Land of Oz

Neighbors

We got a new neighbor who moved in a couple of months ago. He's really not a bad sort, but he does a lot of stupid things that really don't fit in the neighborhood. The house he bought (at nearly list) had one of the best lawns in the area - now it looks like a hayfield. He has this huge riding lawn mower, waits for the grass to get high, then scalps it down and leaves the cut stuff sitting there. There was one pile about 8" high and 8' long in his driveway for a month.

As soon as he moved in he put in a fence. Naturally for the three (large) dogs he has. I've had more than a few evenings ruined by his beasts barking for hours on end. While the stupid dogs could be worse, I shouldn't have to plan my outside time around his. And one dog pretty regularly runs loose. We've planted some shrubs to hopefully block the view of his fence and yard and dogs.

He has two cats that spend more time pooping and peeing in my yard than they do in his yard. And they love checking out my bird feeders. I keep hoping one of my other neighbors will shoot them.

He rarely sorts his trash for recycling. Our area had a cut in trash fees last year because so many people do recycle.

He parks his car in his back yard. He's got a pretty nice set of ruts across the front yard (not that he cares about his yard) where he pulls it in.

His kids keeps their car in the street where the snowplows have to work around them.

The last time he plowed his driveway, he scalped about a two-three square foot of sod up and has never put it back down. Of course this week we had a new snow that buried his sod and he doesn't seem to shovel his drive.

Another new neighbor on the other side of me told me, "I'm glad you live between him and me." One of the older neighbors across the street mentioned she couldn't understand why they moved here.

This guy has cars in his backyard, his yard looks a mess, he parks just about anywhere and he has three dogs who bark too often and snarl quite viciously when I walk past their fence. While we do live somewhat in the country, it's still a subdivision. This guy should have bought some house farther out in the boondocks where he could be the unthinking slob he strives to be.

Labels: freedom, gripes, michigan

Vote for Somebody

In a couple of weeks something pretty cool is going to happen in the United States. You and I get to have a say in what happens for the next four years in our country. I'm 95% sure who I'm going to vote for, but I have no intention of trying to influence your vote. Both sides have good and bad points; both sides have lied and told touching stories, both sides have done some some real smart stuff and both sides have done some real stupid stuff. It's always like that. What you have to do in a couple of weeks is vote for the one you think will do best for the country. In a couple of weeks, don't do bad and be one of the 70% or so who will stay at home and whine about not being able to do anything, do good and vote.

Labels: freedom, government

85/.22/2

Here's an interesting screenshot from my my.yahoo page. One article is about an 85 year old woman who was robbed in an elevator and the other is about an 85 year old woman who was almost robbed, but pulled her .22 and held the 17 year old robber at gun point until the police got there. And people wonder about the right to bear arms. 85 years old/.22 pistol/Article 2.

Labels: crime, freedom, government

Innocent?

So what - who cares - the government sure doesn't:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. federal agents have been given new powers to seize travelers' laptops and other electronic devices at the border and hold them for unspecified periods the Washington Post reported on Friday. Under recently disclosed Department of Homeland Security policies, such seizures may be carried out without suspicion of wrongdoing, the newspaper said, quoting policies issued on July 16 by two DHS agencies.

Basically the government can do anything to you anytime they want for any or no reason. They can toss you in jail forever with no trial and no evidence and don't even have to tell you why. They can take any electronic device you may own for any reason, or for no reason. You can't even argue, since they won't tell you why they're taking the stuff. They can listen to your phone calls, watch what you do on the Internet and have made sure you can't even sue your ISP if you even knew it.

I'm sure Mr. Orwell is saying, "and you thought it was fiction, didn't you?"

Labels: crime, freedom, government

A Private Remark

The latest political brouhaha is over some comment Jesse Jackson made about Barack Obama. My understanding about it - I haven't heard it - is he said something derogatory about Barack's speeches towards blacks and their social responsibilities. It's amazing how often famous people get caught making nasty remarks and then saying, "oops, oh my, I didn't really mean that." Obviously they meant it, what they really mean to say, is "shit, goddamn reporters keep sticking their fucking noses into other people's business - fuck off, leave me alone and let me talk like I damn well want to talk."

Come on. This is 2008 - there is no privacy. Congress says so. If you say something, plan on it being recorded, filmed, videoed, taped, or otherwise recorded and put up for billions of people to see and hear within seconds after you've said it. Congress just passed a secret bill that many in congress haven't even been cleared to read. It basically says the USofA government can listen to whatever, wherever and it doesn't have to justify itself to anyone. And that anyone (telcom companies) who helps is also above the law. If you say it or write it (and shortly thanks to brain scans - think it) people are going to know.

So if you say you want to cut candidate X's nuts off -- he's going to hear about it and so potentially will some 6 billion others.

Labels: freedom, government

Guns, Law, and Order

Here is the kind of thinking that drives me to distraction. A Washington D.C. Councilman, Phil Mendelson, stated:

"I think an individual possessing a handgun that can fire 18 rounds — that is loaded and can fire 18 rounds semiautomatically — is a problem for public safety in the District," Mendelson said. "I don't know what the correct number is, but something less (than 18 shots)."

This means that an individual carrying a weapon with 18 rounds in a magazine is a bloodthirsty, kill-crazy nut, while another person with only, say 15 rounds is not a problem.

Where do people come up with this stuff? Is there some critical-mass of lead and brass that affects the mind of someone who is carrying a weapon? I'm guessing at the point of the eighteenth cartridge, the mass has increased enough to suck the blood from the brain of the weapon owner, turning him into a mindless, cold-blooded killer? Whereas some trash talking, meth taking drunk, with nicotine for brains with a six round revolver is a happy camper?

Here's my outlook on this. If you carry a weapon; whether it be rock, knife, one shot derringer, 100 round belt fed semiautomatic, or even a small tactical nuclear weapon, and you commit a crime against another person - you go away to jail for a long, long, long time. And if you hurt that other person, and I don't care if it's because you dropped your rock on his toe, you get a short trip (and please make it a short wait) to the gas chamber.

I'm getting tired of hearing about people shooting people and getting off with a few years in the hoosegow, then returning to their 'hood as a hero. I don't care what, if someone is old enough to carry a weapon and use it against someone else, they're old enough to take the punishment - and the punishment should be harsh.

Labels: crime, freedom

SECRET, PRIVATE?

In the past I've wondered about people who answer so-called "anonymous" surveys, especially about illegal activities. You know the kind, those that are reported like, "42% of teenagers used illegal drugs," or "14% of males between 33 and 42 report shooting at least one neighbor." OK, maybe the last one is a bit of a stretch, but you know what I mean. Here's a line from a Time article:

"[Randall Walsh and his colleagues]...compared confidential Census figures from 1990 and 2000 from 15,040 neighborhoods, with an average of about 4,000 residents each, in 64 metropolitan areas, such as Phoenix, Boston, Ft. Lauderdale, Columbus, New York, Atlanta and San Diego.

Note my bolded phrase. Makes you kind of wonder how someone can compare confidential information doesn't it? According to my Merriam-Webster dictionary, confidential means "SECRET, PRIVATE" (and yes, it's capitalized that way in the dictionary). I wonder which part of secret and private Mr. Walsh and friends define differently than the rest of us (us meaning non-governmental types - we all know the government cares less).

Labels: freedom, government

Act Normal!

OK - you're being warned. Don't act differently or you may have the FBI looking for you. I'm basically screwed. We go driving by a tourist scene and I'm ogling the bulldozers and cranes on the scene. Show me a cruise ship and I wonder what kind of propulsion system it uses and how the tugs get it into the wharf. When I drive over the Bluewater Bridge I'm as much interested in how much the expansion joints have opened as I am in the view of the river below - and more than the river, I'm interested in what type of ships are going by.

If you look at my photographs you'll see they're very short on people and sunsets and high on buildings and vehicles. It doesn't mean I want to blow them up, I'm just interested in how they work and what kind of power they have. That doesn't make me bad or dangerous, just a little weird.

Labels: crime, freedom, government

Land of the Free?

What the hell? I knew it was bad, but this is amazing apalling. Thank goodness Congress is covering its ass covering Clement's ass instead of important stuff like 1 out of 99 adults is in jail! If you're a young guy, that rate triples and if you're young and black, basically you're screwed. If you are a 20 year-old black man and you have 9 friends, one of you is heading for the clink. But thank god, that baseball will be positive steroid test free - yeah, do we live in a great country or what?

The nationwide figures, as of Jan. 1, include 1,596,127 people in state and federal prisons and 723,131 in local jails - a total 2,319,258 out of almost 230 million American adults.

The report said the United States is the world's incarceration leader, far ahead of more populous China with 1.5 million people behind bars. It said the U.S. also is the leader in inmates per capita (750 per 100,000 people), ahead of Russia (628 per 100,000) and other former Soviet bloc nations which make up the rest of the Top 10.

"For some groups, the incarceration numbers are especially startling," the report said. "While one in 30 men between the ages of 20 and 34 is behind bars, for black males in that age group the figure is one in nine."

Using updated state-by-state data, the report said 2,319,258 adults were held in U.S. prisons or jails at the start of 2008 - one out of every 99.1 adults, and more than any other country in the world.

Labels: crime, freedom, government

$ports and Lif€

Baseball, steroids, football, video spying, NASCAR, fisticuffs, million$ of dollar$. Does anyone really believe professional sports are some kind of fairy tale land of good sportsmanship and clean living? Come on, billions of dollars are involved here. A tenth of a second faster or slower, a foot longer or shorter can make the difference between a multi-million dollar star's contract or a hundred-grand player's contract. Try figuring the advertising dollars or ticket sales difference between a 15 and 2 team and a 3 and 12 team.

With all that money involved how can anyone honestly believe that all the participants are going to be constrained by using just their natural talents. Can you really tell me that you wouldn't swap a couple years off the end of your life versus making a few million more bucks during the prime of your life if you had a chance. If you can, you are a much better person than I am.

Sure, not everyone is on the take or taking some kind of performance booster. There are honest folks out there. But I have the feeling there are a lot of shades of honesty out there. Are you going to tell me that those players who hobble around like an old man on Friday didn't take something so they can run like the wind on Sunday? Maybe they're not pumping illegal steroids or stimulants, but they gotta be doing something. And I think whatever they did will come back to haunt them in later years. But then again, so what.

OK, you might be one of those who lives to be 93 and still goes jogging. More than likely, if you make it to 75, you'll drooling into your bran fortified oatmeal. Go to an assisted living home someday and remember that the folks in there are lucky enough to be able to afford to be taken care of. Dinner time looks like an outtake from "Night of the Living Dead" as the folks who can still walk hobble their way to dinner. And you really wouldn't swap a few years of that for a few million more in your paycheck?

Labels: celebs, freedom, gripes

Berkeley

Money talks? Berkeley was once again in the news for threatening to boot out the military, specifically Marine, recruiters. While I disagree with that, I do support Berkeley's right to do so. And they can kick them out of their city if they decided to do that. However, it seems they've changed their mind about that. Now they have decided that the military recruiters aren't such a bad bunch of guys afterall.

I wonder why they changed their mind? Do you suppose it was because the government threatened to recall more than $2 million in federal funds as well as federal monies for the University of California-Berkeley? And that is action I also support. If you don't want to support your country's endevours in some places, don't expect your country to support yours. It's the same all over. Everything you do has repercusions. If you vote to cut back on city taxes, don't gripe about losing police and firefighters and bus service. If you buy a 300 horsepower 4X4 pickup truck to drive back and forth to 7/11 don't gripe when gas is $3.10 a gallon. And if you don't want some government services, don't gripe when all government services are gone.

Labels: freedom, government, gripes, military

Theocracy

THIS week [Jan 19] the Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee proposed that the US constitution be brought more in line with God's law in the Bible.

"I [Huckabee] believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards."

Now this scares the hell out of me. It's bad enough the Middle and Near East are full of religious fanatics who are trying to get rid of the secular government and replace it with one they feel supports their vision of religion. Now we have an American who is thinking about the same thing.

If Huckabee gets in, I can see the next couple of years making the medieval crusades look tame. A weapon of mass destruction back in those days was a big rock - today it's a nuke. Can you picture the American flag now being the cross-spangled banner? The amount of religion in today's politics is getting very scary, especially when one of the front runners is already calling for Constitutional amendments to better match the bible. Once they - there's that infamous they again - get their hooks into that, how much longer before we'll be teaching that man played with dinosaurs and the earth is stationary (poor Galileo is probably moaning, oh no, not again...).

Labels: freedom, government, religion

The Right Hand...

I just read a recent article about yet another secret prisoner camp in Cuba - one of ours, not Castros and some officer made a statement that displays a disturbing amount of single-minded thinking. While I certainly understand not needed or even wanting to know about some stuff, I worry about his total exclusion mode of thinking. Not knowing where Camp 7 is admirable in some ways, plausible deniability being one, but staying exclusively in one lane is a bit scary. It makes you wonder how many more times we're going to get hit by someone not driving along in their proscribed lane?

While some military personnel have reportedly grumbled about being kept out of the loop, others don't mind.

Army Col. Larry James, whose team of psychologists assists interrogators, said he does not want to know where Camp 7 is.

"I learned a long, long time ago, if I'm going to be successful in the intel community, I'm meticulously - in a very, very dedicated way - going to stay in my lane," he said. "So if I don't have a specific need to know about something, I don't want to know about it. I don't ask about it."

Labels: freedom, government

Tiger kills man at San Francisco Zoo

I suppose I should be shocked and upset by this news story, but I'm not. You can't blame a tiger for being a tiger. I am a little sad they had to shoot the tiger, but I guess you can't just leave a tiger alone while it munches on a bystander.

This bothers the same way that man-eating grizzlies being shot does. Why blame the grizzly for being a grizzly? Isn't the hiker much more to blame for blundering into the grizzly in the grizzly's home? A brain and upright walking only go so far in survival. You have to know when to use both of them. If 80,000 years ago, Ugh the caveman didn't think, "There grizzly, grizzly bad, me run" and then beat feet, we wouldn't be here to complain about "wild" animals.

And besides, how smart are we if we can't keep a tiger in its cage in San Francisco? I have to say, that while I like zoos, I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea of them. Why take some poor old tiger/lion/bear or even mouse/frog/fish and coop them up in a cage - no matter how cool looking the cage. I don't blame the tiger for getting pissed and chowing down on some guy. If I was him, I'd get pissed too.

Labels: freedom

The US and Torture

I'd say we officially lost the war on terror. We've become what we are fighting. We do it a bit more scientifically - don't want a bunch of blood and guts around to embarass people like those nasty terrorists do with electric drills and knives, but it's still torture.

While I don't always agree with Senator McCain, I do here. He says, and he should know, "All I [McCain] can say is that it was used in the Spanish Inquisition, it was used in Pol Pot's genocide in Cambodia, and there are reports that it is being used against Buddhist monks today (in Myanmar)," he told The New York Times.

"It is not a complicated procedure. It is torture," he added.

Yes, I know, I've heard the scenario. If a terrorist is going to bomb a school full of kids and won't talk, why should we worry about torturing him (most are hims not hers) to get the info to save the kids. Where do you draw the line? Most people would say 100 kids is worth torturing for - Is one kid worth it? If one kid, how about a multi-million dollar building or aircraft?

If a terrorist is going to kill 100 kids, do you really think he's going to tell us the truth about what is going to happen? If I'm tortured I'm going to say as much as I can about everything I can think of. I'm sure you'll get the truth, but it's going to come with a lot of crap you're also going to have to check out.

Bottom line, is I think it's just wrong. Like negotiating with terrorists. A line has to be drawn and when we sink below that line we become what we are fighting.

Labels: freedom, government

Tibet

In case you don't know, here's a picture of the Dalai Lama. I have no desire to extend the usual American jokes about musicals or pack animals and just want to display a picture of someone who from what little I really know, seems to be a pretty nice guy. And who is up against from what I see to be a pretty annoying big country that really doesn't give much of a damn about humans in general.

(CNN News - AP Photo) "Beijing has claimed to be the legitimate and rightful government of Tibet since 1951, the year after China invaded the then-independent state. Some say the claim doesn't jibe with international law. Allegations abound that China has stifled Tibetans' religious and other fundamental freedoms, sometimes violently.

The Dalai Lama has led a government in exile from neighboring India for decades. In 1959, the then-24-year-old Buddhist leader fled Tibet during a failed uprising against the Chinese."

Labels: freedom, government

Thinking of What?

BBC News about Iran's Presidential visit to USofA: Asked about executions of homosexuals in Iran, Mr Ahmadinejad replied: "In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country."

Reacting to laughter and jeers from the audience he added: "In Iran we don't have this phenomenon, I don't know who you told this."

I don't know why people were laughing about this. I'm pretty sure it's a true statement. The Iranian gay population is obviously not like the gay population in the US or most other western countries. Can you imagine a gay pride parade with lightly clad demonstrators on the streets of Tehran? How far behind the parade do you think the Mullahs and their pious followers would be - carrying buckets of rocks?

Also, it's true that Mr Ahmadinejad would like to see more research about the Holocaust. He and his country would like to do more research to make sure they get it done correctly the next time.

Labels: freedom, government

Freedom of Worship

Veils and women. Guys and knives. Anyone and turbans. Feet washing and Friday night fish fries. Yes, as an immigrant you may have been used to those types of customs in your life. However, I don't see a reason for you to expect the country you immigrate into has to support the same customs you were used to at home.

Why do you expect the same customs in the new country? Obviously there was something wrong in your native country or otherwise you wouldn't have left.

If and when I decide to live in another country I wouldn't expect them to support my beliefs. If I have to give up gun ownership and accept stricter government control of what I do, then so be it. If there's higher taxes to be paid and some customs are unacceptable, then either I follow what they already have or I stay where I am. I don't expect a new country to accept me -- I expect to accept the new country.

Labels: freedom, government, gripes, religion

Orwell Lives On

In the Chicago Tribune: "In the last five years, fewer than 100 people have been detained in the CIA's black prisons and less than half of those detainees "have ever required any sort of enhanced interrogation measures," CIA Director Gen. Michael V. Hayden said in a statement to employees yesterday."

Now is that scary or what? Take all the politically correct modifiers out of that statement and you get that; just the CIA alone, in the past five years only, and only in their "black prisons," has openly admitted to torturing nearly 50 people.

That leaves out the military, the justice department, contractors, federal and local law enforcement and just about anyone else. It also leaves out white prisons (and what pray-tell is the official definition of "black prison" anyway), regular prisons, farmer's fields, military bases, ships at sea and aircraft in the air.

I know I'm going to sleep a lot sounder tonight knowing my government is keeping me safe.

Labels: freedom, government

Land of the Free?

According to the International Centre for Prison Studies at King's College in London, the United States has long had the world's largest prison population, followed by China at 1.5 million and Russia at 885,670.

What on earth are we doing wrong? This weekend there were 3 or 4 shootings and a couple of murders in my town. Just south of here last week there was a shooting that involved something like a dozen people. Last week near Detroit some guy stole a woman's necklace and sank her in a nearby lake. Some cop (hopefully ex-cop) in Ohio is accused of murdering his pregnant girlfriend, and a pro-wrestler seems to have killed his wife, his kid and belatedly himself.

And that is with more people in prison than any other country in the world. I don't get it. Who the hell do we have locked up? Do we put some guy in the slammer for smoking some crack while the murderers and rapists wander the streets? Something has gone or is going seriously wrong in the good ol' USofA and it worries me. We have 2,193,798 people (that's about 1 per 137 people) behind bars and it doesn't seem to be helping a whole lot. There is a problem here and I'm absolutely clueless of what can be done about it.

Labels: crime, freedom, government

North Korea

Now I'm not saying that lights are everything, but look at this fairly recent image of a section of Asia. The whole NASA image is here by the way. Look at the border between North and South Korea. I always find looking at that amazing. Other than the glow coming from Kim Jong Il's widescreen TV, the country north of the DMZ (arrowed) is dark - as in lights out. Look at what is south of the DMZ. The greatest percentage of broadband users are sitting there with their lights on. Cranking out Samsung phones and DVD players. The poor folks in the north don't even have enough light to see that they don't have any food to eat. Also check out Taiwan and Japan and see what vibrant and flourishing countries can look like.

Labels: freedom, government, tech

Freedom of Speech

One of the recent news articles talked about a marine who is being disciplined because of his activities in protesting. I hope that everyone reading that article gets the whole story and not just part of the story. If you've read this blog before you've probably seen that I'm big on personal freedoms. However, I'm also big on personal responsibilities. In this case, the marine is wrong. Naturally, the antiwar side is making a big deal about a military protester being busted for protesting.

There is no problem with a military member taking part in political activities. Whether it's a war protest or burning books protest, the military member can take part. What they can't do is wear her uniform while doing so. This is what the marine is being busted for. As far as I'm concerned, whether he's active duty or Ready Reserve, he's still in the military, and as such shouldn't be wearing the uniform during a protest.

He's wrong not about protesting; I'm fine with that, but about protesting in uniform. And one other item that doesn't seem to be getting too much air time is that after an officer reminded him about that, the marine's response was, "He [the marine] replied to the e-mail and expressed his opinion that the military should have more important things to worry about and signed off with an expletive."

My guess is that with that email, that marine is pretty much "expletived" himself.

Labels: freedom, government, military

One Selfish Bastard

Andrew Speaker - Here's one idiot who thinks ONLY of himself. He admits he was advised not to travel, but he wasn't forbidden. Now he's complaining that the CDC has "abandoned" him. What a crock. This guy really pisses me off and gets absolutely no sympathy from me.

He accused the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of abandoning him by asking him to check into a health facility in Rome instead of returning to the United States via commercial airliner for treatment. Speaker and his wife said the government refused to help arrange alternate transportation home.

"Why are you abandoning me like this and asking me to turn myself over for an indefinite time?" Speaker said. "It's very real that I could have died there ... I felt very abandoned."

Maybe you could have died. If you felt that way, why the hell did you jump on a plane and threaten the lives of hundreds if not thousands more? This is the kind of crap one expects from a self-centered, globe-trotting, lawyer who obviously looks out only for himself and like most lawyers is looking for someone else to take the blame for his screwups.

Grow up Andy and take some responsibilities for your own actions. I am sorry you caught the disease, but I'm not at all sorry for the way anyone has treated you since. You decided to put your own selfish interests in front of society, so now suck it up and pay the consequences.

Labels: freedom, gripes

Dogs

I have ranted here about loose dogs in the past and will continue to do so. I just found out that this week is Dog Bite Prevention Week. Most of the following has been admittedly cut and pasted (the links to the originals are there). Here's some stats from a fact sheet by the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA):

An estimated 4.7 million Americans will be bitten this year.

Primary victims are children.

As many as 800,000 people annually require medical treatment for dog bites.

About 12 people each year die from dog attacks.

According to the Insurance Information Institute, insurance companies paid $317.2 million for dog bite liability claims in 2005 alone.

From other places: "Small children are the most common victims, followed by older people and United States Postal Service (USPS) employees."

I have no problem with you having a dog. Most dogs are pretty cool. What I do have a problem with is when you let your dog roam loose. Those dogs aren't cool. If I had my way, I'd just shoot them on sight. And if that pisses you off, then keep your dog and the dog's teeth under control and don't bitch and moan when some driver runs it over.

Labels: crime, freedom, gripes

Thought Police

Remember when yesterday, I mentioned Orwell and 1984? How about this story, "The senior [4.2GPA] at suburban Cary-Grove High School was charged this week with two misdemeanor counts of disorderly conduct after the principal turned his creative writing essay over to police. ...The charges could result in a $1,500 fine and as many as 30 days in jail if Lee [the senior] is convicted.

This is a kid who had been vetted and accepted by the Marine Corp and had never been in any trouble with the police. However, because of a violent story he wrote for a creative writing class, he was turned over to the cops and charged with disorderly conduct! That is just wrong. At best, how about asking him what's going or maybe see a shrink - but arrest? I don't think so.

Where would writers like Mickey Spillane and Stephen King be, or especially folks like John Skipp & Craig Spector who started the splatterpunk genre, if every disturbing story writer was arrested? Stuff like this pisses me off so much I could shoot someone, oops, wait, I mean allegedly shoot someone, ah, I meant allegedly think about maybe perhaps alluding to causing someone alleged harm, kinda. Wait! OK, what I really meant is that it makes me so mad, I could buy them a Twinkie sundae with soft ice cream and a dietary disclaimer to warn them of any possible harm that may occur should they partake of the calorie ridden treat now or at any time in the future.

Labels: crime, freedom, government, gripes

Guns

I suppose I should add my little voice to the torrent of pro-antigun rhetoric. Simply put, I'm for gun ownership if you want one. In fact, any weapon you want to own is fine with me. Where I draw the line is what you do with that weapon. The kid in Virginia was already identified as a nutcase - and he is one who shouldn't be owning a weapon. But that doesn't mean no one should own a weapon.

One thing to think about is that had a couple of law-abiding students, teachers or guards, been packing guns, the whole VTI thing could've ended up much differently. Think about what would have happened if that kid's first stop was in a marksmanship class where everyone was armed. I think the body count would have been much smaller.

One of the cliches that I believe in is, "guns don't kill people, people kill people." And it's true. You put a loaded gun in the middle of a room full of people and nothing's going to happen unless someone stupid picks up the gun and shoots someone - preferably himself. That gun will sit there until it rusts into a pile of ferric oxide and no one will be hurt.

What I'd like to see is a clampdown on gun crime. Do a crime, any crime, even stealing a slice of stale bread and if you have a gun with you I'd like to see a minimum of 25 to life. Hurt someone with the gun, and I don't care if you drop it and the victim trips over it, you get life - period. A gun can be a deadly force, just like a knife or baseball bat. If you pick one up, you need to acknowledge certain responsibilities. Like I said, I see no problem with owning a gun as long as you're prepared to accept the responsibilities of ownership.

To me there's no such thing as an "accidental shooting." If you're holding a gun and it goes off, you're responsible. Every time I pick up a gun, I consider it loaded and I don't point it towards anything (or anybody) I don't intend on shooting. I don't care if you've just rebuilt it and it's still warm from a bluing bath, I consider it loaded until I check for sure. If you're carrying a gun and trip and shoot someone, you're responsible (unless you're a vice-president) because it wasn't an accident.

Labels: crime, freedom