Gun control/rights in the US

Gun rights and gun control groups alike have been lobbying Congress for decades to craft legislation in their respective favors. In the past years the gun issue has reached the nation’s highest court more than ever.
Gun control believers want you to believe that if all guns were outlawed then there would be no crime. Gun rights believers want you to understand that it is your constitutional right to own a gun, and it might save your life .

I think that Guns, like other weapons, though more deadly and possibly more convenient to use, are still inanimate objects and are not the cause of violence or killings. They are not responsible for mass shootings like Virginia Tech, Connecticut, etc... People kill not guns. The main problem is about laws, and the illegal sell of guns. More than 90% of guns used in gun crime were obtained through illegal means such as stealing or the black market. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

Also the major piece of gun control  is legislation , the U.S. Code was the assault weapons ban, which passed in 1994 as part of a larger crime bill passed by Congress and signed by then-President Bill Clinton. The ban applied to the manufacture of 19 specific models of semi-automatic firearms and to other guns with assault-weapons features. But the ban expired in 2004, and repeated attempts to renew it have failed.

 Democrats believed their support for the assault weapons ban cost them control of Congress in the 1994 mid-term elections. Whether that's true or not, there's little question that the politics of gun ownership have swung to the right. Republicans largely oppose gun control, and Democrats are split, with some lawmakers cautious about going against the views of more conservative constituencies, especially in rural districts. And in 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in, striking down Washington, D.C.'s blanket ban on handgun ownership in a case known as District of Columbia v. Heller. The ruling established that the Second Amendment to the Constitution -- "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" -- means that individuals, and not just the police and military, may own guns.

Money ,and power also control guns , Gun rights groups have given more than $30 million in individual, PAC and soft money contributions to federal candidates and party committees since 1989, with nearly $27 million -- or 87% -- of it going to Republicans. And in the 2010 and 2012 election cycles, they let loose another $41.2 million (at least) in outside spending, almost all of which has put Democrats in their cross hairs  The NRA has provided the lion's share of the funds, having contributed more than $21 million since '89 and further opening its coffers to make $25 million in outside expenditures.

Gun control groups, by comparison, have been barely a blip on the radar screen. They've given a total of just under $2 million since 1989, of which 94 percent has gone to Democrats. In the 2012 election cycle, they gave only $5,000.

Obama needs to enforce the guns control laws ,the existing background check system fails 99.91% of the time, and isn't a deterrent to gun violence at all.  If fraud and deception occur at a higher rate than 62 out of 72,600, then rather than add to the number of background checks, we should first ask why the Department of Justice didn't pursue more than 44 prosecutions, which is a worse rate of .0606% of all rejected applications.

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, and the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.” 

― Dwight D. Eisenhower

                                      The energy Crisis 

 
We've seen some pretty incredible things blamed on Global Warming over the years, ranging from hurricanes, tornadoes and blizzards to earthquakes and plunging penguin populations.

President Obama has put salvation from dreaded climate catastrophes on his action agenda hot list.  he said at one of his speeches : “We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.” He went on to shame anyone who disagrees with this assessment, saying, “Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and powerful storms.

Governments, and people are behind this climate change, I don't agree with the global warning story , but i recognize that we have to put red flags , because we are going throw a bad environmental situation .  It is natural to assume that if people do not accept the science of climate change, because they do not understand it, or perhaps need to know more about it.
Certainly it is true that someone who knows very little about climate change is unlikely to care a great deal about its consequences so it is important that the facts about climate change are widely known and readily available.

Whether its about the Global warming which is  the accelerated warming of Earth due to an increase in greenhouse gases, particularly from the burning of fossil fuels, or Climate change which is the natural change in global temperatures over time. More specifically, a change in Earth's energy budget can result in both increases and decreases in global temperatures. we should stand up and  do something to stop this . 

"The Earth is getting warmer, but it’s too much of a leap to say that human beings are the reason. There are plenty of natural climate cycles and I believe in being skeptical " that was a conservative view , Fair enough. But this is science, and skepticism has to come within the framework of what we already understand. The scientific method does not simply mean coming up with an idea, or hypothesis, and testing it to see if it is true.
Hypotheses are supposed to be based on our existing body of understanding , based on our current theory. These get tested before wilder and crazier ideas. We don’t just leap to testing whether aliens are using the planet as a dump for the heat from their warp drives. 

Humans ,and government actions are the major cause behind this big change. Recognizing this does not force anyone to oppose pipelines, support a carbon tax, or start composting and wearing hemp shoes. It just opens us up to start aiming our fiery furnace of a political system at actually solving our problems. 

Anyone can go ahead, argue that the economic cost of anti-greenhouse measures doesn't justify the benefit, especially if the planet is getting too hot. Argue that we should look for technical solutions not only to reduce carbon dioxide and methane emissions . at the end humans activities affect a large climate change , true they are not the only suspects ,The climate has changed throughout the Earth’s history, well before humans evolved.

Here some facts;  When humans burn gasoline, coal, natural gas, and other common fuels to make electricity or drive cars, they release a substantial amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. For every gallon (or liter) of gasoline your car burns, 1300 times that volume of CO₂ is released (a gallon of gas weighs about 6 pounds or 2.8 kilograms, but the released CO₂ would weigh over 19 pounds or 8.75 kilograms).

 in the other side Republican says that other issue such as war, taxes, and other things come before the idea of global warming, but far-right-Republicans believe that global warming is false and is an idea all about money for Democrats to raise taxes, and make people pay more. also a lot of Americans don't believe in climate change ,and its because of a lot of facts .

Psychological: The consequences of climate change are too awful to contemplate. Therefore, we're denying the issue, as we used to deny monsters in the room by hiding under the blanket. If you don't look at it, it can't look at you.

Economic: The costs of a large-scale effort to fight global warming are too steep to bear. Therefore, we're trying to ignore the issue, or pretending it doesn't exist, or we believe that the economy (including development) is more important.

Political: The fact that Democrats are always hammering on about climate change and Republicans aren't suggests that this is a political issue, not a scientific one. This creates a feedback loop: if climate change were real, why is it so polarizing? Because it's so polarizing, it must be slightly suspicious.

overall , if we want believe it or not , we are leaving in a bad situation today . the main contributor of climate change is us . We should take our responsibility,and try to find solution instead of blaming outsources. Maybe changing our behaviors ,and taking this serious might minimize the problem side affect . By controlling our day to day life , we can save what is left in the earth. these number are a huge facts about our activities affects.

1. 4% of carbon emissions come from industrial processes
2.  7% come from agriculture – for example methane emissions from livestock and manure, and nitrous oxide emissions from chemical fertilizers
3. 21% carbon emissions from transport 
4. 65% come from the use of fuel to generate energy (excluding transport)
5. About 40% of carbon emissions in the state are the result of decisions taken directly by individuals. The biggest sources of emissions for most people are likely to be

* energy use in the home (the main use is heating) * driving a car* air travel

There other elements of  people's homes that contribute to climate change indirectly. Everything, from furniture to computers, from clothes to carpets, all use energy when it is produced and transported – and this causes carbon emissions to be released.

Being pro-planet is being pro-life. Saving this earth for the next generation is a responsibility of all of us . Lets take a moment and think about this earth that gave us ,and still giving us everything . 

Jalila Guerina 

                                  Still seeking the truth !

 

We all know the official story of September 11th: 4 jetliners were hijacked by groups of four and five Arabic men armed , who proceeded to fly three of the four jets into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. Subsequently the World Trade Center Towers, weakened by the impacts and fires, collapsed into piles of rubble.

 

The FBI had compiled a list of hijackers within three days, and it was so obvious for them that Osama bin Laden had masterminded the operation from caves in Afghanistan, that there was no need to seriously investigate the crime or produce evidence. The "retaliatory" attack on the Taliban would soon commence.

 Is this story true? Its central assumptions have never been tested by an official government body whose members lack obvious conflicts of interest. There are numerous flags in the official story, which requires a long series of highly improbable coincidences. Questioning that story is an act of responsible citizenship.

President George W. Bush addressed Congress, argued that the evidence pointed to al-Qaida, and called for a “war on terror” that “will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated.” He issued an ultimatum against the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which he accused of harboring bin Laden and his network of terrorists. Most Americans Start wondring about U.S Complicity in this tragedy after all the materiel proves founded.

There is a mountain of physical evidence that directly implicates high-level government knowledge and participation in the planning and execution of September 11. Perhaps the most damning evidence lies in the bizarre collapse of WTC Building 7. Anyone familiar with the story of 9/11 knows about the collapse of the WTC North and South Twin-Towers. But a third high rise also fell that day. At 5:20 p.m., the massive 47-story steel frame Building 7, untouched by the hijacked airplanes, imploded in the exact manner of a professionally engineered demolition

 

Also Money connections between Bush Republicans and Osama bin Laden go way back and the political and economic connections have remained unbroken for 20 years. Conveniently ignored in all of the press coverage since the tragic events of Sept. 11 is the fact that on May 17 Secretary of State Colin Powell announced a gift of $43 million to the Taliban as a purported reward for its eradication of Afghanistan's opium crop this February. That, in effect, made the U.S. the Taliban's largest financial

I agree with Robin Cook , when he said that The most high-level source used to support the "al Qaeda doesn't exist" , Robin former British Foreign Secretary told the House of Commons that "Al Qaeda" is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms, and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan.

I hope in the future Truth comes out . America become more strong after this act, I wish the State government think about people lifes, and families before any politic actions,or fake incident . At the end we the people who pay for the big War, The war of power .

 If someone needs to pay the price must be Bush , he is the real terrorist .His actions,and silent made a thousand of people lose their lifes

 “Even the smallest act of service, the simplest act of kindness, is a way to honor those we lost; a way to reclaim that spirit of unity that followed 9/11.” 
Barack Obama

God be with the families victims .

 

Jalila