A crazy idea to stop mass shootings

Did you know Americans spend 23 hours a week on social networks? That's almost a full day absorbing all the stupidity that's posted on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Pinstagram, Facetrest. There's only one conclusion as to why we tolerate this behavior. Americans must be masochists. And those who want their pain alleviated-write to me. When you see something stupid on social networks-send it to Stu and he'll get Anti-Social.

Today, we look at the gun debate. And if there's anything Americans can agree on, it's that we don't want to get our advice on guns from A) an English talent show host or b) a pop star who puts whipped cream on her boobs.

Let's start off with Katy's tweet. She was reacting to a recent shooting at a mall.

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 10.57.42 AM

Of course, gun control advocate Piers Morgan had an answer for Katy

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 11.00.53 AM 

Did it work? No? Weird.

Afterwards Piers invited Katy Perry on his show and it doesn't seem like Katy actually responded. That's like high school when you're talking to a pretty girl about something you miraculously have in common and then you say ‘Hey, let's hang out and talk about it some more’ and she says ‘Noooo.’ That's been Piers' entire life.

Look we all know that Piers is an anti-gun fanatic. And Katy Perry routinely finds out that thinking is hard, but her motivations are good. She doesn't like tragedy like I don't like tragedy. Hey, we have something in common, Katy, maybe we should go out.

The point is, people like Katy and Piers tell us all the time that we have to do "something" about guns before another shooting happens. The specific shooting they're talking about is the shooting in Maryland that happened a couple weeks ago that left 3 people dead, including the shooter. The shooter, a 19-year-old man, killed two mall employees and himself. Extremely sad and tragic - but what do we do?

Here are the facts. The shooter purchased the gun legally from a gun shop in Rockville, MS. You may notice I said "legally" and didn't say "gun show”. He legally purchased the gun even though Maryland passed sweeping new restrictions on gun ownership, including a ban on new purchases of assault weapons and a 10-round limit on magazines just last year. The shooter hadn't previously owned a gun before and had no criminal record. Friends and family regarded the shooter as a nice, quiet young man. He had no issue with mental illness.

One other thing, there are no elected officials in the entire United States who are proposing a ban to the gun that he used.  In fact, lots of people are telling you to buy that gun - a shotgun. Why does Vice President Joe Biden heart shotguns so much? Maybe because shotguns provide safety to many families and are involved in less deaths per year than clubs and hammers, swimming pools, and falling out of bed deaths

But even if you want to ban every single gun on the planet you still have to deal with this: at the crime scene police found and disabled "two crude devices that appeared to be an attempt at making explosives using firework.” The bottom line is this guy had made his mind up to hurt as many people as he could. Ban the gun, he would have used the bomb.  Yet if you follow the wrong person on Twitter you're going to believe we're in the midst of a mass shooting epidemic that can only be stopped by the iron fists of the government.  And news sources back this stuff up.

There are 300 million guns in America. While 10 extra shootings isn't exactly a big percentage, it's still ten too many. There are other issues with this report, but even if it's true that more shootings are happening at schools, it's important to ask why.

If you look at this chart, you can clearly see that there is no upward trend in mass shootings for the past 35 years. In fact the high point for mass shootings in America was actually 1929.

FS MASS SHOOTINGS GRAPH-01 

So there's no increase in mass shootings, but news outlets tell us there is an increase in shootings at schools. Why is that? Could it be that those mass shooters have decided to pick their targets more carefully? Could it be because schools are gun free zones and that whackos think they can do considerably more damage at these places?

Let me propose something crazy for a second. If you want real "change" as Katy put it, maybe we stop telling the world we're unarmed at all times.

I'm not saying you have to arm teachers, I'm not even saying you have to have armed security. Let's take baby steps. Let's just make it mildly confusing for the murderers. How about not alerting predators in advance that there is no danger on the premises? Our goal here is to keep the kids safe, right? What do we do when we want to keep our homes safe? Maybe you buy a gun. And if you really love the second amendment you might even put this sign on your lawn.

You might get an alarm system for your home, or if you have a dog you might want to put a “Beware of dog” sign on your lawn. You're telling the world  with these signs to that there's a reason not to come inside.

But why would anyone in their right mind put up one like this?

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 10.50.16 AM

You might as well be saying "Come on in!"

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 10.50.45 AM

It makes about as much sense as putting up a sign that say this:

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 10.50.52 AM

Or this:

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 10.51.07 AM

You'd never put any of these signs up, because doing so would be completely insane. It's like rolling out a red carpet for anyone trying to do you harm. That's exactly what a "gun free zone" is.

So let's start with a little tiny baby steps. Even if you want to keep your school as a gun free zone, stop telling people it's a gun free zone. Instead try something like this:

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 12.17.47 PM

Or this?

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 10.51.27 AM

Or maybe even this:

Screen Shot 2014-02-21 at 10.51.45 AM

So to review:

1)   Gun free zones for kids = danger free zones for criminals

2)   “Doing something" is never a good idea unless you know what that something is.

3)   Piers Morgan's IQ is smaller than Katy Perry's bra size.

In light of the national conversation surrounding the rights of free speech, religion and self-defense, Mercury One is thrilled to announce a brand new initiative launching this Father's Day weekend: a three-day museum exhibition in Dallas, Texas focused on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens.

This event seeks to answer three fundamental questions:

  1. As Americans, what responsibility do we shoulder when it comes to defending our rights?
  2. Do we as a nation still agree on the core principles and values laid out by our founding fathers?
  3. How can we move forward amidst uncertainty surrounding the intent of our founding ideals?

Attendees will be able to view historical artifacts and documents that reveal what has made America unique and the most innovative nation on earth. Here's a hint: it all goes back to the core principles and values this nation was founded on as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Exhibits will show what the world was like before mankind had rights and how Americans realized there was a better way to govern. Throughout the weekend, Glenn Beck, David Barton, Stu Burguiere, Doc Thompson, Jeffy Fisher and Brad Staggs will lead private tours through the museum, each providing their own unique perspectives on our rights and responsibilities.

Schedule a private tour or purchase general admission ticket below:

Dates:
June 15-17

Location:

Mercury Studios

6301 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039

Learn more about the event here.

About Mercury One: Mercury One is a 501(c)(3) charity founded in 2011 by Glenn Beck. Mercury One was built to inspire the world in the same way the United States space program shaped America's national destiny and the world. The organization seeks to restore the human spirit by helping individuals and communities help themselves through honor, faith, courage, hope and love. In the words of Glenn Beck:

We don't stand between government aid and people in need. We stand with people in need so they no longer need the government

Some of Mercury One's core initiatives include assisting our nation's veterans, providing aid to those in crisis and restoring the lives of Christians and other persecuted religious minorities. When evil prevails, the best way to overcome it is for regular people to do good. Mercury One is committed to helping sustain the good actions of regular people who want to make a difference through humanitarian aid and education initiatives. Mercury One will stand, speak and act when no one else will.

Support Mercury One's mission to restore the human spirit by making an online donation or calling 972-499-4747. Together, we can make a difference.

What happened?

A New York judge ruled Tuesday that a 30-year-old still living in his parents' home must move out, CNN reported.

Failure to launch …

Michael Rotondo, who had been living in a room in his parents' house for eight years, claims that he is owed a six-month notice even though they gave him five notices about moving out and offered to help him find a place and to help pay for repairs on his car.

RELATED: It's sad 'free-range parenting' has to be legislated, it used to be common sense

“I think the notice is sufficient," New York State Supreme Court Judge Donald Greenwood said.

What did the son say?

Rotondo “has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises, and claims that this is simply a component of his living agreement," he claimed in court filings.

He told reporters that he plans to appeal the “ridiculous" ruling.

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.