Thursday, October 17, 2013

Society and Murder

by Grant Murrow
published by The Voice on October 17, 2013
in response to "Taking Control of Gun Control", published by The Voice on September 26, 2013


Many things have occurred in America in the past 20 years that should cause every American to question where our country is heading in terms of culture, and how we behave as a society. Several very important occurrences that should incite curiosity are mass shootings and massacres. April of 1999: two students at Columbine high school open fire and kill 12 classmates.  April 2007: student Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people and wounded 15 others at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia.  January of 2011: Jared Lee Loughner opened fire killing six and injuring 12 others including the now recovered Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona.

All three of these events remain firmly engrained in the minds of those there to witnessed them, and each caused a stir in its own right. After each of these shootings, national arguments were sparked over the controversy that is “Assault Weapons” and how their regulation along with other firearms regulation could help stem the tide of such events from occurring. Something that may surprise you, however, is that only one of the four shooters involved in these deadly events used what the media refers to as an assault weapon during their spree.

That person was Dylan Klebold of the Columbine shootings and he was in possession of a TEC-9 semi-automatic machine gun, with three 30 round magazines (which he used the least out of his three weapons). Otherwise, every shooter used weapons that do not fall under the “Assault Weapon” category. Both Cho and Laughner used pistols, and the other Columbine shooter Eric Harris used a 12 gauge double barrel shotgun, all of which were purchased legally or taken wrongly from someone who had legally purchased them.

While “Assault Weapons” remain an issue of heated discussion, many people overlook the actual number of murders committed with these weapons. According to the FBI statistics for the years of 2007-11, less than 1180 out of 46,320 total gun murders were committed with rifles or long guns throughout the United States, which includes the firearms that fall under the now infamous term “Assault Rifles.” Also, according to the Department of Justice, only 2% of state and 3% of federal inmates were armed with the newly branded “Assault Weapons.” So comparing our firearm murder rates to other countries’ rates doesn’t exactly bring the true issue to light. In fact, examining our gun violence points to a very different trend, one in which “Assault Weapons” are not the main culprits.

So if it’s not the availability of firearms, what could it be that causes people to commit these murder sprees? Is it trends in society towards violence? Lack of mental healthcare availability? Or are these shooters overly glamourized and given too much attention by the media after committing these atrocities? Perhaps it’s all of the above.

According to the National Institute for Mental Health, only about 50% of adults with a serious mental issue receive treatment, and the largest group to have these illnesses falls between the ages of 18-25. Combine that with classic trending violence in American movies, TV shows, games, etc., the amount of attention given to the shooters whom commit these atrocities, and the availability of firearms and you have a deadly combination. But people seem committed to removing only one, rather than spending the time and money needed to correct and prevent mentally sick persons from both obtaining firearms and putting them on the road to recovery.

With only a few years and a small investment of money, and who knows? One day events like these can be a distant, but not forgotten memory.

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Meeting with State Representative David Millard

Thanks to Representative David Millard for inviting us to his office last night for pizza, a discussion of state and local issues, and encouragement.  A great time was had by all!

Thursday, October 3, 2013

Crash Course in Shutdownology

This post is not meant to completely cover the topic regarding the shutdown, but to just answer your most pressing questions.  Here we go:

Question: Why is the government shutdown?

Good question to start with!  Well, have you hear that the government has been running a bit of a deficit the last few years?  The problem with that is no one has actually fixed that issue yet, and the House, Senate, and President just keep agreeing to Continuing Resolutions to fund the government for a determined amount of time.  The last one was to expire at midnight, the end of September 30, 2013.  In other words, the government has no funding at this time.


Question: Why don't they just write another Continuing Resolution?

Here's the thing, the House offered three CRs to the Senate, and the senate voted against all of them.  See, the House is doing all they can to prevent the monstrosity known as Obamacare from comopletely obliterating our healthcare system, putting the government between you and your doctor, and killing jobs.  The first attempted to defund Obamacare all together.  The second resolution attempted to delay Obamacare for a year and repeal the medical devices tax (which Democrats at one time agreed with).  The third CR would have just delayed the individual mandate for a year and would have eliminated the subsidies for lawmakers and their aides. 


Question: So this isn't really the fault of the Republicans, is it?
No, not really.  Even people who don't like the Republicans or the Democrats see this as mostly President Obama's fault.  One major reason is that back in the begining of the year,  "The Republican-led House passed a budget calling for $3.5 trillion in spending, the Democratically controlled Senate passed a budget calling for $3.7 trillion in spending, and President Obama issued a proposal calling for $3.77 trillion in spending. This happened back in the spring. The House and the Senate passed their budget plans in late March. The president's proposal, the last to be issued, came out on April 10."


Question:  Has this ever happened before?

Yes.  Seventeen times.  It's a miracle you're here at all, isn't it?


Question: So I don't have to worry about the NSA spying on me or paying my taxes, right?

HAHA!  You go ahead and think that.  In actuality, about 80% of the government is still functioning.  Here's a fun Buzzfeed quiz for you to take to see what is still running. 


Question: How can I stay informed about this topic?

We personally recommend news outlets like National Review and the Drudge Report, but you can also come out to our weekly meetings held on Mondays at 5pm in KUB 411 (though we will be off-campus on October 7) and follow us on Twitter @BloomURepubs.

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

Surprising Benefits of a Split Congress

by Greg Harvey
 
Ever since the Republicans took the House of Representatives in 2010, compromise in Washington has been hard to find. This all came to a head on Monday night when Congress failed to pass a bill to continue any discretionary spending, resulting in the first government shutdown since 1994. Obviously, both sides are pointing fingers at each other over whose fault the failed negotiations were and the media naturally blames the Republicans, but maybe the shutdown really isn’t that bad. Here are a few points to think about:
First, the shutdown forces the government to only fund bare necessities. While it is a shame that national parks and some agencies will have to close abruptly, all the essential functions, including the military, mail delivery, and Social Security checks, won’t be affected. Even the USPS and Amtrak will stay open, though for how long remains uncertain. Overall, the whole shutdown simply forces the government to only spend money on the things it really should, which is what it should have been doing all along. For too long the government focused on spending money every time the opportunity arose, which created a system that couldn’t be justified indefinitely. While the parties have been quick to criticize each other over whose who caused the failed compromise, it’s really just the culmination of decades of irresponsible government.
Second, even though the media blames the House Republicans, they deserve some credit. They passed two bills before the deadline, only to be shot down by the Senate. While the Senate disproval of the bills due to the cuts to Obamacare was certainly expected, what was shocking was that they refused even to compromise. Instead, they engaged in a war of words, with Harry Reid stating the Republicans “lost their minds,” but then rejected the Republican offer to create a committee to settle differences.
Finally, this is the third time this year that Congressional partisan caused scares; the other two times were the sequester and the expiration of the payroll tax. Both of those times, remember, were preceded by warnings that failure to work out a deal would lead to bad things for the economy. What was the ultimate effect? There weren’t any major repercussions to the economy, at least nothing as serious as the aforementioned warnings promised, and, as an article from Fox Business reported, the government actually ran a $117 billion surplus in June. While the actual effects of the shutdown have yet to be seen, recent events certainly indicate, this shutdown will likely not create any widespread harm to the country. Rather, it may even produce some good side-effects to our fiscal health.