Saturday, September 26, 2009
18 September 2009
Lock and Load: Second Amendment Rights to the Constitution
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” (United States Constitution: Bill of Rights) This is probably the most quoted and misquoted line in the United State Constitution, second only to the First Amendment. These words are etched in stone on the headquarters of the National Rifle Association and in the hearts of the American people. The statement gives freedom but comes with restrictions. For example, guns are not allowed to be carried on federal or school property. In addition, one must have a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Virginia, or to carry at all in some states. There exists a laundry list of restrictions and requirements allowing and barring the average John Q. Public from possessing a firearm. However, because of the ambiguous nature of our country’s constitution and recent events such as the Columbine and Virginia Tech shootings, it stands to reason that the American public would clutch even more tightly to whatever will give them the right to defend themselves and their loved ones. Because of said nature, the Amendment allows for a much heated debate. It poses the question: are student’s constitutional rights being violated by banning the possession of firearms on campus if they feel the need for self-protection? To answer this question one would have to accept two very specific ideologies as fact; namely, that the Second Amendment does in fact give citizens the right to bear arms and that the right is subjected to limitation (i.e. only in the defense for the state or one’s self while engaged in any action that would be in direct assistance to the nation). For the sake of this discussion, both assumptions are accepted. Therefore, it is a direct violation of the Second Amendment to deny any person, student or otherwise, the right to have access to a firearm in the case where there is an apparent and legitimate threat to the security of a person’s life by way of oppression of the liberties guaranteed to them by the United States Constitution.
Regardless of whether one is in agreement or not with the private possession of firearms there is one aspect of this that is not open for debate. The Constitution does make some guarantees, and states specifically that the American people have the right to “keep and bear arms.” Thomas Jefferson may have deemed that “…all men are created equal” (Declaration of Independence) it does not mean that they were all born with the knowledge of how to use a firearm and the maturity to handle one. This is why there exist so many restrictions upon this particular civil right. The fact that the U.S. Constitution gives us the ability to defend ourselves is just one small aspect of what makes America a nation of freedom and opportunity. Rather it is the applicable times and places of the amendment that cause such discord among the public, not the motives of individuals or the individuals themselves.
The right of the state to be able to form a militia and defend itself is perhaps one of the greatest liberties that our Founding Fathers gave to us while crafting the Constitution of our government. It is one that sets us apart from almost every other nation on earth. Yet the awkward verbiage gives us the sword to defend ourselves while cutting the very hand that wields it. Often we find that some will take advantage of that murky wording to suit their own needs, or worse, to justify actions bred from fear and ignorance. Thus, the argument that a student should be allowed to carry a firearm on campus if he or she is in fear for his or her life is just one of the many questions this debate raises, yet there are additional issues that should be addressed before discussing the assumed violation of civil rights. Just what exactly is the student in fear of? Is it another student or is he afraid that his school and consequently his life will be over thrown by terrorists? Why hasn’t the school stepped in to intervene on behalf of this student? Frankly, unless the student is an active and on duty member of law enforcement, military police, or perhaps a Minuteman left over from the American Revolutionary War, there is absolutely no need for students to carry a weapon on campus and by allowing it, it is no longer fulfilling a civil right unless said student is defending himself against tyrannical opposition and oppression. Consenting to anything less is gratuitous, and by doing so, it cuts into the authority and validity with which officers of the law are bestowed based upon the United States Constitution, the states' Bill of Rights, and the consent of the people of our nation. Ironically, it is the government’s attempt to compromise on the original intent of the amendment written by the Founding Fathers that causes a row to begin with. However, by denying the student all accessibility to a weapon should the need arise the school would be in direct violation of the Constitution. Perhaps a better solution would be to keep in place the strict policies regarding carrying a weapon on one’s person and redefining the accessibility of a weapon to a citizen in a public or federal venue at times of crisis.
Each state called for a ratification of the Constitution, not surprisingly, resulting in the crafting of the Bill of Rights and giving us the oh-so-vague Second Amendment. Both Virginia and North Carolina asked, “that the people have the right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state."(The Right to Keep and Bear Arms) The Virginia Bill of rights goes on to say, “That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”( 42-Virginia Bill of Rights) One will notice that with each mention of the people’s right it is yoked to the necessity of a militia. There is no free standing clause or amendment stating that the people have the right to possess weapons merely for the sake of owning them.
The right that the Second Amendment gives citizens to keep and bear arms is part of the foundation that sets Americans apart from the rest of the world. Our Constitution not only gives us the right to defend ourselves, but the responsibility to pick up those arms in the face of tyranny and oppression; oppression of ourselves and of others and to overthrow it if need be. This constitutional amendment built a nation of people that possess a unique sense of justice, safety, and independence. It offers security in knowing that no matter where we are, be it work, home, or even school should the need arise we are able to rally and defend ourselves, not remain helpless in the face of oppression but be a nation of action against it.
Word Count: 1,328
Hatch, Orrin G. Senator. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Washington 1982. Retrieved 17 September 2009. http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm#42
Hatch, Orrin G. Senator. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Washington 1982. 42. Id. At 1030 Retrieved 17 September 2009. http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm#42
Untied States Constitution: Bill of Rights. September 17, 1787. Retrieved 17 September 2009. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/rights1.asp#2
Virginia Bill of Rights. June 12, 1776. Retrieved 17 September 2009. http://www.constitution.org/bor/vir_bor.htm
Jefferson, Thomas. Declaration of Independence. June 28, 1776. Retrieved 17 September 2009. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Any ways, here ya go:
Stupidity Should be Painful
After working with the public for several years I have come to three conclusions: First stupidity should be painful, second there needs to be an amendment to the constitution stating this, and thirdly, if it did in fact cause physical pain to one’s person then eventually people would stop being stupid. Though I am loathe to ask for yet another committee to be spear headed by our federal government, I feel that in this particular instance (mostly for the funding) that a committee of intellectuals and the like should come together so that there is some type of supervision over the actual implication of the Stupidity Should be Painful Program. Each person would go to a local testing facility and submit to various tests to check their level of stupidity. If found that they are only moderately stupid, i.e. prone to ridiculous or asinine behavior in small isolated instances then they can be monitored by remote access through one of the many Remote Viewing Centers that will be put in place. Monitored and equipped with a small device that must be worn on their person at all times, they would receive an electric shock when they engage in any behavior that the committee has deemed stupid. These Remote Viewing Centers would serve a dual purpose, acting as both a monitor and call center, giving a civilian the constitutional right to call in if they in fact witness a person committing a potential stupidity violation. At which time, a formal investigation would commence and if the person was indeed found guilty of being stupid, the penalty would be delivered quickly and harshly, after first making the person watch a dramatization of their violation so that they understand exactly why they are being punished.
If, however, a person was found to test positive for chronic stupidity, steps would be taken to reduce the impact that they would have on society and other non-stupid people in general. At this level of stupidity it would be fairly safe to assume that they would need almost constant supervision such as, a personal Stupidity Monitor. Someone who would follow them around so that when an act of stupidity is occurring the Monitor would simply hit them with the approved punishment device (possibly a cane or a 2x4) thusly creating the desired Pavlovian response. Furthermore, their driving licenses would be revoked (as this seems to be the time when most people become stupid), their license to breed would be suspended, they would be required/forced to attend weekly re-education camps and counseling, and their family and loved ones would be given access to pamphlets on coping with a chronically stupid person as well as the choice to meet with a weekly support group. It is my belief that if these steps were to be taken, we might one day live in a world where bad driving, reality TV. , and Scientology were things of the past, and stupidity, which is already painful for everyone else, will finally start affecting the people that it should.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Now I've never had a web cam before, and I was seriously tempted to get online and get up to no good, but my responisable and mauture nature kept me from doing any thing rash, (honestly, who am i kidding, I have shit connection out here and the view my web cam feature on yahoo wouldnt connect. Probably a good thing) I was feeling perticulary fiesty that day, as well as super hot and for some reason really skinny so I started playing in front of the web cam and snapping pictures. All I needed was Right Said Fred belting in the back ground and my narcissism knows no bounds. So I took this pic of me leaning over the computer while I was reading something I had pulled up on google. I was wearing a tank top and my pajama shorts, no make up and because I have side bangs, my hair was covering one of my eyes...apparently very Jessica Rabbit. Um...it was apparently a hot pic. I thought I looked sexy and confident, (which I am) and I was pretty sure the picture was sexy, scandalous even, but nothing more. I was wearing a tank top for christ's sake. In essence I loved the pic and wanted everyone to see it. So naturally I posted it on my Facebook.
My bff emailed me the next morning, telling me the pic was skanky, and since I'm not, perhaps I should considered taking it down. I disagreed, as I am want to do when someone is telling me something of importance, and went about my business. However, becasue she is the bff and I value her opinion so much, I did think about it. So I polled the audiance. Results were mixed. The other bff loved the pic as well as most of the younger girls at work, however the older women, didn't really care for it. Interesting. I decided to take it a step further. I posted it as my profile picture on yahoo and then hit the chat rooms. The results were shocking.
I have never in my life been propestioned for cheap meaningless sex with so many people! I was like hell yes. But of course I wouldn't actualy do it. As the bff stated above, I'm not a skank. However, i kept a little mental note of the conversations and I noticed a distant theme emmentating from them. All the men wanted to know how old I was, (ahh i did look REALLY young in the pic..I don't know what that was about) what I was looking for and when I told them (nothing) they would either complement me prfousley or get mad at me. One man even went so far as to call me the C word. Ahhh starts with a c....ends with unt. Sounds like Cunt. And then threatened to have me booted from the room and if I came back in under that screen name he would peremently delete my screen name...Now I wouldnt normaly do this...well yes I would, but this guy was an asshole and the blatent...stupidity needs to be shared and mocked. So yes...I'm going to post the conversation:
Btw...im indecorousbilletdoux, I changed his name to proctect...well honestly to protect the stupid. And notice how there was no hi, hello how are you.
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:33:42 PM): F'burg huh......u single and lookin?
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:34:15 PM): i'm single..i'm not looking
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:34:33 PM): your in a ROMANCE themed LOCAL chat room and your not looking? hmm
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:34:47 PM): well i'm prob not looking for the same thing u are
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:34:58 PM): so your assuming? lol
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:35:59 PM): like you said..its yahoo...yeah i'm assuming
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:36:45 PM): well then you are acknowledging that you basically know what the rooms are about so why be here? lol
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:37:23 PM): i have my reasons
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:37:48 PM): well there's only a few reason you could be here and I think you've done established its none of them so.
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:38:10 PM): what are the "few reasons"
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:38:26 PM): well most people here are either lookin for something fun or something serious.....
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:38:43 PM): oh...some people are looking for something serious..i've not met any of those people
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:38:50 PM): just the "something fun"
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:39:07 PM): well I think you should have fun before you get serious......it works that way, the other way around is kinda awkward
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:39:31 PM): I don't see nothing wrong with having that kind of fun as long as you want to have it with one person and work towards having something serious with them
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:39:45 PM): really.....thats like putting the cart before the horse
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:39:49 PM): but good luck with that
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:40:33 PM): well I'm not gettin into a relationship before I have fun, that's retarded
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:41:24 PM): yeah yeah your right...lets not get to the know the other person at all before jumping into a relationship because sex is what you base a foundation on for a lasting commenment
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:41:36 PM): commintment
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:41:40 PM): ehh which ever
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:42:20 PM): that's not retarded at all
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:42:42 PM): and I'm not calling some girl my girlfriend I just met and then having sex.....
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:43:12 PM): its called dating...and while your doing that you get to know one another
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:43:18 PM): *insert shock and awe here*
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:43:43 PM): well that makes sense......just like doing things a bit differently.....doesn't mean its wrong, I don't like stuck up girls anyhow
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:43:55 PM): r u saying i'm stuck up?
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:44:27 PM): I just catch that vibe.....like your too goody goody to just have some fun without thinking you've been used or somebody is just up to fuck and run
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:44:54 PM): so your saying by me choosing to not have a random cheap and meaningless sexual encounter with you i'm stuck up?
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:45:38 PM): its only random if its one time......but you keep callin it that
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:46:25 PM): i notice how u didnt focus on the cheap and meaningless part
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:46:27 PM): nice touch
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:47:17 PM): well I've been with girls where i had sex with them the first time I met them and we was together for 3 years.....I've done the whole wait a couple months and then it happens and your only together 3 months or so.......so how long you wait doesn't mean jack shit
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:47:46 PM): but its like this.....stay the hell out of rooms where you know damn well what most are about if your not about it......that's what this is really all about
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:47:55 PM): omg seriously
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:48:08 PM): I'm not the one in the WRONG place
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:48:10 PM): lmao
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:48:11 PM): this is great
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:48:14 PM): I'm a realist......I know what these rooms are about
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:48:22 PM): its about to get even more when your booted here in a few
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:48:31 PM): i told u i had various reasons for being here
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:48:39 PM): i'm not bothering u and u Pmed me
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:48:44 PM): oh well
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:48:45 PM): your just butt hurt bc i dont want to fuck u
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:48:53 PM): I never asked you to fuck m
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:48:57 PM): so don't flatter yourself cunt
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:49:00 PM): oooo
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:49:04 PM): u really put me in my place
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:49:06 PM): never came close
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:49:09 PM): just said your not here for the right reasons
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:49:13 PM): I do most
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:49:13 PM): "right"
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:49:24 PM): like u decided what right and wrong is
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:49:33 PM): dumb shit
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:49:35 PM): have fun
indecorousbilletdoux (9/4/2009 11:49:38 PM): and leave me the hell alone
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:49:51 PM): look you can keep coming back with all you want, here in about 10 minutes if your not out of here you can and will be booted, you don't like it oh well
xxxx (9/4/2009 11:50:02 PM): and if you comeback at that time then your name is gettin taken....u fuckin try me
At this point i went to the room and had a jerry springer like encounter with him. The point of the story is this...perception is everything and arguing in a chat room is like being in the special olympics, win or loose, your still retarded.
Oh. And I took the picture down.