"Dr. [Terry] Shea [director of pharmacy management for BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee], said Tennesseans overall continue to use more drugs because the state tends to be older, more obese and sicker than the U.S. population as a whole."
Examine that assertion and what it really means...
"older" - Either Tennesseans aren't having children at a rate comparable to residents of other states, OR younger Tennesseans aren't staying in Tennessee. I suspect the latter, which begs the question, "Why?" What causes the younger generation to leave? Opportunity?
"more obese" - Is this a function of diet, exercise, or both? Think about where you can walk from your home. To school? To the store? To the pharmacy? To... anywhere? Are there sidewalks? Is there public transportation, and if so, is it within a reasonable walk? Or is a car an absolute necessity? How many trails and greenways exist? A pedestrian-friendly environment is the result of planning and zoning - what is your community doing along these lines? As for diet, in an age where the adult(s) in each household generally work, eating out is increasingly a way of life. What affordable options are available?
"sicker" - Why? Acute illnesses, chronic diseases or both? Are either or both a function of environment or personal lifestyle, and to what extent? Environmental pollutants, as well as the pedestrian friendliness of the environment are major contributors to sickness.
Bottom line: As Shea points out, use of drugs is merely a symptom of the real problem which is the state's "older, more obese and sicker" population. Cutting insurance benefits does NOTHING do address the problem.
How about tackling the actual problem for a change?
Show of hands: how many hunters have a citation for transporting their guns? How would or want to transport their long guns loaded? How many hunters would do that OR want anyone else to? How many want to spend $115 on a handgun permit if they don't have a handgun and don't want to transport a loaded long gun anyway? How many hunters know how poachers usually get caught? How many hunters want law enforcement to have an even harder time catching poachers?
Hunters don't need or even want this bill, the NRA isn't backing it, so why are 2 lawyers in the legislature trying to pass it, and why are other legislators voting for it?
HB390 and corresponding SB578 introduced by Rep Henry Fincher of Cookeville and Sen Doug Jackson of Dickson, who apparently never took a hunter safety education course...
If enacted, will allow carry permit holders to transport loaded rifles, shotguns, magazines and clips in motor vehicles, "the public welfare requiring it."
And exactly what about the public's welfare requires this??
From my son's hunter safety course:
"Always unload and case firearms before transporting them. In many states, this may be the law. The action should be open or the gun broken down, whichever makes the firearm safest if it’s mishandled."
Excellent editorial! Even more encouraging were the remarks from moonpie. I, too, am a gun-owner who supports restrictions, and there are more than two of us. The notion that personal safety is enhanced by carrying a loaded gun wherever you go is nothing more than a sales pitch by the gun industry, which, of course, funds the NRA. Fear-mongering turns out to be a great sales tactic. Fear of crime, fear of government, fear of loss of rights, fear of confiscation, and oh yes.... fear of losing the next election when the NRA funds your opponent. :-)
Fear is easier to sell than rational thought.
Nothing about a carry permit guarantees the permit holder is either rational or responsible or hasn't committed one or more crimes. Rational, responsible gun-owners separate loaded guns from the presence of alcohol as well as children.
TN ranks in the "top ten" states for deaths from guns per capita. Removing the precious few restrictions in place might well move us into the "top five." I don't want to go there. If our legislators believe existing restrictions are unnecessary, let them first test their theory on themselves by removing the metal detectors and allowing all permit holders to carry loaded, concealed guns throughout the State Capitol, House and Senate chambers and all legislative offices. To be sure it's a fair test, they can't add more law enforcement officers since there's no provision for more law enforcement attached to these bills.
For Rolando, the Supreme Court does not share your view. Last summer, in DC v Heller, the Court merely struck down a wholesale ban, and I have no problem with that decision. The Court also made clear the Second Amendment "like most rights, is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose," and went further to state that its ruling "should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
You might not agree with the Court's decision, of course, but the Court's opinion trumps yours.
The revisions to the unemployment system are long overdue. These revisions would make it easier for part-time workers to qualify for unemployment benefits and provide benefits to people leaving work for a “compelling family reason.”
UNDERemployment has been plaguing American workers for years as employers drop workers' hours to avoid paying benefits such as unemployment insurance and health insurance. This is not a scenario of people not wanting to work full-time; it is a situation of many people working multiple part time jobs (if they can find them, coordinate the hours, etc.) just to make ends meet because full time jobs with benefits have been evaporating as businesses seek to increase profit margins to answer demands for stock dividends and higher pay and bonuses for the top executive tier.
Maybe the federal government will also crack down on the growing number of employers who are cheating employees AND the IRS by classifying their regular employees "contract workers."
Tennessee's legislators and her governor need to get behind these changes, not oppose them. These revisions are ALL about a commitment to "family values."
Tennessee: Limits cut cost of drugs
"Dr. [Terry] Shea [director of pharmacy management for BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee], said Tennesseans overall continue to use more drugs because the state tends to be older, more obese and sicker than the U.S. population as a whole."
Examine that assertion and what it really means... "older" - Either Tennesseans aren't having children at a rate comparable to residents of other states, OR younger Tennesseans aren't staying in Tennessee. I suspect the latter, which begs the question, "Why?" What causes the younger generation to leave? Opportunity?
"more obese" - Is this a function of diet, exercise, or both? Think about where you can walk from your home. To school? To the store? To the pharmacy? To... anywhere? Are there sidewalks? Is there public transportation, and if so, is it within a reasonable walk? Or is a car an absolute necessity? How many trails and greenways exist? A pedestrian-friendly environment is the result of planning and zoning - what is your community doing along these lines? As for diet, in an age where the adult(s) in each household generally work, eating out is increasingly a way of life. What affordable options are available?
"sicker" - Why? Acute illnesses, chronic diseases or both? Are either or both a function of environment or personal lifestyle, and to what extent? Environmental pollutants, as well as the pedestrian friendliness of the environment are major contributors to sickness.
Bottom line: As Shea points out, use of drugs is merely a symptom of the real problem which is the state's "older, more obese and sicker" population. Cutting insurance benefits does NOTHING do address the problem.
How about tackling the actual problem for a change?
Tennessee: Gun bills rifle through House
Show of hands: how many hunters have a citation for transporting their guns? How would or want to transport their long guns loaded? How many hunters would do that OR want anyone else to? How many want to spend $115 on a handgun permit if they don't have a handgun and don't want to transport a loaded long gun anyway? How many hunters know how poachers usually get caught? How many hunters want law enforcement to have an even harder time catching poachers?
Hunters don't need or even want this bill, the NRA isn't backing it, so why are 2 lawyers in the legislature trying to pass it, and why are other legislators voting for it?
A growing, deadly gun culture
VERY DANGEROUS GUN BILLS:
HB390 and corresponding SB578 introduced by Rep Henry Fincher of Cookeville and Sen Doug Jackson of Dickson, who apparently never took a hunter safety education course...
If enacted, will allow carry permit holders to transport loaded rifles, shotguns, magazines and clips in motor vehicles, "the public welfare requiring it."
And exactly what about the public's welfare requires this??
From my son's hunter safety course: "Always unload and case firearms before transporting them. In many states, this may be the law. The action should be open or the gun broken down, whichever makes the firearm safest if it’s mishandled."
A growing, deadly gun culture
Excellent editorial! Even more encouraging were the remarks from moonpie. I, too, am a gun-owner who supports restrictions, and there are more than two of us. The notion that personal safety is enhanced by carrying a loaded gun wherever you go is nothing more than a sales pitch by the gun industry, which, of course, funds the NRA. Fear-mongering turns out to be a great sales tactic. Fear of crime, fear of government, fear of loss of rights, fear of confiscation, and oh yes.... fear of losing the next election when the NRA funds your opponent. :-) Fear is easier to sell than rational thought.
Nothing about a carry permit guarantees the permit holder is either rational or responsible or hasn't committed one or more crimes. Rational, responsible gun-owners separate loaded guns from the presence of alcohol as well as children.
TN ranks in the "top ten" states for deaths from guns per capita. Removing the precious few restrictions in place might well move us into the "top five." I don't want to go there. If our legislators believe existing restrictions are unnecessary, let them first test their theory on themselves by removing the metal detectors and allowing all permit holders to carry loaded, concealed guns throughout the State Capitol, House and Senate chambers and all legislative offices. To be sure it's a fair test, they can't add more law enforcement officers since there's no provision for more law enforcement attached to these bills.
For Rolando, the Supreme Court does not share your view. Last summer, in DC v Heller, the Court merely struck down a wholesale ban, and I have no problem with that decision. The Court also made clear the Second Amendment "like most rights, is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose," and went further to state that its ruling "should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
You might not agree with the Court's decision, of course, but the Court's opinion trumps yours.
1 in 4 state legislators holds gun permit
Hmm. Thirty-four actually passed the background check? Wonder how many didn't? What if... I mean, could it be that only 34 could pass? ;-)
Tennessee, Georgia governors may reject unemployment stimulus funds
The revisions to the unemployment system are long overdue. These revisions would make it easier for part-time workers to qualify for unemployment benefits and provide benefits to people leaving work for a “compelling family reason.”
UNDERemployment has been plaguing American workers for years as employers drop workers' hours to avoid paying benefits such as unemployment insurance and health insurance. This is not a scenario of people not wanting to work full-time; it is a situation of many people working multiple part time jobs (if they can find them, coordinate the hours, etc.) just to make ends meet because full time jobs with benefits have been evaporating as businesses seek to increase profit margins to answer demands for stock dividends and higher pay and bonuses for the top executive tier.
Maybe the federal government will also crack down on the growing number of employers who are cheating employees AND the IRS by classifying their regular employees "contract workers."
Tennessee's legislators and her governor need to get behind these changes, not oppose them. These revisions are ALL about a commitment to "family values."