It's a dangerous world, and our children live in it. What can we do to teach them about safety? We are not always there to protect them. Therefore, it is vital we teach children about internet safety, park safety, drugs, accidents, dangerous substances, bullies and strangers.

The following are key points to remember when teaching your children about safety:

Internet Safety: Teach your children to be safe on the internet by letting them know about sexual predators. Tell them not to give anyone they are chatting with personal information such as their address, their phone number, password, or last name. Tell them to log off or call an adult if someone they are chatting with makes them uncomfortable, or uses bad language. Tell your children not to agree to meet with anyone unless they check with you. If they end up in a site that is for adults only, tell them to log off or leave the page.

Park Safety: In the park, tell your children to stay where you can see them. It is safer to play in groups and stay away from the street. If a stranger approaches them, they have to let you know.

Drugs/Alcohol: When someone they know offers them drugs or alcohol, teach your children to say no and walk away. Then, they have to call a trusted adult.

Dangerous Substances: Walk with your children and point out dangerous substances such as matches and poison. Explain to them that they can get hurt if they touch, eat or play with dangerous substances.

Bullies: If your child is getting bullied, tell them to walk tall and look at the bully in the eye. If possible, they should stay with a group of friends. Firmly tell the bully no and if that does not work to call an adult.

Strangers: I told a four year old girl what to do in case a stranger tries to get them into their car. I told her to scream, get away and fight the stranger. Then, find an adult with children or call 911.

Here are some ways to teach children about safety:

(1)Talk to your children. I know a mother who constantly worries about her daughter. She is so afraid for her daughter, she hacks into her daughter's emails just to make sure her daughter is safe on the internet. Invading your children's privacy is not a good idea because eventually they will find out and it destroys their trust in you and in themselves. Instead, communicate to your children your concerns and what they can do if they are in a dangerous situation.

(2)Role Play with your children about what they can do when they are in danger.

(3)Charts. Create a poster about safety issues.

(4)Make up songs This works for young children. For example, you can make up a song about safety in the park. You can use familiar songs or make up a tune.

(5)Make up a game. Create a game wherein your children create a dangerous scenario and what they can do about it.

(6)Draw pictures. Have your children create a drawing of dangerous objects they can come in contact with.

(7)Teach your children basic first aid what to do in case someone is choking or is in need of assistance.

(8)Create a story book regarding safety issues.

(9)Watch a safety video or dvd together.

(10) Create a safe environment for your children. This involves more than child proofing your home, create an environment where your children can talk to you about safety and what concerns them. Try not to be judgmental and listen to the verbal and nonverbal cues your children give you.

At $239.95 the TomTom XL model 340S LIVE can be said to be the most effective of the Internet-connected GPS or Global Positioning System gadgets I've examined yet. It provides enough Google-based searches plus traffic information in real-time. TomTom XL 340 also has a lot of what holds TomTom as one among the top-tier piloting sellers, incorporating a display for information, clear vocal promptings, and a tractable user interface. However I am all the same not into this type of connected GPS-device construct because of the tidy additional fees and mismatched operation, amid different Internet-based features. Nevertheless, if you are set on acquiring a Internet-connected GPS, the TomTom XL 340S LIVE can be a sturdy selection, and it is more reasonably priced than its competitors.

Design, User Interface, & POI Searches: TomTom XL 340S LIVE made of black synthetic, measuring 4.8 by 3.2 by 1.1″ (HWD), weighing 6.5 oz, and includes the hallmark Easy Port mount, which screws straight into the rear of the whole thing. Yet without it, TomTom XL 340 LIVE is a bit stockier than the company's additional gadgets, thanks to its inbuilt cellular data radio set. The 4.3″widescreen liquid crystal display or LCD is bright and sharp, and has a 480×272-pixel (WQVGA) resolution.

On the Road: All the TomTom gadgets I've looked at have got very enlightening exhibits & the TomTom XL 340 also is not an exception. Essentially, it is a lot like the 5″TomTom XXL 540S that I tried lately. A lot of the journey shows on the screen, comprising distances to the following bend, leftover travel distance and current speed limit, current road speed, time, and more. Meantime, a lane-assist aspect shows three-dimensional images showing the right lanes for every main road outlet if applicable. The TomTom XL 340S lane-assist graphical came on at all the proper times, contrary to Garmin and Magellan gadgets I've tried lately, which deploy them periodically when comparing.

Audio: On the sound side, the TomTom XL 340S provides strong, punchy vocal promptings at timely intervals. Most of the time it articulated street and main road outlet names correctly. However there is no voice-recognition method. One good detail is that if an approaching traffic hold up changes significantly, the gadget TomTom XL 340, admonishes you with a vocal prompt & then assures you that you are still on the quickest path or proposes another option if there is a better one.

At $199 Insignia NS-CNV43 has the task completed and has a tactile feedback-enabled touch on screen, even if it costs nearly the same price as this TomTom XL 340 and it is also slow compared to the Garmin and TomTom units. Altogether, if you may have to await another 12 month period or so while the mobile phone piloting market comes out, but if you still need an equivalent Google-powered connectivity gadget, this TomTom XL 340S LIVE ought to function well for you.

http://www.retrevo.com/s/TomTom-340-GPS-review-manual/id/23347ci175/t/1-2/

http://www.tomtom.com/products/product.php?ID=846&Lid=4&Category=0

Did you know that the “War on Terror” is out, and that America is now fighting “The Long War?” While we were chuckling over Dick Cheney’s bad aim and even-worse public relations skills, the Pentagon, yet again, renamed the conflicts American soldiers are engaged in over in Iraq and Afghanistan. But this time, it is more than just a shift in semantics. It is a shift in strategy that is taking what was originally sold to Congress as a limited battle to uncover weapons of mass destruction, and turned it into – literally – a war without end.

The latest re-branding of the war actually occurred on February 3rd, when the Pentagon presented Congress with its 20-year strategic plan called the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The report, which is issued every four years, was widely anticipated in Washington defense circles because it is the first post-9/11 QDR. And although America’s global military role has changed dramatically since 2001, resulting in America’s involvement in an increasingly unpopular war, the release of this significant document went almost entirely un-noticed by most major news outlets.

The opening sentence of the 2006 QDR says that “the United States is a nation engaged in what will be a long war,” a phrase that was echoed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in a speech to the National Press Club a day prior to the report’s release. The QDR explains that the U.S. military has moved away from conventional warfare to what it calls “irregular conflicts.” That is, unlike the Cold War or World Wars I and II which framed specific countries as enemies, an “irregular” war’s targets are insurgents, terrorists and other non-state enemies. According to the Pentagon, the long war “may well be fought in dozens of other countries simultaneously and for many years to come.”

Up until now, Americans have been led to believe that “we are winning the war on terror,” (President Bush, Feb. 6, 2006 State of the Union) and that “the insurgency is in its last throes,” (Dick Cheney, May 31, 2005). These were statements which suggested that there would be a clear end to the war America is currently fighting. But the QDR tosses that notion right out the window, and in fact, presents a more realistic vision of what our country and our military face in the coming decades. It also admits that the methods the military will use to fight this war “requires…unconventional and indirect approaches.” In Pentagon-speak, that means spying and intelligence gathering. “Maintaining a long-term, low-visibility presence in many areas of the world where US forces do not traditionally operate will be required” is how it is phrased in the report. However, the QDR does not make it clear whether or not that includes increased spying operations on home soil.

In the past, President Bush and his advisors have very shrewdly made a show of re-branding the war, in an effort to regain lost American hearts and minds. But war, and his handling of it, continues to be a drag on the president’s approval ratings. The latest Zogby International poll out this week shows Mr. Bush’s approval ratings down to 37%. That’s more than 30 percentage points lower than President Clinton’s approval rating at the time he was impeached. Those shrinking poll numbers no doubt played a role in the decision to sneak this latest war re-branding effort under the radar, in the guise of an obscure Defense Department report. Not coincidently, the QDR came just days before the release of the Bush Administration’s 2007 proposed federal budget, which included a record request for $439 billion to fund the Department of Defense.

Meantime, President Bush and his handlers have been keeping pretty quiet about the long war, choosing instead to focus their agenda on energy issues (this week), and health care (last week). The media seems to be bored with war coverage as well, choosing instead to cover Dick Cheney’s misfire, questionable port security contracts, Muslim cartoon outrage and America’s failure to dominate the Winter Olympics. But while both the president and the press are putting the war issue on their back burners, Americans still find it critical. In fact, this week’s Zogby poll found that the war in Iraq and “the long war” (formerly known as the “war on terror”) remain the top two issues for Americans.

So while the President travels around trying to focus on domestic areas of his agenda, and the press runs rabid after – whatever, Americans who really want to know where we are heading militarily need only read a copy of the QDR found on the DOD’s website. Because even if you don’t agree with it, at least it’s better than being kept in the dark.

Upper Deck will be bringing a way for collectible card game fans to “duel” with each other while also being able to donate sporting goods to local Boys and Girls Club. The game players will participate in is Konami's Yu-Gi-Oh. The tour is “Time 2 Duel”. Konami who is the producer of the Yu-Gi-Oh! card game announced the tour in a recent press release. Upper Deck is one of the country's top trading card producing companies, and one of their subsidiaries is the distributor for Yu-Gi-Oh!.

The tour will include ten cities in the United States over a ten week period. The first eight stops of the tour have been announced. These include cities such as Denver, Kansas City, Chicago, and Illinois. Additional dates for the tour can be found on the tour's website. The tour begin in July at Kidspree in Colorado where it spent three weeks.

When attending the tour, participants will be able to play against one another in “dueling” with their Yu-Gi-Oh! cards. They will also see demonstrations of the products, a bingo game based on the cards, and question and answer sessions with the company's representatives on the tour. At each stop the tour will also be hosting a sports equipment collection drive. The donates sports equipment supplies will be donated to local Boys and Girls clubs to help children enjoy the competition of participating in sporting events.

Yu-Gi-Oh! is a collectable card game. These are games where players can purchase base packs of cards and then get more valuable cards through purchasing, trading, or winning cards as special events. They can also win cards from other players in certain sets of rules with the competitions. The cards include monsters, spells, and traps that can aid the player in defeating their opponent. A duel is played between two players with their decks of cards. Each player starts with 8,000 life points, through the play of the cards you try to reduce your opponent's life points. To play in a duel each player starts with at least 40 cards. When one player is reduced to zero life points they lose the match and the other player is declared the victor.

According to the press release Yu-Gi-Oh! is the number one ranked trading card game in the word. There are millions of fans playing it internationally. Since the game was created, over 15.8 billion trading cards for the Yu-Gi-Oh! game have been sold throughout the world.

SOURCES:

Prnewswire.com. “Upper Deck Entertainment Brings Konami's Yu-Gi-OH! Trading Card Game on Tour to Fans Across the U.S.”
URL: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=/www/story/08-13-2007/0004644253&EDATE=MON+Aug+13+2007,+09:00+AM

Yorquise is a 1-year-old boy, progressing into a rambunctious toddler, learning to walk and talk. He has a vocabulary of about 10 words, right at average for his age. He can feed himself and he loves to play with his toys and siblings. He has the cutest little head of blond curls and bright blue eyes. Yorquise's mom notices one day that he is not responding to her calling his name. He has stopped talking altogether and seems to have introverted into himself. The pediatrician repeatedly tells his mom that there is nothing wrong, until mom finally goes to the doctor's office and demands that some tests be done. The author is that mom and many, many tests later, her son Yorquise is Autistic. Through hard work and determination she hopes to provide Yorquise with a way to live life functionally and happily. Early intervention is the key to learning to deal with the effects of Autism. The National Institute of Mental Health says that “the earlier that the child is diagnosed, the sooner they can be helped through treatment interventions.” (Latitudes online, 2005, Vol. 7 Issue 1, p1) Is there a therapy better than another?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that one in 166 children is diagnosed with Autism. (CDC, 2006) The CDC also states “Autism Spectrum Disorders are the second most common serious developmental disability.” Boys are four times more likely to be affected by Autism than girls will be. More than 1.5 million are diagnosed in the United States alone with Autism. (TACA, 2000-2006) The CDC (2006) also says that:
It is important that we treat common developmental disorders, and especially the Autism Spectrum Disorders, as conditions of urgent public health concern, do all we can to identify children's learning needs, and begin intervention as early as possible to enable all children to reach their full potential. (How Common Are Autism spectrum Disorders, Summary section para. 1)

Autism Society of America describes Autism as ” a complex developmental disability that typically appears during the first three years of life and is the result of a neurological disorder that affects the normal functioning of the brain.” (ASA, Defining Autism, para. 1) The effects of the disorder know no boundaries; it affects all races, ethnicities and social statures. Autism limits communication and learning skills. Symptoms are different in every child; one could be mild where another could be severely affected. (Autism Speaks, N.D.) Autism Speaks also says that “If your child is diagnosed with autism, early intervention is critical to gain maximum benefit from existing therapies.” (Autism Speaks, The Overview, para.4)

All individuals that have any form of ASD have some sort of developmental disorder. Whichever the disability, it is unique to each person. Therapy and educational needs should be based on the individual needs of the student. Individuals with Autism respond well to structured, individualized education programs designed to meet the student's needs. Parents and teachers need to work together to provide the best atmosphere for their children. Is it best to try several therapies and find out which ones work best for that individual. (Autism Society of America, Unique Needs & Abilities, para. 4) One of the structured education programs is called TEACCH. TEACCH stands for Treatment and Education of Autistic and Related Communication Handicapped Children. Founded in the 1970's by Eric Schopler at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, TEACCH focuses on smaller teacher to student ratio classes and works with the needs of each child individually working to build existing skills and interests. (Division TEACCH, 2006) Since autism is a lifelong condition, it is best to offer a continual program that can be used through-out all aspects of life; social and educational. Dr. Gary B. Mesibov Ph.D. says that “Our TEACCH principles, developed in 1974, have stood the test of time; adults brought up using those practices are now the most productive and successful in the world with lives that are full, rich, and meaningful.”

Applied Behavior Analysis offers one-on-one intensive training, where the instructor offers rewards for completing a task. Many professionals use what is called discrete trial training, which consists of 30-40 hours a week with someone trained in ABA therapy. The student is required to perform a task and is then rewarded for said completion. This is done repetitively, reinforcing positive behavior. Some doctors and therapists feel that this therapy is too intense. They feel that it is too emotionally draining for children with autism, that the amount of time spent in therapy is too extensive and intrusive on family life. (Autism Society of America, N.D.) In early trials of the ABA therapy, the therapist used what would now be called abuse to punish the children. Slapping the children in the face and screaming at them, using floors with metal strips used to shock the children. (Life Magazine, 1967) Most therapists have gotten away from using this form of punishment any longer, but instead drill in repetitive behaviors until the child gives the correct response. While this therapy has proved beneficial to some, it hinders incorporating change into the children's schedule.

12 years after ethyl mercury was added to the pertussis vaccine, the first case of autism was diagnosed. (Miller, D., 2004) Dr. Donald Miller states that vaccine makers added thimerosal (which is half ethyl mercury) to vaccines to prevent bacterial infection. There are some doctors who believe that detoxification can remove some of the mercury from autistic children's bodies and improve the health and behavior. (Autism Research Institute, 2005-2006) One form of detoxification is called Chelation. TACA (2000-2006) says that “Chelation is the process of removing toxic metals from the body.” Through medication, the toxic metals are removed by urinary and fecal excretion. (Holmes, A., 2000-2002) In October 1998, the FDA banned the use of thimerosal in over-the-counter medications but it is still used in most vaccines. (TACA, 2000) Although some vaccine manufacturers have started to remove some of the thimerosal from the MMR vaccine (Miller, D.,2004), the CDC says that there is no relationship between autism and vaccines. (CDC,2004) 33% of parents who have autistic children believe the MMR vaccine is one of the causes of autism because the symptoms arrive shortly after the children receive their vaccination. (CNN, 2002) The CDC states that the MMR vaccine is a combination vaccine that protects children from the measles, mumps and rubella viruses. The first dose is given between 12 and 15 months of age with the second dose given around 4 years of age. (CDC, 2004) There is much disagreement over whether or not autism and vaccinations are related. These same vaccines are needed to prevent other deadly diseases and are required for children to enter public schools. Parents must choose which is the greater risk.

Augmentative devices are another way to help break the communication barrier. Augmentative devices are a variety of devices to help enhance communication and language skills. In addition to speech therapy an augmentative device can help a non-verbal child to speak or express themselves. Some of the devices allow the buyer to record their own voice and incorporate pictures into the device. The child can press the corresponding picture and hear their parents or teacher's voice and words that are used in everyday life. (Enabling Devices, N.D.) Picture Exchange Communications System (PECS) is another augmentative device that uses pictures to communicate. Wallin(2001-2004) says that “picture exchange is a selection-based communication system. Where a single set of behaviors, selecting and exchanging, is necessary.” PECS is a more universal approach as opposed to sign language because there is less motor skill involved. There is no need to learn sign language in order to communicate when using PECS as with signing. Maintaining a schedule is crucial in implementing any type of therapy with autism. With PECS it is best to keep the child's picture or communication book available at all times, so that he or she may use it at any time during the day. (Wallin,J., 2001-2004)

With so many different therapies available, it is best to evaluate all the possibilities and choose what is best for the child. Having a variety of therapy options available can only improve the chances of self- assurance. While there is no cure for autism, beneficial improvements can be made with early intervention and choosing a therapy that will help the child function in everyday life. Early structured education based on the child's needs seems best suited for maximizing their potential to become functioning productive adults.

References

Autism Research Institute (2005-2006) Mercury Detoxification. Retrieved June 24, 2006

http://www.autismwebsite.com/ari/vaccine/mercurydetox.htm

Autism Speaks (N.D.) What is Autism: An Overview, para. 1. Retrieved June 24, 2004

http://www.autismspeaks.org/whatisit/index.php

Autism Speaks (N.D.) What is Autism: An Overview, para. 4. Retrieved June 24, 2004

http://www.autismspeaks.org/whatisit/index.php

Autism Society of America (N.D.) Applied Behavior Analysis para. 1.
Retrieved June 24, 2006 www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=LearningApproaches#ABA

Autism Society of America (N.D.) Unique Needs & Abilities, para. 4.
Retrieved June 24, 2006 www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Education

Autism Society of America (ASA), (N.D.) Defining Autism, para. 1. Retrieved 06-24-06

http://www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=WhatIsAutism

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2006) How Common Are
Autism spectrum Disorders? para 1. Retrieved June 23, 2006

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/asd_common.htm

CDC, (2006) How Common Are Autism spectrum Disorders? Summary section para. 1,
Retrieved June 23, 2006 http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/asd_common.htm

CDC, (2004) Vaccines and Autism Theory. Retrieved June 24, 2006

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/autism/default.htm

CNN, (2002) Vaccinations Contributing to Rise in Autism? Retrieved June 24, 2006

http://www.autismwebsite.com/ari/vaccine/cnntranscript.htm

Division TEACCH (2006) TEACCH Autism Program. A Division of the UNC
Department of Psychiatry. Retrieved July,8 2006
http://www.teacch.com/welcome.html

Enabling Devices (N.D.) Retrieved June 24,2006
http://enablingdevices.com/viewproduct.aspx?id=130

Holmes, A (2002-2006). Autism: Treatments Chelation of Mercury. Retrieved July 2,
2006, Web site: http://www.healing-arts.org/children/holmes.htm#wethink

(2005). Latitudes Online, Vol. 7 Issue 1, p1, 11p. Retrieved June 23, 2006 from
http://web11.epnet.com/externalframe.asp?tb=1&_ug=sid+3A1002B7%2D464B%2D4F94%2D82B9%2D167122F8860C%40sessionmgr3+dbs+aph%2Cawh%2Cbth%2Cf5h%2Cnqh%2Ctfh%2Cufh%2Czbh+cp+1+2EEC&_us=mh+1+hd+False+hs+False+or+Date+mdbs+aph%2Cawh%2Cbth%2Cf5h%2Cnqh%2Ctfh%2Cufh%2Czbh+fh+False+ss+SO+sm+ES+sl+%2D1+ri+KAAACBTB00018445+dstb+ES+sel+False+frn+1+F134&_uso=%5F3&fi=awh_19991449_AN&lpdf=true&pdfs=273K&bk=C&tn=281&tp=CP&es=cs%5Fclient%2Easp%3FT%3DP%26P%3DAN%26K%3D19991449%26rn%3D10%26db%3Dawh%26is%3D%26sc%3DR%26S%3DR%26D%3Dawh%26title%3DLatitudes%2BOnline%26year%3D2005%26bk%3DC&fn=1&rn=10&

Mesibov, G. (2006) What is TEACCH? Para 6. Retrieved July 8, 2006

http://www.teacch.com/whatis.html

Miller,D. (2004) Mercury On The Mind, para. 7. Retrieved June 24, 2006

http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller14.html

Miller,D. (2004) Mercury On The Mind, para. 19. Retrieved June 24, 2006

http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller14.html

Screams, Slaps & Love. A surprising, shocking treatment helps far-gone mental cripples.
(1965) Life Magazine. Retrieved July 2, 2006 http://www.neurodiversity.com/library_screams_1965.html

Talk About Curing Autism (TACA) (2000-2006) Latest Autism Statistics.
Retrieved June 24, 2006 http://www.tacanow.com/latest_autism_statistics.htm

TACA (2000-2006) Vaccines, Chelation & Autism. Retrieved July 2, 2006

http://www.tacanow.com/chelation.htm

Wallin, J. (2001-2004) Visual Supports, PECS. Retrieved June 24, 2006

http://www.polyxo.com/visualsupport/pecs.html

Arrr, these be mighty good days for talking like a pirate. Johnny Depp and the booty-making franchise of his Pirates of the Caribbean have thrust the distinctive slang of pirates back into the public consciousness in a way not seen since the original Johnny Depp – Errol Flynn – was sailing the seas back in the 30s and 40s. Why, if it weren't for the sequel, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (and am I the only one who thought it should have subtitled Davy Jones' Locker), many people would still be thinking that Davy Jones Locker had something to do a 60's singing idol from England. Shiver me timbers, but there is even an official International Talk Like a Pirate Day! And what article about the rise in popularity of pirate slang would be complete without mentioning Capt. McAllister from The Simpsons? Pirate slang isn't used much by actual pirates anymore, but it persists in the form of an instantly recognizable language that can be used for fun by me, you and pratically everyone. (Though, frankly, I think it would be just weird to hear it coming out of the mouth of Queen Elizabeth, but maybe that's me.) One of the oddest things about pirate slang, something that separates it from most other types of slang, is that it's not enough to merely say the word; most people using pirate slang instantly adopt a very specific and precise manner of tone and inflection.

As is the case with many other slang words, a lot of pirate slang cannot be accurately traced back to a single source. For instance, the exclamation “shiver me timbers” dates back to pirate days, but no with no incontrovertible etymology. It was used by several authors who wrote novels about pirates, but may or may not have been as prevalent a pirate expression as commonly believed. It has since come to mean the equivalent of expressing surprise or even shock at some new bit of information, as in “Shiver me timbers! I never knew Paris Hilton was such a multi-dimensional actress!”

Because pirates came into contact with many various cultures, it shouldn't be surprising that some pirate lingo can be traced back to non-English sources. Savvy? Savvy is a way of asking if you are being understood and its etymology goes back to the Spanish root sabe, which means “to know.” Today this word has expanded to mean being particularly knowledgeable about a topic. As in, “Wow, that Jennifer Tilly sure is one savvy poker player.”

Avast is another word with a non-English source, stemming from the Dutch phrase hou vast, which means “to hold fast.” The phrase was used by most seamen merely to mean look out for something, but was eventuallyy adapted into a piratical greeting. It's fun to use today in pretty much any situation. For example, “Avast, you scurvy dogs, ye be in my way of watching Silence of the Lambs and A&E is only airing it thirteen times this month.”

Of all the mysteries of pirate lingo, perhaps none is as great as mystery surrounding the origin of the meaning of Davy Jones Locker. Davy Jones himself is usually described as fiend who rules over the ocean depths and his locker is the sea itself, where he keeps and captures all lost belongings, including people. I wonder if Marcia Brady is in there?

Compounds often find their way into pirate lingo, such as landlubber. The pirate lingo means someone who lives their life on the land is meant to be used in a derogatory fashion, although frankly I can't figure out why anyone makes a habit of daily having to eat an animal that lives in its own toilet has reason to look upon anyone else with such an attitude. The reason for this attitude could be that the word “lubber” originally meant someone considered big, ungainly and awkward; in other word the type of person who would not fit well aboard ship. You may now insert your own joke here about…well, whichever overweight celebrity rubs you the wrong way most.

Interesting how words change meaning. For instance, how did booty go from meaning loot to a euphemism for a shapely backside? The root for loot goes back to a Middle English word for sharing the spoils. There is almost certainly a sex joke in there somewhere, but I'm not even going near it. On the other hand the meaning of the pirate logo bucko has pretty much remained unchanged; it meant a bosom pal then and it still does today. So, too, does matey, but today it is usually shortened to more familiar mate. At least among limeys and Aussies, that is.

Then there is the pirate lingo that stems from one meaning and is then tweaked to mean something else. Scurvy originally applied only to the popular disease, but was drafted into service as adjective to describe someone whom the pirate looks upon more as a socially diseased person. (Yeah, that's right, that's why I called you a scurvy dog instead of just a dog back then.) Pirates were great at taking an object and turning it into a social comment. For instance, a swab originally meant just the the mop used to clean the deck, but it soon became a description of the lowly person whose job it was to swab the decks.

The view of women that these guys had is very often expressed through pirate lingo. This can be succinctly demonstrated by the fact that they called them wenches, which traces to a Middle English root that meant child. Of course, one of the great things about using pirate slang is that-at least when adopting the distinctive pirate inflection-calling a woman a wench doesn't normally sound too bad. After all, pirates are hardly noted for their etiquette and there are certainly more colorful phrases by which women could be described that one might be tempted to substitute. Today, in fact, addressing a woman as a wench almost has a certain kind of quaint quality, although I wouldn't necessarily try it out on women two particular women named Hillary or Nancy. On the other hand, there is one particular woman named Ann who would probably appreciate being called wench; it's likely to be the nicest thing she's called all year by either foe or male prostitute.

The view that pirates have toward men of the cloth may be equally summed up by the slang term they adopted: devil dodger. Actually, this was naval slang, but over the years it was stolen and became pirate slang extraordinaire. Buccaneers duly believed in the devil, as they believed in many superstitions. However, well known belief has resulted in many somewhat mundane piratisms being confused with having a deeper meaning. For instance, although the phrase Dead Man's Chest conjures up any number of superstitious legends and beliefs, in fact it is really nothing more sinister than a description for a coffin. Likewise, damn your eyesseems to contain at least a hint of the possibility of the supernatural when it fact it is an all-purpose expletive that can cover many situations. (And goodness, we can't get enough all-purpose expletives, can we?) Although it may have originated as an insult or even a curse, it evolved into an expression used for no particular purpose. Kind of the pirate lingo equivalent of cool jazz. In fact, much pirate slang simply cannot traced back to a root meaning.

For instance, perhaps the greatest known and most commonly used pirate slang in the contemporary world not only doesn't have an agreed-upon etymology, it has no real meaning whatever. Arrrr is pirate slang that everybody uses, but has no rules. Usually, in fact, it is utilized as a sort of verbal punctuation that comes either before or after a statement. It serves as a kind of exclamation point to illuminate the depth of emotion behind the actual statement. Despite the fact that no particular meaning is attached to Arrr, or perhaps because of it, the slang phrase will probably las well beyond all other pirate slang. One bit of pirate slang, on the other hand, that hasn't seemed to made it into this century is their word for pudding. This could be because pudding isn't what it used to be, popularity-wise, or because the word has been co-opted by the writers of the Simpsons as the show's favorite brand of beer of its most recognizable character. While dufffor Homer Simpson signifies a glorious beverage that awaits him at the end of a hard day…of…goofing off…for pirates duff was slang for the delicious pudding that awaited them at the end of a hard day…of stealing booty and making fun of beef-eating landlubbers.

Clearly, even though much pirate slang has been in existence for centuries, it still permeates the consciousness of modern society. Even without the recent rise in interest in pirates due to the Pirates of the Caribbean movies-and that dreamy Johnny Depp, ahhhhh-most people would instantly recognize typical pirate slang for what it is. And, like most other slang-if not all other slang-it arose from the need to create exclusivity among members of a certain subculture. The pirates were particularly conscious of their difference from average people, beginning with the primary differentiation of living on the water instead of land, and then the fact that they were the first dudes to wear earrings before it became a conformist way of rebelling against The Man, and they took great pride in the fact that they were tougher, harder and more manly than those who lived on the land. (Well, except for the Dutch; man those guys are tough!)

Pirate slang is overrun with derogatory descriptions of those who don't live the pirate life. Another reason for needing slang was that they were outlaws and needed to know who to trust and slang is always a shorthand for that. Interestingly, pirate slang has managed to find its way into public discourse in a much bigger way than more recent slang such as 30's gangster slang or carny slang. I guess you could say that pirate slang is on the trolley now. While few teenagers would be able to define the gangster term moll, almost all would know what is meant by a wench. And I'm not even talking about the one whose moms work at the Steak and Ale.

The original Star Wars trilogy (Episodes IV, V, and VI) told the story of Luke Skywalker, a young farmboy who became a hero in the struggle to overthrow an evil empire and had to confront one of the Empire's staunchest henchmen, Darth Vader, who held the terrible secret of his father's fate. The new Star Wars trilogy will go back in time a full generation to tell the story of Anakin Skywalker, the innocent boy who will one day become the dreaded Darth Vader. Episode I: The Phantom Menace In Episode I, Luke Skywalker's father is just a hopeful 9-year-old boy named Anakin, who knows nothing of his eventual fate as a Dark Lord in years to come. In this earlier time, Obi-Wan Kenobi is a determined young Jedi Knight. Qui-Gon Jinn is Obi-Wan's venerable Jedi master, trying to teach the Jedi way to his apprentice as their world begins to unravel in political turmoil. Episode I will take audiences through extraordinary realms and adventures, from the desert planet of Tatooine to the galactic capital world of Coruscant (with its Jedi Temple), the green world of Naboo, and beyond. Familiar Star Wars characters Yoda, R2-D2, C-3PO, and Jabba the Hutt are along for the ride. This first chapter in the Star Wars saga follows young Anakin Skywalker's journey as he pursues his dreams and confronts his fears in the midst of a galaxy in crisis. Episode II: Attack of the Clones The Star Wars saga continues in Episode II, as Anakin Skywalker grows into a teenager, learning the ways of the Force under the tutelage of Obi-Wan Kenobi, and falling in love with the beautiful and captivating Queen Amidala of the Naboo – a love that is eventually doomed as young Anakin begins his journey towards The Dark Side. Ten years after the events of The Phantom Menace, not only has the galaxy undergone significant change, but so have our familiar heroes Obi-Wan Kenobi, Padmé Amidala and Anakin Skywalker as they are thrown together again for the first time since the Trade Federation invasion of Naboo. Anakin has grown into the accomplished Jedi apprentice of Obi-Wan, who himself has transitioned from student to teacher. The two Jedi are assigned to protect Padmé whose life is threatened by a faction of political separatists. As relationships form and powerful forces collide, these heroes face choices that will impact not only their own fates, but the destiny of the Republic. Episode III: Revenge of the Sith The story opens with Anakin and Obi-Wan returning from a space mission to find Coruscant under attack by a Separatist fleet under the command of General Grievous and Count Dooku, and that Chancellor Palpatine has been kidnapped. They fight their way onto the ship, fight across the ship, and then fight Count Dooku, who is holding Palpatine. Obi-Wan is knocked out, and then Palpatine (whom we the audience have finally learned really is Darth Sidious, but Anakin has not) urges Anakin on in his fight against Dooku. Anakin kills Dooku in the duel. There's some more running around, and a confrontation with Grievous (who then escapes) before Anakin flies the remnants of the ship into a controlled crash on the planet. Anakin, Obi-Wan and Palpatine all walk away (though Palpatine's plan was to have Obi-Wan die in front of Anakin). Palpatine is calling for even more powers, and the Senate is prepared to give them to him. He wants, in particular, immediate and direct control over the Grand Army of the Republic and control of the Jedi. The Jedi, of course, don't want to let him have either, and are trying to find ways to stymie him. A group of Senators, led by Padme Amidala, is also trying to reign in Palpatine's powers, and presents him with a petition asking him to return his powers to the Senate. Palpatine names Anakin as his representative on the Jedi Council, which makes everyone more unhappy and increases tensions. Grievous is discovered to be on an out-of-the-way planet on the Rim, and Obi-Wan is sent, alone, to bring him in. Anakin is annoyed that the “team” is being broken up. Yoda is also sent out on a mission, to the Wookiees' planet. The war would seem to be winding down, but Palpatine shows no signs of allowing that, and wants to turn the screws tighter — he rejects Jedi calls for peace negotiations. Anakin has been distracted since he's had prophetic dreams of Padme dying in childbirth, and his previous dreams have always come true. Palpatine strings Anakin along with stories of great Sith knowledge, and the potential to save her life, and eventually reveals himself as Darth Sidious. Anakin returns to the Jedi Temple and tells Mace Windu who Palpatine really is. Windu immediately grabs the three strongest Jedi there, and goes off to “arrest” Palpatine. Palpatine tapes the confrontation, making himself seem weak and helpless, then kills the four Jedi and starts his immediate purge of the Jedi, getting Anakin to do much of the work at the Jedi Temple, backed up by clone soldiers, who across the galaxy are having their secret “kill all Jedi” orders revealed. Palpatine stuns the Senate the next morning with news of what he calls a Jedi attempt on his life, and declares the beginning of the first Galactic Empire. Obi-Wan and Yoda both survive, though no other Jedi are seen to live through the assault. They both make their way back to Coruscant, where Obi-Wan meets with a practically-in-labor Padme. Anakin has, at the same time, been sent off to yet another hole-in-the-wall planet to kill the remaining Separatist leadership. Obi-Wan rushes off to confront him, while Yoda confronts Palpatine simultaneously. Yoda is defeated by Palpatine but manages to escape, with the help of Senator Bail Organa. Padme had chased Anakin to his planet, and they are quickly joined by Obi-Wan. Anakin is jealous of Obi-Wan, who he thinks might have something going on, on the side, with Padme. Padme is left unconscious, and the two Jedi fight. Obi-Wan eventually wins, with Anakin left legless and armless near a lava flow. But Obi-Wan has to flee, because Palpatine is rapidly approaching in his ship. He runs away with Padme, who gives birth to twins and dies on board Bail Organa's ship. Organa will take the female twin, Leia, to raise as his own daughter. Obi-Wan takes the boy, Luke, to live with Anakin's relatives on Tatooine. Yoda insists that they not be trained as Jedi in any way whatsoever. Episode IV: Star Wars: A New Hope(original 1977) A Princess – and member of the rebellion – calls upon the help of Obi-Wan Kenobi to deliver secret plans of the Empire's newly created battle station to her home world of Alderaan. Kenobi (now in his 60's) enlists the help of Luke Skywalker (Anakin's son), pilots Han Solo and Chewbacca, and droids – R2-D2 and C-3PO – to deliver the plans to Alderaan but their trip is slightly altered when they find themselves trapped inside the Empire's Death Star and Kenobi finds himself in the presence of Darth Vader one last time. Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back. Vader locates the Rebel base on the ice world of Hoth and prepares a full-scale attack. The rebels however are alerted to their presence and begin the evacuation. While Luke escapes successfully to meet his newly assigned Jedi Master, Yoda, on Dagobah; Han Solo, Chewbacca and Princess Leia aren't so lucky as they're pursued constantly by Darth Vader and his Imperial army. Episode VI: Return of the JedI While our rebel heroes attempt to rescue their friend Han Solo from the clutches of Jabba the Hutt, the tyrannical Empire has begun construction on a second and more powerful Death Star. Luke Skywalker in the meantime, still struggling to come to terms with his past, must resist the will of Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine in turning him to the Dark Side.

I remember the ads that used to run to talk to my kids about drugs. Remember, the black man trying to talk the kid into taking drugs and when the kid keeps saying 'no' the man, his father, pats him on the back and says “That's exactly what you tell anyone who tries to get you to try drugs”. Brought to you by the Department of Health. It said, talk to your kids about drugs, and then, tell them not to take them. Parternship for a Drug Free America. Kind of command and control, but taking those drugs is illegal, and it does pose a public health risk. It's a no brainer for parents, really, and it's an appropriate use of tax dollars to educate the public about a health risk, even if any real urban father raising a kid on the mean streets knows he needs a lot more than a pep talk to keep his kid off drugs.

I remember the ads that said talk to your kids about smoking. I think those may have been paid for out of tobacco settlement funds, but it doesn't mean they weren't government sponsored. It's more prudent to use settlement money rather than tax dollars if you have it available. Those ads said talk to your kids about smoking and tell them not to. Kids under 18 can't legally smoke anyway, and, again, it is a public health issue. Even for parents who are smokers it's sort of a no brainer. Smoking isn't healthy. It isn't legal for kids. Parternship for a Tobacco Free America.

Now I see the ad that says talk to your kids about sex. It's a good ad stylistically. The kids say talk to them, even if it seems like they aren't listening, they are. The ad doesn't say tell them to wait to have sex. It says 'tell them to wait UNTIL MARRIAGE'. Outside of Hollywood what parent, even all the hypocrites, doesn't start from that point? “Sex is a beautiful thing when shared between a husband and wife.” My mother told me that and I told my kids that. Except, wait until marriage, hmm. Honestly, even as a very strict parent who lives according to a very strict moral code and certainly enforces it in the home – how is it the government's business when an adult first has sex and where a parent draws the line? What health crisis is associated with someone having sex before marriage that might not be more effectively averted by providing preventive information and leaving the decision to resort to doublespeak to individual parents? If everyone magically responds to this governmental/parental surrogate message unwanted pregnancy is avoided (not that they don't happen within marriages); sexually transmitted diseases are avoided (oops, what about extramarital – forgot to remind them wait UNTIL marriage, and then only with your spouse for the rest of your life). If you really want to be proactive to address public health issues surrounding sex, you have to talk about safety and prevention – that's the government's role. But we're kind of skittish about that. And some parents say they don't want their kids to know about that and it's their choice whether or not they tell their kids about contraception, etc. I'm down with that. It's a free country, and that is a parent's choice. Some could argue the government has a little more responsibility due to public health concerns, but, whatever.

I keep running those commercials around in my head. If I'm not responsible enough as a parent to tell my kids not to take drugs and they start taking drugs, I may be contributing to a public health crisis. So, I'm not concerned that maybe the government over reaches a little there by telling me specifically to tell my kids not to take drugs. Ditto with the smoking. It's not as black and white with the sex until marriage ad. People have been teaching abstinence from time immemorial. It is a moral precept, not a public health concern – although there are related public health concerns. And, I pity the child of mine who engages in sexual activity before the age of 18, because up to that point, the law recognizes my parental prerogative to tell them they have to say no. My house. My rules.

Why did the commercial have to say 'until marriage'? How realistic is that, really? Doesn't the government realize how hard we are all fighting to keep them chaste until they at least have reached the age of majority? When I was growing up there was no commercial telling my parents to tell me to wait until marriage. My tax dollars weren't paying for parents to impose moral choices upon children. Because, the truth is, if two adults have a monogamous sexual relationship, it is their business. It is their moral choice to make – not mine. Even as the parent. And it's certainly not my business as the government.

Why is this so under my skin? Well, for one I have a 17 year old daughter. I have been telling her since she was a little girl that marriage is the place for sex. Last night she asked me, 'honestly mom, how old were you when, you know.?” She's not 10 or 12. I've been telling her since we had the first sex talk that I wouldn't risk sex in high school and no one is ready for sex at that age, and I expect her to wait until she's a grown up to even think about having sex. I've taught her all about love, marriage, what it really means, how important and truly sacred it is. But, she's 17 now. It wouldn't matter if I did wait until I was married to have sex. That would be my life, my choice. I have to start treating her like the adult she will very soon be. So, I told her the truth. I was 20. I also told her she's not emotionally ready for sex yet, and it is against the law as she is under 18. I told her we should talk if she was feeling pressured, or if she was just considering it. She was feeling a little pressured, but she wasn't really considering it. She wanted a little validation from someone who knew, who'd been there, that it was okay to wait. She said she just couldn't really talk about those things with her friends.

As a parent I have an obligation to provide my children with all the information they need with regard to public health issues. I think of that not just as a parental and personal obligationl, but as on obligation to the public at large. For example, when I realized some of my children's friends were engaging in oral sex in high school, I let my oldest daughter know that oral sex is still sex. You can still get diseases that will be with you for the rest of your life. And, if you're not ready for intercourse, you're not ready for oral sex. I don't care what anyone tells you about it not being real sex. It's a way for one person to give another person graitification, period. And call me a feminist, but if a woman isn't ready to trust a man enough to have actual intercourse with him – she is not ready for intimacy. And visa versa. My daughter squirmed and wanted to leave the room, but she understood. Some of her friends were telling her it wasn't sex. I have to tell her the truth, for her safety. I guess none of us want public announcements about oral sex. You don't talk about it in polite society. But it goes on every day, even among people who will later claim they saved themselves for marriage, and who will believe that they did.

What does it tell young people, people my daughter's age, or a little younger, or a little older, when they see those ads? The government is telling me I have to wait until I get married to have sex. The government is just as unrealistic as my crazy parents. Right, given all the sex scandals these kids hear about every day involving members of the government, the government still tells parents to tell kids to do as they say, not as they do. Yeah, that's going to keep people chaste until marriage. And, it isn't the government's role. Tell your kids not to take drugs. Not to break into cars. Not to smoke – but leave morality to the individual home. Parents have a right to set and maintain the standards. The government, the Department of Health and Human Services, knows the data. They know that a high percentage of those parents they are advising to tell their kids to wait until marriage to have sex, didn't wait themselves. They are also more or less asking the parents to acknowledge their own choice as a mistake, something bad. That's not the government's role either. And that's putting aside, of course, how totally ineffective it is. An ad that says “Tell your Kids to Wait to Have Sex” might be part of an effective camapaign to get kids to wait, at least until after high school. You never know. But when you say 'wait until you're married' – the ears are closed.

And – let's not forget the hidden subtext. What about the kids who can never marry? What about the gay kids? I didn't miss that and my children didn't miss that. The government, with our tax dollars, is sending only a slightly subliminal message “tell your gay kids they can never have sex.” And that's not the government's role either.

So, flashback to when my parents were kids. My mom, her strict Sicilian family. You bet my noni and nona told her no sex until marriage and they didn't much care what the government had to say about the matter. My dad was raised largely by a single mother, until she married his step father. She told him to be happy, find love, have a family. My parents were both 26 when they married and they were both virgins. Mom shouted this from the hills, dad blushed the one time she brought it up to the assembled children. “See,” my mother said to all of her daughters – “I'm not a hypocrite! I waited. You can too.” My parents lived exemplary lives. But, their children made their own choices as adults. We knew about sex. We knew about birth control. We had the health lectures in school. Some of us made really good choices almost all of the time. Some of us made a few bad choices. But, growing up we didn't look to the Department of Health and Human Services for our moral direction. We looked to our parents. And they didn't need the government to tell them when we should have sex. Fromt he government they needed information that hasn't been around since time immemorial.

I am troubled by the use of my tax dollars for commercials that say tell your children to wait until they're married to have sex. I wouldn't mind if those ads were brought to me by the Catholic Church. It's been telling me that my whole life. That's my Church's job. And the real sticking point is, the government is doing the public, the taxpayer a huge disservice with the commercials because it may be my right to determine my family's moral tone – but with all the statistics it has, the government has an obligation to provide meaningful, effective information to prevent or minimize health crises.

Those commercials get the government off the hook. “Okay, you don't want condoms in schools, don't want information about safer sex getting to your kids – well we've got teen pregnancies to deal with and the highest STD rate in history right now. So, fiddle dee dee – just tell your kids to wait until marriage and 'poof' we've done our part.” Even the slanted statistics recently compiled to pander to the Religous Right demonstrate that abstinence education isn't effective at fighting the rise of STDs. So why are my tax dollars being spent on a program that has proven to be ineffective? Thanks, Department of Health and Human Services, but I can put blinders on and totally ineffectively deal with a health crisis without spending a dime ofthe government's money, so stop spending mine on more of the same. And, please, don't pretend to be any kind of a moral authority.

Walk down Chestnut Street and Market Street in Philadelphia's Center City and you will have your plentiful pick of footwear retailers to purchase your sneakers from. You have the five Foot Lockers, Sneaker Villa, Samsung, City Blue, Unica and many other mom and pop sneaker shops to choose from. Many of them have a wide selection of fashion footwear such as country edition Air Force 1's, Kermit the Frog and Ms. Piggy Adidas and other things that cater to the young urban crowd. Yet none of the stores listed cater to people of all genders, tastes and athletic needs.

Then recently two Finish Line stores have opened up in Center City, one on 16th and Chestnut and the other in the Gallery Mall on 8th and Market Street. Since I work right around the mall that is the Finish Line I have been to four times since it's opening in April. What makes the Finish Line the best place to get footwear in Philadelphia is the immense selection of footwear they carry, let me explain. The Finish Line has the fashion-based footwear like you would find in Samsung, City Blue and Unica and they carry the running footwear you would find in Philadelphia Runner on 16th and Samson Street as well as every other style in between.

What separates this store from the rest along with the footwear is their level of service, which good service is hard to find in the Gallery Mall. You are greeted when you first walk into the store and no matter what side of the store you are on there is someone there to help you. Another good thing is unlike other footwear retail stores the associates are not pushy at all; they don't force or try to trick you into buying anything. One incident in particular was when I went in 4th of July weekend to get a pair of running shoes. I wanted the Adidas Goodyear sneakers, which they did not carry. The female associate informed me they did not carry that particular shoe but asked me what I would be using the shoe for, how far I would be running and plenty of other questions to determine my needs along with if I had an iPod nano or not which I found kind of odd at first. Then she chose the $130 Nike Air Max 180 shoes. I first thought the young lady was trying to get a big sale from me but before she went to get the shoes she outlined all the features and benefits of the shoe and how it could be beneficial to me. I obliged and we tried the shoe on and I must admit it fit like a glove and felt comfortable. She stepped back and let me bounce around, run around the store to try out the shoe and wasn't pushy in any way.

Once I decided to purchase the sneakers the young girl told me how the shoe was compatible with my iPod nano and how it worked with my shoes and I was sold. Unfortunately the kit that went with the shoes they didn't have so a female assistant manager called another store to have it shipped to them. I then walked around the store and saw other items to purchase in the future. The young woman then showed me socks that'll keep my feet dry while I ran and I purchased three pair for fifteen dollars. The whole time I was in the store she was patient, informative and sweet she even talked to me about what I would be doing for the holiday. I figured out who the manager was by the way he commanded his staff and the way he spoke to a few of the employees there. He was smiling, pleasant and full of energy the whole time I was in the store and he was that way the other two times in the store, the fourth time the female assistant manager was there.

My other three visits were in similar experience and the service never slacked off. Along with the footwear selection in the store if there is an item listed on the company's website I can bring in a print out of the item and they can order it for me and have it sent to my home for free, an option I have taken once before. The store is always well lit, the music is suitable for shopping and the selection of merchandise is awesome. I can get my shoes, socks, jeans, t-shirts, polo's hats and jackets all in the same store and the selection is the same for women's and the footwear selection is great for children too as well as having a great amount of backpacks when it was back to school time. The store is upbeat, neat clean and organized and the staff's knowledge about the product is exceptional. 

I make Finish Line my only stop when I want sneakers, or something as small as a pair of shoelaces. Last Saturday I was in the store and they had a live DJ and when I asked the manager why was he here and his reply was he wanted to create an atmosphere where teens can hang out Saturday afternoon to keep them occupied, I don't know how many retailers care that much about the kids in the community. That is another reason why Finish Line is the best place to get footwear in Philadelphia. It is the best place for additional items such as clothing and accessories; it is even the best place for teens to hang out on a Saturday. So whether you need a pair of shoes to run the Broad Street Run, or an outfit to go out on a Saturday night you can definitely find it at the Finish Line located on the lower level of the Gallery Mall on 8th & Market Street in Philadelphia. Tell them Shaun sent you!

Some of the largest public outrages against the police came through the tragic mishandling of events. These events, which include the fatal shooting of Black Panther leader Fred Hampton in Chicago and the later bombing of MOVE headquarters in Philadelphia disproportionately involve African-Americans. This is not merely coincidence but rather shows a sad fact of policing, one that is described by “Black (1980)… found that encounters between police and African Americans were more likely than encounters between police and White Americans to result in formal or legally based decisions (398).” Consequently, the amount of publicity these events get is nowhere near the amount given to negative portrayals of African-American individuals, and with each year that passes fewer and fewer individuals recall the events that transpired.

Where racial antagonism between “predominantly white police forces and expanding black communities” may have offered an explanation for police racism in policing in Hahn and Feagin’s 1970, the approach loses robustness with the increasing prevalence of African-American police officers. This tendency to disproportionately affect African-American individuals (whether it be through arrest or force) has not changed in light of more diverse police; cases including those of Rodney King (1991), Abner Louima (1997) and Amadou Diallo (1999) show that this problem is as prevalent as ever.

MOVE started as the American Christian Movement by Vincent Leaphart, a former dog-walker. The group began gaining converts when Leaphart’s (now John Africa’s) musings on a variety of subjects were transcribed and put into a book form by graduate student Donald Glassey (Maddox 1995, 30). These teachings held that all living life is sacred, that all matter should be “cycled” (recycled), and that childbirth should be a natural happening, without drugs. Couple these beliefs with a revolutionary strain of thought, that human law was not to be followed due to it not equally affecting individuals (through loopholes) and that “all living things instinctively defend themselves”, and one has a dogma that brought in a number of individuals to a communal house in Powelton Village (MOVE 2005). Powelton Village at the time was a heavily-black neighborhood that was fending off the gentrification advances of Drexel and the University of Pennsylvania; it was with this obvious intrusion against the MOVE belief that “all living things, beings that move, are equally important” that MOVE began to agitate for change. This agitation would eventually bring a bomb down upon MOVE, in a typical bout of police over-action that killed 11 citizens of the United States in 1985.

For a short period after moving into the Powelton village house, things were relatively quiet as MOVE kept to themselves. MOVE soon started agitating through constant tirades using a bullhorn and by actively leading protests, a move which finally lead to the creation of a data-collecting team by the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) (Maddox 1995, 38; Assefa and Wahrhaftig 1988, 22). After being arrested for non-violent protests at high-publicity places (the Philadelphia Zoo, the Board of Education), MOVE actively committed offenses that would force police to put them in the criminal justice system. Ramona Africa, the only MOVE member that survived the 1985 bombing, would later say in a radio interview: “You want to arrest MOVE people? You want to put us in the court system? OK, but you're going to have to do it consistently. And we were going in and out of jail so much that we racked up so many cases that it clogged the court system. (Sanchez, 1996)”

Cycling members through the court system was admittedly not something to raise the ire of police; at some level, they were making money for each time a MOVE member was sent off to jail regardless of the offense. The event that escalated MOVE-PPD tensions occurred in March 1976, when MOVE and Philadelphia police members skirmished, leaving a number of individuals on both sides injured (Assefa and Wahrhaftig 1988, 23). One of these individuals was Life Africa, an infant that was killed (or that MOVE claimed to be killed) in these attacks. This death was so heinous that it brought John Africa to move to a more Black Panther-esque type of armed resistance; that “MOVE would counter with violence if attacked. (24)”

It was this change in philosophy that ultimately led to the Philadelphia police bombing of MOVE’s house in 1985; what had originally been perceived as institutional racism by MOVE was turned into a set of individuals that actively disobeyed Mayor Goode in pursuing their anti-MOVE agendas. It is this individual action that is supported in theory concerning structural racism in policing. Scholars like J.M. Floyd-Thomas would explain the interest in the operations of MOVE by the Philadelphia Police Department was “due to the MOVE family’s racial composition, counter-cultural lifestyle, radical politics, and unorthodox religiosity made them fair game to receive the full brunt of police oppression (16).” Furthermore, the lack of faith in the criminal justice system by African-Americans is not something that is only present in the more radical and fringe groups. Countless studies, including those by Engel (2005), Hagan and Albonetti (1982) and Wiley (2002) have shown that African-American individuals feel that they are treated worse by police both in terms of treatment and ultimate outcome (what punishment they are given, if any). Studies may show that there is a psychological difference in the way African-Americans and whites see their treatment by police, but there are some cold, hard facts that inform these outlooks on the world.

MOVE may have felt (whether rightly or wrongly) that they were being unduly persecuted because of their race; after so many arrests and complaints on their group, it is really no surprise that MOVE would gradually grow into something that was completely different from the non-violent, naturalist group that was founded by John Africa in 1973. Scholars including Waddington (2004) and Weitzer (2000) describe the real-life circumstances of racially-biased policing as a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy. This means that disproportionate amounts of African-Americans are confronted or placed in the criminal justice system because they are visibly acting in a way that is contrary with the law and the norms of society.

Labeling theory works in MOVE’s context because the group was originally acting in a way that they felt was legal under their beliefs during the non-violence actions at places like the Philadelphia Zoo. When group members were labeled troublemakers and put into the criminal justice system for action they thought was legal, they began to act more like troublemakers. This is shown by the press release of MOVE during the lead-up to the shootout, which said that “We are prepared to hit reservoirs, empty hotels, and apartment houses, close factories and tie up major cities of Europe (Floyd-Thomas 2002).”

More police intervention brought behaviors that were even farther outside the norms of society. This downward spiral of action culminated in two events: MOVE’s outside patrolling of their house with weapons and the later 1978 shoot-out, which led to “one death, several woundings, and deepened distrust that would lead to worse violence in the future (Assefa and Wahrhaftig 1988, 27, 37).

It is important to see that at each step there was an escalation of the police presence that dealt with the problem that MOVE created. This escalation began as arrests during the non-violent actions in the early seventies and only ended with a bombing that killed “11 people (all MOVE members), 61 homes completely destroyed, and 250 persons left homeless (Persons 251).”

This escalation further supports the “rogue police” explanation of the disproportionate number of African-Americans that are pulled over or otherwise acted upon by the police put forth by individuals like Tomaskovic-Devey et al (2004). This theory concedes that there are these disproportionate amounts of African-Americans being arrested or affected by the police, but that these actions are done by individuals that are racist or have some problem with the group in question. Coupled onto the higher number of African-Americans placed through the criminal justice system is a beefed-up set of circumstances that could lead to apprehension, with the most visible precursor “offense” being what is colloquially called “driving while black”. After getting pulled over, African-American individuals are more often assessed a fine or arrested for matters that would normally just be a warning for white individuals (broken taillight, moving violation). However, this line of theory is under fire by theorists like D’Alessio and Stolzenberg (2003), who say that it is not necessarily the race of the offender but rather other factors (if the crime is done to a friend or committed alongside other crimes) that determine arrest-ability.

The “rogue police” explanation, regardless of the other explanatory theories, is the best fit in trying to understand the lead up of tension that would eventually lead to the 1985 bombing of MOVE headquarters. Where the patience of individual police may have been tried by the number of times they were called out to MOVE headquarters for noise violations or smaller complaints, the defining event in the changing of police attitudes occurred with the murder of Officer James Ramp during the May 1978 standoff. While the forensics expert at the later MOVE Commission would absolve MOVE from any murder charges (the bullet entered from the back of Officer Ramp, instead of the front), the hostility of the police officers that were part of this standoff was so great that the then-Mayor stopped all officers from being present at the 1985 siege.

Instead of following the orders of the Mayor, who “in July of 1984…met with two former MOVE members… implored Mayor Goode to release MOVE members from jail in order to diffuse the escalating tensions between neighbors, police and MOVE.”, the police came to the MOVE house in the early morning of May 13th, 1985 and proceeded to shoot 10,000 rounds of ammunition into the house and drop a 3.5 pound bomb on its roof (Assefa and Wahrhaftig 1988, Maddox 1995, 99). Both the components of the bomb and a gun used in the attack were of a military-grade quality that was expressly banned by the leaders of the Philadelphia police department (Floyd-Thomas, 2002). How could the 1985 bombing have been avoided? The behavior of the Philadelphia Police Department in dealing with MOVE was retributive instead of restorative in this case.

A shift in the behavior of the corrections and police departments of Philadelphia along the same lines as the Mayor’s department would have defused the situation before it lead to the deaths of 11 in 1985. First off, lesser penalties for the MOVE 9 would have kept the demands of the rest of MOVE reasonable; each of the members was given 30 years for murder, even though only one bullet hit Officer Ramp. Secondly, a greater amount of sensitivity training should have been given to the Philadelphia police force, as put forth by Huisman et al in their “explaining commonalities” between races (2005). This move might have led to a greater empathy for the situation by leaders like Police Chief Gregore Sambor, who (aside from blocking the Fire Department Chief from putting out the fire on the MOVE house caused by the bomb), stoked more tension when he yelled out “attention MOVE, this is America (Maddox 1995, 85).” Finally, the continual arresting of MOVE members might have not transformed MOVE’s mission from something resembling Martin Luther King’s non-violent theories to Malcolm X’s armed resistance if there was a deferment program in place, tied to a greater following of Philadelphia law for all who lived in the MOVE house. Tie this continual arresting in with the fact that MOVE had gotten wind that a video tape showing one of their members, Delbert Africa, was being shown to the Philadelphia Police Department trainees as a training exercise, and a condition was created in which both sides, MOVE and the PPD were ready to fight (Sanchez, 1996). If the mindset of individuals like Chief Sambor was that MOVE and groups like MOVE needed to be stopped at all costs, why was there not a greater review of the literature available to them regarding the best course of action in removing individuals and groups from authority? The attack on Fred Hampton in Chicago had only occurred a decade before, and the outrage from that case brought more trouble to all involved than any Black Panther rally could ever bring. The original plan put forth by the Mayor, Fire and Police Chiefs, and the Mayor’s aide was to first knock off the bunker on MOVE headquarters by water cannon (to ensure that there would not be as many shots fired from an advantageous position) and eventually wear MOVE down to the point where it could then apprehend Ramona Africa, who was then leader of the organization. The plan was declared a failure after six hours; compare that to the 1978 siege, which lasted two months (Assefa and Wahrhaftig 1988). MOVE had guns in 1978 just as they had guns in 1985; what had changed so much to offer such a rapid change in plans and such a lack of patience?

This change could be seen as developing through a set of circumstances that in only the most tangential sense involved MOVE. Mayor Goode, the city’s first African-American mayor was elected on the backs of white liberals and middle-class African-Americans to oust Frank Rizzo, who was attempting to change election law to run for another term (Parsons, 1987). Those who lived in the same Osage Avenue district were essentially those that allowed Goode to be elected, and those constituents were growing tired of MOVE’s antics. By this time, MOVE has moved from directly protesting government locations and put the impetus of change on those individuals they lived near; when Osage Avenue residents complained about the bullhorn spewing such niceties as “MF Santy Claus”, MOVE told the residents to tell their politicians that “the reason MOVE is doing it is because they want their people home.” The reasons our people were doing this is because they couldn’t get Wilson Goode to listen (Assefa and Wahrhaftig 1988, 108).”

Aside from the pressure being enacted on Mayor Goode by the residents of Osage Avenue, MOVE exacerbated the situation by fortifying their house. For the time that MOVE was doing this, there was a lack of harassment of the Osage Avenue neighbors, which in turn led to a relaxation of the pressure on Mayor Goode. This relaxation caused all segments of the City of Philadelphia to let their guard down until late April, where the bullhorn messages restarted with more vitriol and violent threats than had occurred before. Instead of being nebulous threats as they were before the 1978 shootouts, MOVE threatened to kill Mayor Goode and any other individuals that would set foot on their property. This change in behavior from a timid and afraid style to something that seems like a viable threat forced the Mayor’s hand as much as did the construction of a gasoline tank on the roof of the house (which could conceivably be used for bombs).

This escalation shows that while the ultimate decision to bomb the compound was still the wrong one made by the Philadelphia Police Department, that MOVE was not necessarily as innocent as they would like to make themselves out to be. Aside from a shared responsibility of the eventual outcome, there also seemed to be some systemic distributional and government failures at play that led from the non-violent MOVE being arrested in 1974 and 1975 to an armed, almost terrorist-like group in 1985. In terms of distributional failures, there was an information asymmetry between the different City of Philadelphia groups. Mayor Goode was not aware of the plans to increase the power of the bomb, which was originally only intended to be a “concussive device” (Persons, 1987). Likewise, the Fire Department chief was unable of Mayor Goode’s order to turn the hoses on the raging fire that was created by this bomb. Even Police Chief Sambor was left in the dark about some of his officers bringing in a military-caliber gun for the assault. There was a bureaucratic failure in that the order from Mayor Goode to remove all officers that had participated in the 1978 shootout from the teams assigned to the May assault was not followed. MOVE themselves were unclear at the length that the City of Philadelphia would go in removing them from their home; if this was communicated to them more clearly, the situation may have defused without all the bloodshed and destruction that the fires created by the bomb committed. Finally, the pressure placed on Mayor Goode reflected a government failure in terms of geographic constituencies and electoral interests; if Mayor Goode was not going to do something drastic for the “nuisance” that was present in the Osage Avenue area, there was going to be a good chance a new Mayor would be installed on election day.

The bombing of MOVE headquarters, despite what may be said, was not the ultimate goal of an overtly racist police department. Rather, Tomaskovic-Devey et al’s idea of police officers that operate on their own rules in regards to the apprehension or the approaching of a group of citizens (whether they be by race or class) fits in perfectly in explaining why it was necessary in Chief Sambor’s eyes to drop a 3.5 pound bomb of C4 and Tovex on a building containing a number of infants (Floyd-Thomas, 2002). Operation MOVE can thus partially explain the disproportionate number of African-Americans that are put into jail on small charges or pulled over for minor violations; that certain individuals take their interpretation of what is right and lawful too far. The other sections that influence these higher numbers of African-American individuals being approached by police do not fit as nicely; stereotyping and racial profiling do not necessarily fit due to the length of exposure that the City of Philadelphia had with MOVE, a minority-heavy area does not necessarily fit because of the fact that Philadelphia itself is such an African-American heavy city (with an excess of 30% African-American population).

Individual responsibility of those individuals in power explains a large part of why the MOVE headquarters were bombed, but MOVE cannot escape all guilt in the matter. By being tagged as criminals at the earliest part of their existence, a kernel of criminality was created that simply because larger with each time that they were apprehended. This “labeling theory” shows the gradual shift in MOVE’s philosophy through the years from a non-violent group that believed in the right of all creatures to life to one that threatened to kill any City of Philadelphia individual that even dared to set foot on their property (MOVE 2005). There is some part of systemic policy and criminal justice that brought situations to a much more rapid boil; the existence of retributive justice (that espouses labeling theory as a method to “punish” the badness out of individuals in the system”) instead of a more holistic brand of justice that would encourage prison deferment based on the completion of programs that were in topics that individuals complained to city officials against MOVE about (cleanliness, child care).