Wisconsin Recall Election

I have mixed feelings about Wisconsin's recall election.  I thought I'd try to enumerate some of them:

1.  I am very unhappy with Wisconsin's Republican administration's policies.  I believe that demonizing those workers who are doing work for the public good is extremely troubling.  They are often underpaid and under-appreciated when compared to comparable private sector workers of similar skills and education.  To decide to declare war on teachers, health workers, firemen and police seems at a minimum foolish and at most, criminal.  Take away rights from the people who take care of us?  That's wrong.

2.  I do not believe in recall elections in almost all cases.  The only case I believe it could be used is when the governor is a criminal (Blagojevich) and he needs to go.  I didn't like it when California kicked out it's elected governor and elected Arnold.  I think that if the people speak, the winner should get the term he/she is elected to.

3.  Let's be clear.  This recall didn't fail because Wisconsinites love their governor.  This recall falled because outside interests spent hundreds of millions of dollars.  This election was bought.

4.  Another thing.  This wasn't a referendum on Obama.  Exit polls still showed Obama with a substantial favorable rating even while Wisconsin was voting back their Republican governor.  Not that there won't be a couple of hundred million dollars spent there to change minds.

So to sum up.  I don't like what Wisconsin is doing.  I don't like recall elections.  I don't like big money in elections.

Not likable today.

Guns in America

It's getting worse.

Time was when there was a national discussion about how best to control guns in America.  There was an epidemic of gun violence.  A president was shot.  Gun crime was up.  Assault weapons were deemed unsuitable for normal citizens.  There was a national drive to reduce gun ownership, or at least have some control on who could get what.

That time is gone.  It is now political suicide to talk about any gun regulations - unless it is about reducing or eliminating them.  The Supreme Court has ignored decades of precedent and reinterpreted the 2nd Amendment to mean that ordinary citizens have a constitutional right to carry firearms.  49 states have made it legal to carry a concealed firearm (only Illinois is left and I don't think that'll last long).  You can now go into a National Park with your gun (not just for hunting, but for "protection").  Shooting ranges are becoming almost as common as Post Offices.  

To set the stage, my belief is that handguns and assault weapons are by their very nature, evil.  Their sole purpose is to kill another human.  They're not designed for hunting for food or for sport.  They're not designed for sport shooting (although there are target pistols).  They are designed to harm or kill another human being.  To me that is evil.  No good can come of such a device.  None.  Wars come from this device.  Violent crime.  Domestic violence.  Murder.  Accidental deaths.  "Guns don't kill people.  People kill people." is technically true.  And it is also true that violence and murder can be performed by other tools - baseball bat, rope, knife, fists.  But a baseball bat wasn't designed to kill people, nor was a rope, or your hands.  Some knives are, but knives are also good for cutting cold cuts and carrots and cake.  No, not even knives' sole purpose is killing.  Only handguns and assault weapons (and missiles and bombs and rpg's) are designed for that.

A common argument on the proliferation of gun ownership by ordinary people is that we need these to protect ourselves and our homes from the "criminals" who are already armed.  If we carry concealed weapons, that will make the criminal think twice about using their weapon on us.  The answer to too many guns on the street is to have more guns.  This is the domestic equivalent of the old Cold War strategy of Mutual Assured Destruction.  We have so many that they wouldn't dare attack us because they'd also get hurt.

Here's an analogy.  Suppose we were talking about the problem of insects in my house.  They are eating the wood and destroying my house.  Would my solution be to get more insects to combat those who are destroying my house?  OK, suppose those insects are just as dangerous?  Wouldn't I want to get rid of the insects instead of adding more insects?

I don't understand the argument that there are too many guns (and too much gun violence) so we have to get more guns.  If there are too many guns, we need to reduce the amount, not increase the amount.  And how is making it easier to buy guns reducing the amount of gun violence?  The way to reduce gun violence is to reduce the number of guns.  Fewer guns in society will reduce the amount of gun violence.

And the American society has gone way beyond the point where we have a firearm in the house to protect our property and loved ones.  There is a huge culture of guns-as-a-hobby here.  Guns.  Plural.  People who have a gun often have more than one.  More than two.  More than ten.  It has become another "man toy".  I know several people who have become "gun collectors", which isn't that they collect old or historic firearms. No, they collect as many modern handguns and assault weapons as they can get their hands on.  10.  20. 30.  With enough ammunition to battle the Zombie Apocalypse for the next 20 years.

Why?  Because it's "fun".  They can go to a shooting range and fire away.  Owning as many human kill devices as one can get one's hands on is perverse, obscene.  How many does one need?  This is not a sports car or a motorcycle or a boat or a snowmobile.  It's not basses or guitars or fishing poles.  This is a personal armament.  For destroying human life - it's sole purpose.

I went to Barnes and Noble the other day and was browsing through the magazine racks.  I was shocked at how many magazines were devoted to guns.  An entire section of very specific magazines.  Gun porn,  celebrating violence.  Only in America is violence deemed perfectly acceptable for the general public and sex is obscene.  Creating life or celebrating love, or even having pleasure is obscene.  Weapons of specific destruction and death is Rated G.  That is backwards, it is perverse, it is twisted.

I have no issue with hunting.  I watched the biathlon in the Winter Olympics with fascination.  The police should have guns - they're there to protect us, after all.  We need the military to be able to defend us.

But personal ownership and hoarding of multiple firearms is indefensible.  There will be no Zombie Apocalypse.  We live in a very stable, well-run society with law enforcement, courts, and a military to protect us.  Society is not collapsing, despite the doom and gloom and conspiracy theories abounding.  My 30 firearms won't protect anyone from a terrorist attack - not even me.  If I am carjacked on the streets and have my concealed weapon, they'll still get my car because they'll have already drawn their gun.

There is no NEED for personal ownership of handguns and assault weapons in American society.  And if we're owning them as toys, it's time to put them away and become an adult.  It's past time to limit handguns and assault weapons in America.  Our lives are at stake.