Tag Archives: guns

Three Steps For Solving the Assault-Type Weapons Problem

16 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Assault Weapons, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Reno, Second Amendment, The Tipping Point, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Some people are saying that assault-type weapons genie is out of the box. Their belief is that the ban on assault-type rifles can never be reinstated. They fear that collection of assault weapons may involve violent confrontations with gun extremists. There is a way out of this mess caused by letting the assault weapons ban expire. It involves three steps.

Designed to Kill Without Aiming – Semi-automatic Mossberg-MMR

STEP ONE:  Reinstate the ban on assault-type rifles

All future sale, trade, and/or gifting an assault-type rifle, including all rifles with an automatic and/or semiautomatic firing function, would be banned in the United States of America. These weapons would not be allowed to be imported, nor purchased outside the United States and brought into the country.

STEP TWO:  Voluntary Surrender of Assault-type Rifles

Any current owner of an assault-type rifle would have the option of surrendering hu’s* weapon to local law enforcement. Those guns would need to be secured or destroyed.

STEP THREE:  Conditions of Ownership of Assault-type Rifles

Condition One:  Registration

Anyone with peaceful intent should be willing to comply with the registration of all assault-type weapons. Those that fail to register their automatic and semi-automatic weapons shall be considered to have a violent intent. They will face stiff fines and possibly prison. Registration will also consist of a background check, regardless of whether one was done when the owner purchased it.

Assault-type weapons cannot be sold to anyone else without approval from the local law enforcement agency. That agency will be required to perform a background check.

CONDITION TWO:  Insurance

Anyone owning a weapon in question must obtain and maintain a one million dollar liability insurance policy. This is similar to the liability policy required to own a car. Failure to do so will require forfeiture of the gun and a significant fine and possibly prison.

CONDITION THREE:  Compliance With the Second Amendment

Per the Second Amendment, an owner of an assault-type rifle must join a State National Guard and submit to regular training and duty as long as they own the weapon. Use of the weapon shall be regulated by that State’s National Guard, including the determination of mental and physical qualifications of use of such weapon.

(*’Hu’s’ is a pronoun meaning ‘his’ and/or ‘hers.’)

Why Are Conservatives Anti-Society?

13 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Business, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Economy, Education, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Higher Education, History, Housing, labor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Religion, Reno, Respect, Second Amendment, Taxes, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The conservative agenda is not society friendly. It is designed to benefit few and ignore the rest. The ideology of conservatism is based on an idea of keeping what is perceived to be good and avoiding risk-taking in the future. It assumes that there will be winners and losers so life is about making sure they are the winners.

Fear and Hate are the Entrees for Conservatives

Religions As Safe Harbor For Conservatives

Religions are typically conservative because most religions are built on a paradigm of preserving past traditions. Even the Christian religion is filled with rules and rituals that preserve the thinking of the past and are resistant to change. This is why so many Christians identify themselves with conservative thinking.

The idea that everyone is worthy and equal is usually rhetoric in religions mixed with a condescending effort to help those less fortunate. Often religions and conservatives blame the less fortunate for their own problems. They are the losers and a conservative often consoles hu’s* conscience by making offerings or volunteering to help the less fortunate.

A Liberal Perspective is in Direct Conflict with a Conservative

A conservative, by definition, is focused on preserving what they believe with the assumption that any other belief is irrelevant. It is easy to understand why anyone who has a liberal perspective is worthy of ridicule to a conservative because liberals tend to have a less cynical view of humanity.

Conservatives are driven by fear and self-preservation, while liberals are driven by hope. Conservatives need to believe that they are under threat. Examples of conservative thought consumed by selfishness and fear are:

Taxes

All efforts in a society should be of direct benefit to the person paying taxes. Any money spent for the welfare of others is a target to conservatives and considered a waste of money. Conservatives often use rare examples of waste to ridicule spending for the benefit of less fortunate.

Gun Ownership

Conservatives use their fear of humanity to base a belief that a system of laws and impartial judgment are not effective. Conservatives believe that they should have the right to judge the actions of another person and execute them without trial. To the conservative, the term ‘defense’ justifies the instant execution of an unarmed person based on hu’s fear of that person.

Immigrants

Conservatives typically interchange hu’s racists beliefs with issues that target a particular race. Even though there is no significant immigration problem in the United States, conservatives manufacture a fear that immigrants are a threat. Immigration enforcement targets non-Caucasian races and typically ignore Caucasians.

Women

Historically women have endured a subservient role in society. Conservatives want to preserve that subservient role and consciously and unconsciously act as if women are a lesser gender. In religion, a fear of women has pushed them into a role of service to men and the church.

Conservatives Anti-Society

The problem with conservative ideology is that the fear and hate of non-conservatives places them as the adversary of society. It divides the population, often along the lines of race and power. In their mind, everything is an ‘us-versus-them’ battle regardless of a lack of evidence.

This attitude impacts the effectiveness of our society as the concept of a few winners is at the expense of the rest of the population. 

(*’Hu’s’ is a pronoun meaning ‘his’ and/or ‘hers.’)

Three Myths That Gun Extremist Believe

09 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by in All Rights Reserved, Crime, Donald Trump, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Health, History, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Reno, Russian influence, Second Amendment, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Gun Extremists have been fed a steady diet of misinformation by the NRA. Decades of crafting a lie have resulted in gun owners being one of the most misinformed groups in the history of the United States. When you talk with an NRA gun extremist you hear the following statements:

1.  Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT: 

The Second Amendment gives me a constitutional right to own an assault rifle and the government can’t take away my guns.

False. The Second Amendment begins with “A well regulated militia…” That is the focus of the amendment. Everything that is stated afterward is subject to the topic of a well regulated militia. Well regulated clearly means that the government is expected to regulate gun ownership. 

Guns are not trophies

2.  Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT: 

The Supreme Court ruled that the government can’t take our assault rifles away.

False. The Supreme Court ruled in The District of Columbia v. Heller that the government can’t ban handguns in the home, providing the person meets the qualifications required to own a gun. The Supreme Court specifically stated that more dangerous weapons could be banned from public use.

In fact, a ban on assault rifles existed from 1994 until 2004 when Congress failed to renew the ban. The ban was constitutionally legal.

3.  Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT:

I have a right to defend myself with a gun.

False. If you use a gun to injure or kill someone it must be proven that it was in defense. It is true, that in many states if someone enters your home it is considered allowable for a homeowner to shoot that person even if they are unarmed. The law does not give a person the right to be judge, jury, and executioner.

However, it is rare that a gun death is a legitimate ‘defensive’ act. In 2013, of 33,636 deaths due to “injury by firearms,” 21,175 (63%) were suicides and 11,208 (33%) were homicides, 505 (1.5%) were deaths due to accidental or negligent use of a gun. We are the most well-armed nation in the world and over 97% of all gun deaths were not because someone killed the bad guy.

Second Amendment: A Well Regulated Militia

21 Wednesday Feb 2018

Posted by in Aging, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, History, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Politicians, Politics, Second Amendment, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A well regulated militia. Gun extremists pretend that the first four words of the Second Amendment don’t exist. They beat people over the head with the Second Amendment using the last 13 words but never mention the part that frames the topic. I’ve even had one gun extremist tell me that the comma after the first four words invalidates them. 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Second Amendment

What “Well Regulated” Means in Second Amendment

Ironically, the first four words invalidates the gun extremists position against gun control laws. “Well regulated” is not an accidental phrase. It means that what is being discussed is not only to be regulated, but it is to be closely regulated.

Because it is stated first, it means that everything said after is to be considered within the framework of regulation. The Second Amendment is not about unlimited, unrestricted gun ownership. It is not a mandate to allow anyone to own any weapon they want. It clearly outlines that gun ownership is intended to be under the rule of the government.

Regarding assault rifles, our country had a legal restriction on assault-type rifles from 1994 to 2004. It wasn’t struck down because it was unconstitutional. It ended because a Republican Congress let the law die due to a Sunset provision in the ban.

Gun Extremists

Not what “well regulated” means

Supreme Court Ruling Confirms Guns To Be Well Regulated

Even the Supreme Court ruling that gun extremists like to use to claim unrestricted gun ownership confirms the right of the government to control the ownership of guns. In District of Columbia versus Heller, the Justice Anthony Scalia wrote in the majority opinion:

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

Majority Opinion “District of Columbia v. Heller”

Justice Scalia builds a creative argument why guns have to be allowed in the home, but he clarifies that home ownership does not mean unregistered gun ownership:

[a]ssuming that Heller is not disqualified from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the District must permit him to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home.

Majority Opinion “District of Columbia v. Heller”

The concept that guns cannot be regulated, nor registered is contrary to the ruling by the Supreme Court. “Well regulated” is the important aspect of the Second Amendment regardless of what gun extremists want to pretend.

Nevada Middle School Shooting Made Worse By Absent and Inept Public Relations Management

04 Wednesday Dec 2013

Posted by in About Reno, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Opinion, Print Media, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Traditional Media, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

On October 21st a 12 year-old Nevada boy brought a gun to his school, killed a teacher, shot two other students, then killed himself. The shooting left families devastated in a continuing saga of gun-related school incidents. Sadly, the crisis was intensified and prolonged by the failure of the local authorities to use standard and best practices in managing public relations. At times it seemed that there was a vacuum in media management. At other times it seemed that government officials from China had been employed to handle community relations.

Sparks Middle School - A tragedy made worse

Sparks Middle School – A tragedy made worse

In any crisis situation there is panic followed by confusion, rumors, and fear. The first goal is to resolve the immediate crisis. In most situations this will involve turning over control of the facilities and situation to law enforcement and other first responders.

However, the second goal of an organization in a crisis is to reduce the confusion, rumors, and fears. This process must start as quickly as possible, and sometimes it must be done before the crisis is under control by first responders.

In the Nevada incident, parents throughout the Reno community¹ were aware of an active shooter on a local school campus within minutes of the 7:15 AM shooting incident. There were 20 to 30 eyewitnesses when the teenager shot a teacher, who then reportedly went into the school and killed himself . It was all over within a few minutes. 

(¹The shooting occurred in Sparks, Nevada, a suburb of Reno.)

In the first hours following the shooting some rumors persisted that police were looking for the suspect; however, it is likely that law enforcement on the scene knew within ten to fifteen minutes that shooter was dead. With the suspect dead, the priorities of the first responders were to render assistance to the wounded, secure the students and school, secure the crime scene, and gather information.

Children became the official source of the shooting

Children became the official information source of the shooting

At least eight different sources were quoted in the first few hours after the shooting. This would indicate that the Washoe County School District and the various law enforcement agencies responding did not select a skilled spokesperson to manage the post-shooting situation. At 7:42 AM, less than 30 minutes after the shooting, the Reno Gazette Journal reported the following:

  • A shooting had occurred at Sparks Middle School
  • A police spokesperson had confirmed that the shooter was ‘neutralized’
  • Police were looking for the suspect
  • The school was on lockdown
  • The students had been evacuated

It shouldn’t be a surprise that the information coming from the crime scene in the first hour of the incident will be in conflict; however, the role of the primary spokesperson is to rapidly identify rumors and incorrect facts and address them. Two hours after the shooting a press conference was held. This was the opportunity for local authorities to reduce anxiety, confusion, and fear by detailing critical information. By answering as many of the basic questions (who, what, where, when, why, how) as possible the public could be reassured that despite the tragedy, authorities knew what happened and had the situation under control. After the press conference the Reno Gazette Journal reported:

“Authorities released few details about a shooting at about 7:15 a.m. at Sparks Middle School during a 9:15 a.m. press conference.”

If the families of the dead and wounded had not been notified then it would not have been appropriate to release the names; however, authorities wouldn’t even confirm whether teachers or students had been shot. Students began reporting what happened to the media and with no cooperation from local authorities, the families were contacted. That is the symptom of absent or inept media management.

Forcing Children To Be Spokespeople
Within minutes after the shooting word spread, not just within the local community, but around the world. Instantly parents, grandparents, relatives, and friends of school-age children began asking questions. What school? Was anyone killed? How many were shot? Who was killed or injured? Was it over? Why did it happen? Is my child/grandchild safe?

By withholding the details the local authorities did not withhold the story they just lost management of it. Without an official source for information the witnesses, in this case, mostly children, became the official spokesperson. To make the blunders of the first day worse, suburban police and city officials refused to release the name of the shooter for three days, citing that his name did not appear on any ‘report.’ 

The Public’s Right To Know Not the Correct Issue
Local media was incensed by the stonewalling of the authorities to release the name; however, this was more than an issue of the public’s Right to Know. The stated reason by authorities to withhold the shooter’s name was to protect the family, the failure to release this information put more focus on the shooter’s family to confirm or deny the rumors that were rampant within the community.

A skilled spokesperson would have understood this and worked to ensure that the information was appropriately released while also urging the media to respect the family’s need to grieve. 

Who Owns Information?
In the 20th century mass communication came with a catch. Access to information could be controlled. The public knew what the government, public relations staff, editors, and news directors wanted us to know. That changed with the Internet and Social Media. Information is fluid and it will flow through any conduit it can find. Information desired by the public will find the quickest path and anyone who believes they can stop the flow of it is only diverting it through another source. A spokesperson can and should be the quickest path for facts and information because it will reduce the fear, confusion and rumors.

The mishandling of the crisis in Nevada should serve as a lesson as to why a skilled, experienced crisis manager and spokesperson should be a part of every organization. No tragedy should be made worse by inept local authorities.

Nugent Attempts to Assassinate Obama, Gets Wrong City, Shoots Self

01 Monday Apr 2013

Posted by in April Fools Day, Crime, Fiction, Government Regulation, Opinion, Politics, Universities

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Ted Nugent: America's Epic Fail

Ted Nugent: America’s Epic Failure

Miami, Florida – April 1, 2013

Last April the 64 year-old rock musician Ted Nugent said that if President Barack Obama was re-elected:

“…I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.” Ted Nugent

It was the latter and he still had two weeks to spare. On April 15, 2012, Nugent made the comment at the National Rifle Association (NRA) convention in St. Louis, Missouri. He was there to support Mitt Romney for President.

Nugent was arrested in Miami, Florida for attempting to assassinate the President; however, it may be hard for the prosecution to make a case against him since he was almost a 1000 miles away from the Commander-in-Chief. The President was scheduled to speak on the campus of the Miami University in Oxford, Ohio; however, Nugent went to the University of Miami in Miami, Florida.

Nugent apparently became enraged when he could not find President Obama and began waving a gun over his head yelling:

“WHERE IS HE! WHERE IS HE! I’LL KILL HIM! I’ll KILL HIM!”

Within minutes several campus police officers arrived and ordered Nugent to drop his weapon. Nugent apparently calmed down and began to tuck the gun under his belt at which point it discharged, wounding himself in the leg. He then yelled:

“You SHOT Me! You SHOT Me!”

The campus police then moved in, took Nugent’s gun and arrested him. It was several hours later that Nugent learned the police had not fired and that he shot himself. He is expected to make a full recovery, but doctors say that he may walk with a limp. When asked if the wound would affect his ability to play and sing, the hospital representative said:

“They’re doctors, not miracle workers.”

A spokesperson for the Secret Service was asked if they would be involved with the case and she said:

“The Secret Service focuses on credible threats, but somebody will probably have to go down to Miami anyway.”

Nugent will be arraigned in Miami on Monday.

6 Actions Needed To Protect America From Bad Gun Owners

14 Monday Jan 2013

Posted by in Crime, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Opinion, Politics

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

12 of 26 faces lost on December 14, 2012

12 of 26 faces lost on December 14, 2012

One month ago 26 people, of which 20 were children, were taken from us by a man with an assault rifle. The man was given the opportunity to access weapons by a gun owner who failed to understand the potential threat of keeping guns in the home, even though she was so concerned about her son that she was allegedly attempting to have him committed.

Asking for common sense in the ownership, availability and use of a gun is NOT a political agenda. Our pledge is “and liberty for ALL.” Not “liberty for me because I own a gun.” Liberty requires a citizen to act responsibly and most importantly respect all the other citizens of this country. Somehow many gun owners seem to have forgotten that part of being an American.

Fifty years ago I saw a bumper sticker that said, “When guns are outlawed, only OUTLAWS will have guns.” The National Rifle Association (NRA) and some wacko gun owners keep shoving this in the face of America. The problem is that it is not the ‘outlaws’ who are threatening our lives, but irresponsible gun owners. Easy access to guns, especially in urban environments, coupled with weapons that are dangerous for citizens to own is not protecting our liberty, but rather is increasing the likelihood of death and serious injury for all Americans.

In addition, the strong-arm tactics of the NRA is crippling our government from taking common sense actions that are desperately needed.

There are six steps that are necessary to keep Americans safe:

Ban on ownership of assault-type weapons and high-capacity magazines

Assault weapons are effective when used by a trained professional, not by citizens fantasizing glory

Assault weapons are effective when used by a trained professional, not by citizens fantasizing glory

The need for renewing the ban of assault-type weapons and high-capacity magazines has been demonstrated over and over, with each violent event costing innocent lives.

Assault-type (automatic and semi-automatic) weapons give the shooter the ability to spray multiple bullets on a target in seconds. A person must train extensively with an assault-type weapon in order to know when and when not to shoot. Citizens do not have the expertise to use such weapons without endangering innocent people.

In addition, these weapons are often used on law enforcement personnel which means we are encouraging ‘outlaws,’ (aka; our neighbor with a gun and a grudge) by giving them the means to attack the very people who are actually supposed to protect the rest of us.

Strict limitations on conceal and carry permits

Conceal and Carry

Conceal and Carry: a self-inflicted wound to America

Carrying a gun in public is extremely dangerous and most training is inadequate. Gun training organizations acknowledge this:

…”because concealed carry courses required for issue of a CC permit fail to give students the proper skills to safely carry a concealed weapon…”

ALASTAR TDS-C, NC Gun Training Website

Conceal and Carry means that a gun is easily accessible which means that a person might be tempted to use it before understanding the situation. Even under the best circumstances, firing a gun with other people in the area is risking the safety of innocent people.

In 2012, police in New York wounded nine innocent people when confronted by another man with a gun. Certainly a citizen carrying a gun with little or training is not a solution to street crime and in most situations would add to the confusion of crime by pulling out a gun even if it were only in self-defense.

In addition, gun training should be standardized and only licensed trainers should be allowed to teach gun safety. In at least one all day gun training program in Reno, Nevada, one of the instructors spent much of his time ranting about his dislike for President Obama and shared his conspiracy theories about what the current administration was planning to do to gun ownership. The only people making gun ownership a political agenda are gun owners.

Conceal and carry permits should all expire by June 30, 2013, and renewed only if extraordinary circumstances indicated that the citizen needed, and was qualified to use a gun in a public place. In those circumstances the person should be required to be recertified every six month with at least four hours of training in the use of firearms in public situations.

Secret Service Consulting and Training for Schools

Secret Service agents are experts in identifying threats

Secret Service agents are experts in identifying threats

We do not need another TSA-like division of the federal government; however, the federal government does have unique qualifications in the area of observing situations for possible threats. Secret Service agents are experts in assessing and  taking action to neutralize violent threats. 

Acting as consultants and trainers, the Secret Service could create a division with a five to ten-year mandate to work with school district and school staff across the United States in assessing and identifying potential threats. They also could offer classes similar to train law enforcement and school security threat assessment techniques, similar to what the FBI offers to private business leaders and security personnel at Quantico, VA.

Background checks on 100% of gun sales/exchanges

This is a no-brainer. The problem is that a background check doesn’t address future mental breaks, or temporary emotional triggers that could lead to violence.

Financial liability to gun owner and gun sellers for guns used in criminal acts.

Most gun owners are responsible. Most. The threat is not from ‘outlaw’ as the NRA suggests, but from the irresponsible gun owner. We can take steps to attempt to prevent an innocent citizen from being harmed by the direct or indirect act of an irresponsible gun owner, but their must be a consequence in order to discourage the idea that a gun owner can wash his or her hands of a situation that they could have prevented. To do this we need to link the gun owner to the crime committed by the use of his or her gun.

A person should be responsible for any crime committed with their gun both during their ownership, and within 18 months after they sell, trade, give, or lose their gun. The exceptions would be as follows:

  1. The gun is stolen even though the owner took due diligence in securing their gun.
  2. The gun is donated to a recognized government law enforcement agency.

Financial liability should be no less that $100,000 per incident and have criminal penalties for repeat offenders.

NRA Tax Exempt Status

The NRA has held America hostage for decades and has been able to harass our elected officials into complacency, while at the same time being exempt from paying taxes. They have enjoyed preventing government action to protect our citizens as they steal from the citizens by not paying their fair share to support our citizen-run government. This is unacceptable.

As of December 14, 2012, the NRA should be declared by the IRS to by a for profit organization and all contributions be declared as taxable. In addition, all organizations involved in lobbying and/or contributing to politicians, or politically associated organizations on behalf of gun manufacturers, owners, enthusiasts, or gun-related activities should not be considered for 501(c)3 status, or any other tax exempt status.

This should only apply to gun oriented organizations attempting to influence politicians and/or legislation.

These six actions would address the key issues that threaten American citizens, while still allowing for responsible citizens to maintain their rights to own guns. It’s time common sense returned and trumped blind stupidity.

Why David Brooks Isn’t Qualified to Decide Who Can Be A Gun-Control Spokesperson

30 Sunday Dec 2012

Posted by in Crime, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Opinion, Politics, Recreation, Respect, Traditional Media, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

David Brook, New York Times columnist

David Brook, New York Times columnist

New York Times columnist, political analyst, and all-around smart guy David Brooks rarely says anything that lacks intelligent thought, so when he makes a verbal blunder, as he did on December 16th on NBC’s Meet The Press group think session, it should be considered a national holiday for backwater bloggers like myself who make verbal blunders on a daily basis.

Two days after the murder of 26 people in Newtown, CT, David Brooks was making a point about the need for rural people to be included on the debate regarding the use of guns in our society. He said:

Brooks, defender of the innocent rural gun owner

“…it’s perceived as an attack on the lifestyle of rural people by urban people…”

Mr. Brooks then suggested that it was inappropriate for the Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, to be leading the debate. Brooks stated:

“…it’s counterproductive to have him as the spokesperson for the gun law movement.”

As someone who was raised in northwestern Colorado, where blaze orange is always the Fall color, and a gun is put in your hand before a driver’s license, I would strongly disagree with Mr. Brooks and I would dispute that he is the person to choose who can be the spokesperson for laws to restrict gun ownership.

While guns are nearly idols to be worshiped in rural communities, this is not a debate about freedom of religion. Guns tend to have life ending consequences and that consequence is often borne by the person who doesn’t own the gun. Rural people don’t understand the pressures and conflicts (e.g.; road rage, etc.) that occur in more urban environments and therefore they don’t have a place in the debate of an issue that crosses the rural/urban boundaries.

Rural people usually can’t understand why anyone would live in a city and often have built their perception of city living based on news stories of mass killings, drive-by shooting, and murder-suicides. Many rural people see city life as a daily battle ground where the unarmed are targets for the armed bands of criminals who roam the city streets. The fact that millions of people live untouched by violent crime in cities everyday is beyond the belief of people who think Fox News is ‘Fair and Balanced.’

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is exactly the right person to be the spokesperson for the appropriate use and limitations of gun ownership in America. As Mayor of one of the U.S.’s biggest urban areas, Bloomberg’s view of the dynamics of cities and those who live in them is unmatched by few in America.

Brooks remark is akin to saying that only cigarette smokers should have a voice in the control and use of cigarettes, even though they can kill non-smokers. We don’t need to prove guns kill non-gun owners. Guns kill everyone, regardless of his or her gun-ownership status.

Brooks might be correct that this is a rural versus urban issue, but it is the rural citizen that already has the gun in hand and that is the wrong solution in an urban environment. It’s time urban communities were allowed to address the threat that rural values have on our cities.

Who can or cannot be part of this debate should be decided by those who face the threat, not by those who have the gun and David Brooks is not the person to make that decision for us…

….even if he is the smartest person in the room.

Romneylans: A New Species of Stupidity

21 Tuesday Aug 2012

Posted by in Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, Honor, Politics, Religion, Science, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Romulans of the Star Trek kind

Romulans (Star Trek Series): A alien race ruled by a hierarchical society that is always at war or in an uneasy truce with almost everyone, noted by an almost illogical egocentric society using cunning and deception to gain the advantage. Also identifiable by their pointy ears and uni-haircut.

Todd Akin: Romneylan of the stupid kind

Romneylans (rom-nee-lans): Similar to Romulans, but without the pointy ears and the spiffy haircut. 

Romneylans have invaded Earth (specifically the United States) and if they are not defeated we risk losing everything that makes America great.

Ironically, Romneylans are NOT identified by their alleged support of candidate Mitt Romney. Romneylans are actually united by an irrational hate for President Obama. If Bozo the Clown were running against President Obama, Romneylans would vote for Bozo. (NOTE: Mitt Romney is NOT Bozo the Clown and my apologies to any clown named Bozo.)

Romneylans are also noted for their hate for liberals, rejection of reason, and an unshakable commitment to stupidity. Some examples:

Patriotism: Romneylans (A.K.A.: Conservatives) believe that if you don’t agree with them then you are not an American. That in itself is stupid, but what takes it to a new level is the idea that beating your breast about America’s military might is considered patriotic, but it is unpatriotic if you support the civil servants that serve our country with honor and have made America the envy of the citizens of most other countries. Romneylans think that dismantling our government is patriotic. 

Religion:  Romneylans claim to be Christians. Christianity is identified as the belief in Jesus Christ and his teachings that can be found in the New Testament. Romans 14:10 of the New Testament states:

But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

Romans 14:10  King James version

No need to interpret what is being meant by not judging others. Yet, Romneylans feel compelled to declare that the Bible gives them the right to persecute and pass judgement on almost anyone. Ironically, Jesus Christ is one of the most compassionate religious figures in human mythology, but Romneylans love saying “hate the sin, not the sinner,” which is quite possibly the stupidest thing ever said by a group of people known for stupid remarks. A glance at any Romneylan Facebook page and it is easy to determine that their hate is boundless and their compassion for anyone they hate is nonexistent.

Economy: The depth of stupidity of Romneylans is most evident with their take on the economy. The 2007-09 economic collapse in America occurred as a direct result of unbridled greed in private business and a lack of ethics throughout business in general. That is documented.

However, Romneylans believe that the economic collapse was caused by government regulation and that our economy can be restored by eliminating any of the safeguards that make ethical business possible. Romneylans depend on a permanent state of denial about what Conservatives and conservative policies did to bring America to the brink of disaster.

US Employment Data

Jobs: The impact of the 2007-09 Recession on jobs was felt through the first quarter of 2010. There is no magic bullet to recover the jobs lost during that time, but what is not going to help our nation’s unemployment is to eliminate civil service jobs that employ millions of middle class citizens. Romneylans rabid hate for government is the classic ‘biting the hand that feeds you’ syndrome.

Healthcare:  One of the biggest problems America has faced in the last thirty years is the rising cost of healthcare. A major component of this issue is the uninsured citizen without access to affordable healthcare. The uninsured person can’t afford to see a doctor for preventive, or minor health issues, so this often results in that patient receiving no care until it becomes a major health problem. That increases the cost of treatment for which we all indirectly pay. The Affordable Healthcare Act (ACA) solves this problem.

However, Mitt Romney, nor his major contributors will ever have to worry about access to proper medical treatment, thus they don’t care about the millions of Americans who have no access. Ironically, many Romneylans will benefit from ACA either directly or indirectly. Unfortunately, stupidity rules the day with conservative voters and they have convinced themselves that ACA is akin to the Apocalypse, thus it must be stopped before it can take effect.

Another issue is women’s health, in particular, contraception and abortion. While some may say this is another religious issue, for Romneylans it seems to have more of a tie to the gender that is making most of the noise. (See Conservative Pig Influenza of 2012.)

Science:  Anyone who seriously believes that Creationism should be taught in public and or private schools as an alternative option to evolution is certainly a Romneylan. Creationism has no basis as a rational explanation for how the universe and humans came into existence but that doesn’t stop Romneylans from declaring mythology as science.

Regarding climate change, science has demonstrated that we are witnessing an extraordinary change in Earth’s climate on a scale that exceeds any climate change during the last 600,000 years. A study funded in part by conservatives to disprove the science of global warming ended up confirming the data.

This doesn’t stop a Romneylan.  They dispute science by being ‘skeptical.’ Skeptical is another way of saying, “I’m being stupid.”

Immigration:  The Hispanics population in America is growing; however, Mexicans coming to America is not what is driving Conservatives panic attack on this issue. They are just scared white men. That’s sad, but Romneylans are taking their panic and turning into an issue that is long on fear mongering and short on facts. Romneylans are now trying to arm themselves and monitor the border. Guns and vigilantes can be entertaining, but not very smart.

One of the ironies is that most Romneylans nay not know that Romney’s father was born in Mexico when his family fled there to avoid prosecution by the United States of America. His family returned when they became concerned about violence in Mexico.

Romneylan with an open mind?

Guns:  I was raised in one of America’s prime hunting communities. I was one of the first to complete an NRA (National Rifle Association) safety course. In addition, I was taught that guns and people don’t mix, so we had a rule to not come back into town with a loaded gun after hunting. Safety and respect for others was key.

Then the NRA became political and this was the cry of gun owners:

When guns are outlawed, only Outlaws will have guns

Clever. Here’s the reality. Almost every person will at some point in their lives be filled with so much anger that they will have a fleeting desire to injure or kill someone else. The NRA wants that person to have a gun accessible so they can act on that impulse. Does that seem smart or stupid?