On being rational.

18 June

We had no plans for today at all, which as it turns out was pretty lucky. I managed to fall pretty heavily in the living room after tripping on something and staggering the length of the room before I eventually ended up on the floor. We are both relieved that there are no serious injuries, only two small carpet burns, one on knee and one on my wrist. However, I’m still feeling fairly shaken by it. That too is slowly easing as well. Even so, I’m now taking my time more and making sure that my feet are firmly planted before I move.

Crimewatch Roadshow is on telly again and yet again someone asked why criminals don’t of the effects their actions have on their victims. In reality I doubt if they think of victims in any way other than as source of easy money. It’s that money that they really care about; where it comes from doesn’t worry them in the least. One victim today asked why they don’t go and get a decent job and earn their money like so many others. Why would they bother when they can get away with hundreds if not thousands of pounds in such a short time? Which is easier, working in a factory for 35 hours a week for a few hundred quid, or going out robbing someone and getting away with a lot more in just a few minutes. They could do a few jobs in the same area and then can perhaps sit back and have a good time until the money runs out.    

Peter James researches his Roy Grace books to death, and his latest You Are Dead is no exception. Something I read in there last night was that James claimed that murder is not a rational act. Oh yes? It might not be rational to those not involved, but to the murderer it may well be rational, indeed the only thing to do. And yet I can see where James is coming from. The killer in this book is a serial killer who plans and researches his victims just as much as James does his story lines. Is such planning rational? I’ll leave that to you to decide.

Yet another mass shooting has happened in The States, this time with a white guy killing six black people who were at a prayer meeting. Racial tensions are high as it already is over cops killing unarmed black folks and now a white guy kills six unarmed people. Those tensions are likely to be stretched to their limits over this one, and will get even worse if the killer isn’t arrested quickly. So is this attack a rational act?

Again I feel it’s not so clear cut. The killer seems to be a bigoted racist and such hatred sees the deaths of black people as being the only way to deal with a situation that he hates. On the other hand though, why kill just six people? Six compared to the huge number of blacks in that area will hardly make any difference will it. An attack on a larger group would take out a lot more of them in one go. But hang on there folks; what if he isn’t acting on his own but as part of a large group of racist who see that such an act could lead to an all-out race war. That would seem to make it a more ‘rational’ act. Of course none us who live over here would see it as such, or would we? Look at the results of the killing of black guy in London at the hands of the cops. It’s a horrifying thought folks.

Today’s photo … 

Broad Gate, Coventry showing the old and new of the city.

And today’s funny …

Susie's husband had been slipping in and out of a coma for several months. Things looked grim, but she was by his bedside every single day. One day as he slipped back into consciousness, he motioned for her to come close to him. She pulled the chair close to the bed and leaned her ear close to be able to hear him.

"You know" he whispered, his eyes filling with tears, "you have been with me through all the bad times. When I got fired, you stuck right beside me. When my business went under, there you were. When we lost the house, you were there. When I got shot, you stuck with me. When my health started failing, you were still by my side. "And you know what?"

"What, dear?" she asked gently, smiling to herself.

"I think you're bad luck."