Top 5 reasons I could use some of Obama’s “hope” right now.

I think it’s a tad of an understatement that Obama is having a pretty crappy week.  The problem is that these scandals are going to do some damage and it isn’t just contained to the Obama presidency.  I can hear the headlines for the next campaign -

“Democrats targeted Conservatives! Make sure your (insert issue – taxes, guns, soldiers) are safe. Vote Republican!”

The one thing I always counted on was, provided enough rope, the Conservatives always managed to hang themselves.  Turns out Democrats are the one using the rope on ourselves.

The top 5 scandals that have me going…seriously?  Where is the hope Obama?

5.  IRS targeting Tea Party groups.  This is going to get B-A-D.  The worst part is I see liberal groups responding, “they did it during the Reagan administration.” Sorry guys that was 30 years ago.  That response is also BS.  It’s WRONG no matter how much I can’t stand the Tea Party!

4.  Department of Justice seizes journalists’ records.  Even I know that journalists and the Obama administration have never had a love fest.  Looks like things got even colder in this love fest.  How about turning that temp frigid.

3.  The gun control debate that never really was.  All that talk about Sandy Hook never really amounted to anything.  All of your supporters were hyped up for real change and all we got was a lot of talk.  Forget about any real hope.

2.  CIA caught in Russia for spying.  The cold war erupts again in Russia.  Might want to ask yourself WWRD?  (What would Reagan do)

1.  Finally Benghazi – the scandal that never was that won’t go away.

Please President Obama show this loyal Democrat some hope and if possible some change.  Start with yourself and your administration.  Don’t blow it for all future Democrats.  Our next campaign cycle depends on it.

 

About these ads

Pink rifles are for little girls…

Another day, another shooting.

Details: 5-year-old boy shootings and kills 2-year-old sister in Kentucky.

As I was reading the horrible details of this “accident” something caught my attention.  This wasn’t some usual story about a gun left lying around by a parent or a parent cleaning the firearm and it going off.  Oh no…this story is unusual because the owner of the gun was the 5-year-old boy.

Let that one sink in for a minute.

The 5-year-old boy received the Crickett rifle as a gift.

The little boy OWNED the gun.

I’m still trying to figure out what makes me want to lose all hope in humanity more…that this kid received a rifle as a gift or that they make rifles for children.  We are talking about real rifles here people, not the rifles that shoot air bullets or BBs, but real rifles that kill animals or in this case sisters.

I went to the website to check it out.  Crickett Firearms makes these little gems.  They come in camo color for the boys and hot pink for the little girls.  See the above picture.  That is a little girl holding her rifle that can shoot REAL bullets.

See the gallery of these sweet children holding their rifles.  

Retailers like Walmart and Cabela’s sell these rifles for designed for children.  I researched the age limit for owning a rifle in America.  What I found was that it is LEGAL for children to own rifles if they are gifted to them.  That means children like this little 5-year-old who still believes that Santa comes down the chimney can receive a rifle capable of killing his sister and it’s perfectly legal.  Merry Freakin’ Christmas!

I just can’t wrap my head around this.  I think it’s one thing to go out hunting with dad and hold dad’s gun.   It’s another thing to have a little child own their own gun with bullets.  To me it’s the difference between letting little Johnny hold the steering wheel while you drive the car and letting little Johnny have the keys and take the car for a spin.

Having a six-year-old daughter, I can’ tell you she still believes in the tooth fairy, she still pretends her baby dolls are real and she sure as hell wouldn’t understand that if she shoots a gun that death is permanent.

To the parents of this 5-year-old who shot his sister – I say they should be arrested on murder charges.  There was no accident here, it was just a matter of time.

Direct from the testimonial site of Crickett (now excuse me while I bash my head into the nearest wall):

“My wife told me to do something with my daughter after gymnastics today, she recommended going for hot chocolate or a donut. I thought, that’s not special, plus once you’ve consumed the item where does that leave you. Instead we bought a pink Crickett from my six year old daughter and wanted to say thanks for making quality affordable firearms for new shooters. The ‘girls’ option is especially appreciated because as scary as it sounds the color really helped get her excitet about it. Bethany says thanks too! She’ll be quite fashionalble at the Sportsman Club tomorrow.” Chris “I wanted to tell you about my daughter’s first gun. For Christmas 05′ My oldest kid,6,wanted Santa to bring her, her first real gun. When her teacher at school told the class to write a letter to Santa about what they really wanted for Christmans, she wrote “I want a rel gun my size”. The teacher said she couldn’t write that at school and had to write something else. When she told me and her mom about that I decided taht if i had to sell one of my guns to get her one I would..Luckally I didn’t have to sell any of mine to get Chris her gun. She is so responsible, and had proved it with a bb gun, that my wife and I went shopping a few days before Christmas…Our local gun store had just the perfect model in stock. Pink laminiated stock and stainless barrel. To see her face on Christmas morning after opening te wrapping paper was priceless. Out of the box she was a crack shot at 10-15 yeards, and just yesterday she bagged her first ground squirl at about 15 yards..thank you for such a great product that has brought so much fun and joy to my kid…and our family.”Michael “I just wanted to send in a photo of my daughter’s new Crickett rifle. I ordered it from Gander Mountain.It is a bull barrel thumbhole pink laminated stock model. I added a bipod and a 3.5x10x50 scope. It turned out to be a great little target gun for her. I enjoy shooting it too.”

Larry — From GA

The NRA’s 2013 Convention – should I go?

The NRA is holding their annual convention May 3-5 deep in the heart of Texas. I was thinking about  a big trip this summer.  It’s between this and an Indigo Girls concert out West.  I checked out the NRA website to see what fun might be in store for me.

http://www.nraam.org/

Hundreds of exhibitors, celebrities and fun for the whole family!  What’s not to love?

Sarah Palin is attending.  Hell, if Sarah Palin’s going to be there, you know it’s going to be a Grizzly Mama good time.

They are having a special prayer breakfast.  It will probably go something like this, “Dear Lord,  may I never have to shoot anyone unless it is an animal or in self-defense.  Amen.”

There is a Stand and Fight Rally.  Note to the NRA – you are an organization with guns and 50% of America wants to “control” your guns.  How about something a little less violent than the word  fight?  Maybe renaming it a Stand and Peacefully Protest Rally?  

At the seminars, there is the, “Handgun Retention: Protecting Yourself and your Firearm” also known as the “Holy crap, the bad guy got my gun!” seminar.

There is the 7th annual women’s leadership forum luncheon.  This is the NRA’s smartest and brightest women coming together to share ideas about the organization and how women can inspire each other through the common bond of gun ownership and killing things.  This year’s keynote speaker is none other than a female that has shown proven leadership in the areas of 2nd amendment rights and has championed the cause of gun ownership for many women.

The NRA keynote speaker for 2013 is Mrs…..Sean Hannity!

Wait a minute.  Sean Hannity?  That’s a dude.  Seriously NRA?  You couldn’t find a female available for the WOMEN’S Leadership Forum Luncheon?

Might I suggest that mental health background checks be required to attend the conference? Not to buy guns at the conference, but just to attend.  After all, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity and Ted Nugent will be there. There will be lots of guns and ammo.  I think you should have to prove you are sane just to get in.  This conference is for gun nuts – with emphasis on nuts.

#KSleg – Holy Overreaction Batman! Guns and School Employees

Here’s the headline:

KS legislature would allow school employees to carry guns

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/03/12/4116802/kansas-is-contemplating-arming.html

Insert heavy sigh….

Let’s play the fact game shall we?

Fact by the a study out of the University of Pennsylvania studying 677 shootings over 2.5 years:

People carrying guns were 4.5 times more likely to be shot.

4.2 times more likely to be killed.

The conclusion was there a hyper-confidence when it came to people carrying guns that people who were not armed didn’t have.  They were more likely to put themselves in dangerous positions on purpose, increasing the likelihood to be shot.

It is more likely that my kid will be killed by lightning than shot by a mass shooter.

I know, this doesn’t work when it comes to the NRA lobby wanting everyone to have a gun.

According to the National Weather Service – 54 people are killed by lightning strikes each year.

Mass shootings by year and number of people from Alan Fox, Northwestern University Lipman Family Professor of Curriculum Law and Public Policy:

2009 –  27

2008 – 29

2007 – 23

From the American Academy of Pediatrics:

This statement reaffirms the 1992 position of the American Academy of Pediatrics that the absence of guns from children’s homes and communities is the most reliable and effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries in children and adolescents.

Some more interesting stats: In 1997, 306 (7.2%) children and adolescents younger than 20 years killed by firearms died as a result of unintentional firearm-related injuries.

 

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/105/4/888.full

Let’s just ignore those silly docs and all those facts showing that kids are more likely to die from accidental shootings from guns and do the opposite by adding MORE guns to places that our kids frequent – schools.  Makes perfect sense  (more sarcasm).

From that liberal and non-credible  institution called Harvard:

To begin with, having a gun in the home is a risk factor for serious accidental injury and death. As Hemenway points out, death certificate data indicate that 680 Americans were killed accidentally with guns each year between 2003 and 2007. Half those victims were under the age of 25.

I’m sure that having guns in schools will in no way increase the possibility that my child will die from an accidental death from a firearm vs. a mass shooting. (sarcasm)

Now I can already feel pro-gun lobbyist typing out their response to me – “but it’s a deterrent to ward off would be gunmen.”

I’ve noticed how we don’t have any first degree murder now that we have the death penalty.  Deterrents work so well.  Also, since we have all decided that mass gunmen suffer from extreme forms of mental illness, I’m sure they are in their right mind enough to conclude deterrents when they are figure out where their next mass shooting should be.

Adding guns to schools by arming school employees actually increases the likelihood that my child will die from a shooting-an accidental shooting from school employees.  

More guns equal more chances my child will get shot.  Hey – I’m pretty good with math.  I credit great, unarmed teachers!  I understand that we all want to keep kids safe.  That is a great goal, but arming school employees isn’t the answer.  We need to keep our eye on the statistics and not over-react.  Just say no to this legislation!

 

 

 

 

 

Urgent: Play MO and KS gun laws- Fact or Fiction

Let’s play a fun game called Kansas and Missouri Proposed Gun Legislation – Fact or Fiction

1.  Coming from the great state of Kansas, we have HB 2199 will have that federal agents that attempt to confiscate guns manufactured in the state of Kansas could be prosecuted and face PRISON time.

2.  A bill proposed in Missouri has anyone representative who votes in favor of gun control legislation could face prison time of up to four years in jail.

3.  A bill in Missouri and Kansas that makes it a requirement that all girls 12 and younger own a shoot ‘em up Barbie and side kick assault weapon Skipper.

Let’s score this bad boy.

1.  Fact and the estimate of this baby to defend it in court $825,000 of Kansas taxpayer cash that we evidently have oodles of in Kansas.

2.  Fact.  Next up in Missouri – bills that would make discussing if Santa is real illegal.  The follow-up to that bill are more bills on the tooth fairy and unicorns.

3.  Fiction.  I had to throw one in to make this game hard.

So thanks to Kansas and Missouri, I’m book ended by cray-cray.

Let’s start with the Kansas law.  Kansas feels that any restrictions on the 2nd amendment will be unconstitutional.  So we are going to threaten imprisonment of federal agents if they decide to enforce them.  They do this by saying that any guns manufactured in the state of Kansas are excluded from any restrictions on the 2nd amendment.

Hang on federal government, I’ve got the response to this one.

Kansas lawmakers – if you decide to pursue this, I will make the executive decision granted to me by my rights as official blog writer of Pleasantly Eccentric to revoke the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.  That means you are on your own when it comes to combating drug crimes and gangs.  Your biggest fears have come true.  Kansas will become even more of a home base for funneling drugs into the US and gangs will own this great land of Oz.  Also, no response from the National Guard – so all that snow that’s coming or possible tornadoes in the spring that may require federal assistance – sorry Charlie.  No more FBI to solve crime.  Also, in the long-shot category, if a foreign enemy decides to strike, hope those Kansas handguns will serve you well.

You are on your own Kansas. Good luck and God bless!

All of this because of the federal government is trying to REGULATE the 2nd amendment?  Not do away with, but regulate.  Again to my point that we REGULATE the 1st amendment all the time.  Never mind that you are ok putting regulations all over the 1st amendment when it comes to abortion that has been found to be a constitutional right…

Not to get off track.

Missouri – don’t think I forgot about you.

Something I would like to suggest is more anti-bullying legislation.

From stopbullying.gov

Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior among school aged children that involves a real or perceived power imbalance. The behavior is repeated, or has the potential to be repeated, over time. Bullying includes actions such as making threats, spreading rumors, attacking someone physically or verbally, and excluding someone from a group on purpose.

Ding! Ding!   If you just change out school aged children and put in Missouri lawmakers, I think we have a match!  I would say that threatening to put someone in prison qualifies as exclusion.  Instead of introducing laws putting lawmakers in jail, might I suggest expanding on the state-wide anti-bullying definition to include state representatives?

Kansas and Missouri – since I basically straddle the state line, could you please go more than a week and not introduce legislation that embarrasses the hell out of me?  Even if you could just avoid making national news where the journalists don’t roll their eyes or sigh heavily when reading the story that would be a huge start.

 

 

 

Do I want neighbors trading guns? Hell no!

Dear Sen. Blunt,

It’s me again, you know Aimee, a.k.a.  the pain-in-your-ass.  Anyway I’ve got another issue to bring up. I know – shocker.  Just give me a second.  I keep hearing from you that you are opposed to any gun legislation that would, in your words, prevent if  ”two guys living next door want to trade shotguns.”  You and your pro-gun politicians also go on to say that background checks shouldn’t apply to private gun sales or if a family wants to hand down guns within the family.

The more I think about this the more I have a problem with it.

Please just keep reading.

The more I think about this one, the more the visual keeps popping up in my head of the 1950′s housewife coming over to borrow a cup of sugar.  See, it’s not the 1950′s anymore.  Unfortunately ,we rarely know much about our neighbors, let alone what their mental history is.

• Do you really know if your neighbor is paranoid schizophrenic?  
• Do you know if your neighbor has ever been hospitalized for bi-polar disorder?  
• Do you know if they have ever had a restraining order out for harassing someone?  
• Do you know if your neighbor beats his wife?

You may be all cocky and think you know, but you really don’t know.  This is something I know for sure.

I was doing google research this morning on Adam Lanza.  Turns out nobody really knew if Adam Lanza was on any psychiatric meds.  His neighbors certainly didn’t know.  See nobody in his neighborhood really knew Adam Lanza.

If I came to your neighborhood and asked you about all of your neighbors and all of their mental health history, could you tell me?  I certainly can’t tell you all of my neighbors names, let alone the status of their mental health.  Do you really think it’s ok for me to be able to trade or borrow weapons that can kill people if I don’t know any of this vital information that could prevent another mass killing?

I think hiding behind this belief that it’s ok to keep background checks out of it if it’s between neighbors or family is a cop-out.  A deadly cop-out.  If we are serious about gun control, let’s include this as well.  If you want a gun bad enough, go through a background check.  That is the best way to keep our public safe and still uphold the right to bear arms.

Now we can all wish for the good old days when we did go next door to borrow a cup of sugar and our kids ran free all over the neighborhood, but unfortunately those days are gone.

Let’s continue to be serious about strengthening gun control laws – including background checks and apply it to all guns and all people.  I know this is against what the NRA believes, but it’s time to stand up to the NRA.

Sincerely,

Aimee Patton

Sex and Guns – MO leading the way in ineffective curriculum in schools

Yesterday I was featured on a Fox 4 News segment discussing a MO Senate bill requiring MO 1st graders to learn gun safety from the NRA’s Eddie Eagle Program.  I discussed how a 2004 National Institute of Medicine study found that the Eddie Eagle Program was ineffective at actually changing behavior when it came to guns.  http://fox4kc.com/2013/01/30/nra-gun-safety-school-program-drawing-controversy/

I have a feeling that regardless of any silly study showing the effectiveness of the program, MO is probably going to pass this bill and MO 1st graders are going to be singing this snappy tune all over MO classrooms soon enough.  ”Aimee, why so pessimistic?”

Can somebody say abstinence only education?

Ding…Ding!

That’s right boys and girls. Hey kiddos – keep your hands off each other while you read this post.

MO is one of only 29 states that doesn’t require sex education in schools and when it is taught they REQUIRE that sex education is taught with abstinence only education.

You may be saying to yourself,  ”What’s the big deal Aimee?  The only 100% effective method is abstinence.”

You are correct.  Keeping it in your pants is 100% effective.  However, a lot  of time  Johnny isn’t keeping it in his pants – this from my friends at the Guttmacher Institute:

•Although only 13% of teens have had sex by age 15, most initiate sex in their later teen years. By their 19th birthday, seven in 10 female and male teens have had intercourse.[1]

Overall, abstinence only education has been found to be ineffective. Here we go again with these silly statistics on effectiveness getting in the way of popular opinion and big lobbying dollars. This time it’s from the National Institutes of Health from 2005:

Using the most recent national data (2005) from all U.S. states with information on sex education laws or policies (N = 48), we show that increasing emphasis on abstinence education is positively correlated with teenage pregnancy and birth rates.

and it goes on..

These data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S. In alignment with the new evidence-based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative and the Precaution Adoption.

Oh effective curriculum be damned.  Hell there is nothing better than sending my kid to school and making sure that they do nothing more than learn things that don’t actually mean a damn thing.

Good thing we aren’t leading the world in science and math.  We can continue that trend by raising children who can’t actually read these science-based studies from the National Institutes of Medicine and Health showing that the gun and abstinence only sex education doesn’t actual change behavior outcomes.  Well done lawmakers!

Now that we are also in a budget crunch, what other programs are you going to cut in our MO schools?  Art?  Music?  Let’s replace unnecessary programs like these with ineffective programs like Eddie Eagle and Just Say No To Sex. Does Just Say No To Sex have a snappy jingle too?

“You and Jenny like to dance

Just remember to keep it in your pants.

Kissing and necking may be in

but something that isn’t is showing some skin.”

Necking…I now 1955 called and they want their word back.  I know…I know…it needs work, but you get my point.

From my WTF file – Bill of Rights Engraved on Guns.

I’ve been writing about gun control a lot and have been fortunate to debate gun control on Darla Jaye’s 980 KMBZ show (shout out to my favorite Conservative – woot, woot).

Most of the opposing views expressed have been summed up like this – “People who don’t understand guns are the ones who want to prohibit guns.” And loving comments like “you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.”

This feedback had me thinking – what do I really know about guns?

In full disclosure, I have shot a gun once. It was a long, long time ago in the desert of Arizona. My family decided to take a tour of Phoenix. Our tour host was an old-fashioned cowboy complete with the handlebar mustache. While we were out admiring how dry the desert actually was..he showed me and my brother his gun. It was something similar to the picture in this post.

The cowboy asked if my brother and I wanted to shoot it. Curiosity got the best of me and I said yes.

He handed me this gun and told me to aim far in the distance. We were standing on a slight hill in the middle of nowhere. I aimed out to the horizon and shot the gun.

Way off in the distance I heard “hey” shouted.

Now I’m sure the gun had blanks in it (I hope), but it was enough to scare the crap out of me. That was the first and last time I ever shot a gun.

I think my cowgirl experience is enough to call myself “experienced” with guns or should I say…a gun. (sticking tongue out in a very mature matter to all those gun-rights people out there).

I have been researching a lot about guns lately to help support my points.

Sen. Feinstein introduced new legislation to ban 157 different types of assault weapons. I did a Google search to see if that is a large percentage of the guns manufactured in the US or a small percentage. 157 sounds like a lot if the total number of guns manufactured is say 250…I think you get my point. I do know that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms said that in 2011 there were about 6.1 million guns manufactured in the United States minus the exports. http://factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/

How many of the 157 brands are there out of that 6.1 million? I can’t answer that.

However, on search, I found this little gem: http://fmkfirearms.com/index.html

It’s a pistol with the Bill of Rights etched in the gun. In the manufacturer’s words – “Model 9C1 pistol. Putting the Bill of Rights where it belongs.” And they go on..

Each FMK Firearms 9C1 pistol is engraved with the Bill of Rights to remind Americans about our inalienable rights, and pay tribute to those great leaders who have fought for our freedoms, while some ignoble ones have endeavored to undermine them.

First, how small must the font be on that pistol? Second, the inalienable rights include the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. I guess maybe they are focusing more on the liberty and pursuit of happiness part and less on the life part.

• What about all those killed by accidental gun shots?
• What about all those people killed by mass shootings?
• What about all the women murdered in domestic violence assaults?
• What about all those killed in homicides?

Don’t all those victims also have a right to life? Maybe these pistols are manufactured by someone in the Gen X generation. It has been coined the “me generation”. Maybe it’s this type of selfishness that has made America great, but also our own worst enemies.

I guess the flip-side of the argument is that guns can be used to protect your life and not just take someone else’s. So then I searched for how many people save their life from having a gun per year. Not so simple – one can’t assume that every home invasion is life-threatening. Maybe a thief is only after your flat screens, Macs and espresso machines. For as many statistics that show that guns make people safe, there are statistics saying more guns equals more homicides and suicides.

Then I found this from the same article referenced on Factcheck.org -

There is work the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could and should be doing, she said, but has not since the late 1990s. CDC has been wary of studying gun issues after NRA lobbyists convinced Congress to cut into its funding after a series of studies in the mid-1990s were viewed by the NRA as advocating for gun control.

Thanks NRA and CDC – my search for facts to help support my argument has stopped….(big sigh) I guess I’ll go off the argument that guns should be prohibited cause I said so. So there.

To the NRA App Help Desk – URGENT Question about my magic wand

1/15/13

To:  NRA APP customer service/help desk

From:  Aimee Patton

Re:  game app

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to ask for assistance with your new ipad/iphone app.  I recently downloaded this app for  my six-year-old to enjoy.  I am always looking for new games and since this game was designed for those “4 and up”, I thought it would be perfect to add to my daughter’s game collection. Sure enough, it fits perfectly between the Disney Princess dress-up game and her Tangled storybook game.

I was listening closely to the NRA’s statement after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting.  The NRA and I don’t agree on much, but, LaPierre voiced the same concern I have over increasing violent video games impacting our society:

 

“Through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Splatterhouse. And here’s one: it’s called Kindergarten Killers. It’s been online for 10 years. How come my research department could find it and all of yours either couldn’t or didn’t want anyone to know you had found it?

Then there’s the blood-soaked slasher films like “American Psycho” and “Natural Born Killers” that are aired like propaganda loops on “Splatterdays” and every day, and a thousand music videos that portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life. And then they have the nerve to call it “entertainment.”

But is that what it really is? Isn’t fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?”

So when it was time for me to find the next video game to occupy my six-year-old, I turned to the NRA to entertain my child.  I thought it  was a safe choice since your President said violent video games were to blame for our violent society.  I downloaded your new NRA gaming app. This is where I need some help, because my daughter and I can’t seem to figure this game out. Heck, it’s probably user error, but let me explain.

It’s obvious that we get a magic wand.  We were a bit confused when the magic wand turned out to be black, but hey we are open-minded.  All magic wands don’t have to be purple and sparkly.   Then it asked if we wanted to play “inside” or “outside”.  We picked outside, because that is where you can find sweet animals like bunnies to have a nice picnic with.

My daughter took her magic wand to wish for her picnic and there were about 9 holes in the ground.  We assumed that is where the bunnies or other fuzzy animals jumped out of to join us for our picnic.

Turns out it was dishes that jumped out of the hole.  We get it – start with dishes to set the table for an outdoor picnic.  I’m sure the glasses, food and silverware would have popped out next.  Every time we pointed our magic wand at the dishes to set the table for our picnic, the dishes broke.  We can’t seem to get past the part where we get the dishes to set our table for our magical, outdoor picnic.

Now there was a second when I thought that the wand may be a gun and the dishes were for target practice.  I feel silly even bringing this up, because I”m sure that is the farthest thing your gaming developers wanted with Wayne LaPierre’s statement about violent video games causing people to kill.  I may be out of line, but you really should get some better gaming designers who can make these magic wands appear more “fairy-like” since it’s for children “4 and up”.  Usually sparkles and bright colors appeal to children.

Please let me know how we can get past the flying dishes so we can finish setting the table for our outdoor picnic and get to the 2nd stage of your app.  It’s obvious that my black magic wand I’m using is defective or I’m not using it correctly.

Thank you for your assistance and for developing such a sweet and peaceful game for our children.

Yours in raising peaceful children to become non-violent adults,

Aimee

 

Guns don’t kill people, cars kill people

There was a comment posted on a previous blog that I wrote CLICK HERE TO READ and in response to my gun debate with Darla Jay on Friday night. (KMBZ 980 from 6-9 p.m. – thanks Darla!)  that I think needs some attention and a reply.

I’m including the link to this comment, because the comments  are hard to find on my blog:  http://pleasantlyeccentric.wordpress.com/2013/01/10/attention-nra-and-politicians-idea-to-overhaul-mental-health-you-cant-ignore/#comments (note to self – change comments section to be more visible on blog)

Please go read it and then come back.

waiting…waiting…..waiting….

 

Dear Mr. Fisher,

First, thank you for listening to Darla’s show last night and for taking the time to respond to my blog post.  Your response was insightful, respectful and I enjoyed reading it.  It was much better than the text that came in during the show that read “SHE IS JUST WRONG”.  I really appreciate it.

You bring up some excellent points, as did a lot of the callers on last night’s show.  I think it is this kind of healthy dialog that will get real change to occur.

So let me respond to some of your points.

I’ve found that most people that aren’t familiar with guns tend to be a little uneasy around them and don’t see the need for anyone to own one. 

Mr. Fisher, you are correct here, but I would say “uneasy” is an understatement.  The word I would have used is scared.  The outbreak of mass shootings has me on edge.  I know there are statistics that you could find that could show that the probability that I would be shot in a mass shooting is almost nothing.  I get that, but I can’t help but be more than just a little uneasy about guns, mass shootings and the fact that a lot of these guns used were purchased legally.

While you were on Darla’s show a fella called in and made mention about cars killing more people than guns. You said that guns were designed to kill and cars weren’t. Going by the statistics that you like to promote it is pretty clear that cars DO kill many thousands more civilians than do guns. 

You are correct here Mr. Fisher, cars do kill many more people than guns.  I found this argument to be the most interesting in last night’s debate. I don’t know how well I made my point last night, so let me lay it out here.

You can’t ignore the fact that guns were originally designed and produced to hurt and kill.  It may be animals, it may be people, but the invention of guns and bullets was to hurt and kill.  Cars on the other hand were designed to get a person from one place to another – it is far from the same thing.

You go on to say-Lets regulate cars. You know they have a lot more moving parts that can malfunction and there you go, you have an accident. But it probably could have been prevented by better maintenance which you are responsible for or it could have more design controls that would make the car so expensive that you couldn’t afford one. Is that something you are interested in? 

We do regulate cars!  In fact, the states with the highest number of vehicle fatalities are the states with the fewest regulations.  

http://247wallst.com/2012/05/24/the-most-dangerous-states-to-drive-in/3/

We are constantly increasing the safety standards and passing new legislation to keep people safe on the roads.  I think my daughter has to sit in a booster seat until she is 21 now.  Increased vehicle fatalities means more regulations whether it be in seat belt laws and fines, reduced speed limits, no texting while driving laws and higher penalties and for drunk driving.  Why shouldn’t the same be true for guns?  By the way, remind me not to drive in Mississippi – they ranked #1 on the list for vehicle fatalities.

The 2nd amendment is not free from regulation.  Let’s remember that the 1st amendment is regulated all the time.  Freedom of speech, like I enjoy here, is regulated.  I don’t have the right to yell fire in a crowded theater, I don’t have the right to drop the f-bomb on network television (cable – well that’s another story), I can be sued if I slander someone’s name. Why do gun advocates think that the 2nd amendment is so sacred and can’t be regulated?   

You also bring up mental health - Mental health issues have been connected to a lot of the suicides and school killings. In fact if you are going to kill someone whether it is with a gun or something else you have to have some kind of mental issue. So why not address that? The money you would spend on more gun controls would be better spent on better research and help for the mentally ill. The money you would be spending would help more people and help prevent more suicides and school killings than any gun control you can dream up. 

 

You and I agree on something!  Yes, please let’s do something about mental health!  Again, I’m at a loss for what can be except throw more money at the problem.  What I’ve heard suggested is more state mental institutions, forced institutionalization and the mental health database proposal.  Maybe this is the same frustration you share with me about guns – you are punishing the many for the acts of the few.  If early intervention is the key to prevent more shootings, then who get institutionalized?  Who gets put in the database and monitored?  Like I said last night, millions of Americans take antidepressants.  Do we put everyone in the database and monitor all of these people who take these drugs?  Do we force institutionalization on everyone who has been diagnosed with schizophrenia   How about bi-polar?  Where does it stop?  There are many people who have these conditions that lead productive lives and are not a danger to society.

I don’t think either one of us has the solutions to this complex problem.  Like I said last night, as much as I would like to see a gun-free society, even I understand that isn’t going to be possible.  I think the point of this whole thing is both sides have to give.  Maybe the gun supporters need to stop believing that the government is going to take all guns and maybe those of us who have been diagnosed with a mental illness need to not be so paranoid about being locked away.  I believe it has to be a combination of both – better mental health services and funding and more measures to keep citizens safe from guns.  I hope that maybe I have swayed you just a little.

Again, I can’t thank you enough for providing your comment.  I don’t think either one of us will ever see eye-to-eye, but I can definitely say I understand your point of view better.  Who knows, maybe some politicians in Washington will read your comment and my response and maybe they can learn something.

Sincerely,

Aimee