3 posts tagged “opinion”

I was just reading Jack Cafferty's commentary on the legalization of drugs. It's an issue I feel rather strongly about, having seen some of the effects of drugs on people's lives (including a friend), and studied and done research on communities affected by drugs.

I agree that the tax revenue seems really lucrative, but it's a tradeoff. There's a whole set of different issues to contend with and it's not as black and white as saying 'Hey, we spend 77 billion on enforcement and legalization and tax revenue would net us 33 billion'.

That's not counting money we'd have to spend on enforcement, regulation, administration, and fighting the black market that creeps up--and it will--creating more of this drug dealer/cartel violence that Jack is saying would miraculously disappear. How do you regulate distribution? Do we put limits on how much somebody can buy? If we don't, how do we stop people from becoming small-time dealers? If we do, what if people get seriously addicted and have reached their quota already? There might still be a black market. There already is for people sneaking cigarettes across state lines to avoid purchasing them in their high-tax states of residence.

Those too poor, too desperate or strung out to get their fix will rob and rape and murder people. But there may be more of them. Increased consumption due to lifting the taboo might make those issues much worse. Lives will still be ruined. Personally, I would feel unsafe out there if more people became drug users.

Some store owners still sell cigarettes to kids, or adults who have legally purchased them give them out to those underage. Would you like that to happen with crack? Imagine that for a moment. Tobacco is bad enough, but cocaine?

 And we'll have to spend money to fight these increased problems, denting that supposed $33 billion revenue. Money in the short run, but lots of violence and social problems in the long. Terrible idea.

The "War on Drugs" doesn't escape criticism either, however. It is inefficient and ruins many lives. We need to reform the plan, or throw it out and come up with a new way to fight drug use and abuse in our society. Perhaps send more offenders into comprehensive rehab programs instead of jail. Hiring more public defenders, who tend to be so overloaded with clients that they often lack facetime with those they are representing. This leads to those clients sometimes being encouraged to plea to something instead of having their case heard with a real defense behind them.

Whatever we do, we need to take both the short and long-term effects into consideration. I don't think legalization is the answer. It's a Pandora's Box that should remain sealed, no matter how tempting it seems to lift the lid.

During Funcom's GDC presentation, Game Director Gaute Godager responded to a reporter's question about player-versus-player combat, and the problem of ganking with a potentially worrisome solution: Don't join a PvP server.

Depending upon your point of view, this is either the most logical thing in the world or a complete cop out. Godager's statements reflect what seems to be a complete free-for-all option on these servers. At least several months ago, it seemed that there would be safeguards in place to prevent players of very high levels from attacking or engaging players of much lower levels. The rules appear to have changed, and PvP, while in some cases restricted to within designated areas, seems to be open to a large problem with griefing.

Most MMO players know that griefing can be extremely frustrating to deal with, especially in the lower levels. These cyber bullies can even turn players off from renewing their subscriptions. So why make this decision? It seems the vocal members of the PvP audience, in many instances on the official community forums, figured that if the game were aiming for realistic, violent, and mature combat, then it might as well be "realistic" in this aspect as well. Thus, as the game currently stands, a bored level 80 may attack and kill a level 25 without consequence.

I'm not a big PvPer. I engage with friends or guildmates, or occasionally one on one when I'm in the mood. The promised rules blocking high level characters from ganging up on low levels represented the one thing making the possibility of playing on a PvP server remotely tolerable. I don't want other people to dictate how I spend my game time or be allowed to ruin my fun via griefing. If my character has a fair shot of beating someone, then that is tolerable on a PvP server. But to allow free-for-all attacks is just inviting trouble. Bad decision, Funcom.

I caught part of American Idol last night, and saw Jennifer Lopez perform. In a way, it was a proud moment, seeing one of the biggest shows on television feature a huge star singing in Spanish on national television. Regardless of anyone's personal opinion of Lopez' musical career, the fact that this milestone was achieved is pretty important. It's a good demonstration of how Latinos are ever more out there, and how pieces of our culture are shown to be completely at home among all the other diversity America has to offer. At the same time, nobody made a big deal out of it being a sort of milestone. It was just a seamless blend with the rest of the show. That's important, because it normalizes such a performance and the occasional Spanglish and Spanish-language advertising I see on a regular basis.

 I bet most of the audience didn't understand the song and yet they seemed to get into it anyway, simply enjoying the music and the performance for all it was worth. That's where the pride comes in, knowing that enjoyment and music are things that cross cultural and language barriers.

On a related note, I saw this headline via E! News the other day: "Salma's Spicy Studio Deal" which was referring to the recent production deal signed between Salma Hayek and MGM,  to form Ventanazul, a company to develop and distrubute Latino themed film projects. "Spicy"? Way to stereotype. Now, I know most of us are very proud of being a passionate people, but these terms only serve to marginalize and give people a certain impression of us, especially of us Latinas. We're "spicy", "spitfires", "feisty", "hot tamales", etc. But wait - I'm geeky, nerdy, calm, passionate, yes, but whatever happened to celebrating the whole of a person instead of attempting to water them down to an adjective or two? Ventanazul is actually trying to do just that, says Salma, saying that the projects will be involved in "telling uniquely Latin stories like that of Frida Kahlo, to creating unforgettable characters—who just happen to be Latin—like Ugly Betty." Then why such a ridiculously stereotypical headline from the E! writer?

Not that I necessarily disagree that "spicy" may truly describe some people, but it's a tired adjective when attached to stories involving Latinos, and it's about time someone gave these writers a new thesaurus. In the end, I'm happy to hear of the Ventanazul production company and look forward to what kinds of projects will come out of it.