JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

dzimmerm's past comments

• 

  0

  dzimmermSep. 02, 2009 - 09:23PM JST

  I think the reason bullying occurs is due to the intermixing of extroverts and introverts. Extroverts draw power and security by getting attention and being surrounded by people. Introverts draw power from solitude. When you mix the two in a forced social interaction the extrovert tends to pick on the introvert because they do not understand why the introvert does not want to be their friend or part of their gang.

  Early classification of students into these two groups and then separating them into different schools would allow the learning of lessons and socialization to advance to the point where you could then mix the two and both would be mature enough to deal with their differences.

  If a extrovert bullies an extrovert they get in a fight or their different gangs get into a fight and there is resolution. They may even become friends after that. If an extrovert bullies an introvert the introvert is all alone, or if they have a small group of friends who are also introverts, those friends are robbed of power by the large number of people around them.

  An introvert will never openly confront anyone so it is unlikely an introvert would be bully in a school situation. Introverts who are bullies, maybe from past bad experiences in schools, are usually low to mid-level managers who have unresolved problems in their past.

  You can not change a left hander into a right hander and you can not change an introvert into an extrovert. The extrovert and introvert can work together and great teams are formed this way. The problem is children and young adults do not have the wisdom to use this partnership.

  Let the two groups grow and mature before you mix them together to form a stable solution.

  Posted in: What is the best way to combat bullying in schools?

• 

  0

  dzimmermAug. 02, 2009 - 08:56AM JST

  It reminds me of some of the costumes on Second Life. It also brings to mind the female Manga Characters that Japan is well known for.

  I would concur that the conservative Japanese leadership would probably rather be remembered for adding a more refined beauty to the world.

  This is a form of beauty however, just not the kind most folks want to admit exists.

  Posted in: Barrage of complaints force Miss Universe Japan to change costume design for finals

• 

  0

  dzimmermJun. 15, 2009 - 10:24PM JST

  A little research on the web shows that the toy gun is most likely a "Tokyo Marui Smith and Wesson PC356 Fullauto Electric Blowback" as that toy has a distinctive pattern on the side just like the one the boy has.

  Posted in: Packing heat

• 

  0

  dzimmermMay. 25, 2009 - 09:40PM JST

  In 1934,due to the use of the "tommy gun" by Bonnie and Clyde, a law was passed severely restricting ownership of automatic weapons. An automatic weapon is a weapon that can fire more than one bullet when you press the trigger one time. In 1968 a law was made that forbid the manufacture of any new automatic weapons for the use of the civilian population. In effect those two laws made it impossible for a U.S.A. citizen to purchase a new automatic weapon. U.S.A. citizens can not make their own automatic weapons due to the 1968 law and they have to go through an intensive background check and pay an extra $200.00 tax stamp on the automatic weapon if they can find one that was manufactured before 1968. That is just the federal law, Some states also have their own laws banning automatic weapons.

  To speak of new laws needing to be created suggests the person speaking is not aware of already existing laws. If someone is willing to break the law they can purchase automatic weapons from other countries or they can pay to have automatic weapons manufactured in the U.S.A., by people willing to break the law to make extra money.

  You may say that new automatic weapons are being produced by companies in the U.S.A. and you would be correct. Those weapons are made for the military and the state and local law enforcement organizations. Those weapons can not be legally bought by or sold to civilians in the U.S.A. due to the existing law that was passed in 1968.

  In my opinion the polarization of the U.S.A. people by politicians is a joke. It is a way to get people to divide and in that division power can be maintained by both the groups that support the 2nd Amendment and by groups that would rather repeal the 2nd Amendment.

  If a politician tells you they need more laws to control guns, they are lying to you.

  If a politician tells you they need to protect your gun rights they are also lying to you.

  Unless 3/4s of the states agree on repealing the 2nd Amendment there is no constitutional way the government can take away your gun rights. They can pass laws that mean essentially nothing, but those laws will be struck down by court rulings, as has happened in the DC verses Heller case.

  So feel free to beat the drum for whatever side of this issue you are on, but until you get 3/4 of the states to agree with you enough to pass a constitutional amendment you are just making meaningless noise.

  Posted in: U.S. liberals ask how they lost gun rights, Guantanamo votes

• 

  0

  dzimmermNov. 28, 2008 - 11:48PM JST

  For an elderly person who values their privacy and independence such a device would be better than a person they can not trust.

  Posted in: How would you feel about having robots as domestic servants?

Follow us