Pages

Friday, December 21, 2012

The #GunControlNow Paradox




In thewake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting many find themselves lookingfor solutions to prevent these massacres from happening again. The person thattakes the cake when it comes to drawing ratings attention to their showcause is Piers Morgan of CNN. Piers feels like it’s time for America to wake upand do something about guns. Now is the time for #GunControlNow, as he would say. What does “guncontrol” mean? What does it include? What will it solve? Are we trying to solvea problem, or are we just following liberal precedent by “not letting a crisisgo to waste”. I think that Piers Morgan and his gun control advocates need toanswer some questions before America changes its “outdated” 2ndAmendment.

 
 
1.What is an “assault rifle”?

 Assault rifles that are being used in massshootings are not the same “assault” rifles used in by the military. Automaticfiring is not an option on civilian owned “assault” rifles. “Assault” riflesare mainly defined by their appearance and their ammunition capacity. “Assault”weapon bans are ineffective because if you draft legislation to ban the look ofa gun, then the manufacture just changes the look.

 
2. Ifthe gunman used a hunting rifle that shot the same caliber bullet, but did notlook as intimidating as an “assault” rifle, then would you take to Twitter tocall for #GunControlNow?

It sounds like you are moreconcerned about how scary the gun looked. A gun is a gun and a bullet is abullet when it is aimed at a human. Nobody can be scared to death.






Maybe you’re moreconcerned with the number of innocent people that the gunman was able to shoot dueto the high capacity magazine. Or maybe you were outraged that the shooter hadmore than one gun.



 3. Ifthat is the case, do you have a threshold that the body count must fall below in order for you to deem it unworthy of #GunControlNow?


4. So if a madman walkedinto a school with one semi-automatic handgun and killed 6 people what wouldyour response be? I know you would not think it was more acceptable. What wouldyour cause be since “assault” weapons were not used? Would Piers Morgan be silent?Maybe he wants a ban on other types of guns.  

Weknow the answer to this because Piers made similar calls for #GunControlNowwhen the Trayvon Martin shooting occurred. This incident involved no massacre.There was one gun, one bullet, and one death.

 
5. Whatwould be accomplished if “assault” rifles and high capacity magazines are banned? 

If aparent caught a child drawing on the walls with a blue crayon, should theparent take away the blue crayon and tell the child you cannot have any moreblue crayons? No, because the child will instinctively go back and get anothercolor crayon. The child did not care what color the crayon was, he just wantedto draw on the walls. Even if you take all the crayons away, the child will gofind a marker or a pen. This approach is nonsensical. It makes even less senseif you take the blue crayon away from all kids. Address the child’sbehavior, don’t try to eliminate their options hoping they will lose their urge. There are alwaysmore options.
The foundation of the liberalmindset is that we can make this a better world if government micromanagessociety into a near utopia. Unfortunately this is impossible. No matter howgood it sounds, and no matter how much you want these shootings to stop, youcannot micromanage a madman’s murder weapons away from him. Sure there arethings we can do with gun permit screenings, but do not give people a sense offalse security by fighting to ban “assault” weapons. Like the kid without theblue crayon, there are always more options.

I knowPiers Morgan understands that there are other societal influences in Americanthat should be held responsible such as TV, movies, and video games; but I amstilling waiting for that hash tag to be created, #DontHoldYourBreath.

 
Thefoundation of the conservative mindset is that family and strong values makesociety a better place. The more successful we are at preserving the familyunit and its values, the safer we all are in every aspect of life. Sureviolence and traumatic incidents will occur, but as President Reagan said, “We must rejectthe idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than thelawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual isaccountable for his actions.

Thereare people who feel they have a right to own these guns for sport or hobby, andthey do, but I do agree the public feels unsafe. So here is my solution to the“assault” weapon/gun control paradox. Create a 3 tier system to classify legal civilianguns. (1) Home Defense (2) Self-Defense (3) Sport. If you want to own a gun youmust join a gun club. All guns must be bought through the gun club andregistered with the state government. A safety class must be completed. Tier(1) guns may be taken home and the owner is responsible for properly securingit there. Tier (2) guns may be used with a concealed carry permit. This permitrequires course completion so the person can actually use it safely in publicif necessary. Tier (3) guns must be kept at the gun club. These include huntingrifles and assault rifles. They can be fired at the club for sport at any time,and hunting rifles can be taken out of the club for the appropriate huntingseason. Club members must earn a positive reputation with the owner in order totake tier (3) guns out of the club for requested circumstances. The club mustvouch for the member. The government is only involved with permits andregistration to truly secure the 2nd amendment. The gun clubs will act almost as militias for those who fear the government, and it is up to the gun club to release the arms in the event of a national crisis.

6. Doyou think the 2nd amendment is outdated?

 Many People enjoy stating the secondamendment was written during a time of muskets not “assault” rifles. Many alsostate that citizen should not be allowed the same fire power as the governmentor local police. This is true, but they are actually making a case againststricter gun laws. If you think about it proportionally, citizens were allowedto own muskets which at that time were guns with the most power and newesttechnology. We as citizens today do not have that same privilege, concessionshave been made. While handguns are mostly used today for home and self defense, and rifles are used for sport, let's not forget the 2nd amendment allows us to hold arms to protect us from tyranny. I know it is 2012 and America, and maybe the world, thinks a government will never try and overstep its boundray with the people's liberty, but just maybe it is our old Constitution that allows us to feel that security today.

"The people will not understand the importance ofthe Second Amendment until it is too late."
         -     ThomasJefferson -
 
“The strongest reason for the people to retain the rightto keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves againsttyranny in government."
         -     Thomas Jefferson Papers p. 334,1950 -
 
"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchasea little temporary Safety  deserveneither Liberty nor Safety."
              -     Ben Franklin -
 
The Constitution preserves "the advantage of beingarmed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation. . .(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
   -     James Madison, TheFederalist, No. 46 -
 
"Firearms stand next in importance to theConstitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifleand the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by theirsilence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere offirearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, weneed them every hour."
-     George Washington (Address to 1st session of Congress)-
 
 
 

Spread the Conservative Mindset with:

Thursday, October 4, 2012

10 Responses I Yelled at My TV During the Debate






1)      Romney was asked if there was anything he would like to ask President Obama.

Mr. President you enjoy making the claim that I would like to resort back to the same old top down economic model that President Bush used, which you say is “how we got into this mess”. I assume you are talking about tax cuts for the rich. Can you explain to the American people how the Bush tax cuts caused the collapse of the housing market and “the worst recession since the Great Depression”?


2)      In response to the $5 trillion in tax cuts claim:

 Closing loopholes will make up for the lost revenue from lowering rates because more income will be taxed at the lower rate than at the higher rate. Loopholes that he wants to cut will not be written in stone because then he cannot work with Congress to pass legislation. The loopholes need to be debated and discussed on the floor of Congress, not it backrooms like Obamacare. Also, I look at the economy in a dynamic way. I know that cutting rates will grow the economy and increase revenue because more people will have jobs and pay taxes. The study you are quoting does not take that into account.  The $5 trillion claim is a static way of looking at the economy.


3)      President Obama uses President Clinton as a crutch to fall back on:

Clinton worked with a Republican house because he had leadership experience as a Governor, President Obama lacks that experience. Clinton lowered the capital gains tax rate, Obama want to raise it. Clinton served during a relatively peaceful time as compared to previous Presidents, so defense spending was being decreased. Clinton’s economy was a result of a booming technology sector due to the “dot-com” bubble. The “dot-com” bubble was not a result of Clinton’s policies. Clinton never left Bush a surplus. Clinton borrowed the surpluses coming into the Social Security Trust to pay down the public debt. However, the intergovernmental debt (money that the government borrows from itself) went up. It was an accounting trick. Also, the “dot-com” bubble burst went Bush took over, so the “surpluses” that were on paper never actually amounted to anything. Bush inherited a recession not a surplus.


4)      $10 of spend cuts for every $1 of tax increases:

Every time that proposition is accepted the tax increase happens immediately and the spending cuts happen gradually over 10 years, or never at all. Ask Bush Sr. or Ronald Reagan about that.


5)      Big Bird and PBS:

Big Bird does not need PBS, PBS needs Big Bird.  Sesame Street brings in millions of dollars and could survive without government help. Since they are successful I feel confident that they would survive in the private market. If PBS cannot survive in the private market, then that means customers do not want it. So the government should not pay for it.


6)      Medicare and “vouchers”:

The premium support model is the same model that members of Congress use. The private companies must structure a policy that meets the needs and the requirements of Medicare in order to participate.  Competition will create perks like it does in any industry so it can win over new customers. Look at how cable companies use perks to get new customers. I’ve never heard someone say they wish there was only one cable provider. The only complaint I hear is that there is not enough competition.


7)      Healthcare costs:

Romney should have stated that his healthcare place includes tort reform and competition across state lines. In order to bring down costs doctors need to stop duplicating tests to avoid medical malpractice lawsuits. People would be shocked if they knew how much a doctor pays for liability insurance every year. Also, competition always reduces cost. There is no reason someone in Ohio shouldn’t be able to buy insurance from a company in Colorado. This is allowed with car insurance, why not medical? The President was offered these solutions from Paul Ryan and turned them down. Instead he thinks reducing the reimbursement to doctors and raising taxes on medical devices will bring down the costs.


8)      Dodd-Frank:

Big banks hire lawyers to get around these regulations, but small community banks get tied up in red tape. Chris Dodd and Barney Frank are not only the authors of this bill, but they are also responsible for the crisis in the first place. We need to be honest about what caused the housing collapse and the recession. It was Liberals in Washington who thought that it was Big Government’s responsible to help people own a home…even when they couldn’t afford to do so. The problem in this case was over regulation that forced banks to lend to people, using Fannie & Freddie to prop up those subprime loans, which then packaged them together. Like always, it was Big Government that caused crony capitalism. Most importantly, the Dodd-Frank bill does not even address Fannie & Freddie in the legislation.


9)      Role of government:

Government can only promise us equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. President Obama wants to micromanage the American economy to create his idea of social justice, yet he has never managed anything before in his life. The free market works better with Adam Smith’s invisible hand not Uncle Sam’s.

10)   Federal government’s role in education:

Colorado should not send its tax dollars to Washington D.C. so it can give them to New York because their schools are failing. They should keep their money and use it for their own schools. Secondly, who in America would be content if they could only use the gas station in their own town, or grocery store, movie theater, or shopping mall?  If we would be outraged over the lack of choices for those things, then we should be applauded that we allow that to happen with our public schools. If you want more teachers to be hired, create more schools for them to work in. If you want teachers to be paid more, then allow districts to fire poor teachers. Our public schools are a small microcosm of Socialism. Government controlled, no choice, mediocre pay because it must be fair for all workers meaning no rewards or incentives for excellence, benefits promised that can’t be kept, and it results in failure.  Allow each school district to create a system to test their students, grade their schools, and evaluate their teachers. Parents and students need choice and they need it now.

Spread the Conservative Mindset with:

Thursday, March 29, 2012

Americans For Prosperity Supreme Court Rally (VIDEO)


This video was created to show those who were not able to attend what they missed out on. It was also created to show non-Tea Party members what we are all about. Feel free to link, share, forward, embed, or use this video in any way. Enjoy!


Spread the Conservative Mindset with: