Gun control silliness

I don't recall if I've ever stated this here before, but I get deeply concerned whenever a politician gloms onto a hot-button topic and states "we have to do something now."  It's even worse when "for the children" gets added to the mix... it implies, at best, a snap decision is being made, or, at worst, that circumstances are being used to justify attempting things they otherwise couldn't get away with.

Well, it's been a month or so since that Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, and plans are starting to come out of Washington D.C., which is pretty quick for that bunch.  Surprisingly, nobody looks to be jumping on the "bash movies/video games/comic books" bandwagon, and there's some attention being paid to both mental health issues and actually letting gun violence studies happen, which is all to the good.  However, there's also gun-control-related ideas being pushed on Congress, which is just a little bit silly.

First, there's the "assault weapons" ban some are looking for.  Frankly, trying to ban cosmetic features on weapons is worse than useless... and trying to ban non-cosmetic features, like semi-automatic fire, strays dangerously close to Second Amendment territory.

Second, there's the suggested ban on "high-capacity" magazines.  Now, this is a bit of an over-simplification, but a magazine is just a box with a spring-loaded panel... even years back, trying to stop someone from building a box with a spring in it, or sawing off and modifying an existing box, would be pretty foolish... and now, in the modern age of 3D printing, it's laughable.

No, if you want effective gun control, you're going to have to do something about that pesky Second Amendment, by passing another amendment to the Constitution.  Of course, that would involve cooperation and compromise between the two parties, which simply isn't in the cards, especially on this issue... or, if you want to reach even further, we could try the Constitutional Convention route, but I don't see any of a number of vested interests letting that come to pass without some serious opposition.  So, how about we give this a rest, and get back to pressing issues that are at least theoretically within our grasp, like the economy and a balanced budget?

Fiscal silliness

In our continuing efforts to never pay our debts, America's in the throes of another round of sound-and-fury about the latest "fiscal cliff".  The last one was avoided mere days ago, with a 13th-hour deal to limit how much everybody's taxes will go up this year.  However, it was beyond our Congress' ability to tackle the spending end at the same time... end result, we're slated to run into our debt limit shortly, and positions are so firmly entrenched that some people are looking for increasingly-out-there ways to get "free money", so they don't have to worry about little things like spending limits.  One such that's gotten more than its share of attention lately:  the trillion dollar coin.

Pretty much everybody (with the exception of a few die hard supporters) seems to agree that, even if technically legal, it's an extraordinarily bad idea... yet, that's not stopping the idea from reaching ever higher up the media food chain.  In fact, while listening to NPR this afternoon, they were actually talking about whose face should be on the coin, should it ever get printed.  I've seen many ideas on this topic from various places, but I think they all fall short.  There's only one visage suitable for such a coin, should it ever be printed:  Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico.  Not only was he eccentric/deranged, he printed his own currency and convinced businesses in San Francisco to accept it at face value.  It's that sort of thinking that's gotten us where we are today, so why not commemorate it properly?