So, in the Fallon Fox MMA saga the buffoon who decided to spew his hateful ignorance on TV last week has been suspended "indefinitely" for his breach of the UFC Code of Conduct (story here). It has now made it's way to be national news.
As for me - I finished the last 700 miles of the drive yesterday to get home. Good weather, good roads, truck ran great - I think the thing that's worse for wear at the moment is my neck. But overall, I tried to split up the 2,000 miles over the 4 days so that no single day involved over 10 hrs. of driving. That's probably a good life rule.
The lowest gas I saw was $3.08/gal at one gas station in VA. I also saw prices as high as $3.85 in other parts of VA, closer to DC. Typical prices were around $3.50. Needless to say, my Big-A$$-Truck needs be to fed fairly frequently...
Lots going on in the world.
N. Korea preparing to test some missiles. I look at the news every morning when I get up to see if a war has started there yet.
Conversations about guns are like conversations about religion or politics - they evoke strong responses. A gun control "deal" appears to be making its way for a vote in Washington. It's a significantly watered down version of what was originally proposed in terms of banning certain items including a wide arrange of firearms and limited magazine capacities. The version being proposed specifically focuses on universal background checks (supported by 90% of US citizens based on recent polls). I made no secret that I truly don't think that the originally proposed "gun control" would significantly reduce gun violence (which is the reason it's being considered in the first place) and was a simplistic knee-jerk reaction to a single specific tragic event.
Whereas I didn't support those original farther-reaching bans, I can support the background check push. However, I perceive that it's affects will be more symbolic than real. Should that prevent it from passing? No. But the argument that much of the gun violence in this country happens with guns that are obtained illegally so the most significant affect will be on law-abiding, responsible gun-owners is a compelling one that I don't think will be significantly affected by background checks. Congress feels compelled to do something, and I feel that this will be that thing.
Personally, as a gun owner, I feel that something along the line of ensuring gun buyers demonstrate some sort of knowledge of responsible gun ownership would have as much of an effect on accidental gun deaths in this country. How to clean it. How to store it. How to keep it away from kids. As far as I'm concerned, responsible ownership of a firearm is just as (or more) important than being able to buy one.
Individual states are implementing their own restrictions. Connecticut just passed the most restrictive gun-control legislation in the country. But a USA Today headline story earlier this week is more concerning for me - the fact that some states are looking to slap significant taxes on ammunition. For example, it says that Maryland is proposing a 50% tax on ammunition, and California is considering a 5-cent tax on every bullet. Needless to say, I won't be buying ammunition in Maryland or CA.
I was looking at some firearm death statistics and was shocked to learn that there are more deaths annually from self-inflicted gunshot wounds (ie suicides) than homicides. In 2010 there were ~11,000 homicide deaths involving firearms, compared with nearly 20,000 suicide gunshot deaths! (link here). Suicides overtook motor vehicle deaths as the #1 cause of injury death (story here).
Anyway, it's a complicated topic and all I can say is that I'm VERY careful, and I don't expect to become a statistic in any of those categories.
On a lighter topic - I enjoy breakfasts. This morning I made myself some scrambled eggs, covered them with pepper jack cheese, some salsa, and a dollop of sour cream. Mmmmmm. Now that's the way to start a day.