Lowering the Bar

British Medical Experts Say Knives Too Pointy, Call For Ban

Citing a wave of stabbings in early 2005, a group of British medical experts have called for laws requiring knives to be blunt. Not all knives -- that would be stupid -- but at least the kind of long, pointy knives often used by chefs, and apparently also by British people wanting to stab someone.

Writing in an editorial in the British Medical Journal, doctors at the West Middlesex University Hospital in London argue that banning the sale of long, pointed kitchen knives would help reduce "knife crime." (How that differs from "stabbings," I'm not sure -- is there another kind of knife crime, other than stealing one?) They noted that violent crime in Britain is up 18 percent over last year, and that there were 31 knife crimes in Britain during the first two weeks of 2005 alone. (Welcome to England -- I bet there were 31 knife crimes in the first 31 minutes of 2005 just in New York.)

The authors helpfully provide an analysis of why long and pointy knives are dangerous, but blunt ones are not: "When using a knife to harm, a blunt nosed knife is unlikely to cause serious injury, as penetrating clothing and skin is difficult with it." I see, doctor. Please continue. "A dagger type knife, however, can penetrate deeply." Because of its sharpness, I presume. But can you tell me why deep penetration is a problem? "Once resistance from clothing and skin is overcome [by the sharpness], little extra force is required to injure vital organs, increasing the chance of a fatality (likened to cutting into a ripe melon)." I'm a little confused about how melons got involved, but then I'm not a doctor.

Plus, knives don't have to be pointed, they argue. The authors interviewed 10 chefs, which seems pretty thorough, and "none gave a reason why the long, pointed knife was essential." They say that the pointed knife tip is a hold-over from the pre-fork era, when people had to use the knife tip to spear meat. King Louis XIV, who had so many great ideas, noted the association between pointy knives and violence and ordered all knife tips ground down in 1669. (As his grandson found out, the edge of a blade can be a problem, too. I bet he remarked on that irony as he briefly looked up out of the basket.) According to the doctors, forks and blunt table knives were introduced in the 18th century precisely in order to reduce the injuries that were resulting from arguments in public eating houses. To that I say, knives don't kill people, arguments kill people. Or, how about, knives don't kill people, people with knives kill people, or at least they kill people without knives. If everybody carried a long pointy knife, the rate of long-pointy-knife crime would probably drop sharply. (No pun intended.)

I bet that's an answer Wayne LaPierre would agree with. Actually, both sides of the gun control debate (there is apparently no knife-control debate here, yet) found the proposal pretty amusing. LaPierre, executive VP of the National Rifle Association, asked, "Are they going to have everybody using plastic knives and forks and spoons in their own homes, like they do in airlines?" And a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence joked, "Can sharp stick control be far behind?" (Next week's headlines: "Conservatives Demand Right to Pointy Knives on Airlines" and "Liberals Seek to Deprive Americans of Right to Sharpen Sticks.")

Ameican chefs weighed in against the proposal. One called it "yet another sign of the coming apocalypse." I don't think anything like this is actually in Revelations ("And in that time, the moon shall turn red as blood, and all knives shall be blunted") but people use that phrase pretty loosely these days. Chef Anthony Bourdain said that chefs' knives are "extensions of our arms, and in many ways, our personalities." He also said of the proposal that "Where there is no risk, there is no pleasure." Hm. Sounds like maybe he sees his knife as an extension of something else.

New York Times
"Reducing Knife Crime," British Medical Journal, May 28, 2005

"Revenge of the Sith" Causes Stupid Sith to Happen

I was happy to see that the new Star Wars movie has caused stupidity to break out all over.

Yahoo! News reported that two British fans sustained severe burns on Sunday during a fight with homemade lightsabers they had constructed out of fluorescent light tubes filled with "liquid fuel." That's surprising, because the only way something like that could go wrong is if, in acting out a lightsaber duel, you would have to smack the thin glass fuel-filled tubes against each other -- oh, right. The two were hospitalized with critical injuries after the lightsabers exploded.

The movie is also being blamed for a wave of robberies by criminals wearing Darth Vader helmets. Police in Illinois and Florida have reported such incidents so far.

Yahoo! News

Note to Self: Cancel Credit Cards So Ex Cannot Use Them to Hire Hit Man

Keith Costello and Terra Endres of Oswego, New York, were divorced in 2002, and Costello got custody of the children. Apparently still very angry about the whole thing, Endres allegedly hired an Australian hit man to come to the US and kill her ex-husband. Adding insult to potential injury, she bought the hit man's plane ticket with one of her ex-husband's own credit cards.

That really hurts. I mean, not as much as the bullet, but it would still really hurt.

Evidently, Endres did not realize that suddenly charging $2,824 on a long-unused credit card might draw some attention. Costello told the company the charge was unauthorized, and that started an investigation that eventually led authorities to Endres and her hit man friend, who was arrested when he got off the plane in Los Angeles.

AP via SFGate.com

Chinese Couple Sues After Man Breaks Arm During Newlywed Games

Yu Haitao and his bride Fang Shuling have sued their honeymoon hotel in Shanghai, China, after Yu broke his arm during what Reuters News described as "bedroom fun and games." Maybe literally, since state-run media said the two were taking part in traditional "tease-the-newlyweds" celebrations (huh?) when Yu fell off the bed.

"My husband slipped right after he stood up on the bed to get ready for the games," said Fang, likely making finger quote marks near the end of that sentence. "It happened within seconds without any big movement." Hey, could have been the poor guy's first time. You don't have to tell state-run media all about it, Fang.

The newlyweds have filed a complaint against the hotel for "providing unsafe facilities." The article did not describe how the facilities were alleged to be unsafe. Hotel management has denied responsibility.

HoustonChronicle.com

Governor Blames Grand-Jury Investigation on Testicular Virility

Facing a grand-jury investigation of his fund-raising practices, Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois claimed that he had become a target only because of his "testicular virility" in standing up to a Chicago alderman he had accused of wrongdoing. Blagojevich, whose name can be typed only so many times without triggering a fatal carpal-tunnel attack, clashed with Alderman Richard Mell earlier this year when he closed a Joliet landfill operated by a friend of Mell's. And you don't close a man's landfill without some serious payback. Mell in turn accused Blagojevich of trading jobs for campaign contributions.

Another fun fact: Mell is the governor's father-in-law.

Blagojevich said that he believed Mell was only retaliating, and that he was not surprised, "knowing the way he operates and what he's likely to do." He said he believed he had become a target because he had the cojones to do the right thing: "This whole thing is very ironic," he said, "because it's all a product of doing things differently and making the hard decisions [to close landfills and such]. And this is the kind of thing that I think, frankly, separates the men from the boys in leadership. Do you have the testicular virility to make a decision like that [closing a landfill] knowing what's coming your way? . . . . I say I do."

The governor refused to comment on the case itself (although he already seemed to have done so), because he said it would be illegal for him to discuss grand jury investigations, as he just had. "People who are commenting on that are violating the law," he said, "so I can only tell you that we're going to cooperate, and we look forward to full vindication," which sort of seems like another comment of the kind that was supposed to be illegal. "To quote Teddy Roosevelt, we're as clean as a hound's tooth," he persisted in illegally commenting.

Asked about polls showing that Blagojevich's (ow!) rating has plummeted among voters, he said "that's life," and then recited lyrics from the Frank Sinatra song of the same name. Now that's testicular virility, baby.

Springfield State Journal-Register

Politician Confused Into Dousing Homeless Man With Champagne

Peter Gloystein, a German senator and deputy leader of the state of Bremen, resigned this week after dumping a magnum of champagne over the head of a homeless man at a televised ceremony marking the start of "German Wine Week." Gloystein apparently was at the podium making a speech when he suddenly doused "stunned Bremen local" Udo Oelschlaeger with the wine.

The senator has been unable to explain why he did so. He said he had "misinterpreted the situation" but did not explain what he meant by that. Hey, I'm willing to accept that. We've all been in those situations where it seems like the best thing to do is throw something at a homeless guy without warning. Sometimes you just have to make a snap decision and it turns out wrong. We've all been there.

Gloystein said he deeply regretted the incident and had apologized. He said he and Oelschlager had a "long and intensive talk" during which Oelschlager "explained his difficult life," and they "departed on friendly terms." (See how sudden and inexplicable assaults can bring people together?) But a spokesman confirmed this morning that Gloystein had resigned from his various government posts as a result of the incident.

Reuters.com

State Seeks to Evict Woman From Lava Tube

Hawaiian authorities have removed Karen Mayfield from the lava tube she has been living in for three years, and say they will put her on trial May 31 for littering, illegal camping, and "disturbing a geological feature," all misdemeanors. She has been told to vacate the tube while the case is pending.

Mayfield had furnished the tube with a table, stove and canopy bed. She said that she had lived in condos and houses for most of the 24 years she has lived in the state, but "over the years I have gotten closer and closer to the land," until she was finally inside it. Her attorney filed a motion to dismiss the charges, arguing that his client had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the tube and so officers erred when they entered it without a search warrant. But the judge ruled this week that the tube was still public land to which everyone, including officers, had free access.

Mayfield's attorney compared his client to John Muir or Henry David Thoreau. "During their time, a lot of people said they were kooky," he noted.

AP via Boston.com

Abdul Accuser Would Cooperate With Government in "Idol" Probe, If Any

The attorney for Corey Clark, the former "American Idol" contestant who claims he had an affair with Paula Abdul, said Tuesday that his client had "explicit" and "incriminating" evidence that the affair really took place. He was responding to denials by Abdul, and her satire of the incident on last weekend's "Saturday Night Live."

Clark's attorney, Richard B. Jefferson, said his client had not expressed "any plans to voluntarily reveal additional incriminating evidence, which he possesses, to the general public that undoubtedly proves the extent of their involvement because of its explicit nature." That's the kind of tortured public statement that shows why attorneys generally should not also act as spokespeople. Especially when you already have a spokesperson, like Clark does, although that spokesperson, Jed Wallace, refused to comment on what evidence Clark actually has. Personally, I don't think a spokesperson should get paid for saying "no comment," but they probably do.

Jefferson may have gotten a little carried away with his spokesperson role, as he went on to tell the Associated Press that Clark would "fully cooperate with any governmental agency that launches an investigation stemming from his claims." I would be interested to know which governmental agency it is, exactly, that would have jurisdiction to launch an investigation into the sleeping arrangements surrounding "American Idol." I guess Congress can investigate anything it wants, though, and this does seem like a vital national issue.

Geneva Convention Invoked to Save Grapefruit Tree

Laura and Edmund Gerstein of Boca Raton ("Rat Mouth"), Florida, have made a formal claim of immunity under the 1949 Geneva Convention for a grapefruit tree in their backyard.

The tree apparently has been targeted by the state for removal under a program designed to stop the spread of something called "citrus canker," which doesn't sound very pleasant. But the Gersteins are fighting for their tree. They argue that the 1949 Convention contains a provision that protects crops needed for the survival of civilians during wartime, pointing out that, as the President has reminded us so many times, the nation is currently at war.

A spokesman for the Florida Department of Agriculture said he expected the tree to come down.

News of the Weird via Salt Lake Tribune

Robert Blake Sought to Enlist 70s Stars in His Legal Defense

The L.A. Times reports that Robert Blake, the former star of "Baretta" who was accused of killing his wife, was very involved in his legal defense strategy, according to transcripts of conversations he had while in prison awaiting trial. In particular, he had strong opinions as to which 1970s TV stars should be approached to add their clout to the defense.

At the top of the list: "Love Boat" captain Gavin McLeod, who Blake declared to be "perfect." (In what way, he did not specify.) He also thought Lindsay Wagner ("Bionic Woman") and Suzanne Pleshette ("Bob Newhart") would be great. "The whole world loves her," Blake said of Pleshette. Or at least that part of the whole world that still has any idea who she is.

The idea was apparently to parade these stars before the media in order to help Blake's public image. "It should be one person after the other," Blake said. "You call another one and say, 'Would you come to the courthouse with us one time ... and afterward go out and talk to the public?" None of the above three were interested, apparently, but other semi-A-list celebrities, including Sally Kirkland ("M*A*S*H") and Wilford Brimley ("Cocoon"), did either show up in court or visit Blake in jail. (Kirkland may not count, because she said she visited not only as a friend but also in her capacity as a minister for something called the "Church of the Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness." She seemed to be serious.) But Blake actually snubbed a request by Scott Baio ("Happy Days") to come and visit. "Tell him to send me a letter," said the unimpressed accused murderer. 

You know your career isn't going too well if a guy in jail on murder charges can't make time to see you.

Blake also expounded on the defects of the jury system. "Anybody who has a [job, life, or wife] they care about, they just don't get on juries," he said. "And the ones who stay are usually about 85 IQ and, you know, when Johnny Cochran stands up there and says, 'If it doesn't fit, you must acquit' ... we all thought he was a [sic] idiot. But the jury digs that because they're the people that go bowling." A group of 12 such bowlers acquitted Blake in March.

But the tapes also show that Blake claimed he was not too concerned about life imprisonment if he lost. "I don't give a [expletive]," he said. "I'll write my memoirs. Like I said, Charlie Manson ["Helter Skelter"] has a web site and makes money. So it ain't the end of the [expletive] world."

Link: LA Times (via AZ Central.com)