More Than Our Profiles Need Changing

Sorry, but you will not find my Facebook profile decked out in the colors of the French flag to show my support for them following last week's brazen attacks by ISIS. To me, this merely trivializes the magnitude of what ISIS has pulled off and only encourages them to push on with more attacks in other major cities across Europe. It is going to take more than changing our profiles to show our support over ridding the world of these animals. Just how far are we willing to go remains to be seen.

You do not have to look very far to find people, some prominent, others just common every day citizens, who believe it is time to do something. The problem is, what is “something?”

For some, it means rounding up all Muslims in the country and sending them packing. This is a great idea if you want to add to the problem, but does nothing good in the long run. It only shows the level of individual ignorance toward a religion that shares much in common in terms of values found and preached in Christian churches across the nation. It shows how easy it is to fear what we do not understand, and in the United States, Americans pale in their understanding of world religions much like we do in other subject areas. We fail to see the correlation between the actions of extreme violent radicals acting in the name of Allah with those who claim to be acting in the name of God. Violence and hate in any form should be intolerable and never justified for religious reasons.

Where do we send Muslims packing is another issue to consider. Again, our ignorance comes into play here. Because our nation has shoved a curriculum heavy on math and science, we have ignored the teaching of history to the point many see history as everything that has happened since 1990. Few truly understand events like World War II, the Crusades, or ancient Greece and Rome.

Why is this a big deal? When our political leaders fail to grasp history as much as the average citizen fails to, we begin to hear solutions like rounding up law abiding people and taking away their rights just as we did to Japanese Americans in World War II. Rounding up and placing people into “internment camps” (a nice way of say prison camps), was every bit as wrong as our reliance on slave labor. To take away a person's home, business, and freedom simply because of their race or religion is wrong in any form and yet, we are beginning to hear this idea tossed around as a solution to our war against ISIS.

“Okay,” you say. “This is not such a good idea.” However, what about those who we hear touting the plan of closing down all the Mosques in the nation? The level of contradiction I hear justified by people who will fight to the death over any changes to the second amendment but are in favor of denying others their freedom of religion makes me wonder how some people can be so blind to their level of contradiction. If it is okay to take away a law abiding citizen's right to worship after an act of terror, why isn't okay to take a way a law abiding citizen's guns after one?

So back to those colorful profiles you have flooded Facebook with. If this is the average person's idea of showing support for a cause or group of people, we are screwed as a nation. The attacks of 9/11 saw a flood of young men and women volunteering for military service. Meanwhile, the rest of the nation went on with business as usual. The economy crashed, jobs were lost, college debts increase, homelessness increases, the jobless rate drops in large part because millions of Americans have stopped looking for work all together, and those with jobs are over worked and under paid. The new America does not look nearly as rosy as some would have you think and now we rate ISIS as the number one threat this nation faces. Okay, you are willing to change your profile, but just how much more are you willing to sacrifice if this is what is most important to the nation?

If you are under the age of 30, are you willing to sacrifice your current goals and dreams and go serve the country knowing that those who served most recently have not exactly been treated all that well when it comes to finding work, receiving medical care, or dealing with horrific mental, emotional, and physical challenges? In case you missed it, war is not pretty.

If you are a tax payer, are you willing to have more money taken out to pay for the added cost of not just defeating this enemy, but keeping in place a system of security that makes future enemy acts of terrorism impossible to experience? Much of the nation already questions where the money will come to pay for many of the great social programs democrats are offering up. You might also want to ask yourself, of the current social programs in place, which ones are you willing to do away with to help pay for an on going and never ending war against terrorism? Oh, and lets not forget the NSA. Are you okay with every phone call, every credit card purchase, and every web site you visit being known and logged by your government?

There is also the loss of life, not just American, but life in general, to consider. How many innocent refugees are you willing to let die rather than taking them in knowing some might be terrorists in disguise? How many innocents do you mind seeing being killed by U.S. or coalition bombs while the bad guys hide behind human shields inside of schools and hospitals? What about the loss of environmental life? Are you okay seeing an entire region of the world devastated by bombs aimed at oil refineries, dams, industrial centers, hillsides, caves, and anything else? If so, ask yourself if this is in line with your thinking toward things like the Keystone Pipeline, fracking, and off shore drilling at home. Are you okay with being a living contradiction? Is preserving the environment more important than preserving your freedoms?

Then there is this little matter called an election. Who is best equipped to lead this war on terror? Yes, Hillary Clinton has an amazing portfolio she offers up, but she is also linked to the current administration which has taken the approach that ISIS is the JV squad, or more recently being well contained. Do you want our next leader to be someone who was a vital part of the current state of our intelligence community which has made more than its share of major blunders in recent years? Then again, is there a republican candidate out there that can offer up more than chest thumping rhetoric designed to tap into your current anger, but fails to really address a long term solution to a problem, terrorism, that we will have to live with quite possibly for decades to come?

It's easy to change your Facebook profile and show support for the French. However, you may want to do some much deeper thinking and ask yourself just how much are you willing to change, give up, or do to defeat a very real and very scary enemy? For many, this is not a “fun” thing to do, but failing to think about these things now may well lead you into going along with some decisions you will live to regret down the road.

Seven Things I Am Pondering

The Taliban:  Word is the Taliban is now fighting among themselves over who will control the terrorist group.  I guess they finally decided to adopt the American system of politics after all.

Missouri Football:  The University of Missouri football team has gone on strike.  Apparently they are part of a much larger group of students on campus demanding the president of the university step down or be fired over the state of racial unfairness.  Let's see, these "student athletes" receive a free education, are afforded free tutoring services not available to non athletes, are given special breaks over when they take exams or have assignments due, receive special treatment when they break the law, and they have an issue with the university president.  With the treatment they receive, they should be expected to go undefeated every year or lose their scholarships.

Sex Scandal:  So a sex scandal is uncovered at a Colorado high school in which students were found to have sent explicit photos of one another engaged in teens favorite behavior.  Why are people shocked over this?  Yes, their parents should be embarrassed their children were caught, but this stuff goes on in every high school across the nation.  And for those who think otherwise, I suggest you think back to what kind of nonsense went on when you were in high school that you were able to keep from your parents or community from knowing about.  That behavior would not be any different today in a world centered around social media.

Greg Hardy Photos:  It took a while, but Dallas Cowboy Greg Hardy actually managed to fire off an apologetic tweet about the photos made public of the damage he inflicted when he beat, slammed, choked, dragged, and threaten to kill a woman.  Is he sorry for his actions or just for the photos being released?  He's had almost two years to express remorse for what he did, but instead chose to pay off the victim rather than face justice.  As tough as he is on the field or when he is raging against a woman half his size, I guess he is not tough enough to handle himself in prison which is where he should be.

Bromance on Roids:  And then there is Jerry Jones, Hardy's boss, who still stands by his man in what has become the sickest bromance ever.  I wonder what it will take for Cowboy fans, their cheer leaders, and even their players to go on strike against Jones.  Maybe when Jerry awards Hardy with that long term contract he wants to sign him to the rest of Cowboy nation will wake up and see what has become of America's Team.

Bond Voyage:  So this will be the final time Daniel Craig plays the part of James Bond in a movie. It's hard to get excited about a film where the star says he'd rather slit his wrists than play James Bond again.  I wonder how many unemployed college grads or laid off workers would be happy to play make believe while being paid millions of dollars.  Craig has no reason to complain, but his doing so has given me reason to never see the film.  I am on strike until a new Bond is hired.

NFL (Now Financing Lawyers):  NFL player Reggie Bush has announced he intends to sue the city of St. Louis over an injury he suffered recently.  St. Louis will sue the NFL if it loses its Rams to the city of Los Angeles.  The Rams will sue the NFL if they are not allowed to leave for the more lucrative L.A. market.  Los Angeles will sue the NFL if they are denied one of the three existing teams that want to move into a not yet built stadium.  Los Angeles residents will sue if they have to pay a tax to help finance the construction of a new stadium.  Am I the only one who thinks lawyers are the ones getting rich off the NFL while fans are getting screwed?

Loretta Sanchez: Career Hypocrite

So U.S. Representative and California Senate hopeful Loretta Sanchez has an issue with Donald Trump hosting SNL.  She claims having him host is no different than yelling "fire" in a movie theater and puts lives at risk.  Sanchez is another example of how liberals want it both ways.

As a representative in the 46th district, Sanchez is pretty much lock stock and barrel in line with the most liberal oriented agenda.  She sees nothing wrong with allowing 11 million people who are here illegally being granted citizenship, or receiving perks like health care, drivers licenses, and free education in the mean time.  As a Hispanic, she is all about handing our nation over to people who came here illegally and sees nothing wrong with them having done so.

However, allowing NBC and the staff of SNL to have the controversial Trump host a show is going too far.  She and her constituents do not like Trump's desire to deport all 11 million illegals or to build a wall and make it more difficult for them to enter here illegally.  She feels this is encouraging racist behavior toward Mexicans regardless of the fact many Americans, maybe even a majority, support tighter immigration control.

What is more racist, wanting to control our border and keep people from entering illegally or using a disparaging gesture to describe Native Americans, something Sanchez was blasted for doing shortly after declaring her intent to run for Barbara Boxers senate seat.

Sanchez, and others who are to the far left really believe it is okay to censure anyone and everyone who goes against their ideals of political correctness.  They have no problem with the first amendment as long as they agree with what the person has to say.  However, as soon as a candidate like Trump comes along and espouses views counter to theirs, they instantly label them as racists and threaten others with the same label if they give him a public forum.  It's also why anyone who comes out and opposes the Black Lives Matter movement or supports the actions of white police officers are labeled the same but when a group of color riots, loots, and burns a city, it is strictly because of the injustices done to them and is never racially motivated.

Have I been offended by some of the things Trump has said?  Yes, but he has a right to say them, just as I believe people like Loretta Sanchez has a right to respond.  The problem I have is how both of these people are only interested in a divide and conquer mentality which only further leads to the stalemate that exists in Washington DC.

The American voter needs to wake up and look at candidates more based on their character and less on their politics.  Is the person you intend to vote for likely to sit down and work with people who see things differently than they do or are they the type to label, trash, and instill fear?  We need more politicians who are less concerned about being re elected and more concerned with getting things accomplished.  While we need to allow people like Loretta Sanchez to voice her hypocrisy and people like Trump to voice his empty promises, we also need to tune these people out and look more closely at the people who are most likely to work with those on the other side of the isle.

What's The World Coming To?

Caitlyn Jenner:  Woman of the year?  Seriously?  How is she even eligible for such an award?  And of all the groups to hand out this award, it is from Glamour Magazine.  What's happening?  Do companies really believe they are on the cutting edge of society when they do this sort of thing? First, Jenner is recognized by ESPN for a courage award as an athlete even though Caitlyn has never competed in an athletic event.  Now Jenner is "woman of the Year" even though it has been less than a year since her transformation.  And just exactly how does changing one's gender make a person worthy of any award when we now have three women who graduated from Army Ranger school for the first time?  There are two woman running for president and countless others doing great work in the fields of medicine, science, and even athletics.

Halloween Costumes:  How is it okay to award Jenner "Woman of the Year" but not okay to dress up as her for Halloween?  It is just a matter of time Halloween costumes are regulated by a liberal run and politically correct driven government.  Americans have the right to be as rude, crass, and vulgar with their costume selections as they have to be that way the other 364 days of the year.  Seriously, just look at how people dress when they go to church.
No New Taxes, My Ass:  In the 1992 presidential election, President Bush was hammered because he broke his pledge in 1988 when he said, "Read my lips, no new taxes."  The lesson, only make such promises during your second term because you have no worries of running for re election.  Case in point, President Obama.  How many times did he promise America there would not be any American boots on the ground in Syria?  Well, he lied.  Worse, he figured by making it official with a Friday announcement before Halloween weekend, the media and republicans would let it slide.  Well, they shouldn't let him off the hook.  Just remember, U.S. involvement in Vietnam began when Kennedy sent a few "advisers" before we ended up in an ugly war.  Mark my words, there may only be a few dozen soldiers going over now, but it won't be long before we are sending troops over by divisions.

The View Less:  Does anyone watch the View or is it one of those shows where people who watch it are just too embarrassed to admit it after the fact?  Four women on one set, none of whom are qualified to talk about any current events, is guaranteed to be a train wreck and yet ABC continues with it.  So now I read where there is a petition to get former Cosby kid Raven Symone booted from the show because of her controversial comments.  If no one admits they watch the show, how does anyone know if she made any comments?  It's like the tree in the forest?  What would happen if the entire show were pulled from the air?  Would anyone notice?

Mother of the Year:  If Glamour Magazine has a "Mother of the Year" award, I am betting it goes to Rosie "STFU" O'Donnell for the quiet and dignified manner in which she has dealt with her adoptive daughter this year.  First she runs away from home and Rosie announces to the world the girl is mentally ill.  As soon as she is returned, she leaves again for good because she turned 18. Rather than keeping quiet, Rosie continued making her feelings public.  Now she goes to Twitter to respond to an interview in which her daughter Chelsea claims not to love Rosie.  An adopted girl who is raised by a lesbian couple, one of whom, Rosie, has suffered from mental illness and hosted The View, wants to go live with her birth mother and Rosie thinks Chelsea is the crazy one.  I think Rosie needs to find someone new to settle down with and adopt another child with.  I wonder if she has Caitlyn Jenner's phone number.

Thoughts On Football

Now that we have so much medical and scientific evidence over the dangers of repeated head trauma found in people who play football, I do not see how youth tackle football leagues are allowed to continue.  Flag football, when coached properly, will teach our youth all the skills they need before they play tackle football at the high school level.  Throwing, catching, foot work, and even tackling skills are teachable without having to risk head injuries at an early age.

I only saw a replay of "The Play" so I have to put this weekend's finish of the Michigan/Michigan State game as the greatest finish to a football game I ever saw.  There is no describing the incredible luck Michigan State  had on that final botched punt.  How happy were Michigan State players to have pulled out the win and remain undefeated?  Jalen Watts-Jackson, the defensive back who scored the winning touchdown, was mobbed by such enthusiastic team mates, they ended up dislocating his his hip, forcing him to have emergency surgery.

Here is the difference between organizations that expect to win and those who hope to win.  Denver is still undefeated at 6-0 while Cleveland is struggling at 2-4.  However, Denver, with a weal armed and immobile Peyton Manning quarterbacking them, could easily be 3 and 3.  Instead, they keep finding ways to win, including this weekend against the Browns.  Cleveland should have won this game, but found another way to deserve their nickname, The Mistake by the Lake.  In fact, if Cleveland were a team use to winning like Denver is, they could easily be 4 and 2 and in the hunt for the playoffs.

Hard to believe the 49ers and Ravens squared off in a thrilling Super Bowl just a few years ago. While many predicted a rough year for San Francisco, no one could have called a 1-5 start for the Ravens and been taken seriously.

We are half way through the college football season and so far all we know is there is no way of knowing which four teams make the college playoff this year.  I would not count out Alabama despite having one loss.  Nick Saban knows how to prepare his teams better than anyone on a week to week basis.  If they do not make the playoffs, it will only be because they lose once more to a more talented team.

Meanwhile, Ohio State will have to beat Michigan State and Michigan just to earn a spot in their conference championship game. Those are three big games to win before even thinking about the playoffs.

As for USC, their problems go beyond Steve Sarkisian being fired.  AD Pat Haden shoulders as much of the blame for the fiasco known as Trojan football and he may need to go as well.  Whoever their next coach is, he has to be someone with no connection to the Pete Carroll era.  They need a guy who needs to restore a sense of toughness and discipline that has been lacking now for a long time.  It would help if he was someone who also sees himself staying with USC for the long haul and not looking to use the job as a stepping stone to the NFL.

Debate Thoughts

Two and a half hours of pretty much what was expected.  If you watched the democratic debate and you are a fan of Hillary Clinton, she did nothing to change your support.  However, if you did not like her before the debate, you probably do not like her any more.

One thing that stood out was there was no mention of reforming our welfare system and plenty of support for increasing the taxes on the wealthy.  Now, voters have to decide who is serious about it. Who is really going to tackle Wall Street?  Who has a proven track record and who seems able to work in a bipartisan manner to pass legislation that will improve the lives of Americans.

Hillary made numerous references to women and to her being a woman which I believe was specifically designed to create a gender war.  Democrats need to decide if they want a female in the White House or if she is the most qualified democrat to lead the nation.

Martin O'Malley made the most of his opportunity to present his views and came across as a solid alternative to Clinton.  However, his only real chance is if Clinton's campaign implodes due to controversy.  Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb did not fair nearly as well and came across as stiff and unprepared.

What really remains to be seen is whether or not Bernie Sanders improved his position with the American public and if Joe Biden saw anything that indicated he should jump in the race.

While this debate was more civil than the two republican debates, it remains to be seen what happens as the field of candidates begins to narrow.

It's Our Right To Die

Brittany Maynard died last November 1^st by her choosing and not the government's or medical profession's. She was just 29 years old but was given a death sentence when she was diagnosed with brain cancer. After living and enjoying as much life as she could, Brittany decided to take the lethal prescription Oregon doctors prescribed to her and quietly passed away in her bedroom while listening to her favorite music with her husband next to her.

However, Brittany had to move from her home in California to Oregon because California, like 44 other states, does not have a Right To Die law. Thanks to Brittany, that may change.

There is no sound argument to be made against preventing the terminally ill from choosing when to die. No outside entity, whether it be the state or medical profession, has the right to tell us when we can die and they certainly have no right to put the terminally ill through added pain and suffering they may not want to experience.

“Who are we to play God,” you ask? We play God all the time. Whether we end a life via an abortion or the death penalty, it can be argued our society plays God. We play God by providing emergency life saving services whether it be in the form of an ER or life saving organ transplant. God is not the issue when it comes to the right to die.

“What about the Hippocratic Oath doctors take?” Sorry, but as the son of a doctor, I see this as more of a hypocritical oath. Doctors won't prescribe a drug that will end the life of a terminally ill patient but continue to prescribe them to keep a terminal patient alive, often times leaving them to feel more pain while merely existing rather than living. Loved ones are left to suffer that much more as well as they are powerless to do much more than watch a body fade away. This is not medical care nearly as much as it is inflicting undue pain and suffering, two things that run counter to the medical profession.

“But what if the Right to Die drugs fall into the wrong person's hands?” Again, this is ridiculous. Think about how many teenagers have access to mom and dad's Oxycontin or other powerful meds? These are the same kids who find a way to raid the liquor cabinet or know where the loaded hand gun is. We are not exactly doing much as a society to combat these ills which far out weigh the number of terminally ill who might opt for Right to Die meds.

“Ah, but doctors make mistakes.” Yes, they do but we are not talking about a doctor telling a patient they have a few months to live and then handing them a bottle of pills to swallow. Before Right to Die medicine can be prescribed, a patient needs to have at least two doctors make the same diagnosis and the patient may not have more than six months left to live. I don't know about you, but if my doctor tells me I have six months to live, I am going to make damn sure I get a second, and probably third, opinion before the reality of the diagnosis sets in. Then I am going to take a little time before I go asking for a prescription that will end it all for me and even once I have that prescription, I am going to tie up a few loose ends in my life before saying my good-bye to the world.

“But there is always hope.” Hope is what the New England Patriots had in the final minute of the Super Bowl when Seattle had the ball on the one yard line. Hope is what Harry Truman had when newspapers were calling his defeat in the 1948 election before the results were in. Hope is what you have when you are lost in the wilderness and on your second day without any food to eat. However, for some terminally ill, hope is not as important as their dignity and for them, they should have something more powerful than hope; they should have freedom.

Nothing prevents us from our inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But sometimes these pursuits conflict with one another and when one's life is terminally ill, the ultimate freedom we can afford that person is their happiness. For some, that may mean using all means possible to extend their life. However, for others, avoiding those final days, weeks, or months and being allowed to pass on their own terms is the only happiness we can provide.

Right to Die laws do nothing to prevent those who want to live as long as medically possible from doing so. They do not interfere with their beliefs or sense of hope and allow all means to be used to maintain life. They also afford those who oppose such measures to avoid the inevitable and gives them the opportunity to die on their terms and not on those determined by the state.

Brittany Maynard did not make a selfish decision, as some claim, by choosing to die on her terms. She was brave enough to live for what she believed in and thoughtful enough to do so in a way that will allow her to live on in the work done by others. Her videos to the public and our state legislature depict a young woman speaking out on behalf of many others who have, and who will, face terminal illness. She wants for us all to have the choice to decide for ourselves how we leave this world. After all, who is better equipped to make that choice, the state or the individual?

Flounder On: USC Football Needs A Major Change

If Thursday night's 17 to 12 loss to Washington is not enough to create a major shake up at USC then nothing short of a catastrophic earthquake will get the Trojans to embrace the future by letting go of the past. In case they have yet to notice, the Pete Carroll era is dead. Nothing is going to bring it back. However, try telling this to the alumni who desperately long for those days. Try convincing Athletic Director Pat Haden who, if he could, would hire his old coach John McKay if he were not dead. Why is it USC fans see this while those in charge remain in denial?

USC football is exactly what its three wins and two losses indicate; a mediocre team. They are the end result of what happens when four and five star recruits are coached by men who lack the ability to develop the tremendous talent they have recruited. On paper, there are only a small handful of teams that should be able to beat USC in any given year. However, the USC coaching staff has been unable to convince its players games are not decided on paper before they have been played. You actually have to go out and execute a superior game plan if you expect to beat an opponent.

Current USC head football coach Steve Sarkisian is no better than his old pal Lane Kiffen. Both were considered boy wonder geniuses when they were assistant coaches under Pete Carroll and both have proven they are unable to succeed beyond a mediocre level as a head coach.

Since Carroll left USC to coach the Seattle Sea Hawks, the USC football team has only played consistently hard for one person, Ed Orgeron, the man who served as the interim coach between Kiffen's firing and Sarkisian's hiring. Orgeron was also the man who served as Carroll's top recruiter and managed to restore fun into SC football while simultaneously getting players to play above their heads. Unfortunately, Haden passed on hiring Orgeron permanently, as well as other top candidates, and USC is no where further along today than they were the day Haden fired Kiffen.

How does Steve Sarkisian keep his job after losing to a much less talented Washington squad who is coached by one of the candidates Haden interviewed and passed on in order to hire Stevie Boy Wonder? In fact, how does Haden keep his job as Athletic director? If these two questions are being asked over and over again by SC fans, they certainly have to be being asked by influential alumni as well as the University's president. If not, then there is no future for USC football to look forward to.

At a time in which the NFL has all but promised next year relocating one or two teams to Los Angeles, USC football runs the risk of becoming as irrelevant as its basketball program. To stick with the status quo is only telling fans the University is pleased with the direction of its football program. If this is the case, then there was never any reason for the school to fight so hard against the sanctions it received from the NCAA.

Fight on! Not even the most loyal USC fan can claim there is any fight in the Trojans. With Notre Dame, Utah, and UCLA left to play, USC will be lucky to escape this year with just five losses. Teams that begin the year ranked in the top five do not end up with five losses if there is any fight in them.

USC has to say good-bye to both Pat Haden and Steve Sarkisian. Together, they only serve as reminders of what USC once was and never will be as long as either one sticks around. Now is the time to be bold and to find a new Athletic Director who only cares about the future and not the past. Perhaps they need to roll the dice, and the big bucks, and go convince Chip Kelly he is much better suited for USC than he is with the Philadelphia Eagles.

Smart people cut their losses early and know when to move on. Aggressive people pounce without warning. USC football has been neither smart or aggressive since Pete Carroll left which explains why they flounder.

Fight on? Are you kidding? Flounder on best describes what is now USC football.

Little Has Changed In A Year

I wrote the following article last year for the Los Angeles Post-Examiner and was struck by how little has changed since it first appeared on their web site.  Let me know what you think.

New Gun Laws Not Needed

Let me begin by letting the reader know, other than a 20-year old K-Mart pellet gun, I am not a gun owner. I abhor guns and see little use for them. To me, an AK-47 is to guns what and an Indy car is to automobiles. I do not see Indy cars on our streets and see no reason for automatic weapons in the hands of the public. Still, I believe it is the right for Americans to own guns and for the most part, most gun owners go to great lengths to be responsible gun owners.

I see no reason for new gun laws to be passed making it more difficult to purchase fire arms. As it is, the laws we have are sufficient. What is lacking is the ability both in money and manpower to enforce them. Congress does not need to waste taxpayer money passing another law that cannot be enforced. If we cannot keep track of 11 million illegal residents, what makes people think we can keep track of the more than 300 million guns in the hands of legal citizens?

There is a popular sentiment in the country for newer and tougher gun laws every time there is a mass shooting. However, new gun laws will not prevent future Sandy Hook shootings any better than the existing ones have done. No matter what laws are passed, guns will end up in the hands of the wrong people.

There is no doubt gun violence is a major problem in this country. With almost one gun for every citizen, there is no law that will be passed that takes them off the street. We clearly have a sizable population that feels the need to own them and until that changes, guns will be readily available.

In the United States, gun violence surpasses all other forms of violence. Whites who own guns are five times more likely to use a gun to take their own life than someone else while blacks are five times more likely to use one to kill another person than to kill themselves. Police officers are more likely to use their gun to take their own life than to shoot a criminal. Finally, gun owners are far more likely to use their gun to shoot a loved one than to stop an intruder. Despite these facts, gun sales always spike after a mass shooting or prior to a legal decision like with the grand jury in Ferguson.

Sellers like this one at an Ohio gun show should not be allowed to sell firearms at gun shows, with “no paperwork.” (YouTube)

New gun laws will not get guns off our streets, out of our homes, or out of the hands of the mentally ill. Only a major change in our culture can accomplish this.

Lets face it, the American culture is screwed up. How else do you explain our fixation with violence? In the 1970’s, we became concerned with violence on television. Networks started the “family hour” from 8-9 p.m. and only showed family friendly programing. However, from 9-11 p.m., they were free to show more violent programing than we could possibly watch. Often times, this programming was tamer than what the networks showed on their evening news broadcasts.

In the 1980’s, movies implemented a new PG-13 rating after complaints of the level of violence in films. If you were under the age of 13, you had to be accompanied by a parent to see a film rated PG-13. The only problem was there was no real enforcement of this and people soon saw ten-year old kids walking into watch films unaccompanied by a parent. Apparently, ticket sales were more important.

Along about this same time, our culture began shifting from viewer violence to participatory violence with the advent of new and violent video games. This move has also coincided with our love of more violent sports. The NFL has supplanted the much tamer game of baseball as our favorite sport and MMA fighting grows at a record pace and has made boxing look more like Dancing With the Stars. We have also seen a huge increase in mass shootings during this time.

Our culture’s love of violence should not surprise us. Violent video games are far different in their impact than violent movies. Movies only require us to watch what is on the screen which makes them passive in nature. Meanwhile, violent video games require our participation where the need to make quick and violent decisions is a must in order to remain alive in the game. Over the last 40 years, our culture has seen young boys go from playing electric football to Call of Duty for entertainment.

Studies show people who play violent video games become numb when exposed to violence in the real world. They react less to violent scenes in films, violent photos of crimes, and even violent acts in real life. They also become more aggressive in personality, especially when confronted with a stressful or challenging situation. Often times, the only real problem solving skills they have to draw on are from the video games they play which are not just violent, but highly addictive as well.

When you take a formative mind, reward it with points or advancement to a new level for violent decisions, you begin to create the makings of a potential monster. Since these games are pushed on males, when puberty hits and testosterone kicks in, violent outbursts become more likely. Boys are apt to remove themselves from their friends and spend more time alone due to the addictive qualities of these games. Now, when one of these boys has a problem, and they have been programed to kill problems in order to make them go away, you have a potential killer, especially if he suffers from a mental illness.

You begin to understand why a young male, often a loner, goes on a shooting rampage. You see why young males, full of testosterone and anger, respond to a problem with another person by shooting him. You understand why when there are guns in a home and a family argument breaks out, almost always a male ends up as the one who shoots someone they love.

New and stricter gun laws will not change any of this. Only a change in our mind set will. Yes, that means getting rid of the violent video games we let our children play in the isolation of their bedroom and start spending more face time connecting with them rather than avoiding them. It also means we need to become a nation that has something more to offer other nations than just our military might and protection. It requires our leaders to rely on diplomacy and not on the threat of military force.

I can hear it now, “But we need this threat because the world is full of bad people.” Perhaps, that is one way to look at it. However, another is to consider the possibility that other nations see us as bad people with a fixation on violent solutions to problems.

We do not need new gun laws. If, and only if, we want less gun violence in our country, all we need to do is change the culture that pushes it on its citizens at an early age. Once this is done, new gun laws become pointless.

- See more at: http://lapostexaminer.com/new-gun-laws-needed/2014/12/02#sthash.WrwHxmmq.dpuf

Home Grown Terrorism

This is not meant to be an anti gun posting.  That would be too simple and would not solve the problems of increasing mass shootings in this nation.  "Guns don't kill, people do," will be countered with "People with guns kill."  Both are also overly simplistic and fail to address what is really wrong in our culture that we continue to refuse to change our approach to this issue.

This also goes beyond mental illness and how to keep the mentally ill and unstable from gaining hold of guns.  There are over three hundred million guns in this nation, not including what our military and law enforcement have.  I do not believe there are over three hundred million mentally ill people. Like criminals, if a mentally ill person wants to, he can easily get his hands on a gun.  I say he because this is almost entirely a male issue.

Young men all over the nation kill each other over some of the most trivial things.  Chicago is a killing zone, especially for black on black shootings.  Columbine, Aurora, Newtown, and today,Umpqua Community College in Oregon have been just some of the locations for the carnage inflicted by angry, fed up, and possibly mentally ill white males.  The shootings will continue.

At a time we are more concerned about terrorists half a world away, we ignore those who go unnoticed within our borders.  Our mass shootings are not being done by Muslims who seek death to America.  They are done primarily by young males who have lost all hope for their future while being encouraged to hold no regard for human life.

You can not raise boys today to play the violent video games and watch the violent programming we make so readily available to them and think some, if not many or most, will not be negatively affected down the road.  Then when you toss in the unstable homes we encourage too many people to contribute to, add the easy access to alcohol, prescription drugs, or illegal narcotics our kids have, and have a culture where war, multiple forms of violent entertainment, while there is little accountability for our actions, it's easy to see how that sweet young boy who lived across the street grew up and became a killing machine.

This is home grown terrorism and worse, we do nothing about it.

How many young males today have much to look forward to?  If they are not college material, their high schools quit on them.  It used to be they offered trade classes but those have been tossed aside for more AP courses.  At a much younger age, we have placed unrealistic academic expectations that add to the anger, anxiety, and depression that increases at an alarming rate among our youth.  If spotted and treated with meds, often times these powerful drugs suck the life and enthusiasm out of kids and all too often cause suicidal thoughts.

While our president will boast of a 5.1% unemployment rate, our young men know there is not much out there of any real value.  Far too many over qualified people are working multiple and meaningless jobs, are swamped with college dept, and believe at an ever increasing early age the future of this nation and world looks bleak.

Democrats will use today to rant about the need to get rid of our guns.  Republicans will rant about the second amendment.  No one on either side will budge because both will view today as an opportunity to gain the political upper hand on the other.  They could care less about solving the real issues that are resulting in more shootings.

It is going to be up to citizens to make a difference.  For some, this means working a few less hours and living a notch or two below your current level so you can spend more time with your sons who desperately need guidance more than access to violent video games while his parents are too busy at work.  Others need to really consider all the possibilities of what could happen before purchasing a gun and bringing it into the home.  Is a semi automatic weapon really needed even though it is your right to own one?  And everyone needs to become more understanding of those who suffer from some sort of mental illness. We need to think about the pluses and minus of that drug or those drugs your son's doctor wants to put him on and be able to seek alternative treatments at affordable prices.

If you expect our politicians to solve this, ask yourself this, what issue of significance have the two parties worked together on to resolve in recent years?  Like me, you are probably still thinking.  Stop, because they have not done squat for you.

It's time we each hold ourselves accountable for how we contribute to a culture that is all too often turning out home grown terrorists who with a few changes on our part might otherwise become our next generation of problem solvers rather than this generation's problem makers.

The Violet Eye Watch

The media loves to identify the American voter as being either red or blue.  States are divided into these two colors to distinguish between those which lean more toward the democratic party and those which are predominantly republican.  Like a lot of things portrayed by the media, this is an overly simplistic way of dividing a nation that, the last time I checked, was still called The United States of America, not The Divided States of America.

When polled, most Americans are neither red or blue, but somewhere in between.  Hence, The Violet Eye Watch.  Because our media tends to give more voice to the far right and left of the nation, we begin to think what is wrong with us as individuals because we do not seem to follow the thinking and agenda of our most extreme political minds.  We are more of a violet nation than we realize.

The Violet Eye Watch will share with you thoughts, questions, and writings that hopefully will awaken you and get you to see you do not have to be entirely red or blue.  It's okay to oppose abortion while favoring the death penalty, just don't consider yourself to be a right to lifer.  There is nothing wrong with supporting the closing of our border while being willing to grant amnesty to those here already illegally.  It does not make you a hypocrite, racist, or stupid.  Mostly, you do not have to prescribe to the limited thinking of one political party over the other.  Both have their own agendas they want to shove down our throats.  Both give us reason to be concerned about their motives.  And once in a while, both come up with an idea that is worth pursuing no matter what our political leanings may be.

What this space is not meant to be is a forum to spew the type of hate and vitriol that accomplishes nothing; that's what Facebook is for.  However, you should be able to turn to this page and read intelligent takes on subjects that concern us.  You should feel free to respond, disagree, and offer a different take without ripping someone you do not know (thoughtful and intelligent disagreement is encouraged).

So there you have it.  Start the discussion by sending me a thought, concern, or solution to something that is on your mind.  I will do what I can to post it and share with you some of my thoughts as well.

The Violet Eye Watch
jrunnermoore@hotmail.com