We're Coddling Our Children To Death.

I was flipping through my local Target sales paper yesterday evening and came upon the following ad.

After pondering the intent of the items described for sale, I found myself asking...

Do parents really need to watch their baby via a constantly streaming video feed twenty-four hours a day?

After laughing at the Big Brother like nature of the video baby monitor, I couldn't help but be concerned. Is this sort of Orwellian surveillance necessary for the survival of our children? Humanity (Homo sapiens) has been on Earth for over two-hundred thousand years. Our most ancient ancestors have been here for nearly six million years. In all that time, no matter by which method you choose to measure, did children not survive without being constantly monitored? Were children not able to sleep in a cradle without being video recorded non-stop? Are we so pathetic as to require perpetual inspection and control of our offspring?

Let's think about it from another perspective. Consider the situation from the child's point of view. With constant spying, they'll never experience a world where their every action isn't being recorded. They'll never know what it is to enjoy actual privacy. They'll never comprehend the need for personal space and solitude. They'll never be able to make their own decisions. Most importantly, your own child will never know if they can trust you (or anyone else really).

What sort of life is that? Do we really want this for our children?

I realize this is just a single ad in a department store circular, but it reflects a much deeper societal problem that hardly anyone is considering.

We're coddling our children to absolute death.

You can let your child...

• sleep at night without watching their every breath
• play outside and get dirty
• defend against a bully, even if it means throwing a punch
• fail at their classwork, sports or any other personal endeavor
• do their own homework
• spend time alone without constant interaction

Believe it or not, little Johnny can go on the swing without you watching them.

You see, the more we hover over our children and watch their every move, the more we make them less independent. Spying on your child while they're an infant is the first step in a long journey of forming a defective human being -- one that's prone to dependency and needing constant approval from others. This type of helicopter parenting is ridiculous and detrimental to your child's health. And for goodness sake... the last thing this world needs is a populace comprised of attention-starved brats with no sense of independence.

Now cut the camera off and go to sleep.

Grinding My Gears! - Unobservant Pedestrian Shoppers

Have you ever noticed those people whom always seem to walk aimlessly into oncoming traffic when exiting a department store? Trust me -- I HAVE.

Hold the phones, it's...

Today's installment of Grinding My Gears! is all about Unobservant Pedestrian Shoppers. We all know them and we've all dealt with them. Some zeppelin-sized pussbag with three kids in tow will waddle out the front door of your local Wal-Mart or Target. You're driving by trying to find a parking spot (because you're not parking in the fire lane like the rest of the local scum). And of course, without any sense of their surroundings, those fools fail to look both ways and meander right in front of your vehicle. As expected, they take their time when walking in front of you. Big Momma in her pink sweats has to check her Facebook, you know! And those kids... they seem to run every which way BUT away from your vehicle. It makes me want to scream!

AAAAHHHHUUUUUGGHHHHHAAAAARRRRGGHHHH!

Why can't people just look both ways before walking into traffic? I realize that cars have to yield to pedestrians. That's a rule I fully agree with. Yet, doesn't some sense of personal responsibility enter into the equation? Whenever I walk out of a department store or shopping center, I follow a few simple steps.

1. STOP
2. LOOK LEFT
3. LOOK RIGHT
4. DECIDE IF WALKING WOULD IMPEDE TRAFFIC
5. GO WHEN I HAVE AN OPENING
6. WALK BRISKLY TO CROSS THE TRAFFIC LANE

I mean really folks... it's that damn easy. Sure, a vehicle technically has to yield to me if I walk in front of them... but it doesn't mean I should go without judging my surroundings first. Isn't it rude to just walk thoughtlessly in the way of other people? Much less, should you heedlessly enter into a lane of traffic with giant metal bricks on wheels zooming towards you? What if a driver doesn't see you? Did you ever consider that you might just be road kill for the buzzards?

No, you didn't... you're an aloof pinhead.

I can't even begin to count the number of boneheads that have walked in front of my car without so much as looking up and noticing I was there. It's a good thing I was paying attention because they sure as hell were not. Their mobile phone is the usual culprit, but not always. So often I see moms messing with their kids and completely neglecting to insure that it was safe to cross the road. Other times, it's folks shoving coffee or food into their face. Can't that wait until you get to your car?

New flash you morons -- just because drivers are instructed to yield to pedestrians doesn't automatically insure your safety! 

Need proof that more pedestrians are being killed in accidents with vehicles? Take a look at the most recent 2012 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report on pedestrian fatalities. For many years now, pedestrian deaths as a percentage of total vehicle accident fatalities have been steadily rising. In 2012, there were over 4,743 pedestrians killed in vehicle collisions. I'd bet good money that many of those deaths could have been avoided if the pedestrian involved had been more aware of their surroundings.

So there you have it. When you're walking out of a shopping center and going to your vehicle in the parking lot, please be attentive. Look around you. Wait for nearby vehicles to pass before entering the crosswalk. Be courteous of drivers and show them some respect, just as they show you respect.

Because let's face it... if the rule of law wasn't in place, I'd have run you over a LONG time ago. That's the only thing protecting you from me.

An Open Letter to Target: Stop Badgering Me About the REDCard!

The following is an open letter to the Target Corporation. Hopefully, someone within their corporate body will see this message. If not, then perhaps it will make the rounds on the internet in a viral manner. If you're reading this letter, please share it. Either way, my point will have been made.

-----------------------------------------------

Dear Target,

Please stop asking me if I want your REDCard.

Your associates are forced to ask me if I want to sign up for your REDCard -- sometimes two, three or even four times in one visit. No matter what department I try to complete a purchase, I always manage to hear the following.

"Would you like to sign up for our Target REDCard and save 5% off your purchase?"

Seriously... please stop.

Let me explain why I don't want your card.

In essence, your Target REDCard acts as an unnecessary middleman between my bank account and me. Instead of simply paying for my purchase via cash or my personal debit card, you want me to jump through ANOTHER hoop to pay for something. Why would I need a separate debit card that's only good at one retailer? I already have a debit card from my credit union that works just fine. I swipe my debit card at any location that accepts VISA, enter my PIN and I'm done. I get my item and you get your payment.

Most people with half a brain would ask... "Gee, why does Target want to be a middleman between my bank account and me?"

The answer is simple. By being the middleman in a purchase, you get to collect personal information about who I am and what kind of products I regularly purchase. This information is used by you, as well as the other corporate affiliates you share data with. If one were to carefully read the fine print in the REDCard's privacy policy, they would discover this important piece of information. Then again, you're banking on customers to never read the privacy policy. Most customers won't, which your lawyers and accountants have carefully predicted. By superseding the established relationship I have with my bank or credit union, you carefully insert yourself as the new intermediary in my wallet. To be quite honest, I'm just not comfortable with that scenario.

Alas, let's not forget that supposed 'generous' 5% purchase rebate you afford all customers with the REDCard. First, let's get one thing straight -- 5% is pathetic. For every one dollar I spend with your corporation, you only want to return five measly cents? I can find five cents on the ground in your parking lot! Let's expand this notion to a larger purchase. Say I spend fifty dollars in your store. That would equate to a $2.50 rebate off my total purchase. The sacrifice of my personal information for a few dollars is not worth it. If I genuinely need to save a tiny, almost ineffective amount off a purchase, I'll use a coupon. I'll wait until an item goes on sale. I'll wait until the regular price drops. I'll wait until the item is clearanced. Again -- your 5% rebate is insulting. We both know my personal information and shopping data is worth a considerable amount more than any 5% rebate. The data that is mined from personal shopping and expenditures has become, as the World Economic Forum calls it, a new asset class. In layman's terms, that means my data is worth big bucks to you. It helps you learn how to make me give you more of my personal wealth.

Perhaps the more human and tangible issue I have with your incessant asking is the interaction experience with your associates. To begin with, I'm going to provide you with the honest truth about what your own associates feel about the REDCard.

Your associates absolutely HATE pressuring customers about the REDCard every time they want to complete a purchase.

I've spoken with multiple Target employees, both in private and off the clock. They will remain anonymous for the sake of their jobs. The day-in and day-out badgering they are forced to comply with to remain employed is degrading. When I use the word 'badgering', I mean it literally. I am badgered by your unwilling employees to sign up for a service I neither want nor need. As one employee informed me, a customer must decline interest in the REDCard three times in one encounter for the associate to relinquish their corporate-mandated assault! Let me be clear. I place no fault upon the associates I encounter; their compliance is forced in order to stay gainfully employed. The Target Corporation is completely at fault for this rude and hounding behavior.

If I want your REDCard, I will ask you about it. Your endless stream of flyers, signs and advertisements are enough to let me know that the REDCard is available. Should I decide I want the service (which I won't), then I will approach one of your associates about signing up, not the other way around.

According to a study completed by the U.S. Department of Education in 2014, only 14% of the American adult population is either mostly or totally unable to read. That means, under the worst possible conditions, 7 out of every 50 customers that walk through your doors may not be able to read the flyers, signs and advertisements I mentioned previously. Your most likely response to that fact would be...

"We ask all our customers about the REDCard at every opportunity because not everyone has the same ability to read."

My response to that position would be this -- if a person can't read, should they really be signing up for a debit card? I think not.

I've said my peace on this matter. The endless bullying about the REDCard is boorish and upsetting. Your employees feel terrible asking about signing customers up. If I feel pity for anyone in this fiasco, it is your associates. Please rethink your REDCard marketing strategy. As it currently stands, you are pushing customers away.

Sincerely,

Jared A. Manning

-----------------------------------------------

References for the information I used in this letter:

• Target REDCard Privacy Policy Data
• The World Economic Forum -- Personal Data: The Emergence of a New Asset Class
• U.S. Dept. of Education Literacy Statistics

Grinding My Gears! - Lane Thieves

Good evening everyone! I'd like to start a new series of articles here called...

On today's Grinding My Gears!, the topic is Lane Thieves.

Have you ever come to a single lane stop sign or traffic light while driving, only to be suddenly surprised on your left or right by some pushy ignoramus wanting to turn at the same time? It's as if they think there are two turn lanes at the stop, when in fact there is only one single lane. Are they even paying attention to how the road is (or more importantly is NOT) divided? 

I encounter fools like this all the time at a local shopping center. Those of you whom live close to me will surely know what I'm referring to.

Click for a larger image.

At the local Alamance Crossing Shopping Center, there is a three-way stop in front of Target. The traffic that is traveling out of the shopping center has a stop sign, as seen in the crudely drawn map above (click it for a bigger image). All vehicles must yield to the incoming traffic, which does not stop (though some idiots do -- DON'T STOP). On busy days, the outgoing traffic can back up quite a ways, making it very difficult to escape the shopping center. On multiple occasions, including today, I have encountered an idiot whom thinks there are two lanes at the stop sign.

There is only one lane per side of the road in this shopping center. Two cars can not stop at the sign at the same time. If you try to pull beside another car already waiting at the stop sign, it causes confusion and potentially an accident (of which I know of two that have happened in this exact location). Just because a lane is wide enough to accommodate two vehicles does not mean two can stop and wait to turn or go straight.

Whenever I approach a stop sign or light, I purposefully try to occupy as much of the lane as possible. This is to prevent another jerk-wad from pulling by me on either side and trying to turn when I do. This has annoyed some drivers in the past, especially in the case of this particular shopping center stop. While the entire line of cars in front of and behind me will keep to the far right of the lane (which allows morons to try and pull two wide at the stop sign), I drive down the very center of the lane. That's nearly a full car width out of line with the other drivers, but it prevents the Lane Thieves from breaking common traffic laws. I've been cursed and had horns honked at me, but I don't care. Quit enabling assholes, I say.

You know why most folks don't like me coming to stop signs the proper way? Because they would try and pull up at the same time, just like every other crappy driver.

What these fools fail to realize is this...

Only one car per lane at a time can make an action at a stop (unless there are designated turn lanes, of course). If two cars try to make an action at the same stop in the same lane, then they run the risk of blinding the other driver's line of sight. They might not see a turning vehicle from another lane. Or, they might cause another lane's driver to make an improper motion, thereby inhibiting traffic flow or incurring an accident.

So stop pulling up beside other drivers at single lane stop lights and signs, would you? You're being a self-absorbed nitwit.