Back in 2008 life seemed to be going well - I was 8 years into a job I really loved, and seemed to be making a real difference there, too. OK, I was working too many hours, but enjoyed it so much that it didn't seem to matter. My marriage hadn't survived the move to this job, even though it had appeared to be a lifesaver to us both at first, but circumstances meant that I was the one to petition for the divorce, which had been finalised 2 years previously. Walking away from 19 years marriage had been easier than I thought it would be.
Since I started there I had been working with one major handicap - I didn't have an assistant who was capable of running things when I wasn't around, nor willing to make decisions themselves, despite all efforts to empower them. The association (it was a large charity) decided that we didn't need an assistant manager as this would entail paying a lot more, so I simply had a "centre assistant"! It was a nothing title, and didn't even explain what that person did, and none of the people who came and went from that role liked the title - and despite trying to get it changed the committee I answered to refused to move on it. It meant that the people employed as centre assistant didn't feel valued, were not paid enough to take responsibility, and I ended up having to work harder to cover the slack.
At the end of 2007 it all changed. The current centre assistant left after only a few months, due to an unexpected pregnancy, and finally the association decided we should look for not one, but two, replacements (business was also expanding so we needed additional staff), and to give them a worthwhile title - so we advertised for an Assistant Manager, and an Activities Manager (we were a residential outdoor activity centre), and received a much higher calibre of applicant, and duly appointed two very capable candidates.
The association had employed an expert to do some staff training for us, and in conversation with him we had all expressed concerns about the hierarchical chain of command. We had a management committee that we reported to, and I was on that committee, but it had no power - so any decisions we made about the running of the centre had to be passed up to a finance committee, and then to the executive committee for final approval. We met quarterly, but the other committees only twice a year, so the process was very slow, and if they wanted clarification, or changes to our suggestions, it came all the way back and started again. The expert suggested to the association that he could do a review of the system as it appeared flawed, and he felt particularly that the lowest level management committee needed some teeth as it was powerless at present.
We were all excited at the prospect of streamlining the decision making process, and getting plans executed faster, but just after the review started - mid 2008 - we were told that all the current jobs were also under review and there would be changes to all our roles! This was a big shock, as we had all though the review was going to be on the committee structure, and not on the whole staffing structure, particularly as we had just changed things round with the previous recruitment drive.
The result was that they put in a temporary management group, and came up with three new job titles - Centre Manager (which had been my title), Assistant Manager, and Property Manager. They produced the job descriptions and personal specifications for the three posts, and told us we were all eligible to apply for the new jobs! The new Centre Manager job had to have (essential qualities) a degree in Business Administration, and the Assistant Manager had to have (also essential qualities) a teaching qualification, while the Property Manager didn't require any formal qualifications. Surprise, surprise - my former Assistant Manager had a degree in Business Administration, and the Activity Manager had a teaching qualification - while I had no "formal" qualifications,
We were all called in individually and asked which "new" job we would like to apply for - and I pointed out that among the three of us it was clear which roles they had in mind for us since only one person was qualified for either of the two top positions, though they strenuously denied that this was the case, and I could still apply for my old job! I pointed out that I did not have the "essential" qualification needed for either of the two most senior posts, so was basically excluded from applying for those. It was obvious that they had tailored the roles for us in a specific order, but no-one would admit that, or even talk to me - who had been their centre manager for some 7 years (I had a different role with them in another building previously for over a year) - about it.
My job as manager had included free on-site accommodation as part of my "package", which was considered essential as part of the caretaking role, and having someone on hand for emergencies. The new role of Property Manager, which I reluctantly accepted and started early in 2009, was at less than two thirds of my previous monetary salary, so they agreed to include the accommodation in exchange for regular caretaking duties, emergency call out responsibility (we had been supposed to do that in rota before, but since the others lived 30 minutes or more from the property it had all fallen to me!), and as a goodwill gesture!
However almost immediately they informed me that they felt a "caretaker" was no longer needed - this in the same week that I had responded to a (false) intruder alarm, a group turning up to use some of the facilities and no-one leaving a key out for them, and accosting a dog-walker who had wandered onto the property - so were revoking the accommodation offer.
I explained that financially I couldn't afford to accept this, so they offered me redundancy instead - but I also sought legal advice regarding constructive dismissal since they had made changes to my contract of employment making my position untenable! This could all have been avoided if someone from the association had respected my original position of manager and taken the time to talk to me and explain what they were doing, but at no time did anyone, or would anyone, tell me what was going on.
I received a settlement as well as my redundancy payment, which also included free use of the on-site accommodation (a separate cottage) for 6 months as I had nowhere else to live. So ended over 9 years, very successful years for them, relationship between us, leaving me completely in the dark about why it had all come to this - and to this day no-one has clarified this, with even the chairman of the management committee, who was a personal friend, unaware of what the thinking behind it was.
There I was at 56 years of age, unemployed, and with no home of my own. I had fallen into a period of mild depression during the final weeks, so as soon as my final payment came through I decided to visit my nephew in Brazil - I needed to get away and clear my head, and also at the back of my mind was the thought that maybe I could make a new start in Brazil. I had been applying for jobs before I went, though nothing suitable for a 56 year old, with no formal qualifications was turning up.
I had a great time in Brazil, though Salvador (the capital of Bahia state) was too big, too noisy (though I was there during one of their regular festivals), and not that appealing to me anyway. I made a couple of trips, and fell in love with the Chapada Diamantina National Park, some 400 kms away. But, too soon my holiday was over and I returned to job-hunting in the UK.
While sending out some of the 150-plus applications I submitted, I was also wondering what the possibilities were of moving to Brazil. The cost of living was much lower, the climate very agreeable, but job opportunities for a 56 year old foreigner with no formal qualifications about as remote as in the UK - at least legal ones, since numerous foreign tourists simply stayed and worked off the grid (i.e. no taxes and low pay rates). As it turned out I only received 3 replies, all in the negative, from all those applications, and was shocked that so many companies did not even have the courtesy to respond - all the applications were in response to adverts, either in the press, online or at the Job Centre, so I was not "cold calling" them.
I remembered that the hostel I stayed in while in the Chapada Diamantina ran a children's charity, so contacted the owner to see if she would offer me a 2-year voluntary role helping there, which she jumped at. A volunteer visa allowed a 2-year stay (well, one year renewable for the second year), and I hoped that this would give me time to sort out some sort of permanent residence. So I started taking a TEFL (teaching English as a foreign language) course, and trying to get all the required paperwork for the visa - which was much, much harder than I expected!
I was still applying for jobs, and took on some temporary work - 2 contracts - though this didn't amount to much, but also planning my move to Brazil bearing in mind I had to vacate the "free" accommodation in November 2009. Because I would have no income as a volunteer and not that much in savings, even after my redundancy settlement, I cashed in my 2 work-related pensions (though I had only worked for the two companies some 15 years in total so it didn't account for that much) and the endowment policies (taken out to cover the mortgage on the marital home that my ex-wife kept as part of the settlement), primarily because I was still paying into them, and it seemed better to cash them in to purchase an annuity, giving me a small regular monthly income for the rest of my life, rather than keep paying into them. The annuity I took out guaranteed a fixed income for the first two years, so I knew how much I would have coming in, but after that I was hoping to have found a more permanent solution.
By the time November came round I had submitted my first visa application, but it was returned as some of the paperwork - from Brazil - was missing! I decided, however, that I couldn't wait indefinitely so moved to Brazil late November, intending to get the rest of the missing paperwork and return in the New Year to try again! The very nice lady at the
Brazilian Embassy in London, had been very understanding and was holding onto my papers (I had copies!) pending my return. I placed some personal belongings in storage, hoping to be able to ship them out to Brazil once I had achieved some sort of permanence, and flew out to my new life.
Upon arrival my first priority was accommodation - I had managed to book a "kitinet" - basically a bedsit - before arrival, but could only stay there a month as it was booked out for Christmas, a very busy time in the National Park, so immediately started house hunting. Initially a friend of the charity owner was to help me, but after two abortive attempts to meet up after we had met first for a meal, I decided to use a local agency, and was shown several properties in the centre of the small town. Some needed too much work, some had potential, but none had parking space or even a yard, and none of them had full legal title available (which apparently is very common in Brazil!), so the following day I was taken a little further afield - still within the town limits, but away from the centre. Two of the properties were unfinished - they knew I needed to move in urgently! - and a third had great potential as it was in two separate storeys and there was the possibility of renting one out, though the top floor, which had gorgeous views, was again unfinished, and wouldn't have been nearly as nicely appointed as the ground floor! The final property I was shown that morning was a vacant 4-bedroomed house on a 690 sq m plot, with garden (very overgrown) all round, though it had a beautiful view from the kitchen window. It was finished to a good standard, and just needed a coat of paint, and some minor repairs (bug screens were all torn) to be habitable, and amazingly also had full legal title, but I felt was far too big for me, and at the limit of my budget. Bear in mind that small properties in town could be bought for under £5,000!
We returned to the agency office and the agent was checking to see what we could view that afternoon, when someone came in and asked about available rentals. The final house I had looked at was one of their potential rentals, too, and the lady was quite interested, but they asked me first since a sale is better than a short-term rental! It took me about 30 seconds to make my mind up, and I bought a house! The price was far less than a one-car garage in the UK would have cost me, and I paid cash from my redundancy money! It was much bigger than I needed, and a little more expensive than I was initially looking to spend, but the fact it was ready to move in and needed no expensive work doing, meant that it was in fact a good investment, and probably cheaper than many of the others would have been factoring in repairs, and possible legal disputes later on.
I paid a 50% deposit by bank transfer and we started the title deed transfer process, but it became apparent that this would not be complete by the time I had to vacate the bedsit and by then the town was booked out for Christmas (bear in mind it is mid-Summer in Brazil that time of year), so I approached the seller and asked if it would be possible to move in early, and they agreed without any problem - one of the advantages of being a gringo is that they trust you much more than they would a Brazilian. plus they did have half the asking price!! So I immediately started looking for furnishings, bought some paint, some new mesh for bug screens, cleaning materials, and started preparing to move when my rent expired. I moved in on December 23, 2009, after a few false starts on getting the furniture - some shops didn't deliver to the area despite assuring me they did, and the one who I bought most from missed the delivery day (truck got a puncture!), and finally arrived 3 hours before I was due to leave for Salvador to return my hire car, three days later! Much of the furniture arrived flat-packed, and part of the deal is they assemble on delivery, so I had to forego that and do it all myself upon my return!
So after spending the previous 30 years paying off a mortgage (as we moved "up" we renegotiated the mortgages) I was finally living in my own house - paid off in full (well, it was less a month later when the deeds were finally signed and transferred), with no debts, living in one of the most beautiful places I had ever been to - and about to embark on a two-year stint as a volunteer, and feeling more relaxed and contented than I had for years - my only regrets were that my elderly mother and 22 year-old daughter were 5,000 miles away! It did take me a further 6 months and 2 trips back to the UK to finally get my volunteer visa, but nothing then could take away the peace I felt in my soul.
The reference in the title? The Caipirinha is the national drink of Brazil and consists of Cachaça (a sugar based spirit), sugar, crushed ice and ... lots of lemons!
Circumstances made me move to Brazil in 2009, and I spent 6 months of the year there, and the remaining time in Peru, until 2020 when the Covid hit, trapping me in Peru for 14 months, before I managed to return to the UK, where I now reside permanently. I see the world through slightly rose-tinted glasses, but maybe because I have been fortunate in not suffering too many hardships along the way, and maintaining an optimistic, but realistic outlook on life.
Wednesday, 29 August 2018
Saturday, 11 August 2018
Membership of a Trade Union
In the mid-80's I was working for a supermarket in the UK as a Bakery Manager - they were making "bake-off" bread (part baked, rather than made from scratch) and other bakery products so the department didn't need highly skilled bakers, however right from day 1 the bakery was understaffed, and despite numerous pleas for additional staff I was the one making up the shortfall in hours every week. The bakery was never fully staffed (it was a brand new store and the bakery was only 75% staffed from the start), and every time Human Resources advertised for staff, the store manager vetoed this saying we didn't have the funds available, then she would take me to task for working too many hours! After about 6 months of this I decided that the time was right for me to leave so handed in the required (per my contract) 8 weeks' notice. No-one spoke to me about this or asked about my reasons for wanting to leave, so I simply went about my duties as normal. I started looking for other work, but as I had 8 weeks I wasn't initially looking that hard, but the day before the first 4 weeks were up the store manager came into the bakery and told me I could finish the following day!! She said that as I hadn't completed 6 months' service when I handed in my notice I only needed to give them 4 weeks, not 8. There was nothing in my contract stating this, and the HR department also appeared unaware of it, but 24 hours later I was unemployed!
A close friend and neighbour told me that Crane Freuhauf, an engineering company nearby that he worked for, was looking for temporary workers, so I rang them and two days later was granted an interview. The production manager looked at my CV, looked up at me, and asked what engineering skills I had. I explained that, as my CV indicated, I had not worked in engineering before but had reasonable DIY skills, so he opened a drawer and produced a screw, and asked me what I could tell him about it!! I said it was about 2.5c ms long, stainless steel, possibly a size 8, right-hand thread, and required a Phillips screwdriver - which seemed to satisfy him, so he offered me a trial, and asked me to come back the following Monday.
About 50 of us were ushered into the conference room and told that we were being taken on as temporary workers for a period of 13 weeks (the Conservative government had recently announced a job creation scheme and any business who employed new staff for a minimum of 13 weeks received a subsidy equivalent to part of the wages!), and that we were all on 2 weeks probation. He read out our names and the departments we were being allocated, and I was going to be on the main assembly line, however the door opened and the welding supervisor came in and said that some of his new workers had not turned up so he took 5 of our intake to train as welders (all who had some welding experience, but needed to be shown "our" system!), meaning some of the remainder of us were reassigned, and I was placed in the machine shop!
The next part of our induction (which lasted only one morning!) was to meet the shop steward, who said that we should all join the Trade Union (AEU - or Amalgamated Engineering Union), which would cost only a pound or two a week. One of our number was a former shop steward himself, so asked what benefits we, as temporary workers, would receive from our membership - and the shop steward blustered a little and mumbled "well, nothing", but went on to say that the full-time workers would not be too happy working alongside non-union workers (back in times when unions had more power most factories were "closed shops" meaning that non-union workers would not be employed, but times had changed). A few of us, myself included, decided to join up - I had never worked in a factory before and wasn't sure what it would be like anyway, so thought this small concession might make things easier for me.
As it turned out rural Norfolk was not at all militant, and the existing workforce couldn't care less whether we were union members or not! Nevertheless I was a card carrying member of the AEU!
After 13 weeks we were all laid off, at the end of our "contracts" but immediately taken back on for a further 13 weeks! The industry had natural "breaks" so it was a week-long shutdown, but many of us (full-time employees too) worked through the shutdown on overtime, so effectively our employment hadn't terminated - but the company still got a new job creation subsidy!
During my second temporary contract it was time for the annual pay negotiations, which the unions undertook on our behalf, and though, despite being union members, the "temps" had no vote on the outcome, but could attend the meetings (held during work hours). That year the company offered us 6% increase (about double the then rate of inflation), and the union representative from our sister factory, some 30 miles away), who was much more militant advised us to hold out for more!! He was at great pains to explain that the Unions could no longer advise that the workers went on strike for a better deal (as that was now illegal!), but he felt that if we, the workers, were to decide on that course of action we could get an improved offer. There were members of company management attending the meeting, and he kept just inside the law in what he was saying, and then asked for a show of hands on the current offer, which the voting members accepted - much to his disgust!!
During my third temporary contract I was offered a permanent job with the company, and as they promised to multi-skill all the permanent staff (including welding training) I felt it was a good move. The pay was not bad for Norfolk, we got 6 weeks paid holiday a year (though at times that coincided with shutdowns rather than when we wanted a holiday) and holiday pay was paid at time and a half. This was a throwback to the days when many factories worked shifts round the clock, and night and weekend shifts received enhanced rates of pay - so being on enforced holiday meant a reduction in pay for that period. Unions, when they had some power, had negotiated that all holiday, to all the workforce was paid at the enhanced rate of time and a half!
When the pay talks came round the following year the company offered us 10%!! That was way above the national averages, and, in my opinion, a very generous offer. There was a catch - they did want something in return! We had an agreement that anyone clocking in up to 3 minutes late would not get docked pay - they wanted to revoke that. There was also an agreement in place that we stopped working 5 minutes before a break (morning tea break, lunch, afternoon tea break and end of day) to "clean up" - they wanted to stop that, too. Finally because we worked a 39 hour week this was 4 x eight hour days, and Friday was only 7 hours, and there was only one hour between tea break and end of day - they wanted to stop that too.
Before the meeting there was much discussion about this, mostly along the lines of "we are giving the buggers nothing!". I spoke to most of my co-workers in the machine shop and tried to explain that we didn't, in fact, have to give anything up! None of us arrived "late" so the "3 minute rule " didn't apply to us, as the machine shop (and in fact most of the production lines) were classed as "hot" areas we could have a drink (from the vending machine, which cost pennies as it was heavily subsidised, or from a flask which most of us also had) whenever we liked, including Friday afternoon - so we were losing nothing there either, though we would have to drink standing at our work stations rather than sitting in the "tea area". Finally the "clean up time" - we could go to the toilet whenever we needed, so what was stopping us from going 5 minutes before a break time and washing our hands! Basically we could play the system and lose nothing in exchange for a 10% pay rise!
The day of the vote arrived and we met again in the dining room - again the militant Dereham branch shop steward addressed us, and pretty much said we would be wise to accept the offer as it was very generous - privately he was echoing what I had said, but not in front of the management!! So we turned it down, and finally settled for 6% with no concessions!
The two occasions I witnessed trade union shop stewards in action the workforce defied them and voted opposite to what they were advising! I only remained with Crane Freuhauf for 2 years - business was suffering (I believe even back then to cheap Chinese imports!) and the company were closing our factory down, and retrenching a lot of staff, and relocating others to the Dereham plant. I didn't wait for the possible redundancy notice and the risk of fighting with numerous others for scant job opportunities in a rural area, but managed to find another job - not in engineering - very quickly.
A close friend and neighbour told me that Crane Freuhauf, an engineering company nearby that he worked for, was looking for temporary workers, so I rang them and two days later was granted an interview. The production manager looked at my CV, looked up at me, and asked what engineering skills I had. I explained that, as my CV indicated, I had not worked in engineering before but had reasonable DIY skills, so he opened a drawer and produced a screw, and asked me what I could tell him about it!! I said it was about 2.5c ms long, stainless steel, possibly a size 8, right-hand thread, and required a Phillips screwdriver - which seemed to satisfy him, so he offered me a trial, and asked me to come back the following Monday.
About 50 of us were ushered into the conference room and told that we were being taken on as temporary workers for a period of 13 weeks (the Conservative government had recently announced a job creation scheme and any business who employed new staff for a minimum of 13 weeks received a subsidy equivalent to part of the wages!), and that we were all on 2 weeks probation. He read out our names and the departments we were being allocated, and I was going to be on the main assembly line, however the door opened and the welding supervisor came in and said that some of his new workers had not turned up so he took 5 of our intake to train as welders (all who had some welding experience, but needed to be shown "our" system!), meaning some of the remainder of us were reassigned, and I was placed in the machine shop!
The next part of our induction (which lasted only one morning!) was to meet the shop steward, who said that we should all join the Trade Union (AEU - or Amalgamated Engineering Union), which would cost only a pound or two a week. One of our number was a former shop steward himself, so asked what benefits we, as temporary workers, would receive from our membership - and the shop steward blustered a little and mumbled "well, nothing", but went on to say that the full-time workers would not be too happy working alongside non-union workers (back in times when unions had more power most factories were "closed shops" meaning that non-union workers would not be employed, but times had changed). A few of us, myself included, decided to join up - I had never worked in a factory before and wasn't sure what it would be like anyway, so thought this small concession might make things easier for me.
As it turned out rural Norfolk was not at all militant, and the existing workforce couldn't care less whether we were union members or not! Nevertheless I was a card carrying member of the AEU!
After 13 weeks we were all laid off, at the end of our "contracts" but immediately taken back on for a further 13 weeks! The industry had natural "breaks" so it was a week-long shutdown, but many of us (full-time employees too) worked through the shutdown on overtime, so effectively our employment hadn't terminated - but the company still got a new job creation subsidy!
During my second temporary contract it was time for the annual pay negotiations, which the unions undertook on our behalf, and though, despite being union members, the "temps" had no vote on the outcome, but could attend the meetings (held during work hours). That year the company offered us 6% increase (about double the then rate of inflation), and the union representative from our sister factory, some 30 miles away), who was much more militant advised us to hold out for more!! He was at great pains to explain that the Unions could no longer advise that the workers went on strike for a better deal (as that was now illegal!), but he felt that if we, the workers, were to decide on that course of action we could get an improved offer. There were members of company management attending the meeting, and he kept just inside the law in what he was saying, and then asked for a show of hands on the current offer, which the voting members accepted - much to his disgust!!
During my third temporary contract I was offered a permanent job with the company, and as they promised to multi-skill all the permanent staff (including welding training) I felt it was a good move. The pay was not bad for Norfolk, we got 6 weeks paid holiday a year (though at times that coincided with shutdowns rather than when we wanted a holiday) and holiday pay was paid at time and a half. This was a throwback to the days when many factories worked shifts round the clock, and night and weekend shifts received enhanced rates of pay - so being on enforced holiday meant a reduction in pay for that period. Unions, when they had some power, had negotiated that all holiday, to all the workforce was paid at the enhanced rate of time and a half!
When the pay talks came round the following year the company offered us 10%!! That was way above the national averages, and, in my opinion, a very generous offer. There was a catch - they did want something in return! We had an agreement that anyone clocking in up to 3 minutes late would not get docked pay - they wanted to revoke that. There was also an agreement in place that we stopped working 5 minutes before a break (morning tea break, lunch, afternoon tea break and end of day) to "clean up" - they wanted to stop that, too. Finally because we worked a 39 hour week this was 4 x eight hour days, and Friday was only 7 hours, and there was only one hour between tea break and end of day - they wanted to stop that too.
Before the meeting there was much discussion about this, mostly along the lines of "we are giving the buggers nothing!". I spoke to most of my co-workers in the machine shop and tried to explain that we didn't, in fact, have to give anything up! None of us arrived "late" so the "3 minute rule " didn't apply to us, as the machine shop (and in fact most of the production lines) were classed as "hot" areas we could have a drink (from the vending machine, which cost pennies as it was heavily subsidised, or from a flask which most of us also had) whenever we liked, including Friday afternoon - so we were losing nothing there either, though we would have to drink standing at our work stations rather than sitting in the "tea area". Finally the "clean up time" - we could go to the toilet whenever we needed, so what was stopping us from going 5 minutes before a break time and washing our hands! Basically we could play the system and lose nothing in exchange for a 10% pay rise!
The day of the vote arrived and we met again in the dining room - again the militant Dereham branch shop steward addressed us, and pretty much said we would be wise to accept the offer as it was very generous - privately he was echoing what I had said, but not in front of the management!! So we turned it down, and finally settled for 6% with no concessions!
The two occasions I witnessed trade union shop stewards in action the workforce defied them and voted opposite to what they were advising! I only remained with Crane Freuhauf for 2 years - business was suffering (I believe even back then to cheap Chinese imports!) and the company were closing our factory down, and retrenching a lot of staff, and relocating others to the Dereham plant. I didn't wait for the possible redundancy notice and the risk of fighting with numerous others for scant job opportunities in a rural area, but managed to find another job - not in engineering - very quickly.
Wednesday, 25 July 2018
The evolution of my mobile phone usage
I am not, and have never been, a huge user of the mobile phone - but consider mine to be there for "emergencies only" as I travel a fair deal, and sometimes into remote areas in South America (where, as likely as not, there will probably be no signal in any case!). I currently own a "smartphone" but it is an old one (bought in 2012) and the OS is non-upgradeable so most modern "apps" don't work on it anyway, and serves me perfectly in the capacity I use it. My only gripe is battery life!! I have to charge it daily, despite the fact some days it never gets used, and this is actually what prompted to me to make this post, but I will leave that till the end!!
I cannot remember exactly when I bought my first mobile phone, but recall it was on offer at a local supermarket and on the Orange network - it cost the grand sum of £9.99, and I think the contract was £15.00 a month - so I bought one for my wife as well. It was huge! I do not recall the brand, either, so it may have been simply an "Orange" phone. Hardly a "pocket" phone, and I do not even recall if "texting" was possible - the early phones just had a number pad, with 3 or 4 letters corresponding to each number, and you had to tap through to the letter you wanted, so it took ages to type a simple message! It didn't get used very much, in any case.
I moved over to the Vodafone network and got a Nokia 3210 after that - which was, at the time, one of the top phones! Texting was still by tapping through the numbers, but seemed easier though still slower and long-winded. It didn't really affect me, however, as my phone usage was still pretty low, and my texts were almost monosyllabic in those days!
The 3210 was good, but I found it turned itself on in my pocket, so decided I wanted a flip-phone, which would also protect the screen - and upgraded to a Motorola Razr, which really impressed my daughter as it was, at the time, pretty state of the art! I loved it! Battery life was awesome - I could get a week out of it without recharging - the keys were easy to use, the twin screen (small screen on the outside showed caller details before you answered) was great, the camera was good (for the time), and it was just a very good mobile phone.
Then Motorola brought out the Krzr, which was a slimmer version on the Razr, and I upgraded (though my contract) for one of those - and it was as good as, if not better, than the Razr! Being smaller it fit even better in the pocket, and battery life was equally as good, so I was really pleased with the swap. At the time smartphones were becoming the "norm" but I felt I didn't need all the features of those, and since the monthly contract price to get one "free" was more than double what I was paying or felt I needed, I stuck with a "regular" phone.
When I moved to Brazil in 2009 I bought a netbook, so used that for connecting to the internet when travelling - at least when overnight in hostels - so again didn't feel the need to upgrade to a smartphone, and the Krzr still fulfilled all my call and text needs, though I moved to a pre-pay (PAYG - pay as you go) contract as I was unsure of my permanence and didn't want to lock myself into a long contract.
In late 2011 I managed to crack the small outer screen on the phone, not sure how - picked it up one day and it was cracked - and tried unsuccessfully to get a replacement in Brazil, where I was at the time, and considered ordering one from the UK, but since my daughter was visiting the following year I decided to ask her to bring me a new phone, and upgrade to a smartphone!!
I have never been one for following fashions, or having to own big brand names - where style is often at the expense of quality or content - and also have never had the money to throw around updating annually just to have the latest things, even when the old ones are just as good or not worn out. This means that whenever I make a major purchase (and this had to be a sim-free, no contract phone as it would still be on a PAYG basis) I do a lot of online research first to ensure I get best value for my money!
As primarily this was going to be simply a phone, all the other features were incidental - I just wanted something that would make calls and send texts, take the odd photo (I usually carry a good compact camera so the phone's camera wasn't that important), and anything else was a bonus - but battery life was crucial! My shortlist, within my price range, was examined closely and the Samsung W i8150 was streets ahead of the competition in claimed battery life - the Samsung blurb claimed 420 hours stand-by and 120 hours talk-time - and even the independent reviews raved about how good the battery life was! So I bought one, and my daughter duly brought it out when she visited.
We travelled a bit before going to my home so the phone remained boxed up for 10 days and then I followed all the "battery conditioning" instructions before inserting my old sim-card and starting to use it in earnest.
Don't get me wrong it is a great phone - BUT the battery life is terrible! I get around 14 hours out of a full charge - when the phone is on standby and not being used at all! Using it for a couple of calls and texts (or even Whatsapp) don't seem to make any difference to battery life. I did have to change the battery (for another original Samsung one) after 3 years as the battery was "swelling" and my daughter (I was visiting the UK at the time and she is more tech-savvy than me, but I am no slouch!) warned me that smartphones do have a habit of needing regular battery replacements (not a problem generally for those who update every year or so!), but the "new" one is just as bad as the original for battery life.
What prompted me to make this post - back to the first paragraph - is that some days my phone "beeps" to tell me it has low battery (down to 15% left), while others it still has 25% life left at the same time of day when I plug it in to charge - yet yesterday it had 57% left when I plugged it in?? How does this work? The phone gets the same low to zero use every day - I probably make 2 calls a month (yes, a month!) here - to order gas or water - and the rest of the time it sits on a table next to me, so how can one day this equate to 85% battery usage, and another only 43%? I am not using GPS, which I know can use a lot of power, nor do I have it set to seek out wifi - again I have heard that if the phone is continually "looking" for internet connections this can also use a lot of power - so I cannot think of any reason why the usage should be so variable.
I may consider an upgrade soon - or a retro-grade if rumours that Motorola might release a new Razr flip - as the i8150 has another "problem" - the OS cannot be upgraded! It is running Android 2.4, so most modern apps - including some that were factory installed - do not work on it!
I cannot remember exactly when I bought my first mobile phone, but recall it was on offer at a local supermarket and on the Orange network - it cost the grand sum of £9.99, and I think the contract was £15.00 a month - so I bought one for my wife as well. It was huge! I do not recall the brand, either, so it may have been simply an "Orange" phone. Hardly a "pocket" phone, and I do not even recall if "texting" was possible - the early phones just had a number pad, with 3 or 4 letters corresponding to each number, and you had to tap through to the letter you wanted, so it took ages to type a simple message! It didn't get used very much, in any case.
I moved over to the Vodafone network and got a Nokia 3210 after that - which was, at the time, one of the top phones! Texting was still by tapping through the numbers, but seemed easier though still slower and long-winded. It didn't really affect me, however, as my phone usage was still pretty low, and my texts were almost monosyllabic in those days!
The 3210 was good, but I found it turned itself on in my pocket, so decided I wanted a flip-phone, which would also protect the screen - and upgraded to a Motorola Razr, which really impressed my daughter as it was, at the time, pretty state of the art! I loved it! Battery life was awesome - I could get a week out of it without recharging - the keys were easy to use, the twin screen (small screen on the outside showed caller details before you answered) was great, the camera was good (for the time), and it was just a very good mobile phone.
Then Motorola brought out the Krzr, which was a slimmer version on the Razr, and I upgraded (though my contract) for one of those - and it was as good as, if not better, than the Razr! Being smaller it fit even better in the pocket, and battery life was equally as good, so I was really pleased with the swap. At the time smartphones were becoming the "norm" but I felt I didn't need all the features of those, and since the monthly contract price to get one "free" was more than double what I was paying or felt I needed, I stuck with a "regular" phone.
When I moved to Brazil in 2009 I bought a netbook, so used that for connecting to the internet when travelling - at least when overnight in hostels - so again didn't feel the need to upgrade to a smartphone, and the Krzr still fulfilled all my call and text needs, though I moved to a pre-pay (PAYG - pay as you go) contract as I was unsure of my permanence and didn't want to lock myself into a long contract.
In late 2011 I managed to crack the small outer screen on the phone, not sure how - picked it up one day and it was cracked - and tried unsuccessfully to get a replacement in Brazil, where I was at the time, and considered ordering one from the UK, but since my daughter was visiting the following year I decided to ask her to bring me a new phone, and upgrade to a smartphone!!
I have never been one for following fashions, or having to own big brand names - where style is often at the expense of quality or content - and also have never had the money to throw around updating annually just to have the latest things, even when the old ones are just as good or not worn out. This means that whenever I make a major purchase (and this had to be a sim-free, no contract phone as it would still be on a PAYG basis) I do a lot of online research first to ensure I get best value for my money!
As primarily this was going to be simply a phone, all the other features were incidental - I just wanted something that would make calls and send texts, take the odd photo (I usually carry a good compact camera so the phone's camera wasn't that important), and anything else was a bonus - but battery life was crucial! My shortlist, within my price range, was examined closely and the Samsung W i8150 was streets ahead of the competition in claimed battery life - the Samsung blurb claimed 420 hours stand-by and 120 hours talk-time - and even the independent reviews raved about how good the battery life was! So I bought one, and my daughter duly brought it out when she visited.
We travelled a bit before going to my home so the phone remained boxed up for 10 days and then I followed all the "battery conditioning" instructions before inserting my old sim-card and starting to use it in earnest.
Don't get me wrong it is a great phone - BUT the battery life is terrible! I get around 14 hours out of a full charge - when the phone is on standby and not being used at all! Using it for a couple of calls and texts (or even Whatsapp) don't seem to make any difference to battery life. I did have to change the battery (for another original Samsung one) after 3 years as the battery was "swelling" and my daughter (I was visiting the UK at the time and she is more tech-savvy than me, but I am no slouch!) warned me that smartphones do have a habit of needing regular battery replacements (not a problem generally for those who update every year or so!), but the "new" one is just as bad as the original for battery life.
What prompted me to make this post - back to the first paragraph - is that some days my phone "beeps" to tell me it has low battery (down to 15% left), while others it still has 25% life left at the same time of day when I plug it in to charge - yet yesterday it had 57% left when I plugged it in?? How does this work? The phone gets the same low to zero use every day - I probably make 2 calls a month (yes, a month!) here - to order gas or water - and the rest of the time it sits on a table next to me, so how can one day this equate to 85% battery usage, and another only 43%? I am not using GPS, which I know can use a lot of power, nor do I have it set to seek out wifi - again I have heard that if the phone is continually "looking" for internet connections this can also use a lot of power - so I cannot think of any reason why the usage should be so variable.
I may consider an upgrade soon - or a retro-grade if rumours that Motorola might release a new Razr flip - as the i8150 has another "problem" - the OS cannot be upgraded! It is running Android 2.4, so most modern apps - including some that were factory installed - do not work on it!
Sunday, 13 May 2018
Social media gripe
I use social media a lot - primarily Facebook - mainly to keep in touch with family and friends as I live a long way from them. I do, however, post frequently!! I share a lot of photos, and also trip details, but share a lot of daily observations and experiences as well - and I do have quite a following who express pleasure reading about my views on life as a foreigner abroad.
I have a lot of "friends" but the vast majority are people who I play some online games with, and not people I really know (though many of them follow my ramblings too!), but I filter out most of their posts, partly, I suppose, because I feel I would be intruding in their private lives when I don't know them - I am a private person (apart from what I share!) so respect their privacy. I never post anything rude or abusive, too private, or too controversial, so anyone is welcome to read my posts - though I can (and occasionally do) restrict certain people as to what they can see.
This means I do not "follow" any of my gaming friends, and set them as "acquaintances", and if any of those I do actually know post too much "rubbish" (like "is listening to ...", "is having lunch at ...", or are too political, too religious, etc.), which I am not interested in I also "un-follow" them - they are at liberty to do the same to me!! So this means that I have probably no more than a dozen people whose posts pop up in my newsfeed, and maybe as many "others" (organisations - like Sea Shepherd, who I like), who I follow as well, and accept notifications from.
My "gripe" today is those who "like" their own posts!! To me that is a bit like giving yourself a "high five", or a pat on the back, or kissing the back of your own hand! Surely you must "like" your post, or why did you bother posting it in the first place? Now, I understand that the various algorithms that Facebook use, say to decide what adverts to show you, use the "likes" of a post to promote that post to your friends - the more popular the post the more likely it is to be shown to your friends - so if you "like" it yourself then it might get a greater circulation, but I still feel it is a bit like blowing your own trumpet, and is something I could never do.
I have a lot of "friends" but the vast majority are people who I play some online games with, and not people I really know (though many of them follow my ramblings too!), but I filter out most of their posts, partly, I suppose, because I feel I would be intruding in their private lives when I don't know them - I am a private person (apart from what I share!) so respect their privacy. I never post anything rude or abusive, too private, or too controversial, so anyone is welcome to read my posts - though I can (and occasionally do) restrict certain people as to what they can see.
This means I do not "follow" any of my gaming friends, and set them as "acquaintances", and if any of those I do actually know post too much "rubbish" (like "is listening to ...", "is having lunch at ...", or are too political, too religious, etc.), which I am not interested in I also "un-follow" them - they are at liberty to do the same to me!! So this means that I have probably no more than a dozen people whose posts pop up in my newsfeed, and maybe as many "others" (organisations - like Sea Shepherd, who I like), who I follow as well, and accept notifications from.
My "gripe" today is those who "like" their own posts!! To me that is a bit like giving yourself a "high five", or a pat on the back, or kissing the back of your own hand! Surely you must "like" your post, or why did you bother posting it in the first place? Now, I understand that the various algorithms that Facebook use, say to decide what adverts to show you, use the "likes" of a post to promote that post to your friends - the more popular the post the more likely it is to be shown to your friends - so if you "like" it yourself then it might get a greater circulation, but I still feel it is a bit like blowing your own trumpet, and is something I could never do.
Monday, 19 February 2018
Making your mind up too quickly!
My last full-time job was managing a residential activity centre for a large female-only charity in the UK. The property consisted of a 12 bed-roomed house with around 40 beds (an old Rectory), 6 campsites (4 of which had direct access to showers and toilets), and a variety of adventurous activities.
Our focus, obviously, had to be the members of the organisation, but we allowed others to use the facilities at times that didn't clash with the charity's needs, so term-time weekdays we had schools camping and using the activities as they were not needed by the members, and similarly the house could be booked during the week for schools, business conferences, or even residential stays (occasionally by groups of "retired" or senior members).
Weekends were generally reserved for the association, as were the campsites during the school holidays. We were, however, always open to new ideas to generate income for the charity, and offset the considerable running costs. Weekday business conferences were one of the services we offered, as well as training days (using our adventurous activities), but the take-up was relatively poor.
One day one of my assistants came in and said "Why don't we do weddings? A lot of country houses like this do and we could charge a lot of money for the facility." I may have been a little hasty at pouring cold water on the idea, but listed my "objections":
1. Most weddings are weekends, and this is core time for our members
2. Weddings tend to be noisy and we already have a poor reputation with some of our neighbours
3. Parking will be an issue - we only have parking for around 20 vehicles as it stands
4. We would probably have to close the entire site for the duration of the wedding - as we could hardly have revellers wandering around the estate and into campsites occupied by young female members
5. A Saturday wedding (well, any day of the week wedding) would probably require the previous day for preparing and decorating the venue, and the following day for clearing and cleaning - so we would be looking at a 3 day booking for the wedding.
6. Staffing would be expensive as we do not currently have the staff required to attend a wedding
The other 2 assistantss looked at me as I listed all this - they had not considered any of these factors, simply that weddings bring in money! A counter suggestion was made that we "sell" it as venue only, and the clients do all the decorating, cleaning, catering, etc. but that still left the issue of lack of parking, noise, and not being able to have any other guests on site. I asked them to come up with a figure for "lost" income from other sources (activities, camping, etc.) for us to host a wedding, and whether they though the organisation would allow us to refuse a weekend booking to members in favour of a wedding. That idea went no further!
Some months later one of the staff suggested that we should consider hosting "business breakfasts" - there was a group of businessmen from the local Chamber of Commerce who held monthly (on a Friday) breakfasts, currently at a city hotel, but were looking for a new venue. As we had a large dining room with conference facilities, and with a separate entrance from the main house we could host these without interfering with any guests who might be in the house. These meetings were attended by anything between 20 and 60 businessmen, starting at 7.30 and running till around 10.00, so could be a good source of income - my assistant knew how much they were paying and felt we could match or beat that price
I paused briefly before responding, to collect my thoughts, and said I didn't think it was feasible - and before I could elaborate was immediately accused of being negative and rushing to decisions.
So again I enumerated my concerns:
1. If we are using the dining/conference room for these meetings where will any residents have breakfast?
2. Noise? 20 or more businessmen directly below some of the bedrooms.
3. Parking is still an issue - typically businessmen travel alone to these meetings so we could have 40 or more cars to find parking for (when we have space for 20 - assuming we have no other cars already in the car park)
4. With the event starting at 7.30 we would have an influx of people around that time, parking next to our largest campsite, and walking up to the main building past what could be several hundred children (schools or members) early in the morning.
5. Catering - our cook works Friday evenings as we usually have groups in most weekends, so we would have to get a contract cook, and waiting staff, to service the business meeting, and they would have to start probably an hour before the meeting commenced.
6. Toilet facilities - although we could shut them off from the main house we only have 2 toilets serving the dining room, one of which is our downstairs "accessible" toilet
7. Attendance at the meetings is voluntary so we would have no way of knowing whether we were getting 20 (or less!) or 60 delegates, so there was a great potential for wasted food, which we would have had to prepare ahead so it was ready for the 7.30 start.
8. Finally, although the meetings last till "around 10.00" this was not absolute so we could have delegates hanging around in meetings till later, making clearing the room difficult, and possibly even impacting on lunch preparations for any residents.
There was silence from my assistants - again they had not really considered any of these, but then both expressed amazement that I had taken such a short amount of time to assess all these factors, and come to my conclusion. It taught me that reaching a decision quickly can appear as though you have not given it due consideration, but I hope it also taught them that there are people, like me, who can analise something fully in moments, and are not rushing to a ill-conceived decision just because they do it quickly!
Our focus, obviously, had to be the members of the organisation, but we allowed others to use the facilities at times that didn't clash with the charity's needs, so term-time weekdays we had schools camping and using the activities as they were not needed by the members, and similarly the house could be booked during the week for schools, business conferences, or even residential stays (occasionally by groups of "retired" or senior members).
Weekends were generally reserved for the association, as were the campsites during the school holidays. We were, however, always open to new ideas to generate income for the charity, and offset the considerable running costs. Weekday business conferences were one of the services we offered, as well as training days (using our adventurous activities), but the take-up was relatively poor.
One day one of my assistants came in and said "Why don't we do weddings? A lot of country houses like this do and we could charge a lot of money for the facility." I may have been a little hasty at pouring cold water on the idea, but listed my "objections":
1. Most weddings are weekends, and this is core time for our members
2. Weddings tend to be noisy and we already have a poor reputation with some of our neighbours
3. Parking will be an issue - we only have parking for around 20 vehicles as it stands
4. We would probably have to close the entire site for the duration of the wedding - as we could hardly have revellers wandering around the estate and into campsites occupied by young female members
5. A Saturday wedding (well, any day of the week wedding) would probably require the previous day for preparing and decorating the venue, and the following day for clearing and cleaning - so we would be looking at a 3 day booking for the wedding.
6. Staffing would be expensive as we do not currently have the staff required to attend a wedding
The other 2 assistantss looked at me as I listed all this - they had not considered any of these factors, simply that weddings bring in money! A counter suggestion was made that we "sell" it as venue only, and the clients do all the decorating, cleaning, catering, etc. but that still left the issue of lack of parking, noise, and not being able to have any other guests on site. I asked them to come up with a figure for "lost" income from other sources (activities, camping, etc.) for us to host a wedding, and whether they though the organisation would allow us to refuse a weekend booking to members in favour of a wedding. That idea went no further!
Some months later one of the staff suggested that we should consider hosting "business breakfasts" - there was a group of businessmen from the local Chamber of Commerce who held monthly (on a Friday) breakfasts, currently at a city hotel, but were looking for a new venue. As we had a large dining room with conference facilities, and with a separate entrance from the main house we could host these without interfering with any guests who might be in the house. These meetings were attended by anything between 20 and 60 businessmen, starting at 7.30 and running till around 10.00, so could be a good source of income - my assistant knew how much they were paying and felt we could match or beat that price
I paused briefly before responding, to collect my thoughts, and said I didn't think it was feasible - and before I could elaborate was immediately accused of being negative and rushing to decisions.
So again I enumerated my concerns:
1. If we are using the dining/conference room for these meetings where will any residents have breakfast?
2. Noise? 20 or more businessmen directly below some of the bedrooms.
3. Parking is still an issue - typically businessmen travel alone to these meetings so we could have 40 or more cars to find parking for (when we have space for 20 - assuming we have no other cars already in the car park)
4. With the event starting at 7.30 we would have an influx of people around that time, parking next to our largest campsite, and walking up to the main building past what could be several hundred children (schools or members) early in the morning.
5. Catering - our cook works Friday evenings as we usually have groups in most weekends, so we would have to get a contract cook, and waiting staff, to service the business meeting, and they would have to start probably an hour before the meeting commenced.
6. Toilet facilities - although we could shut them off from the main house we only have 2 toilets serving the dining room, one of which is our downstairs "accessible" toilet
7. Attendance at the meetings is voluntary so we would have no way of knowing whether we were getting 20 (or less!) or 60 delegates, so there was a great potential for wasted food, which we would have had to prepare ahead so it was ready for the 7.30 start.
8. Finally, although the meetings last till "around 10.00" this was not absolute so we could have delegates hanging around in meetings till later, making clearing the room difficult, and possibly even impacting on lunch preparations for any residents.
There was silence from my assistants - again they had not really considered any of these, but then both expressed amazement that I had taken such a short amount of time to assess all these factors, and come to my conclusion. It taught me that reaching a decision quickly can appear as though you have not given it due consideration, but I hope it also taught them that there are people, like me, who can analise something fully in moments, and are not rushing to a ill-conceived decision just because they do it quickly!
Sunday, 18 February 2018
Gun Control
I tend to over-think things, to over-analyse, and when I read something though provoking I stop, consider what I have read, do a little research even, and then make up my own mind about it.
This week it is gun control - at the forefront of everyone's minds after the latest horrific school mass shooting in the USA. Immediate knee-jerk reaction to ban all guns, which of course goes against the Second Amendment of the US Constitution "the right to bear arms"!
Fact - the US has the highest per capita gun ownership in the world
Fact - the US has the highest number of "mass" shootings in the world
Fact - actually no fiction - the US does not have the highest rate of gun homicide in the world.
In terms of gun deaths per 100,000 population per year the US comes in at number 11, behind countries like Honduras (6 times higher than the US!), Venezuela and Swaziland but interestingly of the "top" 20 one is in Asia (the Philippines at #13), one in Europe (Montenegro at #12), two in Africa (Swaziland at #3, and South Africa at #14) and the rest, all 16, are in the Americas!
Fact - most gun deaths in the USA are suicides
But the fact is that it is these "mass killings", and especially at schools, that catch everyone's attention and create the call for tighter gun control. People love quoting "Guns don't kill people, people do" - and they are right, it needs someone to pull the trigger, but that person also needs to be in the state of mind that makes them go out and kill as many people as possible.
Propped up against the table amongst my Christmas presents is a Diana model 22 (caliber .177) air rifle - bought by my parents, and I was 7 years old!
I took that rifle with me whenever we went out for a drive, and used to carry it about - but never shot at any animals back then, and certainly would never have shot anyone with it - even at that age I knew that would be wrong. My "targets" were tin cans, paper targets, old light bulbs (challenging when they were swinging!), and my Dad and I used to play "darts" on the verandah with the tiny flighted darts you could buy for airguns! Later in Mozambique, when I was 15 I used it for rat control in our chicken run, and got pretty good at taking down running rats in the tree branches.
This week it is gun control - at the forefront of everyone's minds after the latest horrific school mass shooting in the USA. Immediate knee-jerk reaction to ban all guns, which of course goes against the Second Amendment of the US Constitution "the right to bear arms"!
Fact - the US has the highest per capita gun ownership in the world
Fact - the US has the highest number of "mass" shootings in the world
Fact - actually no fiction - the US does not have the highest rate of gun homicide in the world.
In terms of gun deaths per 100,000 population per year the US comes in at number 11, behind countries like Honduras (6 times higher than the US!), Venezuela and Swaziland but interestingly of the "top" 20 one is in Asia (the Philippines at #13), one in Europe (Montenegro at #12), two in Africa (Swaziland at #3, and South Africa at #14) and the rest, all 16, are in the Americas!
Fact - most gun deaths in the USA are suicides
But the fact is that it is these "mass killings", and especially at schools, that catch everyone's attention and create the call for tighter gun control. People love quoting "Guns don't kill people, people do" - and they are right, it needs someone to pull the trigger, but that person also needs to be in the state of mind that makes them go out and kill as many people as possible.
 |
| Christmas 1960 |
 |
| Out with my airgun |
I took that rifle with me whenever we went out for a drive, and used to carry it about - but never shot at any animals back then, and certainly would never have shot anyone with it - even at that age I knew that would be wrong. My "targets" were tin cans, paper targets, old light bulbs (challenging when they were swinging!), and my Dad and I used to play "darts" on the verandah with the tiny flighted darts you could buy for airguns! Later in Mozambique, when I was 15 I used it for rat control in our chicken run, and got pretty good at taking down running rats in the tree branches.
I do not recall being "taught" that guns were dangerous, or it being drummed into me that you don't point it at people - if anything I would only have to have been told that once and that would have been enough. So why is it that some people, or even some nations, treat weapons differently.
In the UK, my homeland, it is quite hard to own a weapon - low-powered airguns can be owned by anyone under 18, though others are considered to be "firearms" and need licences to own. Handguns are no longer available to the general public, nor are semi-automatic rifles (the favoured weapon of the mass shooter in the USA), but shotguns and hunting rifles need a firearms certificate before they can be purchased. Ammunition needs a separate licence as well! The licence is weapon specific - it must list the particular weapon it pertains too, and adding others requires this to be recorded. Weapons must also be stored securely, generally in a gun safe, and ammunition stored separately, also under lock and key. The police will periodically come and inspect how the weapons and ammunition are stored, and often when the licence is renewed (every 5 years). It is a complicated process to get a firearms certificate, and includes a medical report on suitability of the applicant.
I understand that in the USA you could buy a gun and walk out of the store (you can even buy one in Walmart, not just in licenced specialised firearm stores) with it around 30 minutes later, assuming you don't fall into one of the "prohibited" categories (convicted felon, diagnosed mental illness, history of drug abuse, etc.) on the FBI database - so as long as you do not appear on their database, even if you have undiagnosed mental illness (so you do not need a medical certificate stating competency like the UK), you can buy a firearm - and this includes handguns, assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons. I believe that the Las Vegas shooter had also bought an adaptor (bump stock) that effectively turned a semi into a fully automatic weapon, and sales of these are unregulated!
Now I am not saying that the USA should ban weapon sales completely (not without changing the Constitution), but I do feel that they need more regulation - it does need to be harder to legally acquire firearms, especially multiple firearms! The process should be more rigorous, the background checks more detailed, and include a medical assessment as to competency, and it certainly should take longer than 30 minutes to acquire a lethal weapon! Possibly the process should also include some guarantees about the storage of weapons and ammunition, as there are many cases of children finding loaded unsecured guns and shooting someone with it. This is going to be the most contentious point, though, as many gun owners claim they are for protection, and if you have to find a key and unlock a "safe" (could be a drawer!) to get at your weapon in response to, say, a home invasion this could prove the difference between life and death!
In the 60's my Dad purchased a .22 handgun while we were living in Angola, in response to the commencement of the liberation struggle by "terrorist" anti-government organisations. He kept the pistol, loaded, in his bedside drawer. A few days after he moved it to a lockable cupboard in our lounge (not sure why he did that) he awoke to find an intruder in their bedroom (a pet mongoose, rather than the two dogs sleeping on my parent's bed alerted him!) - he shouted and then went in pursuit, stopping to unlock the cupboard and collect the pistol, but by the time he had it the intruder had vanished. It turned out that it had been a former domestic servant who had been fired recently, as there was no "break-in" but rather the back door had been opened using a key that was "hidden" by the replacement domestic employee. My father, however, was left in quite a state by the incident - he wondered what would have happened had the gun still been in his bedside drawer, and whether he would have been able to shoot at the intruder, and what his reaction would have been had he actually hit and killed the intruder. It affected him so much that he decided to get rid of the gun, as he was unsure whether he could use it against another human being, even in defence of his family, and felt, therefore, that keeping it was dangerous.
My point here is that maybe the British have a different view of guns and their use, to the Americans, and possibly part of this is due to the fact that it is harder to get hold of one (legally!) and therefore "we" look upon it as a privilege, and not a "right" instilled in our Constitution.
In the UK, my homeland, it is quite hard to own a weapon - low-powered airguns can be owned by anyone under 18, though others are considered to be "firearms" and need licences to own. Handguns are no longer available to the general public, nor are semi-automatic rifles (the favoured weapon of the mass shooter in the USA), but shotguns and hunting rifles need a firearms certificate before they can be purchased. Ammunition needs a separate licence as well! The licence is weapon specific - it must list the particular weapon it pertains too, and adding others requires this to be recorded. Weapons must also be stored securely, generally in a gun safe, and ammunition stored separately, also under lock and key. The police will periodically come and inspect how the weapons and ammunition are stored, and often when the licence is renewed (every 5 years). It is a complicated process to get a firearms certificate, and includes a medical report on suitability of the applicant.
I understand that in the USA you could buy a gun and walk out of the store (you can even buy one in Walmart, not just in licenced specialised firearm stores) with it around 30 minutes later, assuming you don't fall into one of the "prohibited" categories (convicted felon, diagnosed mental illness, history of drug abuse, etc.) on the FBI database - so as long as you do not appear on their database, even if you have undiagnosed mental illness (so you do not need a medical certificate stating competency like the UK), you can buy a firearm - and this includes handguns, assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons. I believe that the Las Vegas shooter had also bought an adaptor (bump stock) that effectively turned a semi into a fully automatic weapon, and sales of these are unregulated!
Now I am not saying that the USA should ban weapon sales completely (not without changing the Constitution), but I do feel that they need more regulation - it does need to be harder to legally acquire firearms, especially multiple firearms! The process should be more rigorous, the background checks more detailed, and include a medical assessment as to competency, and it certainly should take longer than 30 minutes to acquire a lethal weapon! Possibly the process should also include some guarantees about the storage of weapons and ammunition, as there are many cases of children finding loaded unsecured guns and shooting someone with it. This is going to be the most contentious point, though, as many gun owners claim they are for protection, and if you have to find a key and unlock a "safe" (could be a drawer!) to get at your weapon in response to, say, a home invasion this could prove the difference between life and death!
In the 60's my Dad purchased a .22 handgun while we were living in Angola, in response to the commencement of the liberation struggle by "terrorist" anti-government organisations. He kept the pistol, loaded, in his bedside drawer. A few days after he moved it to a lockable cupboard in our lounge (not sure why he did that) he awoke to find an intruder in their bedroom (a pet mongoose, rather than the two dogs sleeping on my parent's bed alerted him!) - he shouted and then went in pursuit, stopping to unlock the cupboard and collect the pistol, but by the time he had it the intruder had vanished. It turned out that it had been a former domestic servant who had been fired recently, as there was no "break-in" but rather the back door had been opened using a key that was "hidden" by the replacement domestic employee. My father, however, was left in quite a state by the incident - he wondered what would have happened had the gun still been in his bedside drawer, and whether he would have been able to shoot at the intruder, and what his reaction would have been had he actually hit and killed the intruder. It affected him so much that he decided to get rid of the gun, as he was unsure whether he could use it against another human being, even in defence of his family, and felt, therefore, that keeping it was dangerous.
My point here is that maybe the British have a different view of guns and their use, to the Americans, and possibly part of this is due to the fact that it is harder to get hold of one (legally!) and therefore "we" look upon it as a privilege, and not a "right" instilled in our Constitution.
Thursday, 8 February 2018
Game watching - Part 2. Gorongosa
4 years after our return from Angola we were back in Africa again, this time in Mozambique, living on a remote sugar estate on the banks of the Zambezi River. My sister and I both then started at boarding schools in Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, and our trip to school was by plane, taxi and train, and took almost a day to complete!
Shortly after our arrival we made our first trip by road, to Rhodesia, to visit the schools and get our school uniforms in Salisbury, the capital now called Harare. We flew to Beira, the closest city to us and picked up our car - I am not sure if it was a rental, or belonged to someone my father knew - a VW Beetle! Not the biggest car for a road trip for a family of four, but certainly up to the job - except it regularly got punctures, which we became expert at changing! On the way back from Rhodesia we were stopping off at a game reserve in Mozambique called Gorongosa (we actually used to fly over part of the reserve on our way from Beira to our home on the sugar estate), which was only accessible during the "dry season" because of the dirt roads.We were somehow delayed on the way so were pushing on a bit on the dirt access road to arrive at the gates before they closed them - around 30 minutes before sundown, to allow vehicles back to the safety of the main camp in daylight - when we got another puncture! After a moment's hesitation to swear we all leapt out of the car and were back on the way in around 5 minutes, arriving at the main gate with minutes to spare! We were able to get the flat fixed overnight in the camp, and at first light were queuing at the inner gate, eager to get out into the reserve.
We were not to be disappointed! Back then Gorongosa was little visited, certainly not as internationally famous as Kruger Park in South Africa, but was well known for a large lion population
 |
| Sleeping lion near the old main camp - now known as "casa dos leões", "(lions' house) |
 |
| Close up of sleeping lion |
as well as large numbers of elephant, though it was almost the end of the first day before we came across any of these elusive giants. We had heard them in the thick forest, and come across fresh "sign", droppings and recently broken branches, but getting a clear sight of them proved extremely hard at first.
 |
| Our first elephant |
 |
| This one first pulled up a small bush to threaten us with |
 |
| Lion on the kill |
 |
| Even the young lions were enjoying the bounty |
 |
| The big boss was centre stage |
 |
| With full belly, looking for somewhere to sleep it off - the waiting vultures could now have their turn |
 |
| Gnu, or Wildebeest |
 |
| Elephant family on the move |
 |
| Some of Gorongosa's buffalo, taken from the air while flying home over the plains (this part of the reserve is inaccessible to vehicles) from school! |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)