Senate OK's Gun Bill

[Link]

The bill does not have the full 21 votes it needs to pass yet, but it only needs one more. I do not like this bill since there are alternatives that could be employed.

For my reasons and opinions are listed here in this early post, if you can't be bothered to find it. [Link]

On my other blog, I posted my personal feelings for what has happened. [Link]

Off Topic: It seems I may try to keep this blog afloat now, since it's no longer being graded. Also if you are wondering, "Strange Happenings" is both a personal blog and an even less professional news blog than "Blue in a Red Sea Makes Purple Waters." I cannot assure that I will update this blog on a regular basis, or "Strange Happenings" for the matter.

With that said, goodbye for now.

The Final Response and Assignment

[Link]

This... This just disturbs me and yet intrigues me at the same time. I mean I can see this as a means to help those who actually suffer from this problem avoid long term jail-time, however I can also see abuse of this by negligent mothers. The human mind is an interesting and not entirely understood area that could actually help or harm this bill if we understood it better.

As of right now, I'd rather see this bill not pass, however I'd rather extensive research on the mind of Andrea Yates to see if postpartum psychosis was indeed the case, rather than plain old insanity or malevolence.

It's not that I'm cruel, it's just that I'd like a method of determining postpartum psychosis that is effective before passing this bill.

Much like you (Morgan), I see the scope of the bill, but to retort we do need to focus on the causes of this, even if this bill doesn't do that properly.

Zero Tolerance Punishment: It Fails... Epicly

Ever noticed those fights that broke out in Middle and High School? Ever notice that both students are punished? Now, have you ever seen that happen when only one student is being abusive physically/mentally while the other one is just standing their taking it, not responding to the abuse? Both were suspended.

... Wait, what?

Yes that happens... A lot, or at least with in experience. Good friends, even family have been punished for being in a fight that they were drawn into and either defended themselves/others or simply ignored the person. This is the Zero Tolerance policy that many schools in Texas (at least all the ones I've been to) have. If you were in a fight, punishment, regardless of whether you did anything or acted in self defense.

Senate Bill 2270, authored by Mario Gallegos Jr., was approved by the Texas Senate on Tuesday, April 28, hopes to remedy this. This bill will require schools to look at the factors both sides had during a fight or similar action. Some schools that I know already do this, which results in the non-aggressive receiving a lesser punishment or none at all. Just because the school officials didn't see the fight, does not mean that no one else saw it. Are there problems with this? Yes, but the positive outcome ("Just" punishments(Hopefully you know the differences between just and Just)) will usually out weight the negatives (False witness, profiling, etc).

Somewhat off topic: I am not feeling the inspiration to write like I normally do today, so I wonder if there is any noticeable changes with my writing.

Insert Witty Title Here

Click here to view classmate's post.

To go out on a limb here, I truly believe that trans fats should be highly limited (This is coming from a fat guy's mouth). Some people, like myself, need to improve their diets and the image of the state. I'm going to say, "Wow, I didn't know the obesity was that high," given that I've lived in the Austin area all my life. While I'll say this is step in the right direction, there are still many milestones ahead, such as getting people to be active and proper dieting (which is my problem).

Other than that, I agree with you. (I could have continued on by rambling but decided not to)

Guns + College + Legal Right To Be On = Stupid

Before I enter the "Semi-Rant Zone," here's a news article that should catch you up to speed if you didn't know what was happening/happened/whichever. (For the people of the future)

"Bills would allow guns at college"

OK, I'm all for safety when it comes to a madman on campus with assault rifles, but this has to be one of the stupidest ways to prevent it (Note: "one of", give me time and I'll think up of more stupid ways). Are these people thinking in the least of what the consequences are? Let me list some of the ones I can think of (That means both good and bad).

First off, if allowed, this would mean that just about anyone could walk on a campus and go unnoticed for a long amount of time (unless we up police/security personnel). The only indicators of the person being a potential threat is if they seem unnaturally nervous for a college student/professor or someone recognizes that they are not a student/professor. Already I have turned this into a fear fest' for those in favor of the bill, but be silent and sit back down until I'm done, please.

The second consequence is that in case there is such a shooting, there will be a minimal loss of life (I see the bright side of things don't I?), maybe. First factor in that guns versus guns typically ends up being a 50-50 chance of you surviving and wounding/killing the attacker. Fists versus guns... Yeah you're screwed, provided that no one else is around you and the gunman is just randomly gunning people down (Never said this was going to be pretty). In a group (large, hopefully) the best option is to listen to the gunman if he is taking hostages (Hopefully) or if they are randomly gunning people down, rather than wait to be shot (provided police aren't there or won't arrive in time) rush them and stop them before even more are harmed.

Gah... This is coming out more like a survival guide, rather than an editorial. Using this moment, let me explain my reasoning for my survival instructions.

Firstly, this bill/idea will not end the shootings. It may deter people who are not willing to go up against an armed group, which is the idea, however those who are crazy/suicidal enough will have no qualms and in fact may do this simply because of the damage it could cause (Meaning more than now).

Secondly (continuation of the "Second consequence"), these people probably don't care what they're aiming at, while you do. Despite needing a license/permit (To be honest, I don't know how you acquire one in Texas) to carry a gun, you may not be able to shoot another person, even in self defense. This causes a problem, either you won't shoot (effectively making the gun useless in your hands) or you will, and not aim at the person in an attempt to scare them which hits someone else, though unintentional. Unless you can use a gun properly, meaning aim and can shoot someone intentionally without mental trauma, this is a losing situation.

Finally, why give us guns? Couldn't we just find some way to up all campus security? Though we are the masters of our own domains, most of us couldn't defend ourselves properly. And though I may be able to say what I think is a good way to defend myself and others, but there is always another way to do things (Meaning heed my advice, but talk to a professional for better ways).

To finish, I care about the lives of others (I may never seem like it though) and to be honest I hope a bill like this will never pass until it is absolutely needed. If you want us to be safer, invest in mental health research and more police officers (who are competent). Prevent the problem from reaching us before we have to deal with the bloody mess.

And Science Weeps...

“Analyze, Evaluate And Critique” Becomes New “Strenghts & Weaknesses” For Science Educators In Texas (Copy pasted Title)

To start off, I have nothing against Creationists wishing for Their Children to learn what they think is right, just don't drag Us into it. I understand that you wish for me to see all sides of an issue (I think I do a better job of it than you may think) such as Evolution and Theistic Evolution Vs. Intelligent Design (Link) however, Religion and Science should not mix at the same time, that's a disaster waiting to happen. Teach Evolution, Global Warming, and Physics in the classroom, unfiltered and if you wish for your child to see the Religious side, send them to Sunday School or teach them your self. But wait a moment... Don McLeroy, State Board of Education Chair, doesn't like this kind of idea apparently (See the second link) and sees this as Evil or something. You just can't please everyone.

Edited in: (Gah... Why do I forget to talk about the article itself?) OK, I'll give Vince Leibowitz points for including documents for us to read and make opinions on ourselves. However, the majority of the post is simply these documents/statements, with some seething commentary (Like I'm one to talk) sandwiched between these. This is nice, but I want to know your opinion fully, not snipets derived from the documents/statements. Other than that, it's a good editorial, at least in my opinion.

And now my thoughts: This is going to have negative repercussions in the future (I mean, look at our current TAKS Science scores, they're terrible already or at least that's what I saw in High School, not mine though). Albeit, the wording has hardly changed how we treat Science, it has opened the floodgates for things that hold no ground in the field of Science. However, this may not be such a bad thing. Seeing as how everything seems to be pointing towards the ideas of Evolution and Global Warming as truth (Physics is true for the most part, as is Mathematics, which is true, Period) so seeing the opposite side may trigger a "Hey this side keeps saying the same thing, but this side makes a reasonable argument so let's listen to them." This however holds true for the opposite side, so it's a matter of perspective.

Why can't we just learn Science in class and then outside of it decide if it conflicts with our beliefs, not force everyone to adhere to someone else's beliefs?

It's that thing we talked about in class that one day...

You know... That thing...

Let me start out by saying, I do not particularly like abortions, however I have nothing against them and see that they're necessary at times. To sum it up, I'm a man for one, and two even if I was a woman, IT'S NOT MY BODY.

I really don't see why this is an issue that needs to be brought up, other than debating it on an individual level (Meaning: Argue with friends). Of course this is America (Texas included) and we obviously care about educating people on safer sex practices. "/sarcasm" This idea would be plausible, note that it would be far from the best, if people ACTUALLY ADOPT CHILDREN OF PARENTS WHO ARE NOT ABLE TO CARE FOR THEM ADEQUATELY. Clearly this is a good idea and should pass. "/rant"

Scare tactics, really? It's such an underhanded move that is only supposed to be used as a last resort. If Perry and the other Hyper "Family Values" people feel so strongly about this, then develop a method to transfer the fetuses to their own bodies. The ethical shortcomings of this idea should counteract the ones from their idea.

Hrmm... If I keep at this I'm going to end up going to bed with this rant in my head. Kelso, I agree with you, they should acquire medical degrees and join their respective, if applies, priesthood.

To note, I spared you, the reader, the full of what I wanted to say. I don't think dropping F-bombs that often would be kind to your eyes.

EDIT: Now a day later, I've calmed down a bit. There's not much I could add that Kelso has not already said. The only thing I could really comment on is the use of ultrasound and listening to the heartbeat. While the ultrasound has been around for awhile, listening to the fetus' heartbeat could have a drastic effect on the mother if, at that point or later, she has to abort it due to health reasons. Psychological damage is difficult to recover from, and if the mother does experience it, which she most likely will given what this tactic is being used for, it will scar her from ever wanting to have a child again. Provided what I said is a tad extreme, it could happen. All I can say about the ultrasound is do away with it, unless the mother wants it. It seems like a waste of money to me. Same with the heartbeat thing.