BlogHer - human rights - Comments

Thank you for

kazari — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:29:32 -0600

Thank you for explaining.

And thank you for taking the time to respond on the blog.

http://myrope.wordpress.com

Convention of the Rights of the Child

IRC1933 — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:48:13 -0600

Dear Kazari,

Thank you for your query. Yes, you are correct, the Convention of the Rights of the Child prohibits the recruitment of children under the age of 15. That is why after the Convention was originally introduced in 1989, the international community saw the need to do more to protect children. This became especially important as more and more children 15 years of age and older began to be recruited into armed groups. As a result, an additional provision, or "protocol," was added to the convention. The first Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict came into force in 2002. It establishes 18 as the minimum age for compulsory recruitment and requires states to do everything they can to prevent individuals under the age of 18 from taking a direct part in hostilities. Also, in 2002 a second Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography was added to the Convention. It provides states with detailed requirements to end the sexual exploitation and abuse of children.

For more information you may wish to visit the United Nations Web site: http://www.unicef.org/crc/

Eduardo Garcia Rolland

Child Protection Technical Advisor

The International Rescue Committee

Interesting

Britt Bravo — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:32:04 -0600

Hi Kazari,

That's interesting. I wonder where I can find out more info. I'll ask the folks at IRC if they can comment.

Telling Stories is Powerful

Willful Woman — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:00:27 -0600

Thank you Kim for sharing part of my story!

I believe strongly in the power of story-telling as a healing force. I was so fascinated to hear part of John Muhammed's wife's story in the documentary about her. I moved away from the DC area 8 months after the shootings but I am very curious about what kind of storytelling the community has done among themselves since to help heal the wounds that terror inflicted. What happens to a community when that storytelling isn't encouraged? Of course, there are some voices we'll never get to hear from. We'll never hear the rest of Muhammed's and Malvo's victims' stories. Muhammed and Malvo silenced them. But we'lll never hear Muhammed's story either now. Maybe we never would have anyway. Or maybe it wouldn't have made any sense. But maybe it would have. Or maybe it would have brought comfort or a shred of understanding to someone. Or, in some way, helped prevent another similar attack. Now we'll never know.

You got right to the heart of my post with that paragraph you quoted. I did feel murderous for a while. I think it is a human response to feeling direly threatened. But I also feel it is our humane duty to rise above this response. Especially as a state. Always a... Willful Woman @ www.besidethestonewall.com Visitors always welcome! Bring your stories to share!

Thank you for your vivid retelling, Willful Woman

Kim Pearson — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:51:30 -0600

First, here are the direct links to your post on BlogHer and your personal blog. It may be that this kind of witness is necessary to exorcising the collective trauma of this horrific episode. I found this paragraph especially powerful:

I began to feel capable of murder. For the first time in my life. We all say it, right? We throw those words around like they mean nothing. I'm going to kill you! I could kill whoever invented this game... But I started to really mean it. I began to fantasize about it. Especially when I was driving around in my car. When I had to drive the kids somewhere or go out to pick something up. I felt so vulnerable. My family was threatened. And it enraged me. I felt that if I somehow found the person who was causing this terror, who had done this evil...I would try to stop them. Physically. That's how desperate I began to feel. How powerless. I've been a pacifist since I was a very young teen but I began to feel capable of real violence. If I spotted them - whoever they were - crouching in the woods with their gun I would steer the van off the road and run them over. Looking them right in the eye. I would run them over and hope they died. This was the only scenario I could conjure up. I've always felt empowered (maybe a little too?) behind the wheel of the car. People up north would talk about how unnerved they felt by the whole scenario. How freaked out they felt at the gas station. I felt like slapping them.

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor|KimPearson.net|

He shouldn't have died by our hands

Willful Woman — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:12:02 -0600

Kim, I just posted my own account of living through the so-called "D.C. Sniper" days and my anti-death penalty stance despite my own very real and unsettling impulse to want to kill whoever was threatening me and my family during that frightening time.

I've become a little obsessed with reading the accounts and theories since those awful few weeks in October 2002. And, in the end, I've come to the conclusion that, like so many of our social nets, John Muhammed slipped through many inadequate legal and social programs that had gaping holes. The domestic violence net that Mildred Muhammed tried to get the authorities to catch him in. That's a joke. The mental health net provided by the army? It's mere threads.

To me, the question isn't whether or not, John Muhammed was responsible for his behavior based on how sane he was or wasn't. It's whether or not society was safe enough from danger with him imprisoned for life. Of course we were. Why did we have to kill him too?When we toss away a human life, no matter how damaged and vile it is, we lessen the value we place on all human life. We bring our world closer to the kind of base and bloodthirsty world that men like John Muhammed crave. It diminishes us all.

See my blog post detailing being on Connecticut Avenue with my 2 year old daughter the morning the shooting spree began here on Blogher. It's called: Me and the DC Sniper. It's under Politics, I think. Sorry, I'm not too good at this yet. Or it's on my blog, www.besidethestonewall.com

I'm so excited to see someone else writing on this!

Always a... Willful Woman @ www.besidethestonewall.com Visitors always welcome! Bring your stories to share!

The point is that we can't know

Kim Pearson — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:00:39 -0600

@pookielocks Yes the crimes spanned weeks, and according to his ex-wife, his abusive behavior and deranged thought patterns had been evident for years before. Did it occur to him during that long time that what he was doing was wrong, or was he so removed from reality and conventional morality that he really believed that he was innocent as he claimed? In one of the articles I read, he supposedly told his lawyers that he was in Germany having dental work during the murders. We can't know whether legal and therapeutic measures would have helped him and saved lives. I do think, though - and perhaps Cooper, this is what you are saying, that I would have preferred that more effort had been made to understand the source of his mental derangement. We know that we have a lot of mentally and emotionally damaged veterans walking around, and Muhammad's case. like the cases of Steven Green and perhap Malik Hasan. underscores that we ignore their mental health issues at our peril.

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor|KimPearson.net|

didn't this span weeks?

pookielocks — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 14:17:56 -0600

didn't this span weeks? there had to be at least 1 moment when he knew what he was doing was wrong.

My latest BlogHer Post - Dolphins: The Truth About Our Friends From the Sea
SBAB &

That was my question as

cooper — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 14:09:14 -0600

That was my question as well. I remember the time, I lived in the area and it was scary, but something about this death bothers me.

It may just be I am against state sponsored executions I don't know, but as a recent report has come out showing that over two thousand vets die each year without insurance, and a lot of signs and symptom of the Hood perpetrator went unregarded or at least univestigated, one has to wonder if this beltway rampage too could not have been prevented had due attention been paid.

cooper

I'm not a lawyer, or even american

kazari — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:47:55 -0600

but I was told it was to do with the armed forces. The charter defines a child as somebody under 18 years of age, and the US allows people to sign up at 16 (I think).

However, looking at your link to the unofficial summary, it only talks about children under 15 with reference to armed conflict (Article 38) so I'm probably wrong.

http://myrope.wordpress.com

Great Article From A TCNJ Teacher!

YourTango — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:00:27 -0500

Not only is this a wonderful article, but I just wanted to give a shout out to Kim Pearson who was one of the best Journalism teachers at Trenton State/TCNJ. I know this because I never took Journalism when I went there and I still know she's a kick-ass professor. Nice to see a friendly face in the blogosphere!

In the long run, it's

no_I_am_zoe — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 09:05:24 -0500

In the long run, it's probably best to let congress take the lead. But, if they drop the ball on this, the President had better pick it up and run.

Thanks for the update on this.

Perhaps we must agree to disagree

Kim Pearson — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:20:17 -0500

Hi Jane,

Actually, I did not agree with the Pentagon's decision to ban photos of the caskets of returning war dead. In fact I blogged in support of the Memory Hole's gallery of casket photos in 2004. To say that there are times when it is appropriate for editors to exercise discretion is not to say that he government should have the right to engage in censorship that is unrelated to national security needs or individual privacy rights.

In this instance, I concluded that it was appropriate to link to the youtube video page rather than posting it directly, so that people can make their own judgment. At that time, youtube had a page up that required viewers to enter their age in order to see the video. I thought that struck an appropriate balance between the public right to know and the need to ensure that the video is not used in an exploitive way.

Peace,

KimBlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|

I don't agree with you, Kim

ByJane — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:04:40 -0500

Journalists, reporters, the press are meant to be the eyes and ears of our informed society. We cannot make the decisions we must if members of the press, for good or ill, are deciding what is and is not right for us to know. As far as our becoming inured to horror--no, I think each incident brings it home anew. As it should. I don't fear people being paralyzed into numb resignation. We, the people, are pretty strong, you know, not to mention smart. We don't need to be protected from life as if we were children. I assume from your points here that you were in favor of the last administration's refusal to allow the caskets of returning soldiers to be photographed. I couldn't disagree more. Life is dirty and messy at times, but if we are not allowed to experience that, we are shortchanged on experiencing its polar opposite--the wonders of life.

By Jane

http://midlifebloggers.com

http://byjane.blogspot.com

Great Piece...

SatelliteSister5 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:44:21 -0500

Kim, great summary about an awe-inspiring story. I believe the video is critical to the message.

I'll direct readers here to get a complete perspective. Thanks.

Lian Dolan

SatelliteSisterLian