Beyond the Cusp

September 21, 2013

Why More Gun Laws Will Not Work

With two shootings on military installations in the news recently, the Major Nidal Malik Hasan trial and the Aaron Alexis shooting at the Navy Yard, some of the glaring deficiencies and misinformation which exist throughout the liberal mainstream media were exposed for all to witness. The worst of the offenders were at CNN where during the Piers Morgan coverage it was reported that the shooter had used an AR-15 shotgun, a firearm that does not exist. The mix-up probably resulted from the erroneous reporting that the shooter Aaron Alexis had used an AR-15 and the fact that he originally began his shooting spree utilizing a shotgun and the liberal mainstream media preoccupation with demonizing the AR-15 as the most evil and dangerous firearm ever produced. In a warped way, the erroneous reporting that an AR-15 was used when none was found at the scene simply served to display for all to see how the news sources have an agenda which they will go to any lengths to make every shooting a case of demonic possession where the presence of a firearm, especially the most demonic AR-15, drove a poor unfortunate over the edge pushing them into a murderous rage. What these two particular shootings have proven is how poorly the authorities, even the military who should be more proficient and knowledgeable, can miss even cases where the perpetrator ends up being somebody who should have set off alarms, warning that they should not be permitted anywhere near a firearm. Major Nidal Malik Hasan had given repeated instances of having taken an interest in Jihad and the Navy Yard Shooter Aaron Alexis had numerous arrests and was disciplined numerous times while in the Naval Reserves. In both cases the authorities who should have easily caught at least some of the warning signs as there were more than enough to tip people off, but in both cases the authorities did not report or even make any records of obvious transgressions which would have prevented either perpetrator to have ever gotten to the point where they performed their murderous rampages. What these two particular shootings proved, as have many shootings over the years, is that had authorities actually done their jobs and made the proper reports when the signs of behavior problems were exhibited, then neither of these two murderous rampages would have gotten to the point where they endangered innocent people.

 

The politicians were quick, especially Ms. Pelosi, to start the call which rings out after every catastrophe for more laws against firearm ownership. The reality in both of these shootings on military installations is that if law enforcement and other public officials had performed their obligations to the public, otherwise known as their jobs, and completed and filed the appropriate paperwork instead of simply deciding that it was not that important and why ruin somebody’s life by making a permanent record, they ended up ruining many people’s lives that were taken or forever traumatically altered as a result of shootings committed by individuals who should never have been allowed to own firearms and had given overt signs that they were headed over the edge into violent rage shooting many innocents. The old adage that if only the authorities enforced the laws then there would be far less firearms violence as there are more than sufficient laws on the books to prevent the majority of shootings is quite true as these shootings prove. The other story line here is that if only we trusted our military personnel when on military grounds to carry their service weapon then such shootings would be ended before the numbers of people murdered mounted to such numbers as in these two cases. If we cannot trust out military personnel to have their service weapon with them while on duty and on military grounds, then who can we trust? A perfect example of allowing military personnel to carry their weapons at least on base being a preventive measure is proven in Israel where the majority of military personnel takes their service weapons with them everywhere, on base and into the public areas and this has proved to be a great deterrent to crime. The real crime of these two particular shootings was that they should have been easily preventable if only laws had been enforced, paperwork completed and filed with the appropriate departments and had the people assigned with doing the appropriate checks had actually taken their obligations to the public by performing their job requirements competently and completely.

 

There is one more item which people are not being informed of and it is simply because it does not serve the story line the press wishes to paint. Where you will likely hear that the number of firearm related deaths are approaching or even surpassing automobile related deaths, you probably missed the report that shows that firearm deaths have been falling on average for the past twenty years. Reporting that truth would not be as forceful to make you fearful of firearms as reporting that traffic deaths and firearm deaths are approaching parity, but the truth is that these statistics are good news for both statistics as vehicular fatalities have also been coming down as well. But as we know, in the news business if it bleeds it leads thus less fatalities is not news so they have to look for anything which they can imply that firearm fatalities are horrendous and a plague beyond your wildest fears. What is the most tragic side of firearm fatalities is where some of the worst statistics in firearm violence and fatalities are also the cities where they have the most stringent laws against firearm ownership and the average citizen can forget about procuring a concealed carry license despite the fact that these cities are the places where such a right is most needed. The shootings which have made the news recently out of Chicago have been newsworthy largely because they are taking place in President Obama’s home town and that supposedly makes these shootings more important than those in your or my town. Still, the deaths in Chicago are shocking and can be used to claim that as Chicago is our President’s hometown we should be ashamed that the gun violence is so rampant. The problem is that the violence in Chicago is actually predictable as it is in Miami, Philadelphia, New York, Los Angeles, and way too many of our large cities which sit in blue states where gun ownership is treated as if it were a criminal offense which results in criminals being the ones with the guns. What the media will not tell you is that in the 1950s often children would bring their 22 rifle to school and place them in the coat room and take them when school let out and go hunt varmints such as squirrel, raccoon, rabbit or such for sport or even for dinner for some families. Of course such would be impossible today yet I would bet there are some who wish that schools still used flashcards to teach math tables and things were more like they were back in the day when spelling counted and you were required to get the correct answer to math problems.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

February 3, 2013

Necessary Immigration Reform Unlikely

The entirety of immigration laws and policies are in need of an overhaul. Much of the difficulties and problems with illegal immigration stem either directly or indirectly from the outmoded and obsolete laws, policies, regulations and procedures we currently are operating under. Unfortunately, what we need will be the last thing that the Congress and White House will enact. What we are most likely going to get thanks in part to the Democrats seeking new voters and the Republicans supporting a pool of below minimum wage workers who have no legal recourse. My bet is that what Congress will enact and the President will pass will be something along the Wimpy character reforms stating, “We will gladly enforce the border next Tuesday for an Amnesty today.” And just like the Wimpy character in the Popeye cartoons, they will gobble up the amnesty granting the eleven -million-plus illegal immigrants permanent work status soon followed by Green Cards which leads straight to citizenship all without stopping the influx of new illegals necessitating the next illegal immigrations debate for seventy-five-million additional undocumented workers in fifteen or so years. We had supposedly solved this problem under President Ronald Reagan’s Administration when a Democrat controlled Congress passed immigration reform which gave blanket amnesty and an expedited path to citizenship for three- million illegal immigrants with a promise to enact reforms and tough and strict enforcement laws soon thereafter. Surprise of all surprises, the reforms and enforcement somehow never quite materialized and now here we are again with reportedly quadruple the problem.

In 1986, with President Ronald Reagan, it was the Congress which enacted the empty promise which never was fulfilled. This time, with President Barack Obama, it is the President who is threatening to veto any legislation which does not allow for immediate amnesty and some viable path to citizenship and who is not all that demanding for any enforcement requirements to be included. There is a small core of Senators and Representatives who are demanding the inclusion of enforcements enacted as part of the legislation and that complete amnesty is withheld until the enforcement phase has been totally implemented. The problem I foresee is whoever is tasked with the responsibility of determining the completion of the enforcement phase has the power and option to acquiesce to those demanding the amnesty be granted with haste even without the completion of enforcement requirements. The basic problem is there are only a minority of people in Washington who truly wish to fix the problem. The forces and money is mostly supporting leaving everything just the way it is as extending the status quo provides everybody with something they desire with little if any downside. Those who desire the cheap labor, be it farming, manufacturing, food processing or domestic workers enjoy the convenience of a ready pool of illegals willing to work for less and who are often paid under the table. Those politicians whose election to office is heavily reliant on voters who do not want the illegals deported or denied the ability to collect a salary or benefits keep those voters happy, and those who stand for enforcement of our borders retain their soapbox on which to pontificate and either continue to hold office, be paid as a lobbyist or be paid as an activist. That has been the problem all along. Continuing the problem by never quite fixing what is wrong in the system serves to extend a great number of moneyed special interests, and we all know that money talks very loudly in Washington.

Even should the Congress pass and the President sign strong legislation that demands the actual physical closing of our borders, with time the enforcement funding will be cut in order to facilitate more entitlement spending. The United States as a country will be unable to implement or even maintain much of its operations if a solution is not found to the illegal immigration problems and the ballooning entitlement payments. For this article there is a special subset of the entitlement problem which also needs to be addressed. There are a fair number of illegal immigrants who are receiving entitlements from the government. This is a double problem as many, but not all, illegal immigrants work off the grid being paid under the table in cash and therefore not paying any taxes, income, FICA, or any of the numerous other taxes. Yet, on the other hand, there are those illegal immigrants who have found their way onto the entitlement roles such as Welfare, Food Stamps, even Social Security Disability as well as others. This is a double drain on the government funds as little if any is coming in while full payments are going out.

This alone should make it everybody’s concern that we put an end to the flood of illegal immigrants entering the United States. Of course there is the question of exactly how. There has long been those who simply claim that it would be impossible to implement or against the law to place the military on our borders to guard them. My response to that has been a simple, “Why?” There is no reason or law which would prevent having the military guard the borders. As far as the logistics, it might prove easier than many think. Imagine if as part of any Combat Arms training cycle, each unit upon completion of training was stationed guarding a sector of our borders for six months before being attached to their permanent duty station. There you have it, instant manpower to guard the border thus minimizing the number of units being deployed for that duty. There will be those who will decry that using the military is too harsh and endangers anybody who might try to illegally enter the country. Isn’t it the whole idea of guarding the border to make crossing the border difficult if not impossible and if it is made life-threatening, then far less people will be foolish enough to risk such a blatant breaking of our laws. Having the military enforcing the border would provide all the foot soldiers, mobile armored infantry, helicopter deployed air infantry, and all the support anybody could ask for. This would also give these soldiers real life active training with a missions statement and actual experience in guarding against active attempts of infiltration. This would very probably produce better soldiers entering the ranks of our military forces as it would give some seasoned training for the newly trained soldiers while providing the country with extremely secure borders. This is the only duty tasked to the military in numerous countries and is the rule and not the exception which many try to make it out to be. All there is to add might be, try it, you might like it and it could not turn out to be any worse than the current mess that is border enforcement.

Beyond the Cusp

Blog at WordPress.com.