Social Security, I have seen and been told by various
individuals and news sources, is completely “Off the table.” Similarly, I have
been informed repeatedly that Social Security does not have anything whatsoever
to do with the deficit. Presumably not everyone agrees with this as it seems
Obama may (or may not ) have agreed to cuts in that program during his
negotiations with Republicans. Progressives are outraged over this possibility,
and for good reason. I have no idea if Obama is indeed going to agree to cuts
in Social Security or not (I sincerely hope he is not). In any case why is it
so difficult to know whether it adds to the deficit or not, or whether or not
it is off the table. This would seem to me to be a pretty straightforward
question. I personally believe those who say it has nothing to do with the
deficit, but I’m not so sure about whether it is off the table or not. It is
apparently not for Republicans who keep worrying over it like a dog with a bone
that has been buried several times and has been devoid of sustenance for years,
they just somehow keep hoping they will get somewhere with their persistent
attempt to destroy it, as they have been trying to do ever since FDR managed to
create it so many years ago. Social Security is the greatest government program
ever enacted, it has been unbelievably successful, and ought to be expanded.
I fear we are going to have the same situation with the
issue of gun control, no matter what Obama might accomplish, there will be
those (mostly Republicans, of course) that will never give up in their attempts
to arm ever man, woman, and child in America. Even now there are those like
Governor Perry of Texas who argues that teachers should be armed, and he is not
alone in this completely demented idea (don’t forget Congressman Louie from
Texas and many others). How anyone in their right mind (which, unfortunately, I
guess eliminates most of these gun nuts) could possibly believe the solution to
gun violence is to add more guns is a complete mystery to me. But if that is
what they want I suggest they should not stop with merely arming teachers, they
should arm the children as well. I suggest that every child entering school for
the first grade should receive, along with their other school supplies, a
handgun of their choice. You know, either a revolver or a semi-automatic
pistol, maybe pink or lavender (they actually produce guns of these colors
these days, presumably for ladies) that will fit easily into their childish
hands. I have no doubt this idea will absolutely delight the gun manufacturers
who have bought the Republican Party to promote and market their product of
misery and death. The subject of guns could be part of the regular curriculum
just like readin,’ ritin,’ and ‘rithmatic. Among other benefits this would
acquaint them with the metric system (6.25 mm equals .25 caliber, 9mm equals .38
caliber, and etc.). As they move up in school they could graduate to bigger and
more powerful guns and ammunition, master ballistics and hollow points,
concealed weaponry, how to shoot first and ask questions later, stand your
ground, and such, until, upon graduation, they could receive as a graduation
gift the gun of their choice (probably nothing bigger than .50 caliber). There
could be courses in shooting various weapons (maybe starting at first with
spear throwing and archery) and fast-draw tournaments (perhaps even knife
throwing as an occasional diversion), as part of the regular school sports
program.
Such a program would have certain benefits. For example,
after a generation or two there would be no one running around with a gun
without having been well trained in its operation. There would be a
well-trained public in small arms use (unless you wanted to expand the program
into the really big stuff) that could easily take up arms in the advent of
hostilities (if they so desired, but this could backfire). It would create lots
of jobs manufacturing guns, also require more teachers and staff, and so on. It
would make the manufacturers money hand over fist and create a demand for
certain natural resources benefitting miners, and so on. It would also most
likely put an end to bullying as an inscription once found on a handgun
suggested: “Be not afraid of any man, no matter what his size, just call on me
my friend for I will equalize.”
Of course on the downside it would no longer be necessary to
buy Congresspersons thus forcing them to sell out to someone else. It might
also lead to gunfights in the alleys behind the schools as children would
probably rather shoot than fight. More importantly, it would doubtless lead to
much more gun violence than already exists because if everyone was armed and
attempted to shoot those who were shooting at them there would be chaos and
more and more deaths. Furthermore, unless there was some way to discriminate
against some children you would be training the wrong ones as well as the rest.
And finally, the militarization of American culture, already an international
problem, would become much worse. Actually I don’t think this is a good idea,
don’t know why I even thought of it, and I’m sorry for wasting both my and your
time.
No comments:
Post a Comment