A response to good questions/ statements with regard to guns and gun ownership and regulations.

My nephew Bryan responded to a Facebook post I made that linked an article talking about the reality of "good guys with guns"

I started to just respond in the face book post but this warrants more attention then a quick face book response.  Hats off to him for actually voicing his views.  How much he or anyone else will accept the logic and reasoning why the arguments fail is not controllable by me.  All I can do is state the reality and point out the flaws.  So with that I hope this makes you think a bit about the issue.

Here is his post and what follows is my response.

BrYan May I don't care what the numbers are, I would want to at least have the opportunity to defend myself against an intruder. Otherwise I'd just be a dude asking the gunman to get out of my house.
It's our second amendment right to keep and bear arms. If there ever was a need for a militia, we as people, would need to be equipped. With the way this government has turned, it's important to be able to protect yourself. This is a tyrannical government that's infringing on a lot of the freedoms our forefathers fought for against England. This is a police state where regular cops have military weapons and vehicles. And laws granting them the ability to go in your house and search without a warrant. Reminds me of the Revolutionary war days when red coats could use houses for whatever they wanted.
There's a lot of fed up people here. If there was ever a rebellion, we need to be armed. To protect ourselves from any enemy.
I just looked up deaths by motor vehicles and guns ans in 2010 the numbers were about even. Should we have stricter regulations on motor vehicles too?

Ok Bryan let me address your points one at a time.
1) "I don't care what the numbers are..." I can stop right there.  Your family is safer without a gun in the house period.  Even with a home invasion risk you, your wife and your children are over 4 times more likely to get shot because you have a gun in your home.  If you goal is to protect your family from harm then the best thing for you to do is not have a gun.  In a home invasion situation the best thing for any family to do is call the police immediately and barricade you and your family in one of the rooms and remain on the phone with the police.  I know it doesn't sound manly to hide in a room but it is the safest thing for your family and I personally don't have to risk my family's safety because I want to look more macho. Arguing that you are safer with a gun is as sensible as saying you are safer not wearing a seat belt in your car.  I don't care how safe you feel.  Reality doesn't care how safe you feel.  Reality says you or one of your family members is more likely to get shot and possibly killed if you have a gun.

2)Next the Second Amendment says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

First 4 words "a well regulated Militia.  This would equate to something like a national guard.  Yes back over 220 years ago well regulated state militias where a credible threat against the Federal government that was still unsure if the laws put in place would be sufficient to control the federal government.  The reality is the laws, if we choose to use them, are very sufficient to control the federal government.  The problem is that most people don't want to bother.  It is far easier for people to complain about the government over reach and corruption and do nothing about it and pretend that if you have a gun that you'll be able to stop the new world order when it comes.  The reality is quite different.  Our forefathers put in place all the tools we need if we just choose to use them.  Lets us take the single largest problem with our government with respect to governing over its citizens.  At all levels government is becoming more and more corrupt.  Big money in politics is the largest factor for this.  Both the democrats and GOP are controlled by big money.  We don't have a right and left wing politicians.  We have right wing and centre right wing politicians because corporations and the ultra rich are primarily right wing.  Over 90% of people in the USA believe that money corrupts politics but congress isn't going to change it, the executive branch doesn't come through with the change that they promised and the judicial branch has been stacked over the last few decades with to many judges that consider corporations and the rich more important then you and I.  With the latest ruling by SCOTUS we get statements like

"Associate Justice Anthony McLeod Kennedy - We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption."

And they expect us to believe that because we let them by our inaction.  Not because we aren't willing to take up arms but that to many people aren't willing to voice their opinion.  We all know that almost all politicians are going to listen to a billionaire throwing them and their party millions of dollars a lot more then you and I who wouldn't even appear on their radar even if we donate to their campaigns.  There are studies that show that, with regard to legislation, the common citizens views do not factor into actual legislative results but if you are in the top .01% the legislation almost always aligns with your positions on a topic.
So given that you aren't going to, and shouldn't, form an armed revolt against the federal government what can you do?  Well the forefathers where very smart individuals.  Article 5 mandates that the states can force the federal government to amend the constitution even if the politicians in Washington don't want to.  There is a big push to have the states force the Federal government to amend the constitution and over turn rulings like Citizens United, which might sound like it is good for you but basically says a corporation is a person just like you ....except better.  They get all the rights you do but can have limited liability, can't be drafted, can't be sent to jail, can spend more money supporting political candidates then you can which means they can legally buy your politicians.  To see how you can help without the use of a gun go to

Now back to guns.  What do you think would happen if the federal government came for you.  I mean really wanted to come for you.  To many people look up to people like Cliven Bundy as standing up to the Federal government and think, "see we've got guns and the government is afraid of us".  They are stupid.  First Cliven Bundy steals from all Americans.  Other ranchers pay grazing fees that Bundy believes he doesn't have to.  He uses federal lands to feed his cattle and doesn't think the law should apply to him.  It is no different then someone thinking they don't have to pay any taxes but still have the government protect them with police and fire departments. Use federal and local roads. Use national parks we pay to maintain with our money.  Use the schools to educate their kids.  For fuck sake it is like someone driving into a national park, cutting down all the trees to hall off to a lumber yard and pocket all the money.  But people flock to Bundy with their AR15s in hopes that they'll be able to use their weapons against the government.

If the government wanted to take them out how hard do you think it would be.  Forget the legality but just pure combat.  I can tell you that everyone at the Cliven Bundy ranch would be dead and I'd be surprised if even 1 military member was even harmed during the assault.  The reason the government just doesn't go in is not because they are scared of the civilians with guns and what they could do to an assaulting force but what a few dozen stupid idiots with AR15s would be willing to try to do to protect a racist thief.  Having a gun doesn't help them any more then them all having kitchen knives and threatening to drink poisoned kool-aid if the feds get to close.

If you try to use a gun to stop a police officer from legally searching your residence then you are stupid.  If police officers illegally search your residence then take legal action against them.  When you see cops racially profiling black kids, speak up there.  Don't interfere but tape it.  Post it.  File a complaint with the police.  Take it to your politicians that you won't stand for them overstepping their authority.  Boston is no stranger to putting police back in their place.  On October 21, 2004 Victoria Snelgrove, a 22 year old journalism student was killed by a police officer after the Red Socks won against the Yankees because the police were using crowd control tactics that the situation did not warrant and the police officer wasn't trained for and should not have been authorized to use.  Did enough happen to all the police officers involved, not in my opinion but actual action was taken and police officers did get punished and demoted.  When cops over step their authority you and every other citizen need to be involved in correcting the issue.  If no one steps up and makes a fuss then the country will slide deeper into a police state.  This means that you have to stand up for your rights even if it means you might get pepper sprayed or arrested some times.  Having a gun won't help you one bit and if you pull it out on a cop then expect that your wife and child will live on without you.

Finally your argument about motor vehicles. We do have stricter regulations on motor vehicles.  You register your motor vehicles.  Your motor vehicles are insured and inspected.  You hold a licence to drive your motor vehicle and can loose the right to drive said motor vehicle. There are sensible road rules.  Speed limited, laws against drunk driving.  Your motor vehicle primary function isn't to kill or maim another person.  Yes accidents happen with vehicles and they get investigated.  But with guns and gun ownership we don't have the same type of regulations.  Vehicles are also used a HELL of a lot more then guns.  If vehicles where used only as much as guns and still had the same death rates ...man.  The average American driver spends about an hour a day in the car. Tell me how many people do you know that use their guns more then they drive? It is also a logical fallacy to say that since cars cause deaths that guns shouldn't be regulated even if the risk in using them was the same which it is not.  It is a lot harder to function in modern society without a car then it is without a gun.  We accept the risks with vehicles and we are constantly making driving safer.  We do no such thing with regards to guns.

Now I've not even said anything about taking away all guns.  If you want to have a hand gun in your home and accept the increased risk to you and your family that is your decision just don't delude yourself.  What I say is better laws and regulations should be in place.  This means standards across all 50 states just like there are standards to drivers across all 50 states.  Just like there are safety standards in all states with the road worthiness of your vehicles in all 50 states.  You can't just go buy a car in Rhode Island because they allow you to drive unroad worthy vehicles there.  I've said it before and I'll say it again if we had similar laws and regulations with regard to guns that we do with vehicles there would be less deaths.  There is a reason why American children are 9 times more likely to be killed by a gun then in an other developed country and it isn't because of "bad guys with guns" most of the time.  To often it is because stupid parents with guns don't know how to secure their firearms properly.

Do you really want change in the government?

With the US Congress's approval rating approaching single digits it would be easy to think that Americans are ready for change.  Sadly many Americans just don't give a shit.  31% of Americans it seems and that is 31% that admit it.  Forget about the 31% the say they support the GOP and 37% that say they support the Democrats but really don't give a shit.  We just finished having primaries for house and senate members and even though 67% of people poles said they want their representative voted out 45% of people when faced with a change said they approved of what their representative was doing.  So Congress's approval rating is 11%, 67% of people said they want their representative voted out but then when faced with a change 45% said they actually approve of their representatives.  If you made it past 1st grade maths you should see those numbers don't add up.  Note they aren't from different poles.

So what does this mean?  It means people are afraid of change.  Especially change that they control.  Most people would rather sit back and do nothing then go forward and cause a change to the system even when they admit the system is fully broken.

These mid term elections often receive less then 40% turn out of eligible voters and numbers show that even though more people say they would support democrats (37%) over republicans (31%) the truth is that among likely voters the numbers are about 50/50.

The issue here is Americans are getting lazy with our involvement in government.  We like to say that we support this or that political view.  We'll share face book posts like crazy but when it comes to actually making an effort with our government it becomes just all to hard for most Americans.  This is a major reason the ultra rich have been so successful in taking away the rights of common citizens.  Today you are a second class citizen behind the rich.  The facts show that it doesn't matter what you and I want with regard to political decisions but if you are part of the top .1%, not even 1%, then the politicians almost always vote in your favor.  Corporations are now first class citizens that are above the law.  They are allowed to avoid paying taxes by shipping profits to countries like the Bahamas.  They are actually paid by our government in the form of subsidies, tax credits, interest and risk free loans and many other forms of corporate welfare to the tune of hundreds of billions and even trillions of dollars a year even while making record profits.

Mean while many of those same corporations continually chip away at your rights as a citizen.  You don't need to be paid a living wage.  You don't need health care. Your vote shouldn't count as much as people richer then you.  You should not be allowed to sue them if they've done anything wrong to you.  They should not be held responsible for the actions taken by their executives.  They should be able to force their will on you and your property without any recourse by you.  They should be able to dictate what content and news you are allowed to view/ hear.

If you've made it this far congratulations for making it through another one of my posts on the growing inequality in our world.  Of the few that made it this far most of you will move on to sharing some useless post on face book and watching videos of kittens on YouTube and put this post out of your mind.  I hope I've actually caused at least 1 of you to actually think about the situation so that maybe just maybe down the line this might be just one of the things that eventually led you to actually care about the country you live in.  To not just say you love your country but to actually do something to fix your country.  I wish I could bet that you would but I'd loose that bet far more often then I'd win.  Sorry but my faith in you is not that great and I wish for you to prove me wrong.

If you want a place to start then go and see how you can help reclaim our government that is supposed to be of the people by the people and for the people. Not just for corporations and the rich that control them.  If it is just all to hard just donate $10 to help those that will make the real effort.

Get off your ass and really support our troops!

There seems to be a new controversy brewing with regard to the U.S. Department of Vetrans Affairs.  Unless you've been sleeping under a rock in the last few decades you would know about the crazy wait times veterans are having to go through to receive the medical care they rate and deserve.  It would be easy to point to Obama and say it is all his fault and he does hold some responsibility for the situation but here is this blog post I'll list some things you need to think about as you hopefully then go on to contact your federal representatives and tell them you do not accept our federal government sending our young men and women into multiple wars then when they come back decide that you don't want to fund a medical system that will fix what the wars have broken.

I already see members of the GOP complaining that the Obama administration is not taking care of our veterans but they seem to selectively forget that it is they who have repeated blocked attempts to provide more adequate funding for the VA.  Mitch McConnell filibustered a 21 billion dollar bill for the VA that had passed the procedural vote 99 to 0.  Then then turned around and complained about the very bill they said they wanted.  They actively fought against helping our veterans then quickly turned around and ram through a bill that exempts the coal mining industry from environmental regulations.  They named it "Preventing Government Waste and Protecting Coal Mining Jobs in America".

Let me translate the title for you
"Preventing Government Waste" - Don't let the government regulate and test the environmental impact of coal mines to include water safety from chemicals used by the mines entering the water table.
"Protecting Coal Mining Jobs in America" - The coal industry that is already making huge profits and allowed to pollute the environment on top of receiving billions in federal subsidies, tax credits and other corporate welfare benefits needs to cut production costs even more so that their share holders make more money.

So the GOP will filibustered a bill helping our veterans but will ram through a bill that allows an already profitable industry to fuck up our environment even more.

You might ask why the VA needs more money.  Don't we give the VA billions already?  Yes but the VA has been on a bad track since the 60s.  The fact that we've doubled the amount of veterans needing care from the 2 wars the Bush administration started didn't help.  Let me be clear here.  The GOP is a war mongering party that took every opportunity to engage in military action and funding a huge military industrial complex, a.k.a. corporations that profit greatly from said wars, then consistently says that the actual people that fight the wars need to tighten their belts because it cost to much to send them to war.  We'll spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year paying companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Raytheon and many otheres but can't even scrap together 3% of our military budget to handle the wounds we inflict on our soldiers by sending them to wars.

The GOP doesn't have a problem passing tax cuts of hundreds of billions of dollars a year for the rich.  Lets look at the Koch Brothers.  Each of them earn about $700,000 an hour.  That isn't 40 hours a week.  That is for every hour of every day of the year.  They save about over $100,000/hr directly from the Bush tax cuts. Even if they paid the top rate which they don't.  Each of them saves literally billions of dollars a year because of tax cuts.  They invest hundreds of millions into the GOP essentially buying politicians to ensure that the tax brakes for the rich keep coming, push for a removal of the minimum wage because paying someone $7.25/hr is creating a culture of dependency.  If you agree with him until I point out he wants to pay people even less.  What the fuck do you think will happen to a family that is already on minimum wage if they now only get 1/2 or 1/4th of their current income?  Who do you think will pick up the slack.   Note they, and the politicians they've bough, fought against bills to help returning vets with getting jobs and starting businesses. Tax cuts for the rich at the cost of fixing our broken vets seems to be one of the GOP's motives here.

You might say why do we need the VA?  Many people have an image of dirty hospitals can poor care when they think of VA centres but this is far from the truth.  When vets do eventually get the care from the VA they tend to be happier then those that are cared for by the civilian system.  The complaints about in patient care has dropped by over 20% in recent years.

While the GOP have been fighting against supporting the VA deal with over 883,000 claims in their system, more then double of 2009, they do things like try to force the Air Force to buy 42 new C-27Js when the Air Force says they don't want them, that they are already moving the some of the already purchased aircraft to the USAF storage facility in Arizona, you know the one..it is in tons of movies. Or how about the Army being force to buy dozens of new M1A1 tanks it doesn't even want.  They politicians will say it is to save jobs but the cost is stupid.  Take the C-27Js cost $53,000,000 each to buy.  The 42 aircraft will save 800 jobs at the Mansfield National Guard Base.  Who the fuck thinks that spending billions to save 800 jobs is a good idea?  I'll make a useless point and say that the air craft are produced by an Italian company but it doesn't matter.  Even if it was an "American" corporation the truth is that they are multi-national corporations that funnel most of their profits through places like the Bahamas to avoid paying taxes.  Here is what you do.  Don't spend that 2 billion dollars on aircraft that we don't need.  Don't give the money to a multinational corporation that pays almost nothing in taxes and funnel that into the VA's budget and you would have increased their capacity to take care of our vets by over 10%.
Lets just focus here BILLIONS on equipment we don't need just in these 2 cases but fuck our troops is the message that congress is send us.  This is because these corporations kick back part of their HUGE contracts into the campaign financing of politicians.  It is literally kick backs here just legal.  The politicians will call up these multi-national corporations and beg for often just tens of thousands of dollars in donations then when in office push through bills that earn these same corporations hundreds of millions to billions of dollars.

There is a bright note here with some conservatives.  Bill O'Reilly just did an interview with Carl Rove, the man that orgistrated and responsible for a war that cost over 4,000 American soldiers and well over 100,000 Iraq civilians their lives, and pointed out that during the Bush administration there was a 3 billion dollar shortfall with the VA's budget.  Bill O'Reilly then points out to Carl Rove that the VA gave the incoming Obama administration, in 2008, a report that said "that the problems and causes associated with scheduling, waiting times and wait lists are systemic throughout the VHA".  O'Reilly says "the problems existed on the day Bush left office".  Carl Rove just said "no no no" denying the facts.  This isn't a problem that happened under Obama's watch.  Sure it continued and got worse as we brought more and more troops back from those wars Carl Rove got Bush to start.  Obama couldn't just not bring back the troops and avoid the problem.  They've been trying to increase the VA's budget and bring its administration system up to date but the GOP keep blocking the funding.

It is all because multi-national corporations have huge lobby efforts with hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars to buy our politicians and our vets only have you and I supporting them.  How about do more then share a post saying you support our vets.  How about you get off your ass and call your federal politicians and tell them you want them to do right by our broken soldiers.  If soldiers are willing to put their lives on the line to protect your freedoms, even if it is because of lies by people like Carl Rove, then you can spend a bit of your time actually involving yourself with the governing of our country and actually support those that protect us.  Then after you tell your politicians that tell them you are supporting a constitutional convention to remove big money from politics and that the Wolf Pac is coming for them.

Go and see how you can help reclaim our government that is supposed to be of the people by the people and for the people not corporations.

US terrorism on foreigners. When will America stop killings innocent people? Warning Graphic Pictures!

  Just one year ago on Oct 24, 2012,  Momina Bibi, a grandmother, was out picking okra with some of her grand children.  She paid for that with her life.  Her grandchildren eye witnesses to her execution.

  The people live in constant fear of US controlled drones.  But life must go on.  They hear the drones every day, 24 hours a day.  They must still tend the fields for the food.  They must still carry about their day.  Sure, this family had never been hit by a drone strike before but it wasn't uncommon for innocent people to be killed by drones.

   The number of people killed by US drone strikes isn't easy to pin down but the best estimates range from 2,526 to 3,621.  Of which between 416 and 948 innocent civilians have been killed, depending on how you classify some of the young men aged and boys.  What is clear is that over 150 children have been killed by US controlled drone strikes.

  On Oct 24 Zubair Rehman, the 13 year old grandson of Momina, watched his grandmother literally get blown to piece.  Along with loosing his grandmother Zubair received shrapnel to his leg and had to undergo expensive surgery.  Surgery that you might think the USA paid for because they mistakenly bombed and innocent family, wounding a few children and killing a 67 year old grandmother.  But you would be wrong.  The USA government's position on this attack is vague.  They will not release any information about it.  They tried to claim 4 militants were killed in the attack but Momina was the only fatality.  When further questioned Caitlin Hayden, from the NSC, called the strike "Precise, lawful, and effective."  WTF?  Precise? Yea you blew a 67 year old lady picking Okra in a field from a drone flying high over head.  I guess that is "precise".  Lawful?  You have to be a huge scum bag of a lawyer to call killing a 67 year old grand mother "lawful".  Effective?  You have to be a huge fucking idiot to call it effective unless being a terrorist is your goal.  Because these innocent families live in constant fear.

  The kids no longer want to go to school and they come from a long line of educators.  Zubair's father is a teacher.  Zubair's grandfather, Momina's husband, is a teacher and he said "I wish God would just take my life, I can't live without her".  Zubair testified "All of a sudden things became very dark.  It was like she was exploded to pieces.". The kids don't like it when the skies are clear because that is when the drones are used the most. They live in fear because the US drones that circle over head.  They live in fear because the USA is terrorizing them. It is as plain and simple as that.

  So not only are they terrorized by the USA but the government won't even explain why the mistake happened or even acknowledge a mistake was made.  They call it "collateral damage".  The issue is the American public don't want to know about the problem.  For fuck sake the politicians don't want to know about the problem either.  Only 5 members of Congress listened to these families, and there was more then just this one family, at the briefing.  Rep Alan Grayson from Florida, Rep Jan Schakowsky from Illinois, Rep Rush Holt from New Jersey, Rep John Conyers from Michigan, and Rep Rick Nolan from Minnesota.  Why?  Because most American's don't know, or don't care, about the damage the US drone program causes.  The people killed, even if innocent, are non-people.  They aren't as important as you, your brother, your mother, your friend, your neighbor or even some guy in the next town over that you've never even met before.  The less you think about the victims of US military actions the better is the position of most Americans.  I can say that because the evidence shows it to be true.  If American's cared that we, as a nation, are responsible for hundreds and even thousands of children loosing their lives from US military actions then our politicians would know it.  They'd care because you care.  They'd know you cared because you would let them know you care.  Every time another one of these reports surfaced you'd contact your representative.  You call your senator.  You'd petition the White House to stop the terrorism perpetrated by the USA via our military and civilian combat programs.

  In the past war was out of sight but US casualties kept it in our minds.  The knock on the door of 2 men in uniform to tell the family that their son has died.  If you didn't get the knock yourself you probably knew someone that did.  So while the images of war wasn't there we had a sense that there is a price to military action taken on by the USA.  In Vietnam we got exposed to not only those knocks but we also had a lot more understanding what was going on via returning vets and journalists.  Pictures that are now timeless that show not only the ugly face of war but let the people know that the USA isn't always the good guy.

  The young people today might not really understand the image above.  Sure the kids look scared but so what?!  Well lets look at Kim Phuc, the little naked girl there today.  She was a victim of a US Napalm attack.  For those of you that don't know it is a disgusting incendiary weapon that was designed to stick to flesh as it burned.  Think of it as hand sanitizing gell that is a LOT more flammable and a lot stickier.  Back then, in 1972, using it on civilians wasn't "illegal".  The UN didn't declare it a war crime until 8 years later.  Unfortunately that didn't help Kim.  Napalm burns at temperatures of 800-1200 Celsius.  For those that are metric impaired that is 1,500-2,200 Fahrenheit or 8-12 times hotter then boiling water.  The problem is that the drones are today's Napalm.  The government calls them lawful and effective but ignore the children and innocent people that are killed by them.  Kim is actually lucky.  She survived.  She lived through the pain of almost being burned to death.  Zubair survived.  He lived through the drone attack that killed his grandmother, wounded him, his sister and a few of his cousins.

  The issue now is that journalists in the USA refuse to publish images that the American people NEED to see.  Images that should outrage all American's.  Images that should stir you to act.  To contact your politicians.  To stop the USA's terrorism program.  We as a nation can not hold the moral high ground and complain when some "evil dictator" kills a few kids when our nation has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds if not thousands of children in Afghanistan alone.  We can not complain about Assad killing a few hundred kids with chemical weapons if we, as a nation, allowed our government to kill hundreds of innocent children with unmanned aerial vehicles.  Just because we are using weapons that have yet to be declared as a war crime if used against civilians doesn't give us the moral high ground over some dictator killing children with chemical weapons.  A dead child is a dead child.  The method of killing them isn't what should outrage you it is their death in the first place that should make you scream.

You should look at these and jump into action.  Remember when the Boston marathon bombing happened?  How outraged where you?  Sure the journalist showed the images over and over but those are images of American's being terrorized, injured and killed.  What about these kids?  Where is your outrage for them?  Where is your posts on Facebook showing support for their families?  Where is your insistence that those responsible for their deaths are brought to justice.  Sadly those you have elected are often the closest you'll get to seeing who is directly responsible.  Look in a mirror and you'll probably see someone that is indirectly responsible.  Someone who, through inaction, allows this to happen.

  The dynamic has changed though.  We no longer have lots of knocking on doors.  Most of you may not know someone that has either died or lost a love one to the current military conflicts going on.  The US "news" outlets seem to weak to expose the public to the ugly side of war.  To many people would look away in disgust.  To many people would call the journalist unpatriotic.  Both these types people disgust me in one way or another.  Every adult should have some understanding of the cost of war.  Right now to many American's call others terrorists because they strap a bomb to themselves and kill themselves and others in an attempt to change things.  But when American's pay lots of money to have foreigners killed without getting their hands dirty at all it they think it is right and just.  It isn't because the policies that control these strikes are flawed.  The people executing these strikes are flawed.  The intelligence gathered that these strikes are based on are flawed and to many innocent people are getting killed.  If you have a program where you know at least 25% of the people you kill are not guilty then there is a major fucking problem. If you don't do anything to stop this program then you are part of the problem.

  Right now the majority of American's support the drone program.  But how many people support the use of a strategy that kills the wrong target at least 25% of the time?  Who supports a program where over 5% of the people killed are innocent children?  Who in their right mind thinks this is "lawful and effective".

  If that all doesn't stir you then think of it this way.  The "interpretation" of the laws that is being used right in the US drone program allows the government to execute you, with out any trial or even oversight from any judge if you are overseas.  There is even grey areas about there use on, or rather above, American soil.

  Take back control of your government.  Let them know you aren't going to let them do what ever they want any more. That it isn't in the best interest of the USA and it's citizens to be terrorizing people half way around the world just because we have more expensive military toys.