Why Should we Pass More Gun Control?

First things first.
We all believe in some amount of gun control.

I think we should only sell T-shirt guns and water cannons but that's just me. 

T-shirt guns are the best cause they're the only gun where when you get shot, you cheer!

But you believe in some form of gun control too.
Ask yourself this:
Should people be able to buy Tanks?
Rocket Launchers?
Machine Guns?

The point is everyone believes in some amount of gun control. Machine Guns were used in America early in the 20th Century as a gang weapon until we banned them. No one really disagrees with that move now, many years later. We don't miss them.

So Semi-Automatic Assault weapons.
This is the crux of what Obama wants to Reban. I say reban because technically these guns were banned from 1994 till 2004, though there were so many loopholes that it didn't ban much.

We could debate over whether or not they are automatic or assault guns or what that means but I don't think that's 100% relevant. They are military grade weapons being sold to the public at large.
No one uses them for hunting.
They're used for battle.

So the sensible majority of the country doesn't understand why any lawful citizen would have need for a weapon designed not for hunting, or sport, or self defense, but battle. "Surely we can agree as a society", the correct majority thinks, "that we don't need weapons designed for battle in the hands of anyone and everyone!"

But there is a fringe minority that thinks weapons for battle are exactly what they need. That defending against Tyranny is the duty of every American Citizen. If you think I'm making this up check out Alex Jones ranting on Piers Morgan. 

We need gun control because we need to come to our senses and talk through our problems rather than prepare to make war.
It's time we all take a chill pill.
And start preparing to make peace.  

Drones, huh, yeah, what are they good for?

Yesterday, Jan 7th, 2013, an American drone strike in Northern Pakistan killed at least 8 suspected militants and possibly an Al Qaeda operative, according to the Associated Press.
If you haven't heard about drones before, they are unmanned planes that fly amongst the clouds and drop precision bombs from the sky.
Basically metal birds with explosive diarrhea.

Are they the best or the worst way to fight terrorists?
You could argue that they are the best because no Americans are in harm's way, their strikes are more precise than all previous technology, and there is less collateral damage than in a ground war.
You could argue that they are the worst because there is almost total secrecy around them, we use them in countries with which we are not at war, and the collateral damage they cause breeds chaos and hostility.
Like Dickens said,
"It was the best of Drones, it was the worst of Drones."

But however you feel about Drones you should know that Obama uses them regularly.
Obama has used drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.
Obama has killed an American born citizen with a drone strike.
Obama has carried out more drone strikes than George W. Bush.

I'm not saying that there are any easy answers with these issues.
I'm saying these are interesting and hard issues that we must grapple with.
Just like that old song says, we have to ask ourselves:
"Drones, huh, yeah, what are they good for?"