The Right to Bear Arms - part 2

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the 2^nd amendment, the right to bear arms and my concern for mass or spree shootings. Buying and possessing guns is relatively easy in Texas, which puts us in danger of violent gun crimes. I do not wish to take away our right to bear arms, because that is simply unrealistic in a country like the USA where the possession of guns is socially acceptable and part of the culture. I do believe in stricter gun policies, here are some measures I believe could prevent violent gun crimes:

1.       Requirement of mental evaluation from a psychiatrist.

This would prevent mentally ill people from buying guns. From our past experiences we know that a large number of mass shootings were committed by people with either a history of mental illness or at least symptoms of them. The requirement of this document alone can prevent potential killers to even try to obtain weapons.

2.       Restriction of semi-automatic guns.

I believe that semi-automatic guns should not be available to the public. There is no real necessity of possessing these guns, especially if you do not have the appropriate training and self control to have one.  These weapons are dangerous and should only be used by officials in extraordinary situations.

3.       End of online sale of guns.

Online sales of guns should be prohibited, there is no real way to know who is behind a computer screen. Someone with a criminal or mental record could purchase guns through an online source by using someone else’s information (friends, family members).

4.       Implementation of a safety course.

I believe that to purchase a gun there should be a mandatory course and interview of at least 10 hrs to explain security measures that should be taken to ensure the responsible use and possession of guns. No one should be able to just go into a store and leave with a gun right away. This process needs to be supervised and the intentions of the buyers should to be clear to officials.

Commentary on the Sonogram Law

This is a commentary I made on the work of my classmate Gypsy King about the Sonogram law which was passed in February 2012. 

           I am in complete agreement with Ms. King. I find it outrageous that the government feels the need to put women through such a painful and traumatic process because of a decision about her body and life. We cannot assume that most women who have abortions took that decision lightly. Having a child is a big responsibility and it is up to the woman to decide if she is ready or not. I do recognize that there are many irresponsible women using abortion as a sort of birth control, but this does not mean we should punish and degrade all women because of it. There are multiple reasons why a woman chooses to have an abortion, but that is her choice, and she should not be punished for it in any way. Abortions already have great emotional impact on a woman, there is no reason to make it even worst. The government should not have allowed this to pass, to me this should be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

The Right to Bear Arms

    Over the last 30 years, our country has had a very sad, and frightening issue to be concerned about: Mass shootings, and spree killings. There has been 62 incidents since 1982, and they have become alarmingly more frequent. The mass shooting in Connecticut in December of last year shocked and devastated our Nation... for the 62nd time. Why have we allowed this to go on for so long? As humans, I think it is natural to avoid thinking about this matter, simply because it is so difficult to comprehend how and why this happens. So although these events are not forgotten, no action seems to be taken to resolve it.

     Out of these 62 killers, 49 of them obtained their weapons legally. This number really scares me because Texas is a state where anyone can purchase and carry a gun. All a person needs is a state issued identification card and they are legally allowed to possess weapons that could potentially take many innocent lives. How are we supposed to protect our people, and especially our children if we don't come up with a screening process to make sure the people that are buying these guns are psychologically and mentally eligible to do so.

    I am not against the 2nd amendment, which declares the right to bear arms, but in 1793 people weren't concerned with mass shootings or spree killings. In today's society this is a major concern, there needs to be better control of who these guns are going to and what their purpose is. If we want to stop these mass murders the first thing we need to do is stop selling weapons to the mentally ill.


.

The Age of Self-Interested Enlightment

          This week I stumbled upon an article in the Texas Blog: Letters from Texas. This article discusses the stance of conservative politicians on gay rights. Most republicans are completely against gay-marriage, unless they have someone related to them that is homosexual. For example Dick Cheney has no problem with gay rights, but only because his own daughter is homosexual. Now Republican Senator Rob Portman has changed his view on same-sex marriage after his son come out publicly as a gay man.

            This article further discusses that many conservatives only favor ideas that favors them, or people close to them. The article claims that the acts of these politicians should not be seen as courageous since these decisions were made solely on personal benefit, and not for the better well-being and justice of the people. Government representatives should be more inclined to understand the reality of its population, and not make decisions based on personal life experience, since the majority of people cannot live in the same way due to educational, economic and social differences.

            I personally agree with this article. I think government representatives should make a better effort to put themselves in the shoes of someone who relies on the government for basic needs. Their policies and ideas should be intended for the better being of all citizens, not just the ones close to them. There are many social issues that these representatives don’t personally have to worry about, for example lack of health insurance, public transportation, or efficient education. It is time for the government to think about everyone’s well-being.

Editorial: European and US trade relations

  The Editorial that I found on the Dallas Morning News stuck out to me right away. President Obama announced in his State of the Union address that he plans to create a trade treaty with the countries in the European Union. This was a bit of a surprise due to the fact that the President Obama has not focused on foreign trade during his last term.

    A trade relationship with Europe would benefit both the US and Europe. The writer explains that if our trading relationship expanded it would result in lower tariffs and duties for American and Texan companies. This idea of trading with Europe is still premature, if the US decided to go through with it, there would be extensive negotiation, especially on labor laws and environmental standards, which are more lenient here.

   The writer compares President Obama to presidents that have taken actions that surprised and defied what the people believed to be in the country’s best interest. For example Reagan’s relationship with communist Gorbachev during the Cold War and Nixon’s relationship with China. This could potentially be Obama’s legacy.

    I think overall the author did a good job in reviewing this idea, he provided information of what the concept is, the benefits of it and brought up some issues that will need to be resolved if this plan moves forward. I appreciated his reference to past presidents and the correlation between their foreign relationships to this current one.

The End of Big Brown

   The Big Brown power plant in East Texas is one of the nation's oldest and dirtiest. It has been operating since the 1970s, but has failed to keep up with new, green technology. Coal combustion produces mercury and other pollutants that endangers the lives and health of inhabitants of surrounding areas. Mercury is known for having effects as severe as brain damage, not to mention the contribution to climate change and ozone.

  The Sierra Club, an environmental organization responsible for the actions taken against this power plant has categorized it as a top priority case. The group has added mailings, phone calls, door-to-door advocacy, and other means to alert residents and policy makers of Dallas, the company's biggest client, about the risks. Luminant, the company responsible for this, and several other mercury emitting power plants, accounts for up to 2% of Dallas' ozone. The company has fired back, claiming they have already spent $270 million on environmental controls, and plan to spend $500 million more from 2013 to 2017. Environmentalist worry that this is not enough, and that the company does not have the means to do what it is promising. Cleaning technology is available, in this case a sulfur-dioxide scrubber is the solution, simple but expensive.

   Environmentalists agree that they cant shut down Big Brown overnight, the plant is accountable for 8% of Texas' energy. The goal is to replace it with renewable energy sources like wind and solar power over the next five years. Natural gas is also a competitor, with low prices and less harmful effects on the environment. Is this realistic? Probably not, but efforts like this from the Sierra Club are necessary to make sure companies are following environmental regulations. It is important that the people know where their energy is coming from and that they are conscious this could be harming future generations.