Friday, December 21, 2012

Clarification of FACT: The Amendments to the Constitution, ie, the Bill of Rights, that guaranteed citizens' rights and freedoms, are not rights granted to the individual FROM government, rather they are expressly the individual's inalienable rights! In other words, these are rights that can only be transferred with the consent of the person possessing those rights. A result of the Founding Fathers exhaustive study of history, the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome, the Protestant Reformation, thinkers such as Voltaire, Montesquieu, and Rousseau and the single most important influence that shaped the founding of the United States, the writings from John Locke. Remember, in the view of many colonists, British rule suppressed political, economic, and religious freedoms. Many of those that hesitated to support independence were soon convinced by the passionate words of Thomas Paine, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, and eventually John Adams and Thomas Jefferson (The Federalist Papers). The Bill of Rights helps to define the American political system and the government's relationship to its citizens. Do not easily surrender you rights because of a horrific incident. Think. Learn. Decisions made today can and will have major impact on future generations. Did you study history enough to usurp the intentions of the Founders? Perhaps a major issue with society today is that we have moved too far away from the intent of the Founders?

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Thoughts on the Connecicut tragedy

OK< thought long and hard about this tragedy over the weekend. Really hard to get my thoughts around insanity but here is what I think: HEARTBREAKING. The american media are more propagandists than investigative journalists...at least what I remember from being a very young boy in line with Woodward & Bernstein, ie Deep Throat. But I remember...here is the most informative, fact based recap I have found... http://bit.ly/V1Ohiu Again, has to come from overseas, sadly.
As is always the case with the insane, there is MUCH more to it than the inanimate object, the gun, in this case handguns. sad, sad. sad. God Bless these innocent souls. Turns out (why I said Friday let us not comment until the facts are clear) the Mom, well, she was a wacker too!! A loon, survivalist....and he (son) was too, they knew. Daddy, too busy being corporate for GE (I worked for them, it's is all consuming, but no excuse, you should have been more involved, you would have seen your son was NOT NORMAL), mom a survivalist with a dysfunctional "brilliant" kid...where have we heard this before? Hmm?
I believe this administration will have a knee jerk reaction with bad policy, (why change) but let me offer contrary view. No-one is happy there has been a spat of these loons of late. But, we "outlawed" illegal drugs how many years ago? Well, under Pres Nixon in 1972. How's that working? Any improvement? At a cost of how much? For what result? Money well spent? .....the crazy, the criminal, the insane, those with no morals, no values, no sense of right or wrong will always find a way.
I think the real question is, ....Remember the good old days when little kids played cowboys and indians with cap guns then grew up to be law abiding, non-violent citizens? What has changed in our society? That is something to look at, no??? That is the core issue IMO.
As to the comments on Germany under the Nazi regime, sorry, factually wrong. The laws adopted by the Weimar Republic intended to disarm Nazis and Communists were sufficiently discretionary that the Nazis managed to use them against their enemies once they were in power. In other words, they didn't need to pass additional laws. Hitler didn't need to impose gun control because gun laws were already in effect (ironically, those original laws were in part designed to disarm the Nazis). Gun control helped the Nazis keep weapons out of the hands of their enemies, but it wasn't a major factor in Hitler's success. BUT, the fact the enimies of the state had no weapons can not be discussed.

Correlation does not imply causation is a phrase used in science and statistics to emphasize that a correlation between two variables does not necessarily imply that one causes the other. (insanity vs guns) just saying.

I think back of the words of the great German Lutheran Pastor, and disodent, Dietrich Bonhoeffer : “We have been silent witnesses of evil deeds; we have been drenched by many storms; we have learnt the arts of equivocation and pretence; experience has made us suspicious of others and kept us from being truthful and open; intolerable conflicts have worn us down and even made us cynical. Are we still of any use? What we shall need is not geniuses, or cynics, or misanthropes, or clever tacticians, but plain, honest, and straightforward men. Will our inward power of resistance be strong enough, and our honesty with ourselves remorseless enough, for us to find our way back to simplicity and straightforwardness?” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Priso