And what exactly would you have policy makers do to combat aging anyway?
Funding. That's all that's needed to make significant progress within the decade, like to confer 10 years of healthy life and then start staying ahead of the curve and adding 10 years at a time.
The first person that will live to be 1000 is already alive today. But we really need to get serious about this. And funding really is the issue.
As for all the overpopulation debate, which I'm fine with being part of honestly, what it really comes down to is by making that decision ourselves we're deciding for the future generations and that's none of our business doing. We need to do the research and then when the time comes the future generation will have the option and they can decide whether they want to live for a really long time or to have lots of babies, but it's just turning our head to tens of millions of deaths every year that could otherwise be prevented.
It doesn't get a lot of funding because it isn't considered important because of a global trance that it's how it's always been and there's nothing we can do about it anyways, so just ignore it. But in my opinion it's by far the most important issue on the planet today, or since the dawn of time, really.
I mean, if what you say is true, then why aren't bombings more common?
Because guns are widely available and they're easier. I mean hell, if you watch the crazy infowars guy in the OP vid then you can hear some random statistic how other countries also have high murder rates, they just aren't with guns since guns aren't around. It doesn't stop knives or pipes or any other various thing people might use.
Overall, the problem with taking away guns from the entire US population... it's not possible without changing our Constitution's 2nd amendment.
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.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms#United_StatesIt's been argued over for a long time just what exactly that means, but overall there's gonna be a lot of pissed off really well armed people that thinks that gun regulations violate the 2nd Amendment.
I think having guns are great to be honest. We're better off because if we were ever invaded (be it another country, aliens, or whatever), so many of us have firearms that we would have a strong ability to fight back as opposed to an unarmed population. An armed mob is a hell of a big deterrent to a foreign army. Occupation against an armed and unwilling population would be incredibly difficult.
Of course, it also reserves the ability to rise up and overthrow our government, should the need ever arise. As Thomas Jefferson himself said: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Hell, rather than unarming everyone, I think arming everyone would help. It'd be kinda hard for a kid to shoot up a school if all the kids had guns themselves -- actually, maybe that's a bad idea. The teachers though, should probably be armed and trained.
The problem though is we're making the issue about protecting the kids. But really, what about every single other large public gathering place? You could go into a football stadium with an AK-47, some large clips and a few pipe bombs, and take out hundreds of people. What good would armed teachers or armed guards in every school do then? Not a whole hell of a lot.
All you can really do is either take the guns away, or make them more widespread. There's problems with both, but those are generally the options. Having a police state with an armed guard for every 5 or so people isn't really feasible. And well, taking the guns away makes us easier to invade and makes revolutions more difficult. And hell, with the way things are going... I wouldn't doubt one being necessary within the century.
Overall, I'm not one of the far right rabid NRA gun supporters myself. I have guns, I have a concealed carry license, and so forth, but uh... It wouldn't really effect me since I already have them and I'm licensed for it. I just really dislike this kind of reactionary policy making. It's a mob mentality, and it's a sad state of governance that this is how things happen. I mean this is how we got into that big bullshit "War on Terror" to begin with. Reactionary politics lead to some of the biggest mistakes in history.
Just going with public outrage rather than keeping a level head has been the downfall of many a great empire.
