I am bald. This is (obviously) no secret to all who can see me. I don't wear any sort of protective headgear. I never had a comb-over, nor was I ever "hanging on to scraps". I'm very comfortable with my head shape and I enjoy the low maintenance. That said, I was a little floored when walking out and about recently. I passed this elderly "gentleman" who looked me in the eyes and asked, "What? Are you going to the barbershop to get a haircut?". My defenses were defeated. I had no reply. For the first time in over a decade, I felt a little sorry I was bald. I don't really feel that way. I think it was just that I didn't have time to react and responded spinally. Once I gathered myself, I knew I had something new to write about...
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Friday, December 14, 2007
Jacked!

Yesterday, while driving home, I saw four young men engaged in what appeared to be an intense conversation in a not-so-nice section of town. Living in Baltimore as I proudly do, having to drive through not-so-nice sections of town is par for the course. That does not mean that Baltimore is not a beautiful and prosperous city - far from it. Often called a "City of Neighborhoods", the city is laid out such that rich and poor often live within blocks of each other. I find that fact enriching; isolation and ignorance breed contempt. If you do not know your neighbors, how can you empathize with them? That's not to say that there aren't well-to-do neighborhoods in Baltimore that work very hard to keep those less-fortunate as far away as possible. I can site a number of neighborhoods who've hired private security to perpetuate a feeling of "safety". More on that some other time (maybe).
Back to my story. Three of the four young men were hooded and surrounding the fourth, who looked visibly frightened. It seems that they were robbing him and threatening violence if he resisted. The poor kid was pushed to the ground. He then got up, took off his coat, and then handed it to one of his attackers. I didn't see what happened next, because I drove off when the light changed. I dialed 911 and gave a description of the muggers and the location of the crime. "Don't snitch"? Fuck that.
Why didn't I do more? Why didn't I get out of the car, get the kid's stuff back then take him home? Honestly, because I was afraid of what might happen to me. I am not afraid to get into a fight. I've been in enough in my lifetime to know what to expect. These days however, kids bring guns to fight, so I'd be at a competitive disadvantage, having only brought fists to the fight. I don't watch enough TV to think I could disarm someone wielding a gun. Not even The Shield could pull that off. I have young children. They didn't ask to be given life, so I shouldn't play around with mine when they need me most.
I felt really sorry for the kid. I felt sorry for him not because he was losing his possessions, but because he was genuinely frightened. I've been mugged in a violent way before. I know what it's like to feel powerless and to not know what's going to happen to you next. That feeling is as basic as breathing. Either you try to get away at all costs, or you fight as though you know you are about to die. The victim didn't appear to be at that stage yet, but I could tell he wasn't far. He had gotten past the paralyzed phase and had moved into the phase where he accepted that he was in fact going to lose his possessions. At this point, you begin to "bargain" to see what your muggers are going to let you walk/run away with. It is also at this point that your mugger(s) will decide whether or not to use violence. Since the muggers didn't immediately descend on the kid and beat him down, that means that they were willing to take the kid's stuff and walk away if he'd just given it up. A simple transaction. Since the victim was resisting, the muggers decided that it was worth increasing the pressure to see how far the kid would go before relenting. The muggers didn't start beating the kid after he resisted a little, so it was obvious that they didn't want to take the exchange too far.
I have no idea how the scene resolved. I left my name and number with the police, but never received a call. I hope the kid made it home in one piece.
Labels:
baltimore,
crime,
fear,
snitching,
the shield
Friday, October 26, 2007
Lunch date with the health inspector

Everyone who knows me knows that I enjoy the occasional meal alone. It has nothing to do with misanthropy or depression, but doing Indian buffet solo is doubly efficient; no waiting, unnecessary chit-chat, etc.
The other day, I was craving Indian buffet. My 2nd favorite Indian restaurant, which is closest to my office, was closed, maybe for good? Instead, I headed over to Mughal Garden. After having filled my plate, I noticed a man with a clipboard walking up and down the buffet, as if he might start scooping food onto the clipboard. It became clear right away that the gentleman was a city health inspector. Among his complaints, I heard him mention that the rice was not hot enough. Following the inspector closely were two of the restaurant's staff, one likely the manager. They looked about as nervous as I was at that moment. That was certainly a new experience for me. For whatever reason, I kept eating. I even got seconds before paying the bill and heading back to work.
Lately though, I've been feeling resigned to eat whatever poison comes from a commercial kitchen because of this book. It's a great read, but be warned; you're thoughts of dining out will be forever changed.
What I take from this experience is that the food at Mughal Garden is tasty, and probably not bad for me, as the health inspector didn't immediately close the place while I was there. What I also take away is that Baltimore City is taking food safety seriously. A restaurant near my office wasn't so lucky and had to shut down for a few days. Ick. Lots of the staff left and now the place has new management. Save for an occasional latte, I don't think I'll darken their doors again.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
It's the economy stupid, part deux
I received a response a previous post:
CC said...
"I agree w/you, except the more taxes bit. I wouldn't volunteer to throw more money into a mismanaged mutual fund, ya know?"
I thought a new post as response would be a better idea than another comment under the original comment.
I agree with CC. I don't like the idea of higher taxes any more than the next person. Americans, and by extension, Marylanders need to decide what we really want our taxes to be used for. Most people feel that government services are lacking, but those same people hate the idea of tax increases. I don't know of a nation that pays more taxes than the Danish, but if you consider their great health care, the cleanliness of their cities, and the amount of services available to all, it seems to be worth it.
You may be scared off by their quasi-socialist social services, but they're doing something that's working. Of course, comparing Denmark to the US is a bit of a stretch, but comparing Denmark to Maryland isn't. The problem is that both Liberals/Progressives and Conservatives want it both ways. Liberals want to spend more and more on social services, but don't have the guts to fend off cries of "unfettered socialism" and to spend what it truly takes to develop social programs for the good of all. Conservatives would rather leave your money in your bank account and shrink the government, but don't have the guts to fend off cries of "heartless robber-barons" and admit that they believe that you cannot depend on the government for anything. This is certainly an oversimplification of the two groups, but isn't that how they play to the voting public when we vote? I can almost hear the ad now, "It's a simple choice of A or B. There's no middle ground!".
CC said...
"I agree w/you, except the more taxes bit. I wouldn't volunteer to throw more money into a mismanaged mutual fund, ya know?"
I thought a new post as response would be a better idea than another comment under the original comment.
I agree with CC. I don't like the idea of higher taxes any more than the next person. Americans, and by extension, Marylanders need to decide what we really want our taxes to be used for. Most people feel that government services are lacking, but those same people hate the idea of tax increases. I don't know of a nation that pays more taxes than the Danish, but if you consider their great health care, the cleanliness of their cities, and the amount of services available to all, it seems to be worth it.
You may be scared off by their quasi-socialist social services, but they're doing something that's working. Of course, comparing Denmark to the US is a bit of a stretch, but comparing Denmark to Maryland isn't. The problem is that both Liberals/Progressives and Conservatives want it both ways. Liberals want to spend more and more on social services, but don't have the guts to fend off cries of "unfettered socialism" and to spend what it truly takes to develop social programs for the good of all. Conservatives would rather leave your money in your bank account and shrink the government, but don't have the guts to fend off cries of "heartless robber-barons" and admit that they believe that you cannot depend on the government for anything. This is certainly an oversimplification of the two groups, but isn't that how they play to the voting public when we vote? I can almost hear the ad now, "It's a simple choice of A or B. There's no middle ground!".
Monday, October 15, 2007
It's the economy, stupid
Soon, our governor plans to propose the legalization of slot machine gambling to the General Assembly in a late-October special session. The idea of gambling isn't new in Maryland, with Lotto (is this still around?), the multi-state Big Game, Pick 3/4, and of course Keno. What is also not new is the idea of attempting to fix budget shenanigans at the expense of the least of us. I don't know about where you shop, but at the majority of places where I might see people buying lottery tickets, I see people who might be best served by saving their money. As for slots, there have been initiatives to legalize them for nearly 12 years, but only now does it seem likely to happen. How will it happen? Slots will be legalized either by General Assembly vote or referendum. I would prefer a voter referendum despite the 2004 Gonzales survey stating that the majority of Marylanders want slots.

The argument for expanded gambling is that the revenues could be used to help relieve Maryland's $1.7 billion budget deficit and to pay for essential services. One look at the Baltimore City School system, once a supposed beneficiary of gambling revenues, and you can clearly see that approach doesn't work. What's more, the lottery was state-run at the time. Now, you can expect an out-of-state entity to reap the majority of gambling revenue. The other problem is where do you put the machines? I don't know anyone who'd want gambling sites in their neighborhoods. Placing the machines at horse racing tracks isn't a good idea either. That will ensure larger purses for horse owners, and less revenue for the state. Ironically, slots get more people to go to race tracks, but not to see the running of the horses.
I am not against preserving the horse racing industry or gambling in general, but I believe there has to be a better way to fix our budget short-fall (higher taxes, better efficiency, and less spending). Horse racing is a rich part of Maryland's heritage, but it isn't a right. If track owners cannot increase attendance at their tracks, it shouldn't be the government's problem to fix. As well, relying on gambling revenue as a stable source of income is stupid and immoral.
Only time will tell what happens with expanded gambling in Maryland, but I'm hoping that there are a majority of legislators in the House and Senate that agree with me.

The argument for expanded gambling is that the revenues could be used to help relieve Maryland's $1.7 billion budget deficit and to pay for essential services. One look at the Baltimore City School system, once a supposed beneficiary of gambling revenues, and you can clearly see that approach doesn't work. What's more, the lottery was state-run at the time. Now, you can expect an out-of-state entity to reap the majority of gambling revenue. The other problem is where do you put the machines? I don't know anyone who'd want gambling sites in their neighborhoods. Placing the machines at horse racing tracks isn't a good idea either. That will ensure larger purses for horse owners, and less revenue for the state. Ironically, slots get more people to go to race tracks, but not to see the running of the horses.
I am not against preserving the horse racing industry or gambling in general, but I believe there has to be a better way to fix our budget short-fall (higher taxes, better efficiency, and less spending). Horse racing is a rich part of Maryland's heritage, but it isn't a right. If track owners cannot increase attendance at their tracks, it shouldn't be the government's problem to fix. As well, relying on gambling revenue as a stable source of income is stupid and immoral.
Only time will tell what happens with expanded gambling in Maryland, but I'm hoping that there are a majority of legislators in the House and Senate that agree with me.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Harper speaks!
Here you can see and hear my adorable daughter, Harper saying a few "words". Usually, at 8 weeks, babies are only interested in complaining about how they think you're neglecting them. Harper is really starting to recognize faces. Of course, the person she smiles at the most is her big sis, Merriwether.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Tell me about yourself
Everyone who knows me knows my love of "stuff". Somewhere I heard or read about being able to describe yourself in 6 words. I chose "I am awesome. Let's get stuff." Immodesty aside, that's how I would describe my unchained consumerism. How would you describe yourself in 6 words?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)