Jack Reacher’s Tough Road to the Screen

Sunday, January 8th, 2012

I haven’t read any of Lee Child’s Jack Reacher novels, but they sound like a perfect example of how Hollywood adapts material with the assumption that any change they make “for the better” will in no way lessen the appeal of the original:

During the last 15 years, many have tried and failed to bring Mr. Child’s iconoclastic character to the screen. Some of the difficulties arose from the challenges inherent in adapting any literary work, but most were particular to Reacher. An unbending nonconformist, his personality runs counter to the prevailing Hollywood notion that a film hero must undergo an enlightening transformation over the course of a picture. Then there’s the matter of Reacher’s size. At 6 feet 5 inches and 250 pounds, he all but demanded the sort of larger-than-life movie actor not seen since John Wayne. Reacher fans are already carping online about the choice of the diminutive Mr. Cruise for the role. There’s a Facebook page called “Tom Cruise is not Jack Reacher.”

Yes, that’s right; Tom Cruise has been cast as Jack Reacher, who is described in the original stories like this:

His arms, so long they gave him a greyhound’s grace even though he was built like the side of a house…. His hands, giant battered mitts that bunched into fists the size of footballs.

Sounds more like a pro wrestler — maybe Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, if they’re looking for mainstream appeal? Vin Diesel? Chris Hemsworth (Thor)?

Kids’ TV

Sunday, January 8th, 2012

When Steve Sailer’s own boys were 10 and 7, he wrote a guide to kids’ TV for the perplexed:

Among the more bizarre commonplaces of kid TV are the abrupt segues from alarmingly belligerent programs about colossal robots battling for galactic mastery to unspeakably adorable commercials for toys like Polly Pocket’s Fairy Wishing World. Even more oddly, the opposite transitions from precious girl shows to pugnacious boy commercials are exceedingly rare. There are simply far more commercials than shows aimed at little girls.

[At this point, you may well be protesting, "Hold it! 'Girl shows?' 'Boy commercials?' Haven't we outgrown these stereotypical gender roles?" Well, I hope you have, but, remember, you're a grown-up. The small children of my acquaintance aren't quite up to speed yet.]

Is this bias toward boy shows the inevitable result, as numerous “social critics” have charged, of the male domination of the profit-hungry entertainment industry? Economists, like Nobel Laureate Gary Becker, generally tend to pooh-pooh such accusations that imply that all firms in a competitive industry would discriminate against a lucrative market segment out of self-defeating sexism. After all, these same greedy male network executives churn out so many disease-of-the-week movies for the primetime female audience precisely because they are greedy. Capitalism encourages empathy: if the capitalist cultivates sensitivity to the differing needs of diverse peoples, he can, well, sell them more stuff.

Yet, in this particular case the feminist media critics appear to be right: Saturday morning’s damsel deficiency does stem from sex discrimination. The unsettling truth, however, is that the bigots who keep girl shows off the air aren’t the often-denounced Old Boys Network, but a Young Boys Network. While most little girls will tolerate boy shows, many little male chauvinist pigs simply will not watch girl shows.

["That's just the way our culture socializes them," you may be interjecting. That may or may not be, but I suspect that if you haven't recently wrestled a toddler for the channel-changer, you might not fully grasp how strenuously -- and often successfully -- each child fights to control which facets of the vast American cultural smorgasbord they are most exposed to. For example, at only 16 months old my first son developed an intense disdain for all things girlish, along with a corresponding passion for watching strong men hit balls with sticks. My wife discovered to her exasperated boredom that our tiny son instantaneously began to whine anytime she tried to flip past televised baseball or, God forbid, golf. When he later began throwing store-aisle temper tantrums whenever his mother denied him a flashlight (or toy sword, gun, spear, rocket ship, baseball bat, bow and arrow, screwdriver, slingshot, or whatever other projection device struck his hormone-warped fancy), she learned there was only one way to silence him. "That's a Girl Flashlight," she'd explain. "They're all out of Boy Flashlights. Do you still want it?" Believe me, dear readers, contrary to what we've been told so often in recent decades, socialization isn't what differentiates the sexes, it's the only hope of their ever getting along civilly.]

In fact, despite all the politically pious rhetoric, boys and girls today may be even more likely to indulge their highly sex-distinct fantasies. Consider games. When families tended to be large, poor and unpermissive, toymakers invented games that brothers and sisters could both stand well enough to play together. Today, though, new games are largely for one sex or the other. We’ve progressed from Monopoly to Mall Madness, from Candyland to Mortal Kombat. Why then, does our capitalist system deliver so few TV shows for little girls? I think because in contrast to games, most families haven’t yet bought each child his or her own TV (although I’m sure that day is rapidly approaching), so the whiniest sexist in the family exercises a veto power over TV shows. Furthermore, when watching alone, many preschoolers can’t reliably change channels, so they tend to watch a single network’s entire Saturday morning slate. To keep the brand loyalty of this captive audience, networks play it safe and avoid programming even a single show that would offend a 3′ tall woman-hater.

Of course, female characters are now fairly common in some crass “entertoyment” series like Pokemon, Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers, and X-Men. (Another perennial question parents ask their kids: “What are you supposed to call those mutant girls on X-Men? ‘X-Women?’”) Girls are suffered to appear, though, only on four conditions: (A) That the girls are knock-outs; (B) That they not outnumber the boys; (C) That a boy is the leader; and (D) Most tellingly, that mentally the female characters really are ex-women, that they scorn icky girl stuff and like only cool boy stuff, such as those giant fighting robots. At its origin, male chauvinism is a fear not that females will act like males, but that they won’t. Intriguingly, orthodox feminists and kindergarten chauvinists — those ostensible adversaries — surreptitiously share two convictions: both want all females socialized to be forceful and aggressive (with the exception of their own personal Moms), while fearing that most girls would really prefer to be gentle and loving. In fact, an appreciation for “stereotypical” femininity would appear to be a sign of relative maturity in males (and maybe in feminists, too).

They said they are about to blow this ship up.

Saturday, January 7th, 2012

From the American destroyer Kidd a booming voice issued commands to the Iranian dhow Al Mulahi:

If you have weapons aboard, the voice boomed, put them where we can see them, on the roof of your wheelhouse.

The American commands were issued in Urdu, the language of Pakistanis and Indian Muslims, because that is what the “Iranian” crew spoke — but their Somali hijackers did not speak Urdu:

For a moment, the captors depended on their captives. They asked their Iranian hostages what the American sailors had just said.

One of the hostages, Khaled Abdulkhaled, answered without pause: “They said they are about to blow this ship up.”

The pirates panicked. Their unity broke down. Each man hoped, variously, to surrender, find cover or hide. Discarding their weapons, nine of them crammed into a small hold beneath the wheelhouse. Six more huddled near the open bow.

Soon, armed American sailors climbed aboard. They spotted the six Somalis on the bow, who did not resist. As more of the boarding team swarmed over the side, the Iranian hostages pointed to where the remaining pirates were hiding. The sailors pulled those men out, one by one, into the light and forced them face down onto the deck.

Al Mulahi was secured. The Iranian hostages had been saved without a shot being fired.

Fight the (Imaginary) Power

Saturday, January 7th, 2012

Stieg Larsson’s work urges us to fight the (imaginary) power, Steve Sailer says:

The more popular it is to worry over some organized threat, the less of a danger it likely is in reality. After all, if some group or institution was truly fearsome, most people would either be terrified into silence or admiration.

For example, Dan Brown made a fortune off his The Da Vinci Code pulp novel during this low ebb of the Catholic Church’s powers with a tale of how a nearly omnipotent Church conspires to cover up pagan feminism’s golden age.

However, actual pagans traditionally complained that Christianity was too female-friendly. But Brown is practically Edward Gibbon compared to his successor as a global publishing sensation, the late Stieg Larsson, author of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (or as it was originally titled in Sweden, Men Who Hate Women). Himself a hate-filled lefty nerd, Larsson concocted an elaborate fantasy world for true believers in the conventional wisdom.
[...]
You may have somehow garnered the impression that Sweden is a politically correct social democracy where the main problems women face (qua women) are oppression and rape at the hands of Muslim immigrants whose traditional misogyny is sometimes excused in the name of multicultural sensitivity. Otherwise, Scandinavia would appear to be a feminist utopia. As WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange, currently appealing against extradition to Sweden on “sex-by-surprise” charges filed by two women scorned, has complained, “Sweden is the Saudi Arabia of feminism.”

Nordic feminism has a thousand-year history since Leif Ericson’s half-sister Freydís Eiríksdóttir terrified the poor Skraelings in Vinland. And modern Sweden’s mild-mannered men are famous among the more aggressive sort of male tourists for their relative lack of apparent jealousy when their womenfolk amuse themselves by flirting with strangers.

But readers of Larsson’s Millennium trilogy, which has sold nearly 30 million books, know better. Larsson fearlessly exposed the true plagues menacing contemporary Sweden: rich Nazis, Christian male chauvinists, rapist legal officials, and two generations of billionaire serial killers — the first preying on Jewish women, the second on immigrant women.

Fortunately, two human beings dare stand up to this fascist tsunami engulfing Sweden. One is a middle-aged leftist journalist (in other words, Larsson’s sockpuppet). Although persecuted (and possessing no discernible personality), he’s still dynamite with the ladies.

The second is his young research assistant, Lisbeth Salander, who comes equipped with every add-on that turned on geeky former sci-fi fanzine editors such as Larsson in female fantasy figures back in the 1990s.

Think Trinity in The Matrix, but with even more attitude. Lisbeth has genius computer-hacking skills, a black wardrobe and a black motorcycle, hand-to-hand combat techniques that let her deal out cruel vengeance upon men twice her 100 pounds, piercings, a mohawk, and lesbianism (until she’s exposed to the journalist hero’s recessive charm).

But this isn’t the 1990s anymore, so the appeal of such dusty clichés has drifted up the age range.

The Illusion of Validity

Saturday, January 7th, 2012

When Daniel Kahneman was a young lieutenant in the Israeli Defense Forces, he found that a simple questionnaire-driven statistical model did a better job of predicting which recruits could perform which jobs than the thorough interviews and “expert” opinions the IDF was relying on. But the illusion of validity was strong — which Freeman Dyson also found while performing operational research in Britain during World War II:

An episode from my own past is curiously similar to Kahneman’s experience in the Israeli army. I was a statistician before I became a scientist. At the age of twenty I was doing statistical analysis of the operations of the British Bomber Command in World War II. The command was then seven years old, like the State of Israel in 1955. All its institutions were under construction. It consisted of six bomber groups that were evolving toward operational autonomy. Air Vice Marshal Sir Ralph Cochrane was the commander of 5 Group, the most independent and the most effective of the groups. Our bombers were then taking heavy losses, the main cause of loss being the German night fighters.

Cochrane said the bombers were too slow, and the reason they were too slow was that they carried heavy gun turrets that increased their aerodynamic drag and lowered their operational ceiling. Because the bombers flew at night, they were normally painted black. Being a flamboyant character, Cochrane announced that he would like to take a Lancaster bomber, rip out the gun turrets and all the associated dead weight, ground the two gunners, and paint the whole thing white. Then he would fly it over Germany, and fly so high and so fast that nobody could shoot him down. Our commander in chief did not approve of this suggestion, and the white Lancaster never flew.

The reason why our commander in chief was unwilling to rip out gun turrets, even on an experimental basis, was that he was blinded by the illusion of validity. This was ten years before Kahneman discovered it and gave it its name, but the illusion of validity was already doing its deadly work. All of us at Bomber Command shared the illusion. We saw every bomber crew as a tightly knit team of seven, with the gunners playing an essential role defending their comrades against fighter attack, while the pilot flew an irregular corkscrew to defend them against flak. An essential part of the illusion was the belief that the team learned by experience. As they became more skillful and more closely bonded, their chances of survival would improve.

When I was collecting the data in the spring of 1944, the chance of a crew reaching the end of a thirty-operation tour was about 25 percent. The illusion that experience would help them to survive was essential to their morale. After all, they could see in every squadron a few revered and experienced old-timer crews who had completed one tour and had volunteered to return for a second tour. It was obvious to everyone that the old-timers survived because they were more skillful. Nobody wanted to believe that the old-timers survived only because they were lucky.

At the time Cochrane made his suggestion of flying the white Lancaster, I had the job of examining the statistics of bomber losses. I did a careful analysis of the correlation between the experience of the crews and their loss rates, subdividing the data into many small packages so as to eliminate effects of weather and geography. My results were as conclusive as those of Kahneman. There was no effect of experience on loss rate. So far as I could tell, whether a crew lived or died was purely a matter of chance. Their belief in the life-saving effect of experience was an illusion.

The demonstration that experience had no effect on losses should have given powerful support to Cochrane’s idea of ripping out the gun turrets. But nothing of the kind happened. As Kahneman found out later, the illusion of validity does not disappear just because facts prove it to be false. Everyone at Bomber Command, from the commander in chief to the flying crews, continued to believe in the illusion. The crews continued to die, experienced and inexperienced alike, until Germany was overrun and the war finally ended.

Spielberg’s Tintin

Friday, January 6th, 2012

Spielberg’s Tintin only brought in $12 million over the holiday weekend, but that’s more than many people expected of the thoroughly un-American not-at-all-super hero:

Tintin is the antithesis of a superhero, which may account for why he seems so alien to Americans. He has an upswept red forelock, wears plus fours and argyle socks and lives alone with his dog, Snowy. He has no exceptional powers, no sexual identity and seemingly no inner life at all.
[...]
Mr. Spielberg has said that he first heard about Tintin in 1983, when he learned that French reviewers were comparing his “Raiders of the Lost Ark” to some of Hergé’s work. Curious, he bought a couple of Tintin books in the original French and, though unable to read them, was immediately smitten.

It’s easy to understand why. Not only is there an Indiana Jones-like quality to some of Tintin’s adventures — he’s forever discovering secret passages or getting trapped in a crashing plane — but Hergé’s drawings have an inherently cinematic quality. They look like storyboards or a movie shooting script, with close-ups, telescopic shots, jump cuts and action sequences.

Hergé, who grew up watching silent comedies, clearly loved the movies, and in 1948 even offered to adapt some of his books for Disney. The studio passed, possibly because the stories were more complicated, more grown-up, than the ones it was then making, or maybe because Hergé’s style was so unlike Disney’s. Hergé was a brilliant draftsman, and his drawings, devoid of cuteness and sentimentality, are a compelling mixture of simplicity and precise detail. Tintin’s face, for example, is just a Charlie Brown-like assemblage of dots and squiggles, but cars and airplanes are so carefully rendered that they can be identified by make and model.

Hergé’s drawings are also insistently two-dimensional, with no shadows, very little shading and not many perspective tricks. They are content to lie flat on the page. To adult fans, who have included Andy Warhol and Roy Lichtenstein, the purity and creativity of the drawing is what most recommends the Tintin series. And to readers used to the original books, the most disconcerting thing about Mr. Spielberg’s film is the way it jumps off the screen.

Mickey Mouse and Pluto in Frazetta Style

Friday, January 6th, 2012

Behold! Mickey Mouse and Pluto in Frazetta style, by John T. Quinn III:

Lauren David of io9 notes that this leaves unanswered the question of what would Minnie be wearing?

A Brutal Chapter In North Carolina’s Eugenics Past

Friday, January 6th, 2012

Julie Rose of NPR calls it a brutal chapter in North Carolina’s eugenics past, a period when the state sterilized 7,000 people, referred not only by doctors in prisons and mental hospitals, but also by social workers:

I found former social worker Merlene Wall in her Charlotte condo. She’s 80, and her memory is going — but she’s willing to talk.

“It was an interesting time. We stayed busy, we really did,” Wall says.

Mecklenburg County was booming then. The typical welfare recipient was a single woman with four or five kids. Politicians and public officials worried that these unwed mothers and their children would overwhelm the system.

The North Carolina Eugenics Board offered them a solution. Since the 1930s, it had sterilized people in mental hospitals and schools for troubled youth. In the ’50s, the focus shifted to women on welfare, and on social workers like Wall.

“I keep thinking back about one case, and there were retarded daughters and my gosh … what a time and what a mess,” she says. “And how do you, how do you protect the children that these two females had?”

I’m not sure that this qualifies as a brutal chapter:

Kuralt did not believe women should be sterilized against their will. He was a champion for reproductive rights who wanted to help women prevent pregnancy when they couldn’t afford the children they already had.

But this was the ’50s: Abortion was illegal, and the birth control pill wasn’t available. Existing methods for women were complicated or unreliable. Having your tubes tied, on the other hand, was very reliable.

Kuralt knew his welfare clients couldn’t afford to pay a doctor for sterilization, but if he referred them to the Eugenics Board, the government would pay.

Consider this case Kuralt initiated:

Married female, age 38. Two children. Currently pregnant. She wandered out into the woods to have her last child. They sleep on corn shucks and cotton piled in the corner. This couple came to the Welfare Department to request sterilization for the woman.

Israel’s Latest Export

Friday, January 6th, 2012

Steven Zeitchik of the Los Angeles Times reports that Hollywood has been importing TV show concepts from Israel:

“Homeland,” which broke Showtime’s ratings record for a first-year series finale, is adapted from the Israeli show “Hatufim” (Prisoners of War). It’s one of a host of U.S. programs that began life as a Hebrew-language series in this Mediterranean nation of only 8 million people. “Who’s Still Standing?,” the new NBC quiz program in which contestants answering incorrectly are dropped through a hole in the floor, is also an Israeli import. So is the former HBO scripted series “In Treatment,” which starred Gabriel Byrne and ran for three seasons.

And that’s just the beginning: Nearly half a dozen shows in development at U.S. networks — including the divorce sitcom “Life Isn’t Everything” (CBS), a time-travel musical dubbed “Danny Hollywood (the CW) and the border-town murder-mystery “Pillars of Smoke” (NBC) — are based on hit Israeli series, their themes and language tweaked for American audiences.

So, why has it taken so long for Israel to export show concepts?

The industry was born only in 1993, after deregulation; before then, the lone state-run television station might broadcast reruns of “The A-Team” and “Three’s Company,” play the national anthem and simply go off the air at midnight.

You have to smile at the way they tiptoe around certain things while suggesting explanations for Israel’s success in the entertainment industry:

Israeli television’s gallows humor fits with post-9/11 American anxiety; Israelis are preoccupied by some of the same subjects as American network executives (“the country has more psychologists per capita than anywhere else in the world, and that leads to psychologically complex stories,” said David Nevins, Showtime’s president of entertainment); a U.S. business that has grown restless with traditional sources; Israeli shows are relatively cheap; and Israeli TV’s small budgets birth creative storytelling.

“When you don’t have a lot of money, you find more interesting and clever ways to write a script,” said Daniel Lappin, the creator of “Life Isn’t Everything,” a sitcom about a divorced couple that can’t get out of each other’s lives that ran for nine seasons in Israel. Lappin — who like Raff and Stollman, also spent some of his formative years in the U.S. — is working with “Friends” writer Mike Sikowitz on the CBS version of “Life.”

American executives, who for years looked to more established territories for imports, say they’ve felt a certain kinship with Middle East creators.

“God bless those Israelis,” said NBC entertainment chief Robert Greenblatt, whose network has “Still Standing” and “Pillars of Smoke.” “They’ve somehow done a great job of finding things that translate well.”

A certain kinship? Indeed…

Middle Childhood

Thursday, January 5th, 2012

Prolonged middle childhood may be a recent evolutionary development:

The anatomy of middle childhood can be subtle. Adult teeth start growing in, allowing children to diversify their diet beyond the mashed potatoes and parentally dissected Salisbury steak stage. The growth of the skeleton, by contrast, slows from the vertiginous pace of early childhood, and though there is a mild growth spurt at age 6 or 7, as well as a bit of chubbying up during the so-called adiposity rebound of middle childhood, much of the remaining skeletal growth awaits the superspurt of puberty.

“Adulthood is defined by being skeletally as well as sexually mature,” said Jennifer Thompson of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. “A girl may have her first period at 11 or 12, but her pelvis doesn’t finish growing until about the age of 18.”

The 18-year time frame of human juvenility far exceeds that seen in any other great ape, Dr. Thompson said. Chimpanzees, for example, are fully formed by age 12. With her colleague Andrew J. Nelson of the University of Western Ontario, Dr. Thompson analyzed fossil specimens from Neanderthals, Homo erectus and other early hominids, and concluded that their growth pattern was more like that of a chimpanzee than a modern human: By age 12 or 14, they had reached adult size.

Life for Neanderthals was nasty and short, Dr. Thompson said, and Neanderthal children had to get big fast, which is why they hurtled through adolescence at the equivalent of today’s chapter-book age. Our extreme form of dilated childhood didn’t appear until the advent of modern Homo sapiens roughly 150,000 years ago, Dr. Thompson said, when adults began living long enough to ease pressure on the young to hurry up and breed.

And what an essential luxury item middle childhood has proved to be. “It’s consistent across societies,” Benjamin Campbell, an anthropologist at the University of Wisconsin in Milwaukee said. “In middle childhood, kids start making sense.”

Parental expectations rise accordingly. “Kids can do something now,” said Dr. Campbell, who edited the special issue. “They can do tasks. They have economic value.”

Boys are given goats to herd and messages to deliver. They hunt and fish. Girls weave, haul water, grind corn, chop firewood, serve as part-time mothers to their younger siblings; a serious share of baby care in the world is performed by girls not yet in their teens.

Workloads and expectations vary substantially from one culture to the next. Karen Kramer and Russell Greaves of Harvard compared the average number of hours that girls in 16 different traditional cultures devoted each day to “subsistence” tasks apart from child care. Girls of the Ariaal pastoralists in northern Kenya worked the hardest, putting in 9.6 hours daily. Agriculturalist girls in Nepal worked 7.5 hours a day.

Then you come to the more laid-back lives of the foragers. The researchers focused on the Pumé, a foraging group in west-central Venezuela, where preadolescent girls do almost nothing. They forage less than an hour a day, significantly less than their brothers, and are very inefficient in what little they do. They prefer hanging out at the campsite. “Pumé girls spend their time socializing, talking and laughing with their friends, beading and resting,” Dr. Kramer said.

But most cultures mark the beginning of middle childhood with some new responsibility. Kwoma children of Papua New Guinea are given their own garden plots to cultivate. Berber girls of northern Africa vie to prove their worth by preparing entire family meals unassisted.

In the Ituri forest of Central Africa, Mbuti boys strive to kill their first “real animal,” for which they will be honored through ritualized facial scarring. And in the United States, children enter elementary school, for which they will be honored through ritualized gold starring.

In middle childhood, the brain is at its peak for learning, organized enough to attempt mastery yet still fluid, elastic, neuronally gymnastic. Children have lost the clumsiness of toddlerhood and can become physically gymnastic, too, and start practicing their fine motor skills. And because they are still smaller than adults, they can grow adept at a skill like, say, spear-tossing, without fear of threatening the resident men.

Middle childhood is the time to make sense and make friends. “This is the period when kids move out of the family context and into the neighborhood context,” Dr. Campbell said.

The all-important theory of mind arises: the awareness that other people have minds, plans and desires of their own. Children become obsessed with social groups and divide along gender lines, girls playing with girls, boys with boys. They have an avid appetite for learning the local social rules, whether of games, slang, style or behavior. They are keenly attuned to questions of fairness and justice and instantly notice those grabbing more than their share.

The mental and kinesthetic pliancy of middle childhood can be traced at least in part to adrenarche, researchers said, when signals from the pea-size pituitary at the base of the brain prod the adrenal glands to unleash their hormonal largess. Adrenal hormones like DHEA are potent antioxidants and neuroprotectants, Dr. Campbell said, and may well be critical to keeping neurons and their dendritic connections youthfully spry.

Evidence also suggests that the adrenal hormones divert glucose in the brain to foster the maturation of the insula and anterior cingulate cortex, brain regions vital to interpreting social and emotional cues.

In middle childhood, the brain is open for suggestions. What do I need to know? What do I want to know?

The Truth About Wealth

Thursday, January 5th, 2012

The truth about wealth is that great wealth often comes with great volatility:

Despite heated rhetoric emanating from politicians and pundits, the top 1% is hardly a fixed group that enjoys consistent income gains. To the contrary, the wealthiest have become the most crash-prone group in our economy.

The total income of the top 1% — or those earning more than $343,000 in 2009 — fell by more than 30% from 2007, according to the most recent Internal Revenue Service data. By contrast, the average income of the bottom 90% fell less than 3% during the same period.

A November Federal Reserve study, meanwhile, found that a third of the people in the top 1% in 2007, as measured by wealth, were no longer in the top 1% in 2009.

Only 15% of the Forbes 400 stayed on the list over a 21-year period, according to a study that cited these five reasons for dropping off the list:

  1. Overconcentration
  2. Leverage
  3. Spending
  4. The “toxic cocktail” [of those first three reasons combined]
  5. Family issues

(Hat tip to Kent.)

More Concealed Guns, and Some Are in the Wrong Hands

Wednesday, January 4th, 2012

Michael Luo opens his recent New York Times piece on concealed-carry permits with the tale of a Times-friendly bicyclist and his four-year-old son getting berated — and then shot at — by a macho SUV-driving fireman in Asheville, North Carolina — a liberal oasis in a rather conservative state.

The message is clear:

If not for that gun, Mr. Simons is convinced, the confrontation would have ended harmlessly. “I bet it would have been a bunch of mouthing,” he said.

Mr. Diez, then 42, eventually pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill.

More than 240,000 people in North Carolina have a permit to carry a concealed handgun:

More than 2,400 permit holders were convicted of felonies or misdemeanors, excluding traffic-related crimes, over the five-year period, The Times found when it compared databases of recent criminal court cases and licensees. While the figure represents a small percentage of those with permits, more than 200 were convicted of felonies, including at least 10 who committed murder or manslaughter. All but two of the killers used a gun.

Wait, over a five-year period, eight permit-holders killed someone with a gun? So, 1.6 gun-homicides per 240,000 permit-holders per year? Fewer than seven per million permit-holders per year. (I’m assuming each “murder or manslaughter” involved one victim.)

Over the past decade or so, North Carolina has averaged well over 300 gun-murders per year, with a population of around 9 million, implying almost 40 gun-murders per million people per year — almost six times the rate for permit-holders.

So, permit-holders, who almost certainly possess the means to commit gun violence, commit murder with a gun at one-sixth the average rate — the average rate for a population that includes the roughly 40 percent of households in NC that don’t have a firearm of any kind.

That said, clearly some concealed guns are in the wrong hands — but many, many more are in safe hands.

The Government-Anointed Regulator of Law Schools

Wednesday, January 4th, 2012

The Duncan School of Law is a small (187-student) school trying to earn the seal of approval of the American Bar Association, the government-anointed regulator of law schools:

That means complying with a long list of standards that shape the composition of the faculty, the library and dozens of other particulars. The basic blueprint was established by elite institutions more than a century ago, and according to critics, it all but prohibits the law-school equivalent of the Honda Civic — a low-cost model that delivers.

Instead, virtually every one of the country’s 200 A.B.A.-accredited schools, from the lowliest to the most prestigious, has to build a Cadillac, or at least come close. Duncan’s library costs $750,000 a year to maintain — a bargain when compared with competitors.

Are there too many or too few lawyers?

“People like to say there are too many lawyers,” says Prof. Andrew Morriss of the University of Alabama School of Law. “There are too many lawyers who charge $300 an hour. There aren’t too many lawyers who will handle a divorce at a reasonable rate, or handle a bankruptcy at a reasonable rate. But there is no way to be that lawyer and service $150,000 worth of debt.”

This helps explain a paradox: the United States churns out roughly 45,000 lawyers a year, but survey after survey finds enormous unmet need for legal services, particularly in low- and middle-income communities.

Clerk Knocks Out Armed Robber

Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012

Mostafa Kamel Hendi entered the We Buy Gold store in Hendersonville, North Carolina 15 minutes before closing time, with a gun tucked into his waistband.

Derek Mothershead, who was working there, threw up his hands and said “Take the money!” — then knocked him out:

“I got the money and he had the bag out and instead of putting it in the bag I stuck it out and said, ‘Just take it.’ So, when he reached out, I took a step in, I cocked back and preloaded and I hit him hard,” Mothershead told News 4′s Mike McCormick.

The punch knocked out the would-be thief.

Mothershead was able to grab the man’s weapon and realized it was a pellet gun.

“When I pulled it out of his waistband I started laughing,” said Mothershead. “I said, ‘Man, you came in here with a fake gun?’”

Mothershead said he dragged the man over to a desk and held him down with one hand and called 911 with the other.

The man, later identified as Mostafa Hendi, eventually regained consciousness.

“He kind of begged me, begged me to let him go,” Mothershead said. “I said, ‘You came in and tried to rob us. You’re going to jail.’”

While they waited for police and paramedics, Mothershead gave Hendi a roll of power towels, sprayed the floor with cleaner and told him to clean up his own blood.

“At the time you really don’t think you hit somebody as hard as you do, but looking back at the tape I can say I hit him pretty hard, I guess,” Mothershead said.

A Very Weird Career

Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012

Eric Lander, founding director of the Broad Institute, has had a very weird career:

At first, though, it looked as if the young mathematician would follow a traditional academic path. He went to Princeton, majoring in mathematics but also indulging a passion for writing. He took a course in narrative nonfiction with the author John McPhee and wrote for the campus newspaper.

He graduated as valedictorian at age 20, won a Rhodes scholarship, went to Oxford and earned a mathematics Ph.D. there in record time — two years. Yet he was unsettled by the idea of spending the rest of his life as a mathematician.

“I began to appreciate that the career of mathematics is rather monastic,” Dr. Lander said. “Even though mathematics was beautiful and I loved it, I wasn’t a very good monk.” He craved a more social environment, more interactions.

“I found an old professor of mine and said, ‘What can I do that makes some use of my talents?’ ” He ended up at Harvard Business School, teaching managerial economics.

He had never studied the subject, he confesses, but taught himself as he went along. “I learned it faster than the students did,” Dr. Lander said.

Yet at 23, he was growing restless, craving something more challenging. Managerial economics, he recalled, “wasn’t deep enough.”

He spoke to his brother, Arthur, a neurobiologist, who sent him mathematical models of how the cerebellum worked. The models “seemed hokey,” Dr. Lander said, “but the brain was interesting.”

His appetite for biology whetted, he began hanging around a fruit-fly genetics lab at Harvard. A few years later, he talked the business school into giving him a leave of absence.

He told Harvard he would go to M.I.T., probably to learn about artificial intelligence. Instead, he ended up spending his time in Robert Horvitz’s worm genetics lab. And that led to the spark that changed his life.

It was 1983, and while Dr. Lander was hanging around the worm lab, Dr. Botstein, at the time a professor at M.I.T., was growing increasingly frustrated. He had spent five fruitless years looking for someone who knew mathematics to take on a project involving traits like high blood pressure that were associated with multiple genes. For these diseases, the old techniques for finding traits caused by single genes would not work.

“I literally went around looking for someone who could help,” Dr. Botstein said. Finally, at a conference, another biologist said, “There’s this fellow, Lander, at Harvard Business School who wanted to do something with biology.”

Dr. Botstein hunted Dr. Lander down at a seminar at M.I.T., and pounced. The two connected immediately. “We went to a whiteboard,” Dr. Lander said, “and started arguing.”

Within a week, Dr. Lander had solved the problem. Then the two researchers invented a computer algorithm to analyze maps of genes in minutes instead of months. Soon, Dr. Lander had immersed himself in problems of mapping human disease genes.