Of the Guns and the Roses
Your fragile, folded wings,
Are just tired from the pure blue sky.
You don't have to force your smiles for anyone,
It's okay to smile for yourself...
Sometimes anime songs just have nice, meaningful lyrics.
Today i went to have the stitch on my eye taken out and boy, was it sick. The guy had some cor-something soemthing forceps and he took a full 5minutes or so plucking and cutting at my EYEBALL to remove the stitch, while i had to keep still whilst i experienced plucking and tugging sounds and feelings. Thank goodness he shone light at the eye to make me blinded or i would have freaked.
The guys had a match against ACS(I), too and they lost 2-1, conceding the last point in the last inning. I couldn't catch the match due to infection prevention measures but apparently Albert said u guys did well and didnt scold you all, so that speaks alot for itself. Anyhow i shall reiterate and say that for the year ones, you have next year and i'm quite confident you'll own it all under Edmunds (and hopefully the V-cap's) steady leadership and the boons of having strong and bonded year two (now year one) players. Just remember to elect the next leader based on leadership, not talent or age or experience.
Reading the papers, most educated people around the world will probably know about the Virginia Tech massacre where a korean man named Cho killed 32 people before commiting suicide. The media, critics, human rights activists and whoever-else have all slammed it on the ease that the state allows guns to be bought. Many also believe that the very fact guns are legal and easily accessible in the country to be a discerning facotr for the US and other countries' high levels of homicides. They protest for guns to be made illegal, they despise the government for their political motives behind sticking to the highly popular gun laws and the idea of "Freedom America". They hope for an America without households with guns, where the streets are safe to roam, they hope it comes soon for they fear more school/workplace shootings.
However, it is not so simple to prohibit guns all of a sudden. It is not merely the political blow that senators and ministers and whatsnots will suffer. It is not merely the implications of shackles and chains that the government would show that matters. It simply the human nature of greed and distrust that hamstrings any such ideas.
Imagine the banning of guns in civilian possession, where guns that have been sold have to be retrieved. Then think of the illegal arms circulating in the country, and of arms whose records have been lost. Certainly people who own such guns would not be willing to surrender their prized possessions, made even more valuable by the fact its illegal. You may suggest checks and investigations, but America is vast and the gun is almost considered a household item, besides, the very notion of "checking for unpatriotic possession of arms" would certainly go against the red blue and white of liberty. Then the problem gets worse, previously in shootings and robberies at least it was the "armed versus the armed" but now its the "armed versus the housewife". Owning a firearm gives criminals power increased exponentially with every other gun surrendered, and with such power, comes greater motivation to break the law with it. Such potetntial victims would thus be driven to protect their own rights, to strive to keep arms for themselves, to defend themselves. The ideal may be achieved, but society will be in greater danger.
Then consider the sheer amount of surrendered firearms. What would the government do with them? Melting them down would be un-economical for pragmatic America and that leaves exporting them to other nations, endangering their societies. When such exports are not enough, the government tries to lobby around the own laws it has created, to try to sell back these guns to "trustworthy" and " certified" people. Going back to problem number one, the availability of guns.
On a second note, melting the guns down would probably required copious amounts of pollution to facilitate and that certainly would piss off those involved in the Kyoto protocol further. Of course its also pertinent to note that America refused to be part of it on the stand that China and India were not included due to their status as develping nations. That makes 3, 3 power-consuming superpowers who could single handedly reverse any effects of the Kyoto protocol. So whats the point of the Kyoto protocol? To ensure that the pollution isn't even more? Or is it an attempt to show the world that involved nations care about the rising problem of pollution?
Haze, global warming, the list of detrimental effects that pollution can create is almost endless. The flowers are dying, the trees are falling, the seas are rising and what do we do? We seek to reduce present causes of such pollution whilst science rushes on at a blindingly blistering pace, creating even more avenues for destruction. There is a part in Dan Brown's book Angels and Demons where there is a speech on "science versus religion". It is too lengthy to quote here but it does show off a key point- that science is progressing at a pace that is exponential, whose limits do not merely multiply with minds but multiply upon each other to create unimaginable possibilities. But we cannot stop science, its mammoth march is not stoppable for man has a need for knowledge and understanding and each new discovery creates new questions, making it an infinite quest. All we can do is control its pace, to dedicate more to contol the side effects of our research. To control our basest nature to utilise the power that we are given but cannot truly grasp.
"It took man thousands of years to progress from the wheel to the car but only decades from the car to space." - Dan Brown, Angels and Demons.
Are just tired from the pure blue sky.
You don't have to force your smiles for anyone,
It's okay to smile for yourself...
Sometimes anime songs just have nice, meaningful lyrics.
Today i went to have the stitch on my eye taken out and boy, was it sick. The guy had some cor-something soemthing forceps and he took a full 5minutes or so plucking and cutting at my EYEBALL to remove the stitch, while i had to keep still whilst i experienced plucking and tugging sounds and feelings. Thank goodness he shone light at the eye to make me blinded or i would have freaked.
The guys had a match against ACS(I), too and they lost 2-1, conceding the last point in the last inning. I couldn't catch the match due to infection prevention measures but apparently Albert said u guys did well and didnt scold you all, so that speaks alot for itself. Anyhow i shall reiterate and say that for the year ones, you have next year and i'm quite confident you'll own it all under Edmunds (and hopefully the V-cap's) steady leadership and the boons of having strong and bonded year two (now year one) players. Just remember to elect the next leader based on leadership, not talent or age or experience.
Reading the papers, most educated people around the world will probably know about the Virginia Tech massacre where a korean man named Cho killed 32 people before commiting suicide. The media, critics, human rights activists and whoever-else have all slammed it on the ease that the state allows guns to be bought. Many also believe that the very fact guns are legal and easily accessible in the country to be a discerning facotr for the US and other countries' high levels of homicides. They protest for guns to be made illegal, they despise the government for their political motives behind sticking to the highly popular gun laws and the idea of "Freedom America". They hope for an America without households with guns, where the streets are safe to roam, they hope it comes soon for they fear more school/workplace shootings.
However, it is not so simple to prohibit guns all of a sudden. It is not merely the political blow that senators and ministers and whatsnots will suffer. It is not merely the implications of shackles and chains that the government would show that matters. It simply the human nature of greed and distrust that hamstrings any such ideas.
Imagine the banning of guns in civilian possession, where guns that have been sold have to be retrieved. Then think of the illegal arms circulating in the country, and of arms whose records have been lost. Certainly people who own such guns would not be willing to surrender their prized possessions, made even more valuable by the fact its illegal. You may suggest checks and investigations, but America is vast and the gun is almost considered a household item, besides, the very notion of "checking for unpatriotic possession of arms" would certainly go against the red blue and white of liberty. Then the problem gets worse, previously in shootings and robberies at least it was the "armed versus the armed" but now its the "armed versus the housewife". Owning a firearm gives criminals power increased exponentially with every other gun surrendered, and with such power, comes greater motivation to break the law with it. Such potetntial victims would thus be driven to protect their own rights, to strive to keep arms for themselves, to defend themselves. The ideal may be achieved, but society will be in greater danger.
Then consider the sheer amount of surrendered firearms. What would the government do with them? Melting them down would be un-economical for pragmatic America and that leaves exporting them to other nations, endangering their societies. When such exports are not enough, the government tries to lobby around the own laws it has created, to try to sell back these guns to "trustworthy" and " certified" people. Going back to problem number one, the availability of guns.
On a second note, melting the guns down would probably required copious amounts of pollution to facilitate and that certainly would piss off those involved in the Kyoto protocol further. Of course its also pertinent to note that America refused to be part of it on the stand that China and India were not included due to their status as develping nations. That makes 3, 3 power-consuming superpowers who could single handedly reverse any effects of the Kyoto protocol. So whats the point of the Kyoto protocol? To ensure that the pollution isn't even more? Or is it an attempt to show the world that involved nations care about the rising problem of pollution?
Haze, global warming, the list of detrimental effects that pollution can create is almost endless. The flowers are dying, the trees are falling, the seas are rising and what do we do? We seek to reduce present causes of such pollution whilst science rushes on at a blindingly blistering pace, creating even more avenues for destruction. There is a part in Dan Brown's book Angels and Demons where there is a speech on "science versus religion". It is too lengthy to quote here but it does show off a key point- that science is progressing at a pace that is exponential, whose limits do not merely multiply with minds but multiply upon each other to create unimaginable possibilities. But we cannot stop science, its mammoth march is not stoppable for man has a need for knowledge and understanding and each new discovery creates new questions, making it an infinite quest. All we can do is control its pace, to dedicate more to contol the side effects of our research. To control our basest nature to utilise the power that we are given but cannot truly grasp.
"It took man thousands of years to progress from the wheel to the car but only decades from the car to space." - Dan Brown, Angels and Demons.
posted by slipperdan at 7:47 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home