. Three of the candidates — J. William Reynolds (Dem.), Gordon B. Mowrer (Dem.), and Esther M. Lee (Rep.) gave very similar answers about preparing the city for the increase in traffic, crime, and use of other city services when the Sands Bethworks casino begins operation. Robert J. Donchez wrote about this issue as well as continued economic development and fiscal responsibility. None of the four did a particularly good job of describing how he or she would approach the issue(s), although Donchez and Lee proposed increasing the size of the police force. Mowrer gets a vote for pointing out that he will work with the casino despite believing that it was a bad choice for the city. I like all of the other 3 candidates, so I may not end up voting for any of the three.

I feel like there should be good, important decisions to be made in this election, but I am finding very little to be excited about. Even in those races where I have selected some candidates over others, my decisions are based on what some might argue are inconsequential reasons. The information with which I have to make a decision is remarkably limited, and I cannot bring myself to spend all day reading the candidates’ individual webpages, trying to extract useful information from the spin and rhetoric. What I would really like as a voter is some publication for which each candidate is given a set of issues that are likely to be decided by members of the office to which they aspire during the term for which they would be elected. They would be asked to give their vote on each issue as well as 200 words or so to explain their reasoning. This would be much more useful than each candidate deciding for themselves what the important issue is and touting their accomplishments and qualifications. If anyone reads this before the polls close tomorrow and has information that should influence me one way or another on one of these candidates, please comment!

November 2, 2007

The Andy Reid Dilemma

Filed under: Personal — chadhogg @ 2:23 am

Britt and Garrett Reid are both back in jail today, and there are are already more calls for Andy Reid to step down from his job as head coach of the Philadelphia Eagles to take care of his family’s problems. An informal web-based poll by NBC 10 (WCAU out of Philadelphia) currently has 62% of respondents taking this position.

The article linked above has all of the details, but I will provide a brief synopsis of the events thusfar. On January 30, Britt Reid (age 21) threatened another driver with a handgun, while having a shotgun, cocaine, marijuana, and Oxycontin in his vehicle. On the same time his brother Garrett (age 23) was responsible for a traffic accident while driving under the influence of heroin, steroids, and prescription pain killers. Both men were released on bail, and Andy took a 5 week leave of absence to concentrate on helping his children with their issues. At some point in August, Britt was responsible for a minor automotive accident in a parking lot. He was found to be intoxicated and several different controlled substances were found in his truck. He was remanded due to this violation of his bail agreement. On October 17, Garrett did not show up for a scheduled drug test and was remanded, then released when he was found to be clean. Both cases have now come to trial; Britt has been sentenced to 8-23 months of incarceration while brother Garrett got 2-23 months. When he was processed into prison earlier this week, Garrett allegedly smuggled at least 89 doses of prescription drugs with him.

At each point in this saga people have been arguing that Andy should quit his job and focus on his family, although he has insisted he will not do so. I cannot claim to know what is going on in the Reid household; perhaps his younger children really do need their father to be ever-present. I find it absurd, however, that people really think he should put his life on hold for the sake of his criminal sons. I argued a few weeks ago that the “War on Drugs” causes more harm than good, but that does not mean that I have any respect for junkies like the Reid boys. I will fight for your right to throw your life away, but I certainly will not feel sorry for you when you do so.

Presumably, when Andy took those 5 weeks off, he did what he could to show his love to Garrett and Britt and to assist them in changing their behavior if they were willing. If so, then either Andy was incapable of helping them, in which case more time would likely be unproductive, or they were unwilling to give up their drug habits, in which case further attempts would be both futile and undeserved. It is most ridiculous that people think he should quit now, when both Garrett and Britt are in jail, where he can do little beyond the occasional visit.

I wonder how many of the people responding affirmatively to the above survey are so-called “helicopter parents“. At 21 and 23 years old, people are going to make their own decisions and there is not much a parent can do about it. All Andy needs to do now is to tell Garrett and Britt that he loves them, but that they need to face the consequences of their actions. He should be willing to do anything they ask of him that will lead to recovery (such as paying for treatment) but nothing that will enable their current behavior, making frequent random drug tests a requirement for entry into his home when they are released. At this point, you worry about those family members that you can still influence, and you protect them from their brothers. None of this requires throwing his career away.

November 1, 2007

Assault & Murder

Filed under: Politics — chadhogg @ 12:54 am

December 4, 2006: Six black teens attack a white teen at a high school in Louisianna, knocking him unconscious and allegedly continuing to beat his unconscious body. The motive is allegedly retribution for several racially-motivated acts against blacks, although (as far as I can tell) there has been no allegation that the victim was responsible for any of them. The attackers who could be charged as adults are indicted for attempted murder. One perpetrator is found guilty, although this is overturned on appeal, and the other 5 have not yet been tried. There is widespread condemnation of the severity of the charges leveled, in particular that the race of the accused was a significant factor.

September 7, 2007: A Kutztown University student is killed by a single blow from a chair leg in an unprovoked attack. The wielder of the weapon, as well as his two companions, are charged with third-degree murder. They had allegedly been out looking for a fight. None have yet been tried.

October 19, 2007: Two Kutztown students punch another student when his girlfriend protests being randomly groped by one of them, breaking his jaw. Both attackers are charged with aggravated assault. Neither have yet been tried.

This could be an outraged essay about the senselessness of violence, but I am afraid there is little that can be done about it; there will always be thugs. What concerns me is the difficulty of determining punishments for these crimes. In one case, someone was killed. In the other two, an act that is arguably similarly violent did not result in death. Should the people who were unfortunate enough to kill someone instead of merely injuring them be punished more severely? As much as it puts a bad taste in my mouth, this luck-based selection seems entrenched in our system of justice.

I find myself wanting to say that all of the attackers should be charged with attempted murder (or actual murder in the case where the victim died). Whether or not there is specific intention to kill, it should be obvious to anyone that a violent attack risks the life of the victim. However, I cannot see how we could implement this. Although I have been fortunate enough to never have the experience, fistfights are not uncommon events, and if we start locking people up for 20 years to life when they participate in one, it will just exacerbate the problems I wrote about a few weeks ago. Is there a fair solution to this problem?

Powered by WordPress