When my kids were younger, I tried to convince them that my taste in music and entertainment was the only way to go. For a while, it seemed to be working. My little boy actually used to dance to Phil Collins music. And my daughter seemed to enjoy watching sappy dramas with me. But now, that's all changed. No matter what, I cannot get my kids into listening to Phil Collins anymore. They don't even want any Credence Clearwater Revival. My little boy (who is really not little at all anymore) listens to--gasp--Taylor Swift. And my daughter listens to--well, whoever it is, I haven't even heard of them. Neither one watches much TV with me anymore. They now prefer shows like iCarly and other goofy teen stuff. (I feel obligated to mention at this point that my not-so-little boy is really into cooking shows right now and I do actually enjoy some of them myself.) So what happened to my kids?
Whenever I start to complain--in my mind, at least--about my kids not appreciating the same entertainment I enjoy, I think about how my own parents would view my current tastes. I grew up with music by Gene Autry, people on the Lawrence Welk show, and a bunch of guys that yodeled a lot. Seriously, has anyone besides my dad heard of Elton Britt? We faithfully watched Little House on the Prairie and The Wonderful World of Disney. I think my folks would be surprised that I watch so much sci-fi now. We watch a lot of superhero movies and Star Trek related shows. And with the exception of a few memorable songs I grew up with, most of the music on my iPod is adult contemporary and 80s stuff. I'm sure my parents would not enjoy very much of it.
So what is a parent to do? Well, pretty much all we can do is raise our kids with a decent set of values and hope that they make choices about entertainment that go with those values. The only other choice would be to raise your kids in a sterile bubble and try to cram your opinions down their throats. But that might not be very practical.
Besides, I've heard bubbles like that cost a fortune.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Thursday, November 4, 2010
We the Jury
Recently I had the opportunity to serve on a jury. It was a new experience for me and I'm not even sure if anyone I know has ever served on one.
When I first received my jury summons, I was not particularly pleased. I really didn't know what to expect and I wanted to avoid trials for major crimes, such as rape and murder. Even if all the evidence pointed to a defendant's guilt, I would always wonder if I had helped put an innocent person in prison (or worse). So when I made the phone call the night before to see if I had to report in, I was somewhat discouraged when my group number was one that would be needed.
The next day I dutifully reported in early and then proceeded to sit in a room with about 15 or so other people. Nobody talked to anybody else and most of us just sat there and read. Then the bailiff came in and showed us a movie about jury duty. (The movie was an actual video tape. Have these people heard of DVDs?) After another wait, we finally all traipsed into the courtroom and were assigned numbers.
Then the judge told us about the case. It was for somebody accused of driving under the influence. From what I could tell, there was only one witness: the officer who had arrested the defendant. One witness? This trial could be over today. A DUI? This case should be super easy. Just show me the results of the Breathalyzer and we are out of here. Sign me up.
After the judge and lawyer asked the group a bunch of questions, a couple of potential jurors were eliminated and the six people who happened to be in the front row were assigned to the actual jury. And I was one of them.
The actual trial finally began. One of the first things we learned was that the defendant had refused a Breathalyzer test. We had to base his guilt or innocence on the way he had been driving and results of field sobriety tests. Maybe not so easy after all. The police officer took the witness stand. His testimony must have taken the better part of two hours. Questions had to be broken down into little pieces. The same questions had to be repeated for each individual part of the field sobriety test. It got incredibly boring after a while, but I managed to stay awake and tried not to make up my mind regarding a verdict yet.
I actually got to hear in a real courtroom those things they say on those TV crime dramas:
"Let the record show that the witness has identified the defendant..." "Could you please demonstrate to the jury..." "This has been marked as exhibit A." "The prosecution rests, your honor." "The defense rests, your honor." I was hoping I could hear somebody shout "Objection!" but that didn't happen.
Eventually, we received our jury instructions, heard closing arguments, and finally went in to deliberate. The defendant had apparently been drinking, but had he consumed enough to be impaired in his driving? This is what we had to decide. Reaching a verdict didn't take much time. We talked for about 15 minutes and we were all in agreement. Reading the verdict took even less time. But after seeing all the details that had to be covered to make sure people get a fair trial, I can understand why everything in the legal system takes so much time.
All in all, it was a very interesting and educational experience. If I ever get a jury summons again, I don't have to wonder what will happen. I would even look forward to serving again if it is a simple case. With one witness. That can be completed in a day. Maybe two at the most.
When I first received my jury summons, I was not particularly pleased. I really didn't know what to expect and I wanted to avoid trials for major crimes, such as rape and murder. Even if all the evidence pointed to a defendant's guilt, I would always wonder if I had helped put an innocent person in prison (or worse). So when I made the phone call the night before to see if I had to report in, I was somewhat discouraged when my group number was one that would be needed.
The next day I dutifully reported in early and then proceeded to sit in a room with about 15 or so other people. Nobody talked to anybody else and most of us just sat there and read. Then the bailiff came in and showed us a movie about jury duty. (The movie was an actual video tape. Have these people heard of DVDs?) After another wait, we finally all traipsed into the courtroom and were assigned numbers.
Then the judge told us about the case. It was for somebody accused of driving under the influence. From what I could tell, there was only one witness: the officer who had arrested the defendant. One witness? This trial could be over today. A DUI? This case should be super easy. Just show me the results of the Breathalyzer and we are out of here. Sign me up.
After the judge and lawyer asked the group a bunch of questions, a couple of potential jurors were eliminated and the six people who happened to be in the front row were assigned to the actual jury. And I was one of them.
The actual trial finally began. One of the first things we learned was that the defendant had refused a Breathalyzer test. We had to base his guilt or innocence on the way he had been driving and results of field sobriety tests. Maybe not so easy after all. The police officer took the witness stand. His testimony must have taken the better part of two hours. Questions had to be broken down into little pieces. The same questions had to be repeated for each individual part of the field sobriety test. It got incredibly boring after a while, but I managed to stay awake and tried not to make up my mind regarding a verdict yet.
I actually got to hear in a real courtroom those things they say on those TV crime dramas:
"Let the record show that the witness has identified the defendant..." "Could you please demonstrate to the jury..." "This has been marked as exhibit A." "The prosecution rests, your honor." "The defense rests, your honor." I was hoping I could hear somebody shout "Objection!" but that didn't happen.
Eventually, we received our jury instructions, heard closing arguments, and finally went in to deliberate. The defendant had apparently been drinking, but had he consumed enough to be impaired in his driving? This is what we had to decide. Reaching a verdict didn't take much time. We talked for about 15 minutes and we were all in agreement. Reading the verdict took even less time. But after seeing all the details that had to be covered to make sure people get a fair trial, I can understand why everything in the legal system takes so much time.
All in all, it was a very interesting and educational experience. If I ever get a jury summons again, I don't have to wonder what will happen. I would even look forward to serving again if it is a simple case. With one witness. That can be completed in a day. Maybe two at the most.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)