Lawmakers this week have finally settled down and are getting to the important things in life: college football. Yes, lawmakers in the House this week introduced legislation that would prevent the NCAA from calling a game a national championship unless it’s the outcome of a playoff. Whoo-hoo.

Should this really be what congress focuses on? I mean... it's not like we're in a shaky economy with a widening federal deficit, a need for updated health care, social security, and education systems, and many other important things, right? Oh wait, yeah we are.

I understand lawmakers do have personal lives and yes, may even get time to watch some college football... but to be completely honest, congress shouldn't be trying to make every little idea in their head into a law. Congressional leaders should be level-headed and responsible... as well as intelligent. As far as I know, the constitution doesn't provide for adding rules to sporting organizations... even when applying the Necessary and Proper clause and the Commerce clause.

Sometimes representatives go too far, sometimes they're stupid, and other times, they're just plain ignorant. Rep. Joe Barton of Texas: you, sir, are all three. (Maybe your governor had the right idea. Perhaps Texas would be better off without the rest of the states. Don't let Oklahoma hit you on the way out.)

(I began writing this last week, but forgot to publish it, sorry!)

Sometimes people completely and utterly confuse me. Ten years ago today, 12 students and a teacher were killed at Columbine High School. Twenty-four more were critically injured. Three days ago was the anniversary of the Virginia Tech shootings, where 32 were killed. There are many other stories like this, yet nothing is being done.

Well, that's not completely true. There is something being done, but I find it to be the exact opposite of what should be done. In Texas, lawmakers have been debating allowing guns on college campuses.

Wait. Let's read that again: Texas lawmakers want guns on campuses?

So the solution to preventing campus shootings is to add more guns to the mix? I think I get it: it's kind of like giving the burglar your alarm code so he doesn't have to break into your house. Got it.

Seriously, though, how can anyone honestly say that allowing guns on campuses, where there is a high concentration of stressed individuals, is a good idea?

In addition, the passing of this law effectively disallows universities and colleges from having their say as to what objects are permitted on campus. If guns are allowed, what does this say about knives, decorative swords, hot plates, candles, or anything else that could, potentially, be dangerous? In the presence of guns, banning these objects seems almost trivial.

I have read many of the comments in the articles reporting this story, and I must say - I have difficulty in analyzing the perspective of those in favor of it. Here are some of the comments and my rationale against them:

"Just because they have a gun and have a right to use it does not mean they have the right to shoot a teacher over a grade."
No, but free access to a gun sure does make it easier.

"It actually makes things safer: students who want to shoot up the campus are going to bring a gun regardless of whether it's legal or not. Having a gun would protect those on campus."
That's a valid point; however, students who consider shooting up the campus would be more likely to be found if the school has a no gun policy in place.
Consider this:
Let's pose a student who does, indeed, want to commit this atrocity on his/her campus. Prior to their set date for committing this crime, the school pursues a random inspection of all rooms due to a rumor that a school shooting may occur.

Here's where the line changes:
In one situation, the school refuses to allow guns on their campus. Should an inspection turn up a gun, the student is found, arrested, and questioned.

In the other, the school is forced to allow guns. Inspections cannot prove any intent, as there are too many students who possess this weapon. All students possessing a gun must be questioned or a separate investigation must take place.

I hope my lines of logic makes sense. I've tried to see the argument on all sides, but for me, it seems most appropriate to not allow guns on campuses for any reason whatsoever except in the case of security officers and police. These men and women are trained to handle these situations and, although they may be slow to react at times, resulting in more deaths, it is a safer situation than to have many students reacting to a gunshot.

It's times like these when I wonder what good it does to be a good person. Eighteen-year-old Paul Leicester, a native of England, found a cell phone lying in the street while out celebrating his birthday. Seeing as he did not know the owner, he called the last person dialed on the phone and arranged for the phone to be picked up at the police station.

The rest of this story should be, "the owner came in tears and thanked the young boy for finding their valuable cell phone." Instead, Paul found himself arrested. The charge? "Theft by finding". That's right, you read it correctly - finding something and attempting to return it is now theft.

Paul spent the next four hours in the police station and even had his DNA sampled. Now, at this point, one would think the mistake would be immediately fixed and taken care of, with an apology by the police station. But no. The police station's response? “We are reviewing the circumstances of the arrest.”

Reviewing? I'm not sure I understand. As far as I know the report would read: 'Young male returned found cell phone. Arrested thereafter.' Unless you have the reading level and comprehension of a 3-month old chimp, you should be able to realize that your department is what is in need of a review, not the arrest itself.

How can anyone do the right thing anymore? I keep seeing things like this in the news, last year someone was sued for injuring someone while saving them from a burning car. I think I'd rather be injured and in one piece rather than dead and in a thousand. The police and law are definitely overstepping boundaries if one can be arrested or sued for doing the right thing. I may think twice before I decide to return the next item I find on the ground. I might end up in prison for it.