Gun Control

In the wake of the Tucson, Arizona shooting, we’d be missing a golden opportunity to prevent future tragedies if we did not use the sudden spike in awareness of the American people as a catalyst for taking action against violence of this nature. There is no question that the six deaths and numerous injuries caused by a man who exhibits signs of mental instability were utterly senseless and absolutely preventable. There are several options to consider. The first is to do nothing. The second is to make one or more compromises that will limit the availability and/or lethality of firearms; perhaps by banning extended clips like those used by shooter Jared Lee Loughner or requiring a more extensive screening process of prospective gun buyers. The third option is to move towards a public ban on all guns for civilians. If the safety of the American people is of primary concern for our government, as indeed it is, it is obvious that the one option we cannot afford to select is inaction.
There exists a rather morbid trend in America. Every few years, a lunatic will go on a shooting spree. From the teenagers of Columbine to the young adults of Virginia Tech and now Tucson, these public examples of the second amendment gone haywire are reminders that guns too often get into the hands of the last people who should have them: those who use them to kill innocents. Author and Naval intelligence officer Ian Fleming once said, “Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action”. Granted this quote came in the context of a James Bond novel, but for the purposes of this subject I find it insightful; we have moved beyond the realm of coincidence when it comes to these shootings. Therefore, without a change in policy, we should expect the trend to continue. Unless we consider the death and suffering of innocent people to be an acceptable price to pay for the unregulated sale of lethal weapons (for which there are few uses other than violence or intimidation), action must be taken on a Federal level.
There is a contiguous relationship between certain qualities of a firearm that would make them more dangerous. Bullets that can pierce body armor are more dangerous than ones that cannot, for obvious reasons. Guns made from plastic (and thus undetectable by metal detectors) are more dangerous than their metal counterparts because they can be more easily concealed and thus be taken into places that guns should not be. Fully automatic and submachine guns are more dangerous than semi-automatic handguns. They can fire at a more rapid rate, and possess the potential to hit many more people in a short period of time. Aside from being more dangerous forms of weaponry, these items have another thing in common: the Federal government has banned them all. This fact illustrates a legal precedent for restricting the amount of damage that a gun can do by outlawing certain guns and bullets considered to have a high level of destructive power. Coupled with a healthy dose of common sense, it would seem reasonable for extended gun clips (which allow a gun to fire more rounds without needing to be reloaded) to be put in this category.
Many gun enthusiasts claim that “guns do not kill people, people kill people”. The sentiment is essentially that having their guns and ammo taken away because of the actions of a few bad apples should not be the penalty for law-abiding citizens. Rather, we should work harder to recognize potentially violent individuals and keep guns away from them and them alone. While the efficacy of such a strategy in practice is debatable, it would be hard to make an argument against trying to limit the availability of guns to those of us who are not mentally or emotionally equipped to handle one safely.
Extensive background checking should be mandatory before the purchase of any firearm. History of arrests, mental illness, and possibly even academic achievement should all be scoured and taken into account. However, it would be incredibly wishful thinking to believe that this alone would be enough to prevent shooting deaths. There are many other facets to a human being that aren’t so easily documented, such as mental coherence, involvement in extreme ideologies, lack of a guiding social institution, and abuse of drugs and alcohol. There is no doubt that these are variables that would factor considerably into the equation, but although there are truths to be known it certainly could not always be easy to know them.
The right to bear arms is guaranteed under the United States Constitution. Our founding fathers had deemed such right to be so important that it was preceded only by the right to freedom of speech in the original Bill of Rights. Many modern Americans seem to give extraordinary levels of credence to this particular centuries-old document, to the point that its decrees are almost biblical in stature. They seem to forget that it includes an elastic clause to accommodate for inevitable changes that will need to be made as the country progresses. There is no doubt that the founding fathers had some wonderful ideas. Some say that Thomas Jefferson’s original Declaration of Independence is among the greatest pieces of persuasive writing ever written. However, after aging over two hundred years, even the brightest ideas can begin to lose their luster. For example, it’s impossible for me as well as most people alive today to remember when the third amendment was relevant. Protection from having to quarter troops simply is not very high on the list of priorities for most Americans these days. Consider that the Constitution was composed not only long before such things as the Internet or smart phones changed the way we interact with each other for good, it was before the likes of the assembly line and industrialization. Before humans flew to the moon – or even flew at all. These are things so embedded into our everyday modern lives that we cannot help but take them for granted. America has been through a lot since its birth. In a society where you can speak directly to law enforcement officials almost immediately, regardless of where you are or the time of day, how much extra protection can a gun really offer?
If a perfect world is what we strive for, and a perfect world includes peace and harmony, then it is difficult to figure a way for guns to fit in. However, we would do well as a society to temper our collective optimistic outlook with realism. This technology cannot be un-invented. If we want to make a decision that is going to do the most good in the context of the world that we live in, we need to factor in the notion that making all guns illegal is not the same as waving a magic wand and making them disappear. As illicit drug trade can attest, contraband often finds its way into the hands of the general public. There will always be a market for guns, and people will buy them whether they are legal or not. By controlling which guns we make available to whom, we maximize the level of safety. If we were to make all guns illegal and thus put them into the hands of smugglers and criminals where they cannot be regulated, all bets are off. There is no question that a gun is a deadly weapon in the hands of anybody. Just how deadly we allow them to be is up to us.

Osama's death: A historic moment

This is America, land of the free. A utopia where we don’t bask in the suffering and misery of others. Where we don’t treat people’s lives as a means to an end and kill them indiscriminately based on our vague notions of self-righteousness. Where we don’t pass judgment on somebody unless it’s in front of a judge and jury. Wait - actually it turns out that we do all of those things, and are damn proud of it too. I must have been incredibly naïve to think that we as a species had moved far enough along on the evolutionary timeline so as not to do things like lobby for a national holiday commemorating the death of a fellow human being.

Look, all indications were that Osama Bin Laden was a pretty bad guy. And I personally don’t doubt that he was at best partially responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. But I can guarantee that not one person reading this has any more evidence suggesting the truth value of that claim aside from the repetitive, brainwashing assurances from our media and government. BLIND FAITH IS NOT A VIRTUE. Many people couldn’t accept Barack Obama’s citizenship based on it, and they’ve seen and heard much more from him than they have from OBL. If you demanded more evidence from someone regarding their citizenship than you did from the people who accused somebody of being the leader of the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world and the person solely responsible for the death of thousands, then I really think you need to slow down and take a mental inventory – you may need to be medicated.

America has made her point clearly. Osama Bin Laden was an enemy of the state, and as we have shown we will spare no expense when it comes to money, human lives, global respect or time in order to get our man. We won’t put him on trial and when he is dead our people will rejoice fervently, wishing only that his death was as painful as possible and that they themselves could have been there to inflict some of the damage personally. Does anybody else see anything wrong with this? This bloodthirsty, black and white, "fuck with me and die" sentiment we're propagating sounds very much like the attitude the Muslim community takes towards apostasy, and no matter what the context is I don’t think it’s a good sign when any comparison can be drawn between Islam and us. I wouldn’t say we’ve lost our humanity, but never in my lifetime has the glare from our lack of it so obstructed our vision.

First Post

Ordinarily, I'd probably title my blog entry something a little more thought provoking than 'first post'. Cut me some slack though, I haven't written anything much longer than my signature on the timecard at work in quite some time now. And lets face it, despite the fact that we're probably friends (otherwise I don't know how you could've possibly found this site), I'm not trying to scare anyone away with my totally unecessary and pretentious use of big words or obscure quotations that nobody understands. Not yet at least.

So..why create a blog? Well, I'm a self proclaimed deep thinker who enjoys hearing words come out of his own mouth. Seeing words typed by his own fingers? Even better. Now I can reread my little pearls of wisdom whenever I want. Is there some part of me that hopes this blog will become exceedingly popular and result in a budding journalism career or something of that nature? Eh, not really. As I'm sure the posts that follow this one will show, I'm a realist. Big, BIG realist. Don't believe in ghosts or karma and extremely skeptical of anything supernatural.

On a more concrete personal level, here's some basic info about me:
I'm 22 and live on Long Island. I don't think it's as bad as some others do, but I damn sure wish I could live somewhere else (Cali or Florida would be ideal). I graduated from University of Delaware with a Psychology major and Philosophy minor which means that I'm pretty much incapable of getting a 'real' job. Oh well. A little transitional phase never killed anybody.

Most of these blogs are pretty much gonna be me sharing some of the more absurd thoughts that enter my degenerate mind. It's pretty likely that the subsequent ones will have more interesting subject matter than this one. So thanks for procrastinating with me on here, keep on checking out my shit and I hope you'll find it to be time well wasted.