Yet again... an article.

Hello everyone!

I just picked up my driver's license for the motorcycle... you can expect me at school with my motorcycle within a few weeks. =D
Anyway, here is yet again an article, a summary and my opinion.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/6190432.stm

'Let car drivers ride motorbikes'

Summary:
Motorcyclists casualties remain too high to be at ease. Geoffrey Squibb, a former motorcyclist until 1990 where he had an accident which paralyzed him from the chest down, says the police "can't sit back and do nothing because people are dying on the roads". He wants car drivers to learn how to drive a motorcycle so they can feel how a motorcyclist feels vurnerable at times where a car driver feels completely comfertable. Ofcourse, this is not the only solution for reducing the casualties. Motorcyclists should wear bright colored jacks so they are more visible on the road. Also to remember for both parties: "Speed limits are there for a reason, it is a maximum and not a target."

My opinion:
Like I said, I just picked up my license so I'm still a rookie when it comes to driving a motorcycle. I think the casualties are indeed far too high, and there's both parties to blame. Car drivers usually think they're in their safe tin can. That's where the looking part slides away. A motorcyclist will look better because he knows he is vurnerable. Car drivers always say 'I didn't see the motorcycle at all!' after an accident, this is the problem of motorcyclists. So both parties need to be more aware of the other party, that way, we will know what the other perspective is.

So I hereby conclude my article jibberjabber and start to enjoy the feeling of being a motorcyclist! =D

--Joost

Another Article =P

Hey guys,

Yet again an article... I've just been to Cambridge and I'm totally wrecked..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6943835.stm

"State of Play: Violence and video games "

Summary:
The public debate about video games and violence starts every now and then. The debate always has two parts with the pros and cons. Yet people wonder, are we asking the right questions? There are a lot of people who enjoy puzzle games like tetris but games like GTA IV and Manhunt are (almost) banned because of their violence. Maybe we should stop talking about GTA and start talking about Puzzle Quest. Puzzle quest is a game in which you line up three crystals but at the same time, the more you lineup, the more damage you do to your opponent. Why can't we play puzzle games without killing? This is going to be a problem in the next few years. The simplest of games, killing added just for the amusement of the crowd. The future is going to be very weird.

My Opinion:
I agree about the main topic. I've played GTA and Manhunt myself and I personally think that they're just games for enjoyment just as puzzle games are for enjoyment too. Why do puzzle games suddenly need violence to be fun? That is indeed a question we need to ask ourselves.
Are games like Manhunt really the problem or are games like Puzzle Quest the beginning problem?

And yet again, signing out.

--Completely Wrecked Joost

Files released on UFO sightings

Hello everyone,

Here is yet again an summary and article reaction, so...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7398108.stm

Summary:
Eight files about UFO sightings were released by the Ministry of Defence. This is going to expand to 200 files within the next few years.
These eight files cover the time between 1978-1987. In these files several people claimed to see weird lights and objects not known. One man even stated he had physical contact with green aliens since he was a child. Within the files are also sketches and drawings of UFOs which people claimed to have seen. There are people who say the files are just a wash-up and the real files are still somewhere within the government.

My opinion:
I think UFOs are interresting. That is because there are so much theories about it and I think it is quite good to finally have some 'official' stories and files. However, I DO think this could be a wash-up just to shut some people up. I will not believe a lot of stories until I saw it myself, and I think I share this opinion with a lot of people.

And so I conclude my weekly (sortof) blogging...

Signing out,
--Joost

Why are girls fighting like boys?

Hey everybody, hope everyone had a nice holiday...

Here is yet again a summary of an article and my opinion about it.:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7380400.stm

Within the last few years, women got more violent. This was a shock to people in the UK because women are seen as mothers, daughters or wives. Women are usually less aggressive than men and the reason behind the aggressiveness is still a mystery because it takes more anger for women to really act violent. Women only cause 10 percent of the total crimes but this is a steep rise compared to a few years ago. Normally the women use nails or pull hair but the last few years they have brandished knifes, bottles and even pieces of wood. Some teenagers explained why they act so violent because the combination of drugs and binge drinking. They claim to have a kick and rush of adrenaline when they get punched and when they feel on top of the world. Some violent women are now causing a ruckus because men who are even more violent than them are given lighter sentences.

--

My opinion:
It is indeed a shock to hear women acting more violent. I never see women fight, only with boxing matches. It is quite weird to hear women getting worse sentences than men who are even acting more violent. I wonder what the women have trouble with because women are usually calmer than men and yet they attack people too. Fighting is something for men to do. Women should behave themselves because they always tell men that women are a more behaving sex. Even though women are only the 10% of the total crime rate, fighting remaines a bad thing altogether.

--

Until next time,

--Joost