Biting the Bullet with Gun Control
Sep 3, 2007 Blogging, Personal, Politics
I was talking with a friend on the phone and the topic of Gun control was discussed. In a nutshell, he’s pro-firearms and I’m indifferent with the exception that I don’t want our government to waste any more money on a failed bureaucratic process.
Point 1: Let’s say guns entirely were decided to be completely illegal except for law enforcement. That works for illegal drugs, right?
I agree with this, because our war on drugs is never over, and it’s amazing to think about how much money we pumped into it, yet you ask a kid in high school middle school and ask them where they can get marijuana, MDMA, cocaine and they can probably tell you.
Although I am against the use or distribution of illegal drugs, I know we have a failed system. Guns win on this point.
Point 2: Second Amendment interpretations: In 1773, it was a different time with one militia and not local law enforcement. They didn’t intend for everyone to possess a gun.
A lot of people will raise the question of the matter of our second amendment (”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.”) to imply this right was written with the belief that only one militia was provided, as opposed to our varying levels of local law enforcement.
Let’s interpret it in the 1700’s: African Americans and women don’t have the right to vote, slavery is legal, 13 colonies, etc. We need to balance the interpretation by reading the Constitution as neutral as possible, with no regard to time it was written or conditions that may have been affecting it.
Point 3: President Bush didn’t renew the Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) [enacted in 1994], we’re going to have more people dying or more criminals with more dangerous weapons.
False. Even though the act did expire in September 2004, very few crimes were observed in relation to the bill expiring. The AWB did very little, primarily, prohibiting larger volume magazines, telescoping stocks, and pistol grips from being used in weapons. You can learn more about the AWB at Wikipedia.
—
Having that said, I believe we just need to maintain the laws we currently have and not get caught up in the semantics about the definition of an “assault weapon,” specifically, monitoring the effectiveness of background checks, testing for security issues and finding loopholes.
Gun control has always been a hot topic, because everyone feels they have the answer to it. The truth is, restricting weapons isn’t going to lower violence. The supply and demand theory doesn’t apply. If someone wants to kill you, they will do it by means of themselves, knives, or whatever free objects available. Murder (or DV) is a behavior. The weapon is not killing the victims, it’s the criminals who commit crime.
Rumor has it, given that there’s a very high probability of a democratic president, the AWB of 2007 could be re-enacted with even more stringent provisions. Get your guns now, before they only hold ten rounds. 
I’m thinking about getting either a Mossberg 12 Gauge or Bushmaster XM-15. I like the coverage of a shotgun, but I also want the precision of a full rifle. I’ve always like the aesthetics of a carbine and appreciate the complexity of a carbine, too.
What do you think? Should the government continue its regulation and restrictions on firearms? Let me know in the comments.
Tags: debate, discussion, freedom
‘Bong Hits 4 Jesus’ Rests in Supreme Court
Mar 19, 2007 Blogging, Politics
If you haven’t learned already, small changes bring big results. The small change in regards to enforcing school policies, now leads into a larger case of Freedom of Speech. Joseph Frederick, a high school senior, displayed a 14-foot banner in the name of humor, “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.”
As a result of Frederick’s display, the sign was confiscated by his principal and he was suspended from school. The student is contesting this response, and has escalated to the United States Supreme Court regarding how far a school’s right to interfere with a student’s right to free speech can reach (such as onto public property).
While I agree that schools need to have policies against harassment and must have a stance on discouraging use of illegal substances, I don’t believe the school’s principal is just in suspending the student from classroom time. If I want to write a sign that says “It’s Miller Time!” then I damn well should retain the right to display a sign like this on a public street. Even a conservative blogger agrees. As long a public display is not slandering or advocating direct substance use, it should be permitted under school jurisdiction.
I fully endorse and support Joseph Frederick’s fight for his civil right to free speech. Damn, I wish he had a blog, cause he’d get some mad hits right about now.
Our country’s forefathers would be turning in their grave, knowing that government institutions continue to impede a student’s right to free speech, rather than embrace our rights in the great country. That’s the point.
[tags] Bong Hits 4 Jesus, Supreme Court, Freedom of Speech, Civil Rights[/tags]
Tags: debate, freedom, Government, Rants
Free Genarlow Wilson
Jan 28, 2007 Blogging, Tech News
How would you like to get eleven years in prison for consensual sexual acts as a minor? Well, that’s what happened to Genarlow Wilson, from the state of Georgia. The whole story and legal documents are available at WilsonAppeal.com. It’s a bunch of BS if you ask me since GA enacted the “Romeo & Juliet Act” which is designed to prevent situations like this from happening.
As Calacanis suggests; if bloggers would share this story and spread it around - it might make a difference. Heck, just a link even. 
Tags: freedom, Government, internet
