More Guns or Better Control

In a span of a week, two separate gun owners, arguably with mental health issues, each committed mass murder with the guns they legally obtained, one in Tallahassee, FL last week and one much larger in Los Angeles, CA yesterday.

The question we should be asking is, do we need more guns or better control? 

Let’s explore both sides.

In reference to more guns, I do not think that is the answer because as I have previously shown conclusively, more guns have led to more deaths; please see the post entitled,  Who Are These People That Kill People? 

In reference to better control, most people believe that I refer to gun control.  I actually refer to people control because “guns do not kill people, people kill people” and those people are typically gun owners under mental duress.  However, if we do not sadly have people control we will end up with gun control, which is why I think the NRA is the threat to our Second Amendment (2A). The NRA fails to acknowledge that people are humans and humans are well human. 

Some people take responsibility for their actions, but not all.  It is those that fail to act responsibly that require laws and regulations to promote and ensure that responsibility.  These laws and regulations are a form of people control.

The first thing we should do is remove guns from those that are deemed mentally unstable or in other words, not of sound mind.  Once these people demonstrate mental stability they can have their guns back.  This is not gun control; this is people control.  Moreover and more importantly, it is F*#@ING common sense.

Our Usual Ritual – Thoughts and Prayers

On Saturday October 27, 18 Robert Bowers, A GUN OWNER, killed ten (10) people in a Pittsburgh, PA synagogue.  If you have not given your “thoughts and prayers” then you should.  They are obligatory are they not?  Nothing else and we can go about our lives until it is our time or that of some other unsuspecting American to be the sacrificial lamb. That is the price we pay to have the Second Amendment (2A) per one NRA member.

They may be willing to trade their life un-needlessly, but I do not want to and neither should you.

We do not need gun restrictions because “guns do not kill people.”

However, we do need laws to ensure that “people” (that either own or seek to own a gun):

1. Are mentally stable to ensure they respect and will not infringe upon everyone else’s unalienable right,
2. Properly store and care for a weapon of death and destruction, and
3. Receive proper training on a periodic basis to use a firearm with reasonable safety

Because “people kill people” and when they use a gun they are so much more lethal as observed for the past goddamn 20 years.

I am so fed up with the obstinate behavior of some gun advocates.  Hopefully, you are, too.

If you have been reading my posts, I have given you tools to counter these people’s arguments by using their own words.

I encourage you to:

1. Agree with gun advocates when they say, “guns do not kill people, people kill people.”  You should tell them we do not need gun restrictions, but instead restrictions on people with unstable minds or people that fail to demonstrate responsibility in properly handling a weapon or people that fail to respect others’ unalienable right.
2. Remind a gun advocate/gun owner that the US Supreme Court tells us in item 2 on page 2 (of the 157 page) Heller opinion which says the 2A applies to self-defense, the Justices state that there needs to be prohibitions on those that are not mentally stable and
3. Inform the gun advocate/owner they should use the total number of gun owners, not total number of Americans, to calculate homicide rates from guns because as shown above it’s the gun owners that are committing or enabling the killings of others and when that is done, homicide rates have increased – because the number of guns have increased – duh!

It Starts At The Top – The Big Top (aka the circus)

An organization’s performance is highly dependent if not solely dependent upon on the individual in charge. I came to this conclusion 25+ years ago when I was a Naval Submarine Officer while I stood by the fast attack submarine wharf at Charleston Navy Base where I was once stationed when I served our nation.

The particular wharf by which I stood could berth approximately 10 submarines if my memory serves correct.  While not all submarines were at their respective berths, I ruminated on why one had the Battle “E” (i.e. recognized as being the best), yet another had high morale problems.

These 10 or so submarines provided a unique crucible for me to reconcile my observation and come to my conclusion.  The submarines when each viewed as a stand alone entity were essentially identical. Each had the same number of sailors, give or take one or two, and each sailor went through a rigorous selection and training program before being stationed on board.  In short, one sailor could be easily exchanged with another (assuming rank and rate remained constant). So the question I asked myself if each complement of sailors was fairly consistent across all boats, why difference in performance.  It should be obvious here on this page as it was to me as I stood next by the wharf, the submarine’s performance was a direct reflection of its Commanding Officer. As previously told to me by a former CO with whom I had a chance meeting in the Pentagon while we each essentially fetched the proverbial coffee for the admirals running the show, a CO is king, king of his fiefdom.

I found that my observation has held true as life has progressed and I had the opportunity to analyze companies when I was a stock analyst. While a CEO does not have a fiefdom, she or he does wield considerable power that influences all employed. I think most would agree that my observation can be observed in how our Federal government is being run today.  The Kavanaugh nomination is a prime example.  Donald J. Trump (DJT), a documented misogynist and someone with questionable business acumen, nominated a jurist for the Supreme Court, who has demonstrated poor decision making as well.  Additionally, an easy-going southern gentleman, Lindsey Graham, has begun to rant and rave and we have David Nunes, who, too, was once easy going, jumped early on the bandwagon  to promote conspiracy theories and less than sound policies.

I recently purchased a t-shirt that has a picture of baby trump and the words, “Elect A Clown” and “Expect A Circus” similar to the one shown to the right.  I wore it about town yesterday and had fun enjoying the responses, which varied from stares by older white men to favorable comments from minorities and women.  Sadly, these responses were not unexpected.  I was even prepared for someone to verbally attacked me, but fortunately that did not happen.

In short, if you are frustrated like me, I encourage you to find a way to enjoy the circus in which we find ourselves.  More importantly, I encourage you to ask questions of yourself and those of others as a means to find common ground so we can begin to get out from under this mess (um, I mean big top).

Challenges, Some Are More So Than Others

I think the challenges Brett Kavanaugh's family encounters pale in comparison to those of the Lawrence family residing on Jacksonville’s Westside in FLCD-5/formerly FLCD-3.

This morning Mrs. Lawrence was riding her bicycle at 6AM EST as she commuted to work at Amazon.  She was hit and killed in an auto accident not too far from where her daughter stood awaiting her school bus.  There are many unknowns to the situation; more specifically, did she have safety lights, was the car traveling at a high rate of speed, etc., but that is immaterial.  Her death creates long-lasting challenges for her survivors and my heart aches for them like my heart aches for Brett Kavanaugh’s daughters.

Mrs. Lawrence’s survivors include:

1. A husband and 
2. At least 2 teenagers of which:

• One is the previously mentioned daughter and 
• The other is an older special needs child.  

Moreover, her survivors live in a trailer not too far from where the accident occurred in an area that I once trod as I conducted surveys door-to-door approximately 9 nine years ago.  I mentioned that only to paint the picture that this family is poor, but doing what they needed to do to survive albeit with a hope and a prayer.

I learned of Mrs. Lawrence’s death reading the local news immediately after reading about Brett Kavanaugh’s third accuser and her accusations.  I immediately thought about each family and how each would deal with their respective challenges.

Sadly, I think the Lawrence family will have considerable struggles and hardships for years to come whereas the Kavanaughs (especially the daughters) will most likely only wrestle with the notion that Brett Kavanaugh had arguably been disrespectful to young women when he was at an age not much older than his daughters.

Moreover, I can empathize more with the Lawrences than the Kavanaughs.  While I personally have known a few individuals with wealth and influence from time to time, I have for the most part felt like being on the outside only to look in from time to time.  I am very fortunate that my wife works as I have yet to find steady income after being laid off from a reduction in force (RIF).  I am in the process of improving my skills to find employment with upward mobility versus having to take on menial work at a place like a warehouse.  I realize my situation is a luxury that many people do not have so they take what they can, which makes it very hard for them to break the cycle of just-getting-by let alone poverty.

Therefore, I find it galling that our government may put on the Supreme Court a man who is arguably unfit to sit there for multiple reasons, the most important one being honesty.  Brett Kavanaugh with all his privilege squandered his opportunities, which I blame in part on his parents who I believe abdicated their parenting duties and the boarding school administrators failing to assume them as it seems Brett did not develop if he developed at all a strong moral compass.  It is possible Brett Kavanaugh developed a moral compass later on, but he has obviously failed to acknowledge it until today after the third accusation.

Another reason why he is unfit to sit on the bench is that his arguable lack of self-introspection makes it hard for him to fully understand the challenges a family like the Lawrences now encounters.  As such, we need people on the bench that not only know the law and respect it, but know and empathize with families like the Lawrences because I believe there are more of them than the Kavanaughs amongst us.

The Slippery Slope to Anarchy

Someone is lying. That someone is either Christine Margaret Blasey Ford or Brett Michael Kavanaugh.

Mrs. Ford, a college professor, has stated that Mr. Kavanaugh, the current Supreme Court Justice nominee, sexually assaulted her at a party 36 years ago when they were both teenagers.  Mr. Kavanaugh refutes that accusation.

Most if not all vectors point to Mr. Kavanaugh lying.  The most credible vector is that Mrs. Ford disclosed six years ago – six years prior to her ever knowing that the President would nominate Mr. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court – during a therapy session that she was physically assaulted by Mr. Kavanaugh. I could go on with a list of other vectors, but that is not the point of this post.

The point of this post is that we could be on the slippery slope to anarchy.

• Our President lies (he has been proven in a court of law that he has lied repeatedly in the past and arguably, in the court of public, currently, on a daily basis).
• Arguably, a past and current Supreme Court Justice has lied.
• The current Supreme Court Justice nominee has arguably and very much convincingly, lied  - on separate and multiple instances.
• And members of Congress for the most part condone it.  

Are we a nation of liars?

There are consequences to lying.  If those that enforce the law, such as our President lies, then others may be led to believe that lying, if not acceptable, may be expected, which is the beginning of the slippery slope leading to where no one can be trusted.  That is a scary proposition. Even God condemns lying; please look at the 8th Commandment. 

Another Gun Owner, Another Mass Shooting

Have a problem?  Well, if you own a gun then use it (for its intended purpose, killing a living being).  That's how you solve it (the problem, that is), is it not?  Who cares if shooting at someone creates more problems.

The NRA doesn't. Is this not true?  Look at Bakersfield CA. Javier Casarez, a gun owner, killed his wife and four others yesterday, September 12, 2018, because he believed she was cheating on him.  Did the NRA or any notable gun advocate state that these killings are unacceptable and runs counter to our founders' beliefs that our unalienable rights should not be infringed upon? No! Their silence portends that the loss of innocent lives by a gun owner firing his or her weapon is the price that our society must pay to have the Second Amendment (2A) - kind of like a sacrificial offering to the gods.  That attitude puts the 2A at risk.

I may not know the people killed in Bakersfield, CA, but I regret that they lost their lives and that their survivors now have a loss that they may never understand, that they may never find peace and solace and that they may take to their grave a pain unimaginable. Do you want this on your soul?  I don't.

These senseless killings must stop.

The answer is not gun restrictions because "guns do not kill people."

The answer is that people that want to own a gun must demonstrate that they are:

1. Responsible, 
2. Sane (aka mentally stable) and 
3. Have the discipline to properly care for a gun 

because "people (a gun owner as shown above in this instance) kill people" and guns are so much more efficient at doing the job.

Since the gun industry fails to promote the three (3) criteria stated above then our government must pass laws that dictate the proper behavior.  These laws will NOT place restrictions on guns but instead ensure proper behavior to ensure every one's unalienable rights are secured and protected.  Seems reasonable to me, does it not?

Sue The Gun Manufacturers

Tonight I attended Duval County Public Schools' monthly Board meeting to give a speech, a first in a series, which I show below.

Good evening Duval County Public Schools Board Members. Thank you for taking my comments.

Fear lays like a shroud upon our schools. At first blush our schools are not much different than prisons – 6ft or higher fences, gates & doors locked, access via a single door and security guards with a weapon prominently displayed.

Even worse, this loss in liberty was preceded by a loss of many lives in Parkland FL.

We have “unalienable Rights” of “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness” and “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it?”

I want to exercise that right to alter our government; however, I cannot do it alone.

I seek to help everybody in this room and those watching on TV that we most act in a brave and bold manner to protect our children and our nation.

The MSD Act:

1. Does more to infringe on our children’s’ unalienable rights than protect them;
2. It fails to hold accountable those people that have directly and indirectly infringed upon our rights; and
3. It redirects dollars that could be invested in more accretive activities

This is not the first time a government entity has incurred costs from the use of unsafe manufactured products by its citizens. A large group of US government entities successively sued manufacturers 2 decades ago. This renowned lawsuit is known as the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA).

Should not our district sue the gun manufacturers?

Regrettably, we will most likely have to sue our state and federal government as the majority of the elected officials have arguably allowed themselves to be corrupted by the gun industry for example:

1. MSD act funnels money to the gun industry – more guns, ammo most be bought and 
2. Congress passed H.J.Res. 40 less than 2 years ago that it made easier for someone with documented mental health issues to purchase a gun.

In reference to the latter, in 2008 the US Supreme Court in the renowned DC vs. Heller opinion, which affirms that a gun may be owned for self-defense, the court states the Second Amendment right is NOT UNLIMITED.

For example, the majority writes, those with mental illness should NOT be allowed to have a gun. In short, our nation’s highest court says there must be people restrictions.

Regrettably, the burden falls on us. As I see it,  school districts are the only avenue to affect meaningful and lasting change.  I encourage DCPS to sue the gun manufacturers. I am confident others districts will join. We have case law at our back.  I believe and hopefully you do to that we must act to protect our unalienable rights, of life liberty & pursuit of happiness so we can remove the shroud of fear from our schools.

NPR Seeks To Know What Issues Affect You

In my news feed today I noticed that NPR seeks to know what issues affect us.  I share with you below what I shared with NPR.

The issues that affect me are promoting responsible gun ownership and tackling our nation’s healthcare challenge; however, we cannot focus on these issues because of dysfunctional leadership at the Federal level.

In reference to the latter, dysfunctional leadership, we have a President that lies.  His political party, the GOP, will not hold him accountable.  I do not think the other party, the Democrats, is much better.  This mess is due to campaign finance – primarily, the rich and special interests have considerable control on our choices, which are typically poor, so instead of voting for someone we end up voting against someone.


In reference to guns, the argument needs to change to match reality.  The argument should be “responsible gun ownership” not gun restrictions.  For people to own a gun they should have to demonstrate they are responsible enough to own a weapon.  The Heller opinion states on page 2 that there should be prohibitions on people who are mentally ill.  Moreover, gun dealers, need to demonstrate that are responsible as well to ensure they will not sell weapons to criminals.

In reference to Healthcare, it is only going to get worse.  The increasing costs are crowding out other purchases, such as investments in infrastructure to facilitate economic growth.  This issue continues to be ignored.  Neither solely universal nor solely competitive is the answer.  It is a mixture of both; however, I believe we will go to universal in 10 years to eventually arrive at a mixture 30 years hence.

THX NRA! FLA Kindergartners Now Receive Active Shooter Training

Yesterday, my daughter brought home a letter from the school's principal making us aware of "three very important security updates," which are:

1. Announce the school's Independence Day (it should actually be called Parent-Child Separation Day) this coming Tuesday; 
2. To inform parents that school staff received active shooter training; and 
3. All school age children, including kindergartners, must receive active shooter training on a monthly and quarterly basis with initial training with introductory videos later next week. 

"Independence Day" is when the parents leave their children at the school entrance and let the children walk themselves to their classroom. My fifth grader is not happy about that, but she would have most likely been in a state of tears if this occurred when she was a kindergartner. This so-called "independence day" seems more like Separation Day and analogous to what occurred at the southern border.

The videos are below, but the producers of these training videos have no clue about a live shooting environment. The teachers/actors tell the viewers (children) that they "won't be scared if they are prepared."  I am sorry, but I believe they lie, lie to themselves and lie to children.  It is normal to be scared when your life is in danger. Even police officers who are trained are scared in these types of situations. I think Sacha Baron Cohen's video shown further below creates a more realistic situation.

THANK YOU NRA and NRA SUPPORTERS! 

Thank you for the lose of our children's freedoms so YOU MAY HAVE THE FREEDOM TO PURCHASE A GUN WITHOUT DEMONSTRATING MENTAL STABILITY or the ABILITY TO PROPERLY HANDLE and CARE FOR YOUR WEAPON (of death).

Florida Training Video For K thru 2 Grade

Florida Training Video For 3 thru 5 Grade
Sacha Baron Cohen's video

Libertarians Should Embrace Responsibility & Accountability

Last week I received a form letter from the leader (actually EVP) of a well known libertarian think tank inviting me to join/subscribe/donate to its cause.  I suspect I received the invite for the following reasons, which are:

1. I am a super voter,
2. Middle-aged, and
3. That I have no party affiliation following my departure from the GOP more than five years ago.

Upon initially reading the invite something bothered me about it, which led me to peruse the invitation and analyze its contents.  I shared my takeaways from my analysis with the leader of this think tank using a lot of his own words in a letter that I sent him last week.  I provide the contents of my letter below.  In this letter I describe my beliefs pertaining to freedom and responsibility, a subject that I said I would write about years ago. I hope you find what I write informative and more importantly, helpful.

Dear EVP:

I received your letter earlier this week asking that I join your think tank (TT). You seek funds for a “more prosperous, free and peaceful future” to achieve the goal of “a better and freer” society. Sounds wonderful, but I believe you fail to:

1. Fully acknowledge, 
2. Accurately disclose, and 
3. Subsequently lead with the most critical element in achieving these goals, individual responsibility and accountability. 

I agree with you when you state that, “our lives would be freer, more prosperous, and more satisfying” when the “exercise of power, not the exercise of freedom…requires justification.” You write “free,” “freer,” and “freedom” approximately 45 times (45x), yet only write “responsibility” three times (3x).  Should it not at least be one-to-one (1:1) and most likely more heavily slanted towards personal responsibility? You even promote your book a third more than “responsibility”, mentioning it four times (4x). Sadly, you do not mention “accountability” of one’s actions once (0x).

As a fellow Vanderbilt University alumnus, I am extremely disappointed in your arguments; you can and should do better if you truly seek to promote liberty. Your lack of appreciation and need for individual responsibility and accountability paints you as hypocrite, which I point out further below. Additionally, your letter preys on our sensibilities and smacks as an opportunistic way to raise funds to pad TT coffers and possibly fund your retirement.

You allude to individual responsibility when you mention the “essence of libertarianism,” but you fail to drive home the importance that all people must act responsibly to protect “the rights and dignity of the individual” those rights being “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.”  You do not even list responsibility as a  “key concept of libertarianism;” its simply embedded in the “rights…of the individual.”

I think you struggle with the concept of right versus wrong and accountability as you derisively use the word, “moral”, when you state, “moral agenda” and “moral codes.” I think I may know why based on how and what you state and if I am right, I regret you have experienced that pain.  I encourage you to have the strength and fortitude to move past that pain and embrace the concept of a strong moral compass (including “spreading equal rights for women, gay people and minorities”) to act as one’s guide.  As you may know, Marcus Tullius Cicero, a well known Roman statesman and philosopher, created the basis of the word “moral” that we use today when he translated works of the great Greek philosophers to help his fellow Roman understand the difference between right and wrong.  You are in a way a philosopher.  Whether you acknowledge it our not, you seek to change our understanding of what it means to be morally right so people have more freedoms and I respect that.

You attribute the loss of freedoms to both conservatives and liberals “endorsing restrictions,” yet does TT research to find what causes led to this effect?  I argue no because you state that TT, “principally focus[es] on analyzing the domestic and international policies of the federal government” as to whether “those policies extend or limit liberty.”

I contend we have increasingly lost our freedoms to increasingly more restrictions over the past 230 plus years because people failed to act responsibly so our elected officials enacted laws to either enforce that responsibility at the behest of the electorate or opportunistically for their benefit.  Some times they got it right, most times they got it wrong because they are human and they may not fully appreciate what is right and wrong as well. Consequently, I encourage TT to focus more on the causes to ultimately improve the effects of legislation (i.e. extend liberty).

As anecdotal evidence, please allow me to describe a loss of freedom that not only my family experienced, but also many other families with school age children in Florida experienced. I can no longer walk my daughter to her classroom through a gate in the fence surrounding the elementary school she attends.  Instead, we must walk further to pass by a policeman prominently displaying a gun to go through the main building (adding insult to injury, the salaries for the additional security are being funded in part from cuts in Humanities).  Additionally, all the classrooms are locked; we have to knock before entering.  You should:

1. Think to yourself that this harks of prison and
2. Concerned that she, I, and other families have lost freedoms. 

Sadly, our loss in freedom pales in comparison to the loss in lives that led to this loss in freedom, which I hope further upsets you, but more importantly, emboldens you to take action.

We lost our freedoms because our elected officials chose to enact a law requiring heightened security at schools following the loss of 19 lives at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School at the hands of a young mentally disturbed man wielding a firearm he legally obtained in Florida because the State and Federal laws are lax as a result of heavy lobbying by the gun industry as evidenced by its actions of pimping out one sentence of our Constitution to sell more weaponry to increase the industry’s coffers with which to pay executives (a sentence crafted with my favorite author in mind).

I just described many causes and many effects, but what is the root cause? The root cause is a lack of personal responsibility on many peoples’ part, but who are these people?  The people that acted irresponsibly are the:

1. Executives within the gun industry 
• (Promoting gun ownership with nary a word on safety and 
• Seeking to influence our government for their benefit and to our collective demise),
2. People purchasing the guns 
• (Failing to either respect the inherent dangers of owning a gun and or 
• Ensuring other gun owners have that same respect), and
3. Elected representatives 
• (That enacted laws and or 
• Did not enact laws that ultimately benefited their donors and themselves). 

Yet, did the school age children and their parents acted irresponsibly? No! Therefore, who should be held accountable for the loss in lives and freedoms, the

• People that acted irresponsibly or 
• The group of people who experienced losses in lives and freedoms?

The people that acted irresponsibly should be held accountable, yet you do not seem to believe that nor do our elected officials (& some gun owners).

You seem to believe the killing of school age children, my loss of freedom, those of my child, and all the other school age families is acceptable based on what you write.  You, who touts individual rights and personal freedoms, believe that, “politicians and political majorities shouldn’t be arbiters of what can be sold,” which implies that it is okay to promote more guns without requiring responsibility from either the seller or buyer.  Please keep in mind I swore an oath to protect our Constitution when I served our nation as a Naval Submarine Officer. As such, I view you as hypocrite and an imposter, which I attribute to failing to:

1. Understand human behavior (at our root we are greedy, impatient, and lazy),
2. Acknowledge that individuals must have a strong moral compass (that includes “spreading equal rights for women, gay people and minorities”), and
3. Hold people and ourselves accountable for their and our own actions.

Maybe the gun industry is a big donor of TT and you have been corrupted, too. Please tell me it is not so.  Please tell me that I misunderstood your words and took them out of context.  Please tell me that you and TT will:

1. Study and understand human behavior (to better understand the causes leading to bad legislation), 
2. Promote the need for all of us to have a strong moral compass so we can guide ourselves to ensure life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness for not only ourselves, but for all others with minimal interference from our government, and
3. Promote accountability.  

I am passionate about freedom – yours, everybody’s, and mine.

Demonstrate to me that you know how to influence behavior to increase personal freedoms and I will donate to TT so you can help create a “political movement that will [positively] change the century.”

An Unstable Mind Became A Killing Mind

The killer (& gun owner) of two fellow gamers participating in a competition in Jacksonville, FL this past Sunday had mental health issues.  That is shocking, is it not?  Despairingly no, but hopefully it is to those who can affect the needed changes.

Most of the recent killers (& gun owners as well) initiating and orchestrating mass shootings have had documented mental health issues, which should not be a surprise.  Hopefully, this killing of fellow humans will shock our elected officials out of their irrational nonsense for allowing this irresponsible behavior to occur.

I should not single out all elected officials, only the ones responsible. The blood is figuratively on the hands of the Republicans who literally used their hands to signal their vote on legislation that allowed people with documented mental health issues to legally obtain weapons of death and destruction.

If you believe deaths such as those this:

1. Past weekend in Jacksonville, 
2. Earlier this year in Parkland, FL and 
3. Almost six years ago in Newtown, CT 

Are unwarranted and destructive to America then I encourage you to act.

You can:

1. Call your representatives, 
2. Engage those Republicans that represent others, 
3. Vote for 3rd party candidates or Democrats in upcoming elections as most Republicans seem unfit and unwilling to lead and 
4. Reach out to gun owners (as most are responsible) to encourage them to put pressure on their community to encourage the appropriate legislation to promote responsible gun ownership.  

If it helps, I have done all the above.  If I did it, so can you.  More specific to action item #3, today in Florida's primary election, I only voted for those candidates that had no party affiliation or were Democrats.

Close To Home The Bullets Fly

Today, at least three people are dead from a mass shooting at the Jacksonville Landing in downtown Jacksonville FL.  My family and I live less than 3 miles southeast from the Landing.

My daughter and I were 3 blocks directly north of the Landing near the time of the shooting.  We went to Chamblin's Uptown to purchase two books. Upon exiting the store I suggested we go for a walk thinking it was such a beautiful day, but for some unknown reason I changed my mind and we headed north to get in our car to return home.  If I drove directly south we would have been at the Landing shortly after shooting. However, we went east then south to go over the St. Johns River, which the Landing sits near.  As we approached the bridge a fire and rescue vehicle without its siren nor lights on nearly ran a red light.  At the time I thought of the irony that I may have collided with the vehicle and possibly been hurt.  It was only when I got home that I learned of the news, which obviously explained the driver's behavior.

Sadly, this is another bad day for America as we once again confront gun violence.  Unless something changed, the gun lobby believes more gun owners with more guns is the answer. IT IS NOT!

My last post shows there is a direct correlation of gun owners to gun deaths.  In short, more gun owners = more gun related deaths and I blame the gun industry and our elected officials.  More specifically, I blame:

1. Executives within the gun industry for:
• Promoting gun ownership with nary a word on gun safety and 
• Seeking to influence our government for their benefit and to our collective demise,
2. Elected representatives for: 
• Enacting laws and or 
• Not enacting laws to protect our freedoms, but instead ultimately benefit their donors and themselves, and
3. Gun owners for either:
• Failing to advocate fellow gun owners and the gun industry promote gun safety to demonstrate respect for their fellow being/American (even though they themselves may be responsible as 99% seem) or
• Failing to demonstrate responsible gun ownership (the remaining 1% when including all gun related violence).

I think it is more than reasonable to expect one day that the gun manufacturers could become subject to class action lawsuits for its irresponsible behavior – promoting gun ownership while arguably influencing our elected officials to relax legislation that would promote and enforce responsible gun ownership to ensure and to protect our freedoms of life, liberty and pursuit happiness.

Who Are These People That Kill People?

Gun advocates tout that homicides rates from the use of a firearm have decreased even while the number of guns outstanding increased; one such example can be found at www.thetruthaboutguns.com, in the article entitled, Guns and Violence in the United States, By the Numbers.  The author concludes “that the object [i.e. a gun] is not the problem[,] but instead it’s the behavior that needs to be changed.” The author may not realize it, but he just advocated for responsible gun ownership with which I could not agree more.

This commonly held belief among gun advocates that the "gun is not the problem" is encapsulated in the NRA slogan, “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” I find it snarky and disingenuous. David Kyle Johnson Ph.D., a professor of philosophy at King’s College (PA), in www.psychologytoday.com shares his analysis of the statement to explain why it is annoying to some. He contends that the statement mixes the different degrees of causation, which causes confusion and frustration.  He concludes that “people are the ultimate cause and guns are merely proximate causes,” which is in-line with the argument above. With that in mind, let’s turn our focus on those “people,” those that own a gun (or two, or three, or…).

While we do not have accurate data due to gun advocates via the NRA blocking data collection, arguably, it is common knowledge that the number of guns owned in the US has increased whereas the rate of gun ownership has decreased. Irrefutably, occurring at the same time, total US population has increased.  Therefore, using data collected from reputable sources, I conclude that rates of homicides-from-a-firearm per 100,000 of gun owners has increased 26% from 1970 to 2015 as shown in the table below (please note I list my data sources, unlike the first article mentioned above). I attribute the increase to "proximate causes" coupled with "ultimate cause"; essentially, gun owners became less responsible for a myriad of reasons for which we have no discernible answer because....well maybe the gun industry does not want to be held accountable for its bad behavior so why not block research.

Some gun advocates may argue that the 2015 gun ownership rate is too, low.  First, they should stop carping. Secondly, if they want more accurate data then they should start tracking it so they can make a sound argument.  However, to appease these folks I calculate the implied gun ownership rate so homicides rates remain flat, which is shown in the chart below; essentially, 2 our 5 people would need to own a gun, a figure I do not think is reasonable to expect.

At the end of the day, guns equate to death; there is a ratio as shown above. The ratio may change depending upon the society, but the ratio exists.  Therefore, to have less gun related deaths then either there needs to be fewer gun owners (as an increasing number of them have demonstrated that they are a scourge to our society and a threat to our freedoms) or society must dictate policies and procedures that all gun owners must follow so our freedoms are protected. To use a gun advocate's own words,  “the [gun owner's] behavior … needs to be changed.”  I encourage gun advocates to start embracing legislation that promotes responsible gun ownership among their ranks so they can have access to guns and we can all enjoy more freedom, not less.

Schools Have Become A Prison Courtesy Of The NRA

Freedom.  Arguably, the use of that word has increased recently, at least in certain contexts, but what does the word, freedom, mean? Essentially, freedom means, the ability to do what one wants when they want¹. However, we cannot do all we want when we want, can we?  No we can’t because of rules, regulations, etc.and our own moral compass.

"Rules" and "regulations" (aka laws) are instituted for a myriad of reasons, one being that people's moral compass failed or they failed to act responsibly so society (via their government) had to enact laws to right that compass and or enforce that responsibility. These laws impact all peoples' freedoms.

Just this week, my daughter and I along with million others in Florida experienced the loss of a freedom or two.  For the past five years I have been blessed with the pleasure of walking my daughter into school.  Last year and the four prior years, we walked through a side gate because it was convenient.  We no longer can do that due to a lock on the gate (i.e. we lost a freedom).  In addition to the locked gate(s), doors to classrooms are locked and there is a police officer standing guard.  This loss in freedoms is in response to the killing of students attending MSD High School in Parkland, FL and all the other senseless killings at schools over the past 20 years.

Some of you may say this armed protection and lock down on a daily basis is great.  Is it?  Did you attend an elementary school with armed guards and the doors locked? I did not and as such, it harks of a prison.  Is this "making America great again?" In this particular instance, no; we regress. Essentially, our elected officials put restrictions on children, but not the group of people whose moral compass failed and acted irresponsibly.

I contend that it happened because the NRA has repeatedly acted irresponsibly. It touts "Firearms For Freedom" nary a mention of responsible gun ownership so now my family and other families with school age children now have less freedoms due to firearms. The NRA blocks government funding to determine the causes of mass shootings and other needless killings by the use of a gun because they fear it may impact their freedom to use a gun as they desire, yet the NRA finds it extremely acceptable to use government funding (my and your dollars) to sell more guns to create a prison type environment for our children.  Adding salt to the wound of less freedoms, our school district reduced courses in the humanities² because it has limited dollars and the newly hired security officers must be paid.  Humanities help make our world a better place, subjects that are deemed non-important by the NRA and others with a gun obsession as seen by their actions and the effects from those actions.

I would like members of the NRA and the NRA organization to demonstrate to our nation that they truly care more about life than guns in “cold, dead hands.” I encourage them to embrace life not cold, dead hands.


1. Please refer to the definitions from three credible sources below if you disagree. 
A. Per dictionary.com freedom is defined as:

• The state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint:
• Exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.
• The power to determine action without restraint.

B. Per oxforddictionaries.com freedom is defined as:

• The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants.
• The state of not being imprisoned or enslaved.

C. Per Merriam-Webster freedom is defined as:

• The absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action
• Liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another 
• The quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous
• Unrestricted use 

2. Per Stanford University, humanities are defined as “the study of how people process and document the human experience[; it is the use of] philosophy, literature, religion, art, music, history and language to understand and record our world.” 

The KGB Played The NRA

At least one leader and other high-ranking members of the self-proclaimed defender of the Second Amendment (2A), the NRA, were arguably influenced by a Russian intelligence operative as the operative sought ways to undermine our republic, which proves governments can be destroyed without guns and conversely, guns are not always needed to defend ourselves.  What we need is more intellect and improved cognitive thinking skills to protect our freedoms. 

Obviously, Vladimir Putin and his cronies used their intellect in this particular case.  The Russians succeeded because the NRA only cares for Guns, Little more guns, Topped with guns (GLT – similar to a BLT)*.  The NRA's focus on GLT led to some of its high-ranking members to be blinded to the very threat that the NRA purportedly seeks to defend against.

I stand by my assertion that the NRA is a threat to 2A because its leadership's gullibility and culpability in this instance helped enable foreign aggressive agent provocateurs seek ways to undermine our Constitution (i.e. our form of government), which 2A is attached to – as an “amendment”.

* America now has more guns within its borders than there are Americans.

Who Is America? (2018) | First Look | Sacha Baron Cohen SHOWTIME Series

Sacha Baron Cohen has a new entertainment series, "Who is America?", on Showtime. The episode in the YouTube video below is scaringly hilarious. It is scary because people in power actually believe in what Sacha parodies as it pertains to arming children, which I wrote about five months ago in my blogpost entitled, "Home of the Brave."

Republicans, The Enemy Of The State

Only now, after the debacle in Helsinki, are some Republicans pushing back against Donald J Trump (DJT), but I believe it is too little and too late. John Kasich, Ohio’s Governor, has been the ONLY Republican on the national level to consistently point out the challenges that DJT has created for our country. I view him as a party of one.  He should leave the GOP and start his own, preferably called The Freedom and Responsibility Party because we cannot have one without the other.

Before I proceed I need to point out one thing.  I did not vote for DJT nor did I vote for Hillary Clinton.  I voted for the person I believe that was more qualified to lead our country than anyone else listed on the ballot; I wrote my name in.  Some of you might say that my vote was wasted.  I say, no.  As I saw it then and still today, if the train of DJT did not hit us then the bullet of Hillary Clinton would, both equally bad. DJT became president because people voted AGAINST Hillary hoping for the best.

I can live with people hoping for the best by seeking to shake things up when encountered with two equally disastrous choices.  What I cannot live with are enablers and boot licking sycophants’, which is how I view the Republican Party ex-John Kasich.

There are so many problems with DJT, but the biggest is trust.  He has not earned mine and I think he has not earned that of the majority of Americans for the simple fact that he lies on a repeated basis. I could go on with a laundry list of grievances, but it is immaterial.  With out trust, he cannot lead and with out a leader we are sitting ducks.  The Republicans ex-John Kasich have placed their allegiance to the Party ahead of their allegiance to the country by failing to hold DJT accountable for his actions, but instead support and defend his actions.

Consequently, the Republican Party is not fit to lead.  This November, I encourage you to vote for a third Party or Democratic candidate.

Collaboration Desired

In this post I share the additional findings that I alluded to in last week’s post that I gleaned from the surveys I conducted going door-to-door in the neighborhoods surrounding my house.  The additional findings pertain to three items, which are:

1. Was the interviewee more concerned about paying for healthcare or saving for retirement;
2. What was the U.S. doing right; and 
3. What things should the US improve upon?

In reference to question one, approximately 70% were concerned about healthcare costs.  I find this interesting because the data shows that Americans are ill prepared for retirement; therefore, if an overwhelming majority are concerned about affordable access to healthcare then they must believe that either they may not make it to “retirement”, that healthcare is taking too much of their hard earned dollars to save for retirement or both.

In reference to question two, I was shocked, humored and saddened by the responses I received.  90% stated essentially nothing.  Approximately 50% stated the same phrase, “do not know.”  Given that consistency, I conclude that America is hurting and I blame it on President Trump and his enablers, the Republican Party.  The discourse coming from Washington, D.C. is one of hatred and lies.  There are good people in the Republican Party, but senior leadership does not seek to hold Donald J. Trump accountable for his behavior, which allows some to believe similar behavior on their part is acceptable. I think people hunger for improvement, which leads into the final question.

In reference to question three, people had a difficult time answering, but when they did they wanted America to come together to solve our problems.  They wanted people to talk to each other and find common ground from which to work. Upon leaving on that final question and their answer, I felt better about America and hopefully they did, too.

Field Research Pertaining To The Economy

A couple of weeks ago I analyzed BLS data and concluded that I had more control over my employment situation than previously thought; please see post entitled, Plug Away.  To verify my conclusion, I conducted field research the past two weeks. My findings were mixed. 

Going door to door during the day 99% of those with whom I spoke were not seeking employment (either they were retired or held positions with hours not during the standard business day); however, when I went to a job fair for finance and IT professionals, over 80% of those in attendance were 35 and older with more than half those 50 and above.  Based on this limited research, I conclude that it is still a tough employment market, especially for those that are older for a myriad of reasons for which I am still uncertain.

Separately, when I went door to door, I conducted additional research pertaining to healthcare, retirement savings and peoples’ perception of America.  I will share those findings next week. Stay tuned!

Ollie North Don’t You Recall, “I Don’t Like Mondays?”

On Sunday, two days after the ten people were killed by a young man wielding a gun at a high school in Santa Fe, TX, Oliver North, incoming NRA President, demonstrated once again his lack of common sense¹ when he stated on Fox News Sunday that this horrific crime was like a “disease…[caused by] a culture of violence” and we must “harden the place [referring to schools] sufficiently, that those kids are safe inside the door.” Upon learning his comments, I immediately recalled the song “I Don’t Like Mondays”² by the Boomtown Rats.  I encourage you to listen to it while you read this post; the link will pop up in a new window.

The song is not about going to work or school; it is about Brenda Spencer, who is still in jail for killing two school age kids at a school and wounding many more from across the street in January 1979³. Her actions prove that “hardening” the schools is not the answer; responsible gun ownership is, which leads be to conclude that the disease is the NRA. It promotes a gun "culture" with nary a mention of responsibility that should be required on the part of the owner.  The NRA's reckless behavior is putting our Second Amendment at risk and I am pissed!

The military promotes responsibility, should not we expect and demand that of ordinary citizens? I encourage you to read the Atlantic article entitled, Regulate Weapons Like We Do in the Military, Says an Army Officer.

I just wonder when the states will sue the NRA and the gun manufacturers for the increased costs to “harden” schools and other associated measures. I believe this is a reasonable expectation given that the states sued:

1. Tobacco companies for the costs associated with treating lung cancer and other illness attributed to smoking and
2. Drug manufacturers for costs associated with the opioid addiction our country is currently facing.

1. He was a central figure in the Iran-Contra scandal.
2. The song topped the UK charts in 1979 and made it to 73 in the US.  It is a catchy tune, is it not?
3. Forgive me for ruining the song for you if you did not already know the back story.

When Does The NRA Own The Problem It Helped Create?

I think most people would agree the ten people killed at a high school in Santa Fe, TX earlier today, which comes on the heels of five killed in Ponder, TX two days prior, which comes on the heels of… (well let’s just say the list goes on) is a problem, is it not?  Most if not all mass shootings are arguably caused by a mentally unstable individual, yet the NRA does not advocate funding for mental health; instead, the NRA seeks to repeal/reverse laws previously enacted that made it difficult to purchase a gun by a person who has been determined not mentally fit as evidenced by H.J.Res. 40, which became law on February 28, 2017. Additional anecdotal evidence to support my belief that the NRA helped create this problem is its actions of deniability.  Not once has the organization ever made a statement when a mass shooting like the one that occurred today that goes something like the following - "We at the NRA regret that guns were used  in such a senseless way creating destruction within the core fabric of our families, communities and Nation - the heart of America.  We find such actions unacceptable."

However, not all is lost with the NRA.  It may not know it, but the NRA recently demonstrated strong undeniable leadership for gun control. The NRA banned weapons at its own annual conference earlier this month.  It did so to ensure the safety of our President and Vice President. Yet, are we not all “created equal [and] … endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?”  We are! Therefore, if the ban on weapons is good for the President and Vice President then should it not apply to all, everywhere?  If not then what legislation do you propose?  If you are not willing to investigate, accept and promote sound legislation to ensure responsible gun ownership to protect our unalienable rights then maybe we should ban weapons, do you not agree?  I am for the former (legislation promoting responsible gun ownership), but if your against such measures then I believe you are the problem and we must ban weapons because our unalienable rights precede the Second Amendment.

Plug Away

In three years since I was laid-off due to a reduction in force (RIF), I have found sporadic income, which I attributed to a skills mismatch and the economic environment following the “great recession.”

In reference to the former, I have sought to close the skills mismatch gap. I have accomplished more and learned more in the past three years than I did in the three prior years for which I am proud.  However, I am not proud that my family is worse off financially due to me earning wages sporadically via gigs vs. steady, on-going wages via full-time employment.

I am not alone, as I know others in a similar situation. Seeking answers, I delved into data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor. I retrieved “employed persons by detailed industry and age” within “household data, annual averages” for years 2011 through 2017.  While it is highly detailed (over 400 different job categories), I focused on total employment by age.  The following chart shows my findings.

There are three columns for each age group: those employed in 2011, 2017 and the change (∆).  All age groups with the exception of the one in which I reside, 45 to 54, showed gains. The data validated what I believed. More specifically, older workers such as myself are passed over for a myriad of reasons, one being the cost of providing benefits, namely healthcare, which would also explain why those 65 and older saw big gains, these individuals have Medicare negating the need for company sponsored healthcare. I went to bed that night in a slightly better state of mind.

Intuitively, I knew the chart above did not tell the whole story; people age-in and age-out of groups.  To adjust my data for this flux, I adjusted the results above using total population data provided by the census bureau to obtain a ratio of employed:total population by age.  The following chart shows my findings.

Whoa! All age groups have had job gains. I painfully concluded, “The fault … is not in [my] stars, but in [myself]” (Shakespeare 1.2.142-143). The first day, I was in a funk.  I tried to cheer myself up by saying the good news with my findings is that I have more control over my fate than I led myself to believe.  Sadly, the second day did not get better; I yelled at myself – to fix me, change the way I think, how I prioritize, etc. On the third day still in disbelief I recalled a quote attributed to James Allen, a British author, “Work joyfully and peacefully, knowing that the right thoughts and right efforts inevitably bring about the right results.” In short, I must continue to plug away.  In the process, maintain optimism while learning new skills and marketing myself more effectively.

The NRA Puts The Second Amendment At Risk

As Job stated in Job 3:25, “The thing which [the citizenry] greatly feared is come upon [them], and that which [the citizenry] was afraid of is come unto [them].”

A friend of mine once told me the purpose of the Second Amendment (2A) of the United States Constitution was so citizens could protect themselves from a government that seeks to be an overlord, similar to that of the British government during colonial times, which I failed to point out in my post entitled, “Is It Time To Use Article V Of The US Constitution?”.  While my friend is a member of the NRA, I have not heard nor seen such language from the NRA organization of late. Instead, what I have heard and seen from the NRA organization is that more guns will prevent people from using guns to kill other people (that sounds silly, does it not?).

The NRA loves to tout the Heller opinion focusing on one aspect, guns for self-defense, hence its promotion of more guns.  The NRA fails to acknowledge another aspect of the Heller opinion, the need for regulations.  Contained within the Syllabus of the Heller opinion, the majority writes, “The [2A] right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose [¹]: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the [2A] or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.”

Because the NRA has thwarted meaningful regulations to prevent actions such as a mentally challenged individual from obtaining guns similar to the shooter at the Waffle House in Nashville two weeks ago² the US Government has dictated to the NRA that it must ban all weapons of any kind - at its own conference this coming weekend to protect our elected officials.  If NRA believed in what it promoted then it should have told the Secret Service come as you are or do not come at all.  Is not banning guns at their own private event at the request of some government official tantamount to a government acting as an overlord? Does not acquiescing to such dictum run counter to the 2A and set precedent for similar actions in the future?

As such, I stand by my assertion that the NRA is the threat to our 2A, not its protector, which I stated in my post entitled, “Should We Not Help Republicans Regain Their 1st Amendment Right?”.  The NRA has run amok and acted carelessly due to its willful ignorance.

The majority of the Supreme Court believed in the need for regulations. I think it is about time the NRA believes the same.

Freedom and responsibility require each; we cannot have one without the other. We have enough guns.  We need to demonstrate more responsibility with those guns.

If the NRA truly believes in protecting then 2A then they should:

1. Embrace and advocate funding for mental health and 
2. Seek to keep guns out the hands of those with mental health issues.

While at it, the NRA should disinvite the VP of the United States to demonstrate that it drinks its own kool-aid and eats its own dog food. Else, the NRA tacitly admits by its actions (as actions speak louder than words) that more regulation is needed to ensure responsible gun ownership.



Note:1.  Just like the Commerce Clause in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, this 'clause' leaves a lot (let me repeat, a lot) of maneuverability room to craft reasonable legislation.

2. The system, as it is currently designed, worked.  The system took the guns away; however, the family gave the guns back to the killer.  Obviously, the system failed; therefore, maybe the confiscation of guns should extend to immediate family since the apple does not fall far from the tree.  Please let me know and more importantly, your elected representatives know if you have a better idea.  Status quo, do nothing, claiming no law out would prevent a crime such as the one in Nashville is a cop out.  That attitude will lead to a complete ban on guns like it did at the NRA conference.

Human Capital Development, Not More Guns

Today at CPAC, Wayne LaPierre, NRA EVP, doubled down on the gun lobby’s vision for America, more guns.  He did so by advocating for additional security at schools.

If he truly believes that schools need more security then he and the gun lobby should pay for it.

I do not like nor respect Mr. LaPierre and others in the gun lobby seeking to spend my tax dollars on items that do not contribute to human capital development and will more than likely lead to more deaths. We have limited resources and I prefer that we focus on the development of human capital, which should result in improved thinking so we can, for instance, resolve conflicts without force.

I am not naïve.  Force may be needed, but for all intents and purposes, is it not the last resort?

Folks like Wayne LaPierre wrap themselves in the red, white and blue; they talk the talk of supporting our Constitution the Second Amendment, but never truly walked the walked by having signed their name on a piece of paper to defend our Constitution with their own life.  I did.  I served our country as a US Naval Officer when such service was frowned upon. I took my oath seriously and still do.  As such, I feel obligated to invest my time to overcome the rhetoric of those that pimp out the Second Amendment so they can sell more guns, which will most likely result statistically in more deaths, please see Guns = Death.

Guns = Death

What is the primary function of a gun?  If you answered something other than kill, you are delusional. Guns may perform other functions, such as – fill in as a paperweight, a prop in a piece of art, used to fire a bullet to hit a target, etc, but the intended function is to kill, that simple.

Guns as they relate to America form a dichotomy. Without guns we could not have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, yet today guns are literally killing us, please see chart below.  

America has a problem and it is more than just guns. Our country is kind of like Imelda Marcos.  Instead of shoes, we have a gun obsession, arguably fueled by the gun lobby.  As such, America has 3x as many guns per 100 people than the median and 10x the number of homicides-by-gun per 100,000 people than the median resulting in approximately 4 homicides-by-gun per 100,000 guns or approximately 3x the median. We have more and kill more! Just like Imelda, unfortunately some of us must have some form of psychosis to ignore the facts.

In 2015 slightly more than 10 million guns were manufactured and distributed in the US.  If the ratios I just provided remained constant then there would have been 360 more homicides-by-gun in 2016, yet per CDC data, the total increase in deaths by firearm was 2406.  Assuming the ratio of 2 suicides-per-gun for every homicide-by-gun holds true then there was an increase of approximately 900 homicides-by-gun over the prior year, an acceleration in deaths.

Some of you may be jumping out of your seat yelling that is why we need guns for self-defense. First, less than 300 deaths by firearm were attributed to self-defense last year; translation, guns used for self-defense is immaterial.  More importantly, that thinking is in-line with those who believe that only more government policies can solve poverty.  Think of it this way, the more right you go, the more left you become.

Since some people may have a hard time wrapping their mind around these facts, please let me state the obvious, less guns will mean less deaths.

Is It Time To Use Article V Of The US Constitution?

To prevent any erroneous conclusions from my two previous posts, I want to state unequivocally that I support the Second Amendment as it is written, not as it has been manipulated, twisted, contorted and abused to feed some Americans’ obsession with guns.

The Second Amendment (2A) states, “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.”

I believe that one sentence is extremely well crafted to prevent any ambiguity.  However, over time ambiguity has set in, which I attribute to two major changes following the ratification of 2A. Those changes are: 1. The U.S. formed an army several years later (i.e. stopped relying solely on militias) and 2. State governments had greater legislative power until the passage of Amendments 14, 15 and 16 following the Civil War, hence the use of the words, “Militia” and “State.”

Because of the aforementioned changes coupled with the passage of time this ambiguity has arguably increased leading some Americans (including some Justices of the Supreme Court to my chagrin) to now believe 2A means something different than initially intended, such as guns for self-defense.  If these individuals believe so strongly that 2A means something totally different than the original intent then it is imperative for them to seek changes, not through narrow opinions issued by the judicial branch, but from the legislative branch.  These individuals should seek to amend the Constitution via Article V. This process will most likely be nasty, but the debates should undoubtedly determine what we want as a nation.

Home Of The Brave

I recently worked in an industry in which conviction was expected. If you believed in your vision then you were obligated to stand tall and stand proud even when events ran counter to your belief. If you could not pound the table with conviction during such events, then you lost the respect of your audience – competitors, employer and customers. With that in mind, I find it interesting that the gun lobby shrinks back into the shadows following the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas (MSD) on Valentines Day, a day of love and compassion. Their actions imply guilt and remorse for what occurred.

Yet, the gun lobby has worked tirelessly and insidiously for decades promoting their vision.  The Supreme Court essentially rewrote the second amendment with a ruling based on a tortured analysis of just one sentence’s structure allowing the narrow majority to infer the authors’ intent 215 years later instead of validating and reinforcing what was actually written. The Supreme Court says the Second Amendment now pertains to self-defense, which has helped crystallize the gun lobby’s vision for America.

If the gun lobby truly believes their vision for America is right then they are duty bound to pound the table with conviction that the gunman at MSD would have been literally stopped dead in his tracks if guns were allowed on campus.  Just today, Rush Limbaugh advocated for guns on campus.  I am led to believe, the gun lobby has lived for this moment so they could advocate for all to have guns, including but not limit to teachers, administrators and most importantly, students. That’s right, students.

The killing of innocent Americans by an American on American soil should be a rally cry by the gun lobby for Americans to own guns, not just adults, but all Americans. Self-defense classes should begin in kindergarten and continue through twelfth grade graduation. Why, you may ask. Surely, you have not forgotten that kindergarteners died in the Sandy Hook massacre. Surely, the gun lobby would not want anything like that to happen again and is not just a price that is paid to have the right to own a gun for self-defense (which could be accomplished by myriad of other less dangerous activities).  We must arm these young tots, adolescents and teens so they are ready for the dangers they will encounter (regardless whether the adults allowed these dangers to manifest, germinate in the first place – that’s immaterial). Shootings like those at MSD and Sandy Hook and Virginia Tech and ... are like a war zone and the students must be armed.

Weekly trips to the firing range are a must, so are target practice and unscheduled drills to simulate armed intruders.  Since schools have tight budgets and cannot add this training to the curriculum then courses such as art, music and other unnecessary electives should be dropped, but definitely not gym because we want the students physically fit. In addition to buying pencils, pens and notebooks to begin the school year, parents could buy ammo and new cool holsters that match lunch boxes and back packs.

Guns are part of America’s heritage and all should embrace it.  Understandably, there are some adults who do not (that's me if you have not figured out), but if we start the process of training and more importantly, indoctrinating the use of guns at a very young age then over time there will be greater acceptance, would you not agree?

 Just imagine, if this vision were executed ten years ago then the students at MSD would have been able to coolly duck for cover, pull out their weapon and drop the perp in seconds saving many lives. Per President Trump, “no child, no teacher, [would] ever be in danger in an American school [again]. No parent [would] ever have to fear for their sons and daughters when they kiss them goodbye in the morning.” That would be awesome, would it not?!

Some of you reading this may think that this vision smacks of a third world country and you would be right.  USA has the highest gun ownership per capita in the world followed by, you guessed it – third world countries, predominately those in the Middle East.

To paraphrase Charlton Heston, let them pry the guns from our cold, dead hands – after the dust settles, of course. 

Go America! We are the home of the brave because we have to be if this vision becomes reality.

When is Enough, Enough?

Today there was another shooting at a school, 17 dead at the time of publication exceeding the number of deaths that occurred at Columbine approximately 19 years ago.  This shooting happened in south Florida, the state in which I live.

In this year alone,  just one and half months, there have been over 10 shootings at schools this year and several mass murders alone.  I have lost count and it is possible you have, too.

When do we say, “enough is enough!”

When we find ourselves in a hole, should we keep digging?  I think not.

Given all the deaths from shootings at school, some say, we should allow more open carry or concealed carry.  Does it really matter whether it is open or concealed?  To use the gun in "self-defense" someone has to shoot first and it is very well possible one or more people die before the shooter is prevented from firing more bullets.  Allow me to repeat myself, “it is very well possible one or more people die before the shooter is prevented from firing more bullets.” Even if the shooter does not kill someone, the mere fact of spraying bullets surely causes trauma.  My nine year old was traumatized from learning the news of today’s events on the radio on her way home. Should not schools be a safe place?  After hearing the news, I am sure my daughter is a little less certain, would you not agree?  Is that acceptable?  You may say that is life (or in this case, death).  I say that is sad, depressing and unacceptable!

Some say, we should arm the teachers.  Maybe the teachers do not want to be armed.  Regardless, are not teachers already over loaded with minutiae?  Do they need another task that at the end of the day is not accretive to higher learning?

Some say, we should have additional security at school.  That would be fine, but where is the money coming from? To my knowledge, taxpayers (at least the vocal ones) already complain schools receive too much money.  If no additional money is raised to pay for security services then something has to be cut, does it not?  That seems asinine, does it not, especially so when people bemoan that our education system is broken?

So what is the solution to the problem?  Some say, it’s complicated.  Truly, it is not. Please allow me to repeat myself from above, “when we find ourselves in a hole, should we keep digging?”

Are more guns the answer?  Therefore, what is the problem?   What is the one thing we could remove and there would be no more deaths from shootings?

What is more important, life or death?  If death (whether yours or someone else’s), is it really that important? Not in my book.