Unvalued Vivaciousness
I'm Katrina.
Some basic stuff about me: I'm from Texas, but my Dad is from El Salvador. Despite this I do not speak a lick of Spanish, though I can German fairly well. I also English well too, please note the lovely vocabulary that is my blog title. I attend a University and study Geology. Rocks are my passion, unlike fashion.
Warning: I do post ponies. Why? Because it's a good show. You should watch an episode, it's surprisingly good.
My blog is not typically saturated from them, but it's definitely one of the regular things I post.
There's a lot of Scenery, Geology, Animals, Pokemon and whatever I find humorous or interesting on this blog. Essentially, I re-blog anything I like, as this is my personal blog you see.
http://news.yahoo.com/santorum-says-doesnt-believe-separation-church-state-164307440.html
Have you guys seen this? Anyone who has learned ANYTHING about American History knows that this is just wrong, plain wrong. How on Earth is this guy still able to run?
Wasn’t the whole point of America being founded was to find religious freedom?
And besides, hasn’t anyone learned anything from religious leaders? Not to mention how many denominations of the bible there are, the interpretations, easily skewed and can be seen so many ways. Not one view can be seen as correct, or absolute. When it comes down to it, the Government just cannot be run on beliefs, rather on facts, and universal morals that the country as a whole can agree on.
It is the Government’s duty to insure equality, and to protect citizen’s rights to believe what they want to believe and not receive any form of discrimination.
Aren’t we supposed to be moving forward towards a greater step in equality and rights? Haven’t we moved passed the era were the government imposes their ideals of religion?
In this coming campaign I can say without a doubt Obama holds my next vote. Sure, at heart I’m not a democrat, but he does stand for independent rights. From what I can see, quite a few other candidates don’t seem to comprehend the importance of individual freedoms.
Homosexuals across the nation have been continually discriminated against. Several of them being judged for simply who they are. No one can help their sexual orientation after all. Obama has actually made steps towards there rights, first by repealing “Don’s Ask, Don’t Tell” and declaring the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.
I don’t know about you, but from what I can see Obama has his head on straight. Not to mention the pro woman’s rights movement he has going, signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. You know, the act that allows woman to be paid the same amount as their male counterparts. I know that it may seem that we’ve moved past the sexist era, but that’s just it, we apparently haven’t, but at least Obama is pushing through.
Another great thing I’ve noted about Obama is his spread of Contraceptive aid across the nation. By aiding woman he allows them the freedom to govern their own body. Taking a stance against contraceptives is definitely short-sighted, given the increase in global population, the last thing we want to do is help substantially increase it.
And that’s another thing, our air, the air we breath, each year is depleting in quality. One of the main factors? That’s right, fossil fuels. We’re dependent on them, and as we all know, they won’t last forever. Obama is actually striving towards the replacement of fossil fuels for a healthier world tomorrow.
Not everyone is perfect, but from what I can see Obama seems to be the best choice for the job. At the very least, this man fights for individual rights, and that’s doing something right.
I mean, it’s not a big deal or anything, he’s just actually moving forward and giving citizens more freedoms.
I can’t find the text of H.R. 35 anywhere, however I did find some thoughts on the bill that almost passed, just last year I believe. If I’m correct, it’s the same one. The bill from last year was only postponed.
First off, the proposed bill is not a free for all gun charade where anyone can bring a gun onto a school campus. You have to be certified, with a Concealed Handgun License. In Texas, these licenses are very strict. Background checks, mental evaluations, fingerprinting, training, and what have you. The people who will be allowed to carry guns on campus will be of sound mind and well trained.
I’ve noticed a lot of propaganda around the bill, and I think that needs to be cleared up. Not any idiot is allowed to bring a gun onto campus, that would scare the shit out of me too. You’re also not to know if the guy or girl sitting next to you is holding a gun. That’s part of the license, if you’re showing it off, you get your license revoked. Period.
It’s not for showboating, it’s for protection only. Of course, there will be registration with the school, the school will need to be aware who is licensed, who is carrying a gun, all that. Once again, this is not some sort of mindless gun fest.
One thing I noticed about this article is a law enforcer states at the end, that in the heat of the moment, one person having their gun drawn out in defense can create confusion. The training for a concealed carry covers this problem with proper responses to such scenarios. They cover every inch of detail, after all, this is the purpose of concealed carry. License holders will know what to do in this situation and what the proper response is.
For instance, because it’s pretty common sense… If the law enforcement arrives, and you have your gun drawn, lay it on the ground. Tah-dah.
And finally, I noticed a lot of people stating the logic behind “22 years ago there were only this many shootings, and the shootings after the gun free zone law, more shootings happened” doesn’t make sense.
Let me clear it up for you. One, we glorify school shootings, they’re pasted all over the media, we know the shooters names and they literally become famous. That’s a huge cause right there, and the main one in my opinion. Two, and I’ve stated this before; Gun Free Zones are not magic.
The world is not this perfect place where everyone just abides by these rules, otherwise we wouldn’t be having this gun issue at all. Creating a Gun Free Zone, only makes respectable citizens gun free. If a bunch of criminals decided to rob a bank, do you think they’ll just leave their guns outside because of that Gun Free Zone sign pasted on the door? Do you really think that’s going to deter them? The only people it prevents from carrying guns are the people who were going to be law-abiding to begin with.
The logic that Perry (I hate this man, he’s an idiot) was using is that schools being gun free only prevent law-abiding students seeking to defend themselves from carrying a gun on campus. To that shooter, all it means is that no one on campus is carrying a gun. Gun Free Zones makes it easier for crazed shooters to pick off students, they become fish in a barrel. Maybe with Concealed Carry aloud on campus, a shooter can be stopped in his tracks : http://www.examiner.com/article/media-blackout-oregon-mall-shooter-was-stopped-by-an-armed-citizen Instead of just waiting for them to finish what they came for.
Did Gun Free Zones cause a rise in school shootings? Honestly? I don’t think it is the cause, my blame rests with the media and how they uphold the shooter in dramatic light for weeks on end. However, I do think allowing concealed carry on campus can really bust protection on campuses.
Why gun control does more harm than good: http://www.dailycaller.com/2012/12/17/why-im-against-gun-control/
There are two sides to every debate, and I’ve had my fill of both views. I’ve argued both sides, you know which ones are more right when one side is monumentally easier to argue for.
The GOP logic: all threats must be dealt with after they happen.
OMG. YES. This is exactly what I’ve been trying to express to those conservatives on FB.
This is the argument I am perpetually having with pro-gun people.
All right, this point is obviously not being explained properly.
Guns are intended for two main legal uses; self defense and hunting. These uses don’t harm society. Thievery does.
All right, so let’s make guns illegal. Now the only people who are going to own guns are the people who own them illegally. More than likely, they aren’t using these weapons for self defense, but for offensive measures… killing people, running black markets, robbing, ect. When you make guns illegal, the only people this removes guns from are the responsible citizens. That’s the issue here.
How do we know this doesn’t work? Look at Chicago. A city that has extremely strict gun regulations, gun crimes should be declining right? Well, it’s not. It’s one of the most gun crime ridden cities in America. Basically all that’s happened is criminals own guns, while law abiding citizens don’t. It makes domestic crimes easier.
Look at Houston. Same exact stats as Chicago minus the gun control. (Around the same population, same income, similar ethnicities, same education opportunities). Gun crime is actually lower than Chicago.
So, how do we lower gun crime? Well, it’s certainly not by banning guns. To an extent, they act as a deterrent. Put yourself in the shoes of a criminal, would you rather rob the neighbor with a gun, or without one? The choice is fairly obvious.
In either case, guns are not the problem. Guns don’t cause violence or crimes, they’re not causing the behavior or actions. No, that issue lies with mental health, and strongly correlate to poverty levels and education. Want to lower gun crime? Invest in the struggling populous. Invest in education. Health care. Employment opportunities. Lets actually solve the problem, not just treat a symptom. That fixes nothing.
