Consider the following approach to a gun toting license:
- One would obtain said license upon each license-specific qualification being verified: in person, by a temporary occupational waiver, or by an occupational waiver of qualification-specific permanence.
- Any weapon toted by an individual must be registered either to the license of said person or to that of the private property wherein it is being toted. When licensed, said person or property will henceforth, be referred to as the licensee.
- A weapon may be licensed to more than one licensee, such as to members of the same family, or to a property and its owners; and the license of one licensee may have more than one weapon registered to it.
- When a licensee is found to possess a weapon, not so registered, it would be temporarily confiscated, checked, and upon becoming properly registered (to a new or existing license), returned to that person or private property: in fact, to that licensee.
- If the above unregistered weapon had been possessed by someone, later charged with committing a crime, during that possession, it would have been held throughout its term as evidence, and so long as it were possible for its owner to regain his, her or its license, and register said weapon. Furthermore, were a conviction obtained, two possibilities would emerge: if the weapon had not been fired, an NF% (say 5%) would be added to the sentence; but had it been fired, whether or not anyone had been hit, an F% (say 15%) would be added. After all, with due respect to the Equalizer, and given that a crime had been committed, why should the level of skill or bad luck even matter.
In season, pollen grains containing trillions of genetically engineered gametes slip across boundaries into small, private farms where they have their way with local daughter gametes. Far from offering to pay child support, one large agribusiness insists instead upon receiving a stud fee. As hoots go, this would be grand, but our judicial system does one better. It holds the issue up to an earlier, wrong decision and considers the required stud fee quite sensible.
Suppose that a particular right is both worthy of judicial support and in need of it. The details of codification take on an importance equal to that of the right itself, because the final draft is responsible to the entire legal system as well as to its own message (e.g. laws governing illicit drugs and parole boards).
I have known undocumented foreigners and would not affect scorn towards them in place of the affection I feel. Many willingly close their eyes to a felt warmth, feigning instead a suppose-to bitterness. What is needed is to drop the cosmetic anger and deal with the problems generated by this trickle invasion. Anger only distracts from our, true warrant, sifting through the litany of half truths about us as a people. Continue reading
Posted in Crime and Punishment, Evolution, Fiscal responsibility, Homeland Security, Immigration, Justice, Obscured motives, Psychology, Rights and Obligations, Sociology, United States
Tagged Illegal immigration, Rio Grand
In an ideal world, employees should be paid according to the effort made, the risk taken, and the benefit brought to the company. It must be difficult for management to set pay standards for the lower ranks, but for themselves it is impossible: their contribution is unique as is their personal interest in that setting.
Image via Wikipedia
For centuries, homosexuals had been harassed into separate closets and were more recently told that a military demand for confidentiality was about returning to that situation. Crusaders instilling shame and defenders from it imagined that this policy was about their own holy wars. It was not, but rather it asked whether homosexuals would be allowed to move on to that or any non-disclosure without being stigmatized as having acted in shame.
Friendly or Fauxy
In early 2003 Saddam Hussein had, at the very least, access to materials and designs for the production of weapons of mass destruction; furthermore, he would soon have had at his disposal the unfettered wealth of Iraqi oil fields. At that time President Bush appeared to be faced with a dilemma: either live with the coming critical mass of oil wealth and homicidal mania, or launch a preemptive war.