Drugs and Guns are Partners in Crime

   Drugs and guns are partners in crime. Or, that is, often they are.This story tells of a triple homicide in Idaho in which a marijuana grow was found in the home. The story doesn't give much indication where the gun used came from, which was what I was looking for.

http://www.idahostatejournal.com/news/local/article_87e9f38c-9e63-11e2-812d-001a4bcf887a.html

To Look at a Baby is to be Grateful it wasn't Aborted

   I looked over at little Cielo, cradled in the arms of her uncle Brian, and wondered about . . .
   Abortion.
   Would we, as a society, really have chosen to say it would be quite all right if she had never been born? 
   Looking at a precious baby, and realizing it could have been aborted, is to shout praises that it wasn't.

 These Two Stories Lack Enough Evidence to Convict Guns

  (Note: If you are regular reader, I'd skip this blog. Not too interesting. Wrote it more as a matter of record, to help me track what leads to gun violence.)
   Once, the news stories I passed over were the ones about murder. It was issues I was concerned about.
   Then came the great gun debate. Now, I find myself combing the stories of violence in search of hints as to whether owning guns leads to death. So, take these two stories from today's newspapers. 
   First, a five-month-old-boy died after being shot, and his father, Joshua David Peterson, was arrested in the investigation. The story tells me the son was laid on the couch, and then the father allegedly went into another room and got a gun, loaded it, and shot the baby. I find myself saying, The gun was available and if it had not been in the home, the murder might not have happened. But, reading on, I see how the father told investigators he had been considering killing the baby and himself for the past month. Someone reportedly tackled the father after he shot the son and before he was able to pull the trigger on himself. If he had been considering murder-suicide, he had time to buy the gun, rather than already having it. Also, there are those who would say if the gun wasn't available, he would have just used a knife.
   Perhaps, though part of me wonders if guns make the killing easier.
   The father reportedly did have mental challenges, of note since many violent crimes are committed by those with mental illnesses.
   Story two is about a couple men who got into an argument, and one pulled out a gun and was threatening the other. The friend tried to ward off the gun, and it went off, the bullet hitting him in the stomach. Was the assailant wearing the gun? Or did he pull it out from somewhere in the home? Either way, the availability of a weapon made the crime possible. But, if the man had not a gun, would he have been wearing a knife, instead? That seems possible. 
   So, on these two stories, I do not find enough evidence to be confident the availability of guns was a decisive factor.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865577594/5-month-old-boy-shot-to-death-in-American-Fork-home.html

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/56113467-78/friend-charges-shooting-according.html.csp

America: Where We Hate Our Government and Love Our Country

  America, where we hate our government and love our country. We disdain paying taxes, think our politicians are corrupt, and grew up complaining about everything from the mail service to the moon landing.
   Sometimes, I think we just listened to a little too much John Mellencamp. "Ain't that America somethin' to see . . . Little pink houses for you and me," and, "When I find authority, authority always wins." 
   It's like we internalized those words, and grew up hating our government and blaming it for everything.
   All of which goes against what we think of our nation. Say "our government" and "our nation" and its like you are talking about two different things. Our country is George Washington, freedom, and the American Dream, all of which are wonderful. It is freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and American exceptionalism. No country like it, no nation to compare.

Where did This Idea of Federal Drone 'Testing' Come From?

   The industry of taking money from the taxpayers: I wonder if we spotted it in yesterday's news. 
   Utah is lobbying to host drone testing conducted through the Federal Aviation Administration. The story doesn't say whether the testing will determine if the drones can be used safely, or, if, rather, the testing is to see if the drones can do something worthwhile.
   Like fight forest fires, or gather information on crop well-being.
   But, it sure raises my eyebrow that the "testing" will last through 2015. Seems like you should determine the safety of something long before then. And, if the more likely scenario is that you are wondering if the drones will be productive, then 2015 is an awfully long contract for something that might prove unproductive long before then.
  You ought to be able to find out if something is worthwhile in just a year or two, and not be committed to carrying it on all the way til 2015 if it isn't.
   The news story says Congress mandated that the Federal Aviation Authority is to bring unmanned aircraft into airspace and is to "develop technology to move the program forward." That's a little vague, to me. The story also says prospective test sites must publish a privacy policy and follow existing privacy laws. Now, if we are talking about fighting forest fires, and gathering information about crops, I can't exactly see where privacy comes in. Could you tell me what other uses of drones you are considering, so I'll understand the privacy thing?
   I would imagine some folks are going to win government contracts out of all this. Actually, that is a concern. I wonder if in some board room, some aviation corporation had the idea that if they could get the government to pay for it, then they could manufacture and sell drones to gather crop information, fight fires, and so forth. It would open a new market for the aviation industry. Now, as an angle to get the government to do it, tell them the matter needs to be investigated, tested, just to see if it is worthy.
   But, make sure the testing lasts till 2025. By that time, it will be ingrained in the system and hard to remove.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865577222/Utah-hoping-to-be-1-of-6-drone-testing-sites-in-the-country.html
http://www.kaaltv.com/article/stories/S2986139.shtml?cat=10151

Music as an Influence on Politicians

   Music, it is said, stirs the soul. It also shapes the man.
   Perhaps you've heard church speakers preach on the power of music. Or, perhaps, you've simply looked around life to see people take on songs, mimicking in their own hearts the very feelings of the song. The feelings of the song become their own.
   The song owns them, and,they become what they sing.
   Now, this is a political blog, for the most part. So, what, you may ask does any of this have to do with politics? Well, what if a person wanted to be a good politician -- what if he wanted to shape himself into a good politician by the songs he listened to -- what songs would he sing?

 Consider the Regnerus Study

  So, I find myself wanting to post quickly, so I can spend the final moments of my day studying on something I am not prepared to post on, Mark Regnerus's study on parenting by those who have had same-sex encounters.
   Alas, I think I shall post on Mark Regnerus's study, anyway.
   Here's my thought: The debate on same-sex attraction and marriage is at a high point, what with the Supreme Court considering the issue, as well as the Boy Scouts of America. Now, I've hardly tucked my nose into the actual debates the High Court is having, but, it does seem to me they should be considering this Regnerus study.
   Not that law, itself, and specifically what the Constitution offers, should not be their concern as they make a ruling, but it does seem they should run across their minds what impact same-sex marriage has on a society. The Regnerus study is one of the most watershed of studies, if not the most. While the authors of it, themselves, say it does not make a determination of causation, from what I have read so far, it does offer insights on that question.
   If same-sex marriage is of importance to our nation, the Regnerus study is very worthy of our attention. I'm told Ray Bradbury once said, "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them."
   Well, if you are concerned about a public issue, it seems worthy -- though not required -- to read what you perceive might be the most significant study on the issue. It seems almost a crime that such a study should not be read.
   But, so much for reading the study tonight. I'm due for bed.