You Are Not Excused

Everyone knows by now about the Boston Marathon bombings and the subsequent aftermath. Despite the tragedy, it is nice to see people standing up together instead of fighting for a change.

Having said that, I’ve seen a disturbing trend in the last few years.  It is very likely it existed long before I noticed it, but now it’s all I can see. I am talking about select people’s need to use current events to further their own goals.  In this case specifically, I am referring to the connection people are making to the Boston Marathon bombings and America’s gun control laws.

These two things have absolutely nothing to do with one another, and yet I’ve seen dozens of posts, memes, images, and articles proudly displaying that there would be no fear for citizen’s armed with assault rifles. Good job, you’re retarded.

Why, you ask? Let me count the ways.

1.) Just because a person owns a gun doesn’t mean they know how to use it.

2.) A person filled with fear is far more likely to have an itchy trigger finger, which would cause more problems in this case, not get results.

3.) You can’t cry about your constitutional rights to own firearms while simultaneously saying the suspect(s) should be shot on sight.

Now to drift away from the subject of Boston and focus solely on gun ownership in America from my point of view.

There are very, very few people I know that I would trust with a gun. By that statement you may assume that there are many people I would not trust with a gun, and you would be correct. The problem is that a lot of gun owners I know fall squarely into the second category. If you want a gun, I don’t care. Go for it. Just learn how to use it. Learn everything about it. If you don’t know every single piece and their functions, you have no business owning that weapon.

Why do you want to own military-grade weapons? “Home defense”? A pistol can do that, arguably much more effectively due to its smaller size. Because you’re “a collector”? I get that, I really do, but if you choose to be a gun collector then you should be fully aware of how dangerous these guns are and act accordingly, i.e. not keeping a loaded AR-15 in your hands on the off-chance a terrorist walks into your house (see point 2 above).

What it really seems to come down to is that they’re cool, and I won’t argue with that. Guns are cool, Hollywood has been pounding that into my head for decades. They’re also fun to shoot, they give quite the adrenaline rush, and their wide array of types makes them a hell of a hobby. But you know what else is cool? Hm. Smoking, perhaps?

Yes, that seems fitting. You tie your constitutional rights to a bombing attack, and I shall compare the girth of your hard-on for guns with my disgusting black lungs. Each topic is about as closely related to each other, I think.

The only real problem in my opinion is that imposing restrictions on these kinds of guns would make it way too easy to further encroach on a citizen’s rights and eventually be able to not only disarm the entire population, but also tell us exactly what we can or cannot have. It’ll be like that scene in Demolition Man where Sandra Bullock explains what the government has made illegal: “smoking is not good for you, and it’s been deemed that anything not good for you is bad; hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, contact sports, meat […] bad language, chocolate, gasoline, uneducational toys and anything spicy.”  It may sound far-fetched, but it looks like we’re already taking steps toward a parallel future.

In the meantime, learn how to take those “Like if U Agree!” banners and shove them up your ass. Clicking that button is not an act of supporting your own rights, it’s just feeding into the ego of some anonymous asshole that has no say in the matter at hand and only wants to win some sort of faux popularity test.

As America Succumbs to a Government-Provided Plague

All of us have heard a few examples of dumb laws in our time, ranging from a law in Oregon stating that dishes must “drip dry” to Canada placing a ban on any comic books that contain images of illegal acts.  While amusing, I don’t find these to be the truly stupid laws.  My examples are much worse.

Abortion Laws

Let’s start with pro-life versus pro-choice.  Everyone knows the argument and takes their own sides.  I’m not here to tell you who is right and who is wrong, nor am I here to explain my feelings on the subject.  Instead, I wish to present some facts that prohibit one side (either one, doesn’t matter) from practicing their beliefs, and how the government sometimes seeks to place firm restraints on its citizens that are far beyond what We The People should deem acceptable.

For example, Kansas made a few headlines recently when the Republican-driven Kansas House of Representatives passed a bill defining life as beginning “at fertilization.”  In layman’s terms, this renders all abortions illegal.  Period.  No argument, no discussion.  As soon as Governor Sam Brownback puts his name to paper, abortions will be considered illegal in the state of Kansas.

Duchovny Arrest Scene

Maybe we should start with locking up all the sex addicts first?  Nah, that’s crazy…

This is not the first state to pass such a bill; in fact, it’s the eighth (or thirteenth, depending on your source).  I understand why it’s such a hot debate: is abortion murder?  It’s nearly an impossible question to answer given people’s varying perspectives on when life truly “begins” inside of a womb, but to have a government impose laws telling us how we should view any subject is just wrong, pure and simple.  It is one of many steps this country’s leaders have taken to establish supreme control over its people.

North Dakota also recently passed an abortion-related bill into effect in a campaign spearheaded by Republican Governor Jack Dalrymple.  This particular bill states that abortions are declared illegal after a fetal heartbeat can be detected through a transvaginal ultrasound, which occurs about six weeks into a typical pregnancy.  Although this “Heartbeat Bill” has little chance of standing up to the Supreme Court, it is still a very clear effort to restrain the individual freedoms of the American people.

Jack Dalrymple

Hell, I can barely hear his heartbeat coming through those cholesterol-clogged arteries. Maybe we can still abort him?

Let’s change the subject, shall we?  Nobody likes talking about dead babies for too long.  How about…

Drug Testing For Welfare

Ah, this issue seems to have really exploded over the last few years amongst cries from blue-collar America, screaming about how drug users can still apply (and receive) welfare while they spend all their “free money” on drugs and alcohol instead of life necessities.  It got so hyped up that many states began working on legislation to pass bills addressing the issue, including Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Missouri, and a dozen others.  The most notorious of these instances involved Florida, however, in which the state legislation signed into law the mandatory drug tests for welfare recipients.  The entire affair lasted only a few months before a temporary – and still currently standing – ban was placed on the program, and in the span of these few short months, a groundbreaking 108 people tested positive for drug use, most of which were for marijuana use.  That may sound high, but considering the state tested over 4,000 people, the number is hardly impressive.  Another interesting bit of information is the fact that any person that passed the test was refunded the cost of the procedure, which resulted in costs of nearly $200,000 – all in the span of only four months.

“Well, maybe they knew the tests were coming and decided not to take them.”  A good theory, and one I certainly wondered myself.  It should be noted, then, that only 40 people actually canceled their tests.  So I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt: let’s say 148 out of 4,126 people would have tested positive for drug-use.  That’s…what, 3.5%, if my math is right?  WOW.  Good job, guys.  Wouldn’t it be cheaper to just pay the benefits to the drug users in the first place?  Actually, yes.  Yes it would.

heroin

Not pictured: someone worried about getting on welfare.

And while we’re on this subject, how many of you smoke pot?  Because I’m 26 years old, and pretty much every single person I know has at least tried it or become a full-fledged habitual user.  Not only that, but the most common reasons I personally hear when asked why you smoke pot is “It just helps me mellow out” or “I had a rough day and just need it to relax.”  Fair enough, we all have our vices, and I am of the opinion that marijuana, while not my cup of tea, really isn’t that bad.  I’d even say cigarettes and alcohol are infinitely worse, and I have experience with both of those things.  But anyway, let’s say things in your life take a turn for the worse and you find yourself in a position of applying for welfare to help get through the tough times ahead.  Is your first instinct going to be “I better give up that thing that makes me happy for a few hours a day!” or will it be “this sucks, everything sucks, I’m depressed, I’m gonna smoke a joint and chill out for a bit.”

….Yeah, I thought you might go with the latter.  So, are these people heathens that deserve to be denied access to money they would most likely spend on food, clothes, laundry detergent, shampoo, and electricity (and maybe a dimebag)?  I would say no, but we’re all entitled to our opinions.

Marijuana Machine

$15?!  There goes all my food money.

I’m simply asking for everyone, no matter which side of an argument to stand on, to stop and take a look around at what’s happening.  While we’re too busy having our petty squabbles with each other, our individual freedoms are getting destroyed by those that we elected to preserve them.  Maybe instead of blindly reposting the same images on Facebook and Twitter every day, you can go do some research on a given subject and weigh the pros and cons for yourself.  All I’m saying is, don’t get caught up in something just because it sounds nice in your head.  At the risk of ending this post with a cliché, even communism looks good on paper, but that doesn’t mean it works well in the real world.