Irresponsible…

I once wrote a proposed law to address gun problems that I called The ‘Keep Your Gun Act.’ It took the position that people aren’t in much of a position to judge themselves no matter how clearly the rest of the world sees them. Hitler and his sycophants, for example, didn’t see themselves as evil – but everyone else does. In similar fashion, ALL people who own guns likely see themselves as “responsible” but we all know that not all of them are responsible.

We ALSO all know that every time someone proposes some common sense solution to address the gun problem in this once-great nation the NRA falsely promotes the idea that someone is coming to “take your guns” and the conversation dies at that point. So I decided to come at it from a different point of view. It’s MUCH harder to make the case that someone is plotting to take your guns if the law is called the ‘Keep Your Gun Act.’ It’s right there in the name: KEEP your gun.

The ‘Keep Your Gun Act’ is a two part law. One part raises the NRA’s rules of gun ownership to the Federal Law of Gun Ownership. As a quick review for those not up on the NRA’s rules, here they are:
1) Treat all guns as though they are always loaded.
2) Never let the muzzle point at anything you aren’t willing to destroy.
3) Keep your finger off the trigger until you have made the decision to shoot
4) Be certain of your target and what’s behind it.

The Keep Your Gun Act restricts law enforcement’s ability to simply “investigate” and then declare some event a “tragic accident.” In short, if someone except the owner has the owner’s gun or one of the four rules of gun ownership are violated, the gun owner MUST be charged accordingly. There are FAR too many good old boys who dismiss gun “errors,” leaving a dangerous weapon in the hands of a proven, irresponsible individual.

The other part requires people to keep their guns or transfer them legally. It sets out penalties for losing your gun through any other means and requires the gun owner to report the loss. (A successful defense requires a person to show the gun was stored as safely as possible, say, in a gun safe, for example.) If you don’t, you’re guilty of ‘Failure to Keep Your Gun,’ a Felony punishable by two years probation. If your “lost” gun is later used in a crime, you’re guilty of “Supplying a gun to a Criminal,” a Felony punishable by up to two years in prison. They’re both Felonies because a Felony precludes one’s right to legal ownership of guns. There’s already a process in place to have a conviction set aside and have one’s gun rights reinstated so it may not be permanent. It might be more of a “time-out.”

I’ll be honest, here. The goal IS to remove guns from irresponsible gun owners, as measured by their own reckless actions. MOST gun owners (even many irresponsible owners) never have an “incident.” Ergo, most gun owners would never run afoul of the ‘Keep Your Gun Act.’ Those who do? Society will decide if you’re a “responsible gun owner” through a fact-based court action.

Here’s an example: Let’s say you go out and buy a gun legally. Then you put it someplace where, say, a six year old can lay their hands on it, put it in their backpack, take it to school, and shoot their teacher. You’re not a responsible gun owner. Period. You shouldn’t be allowed to have guns because your irresponsible behavior puts the entire society at risk. And, bear in mind, I didn’t decide you weren’t responsible. YOU proved it…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’ve been on the fence about whether Joe Biden should run again or not. On the one hand, in real life, Biden has done a pretty good job. (Cons have no clue and think the world outside their doors looks like a ‘Mad Max’ style hell-scape.) On the other, Biden is pretty old. I have nothing against old people and I don’t think age, alone, should be the deciding factor. But when one sees signs of age-related “slippage?” Probably best not to put that person in the highest office in the land.

Recently, people have been discovering classified materials Biden was apparently responsible for in various places but, and this is important, not where they’re supposed to be. The first time? We were told they were co-mingled with papers regarding son Beau’s death. I thought Biden had misplaced them in his grief, still not okay but…understandable. The second time? I’m far less sanguine about the pretense that Biden handles classified information properly. But now there’s been a THIRD “find.” The “explanations” have “evolved” but always come to some form of “The President doesn’t know how they got there or forgot about them.” At some point, even the most loyal Democrat has to start questioning Biden’s handling of classified materials – and I’m not a Democrat.

It seems – at best – irresponsible. It does have the advantage, though, of demonstrating that, apparently, classified materials are mishandled on a fairly regular basis and the people responsible for those materials don’t seem to have a coherent system of tracking the materials and ensuring they’re properly returned. One of the most frustrating bits is that BIDEN has now opened the door to Former Guy generating a firestorm of “controversy” that may, yet, allow him to once again slither out of responsibility for his Obstruction of Justice.

I’ll tell you this: I hope Biden doesn’t run again. I think he’s too old, not because of his age, alone, but because he’s clearly showing signs of “slippage” and we simply should not have that in the most powerful office in the world…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ah, the debt ceiling. We’ve heard this story before. There are some conservatives who hate America so much, they will literally destroy it if they don’t get their whiny way. All they want is to comfort the wealthiest people and make everyone else suffer. That’s it. Now they’re in control of the House of Representatives and they’re already threatening to destroy the United States economic credibility if Biden and the Democrats don’t agree to harm old and disabled people. No, that’s not the way the phrase it. Of course not. But it IS the end result they seek and semantic games don’t change it.

“Spending cuts” is con-speak for cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. To be clear, they are NOT talking about cutting spending for the military budget. Not even one nickle. Nor are they interested in withdrawing government subsidies to multi-national corporations. They CLEARLY oppose giving the IRS the tools to find tax cheats, thereby increasing revenues to the government. They ONLY want to harm old and disabled people. I blame the Democrats.

Vicious MAGA-con desires to inflict harm on the most defenseless members of our society are nothing new. They’ve been whining about the social safety net for years – decades, even. They’ve even shut down the government in the past to make it happen, risking America’s standing in the financial markets of the world. The Democrats have known this for as long as everyone else. During the most recent lame-duck Congress, the Democrats held the power and COULD have raised the debt ceiling high enough to cover the next two years in one fell swoop – but they didn’t.

I’ll tell you this: Actions speak louder than words. When a person or group CAN prevent horrible outcomes, but chooses not to? That speaks volumes to me. The Dems could have removed this particular weapon from the cons but didn’t. By choice. It suggests the Dems are perfectly willing to risk what tiny, little social safety net still exists in our submerging nation in exchange for political posturing. That attitude didn’t work out well with Roe v Wade and it won’t work out well with the debt ceiling…