Baron Josef von Kronen's posts with tag: bill-of-rights
These are perilous times for America. I hate to sound cliche or fear-mongering in my first blog in nearly a month, but I've had this pervasive feeling in the back of my mind for the last while. It's percolated past a previous precedent to pestilent proportions.
The pernicious problem presides in Congress.
 Besides having one of the lowest approval ratings in Congressional history, and in all rating systems ever, most likely (yes, that means they have worse ratings than The View), Congress is doing something else that's reasonably suspect. They're limiting our freedoms.
I've always pictured myself as a hybrid between a conservative and a Libertarian, which is sort of an awkward cross. A truly far-right conservative puts values on some personal restrictions to preserve (or, *cough*, "conserve") traditional family values. An example of this might be gay marriage. As a conservative, I can't see giving them a "marriage" as the right thing to do. I want to give them something else that's similar, but not really the same thing. That's the legal aspect of it. The Libertarian streak in me says that when it comes to two consenting adults in a private bedroom, they can do whatever the hell they want. That's personal freedom.
A firestorm erupted when the Supreme Court was considering taking up the DC handgun case. It escalated to a higher degree when they actually did take it up. The Supreme Court, to simplify it, is really at a four-four lib-conservative split. It's almost always one judge who is the wild card that makes the decision -- and his name escapes me. I believe it's Anton Scalia or Justice Kennedy.
Anyway, point being that all this hell was raised: "Are they gonna take our guns away? Will it set a precedent for further measures to take more guns away?" and "Will it make our streets safer? Will it set a precedent for further measures to make the streets safer?" Really, though, it came down to splitting hairs on an amendment that pretty much spells it out.
As an avid gun shooter and owner of multiple firearms, as a person who hopes to be able to defend myself should the need present itself, and as a right-wing Libertarian, I'm ecstatic the decision was made to overturn the handgun ban.
It would have been a monumental blow to our rights to have a Supreme Court spit in the face of the Second Amendment like that. Freedom loving Americans can breathe a sigh of relief. My axe to grind, as I mentioned earlier, is with Congress.
Our rights are being nibbled at more and more every day that Congress meets. This is a fairly repeated phrase, really, and people just tend to nod their heads and walk along. Apathy is what's killing America.
On December 19, 2007, Congress eliminated a freedom that will affect undoubtedly every American with nary a blink from Big Media or the populace. I blogged about it about a month later in an entry called "Live Green or Die Trying." 43 people saw the entry. I don't think any of us realized the repercussions of that particular measure, though.
Congress banned incandescent bulbs, the round kind that most of us have, by 2014. The only viable alternatives right now are compact fluorescent bulbs and whale blubber. (Damn, the Japanese have a monopoly on that market and the eco-libs vow energy independence... CFLs it is, then.) Frankly, I suspect they are going to phase-out the bulbs by disallowing the sale of the bulbs which'll have a trickle-down effect, but I plan on stockpiling incandescent. That, of course, is another rant entirely...
While freedom to light bulbs isn't in the Bill of Rights, I believe that "liberty" is in one of those old documents -- "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Frankly, I think Congress has more important issues to deal with than what light bulbs we use. Besides, this is America and I want to choose my own damn light bulbs.
There might be some caribou on an ice float in the ozone layer that'll be impacted by my desk lamp, but it's my decision: freedom of choice. I know that there needs to be some regard shown to the environment, but it isn't like America -- at least in theory -- to do things this way. Tobacco is bad for people, but can you imagine the uprising if Congress tried to phase it out, first cigars, then cigarettes, then chew, and finally Nicorette?
I think the government took a pretty good road with tobacco, actually. You can still get tobacco, but there is an exorbitant tax on the stuff. If you want it, you can get it, for a price. That is using the economy and the markets to influence people's buying habits. I think that while this is still questionable when orchestrated, it's a better alternative to just banning the stuff outright considering it happens all the time. Look at the sudden upswing in people taking advantage of public transportation. The force of economics taking form of $4 gas is forcing people's habits, likewise with tobacco. Tobacco users should be allowed to do what they want -- even if that means giving themselves lung cancer in the privacy of their own home.
"I don't believe in a government that protects us from ourselves."
-Ronald Reagan
The average incandescent is what, $0.50? Most CFLs are about $3. As they get used more, of course, the price will come down. But let's say that instead of phasing out the bulbs, Congress put a $2 tax on the 100-watt bulb in 2012, $2 on the 60 by 2013 and $2 on the 40-watt by 2014. While it would have undoubtedly made some people angry, that money could go towards corn mash, dry ice, and parachutes for those caribou stranded in the upper atmosphere or some other environmental project of your choosing.
You see, though, it's not just big decisions like the DC gun ban case or the amendments to the FISA that are pieces of your freedom at risk. It happens every session Congress meets.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
-Mark Twain
| |
