Federal Bureau of Inconsistency

A little less than a year ago, on July 29, 2015, the FBI released a statement that wasn’t covered by any of the major news outlets, wasn’t the leading story on the local news, and was never committed to the black and white of the newspaper. It wasn’t news “worthy of dissemination” but, given the recent statement issued by FBI Director James B. Comey regarding Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server the verdict announced last summer is finally being brought to light. First, let us review a small section of the statement from 2015:

“Bryan H. Nishimura, 50, of Folsom, pleaded guilty today to unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials, United States Attorney Benjamin B. Wagner announced… According to court documents, Nishimura was a Naval reservist deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment. In the United States, Nishimura continued to maintain the information on unclassified systems in unauthorized locations, and copied the materials onto at least one additional unauthorized and unclassified system.”

When looking at the “crime” and the penalty it is pretty straightforward and should be easily applied to future situations. This is especially true when you consider the fact that this is pretty much a textbook example of Section 793, subsection (f),”Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information“, of the US Code which outlines the following:

“Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”

So now let us consider the case at hand. While clearly a much more complicated investigation than the one previously detailed, the results are much more concise in the transgressions committed by Secretary Clinton during her time at the State Department. First let us determine if any of those emails contained classified information that would warrant charges based on the aforementioned statute. For this, I reference two sections from the recently issued statement:  

“From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent… Because she was not using a government account—or even a commercial account like Gmail—there was no archiving at all of her e-mails, so it is not surprising that we discovered e-mails that were not on Secretary Clinton’s system in 2014, when she produced the 30,000 e-mails to the State Department.”

…

“Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”

And, just as in the case of Bryan H. Nishimura, intention is not a factor in determining whether or not someone has broken the law. There is a reason why security measures are in place, systems are monitored, and all correspondences are catalogued… these are steps we need to take to protect our information and maintain the level of security necessary in this world. While the FBI is kid in the following section, I would qualify the actions of the State Department, including Secretary Clinton, as grossly negligent:

“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information… None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”

What really matters here is that this was a breach of national security and, while they haven’t been able to determine whether or not hostile parties have accessed classified information the FBI admitted noted that “…we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.” We were put at great risk by Secretary Clinton and she should be facing charges. But…

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case… To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.”

And there is the double standard clearly stated by the FBI Director himself. Of course, today’s testimony makes me think a little about his “interesting” perspective on the law:

Yet Comey said while Clinton showed “great carelessness,” he did not see evidence she and those with whom she corresponded “knew when they did it they were doing something that was against the law.”

He said no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case based only on what is known as “gross negligence.” At the same time, he suggested that if Clinton had worked at the FBI, she could be subject to a range of disciplinary measures including suspension or termination.

“You could be walked out,” he said.

Basically, he is stating that if you get pulled over on the highway but you didn’t realize that you were speeding then you didn’t break the law. Yeah, my head hurts too. While there are many trying to assign motive to Director Comey, I am not going to do so, his more recent statements pretty much sum up his thought process and qualification to hold his position.

All I will say is that there is no way I will ever trust Secretary Clinton… not now and certainly not as someone running for the Presidency. But, if you believe in double standards and hypocrisy, by all means cast your vote for Hillary. Personally, I would much rather vote for someone who believes in self-sufficiency and personal responsibility… but I will settle for Trump.  

Rant Time: Protesters And Immigration

It has been about a month since I thought about writing this post but I wanted to give it a little time and think about what I wanted to say. In this instance, that was the wrong approach as the rant has, for lack of a better term, festered a bit. So, what got me riled up? It was all the protesters taking to the streets of Philadelphia in mid April… most of which should have been charged, at the very least, with disturbing the peace.  

I don’t have anything against protests in general as there are many messages and policies about which people are passionate about whether they are right or wrong to hold those views. However, the recent trend has been to, at best, disrupt the lives of those in the vicinity of the marching and chanting and, at worst, simply a collection of misguided hooligans that could care less about the negative impact that they have on those around them. A prime example of the latter occurred during the morning rush hour last month when a small group gathered in Old City with no clear message but with the purpose of simply terrorizing those who got in their way. This small gathering was only the preamble to mass chanting of vitriol slogans during the protests during the evening rush hour.

While many of the “peaceful” protesters that have recently come out of the woodwork there is nothing peaceful about the words that they are using or simply their actions during these gatherings. In many cases there is no question that they are using this ‘peaceful means of expression’ to incite violence and hatred (for which there are a few that should be charged accordingly). In the above mentioned incident, those involved in that small group in Old City should be facing charges as they were clearly guilty of false imprisonment (a woman was unable to move her car or get out of her car) and corruption of minors (they encouraged kids on their way to school to participate in their act of harassment). But, not surprisingly, no charges have been filed.

Unfortunately, I wouldn’t expect anything else from a city that insists on breaking the law. Following the Obama administration’s campaign to only deport those ‘undocumented workers’ who commit a crime, many delusional cities have declared sanctuary status including Philadelphia in January of this year. While the DHS directive birthed from that declaration has citied that enforcement will only occur if the person in question is a known criminal or breaks any additional laws after illegally entering the United States. Guess what, I am not buying that load of crap!

Let’s make things really simple. If I break the law, I should be held accountable. By entering the country illegally, by breaking the law, you have committed a crime and the penalty for that crime is to be deported. It is a rather cut and dry matter. The government is not to be held accountable should you have children in the United States (they would be citizens in this instance and cannot be deported) after illegally entering the county… it was your decision to not obey the laws of this country. You are the one tearing apart your family.

Am I saying that the immigration system is perfect? Heck no, it is broken to say the least. But there are many departments and agencies in this country that could be described as FUBAR but that doesn’t mean that we can simply ignore the laws and regulations enforced by those agencies… the IRS is a perfect example of this. Unfortunately, there are misguided politicians in this country that are declaring sanctuary status for their cities. And they should be held accountable for their actions as well as they are aiding and abetting a known criminal with the possibility of criminal conspiracy charges being leveled should it be proven that this was a coordinated and calculated effort to break the law. Arrest them or impeach them (or both) but hold them accountable for their actions like the rest of us are in our daily lives.

But, for now, enforce the law. Don’t just overlook the criminal acts of others and hand out free passes. We have to be held accountable for our own actions and we must protect ourselves and our rights before simply handing them over to others. Now, if you want to see the system changed, get involved. Don’t just start yelling in the streets and making hollow declarations. Take action and put forth the effort to effect change in this country. After all, 99% of the people in these protests are the ones who voted for change in the first place but what are they doing to influence the process and make progress on the policies about which they hold the greatest passion?

However, don’t preach about the rights of others with one breath and try to strip the rights from law abiding citizens in the next like I have heard many politicians and protesters do as they jump from an immigration rally to an anti-gun rally! My rights are not on the table, they are not for debate, and any politician in Pennsylvania should face impeachment should they question that right.

Firearms Friday: FUBAR Laws (Chicago Edition)

This past week, everywhere I turned while walking the streets of Chicago I saw signs in the windows and on the doors stating that there were no firearms allowed. It was a rather disturbing sight as I felt a little uncomfortable knowing that the only people that would be carrying in those buildings are law enforcement and those who consciously decided to break the law. While I certainly have no problem with the former, it is the latter group that bothered me. After all, law abiding gun owners are not the problem facing this country, illegal firearms ownership is the issue and I seriously doubt that a sign would prevent them from walking through the door especially when they know that no one inside is armed.

Further, those residents in the state of Illinois have to deal with a myriad of other restrictions. Wikipedia actually does a pretty good job summarizing the hoops that law abiding gun owners must jump through both to purchase and to carry a firearm in the state (keep in mind that the city of Chicago is a whole different beast altogether):

To legally possess firearms or ammunition, Illinois residents must have a Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card, which is issued by the Illinois State Police to any qualified applicant. Non-residents who may legally possess firearms in their home state are exempt from this requirement.

The state police issue permits for the concealed carry of handguns to qualified applicants age 21 or older who pass a 16-hour training course. However, any law enforcement agency can object to an individual being granted a permit "based upon a reasonable suspicion that the applicant is a danger to himself or herself or others, or a threat to public safety". Objections are considered by a Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board, which decides whether or not the permit will be issued, based on "a preponderance of the evidence". Permits issued by other states are not recognized. Open carry is prohibited in most areas. Without a concealed carry permit, a firearm must be unloaded and enclosed in a case when it is being transported.

There is a waiting period to take possession after purchasing a firearm — 72 hours for a handgun, or 24 hours for a rifle or shotgun. For private sales, the seller must verify the buyer's FOID card, and keep a record of the sale for at least 10 years. Lost or stolen guns must be reported to the police. Possession of automatic firearms, short-barreled shotguns, or suppressors is prohibited. Possession of short-barreled rifles is permitted only for those who have an ATF Curios and Relics license or are a member of a military reenactment group.

Illinois has state preemption only for certain areas of gun law, and some local governments have enacted ordinances that are more restrictive than those of the state.

It is no wonder why Chicago has such a low crime rate! Oh wait, that doesn’t quite add up now does it. Thankfully I am back in Pennsylvania where the laws remain reasonable (for the most part) and I don’t have to worry walking into many of the buildings that are around me. It is amazing what happens to the crime rate once you travel beyond the iron curtain of urban sprawl and the oppressive states that make up a shrinking portion of this country.

Firearms Friday: SNAFU

When Sig Sauer originally started producing the Sig Brace they insisted that reviewers, especially those on YouTube, not shoulder the brace so that the ATF wouldn’t get their feelings hurt. The brace was designed with a specific purpose at its inception in that it would assist those unable to shoulder an AR-15 by allowing them to put the brace on a pistol length platform and wrap the brace around their forearm allowing for one handed operation. Since the ATF was fine with people shouldering an unaltered pistol, the brace was frequently being employed as a means to circumvent NFA requirements and making AR pistols function similarly to the highly regulated short barrel rifle.

The Sig Brace even came with (and probably still does) a letter from the ATF securing the legality of the brace and the multiple purposes that it serves. Everything was fine for a while but as soon as the first video was posted of the brace being shouldered, the letters to the ATF came pouring in. The astounding thing is that these correspondences were not from the registration and regulation happy crowd, they were from law abiding gun owners basically asking the federal agency if they were really really sure that shouldering was okay.

Well finally the ATF had enough and like most people in politics they decided to flip flop and declare that the shouldering of the brace was no longer allowed. That’s right, we had a good thing going and we are the ones that screwed it all up. So now we are going to have to wait and see if Sig Sauer decides to fight the ruling and eventually we will find out if the ATF will reverse their decision again.

But, for the time being, here are four simple words for some of the gun owners out there: “Shut The Heck Up!”

Of course, there are many of us that see the Bureau of Always Totally Fudged more as a waste of money rather than an effective means of regulation. After all, who are they really regulating anyway? That’s right, it is the law abiding gun owner (some obviously a little too overzealous in their caution) not the ones that would use any of the NFA items in a nefarious way. The $200 tax stamp, extra paper work, and additional background checks are only ensuring that they know where all the legal firearms are and doing nothing to remove them from the hands of criminals. 

Heck, maybe the ones who need to be controlled are the hoplophobes who like to randomly tackle citizens legally carrying a firearm into a Florida Walmart. Those people are nuts… and fortunately now they’re going to jail. Who’s the real criminal here?

Someone Is Drunk Behind The Wheel!

I'm okay to drive!

So the big speech is tonight and all those watching the Latin Grammy Awards will have to pardon the interruption at the President overextends himself. In an unprecedented move, the President is expected to extend amnesty to roughly 5 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States. Contrary to what you might hear on MSNBC or CNN, this is completely different than that of the amnesty granted by Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush in that they were making ever attempt to keep families together in the wake of an ill-conceived piece of legislation passed by congress while still working within the parameters of that law.  

Tonight we will see a President not working within the limitations of the law but someone who is willing to exceed his power and make decisions without bothering to take a minute to listen to the voice of the people. For someone who is supposedly a ‘Constitutional Scholar’ he has not acted in a way that would make me believe that claim. Given the latest vote by the house clearing the way for a lawsuit to be filed against the president on the grounds of exceeding his authority, this bombastic and self-righteous move is not a surprise… especially the PR move to schedule to speech on the same night as the Latin Grammy Awards (you are incredibly naïve if you think this is mere coincidence).

So what is fallout going to be like after this dictatorial declaration? I really couldn’t say as there are so many possibilities and factors that are playing into this whole crisis. However, given the scope of the aforementioned lawsuit and the permissive language used within it, I am pretty sure that this whole incident will be added to the case. Oh, did I mention that the attorney hired to try the case was actually an Obama supporter and has come to the realization over time that he is indeed overreaching his powers? Well, that is the kind of president that we have to put up with for two more years.   

What I can tell you is that this result of the reckless actions will be comparable to slowing down and trying to figure out how it all happened as you pass an accident scene on the highway. Fingers will be pointed, blame will be passed around, and no one is going to have any answers. Just get ready for the traffic jam and potential shutdown of the government highway that may result from the actions of one irresponsible man who decided to get behind the wheel while drunk with power.

This Week In WTF: Healthcare and Immigration

Not saying he was a great President but he was pretty good compared to what we have now.

Yeah, I know, this is a completely random post but this past week there have been a couple of things that have forced me to record my thoughts. Not that anything bad happened there are just certain things that reminded me of the tremendous CF that we find ourselves in as a country with regard to policies in these two areas. Oh, how far we have come during the tenure of this President, the one who can do no wrong.

This week I had a few moments when I wished that the healthcare system was much simpler… the way it used to be when it was just a small PITA. While health insurance paperwork has always been a headache… the kind that is brought on by tediousness and nitpicking… it had only gotten worse in recent years. This was never more evident then when I went to enroll my wife on my health plan at work. Turns out the form is no longer enough and now they require special letters (no emails), answers to even more questions, and the blood of a virgin chicken that was discovered in Belize, carbon dated, and proven to be used in a Mayan ritual which then had to be verified by three archeologists (because four would be asking too much) with last names that have a “q” in them from three different countries that only import produce on even number days with temperatures above 55 degrees Fahrenheit and transported on a ship or plane where the entire crew has seen Back to the Future at least twice but has never watched the sequels.

I think this is how they will eventually made Obamacare solvent… people will turn over the extra money (it would cost us about twice as much for my wife to go on Obamacare) just so they wouldn’t have to jump through these hoops. It doesn’t even matter anymore whether you are in this country illegally, you can still get health insurance through the United States government. What kind of crap is that? Maybe, just maybe, if we let the immigration “reform” proposals collapse under their own BS we might have a chance at changing that. Maybe.

For now, people are streaming into the country where those who file applications for amnesty ‘shall not be detained, determined inadmissible, deported, or removed until their applications are finally adjudicated, unless they commit a future act that renders them ineligible with amnesty.’ Essentially, illegal aliens cannot be immediately deported unless they commit an illegal act. So, if they don’t do anything illegal (except of course for entering the country illegally) they are put into an application system that is more backed up and mismanaged than the VA hospitals in Arizona. Except instead of causing the deaths of those who fought for our freedom, it ensures a free pass to those who don’t even respect one of our most basic laws (and some of them don’t respect the law whatsoever as criminals are also eligible for amnesty and citizenship so long as they only committed one felony or three misdemeanors).

As Marty Huggins said, “It’s a mess.” I guess what this all comes down to is the fact that the system is broken, this administration had failed, and while I didn’t vote for any of this crap I, along with everyone else, have to deal with the fecal fallout. And if you agree with me then, according to the bluer than Violet Beauregard turning into a blueberry liberals, you’re a racist too. Never mind the fact that this is an equal opportunity cluster.

You Might Want To Consider Thinking Before You Act…

I know NOTHING!

It has been interesting, to say the least, watching and listening to all the commentary surrounding the recent prisoner exchange that President Obama sprung on everyone a couple of weeks ago. As soon as his father spoke and made the claim that his son had forgotten how to speak English I knew there was something a little off about this situation. After all, did Senator McCain forget how to speak English? Did Galid Shalit forget how to speak Hebrew? Anyway, that is another topic altogether, so let me steer this post back on track.

Given the nature of the questionable action and subsequent announcement it seems as though this was done solely to ease the pressure that had been mounting from the VA scandal. However, this just proves that it is best to think before you act as support is nowhere to be found even from some of his own party diehards like Senator Diane Frankenfeintein who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee (I know, hard to believe isn’t it). The following excerpt from Town Hall sums up this little cluster:

Two top lawmakers on the Senate Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that the Obama administration broke the law by not informing Congress before the prisoner exchange that resulted in Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl’s release.

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss said the administration violated the law by failing to address serious concerns they had about the deal to swap Bergdahl for five Taliban detainees. Chambliss said he had not had a conversation with the White House about a possible exchange for at least 18 months.

"It comes to us with some surprise and dismay that the transfers went ahead with no consultation, totally not following law," Feinstein told reporters following a closed door meeting. "And in an issue with this kind of concern to a committee that bears the oversight responsibility, I think you can see that we're very dismayed about it."  

Of course that only really speaks to the process not what actually took place. That is an entirely different story. Those who served with the supposed POW had particularly strong feelings regarding his release (watch the interviews here) and others from the military have commented on the circumstances around his “capture” and the impact that it had both on operations and moral. The Washington Post had an interesting article which included interviews with those involved in the search and rescue operations after his disappearance:

One Afghan special operations commander in eastern Afghanistan remembers being dispatched.

“Along with the American Special Forces, we set up checkpoints everywhere. For 14 days we were outside of our base trying to find him,” he told The Washington Post, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he is a member of a secretive military unit.

But U.S. troops said they were aware of the circumstances of Bergdahl’s disappearance — that he left the base of his own volition — and with that awareness, many grew angry.

“The unit completely changed its operational posture because of something that was selfish, not because a soldier was captured in combat,” said one U.S. soldier formerly based in eastern Afghanistan who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the search. “There were military assets required . . . but the problem came of his own accord.”

In the end, the elation didn’t really spread beyond the soldier’s small town in Idaho as many of us, civilians and veteran’s alike, questioned the circumstances surrounding both his ‘capture’ and his release. Even my great uncle, a 27 year Air Force veteran who has been retired since 1974, made his voice heard via Facebook posting the following:

“FROM MY EXPERENCE OF 27 YEARS IN THE AIR FORCE, WHEN PERSON WAS BROUGH BACK UNDER MILITARY CONTROL AFTER BEING AWOL OR DESERTION HE OR SHE WAS PLACED UNDER ARM GUARD. I DON'T KNOW WERE GENERAL DEMPSEY OF THE JOINT CHIEFS GET THE NOTION THAT ARMY MUST TAKECARE OF HIM AND HIS FAMILY. HIM "YES" HIS FAMILY "NO". THE ARMY IS HIS "FAMILY" UNTIL HE DISCHARGE EITHER HONORABLE OR DISHONORABLE.”

And while we could all see that this political move was a huge error by the President, somehow he still seemed surprised that we rely on the facts at hand to determine what is right and what is wrong. Oblivious to the mind of the people and the opinions of those who are and have served in the military, the President’s act before you think cluster leaves us with one final question, as originally asked by Ralph Peters in the National Review, “As for President Obama, how about just one word of thanks to the families of those fallen soldiers you sent out to find Bowe Bergdahl?”

California Politics = SNAFU

I don’t hide the fact that I am a rather partisan person when it comes to politics. However, in my life, there are instances when I have broken with party lines and voted for another candidate. Granted, there has to be darn good reason to do so but it has happened and I believe that I made the right choice at the time. There are people in this country that are ardent supporters of one party over another regardless of the actions of the candidates… welcome to California!

Back in March, anti-gun California State Senator Leland Yee (D) was arrested by the FBI on corruption and bribery charges. Unfortunately, it is not surprising these days to hear such charges being leveled on a politician. However, what made this case unique and rather disturbing is the fact that the anti-gun legislator, who has attached his name to nearly every anti-gun piece of legislation since he took office, was also arrested by the FBI on charges of conspiring to illegally import and distribute firearms, allegedly including machine guns and “rocket launchers”. Since that time additional details have surfaced. Specifically, he was arrested for conspiring with the Chinese mafia (Triads) to import and sell full-auto rifles and rocket launchers (I wonder if any of them were “ghost guns”). The full warrant affidavit can be read here.

This week, Leland Yee was back in the news. Mr. Yee, supposedly possessing either the worst memory or biggest balls in history, was running for Secretary of State. This is not a punch line, this is reality. I heard about this some time ago and, like many law abiding gun owners, I was confident that no one would vote for such a criminal. Well, like many times before, I underestimated the stupidity and partisanship of many voters. Leland Yee collected nearly ten percent of the vote in the California primary. This translates to a third place finish with 300,425 Californians who decided that legal firearms are bad but illegal guns are perfectly acceptable.

Results such as this really bring to light that not all the issues in politics can be blamed on the politicians themselves, it all comes down to the voters. This isn’t a new problem, this has been a part of politics since the beginning when politicians realized that they had four primary ways of running a campaign: run an honest race and position yourself as the best person for the job; manipulate the perceptions of the voters and attack your competition; use your celebrity status (entertainment, sports, politics, etc.) to garner popularity votes; or, run for office in a place where your party is guaranteed to win by blind party vote. The first has long since withered away while the other three strategies are what have taken root in this country. This is why it really doesn't matter if you are an adulterer (happy belated 50th birthday to Monica Lewinsky), left someone to die after driving your car off a bridge, you are an arms trafficker, or your biggest accomplishment is finishing second on American Idol... you still have a chance to be elected.

A blind vote is supporting the Political SNAFU that we all despise. While I don’t think this is ever going to go away, we should at least do all we can to stunt it’s growth by educating ourselves as to the candidates that are running, knowing who is currently representing us, and giving a crap about the decisions that these people are making in office. While we may all have opinions as to whether their actions are good, bad, right, or wrong, we should take those policies, actions, and charges into account before we pull that lever or hit that button. I am not against voting along party lines so long as you know who you are voting for.

Say Goodbye To Baseball Bats

I know the title has some of you thinking about the meaning behind the statement but it really is very simple. I have decided to take the advice of the President and will start doing anything I can to save lives. After all, “if it saves one life, it’s worth it.” And so begins the campaign to ban baseball bats or, at the very least, require a background check in order to purchase one. It only makes sense to start looking at sources of unregulated weapons (especially if they’re black and scary looking) to ban or control first before going after other items (themselves innocuous) used in crimes.

Essentially, a criminal can walk into any sporting goods store, Wal-Mart, or thrift shop and buy a weapon without showing any form of idea, without filling out any forms, and without a background check having been completed. Even children can buy bats at numerous retailers, even the tactical black models. How long are we going to sit on the sidelines quietly and wait for these kids to recreate the meeting scene from “The Untouchables”. This unregulated market needs to stopped and only professional athletes paid to play this sport and certified trainers should have access to these items with such deadly potential.

Of course, this is only the first of many initiatives. Knives are also an unregulated weapon which children and the mentally unstable have easy access to and the same can be said for household cleaners, fast food, and power tools. All of these things have been the cause of death on countless occasions. Also, while tobacco, alcohol, cars, and prescriptions are regulated to a certain degree, they are still prevalent aspects of daily life which also cause a substantial amount of deaths every year. Ban them all and save thousands of lives. Maybe tens or hundreds of thousands of lives.

I know what you’re asking, but why would I chose to go after baseball bats and not guns? Well, they simply aren’t as big of a concern. Contrary to the rhetoric being bandied about recently, those statistics are trending in the right direction and, therefore, should not be our first priority. After all, at least you have to pass a background check to legally buy a firearm. But why take my word for it…

As was reported by the U.S. Department of Justice and Pew Research Center, gun crime statistics continue to steadily decline while gun ownership, especially in recent years, has experienced a sharp rise. According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.

Additionally, Pew researchers observed that the huge amount of attention devoted to gun violence incidents in the media has caused most Americans to be unaware that gun crime is “strikingly down” from 20 years ago. In fact, gun-related homicides in the late 2000s were “equal to those not seen since the early 1960s.” Yet their survey found that 56 percent believed gun-related crime is higher, 26 percent believed it stayed about the same, and 6 percent didn’t know. Only 12 percent of those polled thought it was lower.

In the end, if you really want to save a life, turn in your baseball bat and buy a gun.