The hot topic in the American Congress right now is the talk of keeping terrorists away from being released American soil. The topic is heated and this is one issue that I have a foot in both puddles.

First off, I agree with the President’s decision to close Guantanamo bay. The amount of nonsense propaganda that comes out due to Gitmo is simply astounding. It is claimed by Al Qaeda that the American army flushes Qurans into the toilet and claim that the interrogators are all Jews.

The best defense that the US could come up with is say “Oh, we do not do all this but we water-board, sleep deprive….” So it is something that did not spin a positive image for the US. It was also something that President Obama and Senator McCain promised in their election campaigns last year and President Obama was elected on that platform.

So after this where are the terrorists going to go if Gitmo is closed? Unlike the Republicans, I think that they should be tried on main-land America. They should be tried as soon as possible and pay the price for their actions. Would we try the Boston Strangler in Phoenix, Arizona as people in Boston would be too scared of him. I also think that symbolically it would be a showcase of justice : The person that killed on that spot to face justice by that court there.

But then the problem would come in for those people that were innocent and put there. Where would they put them? They were not a threat and has now become one. Would you be happy if you stayed in a jail without any charge when you did nothing? They also would have met the hard-core terrorists in Gitmo and also could have become radicalized.

So the thing suggested with these group of “innocent” people is to release them into United States soil. This is because, with the exception of China, no other country want most of them back. These countries are afraid that these people would wreck havoc on their lands. So most of them would be released on US soil.

This is where I feel that the Republicans are right. Are the Democrats crazy to have them released in the USA? Yes, it is not morally right for them to be in Gitmo especially if they are innocent, but they may not be so innocent right now! They cannot be allowed to roam free on American soil. Seriously, have they lost their freaking mind?!

So what should we do about these prisoners that are “innocent”. I think that should their countries not want them back, send them so some desolate part of Alaska and let them live out the rest of their lives out there for the rest of their lives at the expense of America. Or maybe send them to an uninhabited island that is under the control of the USA. Somewhere they can be left alone to live their lives for free with the condition that they cannot leave that place for eternity. Still harsh but that is the best idea that I can come up with so far.

I think that the politicians in power right now should be cursing away at those that passed this Gitmo debacle. Ironically, most of them in power now were also in charge then when the creation of Gitmo was passed. Only some members of the President Bush administration are not around. This should be a lesson learned for the History books.

Another lesson that we must take back is that we need to try people quickly. An example of that is Singaporean terrorist Mas Selamat Kastari is recaptured. We would only be inviting trouble by leaving them in prison hoping to break them. We must try them as soon as possible and get rid of the problem as soon as possible.

Lastly, I think that we must not hold back the death penalty for these people. I think that the charge for terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is death. We would not be so tolerant with serial rapists and we would not keep gangsters indefinitely in the hope to catch other murderous gangsters.

Lets hope that this unnecessary thing would never happen again in the US or in another country in the world. I also think that this should go into law that Gitmo never happen again.

The question is this when is enough, enough? What would it take for people to realize that guns is the key ingredient to killing people? How many innocent people must die because governments around the world kneel to gun lobby groups?

Finland took action when two killing spree happen a year within each other and after 19 unnecessary deaths. IT transformed overnight from a country that had a high tolerance for guns to one that now is very suspicious of guns.

When would the Americans get that? They had the Columbine school massacre, the Virgina Tech school massacre and the most recent case in Chicago where a crazed gunman went about killing people in a church. When would this stop? When would American stop kow-towing to the National Rifles Association and put a stop to this?

When would the Germans get it? This is not their first case of violence caused by firearms. Have they forgotten the Erfurt massacre in 2002? Or the more recent case is Emsdetten? When are the Germans going to wake up?

I really do not see the need to have guns in this world today. Guns do no good. They are there to kill and to deter aggression. That is the reason you see policemen and the Army having them, to be used as a deterrence force. Gangsters use it to kill. Period.

It is very difficult to go about on a killing spree with a sword or a bow and arrow but so easy to carry a gun. A woman can keep a gun in her purse. It is easy to conceal and much easier to use to carry out killing sprees.

Do you know what is the most irritating defense there is by the pro-gun lobby for acts like these? “Well if there were students in the schools that had guns, they could have taken care of this situation better.” That excuse is like saying that the International Olympic Committee should not go after athletes who take steroids but rather make it legal.

Another popular defense for gun and fire-arms use is that these items do not kill people but people kill people. These people would also point to the fact that there are less gun-related death that there are to food poisoning or jay-walking. My answer to this claim is a rather simple one: People kill people much easier with guns. Gun related deaths account for a very small percentage of death, but every death at the hand of a fire-armed lunatic is way too much.

There are lots of debate between the right and left that I respect. I am with the left on abortions but I respect the position from the right. I am with the right when it comes to making unions, but I understand the argument from the left.

But when it comes to guns, I take absolutely no exception. It is so obvious that facts stack up in one direction. It is almost culpable to us allowing people to die because of gun lobbies all around the world. In fact there are many countries in the world where having an illicit fire-arm is the act of attempted murder to some degree.

Look at countries that have strict gun measures. They are generally regarded as safer than countries that do not have guns. Such examples of countries are Singapore and Hong Kong which are much safer than most Western cities.

I really hope that this sends a loud message to the Americans and the Germans. It is time for their governments to “wake up” and face the gun problem head on. It would really make many people sleep safer the night guns are banned.

Related articles by Zemanta

• German High School Shooting (outsidethebeltway.com)
• Teens in and out of psychiatric ward (ctv.ca)
• Man accused in Mountie shootings collapses in court (cbc.ca)