Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2013-10-24, Page 5THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2013. PAGE 5. Far be it from me to restrict people with physical disabilities, but when it comes to folks with badly impaired vision there are probably one or two activities we can all agree should be frowned on. It goes without saying that blind people should be discouraged from driving Formula One cars, directing air traffic, judging art exhibitions or carrying loaded weapons in public, correct? Not correct – at least not on the last point, and not in the great state of Iowa. Legislators there have just ruled on who has and who does not have the right to carry lethal firepower on their hip or under their jacket at all times. You can’t do it if you’re under 18, a convicted alcoholic or a felon, but if you’re none of the above and happen to be stone blind, fill your boots – or holster, as it were. “It seems a little strange,” says a spokesman for the Iowa sheriff’s office, “but we can’t deny them (a permit) just based on that one thing.” Being blind, the sergeant means. And no sergeant, it doesn’t really seem all that strange. Not when it comes to guns in America. The rest of the world has become pretty much inured to the eye-bulging, drool- mouthed insanity that burbles to the surface when Americans talk about their guns. You folks stopped making sense on the subject about the time that JFK...or was it his brother? Or was it Martin Luther King? Heck, it might have been Abraham Lincoln – was shot and killed by some deranged lunatic who had no business carrying a lethal weapon in public. Those were the A-list murders of course. They rather pale when you consider the thousands upon thousands upon thousands of U.S. school kids, teachers, policemen, firefighters, office workers and innocent American bystanders who have been gunned down, year in year out, since anybody started keeping score. Remember the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut – the one where 20 first-graders and adults were slaughtered? That happened last December – not even a year ago. Since then, Slate.com has calculated that more than 25,000 Americans have died from gunshots in the U.S. That’s more than 10 times the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks. America started two wars over the Twin Towers; she’s mute about the monster in her own backyard. Other countries have had to deal with lunatics bearing arms in public. Canada changed the entire nation’s gun laws after a maniac in Montreal went on a lethal rampage. Great Britain and Australia endured mass shootings; they overhauled their gun laws in response and shooting deaths shrivelled. What happens when mass murders occur in the U.S.? Government officials blather; gun sales go through the roof. When it comes to guns, America is sick. Crazy sick. The rest of the world looks on the way you’d look on at a dog having a rabid fit in the middle of the street. Americans’ continuous kowtow to the profoundly evil National Rifle Association, coupled with their inability to stop shooting themselves, has led to flat out scorn from abroad. Alexei Pushkov, a Russian politician, recently snorted “Nobody’s even surprised anymore. A clear case of American exceptionalism.” You know you’re on the wrong trail when a spokesman for one of the most blood-bathed nations in the world is laughing in your face. My advice to Mr. Pushkov? Point made, but you’d best shut up. You’re dealing with a rabid dog here. And he’s got a gun. Arthur Black Other Views Oh, say can you see? Not necessarily Shawn Loughlin Shawn’s Sense It’s always a great day when the work I do one week dovetails nicely into the work I’m doing the next week and this was just one of those weeks. Last week I had the distinct displeasure of taking some pictures of children getting their meningitis and hepatitis B shots at Hullett Central Public School. The event itself wasn’t unpleasurable, nor was anyone I had to deal with, it’s those stainless-steel metal menaces that make me not want to think back on the event. Question my fortitude if you must, but I’ve got an irrational fear of needles. Despite having had many of them shoved everywhere from my toe to my jaw throughout my life, I’ve never got over the fear of having a needle jabbed in me. To that end, it’s a darn good thing I’m a reporter in Huron County, and not a medical worker in British Columbia. Last year, in British Columbia a document was instituted saying all medical professionals need to have the influenza shot. The document, which was based around preventing the spread of the influenza virus from healthcare professionals to patients, has received a lot of flack from the medical community. That community is so incensed by the document that it is currently involved in arbitration over whether or not the document can force them to roll up their sleeves and get the shot. While many medical professionals get the shot, many are also taking issue being forced to do it under pain of termination or forcing them to wear a mask. Last year, the punishment part of the document was held in abeyance and, while it resulted in many people who hadn’t got the shot getting it again, many of them must have done so begrudgingly. The main problem, according to reports from the group, is that this document is based on the idea of lowering the transmission of the disease from healthcare professionals to patients. The number of occurrences of that have not yet been quantified in Canada according to the community’s legal team. Another issue with it is that some people, for one reason or another, can’t get the shot and the only option is for them to wear masks for the duration of the influenza season. For some professionals, that’s simply not an option they feel they can take. Pair those facts with the fact that the influenza shot is only 58 per cent effective on average for the person receiving it (and only nine per cent effective for citizens over the age of 65 according to the United States’ Centre for Disease Control) in 2012, and you’ve got the medical cocktail that has landed the document in such hot water. Why am I worried about it? My job has me visit a lot of different places. I visit schools (and if you want to stop spreading the influenza virus, I think the first people to get mandatory shots should be education professionals and children), I visit gatherings of community groups, and, yes, I visit hospitals for the work I do. What do all of these locations have in common? Well, to me, they are the perfect place for influenza or any communicable disease to be spread. All of these places are places where people gather, touch the same things, use the same tools and utensils and toys and, inevitably swap germs. Sure, the germs may be benign, but they may also be the next strain of influenza ready to lay people flat. Influenza, according to modelling as claimed by the BC medical professionans’ legal squad and not according to actual data gathered, kills 2,000 to 8,000 a year in Canada and, those that survive it, while they are the majority, are certainly no better for wear. They can end up laid up in bed or worse for a week or more. Influenza is nothing to sneeze at (Sorry, I couldn’t resist). In short, influenza is bad news and anything that gives people a 50/50 chance of avoiding it is probably worthwhile, right? Well, maybe it is and maybe it isn’t. There are people who are allergic to the shot or have medication that will interfere with or become less potent because of the shot and then there are people like me who just hate needles. My question is, in this world of excess where rules are applied liberally to everyone without thought instead of sitting down and taking the time to figure out who needs these shots, who should have to have these shots and who is able to use their own discretion, how long will it be before I’m forced to have an influenza shot? Sure, I’ll survive it if I have to, but for someone like me who flirts with unconsciousness every time I’m jabbed, a 58 per cent chance of the serum working against the particular influenza strain I may or may not succumb to isn’t enough to make me want to roll up my sleeve. I’m sure that many medical professionals, and, for that case, teachers, receptionists, business owners, reporters, cashiers... heck, I’m sure pretty much everyone except those lucky enough to telecommute during this season of disease has a reason to get the shot and I’m sure many of them do and would continue to do so regardless of whether or not it was mandatory. I’m also sure that, like me, a lot of people would prefer to fight the disease than to brave the cure. I’m not a big fan of the idea of Big Brother to begin with. It’s probably all those books that I was forced to read for school like George Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm or William F. Nolan’s Logan trilogy (which started with Logan’s Run), but when they start dictating that people have to have their body pierced by needles, I start to question it especially when we’re talking about medical professionals. Wouldn’t they be the best people to decide whether they need to take the vaccination versus a government policy maker? Wouldn’t a doctor in an emergency room know whether it would be worthwhile for them to be injected? Regardless, if it’s my turn to take a mandatory shot, my tale will be called Denny’s Run. Denny Scott Denny’s Den Roll up your sleeve and try not to cry A magnificent saga While architect and Brussels native John Rutledge, contractors and the Municipality of Huron East work towards the grand re-opening of the Brussels Library (likely to be scheduled for January), I have to say, there were times I thought that day would never come. Going through past issues of The Citizen recently, I stumbled upon stories from October of 2006, when a young man named Shawn Loughlin began his time here. On my second day on the job, I was sent to cover a Huron East Council meeting, and thus began my relationship with the Brussels Library. Before I knew much more about Brussels than it was a village The Citizen covered, I was learning about its historic library and its place in the fabric of the community. This week I read many of my stories from the following weeks and, given that I had just toured the library and its massive addition, it was amazing to think both how far the project had come, while at the same time, that it took this long. It would be an understatement to call the project a roller coaster. At the time, councillors felt that costs associated with renovating the existing Andrew Carnegie library were exorbitant; costs that would more than double by the time the project would finally go ahead in 2012/2013. The economical option was to build a new library, no doubt about it. In a village like Brussels, which had such a connection to its history, both architecturally and otherwise, a historical library built in 1910 means something to the community and its people. Public meetings were held and it was decided, by a voting group of under a dozen citizens, to build a new library. However, when council put the project on the shelf, an election meant a new council was in the driver’s seat and the issues was revisited. This council seemed a little more interested in preserving the past than building a new future when it came to the Brussels Library, but the costs, once again, gave council cause to pause. It was about this time that Rutledge got involved on spec., as they say in the business, when he submitted some ideas on how to expand the current library, make it accessible, but preserve its history. While council had not asked Rutledge for anything, he supplied councillors with exactly what many of them were looking for, and they began moving forward in a relationship that would mean the preservation of one of the village’s most historic buildings. So now, for this week’s issue of The Citizen, I took a stroll through the Brussels Library, both its old and new wings, and I have to say it is a beautiful building that will serve the community for decades to come, just as council had promised. I had to wear a hard hat and steel-toed boots, because there is still some work to be done yet, but it looks as though Rutledge has delivered the municipality a library more beautiful than anyone could have thought back in 2006. I have said before that the Brussels Library project, to me, had a Groundhog Day feeling to it, where things started over again every day when you woke up. Now that I’ve seen the building, inside and out, I’m happy to report that the past seven years have not been wasted. In January, when the library is re-opened to the public, it will be a building of which the people of Brussels can be proud, preserving the past and looking to the future.