In the past week or so, a viral video has taken the internet by storm. Millions of people have viewed the video, the man in the video has been doing a tour of shows on TV, and it's been an extremely hot topic on every social media platform you can think of. 

But what does it mean for the USA? 

Well, as I said millions of people have seen the video. It has apparently made enough of an impact that a lot of liberals and liberal media outlets are now calling it a fake campaign by Russian bots. Once you are labelled a Russian bot in this day, you know you've made an impact. As of this writing, there are 89.316 members of the Facebook group, and that number is ever growing (by the time I hit publish on this article there will be hundreds more members). 

If you take into consideration that some of those people aren't walking away from anything and are just there to support the people who are, you can assume about 3/4 of the people, give or take, are people who are actually walking away. There are women, transgenders, homosexuals, African Americans, Hispanics, etc. all joining this thing and leaving their stories as to why they decided to walk away. 

​Still, the about 90,000 members isn't really a huge swath of people considering it is a political movement. So why is there such an impact? Why are people getting scared of this enough to start accusing the group of being run by Russian bots? 

​I think we need to walk back a little bit toward Kanye West. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm not taking away credit for this movement and giving it to Kanye. But if you think back towards that whole debacle, you'll remember the outrage over Kanye saying pro-Trump things and all his Hollywood elite friends were unfriending him and stuff... and he didn't apologize. He moved forward unapologetically. The heat cooled down eventually and he's really not in the news anymore. But he got away with "being a free thinker" without his career going down the drain. 

After that, the approval ratings for Trump among African Americans began to rise. Now, there's this growing movement being led by a gay man who is now all over TV and seemingly overnight became a very recognizable face. It is packed full of people the left thought they had a monopoly on. These are people they have been telling for years that the right despises and wants destroyed, people they tell that Trump was elected to rid us of. 

The movement is getting so much attention because it is challenging the minority monopoly. 

​A common theme I am reading in these testimonials - and I admit, I've read hundreds of them - is that these people were taught to believe that only the left cared about them and everyone else hated them, but now they are seeing that this isn't true. They are watching the left talk a lot without any action. They are watching non-citizens and criminals getting preferential treatment. Many had long time good friends who cut ties with them when they began to question the left. I am seeing a lot of those stories, many of them are heartbreaking. Decades long friendships ended immediately because of one questioning moment. They are watching the reactions to that one questioning moment and realizing in seconds a group of people who claim to be tolerant and supportive of them are suddenly not so much when they question anything... while the side who was supposed to hate them is answering their questions and not really caring who they are. 

Right now, Americans are tired of the division. Everything is racist. Everything is sexist. And it's getting tiring. I watched a news story tonight about a woman who was questioned while entering the pool of a housing development, and I listened as she and the reporters - both local and national - immediately decided it was because she was black and compared it to other incidents that have happened. Seriously, the local news reporter actually began the story by saying, "There's been a recent rise in the amount of white people calling the police on black people while they do every day things." I watched the video, and my response was "I need more information." I didn't pass off their claims of it being racially motivated, but I refused to immediately call the man racist. My complex has a pool. I don't use it much, but when I did, there were times I was asked for ID to prove I was a resident. Once I was actually escorted out because I hadn't brought my ID. So yes, I need more information.

But we don't do that anymore. The news is a race to report first, and apparently making sure you have the correct reports isn't necessary. Everything is motivated by hatred and there is no more supply of evidence or allowing the other person to have a side of the story. 

White people are constantly admonished for being racist, while also being told that we're born racist. OK, so you mean it can't be fixed? Then why are we trying? Trump has a supreme court pick coming up, and everyone is clutching their pearls because obviously abortion is going to be completely outlawed immediately and gay marriage rights are going to be taken away, leaving gay marriages non-valid. Anyone who wasn't born in the USA is obviously going to be deported immediately. Everything is a massive crisis, the world is constantly coming to an end, and only about .0000002% of things being reported are actually things that are true and/or are of major concern. 

We're watching as groups of "marginalized people" are lifting themselves up by tearing everyone else down. Women have to tear down men. Blacks have to tear down whites. Immigrants have to tear down birth citizens. Gays have to tear down straights. Transgenders have to tear down cis genders. No, we don't! You don't have to tear anyone down to lift yourself up! You gain actual equality by raising yourself and your community up, not by tearing everyone else down. And when you raise yourself up, the country is better for it. When you tear others down, we're more divided and less of a nation. 

90,000 people have realized this and are sick of it. 90,000 people aren't going to cause a revolution. They aren't going to cause a wave in elections. But they are a start. They are proof that we as Americans can come together and be just that - Americans. We need to get past labeling each other to death and just be one people. We need to learn about each other and stop taking someone else's word for it when they tell you what someone else is like. 90,000 people were a little surprised to find out that people who don't identify as left wing didn't hate them. Those 90,000 people are going to be the voices that let others know. And that scares the extreme left, because it threatens their monopoly. It creates free thinkers who don't need them to tell them how to feel about things anymore. And I hope it grows. This is the first sign of real 'hope and change" that I've seen in years. 

Now, as many of you know, I am a long time resident of the state of NC, a transplant who came here 15 years ago and has called it home ever since. Over the last few years I have watched the battle over voter ID with great interest, as I am in favor of voter ID. At one point it was even made law. However, I only had to show my ID once when voting before the courts ruled it unconstitutional. 

See, apparently voter ID is actually voter suppression. Or, at least, that's what they're trying to convince us of. According to local activist groups, this is the GOP's attempt to stop African Americans from voting. 

Because liberals apparently think African Americans are incapable of getting an ID. This baffles me, of course, because I've never met an African American without an ID, whether it was a driver license or a state issued ID card. But what does it take to get an ID in NC? Well, before we get into the whole story here, let's examine this so you know where all of this coming from. From the NC DMV themselves:

Sounds easy enough. But what about the cost? We're being told they can't afford the ID! So the cost must be limiting.

Oh... it's $13. Well! There you go! $13 doesn't sound like much to some of you, but to a lot of people that is big money! They can't afford to pay $13 for an ID!

Wait a minute! Just because you are poor does not mean you are homeless! 

Here's the thing. I included the out of date information above for a reason. That was the no fee ID that was put into place when voter ID became the law. If you are receiving benefits, they actually give you information on registering to vote on the application for things like food stamps. They'll actually help you register to vote. In order to receive those benefits, you had to provide something that proves your identity and residency. If you successfully did all of that, you qualify for a free ID card to vote with! 

OK, so why am I getting into all of this?

Well, voter ID in NC isn't out of the picture just yet. In fact, the NC GOP has proposed HB 1092, which needs to be approved by a 3/5 majority of both chambers, which is actually likely since the GOP has a super majority. At that point it would go to the voters to vote on. 

Yes, you read that correctly. They want to allow the NC voters to vote on whether or not to amend the state constitution to make voter ID a thing. That vote could happen during the November mid-term elections. 

Enter "Color of Change," the "nation's largest online racial justice organization." They argue that this law discriminates against African Americans. So what are they doing about it?

Well, Amazon is looking at NC as one of 20 possible locations for the newest headquarters. Apple is also looking at NC as a possible location for a new campus since we are an ever growing tech hub. Color of Change is requesting that both companies remove NC from their list of prospective locations because of HB 1092.

You know... the house bill that allows NC residents to vote on voter ID. It doesn't pass voter ID. It just gives the residents a say in whether or not they want this to be a state constitutional amendment. 

​According to this activist group, allowing the residents of the state to vote on it is discriminatory to African Americans. How so? Well, because, as you saw above, they can't afford IDs! Keep in mind, they won't be required to show an ID for the midterm elections, so these people they are claiming can't get an ID can actually still vote anyway. But apparently, they shouldn't be allowed to because... they might discriminate against themselves, I guess. 

It really does not make sense. These people the activist group claims to be protecting are going to have no issue voting. Registering to vote is free and it is easy to do. In this state, they pretty much ram voter registration down your throat; I've even been asked at local street fairs if I want to register (I already am registered, thank you). ID isn't required as of right now, so they can vote in the midterms without it. The house bill is opening up the constitutional amendment to the voters, meaning if you don't like voter ID requirements, you can vote no. If enough people vote no, the voter ID thing goes away. If they vote yes, then they obviously didn't agree that it was a bad law. 

So basically... the activist group is trying to turn away thousands of good jobs from the area in an attempt to prevent people from voting yes or no on a law they don't like and are apparently afraid they won't be able to turn people against. Does that not sound like voter suppression to anyone else? If you really do care about these people you claim to want to protect, let them have their own voice. Stop speaking for them. Get them out to vote instead. They have a right to get their voices out there to say yes or no on this bill themselves, they really don't need your help, especially if you want to speak for them without asking them, which is exactly what you are doing right now. 

While everyone was busy freaking out over Roseanne Barr, Trump signed a bill that allows terminally ill patients access to drugs still in clinical trials that have passed phase 1 of the FDA's approval process.

This was actually a pretty controversial bill, but personally, I'm glad he signed it. Those who oppose the bill state a list of things as reasons, such as the lack of knowledge on how to administer the drugs, giving the patient a "false sense of hope," lack of knowledge of side effects, and that it cuts the FDA out of the mix, cutting doctors off from this knowledge. 

Several states already have right to try - Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington and Wyoming - but by signing this, Trump has made it national. 

Why do I support it? Well, let's take a look at who this effects. The people gaining access are terminally ill patients. If I was terminally ill, I would want to try everything I could. These people aren't stupid. They understand the risks. They know it could make them sick, or it might not work, or the doctors might struggle with the dosage. But they also know that the information gained from their usage of it will greatly help the doctors and future patients. Besides, it might work. It can't hurt to try. What's the worst that could happen, they die? They're terminal. 

When my father was sick, because I had to get a Senator involved, the VA actually did this with him. He was given treatments under our state's "right to try." Dad's cancer was a terminal diagnosis. We knew that. My dad knew that. And we knew these treatments most likely wouldn't do much for him. And they didn't. But we tried anyway. The hope was there that something might restore - to some extent - his mental capacity so he could live a little more normally in his final days. Maybe it would buy him a few more years. Maybe it would stabilize him enough to be able to have conversations with other patients at the hospitals or something, just to make it more bearable for him. 

Like I said, it didn't work for him. But the doctors had new data to add to the pile about administering the drug, side effects, effects on his particular stage of the cancer and his particular variety of the cancer. And we tried. We literally let them try whatever they had on my dad. Because really, it couldn't hurt. His diagnosis was grim, but we at least tried to make him comfortable and less miserable, and we hoped to get his life expectancy from 1 -3 years up to 5 - 7 years. We tried. 

My dad was on board for a lot of reasons. Obviously, he didn't want to die. But he was also on board because he knew other Veterans around him were going through it, too, and more would follow, and he wanted to help them if he could. And my dad was a scientist (chemist), so he would do anything in the name of science. 

So I'm on board. I'd want the option if it were me. A lot of us would. At the end of your life, when you've tried everything else, it really can't hurt. Side effects don't really matter at that point, they can't be much worse than what you're already going through. And since the end is near anyway, if it doesn't work, nothing much changes... but at least you tried. At least you went out fighting. Your family can rest a little easier knowing they did literally everything they could. I don't see that as a bad thing. 

So I just had someone tell me that my view on gun control would change if someone I knew had been the victim of gun violence. So let's discuss that. Because what the person doesn't know is that I carry a gun because people I love have been the victims of gun crime. 

I want to talk about one specific friend. His name is Jamal. I met Jamal when I was 14 years old, through a mutual friend. We never went to school together until college, but we made it through our teen years together. He used to come over to my house all the time to play guitar, and he was very gifted on the instrument. Jamal was a very close friend. 

The last time I ever saw Jamal is now permanently burned into my mind. I was graduating from college and there was a procession through our small campus to the area where graduation was being held. We walked through a crowd of friends and family, and as I was passing one particular spot, a hand reached out and pulled me out of line. It was Jamal. He had come to campus to watch me graduate, and wanted to take a moment to introduce me to his girlfriend, because with all the craziness - and the fact that I had moved out of state and had only returned for graduation - he wasn't sure he'd get a chance for us to meet again. I could only spend a moment and then had to run to catch up. I didn't realize I'd never see Jamal again. 

Six months later, Jamal stepped off a bus a block away from his home. It was 10:00 at night and he was returning from work. It was a major road in the city with a lot of apartments and heavy foot traffic at all hours of the day and night. He was in front of a blindingly lit car lot. Out of nowhere, a guy walked up to him and put a 22 LR right in the side of his neck. As Jamal lay on the ground, the guy emptied his pockets and made off with $2. 

An hour prior to this, this same man had robbed a woman and her small child in a fast food restaurant. Jamal was his second victim of the night. He wasn't the guy's last victim of the night, though. He was eventually caught. The gun was stolen. He was charged and convicted on a bunch of charges, including murder.

The story doesn't end there. Yes, I blame the person who shot Jamal. But I want to discuss this a little further. 

Go back to the description of the area. It was a heavily traveled, heavily lit area. Cars passing, buses passing, Lots and lots of apartments. He was right at the bus stop when this happened. 

Now, let's discuss the aftermath. Jamal was discovered at 7:30 the next morning by a sales person from the car lot he was in front of. The guy called 911, but Jamal was obviously dead at this point. An autopsy was performed and it was stated that it took several hours for him to bleed out. 

Put the last two paragraphs together in your mind for a moment and think about it. 

1. Someone heard the shot. They had to. 
2. People walked by. People drove by. There's a chance people getting off the bus stepped over him. People may have stood near him waiting to catch the bus. 
3. Someone in one of those apartments most likely saw him lying there in his own blood. 
4. The people on the bus he'd just gotten off most likely saw at least some of the robbery. They most likely heard the shot and saw Jamal fall to the ground. 

No one called 911 until 7:30 the next morning. Jamal laid on that sidewalk for 9.5 hours. He was alive for a good deal of them, I don't know how many, but the autopsy said "several." 

So yes, I blame the guy with the stolen gun who shot my friend. But I also blame all of those people. I won't lie, it's been a long time. It's been about 15 years since the world lost Jamal. And I am still angry. If just one of those people had bothered to call 911, Jamal might still be alive today! His parents wouldn't have lost their only child. His then fiance wouldn't have lost the love of her life. He most likely would have been doing something amazing with his life. He might have a kid or two by now. He would have had some work to do in the hospital and would have a scar to remind him daily of that night. But he would have been alive!

If just one person valued his life. As a human being. As someone they saw get shot, or watched slowly bleed to death. If just one person had gone to a pay phone right there on the corner and had dialed 911 to give an anonymous report that someone had been shot, Jamal would have been the victim of an armed robbery instead of the victim of a murder. 

We say all the time that criminals won't obey laws and won't stop being criminals because guns have been outlawed. If someone wants to kill, they'll find a way. Bombs, knives, cars, whatever they have to use. 

But beyond all of that, every time there is a shooting, I hear a lot about what punishments should be given out to all of us who didn't do it, what rights we are expected to give up. I never hear anyone talk about fixing the gang problem, how exactly we should tackle the mental health issue we keep bringing up, root causes, etc. All we hear about is guns guns guns. Let's arm teachers. Let's write more laws. Let's put up metal detectors in schools. Let's repeal the second amendment. Let's pull some heartstrings by thrusting kids into the middle of a political debate they know nothing about and probably can't handle. Let's blame the NRA. Let's blame Hollywood. Let's blame the president. Let's blame video games. 

At what point do we sit back and say, "How about we discuss how we treat each other?" 

Look, the issue is multi-faceted. There isn't one fix all. Nothing done is going to please everyone. Everyone is always going to fight. But one thing we can work on is how do we instill the proper treatment of each other into our kids? How do we instill that value into ourselves? 

Are you bullying your classmates? Are you ignoring the people around you? Would you call 911 if you saw a man bleeding to death in the street?

How did you treat the last homeless person you passed? Did you feel anything? Whether you gave him anything or not, did you feel something inside that couldn't be described as disdain? Did you realize he was a person just like you? Did you feel bad for him or did you assume he was a drunk or a drug addict with no evidence and didn't deserve your pity? 

How did you treat the last waiter or delivery person you had contact with? Did you leave a tip? Did you get angry because of something that they had no control over? Did you give them a dirty look? Did you ask for 100 different things 100 different times instead of all at once so they could do one trip instead of 100? Did you berate or laugh at them? Did you assume they were uneducated? 

​How about the other people driving around you on the road? Did you flip someone off for doing the speed limit? Did you get angry because you wanted to drive faster and they didn't? Did you over dramatically pass someone and get too close when cutting in front of them? Did you tailgate someone to make them drive faster? Did you cut them off? Did to slow to a crawl even though it wasn't necessary to oggle a wreck on the road even though you've seen a hundred wrecks just like it before? Did you laugh at someone who got pulled over? 

I'm not saying you have to act in a manner that would have you up for sainthood. But at some point we need to sit back and realize that we don't treat our fellow human beings as fellow human beings. We treat people as though they are beneath us. We don't see the people driving those cars. We don't understand that the waiter isn't just a waiter, that he has a lot of other aspects of existence that make him up, and his reason for living isn't to bring you junk food. We don't see a homeless person as the same as us, they're an expendable nuisance instead of a Veteran with PTSD who needs help, not hate. We see people in trouble and assume someone else will do something. 

Even these mass shootings have no humanity. People are dying. The shooting isn't even over yet before the political fights begin, and no one stops to think about the kids who survived and what that several minutes is going to do to the rest of their lives. We don't think about that frantic feeling of every single parent of every single child within 50 miles of that scene. We don't think about how the teachers feel because they couldn't prevent a child from being killed even if they prevented another 30 from being killed. We spend a moment to point out the heroes, but don't think about how horrible they feel that they couldn't save everyone. The media spends weeks on end giving us every detail about the life of the shooter without realizing that the next shooter is taking notes and worshiping this person as a hero, using these details to form his own plan and outdo him because it's a game to him. 

We don't give any value to the lives around us of people we don't personally know. Hell, sometimes we don't value the lives of people we do know. 

So yes, I carry a gun. I will always carry a gun. Because I know people don't value my life. I know my life could be cut short for the $2 in my pocket or because someone wants my car or my cell phone. Someone reading this right now disagrees with me and thinks I should die because I am pro-gun. Someone is reading this right now and hoping for my death so I can't vote in the midterms. Or because I voted for Trump. Or because of the color of my skin. I carry a gun because I have, in fact, looked down the barrel of someone's gun. I have been robbed. I have been assaulted. I have had someone try to stab me for my wallet. I have had someone road rage at me and try to get into my car. And the only person who truly values my life is me. I carry a gun because I want to survive. I don't want to hope someone calls 911 for me before I die. I don't want to stand helpless as I watch someone slaughter someone I love for nothing. I wish Jamal had had a gun. So I carry a gun. 

A friend of mine shared this on Facebook and I wanted to break it down. This meme could have taken up less space by just saying, "It's a lack of parental involvement." 

We're talking about school shootings, where the shooters are generally under the age of 19, most often 17 and below. Kids who will stand up, like those in Parkland, and tell us about our rights and their rights and what we need to do, but they themselves aren't willing to change the teenager culture that requires you to be pretty and cool at all cost or get absolutely decimated by your classmates. So we're going to look at this as it pertains to school shooters under 18. 

"It's the violent culture." That your parents allowed you to be subjected to. Your parents aren't paying attention to your TV habits or what garbage you are watching on YouTube and can't be bothered to at least try to set the computer to block content. So we're going to request musicians change their styles to suit your kids, that TV shows meant for adults produce kid friendly content, that YouTube censor content creators because their snowflake might find a bad video that was meant for adults. 

"It's violent video games." That were meant for adults. Video games have ratings for a reason, and odds are, little Johnny didn't spend his own $60 to get the latest Call of Duty game. Mommy or daddy probably bought it for him to shut his little whiny butt up. Why should I, as a legal adult with a job and money, have video games I enjoy blocked from sale because Karen and Rob can't control their little brat who screams until they buy him a video game where the point is to fight a war?! 

"It's violent movies." That were meant for adults. Little Johnny isn't going to the theater alone. I remember trying that as a kid, it didn't work. And guess what? My mother didn't buy me a ticket, either. As the parent, your job is to exert control over this sort of thing. Don't buy or rent movies your kid shouldn't be watching. Don't take your kids to the movies to see violent movies. Use the safeties on your devices and services to prevent your kid from sneaking them when your soaking in the bathtub. But don't tell Hollywood that they can only make certain kinds of movies to protect your child. Protecting your child is your job. Not Hollywood's. And I want to watch whatever I want to watch. 

"It's the lack of respect for human life." A lesson meant to be taught by parents. And if you are paying attention to what music they listen to, what movies they watch, and what video games they play, you are already half way there. Respect for life is a lesson parents should be teaching their kids regularly. From the value of the life of a butterfly to the life of their neighbor, you should be teaching your child how to treat life. 

"It's the lack of moms and dads." Which really could have summed up the entire meme. Be there for your child. You aren't their friend, you are their parent. You can be their friend when they move out and get a job. Until then, you are in control. You set the boundaries. Single parent? Still not an excuse. Your child should have a person in their life that fills that roll. It could be a grandparent, an aunt or uncle, a teacher, a pastor, or someone from one of the mentoring services offered. 

"It's the lack of communities." These are available if the parent takes the steps. It could be a community center, a church or other house of worship, youth groups, scouting, soccer teams, swim teams, basketball teams, cooking classes, after school activities. A strong community can be found in a lot of places. 

"It's a lack of church going." Again, this is up to the parents. My family was never religious, but when I was young my parents took me to church on Sundays anyway. I went to religious based schools. I grew up to be non-religious. I have beliefs, but I do not follow organized religion. The bottom line is, my parents gave me the option. If you are not religious, that, too, is fine. Religious debate with your child, on their level, is not a bad thing. It's a learning experience. What your child learns there will stick with them no matter what. And that's the good and the bad. I blame my religious schools for my lack of desire in participating in organized religion. Your child isn't going to tell you what the teacher said in their 1st grade class, because they might not grasp what was wrong with it until high school. That's what happened to me. I took the teacher's word for it, my parents never knew. Then I got to high school and remembered what she said and how it was incorrect... and it tainted my faith badly. 

​"It's the lack of attention to mental issues." Agreed. But again, this is on the parents. It is very hard to do, though. You have to look at your own child and realize something is wrong. No parent wants to admit their kid might need some mental help. No parent wants to admit their child isn't perfect. They are perfect to you. But realizing early that your kid might need help could help them to live a long and normal life outside of the prison system. 

"It's the lack of teaching right from wrong." Something we expect the teachers to do, but that job is also the parents'. Your wrong might not be the teacher's wrong. That teacher is there to teach them math, science, reading, writing, etc. Morals are on you as a parent. 

"It's the lack of love." Here's where the proverbial poop is about to hit the fan. You might not like what I am about to say, but I am going to say it... because someone has to. 

If you are not prepared to love your child, do not have one. 

That means... if you are having a kid because your parents are badgering you to.... because you are "supposed to"... because your political and religious leaders are telling you it is "your duty"...

​Then you are having kids for the absolute wrong reason. 

That child is not a clothing accessory. It is a human being that depends on you to raise it and teach it. To be a parent. Not to be a friend... a parent. Not to get you more likes on Instagram... a parent. Long after you are gone, that kid has to survive. They have to live in this world and function, and all they have is what you taught them. That means they're going to tell you they hate you sometimes. They are going to cry and scream. They are going to be difficult. You are going to have to sacrifice. You might not be able to get the latest tech products anymore because your kid outgrows their shoes every three months. You might not be able to take romantic vacations because your kid is going to completely destroy those plans. You might have to change your movie viewing habits so little Johnny doesn't watch Marsha get disemboweled by a monster in a horror movie. You might spend your vacation time at amusement parks instead of the hiking trails. You might have to go without some things so your kid can have something they need. 

That is a human being. And until you are willing to spend the necessary time to raise and teach that human being... until you are ready to sacrifice the things you want to own and do... until you can handle the tough times with the fun times... don't have kids. 

And yes, for some people that day is never going to come. You may never have a kid. And your parents might throw a fit. People around you might be beside themselves. You might have to hear "you'll change your mind" 60,000 times a month. You might get guilt tripped. You might have people say absolutely awful things to you because they are absolutely awful people. You might have to listen to people on your political side whine and cry about how you HAVE to make babies because the human race is going to die off or something if you don't. You will be accused of being selfish. People will ask who is going to take care of you when you are old (as if having kids guarantees they will). 

But at the end of the day, you need to decide what is best for that kid. If you are unwilling to do everything required to be a parent, don't be one. It's hard work. It's time consuming. It's thankless. It's expensive. And a good portion of the people out there are ready and willing to do that. But a lot aren't. And we need to leave better kids for our world. Not being in it 100% doesn't leave better kids for our world, and it isn't doing that kid any good, either. So forget about everyone around you. You are the one raising that kid. And if you aren't willing to do it 100%, please don't bother. 

Before I start any of this out, I just want to say... I still don't care about Kanye. Yes, I know a lot of people are treating him like the new hero on the right, but I don't. My stance on celebrities talking politics has always been "shut up and entertain me." They are, obviously, entitled to their opinions. I don't want to take that away from them. But I am tired of their opinions somehow carrying more weight than everyone else's in other people's eyes. They're people, too. No more and no less important than the rest of us. And while they are entitled to their opinions, I don't necessarily have to care. They don't have to care about me, either. And trust me... they don't. And I am not going to sit here and roll my eyes at the ones I disagree with and cheer for the ones I do agree with. Entertain me. Also, I'm not a fan of Kanye. I don't dislike Kanye, either. I can honestly say I don't think I have ever heard his music. I may have and didn't realize it, but I don't have any opinion on Kanye has an entertainer, and I can't form one on him as a person because I've never met him. 

But I do want to discuss it anyway because there are some serious implications here. And they really do go both ways.

First of all, why is everyone freaking out about Kanye now? Did everyone forget this:

He hasn't exactly hidden it. He didn't vote, either, but that's neither here nor there. But he did this shortly after the election, and this was in San Jose. The crowd boos. He keeps on. 

​So why now? Because he still hasn't turned on Trump over a year later? Because he hasn't gotten in line? 

Since this happened, a lot of his elitist celeb friends have "unfollowed him twitter," which is the 2018 way of ending a friendship. Hm. 

Chance the Rapper made a comment about how "black people don't have to be democrats." That was an amazing statement. People turning on him and he walked it back. 

Chance, I wish you hadn't. See, here's the thing. Black people don't have to be democrats. They don't have to be republicans, either. Like everyone else in this country, I encourage everyone to do their homework. Know what is going on in the world. You don't have to obsess over it like some of us. But be informed. When election time comes - local, federal, whatever - take a few moments to read up on the candidates. Know who you are voting for beyond their political party and the promises they make in their TV ads. Go by records, not by lip service. It really doesn't take that long. I promise. 

Anyone in this country can be whatever political party they want to be, and there are more than just those two. Heck... be an independent. Don't pick a party because you are "supposed to." It's OK to have opinions on both sides of the isle. You can be pro-gun and pro-gay marriage. You can support legalizing marijuana and be pro-life. You can actually be a caring humanitarian and believe the government shouldn't be involved in your healthcare. 

I liken political parties to religions. A lot of people believe what the party tells them to believe. Instead, believe what you want to believe and choose the party that best suits those needs. None of them do? Then do your own thing. I call myself a conservatarian, and people ask me why. My explanation is usually that I am too liberal to be a true conservative, but too conservative to be a libertarian or liberal. On the same thought process, I am a non-denominational christian. I believe in God. I believe in Jesus. None of the organized religions do it for me. So I have my own personal relationship with God instead. 

Either way, never choose a side because you are supposed to. Who says? Be your own person. Kanye is allowed to think however he wants. Right now, he's being chastised by the elites for going off script. Basically, he's being chastised for not thinking the way they told him to. He went off and did his own thing and that isn't allowed, so now he has to be punished. When Chance the Rapper looked like he was going off script, too, they went after him, too. Now he's back on script. Kanye isn't. 

The leftist celebrities don't apologize when the right chastises them for their opinion. Why should the right leaning celebrities? Your opinion is your opinion. It's been a long time since I gave a celeb opinion much attention. Articles come across my screen all the time about who said what about which politician, and I don't even click on them anymore. They have an opinion? Good for them. I don't care. It isn't going to change my mind, and it shouldn't change yours. Just like Kanye. His opinion shouldn't change yours if you really believe what you believe. And yes, you can enjoy his music even if you don't agree with his political opinions. A successful black man with a differing opinion is still a successful black man, and you should be excited about that. 

If you know what you believe and why, and if you know what is going on in the world or at least your own country, your opinion will be hard to sway. That means that celebrity won't change your mind, which is how it should be. You are now free to enjoy their music or movies regardless of their opinions, because those opinions are irrelevant to you. Everyone has an opinion. You won't agree with all of them. But we are all free to have those opinions, regardless of what they are. Allow others the same respect. Even Kanye. 

The topic of video games is a very hot one, I am aware. Both sides of the isle are split among themselves on the influence they have on young minds and what should be done about them. But I'm having a tough time with countering one group saying to ban guns with another group saying to ban video games. I'm not a big fan of banning things. Bans mean less freedom. 

Right now, I'm listening to a lot of people talk about how parents need to take an active roll, discipline their children, raise them to respect life, etc., and then in the same breath forgetting parents all together when it comes to video games. 

When you make the decision to have a child, that decision brings a lot of responsibility and sacrifice. It means giving of yourself to make a life for your child, putting in long, thankless hours to raise that child, and doing a heck of a lot of work. A child is not a decision to be made because your parents are badgering you to give them grandkids, or because society says you should have kids, or because you get extra perks at work or on your taxes or whatever. You should be having a kid because you want one and are ready to raise one. 

And raising a child means that sometimes you are going to anger that kid. Too bad for the kid. If your kid is playing violent video games, that is on you, the parent. Video games cost between $50 - $60 a piece, and the consoles themselves are astronomically priced. Your child is not buying those on their own. You bought them. The games are rated. They give a pretty good description on the back panel. And, frankly, there are a ton of really good games out there that are age appropriate and fun to play. If your kid is Lego Batman age, maybe Call of Duty is the wrong purchase. 

Oh, your kid might be playing them at the houses of friends who's parents buy them anyway? That's your responsibility to know. You should know what activities are taking place at friends' houses, and you should be in touch with the parents. 

This is actually doable. We had video games when I was kid. The Nintendo system was all the rage - you know, the one where you had to blow in the cartridges and beat the console to get it to work? - and I had one after spending an entire year begging my parents endlessly until the Christmas morning where it showed up under the tree. I played a lot of Super Mario Bros. and soccer games. My mother bought the games, and she wasn't afraid to say no if I chose something that was not appropriate. She let me scream and yell, too. But she held firm. 

And I've noticed in my town that the kids don't seem to act as we assume the norm is today. I hear people complain that kids don't play outside anymore. Well, then apparently my state is bizarre, because you can't drive anywhere without kids in backyards, front yards, or parks. Spring is coming, and I know full well that within days the kids will be running through our housing development in a herd, playing basketball in driveways, riding their bikes and scooters, and walking their family dogs around proudly. Just yesterday I watched six of the neighborhood kids playing hopscotch in one of the driveways. It is on you, as a parent, to usher your child outdoors. 

So, let's recap. Stop buying your kids violent video games. Get your kids outside and into sporting activities after school (every area has a big sport. Where I grew up, it was soccer. Where I live now it is swimming). Engage your own child and know what they have, what they are doing, and what they do while inside other people's homes. 

And don't expect everyone else to give up what they like because you refuse to do this with your own kids. Banning stuff always means less freedom, so I very rarely support banning stuff. And I'm sorry, but I'm not giving up my adult rated video games because you can't say no to your child. 

Among everything else going on in the gun world these days, another hot topic is arming teachers. Trump suggested it right after the Parkland shooting, and it began a very heated debate among the people. To date, I haven't touched on it much, but I want to go ahead and do that. 

You might be surprised to hear I don't support the suggestions put forth for arming teachers. Why? Because I believe it would a lot easier and much more stream lined if we just removed the laws that prevent them from doing so in the first place. 

You have to remember, with the leftists and gun grabbers, they have an all or none mentality. They aren't hearing what arming teachers actually means. They keep going on and on about how they don't want to carry a gun and they don't want teachers to be armed... the thing is, the suggestions put forth have never suggested forcing any teacher to carry a gun. It's voluntary, and only those who want to can. Meaning if you don't want to be armed you don't have to be. 

And leftists gun grabbers are using the same arguments here that they used against concealed carry in general, the same ideas that never panned out. "THERE WILL BE BLOOD IN THE STREETS!" Of course everyone was going to shoot everyone else and the murder rate was going to skyrocket and we'd be hearing gunfire all the time, taking cover for 3/4 of our day as the public shot at each other over line cutting disputes and hatred for someone's shoes. That never happened; concealed carriers still remain one of the most law abiding groups of people in the country. But now we're saying teachers will be shooting the kids for acting out in class and the students will steal their guns and all this other stuff. The schools will be war zones! Blood pouring from the lockers! Yeah, right. 

But I think a lot of that could be overlooked by just doing away with the law preventing them instead of creating another law or loophole to allow them to. Maybe concealed carry only for the buildings or something. The government should not be paying for their training. The government should not be paying for their guns. By removing the laws, we take government out of it completely. OK, now you can carry if you have a concealed carry license and are complying with state and Federal laws. You are required to go through the same training as any other concealed carrier, and the cost burden is yours, like everyone else. Your gun is your choice and the cost burden is yours. If you don't want to carry, don't. 

However, I also support school guards. There are plenty of veterans who are out of work right now who would love a job protecting kids. They are fully trained with their weapons, they have procedure down pat, and they have training far and above anything you could ask a teacher to go through. You'd be giving these men and women a full time job that they would enjoy, and you would be getting extra out of the military training they received. I would put one at every door leading outside from a hallway or office cluster, and two roaming hallways per building. Uniform: polo shit and khakis in the school colors. 

Schools should be carrying out basic safety procedures. I recently started delivering food for an app service part time, and I deliver to several schools. And I'm noticing things. One school is locked down like Fort Knox. You aren't getting in there unless someone physically lets you in. And the people are placed away from the doors in such an way that if a nutter tried shooting through the doors, if a bullet went through, the office personnel would not be hit. Another school, however, has entrances in various areas - as well as stand alone trailer classrooms - that lead directly to classrooms. The doors are glass. There is no one in the hallways. I don't know if they are locked during school hours, and I don't know the rating on the glass, if it even has one. Each classroom has a door leading outside - also glass. Those are not locked, because I've driven by and seen them propped open during the day. This should not be. Those doors are there for quick exit during a fire, but I think they are a terrible idea. If they are there, they should be solid metal doors that remain locked at all times, and should have a fire alarm that sounds if opened. This shouldn't be a problem, considering other classrooms have bookcases in front of them anyway. So what's the use? 

I've been in a school that was evacuated due to fire (we had a stage in our gym, and the lighting system fell and caught the stage on fire). The school wasn't all ground level like these; it was four floors high with twisting hallways, long staircases, no elevators, and lots of other obstacles. We all got out fine. That's what fire drills are for. 

A big portion of the argument against doing anything safety wise in the schools is the fact that people don't want schools to be prisons. But the fact is, a lot of schools have metal detectors and police roaming the hallways. When I was high school age, our local public high school was that way. And that was in the early and mid 90s. Now, that was a rough school (note: total number of mass shootings: 0. Total number of shootings of any kind: 0). So I'm not saying every school should be like this. But doing basic things to defend students should be a no brainer. And having armed veterans is not, in fact, a bad idea. Odds are, after the first week, the kids would forget they were even there. 

And here's where honesty comes in. A lot of the problems in the schools are your little special snowflakes. We have resource officers in the schools because your little tykes can act like real buttholes sometimes. And at the end of the day, your precious little ones are spending their day cutting each other down to build themselves up. We keep hearing about what everyone else has to do. How about what you, as parents, are going to do? What are you going to do, tonight, to teach your child to not be a little piece of trash? And no, I don't want to hear about how your kid would never do anything like that. What you think and what is reality is irrelevant. You don't know what your kid is doing at school. So maybe we can work towards raising kids who learn to respect others, to respect human life, and to not treat each other like garbage so they can be "cool." Stop expecting everyone else to raise your kids, and start taking them in hand yourself. Teach them values and morals. And when you hear your kid did something to another student, discipline them. Stop chastising other parents for raising their voices to their kids or doing something to discipline them. Kids don't raise themselves. You have to raise them. They aren't an accessory, a quick way to a pay raise at work, or something you have because you are expected to. If you can't bring yourself to raise your child to be a decent human being, don't have a child. But if you do have a child, raise them. 

To the kids themselves... stop spending your time telling everyone else what they have to do to make your school safer. Take a minute away from preening in the bathroom mirror or trying to be the most popular kid in school, and realize that matters not one bit in life. Talk to the kid no one else is talking to. You don't have to become best friends with them, but say hi when you pass them in the hallway. Maybe once in a while do something like tell them you forgot to write down the homework assignment for the night and ask if they have it so you can see what you need to do for homework. Nothing too serious. Just enough that the kid doesn't feel invisible. And if you don't like someone, that's fine. Ignore them instead of torturing them. If you want your 15 minutes of fame, you have a great shot at getting it by doing something good for someone or by doing something others can't do then you do by torturing someone for an online video. And since that stuff will haunt you for the rest of your life online anyway - especially if you got your 15 minutes of fame from it - it will do you better trying to get into colleges or trying to get jobs if your 15 minutes came from something amazing instead of something showcasing your torture abilities. No college and no hiring company wants a butthole around. 

Now I know, no one wants blame bullying or any of that stuff for these shootings. And that's fine, you can live in a dream land where these things happen out of thin air and everyone just randomly snaps for no reason. But the fact of the matter is that a simple hi once in a while can snap someone out of their own dreamland of mass killing. It gives them some fleeting hope that maybe someone actually sees them and they aren't as worthless as they think they are. Yeah, I believe these shooters have mental issues. That's sort of obvious. But people who are unstable can be set off. You can, in fact, make a big difference with people like that by doing simple things. 

Anyway, these are just some ways to make schools safer. The most important ways being veterans protecting our kids and removing laws that keep teachers defenseless. If teachers want to be armed, they should able to do so, on their own dime. If they don't want to to be armed, that, too, should be their choice. And it is high time schools get their acts together and start being serious about school security. That's actual school safety. And it doesn't violate anyone's constitutional rights. 

I read this article this morning and started thinking. As a former smoker, I watched the progression of smoking laws in that area. And I found the article profound for more than the smoking laws. This is how we outlaw things in the USA - in pieces. 

Lately, bump stocks for rifles have been back in the news, with Trump coming out hard against them. The media regularly states, mockingly, that people who disagree with the ban see it as a "slippery slope." Because how laughable is that, right?

Not very. It's the truth. And we have a lot of things to point to to prove it. I could point out that the UK successfully got rid of guns and they are now moving on to knives, because as I have been stating for years, it's never enough. These types don't stop to soak in a victory, they move on to the next thing they want banned "for your own good." And they will never stop. 

​But instead, let's look at what NY is doing with smoking. Of course, you have "the children" being used as an excuse, because literally 4 things on Earth right now won't kill your kids and we have to ban everything else. Kids born after 1990 are all apparently made from glass and paper and are so much more emotionally sensitive than generations before them. So every law they want to pass that restricts any form of freedom is, of course, in the name of children. Besides abortion. You can have one if you want, that's cool.

​NY wants smoking banned. Period. But the outrage would be amazing, and a lot of people would be voted out of office. There are still a lot of smokers out there, and with vapers being demonized along with them, you can triple the number of people being outraged. So we do it in pieces.

Start raising the taxes. Currently, a pack of smokes in NY can cost upwards of $13. That's a pack of 20 cigarettes. Most of that cost is going to the government so they can buy $58,000 toilet seats or ensure their hallways have real marble on the floors and walls, with the extra money is for getting it up on the ceiling, too, and maybe some gold gilding. You can bet it isn't actually going back to the community for education or anything like that. The kids are only useful for agenda reasons, after all. 

Then ban smoking indoors. Ban smoking in certain places, like parks. Then ban smoking where kids are present. Ban smoking in hotels. Cops can approach you to inspect your cigarette packs to ensure you have the stamp on them that says you bought them in state and paid the tax. Now, if you are walking and smoking you can be fined $50. At some point they'll ban smoking in rental properties, which means if you live in an apartment in NY you won't be allowed to smoke there. They'll move to banning smoking in cars because, after all, if your smoke is causing this politician to have some kind of demonic fit just by being 200 feet behind a smoker on the street, he's really going to have issues with driving smokers who are releasing their demons over many blocks! They'll keep enacting more and more laws about where you can't smoke and what you can't be doing while smoking until you literally will not be able to smoke in the state unless you are on a property that is owned by you - meaning the mortgage is paid off - and it is in some remote area where your nearest neighbor is a mile away. Then they can say they didn't actually ban smoking. You can still smoke. You can smoke all you want! Just follow these 85,000 pages of laws. 

You end up with people being forced to behave as the government wants them to, and you also create a black market. We all know about loosies. Eric Garner could tell you about loosies if he was still alive. No, that isn't a shot at the cops. But let's face it. He was approached by the cops for selling black market individual cigarettes (loosies), which is against the law (because the state doesn't make money off of it), a crime that was created by these very laws meant to ban cigarettes in pieces. People get arrested for selling loosies all the time. They get arrested for smuggling cigarettes from out of state all the time, too. NY created more crimes, and people are still smoking. 

Now we're doing it with guns. Well, we've been doing it with guns. But people don't see it. We have a constitutional right to bear arms, and a good majority of the country actually supports gun rights - regardless of what the media says, the research, polls, and studies don't support their claims - so an outright ban of all guns isn't going happen. And banning them in pieces is going to take longer. 

Full autos are banned. You can't open carry in some states, and in many states you need a license to carry concealed. In some states you really can't carry at all. In many states where carrying is legal, the cops will approach you every time they see you. In some states you can carry but the gun can't be loaded. In some states you have to pay the government to run a background check that gun stores run on rifles for free. Literally the exact same background check (the reason: revenue and the hopes that you won't bother driving out to the sheriff's department, where you have to pay for parking if you can even find it, to apply and also to pick up the permits since they need five days to complete an instant background check, during weekdays when everyone is working which means you have to take time off of work - twice - to complete the process).  

Now people are marching for a ban on "assault weapons." Because obviously banning a rifle used in a minuscule amount of gun crimes and deaths would make a huge impact, right? Once that's done, your deer hunting rifle will be deemed a "sniper rifle" and we'll start marching on Washington to have those banned. Then someone will start on handguns, probably starting with semi-autos because they can fire 800 rounds a minute or some made up horse manure like that. The revolvers will be a problem because the casings once used as evidence in crimes will be left inside the cylinder, making solving gun deaths harder. 

And we'll be standing here on the curb with a pump action shotgun that holds three rounds and a single shot 22 LR bolt action wondering what the heck happened. They didn't ban all guns, after all. You can still have fun at the range with that single shot 22 LR, and the shotgun is great for home defense, and you can hunt with it! Isn't your government benevolent?! 

Like a good portion of you, I am having a tough time supporting the kids walking out. And it isn't just because they are marching against the Constitution and their own freedoms and that what they are protesting for is something I am fully against. I'm not sure these kids have any idea what they are protesting. Yes, I am sure some of them do. But a good majority of them don't. And from what I have seen, knowing what you are protesting isn't something the schools are freely encouraging the kids to do. 

These kids are being fed. I'm sure they have opinions. I'm also sure they aren't getting both sides of the story. How many of them know the statistics for school shootings? The real ones put out by organizations who clearly define mass shootings and other crimes and keep track of them, not the padded numbers offered by the media. How many know the gun laws? The actual gun laws. How many know what representatives in their state to contact? Who was the protest aimed at? What, exactly, is an AR-15? What does "semi-automatic" mean? What is the difference between an AR-15 and an M-16? What independent research have they done without a parent or teacher over their shoulder? You all have smart phones, check it out while you're on the toilet. 

I'm going to assume not much personal research was done, otherwise this young lady would have realized that shirt wasn't appropriate for an anti-gun march, considering how prevalent that is in pro-gun culture. Like, you really can't do any opposition research without finding that term. 

The other reason I believe these kids are protesting based only on their parents and teachers' thoughts is because of the overuse of buzzwords and phrases. The above sign for example. Every anti-gun protest has that exact same sign. "Common sense gun control." "Gun show loophole." "I don't want to ban all guns, but..." "I'm pro second amendment, but..." The list goes on. The signs were the same generic signs at every gun control event. This is not the sign of independent thought. This is a sign of being showed one side of the story and argument. 

The same goes for the kids who were pro-gun. "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is not an original thought. It's another over used phrase that, while true, was fed to a teenager. 

However. It goes beyond that. In NC, students were basically forced to participate in the walk out because all the teachers were participating and no students could be in the classrooms alone. Therefore, all the students had to be where the teachers were. 

A young man in Ohio was suspended from school because he wanted to be a-political. He basically didn't want to take a side, and going outside for the walkout was support for gun control, but going to the common area was supporting gun rights. Instead of providing a place for kids to stay who didn't want to take sides for whatever reason, they tried to force them to take sides. 

​This is not a protest. When kids are not being presented both sides of the argument, are being suspended for not taking sides, and are being escorted away for having an opinion against gun control, that isn't a protest or students expressing themselves. That is forced dissent. These kids are being forced to protest something they don't even understand fully. 

The proper way to do this would be to encourage the kids to study both sides. Teach them how to think, not what to think. Do a report on both sides. Do a report supporting one side or arguing against one side. Heck, when I was in high school we had a public speaking team, and one of the categories you could do was called the "Lincoln-Douglas Debate." You gave the kids a topic and told them what side they were arguing - it didn't matter what side they agreed with - they were given time to research the topic, and then they debated each other on the topic. In a learning situation, you could get the kids to argue in favor of the side they disagreed with. What better way to learn about the opposing side then to defend it in a debate with intent to win! It forces the kids to learn about both sides of the issue, they all get to listen to different points of view, and they get to learn how to do an actual debate on top of it all! Win-win! 

But this is the overall issue I have with kids leading the fight. Yes, people listen to kids because of emotion and how hard it tugs their heart strings, and the leftist politicians do love to parade around children even though they really don't give a crud about them past their own agenda, the same as they feel about everyone else. It's power over all. But the reality of it is pretty cold. No, we shouldn't be listening to kids. Do they have a right to protest? Of course. They are citizens, too, and have the same rights as anyone else. But like celebrities, their opinions hold no more weight than anyone else's.  Less, even. Kids are not being taught how to think. They aren't being taught to study both sides of an issue and to form an honest opinion. They aren't being taught to sift through the crap to find the facts. They are being told what to think. They are being given lines and buzzwords and chant like sayings for standard signs and are being pushed in front of cameras to parrot it all back at us, because we feel things for kids. And we were all there. At some point, you believed what your parents believed. Then you believed the opposite of what they believed because that was being rebellious. And then you had life experiences and began doing your own research and really looking into issues and you began to form your own opinions. You stopped caring about being accepted by your peers or making mom and dad proud. Some of your opinions stayed the same, but many changed. Right now, though, these kids are in their teen years. They want to make their peers accept them and they want mom and dad to be proud. They don't want to argue with their parents or stand too far out from the crowd. They don't want to be the weird kid no one talks to and who people whisper about as they walk down the halls. They don't want to be like the school shooters, the weird kids no one bothered with. 

So yes, I believe the kids should be allowed to protest. But I also believe we need to get back to teaching our kids how to think and stop telling them what to think. We need to encourage our kids to learn about a topic before diving into it. And I think we need to stop making national spectacles out of our kids for an agenda they don't fully understand. Let your kids be kids. Let them grow up and get some life experience. Let them learn and be carefree. Those carefree years go by so fast. They don't understand yet that the world isn't a safe place. They want it to be, we all do, but it isn't. But most of all, allow them to become who they are meant to become, not what you force them to be. 

And let's be fair. If the protests are allowed for one, they must be allowed for all, and the schools aren't prepared for that. Kids will find something to protest every day if it gets them out of class. But stop teaching them an agenda.