"The Tree of Liberty is watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson
Many people, including our founding fathers, lived and died by this quote. Thomas Jefferson was a man who believed in a country so great that it would rival all other countries for years to come. I still believe in this country. I still believe that after everything that we think is going wrong, after everything that has gone wrong, we still stand as the greatest country in the world.
I believe that what this country stands for is the most important aspect of who we are. What the United States of America represents is a beacon of hope for the rest of the world. However, what I would like to know is when did it become not only OK, but trendy to not be proud of your country? At some point in time, hating what the United States stands for became not just something that you had a privilege to do, but something that was cool and hip.
The movement right now is change. Change in office, change in health care, change in America. But it is what this change represents which has me most concerned. What this change represents is a fundamental doubt in the United States of America. What this change represents is how hopeless people feel in dealing with their government. However, what I think, is that people are misinterpreting things going wrong for things going wrong with the fundamental staples of American society.
For example, Universal Health Care. People believe that as Americans we have the need for a universal health care system. What many fail to realize is that we already have a system in place which takes care of people. If you go into a hospital emergency room, you cannot be turned away without treatment. It seems that many people look to the fact that 47 million Americans are without health insurance. However, all this means is that giving them health care through the government would create a huge bureaucracy with no progress made anywhere, only one giant money sucking machine.
I think that as true Americans we need to get back to our roots. The time in America when the government did not have to decide what's best for me. I know what is best for me. Just because a person is elected does not mean that they are smarter than I am, I will make my own decisions and will make my own way. I was not born wealthy, yet I am making my own way. I know that when I look back on my life I will see pain, struggle, but most of all, I will be happy that I made it in life.
A side note: "Government should be afraid of it's people; not people afraid of the government"
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Gun Control
In America there are many laws, and many of these laws have a lot to do with how we live our lives. These laws affect everything from where and how we drive to how long we attend school. The law also dictates when you become an adult, but this line is already very blurry. You can smoke and vote at 18 and are considered an adult however you are not able to drink legally in most states. In addition to that in most states if you commit a particularly heinous crime under 18 you can still be charged as an adult. So what they tell me is that I might be an adult at 13, 18 or 21? That makes sense. Similarly, another control the government puts on our lives is gun control. The issue has most recently popped up in the Supreme court case that is currently pending review. The law in question is the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 which states that is is illegal for residents in Washington, D.C. to own a handgun.
This court decision which is due sometime in the end of June is the most important decision on the 2nd amendment ever. This question of whether the right to bear arms belongs to the state or to individuals is, I believe, a moot point. The reason that the Founding Fathers put this into the constitution was so that the people would be able to protect themselves from their own government. This isn't a question about hunting or states having militias, this about the constitutional right of the individual to own guns. It is the principle which is in jeopardy in the court decision. If the government says that we as law-abiding citizens can't own guns, then what can stop them from taking other things, and once they start taking, what is there to stop them? Nobody has any guns. This is what I like to call a problem.
The only Hope that I have is that the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the individual. If this happens then, hopefully, we will be able to have guns available to us in this country forever. However if the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the state militias then we are in trouble. Not only would there be wide implications for hunting and sport shooting but also self-defense. If someone breaks into your house and they know that as a law-abiding citizen you don't have a gun then what deterrent do they have?
In a suburb of Atlanta the city Kennesaw has an ordinance which requires every head of household to own a gun and proper ammunition. Although there is no penalty for violating the law, many homeowners felt that it would be a good idea and got a gun. When the law was adopted in 1982 the small town was thrust into the spotlight, and since 1982 the city has had a dramatically lower crime rate. This is an excellent example that if a criminal feels that a homeowner might have a gun then they are a lot less likely to break in. It reminds me of a great phrase, "If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns". My feelings exactly. I hope, for the sake of America's constitution and America's future, that the Supreme court will give the individual the right to protect himself, his family and his country if need be.
This court decision which is due sometime in the end of June is the most important decision on the 2nd amendment ever. This question of whether the right to bear arms belongs to the state or to individuals is, I believe, a moot point. The reason that the Founding Fathers put this into the constitution was so that the people would be able to protect themselves from their own government. This isn't a question about hunting or states having militias, this about the constitutional right of the individual to own guns. It is the principle which is in jeopardy in the court decision. If the government says that we as law-abiding citizens can't own guns, then what can stop them from taking other things, and once they start taking, what is there to stop them? Nobody has any guns. This is what I like to call a problem.
The only Hope that I have is that the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the individual. If this happens then, hopefully, we will be able to have guns available to us in this country forever. However if the court finds that the right to bear arms belongs to the state militias then we are in trouble. Not only would there be wide implications for hunting and sport shooting but also self-defense. If someone breaks into your house and they know that as a law-abiding citizen you don't have a gun then what deterrent do they have?
In a suburb of Atlanta the city Kennesaw has an ordinance which requires every head of household to own a gun and proper ammunition. Although there is no penalty for violating the law, many homeowners felt that it would be a good idea and got a gun. When the law was adopted in 1982 the small town was thrust into the spotlight, and since 1982 the city has had a dramatically lower crime rate. This is an excellent example that if a criminal feels that a homeowner might have a gun then they are a lot less likely to break in. It reminds me of a great phrase, "If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns". My feelings exactly. I hope, for the sake of America's constitution and America's future, that the Supreme court will give the individual the right to protect himself, his family and his country if need be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
