Today Gov. Cuomo of New York signed into law new legislation that replaced existing law to redefine the assault rifle, limit the size of clips and place more restrictions on gun ownership in New York. Tomorrow, President Obama, surrounded by children, will announce Vice President's Biden's suggestions that President Obama agrees with as he looks to stem the tide of gun violence. Many believe that it will call for the ban on assault rifles and the elimination of large magazine clips.
Mother Jones, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map?page=2; has posted a guide to mass shootings in the United States dating back to 1982. 62 mass shootings in all took place over the past 30 years. I took a look at the past ten years of history. Per the shootings reported by Mother Jones we 29 mass shootings with 475 people killed and injured. What the article doesn't discuss is the method used outside of the fact that they were shootings. Let's compare that ten year record to homicides reported in Chicago for 2012.
RedEye data, http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/, has listed a link to all homicides reported in 2012 and by method. After downloading the data and stripping out anything not gunshot related one is left with 442 people killed by gunshot. Now the data doesn't discern from handgun, shotgun, assault rifle, etc. 442 people were killed by gunshot in 2012 alone while we saw 475 people killed and injured during mass shooting over tens year period. Now, I do not diminish the deaths nor mock those that senselessly perished during mass shootings but we need to put the numbers into perspective as we allow our elected officials to use the Second Amendment as a hot political potato.
We can all agree that access to an assault rifle is not for hunting of any sort and the same time we can all agree that guns do not kill. What I mean is that a ridiculous it is to shield your pro-gun stance based on the recreational exercise of hunting as a reason to own an assault rifle lays on the same plane of logical argument of the anti-gun advocates that claim the gun is the killer. The gun does nothing until someone picks it up and uses it.
That person can use it to provide food, target practice, protection, and mass shootings. Again it goes back to the person behind the trigger and their intent on if the gun is being used with respect or being abused. Looking back at the list that Mother Jones put together a common theme exists among the shooters; degrees of mental illness. The trouble is that its not nearly as sexy or politically correct to put our thumb on mental illness as it is on the gun. The gun is the smoke; yet that smoke cannot materialize without the flint - human being.
While I do not promote the notion that returning to the arcane methods of dealing with mental illness and sending the medical community back into the Stone Age, there is something to be learned. Rumor has it that President Obama will address the mental illness aspect insofar that during the background check one will be searched, violating HIPPA in the process, for a history of mental illness along with a felony record. How do we tackle this slippery slope? If we say today it is okay to background check for mental illness what doors will that open for other illnesses for services or rights? When will someone in our political elite display a sober temper and re-direct the ship and deal with the issue at hand - the person behind the gun?
Showing posts with label New York. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Gun Control!?!?!?!
This past Thursday I attended the School Board meeting for Watertown-Mayer school district. While my purpose to be there was due to my role with the Watertown-Mayer SEAC, the School Board had a topic on the agenda to discuss school safety; specifically ensuring the kids are safe from a mass shooting. Several residence showed up for the meeting and offered their opinions on the how to keep the school safe. Suggestions ranged from more surveillance more buzzer's for prime entrances, to having a roaming officer and then to the point of arming the teachers and administration.
It will not be long before a member of Congress brings before their respective chamber a bill that would restrict gun ownership in some manner. A lot of the talk shows have focused on the "assault" rifle an the large magazine clips that many of these guns have. As rule of law no weapon is permitted to be fully automatic which means that one would have to pull the trigger every time they wish to expel a bullet or a short burst of bullets. That being said, one doesn't have to be a genius to turn the semi-automatic into a fully automatic.
Recently a newspaper published those with conceal and carry permits in Westchester county in New York. Why on Earth would this type of information be made public? The newspaper just gave thieves, rapist, arsonist, and other thugs a road map for which houses to invade and which ones to avoid. Some claim that the gun is the threat to our safety. In Westchester County, now thanks to the paper, the lack of having a conceal and carry permit has made one a target!
Second Amendment does deny the Federal Government from restricting gun ownership or the right for "one to bear arms". Anti-Gun advocates argue that the Founding Fathers didn't envision assault rifles to be covered and that no one needs one to hunt with them. First let's take the hunting aspect off the table because the Second Amendment didn't materialize because the Founding Fathers needed to hunt. Besides, if one has ever heard one of my Uncle's shoot his bolt action rifle during the deer hunting season you'd swear it was semi or even fully automatic.
The gun in of itself cannot harm anyone as it takes a human or some other action for it act. Society doesn't have a healthy respect for the gun and that is our root cause. When you hear a child shoot another because they found their parents handgun it is do to the lack of respect given to that gun. Now I am not blaming the child directly; rather it is the lack of respect that parent gave the gun by not properly securing the gun and explaining to the child the purpose of the gun.
We don't need to control the access to weapons; rather we need to gain respect for the potential outcome that weapon can become. We need to educate society on usage of guns to gain the respect, understanding, and responsibility gun ownership brings.Banning assault rifles does not make us more safe; rather it prevents us, as a society, to have the means to protect our populous in the event that our government, or another government, because tyrannical or invades.
It will not be long before a member of Congress brings before their respective chamber a bill that would restrict gun ownership in some manner. A lot of the talk shows have focused on the "assault" rifle an the large magazine clips that many of these guns have. As rule of law no weapon is permitted to be fully automatic which means that one would have to pull the trigger every time they wish to expel a bullet or a short burst of bullets. That being said, one doesn't have to be a genius to turn the semi-automatic into a fully automatic.
Recently a newspaper published those with conceal and carry permits in Westchester county in New York. Why on Earth would this type of information be made public? The newspaper just gave thieves, rapist, arsonist, and other thugs a road map for which houses to invade and which ones to avoid. Some claim that the gun is the threat to our safety. In Westchester County, now thanks to the paper, the lack of having a conceal and carry permit has made one a target!
Second Amendment does deny the Federal Government from restricting gun ownership or the right for "one to bear arms". Anti-Gun advocates argue that the Founding Fathers didn't envision assault rifles to be covered and that no one needs one to hunt with them. First let's take the hunting aspect off the table because the Second Amendment didn't materialize because the Founding Fathers needed to hunt. Besides, if one has ever heard one of my Uncle's shoot his bolt action rifle during the deer hunting season you'd swear it was semi or even fully automatic.
The gun in of itself cannot harm anyone as it takes a human or some other action for it act. Society doesn't have a healthy respect for the gun and that is our root cause. When you hear a child shoot another because they found their parents handgun it is do to the lack of respect given to that gun. Now I am not blaming the child directly; rather it is the lack of respect that parent gave the gun by not properly securing the gun and explaining to the child the purpose of the gun.
We don't need to control the access to weapons; rather we need to gain respect for the potential outcome that weapon can become. We need to educate society on usage of guns to gain the respect, understanding, and responsibility gun ownership brings.Banning assault rifles does not make us more safe; rather it prevents us, as a society, to have the means to protect our populous in the event that our government, or another government, because tyrannical or invades.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Violence in America
The tragic and senseless killing of 28 innocent lives yesterday in Newtown, Connecticut is a microcosm of the ills our society faces today. Unfortunately Americans and the world will talk more about the Second Amendment, Gun Control, and mental disorders than what is really at the heart of these senseless acts. Guns don't kill people; rather it is the person behind the gun that does. President Obama spoke on the shooting and expressed his concern as a parent which is commendable. Yet, President Obama stated, "And we're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this; regardless of politics."
Mayor Bloomberg has come out and said, "President Obama rightly sent his heartfelt condolences to the families in Newtown. But the country needs him to send a bill to Congress to fix this problem. Calling for 'meaningful action' is not enough."
Rep. Jerold Nadler (D-NY) on the Ed Schultz show yesterday said, "These incidents, these horrible, horrible incidents...are happening more and more frequently. And they will continue to happen more and more frequently until someone with the bully pulpit, and that means the President, takes leadership and pushes Congress."
Really? So the answer to stem the tide of violence that has rocked our society - Newtown, Oregon Mall, Colorado movie Theater the Temple in Wisconsin, Arizona Congresswoman - is to limit the ability to own guns? The trouble is not the method of choice - in these cases a gun - rather it is societies loss of core family values. The demands on the family unit has eroded the respect, understanding and nurturing of core family values.
Our educators will be the first to state the fact that over the past several decades students have become increasingly disrespectful to them, to each other and to authority figures. Part of this stems back to the family unit where it is no longer common place for a family to have a single bread winner. Instead most family units are fractured due to the need of two incomes to make ends meet. Items like internet, cell phone, computers, TV's, and Xbox are considered necessities The concept of a family dinner is being eroded due to dual income households and the use of television as a baby sitter or a pacifier for out children.
Take a moment today and over the holiday season as you gather with family to evaluate the importance of the material objects in your life and how they contribute to the erosion of core family values. It is very possible that one may understand that events like Newtown are not the guns fault but lies right inside the family unit.
Mayor Bloomberg has come out and said, "President Obama rightly sent his heartfelt condolences to the families in Newtown. But the country needs him to send a bill to Congress to fix this problem. Calling for 'meaningful action' is not enough."
Rep. Jerold Nadler (D-NY) on the Ed Schultz show yesterday said, "These incidents, these horrible, horrible incidents...are happening more and more frequently. And they will continue to happen more and more frequently until someone with the bully pulpit, and that means the President, takes leadership and pushes Congress."
Really? So the answer to stem the tide of violence that has rocked our society - Newtown, Oregon Mall, Colorado movie Theater the Temple in Wisconsin, Arizona Congresswoman - is to limit the ability to own guns? The trouble is not the method of choice - in these cases a gun - rather it is societies loss of core family values. The demands on the family unit has eroded the respect, understanding and nurturing of core family values.
Our educators will be the first to state the fact that over the past several decades students have become increasingly disrespectful to them, to each other and to authority figures. Part of this stems back to the family unit where it is no longer common place for a family to have a single bread winner. Instead most family units are fractured due to the need of two incomes to make ends meet. Items like internet, cell phone, computers, TV's, and Xbox are considered necessities The concept of a family dinner is being eroded due to dual income households and the use of television as a baby sitter or a pacifier for out children.
Take a moment today and over the holiday season as you gather with family to evaluate the importance of the material objects in your life and how they contribute to the erosion of core family values. It is very possible that one may understand that events like Newtown are not the guns fault but lies right inside the family unit.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Fry Cook a Career?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/29/nyregion/drive-to-unionize-fast-food-workers-opens-in-ny.html?ref=nyregion
When I saw this article yesterday in the New York Times my first thought was - WHAT! One of the workers at McDonald's quoted in the article said she is getting paid $8 hour but feels she deserves $15 hour. Really? Now I know that it is expensive to live in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and other major metropolitan areas but are we to this point as a society that being a fry cook or a cashier at McDonald's, or any fast food establishment, is a career.
Don't get me wrong, working for McDonald's is a great place to learn business, develop client service skills and test one's ability to multi-task. Not to mention that one can move from Fry Cook or Cashier to an owner of a franchise as well. Instead of complaining about the $8 hour wage, why not try to obtain more skills to move up the food chain at McDonald's or with another company.
I am okay with private Unionization of workers but we need some common sense to take place here. If Fry Cooks and Cashiers start making $15 a hour we will either have a value menu at $5 an item or the portion sizes with be even smaller than they are today. And as the one owner in the article states, if the wage does go up then that means fewer jobs. McDonald's has a great educational reimbursement program for the workers, why isn't the $8 hour Cashier trying to take advantage of that so she can move up in McDonald's or find gainful employment elsewhere?
When I saw this article yesterday in the New York Times my first thought was - WHAT! One of the workers at McDonald's quoted in the article said she is getting paid $8 hour but feels she deserves $15 hour. Really? Now I know that it is expensive to live in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and other major metropolitan areas but are we to this point as a society that being a fry cook or a cashier at McDonald's, or any fast food establishment, is a career.
Don't get me wrong, working for McDonald's is a great place to learn business, develop client service skills and test one's ability to multi-task. Not to mention that one can move from Fry Cook or Cashier to an owner of a franchise as well. Instead of complaining about the $8 hour wage, why not try to obtain more skills to move up the food chain at McDonald's or with another company.
I am okay with private Unionization of workers but we need some common sense to take place here. If Fry Cooks and Cashiers start making $15 a hour we will either have a value menu at $5 an item or the portion sizes with be even smaller than they are today. And as the one owner in the article states, if the wage does go up then that means fewer jobs. McDonald's has a great educational reimbursement program for the workers, why isn't the $8 hour Cashier trying to take advantage of that so she can move up in McDonald's or find gainful employment elsewhere?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)