Why am I blue?
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) wants to ban “5.56mm constituent projectiles of SS109 and M855 cartridges." This type of ammunition is commonly used by hunters and target shooters. The ATF says that they want to ban this type of ammo because it has armor-piercing capabilities.
I do not think that the ATF has the right to ban this ammunition. One of the main reasons we have the 2nd amendment is to prevent government tyranny of the people. How are the people suppose to defend themselves when you take away the ammo necessary for the defense of our rights?
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Wednesday, February 11, 2015
Critical Summit over the fate of Ukraine
What's this button do?
Today, the leaders of France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine met in Minsk, Belarus to talk about the future of Ukraine. According to an unnamed source, the four leaders will be signing several documents, including a declaration of Ukrainian independence and sovereignty and an agreement affirming the leaders' commitment to the peace plan that was drawn up in September. Here is what each side would like to see at the summit: Russia wants legal rights for Russian speaking Ukrainians, full autonomy for rebel held regions, withdraw of government troops from the war zone, and no return of Crimea to Ukraine; Ukraine wants control over rebel held regions, withdrawal of Russian troops, a secure border, and full prisoner exchange; Pro-Russian rebels want independence; The EU and US wants democracy, withdrawal of Russian troops, and a demilitarized border in Eastern Ukraine along with Ukrainian territorial integrity. President Obama also has said that if diplomacy fails, he may begin sending arms to Ukraine.
I hope some real good comes out of this summit. All sides have reasonable demands so diplomacy and compromise may be easier. What I personally would like to see most closely resembles Russia's demands. I think that the rebel held regions should have greater autonomy because from what I've read, most people in the region want that.
Today, the leaders of France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine met in Minsk, Belarus to talk about the future of Ukraine. According to an unnamed source, the four leaders will be signing several documents, including a declaration of Ukrainian independence and sovereignty and an agreement affirming the leaders' commitment to the peace plan that was drawn up in September. Here is what each side would like to see at the summit: Russia wants legal rights for Russian speaking Ukrainians, full autonomy for rebel held regions, withdraw of government troops from the war zone, and no return of Crimea to Ukraine; Ukraine wants control over rebel held regions, withdrawal of Russian troops, a secure border, and full prisoner exchange; Pro-Russian rebels want independence; The EU and US wants democracy, withdrawal of Russian troops, and a demilitarized border in Eastern Ukraine along with Ukrainian territorial integrity. President Obama also has said that if diplomacy fails, he may begin sending arms to Ukraine.
I hope some real good comes out of this summit. All sides have reasonable demands so diplomacy and compromise may be easier. What I personally would like to see most closely resembles Russia's demands. I think that the rebel held regions should have greater autonomy because from what I've read, most people in the region want that.
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
US wants to arm Ukraine to fight Russia
BBC World News
Secretary of Defense nominee Ashton Carter announced that he would want to send weapons and other "lethal aid" to Ukraine in order to counter Russian aggression in the Donetsk region of Eastern Ukraine. President Obama has also stated that he is considering sending lethal aid to the Ukrainians and later the President will make the final decision regarding these weapons. It is also reported that the White House fears that sending weapons to Ukraine could further escalate the crisis.
I hate our foreign policy. We intervene in conflicts that have nothing to do with the nation and do not threaten us in anyway. Ukraine is not a U.S. ally and therefore should not be any of our concern, let Ukraine's allies and Ukraine take care of Ukraine, it is none of our concern. If we do end up sending weapons to Ukraine, which we most likely will, it will only further escalate this crisis. Once Russia sees that their rebels are losing, they will most likely up their support and maybe even send in ground forces, thus turning this relatively small conflict into a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia. With both sides increasing aid to their faction, the war will undoubtedly escalate more and may even turn into a full fledged war between NATO and Russia, a very scary, Cold War like scenario. All of this is just hypothetical of course. Nonetheless, hopefully the U.S. will make the right decision and not intervene, but knowing how we react to these things, we'll make the wrong one.
Secretary of Defense nominee Ashton Carter announced that he would want to send weapons and other "lethal aid" to Ukraine in order to counter Russian aggression in the Donetsk region of Eastern Ukraine. President Obama has also stated that he is considering sending lethal aid to the Ukrainians and later the President will make the final decision regarding these weapons. It is also reported that the White House fears that sending weapons to Ukraine could further escalate the crisis.
I hate our foreign policy. We intervene in conflicts that have nothing to do with the nation and do not threaten us in anyway. Ukraine is not a U.S. ally and therefore should not be any of our concern, let Ukraine's allies and Ukraine take care of Ukraine, it is none of our concern. If we do end up sending weapons to Ukraine, which we most likely will, it will only further escalate this crisis. Once Russia sees that their rebels are losing, they will most likely up their support and maybe even send in ground forces, thus turning this relatively small conflict into a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia. With both sides increasing aid to their faction, the war will undoubtedly escalate more and may even turn into a full fledged war between NATO and Russia, a very scary, Cold War like scenario. All of this is just hypothetical of course. Nonetheless, hopefully the U.S. will make the right decision and not intervene, but knowing how we react to these things, we'll make the wrong one.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Courts to Review Lethal Injection
Don't click this
Last week, the Supreme Court announced that it will review the use of lethal injections for executions. This was brought to the attention of the Court by four Death Row inmates, one of which has since been executed. The irony in his execution is that he was executed using the very same drugs he and his fellow inmates were challenging before the Supreme Court. His death was also reported as being excruciating, even saying that his body "felt like it was on fire" and that the injections "felt like acid." Until the case is heard, though, executions by lethal injection will be halted.
Overall, I think it's a good thing that the Supreme Court is reviewing the inmates' case because no one, no matter how evil they seem, should have to suffer that much before they die. With that said, I think that we should abolish the death penalty all together. Sure most criminals on death row seem to be the spawn of Satan, but how is killing them going to solve anything and how is killing them even constitutional? Shouldn't everyone have the right to life and isn't death considered a "cruel or unusual punishment"? If we are going to have capital punishment, we might as well give the inmate a choice which method they want to be executed whether it be firing squad, electric chair, hanging, lethal injection, or the classic bullet to the head.
Last week, the Supreme Court announced that it will review the use of lethal injections for executions. This was brought to the attention of the Court by four Death Row inmates, one of which has since been executed. The irony in his execution is that he was executed using the very same drugs he and his fellow inmates were challenging before the Supreme Court. His death was also reported as being excruciating, even saying that his body "felt like it was on fire" and that the injections "felt like acid." Until the case is heard, though, executions by lethal injection will be halted.
Overall, I think it's a good thing that the Supreme Court is reviewing the inmates' case because no one, no matter how evil they seem, should have to suffer that much before they die. With that said, I think that we should abolish the death penalty all together. Sure most criminals on death row seem to be the spawn of Satan, but how is killing them going to solve anything and how is killing them even constitutional? Shouldn't everyone have the right to life and isn't death considered a "cruel or unusual punishment"? If we are going to have capital punishment, we might as well give the inmate a choice which method they want to be executed whether it be firing squad, electric chair, hanging, lethal injection, or the classic bullet to the head.
Thursday, January 22, 2015
Obama wants authorization to make war with ISIS
Link
In President Obama's State of the Union Address on Tuesday, he stated that he wanted authorization to combat ISIS but sources say that he is unlikely to send any language to Congress to get full approval to do so. Many Congressmen are saying that him not sending language to Congress is a sign that his administration just does not know what their strategy is and how they will combat the militants. What will happen if Obama gets authorization from Congress to combat ISIS? What will it look like? Well, judging from the fact that in just the five months we have been bombing them we have spent more than a billion dollars, done more than 1,700 airstrikes, and sent more than 2,000 U.S. troops to Iraq, it will probably look a lot like the situation in Afghanistan a year or two ago, resulting in the deaths of thousands of U.S. servicemen and thousands of Iraqi civilians, not to mention economic devastation for Iraq.
I think the way that the U.S. is handling the ISIS threat is reckless and unnecessary. If we want to create a permanent peace in the Middle East, we should not invade Iraq or any other Middle Eastern nation for that matter. When we invade any nation, it results in thousands of civilian deaths. When these innocent civilians die, it just creates more anti-American sentiment and thus more people are likely to join the ISIS cause to combat what they see as violent occupying force. If a foreign power invaded the United States to combat a few thousand terrorists, killing thousands of innocent Americans in the process, would you not be outraged? Would you not be tempted to join the terrorists to try and defend your families and friends? It's the same situation in the Middle East right now, except we are the invading force. The point is, invasion and increased troops numbers in Iraq is not the solution to achieve peace. If we want peace, we need to try something else.
In President Obama's State of the Union Address on Tuesday, he stated that he wanted authorization to combat ISIS but sources say that he is unlikely to send any language to Congress to get full approval to do so. Many Congressmen are saying that him not sending language to Congress is a sign that his administration just does not know what their strategy is and how they will combat the militants. What will happen if Obama gets authorization from Congress to combat ISIS? What will it look like? Well, judging from the fact that in just the five months we have been bombing them we have spent more than a billion dollars, done more than 1,700 airstrikes, and sent more than 2,000 U.S. troops to Iraq, it will probably look a lot like the situation in Afghanistan a year or two ago, resulting in the deaths of thousands of U.S. servicemen and thousands of Iraqi civilians, not to mention economic devastation for Iraq.
I think the way that the U.S. is handling the ISIS threat is reckless and unnecessary. If we want to create a permanent peace in the Middle East, we should not invade Iraq or any other Middle Eastern nation for that matter. When we invade any nation, it results in thousands of civilian deaths. When these innocent civilians die, it just creates more anti-American sentiment and thus more people are likely to join the ISIS cause to combat what they see as violent occupying force. If a foreign power invaded the United States to combat a few thousand terrorists, killing thousands of innocent Americans in the process, would you not be outraged? Would you not be tempted to join the terrorists to try and defend your families and friends? It's the same situation in the Middle East right now, except we are the invading force. The point is, invasion and increased troops numbers in Iraq is not the solution to achieve peace. If we want peace, we need to try something else.
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
Cheney says torture report is "full of crap"
Link
Recently, Dick Cheney has gone public about his true feelings on the newly released "torture report." Earlier this week, Senate Democrats have published a report about the "enhanced" interrogations that were authorized during the Bush administration. Apparently, Cheney does not agree with the Democrats' findings, calling it "full of crap." Cheney states that the Democrats did not interview any CIA officials that were in office at the time and that the program was designed "to catch the bastards" and "that's exactly what they did."
Personally, I have mixed feelings about the whole report and enhanced interrogation. On one hand, it could be a useful tool for extracting information that could potentially save lives but on the other hand, it's morally wrong. So we face a dilemma. Should we follow our moral compasses and do the right thing, or should we do whatever is necessary to protect the country and its people?
Recently, Dick Cheney has gone public about his true feelings on the newly released "torture report." Earlier this week, Senate Democrats have published a report about the "enhanced" interrogations that were authorized during the Bush administration. Apparently, Cheney does not agree with the Democrats' findings, calling it "full of crap." Cheney states that the Democrats did not interview any CIA officials that were in office at the time and that the program was designed "to catch the bastards" and "that's exactly what they did."
Personally, I have mixed feelings about the whole report and enhanced interrogation. On one hand, it could be a useful tool for extracting information that could potentially save lives but on the other hand, it's morally wrong. So we face a dilemma. Should we follow our moral compasses and do the right thing, or should we do whatever is necessary to protect the country and its people?
"Torture is an impermissible evil. Except under two circumstances. The first is the ticking time bomb. An innocent's life is at stake. The bad guy you have captured possesses information that could save this life. He refuses to divulge. In such a case, the choice is easy."~Charles Krauthammer
Wednesday, December 3, 2014
Canadian Family Attempts to Resurrect Husband.....For Six Months.....
Link
Recently, a Canadian family held onto the head of the family for six months and prayed for his resurrection daily. The only way authorities found the dead 52 year old man was after police came to the house to evict them for not making house payments. To prevent the smell from alerting neighbors, the family sealed the house. The deceased husband was a very religious man and his wife even more so. She was given a suspended sentence and told to go to counselling.
Well.... this story definitely got my attention. I get that losing a loved one is a very hard thing to go though, but I didn't think it would drive people to try and resurrect them six months after death. I mean, how would you even put up with a decomposing body in the place where you live? Why would you even want to resurrect a 6 month old zombie-like corpse?
Recently, a Canadian family held onto the head of the family for six months and prayed for his resurrection daily. The only way authorities found the dead 52 year old man was after police came to the house to evict them for not making house payments. To prevent the smell from alerting neighbors, the family sealed the house. The deceased husband was a very religious man and his wife even more so. She was given a suspended sentence and told to go to counselling.
Well.... this story definitely got my attention. I get that losing a loved one is a very hard thing to go though, but I didn't think it would drive people to try and resurrect them six months after death. I mean, how would you even put up with a decomposing body in the place where you live? Why would you even want to resurrect a 6 month old zombie-like corpse?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)