We had a going-away party for one of my coworkers yesterday. He’s leaving the company after eight years to return to school. It’s a sign of a good company, and a valuable person, when that somebody gets a party upon his unexpected departure.

(This post is part of the 100/100/100 challenge)

In response to an increase in panhandling, Minneapolis is considering new ordinances:

The proposed rules would ban panhandling at night, along with verbal solicitation of money within 10 feet of a crosswalk, where people feel captive to importuning beggars.

Opponents object that the amended ordinance would target poor and homeless people.

Wait… come again? The “opponents” take issue with the implied wealth and station of beggars? Of course the new rule targets the poor: the poor are the ones begging (exceptions notwithstanding). Sure, they might need extra money solely to feed a drug or alcohol habit, but the rich satisfy those vices without accosting people on the street.

To say that panhandling laws unfairly target the poor would be like saying that insider trading laws unfairly target the wealthy.

(This post is part of the 100/100/100 challenge)

There is a certain magic that I feel in bookstores.  It’s a sense of wonder, of possibility, of excitement at all the knowledge waiting to be learned and stories waiting to be enjoyed.  A thousand lifetimes would be insufficient to absorb it all.

Oddly, I don’t have the same feeling in a library.  Sure, the books are free to borrow, and some libraries now sell espresso, but there’s something lacking in the experience.  Have I been brainwashed by Barnes and Noble to prefer ownership over community?  Is the bookstore more convenient and better stocked?  I wonder.

(This post is part of the 100/100/100 challenge)

Three years ago, I spent a month backpacking through Europe. In the hope that somebody can benefit, I’m sharing my packing list. I think my choices worked well. The best advice I can offer is that the less stuff you bring, the happier you will be.

Of course, not everybody subscribes to that school of thought. I couldn’t believe how much crap some people lugged around. Two female Aussies that Webb and I encountered had enormous camping backpacks, plus giant suitcases, plus large bookbags. They must have been miserable while on the move.

Pack smart. Pack light.

(This post is part of the 100/100/100 challenge)

A soon-to-be-released report produced by the University of Minnesota in cooperation with the Minnesota Department of Transportation concludes that “during [a period of enhanced speed enforcement] there were reductions in the numbers of Fatal and ‘A’ Injury Crashes.” (Harder 2007) That’s great, right? Fewer people dying is good for everybody, morticians excepted.

Trouble is, the data showing a decrease in casualties is a bit sparse, and the study fails to establish a causal relationship between enhanced enforcement and fewer fatalities. Specifically, the bad crashes decreased in number in both the enhanced and regular enforcement zones. Was there a halo effect? Did cars get safer? A similar argument could be made about the implied correlation with speed and the lack of supporting data.

The report openly acknowledges that “an increase in the variability in speed … is often associated with increases in crash rate.” In other words, it’s not necessarily absolute speed that’s a problem, but rather the relative speed between cars. Data varied, but the study showed that generally less than 65% of drivers in the study areas were within the 10 mph pace.

Perhaps we’re going about speed enforcement the wrong way. Instead of setting an absolute limit, maybe we should post a suggested speed. Officers would monitor the average speed of the traffic and note outliers. Individuals who are not within +/- 5 mph of the mean speed would receive a citation.

With that system, the differential speed would be reduced, which in turn would decrease the crash rate. People could drive faster than present limits as long as everybody else travels at a similar speed. Likewise, people going far slower than the flow, thus presenting a hazard, could be cited.

I like it.