RIFLE RANGE BOY

I have always wondered whether one should take sides in an argument when he is not the actually affected party. Being quite aware of Rashomon's effect of different perspectives on what actually transpired during an event, should anyone go all four barrels against the other just because one side is related to us? We know we sometimes make our decisions rather prejudicially, guided by personal appearance, gender, common ethnicity or overt display of emotions by one aggrieved party, and the affected party is related to us. Still, when the push comes to the shove when our own kind is under the spotlight, where do you stand? Is blood thicker than water, and do we support our flesh and blood no matter what? Do we drone down in support of loved ones, or do we go against the grain and take the side of where we think the truth lies? What if the scandal happened within the family fold? Do we hush everything and sweep it under the rug? Still, there will come a time when a definite decision n...

Now how often have we heard people sitting high up and looking down saying, "yeah but they is the real way of doing it! They are not doing it right. There are specific ways of doing it. The Truth is all there in the scriptures!" Yes and yet no religion is not guilty of it. The animals are supposed to be respected and are said to be also creations of the Almighty but the way they are abused, culled and hunted, it appears like their sole purpose of existence is to be eaten, hunted and be bullied. They say that their religious way of justice is God sent and is cast on stone. If you look around, their justice is made to look so disconnected from the train of thought of contemporary man. If you do not have a living example to follow, how can you proclaim that your system is the best. We need a sign. We need a living proof of superiority of the merchandise that you are trying to sell us! Your religious leaders allow atrocities to be carried out on fellow citizens. Yet they adv...

Not many are aware, maybe the Facebook generation would, (as they find immense joy and comfort in communicating through Facebook rather than face-to-face!) of a cyber discussion, justification and counter justification between a grieving wife and an husband who has been labelled aggressor. This young couple (guy early 20s, girl 19 years) have not seeing eye to eye quite some time now. Saga of their unhappy suddenly surfaced one day when the wife decided to showcase the closed circuit TV recording of their domestic violence, which happened in her boutique, on You-Tube. The response from the netizens was viral. Sympathisers poured in their support behind the wife who was also 2 months' pregnant. The husband was criticised left, right, centre, sideways and back. The following day, the beleaguered young man responded with his side of the story to 'justify' his violent behaviour. As with most marital disharmony, there is no right or wrong answer. The truth mu...