The Victims of the Boston Marathon Bombing are Lucky (for now)

The victims of the Boston Marathon Bombing are lucky (for now).

The victims of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing are actually very lucky.  I know that sounds strange, but their lives after the bombing would have been far worse if the bombing had happened just a few years ago.  Although the emergency medical care that they received right after the bombing is much better than it would have been even 10 years ago, that’s not what I’m referring to.  There’s a term for amputated limbs and for organs that have been repaired: pre-existing conditions.  Yes, their health insurance would have cover treatment for their injuries (to a point).  However, if they were covered by medical insurance through their employer, and they had to leave their employer for some reason - maybe they couldn’t perform their job anymore due to their injuries, or their employer closed, or they wanted to start a company of their own (the engine of prosperity), they would have a problem.  If they tried to purchase private health insurance on their own they would have had a very hard time finding an insurance company that would cover them.  If they were able to get health insurance on their own or through an employer with a mediocre insurance plan, they would have had another problem; their preexisting medical condition would not have been covered.  If they needed a new prosthesis, well, tough it’s a preexisting condition that wouldn’t have been covered – it would be time to go back to a wheel chair.  If they had a problem with a liver that had been damaged in the bombing, well, it’s a preexisting condition; it would be time for them to go home and die. 

Fortunately, the bombing happened last year rather than a few years ago.  The evil Obamacare guarantees the bombing victims the opportunity to get medical insurance, and if the victims get medical insurance, that insurance will cover their preexisting conditions.  However, Congress has tried to derail Obamacare at every opportunity.  So far Congress has voted to block Obamacare more than four dozen times.  So, if you see one of the Boston Marathon victims back in a wheelchair … thank your conservative congressman.

House Republicans Admit that Barack Obama is a Good President

In a surprising turn of events, Republicans admit that Barack Obama is actually a pretty good president. 

Coming off of a blistering defeat during the debt limit and government shutdown battle, House Republicans were hunting for payback.  Unfortunately, they weren't able to find anything significant, like evidence that the President, under false pretenses, knowingly plunged the country into the longest and most expensive war the country’s history.  They couldn't even find anything titillating, like the President [really, really] enjoying the company of an intern in the Oval Office.  The Republicans had to settle on … wait for it … wait for it … a website that  didn't work properly when it was first released. 

When a broken webpage is the worst thing that you can find against your mortal enemy, a man who runs over puppy dogs for fun (sorry, wrong person, that was Dick Cheney), then it’s a pretty strong endorsement of that person.  So, you see, the Republicans have finally admitted that Barack Obama is a pretty good president.

I Want a Rocket Launcher

I find it interesting that the NRA, and many gun owners, are making such a fuss about regulating assault rifles and large magazines.  They insist that weapons bans are a breach of the Second Amendment.  This is interesting because there have been limitations on weapons for many years.  In 1934, Congress passed the National Firearms Act (NFA), in response to the gangster violence that grew out of Prohibition.  The NFA put tight restrictions on machineguns (their wording) and various sawed-off weapons.  The NFA was rewritten in 1968 in response to a court case.  The rewrite extended the act to include “destructive devices” (bombs, missiles, poison gas, etc.).  The Constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms.  However, it doesn't specify that people have the right to own any arms they desire or the right to bear those anywhere they so choose.  The Supreme Court has, on several occasions, upheld laws that regulate arms.  An assault weapons ban would simply be a matter of degree.  If an assault weapons ban would infringe on the Second Amendment, then you can argue that bans against fully-automatic weapons (machineguns), grenades, and cannons also infringe on our Second Amendment rights.  In fact, if the Second Amendment guarantees our right to own any weapon we desire, then, taken to its logical conclusion, the Second Amendment gives us the right to own nuclear missiles; it's just a matter of degree.  Personally, I just want a rocket launcher so I can eliminate slow drivers that insist on driving in the fast lane of the highway.    

We Need to Arm Our Teachers

NRA spokesman Wayne LaPierre, proposed putting armed police officers in all schools to prevent school massacres such as those in Newtown and Columbine.  I think that school resource officers are great, but the idea that they can prevent a school massacre is just plain silly.  Is one officer going to protect the whole school?  At Columbine there were multiple shooters, so the officer would have had to be at 2 places at once.  My daughter’s high school had more than 10 buildings, so a shooter could have easily gone into one building and killed many students and teachers before a police officer in another building even knew what happened.

No, putting a police officer in every school isn't the answer; we need to arm teachers so that every classroom has a person with a gun.  None of the 7 million teachers in the U.S. are mentally unstable, so we won’t have any problems with that.  I’m sure that there would never be a teacher going through a nasty divorce that would get fed-up with a classroom of angelic junior high students and go off the deep end.   People with guns never get jumped, so an angry student could never take a gun away from an armed teacher and start shooting.  Of course, each armed teacher would regularly have tactical training like police do, so they would never accidentally kill innocent people during an incident.  After all, trained New York Police officers only directly shot 3 innocent bystanders when they fired 16 rounds at a murder suspect in front of the Empire State Building last year, the other 6 innocent bystanders were injured by ricocheting bullets that were fired by the police.

Yes, armed teachers are definitely the way to go.

Preventing Subway Violence

I heard today that a young woman pushed a man in front of an oncoming subway train.  This is the second time in less than a month that someone has been killed by being pushed in front of a New York subway train.  People have proposed many ways to reduce these senseless murders, but the solution to this problem is obvious.  We need to place armed teachers at every subway station to curb this epidemic of subway violence.

A Different Perspective on Gun Control

First, some background.  I’m not a member of the NRA.  I do own a gun, but it’s never been fired.  In fact, I haven’t fired a gun since I went to summer camp when I was 12.

A trip to Switzerland after college convinced me that while guns are related to gun violence (duh), they are not the cause of gun violence.  In a Swiss train station I was surprised to see several men carrying assault rifles, and while I was out in the countryside, I heard gunshots.  I was told at the time that the men were simply going to target practice as part of their military service.  I did some research when I got home, and found out that Switzerland doesn't have a regular army, but that Swiss men are required to serve in the militia (National Guard).  To make it harder for an enemy to concur Switzerland, the men keep their weapons at home rather than keeping them in central armories that could be easily captured.  Therefore, many men in Switzerland have either an assault rifle or a handgun at home.  Despite the very high ownership of assault rifles and handguns, there is actually a very low incidence of gun crime in Switzerland.

Many people say that we should outlaw assault rifles because they don’t serve any useful purpose in normal life.  That’s true, but I believe that citizens should have a way to keep governments in check if they become oppressive.  I once heard that no oppressive governments allow citizens to own guns.  That may not be absolutely true, but I know that oppressive governments have a history of taking weapons away from their citizens.  Can assault rifles and hand guns stand up to modern weapons?  Not really, but the Vietnamese didn't have nearly the firepower that America had during the Vietnam War, and they prevailed.

I do believe in a waiting period to purchase firearms because I believe that waiting periods give people who attempt purchase a gun in anger time to calm down and think more rationally. (Yes, a person could stab another person in anger, but ask yourself, in a moment of anger would you be more likely to grab a knife from the kitchen and stab someone or to pull a gun out of a drawer and shoot them?)  On the other hand, I believe that while gun control laws will prevent law abiding citizens from purchasing guns, I know that there are enough guns in America that criminals will find a way to get guns despite gun control laws.

The U.S. Post Office ... "So What" is Our Motto

Yesterday a business sent us a package by United States Post Office Express Mail.  They paid extra to have delivery guaranteed before noon today.  At around 10:00 my in-laws came over.  At 10:30 my mother came over and found a note from the postman saying that they tried to deliver it and we weren't home.  That’s despite the fact that we were one room away from the front door (so we probably would have heard a knock on the door), and we were in the room with the doorbell ringer (so we definitely would have heard the doorbell if the postman rang it).  Everyone makes mistakes, so that comes under the heading “do-do occurs”.

However, the delivery notice said volumes about the Post Office.  If the package had been sent by FedEx, the note would have said that they would retry delivery the next day, or we could pick-up the package between 5:00 & 7:00 p.m. tonight.  In other words, we would have at least been able to get it the same day, and we could have picked it up after normal working hours, when it is more convenient for customers who work.

On the other hand, the delivery notice from the post office gave a couple of options.  We could request redelivery (either online or by filling out the form and leaving it where the carrier can see it).  If you request redelivery, then you have to give the Post Office at least 2 delivery-days notice.  In other words, they will attempt redelivery within 2 days at the earliest; if a weekend is involved, and you fill out the form which will be picked-up the next day, then it could be up to 4 days after the overnight package was supposed to be delivered.  The other option is to pick up the package yourself at the Post Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. the next day.

In other words, if it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight, the USPS really doesn't care, so you better send it FedEx!